St. Clair Flats management plan

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

CLAI FLATS
MANAGEMENT
PLAN

W, -1-

,j"
- 0*4

QH
541.5 IVISION OF Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May, Inc.
.M3 kND RESOURCE PROGRAMS Engineers - Architects Planners
S7 Ann Arbor, Michigan
STM

1980 T OF NATURAL RESOURCES

At the mouth of the St. Clair River and forming a delta of marsh land which has
been known from time immemorial the world over as the St. Clair Flats, the Venice
of America, we have the greatest small mouthed bass spawning grounds in the
country; also, a natural nesting place for the mallard, canvasback, teal, etc.
Situated as it is, only a few minutes ride from Detroit, and forming as it does, Dne
of the finest recreational haunts for the sportsmen in America, this paradise for
the sportsmen has been slowly but surely taken away from the people of this State.

"St. Clair Flats Battle is On"
By Lloyd F. Eagan
Detroit Waltonian, March, 1925

ST. CLAIR FLATS MANAGEMENT PLAN

FEBRUARY, 1980

Prepared for the:

Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Division of Land Resource Programs
Coastal Program Unit

Prepared by:

AYRES, LEWIS, NORRIS & MAY, INC.
Engineers - Architects - Planners
3983 Research Park Drive
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104

Financial assistance for this plan
has been provided through the
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1972
administered by the
Office of Coastal Zone Management
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
and the
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Division of Land Resource Programs
Coastal Program Unit

Property of CSC Library

U - S - DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
r 2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON SC 29405-2413

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

MANAGEMENT PLAN SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . i-vi
Findings and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Management Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Land Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Policy Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
Acquisition Priorities Plan . . . . . . . . . . . vi

I INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4
Purpose of the Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Planning Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

11 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-11

III NATURAL RESOURCE AND CULTURAL
RESOURCE FACTORS . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-69

Natural Resource Factors

Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Water Quantity/Flow Characteristics . . . . . . 12
Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Flood Hazard Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Physiography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Geologic History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Geomorphology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . 24
Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Fish and Wildlife Resources . . . . . . . . . . 30
Unique Habitats; Endangered, Threatened,
and Rare Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Other Functions of the Wetlands . . . . . . . . 43
Cultural kesource Factors

Land and Water Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Utilities and Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Local Economy and Tax Base . . . . . . . . . . 5@

(Table of Contents - Page Two)

SECTION PAGE

III Existing Regulatory Authority . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Land and Water Management . . . . . . . . . . 53
Public Health and Water Quality . . . . . . . . 65
Dredge and Fill Activities . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Miscellaneous Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . 68

IV PHYSIOGRAPHIC AND CULTURAL UNITS . . . . . 70-82
Characterization of Physiographic Site Types . . . . . 70
Characterization of Cultural Units . . . . . . . . . 81

V MANAGEMENT PLAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83-123
Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Alternate Mancgement Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . 90
Evaluation of Management Scenarjos . . . . . . 90
Selection of the Management Scenario . . . . . . 98
Land Management Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Policy Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
General Policies . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Land Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Public Health and Environmental
Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
Recreational Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Resource Value of the Flats . . . . . . . . . . III
Acquisition Priorities Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Acquisition Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
Acquisition Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Acquisition Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Acquisition Funding .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
CONCLUSIONS . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124,125

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure I The Planning Process
Figure 2 St. Clair Flats Regional Area
Figure 3 State Legislation Dealing Specifically with the St. Clair Flats
Figure 4 Distribution of Inflow from the St. Clair River through
Lake St. Clair
Figure 5 Typical Landform Cross-Section, St. Clair Flats Area
Figure 6 The Deltaic Landforms of Dickinson Island,
Figure 7 Typical Soil Profile, St. Clair Flats Delta
Figure 8 Plant Community Displacement Model, Dickinson Island
Figure 9 Areal Extent of Wetlands, by Vegetation Type,
Dickinson Island Wetlands, 1949, 1964, and 1975
Figure 10 Fish Species Found in St. Clair Flats
Figure I I Michigan Non-Salmonoid Sportsfish Catch and Fishing Effort,
Lake St. Clair vs. Other Michigan Great Lakes Waters, 1975
Figure 12 Spawning Requirements and Habitat Preferences of the
Primary Sportsfish of the Flats
Figure 13 Fish Species Inhabiting Coastal Wetlands which are Tolerant
to Siltation, Turbidity, and Pollution
Figure 14 Species Kill Data, 1976-1977, St. Clair Flats, Michigan
Figure 15 Endangered Plants Found in the St. Clair Flats Area
Figure 16 Septic Permits Issued in the Flats, January, 1978 - July, 1979
Figure 17 Legislation Relating to the St. Clair Flats
Figure 18 Summary of Deeded and Leased Parcels, St. Clair Flats, 1977
Figure 19 Original Lease Rental Fees, as Provided for by Act 326
Figure 20 Physiographic Unit Evaluation Matrix
Figure 21 Physiographic Unit Sensitivity and Development Capability
Figure 22 Range of Management Scenarios
Figure 23 Scenario Evaluation Matrix: Summary of Costs
Figure 24 Scenario Evaluation Matrix: Summary of Benefits
Figure 25 Acquisition Methods of Leaseholdings
Figure 26 Land Acquisition Methods for Deeded Properties and
Private Claims

LIST OF MAPS

Map I Physiographic Units
Map 2 Cultural Units
Map 3 Land Management Plan
Map 4 Acquisition Priorities Plan

i
I
-i i
-I
I -
I
I
I
I
I
I

I Summary
I
I
.1
.1
I
I
I
;Ki@
2:@'A

ST. CLAIR FLATS MANAGEMENT PLAN

SUMMARY

The St. Clair Flats, located at the mouth of the St. Clair River, represent the
largest deltaic wetland system in the Great Lakes. Due to the extensive wetland
habitat, the Flats have received national recognition as G popular spot for hunting,
fishing and boating. As a recreational resource, the St. Clair Flats are easily
accessible to three-fifths of the State's population.

Unfortunately, the highly valuable wetlands of the Flats have been significantly
altered over the years. Prior to 1900, the Flats contained over 13,500 acres of
wetlands. Today, less than 4,500 acres of wetlands remain. The remaining wetland
acreage represents 88% of the total wetland on the Michigan portion of Lake St.
Clair. Residential and commercial development has altered much of the original
wetlands. Dredging, filling and bulkheading has destroyed important fish and
wildlife habitat and has degraded public recreational opportunities. Court decisions
in the early 1900's declared the Flats to be State-owned bottomlands. However,
legislative mandates and the lack of regulatory enforcement by State and local
governments have allowed the diversion of State-owned bottomlands to private
residential and commercial use. The St. Clair Flats Act, Act 326, P.A. of 1913, and
subsequent amendments, have provided for the leasing and deeding of State-owned
land for private use. Presently, the Flats are a mixture of State-owned lands,
State-owned leased lands, and privately-owned deeded properties.

This study has concluded that the Flats are biologically and economically
important. Fish and waterfowl production for the entire Lake St. Clair region is
dependent on the Flats as the last remaining wetlands on the U.S. side of the Lake.
The biological value is directly tied to recreational opportunities such as fishing
and hunting for over three million residents in southeastern Michigan. In addition
to the biological value, social, economic and recreational values require that the

past management practices be rectified and that new management policies be
adopted which recognize the importance of the Flats.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

A summary of major findings which form the basis of the management plan is
presented. The findings highlight the major issues and problems and demonstrate
the need for corrective action in the Flats.

Major Findings and Conclusions

Over 80% of the coastal wetlands on the Michigan side of Lake St. Clair have
been destroyed. Of the remaining wetlands, 88% are found in the St. Clair
Flats.

The wetlands of the Flats offers important food, cover and breeding areas for
fish and wildlife. The resources of the Flats are believed to support many fish
found within the entire Lake St. Clair system. Large numbers of migratory
waterfowl are also supported by these some resources.

0 Because of the close proximity to the Detroit metropolitan area, and the high
productivity of fish and waterfowl, the Flats are an extremely valuable
recreation resource for fishing and hunting.

Special interest legislation has historically authorized the conversion of State-
owned public trust bottomiands to private leases and deeds. However, changes
in public attitudes and increasing scientific documentation of wetland values,
as evidenced by recent enactment of the Goemarve-Anderson Wetland
Protection Act, P.A. 203 of 1979, support additional protection of wetlands
such as St. Clair Flats.

Department of Natural Resources has not developed regulations to protect the
paramount rights of hunting, fishing and navigation as directed by Act 326,
P.A., 1913.

0 Lots have been leased or converted to deeds at extremely low prices. This has
inadvertently encouraged development and despoiled the resources of the
Flats.

0 A 1977 survey of the St. Clair Flats area concluded that approximately 50% of
leased and deeded parcels remain unoccupied and undeveloped.

0 Because of extremely high water table, septic systems do not function properly
and pose severe public health hazards to the users of the Flats.

0 Many residents utilize direct intakes of water for household use. There exists
a potential for contamination of water supplies from the inadequate sanitary
systems.

0 Most parcels are subject to severe flooding or ice damage. The costs of flood
protection are a. burden to the residents and the public.

Sewers, water systems and flood protection structures will require unusually
0 high expenditures because of the unique site conditions of the Flats. The
unusual development costs are a burden for private individuals and the public.

Septic field permits continue to be granted by St. Clair County. While most
applications for new permits are denied by the County sanitarian, a County
Health Department Appeals Board overturns the denial and issues the permits.

A State Circuit Court (1974) has ordered Clay Township to refrain from issuing
building permits which will threaten or degrade the waters of the State.
Building permits are still being issued and the waters of the Flats are
jeopardized.

SUMMARY OF MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

The summary of findings demonstrates the value and importance of the Flats to the
people of the State of Michigan. After preparation and evaluation of five
alternative management options for the Flats, an approach was selected which
promotes strong resource conservation, strict environmental enforcement, and
mixed recreational use.

The Management Plan presents management recommendations divided into three
sections: Land Management Plan, Policy Plan, and Acquisition Priorities Plan. A
summary of the management recommendations are as follows:

Land Management Plan

The Land Management Plan designates land use within the Flats according to
physiogrophic units developed in the course of the study. Specific land use
recommendations are based upon the sensitivity of the physiogrophic units to
sustain such usage.

The majority of the Flats are designated as "Conservation" due to productivity
0 for fish and wildlife. These areas are largely located around interior boys, out-
islands, Dickinson Island, and a portion of Horsen's Island adjacent to
Muscamoot Bay.

Residential, commercial and boating facilities are recommended to be
contained in existing developed areas approved for deeds.

Wildlife management areas include the managed c@opland and waterfowl areas
currently operated by the State.

Policy Plan

The St. Clair Flats Management Plan should be adopted by the Natural
Resources Commission to provide policy guidance to the Department of
Natural Resources regarding future decisions affecting the Flats.

Existing regulatory authority should be enforced. Provisions to protect the
fish and wildlife resources of the Flats are available under Act 326, PA 1913
and Act 247, PA 1955. In addition Act 245, PA 1929 and Act 368, PA 1978
provide authority to regulate the discharges of sewage waters into the waters
of the State. Strict enforcement of the Acts would protect the valuable
wetland resources from further alteration and minimize contamination of

public waters and its potential health hazards.

In view of substantially increased awareness of the public values of wetlands,
the Legislature should consider an amendment to Act 326 which would allow
the termination of undeveloped and unoccupied leased parcels, and the
acquisition of leasehold interests.

The land management plan designates areas as "conservation." These areas
have a special environmental significance and no new leases should be issued
for these areas. Holders of existing leases should be informed that their leases
will not be renewed.

The conversion of deeds may be permitted in "areas approved for deeds,"
subject to the protection of the paramount rights of hunting, fishing and
navigation. However, the cost of deed conversions should be reflective of the
market value of the property.

The uses and density of the leased or deeded properties must be strictly
controlled. Assignment of leased properties resulting in more intensive use
should not be permitted. Fractionalization of leased and deeded parcels should
also be prohibited.

Local authority under Clay Township's Zoning Ordinance, building code and
� floodplain regulations should be enforced. Specifically, site regulations,
structural safety and building restrictions must be complied with to insure the
safety of the residents.

State, County and Township officials must work together to formulate a
cohesive policy regarding water quality and public health. The township must
� comply with the Circuit Court order of 1974 which prohibits the issuance of
building permits which degrade the waters of the state. The county must
enforce the sanitary code and deny sanitary permits which violate septic field
requirements.

Mixed recreational uses should be promoted. Fishing, hunting, boating and
wildlife interpretation are recreational opportunities which are well suited for
the Flats. However, the activities must be conducted in a manner that
promotes the total protection of natural resources.

The Flats must be viewed as a unique and dynamic biologic and geologic unit.
All future management proposals must be evaluated with regard to their
impacts on the function of the natural hydrologic regime and ecosystem.

Dredging, filling and bulkheading destroys fish and wildlife habitat. Such
activities should be prohibited in critical areas within the Flats.

Acquisition Priorities Plan

Acquisition priorities are based upon the importance to fish and wildlife, land
use, land value and other cons iderat ions.

Priority attention should be directed toward acquiring the undeveloped leased
and deeded parcels.

Acquisition of leased parcels on Muscamoot Ridge, Muscamoot Bay and various
out-island areas are recommended.

0 Acquisition priorities for deeded parcels include interior lands along Little and
Big Muscamoot Bays and scattered parcels on Dickinson Island.

Notices should be given to all leaseholders that leases will not be extended
beyond the original 99-year period.

A variety of acquisition methods should be employed and range from fee
simple purchase to less common methods such as purchase of development
rights and conservation easements.

vii

Introduction

M-RAll

INTRODUCTION

The St. Clair Flats has long been recognized as one of the State's important natural
resources. The area supports large numbers of fish and wildlife and has provided
popular recreational opportunities to the residents of Southeastern Michigan. Since
the late 18001s, settlers and vacationers have been attracted to the excellent
fishing, hunting, and boating opportunities. Over the years, recreational pressures
and population densities have increased. Unfortunately, the popularity and demand
has imposed an excessive burden upon these lands and aquatic resources. Urban
development and its accompanying problems of pollution and encroachment into
sensitive wildlife areas have despoiled much of the St. Clair Flats. In post years,
the Flats was often looked upon as swamp wasteland with little value. Special
interest legislation was enacted allowing the diversion of public resources to
private use. More recently, the public value of the unique and irreplaceable
qualities of the Flats have come to the forefront.

The value of the Flats is even more significant when considered in the context of
its geographical proximity to southeastern Michigan. The Flats are within easy
access to over 3 million residents within the metropolitan Detroit area. To many
of these residents, the recreational opportunities of northern Michigan are not
accessible or cannot be afforded. Recreation pressures for boating, fishing, and
hunting will undoubtedly increase. Urban development and demand for vocation
homesites within a short drive of urban centers will also increase. In short,
recreational and residential pressures will continue to encroach upon the Flats.
Yet, how much development can the wetlands absorb without adversely impacting
the ecosystem? What are the best uses of the Flats, and which areas are most
sensitive? Finally, in what manner should these lands be managed?

To answer these and other important questions, the Michigan Department of
Natural Resources commissioned Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May, Inc., an independent
consulting firm, to document post management actions and recommend a
management strategy for the St. Clair Flats.

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

The purpose of the St. Clair Flats Management Plan is to provide a long-term guide
for the future administration and use of the Flats. The Plan is directed at utilizing
the public resources in the best interest of all the people of the State of Michigan.
The Management Plan is intended to clarify the basic issues and systematically
study all natural and man-influenced factors. The Plan will provide a detailed
inventory and analysis of natural resource factors, cultural factors, existing
legislation, local ordinances and administrative procedures. By establishing a
detailed base of information, the effect of future management options can be
considered.

A primary purpose of the Plan is to offer management recommendations which are
in the best interest of the public and the resources of the Flats. Sensitive wetland
areas are identified and conclusions concerning the carrying capacity and future
uses are made. An acquisition and implementation plan which establishes priorities
for critical lease or deed holdings, is presented. In addition, policy recommenda-
tions are made which provide a management framework for the most suitable
future uses of the St. Clair Flats.

In summary, this Plan is intended to be a policy guide to the Michigan Department
of Natural Resources, the administering agency for the Flats. It is based upon a
comprehensive understanding of the unique terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem. It is
intended that the future uses will not degrade this fragile resource while offering
unique recreational opportunities for the people of the State of Michigan.

PLANNING PROCESS

The planning process followed a three step procedure which included: (1)
background studies; (2) evaluation and interpretation; and (3) management
planning. Detailed planning procedures are summarized in the accompanying
diagram (Figure 1).

Figure I

St. Clair Flats Management Plan
5fUcI3 P@-Ooe ss

a. Nc@ural COUMI
%SELNe, fiesourre
.Y
b. I
EVALUA-"0@4 Nq-510 a
Af-0 UiTtv qr f*1 6tod AWUMOM5
INMRPROTA-WN

C. planvirtig
MANAGEMEW
AW
PLA@444/4'

Managemenf-
Maki

Background studies involved extensive data collection. Sources included previously
published data, contacts with experts familiar with the Flats, discussions with local
officials and citizens. In addition to these sources, detailed conversations with
State and Federal agencies also transpired. The Michigan Department of Natural
Resources and its various divisions were the primary source of information. Other
contacts include the Great Lakes Fishery Laboratory, Soil Conservation Service,
Army Corps of Engineers, and interest groups concerned with the Flats.

The second step in the planning process included an evaluation and interpretation of
the gathered data. The study area was classified according to physiographic and
cultural units. These units were based upon natural resource and cultural
characteristics and provide a framework for detailed evaluation. This procedure
evaluated the opportunities, constraints, and carrying capacity of these physio-
graphic units. Management implications of the cultural units were also assessed.

The final step in the process involved management planning. Alternative
management scenarios were prepared in order to present a range of alternatives for
the future use of the Flats. The scenarios were evaluated and a scenario selected
which provided a basic framework for the Management Plan. The final step was
the development of the Management Plan including a Land Management Plan,
Policy Plan and Acquisition Priorities Plan.

I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
. I
I
I
I Historical
I rspective
I
I
I
I
I
MMV

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

The area known as St. Clair Flats, located at the mouth of the St. Clair River in
Clay Township of St. Clair County, represents the largest deltaic wetland system in
the Great Lakes. It is a nationally known recreation, waterfowl, and fishing area
which is located 25 miles from Detroit, and thus easily accessible to three-fifths of
the State's population. Figure 2 illustrates the regional location of the Flats and
outlines the land areas of the delta. The delta is cut by four main channels, the
North, Sni Bora, Middle, and South Channels, and consists of a Variety of large and
small islands and marshland. Approximately 8,185 acres a f land and 13,509 acres of
marsh and water (a total of 21,694 acres) are included in the St. Clair Flats study

a,ea.

Because of the excellent hunting and fishing available in the Flats and its close
proximity to Detroit, it is an extremely attractive location for summer cabins or
permanent homes. In the early years, many people settled there without clear title
or deed. This situation, coupled with ambiguous or conflicting policies and
legislation has created a complex situation. A review of the early court cases and
legislative actions regarding the Flats illustrates the confusion and discrepancies
which have occurred in its post management. Through such past confusing
management practices, the public resource has been diverted for private use.

When the first ship channel was dredged through the Flats in 1866, the way was
cleared for the recreational use of the area. During this period, the State generally
classified the Flats as "swamp" or "overflowed" lands, subject to the Federal
Swamp Lands Act of 1850. Such lands were placed under State control and could
subsequently be sold or disposed of in a variety of ways. In 1899, the Legislature
passed Act No. 175 to provide ". . . for the sale, disposition, and control of the
unpatented swamp and overflowed lands ... in the St. Clair Flats ... " The Act
provided for a survey of the area and represented an attempt to dispose of them as
marshlands. Those who had previously settled in the Flats become classified as
trespassers on State land and ejection proceedings followed. The settlers were
involved in numerous lawsuits from 1901 to 1910, which resulted in contradictory
rulings.

NeW 1541HMAMI-e

St. Clair Flats
Study Area

ciake 51- Clair

Figure 2

St. Clair Flats Regional Area

The rulings involved claims by the State that "swamplands" were State lands. A
few years later the State changed its stance and held that the Flats were not
11swamp or overflowed" lands, but were actually part of the bottomlands of Lake St.
Clair. The new position was taken because the swamplands were eligible to be
claimed by citizens under a land scrip program issued after the Civil War. By
declaring the Flats "bottomlands" instead of "swamplands," the lands were retained
in the name of the public trust and the public resources could be protected.

The survey provided for by Act 175, P.A., 1899 was completed in 1902, but by
that time the Supreme Court had ruled that the land could not be disposed of in the
manner prescribed by that Act. Because lake bottomlands were to be held in the
public trust and thus could not be sold, provision was made to grant five-year leases
to those occupying the land through the passage of Act 215 of the Public Acts of
1909. Act 215 was a temporary measure designed to alleviate the trespass
problem, and it was repealed in 1913 with the passage of Act 326. In 1910, in the
State vs. Venice of America Land Company, the Court confirmed that the St. Clair
Flats were part of the bottomlands of Lake St. Clair and thus held in title by the
State.

Act 326 of the Public Acts of 1913 was passed to provide for leasing, control and
taxation of the unpatented overflowed lands and lake bottomlands of the St. Clair
Flats owned by the State of Michigan. Act 326 specified that the rights of the
lessee were subject to the paramount rights of hunting, fishing and navigation
which were, and remain today, retained by the State in the public interest. Section
2(e) authorized the Department of Conservation to make and enforce regulations
necessary to protect hunting, fishing and navigation rights. Such regulations have
never been developed.

AW. LL

-7 , - @-T_ -7

Although paramount right of hunting, fishing, and navigation
were retained by the State, much marshland in the Flats has
already been diverted for private use.

A Board of Control consisting of the Secretary of State, Auditor General, and
Commissioner of the State Lands Office Was originally charged with the
responsibility of leasing the lands for a ninety-nine year term, divided into periods
Of fifty and forty-nine years. The Board was empowered to determine rental
values, based on the value of the land excluding value of improvements made on the
land. Original rental fees were based on an average front footage basis and were
set at an extraordinarily low level. More detailed information on lease rates is
presented in another section of this report.
r

Since the passage of Act 326, numerous acts have been adopted amending Act 326
and expanding the rights of private interests in the Flats. Figure 3 summarizes
legislation dealing with the Flats. Act 92 of the P.A. 1915 amended Act 326 and
provided the lessee with the e'xclus ive rights to remove marl, stone, rock, sand,
gravel or earth from the area adjoining, or immediately in front of, their property.
Act 92 allowed this right to be exercised 500 feet into Lake St. Clair or 100 feet
into the channels of the Flats from the low water mark, subject to the protection
of public rights of hunting, fishing and navigation. Act 12, PA 1917 again amended
Act 326 and provided for the forfeiture of lease rights by those who do not pay the
second half of their lease rental or who are delinquent in payment of their property
taxes. It also provided mechanisms for re-leusing parcels.

In 1949, an association of lessees petitioned the Legislature to authorize the
conversion of leases to deeds. The lessees felt this was justified to facilitate
borrowing money, protect investments in expensive improvements, and provide the
Ifowner satisfaction" associated with a deed. As a result, Act 215 P.A. 1949 was
passed. It mandated the conversion of leases to deeds of certain designated parcels
along the South Channel, but retained the paramount rights of navigation, hunting
and fishing for the public. More detailed information regarding the fees charged
for deed conversion are discussed in a later section of this report

Act 215 also granted the Department of Conservation (now the Department of
Natural Resources) the authority to dedicate certain unleased surveyed lake
bottornlands of the Flats exclusively for public hunting, fishing, and other
recreational uses and to determine acquisition priority for areas already leased.
This provision resulted in the establishment of the St. Clair Flats Wildlife Area.
The acquisition of these parcels has been accomplished as funds have become
available. Approximately $64,000 has been spent on acquisition since 1952,
however, most of these funds have applied to acquisition of interior wetlands within
the managed wildlife area on Harsen's Island.

