HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetland Delineation Report - 977700090 & 977700003Prepared for:
Hulbert Custom Construction
PO Box 1792
Port Townsend, Washington 98368
(360)531-2374
Prepared by:
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
1157 3rd Avenue, Suite 220A
Longview, Washington 98632
(360) 578-1371
Project Number 2356.01
December 2015
Wetland Delineation Report
for the
Meyer-Jansen Road Property
Nordland,Washington
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services,Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report i December 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................1
METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................................1
SITE DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................................2
VEGETATION ...................................................................................................................................2
SOILS................................................................................................................................................3
HYDROLOGY....................................................................................................................................4
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY .................................................................................................4
JEFFERSON COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS ...........................................................................................4
CONCLUSIONS..................................................................................................................................4
WETLAND CATEGORIZATION .....................................................................................................4
CRITICAL AREA REGULATIONS..................................................................................................5
LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................................................5
REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................6
FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Site Map
Figure 3 Soil Survey
Figure 4 National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 5 Jefferson County Critical Areas Map
Figure 6 Wetland Rating Form-150’
Figure 7 Wetland Rating Form-1 KM
Figure 8 Wetland Rating Form-303(d)/TMDL
Photoplates Site Photos
APPENDIX A
Wetland Determination Data Forms
APPENDIX B
2014 Western Washington Wetland Rating Form
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services,Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report ii December 2015
SIGNATURE PAGE
The information and data in this report were compiled and prepared under the supervision and
direction of the undersigned.
___________________________
Joanne Bartlett, PWS
Professional Biologist
Laura Westervelt
Biologist
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report 1 December 2015
INTRODUCTION
Ecological Land Services, Inc. (ELS)was contracted by Hulbert Custom Construction (HCC)to
complete a wetland delineation and report for the properties on Jansen Road,which is comprised
of eastern portions of parcel numbers 977700003, 977700002, and 977700001 in SE 1/4 Section 4,
Township 29 North, and Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian within the Nordland area of
Jefferson County, Washington (Figure 1).This report summarizes findings of the wetland
delineation according to the Jefferson County Unified Development Code,Chapter 18.22,Critical
Areas (JCUDC).
METHODOLOGY
The wetland delineation followed the Routine Determination Method according to the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers,Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987)and the
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains,
Valleys and Coast Region, Version 2.0 (U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center
2014).
Delineation of wetlands is typically conducted using the Routine Determination Method, which
examines the three parameters—vegetation, soils, and hydrology—to determine if wetlands exist in
a given area.Hydrology is critical in determining what is wetland, but is often difficult to assess
because hydrologic conditions can change periodically (hourly, daily, or seasonally).
Consequently, it is necessary to determine if hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils are present,
which would indicate that water is present for long enough duration to support a wetland plant
community.By definition, wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or
ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands are regulated as “Waters of the United States” by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE),as “Waters of the State”by the Washington Department of Ecology
(Ecology), and locally by Jefferson County.
To determine the presence or absence of wetlands on this property, ELS biologists collected data
on soils,vegetation,and hydrology at various locations across the eastern properties.The eastern
properties represent extensions of the larger properties west of Jansen Road. Work was conducted
only on the eastern portions but delineation of wetlands on the western portions may be completed
in the future. Two site visits were conducted on December 4 and 9, 2015 to fully examine the
eastern properties.Each visit was preceded by periods of heavy precipitation that caused many
areas of the formerly logged property to contain surface water and shallow water tables.During
the site visits,one wetland was identified on the eastern properties. The onsite wetland lies across
the west portion of the properties on relatively flat terrain and extends across the two adjoining
properties ending at a culvert under the driveway to those properties.The wetland was delineated
using consecutively numbered fluorescent flagging labeled “WETLAND BOUNDARY”.Wetland
boundaries were determined through breaks in topography, changes in vegetation, and evidence of
long term wetland hydrology.Vegetation, hydrology, and soil data was collected at thirteen test
plots to verify the wetland boundary delineations (Appendix A)and to document onsite upland
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report 2 December 2015
conditions. The wetland boundary and test plot flags were located using Trimble and Magellan
handheld Global Positioning System (GPS)units and are shown on Figure 2.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The eastern properties are located on the east side of Jansen Road in the Nordland area of Jefferson
County (Figure 1).The western portions of these properties lie immediately west of the eastern
portions, which is west of the southern section of Jansen Road (Photoplate 1).Jansen Road runs
east from Marrowstone Road East, turns south at the corner of the property,and then extends
easterly to a gravel driveway lying south of the properties. The properties are long and narrow
fingers extending from the road to the shoreline (Figure 1).The eastern property boundaries follow
the shoreline.The topography is undulating and slopes gently from west to east towards to the
shoreline.Several retired logging weave across the property.One of the roads appears to have
provided access to an abandoned cabin that lies near the middle of the eastern properties (Figure 2).
The property is currently undeveloped,but was logged in 2009,which has resulted in a thick shrub
layer and the creation of many small depressions where water is able to stand for short periods of
time during the winter months.
The delineated wetland is situated in a low, shallow depression across the southwest portion of the
properties.It lies along a seasonal stream that has several culverts where has been constructed and
ponds have formed (Photoplate 4).The wetland begins offsite at Jansen Road where a culvert
conveys water from upslope of the property under the road (Photoplate 3). It extends northeast in a
fairly narrow channel before widening into a shallow ponded area (Photoplate 4), which is formed
by an old logging road at the north end. The wetland narrows again as it enters the property and
water is conveyed through two shallow pipes that appear to have been beneath an old logging road
(Figure 2). Retired logging roads have created open areas with young alder stands and an
herbaceous understory (Photoplate 6). The topography of the land with the combined effects of the
historic timber harvest activities has created drainage channels across the wetland (west to east).
These channels widen the wetland in places into areas that are very dense with shrubs (Figure 2).
Towards the north end of the wetland two of the channels become streams that carry overflow
water from the wetland down the slope to the shoreline bluff (Photoplates 4 and 5).The site visits
were conducted during extremely high storm events and high water movement was observed
within the streams.
VEGETATION
The wetland is composed of a riverine, scrub-shrub and emergent system. The dominant species
included red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC), water parsley
(Oenanthe sarmentosa, OBL), stinging nettle (Urtica dioica, FAC), and creeping buttercup
(Ranunculus repens, FAC).Smaller percentages of Pacific willow (Salix lucida ssp. lasiandra,
FACW), soft rush (Juncus effusus, FACW), and piggy-back plant (Tolmiea menziesii, FAC) were
also present in the wetland test plot.
The upland areas of the property are composed of a mixed forest dominated by red alder,Douglas
fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii, FACU),and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum, FACU)in the forest
canopy. Most of the shrub layer is very densely vegetated and dominated by salmonberry,red
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report 3 December 2015
elderberry (Sambucus racemosa, FACU),bristly black gooseberry (Ribes lacustre, FAC), and in
one plot, Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus,FACU).A small percentage of red blueberry
(Vaccinium parvifolium, FACU) was also present in one plot (Test Plot 9).The herbaceous layer is
dense where the shrub cover is sparse and is dominated by sword fern (Polystichum munitum,
FACU),stinging nettle, miner’s lettuce (Claytonia perfoliata, FAC),trailing blackberry (Rubus
ursinus, FACU),velvet grass (Holcus lanatus, FAC), creeping buttercup,slough sedge (Carex
obnupta, OBL), and wood fern (Dryopteris expansa, FACW).Lower percentages of piggy-back
plant, fringecup (Tellima grandiflora, FACU), soft rush, licorice fern (Polypodium glycyrrhiza,
UPL), and marsh bedstraw (Galium triflorum,FACU) also occurred in the herb layer of some test
plots.
The dominant vegetation found onsite is recorded on the attached wetland determination data
forms (Appendix A). The indicator status, following the common and scientific names, indicates
how likely a species is to be found in wetlands. Listed from most likely to least likely to be found
in wetlands, the indicator status categories are:
OBL (obligate wetland)–Almost always occur in wetlands.
FACW (facultative wetland)–Usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in non-wetlands.
FAC (facultative)–Occur in wetlands and non-wetlands.
FACU (facultative upland)–Usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands.
UPL (obligate upland)–Almost never occur in wetlands.
NI (no indicator)–Status not yet determined.
SOILS
The U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS 2015) website maps, from west to
east, Belfast silt loam, wet variant (Bk), Agnew silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes (AgB), and coastal
beaches (Co)for these properties (Figure 3).Belfast soil is considered hydric soil, but Agnew and
coastal beaches are not (NRCS 2014).Areas mapped as hydric soils do not necessarily mean that
an area is or is not a wetland—hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, and hydric soils must all be
present to classify an area as a wetland.
Soils evaluated in the wetland showed deep brown (10YR 2/1) surface layers with depleted matrix
(2.5Y 4/2) chromas below and prominent redoximorphic features (10YR 4/4). These profiles meet
hydric soil indicator A11, depleted below dark surface, because the depleted layer is at least 6
inches thick and the dark chroma above is less than 12 inches thick.The soil texture was recorded
as sandy silt loams which is slightly different that the mapped Belfast soil.
