Mississippi Meeting Minutes

Mississippi River Conservation Initiative

Mississippi Planning Meeting

November 20-21, 2003

The Lower Mississippi River Conservation Committee (LMRCC) conducted the fifth in a series of six state-level planning meetings at the Battlefield Inn in Vicksburg, Mississippi on November 20-21, 2003 to identify aquatic habitat restoration opportunities in the Lower Mississippi River (LMR) leveed floodplain. The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks (MDWFP), members of the LMRCC, served as local hosts of the meeting.

Approximately forty participants representing state and federal agencies and the private sector participated in discussions to: 1) identify potential habitat restoration sites along the Mississippi reach of the LMR, and 2) to review federal, state, and private programs relevant to habitat and environmental restoration within the LMR leveed floodplain. Participants were welcomed to the meeting by Moderator Richard Ingram, MDEQ Yazoo River Basin Coordinator. The meeting began with an introductory session comprised of presentations on issues related to conservation and habitat restoration of the Lower Mississippi River’s aquatic resources. The introductory session was followed by general discussions of potential restoration opportunities. The second day consisted of reviewing and discussing restoration sites not covered during the first day. Because essential Memphis District Corps of Engineers (COE) staff weren’t present at the beginning of the discussion of potential restoration sites within their district, sites identified in the Vicksburg COE District were addressed first. After Memphis COE District staff arrived, discussion was focused on potential restoration sites identified within that district. The meeting notes begin with proposed restoration Site 1 (RM [River Mile] 719) and proceed down river to Site 80 (RM 322). A summary of presentations and discussions are presented below. Printouts of the slide-shows are provided in the appendices.

INTRODUCTORY SESSION

AWater Quality Benefits from Implementing the Lower Mississippi River Aquatic Resource Management Plan@ - Richard Ingram (Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality)

Mr. Ingram discussed various environmental problems associated with the LMR, including the deforestation of wetlands along the river corridor that has resulted in soil from the river=s floodplain being increasingly eroded away by high water events. Increased nutrient input and sediment loss from LMR watershed has increased the Gulf Hypoxia problem. Implementation of the aquatic restoration goals outlined in the Lower Mississippi River Aquatic Resource Management Plan will improve water quality in the LMR and positively affect the LMR ecosystem=s natural resources.

AOverview of the Lower Mississippi River Aquatic Resource Management Plan@ -

Bubba Hubbard (Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks)

Mr. Hubbard discussed the potential importance of the LMR’s role in providing natural resource and economic benefits to the Delta region and the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks’ interest in working with other partners to accomplish habitat restoration objectives within the Mississippi reach of the LMR leveed floodplain. The LMRCC has three broad goals that will improve the LMR=s aquatic resources. These goals are to: 1) raise public awareness of the River as an ecosystem (most people aren’t aware of the river’s natural resources) 2) implement sustainable land use changes on the floodplain by working with willing private landowners to reforest marginal agricultural lands, and 3) increase public interaction with the river by promoting consumptive (hunting and fishing) and non-consumptive (tourism, bird watching, camping, recreational boating, etc.) uses. The Lower Mississippi River Aquatic Resource Management Plan (LMRARMP) provides a mechanism for addressing these three broad goals. LMRARMP objectives are: 1) restoration of 50% of degraded secondary channels 2) restoration of 60% of degraded floodplain lakes 3) reforestation of 130,000 aces of cleared wetlands (primarily on private land), and 4) restoring hydrology on 80,000 acres of degraded wetlands. Mr. Hubbard concluded his remarks by saying the Tennessee restoration plan for the LMR was an excellent template to follow.