Six additional legislative acts have been passed since 1949, each providing for

conversion of existing leases to deeds in specified segments of the Flats. They are
Act 221, P.A. 1956; Act 43, P.A. 1961; Act 107, P.A. 1961; Act 148, P.A. 1962; Act
153, P.A. 1962; and Act 194, P.A. 1963. Act 107, P.A. 1961 provided that lessees
could lease or deed one half of a water highway adjacent to their property if it is
determined that the highway is no longer needed for navigational ingress or egress
to surveyed lots, or for any other public use. In all instances, the paramount rights
of navigation, hunting, and fishing have been retained by the State.

Figure 3
State Legislation Dealing Specifically with the St. Clair Flats

Act and Year Area of Authority

Act 326, P.A. 1913 Provided for leasing control
St. Clair Flats Act and taxation of Flats' lands
subject to the paramount
rights of hunting, fishing and
navigation

Act 92, P.A. 1915 Deals with leasee rights with
regard to mining and dredging

Act 12, P.A. 1917 Amends Act 326; deals with for-
feiture and re-leasing

Act 215, P.A. 1949 - Provides for conversion of leases
to deeds in area along South Channel;
dedication of lands for the St. Clair
Flats Wildlife Area

Act 22 1, P.A. 1956 - Provides for conversion of leases
Act 43, P.A. 1961 to deeds in additional portions
Act 107, P.A. 1961 of the Flats. Including lots approved
Act 148, P.A. 1962 for deeds in 1949, a total of 652
Act 152, P.A. 1962 deeds have been issued
Act 194, P.A. 1963

Natural Resourc e a nd
Cultural Resource
Factors

NATURAL RESOURCE FACTORS

This section summarizes the inventory of the natural resource factors of the Flats.
The water resources of the area are discussed, followed by a presentation of
geologic history, soils, and geomorphology of the area. Finally, the aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems are described. This baseline environmental information will
be utilized to characterize the area by physiographic units. These physiographic
units will subsequently be evaluated to determine their sensitivity and suitability
for various uses.

WATER RESOURCES

Water Quantity/Flow Characteristics

The St. Clair Flats are located at the mouth of the St. Clair River, which connects
Lake St. Clair and Lake Huron. The St. Clair River is approximately 40 miles in
length, 20 miles of which lie north of the City of Algonac. South of Algonac, the
River divides into four distributaries which flow through the St. Clair Flats delta
into Lake St. Clair. The greatest quantity of water flows through the western, or
American side of the delta. Ninety-five percent of the flow of the St. Clair River
is carried by the North, just five percent (Jaworski et al, 1979 p. 76; Rf. ACOE,
1968)

A century ago, the North Channel was the main channel, however in 1962 the St.
Clair Cutoff was extended along the South Channel in order to provide a direct
route for shipping. Continued maintenance dredging of the South Channel has
increased the depth and flow making this channel the principle distributary. The
depth of the South Channel is maintained at 35 feet. Inflow into Lake St. Clair
from the St. Clair River averages about 187,000 cfs per year. The proportions
borne by each channel are summarized below in figure 4.

Figure 4
Distribution of Inflow
From
St. Clair River Through Lake St. Clair

North Channel 99,200 cfs
(Splits into:)
North Channel 61,800 cfs
Middle Channel 37,400 cfs

South Channel 78,500 cfs
(Splits into:)
Southwest Bend 33,600 cfs
St. Clair Cutoff 37,400 cfs
Bassett Channel 7, 500 cf s

Chenal Ecarte (Canadian side) 9,300 cfs

Water Gkmlity

Discharge of sewage into the waters of the St. Clair Flats has undoubtedly
degraded water quality. Privies and improperly functioning septic fields are
responsible for direct or indirect discharges into these waters. According to a
Michigan Department of Public Health Survey conducted in 1973, 75% to 80% 'Of
the septic systems of the Flats lie within the groundwater table. It is safe to
assume that many of these septic systems are polluting the surface waters.

Unsuitable soils and high water tables place severe constraints
on septic system operation. Some residents have opted for the
direct disposal method: using privies which discharge directly
into surface waters and pose a.potentially severe health hazard.

This same survey collected samples of water from six untreated intake lines. Four
samples were considered unsafe due to fecal coliform levels, while two had no
evidence of contamination. The samples were drawn from an unspecified site on
Horsen's Island.

In addition to these samples, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources has
maintained an ongoing water quality station inventory (Data is available through
the EPA's computerized "STORET11 System). The nearest stations to the Flats are
all located within the St. Clair River near Algonac and do not accurately reflect
conditions within the interior boys, channels and wetlands of the study area. The
Great Lakes Fishery Labratory is also unable to supply reliable water quality data
on the interior waters of the Flats. Although data on the major channels and St.
Clair River is available, the fast flow of the river and upstream influence will not
indicate accurate conditions of the immediate area. Chemical sampling was
performed by Environmental Control Technology Corporation (under EPA contract)
in 1973 at the mouth of the St. Clair River. The samples indicated enriched levels
of phosphorous, nitrogen and heavy metals. The environmental impact statement
for the Dickinson Island dredge spoil disposal site (ACOE 1974) confirmed
concentrations of heavy metals, especially mercury. Based upon these chemical
samples, it is likely that sediment found within the wetlands is polluted and passed
within the food chain to fish and waterfowls.

In conclusion, field observations and limited sampling indicate that the water
quality within the Flats has been degraded. It is apparent that the wafer is unsafe
for consumption and in some areas may be unsafe for body contact. While turbidity
and chemical contamination of the wetlands is a concern, the most serious problem
is the health hazard which these waters present to the occupants and users of the

Flats.

Flood Hazard Areas

The St. Clair Flats is especially sensitive to flooding because of its delta formation

and low-lying elevations. Cyclical fluctuations of lake levels within the Great
Lakes are the primary cause of flooding within the Flats. High water levels are
also complicated by wind tides and ice jams. Record flooding occurred during the
spring of 1973 and 1975, when lake levels rose to approximately four feet above the
low water datum. Residents within the Flats suffered extensive property damage,
and while water levels have subsided since 1973, property owners face a continual
battle against shoreline erosion and bulkhead deterioration.

Because Clay Township is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program,
the Office of Federal Insurance and Hazard Mitigation has published a Flood
Insurance Study which delineates the 100-year flood plain. The results of this study
indicate that over 90% of the land area within the Flats is susceptible to severe
flooding. The Sni, North and Middle Channel areas and most of the South Channel
area is within the I 00-year f loodplain and thus subject to f loading.

Throughout the Flats, approximately a foot and a half of water could inundate the
f irst f loor of a home during -a I 00-year f load (H.U.D. Flood Insurance Study, Clay
Township, State Frequency Curve). Based upon typical residential flood damage
curves for homes without basements, (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1974) flood
damage for the 900 homes within the Flats could be as high as six million dollars.
(Appendix C). In addition to flood damage costs, residents are also burdened with
necessary improvements to bulkheads and shoreline- stabilization structures to
protect against flooding, ice damage and shore erosion.

PHYSIOGRAPHY

Geologic History

St. Clair Flats was once covered by an ancient glacial lake system. While the
geologic history of the delta is complex and poorly understood, some basic
conclusions concerning the geologic significance can be drawn (Jaworski and
Raphael, 1973). Periodic glacial scouring and deposition of clay materials formed

the 100 to 140 foot sub-base beneath the delta. A cross-section of the delta,
(Figure 5), depicts different land elevations. The land level corresponds to the pre-
modern and modern surfaces which were formed during different geologic periods.

Approximately 11,500 to 12,500 years ago, the ancestral St. Clair River flowed
southward. This flow was interrupted when outlets through what is now Georgian
Bay were established and the level of Lake Huron dropped. Flow through the St.
Clair River then ceased. This period of low water occurred between 7,500 and
11,200 years ago and corresponds to the existence of Lake Stan I ey-Nipissi ng. A
subsequent rise in water level about 6,000 years ago created ancestral Lake Huron,
known as Lake Nipissing, which drained southward. Leverett and Taylor believe the
pre-modern delta was deposited during the establishment of Lake Nipissing
(Leverett and Taylor, 1975).

The older, pre-modern delta has a surface about five feet above the level of Lake
St. Clair. It lies at the apex of the delta, and is characterized by coarse, oxidized
sand and primarily upland vegetation. It was dissected by long, sinuous channels
which have subsequently become inactive, or "relict." The modern delta is located
at the present mean lake level and is characterized by finer sediments and species

indicative of moister soil conditions.

Lakeward migration of the modern delta continues today. The St. Clair River
erodes materials from its banks and bed and transports these materials, along with
those eroded by waves acting on the shores of Lake Huron, to Lake St. Clair. Large
pebbles are transported within the fast moving channels, while finer sediments may
be transported by slower moving crevasse channels, locally known as "highways."
The reduced velocity in the highways results in deposition of the sediments almost
transversely across the bays. Continued deposition results in filling of the bays,
subsequent colonization by emergent vegetation and ultimately in lakeward
extension of the delta.

While specific rates of sediment accretion are unavailable, the growth rate of the

Figme 5
Typical Landform Cross-section
-5f. dlaiv- Pla+s Aeea
no@ 1-0 -scale

.........
...........

.... .. . .......
............... ........ ............... .....
..............
............................ .. ......
.........
.........

qIeh WA+er ->11oore-modern irfer i ov weH6md;5 arid
del+-a cleer ryictrch

Sources: Adapted by Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May
From Jaworski and Raphael, 1979

delta can be charted by comparing surveys made in 1903, 1952 and 196 1. These
comparisons reveal that the delta head and delta interior lands are slowly
advancing. However, the filling of the boys is a slow process. Crevasse channels
are persistent features of the landscape and appear to actively transport sediments
to the boys only intermittently. Even ice jams, which divert flow from the main
channels through these highways, do not appear to result in much sedimentation of
the interior boys. The dominant sediment size is sand which is not easily
transported from the deep channels to the back bays.

A number of other factors slow delta formation. First, the annual sediment load
carried by the River is small, amounting to approximately 20,000 cubic yards per
year (Pezetta, 1975). The sediments are transported primarily as bedload, rather
than in suspension, as is evidenced by the clarity of the water. Most of the load is
transported directly into Lake St. Clair. Secondly, man's activities disrupt the
natural erosive and depositional process. Maintenance dredging by the Army Corps
of Engineers removes an average of 80,000 cubic yards of sediments annually.
Commercial operators have been granted leases to engage in the removal of sand
and gravel from the channels for many years. On a smaller scale, property owners
modify shorelines by dredging and filling to protect their homes or provide boat
access to their properties. The net effect of these activities has been to retard the
growth of the delta. However, the delta remains an extremely dynamic system due
to continual erosive and depositional action and fluctuation of Great Lakes water
levels.

Geomorphology

The St. Clair Flats Delta is a unique geomorphic system. No other fresh water
delta of its size exists within the United States and the area has been a living
laboratory for numerous scientific inquiries. Comparisions have been made to the
Mississippi River Delta which has a similar bird-foot configuration yet empties into
a marine basin (Jaworski and Raphael, 1973).

Figure 6 depicts the geomorphic features of Dickinson Island. As was mentioned
previously, the pre-modern delta was formed during an earlier geologic period. It is
crossed by inactive or "relict" channels which may periodically become inundated
and colonized by marsh vegetation. Formation of the modern delta continues
today, as water-borne sediments accumulate in the bays.

Along the interior shorelines of the bays, poorly developed beaches may be found.
Other features which resemble beach ridges may be found within the interior
marshes. These features may represent previous shorelines which existed as delta
formation occurred.

The St. Clair River divides into distributaries as it enters Lake St. Clair. These
distributaries, known as the North, Middle and South Channels, average 35 feet in
depth and 1,500 feet in width. However, depths of 80 feet and widths of 2,000 feet
are not uncommon. The channels exhibit submerged river shoals, along both sides
which may be attributed to lateral erosion of fine, sandy deltaic sediments which
overlie the lacustrine clays, or to slight base level oscillations (Jaworski and
Raphael, 1979). Because lake levels fluctuate only 1.5 to 2 feet annually, natural
levees are poorly formed and average a few inches to 1.5 feet in elevation. Lower
levees are often breeched during periods of high water and sediments are carried
into the interior wetlands.

Soils

The soils of the St. Clair Flats area are classified as fine sandy soils' transported
from the Lake Huron Basin by the St. Clair River. As the river velocity decreases,
water-borne sediment is released and deposited within the delta region. Over the
years, sand accretions have created upland delta formations. The Soil Conservation
Service has identified two major Soil CISSOCiGtions in the delta area. These
associations are Sanilac very fine sandy loams and Bach very fine sandy loams.
Both soils are poorly drained, level and characteristic of marshlands, river

Figure 6
The Deltaic Landforms of Dickinson Island P AL 15"CH
St. Clair County, Michigan

Kl-t

............ . ...
.............
..............

..........
I-A
AX
-.77

............ ....

.... .......
411-w

OOK

. ....... . .

1@-AY
IIGLANP

miles

Kilorne+-ers

Crevasse defosi+s
... ........

re rvi act e- m

MU:56AMOOr
15AY
cLiha baoq aerie;l Ph4oqrwk@
April Pq, 1,771

Source: Jaworski and Raphael, (1979), p. 78.
21

channels, and dredged lands. A high lime content is common and while certain
areas are suitable for agricultural uses, the primary restriction is wetness and high
water table. The high water table places severe limitations upon septic disposal
fields. Michigan Department of Public Health officials estimate that 75-80 percent
of tile fields in the Flats are within groundwater levels. (Michigan Department of
Public Health, Field Survey, 1973). The high groundwater table does not allow
effective filtration of sewage through the Soils and there is little doubt that the
soils within the flats are incapable of safely disposing of waste material.

A typical soil boring is illustrated in Figure 7. The top stratum is composed of two
feet of organic soils, six feet of silty brown sand, six feet of grey silty sand, and
three feet of marl and peat. The bottom layers are composed of wet clays which
are found down to bedrock. During spring flood conditions, groundwater is often
found within 12 to 24 inches of the surface.

The wetland soils and vegetation have a unique and complex relationship within the
ecosystem. Vegetation stabilizes soils, prevents erosion and allows sediments to
accumulate within the delta. Nutrients are found within top soil layers and are
taken up by vegetation. As the vegetative matter dies and decays, nutrients are
cycled back into the soil. This process modifies soil pH and adds organic matter to
fine-textured silt-laden sands.

FiWre 7
T
ypic*al Soil.. Profile,
5f C14k-
L@-' Rvt

Prier: TYf`@-::

brown
-649 :54nd

C;:
u

Mart and Pco(f-

TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS

Coastal wetlands are extremely dynamic ecosystems which change in form and
function in response to the fluctuation of the GreGt Lakes water levels. The St.
Clair Flats is no exception, and is perhaps even more dynamic than most coastal
ecosystems due to its unique deltaic geomorphology. The level of Lake St. Clair
fluctuates both seasonally and annually and may vary as much as 5 to 6 feet in a
10- to 15-year period. Vegetation, fish andwildlife respond to this dynamic system
and are all interdependent upon its functions.

Vegetation

Vegetative communities change in response to the wetness or dryness of a site, and
the boundaries of a given plant zone vary in response to these changes in water
level. Subsequently, the magnitude of the use of a zone by various wildlife species
and the physical function of the wetland vary in response to water level.

Submergent vegetation is found in the deepest areas, and becomes intermixed with
hardstern bulrush (Scirpus Sp.), bur-reed (Sparganium Sp.) and pickerel weed
(Pontederia cordata) in shallower areas. A cattail zone is found in water 6 to 12
inches in depth. Sedges dominate in the area immediately upland of the cattail
zone, followed by dogwood meadow associations in slightly higher areas. Shrubs
become established in areas inundated infrequently, while forests may become
established on the upland areas which remain dry for long periods of time. Figure 8
depicts the relationship beween vegetation and water level as interpreted for
Dickinson Island, (Jaworski and Raphael, 1979).

Vegetation in the Flats is not established in regular patterns due to the unique
geornorphology of the area. For example, cattail and bulrush marshes may be found
in the interior of Dickinson and Horsen's Islands in old distributary channels.
Furthermore, the effects of water stress and invasion of an area by different
communities may not become evident for several years after G period of low or
high water.

MMMM

Figure 8
Plant Community Displacement
Model
DICKIN50N 15LANO

Meadow
577-

....... .......
Ln

..........
................... .
.........

. .. .........
. .... .........
. ........

.... ..........
.................
.. .... ................
%: - - ....................
Mean LaKe Lovel'

572--

571
2-000 4C@O (OCOO WT

0 4co VOO 1.200 1600 1

Source: Jaworski and Raphael, (1979), p. 319.

Maps of vegetative changes on Dickinson Island depict how drastically vegetation
associations can change over a period of years. Low water levels were experienced
in 1964 and high levels in 1975. Levels in 1971 are closely comparable to those of
1979, and are representative of mean water levels. Jaworski and Raphael (1979)
have studied the magnitude of these vegetative changes on Dickinson Island (See
Figure 9). The sedge and meadow areas appear to change in area and extent for
most all of the plant associations.

Wildlife users change with the fluctuation of water level. During periods of low
water, the red-winged blackbird, short-billed marsh wren, mallard, blue-winged
teal, and the muskrat are more common. Dabbling ducks may feed and breed near
the remaining open water areas, while white-tailed deer, cottontail rabbits, and
small rodents may also be more dependent on the wetland during low water periods.
(Jaworski and Raphael, 1979)

During high water levels, wildlife diversity increases. Macroinvertebrates,
amphibians, and reptiles may increase in abundance due to the increased
availability of their preferred habitat (submergent vegetation in open water areas).
They in turn are consumed by piscivorous birds and some fish species. (Jaworski
and Raphael, 1979).

Fresh water ecosystems are among the most productive on earth. The high
productivity can be attributed to the extensive growth of macrophytes and the
epiphytic algae which colonize submerged substrates. Emergent vegetation,
particularly cattails, is the most photosynthetically productive group of macro-
phytes. Extensive beds of cattail are found in wetlands, and the plant's long narrow
leaves provide a large surface area for photosynthetic activity. Emergent
vegetation is not consumed directly by most organisms because its high fiber
content renders it difficult to digest and slow to decompose. However, seeds are
consumed by waterfowl, and the vegetation does provide excellent cover for
waterfowl, fish, and other organisms.

Figure 9
Areal Extent of Wetlands, by Vegetation Type
Dickinson Island Wetlands, 1949, 1964, and 1975

1949 Distribution (Low to Average Water Level)

Wetland Type Acres Hectares % of Total

Wooded and Shrubs 252 102 9
Meadow (Grassy) 252 102 9
Sedge Marsh 644 260.5 23
Emergents (Cattail) 1,120 453.5 40
Submersed-F looting 322 130.5 11.5
Developed Lands 154 62.5 5.5
Open Water 56 23 2
Subtotals 2,800 1,134.0 100.0

1964 Distribution (Low Water)

Wetland Type Acres Hectares % of Total

Wooded and Shrubs 280 113.5 10
Meadow (Grassy) 252 102 9
Sedge Marsh 1,022 414 36.5
Emergents (Cattail) 1,036 419.5 37
*Submersed-F looting 140 56.5 5
Developed Lands 56 22.5 2
Open Water 14 6 0.5
Subtotals 2,800 1,134.0 100.0

1975 Distribution (High Water)

Wetland Type Acres Hectares % of Total

Wooded and Shrubs 280 113.5 10
Meadow (Grassy) 112 45.5 4
Sedge Marsh 364 147.5 13
Emergent (Cattail) 784 317.5 28
*Submersed-F loot i ng 840 340 30
Developed Lands 210 85 7.5
**Open Water 210 85 7.5
Subtotals 2,800 1,134.0 100.0

*includes scattered colonies of hordstem bulrush and three-square.
**This category may be underestimated because some open water was in-
cluded in the submersed f looting- leaved wetland category.

Source: Jaworski and Raphael, (1979), p.247

The productivity of submergent vegetation is highly variable, depending on local
environmental conditions. Both the submergents and floating-leaved plants hove a
higher nutritive value and are more commonly ingested directly by herbivores or
omnivores than is emergent vegetation. Both provide prime habitat for
macroinvertebrates. Floating leaved planfs are restricted to quiet, protected areas
(such as the southeastern corner of Little Muscamoot Bay and Mud Lake) and, as
thus, are not as abundant as submerged species. Goose Bay and Big Muscamoot Bay
are largely devoid of submergent vegetation due to wave action, the turbidity of
the wafer and the sandy substratum. Growth is limited to scraggly stands of
Muskgrass (Chara) which is interspersed with L@@ in Goose Bay later in the
season. Little Muscamoot, Fisher, and Anchor Boys are more densely colonized by
submergents. Little Muscamoot is possibly the most productive. It is colonized by
dense stands of Potamogeton, Chara, and Myriophyllum in the central portion, as
well as some Elodea and Vallisneria. The southeastern portion is colonized by
water lilies (Nympheo , pickerel weed (Pontederia), and pondweed (Potamogeton
notans). (Personal communication with Charles Brown, Great Lakes Fishery Lob).

Mud Lake, in the interior of Dickinson Island, is connected to both the Sni Bora
Channel and to Fisher Bay. Mud Lake supports floating leaved plants, and Fisher
Bay is almost as densely colonized by submergents as Little Muscomoot Bay. Small
and largernouth bass are caught in large numbers in this area.

Channel weed (Elodea) is particularly dense in Snook's Highway, Dead Tree Cut, and
Big Fisher Highway. Another dense bed can be found at the mouth of the North
Channel where vegetation ranges from cattail along the shore to bulrush (@ @rus)
in slightly deeper water, and finally to Potamogeton and Myriophyllum in the
deeper water. The current is too swift to support dense vegetative growth in the
center of the channel. Instead, the growth forms bands 10 to 15 feet wide along
either bank. The vegetation provides cover for fish and is often associated with
excellent fishing sites.

Submergent and floating leaved vegetation is important habitat for macro-

invertebrates, which are a major food source for fish. Waterfowl also ingest
macroinvertebrates, particularly during their breeding season, to help aid egg yolk
formation. Myriophyllum and Elodea in particular, are heavily colonized by
mayflies, isopods, amphipods, and chironomids. Submergent vegetation is also a
major direct food source for waterfowl. Elodea, Vallisneria, and Potamogeton sp.
are particularly important. Food preferences and consumption patterns Vary from
species to species and in response to season and food availability.

Submergent vegetation is also extensively colonized by epiphytic algae, which take
advantage of the large surface area provided by the finely dissected leaves of many
spec.ies. Epiphytic algae is a more important primary producer in wetland
communities than planktonic algae which is more abundant in open water areas.
Epiphytic algae remains viable during the winter and is an important food source
for aquatic organisms which are active during the winter months.

Wetlands produce more detritus than any other aquatic community in the Great
Lakes. Detritus is defined as particulate organic matter which has been lost from
any level of the food web. The material consists primarily of dead vegetative
materials which are extensively colonized by bacteria and fungi. Detritus serves as
the primary base for the food chain in wetlands, and numerous macroinvertebrates
rely completely on it as their food source. In turn, macroinvertebrates are an
important food source to fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals. The
diversity of macroinvertebrGtes is high in wetlands due to the variety of habitat
available and large amount of detritus found there. Detritus feeds not only
organisms residing in the wetlands but is also transported to nearshore areas of
open water where it is utilized by organisms not generally associated with
wetlands.

The Flats are the largest wetland remaining on the American side of Lake St. Clair
and must be recognized for their importance to fish and waterfowl. The extensive
wetlands of the St. Clair Flats provide a source of food, as well as cover, nesting,
and spawning sites, for organisms which are found throughout Lake St. Clair and
surrounding area. The concentration and diversity of aquatic vegetation illustrate
the importance and uniqueness of the area.

Fish and Wildlife Resources

The Flats are notionally known for the large number of fish and waterfowl species
they support. They also are famous for the fishing and hunting opportunities they
of f er. The Flats are in close proximity to over three million residents in the
southeastern Michigan area and are easily accessible to many recreational users. In
1975, Lake St. Clair accounted for approximately 50% of all non-salmonoid angler
days for the entire State. It is evident that the demand for hunting and fishing
opportunities near Detroit will continue.

Over the years, many of the wetlands in Lake St. Clair have been degraded or
destroyed by man's activities such as dredging, filling and bulkheading. The result
has been a progressive loss of habitat and a corresponding decline in fish and
wildlife populations. However, the significance of the Flats for fish and wildlife
production is now even greater than in the past because most of the wetlands along
the western shore of Lake St. Clair have been destroyed.

