HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Report (014) 22 Acre Parcel, off the Duckabush Road
Wetland Delineation Report
August 11, 2002
mreparedBy: [[~I [ .... ((~ [, ~
APPLIED I~l
E ~VIRONMENTAL Iii2 AUG 2 3 2002
S ;RVICES, INC.
[)EPT. OF (.'.Or,,l,*viU ~.IIt'Y DEVELOPS,
l~50 Woodridg~ Driv~ SF.
Port Orchard, WA 98366
~REFACE
This report has been prepared by Applied Environmental Services, Inc. (AES) followin¢
the described methods and information available to the best of our knowledge at the time
of the work. The information presented in this report reflects AES's best professional
opinion regarding, the subject property. The applicant is advised to contact all appropriate
regulatory agencies (local, state, and federal) prior to design or construction of any
development to obtain necessary permits and approvals. Wetland boundaries,
classifications and discussions are based on our understanding of the local, state, and
federal regulations, and site conditions at the time of our work. The final wetland boundary
determination and wetland classification is to be made or verified by the appropriate
jurisdictional agency. Within the defined scope of our contract, schedule, and budget, our
services have been executed in accordance with standards acceptable in this profession
at the time this report was prepared. No warranty, declared or implied, should be
understood.
Any alteration, deletion or editing of this document without explicit written permission from
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. is prohibited. Any other unauthorized use of this
document is prohibited. This document is intended to be used in its entirety. If an excerpt
is quoted or paraphrased, it must be properly referenced.
Lisa A. Berntsen, PWS
Environmental Scientist, President
Wetland Delineation Table of Contents
CHAPTER PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 LOCATION 1
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1
1.3 SCOPE 1
1.4 PERFORMANCE AND GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION 1
2.0 METHODS 4
2.1 PAPER INVENTORY 4
2.2 FIELD DELINEATION 4
2.3 WETLAND EVALUATION 4
2.4 WETLAND PARAMETERS 5
2.4.1 HYDROPHYTIC PLANTS 5
2.4.2 HYDRIC SOILS 5
2.4.3 HYDROLOGY 6
3.0 RESULTS 7
3.1 PAPER INVENTORY 7
3.2 FIELD DELINEATION 7
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 20
4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS WETLANDS 20
4.2 WETLAND CATEGORIZATION 20
4.3 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE HYDROLOGY 21
4.4 OFFSITE WETLANDS 21
4.5 WETLAND FUNCTION 21
4.6 WETLAND VALUES 24
4.7 DUCKABUSH RIVER 25
4.8 IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL 25
REFERENCES
PHOTOGRAPHS
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
1.0 INTRODUCTION ]
1.1 LOCATION
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. (AES) performed a wetland delineation on a 22
acre parcel of property located at off the Duckabush Road one mile up the Duckabush
Road immediately west of the power line easement in Jefferson County, Washington.
This property lies within Section 17, Township 25N, and Range 2W WM in the state of
Washington. The local jurisdiction is Jefferson County. Figure 1 illustrates the project
vicinity.
1.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This wetland delineation has been prepared in association with a Site Plan Approval
Advance Determination. (SPAAD) request for a proposed single family residence on the
property. This SPAAD is important to the proposed buyers due to the existing critical
areas found onsite. As pan of the site development planning process, the prospective
purchasers request county approvals of locations of pertinent site features which include:
· primary and secondary drainfield,
· existing road layout and configuration,
· proposed well location and most importantly,
· a residence footprint large enough to accommodate a permanent residence of
'reasonable size' with a three car garage on the highest terrace in the vicinity of
the existing site structures. No specific building plan exists at this time.
One of the most important issues to consider with this SPAAD application is the
possibility of utilizing some sort of grandfather clause to allow for use of the previous
wetland buffers. Using this avenue will make it relatively simple to build the new home
within the perimeter of the existing onsite structures.
1.3 SCOPE
The scope of this investigation was focused toward the following specific goals.
· Identify any wetlands and associated boundaries within the subject property.
· Evaluate existing conditions regarding wetland function and value.
· Assess probable impacts to wetlands as a result of the proposed activity.
· Identify potential mitigation options that will minimize and compensate for wetland
impacts.
· Identify and flag the top of bank of the Duckabush River as it forms the natural west
and south boundary to the property.
1.4 PERFORMANCE AND GENERAL SITE DESCRIPTION
On June 30, 2002 Lisa Berntsen, PWS, performed the wetland delineation and identified
the top of bank associated with the Duckabush River. Weather during the site
investigation was overcast but warm. The region had experienced normal to above-
normal precipitation through the winter and spring months.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc.