Evaluated upland soils varied across the site both in color,deep brown (10YR 2/1) to bright orange
(2.5Y 5/4),and in texture, fine silt loam to gravelly sandy loam. Some forested plots had a thick
duff layer on the surface and some plots near old logging roads contained compacted fine sandy
loam and silty clay loams in the profile.The soil profiles in Test Plots 2 and 10 were determined to
meet hydric soil indicators due to the dark soil surface layers over depleted matrix subsurface
layers but lacked other wetland parameters.The other upland test plots were determined to be non-
hydric because the soil conditions did not meet the criteria for any of the hydric soil indicators.
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report 4 December 2015
HYDROLOGY
The wetland delineation was conducted after precipitation events that dropped 5 to 8 inches of
above average rainfall in the Nordland area that resulted in an excess of water across the entire site
(NOAA 2015).Additionally, the old roads that occur through the properties have compacted soils
and may be causing ponding in places that otherwise would not exhibit hydrology.
Water was present all of the wetland test plots during the field delineation and seasonal flooding
was present in most areas across the site due to abnormally high precipitation.The source of
hydrology to the wetland is primarily the stream that enters the wetland at a culvert under Jansen
Road. Water flow is to the northeast through the wetland and down the slope to the east until it
reaches the shoreline.During high water events the stream overflows its banks and ponds on both
the west and east sides of the channel.Additional sources of water include direct rainfall and
surface water runoff.
Shallow water table and standing water was observed at several of the upland test plot areas but
primarily in areas that appear to have been impacted by logging activities.These areas were
determined to be upland based on the absence of hydrophytic vegetation or hydric indicators within
the soil profiles.The presence of hydrology was attributed to the heavy rain events prior to the field
visits and the historic logging impacts. It was not considered wetland hydrology because there
were no indicators of hydrology that occur for a significant duration of the growing season.
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)map does not show wetlands on the properties but
estuarine and marine wetlands are mapped along the shoreline directly east of the site (Figure 4).
The findings of the ELS delineation do not agree with the NWI mapping because wetland was
identified on and adjacent to the property.The NWI maps should be used with discretion because
they are used to gather general wetland information about a regional area and therefore are limited
in accuracy for smaller areas because of their large scale.
JEFFERSON COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS
The Jefferson County Critical Areas map (JC 2015)indicates the presence of wetlands on the
eastern properties that matches the Belfast silt loam (hydric)soil unit that is mapped on the soil
survey (Figure 5). The ELS biologist disagrees with the JC map because wetlands were identified
on and adjacent to the property in areas outside of the hydric soil unit (Figure 2).
CONCLUSIONS
WETLAND CATEGORIZATION
The onsite wetland is situated in a shallow and narrow stream valley that begins at the gravel
driveway that accesses the two adjacent properties.The wetland is situated from south to north at
the west end of the properties.This wetland was rated according to Washington State Wetlands
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report 5 December 2015
Rating System for Western Washington,2014 Update (Rating System)(Hruby 2014).It scored 17
points on the rating form and is considered a Riverine,Category III scrub-shrub and emergent
wetland based on functions (Appendix B).The wetland scored 8 points for habitat functions,
which is a high rating.
CRITICAL AREA REGULATIONS
The JCUDC Chapter 18.22 specifies buffers based on wetland category, scores for habitat
functions on the rating form, and the intensity of the proposed land use in accordance with the
2014 Wetland Rating System.The wetland identified on these properties is determined to be a
Category III system with high scores for habitat functions (Figure 2).The required buffers differ
with the proposed land use impacts (Table 1)with the largest buffers required for high impact land
uses, which include development of more than one house per acre.
Table 1: Wetland Buffers
HGM
Class
Wetland
Habitat Rating
Wetland
Category
Proposed Land Use
Impact
Buffer (feet)
Wetland
A
Riverine High III Low
Mod
High
75
110
150
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions listed above are based on standard scientific methodology and best professional
judgment. In our opinion, local, state, and federal regulatory agencies should agree with our
conclusions; however, this should be considered a preliminary jurisdictional determination and
should be used at your own risk until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by the
appropriate regulatory agencies.
Hulbert-Meyer Jansen Road Property Ecological Land Services, Inc.
Wetland Delineation Report 6 December 2015
REFERENCES
AHPS Precipitation Analysis. (2015, October 7).http://water.weather.gov/precip/.Website
accessed December 2015.
Cowardin, L.M., C. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979.Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States.FWS/OBS-78/31. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987.Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical
Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Hruby, T. August 2014.Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington, 2014
Update. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-029. Olympia,
Washington.Effective January 1, 2015.
Jefferson County Unified Development Code,Chapter 18.22 Critical Areas.2005.Jefferson
County, Washington.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010.Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0),
ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-08-13. Vicksburg, Mississippi:
U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service. 2012. National Wetlands Inventory. Online document <
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html >. Website accessed December 2015.
U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2012.WA015 Jefferson County Area.
Online document <http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app >.Website accessed December
2015.
U.S.D.A. Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2014.Washington Hydric Soils List.
<http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/>.
FIGURES AND PHOTOPLATES
NOTE:
USGS topographic quadrangle map reproduced using
MAPTECH Inc., Terrain Navigator Pro software.
LOCATION MAP
WASHINGTON
48.0330° Latitude
-122.6728° Longitude
SITE
SITE
PROJECT
VICINITY MAP
SCALE IN MILES
30150
CAMAS
QUILCENE
QUEETS
NEAH BAY
CLALLAM BAY
5 542
542
209
LOPEZFRIDAY HARBOR ORCAS
ANACORTES
LAKEROSS
ROCKPORT
BELLINGHAM
FERNDALE
LYNDENBLAINE
SEDRO WOOLLEY
MOUNT VERNON
OAK HARBOR
STANWOOD
DARRINGTONARLINGTON
EVERETT
MUKILTEO 9
MONROE
PORTTOWNSEND113112
SEQUIM
ANGELES
PORT
101
FORKS
MORTON
KELSOLONGVIEW
HOQUIAMABERDEEN
MONTESANOOCEAN
SHORES
WESTPORT
RAYMOND CENTRALIA
CHEHALIS
WINLOCK
CASTLEROCKCATHLAMET
WOODLAND
5
12
12
6
5044
12
101
PACIFIC
BEACH
GRAYS
HARBOR
PACIFIC
LEWIS
COWLITZ
WAHKIAKUM
KALAMA
ELMA
5
BATTLE
GROUND
VANCOUVER NORTH BONNEVILLE
STEVENSON CARSON
MT. ST.
HELENS
MOSSYROCK RANDLE
PACKWOOD
EATONVILLE MT.
RAINIER
ROY
ORTING
BUCKLEY
ENUMCLAWPUYALLUP
DUPONT
TENINO
YELM
OLYMPIA
SHELTON
HOODSPORT
GIG
TACOMA
AUBURN
KENT NORTH BEND
SEATTLE
DUVALL
BOTHELL
SKYKOMISH
14
LA
CENTER
503
5
SKAMANIA
CLARK
MASON
KING
THURSTON
PIERCE
KITSAP
505
127
123
410161
101 3
3
18 90
2
WAY
101
101
ILWACO
OCEANPARK
LONGBEACH
COPALISBEACH
JEFFERSON
CLALLAM
SNOHOMISH
SKAGIT
WHATCOM
ISLAND
SAN JUAN
AMANDAPARK
SOUTHBEND
KIRKLANDREDMOND
BELLEVUE
HARBOR
FEDERAL
PORTORCHARD
BREMERTON
POULSBO
STEILACOOM
RIDGEFIELD
WASHOUGAL
SITE
12
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5
1
0
:
2
2
A
M
c:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
j
a
c
k
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
E
L
S
W
O
R
K
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
-
f
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
1
4
a
c
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
.
d
w
g
Ja
c
k
N
S
W E
DA
T
E
:
DW
N
:
RE
Q
.
B
Y
:
PR
J
.
M
G
R
:
CH
K
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
N
O
:
Fi
g
u
r
e
1
VI
C
I
N
I
T
Y
M
A
P
12
/
1
6
/
1
5
23
5
6
.
0
1
Me
y
e
r
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
D
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
Hu
l
b
e
r
t
C
u
s
t
o
m
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4 ,
T
o
w
n
s
h
i
p
29
N
,
R
a
n
g
e
1E
,
W
.
M
.
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
WA
JL
L
JB
SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
0
20
0
0
40
0
0
11
5
7
3
r
d
A
v
e
.
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
2
0
A
Lo
n
g
v
i
e
w
,
W
A
9
8
6
3
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
3
6
0
)
5
7
8
-
1
3
7
1
Fa
x
:
(
3
6
0
)
4
1
4
-
9
3
0
5
ww
w
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
.
c
o
m
TP
-
1
TP
-
2
TP
-
3
TP
-
5
TP
-
4
TP
-
6
TP
-
7
TP
-
8
TP
-
9
TP
-
1
0
TP
-
1
1
TP
-
1
2
TP
-
1
3
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
St
r
e
a
m
1
Ty
p
e
N
s
50
'
B
u
f
f
e
r
St
r
e
a
m
2
Ty
p
e
N
s
50
'
B
u
f
f
e
r
Ol
d
L
o
g
g
i
n
g
R
o
a
d
We
t
l
a
n
d
Ca
t
e
g
o
r
y
I
I
I
0.