Economic analyses of the value of an acre of wetland are based on values that are
difficult to qualify. However, it has been estimated that the value of sportfishing
in lower Horsen's Island is $324.00 per acre of wetland per year, (Jaworski and
Raphael, 1978). In comparison, the value of waterfowl hunting is approximately
$31.00 per acre of wetland per year. These calculations are based upon annual
expenditures by sportsmen and revenues generated by these activities.

Fisheries

Lake St. Clair, the St. Clair River, and the marshes and boys around the delta
support a diverse array of fish species which spawn, feed, or utilize the Flats as
cover. Some species migrate through the area as the seasons change and as they
enter different periods in their life cycle. Others are found in the Flats year round.
A list of species may be found in Figure 10.

Figure 10
Fish Species Found in the St. Clair Flats

Sportsf ish

Sol monoids - - Non-Salmonoids -

Chinook Salmon Yellow Perch
Coho Salmon Walleye
Steelhead Northern Pike
Rainbow Trout Muskellunge
Brown Trout Pon Fish (Bluegill, Pumpkinseed,
Splake & Sploke Backcross Rock Bass, Green Sunfish)
Atlantic Salmon Black & White Crappie
Souger
Lake Sturgeon*
Largemouth Bass
Smollmouth Bass

White Bass

Forage Species Underutilized Species
Rainhow Smelt Channel Catfish
Banded Killifish Corp
Silver Chub* Black Bullhead

Brook Silverside Brown Bullhead
Mottled Sculpin Yellow Bullhead
Trout Perch Freshwater Drum (Sheep's Head)
Log Perch Turbot
Blockchin Shiner Mooneye*
Golden Shiner Red Horse*

Lake Emerald Shiner Lake Whitefish
Spotf in Shiner Bowf in (Dogf ish)
Spottail Shiner American Eel
Blackstripe Topminnow Common Sucker
Bluntnose Minnow Quillback Corpsucker
Least Darter Hog Sucker
Johnny Darter Spotted Sucker
Northern Greenside Darter Grass Pickerel
Brindeled Madtorn Longnose Gar
Tadpole Madtom Goldfish
Stonecat (Madtom) Bigmouth Buffalo
Alewife

Gizzard Shad
Parasitic Species
Silver Lamprey
Sea Lamprey

*indicates endangered species Source: Personal communication, Ron Spitler,
DNR District Fish Biologist

Lake St. Clair is the most valuable non-salmonoid sports fishery in the Great Lakes.
Figure I I illustrates the non-salmonoid sportfish Catch and fishing effort in Lake
St. Clair versus other Michigan Great Lakes. In 1975, 48% of the fishing effort and
33% of the Great Lakes fish catch were attributed to Lake St. Clair. More
wolleye, bass, and centriarchid panfish were taken from Lake St. Clair than from
any other Great Lakes water body. More than half of the state's muskellunge are
caught there (Jaworski and Raphael, 1978). These figures are particularly
impressive in light of the Lake's small size and can be tied to both the extreme
productivity of the area and its accessibility to the large population of southeastern
Michigan.

There are no ongoing fish management programs in the immediate area. Steelhead
and brown trout were stocked in the North Channel adjacent to Decker's Landing in
the Past, Grid an experimental walleye rearing program was conducted in the
marshes of the Wildlife Area. The walleye evidenced exceptional growth, but
recovery of the fish was unsuccessful. (Personal communication Pospichal, DNR
Wildlife Division). Steelhead, coho salmon, and chinook salmon have been stocked
in other portions of Lake St. Clair and may be caught in the Flats, particularly in
the North Channel and St. Clair River at the northern end of the delta.

Commercial fishing has been nonexistent in the United States side of Lake St. Clair
and the St. Clair River since the 1930's, except for the temporary fishing for
catfish in the 1960's. The only commercial fishery in the Lake is operated by the
Walpole Indians of Ontario, who fish for northern pike in the wetlands of Walpole
Island.

Lake St. Clair general spawning requirements and habitat preference of the most
popular sportfishes can be found in Figure 12. Northern pike and muskellunge
spawn in emergent vegetation adjacent to Dickinson Island, (MDNR, EIS, 1975a, p.
11) and probably in Little Muscamoot Bay. Smallmouth and largemouth bass spawn
in deep cattail marshes. Smallmouths have been observed on reeds in southeastern
Little Muscamoot Bay and both large and smallmouths are found in the Fisher
Bay/Mud Lake area. Yellow perch spawn in shallow waters throughout the marsh.

Figure I I
Michigan Non-Salmonoid Sportsf ish Catch and Fishing Effort in
Lake St. Clair vs. Other Michigan Great Lakes Waters, 1975

Yellow % of
Lake Perch Walleye Bass Panf ish N. Pike Total

St. Clair 6,803,060 809,030. 399,500 1,490,900 114,410 33

All Others 17,856,660 96,560 329,630 1,294,040 168,300 67

TOTAL 24,659,720 905,590 729,130 2,784,940 282,710 100

Angler Days Percent of Total
St. Clair 1,996,990 48
Others 2,137,750 -52
TOTAL 4,134,740 100

Source: Jamsen,(1976),p.6

Figure 12
Spawning Requirements and Habitat Preferences
of the
Primary Sportsfish of the Flats

Fishing Season
Timing and Location Year Round (Y) and Locations in
Species of Spawning Feeding mid Cover Migratory (M) Lake St. Clair

Yellow Perch April - May; after pike. throughout the area, es- Y Year Round
spawn in shallow water pecially channel fringes
over submerged vegeta- and marshes
tion and brush

Walleye April; channels, marsh fringes, M Year Round
Thames River, Canada; openlake Spring: St. Clair River
cold, clean, running All season: North Channel
Clinton & St. Clair Rivers

Northern Pike Late March - Apri I; protected boys, marshes Y May 15 - Feb 28
sedge meadows (shallow
marsh)

Bass
Larqe Mouth Mid-May - Mid-June; marshes (in reeds and Y June 16 - Dec 31
Small Mouth deep cattail marshes cattails, channel edges, Marshes, all season
Anchor Bay weed beds Small Mouth in channels
midseason, also
White Mid-May - Mid-June; channels Y Year Round
Rock June - July; marshes, channel edges Y Year Round

Muskellunge Early June; migrate counter-clockwise Y June 3 - Dec 15
deepest part of around Lake St. Clair;
Anchor Bay weed beds in lake/channels

Panfish
Bluegill Late June; throughout area Y Year Round
Pumpkinseed after bass. (especially channel
Crappie cattail marsh fringe and marshes)
"shoreline"

Lake Sturgeon May; channels, deep "holes" Y Year Round
St. Clair River and
North Channel,
deep "holes"

Salmonoids
Brown Trout channels - M April - May
Rainbow Trout (stocked) spring and fall migrants (St. Clair River)
Chinook lalmon May
Coho Salmon steelhead and browns (North Channel)
Steelhead more extended periods
Splake X Lake Trout Year Round

Spawning grounds during spawning season are particularly sensitive areas. How-
ever, it should be emphasized that protection of these areas alone will not insure
the continued high production of the species. Fish move to different habitats
during different periods of their life cycles and for feeding or cover. Therefore, it
is a misconception to believe that protecting one unique habitat type will insure the
continued productivity of a species.

Bulkheading with backfill is one of the most destructive practices on fish
productivity. Bulkheading destroys the natural gradient of the lake bottom. Most
of the Flats is so shallow that small changes in water level may be evident in a ten
to fifteen foot area. When bulkheads are constructed and the natural gradient is
destroyed, water levels fluctuate a foot or two along a shear bulkhead wall. A
portion of the habitat to fish is lost. Research into gabion structures to replace
bulkheads has been proposed. Gabions are composed of large rocks and would
provide a more gentle transition between the land and water. The resulting habitat
would be more favorable to fish than bulkheading.

Dredging is not always harmful to fish. Dredging may provide fish access to
interior wetland and provide for the exchange of nutrients. However, the benefits
of the dredging have to be carefully weighed against the environmental costs
associated with increased turbidity and loss of habitat. Effects of dredging are
likely to be less detrimental in open water areas than in marshes if the sediments
are unpolluted. Filling is typically more detrimental because it is most often
proposed in shallow, marshy areas which are vegetuted and utilized extensively by
fish and waterfowl. Unfortunately, much of the wetland alteration in the Flats has
occurred in these shallow marshy areas which are especially productive for fish and
waterfowl.

Figure 13 indicates the tolerance of some common fish species to turbidity siltation
and pollution. While the tolerance of species varies, some generalizations can be
made. Species which are more tolerant are not considered to be desirable for sport
fishing. The diversity of species decreases in response to siltation and chemical

Figure 13
Fish Species Inhabiting Coastal Wetlands
Which ore Tolerant to Siltation, Turbidity, and Pollution

Species Tolerant to an Increase in Turbidity and Siltation

Gizzard Shad White Crappie
Bigmouth Buffalofish Black Crappie
Channel Catfish Green Sunfish
Brown Bullhead Sauger
Black Bullhead Freshwater Drum (Sheepshead)

Species Tolerant to Organic and Inorganic Pollution

Common White Sucker
Corp
Goldfish

Source: Pinsak and Meyer, 1976, as cited by Jaworski and Raphael, (1978).

pollution. Large predators such as northern pike and bass, and forage minnows such
as blacknose and golden shiners decline in numbers. Fast growing detritivores
increase. This trend has been observed in Lake Erie where less valuable species
such cis freshwater drum, alewife, gizzard shad, carp and goldfish have become
predominant (Great Lakes Basin Commission, 1975c, p. 165).

Waterfowl and Wildlife

Michigan is situated at the intersection of the Atlantic and the Mississippian
Flyways. An estimated three million waterfowl migrate annually through the
State, including large numbers of dabbling and diving ducks. Canadian geese, snow
geese, blue geese, swans and coots are also commonly found.

Lake St. Clair is crossed by the primary migratory corridors utilized by the
dabbling and diving ducks and the secondary corridor utilized by Canada geese. The
principle migration corridors of whistling swans, convasback, buffleheads, and the
ruddy ducks extend diagonally across the state from the northwest to the southeast
with a resting stop in Lake St. Clair. The Lake is characterized by extensive beds
of submergent vegetation and relatively calm waters which make it an attractive
resting place. It is a notionally recognized concentration area for convasbacks,
redheads, scaups and buffleheads. A recent study (Dawson, 1975) suggested that
only a small portion of the submergent macrophytes and invertebrates available to
migrant ducks in Anchor Bay is being used. This is probably because of hunting
pressure and disturbance by boaters and fishermen which force the main flocks out
before they deplete food supplies, (Dawson, 1975).

Studies conducted on Horsen's Island indicate on the average, 72 to 103 nesting
pairs of ducks may be found per square mile. Each pair has an average of 7.5 acres
of wetland. The number of young which can potentially be produced is .96 per acre,
(Martz, undated, and Martz, 1976).

In addition, a large number of redheads and canvasbacks breed on Horsen's Island

along the South Channel in the unfilled marshes between the road and residential
properties. (Personal communication, Elden and Pospichal). Mallards also nest
there and in other portions of the Flats.

Portions of the St. Clair Flats are managed for waterfowl production. Hunting is
prohibited in two open water areas south of Anchor and Goose Bays in an area
designated by Presidential proclamation as the St. Clair Wildlife Refuge. This area
is protected by the Fish and Wildlife Service. Lower Harsen's Island is managed by
the MDNR Wildlife Division for waterfowl production and is known as the St. Clair
Flats Wildlife Area. The objectives of the wildlife management program are to:

1) provide food, cover and sometimes needed protection for peak populations
of upwards to 150,000 migrating waterfowl;

2) to provide quality hunting opportunities for waterfowl on a fair and
equitable basis to the public;

3) to provide viewing and other nonconsumptive uses to the public during
migration period; and

4) to provide breeding habitat for the production of 4,000-5,000 waterfowl
per year. (MDNR Wildlife Division, St. Clair Flats Wildlife Area Master
Plan, 1977-1987)

A twenty-three mile long system of dikes provides total control of water levels in
the Wildlife Area. The area is comprised of two marsh units, totalling 1,600 acres,
and ten agricultural units, totalling 1,100 acres. In 1977, a total of 850 acres of
food crops were planted, including corn, mullet and buckwheat grains.

In addition to the vast number of hunters who use the remaining 20,000 acres of
the Flats, the St. Clair Flats Wildlife area is utilized by 6,000-7,000 hunters during
the 50-day season, and more seek permits than there are available reservations.

Seventy-three percent of the 1977 kill was comprised of mallards. A su4st(intial
number of green-wing teal, black ducks, pintails, arid boldpates were also killed (see
Figure 14). It is estimated that the area could accommodate up to 12,000 hunters
if the management program is expanded. Proposals for future programs include
diking and managing portions of Dickinson Island for waterfowl. Dickinson Island is
essentially uninhabited and undeveloped at the Present time.

In addition to being a waterfowl concentration area, the Flats is extensively
utilized by shorebirds, seabirds and marsh wading birds. Shorebirds include several
species of sandpipers, lesser yellowlegs, Wilson snipe, dowitcher, kildeer, black-
bellied plover and upland plover. These birds concentrate on exposed mudflats
which are especially available during low water years. Seabirds include several
species of gulls and terns, many of which are present year round. They can be
observed on old pilings and other objects emerging from the water. Representative
species include herring gull, Bonapart's gull, ring-billed gull, common tern and black

tern.

Marsh bird species include egrets, bitterns, rails and herons. Especially significant
is a large great blue heron rookery which is located in the southeastern corner of
Dickinson Island. In May 1972, 125 occupied nests were counted in two hours of
observation. (U.S. ACOE, 1975). Herons and egrets can be observed hunting
throughout the Flats during ii-nuch of the year. In addition, 170 species of upland,
non-game, water-oriented and terrestrial birds can be observed throughou t the
year. PheOSGnts are managed concurrently with waterfowl.

A variety of mammals inhabit the Flats including racoons, muskrats, fox squirrels,
rabbits, foxes, deer, skunks, opossums, weasels, and a few minks. Muskrats are the
most numerous, and the annual hunting take is 5,000-7,000 animals. Racoons are
the second mosT hunted mammal. A small local deer population offers limited
hunting opportunity. However illCgGi kill during the off-season, (year-round), keeps
the deer population low. Rabbits end fox squirrels are indirectly managed by the

Flogure 14
Species Kill Data 1976-1977
St. Cluir Flats, Michigan

1976 1977

Mallard 5,646 73% Mallard 5,898 73%
Black 512 7% Greenwings 612 8%
Baldpate 399 5% Black 582 7%
Greenwings 382 5% Pinfail 521 6%
Pintail 376 5% Baldpote 244 3%
Ringneck 117 1.5% Ringneck 63
Bluewings 116 1.5% Bluewings 48
Godwall 42 Black x mallard 24
Wood duck 35 Godwall 21
Lesser scoup 31 Hooded merganser 16
Goldeneye 23 Wood duck 13
Black x mallard 14 2% Buf f I ehead 12 3%
Bufflehood 14 Lesser scoup II
Hooded merganser 12 Shoveler 9
Shoveler 10 Goldeneye 3
Greater scoup 10 Greater scoup 2
Common merganser 3 Redhead 2
Ruddy duck 2 Ruddy duck I
Redhead I
Pini-ail x baldpate I
Mallard x pintail I
Subtotal 7,747 8,082

Canada goose 62 Canada goose 40
Snow goose I Snow goose I
Coot 16 Coot 5
Snipe I
Pheasant 33

Subtotal 79 80

Total 7,826 8,162

Sources adopted by Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May, Inc. from:
St. Clair Flats Wildlife Area Master Plan
Department of Natural Resources, ( 1977)

provisions of cover. Nonagricultural and brushy areas and meadows provide nesting
sites and summer food, and the frozen cattail and sedge marshes provide excellent
winter cover.

Unique Habitats; Endangered, Threatened, and Rare Species

The value of a wetland can be determined by documenting unique biological and
geological characteristics. The geologic and geomorphic uniqueness of the St. Clair
Delta has already been described and has resulted in the development of a variety
of habitats and species associations.

The normal successional patterns of a wetland are disrupted by fluctuations in
water level. However, the unique geornorphology of Dickinson Island including the
uplands associated with the pre-modern delta and the interior marshes found in the
low former distributary channels make several successional zones present at all
water levels. Each zone is characterized by vegetation tolerant of various water
depths. The boundaries of these zones may change with fluctuation in water levels,
but each persists throughout the course of time (Jaworski and Raphael, 1979).
Dickinson Island has a diverse array of habitats and species.

J. T. Curtis (1959) classified Wisconsin prairie vegetation on the basis of soil
moisture conditions. Wet prairie environments are unique in Michigan, and seven of
ten indicator plant species have been found on Dickinson and Horsen's Islands.
Thirty-eight percent of the probably extinct, threatened, or endangered species
occupy or have occupied aquatic and wetland habitats (Beaman, 1977). It is likely
that more plant species have been lost from wetlands than from any other habitat.
Endangered, threatened and rare plants which have been documented in the Flats
are presented in Figure 15.

Endangered bird species do not reside year round in the St. Clair Flats. However,
the American peregrine falcon, the bald eagle, the osprey and snowy owl are
occasionally sited in the Flats. The red-Shouldered hawk (a threatened species),

the rare black crowned night heron, and the American bittern are common visitors.
In addition, a great blue heron rookery is located near the southwest corner of
Dickinson Island. The endangered lake sturgeon is found in the area and is believed
to spawn in the North Channel. Other endangered or threatened fish found in the
area include the mooneye, red horse, silver chub and souger (Horsen's Island, 201
Facilities Plan).

Figure 15
ENDANGERED, THREATENED AND RARE FLORA OF THE ST. CLAIR FLATS

Key: Endangered (E); Threatened (T); Rare (R);

Location Species

Horsens Island Panicum liebergii M

Horsens Island Triplasis purpurea M

Horsens Island Asclepias sullivantii, Sullivant's milkweed

Horsens Island Cirsium hillii, Hill's Thistle (T)

Horsens and Habenoria leucophaeo,
Dickinson Islands Prairie Fringed Orchid M

Horsens Island Fimbristylis 2:jb!@@, M

Dickinson Island Rudbeckia fulgido, var. sullivantii,
Sullivant's Coneflower M

Horsens Island Zinzonia aquatica, Wild Rice M

Source: Wagner et al., 1977; additional sources as cited, as adopted from
Jaworski and Raphael, 1978. 42

Other Functions of the Wetland

Besides providing food and cover for numerous aquatic and terrestrial organisms,
coastal wetlands such as the Flats serve other functions which are difficult to
quantif y. Emergent vegetation in particular helps dissipate current and wave
energy, and may in fact help abate shoreline erosion in the delta. No quantified
information is available at the present time. Wetlands also serve as effective
sediment traps, and nutrients are immobilized by wetland vegetation. While some
nutrients are returned to the system upon the death and decay of the plants and are
transformed by various microbial processes, the net effect seems to be a reduction
in concentration of nutrients in the water.

The hydrology, retention time and nutrient cycling relationships associated with
wetlands are difficult to measure and quantify and information on this is generally
unavailable. However, wetlands are dynamic, complex ecosystems. In the case of
the St. Clair Flats, the uniqueness of the area cannot be attributed to any single
species of plant or animal. Rather, its importance can be attributed to the large
size of the area and the role it plays in maintaining the viability of the flora and
faunG of Lake St. Clair and adjacent ecosystems.

owl

CULTURAL RESOURCE FACTORS

Although the Flats is a unique biologic and geologic resource, it has been utilized
and developed by humans for a long period of time. An inventory of cultural
resource factors includes land and water uses, zoning ordinances, housing, and
utilities. Information on the local economy and tax base are also included to
assess the effect of changing policies on the economic well-being of the area.
Finally, State and Federal legislative mandates applicable to the Flats are
presented. Cultural data must be studied in combination with natural resource
factors to obtain an accurate picture of baseline conditions in the area.

LAND AND WATER USE

The entire delta has a history of use by Native Americans. Ojibwa, Potowatomi,
and other eastern woodland tribes occupied the area seasonally to utilize the vast
food supplies available. European settlement began on Dickinson Island, formerly
known as Stromness Island, as early as 1790. The current land use of the St. Clair
Flats area is a mixture of open, residential and commercial uses. Lands are
primarily open or vacant and the majority of these lands are State-owned and
included within the St. Clair Flats Wildlife Area. Residential uses are located
throughout Horsen's Island with higher densities of development occurring along the
main channels. Densities average three to four units per acre along the waterfront
while lower densities are prevalent on the northern and inland portions of the
island. Dickinson Island is predominantly uninhabited except for approximately 30
seasonal homes on the east end of the island. The Army Corps of Engineers owns
and manages two dredge disposal sites on the north end of the island. The sites are
expected to revert to State ownership once filling of the diposal areas is
completed.

The smaller, isolated outer islands maintain a mixture of open and residential lands.

North Island, Strawberry Island, McDonald Island, and Bruckner Island support
numerous seasonal residences. In addition to these islands, the southwestern
portion of the delta contains many other smaller islands and wetland areas.

Hunting, fishing, and water-related recreation have been popular in the area since
the early 1900's and population increases within southeastern Michigan have been
accompanied by increased recreational demands. Wildlife management programs
have responded to these demands and the Flats offers numerous recreational
opportunities for sport hunting and fishing and boating.

The productivity of the wetlands and the close proximity to the Detroit
metropolitan area has made the Flats one of the prime duck hunting areas in the
State. Although duck hunting is prevalent throughout the Flats, hunting data is
available for the DNR-managed St. Clair Flats Wildlife Area. For example, during
a single hunting day in 1976, 1,099 duck hunting applications were submitted for the
535 daily hunting permits available.

In addition to duck hunting, the Flats is an extremely popular sport fishing area.
Fishing activity within the lower Horsen's Island area was estimated at 100,000
angler days for 1975. Recreational demand forecasts for the State indicate that
fishing will continue to be one of the more popular outdoor activities. Given the
tremendous success rates of fishermen within the Flats, there is every reason to
believe that fishing activity will continue at a high rate.

Pleasure boating is another prevalent means of recreation. The many islands and
the calm inland bay waters of the Flats provide attractive surface waters for many
boaters. Boat registration within a short cruise of the Flats is well over 100,000
and the outlying islands are a convenient destination for boaters from the Detroit
Metropolitan area. It is suspected by some MDNR personnel that heavy boat
traffic disturbs spawning and nesting habitat and has a detrimental impact upon
wildlife resources. Specific data on the exact impacts of boating traffic in
unavailable; however, future boating demands will place additional burdens on these

areas and will pose additional problems for fish and wildlife management. Boa 'ting
activity is particularly heavy on summer weekends and Gull, Firecracker, and
Strawberry Islands have been extensively used by pleasure boaters. The over-use of
these stop-over islands and the accompanied problems of litter and human wastes
have prompted some local authorities to suggest that facilities be constructed to
control the abuse of these islands.

ell.

Outlying islands, without sanitation or recreational facilities,
are intensively used as stopover points during the summer
months. Sand Island, shown here, is one of several stopover
islands in the Flats.

Residential land use in the St. Clair Flats includes a mixture of types, conditions,
and values. Within the study area, there are approximately 900 housing units, the
majority of which are seasonally used. A few year-round residents are located on
the of f-islands, but most are found on Horsen's Island and along the South Channel.

The 1977 DNR field survey of parcels in the Flats included a review of housing
conditions on leased parcels. Appriximately 10% of dwellings along -the Middle
Channel, 20% on the North Channel, and 10% on the Sni Bora were classified-as
deteriorating. In general, these three channels contained the homes in the poorest
condition. Homes along the South Channel and homes with automobile access are
generally in better condition than homes on isolated islands.

Transportation of building materials by boat is difficult and remodeling or
improvement efforts are restricted. Many home owners with structures on leased
lands may also be reluctant to invest large funds on a parcel with a limited lease.
Finally, many units are serviced with only limited utilities. Electrical power is not
available to all homes and provision of water and available wastewater disposal
methods present serious problems. In summary, the homes in good condition have
access to roads or utilities and are located on properties that have been deeded by
the State.

