Are there problems with mitigating impacts on wetlands/streams at an off-site location within the same watershed? i.e. fill a wetland in Maryland and mitigate for it or create it in Virginia. Should the federal government (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) or a developer decide which wetland to fill or not?
No one should tamper with a wetland without a thorough and impartial environmental impact study.
Isn't that answer basically your own opinion, not his, which is what the question is asking for?
Mitigating impacts on wetlands and streams by creating or restoring them in off-site locations within the same watershed is a common practice known as off-site wetland or stream mitigation. However, there can be challenges and potential problems associated with this approach.
One of the main concerns is ensuring that the off-site mitigation effectively compensates for the loss or degradation of the impacted wetland or stream. It is crucial to consider factors such as the ecological and hydrological function, size, location, and sustainability of the proposed off-site mitigation area. These factors can influence the overall success of the mitigation effort and the ability of the off-site mitigation area to function as a replacement for the impacted one.
Deciding which wetland or stream to impact and, subsequently, which wetland or stream to mitigate is a complex decision that involves considerations of both ecological and regulatory factors. Ultimately, it is essential to strike a balance between development objectives and the protection of valuable ecosystems.
In the United States, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is the federal agency responsible for regulating activities impacting wetlands and streams under the Clean Water Act. The USACE typically follows established guidelines and regulations to evaluate and decide on mitigation requirements. They consider factors such as the type and extent of impacts, the availability of suitable mitigation sites, and the overall ecological benefits achieved through the mitigation. Their decision-making process involves consultation with other federal, state, and local agencies, as well as public input.
Developers, on the other hand, play a role in proposing potential off-site mitigation sites and working closely with the USACE and other relevant agencies to ensure compliance with regulations and best practices.
In summary, the decision on which wetland or stream to fill and which wetland or stream to mitigate involves a collaborative process between the USACE, other regulatory agencies, and developers. It is crucial to consider the ecological and hydrological functions of the impacted and mitigation sites to ensure effective and long-term mitigation of the impacts.