1
7
A
c
r
e
s
O
n
s
i
t
e
(
0
.
4
5
A
c
r
e
s
T
o
t
a
l
)
Ri
v
e
r
i
n
e
Sc
r
u
b
/
s
h
r
u
b
&
E
m
e
r
g
e
n
t
Pe
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
l
y
&
Se
a
s
o
n
a
l
l
y
F
l
o
o
d
e
d
Ol
d
C
a
b
i
n
1 2
4
33
5
7
8
9 12
13
15
16
19
21 22
23
241
26
2831
37
3941
43
36
Cu
l
v
e
r
t
Cu
l
v
e
r
t
s
Sl
o
u
g
h
12
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5
1
0
:
2
2
A
M
c:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
j
a
c
k
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
E
L
S
W
O
R
K
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
-
f
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
1
4
a
c
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
.
d
w
g
Ja
c
k
SI
T
E
N S
W
E
DA
T
E
:
DW
N
:
RE
Q
.
B
Y
:
PR
J
.
M
G
R
:
CH
K
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
N
O
:
Figure 2 SITE MAP
12
/
1
6
/
1
5
23
5
6
.
0
1
Me
y
e
r
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
D
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
Hu
l
b
e
r
t
C
u
s
t
o
m
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4 ,
T
o
w
n
s
h
i
p
29N , Range 1E , W.M.
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
County, WA
JL
L
JB
SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
0
15
0
30
0
LEGEND:Site Boundary Parcel Boundary Wetland Boundary 110' Moderate Impact Wetland Buffer 150' High Impact Wetland Buffer Stream with Flow Direction Stream Buffer Test Plot Location Wetland Flag
NO
T
E
(
S
)
:
1.
Ae
r
i
a
l
f
r
o
m
G
o
o
g
l
e
E
a
r
t
h
™
2.
We
t
l
a
n
d
a
n
d
t
e
s
t
p
l
o
t
s
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
us
i
n
g
h
a
n
d
h
e
l
d
g
p
s
u
n
i
t
w
i
t
h
su
b
m
e
t
e
r
a
c
c
u
r
a
c
y
.
11
5
7
3
r
d
A
v
e
.
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
2
0
A
Lo
n
g
v
i
e
w
,
W
A
9
8
6
3
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
3
6
0
)
5
7
8
-
1
3
7
1
Fa
x
:
(
3
6
0
)
4
1
4
-
9
3
0
5
ww
w
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
.
c
o
m
TP
-
1
1
NOTE(S):
1.Map provided on-line by NRCS at web address:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/
LEGEND:
AgB Agnew silt loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes. Not hydric.
Bk Belfast silt loam, wet variant. Hydric.
Co Coastal beaches. Not hydric.
12
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5
1
0
:
2
2
A
M
c:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
j
a
c
k
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
E
L
S
W
O
R
K
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
-
f
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
1
4
a
c
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
.
d
w
g
Ja
c
k
SITE
N
S
W E
DA
T
E
:
DW
N
:
RE
Q
.
B
Y
:
PR
J
.
M
G
R
:
CH
K
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
N
O
:
Fi
g
u
r
e
3
SO
I
L
S
U
R
V
E
Y
12
/
1
6
/
1
5
23
5
6
.
0
1
Me
y
e
r
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
D
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
Hu
l
b
e
r
t
C
u
s
t
o
m
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4 ,
T
o
w
n
s
h
i
p
29
N
,
R
a
n
g
e
1E
,
W
.
M
.
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
WA
JL
L
JB
SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
0
40
0
80
0
11
5
7
3
r
d
A
v
e
.
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
2
0
A
Lo
n
g
v
i
e
w
,
W
A
9
8
6
3
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
3
6
0
)
5
7
8
-
1
3
7
1
Fa
x
:
(
3
6
0
)
4
1
4
-
9
3
0
5
ww
w
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
.
c
o
m
NOTE(S):
1.Map provided on-line by US Fish & Wildlife Service at web address:
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/index.html
No mapped wetlands indicated onsite by US Fish & Wildlife Service.
E2USN Estuarine, Intertidal, Unconsolidated Shore, Regularly Flooded.
12
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5
1
0
:
2
2
A
M
c:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
j
a
c
k
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
E
L
S
W
O
R
K
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
-
f
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
1
4
a
c
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
.
d
w
g
Ja
c
k
N
S
W E
LEGEND:
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
DA
T
E
:
DW
N
:
RE
Q
.
B
Y
:
PR
J
.
M
G
R
:
CH
K
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
N
O
:
Fi
g
u
r
e
4
NA
T
I
O
N
A
L
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
S
I
N
V
E
N
T
O
R
Y
12
/
1
6
/
1
5
23
5
6
.
0
1
Me
y
e
r
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
D
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
Hu
l
b
e
r
t
C
u
s
t
o
m
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4 ,
T
o
w
n
s
h
i
p
29
N
,
R
a
n
g
e
1E
,
W
.
M
.
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
WA
JL
L
JB
SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
0
40
0
80
0
11
5
7
3
r
d
A
v
e
.
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
2
0
A
Lo
n
g
v
i
e
w
,
W
A
9
8
6
3
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
3
6
0
)
5
7
8
-
1
3
7
1
Fa
x
:
(
3
6
0
)
4
1
4
-
9
3
0
5
ww
w
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
.
c
o
m
SITE
NOTE(S):
1.Map provided on-line by Jefferson County at web address:
http://maps.co.jefferson.wa.us/Website/mspub/viewer.htm?mapset=esa
SITE
12
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5
1
0
:
2
2
A
M
c:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
j
a
c
k
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
E
L
S
W
O
R
K
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
-
f
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
1
4
a
c
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
.
d
w
g
Ja
c
k
N
S
W E
DA
T
E
:
DW
N
:
RE
Q
.
B
Y
:
PR
J
.
M
G
R
:
CH
K
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
N
O
:
Fi
g
u
r
e
5
JE
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
C
R
I
T
I
C
A
L
A
R
E
A
S
M
A
P
12
/
1
6
/
1
5
23
5
6
.
0
1
Me
y
e
r
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
D
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
Hu
l
b
e
r
t
C
u
s
t
o
m
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4 ,
T
o
w
n
s
h
i
p
29
N
,
R
a
n
g
e
1E
,
W
.
M
.
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
WA
JL
L
JB
SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
0
40
0
80
0
11
5
7
3
r
d
A
v
e
.
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
2
0
A
Lo
n
g
v
i
e
w
,
W
A
9
8
6
3
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
3
6
0
)
5
7
8
-
1
3
7
1
Fa
x
:
(
3
6
0
)
4
1
4
-
9
3
0
5
ww
w
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
.
c
o
m
Culvert
Culvert
Scrub/shrub
Seasonally Flooded
Permanently Flooded
Emergent
Seasonally Flowing
Seasonally Flowing
12
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5
1
0
:
2
2
A
M
c:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
j
a
c
k
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
E
L
S
W
O
R
K
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
-
f
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
1
4
a
c
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
.
d
w
g
Ja
c
k
SITE
N
S
W E
DA
T
E
:
DW
N
:
RE
Q
.
B
Y
:
PR
J
.
M
G
R
:
CH
K
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
N
O
:
Fi
g
u
r
e
6
WE
T
L
A
N
D
R
A
T
I
N
G
F
O
R
M
-
1
5
0
'
O
F
F
S
E
T
12
/
1
6
/
1
5
23
5
6
.
0
1
Me
y
e
r
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
D
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
Hu
l
b
e
r
t
C
u
s
t
o
m
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4 ,
T
o
w
n
s
h
i
p
29
N
,
R
a
n
g
e
1E
,
W
.
M
.
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
WA
JL
L
JB
SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
0
15
0
30
0
NOTE(S):
1.Aerial photo from Google Earth™.
LEGEND:
Wetland Unit Boundary
Vegetation Class Division
150' Wetland Offset
11
5
7
3
r
d
A
v
e
.
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
2
0
A
Lo
n
g
v
i
e
w
,
W
A
9
8
6
3
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
3
6
0
)
5
7
8
-
1
3
7
1
Fa
x
:
(
3
6
0
)
4
1
4
-
9
3
0
5
ww
w
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
.
c
o
m
Rating
Question
Description Answer
R 1.1 Ponded depressions Depressions cover > ½ area of wetland
R 1.2 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and
herbaceous plants
Trees and shrubs cover > 1/3 of wetland
R 2.2 Contributing basin Contributing basin does not include UGA and/or incorporated areas
R 2.3 Contributing basin-tilled fields, pastures,
clear cuts
< 10% of the contributing basin is composed of tilled fields and
pastures
R 5.2 UGA or incorporated area upgradient of
wetland
The upgradient area is not composed of a UGA and/or incorporated
area
R 2.4 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the
wetland
<10% of the area within 150' in land uses that generate pollutants
R 4.1 Width of unit vs. width of stream Width ratio is 5-<10
R 4.2 Characteristics of plants that slow the
flow of water
Forest/shrub for >1/3 or emergent plants >2/3's of the wetland
H 1.1 Cowardin Plant Classes Scrub/Shrub and Emergent
H 1.2 Hydroperiods Permanently flooded, Seasonally flooded, Seasonally flowing stream
H 1.4 Interspersion of habitats Low interspersion of habitats
Riverine
M
H
H
U
U
U
U
U
M
M
M
M
A
A
M
M
U
U
U
12
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
5
1
0
:
2
2
A
M
c:
\
U
s
e
r
s
\
j
a
c
k
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
\
D
e
s
k
t
o
p
\
E
L
S
W
O
R
K
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
-
f
i
g
u
r
e
s
\
1
4
a
c
r
e
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
\
2
3
5
6
.
