Group A

1
Group A

• Brian Whitehead
• Robert Andrews
• Sarah Lintner

2
Topics

• River Alterations
• Wetland Mitigation
• Habitat Loss
• Land Reclamation
• Endangered Species

3
Mississippi River Alterations And Wetland
Mitigation
4
Overview

• Possible Alterations to the Mississippi River,
  surrounding streams, wetlands, and the watershed
• Mitigation Plans

5
The Alterations

• Bodies of water are all connected
• Alterations to one can cause alterations to the
  ecology of the entire watershed
• Holcims plans will affect 30 acres of wetland
  and floodplain along the Mississippi River
• And 17 miles of upland streams

6
The Alterations

• Flooding
• Habitat
• Filtering of contaminants
• Erosion of Soil

7
The Alterations

• Flooding could become more severe
• Wetlands act like a sponge
• Destroying them and the floodplain could increase
  chances of property damage

8
The Alterations

• Construction, rerouting of streams, and
  destruction of wetlands can impair local habitat
• These habitats support a diverse number of
  organisms

9
The Alterations

• The wetlands play a vital role in filtering
  contaminants
• Without them the amount of contaminants reaching
  local streams and the Mississippi River will
  increase

10
The Alterations

• Due to construction and rerouting of streams soil
  erosion will increase
• Soil will be deposited in new areas
• This would further alter stream banks

11
Mitigation Plans

• The Missouri Department of Natural Resources has
  required Holcim to make certain changes in their
  mitigation plans
• Railroad spur plant will be relocated to avoid
  1.5 acres of wetland
• Hickory North Hollows will no longer be used as
  disposal areas storm water detention avoiding
  impact to .27miles of streams
• Only 2.98 miles of streams 14.1 acres of
  wetlands will be effected

12
Mitigation Plans

• The required wetland mitigation ratio will be
• 21 emergent wetlands
• 2.51 scrub/shrub wetlands
• 31 wooded wetlands
• 11 farmed wetlands
• A permanent conservation restriction will be put
  on the mitigation area

13
Mitigation Plans

• Jurisdictional streams will be mitigated at a 11
  ratio
• These areas too will be protected by a
  conservation restriction

14
Mitigation Plans

• The wetlands and river banks will have native
  vegetation planted along with mulch and
  fertilizer for promoting plant growth
• Native soil will be used as topdressing when
  restoring wetlands and streams

15
Mitigation Plans

• There will be on-site inspections to help ensure
  successful revegetation and to make sure that
  erosion and deposition of soil in local streams
  does not occur
• Fluming-sealing off work area from flow while
  letting stream to pass in a separate channel
• Prevent erosion from construction entering
  streams
• Structures will be located downstream from
  excavated areas to dissipate energy from altered
  stream gradients catch sediment

16
Mitigation Plans

• The Problems
• Cant make organisms move
• Mitigation usually only works if water flow and
  soil isnt altered too drastically
• If new wetland is not in the natural stream flow
  it may not reduce flooding
• Land will never be the same

17
References

• University of Wisconsin. Flood of Evidence Wet
  Wonders. 2000. lthttp//whyfiles.org/107flood/4.
  htmlgt.
• Bob Hrabik. Missouri Conservation Department.
• Missouri Department of Natural Resources Division
  of Environmental Quality
• Missouri Clean Water Commission

18
Land Reclamation and Habitat Loss
19
Land Reclamation

• Holcim is going to build a limestone quarry on
  about 4,000 acres of land.
• They have acquired a permit to quarry limestone
  from 1,627 acres over the next 100 years.
• This is going to require some form of land
  reclamation once they are done.

20
Land ReclamationGood News

• Holcim is planning on creating and restoring 61
  acres of wetlands, replacing the 14 acres that
  will be disturbed by the plant.
• Holcim also plans on reconstructing the rugged
  upland topography (lower elevation), replace the
  intermittent stream systems, and create small
  ponds.
• No more than 200 acres will be open at one time.
• Holcim is going preserve 2,200 acres in its
  present state as a buffer around the quarry.

21
Land ReclamationBad News

• Once an ecosystem is destroyed there is very
  little chance that it can be fully restored to
  its natural form.
• There is plans of a 400 acre lake to be build on
  the mining site after mining is completed.

