Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetland Report CENEX 901142036MEEHAN-ROULST WETLAND DELINEATING nr�c��adr� JEFFERSON COUNTY �- •�� �pp3C� Mt,A 5 - Kimberly Meehan-Roulst, Wetland Specialist 407 Embody Rd., Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Phone:360-732-0073, Cell: 360-774-0551 Specializing In: Welland and Stream Mapping, Delineation and Restoration Critical Areas Investigation: NON WETLAND INVESTIGATION Applicant: CHS Inc., Manager: Rory Bush 9315 Rhody Drive, Chimacum, WA 98325 (360) 732-4585 Zoning: NC-NeighborhoodNisitor Crossroad Parcel#: 901142036 Investigated Parcels and Location: CHS Inc. and Finn River Farm/Chimacum Dairy LLC Finn River Farm Location: 142 Barn Swallow Rd, Chimacum, WA 98325 Parcel #: 901151004 Zoning: AP -20 Commercial Agriculture Legal Description for Cenex Inc. Sec. 14/T. 29N/R. IW Lot: 48deg.00'38.26"N Long: 122 deg.46'25.03"W Investigation Dates: 3/13/16-3/22/16 Investigator: Meehan-Roulst Wetland Consulting 407 Embody Road Port Ludlow, WA 98365 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION RESOURCES REVIEWED PRIOR TO FIELD INVESTIGATION DESCRIPTION OF PARCELS Cenex Inc., Parcel 901142036 Finn River Farm, Parcel 901151004 FIELD INVESTIGATION RESULTS: SOILS, VEGETATION AND HYDROLOGY CENEX INC. PROPERTY PI (Plot 1) FINN RIVER FARM/CHIMACUM DAIRY FARM P2 (Plot 2) P3 (Plot 3) P4 (Plot 4) CONCLUSION: NON WETLAND DETERMINATION TABLES: TABLE 1: PASTURE GRASSES AND PLANTS TABLE 2: DAILY RAINFALL FOR March 8`" -March 14" 2016 MAPS: DRAINED HYDRIC SOIL LOCATIONS/OLD WETLAND BOUNDARY 10 APPENDIX A: MAPS APPENDIX B: FIELD DATA SHEET FOR PLOTS 1-4 APPENDIX C: APPROACH AND METHODS PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION: Cenex Inc., located in Chimacum WA, excavated gravel from the east side of their parcel, #901142036, and relocated the gravel to the south property line of their parcel. Gravel was placed behind a 30,000 gallon liquified petroleum gas tank. Location can be found on the map on page ten of this report. They placed the gravel there for future storage area. The relocation of the gravel was noticed by Joel Peterson, associate planner for Jefferson County's Department of Community Development (DCD), during a routine inspection for Case Number: 5DP15-00017 which was for parking lot paving and stormwater facility improvements. Joel Peterson noticed from Jefferson County's Critical Areas maps that the location of the gravel could be in a buffer of a mapped wetland. The JCC Critical Areas maps show a large wetland on the property south of Cenex Inc., parcel #901151004, which is Finn River Farm and the south west corner of Cenex Inc. parcel, parcel # 901142036. Meehan-Roulst Wetland Consulting, my self, was then contacted by the manager of Cenex, Rory Bush. He asked Meehan-Roulst Wetland Consulting to investigate for potential wetlands on the property owned by Cenex as per Joel Petersons request stated in Joel Peterson's Site Visit Results letter dated 3/8/16. Field investigation for potential wetlands started on 3/10/16 and was concluded on 3/17/16. Field investigation results showed that there were no Critical Areas: Wetlands on the property owned by Cenex Inc. As a biologist, I can not delineate, or rate, a wetland on someone else's property. I did however contact Eric Jorgensen from Finn River Farm and asked his permission to investigate Finn River Farms property for wetlands. I explained that it would have no hearing on Finn River Farm and that it was for informational purposes only. He kindly gave me that permission to start the investigation on their parcel, parcel #901151004. I was then able to do the same as full wedand delineation: gathering vegetation, hydrology and soil data. The field data results showed that the pasture was an old wetland from years ago that still has visible hydric soils but no hydrology source. RESOURCES REVIEWED PRIOR TO FIELD INVESTIGATION: • Jefferson County Critical Areas Maps, years 2005-2015. Under Fish and 4 ihNfe C'unw,I"Ilion Jrras there is a Tvpe F fsh habilat stream (C'himacun Creek) that has It 150'sucunt bulier. C'hinacum Creek runs on the west side of hath panels. the project location, placement of gravel behind large propane lank. is 220 %ee[ em ai /i om stream at it'sclosest paint which is '0' beyond the required bq1jer. Google Earth Maps, years 2016 back to 1990 • National Wetland Inventory Maps. See Map in Appendix A. The wellunds hrr aII 111 Irom where Cenex Inc. placed ,rp. • Jefferson County Unified Development Code • Soil Survey of Jefferson County, 1975. r; ,on County 'F Critical Areas Maps 11,111, 01.11 tin t „liP .iii lOUIN 11111 , , ,n:, 1,,tndlel along the Chimacan Creek that extends 180 east into the pasture. It then .shows the Belfast silt loams, wet ail, ,nrr iht 7111,111,, Of Roil, .01!11!.. arc " P,v,rly Drained Soils "and Jl pits. • Jefferson County Community Development: Laserfiche. "OrCel.S 901142001 and 9111 14?00 were inresitgaied. Both panels are sowh III ('ener Inc. but boil? have similar habitat: T17)e F stream with wellands on hath sides gl'.sarunt. Panel 901142001 is on the east .side o1'snra m and 901142002 is on the ivee't side of stream. Both were delineated by ' Olvinpic Welland Resources". parcel vu+l.1'n(r'„ , J:�. ,r hrith .; 'Ung rerlundbu(jer. parcel viand huller. • Community Collaborative Rain, Hail & Snow Network: Daily precipitation DESCRIPTION OF PARCELS: Cenex Inc.. Parcel 901142036: Physically it is situated between Chimacum Creek to the west and Chimacum Cafd to the east. It is south of Rhody Drive road and north of Finn River Farm/Chimacum Dairy LLC. The topography of the parcel is relatively flat. A small area in the south west corner of the parcel has a small slope (approximately 5%) that slopes to the south west property line. Chimacum Creek is on the west side of the west property line. Chimacum Creek is a Type F stream with a 150' buffer associated with it. Most of the parcel has been in use for several years. There is the main building, newly paved parking lot, petroleum fueling station, propane fueling station and outdoor storage areas for farming necessities such as