1 / 26

Mid-Chesapeake Bay Feasibility Study

Mid-Chesapeake Bay Feasibility Study. Screening Criteria. Tier I: Island needs to be in study area Tier II: Island needs to be or have historically been at least 200 acres; currently needs to possess the ability to be 200 acres or more

hazina
Download Presentation

Mid-Chesapeake Bay Feasibility Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mid-Chesapeake Bay Feasibility Study

  2. Screening Criteria • Tier I: Island needs to be in study area • Tier II: • Island needs to be or have historically been at least 200 acres; currently needs to possess the ability to be 200 acres or more • Island must be reasonably accessible for dredged material placement • Island restoration cannot negatively affect the hydraulic conditions of existing river systems • Island cannot significantly impact current navigation of existing waterways • Must be an island/not shoreline

  3. Tier II Continued: • Island must not be a highly populated center • Island must not involve any unexploded ordinance or hazardous, toxic and radioactive waste • If island is currently State or Federally managed as a wildlife area, must have support from the landowners for restoration • Compatibility with any other Corps-led studies being conducted on the island

  4. Barren Island, Dorchester County • Holland Island, Dorchester County • Hoopers Islands, Dorchester County • James Island, Dorchester County • Little Deal Island, Somerset County • Ragged Island, Dorchester County • Smith Island, Somerset County • South Marsh Island, Somerset County

  5. Formulate Alternative Plans • Screen the Island(s) • Collect Detailed Environmental - Engineering - Socioeconomic Data • Prepare Conceptual Plans • Determine Potential Island Configurations/Acreages • No configuration pre-determined • Analyze/Compare Plans • Select Recommended Plan

  6. Corps Six Step Planning Process • Specify Problems and Opportunities • Inventory and Forecast Conditions • Formulate Alternative Plans • Evaluate Effects of Alternative Plans • Compare Alternative Plans • Select Recommended Plan

  7. Site Locations: James and Barren Islands Dorchester County, MD James Island Barren Island

  8. James Island Project Concept Area

  9. James Island Study FindingsCOASTAL ENGINEERING • Water depths in concept area(s) are 2-12 feet • Highest waves approach from north and south • East side of island sheltered from waves • Longest fetch from south • Currents relatively weak • Maximum velocity 1 ft/sec • Update bathymetric survey Fall 2002

  10. James Island Study FindingsHYDRODYNAMICS & SEDIMENTATION • Minimal impacts on local tidal elevations • Current velocities impacted • Maximum change ±0.4 ft/sec • Beneficial effects on sedimentation rates and patterns • Less shoreline erosion of James Island and portions of Taylors Island • Probable reduction of suspended sediment and improved water quality

  11. James Island Study FindingsEXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONSFall 2001/2002 & Summer 2002 Studies • In situ water quality results were in expected range • Diverse fish community with juveniles of commercially important species • Essential Fish Habitat for 9 finfish species • Bluefish, red drum and summer flounder present • Low B-IBI scores • Average score of 1.6 in Summer 2002

  12. Habitat Types on James Island

  13. James Island Study FindingsENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS (continued) • Variety of wildlife utilizes island remnants • 42 bird species present • 9 species of wildlife • No adverse impacts expected on terrestrial vegetation, including wetlands • Commercial crabbing within concept area will be displaced • Temporary viewshed and noise disturbance during construction • No cultural resources within concept area

  14. Current Erosion at James Island

  15. James Island Additional Studies • Crab Pot Surveys • April – September • Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Survey & Popnetting • Late season grasses • Pound net surveys • Clam Surveys • Soft shell • Razor shell

  16. Barren Island ConceptArea

  17. Habitat Types on Barren Island

  18. Barren Island Study FindingsCOASTAL ENGINEERING • Water depths in concept area are 3-10 feet • Highest wind speeds from the southwest and northwest • Longest fetch from the south • Eastern side of island requires less armor because it is sheltered

  19. Barren Island Study FindingsENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONSFall 2002 & Summer 2002 Studies • In situ water quality results were in expected range • Area inhabited by numerous finfish species • Several species support commercial and recreational fisheries • Essential Fish Habitat for 9 finfish species • Bluefish, summer flounder, and red drum present in area • B-IBI scores were high • Average 3.84 • SAV beds present along eastern shoreline and in quiescent waters east of island • RTE species: bald eagle, royal tern, Wilson’s plover

  20. Barren Island Study FindingsENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS (continued) • Two NOBs located in areas adjacent to proposed dike alignment • Island important habitat for colonial waterbirds and wading birds • 61 bird species observed in Summer 2002 • Variety of wildlife utilizes island remnants • 13 species • Reduction of commercial crabbing area • Negligible noise and viewshed disturbance • MHT- no records of historically significant sites

  21. Erosion at Barren Island

  22. Barren Island Additional Studies • Crab Pot Surveys • May – September • Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) Survey & Popnetting • Late season grasses • Pound net surveys • Clam Surveys • Soft shell • Razor shell

  23. Plan Formulation • Goal • The goal for this feasibility study is to restore and protect valuable but threatened Mid-Chesapeake Bay island ecosystems through the beneficial use of dredged material.

  24. Plan Formulation • Objectives • Restore and enhance wetland, aquatic and terrestrial island habitat for fish, reptiles, amphibians, birds, and mammals; • Protect existing island ecosystems, including sheltered embayments; • Minimize impacts to fisheries nursery-, feeding-, and protective-habitats; • Increase wetlands acreage in the Chesapeake Bay watershed; • Decrease turbidity and shoreline erosion;

  25. Plan Formulation • Objectives (continued) • Promote conditions that promote the establishment and protection of submerged aquatic vegetation; • Promote conditions that support oyster recolonization; • Minimize impacts to rare, threatened and endangered species and their habitats • Minimize establishment of invasive species; and • Allow for placement of 2 millioncubic yars/year of dredge material.

  26. Plan Formulation • Design Criteria and Constraints • Must protect existing island habitat • Dredge placement depths will be considered in the range of 7-9 feet. • Footprint should be based on geomorphology (i.e. clay areas) • Dike heights need to be at a minimum of 10-12 feet above MLLW.

More Related