0
1
.
d
w
g
Ja
c
k
SITE
N
S
W E
DA
T
E
:
DW
N
:
RE
Q
.
B
Y
:
PR
J
.
M
G
R
:
CH
K
:
PR
O
J
E
C
T
N
O
:
Fi
g
u
r
e
7
WE
T
L
A
N
D
R
A
T
I
N
G
F
O
R
M
-
1
K
M
O
F
F
S
E
T
12
/
1
6
/
1
5
23
5
6
.
0
1
Me
y
e
r
J
a
n
s
e
n
R
o
a
d
D
e
l
i
n
e
a
t
i
o
n
Hu
l
b
e
r
t
C
u
s
t
o
m
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
Se
c
t
i
o
n
4 ,
T
o
w
n
s
h
i
p
29
N
,
R
a
n
g
e
1E
,
W
.
M
.
Je
f
f
e
r
s
o
n
C
o
u
n
t
y
,
WA
JL
L
JB
SC
A
L
E
I
N
F
E
E
T
0
12
0
0
24
0
0
NOTE(S):
1.Aerial photo from Google Earth™.
LEGEND:
Wetland Unit Boundary
Contributing Basin
Accessible Habitat (51.1%)
Undisturbed Habitat (76.1% *Includes Accessible Habitat)
High Intensity Land Use (1.2%)
Moderate/Low Intensity Land Use (22.4%)
H
M
H 2.1 - Accessible habitat is > 13 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon (62.3%).
H 2.2 - Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon (87.3%).
H 2.3 - ≤ 50% of polygon is high land use intensity.
U
A
11
5
7
3
r
d
A
v
e
.
,
S
u
i
t
e
2
2
0
A
Lo
n
g
v
i
e
w
,
W
A
9
8
6
3
2
Ph
o
n
e
:
(
3
6
0
)
5
7
8
-
1
3
7
1
Fa
x
:
(
3
6
0
)
4
1
4
-
9
3
0
5
ww
w
.
e
c
o
-
l
a
n
d
.
c
o
m
Figure 8a-303(d) Map:There are no waters near or downstream of the site appearing on the 303(d) list.
Figure 8b: TMDL List for Jefferson County.There are no TMDLS for the waters on or around Marrowstone
Island.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/10/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Figure 8-Wetland Rating
Form-303(d)/TMDL
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County,
Washington
←Project site
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 1
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 1 was taken from where
the old logging road enters the
eastern properties. It looks north
at Jansen Road with the eastern
properties on the right. The thick
shrub layer begins right at the
road.The western portion of the
properties is visible along the left
edge of the photo.
Photo 3 was taken from the
same location as Photos 1 and
2. It looks south along Jansen
Road. In the background
Jansen Road can be seen
veering off to the east.Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 2 was taken from the
same location as Photo 1. It
looks easterly onto the eastern
properties at the thick shrubs
and occasional trees typical of
the rest of the properties.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 2
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 4 was taken from near the
southern property boundary at
Jansen Road. It looks west at the
same curve in the road that
appears in the background of
Photo 3. The eastern properties
for which this report was
prepared is on the right.
Photo 6 was taken from the
same location as Photos 4 and
5. It looks east along Jansen
Road as it becomes the
driveway access for two
adjacent properties.Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 5 was taken from the
same location as Photo 4. It
looks south across the road into
the stream and wetland that
ends at the road. A culvert
under the road provides for
continuation of water flow into
the onsite wetland.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 3
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 7 was taken from the south
end of Wetland A as viewed from
Jansen Road.Wetland Boundary
Flag 22 is visible on the left. The
wetland is narrow here as it
enters the property through a
culvert beneath Jansen Road.
Photo 9 was taken from inside
the boundary of the wetland
looking southwest at Wetland
Boundary Flag 24.
Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 8 was taken from inside
the wetland boundary.It shows
the outlet of the culvert that
conveys upslope water into the
wetland under Jansen Road.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 4
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 10 was taken from the
south edge of the ponded area of
Wetland A.It looks southwest
towards Wetland Boundary Flags
19 and 25.
Photo 12 was taken from the
same location as Photos 10 and
11. It looks north along the
wetland boundary.
Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 11 was taken from the
same location as Photo 10. It
looks west over the pond.
Several downed trees occurred
in the water.This ponded area
is formed by an old logging
road at the north end that has
culverts but the flow of water
is severely constricted causing
the water to back up into this
area.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 5
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 13 was taken from where
Wetland A becomes Stream 1
around Wetland Boundary Flag
A-37. It looks southwest towards
the wetland. Photos were taken
during a very high flow event so
there was a significant amount of
water flow in the stream at the
time of the site visit.
Photo 15 was taken of Stream
1 as it fell into the slide/slough
just before reaching the
shoreline. It looks east at the
overhanging vegetation. In the
background is the open water
of Admiralty Inlet.Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 14 was taken of Stream
1 as it begins flowing down the
slope towards the shoreline. It
became more channelized
farther away from the wetland
boundary.The shoreline
section flows through an old
slide or slough area that drops
down to the beach below.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 6
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 16 was taken from where
Wetland A enters Stream 2
around Wetland Boundary Flag
A-41. It looks southwest towards
the wetland. Photos were taken
during a very high flow event so
there was a significant amount of
water in the wetland and stream.
Photo 18 was taken of Stream
2 as it began to rush down the
same slough as Stream 1. The
two streams meet up before
falling into the deep slough.
Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 17 was taken of Stream
2 just after it leaves Wetland A.
There was significant flow of
water that caused the adjacent
uplands to flood.Licorice
ferns growing nearby were
wilted from the high water.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 7
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 19 was taken near the
entrance to the property.It looks
east at an example of the old
logging roads and the vegetation
that grew in following the past
logging activities. Most of the
old road has grown in with
herbaceous species and young
alders between thick shrub areas.
Photo 21 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 2 was located.
It was conducted in the old
logging road that begins at
Jansen Road. This area
exhibited some ponding
following the severe storm
events. This area is determined
to be upland because it is an
old road and did not exhibit
positive wetland hydrology
indicators.
Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 20 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 1 was
conducted. It was located in the
dense salmonberry area west of
Wetland A.This area is
composed of upland because it
lacks positive indicators for all
three wetland parameters.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 8
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 22 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 3 was conducted.
It was located at the north end of
Wetland A.The plot was
dominated by red alder,
salmonberry, water parsley,
stinging nettle, and creeping
buttercup.This area is
determined to be wetland because
there are positive indicators
present for all three wetland
parameters.
Photo 24 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 5 was located.
It was conducted in another
reach of the old logging road
that had become overgrown
with vegetation.This road also
historically provided access to
the old cabin so has been used
for a long period of time.The
plot was found to be upland
because it lacks positive
indicators for wetland
hydrology.
Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 23 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 4 was
conducted. It was located in the
upland area to the north of
where Test Plot 3 was located.
This area is composed of
upland that lacks positive
indicators for all three wetland
parameters.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 9
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 25 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 6 was conducted.
It was located east of Stream 1.
The area was beneath a bigleaf
maple tree and dominated by
sword fern.This area is upland
because it lacked positive
indicators for all three wetland
parameters.
Photo 27 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 9 was
conducted.The plot was found
to be upland despite having
standing water.The prevalence
of water across the site was due
to heavy storm events that
occurred prior to the site visits.
This area lacked positive
indicators for hydrophytic
vegetation and hydric soils
Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 26 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 8 was
conducted. It was located in the
upland area northwest of the
wetland.This area is upland
because there were no positive
indicators for hydric soil or
wetland hydrology.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 10
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 28 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 10 was
conducted.It was located near the
north line of the eastern
properties and directly west of
Test Plot 9. Water was also found
in this test plot but is not wetland
because it lacks positive
indicators for hydrophytic
vegetation.
Photo 30 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 12 was
located.Despite finding water
in the test hole, the soil was
bright brown and the
vegetation was not hydrophytic
so it is determined to be non-
wetland.
Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 29 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 11 was
located. It was conducted in the
upland area at the northwest
corner of the eastern properties,
just downslope of Jansen Road.
This area is not wetland
because it lacks positive
indicators for hydric soil.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
DATE:12/14/15
DWN:LHW
PRJ. MGR JB
PROJ.#:2356.01
Photoplate 11
Project Name:Meyer-Jansen
Road Delineation
Client:Hulbert Custom
Construction
Jefferson County, Washington
Photo 31 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 13 was located.It
was conducted at the edge of the
logging road that accesses the
properties.This area exhibited
positive indicators of hydrophytic
vegetation but is not wetland
because it lacks indicators for
hydric soil and wetland
hydrology.