Deteriorating homes are common in the Flats. Lack of road
access makes transport of building materials difficult, and
the local condemnation procedure is a slow and lengthy pro-
cess.

Local township officials are empowered to -condemn structures which are in
violation of building codes. The condemnation process is a lengthy procedure which
involves notification, hearings, committee review and court proceedings which can
ultimately impose an ordered lien against the property. Approximately 10
condemnation proceedings have been held within the past two years, resulting in
the condemnation of several buildings. However, many other dilapidated, unsafe
structures are still standing due to the time and effort required of local authorities
to condemn these structures, and because the low makes every effort to protect
the property rights of the homeowner.

Utilities and Services

The entire delta is currently without a central wastewater collection system, and
disposal is limited to on-site septic fields and direct discharge into surface waters.
Unsuitable soils, the high water table, and limited lot sizes render the proper
operation of septic systems nearly impossible. Most severe septic problems occur
during periods of high water when ground and surface waters inundate the fields
and prevent percolation. In addition to inadequate and improperly functioning
septic systems, many seasonal residences have privies which discharge effluent
Airectly into Lake St. Clair.

A sanitary survey was conducted in 1973 by the Michigan Department of Public
Health to assess development and occupancy on Horsen's Island. Approximately ten
percent of the homeowners were interviewed at that time. Sewage was observed
ponded on the ground surface in some areas, and an estimated 75-80 percent of the
tile systems were in the groundwater table of that time. The remainder of the
septic fields were believed to be no more than 12-18 inches above the water table.

In 1974, Judge Halford Streeter of the Circuit Court of St. Clair County issued a
ruling that prohibited issuance of building permits or septic permits in Clay
Township until a series of conditions was met. These conditions included:

A sewage treatment facilities plan for Horsen's Island
Application for federal grants to plan and construct a system
48

A facilities plan has since been completed for Horsen's Island. The cost of sewer
construction of approximately $12,000 per homeowner (over 17 million dollars for
the system) are extremely high due to the high water table, soil conditions and
scattered development. Less costly alternatives are presently being considered and
include nonconventional systems such cis composting toilets or cluster septic
systems. However a detailed study of these alternatives has not been made and
will not likely begin until 1980. It should be noted that the study of alternative
systems would only address problems on Horsen's Island and not consider sewage
disposal on other islands.

The Streeter Order also prohibited the Township from issuing "further building
permits which will cause or threaten to cause any additional degradation of the
waters of this state. . . ." The Township has issued approximately six new building
permits in the Flats since 1977, in spite of the Streeter Order. At the time of this
writing the Water Resources Commission has been notified and a course of action
will be forthcoming.

In August of 1979, representatives from the DNR, Michigan Department of Public
Health and the St. Clair County Health Department field inspected two septic field
sites on Horsen's Island. Soil borings and visual inspection revealed evidence of
extremely high water table and very poor land disposal capability. In addition, the
size of the lots were insufficient for adequate isolation distances. In one case, the
septic field was within 30 feet of open water. Unfortunately, these examples are
typical of most septic systems within the study area. If is evident that a
potentially serious health hazard exists under these conditions and there is a
possibility that a serious disease outbreak could occur.

The St. Clair County Board of Health is responsible for issuing septic system
permits and acting on nuisance complaints. Most applications for the construction
of new systems in the Flats are denied by the County sanitarian because few areas
are suitable. However, the applicant can appeal the decision to an appeals board
comprised of three of nine members who rotate in hearing appeals. The appeals

board is composed of one from each of the following groups: three township
supervisors, three "professionals," and three Board of Health members. Denials are
often overturned. If the denial is upheld, an applicant can appeal again at a later
date. The local sanitarian inspects construction of the septic system, yet the
inspection does not insure proper operation due to the high water table and minimal
lot sizes.

Due to the lack of time and manpower, the County Board of Health does not
actively search for violations, but instead acts on complaints of septic system
failure. It is their general policy to issue septic permits for replacement or repair
of the septic system. Structural repair will eliminate some problems; however the
high water table remains as the major limitation. In some cases, the County has
required elevated replacement fields so that the drainage field and water table are
isolated. In these situations, the tile fields are mounded above the original grade
with up to two feet of sandy soil. This helps to isolate effluent from the
groundwater but can also cause drainage and seepage to flow into a neighboring
system. Even if all problems are not mitigated, improvements are often made.
Improvement of (in existing system is often the most which can be accomplished for
structures which have been permitted.

In the period from January 1, 1978, to July 10, 1979, a total of 35 septic permits
were issued in the Flats, including northern Horsen's Island, where most residences
are found. Figure 16 summarizes the issuance of septic permits.

Figure 16
Septic Permits Issued in the Flats
January 1978 to July 1979

Type of Application Nuisance
New Replacement Abatement Total
I/l/78-12/31/78 9 9 3 21
1/1/79-7/10/79 4 10 - 14

The study area is presently without a central water supply system. Potable water
is transported to the islands in containers due to concerns over possible
contamination of water. Many households use water obtained from intakes which
extend into the Channels or from shallow wells. The shallow wells yield low
quantities of water and lack protection from surface water contamination. Deeper
wells penetrate an aquifer with a high brine content. Construction of a waterline
to Horsen's Island to provide island residents with a reliable source of safe drinking
water was recently begun. Water will be available at a centralized location, at the
north end of Horsen's Island, and residents can fill containers for household use.
Problems will remain with use of contaminated containers and continued use of

more convenient wells and intake.

Electric power and telephone service is supplied to all the major islands within the
St. Clair Flats. A few of the smaller, remote islands also have power and utility
easements for electrical transmission over State lands. The remote off-islands
near the Sni Bora Channel and isolated islands near Goose Bay are without

electrical service.

Most homes within the study area are without furnaces or home heating equipment.
Those homes that are winterized are dependent upon bottled gas or fuel oi I which is
transported to the island by ferry. The seasonal vacation homes rely upon electric
heat or firewood during cold weather periods.

In summary, provision of utilities is limited within the Flats. The island
configuration, high water table and remote setting restricts normal services. While
most residents do not mind the electrical and heating limitations, a more serious
problem involves water supply and wastewater disposal. Contamination of surface
waters seriously endangers public health and contributes to water quality
degradation.

Local Economy and Tax Base

Job producing activities within the study area are not significant due to the non-
industrial uses of the islands. The majority of year-round residents on Horsen's
Island commute to the mainland for employment. These uses are largely dependent
upon the recreational and boating industries and service the needs of both the
residents and non-residents of the islands. Commercial uses are located upon
deeded parcels within the study area and are listed below:

Bars and Restaurants Marinas

Brown's B & E

Four B's Minnick's
Four Winds Snyder's
Idle Hour St. Clair Flats Marina

Payments in lieu of taxes by the State on State-owned lands contribute a small
share to the local tax base. More importantly, these lands provide the major
recreational attraction to the area. Federal lands include the Army Corps of
Engineers dredge disposal sites on Dickinson Island and the U.S. Coast Guard
Station on the South Channel.

The major portions of the tax base is contributed by residential properties. State
Equalized Valuation (SEV) for the study area is approximately 10 percent of the
entire SEV for Clay Township. The majority is assessed to deeded parcels that are
found along the South and Middle Channels. State-leased properties within the
Flats contribute only 1.5 percent to the total Township SEV.

EXISTING REGULATORY AUTHORITY

Local, State and Federal regulatory authority establishes the procedures and rules
applicable to various activities. This authority provides the framework within
which the implementation of the management plan must be structured. Significant
legislation and regulatory authority pertinent to the Flats is summarized in Figure
17 and described below.

Land and Water Management

A variety of federal, state, and local laws apply to the land use and water
management of the St. Clair Flats. The most important of these laws are
concerned with administration of the Flats by the State and local land use
regulations by the Township.

State Programs Specific to the Flats

The St. Clair Flats Act P.A. 326 of 1913 is currently jointly administered by the
MDNR Lands Division and Division of Land Resource Programs. The Lands Division
accepts, records, and acknowledges all applications for the transfer, leasing, or
deeding of eligible parcels in the St. Clair Flats, and sends copies of the
applications and other pertinent information to the Division of Land Resource
Programs. The Lands Division handles appraisals to determine the value of leased
lots on applications for deeds.

The Division of Land Resource Programs, upon receiving copies of an application
from the Lands Division for a lease, deed conversion, change in use, or
fractionalization of a lot solicits comments from other Divisions and the
Department of Public Health. Upon receiving comments, Land Resource Programs
decide whether the application should be approved or denied. If necessary, special
conditions are included in the final agreement to protect the parcel or restrict its

use.

Figure 17
Legislation Relating to the St. Clair Flats

Federal State Local

Coastal Zone Management Act, Soil Erosion & Sedimentation Clay Township
1972 (16 USC 1452) (Act 347, P.A. 1970) Building Codes &
Zoning Ordinance
Notional Flood Insurance Act Shorelands Protection & Mgmt.,
of 1974 Flood Risk Areas
(Act 245, P.A. 1970)
Flood Disaster Protection Act Great Lakes Submerged Lands
(Act 247, P.A. 1955, as amended)

River and Harbor Act Great Lakes Submerged Lands
(1899) - Section 10 (Act 247, P.A. 1955, as amended)

Federal Water Pollution
Control Act ( 1972)
PL 92-500 - Section 404

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
(1934, + amendments)

Federal Water Pollution Public Health Code, St. Clair County
Control Act (Act 368, P.A. 1978) Board of Health and
PL 92-500 (1972) - Water Resources Commission Act, local appeals board,
Section 201 County Sanitary Code Act 245, P.A. 1929,
Municipal Wastewater (amended by Act 118, P.A. 1972) and Regulations
Treatment Works
NPDES Permits
(administered by MDNR, The Privies & Water Closet Act
Water Quality Division) (Act 136, P.A. 1881)
The Outhouses Act
(Act 273, P.A. 1939)
St. Clair Flats Act
(Act 326, P.A. 1913)

Federal Refuse Act Solid Waste Management Act,
National Solid Waste Act (Act 641, P.A. 1978
Endangered Species Act Endangered Species
(PL 93-205) (Act 203, P.A. 1974)

National Environmental Policy Act Michigan Environmental
of 1969 (42 USC 4321-4327) Protection Act
(Act 127, P.A. 1970)
Estuary Protection Act
(16 USC 1244; 82 Stat 627)

Although authorized by Act 326, regulations which evalu6tes the impact of parcel
conveyance and use on the public rights of hunting f ishing- and navigation have
never been developed. Nevertheless, recommendations of the Land Resource
Programs Staff are based on consideration of the purpose and legality of the
application, impacts on the public interest and public trust, impacts on the
environment, and compliance with existing land use plans, coastal zone manage-
ment plans and other related policies and programs. If the decision is contested in
Court,the Division of Land Resource Programs must address all questions about
their decision regarding the application.

Upon becoming involved in the management of the Flats in 1977, the Division of
Land Resource Programs conducted a study and field inventory to collect current
information regarding the disposition of lots in the Flats. Figure 18 provides a
summary of information obtained from this study. Through fractionalization of
parcels, the 1,868 lots contained in the original 1902 survey have been increased to
2,172 lots. Of these lots, 953 lots are state owned, not under lease or deed. There
are 567 lots leased and 652 deeded.

Low fees charged for leases and deed conversions have been a major inducement
for the large number of lots which have been deeded and leased. These low fees
have been a result of both the mandates of the legislation as well as past
administrative policies of the Department of Natural Resources. In addition, the
fractionalization of leased parcels have been permitted by the Department
compounding the existing public health and sanitation problems.

As discussed previously, Act 326 established base rental fees.- The original rental
fees were based on average front footage in accordance with the following
schedule:

Figure 18
Summary of Deeded and Leased Parcels
St. Clair Flats, 1977

Area Approved for Deeds Area
Number Leased Parcels
of State in Area Approved for Deeds
Total Owned Deeded Total Full Frac. Total
Segment Parcels Parcels Parcels Leases Lots Parcels Leases

South Channel 687 137 466 84 42 42 0
Muscomoot Bay 44 30 --- 0 0 0 14
Middle Channel 497 127 100 45 19 26 225
Goose Bay 53 53 --- 0 0 0 0
Sni Bora 531 323 36 12 11 1 160
Anchor Bay 48 48 --- 0 0 0 0
North Channel 312 235 50 5 1 4 22

TOTALS 2172 953 652 146 73 73 421

Total State-Owned Parcels 953

Total StGte-Owned Leased Parcels 567

Total Deeded Parcels 652

Source: Adopted by Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May,inc from:
Department of Natural Resources
Survey of the St. Clair Flats (1977)

Figure 19
-Original Lease Rental Fees,@@ as provided by- Act 326

Main Channel Interior Channel
Section Frontage Frontage

South Channel 75 cents per foot 50 cents per foot
North Channel 40 cents per foot 20 cents per foot
All Other Channels 20 cents per foot 20 cents per foot
(including Middle
and Sni Bora)

The original rental fees reflected a rate far below market values and actually
encouraged development of valuable wetland habitat. For example, an average lot
might have 200 feet of frontage and be 500 feet in depth (approximately 2.3
acres). The lease averaged $75.00 for the first 50 years, or about $1.50 per year
plus taxes. This is equivalent to a rental of $32.60 per acre for 50 years or less
than 70 cents per acre per year. Legislation stipulated that rental for the second
term could not exceed twice the charge assessed during the first term of the
lease. Those who applied for a lease prior to this legislation under Act 175, P.A.
1899 or Act 215, P.A. 1909 did not have to reapply.

Act 215, PA 1949 provided for the conversion of leases to deeds for certain
parcels along the South Channel. On September 8, 1949, the Conservation
Commission approved a policy for arriving at the consideration for a deed. The
policy stated:

1) Land values only will be considered and not the improvements such as
dredging, leveling off, sheet piling, docks, buildings, and other improve-

ments.

2) In arriving at the land value, consideration will be given to the fact that
the State will retain the paramount right of navigation, hunting, and
f ishing.

3) When the applicant is a lessee, the appraisal value of the land will be
reduced to allow credit for the unexpired term of the lease for which
rental has been paid. The present appraisal value less this credit will be
the consideration for the deed.

The Commission further elaborated on this policy. First, relating to Item I above,
the original appraisals made for leases were considered to serve as a guide for
establishing land values without improvements. However, because the original
legislation provided that the rental fee for the second term of the lease should not
exceed twice the original fee, it seemed reasonable to consider twice the original
rental fee cis a fair appraisal of present land value exclusive of any man-made
improvements. Therefore, appraisals were to be calculated at twice the average
or $1.50 per front foot for property fronting on the South Channel, and $1.00 per
iront foot for property fronting on canals in the rear of the South Channel.

In accordance with Item 3 above, appraised values were to be adjusted to give
credit for the unexpired lease term. An exception was to made if a lease was
issued in recent years at a rental appraisal considerably more than the average
appraisal mentioned above. In those instances, credit due the lessee could have
reduced the appraisal to ci nominal amount. To counteract this possibility, G
minimum appraisal of $25 was adopted.

On July 12, 1963, the Conservation Commission directed the Department to revise
the 1949 formula for converting a lease to a deed to more accurately reflect
current market values of property in the Flats. In determining market value, the
value of structural improvements was not to be considered. Further, credit was to
be given for the unexpired term of the lease. Although the Lands Division of the
Department revised the 1949 formula and conversion fees were increased, the
revised formula allowed conversion at fees still substantially below market values.
The revised formula established the following front-foot conversion rates:

Middle Channel $2.00

Sni Bora Channel 1.50

South Channel 3.00

Interior Channel 2.00

Interior Lands not
on Water 1.00

This formula has been used since 1963 and accounts for the incredibly low prices
for deed conversions. For example, the fees charged for deed conversion on the
South Channel have been $3.00 a waterfront foot while current market prices have
averaged between $80.00 and $100.00 a waterfront foot. In April 1973, the
minimum deed consideration was raised from $25.00 to $100.00, yet this min -imum
hardly reflects the true market value of property in the Flats. Since the 1963
formula went into effect, over 400 deeds have been issued. The extremely low
prices of the past have contributed to increased development, lot splitting and
profit taking resulting in the alteration of valuable wetlands and State-owned
bottomlands.

Other State Programs

Other State regulatory programs are significant to land management in the Flats.
Three statutes administered by the Department of Natural Resources-, the Great
Lakes Submerged Lands Act, the Shorelands Protection and Management Act and
the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act are applicable to the Flats.

The Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act (Act 247, P.A. 1955, as amended) was
originally passed to clear title to unpatented Great Lakes' bottomlands filled, prior
to 1955 and to regulate filling of these bottomlands. The Act has been amended
to regulate construction activities on both patented and unpatented bottomlands,
convey marina leases, and allow the State to enter into agreements for the use of
State-owned bottomlands.

The definition of the Flats as swamps or bottomland was clouded for some time

and there was confusion as to whether Act 247 applied to the Flats. On August
19, 1977, the Attorney General opinioned that the Flats is subject to the mandates
of Act 247 and permits are required for any future activities involving the
alterations or modifications of the bottomlands of the Flats.

One of the basic objectives of the Shorelands Protection and Management Act
(Act 245, P.A. 1970) is to protect new construction from flood damage and flood
hazard. Implementation of the low is to be accomplished by local zoning
ordinances or regulations which have received MDNR approval, or in the absence
of such ordinances, directly by the DNR through site plan permits. The Flood
Insurance Study conducted for the National Flood Insurance Program was
completed for Clay Township in 1978 and the Township is scheduled for
designation as a flood hazard area under Act 245 in 1980. Upon designation, DNR
will review Clay Township's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance for conformance
with the provisions of Act 245. This act also provides for the designation of
environmentally sensitive areas. However, such environmental areas are to be
situated within 1,000 feet landward of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM)
established in Section 2 of Act 247, P.A. 1955, as amended. While portions of the
St. Clair Flats lie below the OHWM, other areas are above the OHWM and thus
eligible for designation as environmentally sensitive areas.

The Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act, Act 347 P.A., 1972, provides for
the prevention of soil erosion and control of waters of the state by the regulation
of any activity which disturbs one or more acres of land or occurs within 500 feet
of a watercourse. The principle regulatory tool is a state-approved construction
permit program developed and implemented by a local or county enforcement
agency. Certain designated "authorized public agencies" are exempt from the
permit requirements. This statute applies only infrequently to construction
activities in the Flats because it regulates man-made changes in natural cover or
topography of the land (Section 2(7)). The most disruptive activities in the Flats
involve creation of new land by bulkheading and filling.

Local Programs

The Clay Township Zoning Ordinance covers Harsen's, Dickinson, and the outlying
islands of the Flats. All of Dickinson Island and most of Horsen's Island is zoned
single-family residential. Limited areas on Harsen's Island are zoned commercial
and one area on the north end of the island is zoned for mobile home parks.

There has been considerable question regarding the relationship between local
zoning and State-owned, leased lands in the St. Clair Flats. Legal research on this
question was sought from Diana V. Pratt, Attorney-ot-Law, from Ann Arbor.

Pratt reports that the question of whether publicly-owned land is subject to local
zoning has been extensively reviewed by the Courts of the nation. Michigan
Courts, until very recently have wrestled with the individual fact situations
presented, but have not followed a coherent and consistent rule. That situation
was corrected by the Supreme Court in Dearden vs. Detroit, 403 Mich 257 (1978).
After G review of the case law, the Court held:

The common thread running through these cases, although not
clearly stated in some is on attempt to determine the intent of the
Legislature when deciding whether a governmental unit is subject
to a municipal zoning ordinance. We hold today that the legislative
intent, where it can be discerned, is the test for determining
whether a governmental unit is immune from the provisions of local
zoning ordinances.

The Court applied the test in the Dearden case, finding that the Legislature
specifically established the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections.

Subject to constitutional powers vested in the executive and
judicial department of the state, the deportment shall have
exclusive jurisdiction over the following: ... (c) penal institutions

The Court found on this basis that the Legislature intended the Department of
Corrections to be immune from local zoning. Other case low, although not applying
the test, has provided guidance in ascertaining legislative intent.

The issues in regard to St. Clair Flats can be resolved by ascertaining the
legislative intent. The St. Clair Flats Act does not state whether the State lands in
question will be subject to local zoning. The Township Rural Zoning Act addresses
only conflicts with conflicting ordinances and not with statutes. The provisions of
the leases themselves are not helpful. The Clay Township Zoning Ordinance,
however, provides a means for resolution of potential conflict.

Whenever any provision of this Ordinance imposes more stringent
requirements, regulations, restrictions or limitations than are
imposed or required by the provisions of any other low or
ordinance, then the provisions of this Ordinance shall govern.
Whenever the provisions of any other law or ordinance impose more
stringent requirements than (ire imposed or required by this
Ordinance, then the provisions of such ordinance shall govern.

The Ordinance further states:

In the interpretation and application, the provisions of this
Ordinance shall be held to be minimum requirements adopted for
the promotion of the public health, morals, safety, comfort,
convenience, or general welfare. It is not intended by this
Ordinance to repeal, abbrogate, annul, or in any way to impair or
interfere with any existing provision of low or ordinance, or with
any rules, regulations or permits previously adopted or issued or
which shall be adopted or issued pursuant to the low relating to the
use of buildings or premises; provided, however, that where this
Ordinance imposes a greater restriction than is required by existing
ordinance or by rules, regulations or permits; the provisions of this
Ordinance shall control.

The Zoning Enabling Act, as interpreted by Dearden, supra, is intended to permit
local government regulation of land use. Because there is no statutory provision to
the contrary, the zoning ordinance provides a means for resolving land use
conflicts. If the DNR by rule or by the terms of a lease or deed issued after the
enactment of the Zoning Ordinance, July 27, 1967, imposes a more stringent
restriction on use of the land in question, that rule, deed or lease provision will

control. Otherwise, the provisions of the zoning ordinance apply. If, however, a
rule or the terms of a deed or lease become effective prior to the enactment of the
Zoning Ordinance, under Detroit vs. City of Wixom, the DNR, the owner, or the
lessee may have a vested interest in that use. The zoning ordinance has a provision
dealing with vested rights:

Nothing in the Ordinance shall be interpreted or construed to give
rise to any permanent vested rights in the continuation of any
particular use, district, zoning classification or any permissible
activities therein; and, they are hereby declared to be subject to
subsequent amendment, change, or modification as may be nec-
essary to the preservation or protection of public health, safety and
welfare.

If an existing use is not permitted in the Ordinance, it may continue but as a non-
conforming use.

Where the State retains ownership of the land and has not and will not lease or deed
it away, the State will likewise be bound by the more stringent requirements, either
of the Zoning Ordinance or its own rules. Where the State use is controlled by a
statute other than the St. Clair Flats Act, the legislative intent will control. The
private user will not be able to claim immunity from zoning except in the very
restricted case, where the use is specifically exempted from zoning by statute.

In regard to the sale of unleased lands, Section 2c, specifically states:

Any of the lands described in Section 2a, not now or subsequently
under lease may, in the discretion of the Department of Conserva-
tion, be sold and deeded in the same manner, in consideration of
the payment of a sum to be determined by the Department of
Conservation by using the method provided by Section 9 of Act No.
326 of Public Acts of 1913: Provided, that should the applicant
seek to use said lands for other than residential purposes, that
pending the enactment of zoning ordinance by the Township of Clay
of the County of St. Clair, such other use shall comply with the
usual requirements of the Department of Conservation in such
regard.

All uses of these lands other than for residential purposes must comply with the
zoning ordinance if it exists at the time of the sale, unless the purchaser complies
with DNR requirements. Where there is a conflict between the DNR requirements
and the zoning ordinance, the more stringent standards apply w hether the origin of
the standard is with the IDNR or the Township.

No distinction need be drawn between leased lands and leased lands that can be
deeded. The St. Clair Flats Act in Section 2G provides:

The deeds shall contain the some provisions as to use and
occupancy as now set forth in all leases heretofore granted under
Act No. 326 of Public Acts of 1913, as amended.

Under Dearden, supra, the use of the land, whether by the owner or lessee, is
controlling. Where there is no statutory exemption of private use of these lands
under lease, the lease and subsequent deed is subject to the zoning ordinance.