fencing. See Appendix A for locations. Finn River Farm, Parcel 901151004: Physically the parcel is situated in between Chimacum Creek to the west and Center Valley road to the east. Cenex Inc. and Finn River Farm share a property line. Cenex is north of Finn River Farm. Red Dog Farm is to the south of Finn River Farm. The area of mapped wetlands according to Jefferson County's Critical Areas map is on the west portion of this parcel. The map shows a large wetland that is associated with Chimacum Creek that extends east approximately six hundred and fifty feet. See Appendix A "Jefferson County Environmental Sensitive Ares Map". This area is relatively flat with five percent slope to the west. The area next to Chimacum Creek was built up years ago (west of property line). It was also excavated and straitened to control the flooding of the pasture. The built up area can visibly be seen on the ground. Local organizations have planted the diked area with native trees and shrubs to provide shading for the stream in efforts to lower the water temperature during the warmer months. The west half of the mapped wetland is in pasture that is used for hay. The other half of the mapped wetland has been converted as of recent (last year or two) into an orchard. The pasture is an herbaceous community of pasture grasses and low growing plants. The following plants can be found throughout the pasture: TABLE 1 "PASTURE GRASSES AND PLANTS" COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME/INDICATOR STATUS Perennial ryegass Lolium erenne FAC Kentucky bluegrass Poa retensis (FAC Orchard grass Dactylis glomerata (FACU) Meadow foxtail Alo ecurus ratensis (FAC) Timothy Phleum pretense (FAC) Dandelion Taraxacum o ecinale FAC Red clover Trifolium pretense FACU) Mouse -ear cress Arabido sis thaliana (NL) Dead nettle Lamium Purpureum L) FIELD INVESTIGATION RESULTS: SOILS, VEGETATION AND HYDROLOGY Based on the field data, the pasture is no longer by definition a "Wetland" do to lack of one or more of the three parameters: hydric vegetation, hydrology or hydric soils. It is a drained wetland with drained hydric soils. Data Plots 1 and 4 were all "Upland Plots". However, Data Plot 3 did meet the definition of hydric soils and hydric vegetation but still lacked one parameter, hydrology. All three parameters must be met to be a wetland: Hydric Soils, Hydrology and Hydrophytic Vegetation. Location of Pl-P4 can be found on the map on page ten. APPROACH AND METHODS: Approach and Methods can be found in Appendix C. CENEX INC. PROPERTY: Field Data Sheets Pl-P4 can be found in Aonendix B. Jefferson County Soils Survey and Jefferson County's Environmental Sensitive Area map lists the soil next to Chimacum Creek as the Tisch silt loams (Th). The area extends to the east into the pasture 172'. It then lists the Belfast silt loam (Bk). Both of which are poorly drained soil. During investigation of all soil pits, neither soil series was present. PLOT : Soils Pi: Soil was mapped the Th series. Soil had moderately well drained very dark brown IOYR2/2 sandy loams with no redoximorphic features in the upper horizon down to a depth of thirteen inches. Below thirteen inches there were grayish brown 10YR5/2 loamy sands. 7.5YR4/6 redoximorphic features started at thirteen inches from the soil surface. Soil did not meet the definition of a "Hydric Soil". Hydrology Pl: No hydrology present within thirty inches of the soil pit surface. Vegetation Pl: 30% dandelion (FACU), 30% red clover (FACU), 20% meadow foxtail (FAC), 20% on identified lawn grass. Vegetation did not meet the definition of "Hydrophytic Vegetation" (fifty percent or more of the vegetation is FAC or wetter). Conclusion based on field data: South west corner of parcel is upland therefore; there the property owned by Cenex Inc. is a Jefferson County Critical Areas: Non Wetland Determination. FINN RIVER FARM/CHIMACUM DAIRY PROPERTY: PLOT 2: Soils : Soils were mapped as the Th series. The soils in the upper eleven inches were very dark brown 10YR2/2 sandy loams. Eleven to thirteen inches was 10YR5/2 fine sandy loam. Thirteen to sixteen inches was grayish brown 10YR5/2 sandy loams with twenty five percent 7.5YR 4/6 redoximorphic features starting below thirteen inches. Soils did not meet the definition of a "Hydric soil' Hydrology P2: No hydrology present within thirty inches of soil pit surface. Vegetation P2: 30% dandelion (FACU), 30% red clover (FACU), 20% perennial ryegmss (FAC), 20% mouse -ear cress (NI). Vegetation did not meet the definition of "Hydrophytic Vegetation". PLOT 3: Soils P3: Soils were mapped as the Bk series. The soils upper nine inches was moderately well drained with a very dark brown 10YR2/2 loams. From nine inches to fifteen inches, the soil was a grayish brown 10YR5/2 loams with forty percent 7.5YR5/6 redoximorphic features. Below fifteen inches were medium sands. Soil did meet the definition of a "Hydric Soil'. At 1. Depleted Below Dark Surface for mineral soils. Depleted matrix starts within twelve inches. Hydrology P3: No hydrology present within thirty inches of the soil pit surface Vegetation P3: 30% perennial ryegrass (FAC), 25% meadow £oxtail (FAC), 25% dandelion (FACU), 20% red clover (FACU). Vegetation did meet the definition of "Hydrophytic Vegetation". PLOT 4: Soils P4: Soils were mapped as the Bk series. The soils in the upper ten inches were very dark brown 10YR2/2 fine sandy loams. Ten inches to fourteen inches was grayish brown 10YR5/2 loams with thirty percent 7.5YR 4/6 redoximorphic features. From fifteen to twenty inches there were medium sands. Soils did meet the definition of a "Hydric soil". All. Depleted Below Dark Surface. Hydrology P4: No hydrology present within thirty inches of soil pit. Vegetation P4: 20% perennial ryegmss (FAC), 15% timothy (FAC), 20% dandelion (FACU), 20% red clover (FACU), 20% dead nettle (NL). Vegetation did not meet the definition of "Hydrophytic Vegetation'. CONCLUSION: The property owned by Cenex Inc., parcel # 901142036, and Finn River Farm/Chimacum Dairy, parcel #901151004, do not have the following Jefferson County Critical Areas: "Wetlands" within the investigated