Compliance with Wetland Mitigation Standards in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, USA

The United States has lost about half its wetland acreage since European settlement, and the effectiveness of current wetland mitigation policies is often questioned. In most states, federal wetland laws are overseen by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but Michigan administers these laws through the state’s Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ). Our research provides insight into the effectiveness of the state’s implementation of these laws. We examined wetland mitigation permit files issued in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula between 2003 and 2006 to assess compliance with key MDEQ policies. Forty-six percent of files were out of compliance with monitoring report requirements, and forty-nine percent lacked required conservation easement documents. We also conducted site assessments of select compensatory wetland projects to determine compliance with MDEQ invasive plant species performance standards. Fifty-five percent were out of compliance. We found no relationship between invasive species noncompliance and past site monitoring, age of mitigation site, or proximity to roads. However, we found wetland restoration projects far more likely to be compliant with performance standards than wetland creation projects. We suggest policy changes and agency actions that could increase compliance with wetland restoration and mitigation goals.

[1]  D. H. Knight,et al.  Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology , 1974 .

[2]  Earl D. McCoy,et al.  The Statistics and Biology of the Species-Area Relationship , 1979, The American Naturalist.

[3]  T. Dahl,et al.  Wetlands Losses in the United States 1780's to 1980's , 1990 .

[4]  Edward B. Barbier,et al.  Sustainable Use of Wetlands. Valuing Tropical Wetland Benefits: Economic Methodologies and Applications , 1993 .

[5]  Joy B. Zedler,et al.  Ecological Issues in Wetland Mitigation: An Introduction to the Forum , 1996 .

[6]  Joy B. Zedler,et al.  Tracking Wetland Restoration: Do Mitigation Sites Follow Desired Trajectories? , 1999 .

[7]  K. J. Canters,et al.  Guidelines for ecological compensation associated with highways , 1999 .

[8]  J. L. Regens,et al.  Regulating Wetlands Protection: Environmental Federalism and the States , 1999 .

[9]  A. Breaux,et al.  Validity of Performance Criteria and a Tentative Model for Regulatory Use in Compensatory Wetland Mitigation Permitting , 1999, Environmental management.

[10]  C. Lant,et al.  The Effect of Wetland Mitigation Banking on the Achievement of No-Net-Loss , 1999, Environmental management.

[11]  T. Söderqvist,et al.  Ecological-economic analysis of wetlands; scientific integration for management and policy , 2000 .

[12]  W. Mitsch,et al.  The value of wetlands: importance of scale and landscape setting. , 2000 .

[13]  Joan G. Ehrenfeld,et al.  Defining the Limits of Restoration: The Need for Realistic Goals , 2000 .

[14]  Richard T. Kingsford,et al.  Ecological impacts of dams, water diversions and river management on floodplain wetlands in Australia , 2000 .

[15]  J. Boyd.  Compensating for Wetland Losses under the Clean Water Act , 2002 .

[16]  Frank Lupi,et al.  The Economic Equivalency of Drained and Restored Wetlands in Michigan , 2002 .

[17]  Charles Andrew Cole,et al.  Section 404 Wetland Mitigation and Permit Success Criteria in Pennsylvania, USA, 1986–1999 , 2002, Environmental management.

[18]  Erik Skärbäck,et al.  Environmental compensation in planning: a review of five different countries with major emphasis on the German system , 2003 .

[19]  Melissa M Hornyak,et al.  Wetland Mitigation Compliance in the Western Upper Peninsula of Michigan , 2003, Environmental management.

[20]  M. Brock,et al.  Drain it, dam it: alteration of water regime in shallow wetlands on the New England Tableland of New South Wales, Australia , 1999, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[21]  W. Niering,et al.  Vegetation change in created emergent wetlands (1988–1996) in Connecticut (USA) , 1999, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[22]  R. Brooks,et al.  A comparison of created and natural wetlands in Pennsylvania, USA , 2002, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[23]  M. J. O'Connell,et al.  Detecting, measuring and reversing changes to wetlands , 2003, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[24]  J. Zedler,et al.  Wetland resources : Status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability , 2005 .

[25]  Alfred Herberg,et al.  Mitigation banking and compensation pools: improving the effectiveness of impact mitigation regulation in project planning procedures , 2005 .

[26]  K. Schuyt.  Economic consequences of wetland degradation for local populations in Africa , 2005 .

[27]  Douglas J Spieles,et al.  Community Structure and Quality After 10 Years in Two Central Ohio Mitigation Bank Wetlands , 2006, Environmental management.

[28]  M. Squillace.  From "Navigable Waters" to "Constitutional Waters": The Future of Federal Wetlands Regulation , 2006 .

[29]  Laura Bies.  Wetlands Management in the United States , 2006 .

[30]  D. Olivieri.  Environmental Management , 2006 .

[31]  D. Walters,et al.  Wetland management: an analysis of past practice and recent policy changes in Ontario. , 2007, Journal of environmental management.

[32]  A. Gerlak,et al.  It’s All in the Numbers: Acreage Tallies and Environmental Program Evaluation , 2007, Environmental management.

[33]  M. Graf.  Foundations of Restoration Ecology , 2008 .

[34]  Kevin L. Erwin.  Wetlands and global climate change: the role of wetland restoration in a changing world , 2009, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[35]  Alan Hanson,et al.  Wetland mitigation and compensation: Canadian experience , 2009, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[36]  M. Ju,et al.  Wise Use of Wetlands: Current State of Protection and Utilization of Chinese Wetlands and Recommendations for Improvement , 2008, Environmental management.

[37]  A. G. Endress,et al.  Performance Criteria, Compliance Success, and Vegetation Development in Compensatory Mitigation Wetlands , 2008, Environmental management.

[38]  Todd K. BenDor,et al.  The Social Impacts of Wetland Mitigation Policies in the United States , 2008 .

[39]  B. Johnson,et al.  Local Officials' and Citizens' Views on Freshwater Wetlands , 2008 .

[40]  N. H. Euliss,et al.  Application of a geomorphic and temporal perspective to wetland management in North America , 2008, Wetlands.

[41]  S. Burgin.  ‘Mitigation banks’ for wetland conservation: a major success or an unmitigated disaster? , 2010, Wetlands Ecology and Management.

[42]  W. Daniels,et al.  Comparison of soil and other environmental conditions in constructed and adjacent palustrine reference wetlands , 2000, Wetlands.

[43]  Mark T. Brown,et al.  Evaluation of permit success in wetland mitigation banking: A Florida case study , 2009, Wetlands.

[44]  Stephen Brown,et al.  Effectiveness of compensatory wetland mitigation in Massachusetts, USA , 2001, Wetlands.

[45]  Douglas J. Spieles.  Vegetation development in created, restored, and enhanced mitigation wetland banks of the United States , 2005, Wetlands.

[46]  James T. Anderson,et al.  A comparison of plant communities in mitigation and reference wetlands in the mid-appalachians , 2005, Wetlands.

[47]  Thomas H. Roberts,et al.  Characterization of wetland mitigation projects in Tennessee, USA , 2003, Wetlands.

[48]  M. Kaplowitz,et al.  Michigan residents’ perceptions of wetlands and mitigation , 2003, Wetlands.

[49]  N. H. Euliss,et al.  Linking ecosystem processes with wetland management goals: Charting a course for a sustainable future , 2008, Wetlands.

[50]  D. Cooper,et al.  Mountain Fen Distribution, Types and Restoration Priorities, San Juan Mountains, Colorado, USA , 2010, Wetlands.