The final question concerns uses of the property instituted prior to the enactment
of the zoning ordinance. If the use complies with the ordinance, it may continue so
long as the ordinance is not changed to disallow the use. Where the use does not
conform to the Ordinance, it may continue but only as a nonconforming use. The
Clay Township Zoning Ordinance makes provision for nonconforming uses. Here
again, if DNR requirements are more stringent, they will control.

In summary, eligibility for immunity from local zoning provisions is determined by
use of the land and the user, and not by the owner of the land. State and local
governments are only exempted from the local zoning when the Legislature has
intended that the particular uses are exempt. Private users will have to comply
with local zoning except in the rare instances, where the particular use has been
exempted by the Legislature. Land uses that are not in conformity with the
provisions of local zoning at the time the ordinance becomes effective are treated
as nonfonforming uses and must comply with the applicable sections of the local
zoning ordinance.

As a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program, Clay Township has
adopted a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance. The ordinance requires that
sanitary sewage systems minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the
sewage disposal system. In addition the ordinance requires that new construction
be elevated above the base flood elevation. New building permits within the Flats
must be scrutinized by the local officials prior to -the granting of a building permit.
Strict enforcement of the ordinance would deter or significantly alter some
development in the Flats. However, use of the variance provisions of the ordinance
have allowed construction to continue.

go
V
'Rpm

soft
SIP

This structure may be in compliance with the local Flood
Damage Prevention Ordinance. However, problems associ-
ated with shore erosion and lack of an adequate sewage dis-
posal system remain.

Federal Programs

The Coastal Zone Management Act, (PL 92-582) of 1972, provided for assistance
and encouragement to coastal states to develop and implement rational programs
for managing their coastal zones. Michigan's coastal zone management plan
received federal approval in 1978 and is now in the implementation phase. The St.
Clair Flats is included within the designated coastal zone area. A federal
consistency provision in the Act requires all federal actions to be consistent with
the State program to the "maximum extent practicable." Included are all federally
conducted and supported activities such as the issuance of federal licenses or
permits and federal financial assistance programs. An exception may be made to
the federal consistency requirement if the proposed federal activity or program is
found to be in the overriding national interest.

The federal consistency requirements are significant to the management of the
Flats. Federal activities such as the location and management of dredge disposal
sites in the Flats must be consistent with State objectives. The issuance of Section
10 and Section 404 dredge and fill permits must also conform to State plans for the

area.

Public Health and Water Quality

The Water Quality Division of the DNR administers both the Federal National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System for point source discharges into surface
waters and the state permit program for discharges into the groundwater. These
permitting programs have limited applicability to the Flats since they deal
primarily with nonresidential dischargers and municipal wastewater plants with
discharges over 10,000 gallons per day. The primary water quality problem in the
Flats is the discharge of sewage from "privies" or improperly functioning septic
f ields. The most pertinent legislation regarding this problem is the Water
Resources Commission Act 245, P.A., 1929.

Under Act 245, direct or indirect discharge of human wastes into waters of the
State are illegal. Section 6(b) of Act 245, P.A. 1929 states:

"The discharge of any raw sewage of human origin, directly or
indirectly into any waters of the state shall be considered prima
facie evidence of a violation of this section by the municipality in
which the discharge originated . . . 11

Act 245 clearly regulates discharge activities. It also establishes water quality
standards. The administrative rules of the Act (Rule 62) state that the waters of
the State shall not contain more than 200 fecal coliforms per 100 milliliters for
total body contact recreation. Available water quality samples do not provide
evidence of a violation of these standards; however, it is believed that if samples
are taken near suspected problem areas, the samples would reveal excessive fecal
coliform limits. In order to verify suspected -violations, updated and extensive
water quality sampling is strongly recommended.

In addition to Act 245, two other acts concerning Water quality apply to the Flats.
The Privies and Water Closets Act, Act 136, P.A. 1881 and The Outhouse Act, Act
273, P.A. 1939. Act 136 empowers state or local officials to adopt sanitary
regulations. Act 273 outlines minimum standards and regulations. Some "privies"
are still in use within the Flats and are in direct violation of Act 273 P.A. 1939 and
Act 245, P.A. 1929.

Finally the State has authority within the Public Health Code Act 368, P.A. 1978,
to intercede in situations of "imminent danger" to public health. Section 2251(3) of
the Act states:
"if the director determines that conditions anywhere in this state
constitute a menace to the public health, the director may take full
charge of the administration of state and local health laws, rules,
regulations and ordinances applicable thereto.

Imminent danger is defined as: "a condition or practice which could reasonably be
expected to cause death, disease or serious physical harm . . . " To date, the State
Department of Public Health has not interceded in the Flats to mitigate existing
public health problems.

On the local level, the County acts as the enforcement agency for public health.
The St. Clair County Health Department has adopted Sewage Disposal Regulations
which specify design requirements for septic fields. Isolation distances are outlined
within the regulations and require:

- 2-1/2 feet between the invert of tile field and top
of the high water mark

- 25 feet separation between tile field and open

water

The 1973 Michigan Department of Public Health sanitary survey for Harsen's Island
estimated that the high water table was no more than 12 to 18 inches below grade
for well over 50% of the systems surveyed. It can therefore be concluded that an
isolation distance of 2-1/2 feet is impossible to maintain for all septic systems in
the study area. State guidelines require as much as 4 feet isolation between tile
field and groundwater and 100 feet between tile field and open water. In summary
the County regulations are lenient and reflect a sympathetic attitude towards local
residents and their soil conditions.

Dredge and Fill Activities

Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 WGS passed by Congress to prohibit
unauthorized obstruction or alteration of any navigable water used for post or
present interstate commerce, up to the administratively determined "head of
navigation" (Federal Register,42, No. 138, 329.10). Permits are required from the
Army Corps of Engineers for the alteration or obstruction of any of these waters.
The purpose of this Act is to facilitate navigation. The four main channels of the
Flats are included in this definition of "navigable waters" and are subject to the
corresponding rules and regulations.

The Army Corps of Engineers also regulates by permit the discharge of dredged or

fill materials into navigable waters under the mandates of Section 404 of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, (P.L. 92-500). Included
are all waters previously designated under Section 10 plus those waters between the
"head of navigation" and headwaters of a stream. Through court rulings the
jurisdictional authority of this Act has been expanded to include wetlands. Under
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act and related memos, the U.S. Department of
Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
review all permit applications regarding impact on the fish and wildlife resources
and environmental integrity of the area.

On the State level, the Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act, P.A. 247 of 1955 is the
major piece of legislation controlling dredge and fill activity in the Flats today.
This intent of Act 247 has been previously. discussed in the section entitled
Other State Programs.

Miscellaneous Legislation

The National Environmental Protection Act, (1969), provided that environmental
impact studies (EIS) would be required for all federally supported or funded
projects. The Army Corp of Engineers prepared an EIS for the diked dredge
disposal area which was subsequently constructed on Dickinson Island. A related
state act, the Michigan Environmental Protection Act, (Act 127 of P.A. 1970), also
exists. This Act enables any public and/or private party to take any other party to
Court if it is believed that pollution, destruction or impairment of natural
resources is taking place or is likely to take place.

Under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,(P.L. 93-205), an
endangered species program was organized in Michigan. Michigan Public Act No.
203, The Endangered Species Act of 1974, was subsequently passed. The first State
list was presented to the Natural Resources Commission in February, 1976. As
determined by Beaman (1977), 38% of the probably extinct, threatened or
endangered species occupy or have occupied aquatic or wetland habitats. It is

believed that more plant species have been lost from wetlands than any other
habitat. While there are no endangered birds which reside in the Flats, they may
pass through the area. Included are the American peregrine falcon, the bald eagle,
and the osprey. As discussed in a previous section of this report, several species of
plants and animals which have been classified as "threatened" or "rare" do reside in
the Flats. These legislative mandates are important to insure these species and
habitat critical to them are protected.

Physiographic and
Cultural Units

PHYSIOGRAPHIC AND CULTURAL UNITS

The baseline natural resource and cultural data presented in Part III of this report
has been organized into physiographic and cultural units. These units organize the
data in an understandable and concise form and serve as the basis for the
development of management scenarios and the management plan.

CHARACTERIZATIONS OF PHYSIOGRAPHIC SITE TYPES

The St. Clair Flats is a unique and valuable area attributable to the ecological
relationships and complex interactions of the area as a whole. While particularly
sensitive areas such as the great blue heron rookery and the general location of fish
spawning grounds can be identified, all areas have a significant role in the
propagation of fish and wildlife. Of particular importance are the transition areas
between permanent water and upland. Wildlife and fish require different habitats
during various stages of their lives, and loss of a particular type of habitat area
may threaten the species. Preservation of a nesting or spawning ground alone will
not insure the continued viability of a particular species.

The importance of the Flats ecosystem must also be viewed in relation to the rest
of Lake St. Clair. The urbanization of the western shore and corresponding loss of
wetlands has placed a heavier burden on the Flats for provision of fish and
waterfowl habitat. The Flats serves as both a direct and (in indirect source of food

and fish stocks for the rest of the Lake.

The St. Clair delta is an extremely dynamic ecosystem. The boundaries of
vegetation communities and corresponding wildlife use change in response to
fluctuations in lake levels. Lake levels fluctuate seasonally and annually, and may
vary as much as 5 or 6 feet over a I I- to 14-year cycle. Changes in vegetation may
become evident several years after extremely high or low water levels as plants die
off or invade an area. The dynamic nature of the ecosystem complicates the
process of mapping the area, for a map depicts only a static condition.

Despite the practical difficulties, the Flats were categorized into physiographic
units illustrated by Map 1. These units divide the Flats into units of a
comprehensible size with unique characteristics, and present a basis for the
development of management strategies. The area has been broken down into six
physiographic units:

Unit I - Open Water
Unit 2 - Deep Marsh
Unit 3 - Transition Area

Unit 4 - Meadow Area
Unit 5 - Upland Hardwood
Unit 6 - Man-Altered Areas

Physiographic units are based primarily on water depth and vegetation type.
Substantial interchange exists between Units 2, 3 and 4 depending on lake levels.
Two primary sources of information were used to define and map the physiographic
units. The first study involved interpretation of high altitude LANDSAT
photography* of the Flats by John G. Lyon. (Lyon, 1979). The primary purpose of
Lyon's study was to examine the capability of computer classification of LANDSAT
digital data to provide information on coastal land use and vegetation. The
Michigan Land Cover/ Use Classification System, (MLCUCS) was used to
categorize and map land use and vegetation. Black and white imagery and field
observation were used to verify the results.

The work of Eugene Jaworski and C. Nicholas Raphael, professors of geology and
geography at Eastern Michigan University was also used. JGworski and Raphael
have conducted a number of studies over the years using black and white aerial
imagery and field observations to map vegetative changes which have occured in
response to lake level changes. Rather than use G standard classification system
like MLCUCS, Jaworski and Raphael developed their own classification system.

Each study has its own inherent features. Lyon's results are more detailed and

A,NCHOR SAY
A

Stu

............
-T. On,

tM
'000e
w

D1,;kthsOn
r

"A
00

Harsens Ij
@S Island

%
19
All

0.
el
I W1.

I Vp

LAKE ST CLAIR

maps are presented at a smaller scale. However, the LANDSAT imagery used by
Lyon was photographed in 1974, during high water levels, and represents only one
point in time. Jaworski and Raphael have had extensive previous field experience
with the Flats. They used low altitude photography, the interpretation of which is
a more established technology. However, Jaworskils and Raphael's map of the
entire Flats was based upon 1971 aerial photos when water levels were low. Their
additional studies focused only on Dickinson Island and involved photos for 1949
(average to low water levels), 1964 (low and falling waters levels) and 1975 (high
water levels). Further information on Lyon's and Jaworski and Raphael's work is
provided in Appendix B.

To develop physiographic units for this report, it was necessary to reconcile the
differences between the previously discussed studies. Low altitude infrared
photography taken in 1978, provided by the Department of Natural Resources,
U.S.G.S. topographic maps, navigation charts, interviews with knowledgeable
persons and professional judgement were used to categorize the physiographic

un i ts.

The six physiographic units are described as follows:

Unit I - Open Water

This unit includes permanently wet interior lakes, waters of Lake St. Clair,
river channels, and water highways which are two or more feet deep. Within
the study area, water depths rarely exceed six feet except in the main
channels. The waters of this zone may be colonized by floating-leaved or deep
water emergent plants in protected or quiet areas, (Mud Lake; southeast
corner of Little Muscamoot Bay). Other areas which are somewhat deeper
may be heavily colonized by a diverse array of submergent vegetation (Little
Muscamoot Bay; Fisher Bay; portions of Anchor Bay; some channel edges ---
particularly the mouth of the North Channel, Big Fisher Highway, Snook's
Highway and Dead Man's Cut); or may be virtually devoid of vegetation except

for a few scraggly specimens of Chara, (Muscamoot Bay and Goose Bay).
Submergent vegetation is colonized by epiphytic algae, which provides food
and cover for macroinvertebrates. Macroinvertebrates are in turn consumed
by fish and waterfowl. Waterfowl also directly consume various species of
submergent vegetation. Thus, these areas are particularly important to fish
and waterfowl and also subject to human disturbance due to boating,
waterskiing, or pollutional stress. Pollution problems will be particularly
evident in shallow areas and areas which have a low flushing rate.

Unit 2 - Deep Marsh

These areas ore wet during much of the year and are colonized by cattails,
bulrushes, and various associated species depending on water levels. Water
depth varies from ground level to two feet deep.

Bulrushes (Scirpus sp.) are more tolerant of deep water than are cattails and
may be found to a depth of three feef. They are dominant in high water years
and in deep waters interspersed with submergent vegetation. Cattails are
dominant in shallow areas (6 to 8 inches between the roots and water surface)
or during low water years. They cannot survive prolonged periods of flooding.
Cattails present in 4 to 6 inches of water without influorescenses are probably
actively invading the area. Sedges may be interspersed on the dry, landward
side. Unit 2 might also be termed the emergent marsh unit.

Unit 2 areas are located adjacent to landforms, in open water areas which are
underlain by shallow bar formations or in relict distributary channels in the
interior of Dickinson and Harsen's Islands. The interior marshes are
particularly significant because they provide deep water adjacent to shallow
marshes and are more protected than outlying areas. They add to the diversity
of habitats available to fish and waterfowl (Personal communication, Pospichal
and Elden, MDNR). Their role in sediment transport through the delta is
poorly understood but believed to be very significant (Personal communication,
Jaworski).

Unit 2 is important in terms of primary productivity and serves as an
important source of detritus for the aquatic food chain. Outlying areas are
major fish spawning grounds -and important for waterfowl cover. Interior
marshes serve as brooding and nesting grounds for mallards, blue and green
wing teal, woodducks, pintails and various other bird species. Corp have also
been noted spawning there (Personal communication, Elden, MDNR).

Unit 3 - Transition Area

This unit might also be termed "shallow marsh" or "sedge zone," depending on
water levels. During wet years, rushes and cattail advance into this area.
Sedges are tolerant of varying water levels, but will generally dominate in
drier years. Bur-reed and bluejoint grass may also be found. This unit also
includes forested wetlands, such as willow-buttonbush associations, and
standing dead trees, shrubs, or stumps indicative of lower water conditions in
previous years. Unit 3 is the broadest category. Its importance to wildlife and
fish is closely tied to the water level. Wet areas may be utilized for spawning
by some fish, such as northern pike, or for waterfowl nesting cover. Drier
areas are important habitat for some waterfowl, and also upland birds and
mammals. The relative proportion of wet and dry areas and corresponding
wildlife users varies with water level.

Generally, Units 2 and 3 are most likely to be dredged or filled. Most
surveyed lots fall within these units and they are shallow enough that a
minimal amount of fill will raise the land above water level.

Unit 4 - Open Meadow

These areas are typically dry and are underlain by Sanilac soils. They typify
early stages of succession, as they are generally colonized by grasses or shrubs.
The MLCUCS terms these areas "rangelands." Unit 4 areas on Dickinson
Island, (as well as portions of Unit 3 during dry years and Unit 5 during wet

years), may contain plant species indicative of wet prairie environments which
are rare in Michigan. Many endangered or threatened plant species have been
identified in these areas.

Unit 5 - Upland Hardwoods

These areas are permanently -dry and are underlain by SGnilGC soils. They are
covered with deciduous forest associations, including oaks, silver maple,
American elm, shogbark hickory, eastern cottonwood, and trembling aspen.
The presence of these upland species indicates these areas have been dry for
some time and are more stable than the other units. Unit 5 would be less
sensitive than the other units to development pressures but still has soils
unsuitable for septic systems.

Unit 6 - Man-Altered Areas

Included in this unit are residential and commercial developments, the diked
dredge disposal site currently in operation on Dickinson Island, and the St.
Clair Flats Wildlife Area on Horsen's Island. All have been extensively
modified by man. Most of the residential and commercial areas are on sites
which have been dredged or filled. These areas are not devoid of wildlife.
Canvasbacks, mallards, and redheads nest in remaining open water areas along
the heavily urbanized South Channel. Other birds may be observed feeding
throughout the area. The dredge disposal site supports dense and diverse
vegetative growth and numerous waterfowl and shorebirds were observed in
the area in June 1979. There had been no recent dredge disposal activity at
that time. The wildlife area is managed primarily for waterfowl, and also
supports some upland birds, mammals, and fish.

The physiographic units are evaluated to determine their relative sensitivities to
various types of development. Recreation, commercial and residential uses will
have different impacts on different units. The degree of impact will vary

according to the intensity of -development and the. relative sensitivity of the un i t.
By evaluating and analyzing these -units, critical areas can be -identified and
recommendations made concerning the most suitable uses.

7F,
AR@

----------

This property is one which would be included in Unit 6 - Man-
Altered Area. Marshland has been bulkheaded and filled, and
lack of adequate sewage disposal system is evident.

The units are evaluated on a qualitative basis. It is difficult to assign specific
rankings of sensitivity or numerical ratings because all the units are sensitive. The
units are involved within a dynamic, interdependent ecosystem, and therefore,
specific evaluation is impossible without considering the larger overall process.
However, a qualitative evaluation of the physiographic can be made based upon the
following factors:

- significant value
- functional roles

sensitivity to disturbance
development capability

The significant values of the physiographic units are illustrated in a matrix
presented as Figure 20. Cultural values such as development suitability,
recreational use and visual aesthetics are evaluated. Natural values that are
evaluated include vegetative diversity, unique species, waterfowl and fish.

Figure 21 complete the qualitative evaluation of the physiographic units.
Illustrated in Figure 21 are the functions, sensitivity to disturbance and
development capability of each physiographic unit.

Based upon the matrix and evaluation chart, it is apparent that the entire St. Clair
Flats is an extremely fragile and sensitive ecosystem. All physiographic units are
valuable for fish and.wildlife production. The units are sensitive to human
interference especially by dredging, filling and bulkheading within wet areas where
biological activity is especially productive. While the drier meadow and hardwood
areas are less sensitive to disturbance, they support unique plant species and
provide important wildlife habitat.

In summary, the development capability for these physiogrGphic units is severely
limited. Residential and commerical uses impose severe impacts upon the units
and the fragile ecosystem is incapable of supporting these uses. Limited
development uses such as wildlife areas and interpretive areas are less demanding
and may be permitted within Units 3 or 4. More intensive uses should be limited,
although some suitable sites are found within the drier upland areas of Units 5 and
6.

NATURAL CULTURAL

r
<
(D 00
C. 3: LI?
CA
m >
- on < m
-n 46< @ g x 0
ca
c

1A
CL (D

. . . .... ... . ...
0 0101 1010 (D It 0 Unit I/Open Water Goose So,,
0 40 40i(DI 1010. 0
011 -4) 0 Little Mu
0 0 0'0 1 (D I G) CD aq Big Musc
Fisher Ba
01,G) (D'; (D 0 0 0 0 0
0 0,'G) j(DCD (D (D I (D a) 0'. Water Hi
0 m Main Cho
(OD 0
--i/Deep Outlying
0 01-, C Unit
(D 01 Olt 4
0 0 0 0 a) (D 0 0 .0 010 (D:':. Interior C
0 01 0 0 imlo 0 1 00 0 V (D@-* Unit !/Transition Area
4- -TO-1-0 10 0 0 OiCD 0* Unit 4/Meadow Area
(D (D 0 0 0 (D (D 10: 5/Upland Hardwood
(D mT 101 (D 1 0 MD (D (D I (D
(D 01 (D- :0) Unit 6/Mon-Altered Dredge D
(D (D i0jo 0 (D (D (D 0 *i (D Wildlife
Iwo
f
ID (D.1 (D a) CD W Urbanize
0 :(Ujyl it

PHYSIOGRAPHIC UNIT SENSITIVITY AND DEVELOPMENT CAPABILITY
Figure 21

1. OPEN WATER 2. DEEP MARSH 3. TRANSITION AREA 4. OPEN MEADOW 5.

Function Function Function Function Func
Dense and diverse array of Emergent marsh vegetation The area is tied closely to The area is usually dry and Thes
submergent vegetation serves provides habitat for large pop- fluctuations in water levels. supports grasses, shrubs, and perrr
as habitat for a variety of fish ulations of fish and wildlife. During wet years, the shallows wet prairie plant species. vari(
species and spawning grounds The area is important for fish are used by f ish; in dry years, Mammals, such (is deer and spec
for some. Diving and dabbling spawning, waterfowl food waterfowl, birds, and mam- raccoon are typically found, as
ducks also feed on submergent sources, and the production of mals make use of the area. well as herons, egrets and
vegetation in this area. detritus which is vital to the Waterborne sediment is trap- large birds. This habitat type
aquatic food chain. ped within pockets of vegeta- is rare in Michigan.
tion, and the land forming pro-
cess commonly occurs.

Sensitivity to Disturbance Sensitivity to Disturbance Sensitivity to Disturbance Sensitivity to Disturbance Sens
Boating activity will place Dredging and filling activity In the past, these areas have Development could perma- Dest
pressures upon fish and wild- will have a long term impact been the most susceptible to nently destroy unique plant wood
life. Critical times are during upon deep marsh vegetation. development and alteration. species and habitat for wild- loss
spawning and nesting periods Bulkheading will permanently Disturbance of root rizones, life. habit
in the spring and during spring destroy valuable emergents, loss of vegetation, and water
and fall migration. Submergent and revegetation to its original turbidity will have long term
vegetation is sensitive to the state is unlikely. impacts upon habitat. Urbani-
effects of dredging, filling, zation places stress and inter-
and bottom disturbance. ference upon wildlife behavior.

Development Capability Development Capability Development Capability Development Capability Deve
The areas are incapable of High water levels, flood haz- Recurring high water levels, Drier conditions could support Seas
supporting development. ards, and unique wildlife habi- flood hazards, and valuable some recreation uses; plac(
tat make these areas incapable wildlife habitat make these however, the valuable habitat resid
of supporting development. areas incapable of supporting and high water table place How
Outlying areas are susceptible residential development. Lim- severe limitations upon can
to ice and wave action. ited recreation with non-inten- residential uses and moderate
sive uses may be permitted. limitations upon some
recreational uses.

CHARACTERIZATION OF CULTURAL UNITS

The cultural units, illustrated by Map 2, serve the primary purpose of presenting
the existing land ownership and development patterns in the Flats. The lands in the
Flats are either owned by private -individuals, by the State, or leased by the State.
Not all parcels within the areas approved for deeds are deeded. Some are leased,
while the State retains full title to others.

Included in the map is information on the condition and number of structures on
leased properties. This information was derived from a 1977 field inventory
conducted by the Division of Land Resource Programs of the leased lots. Some lots
are unoccupied, while others have structures which range from deteriorating to
good condition. The type and condition of development on a parcel is indicative of
the property owner's interest in the land and relative value of the properties. It
y also be indicative of the degree of disruption of the natural environment in the

are
Mao. This information will be pertinent when determining acquisition priorities.

Fractionalization of platted lots is a major problem in the Flats. Fractional lots
with more than one structure indicate areas of dense development. The tiny lots
found on these parcels intensify problems of septic disposal in an area which
already has severe limitations on the suitability of soils for septic systems. Septic
systems have been installed on lots much too small for adequate septic systems
even in locations with suitable soils. On both densely developed and other
fractionalized parcels, multiple ownership complicates the process of determining
property lines. Consolidation of ownership and acquisition is also complicated.
Methods of controlling lot-splitting are discussed in the implementation portion of
this report.

