Category: Existing Restoration/Preservation, and/or Mitigation Site 
Location: Bordered on the east by the New Jersey Turnpike – Eastern Spur, to the south by a shopping center, to the west by Mill Creek, and to the north by Western Brackish Marsh in Secaucus, Hudson County.
Latitude/Longitude: 40.79723/-74.04481
Current Land Use: Tidal Marsh and Pedestrian Trail
Size: 128 acres
Current Ownership: NJMC
Site Description: Mill Creek was restored by NJMC as a wetland mitigation area to offset permitted fill that occurred in marsh areas located within the HMD. Prior to restoration, the site was undeveloped, and supported a monoculture of common reed (Phragmites australis). Enhancement of the Mill Creek Marsh site included the excavation of the marsh plane to increase the tidal flow across the site, the creation of open water impoundments, and surface grading to support the development of low marsh and upland habitat areas. The enhancement resulted in low marsh habitats that are flushed daily by the tides, lowland scrub-shrub habitats along the marsh/upland ecotone, and creation of breeding, wintering, and migratory habitats. A secondary component is the nature park and approximately 1.5-mile walking trail. Approximately three miles of canoeable channels with access from Mill Creek (during high tide) exists at the site.
Existing Site-Specific Data Inventory
A. Survey, Maps, and GIS
HMD regional data exists inclusive of this site. Pre-restoration site survey conducted in 1997. As-built survey conducted in 1999. Surveys of outlet areas conducted in 2001.
B. Real Estate/Ownership
Owned by NJMC.
C. Site History & Land Use
No data obtained.
D. Biological Studies – Fauna
Post-restoration monthly and annual monitoring data collected in 1999 through 2003. Fish survey conducted in 2002.
E. Biological Studies – General Environmental
Pre-restoration wetland functional evaluations completed in 1986, 1990, 1992 and 1993. Post-restoration monthly and annual monitoring data collected in 1999 through 2003. Wetland assessments conducted in 2003.
F. Geotechnical
Post-restoration annual monitoring data collected in 1999 through 2003. Also, post-restoration comparative soil sampling study conducted in 1998.
G. Hydraulics and Hydrology
Hydrologic study of outlet channels conducted in 2001.
H. Water and Sediments
Sediment sampling study completed in 1998 and comparative dissolved oxygen study conducted in 2002. Annual monitoring reports completed from 1999 through 2003. Site-specific Rutgers University studies conducted from 1999 through 2002.
I. Historical/Cultural Resources
No data obtained.
J. Restoration/Remediation Design Plans
Wetland mitigation design plans developed for 1997 USACE Permit. As-built designs developed in 1999. Channel outlet re-designs developed in 2001.
Site Reports
Site #6 – Mill Creek Marsh
Category: Existing Restoration, Preservation, and/or Mitigation Site
Location: Bordered on the east by the New Jersey Turnpike – Eastern Spur, to the south by a shopping center, to the west by Mill Creek, and to the north by Western Brackish Marsh in Secaucus, Hudson County.
Latitude/Longitude: 40.79723 / -74.04481
Current Land Use: Tidal Marsh and Pedestrian Trail
Size: 128 acres
Current Ownership: NJMC
Site Description: Mill Creek was restored by NJMC as a wetland mitigation area to offset permitted fill that occurred in marsh areas located within the HMD. Prior to restoration, the site was undeveloped, and supported a monoculture of common reed (Phragmites australis). Enhancement of the Mill Creek Marsh site included the excavation of the marsh plane to increase the tidal flow across the site, the creation of open water impoundments, and surface grading to support the development of low marsh and upland habitat areas. The enhancement resulted in low marsh habitats that are flushed daily by the tides, lowland scrub-shrub habitats along the marsh/upland ecotone, and creation of breeding, wintering, and migratory habitats. A secondary component is the nature park and approximately 1.5-mile walking trail. Approximately three miles of canoeable channels with access from Mill Creek (during high tide) exists at the site.
Existing Site Specific Data Inventory
* – Report repeated under multiple data categories and/or sites.
