Packery Channel Project DEIS Comments - US Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

Packery.Com - Information source for the proposed Packery Channel Project...

Back To Packery.Com

[ NOAA DESI Comments ] [ US Fish and Wildlife DEIS Comments ] [ Texas Parks and Wildlife DEIS Comments ] [ Texas GLO - DEIS Comments ] [ EPA DEIS Comments ]
[ US Fish and Wildlife - page 2 ] [ US Fish and Wildlife - page 3 ] [ US Fish and Wildlife - page 4 ] [ US Fish and Wildlife - page 5 ] [ US Fish and Wildlife - page 6 ] [ US Fish and Wildlife - page 7 ] [ US Fish and Wildlife - page 8 ]

met on July 31, 2002, to review the channel project relative to the MBCHP MP and to
develop appropriate recommendations for assessment and/or monitoring to be included in
the final EIS.

The DEIS identified a Maintenance Material Placement Area (MMPA) on County-owned
property; however, in a letter, dated June 17, 2002, from the City of Corpus Christi to the
Nueces County Commissioner for Precinct 4, this 7.5 acre site was no longer being
considered as a disposal site for the channel project. As a result, a new MMPA needs to be
identified that will accommodate approximately 15,000 cy of material, not suitable for beach
placement, every 5 years for the 50-year life of the project. When compared to the volumes
of material moved in other projects, such as the Gulf lntracoastal Waterway, 15,000 cy of
material may appear insignificant. However, 7.5 acres, or whatever size is ultimately deemed
necessary to accommodate silty dredged material, in a coastal area can be a scarce
commodity, and potentially expensive. The Corps, with the City and appropriate state
agencies, have already initiated discussions regarding potential sites for the MMPA. The
Service requests to be included in the coordination for site alternatives and their proposed
construction methodologies prior to the final site selection.

The DEIS characterized broad habitat types in and adjacent to the footprint for the proposed
project. Additionally, the DEIS identified expected direct impacts of the proposed channel
project by acreage and by habitat type. At the July 8^th meeting, several agency
representatives pointed out that in reviewing the DEIS it appeared that, because of the
methodology used by the consultant to map the habitat types, post construction impacts
would be difficult to assess. As described in the DEIS, the consultant used on-the-ground
mapping in combination with 1995 Digital Ortho-Quarterquads to outline habitat types and
general location relative to the proposed channel project. No GIS points were identified, or
transect lines established that would allow for accurate post-project assessment. High
resolution color aerial photographs, pre- and post-project, were recommended as a means of
documenting the site. In a 2 1/2 hour site visit on July 11, 2002, with a GIS unit, a number
of points were recorded along the waterward boundary of submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAV) in the existing channel and basin. The consultant proposed to overlay those points
on the existing aerial photographs and provide the results to the agencies. According to the
Corps, the potential for current appropriate quality aerial photography is being investigated.
The Service anticipates additional coordination on characterization of the project area.

In the DEIS, the Corps has proposed mitigation for direct impacts only for SAVs. At the July
8^th meeting, participants discussed mitigation ratios currently used for other habitat types
which will, or could be, impacted by the proposed channel project. These included low salt
marsh, high salt marsh, and tidal flats. Additionally, meeting participants discussed the
proposed shallow shelves along the bulkheaded portion of Reach 1 and their concern for the
stability of the shelves with regards to supporting seagrass. Additional coordination will be
needed to identify mitigation sites for the direct impacts of the proposed channel.