Photo 33 was taken from the
same location as Photo 28
facing south. It shows the
forest vegetation that occurred
south of the logging road and is
typical of many areas of these
properties.Photo 2 is taken from the same
location as Photo 1 and looks north
along the trail. The area beyond
the maple tree on the right is a
historic clearing that is now
dominated by blackberry thickets.
Photo 32 was taken of the area
where Test Plot 13 was
conducted. It faces west
towards Jansen Road. The soil
in this plot was dry and bright
brown (non-hydric).
APPENDIX A
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:2 (B)4.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 75 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Sambucus racemosa 10 no FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =42.5, 20% =17 85 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 10 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =5, 20% =2 10 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 90
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is not met because there is not greaterthan 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road,East Properties City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/4/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 1
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0326970696444 Long:-122.67409644759 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Belfast silt loam, wet variant NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 1 is located in the upland west of Wetland A and very near the southern property line.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 5YR 2.5/2 100 duff no redoximorphic features
6-8 10YR 2/1 100 silt loam no redoximorphic features
8-16 2.5Y 5/2 100 sa si lo no redoximorphic features
sa sandy
si silt
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because the layer with depleted colors have no redoximorphic concentrations.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:There was no hydrology present at the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 35 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:5 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:7 (B)4.
50% =17.5, 20% =7 35 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:71%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 10 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Sambucus racemosa 10 yes FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.Ribes lacustre 10 yes FAC OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =15, 20% =6 30 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Urtica dioica 25 yes FAC Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Claytonia perfoliata 25 yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Rubus ursinus 25 yes FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.Carex obnupta T no OBL 1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =37.5, 20% =15 75 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 25
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/4/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 2
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.033018579956 Long:-122.67398785100 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Belfast silt loam, wet variant NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 2 is located in the upland west of Wetland A and north from Test Plot 1.This area is composed of an old road that historically led to the old cabin
and was used when the site was last logged. This area is wet due to past impacts that have resulted in somewhat compacted soils on which water is ableto stand during the winter months. The property was influenced by heavy rain events that occurred prior to the field visit,which resulted in many smallpuddles in the upland areas.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 2/2 100 sa si lo no redoximorphic features
4-10 10YR 3/2 95 10YR 3/6 5 C M silt loam somewhat compacted
10-16 10YR 5/2 90 10YR 6/6 10 C M clay loam
sa sandy
si silt
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:Hydric soil indicator A11 is met due to a depleted layer with redoximorphic concentrations below a dark surface layer.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):8
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Although a high water table was present during the field visit, it is attributed to heavy rain events that occurred prior to the site visit. Therefore, the
presence of water at this time of year is not considered a positive indicator of wetland hydrology because there is no other evidence of hydrology such asoxidized rhizospheres in the soil to indicate that this area is saturated for a significant duration of the growing season.In addition, the vegetation rangesfrom FAC to FACU species with only trace percentages of one OBL species so the FAC-neutral test would be negative. Based on the conditions observedin this area, the wetland hydrology criterion is not met.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 5 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:5 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:5 (B)4.
50% =2.5, 20% =1 5 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:100%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 10 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Salix lucida sp. lasiandra 5 no FACW Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =7.5, 20% =3 15 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Oenanthe sarmentosa 80 yes OBL Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Urtica dioica 15 yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Ranunculus repens 15 yes FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.Juncus effusus 10 no FACW 1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.Tolmiea menziesii T no FAC 2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =60, 20% =24 120 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC and OBL species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/4/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 3
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0329787502185 Long:-122.67375675537 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Belfast silt loam, wet variant NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 3 is located at the north end of Wetland A. Wetland A is influenced by a stream that enters the southern tip and flows northerly through the
wetland. The stream forks at the northeast and flows down toward the shoreline of Admiralty Inlet. It appears that one of the old roads was constructed inthe wetland area but it has since recovered. This portion of the wetland is dominated by emergent vegetation with low cover by young alder trees,salmonberry, and pacific willow.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 2/1 100 sa si lo no redoximorphic features
10-16 2.5Y 4/2 95 10YR 4/4 5 C M sa si lo compacted
sa sandy
si silt
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:Hydric soil indicator A11 is met due to a depleted layer with redoximorphic concentrations below a dark surface layer.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):1
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):surface
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Hydrology was present at the site visit as a high water table with areas of surface water present to depths of 2 inches.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW,or FAC:1 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:2 (B)4.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 75 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Sambucus racemosa 15 no FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =45, 20% =18 90 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 10 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =5, 20% =2 10 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 90
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is not met because there is not greaterthan 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/4/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 4
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0330484831444 Long:-122.67375559476 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Belfast silt loam, wet variant NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 4 was located in the upland east of Wetland A near boundary flag 43. This area is composed of a scrub/shrub area that is slightly higher in
elevation than the wetland.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 2/2 100 duff no redoximorphic features
5-11 10YR 3/1 100 sa si lo no redoximorphic features
11-16 10YR 4/1 100 si clay lo no redoximorphic features
sa sandy
si silt
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because the layer with depleted colors has no redoximorphic concentrations.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:There was no hydrology present at the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 15 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:4 (A)2.Psuedotsuga menziesii 10 yes FACU
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:5 (B)4.
50% =12.5, 20% =5 25 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:80%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 35 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50%=17.5, 20% =7 35 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Ranunculus repens 25 yes FAC Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Holcus lanatus 20 yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Carex obnupta 15 no OBL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.Rubus ursinus 10 no FACU 1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.Galium triflorum 10 no FACU 2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.Juncus effusus 5 no FACW 3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =42.5, 20% =17 85 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 15
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/4/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 5
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0333176735277 Long:-122.67371645875 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:AgB Agnew silt loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 5 was located along an old logging road southwest of the wetland. This old road leads to the old cabin so appears to have been used to access
the cabin historically. There are slightly compacted soils that cause water to stand in portions and allow the growth of potential hydrophytic species butwater does not remain for a long duration of the growing season. This area was very wet due to the heavy rain events that occurred prior to the field visit.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 2/1 100 gr sa lo no redoximorphic features
5-12 10YR 3/1 100 silt lo no redoximorphic features
12-16 2.5Y 5/2 85 10YR 5/6 15 C M fine sa lo compacted
gr gravelly
sa sandy
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:This soil profile does not appear to meet any of the hydric soil indicators because of the thin soil layers above the depleted matrix and the absence ofredoximorphicconcentrationsin the surface layers.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):<1
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Surface water was ponded in places at this test plot due to heavy storm events.This area is an old road that was historically used to access the cabin and
used more recently when the property was logged. These activities have caused the soils to become compacted and contain puddles of water during thewinter season.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 30 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:2 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:4 (B)4.
50% =15, 20% =6 30 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 25 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Sambucus racemosa 10 yes FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =17.5, 20% =7 35 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 60 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Polypodium glycyrrhiza 5 no UPL Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =32.5, 20% =13 65 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 35
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is not met because there is not greaterthan 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/4/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 6
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0332175457086 Long:-122.67311559048 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:AgB Agnew silt loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 6 was located in a low upland area at the east end of the properties. This area is located east of the old cabin.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-8 7.5YR 2.5/3 100 duff no redoximorphic features
8-12 10YR 2/2 100 sa si lo no redoximorphic features
12-16 10YR 3/2 100 gr sa si lo no redoximorphic features
gr gravelly
sa sandy
si silt
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because none of the layers exhibit depleted matrix chromas and they lack redoximorphic concentrations.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Hydrology was not present at the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate the presence of wetland hydrology.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:2 (B)4.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 100 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Rubus armeniacus 10 no FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =55, 20% =22 110 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 15 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =7.5, 20% =3 15 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 85
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is not met because there is not greaterthan 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/4/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 7
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0329418156789 Long:-122.67153519870 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:AgB Agnew silt loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 7 was located in a low upland area that was dominated by dense thickets of salmonberry. This area is located toward the east end of the property.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 7
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 7.5YR 2.5/3 100 duff no redoximorphic features
6-8 10YR 2/1 100 sa si lo no redoximorphic features
8-16 2.5Y 5/4 100 sa loam no redoximorphic features
sa sandy
si silt
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because none the layer exhibit depleted matrix chromas and no redoximorphic features were present.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Hydrology was not present at the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road, East Properties
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 25 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:4 (B)4.
50% =12.5, 20% =5 25 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:75%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 35 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =17.5, 20% =7 35 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 25 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Carex obnupta 25 yes OBL Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Rubus ursinus 10 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.Dryopteris expansa 10 no FACW 1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =35, 20% =14 70 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC and OBL species.