A. Survey, Maps, and GIS
Relevant survey, mapping, and GIS data for the Meadowlands can be found in the Meadowlands-wide site report under data category A.
1. American Geodetic Survey Co., Inc. Survey of Original Conditions at Mill Creek Wetland Enhancement Site. 4/25/1997. [1a] Pre-restoration site survey. Contours are at one-foot intervals.
2. *The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site: Channel Outlet & Bridge Walkway Repair Report. May 2001. [2a] HMDC requested a damage assessment and the subsequent preparation of repair plans for a pedestrian bridge and overflow spillway located within Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site. Includes results of site survey, flow velocity measurements, sediment sampling, hydraulic analysis, and damage assessment, as well as proposed repair plans.
B. Real Estate/Ownership
NJMC acquired Mill Creek Marsh on December 20, 1996.
C. Site History & Land Use
No data obtained.
D. Biological Studies – Fauna
3. *Able, Kenneth W., Melissa J. Neuman, & Guillermo Ruess (Rutgers University). The Influence of Low Dissolved Oxygen on Predatory Fishes: Comparisons between Restored and Impacted Marsh Creeks in the Hackensack Meadowlands. 2002.[1a] A study to determine patterns in water quality indicators and predatory fish use, and examine food habits of the dominant fish predators in two tidal marshes, Mill Creek Marsh (impacted natural creek) and Doctor’s Creek (a restored/created creek that is part of Marsh Resources Wetland Mitigation Bank).
4. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Reports: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, Oritani Marsh, Riverbend Wetlands Preserve and Secaucus High School. August – September 2001. [1a] Monthly observation reports summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, Oritani Marsh, Riverbend Wetlands Preserve, and Secaucus High School sites. Include photographs documenting environmental conditions.
5. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Report: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Secaucus High School. October 2001. [1a] Monthly observation report summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Secaucus High School sites. Includes photographs documenting environmental conditions.
6. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Report: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh. November 2001. [1a] Monthly observation report summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh sites. Includes photographs documenting environmental conditions.
7. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Report: Harrier Meadow and Mill Creek. December 2001. [1a] Monthly observation report summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow and Mill Creek sites. Includes photographs documenting environmental conditions.
8. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Reports: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh. May – December 2002, & January – October 2003. [1a] Monthly observation reports summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh sites. Include photographs documenting environmental conditions.
9. *Feltes, R. M., Jean Marie Hartman, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2001 to June 30, 2001. Report Number 5. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the first half of 2001: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
10. *Feltes, R. M., Jean Marie Hartman, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period July 1, 2001 to December 31, 2001. Report Number 6. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the second half of 2001: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
11. *Feltes, R. M., & Jean Marie Hartman (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2002 to June 30, 2002. Report Number 7. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the first half of 2002: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
12. *Hartman, J. M. Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period July 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999. Report Number 2. Rutgers University. 2000. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Mill Creek Marsh, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh during the second half of 1999: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
13. *Hartman, J. M. & Kelly J. Smith. Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District. Report Number 1. Rutgers University. 1999. [5] Describes work through February 1999 beginning prior to reconstruction of Harrier Meadows, Mill Creek Marsh, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh. The goal of restoration was to obtain cover by wetland vegetation (other than common reed (Phragmites australis)) within two years. Five tasks are addressed: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
14. *Hartman, J. M., Ross M. Feltes, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000. Report Numbers 3 & 4. Rutgers University. 2001. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadow, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the year 2000: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
15. *Weis, J.S., L. Windham, and P. Weis. 2002. Growth, Survival, and Metal Content in Marsh Invertebrates Fed Diets of Detritus from Spartina alterniflora Loisel and Phragmites australis Cav. Trin. Ex Steud. from Metal-Polluted and Clean Sites. Wetlands Ecology and Management, v10 n1 pp71-84. 2002. [1a] Detritus samples were collected from the marsh surface under common reed (Phragmites australis), natural cordgrass (Spartina), and restored Spartina in the Meadowlands and Eastern Long Island. Ground-up detritus was fed to groups of two species of fiddler crabs and to grass shrimp. The survival, limb regeneration rate, molting, and weight gain of the crabs on the different diets was monitored, as was survival and growth of the grass shrimp.
