The How and When of Habitat Restoration in the Lower Passaic River:

Exploring the Challenges of Restoring Urban Environments

Eli Reinharz (1), Reyhan Mehran (2), Thomas M. Brosnan (1), and Carl W. Alderson (3)

(1) NOAA Damage Assessment Center, 1305 East West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, (301)713-3038,  (301)713-4387, eli.reinharz@noaa.gov, tom.brosnan@noaa.gov, www.darrp.noaa.gov/

(2) NOAA Coastal Protection and Restoration Division, 290 Broadway, New York, NY 10007,
(212) 637-3257,212)637-4207, reyhan.mehran@noaa.gov. response.restoration.noaa.gov/cpr

(3) NOAA Fisheries Restoration Center, JJ Howard Marine Laboratory, 74 Magruder Road,
Highlands, NJ 07732, (732)-872-3087, (732) 872-3077, carl.alderson@noaa.gov, ww.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/restoration/

Restoration in less-than-pristine areas or implementation of restoration projects prior to complete remediation of contaminated sediments can be a battle cry in the heavily urbanized and industrialized watershed of the Lower Passaic River in northern New Jersey.  Local constituents have waited too long for restoration along this river and remediation of arguably one of the most contaminated waterbodies in the world may not happen soon enough.  Development pressure along the river is strong, opportunities for restoration are limited and dwindling, and yet the potential for recontamination of restored areas (by unremediated areas, the remediation itself, and ongoing urban sources) poses a serious threat to receptors.   Restoration planners and Natural Resource Trustees are forced to weigh the pros and cons of restoring habitat in, and access to, a heavily contaminated river.  They must also consider how soon restoration can safely occur, how much can be implemented, how it can be designed to minimize adverse impacts (e.g., attractive nuisance), and what benefits the project can provide.   The arguments are strong both for and against restoration in contaminated urban rivers and “restoration before remediation”. 

This presentation will explore the variety of challenges encountered when seeking to conduct habitat restoration in a Superfund site and in urban environments in general.  Site-specific issues on the Lower Passaic River will be used as a case example. 

Sediments of the Lower Passaic River are heavily contaminated with dioxins, DDT, PCBs, heavy metals, and PAHs as well as a suite of other constituents.  The entire lower river has been designated a Superfund Site as well as an Urban Rivers Restoration Initiative pilot project.  Stakeholders on the lower river include a large group of potentially responsible parties, non-governmental organizations, municipalities, and government agencies, each with their own views on how, why, and when restoration along the river must be implemented.

Ultimately some level of restoration may occur before the Lower Passaic River is completely remediated.  Regulators and restoration planners must ensure that those projects are conducted with an awareness of how to maximize benefits while minimizing risks to the public and the environment.  And all stakeholders need to recognize the importance of both the risks and rewards of “restoration now.”