Project Summary

1. Project Identification

Name	Aransas NWR Shoreline Protection
Region	Gulf of Mexico
State	TX
Location	Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, Aransas County, TX
Date of this update

2. Problem(s) addressed (check one or more)

Habitat Restoration/Protection
Wetlands
River systems
Beaches/Dunes
Offshore areas
Mangroves
Assisting Species at Risk
Pollution Mitigation
Non-Point Source Pollution
Other (describe)

3. Project Description (100 words or less. Please include qualitative information, e.g. acres of habitat restored, miles of steam reopened to migration, and legislative authorization, e.g. WRDA, ISTEA, CWA/NEP, CZMA, etc.)

The Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) passes through and along the southern limit of the Aransas National Wildlife Refuge. Erosion of the channel banks caused by boat wakes from commercial and recreational vessels, wind driven waves, and storms has threatened the sole wintering grounds for the federally listed endangered whooping crane (Grus americana). The crane's feeding, resting and territorial habitats are located immediately adjacent to the GIWW. These limited areas are designated as "critical habitat" and negative or adverse impacts are violations of the Endangered Species Act. The refuge has reportedly lost over 1,000 acres of critical habitat for the whooping crane since 1950.

In order to stem this erosion a temporary solution was derived using cement bags to form revertment or embankment to protect the shoreline. Approximately three months each year from 1989 to 1992 were spent planning, designing, coordinating and implementing the all volunteer project. In all, the project protected 75-100 acres of salt marsh utilized by the endangered whooping crane through the placement of shoreline stabilization structures (cement bags) along 3,850 feet of channel bank. The FWS was the project lead and together with the COE, provided coordination and technical support, while the Navy provided funding to increase the amount of shoreline protected and develop an interpretive video on the whooping crane=s plight. Additionally, and perhaps most importantly, 38 private sector businesses, 3 conservation and special interest groups, 4 organized scouting groups, 5 Texas State agencies, and 7 federal agencies contributed in kind services worth over $2.4 million. Five hundred nonfederal volunteers contributed over 7,000 hours of labor to this effort over the four-year life of the program.

A more permanent solution to the problem of continued erosion of the whooping crane=s habitat adjacent to the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway was examined by the COE in a feasibility report due for completion in June of 1995. The study was authorized by Section 216 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1970 which directs the COE to reexamine existing projects if environmental, engineering and/or economic conditions warrant a change in the original project purposes. If authorization for construction is granted and an agreement is reached on cost sharing, this proposed project could provide a more permanent solution.

4. Goals/Benefits (quantify where possible using measures of success list) Was a cost-benefit study conducted for this project? yes/no If yes, provide a summary of findings.

Protected approximately one linear mile of critical habitat from further degradation pending the implementation of the permanent habitat protection solution. / Yes

5. Partners (include each participant's responsibilities - funding, permitting, etc.)

• Federal

  Lead:	FWS: Coordination, volunteers, expertise, oversight
  Others:	USN: funding, volunteers, expertise NMFS: volunteers, expertise COE: volunteers, expertise, funding

• Non-Federal

  TX-PWD: volunteers
  TX-DOT: volunteers
  Local sponsors: volunteers

6. Funding/Contributions (organization and amount)

• Cash

  Federal		$25,000
  Non Federal	State government
  	Local government
  	Private industry
  	Public interest groups
  Total		$25,000

• In-Kind Services (hours, equipment, or other forms of assistance and estimated dollar value)

  Federal	$500,000 (hours and technical assistance)
  Non Federal	$1,875,000 (hours, materials, supplies, assistance)
  Total	$2,400,000

• Volunteers (number of people and hours, and estimated dollar value)

  7,200 hours

7. Legislative authorities used by each participant

---

8. Value added by Coastal America Partnership

1. Would the project have been undertaken by a single agency? (yes or no)

   No

2. IF YES: How was the project different as a Coastal America Partnership Project than it would have been as a single agency project? (e.g. size and scope, funding, time frame, etc.)

9. Project Status

	scheduled	actual
Initiation date	1989	1989
Completion date	1990	1992
Current stage	Completed in 1992

10. Contacts

• Project Manager

  Tom Serota
  Project Leader
  Fisheries Resources Office
  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
  Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi
  Suite 101 Seabreeze Hall, Campus Box 328
  Corpus Christi, TX 78412-
  (512) 991-1443
  (512) 991-2816 (fax)
  er2ffa_ccfro@mail.fws.gov

• Participating Agency/Organization Contacts: (e.g. volunteer groups, conservation groups, state agencies, and other federal agency contacts)

  (See Project Narrative)

11. Any additional information/comments

The project was designed as a temporary "fix" to prevent additional erosion of the GIWW shoreline until such time as the USCOE received funding authorization and implemented a permanent solution. As a direct result of this "volunteer" project, the COE has placed manufactured erosion prevention structures since 1993 along approximately three miles of shoreline. The actual volunteer portion of the project ran from 1989 through 1992. It served its purpose and was disbanded after the mechanized structures were put in by the COE in 1993.

This page was last updated on Saturday, 24-Jun-2000 11:48:47 EDT
Coastal America * Coastal America Regions
Coastal America Reporters Building 300 7th Street, SW Suite 680 Washington, DC 20250
(202) 401-9928 * (202) 401-9821 (FAX)
comments to lawrencea@fas.usda.gov