16. *Yuhas, C.E. Benthic Communities in Spartina alterniflora and Phragmities australis Dominated Salt Marshes. Rutgers University. 2001. [1a]Core samples were collected at the creek bank and edge of vegetation in natural & mitigated cordgrass (Spartina) marshes and in a common reed (Phragmites australis) dominated marsh. A recolonization experiment using sediment from an undisturbed & uncontaminated site was also conducted. The diversity and abundance of benthic communities in the samples were analyzed.
E. Biological Studies – General Environmental
17. Conklin, J. Effects of Herbivores on Selected Salt Marsh Flora. Rutgers University. 2001. [5] Analyzed different herbivory deterrent techniques on five different types of native saltmarsh grasses at the Mill Creek Marsh. Half the seedlings were fertilized and half were not. Half of each of the fertilized and non-fertilized groups were enclosed in a structure designed to provide protection from herbivores, while the remainder were out in the open
18. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Reports: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, Oritani Marsh, Riverbend Wetlands Preserve and Secaucus High School. August – September 2001. [1a] Monthly observation reports summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, Oritani Marsh, Riverbend Wetlands Preserve, and Secaucus High School sites. Include photographs documenting environmental conditions.
19. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Report: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Secaucus High School. October 2001. [1a] Monthly observation report summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Secaucus High School sites. Includes photographs documenting environmental conditions.
20. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Report: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh. November 2001. [1a] Monthly observation report summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh sites. Includes photographs documenting environmental conditions.
21. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Report: Harrier Meadow and Mill Creek. December 2001. [1a] Monthly observation report summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow and Mill Creek sites. Includes photographs documenting environmental conditions.
22. *Donald J. Smith Environmental Consultants. Monthly Reports: Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh. May – December 2002, & January – October 2003. [1a] Monthly observation reports summarizing site conditions, management recommendations, and wildlife monitoring data at the Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh sites. Include photographs documenting environmental conditions.
23. *Feltes, R. M., Jean Marie Hartman, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2001 to June 30, 2001. Report Number 5. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the first half of 2001: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
24. *Feltes, R. M., Jean Marie Hartman, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period July 1, 2001 to December 31, 2001. Report Number 6. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the second half of 2001: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
25. *Feltes, R. M., & Jean Marie Hartman (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2002 to June 30, 2002. Report Number 7. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the first half of 2002: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
26. Hartman, J. M. Mill Creek Wetlands Mitigation Site First Annual Monitoring Report. Rutgers University. 2000. [5] First year of annual monitoring for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site required under USACE Permit Nos. 93-03412, 94-05821-RS, 96-01160-RS, 97-09150, 97-09200, 98-00620, 98-21290-J2, & 1999-14310 and NJDEP Permit Nos. 0205-96-0001.4, 212-95-0001.8, 212-95-0001.9, 0232-90-0001.6, 0232-0001.7, 0237-90-001.4, 0249-93-0003-4, 0256-98-0004, 0714-99-0003.2, 0906-96-0001.5, 0909-91-0001.5, 0909-92-0003, 0000-90-0022.14, & 0000-90-0022.20. Describes vegetation monitoring in various permanent monitoring plots throughout the site during the first growing season, post-construction.
27. Hartman, J. M. Mill Creek Wetlands Mitigation Site Second Annual Monitoring Report. Rutgers University. 2001. [5] Second year of annual monitoring for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site required under USACE Permit Nos. 93-03412, 94-05821-RS, 96-01160-RS, 97-09150, 97-09200, 98-00620, 98-21290-J2, & 1999-14310 and NJDEP Permit Nos. 0205-96-0001.4, 212-95-0001.8, 212-95-0001.9, 0232-90-0001.6, 0232-0001.7, 0237-90-001.4, 0249-93-0003-4, 0256-98-0004, 0714-99-0003.2, 0906-96-0001.5, 0909-91-0001.5, 0909-92-0003, 0000-90-0022.14, &0000-90-0022.20. Describes vegetation monitoring in various permanent monitoring plots throughout the site during the second growing season, post-construction.