ALarge River Aquatic Habitat Restoration Techniques and the Potential Role of the Corps of Engineers in their Implementation@ - Steve Ellis (Mississippi Valley Division U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)

The Mississippi Valley Division (MVD) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is comprised of six districts extending from the St. Paul District in the extreme northern portion of the Mississippi River to the New Orleans District on the south. Mr. Ellis provided an overview of the Corps= channel improvement project and how it fits into the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project (MR&T). The 1927 flood in the Lower Mississippi Valley focused national attention on the need to reduce flooding along the lower river and resulted in Congress passing the Flood Control Act of 1928, which is administered by the Mississippi River Tributaries Commission. The MR&T project is divided into four features: 1) levees 2) tributary basin improvements 3) floodways, and 4) channel stabilization. Mr. Ellis is responsible for administering the MVD=s channel stabilization program which provides opportunities to construct environmentally beneficial features such as notched dikes, articulated concrete revetment (provides a rough surface for invertebrates to become established), chevrons, etc. These tools are available for adding Aenvironmental benefits@ to the Corps= Congressional mandate to maintain a safe navigation channel. In addition to these practices, the Corps maintains an active LMR environmental program involving monitoring the federally endangered least tern and pallid sturgeon. Corps’ studies conducted to assess fisheries resources associated with dike fields have shown excellent populations of river fishes associated with scour holes and plunge pools within and below dike fields.

AOverview of Continuing Authorities Programs@ - Renee Turner (Vicksburg District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)

Ms. Turner discussed the following components of the Corps= Continuing Authorities Program (CAP): 1) Section 205 provides protection from flooding and costs exceeding $100,000 are shared 65 (Federal):35 (non-Federal) rate 2) Section 14 provides funds to protect public facilities that are endangered by a Corps project. The program is administered primarily to prevent erosion damage. The first $40,000 is not cost shared but the remainder of the project=s cost is cost shared at 65 (Federal):35 (non-Federal). 3) Section 107 addresses small navigation projects by providing improvements to navigation, including dredging of channels, widening of turning basins, and construction of navigation aids. Examples of Section 107 projects are the Yazoo Diversion Canal and widening the Mississippi River navigation channel. Cost sharing after the first $100,000 is 80 (Federal):20 (non-Federal). 4) Section 1135 – The Small Ecosystem Restoration Program of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 provides for restoration of degraded environmental systems. Section 1135 projects can be constructed both on Corps-owned land or on non-Corps owned land, if a Corps project caused environmental damage to the non-Corps owned land. The program involves a 75 (Federal):25 (non-Federal) cost share. Project expenses, including the feasibility study, are cost shared to a maximum of $5 million/project. Non-federal government agencies and non-governmental agencies can participate in this program. 5) Section 206 provides funds for restoration and protection of aquatic habitat. This program differs from Section 1135 in that the project need not be constructed on areas impacted by a Corps program. This program requires a 65 (Federal :35 (non-Federal) cost share. It does provide for in-kind work that can total 100% of the non-federal partner=s share whereas Section 1135 projects can only accept 80% of in-kind work. Appropriations for the CAP are authorized by Congress on an annual basis. Ms. Turner mentioned a non-CAP program known as Planning Assistance to States which is cost shared on a 50:50 basis. This is a good program to help fund state comprehensive or master planning.

ANatural Resource-Based Economic Development Potential in Mississippi@ - Ron Nassar (Lower Mississippi River Conservation Committee & U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service)

Mr. Nassar pointed out that the LMRCC has no Congressional mandate to restore the LMR’s natural resources, while the Corps has a Congressional mandate to control flooding and maintain navigation along the LMR. The LMRCC frequently partners with the Corps because they have a diverse array of natural resource conservation programs that can be utilized to achieve both organization’s goals. The LMRCC has begun promoting a new concept that the LMR provides a great economic opportunity for Mississippi, as well as the other states in the Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley. People in Mississippi annually spend large sums to pursue consumptive and non-consumptive uses associated with the LMR. Tourism and wildlife-associated recreation are currently a major industry in Mississippi that was worth more to the state’s economy in 2001 than agriculture. Mississippi=s congressional delegation is beginning to recognize the value of the state=s natural resources to its economy. There is a new term called AGeoTourism@ that is being used by the travel industry to identify tourists who desire a more complete travel experience. The number of AGeoTourists@ is expected to increase from 55 million in 2003 to 100 million in the next ten years. The primary reason the LMRCC is proposing managing the river for sustainable use is that funding expended by tourists in Mississippi can provide a sustainable source of economic development to local communities. The LMRCC is currently conducting a series of six state-level planning meetings designed to promote natural resource-based economic development within the leveed floodplain of the LMR in the Lower Mississippi Valley. When these meetings are complete, the six state plans will be compiled into a Restoring America=s Greatest River, a landscape-scale plan for restoration of the LMR. The possibilities associated with addressing the =s economic value of the LMR’s natural resources were stressed. The river=s economic value can be enhanced through resource restoration, thereby leaving an environmental and economic legacy for generations to come.

