07/15/24 - 152 New Stories - REAL Environmental & Conservation Leadership In PA: http://tinyurl.com/45529742
| Share this: | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
House Stream Cleaning Bill OK'd By Committee, Opposed By CBF
|
|
The House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee Wednesday reported out House Bill 2359 (Causer-R-Cameron) to streamline the process for removing potential flood hazards from streams.
Prior to Committee action, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation wrote to the Committee chairs and members saying, "While CBF understands the premise behind the bill and agrees that it attempts to address situations requiring attention, we believe the bills before the House EREC fall short of creating a viable solution to these complicated issues."
“The process for removing obstructions such as gravel bars from our streams is not only inefficient and cumbersome but also a threat to public safety,” Rep. Martin Causer said. “The Department of Environmental Protection has been unable to offer a solution to the problem, and we simply cannot wait any longer.”
The intent of the bill is to create a clear, efficient and effective process to better manage stream obstruction problems without an unnecessary, complicated and expensive permitting process. The bill also includes measures to further expedite stream clearings when such activities are deemed to be an emergency by local, county or state authorities.
“In Emporium, Cameron County, borough officials have been trying to remove a gravel bar for more than five years but have been unable to get the go ahead from DEP to do so,” Rep. Causer said. “And they aren’t the only ones. There are other communities in our area and across the state that have experienced similar roadblocks. It’s just ridiculous.”
Rep. Causer and other lawmakers in rural areas of the state questioned DEP Secretary Michael Krancer extensively about the issue of gravel bars during House Appropriations Committee hearings earlier this year, and the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee held an informational meeting on the topic as well.
Matthew Ehrhart, PA Director of CBF, told Committee members:
"... attempts to address concerns resulting from recent flooding events by allowing for the removal of obstructions deemed having the “potential” to create a flood without a thorough understanding of the impacts such removal may have on aquatic life and the hydrology of the stream itself. Stream cleaning, as it is often called, often results in increased flooding frequency, higher peak discharges, and a higher flow velocity, thereby increasing the damage to established infrastructure.
"Advocates of stream cleaning fail to recognize that flooding events are not caused by such things as gravel beds and the natural meandering of waterways; rather, poor stormwater management and extreme weather conditions are most often the impetus. Proper permitting and oversight by DEP and its engineers is imperative to ensure that more damage is not done to streams by well-intentioned but uninformed citizens who believe that removal of obstructions will save their property from future flooding events.
"It should be noted that there is a distinction between obstructions resulting from a severe flooding event, such as newly fallen trees, which may in fact need to be removed from a waterway. While House Bill 2359 does not explicitly acknowledge these hazards, it is important to note that DEP currently has an emergency permitting system in place to handle debris found in our streams as a result of an extreme weather event. As such, it may be more productive to work with DEP to set up a more streamline, easily accessible system which addresses post-flooding storm debris."
|
|
5/28/2012 |
| Go To Preceding Article Go To Next Article |