area. The investigated area on Finn River Farm/Chimacum Dairy is those areas north of the maintenance road. Area south of maintenance road was not investigated because it was well beyond 300' from the placement of gravel. Please see Map on page 10 for location of maintenance road. FURTHER ANNALYSIS: This does not mean though that the pasture was not a wetland at some time in history. The indicators of this were the redoximorphic features in the upper horizon in some areas. This indicates that at some time there was enough saturation or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop hydric soils. That point in time was probably prior to lowering the nearby water table by straightening/excavating Chimacum Creek and building up of a dike next to the stream. Hydrology should have been present after the week of rain Chimacum had received. Once a soil produces hydric soil indicators such as redoximorphic features, those characteristics persist for hundreds of years. Some studies say that hydric characteristics can, under normal conditions, persist for 500+ years and some say "Once hydric, always hydic". This means that if the source of hydrology was re placed, the area would function as a wetland again. The water source was not from precipitation. During the many site visits, there were heavy rains that flooded Beaver and Center Valley farms. Water was also a foot high over SR 19 in an area that has not flooded for several years. If the pastures water source was precipitation it would have had evidence of saturation somewhere near the surface or at least within the upper twelve inches of the soil. There was no evidence of hydrology within the upper thirty inches in all areas investigated. See table below for daily precipitation during the week of field investigation: TABLE2 DAILY RAINFALL FOR March 8`" -March 14" 2016 TOTAL PRECIPITATION: 3.67 inches DATE STATION NAME TOTAL PRECIPITATION inches COUNTY 3/8/16 Chimacum 1.8 SW .07 Jefferson 3/9/16 Chimacum 1.8 SW .01 Jefferson 3/10/16 Chimacum 1.8 SW 2.51 Jefferson 3/11/16 Chimacum 1.8 SW .02 Jefferson 3/12/16 Chimacum 1.8 SW .29 Jefferson 3/13/16 Chimacum 1.8 SW .18 Jefferson 3/14/16 Chimacum 1.8 SW .59 Jefferson EXPLANATION OF "DRAINED HYDRIC SOILS": "A soil that is artificially drained or protected (for instance, by dikes or levees) is still hydric if the soil in its undisturbed state would meet the definition of a hydric soil. To be identified as hydric, these soils should generally have one or more of the indicators. However, not all areas that have hydric soils will qualify as wetlands, if they no longer have wetland hydrology or support hydrophytic vegetation."I This is the case with the pasture. At one time, it must have had received hydrology from the stream or the water table before the stream was excavated which dropped the water table. It has been so long now since the stream has been altered that the vegetation in the pasture is FACU (60%) and FAC (40%). Even though this is a Non Wetland Determination Report, I was able to study the site for several days and dug over fifteen soil pits to see where the old wetland lied in relation to the stream. I have produced a map of the "Drained Hydric Soils Locations" for informational purposes only. Any soil pit that had I OYR2/2 surface horizon and redoximorphic features in the upper twelve inches was considered the old wet boundary. If there were l OYR2/2 upper horizon and redoximorphic features below twelve inches, it was considered upland. Soil pits are identified by S 1-S I5. The map is based on soils only. If any SI -S15 is in red type, it was a hydric soil. If it is in yellow Type, it is upland soils. Blue line represents what would be the wetland boundary if the source of hydrology was put back into the pasture. Within the old drained wetland boundary, there were some pockets of upland soils but the majority of the soil pits in the blue boundary line were hydric. See the Map on following page, page 10. ' Wetland Training Institute, Inc. 1995. Field Guide for Wetland Delineation; 1987 Corps of Engineers Manual, Glenwood, NM. WTI 143pp. L ate f "Non withinone site. iun he 71l _ Goo(�Ic earth APPENDIX A II CENEX INC. Parcel number 901142036 12 VAUNITY MAP � N R• k' 1N•it I.y A�< y _� �cla L" a SR • Y\}t inure. Ln Qa u .••.••..••••••-••-Snmlmrvllle Ra�•-... d..,..... c� � ( ••� ............. L]Oemaa Rd J Hpna Si Fa.gl +. Av r m f Me Lee RC S 10 Antlermn Lake Rtl „ m 'm y ru ell - 1 �L 13 N•eahinitan Ln r a J. obaea Or Cak Rd a a U E 4 � a ��e 'A lnbC nf" aivra' Kagisher Pi r p. r ON eJF. �IL r r a y r 6A s qry r ...-'p--• ............. .-.....•.---•• at...•--' ........................ ... ...................... i, la 13 JCC ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS MAP WETLANDS, LFA -Fish Stream, CONSERVACY AREAS 14 ....TOM milliililill Cenex and Finn River Farm National Wetlands Inventor Mx to. a'6 �T Wetlands t+d e i1 t F i r.,...•...... per„ t User Remarks: »ate..,........ No mapped Wetlands 15 APPENDIX B FIELD DATA SHEETS: PLOTS 1-4 16 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Regions ProjecUSite: Geog ID 901142036 Yes ❑ No ® City/County: Jefferson County, Sampling Date: 3/10/16 WA A Iicant/Owner:: Cenex Inc. Yes ❑ No ® State: WA I Sam lin Point: PI:U land Plot Investi to s : Meebm-Roulst Wetland Consaltin Landform illslo e, terrace, etc): slopeLocal im Mahan-Roulst Section, Township, Range: S14 T29N, Rl W relief (concav convex, none : none SI 3-5% Subre ion (LRR): North West Forest Lot 48de 00'38.26."N I Lung: 122de 46'25.03"W Damm: NAD 83 Sail Ma Unit Name: Tisch silt loams and Belfast silt IoamS NWI classification: Herbaceous Are climatic / h drolo is conditions on the site typical for this time of ear? Yes ❑ No If no, explain in Remarks.) above normal reci nation Are ve emtion ,Soil orHydrologysi niPcantl disturbed? Are -Normal Circumstances" resent? Yes ® No Are vegetation Li, Soil , or H drolo nammll roblematic? n needed, explain my answers in Remarks ..I, .a. ,ane .h—i.. smmnlino noint Ineafinns. frnnaects- Imnortant features. etc ydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Is the Sampled Area ydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No ® Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Well dH dr I P ant^ Yes ❑ No 2, Remarks: Use scientific Trus Stratum (Plot size:) Absolute %Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FAC W, or FAC: (A) 1 I 2, Total; Number of dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3 3 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FC W, or FAC: (AB) 33 4 = Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet: Total %Cover of. Multiply bv: SaplinPlShrub StratuH (Plot size) I. GBL species X I = 2 FACW species X2= 3 FAC species 1 X 3 =3 q FACU species 2 X 4 =8 5 UPL Species X5= q Column totals 3(A) I I(B) 5 Prevalence index = B/A =3.6 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: E] 1. