Laserfiche WebLink
FEMA R10 FAQ: Rescinded Policy on Fish Enhancement Structures in the Floodway <br />U& Dgmrtmenf of RMNW ad S curtsy <br />Region X <br />130 228th street, SW <br />HodidL WA 9802119796 <br />Issued, 1999 *FEMA <br />Rescinded: August 17, 2020 <br />Policy on Fish Enhancement Stractures in the Fioodway <br />The balance re uhcd between anadromous fish and the human environment is unique to the <br />Northwest. Maintaining that balance often maks implementing ecgulations a dWIenge. <br />Sometimes the local, State and Federal regulations contradict each other. This is the case with <br />fish enhancement structuxes. <br />FEMA's regulations require communities to prohibit encaoacbments ' A floodways <br />unless provided with a no -rim analysis. The current listing and prop lila of certain <br />anadromous fish species as Threatened or Endangered requures res -ariorethe:ir habitat to <br />ensure their survivability. itestoxing that habitat often entails fioodway. A <br />strict motion of this standard could require a zein ively've ,psis that might <br />exceed the cost of the enleancanent prco ect. .0 <br />FEMA recogmws this. While we behave the beast co <br />encroachment standard as it exists, an informed judi <br />can be made as to exceptions for which less flj&fhe <br />The cominualty official often does not have <br />re the impacts of these structuresd `l <br />cor aunty to deft to the "judgme q <br />qualified hydraulic or hydrology pm 10s�al6 a�lc <br />Development and the Natural Resau C'Arn <br />qualified staff of fisheries. o water <br />V10f, is to preserve the F000dway <br />g fish enhancement strutcum <br />dmulia analyses are required. <br />ake an informed juudgnaent <br />: . Thercf nrn, FEMA will allow the <br />Tofessional regardingg such impacts. Such <br />!'include staff of Ru nd Conservation and <br />t Service, It would also include similarly <br />resources agencies. <br />The qualified pmfessson ��niuimwn, provide a feasibility analysis and certification <br />that, act was des, #a Cep . rise in 100 -year flood levels as close to zero as <br />ly 'ble an tla ko st*� would be impacted by a potential rise. Additionally, <br />routwe .t projt; would be necessary to sustain conveyance over time and the <br />community s'h term Makumance pro �n dr acceptance office <br />project. FEMA ! o ,.:,�,ds a condition be placed on M ojects emphasizing the <br />dyxlatnics of a zip. Mlle community deems necessary, furffia analysis be required. <br />We believe this is pre cable to trying to specify in the ordinance language all the diffmant types <br />of "development" that need not comply with the "no rise" standard. Typically, any rise caused <br />would rare some offsetting action such as compensatory storage, channel alteration, or <br />removal of encroachment. One of these alternatives would be appropriate to compensate <br />for any rise preserve the integrity of the floodplain standards. <br />FEMA Region 10 feels this policy is in, keeping with the concept of wise floodplain tunent <br />which means enjoying the benefits of floodplain lands and waters while still miulmiAngg loss <br />of We and damage from flooding and at the same time preserving and restoring the natural <br />resources of floodplains as much as possible. If you have any questions regarding this policy, <br />please contact the Mitigation Division at (425) 4874737. <br />vrmr fem,a.g" <br />Learn more at fema.gov Mar 2021 6 <br />