28. Hartman, J. M. Mill Creek Wetlands Mitigation Site Third Annual Monitoring Report. Rutgers University. 2001. [5] Third year of annual monitoring for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site required under USACE Permit Nos. 93-03412, 94-05821-RS, 96-01160-RS, 97-09150, 97-09200, 98-00620, 98-21290-J2, & 1999-14310 and NJDEP Permit Nos. 0205-96-0001.4, 212-95-0001.8, 212-95-0001.9, 0232-90-0001.6, 0232-0001.7, 0237-90-001.4, 0249-93-0003-4, 0256-98-0004, 0714-99-0003.2, 0906-96-0001.5, 0909-91-0001.5, 0909-92-0003, 0000-90-0022.14, & 0000-90-0022.20. Describes vegetation monitoring in various permanent monitoring plots throughout the site during the third growing season, post-construction.
29. Hartman, J. M. Mill Creek Wetlands Mitigation Site Fourth Annual Monitoring Report. Rutgers University. 2001. [5] Fourth year of annual monitoring for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site required under USACE Permit Nos. 93-03412, 94-05821-RS, 96-01160-RS, 97-09150, 97-09200, 98-00620, 98-21290-J2, & 1999-14310 and NJDEP Permit Nos. 0205-96-0001.4, 212-95-0001.8, 212-95-0001.9, 0232-90-0001.6, 0232-0001.7, 0237-90-001.4, 0249-93-0003-4, 0256-98-0004, 0714-99-0003.2, 0906-96-0001.5, 0909-91-0001.5, 0909-92-0003, 0000-90-0022.14, & 0000-90-0022.20. Describes vegetation monitoring in various permanent monitoring plots throughout the site during the fourth growing season, post-construction. Recommends additional cordgrass (Spartina) seeding, as well as Canada goose and common reed (Phragmites australis) management for some portions of the site.
30. *Hartman, J. M. Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period July 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999. Report Number 2. Rutgers University. 2000. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Mill Creek Marsh, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh during the second half of 1999: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
31. *Hartman, J. M. & David. J. Bart. Phragmites Control: Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the New Jersey Meadowlands, District – Summary Report for Task 4. Report Number 8. Rutgers University. 2003. [5] Describes methods for controlling common reed (Phragmites australis) at the Harrier Meadow, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh sites. Greenhouse and field experiments were used to understand site conditions and human activities that promote invasion, so that a model might be developed to predict when a site is likely to be invaded.
32. *Hartman, J. M. & Kelly J. Smith. Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District. Report Number 1. Rutgers University. 1999. [5] Describes work through February 1999 beginning prior to reconstruction of Harrier Meadows, Mill Creek Marsh, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh. The goal of restoration was to obtain cover by wetland vegetation (other than common reed (Phragmites australis)) within two years. Five tasks are addressed: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
33. *Hartman, J. M., Ross M. Feltes, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000. Report Numbers 3 & 4. Rutgers University. 2001. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadow, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the year 2000: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
34. *Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. Environmental Impact Statement on a Multipurpose Development. October 1978. [4] Addresses plan to construct a multipurpose development in the HMD. The proposed project included modern retail facilities, office complexes, a residential cluster, and light industrial uses, as well as recreational facilities and corridors of open wetland space.
35. *Hover, V.C. Trace Metal Cycling in Contaminated Estuarine Sediments, Hackensack Meadowlands District, NJ. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 31. 1999. [1a]Determined the spatial variability of contaminant metals throughout the Meadowlands with respect to marsh types – common reed (Phragmites australis), natural cordgrass species (Spartina spp.), and restored cordgrass species (Spartina spp.) – to obtain baseline information on trace metal contents and speciation in sediment and porewaters. The initial sampling concentrated on areas of natural and restored Spartina marshes in the Sawmill Creek and Mill Creek areas, respectively.