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation E] 2,Dominance Test is -50% E] 3. Prevalence Index is <_3.0' ❑ 4. Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) ❑ 5. Wetland Non -Vascular Plants ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No Herb Stratum Plot size: 1Mx1M 1. Taraxacum officinale 30 Yes PACU 2. Trifolium pretense 30 Yes FACU 3. Alopecurus pmtensis 20 Yes FAC 4. Un known lawn grass 20 yes N/A 5 =Total Cover 100 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 1. N/A 2 =Total Cover %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers western Mountains, valleys and Coast- SOIL Sampling Point Dry Profile Description: (Describe t a the depth needed to document the indicators or confirm the absence of indicators) Depth (inches) Matfix Redox Features all that a 1 Textures Remarks color (moist) % color (moist) % Type Loc 0-11" IOYR2/2 100 ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B 13) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ent Deposits (B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CI) SL Very dark grayish brown sandy Imams, moderate medium granular structure, smooth boundary, marry common roots 11-13" 10YR52 100 ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) Deposits (85) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in tilled Soils (C6) LS grayish brown loamy sands, weak sub angular bloc structure, 13-15" IOYR52 80 7.SYR4/6 20 CXS M S grayish brown sands, no structure Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes capillary fringe) Desciihe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: Type: Cxoccamm ca s, D=Depletier. 15h Reduced Matrix. CXS=C.co ed or Coated Sand Grains. Location: PI=Pore lining, RC=Root amnel, M=Marix Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ❑ Histosol (AI) ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) E] Depleted Below Dark Surface (All) E] Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ElSandy Mucky Mineral (SI) []Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) ❑ Sandy Redox (SS) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (FI) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) El Depleted Matrix (P3) E] Redox Dark Surface (P6) El Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Redox Depressions (FS) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: Depth (inches), Hydric Soil Present" Yes ❑ No Remarks: nr:v H drat IndicatorsIndicators minimum of one uired; check all that a 1 Second Indicators 2 or more reuiredce Water (Al) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (except Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MRLA 1, 2, Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 4B) 4A and 4B) ation (A3) I ❑Salt Crust (Bl l) ❑ Drainage Patterns (BIO) r Marks (BI) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B 13) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ent Deposits (B2) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CI) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery Deposits (B3) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) (C9) l Mat or Crust B4) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) Deposits (85) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (133) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (H6) ❑ Started or Stressed Plants (DI') (LRR A) ❑ PAC—Neutral Test (135) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) ❑ Other (Explain in remarks) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (BS) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Field Observations Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes capillary fringe) Desciihe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers western Mountains, valleys and Coast — Version 1.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Regions ProjecUSite: Geog 1D 901142036 City /County: Jefferson County, Sampling Date: 3/10/16 WA A licant/Owner.: Cenex Inc. State: WA Sampling Point: P2: Upland Plot Investigator(s): Meehan-Roulst Weiland ComalthaiLKou Mahan-Ruuls[ Landform thillslope,terrace, do): slope Sectioq Townshi , Range: 514, T29N, RI W I Local relief concave,convex, none : none Slope . 3-5% Subregion LRR): North West Forest Let: 48de 00'38.26."N Lon : I22de 46'25.03"W I Datum: NAD 83 Ne: Tisch silt loans and Belfaxt silt loans Soil Ma Unitam NWI classification: Herbaceous Are climatic / h drola is conditions on the site gpicaL for this time of ear? Yes El No ® Ifno, explain in Remarks.) above normal reci nation Are ve emtion Soil 0, or H draw ❑ Si nificantl disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" sent? Yes No Are ve emtion , Soil , or H drolo natural) roblematic? If needed, explore any answers in Remarks Attach site map showing seen piing point locations, transacts, important features, etc ydrophytic Vegetation Present? ydric Soil Present? Welland Hydrology Present.10 Yes ❑ Yes ❑ Yes ❑ No ® No ® No Is the Sampled Area Within a Wctland? Yes ❑ No Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 1 1 Remarks: 2 VEC Trees Stratum lot size:) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A) 1 1 2 Total; Number of dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3 3, Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FCW, or FAC: (AB) 33 4 = Total Cover Prevalence Index worksbeeh Total a/ Cover of. Multiply by: Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size) 1, OBL species X 1 = 2 FACW species X2= 3. FAC species 1 X 3 =3 4. FACU species 2 X 4 =8 5. UPL Species X5= 4, Column totals 3(A) ll(B) 5„ Prevalence index = B/A =3.6 =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: ❑ 1. