Pittsburgh District AUGUST 2005 Mahoning River, Ohio Environmental Dredging Draft Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement Trumbull and Mahoning Counties APPENDIX N U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SECTION 2(b) REPORT Draft Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report for the Mahoning River, Ohio Environmental Dredging Project Prepared by: Bill Kurey Division of Ecological Services Reynoldsburg, Ohio U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 3 Twin Cities, Minnesota February 2005 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Mahoning River drains 1,133 square miles in northeastern Ohio and northwestern Pennsylvania. The Mahoning varies from 50 feet to about 300 feet in width and is approximately 108 miles long with a slope of approximately 4.4 feet per mile. About 12 miles of the Mahoning River flow through Pennsylvania before joining the Shenango River to form the Beaver River which flows to the Ohio River. Five major reservoirs (Milton, 1917; Meander Creek, 1931; Berlin, 1943; Mosquito Creek, 1944; and Michael J. Kirwan, 1966) have been constructed in the upper watershed. There are also numerous lowhead dams on the river. Nine of these dams are within the study area for the Mahoning River Environmental Dredging Project. The Mahoning River in Ohio was once dominated by heavy industry, especially steel mills and associated industry, and railroads. Vestiges of these industries remain, especially WCI Steel in Warren, Ohio. Even within this intensely industrial corridor, the river has maintained a well defined woody riparian corridor for much of its length. Over the years, sediments in the river, particularly those upstream of the lowhead dams, have become contaminated with a variety of chemicals. Since most of the heavy industry has left the Mahoning River corridor, water quality has much improved, but sediments remain heavily polluted. Contaminants include metals, oil and grease, and organic chemicals such as PAHs and PCBs. The banks and some bottom sediments throughout the Mahoning River south of Warren are heavily contaminated with oil, grease and other chemicals. A human health advisory is in effect for the lower 28 miles of the Mahoning River in Ohio for both fish consumption and contact with the sediments. Fish consumption advisories exist for PCBs and mercury in Mahoning River common carp, channel catfish, smallmouth bass, and walleye. The Mahoning River Reconnaissance Study found that contaminated sediments are the primary limiting factor hindering the biological recovery of the river and must be removed (dredged) if improvement is to be expected; removal of some or all of the dams would enhance the aquatic ecosystem’s recovery; and removal of the sediments by dredging and subsequent restoration of the river is technically feasible, meets the USACE’s requirements for opportunities in its Civil Works Programs, and is in the Federal interest. We agree. We believe that the Mahoning River Environmental Dredging Project is clearly water dependent based on the pollution contained in the river sediments and banks. We also believe that there is a demonstrated public need for the project based on local interest, the impaired aquatic ecosystem, and loss of recreational and environmental services that the river should supply. The Mahoning River Environmental Dredging Project is currently in the phase where the Alternative Formulation Briefing is being finalized, this being expected by the middle or end of March, 2005. When finalized, the project will probably consist of a combination of dredging the main channel in most of the pools and excavation, or some other remedy such as bioremediation, of contaminated sediment in the banks at various locations. Outstanding issues include whether to remove dams as part of the project, the process that will be used to determine the type and extent of bank erosion control, the extent of any wetlands along the project reach, and details of any replacement of wetland and fish and wildlife habitat losses. The success of the Mahoning River Environmental Dredging Project, with regard to sediment quality and fish and wildlife values, will be determined by applying an environmental metric developed by the USACE and agencies cooperating in the Mahoning River project to a model reach (or reference reach) upstream of the project reach and comparing it to the score for the project reach. This environmental quality index (EQI) metric includes evaluation elements routinely used by the Ohio EPA such as IBI, ICI, and QHEI, as well as some other measures of sediment chemistry and predator abundance. The project should meet the EQI goal after implementation. 