Lay of the Land:
Herring Run Stream Restoration
a quick primer to understand what's going on
FHRP would like to thank residents for their concern and support in this matter! You have likely heard controversy about the stream restoration projects in Herring Run stream beds. Below we lay out for you an overall picture of what’s going on, in layman’s terms. This is not an exhaustive, academic review. We are providing this information in a distilled format so that everyone has the information they need to make informed choices about their course of action. Want to help us in our efforts to stop this project? See CALL TO ACTION page.
THE WHERE: There are TWO (2) separate DPW projects being discussed and may be easily confused. Both of these are different from the Hooper Field Project led by Baltimore City Recreation and Parks.
1. The current project is called ER 4054: Herring Run Stream Restoration Western Branch, a project of the Department of Public Works (DPW).
This is the project that is currently underway, and is the focus of recent news coverage. This project covers a portion of the Herring Run stream starting above Northern Parkway, across Hillen Rd from the Mt. Pleasant Ice Arena. It continues south (toward downtown) along the stream bed, along Hillen Rd across from the Mt Pleasant Golf course, to where the stream intersects with Hillen Road, toward Morgan State University.
2. The second DPW project is not yet underway, and will affect a currently undesignated portion of Herring Run Stream that is inside of Herring Run Park, closer to Harford Road, where the stream runs along Parkside Drive. FHRP will let residents know when the community input sessions will take place, when they have been announced by the DPW.
THE WHAT: .
What is Stream restoration?
Stream restoration is meant to restore streams to their natural condition. The challenge is that it involves cutting through large swatches of natural lands in order to “shore up” and reroute a stream bed to protect it from the impacts of flooding.
Is stream restoration good or bad?
The current discussion is about whether stream restoration works, and if it does work in some way, do the consequences of doing that work make it worth the destruction it causes?
In the case of the Western Branch of the Herring Run, the scientists of Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) say NO.
The cost-benefit is actually negative, meaning that the benefit is outweighed by the negative environmental impact. In other words, the bad significantly outweighs the good. Here is why:
It is largely due to too much water run-off from poorly designed public and private spaces with hard (impervious) surfaces.
This means that when it rains, the rain water does not have enough uncovered ground to soak into, which forces high volumes of water into storm drains. These storm drains empty directly into the stream bed. The amount of water going into storm drains continues to increase year after year because of heavier and more rain events, as well as an increase in developing areas that are not planning for water run-off in the right way.
This leads to further erosion problems. We have seen this locally with the Stony Run stream restoration project and the Chinquapin Run stream stabilization project. Further erosion problems then lead to further destruction of natural areas. FHRP has met with community members from these areas to learn about their experiences.
A note about the difference between stream restoration projects and repair/replacement of Storm Water Pipes and Sewage pipe systems: While both of these types of projects are purportedly undertaken in order to manage storm water runoff, in addition to other issues, they are not the same thing. Again, think about the cost-benefit idea of how much good comes out of how much damage. Leaking sewage is a health hazard and highly destructive to the natural environment. Such projects can have a positive cost-benefit (do more good than harm), even when they call for construction in a natural area. The important takeaway here is the idea of what the project costs Baltimore residents in terms of human health, and the health of our environment, versus what the long-term gain is truly going to be.
Please reach out to us at [email protected] if you have any questions! We will do our best to answer them!
Want to help us in our efforts to stop this project? See CALL TO ACTION page. (click the link)
We also encourage you continue to dive deeper into this issue, as FHRP is not representing ourselves as single source authorities on this matter. Power derives from knowledge, and knowledge comes from diverse sources.
THE WHERE: There are TWO (2) separate DPW projects being discussed and may be easily confused. Both of these are different from the Hooper Field Project led by Baltimore City Recreation and Parks.
1. The current project is called ER 4054: Herring Run Stream Restoration Western Branch, a project of the Department of Public Works (DPW).