“Constructing Dike Notches to Provide Environmental Benefits” – Derrick Smith (Channel Improvement Project Manager) & Kandita Waller (River Engineering Section) (Memphis District U. S. Army Corps of Engineers) showed a video on dike notching to restore environmental benefits within the Keyes Point Dike Field (RM 790). The video showed the relative ease with which notches can be constructed in existing dikes to restore flow into extrachannel areas. Cost ($2,000) of constructing the notch using a barge-mounted dragline barge was paid for by the Memphis District. The Memphis District has shown outstanding initiative in constructing environmental restoration features in conjunction with their Operations & Maintenance Program and Memphis District personnel discussed future plans for similar activities.

General observations made by the meeting participants and specifically Dr. Jack Killgore & Dr. Jan Hoover (U. S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center; Vicksburg, MS), Steve Ellis (Mississippi Valley Division Channel Improvement Coordinator), Derrick Smith (Memphis District Channel Improvement Project Manager), Glenda Hill (Vicksburg District Channel Improvement Project Manager), and Jim Guttshall (Vicksburg District River Engineer) relative to restoration of aquatic habitat in the Lower Mississippi River leveed floodplain.

1. Data on controlling elevations in secondary channels and their relationship to Mississippi River stage are required prior to initiating any habitat restoration work in the Lower Mississippi River. The Corps of Engineers may be able to collect this information during their Lower Mississippi River hydraulic surveys which are conducted annually at 0.2 mile (1,000 foot) ranges.

2. In October 2003 the Corps of Engineers collected low water aerial video footage from both sides of the Lower Mississippi River in the reach from Cairo, Illinois to the Old River Control Structure. The data, available in digital format with GPS coordinates, is available for both channel improvement and environmental planning purposes.

3. Corps of Engineers dikes that are notched naturally are not normally repaired, provided that the notch will not adversely affect navigation and there is an apron below the notch to prevent structural damage to the dike. L-shaped dikes, typically used to create a new bankline, are a good environmental feature because they create an unusual type of habitat.

4. Upstream heads of islands usually have gravel bars on them unless they have been armored. Dikes going through Lower Mississippi River islands are burying gravel bars with sand. Shallow water gravel bars provide important habitat for fish but, in some instances, they are degrading due to the effect of the dikes. Gravel bars in the Lower Mississippi River need to be mapped and engineering solutions to minimize their degradation need to be developed. Considering their relative environmental importance, all gravel bars should be designated as special habitat and every effort made to preserve them. Sand and gravel mining is occurring in the Lower Mississippi River and a pre-mining assessment is required by state law (data collected is transferred to a state regulatory agency for use by any agency that requests it).

5. The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers is conducting a study to examine the impacts of sand and gravel mining on fisheries resources and river geomorphology. Pre-existing, extraction, and post-extraction conditions are being evaluated.

6. Point bars have a high level of habitat diversity. Notching dikes on a point bar may adversely affect functionality of the sandbar for some species (sturgeon).

7. A joint (U. S. Army Corps of Engineers x states) monitoring study of 5-10 Lower Mississippi River side channels is needed to develop benefit:cost ratios for habitat restoration projects.

8. Construction of notches for environmental enhancement can be relatively inexpensive. An environmental notch with a 50 foot bottom width and 200 foot top width was constructed in Porter Lake, Arkansas Dike Number 6 (RM 697) at an approximate cost of $2,000. Features to consider when notching dikes for environmental enhancement include determination of the location and size of the proposed notch, amount of stone in the dike (6-10 feet of stone below the notch is considered a sufficient amount of base rock), location of the natural channel(s), and leaving the first upstream dike intact and staggering the locations of notches in the remaining dikes in the field. The Memphis District of the Corps of Engineers conducts surveys to determine the velocity and depth of pools created below notches. Notching dikes in secondary channels is a good environmental feature but the value of notching dikes in straight river reaches should be evaluated. Deep slackwater embayments downstream from some dikes are excellent fish habitat and should be maintained as such.