1 Surveys of mussels would also be a very good indicator of project success because they are more sensitive than other macroinvertebrates, and the return of rare fish would also be an indicator of success. Nobody has systematically surveyed the Mahoning River for freshwater mussels since 1890. We suggest both pre- and post-project surveys of the Mahoning River study reach. Mussel colonization post-project would be a very good indicator of project success, along with the return of missing fish species. Mussels are more sensitive to environmental perturbations than aquatic insects and might better measure success than the ICI. Mussels are sensitive to both the presence of dams and sediment quality. Another way to monitor the success of the environmental dredging project would be to determine the incidence of tumors and cancers in the liver and skin of brown bullhead. Dr. Paul Baumann of the USGS, stationed at Ohio State University, has developed accurate guidelines for determining when pollution has caused these tumors and cancers in bullhead. PAHs, a class of pollutants of concern in the Mahoning River, are known to be a common cause of these tumors and cancers. The recent reduction of the health advisory for fish consumption in the Black River of Ohio was in large part possible because Dr. Baumann’s studies documented improvement in fish health after dredging. We might expect that similar studies, before and after dredging in the Mahoning River, would be successful at demonstrating the improvement of sediment quality by showing a reduction of tumors and cancers in bullheads. Trust species that would use the habitat likely to be affected by the project include migratory birds. A list of bird species observed along the River in May and June of 2004 was created by Shawn Blohm and Courtnay Willis of Youngstown State University (YSU). The FWS Office of Migratory Bird Management lists both the wood thrush and cerulean warbler as species of conservation concern in our region and nationally (both species from the YSU list for the Mahoning River). The cerulean warbler, a bird of forested wetlands, is a candidate species for federal listing, and was included on the YSU list for the Mahoning River. The abundance of large trees along the Mahoning, which canopy parts of the river, is particularly important to some birds as well as to fish and other aquatic life, and the endangered Indiana bat. The species which might be most affected by disturbance of existing streamside vegetation (forest, used for foraging or nesting), or wetlands, include the great blue heron, wood duck, mallard, belted kingfisher, spotted sandpiper, and killdeer. Some of the warblers such as the northern waterthrush are also particularly dependent on riparian vegetation. The details about the cerulean warbler sighting, i.e. location, were not given but would be important. The riparian forest habitat for most of the species listed above would be of medium to high value and is relatively abundant on a national basis. The Corps should strive to achieve no net loss of habitat value while also minimizing the loss of in-kind habitat value. However, the loss of significant amounts of important bird habitat as a result of the project is not a forgone conclusion. At this time, the extent of vegetation clearing associated with the project, and the locations to be cleared, aren’t known. For riparian forest that would be cleared, the type, maturity, and quantity of vegetation (both in terms of feet of riverbank on both sides of the river, and acreage) should be determined. From this the Corps could develop a plan to restore, through planting, a semblance of the original native vegetation and its functions. We suggest that a re-vegetation plan specify large trees be planted. These plantings could be integrated with any bioengineering features that were required for erosion control. Some of the ideas included in the USACE’s Regulatory Guidance Letters No.01-1 and No. 02-2 might be utilized to develop the habitat restoration plan for riverbank vegetation. The acreages of project caused disturbances should be totaled and categorized by type of impact. Restoration for such impacts should be a project feature. We recommend that an ecosystem restoration plan be formulated to address fish and wildlife habitat changes and losses. 2 Wetland along the Mahoning River has not yet been summarized for the project. We suggest that the Corps consult the National Wetland Inventory maps for the project reach of the Mahoning River as a first step. For wetlands that would be affected by the project, we suggest the use of Ohio EPA’s wetland replacement system. The Mahoning River aquatic ecosystem is highly fragmented. From Table 1 it can be seen that fish of some of the dam pools would not have much access to perennial tributaries, and the quality of some of those tributaries is highly questionable. Fish movements are restricted by both Mahoning River dams and tributary dams. Today the Mahoning River, for the most part, does not contain many areas of rapidly flowing water due to the influence of dam pools. If dams were removed from the river subsequent to sediment cleanup, we would expect only positive results for aquatic life in the Mahoning River. The results, in terms of fish, wildlife, and invertebrate habitat quality would be much greater if both dam removal and dredging occurred than if dredging was performed without dam removal.