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2.13ornmance Test is >50% ❑ 3. Prevalence Index is 13.0' ❑ 4. Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate h ) ❑ 5. Wetland Non -Vascular plains' ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No ED Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 MxIM 1. Taraxacum officinale 30 Yes FACU 2. Trifolitaq-pnse 30 Yes FACU 3. Loliumperenne 20 Yes FAC 4. Arabidopsis thaliana 20 yes NL 5 =Total Cover 100 Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:) 1. N/A 2. =Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers wcswm rvmumm ,s, V.iic,s sud Cu.,—rcrsmn 2.6 SOIL Sampling Point: Dry Profile Description: (Deseribe t o rhe depth neetled m document the Ivdicamn m coni5rm the absence of indicators) Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features at a I Textures Remarks Color(moist) % Color(moiA) % Type Loc _04T_ 1OYR2/2 1 00 Crust (Bl1) ❑ Drainage Patterns (BIO) r Marks (Bq atic Invertebrates (1313) SL Very dark grayish brown sandy loams, moderate medium granular structure, abrupt boundary, many common roots I 1-13" 10YR5/2 100 Rhiwspheres along Living Roots (C3) (C9) l Mal or Crust (B4)sence of Reduced Iron (C4) FSL grayish brown fine sandy loams, weak sub singular blocky structure. 13-16" 10YR5/2 75 7.5YR4/6 25 D M SL Grayish brown sandy looms ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Field Observations Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes capillary frm e) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial phoms, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: RSoil ons, D=Doplenon. RM=Reduced Metrix. CXSxovertd or Coated Sand Grains. Location: PI=Pore linin& RC=Root Channel M=Matrix ore: (Applicable to all LRRe, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils` ❑ 2 em Muck (AIO) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks s 3Indicators ofhydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present unless disturbed or faciblessoutic. ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Black Histic (A3) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ❑ Depleted Below Dark Surface (AI l) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (AI2) ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (S I) []Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) U Sandy Redox (SS) ❑ Stripped Matrix (S6) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (FI) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (177) ❑ Redox Depressions (FS) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type; Depth inches: Hydric Soil Present? Yes ❑ No Remarks: H drolo IndicatorsIndicators minimum of onei at a I Second Indicators2ormore re airedce Water (Al)er-Smined Leaves (B9) (except Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MALA i, 2, Water Table (A2)LRA 1, 2,4A, and 4B) 4A and 46) ation (A3) F Crust (Bl1) ❑ Drainage Patterns (BIO) r Marks (Bq atic Invertebrates (1313) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ent Deposits (82)rogen Sulfide Odor (CD ❑ Sammtion Visible on Aerial Imagery Deposits (B3)diwd Rhiwspheres along Living Roots (C3) (C9) l Mal or Crust (B4)sence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Geomorphic Position (D2) Deposits (BS) ent Irov Reduction in tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Shallow Aquitied (D3) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (B6) wted or Stressed Plants (DL) (LRR A) ❑ FAC=Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (117) ❑ Other (Explain in remarks) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (B8) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Field Observations Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes capillary frm e) Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial phoms, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys and Count — WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM —Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Regions Projeet/Site: GeogiD901142036 City/County: Iefferson County, Sampling Date: 3/11/16 WA Applicant/Gamer: : Ceaexlnc. State: WA Sampling Point: 1?3:U land Plot Inveni ata s : Meehon-Roulst Wedand consurtimpKin, Mahan-Roulst Landform illslo , terrace, etc : silo Section, Townshi Ran e: S14, T29N, RI W Local relief concave, convex none : none Slope% 3-5% Subre'on LRR : North West Forest Let: 48de 00'38.26."N Lon : 122de 46'25.03"W I Datum: NAD 83 Soil Map Unit Name: Tisch silt foams and Belfaxt silt looms I N W1 classification: Herbaceous Are climatic / h drolo is condifions on the site ical for this time of ear? Yes No ® If no, "plain in Remarks. above normal roti imiion Are ve elation ,Soil �, or H drolo si ificantl disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" resent? Yes Na ❑ Are vegetation U, Soil U, or HyqMi09Y D natumll rablematic? I tit nceded, explain any answers in Remarks ..0 kaman ehowina samniinv noint]orations. transects. imoortant features. etc ydrophydc Vegetation Present? YesNo Is the Sampled Area ydric Soil Present? Yes D No ® Within a Weiland? Yes ❑ Na vi efland Hvdroloey Present? Yes No ED (A) 2 Remarks: Trees Stratum lot Size:) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FAC W, or FAC: (A) 2 I 2 Total; Number of dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 4 3 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FC W, or FAC: (A/B) 50% 4 = Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover of. Multiply by, Sapline/Shruda, Stratum (Plot size) 1 OBL species X 1 = 2 FACW species X2= 3 FAC species X3= 4 FACU species X4= 5 UPI, Species X5= q Column totals (A) (B) 5 Prevalence index = B/A = =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: D1. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ® 2.Dominance Test is >500/a 3. Prevalence Index is 53.0' ❑ 4. Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) D 5. Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' ❑ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must be present Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ® No D Herb Stratum (Plot size:) IMxIM 1. Lolium Perenne 30 Yes FAC 2. Alopec=a pretenses 25 Yes FAC 3. Taraxacum offtntnale 25 Yes FACO 4. Trifolium pretense 20 yes FACU 5 =Total Cover 100 Woodv Vine Stratum (Plot size:) L N/A 2. —Total Cover % Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 10 Remarks: US Army Corps ofEnginecrs LAIRL Sampling Point: Dry Profile M. pdon: (Ikschbe to the depth needed to document the indicators or confirm the absence ufindicators) Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features sll that pplyl Textures Remarks Color (moist) % —Eclat (m(molst) % Type Loo 0-9" 10YR2/2 100 ❑Salt Crust (BI 1) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (Bq ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B 13) L Very dark grayish brown looms, moderate medium granular structure, smooth boundary, many common roots 9-15" 10YR5/2 60 7.5YR5/6 40 D M L grayish brown loams, weak sub angular blocky structure. ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Shallow Aquitard HXB ❑ Surface Soil Creeks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DI') (LRR A) ❑ FAC=Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Inundation Visible on Acrial Imagery (B7) ❑ Omer (Explain in remarks) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (BS) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Field Observations Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes capillary frialle Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspeMions), if available: Remarks: y tmfims, O= plefim.RM=ReducedMatra.CXS�mredmCoated SandGains. Location P1=Pore lining, RC=Root Channd, M=Matrix cators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils' ❑ 2 cm Muck (A70) ❑ Red Parent Material (TF2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic, ❑ Histic Epipedon (A2) ❑ Black Hisfic (A3) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) ® Depleted Below Dark Surface (At 1) ❑ Thick Dark Surface (Al2) ❑ Sandy Mucky Mineral (SI) EjSandy Gleyed Matrix (SD Sandy Redox (SS) ❑ Stripped Matrix (36) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (FI) (except MI RA 1) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Depleted Matra (F3) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Redox Depressions (178) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type; Depth inches: Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® No ❑ Remarks: rev Weiland H drol Indicators Prim Indicators minimum of one required;;;; check sll that pplyl Secondary Indicators 2 or more re uired ❑Surface Water (AI) ❑ Water -Stained Leaves (119) (except Water Stained Leaves (B9) (MRLA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 4B) 4A and 46) ❑ Saturation (A3) ❑Salt Crust (BI 1) ❑ Drainage Patterns (1310) ❑ Water Marks (Bq ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates (B 13) ❑ Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (132) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor PCI) ❑ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery ❑ Drift Deposits (113) ❑ Oxidized Rhizaspheres along Living Roots (0) (C9) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (114) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Geomorphic Position (32) ❑ Iron Deposits (65) ❑ Recent Iron Reduction in tilled Soils (C6) ❑ Shallow Aquitard HXB ❑ Surface Soil Creeks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DI') (LRR A) ❑ FAC=Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Inundation Visible on Acrial Imagery (B7) ❑ Omer (Explain in remarks) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (136) (LRR A) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (BS) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Field Observations Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes capillary frialle Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspeMions), if available: Remarks: US Army Carps offingineers WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Regions Pmject/Site: Geog ID901142036 Absolute % Cover City/County: Jefferson County, Sampling Date: 3/12/16 WA licant/O.er:: Cenex hic. Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FAC W, or FAC: State: WA I Sam lin Point: P4: U land Plot Invesli o s : Meehan.Rotdst Wetlsod Consul' Landform (hillslope, tenaee, etc): sloe Kim Meelmn-Rouls[ Section, Township, Range: S14 T29N, Rl W I Local relief concave convex, none : none Slope (% 3-5% Subregion LRR): North West Forest Lat: 48de 00'38.26."N Lon : 122de 46'25.03"W Datum: NAD 83 Soil M Unit Name: Tisch silt lesions and Belfaxt silt looms NWI classification: Herbaceous Are climatic / drolo is conditions on Ne site ical for this done of ear? Yes ❑ No Ifno, ez Iain m Remarks.) above normal precipitation Are ve emtion ,Soil or H drolo si ificam disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" resent? Yes ® No ❑ Are vegetation 0, Soil U, or Hydrology naturally roblematic? Ifneeded, explain my answers in Remarks SUMMARY OF FINDINGS—Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc Hydrophilic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No L9 Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes El No ® Within a Wetland? Yes ❑ No Welland Hydrol PmSMd9 Yes ❑ No Remarks: Trees Stratum (Plot size: I Absolute % Cover Dominant S cies? Indicator Status Dominance Test worksheet: Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FAC W, or FAC: (A) 1 I 2 Total; Number of dominant Species Across All Strata: (B) 3 3 Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FC W, or FAC: (AB) 33% 4 = Total Cover Prevalence Index worksheet: Total % Cover oF. Multiply bv' Sapline/Shrub Stratum (Plot size) L OBL species X 1 = 2, FACW species X2= 3, FAC species X3= 4, FACU species X4- 4=5. 5. UPI, Species X5- 5=4 4. Column totals (A) (B) 5 Prevalence index = B/A = =Total Cover Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: ❑ 1. Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation ❑ 2.Dominance Test is>50% ❑ 3. Prevalence Index is <3.0' ❑ 4. Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) ❑5. Wetland Non -Vascular Plants ❑ Problematic Hydrophyde Vegetation' (Explain) 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology most be present. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes ❑ No Herb Stratum (Plot size:) IMxI M 1. Lolium Perenne 20 Yes FAC 2. Phlegm pretense IS No FAC 3. Taraxacum offtninale 20 Yes FACU 4. Trifolium pretense 20 yes FACU 5. Lamium pupureum 20 Yes NL Total Cover 95 t size:) tZU—TotalCover =Total Cover ratum 0 Samnline Point: Dry Profile Desert pdoe: (Describe [ o the depM neetled m ticeume0t Ne iti itatorr or eonfr. the ehrenee of inchisio rs) Depth (inches) Matrix Redox Features Textures Remarks Color(m0ist) % Color (moist) % Type,Loc ❑ High Water Table (A2) 0-10" t0YR212 100 E]Salt Crust (BI l) ❑Dminage Pattems(BIB) ❑Water Marks (B 1) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) FSL Very dark grayish brown fine sandy loams, moderate medium granular structure, smooth boundary, many common roots 10-14" 10YR5/2 70 7.5YR4/6 30 D M L grayish brown foams, weak sub angular blocky structure. ❑ Recent Iran Reduction in tilled Soils BY) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DF) (LRB A) ❑ FAC=Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (117) ❑ Other (Explain in remarks) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (B8) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (37) Field Observations Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes copillial Erin e Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: C-Concenandams, �Dephfon. RM—Reduced Matrix CXSTovered or Coated Sand Grains. Loeatlon: P1=Pore linin& RC=Root Channel,M=Matrix Soil Indiction: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils ' ❑ 2 cm Muck (A10) ❑Red Parent Material (fF2) ❑ Other (Explain in Remarks 3lndicaton of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or roblematic, sel (Al) fic Epipedon (A2) ck Hisde (A3) rogen Sulfide (A4) leted Below Dark Surface (Al l) ck Dark Surface (Al2) dy Mucky Mineral (Sq dy Gleyed Matrix (S4) r Sandy Redox (SS) ❑Shipped Matrix (56) ❑ Loamy Mucky Mineral (FI) (except MLRA 1) ❑ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) ❑ Depleted Matrix (F3) ❑ Redox Dark Surface (F6) ❑ Depleted Dark Surface (F7) ❑ Redox Depressions (F8) ctive Layer (if present):e: inchesks: Hydric Soil Present? Yes ® Noth OGY US Army Corps of Engineers n, .a,..y5 WellandH drolo Indicators Prima Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Second Indicators 2 or more required) ❑Surface Water (AI) E]Water-StainedLeaves (B9) (except Want, Stained Leaves (B9) (MALA 1, 2, ❑ High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 41) 4A and 4B) ❑ Saturation(A3) E]Salt Crust (BI l) ❑Dminage Pattems(BIB) ❑Water Marks (B 1) ❑ Aquatic Invertebrates(B13) ❑Dry -Season Water Table (C2) ❑ Sediment Deposits (112) ❑ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (CI) E]Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery ❑ Drift Deposits (113) ❑ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (0) (C9) ❑ Algal Mat or Crust (84) ❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) ❑ Geomorphic Position (32) ❑ Iron Deposit (135) ❑ Recent Iran Reduction in tilled Soils BY) ❑ Shallow Aquitard (D3) ❑ Surface Soil Cracks (136) ❑ Stunted or Stressed Plants (DF) (LRB A) ❑ FAC=Neutral Test (D5) ❑ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (117) ❑ Other (Explain in remarks) ❑ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) ❑ Sparsely Vegetated concave Surface (B8) ❑ Frost -Heave Hummocks (37) Field Observations Surface Water Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes ❑ No ® Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes ❑ No includes copillial Erin e Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: US Army Corps of Engineers n, .a,..y5 APPENDIX C APPROACH AND METHODS 17 APPROACH AND METHODS CRITICAL AREA DETERMINATION. DELINEATION & CLASSIFICATION: WETLAND DELINEATION BASED ON: STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual, Ecology Publication No. 96- 94, adopted under WAC 173-22-08, March 1997and its applicable regional supplements. Manual was updated in 2010. Wetland Determination Two levels of information were gathered to do a routine wetland determination. These included: a) Review of preliminary site data and, b) On-site investigation to determine the presence of wetlands and non wetland waters. a) A review of existing information was conducted to develop background knowledge of physical features, and to identify the potential for wetland occurrence on the subject property. The resource documents available for preliminary review of the site conditions included: USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS), "Soil Survey of Jefferson County Area Washington", 2013 and 1994, Jefferson County aerial photography, and Jefferson County Planning Department data. b) During the on-site investigation, wetland areas were determined and verified on the basis of three parameters: Hydrophytic Vegetation, Hydric Soils, and Wetland Hydrology, as recommended in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region (Version 2.0), May 2010. Hydric soils are classified using Filed Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7A, 2010. A Positive wetland determination is made when all three parameters are present, or in certain situations determined following the guidelines recommended in wetland determination procedures, or for atypical situations or problem areas. c) The wetland was classified as to Type (category) by using the Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington -October -2014. Effective January 2015, Washington State Department of Ecology's Publication No. 03-06-029 and applicable Rating Forms Effective January 1, 2015. 