-hM
ANCHOR BAY
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
W%al

C!,
Ac-
M.

A -n

A
Harsens
Island

04A

ME
H:

C"*/
of
gv

vi
,W
Ul@

;9,. ftk

MIN

LAKE S7 CLAM

I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Management Plan
I
I
'I
'I
I
it

MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Management Plan is presented in five components: Findings and Conclusions,
Alternative Management Scenarios, Land Management Plan, Policy Plan, and
Acquisition Priorities Plan. The Findings and Conclusions and Management
Strategies serve as the foundation for the development of the Land Management,
Policy and Acquisition Priorities Plans.

FINDINGS

A great deal of information has been presented in the preceding chapters. The
presentation of findings and conclusions will illustrate the need for prompt action
and prudent management of the Flats. The findings and conclusions are divided
into the following categories:

Land Management

Since the early 1900's, the St. Clair Flats has been subject to special
interest legislation allowing for the private use of State-owned bottom-
lands. The St. Clair Flats Act 326 was passed in 1913 to allow for the
leasing, control and taxation of parcels within the Flats. Leases were
allowed in two terms, 50 years and 49 years. Act 215, PA 1949,
authorized the conversion of leases to deeds in certain areas. The extent
of deeded areas was subsequently expanded by legislative action on six
different occasions.

Provisions in Act 326 that the rights of leaseholders are subject to the
paramount public rights of navigation, hunting and fishing have been
largely unenforced until recent years.

Section 2(e) of Act 326 authorized the Department of Natural Resources
to make and enforce regulations for the preservation and use of the

paramount right of navigation, hunting and f ish ing in the Flats. Such
regulations have never been developed.

The passage of Act 326 provided 1,868 lots available for lease. The
fractionalization of parcels have increased the total number of lots to
2,172. There are currently 567 state-owned (eased parcels, 652 deeded
parcels, and 953 state-owned parcels in the Flats.

Lots have been leased at extremely low charges. Lease amounts for the
first fifty years were leased on an average front foot value schedule. For
0 example, a lot with 100 feet of frontage on the South Channel, the most
valuable area, would lease for $75.00 total, or $1.50 per year. The statute
specified that the rental could not exceed double the original rental fee
during the second 49 year term of the lease.

In 1963, the Natural Resources Commission directed the Department to
revise the 1949 deed conversion formula to more accurately reflect
0 market values. Although the Lands Division revised the formula and fees
were increased, deed conversions- have still been substantially below
market values. For example, the fees charged for deed conversions on the
South Channel have been $3.00 a waterfront foot while current market
prices have averaged between $80.00 and $ 100.00 a waterfront foot.

0 A 1977 survey conducted by the Department of Natural Resources
concluded that approximately 50% of leased and deeded parcels remain
unoccupied.

There are approximately 900 housing units in the Flats, the majority of
which ore seasonally used. Most year-round residents live on Harsen's
0 Island. The 1977 survey indicated that 10% of the dwellings on the
Middle Channel, 20% on the North Channel, and 10% on the Sni Bora are
in a state of deterioration. Homes along the South Channel ore generally
in better condition.

A central wastewater disposal system does not exist and the costs of
providing one are prohibitive. Residences use on-site waste disposal,
although some outdoor privies and direct discharges do exist. Because of
the extremely high water conditions and poorly drained soils throughout
the Flats, septic systems-do not function properly, posing public health
problems or water quality violations.

Potable water is unavailable except from a central distribution point on
0 Harsens Island. Residents either haul water from this distribution point or
the mainland, or have direct intakes from the nearest channel. Septic
system failures and direct discharges of sanitary wastes have the potential
to contaminate direct water intakes.

Clay Township participates in the National Flood Insurance Program. The
Flood Insurance Study conducted by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development identifies the entire Flats as a flood hazard area. The Flood
Damage Prevention Ordinances adopted by Clay Township requires new
residential structures to be elevated above the 100-year flood level.

Most parcels require shoreline bulkheading to protect against flooding,
erosion and ice-damage. Dredging and filling and shoreline bulkheading
has destroyed valuable fish and wildlife habitat.

The costs of development in the Flats are a financial burden to both
private individuals and the public. Private dollars are spent on
replacement of failing septic systems, t ransportat ion of potable water,
extraordinary construction methods and material to overcome site
conditions, and shoreline structures to protect against flooding, ice
damage and erosion. Public dollars subsidize private development through
lease fees and deed conversion fees well below market values. Should
central sewers and water be required, public expenditures could be
substantial.

Public Health and Environmental Protection

County septic disposal requirements call for two and a half feet of
isolation between the tile field and groundwater table. A 1973 Michigan
0 Department of Public Health Sanitary Survey of Horsens Island shows that
the water table was no more than 12 to 18 inches below grade for over
50% of the systems surveyed. Similar conditions exist in the rest of the
Flats.

Despite prohibitive site conditions, septic permits continue to be issued by
local health officials. Since January 1, 1978, over 35 septic permits,
0 including 13 for new systems, have been issued. It is the policy of local
sanitarions to issue permits for replacement systems. Most applications
for new systems are denied by the sanitarian, only to be overturned by an
appeals board.

A number of outdoor privies, direct sewage discharges and failing septic
� systems are still in operation in the Flats. Due to manpower shortages,
local sanitarians do not search for violations but instead act on
complaints.

The Water Resources Commission has the authority to regulate the direct
0 or indirect discharge of human wastes under Section 6(b) of Act 245, PA
1929. The Administrative Rules associated with Act 245 establishes water
quality standards which cannot be exceeded.

The Department of Public Health is empowered under the Public Health
Code, Act 368, PA 1978, to intercede in situations of "imminent danger"
� to public health. Section 2251(3) of the Act allows the Director to take
full charge of the administration of state and local health laws, rules,
regulations and ordinances.

Clay Township's Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance requires that
0 sanitary sewage systems be constructed to minimize or eliminate-
infiltration of floodwaters into the system.

Resource Value of the Flats

Over 80% of the coastal wetlands on the Michigan side of Lake St. Clair
0 have been destroyed. Of the remaining wetlands, 88% are found in the St.
Clair Flats. The value of the Flats in terms of biological importance
cannot be overstated.

The Flats are a unique geologic phenomena as one of the largest
0 freshwater deltaic formations in the United States.

Large areas of contiguous wetlands such as the Flats are rare and
0 extremely important for natural fish and wildlife production. The
wetlands provide food, cover and shelter for many fish and wildlife species
and also act to trap sediment and nutrients and dissipate wave energy.

The Flats are extremely productive in terms of fisheries resources.
Thirty-three percent of the total Michigan non-salmonoid Great Lakes
sport catch are caught in Lake St. Clair. Pike, bass, walleye, perch,
0 muskellunge, sturgeon and other species all spawn within the Flats.
Because remaining wetlands on Lake St. Clair are limited, there is no
doubt that the Flats support large numbers of fish found throughout Lake
St. Clair.

The Flats support large numbers of waterfowl. During one fall migration,
over 27,000 ducks, geese and shorebirds were observed in one day.
Aquatic vegetation, calm waters and undisturbed wetlands provide ideal
habitat for many waterfowl species.

The Flats are valuable because they support G diverse array of fish and
0 waterfowl species. Over two hundred fish, water fowl species are
common to the Flats which makes this area one of the richest and'diverse

habitat areas in the State.

Recreational Use of the Flats

The St. Clair Flats offer excellent opportunities for fishing, hunting,
0 boating and non-consumptive recreational use. Its location near the
Detroit Metropolitan area make it accessible to millions of people.

In terms of sport fishing, the value of the Flats is extremely important.
Fishing success is very high and has attracted anglers from all over
0 Southeastern Michigan. Fishing activity within the HGrsen's Island area
was estimated at 100,000 angler days in 1975 and there is every reason to
believe that demand will continue.

Due to natural habitat and the provision of a state managed wildlife area,
the Flats attract large numbers of waterfowl and ducks. The state
9 managed wildlife area provides for 6,000-7,000 hunters over the 50-day
hunting period. Hunting in the remaining areas of the Flats is even more
popular. Duck hunting demand will continue to be popular due to the
existence of natural habitat, the success of management programs, and
the proximity to the Detroit Metropolitan area.

Nonconsumptive recreation such as bird watching is also very popular.
0 There is G diversity of wildlife species offered in the Flats.

Boating is very popular within the Flats. The islands, channels and bays
provide attractive resources for plea sure boating, water skiing and f ishinq.
Well over 100,000 pleasure boats are registered along the eastern shores
0 of Lake St. Clair making the Lake and the Flats one of the most

intensively used areas in the state. Intensive boating has had an adverse
effect in some areas of the Flats through disturbance of spawning areas,
increased turbidity and litter.

ALTERNATIVE MANAGEMENT SCENARIOS

The findings and conclusions presented in the previous section could yield a variety
of problem-solving approaches. In order to give full consideration to the myriad of
viewpoints, a, range of five management scenarios were developed. Management
scenarios (ire planning options which characterize possible courses of action
regarding future use and development.

Figure 22 illustrates the range of management options represented by the
scenarios. Scenarios one through five range from protection of the public trust to
promotion of private interest and present varying development intensities from
restricted development to intensive development.

Figure 22
Range of Management Scenarios

Protection of Restricted
Public Trust Development

40% 00 %W
I Revert to Natural State
2) Conservation and Limited Recreation
3) Mixed UsedGnd Conservation
4) Status Quo/Mixed Uses
%60 5) Increased Residential and *@00
Commercial Development

Promote Private Intensive
Interest Development

Evaluation of Management Scenarios

The evaluation of the management scenarios leads to the selection of a
management scenario which identifies the most appropriate courses of action to be
taken in the future management of the St. Clair Flats.

The alternative management scenarios are evaluated to determine their relative
environmental, economic and social costs and benefits. Figures 23 and 24 are
matrices which graphically illustrate the relative environmental, economic and
social merits of each scenario.

The characteristics of each scenario are detailed in the following discussion. An
evaluation concerning the relative merits or deficiencies is also provided.

Scenario No. 1: Revert Lands to the Natural State

This scenario offers the greatest environmental benefits. All new development
would be prohibited and existing development would be removed from designated
areas. Residential -leases would not be renewed and private land holdings would be
acquired. Public access would be restricted. By restricting public use and
development, the scenario promotes the total protection of ecologically sensitive
lands and pristine wildlife habitat.

The cost of implementation of this scenario could be extremely high. Compensa-
tion would have to be granted to homeowners who would have to be relocated.
Specific dollar amounts for compensation to property owners is difficult to
accurately estimate. However, based upon State Equalized VGluotion averages and
recent sales averages, acquisition costs for the deeded and leased lots could exceed
twenty five million (Appendix C). Acquisition costs may be partially offset when
compared to development costs for an intensive development scenario. Sewer and
water development, potential flood damage, public health concerns and degradation
of wetland habitat are all considerations which could be avoided with the non-
development alternative.

In terms of social costs and benefits, the scenario presents few direct benefits for
public use. Fishing, boating and hunting would be severely limited, conflicting with
the public's right to fishing and navigation on the Great Lakes. In addition, the
scenario would necessitate the insulation of the Flats from outside pressures,

F igure 23
SCENARIO EVALAUTION MATRIX
Summary of Costs

SCENARIOS

C
.0 C
Significant Costs e 4) 0
0 -0 :2
Moderate Costs 0 C
a aC
a 0 ,.a
0
Limited Costs 0 V) U
> Z) 0)
4)
E
> C XC x E
0 a 0 0 a 00
C
of z U:3 _:@ U U
1 2

.... .........

Degradation of Water Quality 9 9

Loss of Fish Habitat a e e

Loss of Wildlife Habitat

Interference with Hydrologic Functions 0 0 49 9

Degradation of Wetland Values 0 0 9 9

> Loss Terrestrial & Aquatic Vegetation 0 0 e e e

Degradation of Geologic Uniqueness 0 0 0 49

Flood Drainage & Disaster Relief 0 0 e 9 9

Shoreline Damage 0 9 9

Ice Damage e 9

Sewage Collection & Treatment
0 0 e) E) 9
U
Water Supply e 9
0 Replacement of Natural Fish Production 0 0 e 9 9
Replacement of Natural Wildlife Production 0 e 9 9

Land Acquisition 9 e 0 0

Governmental Management & Administration
0 0

Residential Displacement e 0 0

Public Health 0 0 e

Loss of Fishing Opportunities
0
U
Loss of Hunting Opportunities

Loss of Boating Opportunities
e 15 o e e

Loss of Non-Consumptive Recreation Opportunities 9 0 e e

Loss of Unique Resources 0 0 43

Figtwe 24
SCENARIO EVALAUTION MATRIX
Surmnary of Benefits

SCENARIOS

c
.0 C
Significant Benefits 4) 0
0 -0 :2
Moderate Benefits Q) C
C 1 0 C
a .0 U 1.0 00
- (D
Limited Benefits 0 0- U
0 0
>
4; 0 V E
D 4) Y) 0
> E
0 a c E C o
0 0
Xz U U :E -S U

Improvement of Water Quality e e e 0 0

Protection of Fish Habitat e e e 0 0

Protection of Wildlife Habitat 19 19 15

Maintenance of Hydrologic Functions
9 0

Preservation of Wetland Values 9 0 0
0
X Protection of Terrestrial & Aquatic Vegetation
e e 0 0

Preservation of Geologic Uniqueness E) e 0 0

Reduced Flood Drainage & Disaster Relief
9 45 0 0

Reduced Shoreline Damage 19 E) (5 0 0

Reduced Ice Damage 9 6 0 0

Reduced Costs of Sewage Collection& Treatment 19 E) 6 0 0

Reduced Costs of Water Supply 0 0
U
Preservation of Natural Fish Production 9 15 0 0

Preservation of Natural Wildlife Production 9 15 0 0
0
UW Reduced Land Acquisition Costs 0 0 15 19 9

Local Economic Activity & Tax Revenues 0 0 15

Improved Public Health e 0 0

Preservation of Fishing Opportunities 0 15 E) 0 0

Preservation of Hunting Opportunities 6 e 0 0

Preservation of Boating Opportunities 6 9 0 0

Preservation of Non-Consumptive Recreation Opportunities 6 9 0 0

Preservation of Unique Resources e 0 0

including pollution, recreational and commercial boating, fishing and hunting. This
would be more difficult to insure, and severely limit the accessibility of the Flats
to all human use. Indirectly, environmental problems may be displaced, as the
recreational demands are met elsewhere, possibly at more distant locations. The
feasibility of implementing this scenario is very low because of its unacceptability
to most interest groups, the intensity of use of surrounding areas, and the density
of population in close proximity to the Flats. In addition, acquisition and land
management costs make this scenario unrealistic and objectionable.

Scenario No. 2: Conservation and Limited Recreation

This alternative is ecologically sensitive yet is less restrictive and would allow
certain recreational uses. Nonconsumptive recreational activities such as
birdwatching, hiking, and interpretive centers would be promoted, particularly on
Dickinson Island. This would insure that the environmental integrity and uniqueness
of the area would be retained for the appreciation of present and future generation.
Development would be restricted to those facilities needed to support very limited
recreational use.

Boating would be prohibited in the highly productive Little MuscamOOt and Goose
Boys during migration, spawning, and breeding seasons. Fishing would be permitted
during noncritical periods in outlying areas. Hunting might be permitted on the
wildlife refuge, but the number of permits available would be cut back and hunting
in open water areas prohibited. As a general policy, the Dickinson Island area and
boys would be the most restricted so that the ecological balance can remain as
uninterrupted as possible. It would be utilized only for limited recreational uses.

This scenario would result in the eventual mitigation of pressures from recreational
boating, littering, and Water pollution from sewage effluent. Residential leases
would not be renewed, and action would be initiated to remove residential
development in specially designated areas.

This scenario will offer environmental benefits. Unique resources would be
protected and environmental constraints would be addressed within limited
recreational use. Economic benefits to the local community are limited and State
administrative costs are significant. While acquisition of designated lands would
cost considerably less than that required for Scenario 1, land acquisition costs would
still be extremely high. Land development costs for sewers, water lines and flood
protection improvements would be minimized because development would be
restricted. The social benefits derived from fishing and fish production would
remain high as well as the value for boating and water activities. The Flats would
continue to provide social benefits from recreational opportunities for southeastern
Michigan. However, residents would be displaced and uses would be curtailed.

In short, this alternative offers environmental and recreational benefits. However,
the non-consumptive uses promoted in this scenario are expensive, and accessibility
to the more pristine interpretive areas is presently limited. More intense
recreational use can be permitted without detrimental impacts to the environment.
Limited recreational uses, high acquisition costs, and the negative impacts on
residential users makes this scenario an unlikely alternative for future action.

Scenario No. 3: Mixed Uses and Conservation

This scenario is characterized by mixed recreational uses on public lands, including
hunting, fishing, boating and nonconsumptive uses. Wildlife management activities
and habitat protection measures would be permitted. However, such management
activities would have to be conducted in a prudent manner which examines the long
range implications of both fish and waterfowl habitat alteration and production. In
addition to fish and wildlife Management, the interpretive value of the Flats would
be promoted. Recreational boating would be permited, although the intensity of
use might be curtailed during spawning or breeding seasons in particularly sensitive
areas. Residential use of the area would be permitted to remain in noncritical
areas, but further development would be carefully regulated. Mixed recreational
uses, restricted residential and some commercial activity are permissible if these

uses are control Ied. The scenario relies heavily on State and local controls and
coordination to insure maximum benefits to the environment and various interest

groups.

This scenario would offer the most desirable economic and environmental benefits
for the Flats. Local and State objectives are met and residential and commercial
uses can be accommodated. A phased acquisition of deeded and leased holdings
would be necessary to preserve sensitive areas. An estimated figure of ten million
dollars for acquisition is based upon average property values within various areas of
the Flats. This figure accounts for the acquisition of approximately 180 leased lots
with homes and 180 deeded lots with homes at current market prices. These homes
are in selected areas within the study area and occupy sites which are important
for the future protection or restoration of resources. In additi on to these
properties, approximately 120 vacant leased lots and 91 vacant deeded lots would
also be acquired (Appendix Q. These direct costs appear to be high but when
considered in light of expenditures required for flood protection, and sewer and
waterline development, the costs of acquisition are placed in perspective. In
addition, the value of the Flats' wetlands for sport fishing has been placed at $374
per acre (Jaworski and Raphael, 1978) or over five million dollars. Scenario 3
would protect most of the productive fish habitat areas and maintain sport fishing
success for anglers in southeastern Michigan.

In conclusion, the Scenario Evaluation Matrix indicates that moderate benefits and
moderate costs are associated with Scenario 3. Relative to Scenarios I and 2 this

is a more desirable mix of costs and benefits.

Scenario No. 4: Status Quo

This scenario promotes the continuance of the status quo situation of mixed uses
within the Flats. Residential and commercial development will gradually intensify,
and more leases will be converted to deeds. This will increase the likelihood of
water quality problems and result in degradation or loss of wetland habitat.

Mixed recreational uses of hunting, fishing and recreational boating will also
continue and possibly increase in response to the demands of various interest
groups. Presently, there is no move to provide nonconsumptive recreational
opportunities or to recognize the uniqueness of the Flats as a unit and to preserve
it intact. This will continue to be ignored and the potential for nonconsumptive use
would continue to be largely untapped.

A scenario which would continue existing conditions is unacceptable for it does not
address issues concerning water quality, parcel fractionalization, and environ-
mental degradation. No overall consistent policy for the Flats exists in the
scenario. Rather, each interest group strives to meet its own needs which may
conflict with those of others, and the environment receives few, if any benefits.
Residential and commercial users, as well as the local economy, receive some
benefits, as do hunters and fishermen. However, the overall impacts on the
productivity of the ecosystem are not considered due to the individual concerns of
these various interest groups. Overall development costs will continue to be high.
Continued development will mean more expenditures for flood protection, dredge
and fill operations and sewage disposal. It is conceivable that the State would be
expected to correct environmental damages suffered during expanded development.
Short term social benefits would result from the increase of recreation oppor-
tunities; however, the long term impacts of intensive uses would eventually degrade
the overall attractiveness of the Flats.

In short, this scenario does not effectively address existing problems and is not an
acceptable course of action for the Flats.

Scenario No. 5: Increased Residential and Commercial Development

This scenario represents the pro-development extreme. More state-owned lands
would be leased, leases would be converted to deeds, and development would
intensify. The trade off would necessarily come with a reduction of recreational
opportunities and degradation of the natural environment, unless adequate provision

was made for water and septic systems. However, recent trends indicate a growing
demand for vacation homes, especially with waterfront locations. Legislative
provisions provide for the conveyance of Flats' lands at a very low price, and the
area is located in close proximity to 60% of the State's population. Thus, the
attractiveness of Flats real estate is likely to remain for some time. This scenario
would attempt to satisfy development interests within the Flats and provide
additional residential and commercial uses.

This scenario is inconsistent with both State and local objectives and existing
environmental legislation. The local economy would benefit from increased
development, but benefits which would accrue to residential and commercial users
would eventually level off and decline. The costs of flood protection and sewer and
water service would be extremely hig@. The Horsen's Island Facilities Plan
estimates that construction of a sewage collection system and aerated storage
lagoon would exceed 17 million dollars. Increased development would incur
environmental costs and the impacts of urbanization would detract from the
amenities which attract people to the area. Resource productivity and unique
habitats and species would be threatened, and the environmental integrity of the
area degraded. Legislation protecting the environment will impose constraints on
development in this area. For instance, it is unlikely that the dredge and fill
permits necessary to reclaim additional lands will be issued in many instances.

In summary, the environmental, economic and social costs for outweigh the
benefits and Scenario 5 is an unacceptable management option.

Selection of the Management Scenario .

The management scenarios previously presented offer five alternative plans to
guide future use of the Flats. The most favorable scenario is that which best
addresses the majority of the environmental, economic and social concerns. In
terms of environmental benefits, the most beneficial scenarios are number one and
two. The scenarios protect water quality, habitat, values and functions of the

wetlands. Moderate or significant benefits are noted for Scenario 3. While this
scenario would incur some environmental degradation it would implement manage-
ment measures designed to protect the resources of the Flats. Economic benefits
(in terms of reduced public costs) also favor the limited-development scenarios.
The public will not be burdened with excessive expenditures for flood protection or
sewage treatment, or water supply systems. Scenario 3 would provide moderate
economic benefits and offer a more realistic program for land acquisition than the
nondevelopment scenarios. Social benefits and Costs are mixed between the five
scenarios. While recreational opportunities are restricted by Scenarios I and 2, the
quality of recreation would eventually be degraded by Scenarios 4 and 5 through
uncontrolled development. Scenario 3 offers a suitable recreational alternative and
offers the greatest overall social benefits.

When examined together, Scenario 3, Mixed Uses and Conservation offer the most
desirable mix of benefits for the Flats. The scenario is feasible, realistic and
implementable and will provide a basis for development of the management plan.

LAND MANAGEMENT PLAN

The Land Management Plan for St. Clair Flats is illustrated in Map 3.
Physiogrophic and Cultural Units and the framework established by Scenario 3,
Mixed Uses and Conservation, serve as the basis for allocating the various land
uses. Most of the proposed uses are currently found within the Flats, but it is the
reapportionment of these uses which is the important aspect of the Plan. Specific
uses and facilities include:

Conservation
Wildlife Management
Residential

Commercial
Boating Facilities
Interpretive Facilities

Conservation areas largely include Physiographic Unit 2 - Deep Marsh; Unit 3 -
Transition Area; and a small portion of Unit 6 - Man-Altered. These areas are
largely located around interior boys, out-islands, Dickinson, and a portion of
Horsen's Island adjacent to Muscomoot Bay. The sensitivity of these areas as fish
and wildlife habitat is fully discussed in previous sections. Much of the
Conservation Area is publicly owned, but significant portions remain privately
owned or available for lease. Continued residential and commercial use in this area
is not recommended. The large tracts of public and productive wetlands are well
suited for continued recreational benefits. Fishing, duck hunting, boating, trapping
and nature interpretation are activities which are acceptable to the overall
objectives. However, it is important that these activities must not subject adverse
pressures to the productive waterfowl and fish habitats.