36. *The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Functional Assessment Model and Guidebook for Tidal Fringe Wetlands in the New Jersey Meadowlands. 2003. [1a](http://merilibrary.meadowlands.state.nj.us/dbtw-wpd/FullText/HGM_guidebook_RVSD.pdf) A hydrogeomorphic functional assessment model and guidebook for tidal fringe wetlands in the Hackensack Meadowlands was completed. The HGM model can be used as a tool to help determine wetland functions and values and to approximate compensatory wetland mitigation. Map-based and on-site field data (including amount of aquatic edge, channel density, vegetative cover, habitat, soil texture, and tidal inundation) were collected from the reference wetlands and used to refine data collection forms, calibrate model variables, and improve the conceptual HGM functional models. Reference sites included Skeetkill Creek Marsh, Meadowlark Marsh, Lyndhurst Riverside Marsh, MRI, Western Brackish Marsh, Mill Creek Marsh, Eastern Brackish Marsh, Mori Tract, Walden Marsh, Oritani Marsh, Harrier Meadow, Anderson Creek Marsh, Kearny Brackish Marsh, and Riverbend Wetlands Preserve.
37. The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mill Creek Wetland Enhancement Site: Seeding & Fencing Program Monitoring Report. September 2001. [2a] Documents weekly monitoring program, beginning in May 2001, to observe the growth of the smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) at the site. Includes photographs, as well as documentation of tidal and weather conditions.
38. *Ravit, B., J.G. Ehrenfeld, & M.M. Haggblom. A Comparison of Sediment Microbial Communities Associated with Phragmites australis and Spartina alterniflora in Brackish Wetlands of New Jersey. Estuaries. 26(2B). 2003. [1a]Sediment samples under different vegetation types were collected at Kearny Brackish Marsh and Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site. Microbial communities within the sediments are being examined to determine if there are any correlations or differences among microbial community, contaminant levels, and type of overlying vegetation in brackish marsh areas.
39. *TAMS Consultants, Inc. Comprehensive Baseline Studies, IR-2 and Off-Site Mitigation Areas/Evaluation of the Harmon Meadow Western Brackish Marsh Mitigation Area. June 1990. [2] Baseline studies were initiated in 1986 to provide Hartz Mountain Industries with planning information about three proposed mitigation sites – IR-2 onsite mitigation (now known as Western Brackish Marsh), Anderson Creek, and South Secaucus (also known as Riverbend Wetlands Preserve) – by documenting existing ecological conditions of the sites and the Hackensack River in their vicinity for a year-long period.
40. TAMS Consultants, Inc. Functional Evaluation of the Villages at Mill Creek Development and Mitigation Sites. March 1993. [2] Qualitatively evaluates the functional opportunity/effectiveness of wetlands at four sites – IR-2 (now the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site), Anderson Creek Marsh, South Secaucus (also known as Riverbend Wetlands Preserve), and Meadowlark Marsh – based on physical, chemical, and biological attributes.
41. *TAMS Consultants, Inc. Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEP): IR-2 Site and Off-Site Mitigation Areas: Evaluation of the Villages at Mill Creek Mitigation Program. October 1990. [2] The HEP was used to quantify the habitat value of the proposed IR-2 site (now the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site) and mitigation area (now Western Brackish Marsh), as well as two potential offsite wetland mitigation sites – Anderson Creek Marsh and South Secaucus (also known as Riverbend Wetlands Preserve).
42. *TAMS Consultants, Inc. Technical Report on Vegetation Mapping for IR-2, Anderson Creek Marsh, and South Secaucus Wetland Sites. December 1990. [2]Presents vegetation mapping with supporting data for the IR-2 site (now the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site), its potential onsite mitigation area (now Western Brackish Marsh), and potential offsite mitigation areas – Anderson Creek Marsh and South Secaucus (now known as Riverbend Wetlands Preserve).