22
Land ReclamationDiscrepancies

• An EIS report was not performed which leaves us
  lacking much information about the site.
• A 400 acre lake is not a small pond and it was
  not part of the natural site.
• Holcim has a very shady past and has not always
  fulfilled its promises.

23
Wilderness or WastelandWilderness

• This site is home to many species of birds,
  amphibians, mammals and fish.
• The site also consists of a large block of oak,
  hickory, and ash forest along the river.
• Two large streams are located on the site.

24
Wilderness or Wasteland

• The area is hardly a pristine wilderness
• The site for the cement plant is 2.5 miles east
  of Highway 61.
• Another quarry operated on the site until it
  closed in the 1980s.
• The AmernUE plant is located just north of the
  site.
• Holcim removed 22 truckloads of rusting cars,
  appliances, and other trash form the property
  after it acquired the land.
• Landowner that had previously lived there say
  that the land had been used for logging, farming
  and hunting.

25
(No Transcript)
26
Wetland Areas

27
References

• http//www.cares.missouri.edu
• US Army Corp of Engineers. http//www.mvs.usace.ar
  my.mil/
• Missouri Coalition for the Environment.
  http//www.moenviron.org/story.asp?contentID6900
  SID4084
• Missouri Sierra Club. http//missouri.sierraclub.
  org/FrontPage2002/ProposedHolcimCementPlantLTR.HTM
  
• Wagar, Kit. Kansas City Star.
  http//www.ohio.com/mld/kansascity/6725594.htm?tem
  platecontModules/printstory.jsp

28
Endangered Species
29
Endangered Species

• Habitat loss, land reclamation, river alteration,
  and wetland mitigation all have the potential to
  harm already endangered species that occur on the
  site.
• Pallid Sturgeon
• Indiana Bat

30
Pallid Sturgeon

• Prehistoric looking, flattened snout, slender
  tail, rows of bony plates instead of scales.
• Bottom feeders
• Known to reach up to 80 lbs. and 6ft. long

31
Pallid Sturgeon

• Occur in the Mississippi, Missouri, Yellowstone,
  and Atchafalaya Rivers
• Dams affect water temperature
• Most of these rivers have been channelized and
  impounded.

32
Pallid Sturgeon

• Was added to the endangered species list in 1990
• Primary cause of decline determined to be human
  destruction and alteration of habitats by
  modification of the river system (USFWS)

33
Holcim project and the Pallid Sturgeon

• The site is composed of substrate and water depth
  that is suitable for sturgeon
• Pallid sturgeon have been caught in the immediate
  area (within 10 miles)
• In 1994, MDC released 4,702 young pallid sturgeon
  near Ste. Genevieve and surrounding river towns

34
Holcim project and the Pallid Sturgeon

• River alterations and construction activities on
  the main channel and barge outlet
• Maintenance dredging (10,000 to 65,000 cubic
  yards annually)
• Location, timing, frequency, amount of material
  dredged, and dumping of dredged materials all are
  likely to adversely affect pallid sturgeon
  populations

35
Indiana Bat

• Medium-sized, brown fur with pinkish underneath
• Feed on insects

36
Indiana Bat

• Occur in the Midwest and eastern U.S. In summer
  it is apparently absent south of Tennessee. In
  winter it is apparently absent from Michigan,
  Ohio, and northern Indiana.

37
Indiana Bat

• Was added to the endangered species list in 1967
• Hibernate in limestone caves
• Maternity colonies roost under loose bark and
  hollows of trees

38
Holcim project and the Indiana Bat

• Bat surveys using mist nets, acoustic bat
  detectors, and radio telemetry indicate that the
  site is heavily used by Indiana bats
• Studies show that these bats return to the same
  areas to forage and roost year after year
• This site provides important and varied habitat

39
Holcim project and the Indiana Bat

• Land reclamation of the site is not likely to
  return the area to its current useful state
• Topography changes, water-way changes, and
  formation of a lake
• Development of this site is likely to disrupt the
  feeding, breeding, and sheltering activities of
  the Indiana bat.

40
References

• http//www.conservation.state.mo.us/news/out/1996/
  out07126.html
• http//endangered.fws.gov/i/a/saa08.html
• http//www.unk.edu/acad/biology/hoback/bio430/430l
  ecture13.html
• US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Response to
  Holcim biological assessment.

41
The End