Residential, commercial and boating facilities are recommended to remain in
existing developed, man-altered areas. These areas are located along the South

100

ANCHOR BAY

Area

Efl
EE qo NNNNNN, NORTH
4A(,V
4
E9 bo
CHE
E9-

STRA@SERRY 0
Harsens
Island

6!"q

CHAN
MIDDLE

...........

zi,

Canada
I COANN.1-

SEA"y ISLAND
Of
CIS,
LAKE ST CLAIR

LILL S)@ It

0 1.00 20a"

Middle, and North Channels in areas which have been altered and are not as
ecologically sensitive. Expansion beyond these areas is not recommended,
especially into conservation areas.

Wildlife management areas include the diked, intensively-managed croplands and
',,vaterfowl areas currently operated by the State. Future expansion of these areas
should be evaluated against potential impacts on fish habitat and the aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems.

102

POLICY PLAN

The Policy Plan addresses the significant issues concerning the St. Clair Flats and
provides direction for implementation of the Land Management Plan. Policy
recommendat ions are organized according to the pertinent issues of residential and
commercial development, recreation, resource protection, and jurisdictional
authority.

General Policies

1) The St. Clair Flats Management Plan should be adopted by the Natural
Resource Commission to provide direction and guidance to the Department
of Natural Resources in the development of policy regarding the St. Clair

Flats.

The Management Plan calls for a program of land management,
environmental enforcement and land acquisition. Implementation of the
Plan will require the active support of all elements of the Department of
Natural Resources.

2) Implementation of the St. Clair Management Plan will require increased
cooperation and coordination between the various divisions of the Depart-
ment of Natural Resources.

The St. Clair Flats Task Force, with the Land Resource Programs Division
as the lead division, should remain established to provide direction and
recommendations to the Natural Resources Commission regarding the
implementation of the Plan. The Task Force should be expanded to
include all divisions affected by the recommendations of the Plan.

3) Implementation of the Management Plan will require the full employment
of existing regulatory authority available to agencies of the State of Mich-
igan.

103

Existing regulatory authority available under the Water Resources
Commission Act, Act 245, PA 1929; Public Health Code Act, Act 368, PA
1978; Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act, Act 247, PA 1955, as amended;
and the St. Clair Flats Act, Act 326 PA 1913, should be fully enforced in
the St. Clair Flats to provide for implernentation of the Management Plan.
Application of these regulations are --nore fully explained in the ensuing
specific recomm endat ions.

4) The adoption and implementation of the Acquisition Priorities Plan will
provide long-term assurance that valuable areas of the Flats are protected
from urban encroachment.

The Acquisition Priorities Plan is more fully described in the next section
of the Management Plan.

5) A permanent staff position should be added to the Division of Land
Resource Programs to specifically deal with matters pertaining to the St.
Clair Flats.

The implementation of the St. Clair Flats Management Plan and the and
monitoring of routine activities affecting the Flats are significant enough
activities to warrant the creation of a full time permanent staff position.
This position would serve as staff to the St. Clair Flats Committee, liason
between the Division of Land Resource Programs and Lands Division,
Monitor Department activities affecting the Flats, and direct the
implementation of the Management Plan.

Land Management

1) The St. Clair Flats Act, Act 326, PA 1913, authorizes the Department
of Natural Resources to make and enforce such regulations necessary for
the preservation and use of the paramount right of navigation, hunting, and
fishing in the St. Clair Flats.

104

To implernent the Land Management Plan, regulations and policies
governing the issuance of leases and deeds subject to public navigation,
hunting and fishing rights should be adopted. A specific format, such as
Administrative Rules, Commission Policies or Department Procedure,
should be explored by staff. Specific provisions of such regulations should
include:

u) In areas designated as "Conservation" in the Land Management Plan no
new leases should be issued. Existing leases should not be extended be-
yond their expiration date.

Conservation areas include largely Physiographic Unit 2 Deep Marsh
and Physiographic Unit 3 - Transition Area. The importance of these
areas as fish and wildlife habitat has been discussed in previous
sections. Continued urban encroachment on Conservation areas could
impair public hunting and fishing rights. Holders of existing leases
should be informed that their leases will not be renewed beyond the
expiration date. Those who wish to sell the remaining equity in their
leases should be so permitted.

b) Areas designated as "Residential" in the Lund Management Plan
are confined to existing areas approved for deeds. New leases which
affect the public trust should not be permitted. The conversion
of leases to deeds should be thoroughly reviewed for the protection of
the public trust.

Section 402 of th-- St. Clair Flats Act states that the Department
may lease lands at its discretion. Such leases are subject to the
paramount rights of public hunting, fishing and navigation. Further,

105

the Department may deny the conversion of leases to deeds if the
rights of hunting, fishing and navigation are impaired. The denial of
leases and deeds is especially supportable on lots which are wholly or
partially submerged. The changing public attitudes and scientific
documentation regarding the value of wetlands justifies the respon-
sible protection of these areas.

0 The conversion of leases to deeds should be reflective of the market
value of the property.

The cost of acquiring deeds has not been reflective of the true
market value of the property. The schedule utilized set deed costs so
low that development has been encouraged.

The Lands Division has devised a new methodology for determining
the value of deeds which calculates the State's equity in the
paramount public rights of hunting, fishing and navigation. The
methodology results in increased fees for deed conversion. This
schedule appears to be a fair and equitable method of determining the
true costs of deeds and should be fully implemented by the
Department of Natural Resources.

d) More intensive uses of leased properties should not be permitted.

Proposed changes in the use of leased properties should be reviewed
by the Division of Land Resource Programs. Requests which propose
a more intensive use of the property should be denied. An example of
a more intensive use would be the conversion of a cottage to a
commercial use.

e) Assignment of leased properties resulting in more intensive use should
not be permitted.

The assignment of leased properties should also be reviewed by the
Division of Land Resource Programs. More intensive uses should not

106

be permitted in the assignment process. Before approval of the
assignment is granted, a clause which prohibits bulkheading, filling, or
more intensive use of the property should be included in the lease
agreement. Similar clauses should be considered to address site
specific conditions on lots, especially within the Conservation Area.

f) Fractional ization of leased and deeded parcels should not be permitted.

Control of fractionalization of leased parcels can be achieved by
denying requests for change in use which propose lot-splitting.
Fractionalization of parcels results in a more intensive use of land.

2) The Legislature should consider amending the St. Clair Flats Act, Act 326,
P.A. 19 13, to allow the termination of leases on undeveloped and unoccu-
pied parcels and the acquisition of leasehold interests.

The 1977 survey of the Flats conducted by the Department of Natural
Resources indicated that 50% of the leased and deeded parcels remain
unoccupied and undeveloped. Due to the increased public awareness of
wetland values, the Department should be given the authority to
terminate leases on undeveloped and unoccupied parcels and to acquire
the remaining leasehold interest.

3) Building codes should be fully enforced including the issuance of violations,
condemnation of deteriorating or uninhabitable structures, and the ultimate
removal of condemned structures where violations hove not been rectif ied.

The Department of Natural Resources has an interesst in structures on
leased lots and should provide technical assistance to Clay Township to
help conduct an extensive and updated inventory of structural conditions.
Notice of violations of the building code and condemnation proceedings
against uninhabitable structures should follow. The information obtained
in the inventory could also be utilized by the DNR to further refine
acquisition priorities. Information of this type could be used to estimate
the market value and potential cost of acquiring a parcel.

107

4) Clay Township is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program.
All development activities should be in compliance with the National Flood
Insurance Program flood plain management regulations. Public awareness
of flood hazards and flood insurance availability should be promoted.

As a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program, Clay Township
has adopted a Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance regulating the
elevation and construction of structures in a flood hazard area. Inasmuch
as the entire St. Clair Flats is identified as a flood hazard area by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Ordinance should be
actively enforced. Further, the Department of Housing and Urban
Development is obligated to ensure compliance with the National Flood
Insurance Program by participating local units of governments.

Public Health and Environmental Protection

1) Existing regulatory authority under the Water Resources Commission Act,
Act 245, PA 1929, and the Public Health Code Act, Act 368, PA 1978 should
be fully applied to the St. Clair Flats to mitigate water pollution and
public health problems associated with inadequate wastewater disposal.

The Department of Natural Resources, Depart ment of Public Health, Clay
Township and St. Clair County Board of Health should work together to
formulate a cohesive policy regarding water quality, public health and
acceptable methods of waste disposal. Specific attention should be
devoted to:

Judge Halford Streeter's order of October 15, 1974 prohibiting the
issuance of building permits.

Reversal of the County sanitarian's decisions to deny septic permits
by the County Board of Health Appeals Board.

108

Measures to mitigate water quality and public health violations due to
fai I ing or nonexistent septic systems.

2) Dredging, filling and bulkheading destroy fish and wildlife habi-
tat. Such activities should be prohibited in critical areas.

The Great Lakes Submerged Lands Act, Act 247, P.A. 1955, regulates
dredge and fill activities on the bottomlands of the Great Lakes as well as
in the Flats. Act 247 specifies that the use of bottomlands shall not be
permitted if the public use thereof for hunting, fishing, swimming,
pleasure boating or navigation is substantially affected or if the public
trust is impaired.

Dredge and fill activities particularly threaten deep and shallow marsh
areas (Physiographic Units 2 and 3). Dredging and filling disrupts
vegetation and results in the loss of fish and wildlife habitat contributing
to the decline in productivity. Because the entire western shoreline of
Lake St. Clair has been bulkheaded, the Flats are increasingly important
for fish and wildlife production for all of Lake St. Clair. Dredging and
filling should be prohibited in all remaining marshlands of the Flats.

Recreational Use

1) Mixed recreational use of the Flats should be promoted to serve a variety
of interest groups.

Concurrent management to promote a variety of uses is desirable and
feasible. Fishing, hunting, boating, and nonconsumptive uses are
advocated. The wildlife habitat and unique waterway systems of the Flats
are ideally suited for these activities. More intensive recreational uses
such as playfields, camping, and extensive picnicking are not recom-
mended because of the fragility of the ecosystem.

109

The proposals of various recreational interests to expand utilization of the
area should be evaluated to assess the impact on other recreational uses.
For example, alteration of the natural hydrologic regime and fish habitat
to provide for waterfowl habitat should be evaluated to assess the long
term impacts on the total aquatic ecosystem.

2) State or locally operated boating facilities are not recommended on out-
islands.

Sanitary wastes and litter are problems associated with these facilities.
The problems are most intense during peak summer weekends. Because
adequate control and sanitary treatment cannot be ensured, these
facilities would be likely to result in further water quality problems and
adverse impacts to wildlife habitat. State funds should not be made
available to construct such facilities.

3) Interpretive and nonconsumptive uses should be expanded and promoted.

Activities such cis birdwatching and nature education are nonconsumptive
and if properly managed can be well suited to the fragile marsh habitat.
A rustic nature center, trail system, and boardwalk would expand the
recreational opportunities of the Flats. The facilities could be located on
Horsen's Island near Little Muscamoot Bay providing an excellent viewing
of wildlife.

4) All recreational activity must be conducted in a manner that promotes
total protection of the unique biologic and geologic resources of the Flats.

While recreation benefits should be maximized, recreation pressures must
be within the carrying capacity of these sensitive lands. Waterfowl and
fish production should be carefully monitored for signs of stress or
disturbance from recreational activity.

110

The interior shorelands of Little Muscamoot and Fisher Boys are
productive habitat areas for fish and waterfowl. Boating and related
water-oriented activities can be disruptive to waterfowl staging areas and
fish spawning areas. If signs of stress are reported by field officers, areas
should be posted as restricted to motorcraft during these sensitive
periods.

Resource Value of the Flats

1) The Flats must be viewed us a unique and dynamic biologic and geo-
logic unit. All future management proposals must be evaluated with
regard to their impacts on the function of the natural hydrologic re-
gime and ecosystem.

The previously described physiographic units may vary somewhat in their
sensitivity to development pressures but all play an important role in
maintaining the productivity of the area. Physiographic unit mapping and
evaluation provides a valuable tool in evaluating the impact of future
proposals. Therefore, all proposed uses must be viewed both in the
context of their acceptability to all interest groups and their impact on
the rest of the ecosystem. Fish and wildlife utilize different areas in
different seasons and during various stages of their life cycles. Thus, the
protection of a spawning ground alone will not insure the protection of a
species.

2) Dickinson Island is the largest area which remains largely in its nat-
ural state. It should be preserved intact and undisturbed.

Dickinson Island remains largely undeveloped and its plant communities
are directly related to water level fluctuation. It also supports
endangered and threatened f fore and fauna and has flora characteristic of
a wet prarie habitat, which is rare in Michigan.

Dickinson Island is mostly state-owned. The federally-owned dredge
disposal site on the northern edge is expected to revert to state ownership
once it is filled and sealed. Every effort should be made to consolidate
ownership by acquiring the privately-owned lands along the main channels
and scattered lots in the interior of the island. Acquisition of the out-
islands which border Goose and Fisher Boys will also help preserve the
system.

Intensive recreational use should be prohibited in this area. State or
federal funds should not be made available to construct boat marinas,
diking systems, or other facilities which promote the intensive use of
Dickinson Island. Diking and cropping for wildlife management activities
would destroy the natural hydrologic regime and unique association of a
variety of habitats.

3) Fish and wildlife studies must continue to monitor conditions within

the Flats.

It is recommended that the DNR Fish and Wildlife Division and the USDI
Fish and Wildlife Service establish an interagency agreement to coor-
dinate studies within the Flats and establish a cooperative, ongoing
program of data collection and analysis. Both agencies have ongoing
research programs in the Flats. A coordinated research program can be
instrumental in long range monitoring of fish and wildlife conditions.

112

ACQUISITION PRIORITIES PLAN

The State has lost a great deal of valuable land to private development interests
resulting in the loss of fish and wildlife habitat and degradation of the environment.
Act 215, PA 1949, provided for the dedication of the State Wildlife area in the
Flats. Since 1949, the Wildlife Division of the Department of Natural Resources
has been acquiring land for the wildlife area utilizing a variety of funding sources.
Currently, acquisition funds available to the Wildlife Division amounts to
approximately $13,000, an amount insufficient to acquire much property. The
previous section outlines a range of policy recommendations to assist in the
protection of the resource base. However, protection policies must be supple-
mented with an acquisition program that provides long term assurance that the
Flats will be held in the public trust.

Acquisition Priorities

Priorities for the future acquisition of leased and deeded parcels were developed
based largely upon the importance of the area to fish and wildlife habitat,
aesthetics, and environmental protection. It is felt that leased properties,
particularly undeveloped parcels, will ultimately be easier and less costly to
acquire because the State retains an interest in leased properties. Many
undeveloped parcels remain in their natural condition and are an important
contribution to fish and wildlife habitat. Therefore, the acquisition of undeveloped
leased parcels is the highest priority. Occupied parcels are likely to be more
expensive because the State will have to buy the lease or deed holders equity in
improvements and interest in the land.

Map 4 illustrates acquisition priorities. All properties recommended for
acquisition lie within the area designated as Conservation in the Land Management
Plan, Most properties are within outlying areas or adjacent to interior boys,
inaccessible by roads, and occupied only seasonally. Deeded properties are not

113

generally recommended for acquisition except for those undeveloped parcels which
lie adjacent to critical interior bays. Private claims on Dickinson Island have been
recommended for acquisition to ensure this area is preserved intact.

Year-round residences on the South Channel and deeded parcels along the Middle
Channel on Harsen's Island are not recommended for acquisition. These areas are
accessible by road and represent significant owner investments. Deeded property
along the North Channel is also not included. This area is easily accessible by boat
and lies near the mainland.

Acquisition priorities as depicted in Map 4 are described as follows:

Acquisition Priorities of Leased Properties

A. MuscGmoot Ridge

Muscamoot Ridge separates the highly productive Little Muscamoot Bay from
Big Muscamoot Bay. Field inspection of the site shows houses which appear to
be in the middle of the bay. They are especially subject to flooding because
they lie so low in the water. Muscomoot Ridge is an old beach ridge which is
important for fish production. This factor in combination with its close
proximity to the. highly productive Little Muscamoot Bay makes it a high
acquisition priority.

B. Northern Edge of Little Muscamoot Bay

Acquisition of this portion of Harsen's Island would consolidate State ownership
adjacent to the wildlife area and help protect the interior bay. This area has
also been recommended as a site for an interpretive facility. Because most of
the property in this area is undeveloped, it should be easier and less expensive
to acquire than more densely developed areas.

114

40'

ANCHOR SAY

Aea

TH ISLAN

IAORTH

CH
Ell
9b
Dickinson Island

STRAWBERRY Jacquire s ttered t
Harsens
Co Island

CHANNEL

N.-

lop
EU

//At
V

.A ARM

NNEL Canada

ANW AN

'w7

SEAWAY ISLAND

LAKE ST CLAIR
'OR -C@4&N,,

oo
u;@@

C. Strawberry Island

This area lies farther out than any other portion of the Flats. It is highly
subject to flooding and ice and wave damage because of its vulnerable
location. Acquisition here will be primarily of occupied parcels, but the area
is not as densely developed as other areas so total acquisition costs should be
lower.

D. Outlying Lands Along the Middle Channel

This area lies for out along the Middle Channel and is one which qualifies as a
critical out-isIGnd. It will be expensive to acquire completely because it is
densley developed, particularly along the northern side of the Channel. The
southern side is occupied primarily by an old and established boat club, which
would have a lower acquisition priority than the seasonally occupied residential
properties in the area. These lands are not accessible by roads.

E. Southern Side of Sni Bora Channel

Acquisition of this area would consolidate State ownership of Dickinson Island.
The area is not accessible by roads and is an outlying area which borders an
interior bay.

F. McDonald Island

This area is accessible only by boat, and lies adjacent to Goose Bay. It has
received lower acquisition priority because it is quite densely developed,
particularly along Big Fisher Highway where many fractionalized parcels are
located. An immediate goal is to prevent any further development in this
area, which could be assured by acquisition of the undeveloped parcels.
Eventual acquisition of this area would ensure protection of the ecological
resources in and around Dickinson Island.

115

G. Leased Properties Along the Northern Side of Chenol A Bout Rand and
Sni BorG Channel

This area has the lowest acquisition priority of all leased areas because it is
removed from the critical interior bays. Several deteriorating or uninhabitable
structures which should be condemned and removed, are located there.
Deteriorating properties and unoccupied parcels should be acquired first due to
lower acquisition costs and to prevent further development in the area.

Acquisition Priorities for Deeded Properties

1. Harsen's Island -
Interior Lands Lying Along Little and Big Muscarnoot Boys

This area has received high priority in the acquisition programs outlined by the
Wildlife Division since 1949. Most of the lands have been acquired as funds
have become available. Acquisition of the deeded (and a few leased) parcels
on the north side of Green Road should continue to consolidate State ownership
and protect lands along the critical interior boys. It may be expensive because
some deeded parcels are occupied by year-round residents. However, its
location adjacent of critical interior boys makes it a high priority acquisition

area.

2. Acquisition of Interior Lands of Dickinson Island

The uniqueness of Dickinson Island as well as the importance of preserving the
island as a unit, has been referred to throughout the report. There are
approximately 125 deeded parcels in the interior of the island. Some of these
parcels have been fractionalized, so there are about 200 property owners
involved. These parcels are undeveloped and should be acquired. It will be
necessary to unravel the legal descriptions and locate the properties and their
owners before acquisition can be accomplished. Any parcels lying in or
adjacent to interior marshes in former distributary channels are most critical.

116

3, 4 & 5. Privately Owned Lands Along the Edges of Dickinson Island

These areas are developed, though they are occupied by seasonal residences.
Area 4 is the most densely developed and largest of these three areas, so it
will be most expensive to acquire. Acquisition of these three areas is
important to insure that the unique Dickinson Island habitat is protected and
retained in its natural state.

Acquisition Costs

Acquisition costs for the priority land areas are approximately ten million dollars.
This figure includes acquisition for the following lots and structures:

Priorities
A through G
180 leased lots with homes (average value of $22,000) $ 3,960,000
120 vacant leased lots (average value of $ 1,000) 120,000

Priorities
I through 5
180 deeded lots with homes (average value of $29,000) $ 5,222,000
91 vacant deeded lots (average value of $8,000) 728,000
Total Acquisition Costs $10,030,000

The figures are based upon average lot and home values for properties within the
Flats. A detailed cost breakdown for each of the leased priority areas or deeded
priority areas is impossible to determine without an individualized assessment of
each lot and structure.

117

Acquisition Methods

Figure 25 presents the various methods available to the State of reacquiring leased
lands. The most direct method would be not to extend leases beyond their 99-year
term in the year 2013. The knowledge that leases will not be renewed will be likely
to provide property owners with a disincentive to maintain their property, and
thereby contribute to further dilapidation of structures in the area.

Figure 25
Acquisition Methods for Leaseholdings

Method Implications

Forfeiture for failure to pay taxes Act 12, P.A., 1917 amends Act. 327, P.A.
1913 to provide the legal mechanisms

Prohibit extension of lease beyond This policy may require State funds to
99-year term compensate leaseholder for loss of
structure

Terminate or acquire lease prior to Method would be particularly useful
expiration of full term for unoccupied parcels but may re-
quire new legislation.

Another method is reversion to the State of leased lands on which taxes have not
been paid. This method requires the smallest commitment of State funds and
effort. However, forfeiture of leases for nonpayment of taxes does not occur
frequently enough to contribute significantly to State holdings in the Flats.

A final method is to terminate or acquire leases prior to expiration of the full term
of the lease. This option would be particularly effective in acquiring unoccupied
and undeveloped parcels in critical areas, but may require new legislation and funds
appropriated for this purpose.

118

Figure 26 illustrates methods for the purchase of deeded parcels and private
claims. The most direct method is negotiated fee simple acquisition. However,
acquisition through fee simple purchase may require substantial funding. Although
the state has issued leases and deeds at a low price, these parcels have enjoyed a
fairly high market value. Even unimproved parcels have sold (it a high -price
because of lot-splitting and development potential.

A less attractive alternative of acquisition to a negotiated fee simple purchase is
condemnation. However, condemnation and subsequent settlements are likely to be
time consuming, expensive and not as politically acceptable as other available
methods.

In some cases, deed holders may be willing to donate their lands fee simple to the
State or G private conservation organization. Donation is particularly attractive to
landowners seeking a charitable deduction on their Federal income tax. Organiza-
tions such as the Michigan Nature Association and the Nature Conservancy have
expressed a willingness to assist the State in developing such a land donation
program in the Flats.

An alternative to fee simple acquisition is the purchase of a less than fee interest
in the land known as a conservation easement. Conservation easements are
negative in nature in that they stipulate what may not be done with either all or a
portion of the property, such as bulkheading, excavating, or building. Easements
have some advantages in that they are less costly than a fee simple purchase, and
the property would remain on the tax rolls. If the easement is donated, the
property owner can enjoy a tax deduction. The difficulty with easements lies in
policing the condition of the easements.

Another method of less than fee acquisition is the purchase of development rights
of undeveloped parcels. Development rights can be figuratively separated from
other rights associated with property ownership. Purchase of development rights is
less expensive than fee simple purchase. However, there is little incentive for a
property owner to hold title to land that cannot be developed.

119

Figure 26
Land Acquisition Methods for
Deeded Properties and Private Claims

Method Implications

Negotiated Fee Simple Purchase Limited acquisition funds are
available. Fair Market Value
is very high.

Condemnation State must pay just compensation
to landowner. Process may involve
extensive litigation and expensive
payments.

Donation of Land Holdings Donor may write off gift as charitable
donation on Federal income tax.

State Purchase of This alternative may be considered
Conservation Easements for protection of critical shoreline
areas. It would insure protection
until State funds become available
to purchase entire parcel.

Purchase of Development Rights The option would be less costly
than fee simple purchase, permit
limited recreational use by owners
and protect critical resources.

Purchase Property and Lease Back This method would purchase a
deeded property and lease back
to landholder. Method would
ensure greater control by State.

Property Exchange Properties located in critical
areas would be exchanged for
property in less critical area.