Project Site:Meyer Jansen Road City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/9/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 8
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.033594013986 Long:-122.67416099372 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Belfast silt loam, wet variant NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 8 was located in a low upland area in the north half of the properties. This area was sampled following a period of very heavy precipitation so
standing water and a shallow water table were present during the field visit. The presence of water at this test plot is not considered wetand hydrologybecause there was no evidence of long term saturation or inundation to indicate water is present for a long enough duration of the growing season.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 8
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 2/1 100 duff no redoximorphic features
5-11 10YR 2/1 100 gr sa lo no redoximorphic features
11-16 10YR 4/2 100 sandy loam compacted
gr gravelly
sa sandy
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because the layer with depleted colors does not include redoximorphic concentrations.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):4
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Wetland hydrology was present at the site visit because of high storm events creating ponding across the site. There are no positive indicators of wetland
hydrology (oxidized rhizospheres) present because water does not remain for a long enough duration of the growing season.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Acer macrophyllum 15 yes FACU Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A)2.Alnus rubra 10 yes FAC
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:5 (B)4.
50% =12.5, 20% =5 25 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:60%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 20 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Vaccinium parvifolium 5 no FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =12.5, 20% =5 25 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Dryopteris expansa 15 yes FACW Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Polystichum munitum 10 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =12.5, 20% =5 25 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 75
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC and FACW species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/9/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 9
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0338153667386 Long:-122.67351305992 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Agnew silt loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 9 was located in a low upland area near the northeast corner of the property just west of the shoreline bluff. This area was composed of a
depression containing surface water with upland vegetation rooted in and around the depression. The presence of water during the field visit is attributed tothe heavy precipitation events that occurred during the previous several days.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 9
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 2/1 100 duff no redoximorphic features
5-11 10YR 2/1 100 gr sa lo no redoximorphic features
11-16 10YR 4/2 100 sandy loam compacted
gr gravelly
sa sandy
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because the layer with depleted colors lacks redoximorphic concentrations.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):7
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos,previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Wetland hydrology was present at the site visit because high storm events created ponding across the site. This area lacks evidence of long term
hydrology such as oxidized rhizospheres that would indicate the presence of hydrology during the growing season.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:1 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:3 (B)4.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL,FACW, or FAC:34%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 25 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Sambucus racemosa 15 yes FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =20, 20% =8 40 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 25 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =12.5, 20% =5 25 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 75
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is not met because there is less than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/9/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 10
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0339109895034 Long:-122.67441000553 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Agnew silt loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 10 was located in a low upland area near the northern edge of the eastern properties. This area sampled contained a shallow water table due to
the heavy precipitation events that occurred prior to the field visit.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys,and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 10
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-3 10YR 2/1 100 duff no redoximorphic features
3-8 10YR 3/1 100 si loam no redoximorphic features
8-16 2.5Y 5/2 85 10YR 4/6 15 C M sa lo compacted
sa sandy
lo loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:This soil profile meets the criteria for hydric soil indicator A11 because there is a dark surface layer with a depleted matrix and prominent redoximorphicconcentrations present.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):6
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Although this area had a shallow water table during the field visit, there were no indicators of long term hydrology occuring during the growing season. The
presence of water is attributed to the heavy precipitation events that occurred prior to the field visit. Therefore, the wetland hydrology criterion is not met.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 10 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:4 (B)4.
50% =5, 20% =2 10 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:75%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 50 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =25, 20% =10 50 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 10 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Dryoptera expansa 10 yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =10, 20% =4 20 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 80
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC and FACW species.
Project Site:Jansen Road City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/9/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 11
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0340179957932 Long:-122.67491699485 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Agnew silt loam, 0-8% slopes NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 11 was conducted near the northwest corner of the eastern properties. It is located just downslope of Jansen Road where it separates the
properties in eastern and western portions.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 11
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-10 10YR 2/1 100 sa si lo no redoximorphic features
10-16 10YR 3/2 100 gr sa lo no redoximorphic features
sa sandy
si silt
lo loam
gr gravelly
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because there are no depleted colors and no redoximorphic concentrations.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):2
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Hydrology was present during the site visitbecause high storm events creating ponding across the site. There were no indicators of long term standing
water or soil saturation so the wetland hydrology criterion was not met in this area.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 20 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:2 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:4 (B)4.
50% =10, 20% =4 20 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:50%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 15 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Sambucus racemosa T no FACU Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =7.5, 20% =3 15 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Polystichum munitum 35 yes FACU Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Rubus ursinus 20 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Dryoptera expansa 10 no FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =32.5, 20% =13 65 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 35
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is not met because there is not greaterthan 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/9/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 12
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0338009911226 Long:-122.67495900771 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Belfast silt loam, wet variant NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 12 was conducted in an area along the west edge of the eastern properties and just downslope of Jansen Road.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 12
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 3/2 100 fine silt lo no redoximorphic features
12-16 10YR 5/2 90 10YR 6/6 10 C M gr lo no redoximorphic features
lo loam
gr gravelly
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:This soil profile meets none of the hydric soil indicators because the surface soil does not have a dark or depleted matrix.The depleted matrix is also deepin the profile.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):8
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Hydrology was present at the site visit because heavy torm events creating ponding across the site. There is no evidence of long term hydrology occurring
for a significant duration of the growing season so the wetland hydrology criterion is not met.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM –Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION –Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size:30)Absolute% Cover DominantSpecies?IndicatorStatus Dominance Test Worksheet:
1.Alnus rubra 10 yes FAC Number of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:3 (A)2.
3.Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:4 (B)4.
50% =5, 20% =2 10 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:75%(A/B)Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:30)
1.Rubus spectabilis 25 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2.Total % Cover of:Multiply by:
3.OBL species x1 =
4.FACW species x2 =
5.FAC species x3 =
50% =12.5, 20% =5 25 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size:30)UPL species x5 =
1.Ranunculus repens 25 yes FAC Column Totals:(A)(B)
2.Polystichum munitum 20 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
3.Rubus ursinus 15 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4.Juncus effusus 15 no FACW 1 –Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5.Tellima grandiflora 10 no FACU 2 -Dominance Test is >50%
6.Tolmiea menziesii 5 no FAC 3 -Prevalence Index is <3.01
7.Carex obnupta 5 no OBL 4 -Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supportingdata in Remarks or on a separate sheet)8.
9.5 -Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10.Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11.1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.50% =47.5, 20% =19 95 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size:)
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No2.
50% =, 20% == Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 5
Remarks:The hydrophytic vegetation criteria is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road City/County:Nordland/Jefferson Sampling Date:12/9/15
Applicant/Owner:Hulbert Custom Construction State:WA Sampling Point:TP 13
Investigator(s):J Bartlett & L Westervelt Section, Township, Range:SE 1/4S 4 T29N R1E
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none):convex Slope (%):0
Subregion (LRR):MLRA 2 Lat:48.0330225082594 Long:-122.67459576997 Datum:Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name:Belfast silt loam, wet variant NWI classification:UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,significantly disturbed?Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes No
Are Vegetation ,Soil ,or Hydrology ,naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS –Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?Yes No
Is the Sampled Areawithin a Wetland?Yes NoHydric Soil Present?Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Remarks:Test Plot 13 was located beside the old logging road near the west edge of the eastern properties. The road portion of the plot is dominated by common
volunteer species that are known to dominate old roadways. This road appears to have lead to the old cabin and was used as a logging road in 2009.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast –Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point:TP 13
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches)Color (moist)%Color (moist)%Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-5 10YR 2/1 100 sandy loam no redoximorphic features
5-9 10YR 4/6 100 sandy loam no redoximorphic features
9-16 10YR 3/3 100 sandy loam no redoximorphic features
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1)Sandy Redox (S5)2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2)Stripped Matrix (S6)Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3)Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1)(except MLRA 1)Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation andwetland hydrology must be present,unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12)Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present?Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks:None of the hydric soil indicators are met because none of the layers exhibit depleted colors.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2)(except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)(MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)Salt Crust (B11)Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2)Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3)Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3)Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1)(LRR A)Raised Ant Mounds (D6)(LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)Other (Explain in Remarks)Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No
Water Table Present?Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?(includes capillary fringe)Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:Hydrology was not present at the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site:Meyer-Jansen Road
APPENDIX B
Wetland name or number A
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 1
RATING SUMMARY –Western Washington
Name of wetland (or ID #):Wetland A Date of site visit:12-9-15
Rated by J. Bartlett Trained by Ecology?X Yes No Date of training 11/14
HGM Class used for rating Riverine Wetland has multiple HGM classes?_Y X N
NOTE:Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined).
