{"id":4615,"date":"2016-10-31T14:24:00","date_gmt":"2016-10-31T18:24:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/?p=4615"},"modified":"2016-10-31T14:24:00","modified_gmt":"2016-10-31T18:24:00","slug":"reedy-creek-revealing-the-deqs-absurdity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/2016\/10\/31\/reedy-creek-revealing-the-deqs-absurdity\/","title":{"rendered":"Reedy Creek: Revealing the DEQ’s Absurdity"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bill Shanabruch\u2019s concern was palpable as he waded deeper and deeper into Reedy Creek.\u00a0 The water furiously rushed over his waders while he explained the intricate relationship between the locals, politicians and environment.\u00a0 His knowledge of the controversial topic <\/a>was evident and his pure passion for the stream was truly inspiring.\u00a0 But with Reedy Creek’s health in jeopardy, he seemed a little anxious.<\/p>\n

\"Looking<\/a>

Looking upstream from the lower end of the proposed Reedy Creek project area.<\/p><\/div>\n

After spending all morning with Bill, I was frustrated with the city of Richmond and could not understand why political officials would push for a project that has received so much backlash from such a large number of citizens.\u00a0 At first, the real issue seemed to be in convincing city officials that their restoration plan could seriously impair the environment.\u00a0 But, according to the city, their project will do just the opposite.\u00a0 Now the main issue seemed to morph into explaining why other restoration plans could contribute to Reedy Creek\u2019s health in a more logical manner.\u00a0 Best management practices within the watershed could solve the issue of stormwater runoff before it even becomes a problem downstream.\u00a0 This point, too, was rejected by the city; however, it finally coaxed out the real problem behind the Reedy Creek debate.<\/p>\n

The city is only trying to fulfill requirements<\/a> set forth by the Department of Environmental Quality. \u00a0While it is important for Richmond to satisfy its duties to the DEQ, it is far more important for the DEQ to enforce methodical, conscious and cognizant environmental standards.\u00a0 One look at the \u201cStormwater Local Assistance Fund Program Guidelines\u201d<\/a> shows the absurdity of the DEQ\u2019s point system that enforces a blanket of rigid requirements upon all participants.<\/p>\n

\"An<\/a>

An excerpt of the SLAF Guidelines shows how projects receive rigid scores based on a rubric which leaves little flexibility to accommodate for particular cases.<\/p><\/div>\n

To begin with, pollution reduction, the most heavily weighted category of the rubric, is based on phosphorous levels alone.\u00a0 Yes, this nutrient is an indicator of stormwater runoff pollution, but so is turbidity, nitrogen content, fecal bacteria and countless other factors.\u00a0 The rubric\u2019s second most weighted category is cost effectiveness.\u00a0 Of course reality forces this boundary upon all restoration projects; however, should it be more seriously considered than relation to impaired water bodies and MS4 requirements?\u00a0 Finally, and most importantly, the scoring system incentivizes waterbody management over watershed restoration projects.\u00a0 Because of this, Richmond chose Reedy Creek\u2019s riverbed as the focal point of their plan, but this is only a quick fix for a much larger issue.\u00a0 Instead of attempting to reduce the movement of eroded sediments and nutrients by altering a downstream section of the creek, the restoration project should attack the problem at its source and focus on best management practices within the watershed.\u00a0 This way, the storm water runoff is stopped before it even reaches the Creek.<\/p>\n

At first glance, Reedy Creek\u2019s controversial debate may seem to be functioning at a local scale, involving citizens and city officials; however, after deeper contemplation, one may more accurately note that the real issue lies with the DEQ\u2019s absurd standards that incentivize poor practices. \u00a0On one level, the Department could be lauded for strictly enforcing policies that often protect and restore the environment, but, on another level, its broad model cannot always be implemented in every case throughout the state.\u00a0 Perhaps a more flexible system that accommodates for the specifics of individual cases could allow cities to develop restoration plans that are designed to actually restore the environmental, not simply check\u00a0a list\u00a0of bureaucratic boxes.\u00a0 Like Bill, I\u00a0am\u00a0concerned\u00a0about the outcome of the Reedy Creek debate; however, I am\u00a0even more concerned\u00a0about the DEQ’s contrived requirements that will continue to negatively affect environmental restoration projects in the future.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bill Shanabruch\u2019s concern was palpable as he waded deeper and deeper into Reedy Creek.\u00a0 The water furiously rushed over his waders while he explained the intricate relationship between the locals, politicians and environment.\u00a0 His knowledge of the controversial topic was … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2956,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6247,1083,1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4615","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-cbl","category-trips","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4615","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2956"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4615"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4615\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4615"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4615"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/james\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4615"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}