This is the project that is currently underway, and is the focus of recent news coverage. This project covers a portion of the Herring Run stream starting above Northern Parkway, across Hillen Rd from the Mt. Pleasant Ice Arena. It continues south (toward downtown) along the stream bed, along Hillen Rd across from the Mt Pleasant Golf course, to where the stream intersects with Hillen Road, toward Morgan State University.
2. The second DPW project is not yet underway, and will affect a currently undesignated portion of Herring Run Stream that is inside of Herring Run Park, closer to Harford Road, where the stream runs along Parkside Drive. FHRP will let residents know when the community input sessions will take place, when they have been announced by the DPW.
THE WHAT: .
What is Stream restoration?
Stream restoration is meant to restore streams to their natural condition. The challenge is that it involves cutting through large swatches of natural lands in order to “shore up” and reroute a stream bed to protect it from the impacts of flooding.
Is stream restoration good or bad?
The current discussion is about whether stream restoration works, and if it does work in some way, do the consequences of doing that work make it worth the destruction it causes?
In the case of the Western Branch of the Herring Run, the scientists of Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) say NO.
The cost-benefit is actually negative, meaning that the benefit is outweighed by the negative environmental impact. In other words, the bad significantly outweighs the good. Here is why:
- Cutting down existing, mature forest with big healthy trees and destroying natural flood plains to replace them with man-made structures will decrease the area’s ability to handle water run-off in the long term, and may create more problems downstream.
- This section of stream bed is already doing what it is supposed to be doing, and doing it well.
- Taking out large sections of the existing natural space will increase sunlight to the area, heat up the river water, kill existing fish, and increase the growth of invasive, non-native plants. These things lead to less healthy forests and deeper loss of natural environments for decades to come.
- The project will likely require additional renovation in the near future, which requires more removal of natural forested space.
- Large, heavy machinery has to be brought to the stream bed. This requires massive removal of trees and plants. In addition, this heavy machinery will also compact the ground it drives over, making the ground less able to absorb rainfall, increasing water run-off to the streams, contributing to more flooding. Large trees in the area that weren’t cut down then die in the following years because the heavy machinery has run over the roots, killing the trees slowly.
- Current stream restoration projects are planned using measurements of water flow that were taken some 50 years ago, which are out of date based on current water flows due to today’s level of development and rainstorm activity.
It is largely due to too much water run-off from poorly designed public and private spaces with hard (impervious) surfaces.
This means that when it rains, the rain water does not have enough uncovered ground to soak into, which forces high volumes of water into storm drains. These storm drains empty directly into the stream bed. The amount of water going into storm drains continues to increase year after year because of heavier and more rain events, as well as an increase in developing areas that are not planning for water run-off in the right way.
This leads to further erosion problems. We have seen this locally with the Stony Run stream restoration project and the Chinquapin Run stream stabilization project. Further erosion problems then lead to further destruction of natural areas. FHRP has met with community members from these areas to learn about their experiences.
A note about the difference between stream restoration projects and repair/replacement of Storm Water Pipes and Sewage pipe systems: While both of these types of projects are purportedly undertaken in order to manage storm water runoff, in addition to other issues, they are not the same thing. Again, think about the cost-benefit idea of how much good comes out of how much damage. Leaking sewage is a health hazard and highly destructive to the natural environment. Such projects can have a positive cost-benefit (do more good than harm), even when they call for construction in a natural area. The important takeaway here is the idea of what the project costs Baltimore residents in terms of human health, and the health of our environment, versus what the long-term gain is truly going to be.
Please reach out to us at [email protected] if you have any questions! We will do our best to answer them!
Want to help us in our efforts to stop this project? See CALL TO ACTION page. (click the link)
We also encourage you continue to dive deeper into this issue, as FHRP is not representing ourselves as single source authorities on this matter. Power derives from knowledge, and knowledge comes from diverse sources.
PO Box 16167
Baltimore, MD 21218 410-417-8565 |