43. *TAMS Consultants, Inc. The Villages at Mill Creek (IR-2) Brackish Wetland Mitigation Concept. May 1986. [2] Quantifies the net impact of filling 97.41 acres of USACE-regulated wetlands and enhancing 91.98 acres for the construction of the proposed Villages at Mill Creek was quantified.
44. *TAMS Consultants, Inc. The Villages at Mill Creek (IR-2) Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) Assessment (Draft). February 1990. [2]A WET functional wetlands value assessment was undertaken in response to a condition of the USACE draft permit for this project. This WET assessment evaluated existing and future conditions at the IR-2 site (now the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site), as well as the potential mitigation sites – Anderson Creek Marsh and South Secaucus (also known as Riverbend Wetlands Preserve). Social significance and functional effectiveness/opportunity of wetlands were evaluated.
45. *USACE. Regulatory Permit # 97-09150. 1997. [2] HMDC received authorization to discharge 2,293 cubic yards of fill to enhance 14.3 acres of wetland within the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank. The permit contains wetland enhancement plans (conceptual – no grading) for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank.
46. *USACE. Regulatory Permit # 97-09200. 1997. [2] HMDC received authorization to discharge 73,880 cubic yards of fill to enhance 19.6 acres of wetland within the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank. These 19.6 acres were purchased by The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to mitigate for impacts at Newark Airport. The permit contains wetland enhancement plans (conceptual – no grading) for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank.
47. USACE. Regulatory Permit # 99-14310. 1999. [2] HMDC received authorization to discharge 59 cubic yards of fill in 0.1 acre of wetland for the construction of shoreline bulkhead and emergency egress piles. The action also included 1500 cubic yards of temporary fill (0.23 acres) for a construction access road. Mitigation included 0.277 acre of wetland at the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank.
48. *USEPA & Gannett Fleming, Inc. Site Survey Report – Ecological Studies: Hartz Mountain Development Corporation Villages at Mill Creek. October 1992. [2]Presents results of a 14-week field study designed to evaluate the existing conditions of bird and aquatic ecology at the Villages at Mill Creek site (now the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site), as well as the proposed mitigation areas for the fill activity at the site – Anderson Creek and South Secaucus (also known as Riverbend Wetlands Preserve).
49. *Weis, J.S., L. Windham, and P. Weis. 2002. Growth, Survival, and Metal Content in Marsh Invertebrates Fed Diets of Detritus from Spartina alterniflora Loisel and Phragmites australis Cav. Trin. Ex Steud. from Metal-Polluted and Clean Sites. Wetlands Ecology and Management, v10 n1 pp71-84. 2002. [1a] Detritus samples were collected from the marsh surface under common reed (Phragmites australis), natural cordgrass (Spartina), and restored Spartina in the Meadowlands and Eastern Long Island. Ground-up detritus was fed to groups of two species of fiddler crabs and to grass shrimp. The survival, limb regeneration rate, molting, and weight gain of the crabs on the different diets was monitored, as was survival and growth of the grass shrimp.
F. Geotechnical
50. *Ducks Unlimited, Inc. Baseline Monitoring Program: Soil and Sediment Contamination at Wetland Enhancement Sites within the Hackensack Meadowlands. March 1998. [1a] Describes the results of soils sampling and analysis at several wetland restoration sites in the HMD, including Berry’s Creek Canal site (also known as Oritani Marsh), Harrier Meadow, Mill Creek Marsh, and the Saw Mill Creek Wildlife Management Area. Preliminary surveys were conducted to screen soils at the sites for detection of the presence of potential chemical contaminants that might affect future plans for wetland restoration.
51. *Feltes, R. M., Jean Marie Hartman, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2001 to June 30, 2001. Report Number 5. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the first half of 2001: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
52. *Feltes, R. M., Jean Marie Hartman, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period July 1, 2001 to December 31, 2001. Report Number 6. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the second half of 2001: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
53. *Feltes, R. M., & Jean Marie Hartman (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2002 to June 30, 2002. Report Number 7. Rutgers University. 2002. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the first half of 2002: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
54. *Hartman, J. M. Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period July 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999. Report Number 2. New Brunswick, NJ, USA, Rutgers University. 2000. [5] Describes progress made on the following 5 post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadows, Mill Creek Marsh, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh during the second half of 1999: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (including examinating physical/ chemical components, geomorphology/ hydrology/ salinity, sediment/ soils, contaminants, benthic invertebrates, fish, insects), Phragmites control, and monitoring reports.