9. Restoration of meander scars within the leveed floodplain should be given a high restoration priority because of their habitat values to fisheries resources.

10. Proposed habitat restoration opportunities need to be evaluated through site specific assessments and prioritized.

11. Some oxbow lakes should be cut off from the river, rather than having an active hydrological connection other than during periods of extensive flooding, because connecting them can fundamentally change the fish community. We should diversify the lentic habitat within a river reach by working with the existing habitat to provide a mixture of permanently flooded, seasonally flooded, and almost entirely isolated oxbow lakes.

12. Headcutting has occurred 20-30 miles upstream of the mouth of Bayou Pierre (to a point above Smyrna, MS) and there are signs of headcutting in the mouth of the Big Black River.

AIdentification of Wetland and Aquatic Habitat Restoration Opportunities in the Leveed Floodplain of the Mississippi River from Mile 715 to Mile 305 - Ron Nassar (LMRCC), Steve Ellis (MVD COE), Memphis and Vicksburg District Corps of Engineers personnel

Note: Areas discussed during the meeting are assigned a number corresponding to the number on the enclosed summary map, followed by an approximate river mile location, a brief description, and the number of the planning map on which it appears.

719

Evaluate habitat rehabilitation need and feasibility in lake complex including installation of weirs, spot dredging, etc. Habitat restoration in Old River Lake located on Island No. 53.

Map

Comment: MDWFP reports that they are unaware of Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency staff sampling or conducting other biological/hydrological investigations in the Horn Lake complex. A 1998 creel survey conducted by MDWFP in Horn Lake found this water body was likely the most heavily fished (hrs/acre) lake in the state. Because the area being recommended for potential habitat restoration lies within both Mississippi and Tennessee, any proposed work should be a cooperative effort between the two states.

710

Replace Desoto County Boat Ramp.

Map

Comment: The existing ramp has a sandbar in front of it hindering boat access. A new ramp should be constructed further down river from the present ramp. The Memphis COE District agree to provide depth information to MDWFP.

710-719

Conserve/Restore gravel bar to increase habitat diversity.

Map

Comment: Information on the location of gravel bars in the LMR is limited, necessitating the need to map and assess all gravel bar sites. Gravel bars are important because many imperiled fish species (e.g. sturgeon, paddlefish) utilize gravel substrates for spawning, foraging, and predator avoidance. Steve Ellis (MVD COE) said that when the Corps is working in the vicinity of a gravel bars they strive to minimize any adverse effects to the bar that might be caused by their work. Note: these generic comments pertain to all gravel bar sites contained in this list.

705-703

Improve aquatic habitat diversity by notching Pickett dike field to increase plunge pools, quiet water, shallow depth, deeper areas, etc.

Map

Comment: The Corps notched dike 3 this past summer and is committed to notching the remaining dikes.

702

Habitat restoration in Old River Lake located on Island No. 53.

Map

Comment: No one was familiar with the habitat features of this area. MDWFP mentioned that the Grand Casino and the Mississippi River Park are located in this vicinity. This site requires further assessment to determine what habitat restoration opportunities might exist.

694

Restore hydrology in Midway Lake to provide aquatic habitat.

Map

Comment: The area is owned by Mississippi but managed by Arkansas. Access to the site is impossible during low water stages of the LMR. This project will require coordination between Mississippi and Arkansas to determine whether this is a public lake or privately owned.

693

Conserve/Restore gravel bar to increase habitat diversity.

Map

Comment: Refer to comments at Site 3.

690

Habitat restoration in Old River Lake on Rabbit Island.

Map

Comment: This is the area where the original casinos were built and the lower end of the site was dug out to facilitate passage of the casino boats into the slip. Approximately 90% of floodplain lakes have been lost and this area should be given high priority for restoration.

682

Conserve/Restore gravel bar to increase habitat diversity.

Map

Comment: Refer to comments at Site 3.

682-681

Improve aquatic habitat diversity by notching Bordeaux Point dike field to increase plunge pools, quiet water, shallow depth, deeper areas, etc.