120

Another acquisition method is the negotiation of purchase and leaseback agree-
ments. The State would purchase fee simple title to the land and subsequently
lease it back to the previous owner with certain use restrictions. This method
might be an attractive interim measure in developed areas which might eventually
be reclaimed by the State. Existing property owners would be permitted to remain
with short-term leases until such time as they are required to vacate the property.

Land exchange is one final method of acquiring land in critical areas. A property
owner (or leaseholder) might be willing to exchange property in a critical area for
property in a less critical area. This exchange would consolidate the existing
pattern of scattered development. Its applicability would be closely tied to the
magnitude and nature of improvements made upon the property and might be more
attractive to a property owner who has not made substantial investment in his
property.

Acquisition Funding

In recent years, a great deal of public and private effort has been devoted to the
acquisition of St. John's Marsh, located adjacent to the Flats on the mainland. The
St. John's Marsh has been a primary focus for the expenditure of funds and
represents an important step for wetland preservation in heavily populated
southeastern Michigan. However, it is hoped that efforts will extend to preserve
the equally valuable St. Clair Flats Area.

It is clear that, if the multi-use potential of the St. Clair Flats is to be realized,
broader funding participation must be sought from other divisions of the
Department of Natural Resources, as well as Federal sources. To date, the Wildlife
Division has been the only division of the Department of Natural Resources
actively seeking to acquire land in the Flats due to the legislative mandate
establishing the St. Clair Flats Wildlife Area in 1949. The Wildlife Division's
priorities have been the consolidation of their holdings on Dickinson Island and the
upland portions of HGrsen's Island (outside of the Study area limits). However, with
only $13,336 remaining in acquisition funds, the prospect is dim for substantial
acquisition.

121

Several State programs exist for land acquisition activities. The Michigan Land
Trust Fund or Kammer Fund is derived from mineral exploration leases. A citizen's
board recommends funding appropriations to the Legislature. Funds are used to
match Federal Pittman-Robinson and Dingell-Johnson funds discussed later in this
section.

The Governor's Urban Recreation Program was appropriated $10 million by the
Legislature in 1978. Approximately $1 million was made available for land
acquisition in St. John's Marsh.

Early Federal legislative mandates and appropriations provided funds for draining
or filling wetlands to reclaim agricultural lands and to control flooding. In later
years, legislation was passed which provided funds for wetland protection and
acquisition because of their importance for fish and waterfowl production. The
major acts included the Pittman-Robinson Act and Dingell-Johnson Funds. The
funds allocated by these acts remain the major sources available for wetland
acquisition today.

The Pittman-Robinson Act derives its authority from the Federal Aid in Wildlife
Restoration Act of 1937. These funds are available for land acquisition,
development, research, and coordination necessary to restore or manage wildlife
populations and to provide for the public use of the resource. Although funds are
not utilized only for wetland acquisition, much wetland acreage has been acquired
under this program.

Dingell-Johnson Funds become available through provisions of the Federal Aid in
Sport Fish Restoration Act of 1950. The provision of funds and coordination
between State and Federal authorities, as well as stipulations for use of funds, are
similar to the Pittman-Robinson program except that they are earmarked for
enhancement of the sports fishery.

122

These sources of funds are used jointly and are matched by State appropriations or
private donations. They are used by the Wildlife Division in its acquisition
program. Recently, a large portion has been devoted to the acquisition of the St.
John's Marsh.

Funds have been available to State and local governments through the Land and
Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). Under this program, Federal matching funds are
granted to State and local governments for land acquisition for recreational and
preservation purposes. LWCF monies have not been utilized for acquisition in the
Flats because of the predominance of fishing and hunting programs. The LWCF
program places greater priority on urbanized areas with a mix of recreational uses.

123

CONCLUSIONS

The St. Clair Flats remain as a vestige of the natural heritage of Michigan and the
Great Lakes. Besides its intrinsic value cis the largest deltaic wetlands system in
the Great Lakes, the Flats represent 88% of the remaining wetlands on the
Michigan side of Lake St. Clair. Located within easy accessibility of three-fifths
of the State's population, the Flats are an irreplaceable public resource providing
fishing, hunting, boating and other recreational opportunities to hundreds of
thousands of people.

Through legislative action and regulatory inaction, much of the Flats has been
degraded and destroyed. Residential and commercial development has been built in
areas not capable of supporting such development. Over 90% of the land area
within the Flats is subject to severe flooding. The high water table prevents
individual septic systems from functioning. Further, the discharge of septic
effluent into area waters poses a threat to public health. Many of the Flats'
residents utilize the direct intake of water for household use. The dredging, filling
and bulkheading which have accompanied urban development have resulted in the
degradation of wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat.

Although a great deal of damage has already been done during this century to the
St. Clair Flats, the opportunity still exists to rectify the abuses of the post.
However, maintenance of the status quo will surely result in the eventual loss to
the citizens of Michigan of this unique and highly valuable area. Failure to protect
the Flats would further deprive current and future generations of the rapidly
diminishing opportunities for hunting, fishing, boating and recreation sought in the
Flats by so many from post generations.

The St. Clair Flats Management Plan is designed to protect and reclaim the public's
interest in the St. Clair Flats. Through a program of revised land management
policies, enforcement of environmental regulations, and acquisition of critical

124

lands, the Flats can be preserved as a public recreational, environmental and
economic resource. The full implementation of the Management Plan will require
the active leadership of the Department of Natural Resources and the cooperation
of local, State and Federal agencies and private organizations. Considering the
value of such an irreplaceable resource, an effective management program of the
St. Clair Flats is essential.

125

I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I Bibliog
I
I
I
I
-1
L

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Clark, John, The Sanibel Report: Formulation of a Comprehensive Plan Based on
Natural Systems, The Conservation Foundation, 1976.
Clark, John, Coastal Ecosystems: Ecological Considerations for Management of
the Coastal Zone, The Conservation Foundation, 1974.
ClayTownship, Clay Township, St. Clair County, Future Land Use Plan, Clay
Township, St. Clair County, Michigan, 1970.
ClayTownship, Ordinance No. 25, Zonin2 Ordinance, Clay Township, St. Clair
County, Michigan, 1967.
ClayTownship Planning Commission, Clay Township, Concepts for Growth, Clay
Township, St. Clair County, Michigan, 197?.
Cole, Leon J., "The Delta of the St. Clair River," Geological Survey of Michigan,
Volume IX, Part 1, 1903.
Curtis, J. T., The Vegetation of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin Press, 1959.
Dawson, Steven A., "Waterfowl Food Production and Utilization in Anchor Bay,
Lake St. Clair," Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann
Arbor, Michigan, 1975.
Federal Water Quality Administration, Investigation of Mercury in the St. Clair
River - Lake Erie Systems, Federal Water Quality Administration, Great
Lakes Regional Office, Lake Huron Basin Office, Lake Erie Basin Office,
National Field Investigations Center, 1970.
Hubbell, Roth and Clark, Inc., Horsens Island Segment of the Clay Township, Ira
Township and the City of Algonac, St. Clair County, Michigan Facilities Plan,
C26-2646, 1977.
Jamsen, Gale C., "Michigan's 1975 Sport Fishery," Surveys and Statistics Service
Report No. 156, Surveys and Statistics Division, Department of Natural
Resources, Ua-m@ing, Michigan, 1976.
Jaworski, Eugene and Raphael, C. Nicholas, Fish, Wildlife and Recreational Values
of Michigan's Coastal Wetlands, Wetlands Value Study, Phase 1, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Region 111, Twin Cities, MN, 1978b.
Jaworski, Eugene, Raphael, C. Nicholas, et of., Impact of Great Lakes Water Level
Fluctuations on Coastal Wetlands, Final Report, Contract No. 14-0001-7163,
for the Office of Water Resources and Technology, U.S. Dept. of Interior,
1979.
Jaworski, Eugene, and Raphael, C. Nicholas, "Modification of Coastal Wetlands in
Southeastern Michigan and Management Alternatives," The Michi2an
Academician, Vol. 80), 1976.
Jaworski, Eugene, and Raphael, C. Nicholas, "A Morphological Comparison of the
St. Clair and Mississippi River Deltas," Proceedings of the Association of
American Geographers, Vol. 5, 1973.

Larson, J. S., Models for Assessment of Freshwater Wetlands, Water Resources
Research Center, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., 1976.
Leverett, Frank and Taylor, F.B., The Pleistocene of Indiana and Michigan and the
History of the Great Lakes, U.S. Geological Survey, Vol. 52, Washington, D.C.,
1975.
Lyon, John G., "Analyses of Coastal Wetland Characteristics: The St. Clair Flats,
Michigan," Unpublished Master's Thesis, University of Michigan, 1979.
McHarg, Ion L., Design with Nature, The Conservation Foundation, 1967.
Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Land Resource Programs,
Michigan Land Cover/Use Classification System, Lansing, Michigan, 1975.
Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, St. Clair Flats Wildlife
Area Master Plan, 1977-1987, 197?.
Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division, State of Michigan,
Environmental Assessment: Purchase and Management of St. Johns Marsh
Wildlife Area, Lansing, Michigan, 1977.
Pezetta, J.M., "The St. Clair River Delta," unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1968.
Pieters, A.J., "The Plants of Lake St. Clair," Bulletin of the Michigan Fish
Commission, No. 2, 1894.
Raphael, C. Nicholas and Jaworski, Eugene, "Geomorphic and Biological Values of
the St. Clair Delta," Michigan Academician, in press.
Roller, Norman, E.G., Changes in the Wetlands and Land-Use Patterns of St. John's
Marsh, St. Clair County, Michigan, ERIM Report 193400-1 I-T, Environmental
ReseoFch -InsVitute of Michigan, 1976.
Tilton, Donald L., Kadlec, Robert H., and Schwegler, Benedict R., The Ecologx and
Values of Michigan's Coastal Wetlands, Wetlands Value Study, Phase 11, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 111, Twin Cities, MN., 1978.
U.S. Army Corps of E ngineers, Detroit District Office, Final Environment
Statement, Proposed Diked Disposal Area on Dickinson Island, St. Clair
County, Michigan, 1974.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Detroit District Office, Maintenance Dredging of
the Federal Navigation Channels in the St. Clair River, Michigan, Final
Environmental Statement, 1976.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District, Typical Residential Flood Damage
Curves for Homes Without Basements, October, 1974.
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of St. Clair
County, Michigan, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1974.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Insurance Adminis-
tration, Flood Insurance Study, Township of Clay, Michigan, St. Clair County,
1977.
U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Estuary Studx,
Volume 4, USDI-FWS, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife and Bureau of
Commercial Fisheries, 1970.

Wagner, W.H., et al., "Endangered, Threatened and Rare Vascular Plants in
Michigan, The Michigan Botanist, Vol. 16, 1977, (reprint), prepared for the
Dept. of Natural Resources.
Williamson, Brooks B., "The Wetlands of Dickinson Island, St. Clair County,
Michigan, and its Response to Water Level Fluctuations," unpublished M.S.
Thesis, Eastern Michigan University, 1979.

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I A .. ces
I
I
I

I
11

APPENDIX A

List of Those Contacted
During the Course of This Study

Local Officials

Clay Township
Ed Spenick - (former) Clay Township Supervisor
William Lowes - (former) Clay Township Building Inspector
Marty Zimmer - (former) Clay Township Tax Assessor
Joe Hoisington - Clay Township (and St. Clair County) Planner

St. Clair County Board of Health
John Tironi - Director of Environmental Health
Norm Grinnel - Clay Township Sanitarian

11. State Officials

Michigan Department of Public Health
Ric Falardeau, P.E.

Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Division of Land Resource Programs
Karl Hosford, Chief
Mo Nielsen - Submerged Lands Unit
Roger Hock - Submerged Lands Unit
Chris Shafer - Coastal Program Unit
Dave Warner - Coastal Program Unit

Lands Division
Jane Bower - Supervisor, Leasing
David Freed - Leasing
Bill Schmidt - Land Appraiser
Wildlife Division
Ed Mikula - Land Acquisition and Management
Leo Pospichal - Wetlands Planner
Dr. Sylvia Taylor - Endangered Species Coordinator
Thomas Nederveld - Wildlife Biologist, Southern Land Management
Dick Elden - Wildlife Biologist, Pontiac District Office
Fisheries Division
Henry Vondett - St. Clair Flats Committee
Ron Spitler - Fisheries Biologist, Pontiac District Office
Environmental Enforcement Division
Don Inman, Wildlife Biologist
Gary Gettel
Virginia Pierce
Water Quality Division
John Wuycheck - St. Clair Flats Committee
Warren Slocum - Grant Review Section
Water Management Division
Wallace A. Wilson - St. Clair Flats Committee,
Supervisor, Flood Plain Management
Daniel Morgan - Flood Insurance Studies
Conservation Officers- St. Clair Flats Area
Gary Hoover
Don Hall

Attorney General's Office
Russel Prins, Assistant Attorney General

111. Federal Government

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Dr. Mary Ann Cooper - Environmental Branch
Brooks B. Williamson - Environmental Branch
Gary Mannesto - Regulatory Functions
William McClarnon - Engineering Division (Winter Navigation)

U.S. Department of the Interior - Fish and Wildlife Service
East Lansing Area Office
Bill Owens

Great Lakes Fishery Laboratory
Thomas Edsol I
Bruce Manny
Charles Brown

Michael T. Werner

and other members of the research team

Shiawassee NWR
Bob Johnson, Refuge Manager

IV. Other Groups Contacted

John Lyon
School of Natural Resources
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan

Doug Joergens
Environmental Control Technology Corporation (ENCOTEC)
Ann Arbor, Michigan

Dr. Eugene Jaworski, and Dr. C. Nicholas Raphael
Dept. of Geology and Geography
Eastern Michigan University
Ypsilanti, Michigan

Dr. Paul Thompson, Plant Ecologist
Cranbrook Institute of Science

Lake St. Clair Advisory Committee
Ray Trombley, Director
Mt. Clemens, Michigan

The Nature Conservancy
Michael L. Green, State Director
Lansing, Michigan

Michigan United Conservation Clubs
John Whitmore, Regional Vice President
Farmington Hills, Michigan

Ducks Unlimited

Barbara Whitmore

ERIM (Environmental Research Institute of Michigan)
Norman Roller, Earth Resources Remote Sensing Application
Ann Arbor, Michigan

Diana V. Pratt
Attorney-at-Law
Ann Arbor, Michigan

APPENDIX B

Relationship of Physiographic Units to MLCUCS
and Jaworski and Raphael's Vegetative Zones

The MLCUCS system uses a four digit system to categorize land cover. Each digit
corresponds to a progressively more detailed classification. For example:

Level I (one digit) I Urban and Built up
Level 11 (two digits) I I Residential
Level III (three digits) III Multi-family, medium to high-rise
Level IV (four digits) IIII High density
1112 Medium density
1113 Low density

Level III and IV classifications have not been developed for all classes. When no
detailed information is available, a zero is used in the four digit code. MLCUSC
classifications which correspond to the physiographic units are presented in Figure
A.

Jaworski and Raphael used vegetative type and water depth to develop their
categorization system. Species of vegetation which correspond to their categories
are presented in Figure B.

Figure A

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSIOGRAPHIC UNITS, MLCUCS DESIGNATION,
AND JAWORSKI AND RAPHAELS CATEGORIZATIONS

Physiographic MLCUCS Jaworski and Raphael's System,
Unit Designation (Dickinson Island), O&R, 1979)

Unit 1: MLCUCS #5 - Water
Open Water 5110 Small streams and rivers Coastal Embayments
15 ft wide) Canals and Ponds
5210 Ponds 4.9 acres)
5220 Small lakes (5-9.9 acres)
5310 Pond reservoirs ( 4.9 acres)
5400 Great Lakes and connecting waters

Unit 2: MLCUCS #6 - Wetland
Deep Marsh 624 Deep marsh Abandoned Channels
6241 Cattail predominates Bulrush and Open Water Marsh
6242 Burreed, rushes, sedges Cattail Marsh

Unit 3: MLCUCS #6 - Wetland
Transition Area 612 Forested wetlands Tussock Sedge Marsh
6126 Willow-buttonbush associations
(less than 50% cover, more
than 611 of water) Transgressive Beaches and
6128 Standing dead trees, shrubs, Island Shorelines (also Unit #4)
and stumps
623 Shallow marsh
6231 Cattail predominates
6232 Burreed, bulrush, sedge, blue-
joint gross
6233 Smartweed, mud plantain, pickerel
weed, arrow arum, and arrowhead

Unit 4: MLCUCS #3 - Rangeland ("areas supporting
early stages of plant succession charac-
terized by grosses or shrubs")
Open Meadow 3110 Upland herbaceous rangeland Transgressive Beaches and Island
Shorelines
3120 Lowland herbaceous rangeland Meadow Zone
3124 Lowland herbaceous rangeland, Shrub Ecotone or Swamp Margin
(sedges predominate) (also Unit #5)
3210 Upland shrub rangeland
3212 Upland shrub rangeland,
(Dogwood predominates)

Unit 5: MLCUCS #4 - Forest Lands
Upland Forest 4110 Upland hardwoods Shrub Ecotone or Swamp Margin
4118 White Oak predominates Deciduous Hardwoods
4119 Other upland hardwoods
4130 Lowland hardwoods
4139 Other lowland hardwoods

Unit 6: MLCUCS #1 - Urban and Built-Up Not Applicable;
Man-Altered Areas 1100 Residential (Referred to as "Urban" or "Crop-
1990 Open and other land" in writings)

MLCUCS #2 - Agricultural Land
2100 Cropland, rotation, and
permanent pasture

Figure B
SPECIES OF VEGETATION
ASSOCIATED WITH JAWORSKI AND RAPHAEL'S CLASSIFICATION CATEGORIES,
AS RELATED TO PHYSIOGRAPHIC UNITS

Physiographic Unit Jaworski & Raphael's Classification & Associated Species

Unit 1: Coastal Embayments (Gooseneck Pond of Fisher Bay, Goose Bay)
Open Water Three square Scirpus americanus Muskgrass Chara sp.
Hardstem bulrush Scirpus acutus Bur-reed Sparaganium chlorocarpum
Hybrid cattail Typha glauca Sago pondweed Potamogeton pectinatus
Water smartweed Polygonum amphibium Pickerel weed Pontederia cordata

Canals and Ponds
Yellow pond lily Nuphar advena Waterweed Elodea canadensis
White water lily Nymphaea tuberosa Water smartweed Polygonum amphibium
Green alage (unidentified) Curly pondweed Potamogeton crisous
Duckweed Lemna minor Other pondweeds Potamogeton spp.
Pickerel weed Pontederia cordata Buttonbush Cephalanthus accidentalis
Muskgrass Chara sp.
Unit 2: Abandoned Channels
Deep Marsh Buttonbush Cephalanthus accidentalis Three square Scirpus americanus
Arrowhead Sagittaria latifolia Yellow pond lily Nuphar advena
Hardstem bulrush Scirpus acutus White water lily Nymphaea tuberosa

Bulrush and Open-Water Marsh
Hardstem bulrush Scirpus acutus Muskgrass Chara sp.
Buttonbush Cephalanthus accidentalis Various emergents and submergents
Cattail Marsh
Hybrid cattail Typha glauca Mud lettuce (unidentified species)
Narrow-leaved cattail T. angustifolia Duckweed Lemna minor
Jewel weed Impatiens sp. Watermilfoil Myriophyllum sp.
Seedlings of grasses and sedges Common bladderwort Utricluaria vulgaris
Unit 3: Tussock Sedge Marsh
Transition Area Tussock sedge Carex stricta Nightshade Solanum dulcamara
Dead shrubs Salix, Populus Common comfrey Symphytum officinale
Other sedges incl. C. laisiocarpa Bluejoint grass Calamagrostis canadensis
Smartweed Polygonum sp. Scattered cattails and bulrushes
Transgressive Beaches and Island Shorelines
E. cottonwood Populus deltoides Sedge Carex stricta
Staghorn sumac Rhus typhina Jewel weed Impatiens sp.
Willows Salix spp. Thistle Cirsium sp.
Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea Stinging nettle Urtica dioica
Bluejoint grass Calamagrostis canadensis Morning glory Convolvulus sepium

(Figure B continued on next page)

Physiographic Unit Jaworski & Raphael's Classification & Associated Species

Unit 4: Transgressive Beaches and Island Shorelines
(See Unit 3, above)
Open Meadow Meadow Zone
Trembling aspen Populus tremuliodes Rattlesnake grass Glyceria candensis
Red ash Fraxinus pennsylvania Cut grass Leersia oryzoides
Red dogwood Cornus stolonifera Panic grass Panicum sp.
Gray dogwood Cornus racemosa Sedge Carex stricta
Swamp rose Rosa palustris Freshwater rush Juncus sp.
Goldenrods Solidago spp. Silverweed Potentilla anserina
Bluejoint grass C. canadensis Swamp milkweed Asclepias incarnata
Fowl meadow grass Poa palustris Morning glory Convolvulus sepium
Shrub Ecotone or Swamp Margin
Red ash Fraxinus pennsylvania Gray dogwood Cornus racemosa
E Cottonwood Populus deltoides Wild grape Vitis sp.
Trembling aspen P. tremuloides Understory plants (see Meadow, above)
Red osier dogwood Cornus stolonifera
Unit 5: Shrub Ecotone or Swamp Margin
(See Unit 4, above)
Upland Forest Deciduous Hardwoods
Pin oak Quercus palustris Shagbark hickory Carya avata
Swamp white oak Quercus bicolor Silver maple Acer saccharinum
Bur oak Quercus macrocarpa American elm Ulmus americana
Unit 6:
Man-Altered (NOT APPLICABLE)

APPENDIX C

Estimated Acquisition a-A Development Costs
(All Study Area Properties)

Acquisition Costs Number of Lots Average Cost Total Cost
Deeded lots, w/homes
and improvements 665 $ 29,000 $19,285,000
Leased lots, w/homes and
improvements 222 22,000 4,884,000
Deeded lots, w/o homes 133 8,000 1,064,000
Leased lots, w/o homes 199 1,000 199,00
1,219 $25,432,000

Costs Associated with Residential Development**

Lost Wetland Use*** Value per Acre per Year
Sportsf ishing $ 374.00 1
Waterfowl Hunting $ 31.23 2
Furbearer Trapping $ 30.44 2
Non-Consumptive Recreational Values $ 138.24 2
$ 573.91 x 887 acres = $ 509,05

Costs of Development Value per Home
Potential Flood Damage to Homes $8,000 3
Sewer and Water Development $12,000 4
$20,000 x 887 homes = $17,740,000
Minus Local Tax Revenue Generated by Development - (51,855)
$17,688,145
Lost Fish and Net Value per Acre 6
Waterfowl Production****

Fish Production $16,450
Waterfowl Production $13,700
$30,150 x 887 acres $26,743,05

*Average costs based on discussions with MDNR personnel and local officials familiar with real estate values
in the Flats.
-Calculations are made using an average figure of one acre per lot. Thus, "lot" and "acre" are
interchangeable values. Also, only lots which have homes or improvements on them are included in the
calculations of costs of residentiaal development. However, it is likely that the fish and wildlife value of
many unoccupied lots has been impaired or destroyed by man's activities, so calculated costs may be low.
***It may be argued that there is no evidence that these uses ever existed on every lot prior to development.
However, values are dollars per acre per year and are calculated for only one year. They are likely to be low
estimates, if the temporal dimension is considered.
****As above, it may be argued that these values do not consider pre-development differences in the
productivity of lots. However, for purposes of making estimates, these figures are adequate.

Sources of Values:
I Jaworski and Raphael, 0 978), p. 133.
2Jaworski and Raphael, 0 978), p. 178.
3U.S. Army COE, (1974), Residential Flood Damage Curve read using (1) $20,000 as value of residential
property, and (2) 1.5 feet as depth of water on first floor.
4Cost estimated in 201 Facilties Plan for Horsen's Island.
5Approximate tax paid in 1977. Information obtained from St. Clair County Tax Assessor's Office.
6Tilton, et al, (1978), p. 85. Study determined net values by calculating cost of replacing an acre of wetland
by purchase or construction. The net value in this table is the average of he figures derived for purchase and
construction of replacement wetlands.

3 6668 00001 3518