18 Hvdronhvtic Vegetation Areas where more than 50% of the dominant species present from all strata are hydrophytes (plants adapted to growth and reproduction in saturated soil conditions) are considered to be inside the wetland boundary, unless clear evidence of hydric soils or wetland hydrology cannot be established. A species is considered dominant if it is equal to or greater than 20% areal cover, or exerts a controlling influence on, or defines the character of a community. Hydrophytic vegetation is determined to be present, when under normal circumstances: More than 5011. of the dominant plant species in a plant community have an indicator category of Obligate Wetland (OBL), Facultative Wetland (FACW), and/or Facultative (FAC) as listed in "National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9)", (Reed, Porter B, Jr., 1988), and the "1993 Supplement to National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9)" dated December 1993 that became effective on March 31, 1994. This Plant Indicator Status Categories system was developed for the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory by Cowardin at al. (1979). The National Plant List Panel, Reed, Porter B., and Jr. modified it in 1988 and 1993. The Wetland Indicator Category (WIC) used in this report refers to the plants Indicator Symbol as referred to in the table below. There have been changes to the list since 1993. In 2012 the list was updated and was used for this report. National Indicators reflect the range of estimated probabilities (expressed as a frequency of occurrence) of a species occurring in a wetland versus a non - wetland across the entire distribution of the species. ("National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9)", Reed, Porter B., Jr., 2012), Supplement to List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9) Percentages expressed as estimated probability. 19 OBLIGATE WETLAND OHI, Occur almost always,>99% (estimated PLANTS probability) in wetlands under natural conditions. <1% in non wetlands. FACULTATIVE WETLAND FACW Usually occur in wetlands, 67-99% and PLANTS 1-33% in non -wetlands. FACULTATIVE PLANTS FAC Equally likely to occur in wetlands and non -wetlands 34-66%. FACULTATIVE UPLAND FACU Usually occur in non wetlands 67- 99%, PLANTS but occasionally found in wetlands 1-33%. OBLIGATE UPLAND UPL Almost always occur in non -wetlands of Plants Northwest Region 9, >99%. <1% in wetlands. Hydric Soils There have been tremendous scientific changes since 1991 in several of the indicators such as the introduction of aquic conditions to cover the requirements for saturation, reduction, and morphological indicators used to define the modified aquic moisture regime, and mottles and low chroma colors being replaced by redoximorphic features. Because of these changes, we consult the US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service. 2007. Field indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 7.0". G. W. Hurt, L. M. Vasilas . (eds.), USDA, NRCS, in cooeation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance and decision in making final hydric soils determinations. Field indicators of hydric soil conditions in this document, (Land Resource Region (LRR) A that includes Western Washington), are presented here: (1) ALL SOILS: Al. Histosols; A2. Histic Epipedons; A4. Hydrogen sulfide; A6. Organic Bodies; 20 A7. Mucky mineral; AS. Muck presence; A10.2 cm Muck; All. Depleted Below Dark Surface; and Al2. Thick Dark Surface (2) SANDY SOILS: Si. Sandy Mucky Mineral; S4. Sandy Gleyed Matrix; SS.Sandy Redox; and S6. Stripped Matrix (3) LOAMY AND CLAYEY SOILS: F1. Loamy Mucky Mineral; F2. Loamy Gleyed Matrix; F3. Depleted Matrix; F6. Redox Dark Surface; F7.Depleted Dark Surface; and FS. Redox Depressions; Wetland Hydrology Water is the driving force for wetlands. Indications of wetland hydrology are those where the presence of water has an overriding influence on characteristics of vegetation and soils due to anaerobic and reducing conditions, respectively. Areas that are seasonally saturated and/or inundated to the surface for a consecutive number of days for more than 12.5% of the growing season are wetlands provided the soil and vegetation parameters are met. Areas wet between 5% and 12% of the growing season in most years may or may not be wetlands. Areas saturated to the surface for less than 5% of the growing season are non -wetlands. Wetland hydrology exists if field indicators are present. Field indicators of wetland hydrology may include, but are not limited to visual observations of inundation, ponding, soil saturation, oxidized root channels (rhizospheros) associated with living roots and rhizomes, watermarks, drift lines, water -bonne sediment deposition, or wetland drainage patterns. The growing season starting and ending dates are required to evaluate hydrologic data. For wetland determinations, the growing season is determined using the local SCS county soils surveys. Generally, the growing season is calculated based on the "28 degrees F or lower" temperature threshold at a frequency of "5 years in 10". For much of western Washington at low elevations, the mesic growing season (March I to October 31) has been considered a good rule. However, in some areas of the Puget Sound Lowlands and coastal areas the growing season occurs all year round because the soil temperature at 19.7 inches below the soil surface is higher than 41 degrees F. 21 Plant Identification and Classification Primary references used for scientific plant names and the endemic and non-native or exotic status of plants to the North Olympic Peninsula were determined as found in Flora of the Pacific Northwest by Hitchcock and Cronquist, Univ. of Washington Press, 1972. Other references referred to included: (1) A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington & Northwestem Oregon by Sarah Spear Cooke, editor, Washington Native Plant Society, May 1997; Wetland plants of Oregon & Washington by Jennifer Guard, Lone Pine Publishing, 1995; (2) Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast- Washington, Oregon. British Columbia & Alaska edited by Pojar and Mackinnon, D.C. Forest Service, Research Program, Lone Pine Publishing, 1994 and, D.C. Forest Service, Research Program, Lone Pine Publishing, 1994; and (3) Northwest Weeds by Ronald J. Taylor, Mountain Press Publishing Company, 1990 22