55. *Hartman, J. M. & Kelly J. Smith. Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District. Report Number 1. Rutgers University. 1999. [5] Describes work through February 1999 beginning prior to reconstruction of Harrier Meadows, Mill Creek Marsh, and Skeetkill Creek Marsh. The goal of restoration was to obtain cover by wetland vegetation (other than common reed (Phragmites australis)) within two years. Five tasks are addressed: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
56. *Hartman, J. M., Ross M. Feltes, & Andrew Krivenko (eds.). Progress on Monitoring Tidal Restoration Projects in the Hackensack Meadowlands District for the Period January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000. Report Numbers 3 & 4. Rutgers University. 2001. [5] Describes progress made on the following five post-restoration tasks at Harrier Meadow, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh during the year 2000: vegetation monitoring, bird monitoring, system function monitoring (soils, hydrology, fauna), common reed (Phragmites australis) control, and monitoring reports.
57. *The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site: Channel Outlet & Bridge Walkway Repair Report. May 2001. [2a] HMDC requested a damage assessment and the subsequent preparation of repair plans for a pedestrian bridge and overflow spillway located within Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site. Includes results of site survey, flow velocity measurements, sediment sampling, hydraulic analysis, and damage assessment, as well as proposed repair plans.
G. Hydraulics and Hydrology
58. *The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site: Channel Outlet & Bridge Walkway Repair Report. May 2001. [2a] HMDC requested a damage assessment and the subsequent preparation of repair plans for a pedestrian bridge and overflow spillway located within Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site. Includes results of site survey, flow velocity measurements, sediment sampling, hydraulic analysis, and damage assessment, as well as proposed repair plans.
59. The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mill Creek Wetland Enhancement Site: Seeding & Fencing Program Monitoring Report. September 2001. [2a] Documents weekly monitoring program, beginning in May 2001, to observe the growth of the smooth cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) at the site. Includes photographs, as well as documentation of tidal and weather conditions.
H. Water and Sediments
60. *Able, Kenneth W., Melissa J. Neuman, & Guillermo Ruess (Rutgers University). The Influence of Low Dissolved Oxygen on Predatory Fishes: Comparisons between Restored and Impacted Marsh Creeks in the Hackensack Meadowlands. 2002.[1a] A study to determine patterns in water quality indicators and predatory fish use, and examine food habits of the dominant fish predators in two tidal marshes, Mill Creek Marsh (impacted natural creek) and Doctor’s Creek (a restored/created creek that is part of Marsh Resources Wetland Mitigation Bank).
61. *Anonymous. Nitrogen Budget Determination for a Selected Site in the Hackensack Meadowlands Estuary. 1974 [1a] Water velocity, DO, salinity, and temperature were monitored in Mill Creek. Samples were collected and analyzed for nitrate, nitrite and kjeldahl nitrogen. Samples were also collected from the Secaucus Sewage Treatment Plant. Found that about five percent of N was removed by the adjacent marsh.
62. *Ducks Unlimited, Inc. Baseline Monitoring Program: Soil and Sediment Contamination at Wetland Enhancement Sites within the Hackensack Meadowlands. March 1998. [1a] Describes the results of soils sampling and analysis at several wetland restoration sites in the HMD, including Berry’s Creek Canal site (also known as Oritani Marsh), Harrier Meadow, Skeetkill Creek Marsh, and Mill Creek Marsh. Preliminary surveys were conducted to screen soils at the sites for detection of the presence of potential chemical contaminants that might affect future plans for wetland restoration.