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TOPO! map printed on 06/29/02 from "duckabush. Lpo" and "Untitled.tpg"
122059.000, W 122o58.000' w 122057.000. W WGS84 122°56.000' W
122°59.000' W 122~58.000' W 122~57.000' W WGS84 12~°56,000' W
8'/,° L -- -2~°°° ~t~T 0==~~00 ~00
VI P~ted from TOPOI ~01 National Geographic Holtl~
FIGURE 1. VICINITY MAP AND TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
DUCKABUSH ROAD WETLAND DELINEATION
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 2
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
This 22 acre property is intriguing due to its existing critical areas and topographic
features. Its dominant feature is the 800+/- footage of Duckabush River frontage along
the'southern and western edges of the property. Then, the existing wetlands are
recognized. Wetlands include those immediately associated with the river and those that
are separated by the floodplain of the river on the steeper upper slopes of the site. Thirdly
noticed are the onsite structures. Clearly, this was a homestead for previous landowners.
There is a well maintained dirt road (termed Valley View Lane on some maps), there are
two power poles, one with a meter (turned off), one small standing shed, one partially
erect barn with chicken coop, one larger fallen barn and a concrete foundation for a home.
There are three distinct terraces: one closest to the river, an intermediate bench, an upper
bench with the dwelling units, then the steep slope leading to adjacent parcels and the
Duckabush Road. There is no evidence of septic or well onsite. See attached photographs
in Appendix A for illustration.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 3
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
2.0 METHODS
2.1 PAPER INVENTORY
To prepare for the field delineation effort, a search for pertinent and applicable literature
was conducted. The Washington State Department of Ecology (1989, 1997) recommends
a thorough review of existing information regarding a particular site prior to conducting
the fieldwork. Data sources that were reviewed for this wetland delineation included the
National Geographic Topographic program (2001) for topographic information, the
National Wetlands Inventory (NWl) maps online 2002
(www.ecos.fws.gov/nwi.mapplet/summap.html), Jefferson County critical areas online
(which included wetland, streams, frequently flooded, elk and fish habitat, steep slopes
etc.) the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FEMA 1982) and Soil Survey of Jefferson County,
Washington (USDA, NRCS formerly SCS, 1975). Fisheries information on the
Duckabush River will be found in Williams et at (1975) and the SASSI report (WDFW
1994). Air photo information included Jefferson County online sources (2002) and
Terraserver (2002).
2.2 FIELD DELINEATION
The delineation methods for this project followed those described for use in identifying
and delineating wetlands per the Washington State Wetlands Identification and
Delineation Manual (1997) that is consistent with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual. The delineation methods used and the results given in this report
are valid for both manuals. Wetland boundaries and soil pit locations were labeled by
surveyor's tape in the field. All flags were sequentially numbered.
The top of bank of the Duckabush River will also be identified with flagging.
2.3 WETLAND EVALUATION
Many references were used in conjunction with experience to complete the evaluation of
wetland functions and values. Reference material is cited where appropriate throughout
the text to justify and explain the results of this investigation. Wetlands delineated during
this effort were categorized by the Washington State (Ecology 1997) Four-Tiered Rating
System and the Cowardin System (Cowardin et al. 1979).
In this report, wetland functions are visually depicted by a pie chart. As documented in
Applied Wetlands Science and Technology (Kent et al. 1994): "Each wetland is unique
with respect to its size, shape, hydrology, soils, vegetation and its position in the
landscape." Based on this understanding, a pie chart for each wetland illustrates various
functions that are directly related to the wetland's unique combination of physical
characteristics. Percentages are determined by the importance of each function as related
to the overall wetland ecosystem defined by the delineation. Explanations are provided to
help understand the determined percentages for each function.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 4
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
As a whole, the chart creates a picture of the functions of each delineated wetland system
that is more descriptive and meaningful than a simple high, moderate or low rating of
singular functions. This method depicts each wetland as a multi-functioning system
formed from a particular and unique combination of physical characteristics. The highest
functioning wetlands will be depicted by well-balanced pie charts indicating that all of the
wetland functions identified are very important to the subject property. When one
function outweighs other functions significantly, the wetland lacks certain important
aspects that promote multiple functions.
Values for wetlands involve a combination of social and biological attributes. Therefore,
wetland values are discussed as to their relative availability or presence associated with
any particular wetland. Often, many unknowns are associated with the evaluation of
wetland value and individual property rights may interfere with societal values commonly
characterized with wetland systems.