Map

Comment: The Corps advised that this site is likely covered by 10-15 feet of sand and the dikes would be extremely hard to notch. The participants mutually agreed that the site would be omitted from the list of potential restoration projects.

676.5

Restore minimum flow through secondary channel by notching Below Walnut Bend dikes.

Map

Comment: The Corps sees no problem carrying this request out.

670

Habitat restoration within the Duck Lake, Mud Lake, North Lake, and Flower Lake wetland complex.

Map

Comment: MDWFP advised that the lakes receive heavy fishing pressure and the quality of their habitat is generally good. Because the lakes already have good quality habitat, they were assigned a low restoration priority. The questions was asked if there are opportunities for notching additional dikes in the St. Francis Dike Field (RM 670 – 671). John Rumancik (Memphis District COE) noted that the large sandbar in this area provides good least tern habitat.

668-666

Improve aquatic habitat diversity by notching Flower Lake Bar dike field to increase plunge pools, quiet water, shallow depth, deeper areas, etc.

Map

Comment: The Corps noted that this is not a problem area for navigation and plunge pools have already formed behind the dikes. Because these plunge pools provide good habitat diversity, the Corps recommended that this site should be left as is at the present time. The Corps agree to consider notching the Prairie Point dikes. It appears one of the dikes in this field may have been notched previously. The final decision at this site was to leave Flower Lake dikes alone and the Memphis District would assess the feasibility of notching the Prairie Point dikes. Note that the Flower Lake Bar outlet channel has been revetted.

667

Conserve/Restore gravel bar to increase habitat diversity.

Map

Comment: Refer to comments at Site 3.

667

Restore minimum flow through secondary channel by notching Prairie Point dikes.

Map

Comment: Dikes 3 and 4 need to be notched to allow flow through the right descending bank side channel.

658-656

Improve aquatic habitat diversity by notching Montezuma Bar dike field to increase plunge pools, quiet water, shallow depth, deeper areas, etc.

Map

Comment: The Corps has identified a navigation problem down stream from this site. Once this problem is addressed, they will reassess the feasibility of notching the Montezuma Bar dikes.

652

Notch dikes along Friars Point. Existing ramp at RM 653 is privately owned and no longer accessible to the public. A public boat ramp has been requested at Friars Point.

Map

Comment: The Corps identified a navigation problem at RM 653-652 and the proposed dike notching in this project was omitted. Slack water embayments downstream from some of the dikes are excellent habitat. MDWFP biologists commented that the boat ramp at RM 652.5 is usable, but there is a question as to whether this is a public ramp. Before discussing an additional boat ramp, ownership of the existing site needs to be determined. A suggestion was made that MDWFP explore the possibility of developing a Cooperative Agreement between the landowners and MDWFP.

650

Yazoo-Mississippi Delta Levee Board regulated water levels annually in Horseshoe Lake from February to May, but is no longer able to do so due to an inoperable water control structure. Weir with operable water control structure needed to raise water levels and improve aquatic habitat.

Map

Comment: The MDWFP said the present water control structure in Horseshoe Lake is operated by inserting a plywood closure to maintain lake levels from January 15 to May 15. After May 15 the levee district may operate the control structure to lower the lake level. MDWFP felt their agency wasn=t ready to enter into an agreement to maintain the water levels within the lake. This project will require joint coordination between the Yazoo-Mississippi Delta Levee Board and MDWFP.

640

Notch closing structures at the head of Island 63 Bend to reintroduce flow. Access to the river is limited at low water but the higher water level in the bend will provide limited access and improve aquatic habitat.

Map

Comment: The Corps will look at this site to assess whether the dikes can be notched. If notching isn=t feasible, suggest dredging out local side channel (Bend of Island 63) to provide low water access to the existing Qua Paw Boat Ramp. This project would have to be carried out through a Section 1135 or 206 Project with the potential for in-kind work by MDWFP to construct a new boat ramp.

639

Improve aquatic habitat diversity by notching Island 63 Bar dike field to restore flow and improve aquatic habitat.

Map

Comment: Dike 2 has a natural notch and the Corps has notched dikes 3 and 4. No further action is needed at this time.

637

Notch closing structure to increase side channel flow.