63. *Hover, V.C. Trace Metal Cycling in Contaminated Estuarine Sediments, Hackensack Meadowlands District, NJ. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 31. 1999. [1a]Determined the spatial variability of contaminant metals throughout the Meadowlands with respect to marsh types – common reed (Phragmites australis), natural cordgrass species (Spartina spp.), and restored cordgrass species (Spartina spp.) – to obtain baseline information on trace metal contents and speciation in sediment and porewaters. The initial sampling concentrated on areas of natural and restored Spartina marshes in the Sawmill Creek and Mill Creek areas, respectively.
64. *The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site: Channel Outlet & Bridge Walkway Repair Report. May 2001. [2a] HMDC requested a damage assessment and the subsequent preparation of repair plans for a pedestrian bridge and overflow spillway located within Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site. Includes results of site survey, flow velocity measurements, sediment sampling, hydraulic analysis, and damage assessment, as well as proposed repair plans.
65. *Ravit, B., J.G. Ehrenfeld, & M.M. Haggblom. A Comparison of Sediment Microbial Communities Associated with Phragmites australis and Spartina alterniflora in Brackish Wetlands of New Jersey. Estuaries. 26(2B). 2003. [1a]Sediment samples under different vegetation types were collected at Kearny Brackish Marsh and Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site. Microbial communities within the sediments are being examined to determine if there are any correlations or differences among microbial community, contaminant levels, and type of overlying vegetation in brackish marsh areas.
66. *Weis, J.S., L. Windham, and P. Weis. 2002. Growth, Survival, and Metal Content in Marsh Invertebrates Fed Diets of Detritus from Spartina alterniflora Loisel and Phragmites australis Cav. Trin. Ex Steud. from Metal-Polluted and Clean Sites. Wetlands Ecology and Management, v10 n1 pp71-84. 2002. [1a] Detritus samples were collected from the marsh surface under common reed (Phragmites australis), natural cordgrass (Spartina), and restored Spartina in the Meadowlands and Eastern Long Island. Ground-up detritus was fed to groups of two species of fiddler crabs and to grass shrimp. The survival, limb regeneration rate, molting, and weight gain of the crabs on the different diets was monitored, as was survival and growth of the grass shrimp.
67. *Yuhas, C.E. Benthic Communities in Spartina alterniflora and Phragmities australis Dominated Salt Marshes. Rutgers University. 2001. [1a]Core samples were collected at the creek bank and edge of vegetation in natural & mitigated cordgrass (Spartina) marshes and in a common reed (Phragmites australis) dominated marsh. A recolonization experiment using sediment from an undisturbed & uncontaminated site was also conducted. The diversity and abundance of benthic communities in the samples were analyzed.
I. Historical/Cultural Resources
No data obtained.
J. Restoration/Remediation Design Plans
68. *The Louis Berger Group, Inc. Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site: Channel Outlet & Bridge Walkway Repair Report. May 2001. [2a] HMDC requested a damage assessment and the subsequent preparation of repair plans for a pedestrian bridge and overflow spillway located within Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Site. Includes results of site survey, flow velocity measurements, sediment sampling, hydraulic analysis, and damage assessment, as well as proposed repair plans.
69. *TAMS Consultants, Inc. The Villages at Mill Creek (IR-2) Brackish Wetland Mitigation Concept. May 1986. [2] Quantifies the net impact of filling 97.41 acres of USACE-regulated wetlands and enhancing 91.98 acres for the construction of the proposed Villages at Mill Creek.
70. *USACE. Regulatory Permit # 97-09150. 1997. [2] HMDC received authorization to discharge 2,293 cubic yards of fill to enhance 14.3 acres of wetland within the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank. The permit contains wetland enhancement plans (conceptual – no grading) for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank.
71. *USACE. Regulatory Permit # 97-09200. 1997. [2] HMDC received authorization to discharge 73,880 cubic yards of fill to enhance 19.6 acres of wetland within the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank. These 19.6 acres were purchased by The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to mitigate for impacts at Newark Airport. The permit contains wetland enhancement plans (conceptual – no grading) for the Mill Creek Wetland Mitigation Bank.
K. Bibliographic Updates
Site #6: Mill Creek Marsh