Source of base aerial photo/map Google Earth
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY III (based on functions X or special characteristics _)
1.Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
Category I –Total score =23 –27
Category II –Total score = 20 –22
X Category III –Total score = 16 –19
Category IV –Total score =9 –15
FUNCTION Improving
Water Quality
Hydrologic Habitat
Circle the appropriate ratings
Site Potential H M L H M L H M L
Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L
Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL
Score Based on
Ratings
4 5 8 17
2.Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
Score for eachfunctionbasedonthreeratings(order of ratingsisnotimportant)
9 =H,H,H
8 =H,H,M
7 =H,H,L
7 =H,M,M
6 =H,M,L
6 =M,M,M
5 =H,L,L
5 =M,M,L
4 =M,L,L
3 =L,L,L
CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY
Estuarine I II
Wetland of High Conservation Value I
Bog I
Mature Forest I
Old Growth Forest I
Coastal Lagoon I II
Interdunal I II III IV
None of the above X
Wetland name or number A
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 2
Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional Wetlands
Map of:To answer questions:Figure #
Cowardin plant classes D 1.3,H 1.1,H 1.4
Hydroperiods D 1.4,H 1.2
Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods)D 1.1,D 4.1
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)D 2.2,D 5.2
Map of the contributing basin D 4.3,D 5.3
1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge -including
polygonsfor accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1,H 2.2,H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d)listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)D 3.1,D 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)D 3.3
Riverine Wetlands
Map of:To answer questions:Figure #
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1,H 1.4 2, 6
Hydroperiods H 1.2 2, 6
Ponded depressions R 1.1 6
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)R 2.4 6
Plant cover of trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants R 1.2,R 4.2 6
Width of unit vs.width of stream (can be added to another figure)R 4.1 6
Map of the contributing basin R 2.2,R 2.3,R 5.2 7
1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge -including
polygonsfor accessiblehabitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1,H 2.2,H 2.3 7
Screen capture of map of 303(d)listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)R 3.1 8
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)R 3.2,R 3.3 8
Lake Fringe Wetlands
Map of:To answer questions:Figure #
Cowardin plant classes L 1.1,L 4.1,H 1.1,H 1.4
Plant cover of trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants L 1.2
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)L 2.2
1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge -including
polygonsfor accessiblehabitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1,H 2.2,H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d)listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)L 3.1,L 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)L 3.3
Slope Wetlands
Map of:To answer questions:Figure #
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1,H 1.4
Hydroperiods H 1.2
Plant cover of dense trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants S 1.3
Plant cover of dense,rigid trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants
(can be added to figure above)
S 4.1
Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure)S 2.1,S 5.1
1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge -including
polygonsfor accessiblehabitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1,H 2.2,H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d)listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)S 3.1,S 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)S 3.3
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 3
A
HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington
For questions 1-7,the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated.If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated,youprobablyhave a unit with multiple HGM classes.In this case,identify which hydrologic criteria inquestions 1-7 apply,and go to Question 8.1.Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods?
NO –go to 2 YES –the wetland class is Tidal Fringe –go to 1.11.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
NO –Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine)YES –Freshwater Tidal FringeIf your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands.If itisSaltwaterTidalFringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored.This method cannot be used toscore functions for estuarine wetlands.2.The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%)of water to it.Groundwaterandsurfacewaterrunoffare NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO –go to 3 YES –The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland,use the form for Depressional wetlands.3.Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without anyplants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size;At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m).
NO –go to 4 YES –The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)4.Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual),The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional)and usually comes fromseeps.It may flow subsurface,as sheetflow,or in a swale without distinct banks,The water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
NO –go to 5 YES –The wetland class is Slope
NOTE:Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small andshallowdepressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ftdeep).5.Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?X The unit is in a valley, or stream channel,where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from thatstream or river,X The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 4
ANO–go to 6 YES –The wetland class is Riverine
NOTE:The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is notflooding6.Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to thesurface,at some time during the year?This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior
of the wetland.NO –go to 7 YES –The wetland class is Depressional7.Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbankflooding?The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches.The unit seems to bemaintainedbyhighgroundwater in the area.The wetland may be ditched,but has no obvious naturaloutlet.NO –go to 8 YES –The wetland class is Depressional8.Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGMclasses.For example,seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain,or a smallstreamwithin a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides.GO BACK AND IDENTIFYWHICHOFTHEHYDROLOGICREGIMESDESCRIBEDINQUESTIONS1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENTAREASINTHEUNIT(make a rough sketch to help you decide).Use the following table to identify theappropriateclass to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within thewetland unit being scored.
NOTE:Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% ormore of the total area of the wetland unit being rated.If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of thetotal area.
HGM classes within the wetland unit
being rated
HGM class to
use in rating
Slope +Riverine Riverine
Slope +Depressional Depressional
Slope +Lake Fringe Lake Fringe
Depressional +Riverine along stream
within boundary of depression
Depressional
Depressional +Lake Fringe Depressional
Riverine +Lake Fringe Riverine
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other
class of freshwater wetland
Treat as
ESTUARINE
If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland,or if you have
more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the
rating.
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 5
A
RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS
Water Quality Functions -Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality
R 1.0.Does the site have the potential to improve water quality?
R 1.1.Area of surface depressions within the Riverine wetland that can trap sediments during a flooding event:
Depressionscover >3/area of wetland points =8
4
Depressionscover > ½area of wetland points =4
Depressionspresent but cover <½area of wetland points =2
No depressionspresent points =0
4
R 1.2.Structure of plants in the wetland (areas with >90%cover at person height,not Cowardin classes)
Trees or shrubs >2/area of the wetland points =83Treesorshrubs>1/area of the wetland points =63Herbaceousplants(>6 in high)>2/area of the wetland points =63Herbaceousplants(>6 in high)>1/area of the wetland points =33Trees,shrubs,and ungrazed herbaceous <1/area of the wetland points =03
6
Total for R 1 Add the points in the boxes above 10
Rating of Site Potential If score is:12-16 =H X 6-11 = M 0-5 =L Record the rating on the first page
R 2.0.Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site?
R 2.1.Is the wetland within an incorporated city or within its UGA?Yes =2 No =0 0
R 2.2.Does the contributing basin to the wetland include a UGA or incorporated area?Yes =1 No =0 0
R 2.3.Does at least 10%of the contributing basin contain tilled fields,pastures,or forests that have been clearcut
within the last 5 years?Yes =1 No =0
0
R 2.4.Is >10%of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants?Yes =1 No =0 0
R 2.5.Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions R 2.1-R 2.4
Other sources Yes =1 No =0
0
Total for R 2 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:3-6 =H 1 or 2 =M X 0 =L Record the rating on the first page
R 3.0.Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society?
R 3.1.Is the wetland along a stream or river that is on the 303(d)list or on a tributary that drains to one within 1 mi?
Yes =1 No =0
R 3.2.Is the wetland along a stream or river that has TMDL limits for nutrients,toxics,or pathogens?
Yes =1 No =0
0
0
R 3.3.Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality?(answer
YES if there is a TMDL for the drainage in which the unit is found)Yes =2 No =0
0
Total for R 3 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Value If score is:2-4 =H 1 =M X 0 =L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 6
A
RIVERINE AND FRESHWATER TIDAL FRINGE WETLANDS
Hydrologic Functions -Indicators that site functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion
R 4.0.Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion?
R 4.1.Characteristicsof the overbank storage the wetland provides:
Estimate the average width of the wetland perpendicularto the direction of the flow and the width of the
stream or river channel (distance between banks).Calculate the ratio:(average width of wetland)/(average
width of stream between banks).
If the ratio is more than 20 points =9
If the ratio is 10-20 points =6
If the ratio is 5-<10 points =4
If the ratio is 1-<5 points =2
If the ratio is <1 points =1
4
R 4.2.Characteristicsof plants that slow down water velocitiesduring floods:Treat large woody debris as forest or
shrub.Choose the points appropriate for the best description (polygons need to have >90%cover at person
height.These are NOT Cowardin classes).
Forest or shrub for >1/area OR emergent plants >2/area points =733Forestorshrubfor>1/area OR emergent plants >1/area points =4103
Plants do not meet above criteria points =0
7
Total for R 4 Add the points in the boxes above 11
Rating of Site Potential If score is:12-16 =H X 6-11 = M 0-5 =L Record the rating on the first page
R 5.0.Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site?
R 5.1.Is the stream or river adjacent to the wetland downcut?Yes =0 No = 1 0
R 5.2.Does the up-gradient watershed includea UGA or incorporated area?Yes =1 No =0 0
R 5.3.Is the up-gradient stream or river controlled by dams?Yes =0 No =1 1
Total for R 5 Add the points in the boxes above 1
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:3 =H X 1 or 2 =M 0 =L Record the rating on the first page
R 6.0.Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
R 6.1.Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems?
Choose the description that best fits the site.
The sub-basin immediately down-gradient of the wetland has flooding problemsthat result in damage to
human or natural resources (e.g.,houses or salmon redds)points =2
Surface flooding problemsare in a sub-basin farther down-gradient points =1
No flooding problems anywhere downstream points=0
0
R 6.2.Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan?
Yes =2 No =0
0
Total for R 6 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Value If score is:2-4 =H 1 =M X 0 =L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland name or number
Wetland Rating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 13
A
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes.
HABITAT FUNCTIONS -Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat
H 1.0.Does the site have the potential to provide habitat?
H 1.1.Structure of plant community:Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class.Check the
Cowardin plant classes in the wetland.Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold
of ¼ac or more than 10%of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac.Add the number of structureschecked.
Aquatic bed 4 structures or more:points =4
X Emergent 3 structures:points =2
X Scrub-shrub (areaswhere shrubs have >30%cover)2 structures:points =1
Forested (areas where trees have >30%cover)1 structure:points =0
If the unit has a Forested class,checkif:
The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy,sub-canopy,shrubs,herbaceous,moss/ground-cover)
that each cover 20%within the Forested polygon
1
H 1.2.Hydroperiods
Check the types of water regimes(hydroperiods)present within the wetland.The water regime has to cover
more than 10%of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
X Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present:points =3
X Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present:points =2
Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present:points =1
Saturated only 1 type present:points =0
Permanentlyflowing stream or river in,or adjacent to,the wetland
X Seasonally flowing stream in,or adjacent to,the wetland
Lake Fringe wetland 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points
2
H 1.3.Richness of plant species
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2.
Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name
the species.Do not include Eurasian milfoil,reed canarygrass,purple loosestrife,Canadian thistle
If you counted:>19 species points =2
5 -19 species points =1
<5 species points =0
1
H 1.4.Interspersion of habitats
Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1),or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats)is high,moderate,low,or none.If you
have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water,the rating is alwayshigh.
None =0 points Low =1 point Moderate =2 points
All three diagrams
in this row
are HIGH =3points
1
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 14
A
H 1.5.Special habitat features:
Check the habitat featuresthat are present in the wetland.The number of checks is the number of points.
X Large,downed,woody debris within the wetland (>4 in diameter and 6 ft long).
Standing snags(dbh >4 in)within the wetland
X Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m)and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m)
over a stream (or ditch)in,or contiguous with the wetland,for at least 33 ft (10 m)
Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30 degree
slope)OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered
where wood is exposed)
X At least ¼ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branchesare present in areas that are
permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians)
X Invasive plants cover less than 25%of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of
strata)
4
Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 9
Rating of Site Potential If score is:15-18 =H X 7-14 = M 0-6 =L Record the rating on the first page
H 2.0.Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site?
H 2.1.Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit).
Calculate:%undisturbed habitat 51.1 +[(%moderateand low intensity land uses)/2]11.2 =62.3%
If total accessible habitat is:
>1/(33.3%)of 1 km Polygon points =33
20-33%of 1 km Polygon points =2
10-19%of 1 km Polygon points =1
<10%of 1 km Polygon points =0
3
H 2.2.Undisturbedhabitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland.
Calculate:%undisturbed habitat 76.1 +[(%moderateand low intensity land uses)/2]11.2 =87.3%
Undisturbed habitat >50%of Polygon points =3
Undisturbed habitat 10-50%and in 1-3 patches points =2
Undisturbed habitat 10-50%and >3 patches points =1
Undisturbed habitat <10%of 1 km Polygon points =0
3
H 2.3.Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon:If
>50%of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points =(-2)
≤50%of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points=0
0
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above 6
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:X 4-6 =H 1-3 =M <1 =L Record the rating on the first page
H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society?
H 3.1.Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws,regulations,or policies?Choose only the highest score
that applies to the wetland being rated.
Site meets ANY of the following criteria:points =2
X It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority speciesIt is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural ResourcesIt has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan,in a
Shoreline Master Plan,or in a watershed planSitehas1or2priorityhabitats(listed on next page)within 100 m points=1
Site does not meet any of the criteria above points =0
Rating of Value If score is:X 2 =H 1 =M 0 =L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 15
A
WDFW Priority HabitatsPriorityhabitatslistedbyWDFW(see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats,and the counties in which they canbefound,in:WashingtonDepartment of Fish and Wildlife.2008.Priority Habitatand Species List.Olympia,Washington.177 pp.http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here:http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/)Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m)of the wetland unit:NOTE:This question is
independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.
Aspen Stands:Pure or mixed stands of aspengreater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).
BiodiversityAreas and Corridors:Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish andwildlife(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).
Herbaceous Balds:Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
Old-growth/Mature forests:Old-growth west of Cascade crest –Stands of at least 2 tree species,forminga multi-layered canopy with occasionalsmall openings;with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha )>32 in (81 cm)dbh or > 200yearsofage.Mature forests –Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm)dbh;crown cover may be lessthan100%;decay,decadence,numbers of snags,and quantity of largedowned material is generally less than thatfoundinold-growth;80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
Oregon White Oak:Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/coniferassociations wherecanopy coverage of the oakcomponentisimportant(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p.158 –see web link above).
X Riparian:The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquaticand terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influenceeach other.
WestsidePrairies:Herbaceous,non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wetprairie(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p.161 –see web link above).
Instream:Thecombination of physical,biological,and chemical processes and conditions that interact to providefunctionallifehistoryrequirementsforinstreamfishandwildliferesources.
X Nearshore:Relatively undisturbed nearshorehabitats.Theseinclude Coastal Nearshore,Open Coast Nearshore,and Puget Sound Nearshore.(full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbedare in WDFW
report –see web link on previous page).
Caves:A naturally occurring cavity,recess,void,or system of interconnectedpassages under the earth in soils,rock,ice,or othergeologicalformations and is large enough to contain a human.
X Cliffs:Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m)high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.
Talus:Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in averagesize 0.5 -6.5 ft (0.15 -2.0 m),composed of basalt,andesite,and/or sedimentary rock,including riprap slides and mine tailings.May be associatedwith cliffs.
Snags and Logs:Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics toenablecavityexcavation/use by wildlife.Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of >20 in (51 cm)in westernWashingtonandare> 6.5 ft (2 m)in height.Priority logs are >12 in (30 cm)in diameter at the largest end,and >20 ft(6 m)long.
Note:All vegetated wetlandsare by definitiona priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressedelsewhere.
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 16
A
Wetland Type
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland.Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met.
Category
SC 1.0.Estuarine wetlands
Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
The dominant water regime is tidal,
Vegetated,and
With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No=Not an estuarine wetland
SC 1.1.Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge,NationalPark,National Estuary Reserve,Natural Area
Preserve,State Park or Educational,Environmental,or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151?
Yes =Category I No -Go to SC 1.2 Cat.I
SC 1.2.Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking,ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing,and has less
than 10%cover of non-native plant species.(If non-nativespecies are Spartina,see page 25)
At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub,forest,or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
The wetland has at least two of the following features:tidal channels,depressions with open water,or
contiguous freshwater wetlands.Yes =Category I No =Category II
Cat.I
Cat.II
SC 2.0.Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)
SC 2.1.Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High
Conservation Value?Yes –Go to SC 2.2 No –Go to SC 2.3
SC 2.2.Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value?
Yes =Category I No =Not a WHCV
SC 2.3.Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland?
http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf
Yes –Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No =Not a WHCV
SC 2.4.Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on
their website?Yes =CategoryI No =Not a WHCV
Cat.I
SC 3.0.Bogs
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit)meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs?Use the key
below.If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
SC 3.1.Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons,either peats or mucks,that compose 16 in or
more of the first 32 in of the soil profile?Yes –Go to SC 3.3 No –Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2.Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils,either peats or mucks,that are less than 16 in deep
over bedrock,or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash,or that are floating on top of a lake or
pond?Yes –Go to SC 3.3 No =Is not a bog
SC 3.3.Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70%cover of mosses at ground level,AND at least a 30%
cover of plant species listed in Table 4?Yes =Is a Category I bog No –Go to SC 3.4
NOTE:If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory,you may substitute that criterion by
measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep.If the pH is less than 5.0 and the
plant species in Table 4 are present,the wetland is a bog.
SC 3.4.Is an area with peats or mucks forested (>30%cover)with Sitka spruce,subalpine fir,western red cedar,
western hemlock,lodgepole pine,quaking aspen,Engelmann spruce,or western white pine,AND any of the
species (or combination of species)listed in Table 4 provide more than 30%of the cover under the canopy?
Yes =Is a CategoryI bog No =Is not a bog
Cat.I
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Wetland name or number
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 17
SC 4.0.Forested Wetlands
Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA
Departmentof Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats?If you answer YES you will still need to rate
the wetland based on its functions.
Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest):Stands of at least two tree species,forming a multi-layered
canopy with occasional small openings;with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha)that are at least 200 years of
age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh)of 32 in (81 cm)or more.
Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest):Stands where the largest trees are 80-200 years old OR the
species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh)exceeding 21 in (53 cm).
Yes =Category I No =Not a forested wetland for this section Cat.I
SC 5.0.Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from
marine waters by sandbanks,gravel banks,shingle,or,less frequently,rocks
The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (>0.5 ppt)
during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom)
Yes –Go to SC 5.1 No =Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1.Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking,ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing),and has less
than 20%cover of aggressive,opportunisticplant species (see list of species on p.100).
At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub,forest,or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
The wetland is larger than 1/ac (4350 ft2)10 Yes =Category I No =Category II
Cat.I
Cat.II
SC 6.0.Interdunal Wetlands
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownershipor WBUO)?If
you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographicareas:
Long Beach Peninsula:Lands west of SR 103
Grayland-Westport:Lands west of SR 105
Ocean Shores-Copalis:Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
Yes –Go to SC 6.1 No =not an interdunal wetland for rating
SC 6.1.Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M
for the three aspects of function)?Yes =Category I No –Go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2.Is the wetland 1 ac or larger,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger?
Yes =Category II No –Go to SC 6.3
SC 6.3.Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac?
Yes =Category III No =Category IV
Cat I
Cat.II
Cat.III
Cat.IV
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
If you answered No for all types,enter “Not Applicable”on Summary Form
WetlandRating System for Western WA:2014 UpdateRatingForm–Effective January 1,2015 18
Wetland name or number A
This page left blank intentionally