2.4 WETLAND PARAMETERS
Wetlands are identified by the clear presence of three physical parameters. These are
hydrophytic plant species, hydric soils and positive hydrology.
2.4.1 Hydrophytic Plants
Hydrophytic plants are species that generally prefer areas where the frequency and
duration of inundation or soil saturation produce permanently or periodically saturated
soils sufficient to exert a controlling influence on the plant species present (Ecology
1997). The relative strength of an individual species' preference for wetness determines
the indicator status for that species. Wetland plant indicator status has been determined
by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the summary of this information for this region
is contained in Reed (1988) with a revision for the Pacific Northwest region (Reed et al.
1993). To meet the wetland criteria established in the Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997) and the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers Federal Manual for Delineating Wetlands (1987), hydrophytic vegetation must
exceed fifty percent of the total dominance measure for each stratum (tree, shrub, herb)
present. When more than fifty percent of the dominant species in each unit of vegetation
have a wetland indicator status of obligate wet (OBL), facultative wet (FACW), or
facultative (FAC), the vegetation unit meets the hydrophytic vegetation criterion.
2.4.2 Hydric Soils
Hydric soils are soils that are saturated or ponded long enough during the growing season
to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper layer (USDA 1988). Prolonged anaerobic
soil conditions lead to a chemically reducing environment. The chemical reduction of
some soil components (e.g., iron and manganese oxides) leads to the development of soil
colors and other physical characteristics that are usually indicative of hydric soils
(Ecology 1997). Hydric soils can be identified by the use of a color comparison chart. A
commercial color chart of soils is produced by Kollmorgen (1988) and commonly used by
wetland scientists. Soil color is typically identified by hue, chroma and value. In writing,
Munsell notation consists of hue, value and chroma with a space between the hue and the
succeeding value number, and a diagonal between the value and chroma numbers. Hue
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 5
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
describes the soil based on its relation to the spectral colors (red, yellow, green, blue,
purple or a mixture of these colors); value describes the degree of lightness; and chroma
indicates the strength or purity of the color. These terms reflect the variable amount of
moisture, organics, and overall composition of any given soil sample providing critical
information on soil wetness and degree of saturation and inundation (Kent 1994). In
general, the lower the number for chroma and value, the more likely the soil sample is to
be hydric. The color chart is also used to compare mapped soil types in the Soil Survey
with field observations.
2.4.3 Hydrology
Hydrology is defined as the presence of water. The term "wetland hydrology"
encompasses all hydrologic characteristics of areas that are periodically inundated or have
soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season. Numerous factors
(e.g., precipitation, topography, soil permeability, plant cover and human disturbance)
influence the hydrology of an area (Ecology 1997). Hydrology is often the least exact of
the parameters, and indicators of wetland hydrology are sometimes difficult to find in the
field. This is especially prevalent when wetlands are delineated in the summer months
when springs or seeps may not be apparent. Under these conditions, indicators of
hydrology are used as positive identification. Indicators such as drainage patterns,
sediment deposits, dried algae and water stained leaves or bark are examples of
hydrology. The presence of these (or other) indicators, hydric soils, and hydrophytic
vegetation confirm the presence of a wetland.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 6
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
3.0 RESULTS ]
3.1 PAPER RqVENTORY
The USGS and NWl maps are tools used to assist with the overall site investigation. The
NWl online map illustrates a PFOA (Palustrine forested) wetland along the western edge
of the property adjacent to the Duckabush River. The southeastern edge of the property
also shows a PSS (Palustrine Shrub Scrub) wetland. The Duckabush River parallels the
southern and part of the western edges of the property. No other wetlands are shown
onsite by NWI or by Jefferson County online critical areas review. NWI maps, produced
from interpretation of aerial photographs and topographic maps, are limited to the time
they are produced. Forested areas are not commonly identified as wetlands on NWl maps
and changes in land use, forestry or development may not be evident on these maps.
Figure 2 is an excerpt from the Soil Survey of Kitsap County, Washington (USDA, NRCS
formerly SCS, 1975) that identifies four soil types as being associated with the project
site: Ahl very gravelly loam, 50-70 percent slopes, Belfast silt loam, Grove very gravelly
loamy sand, 0-15 percent slopes, and Riverwash. None of these soils are listed as hydric
in the Hydric Soils of the State of Washington (USDA 1988). The 1994 Terraserver air
photo is included as Figure 3.
The lower Duckabush River (up to 2.5 river miles) contained some of the most
productive salmon habitat in the state (Williams et al 1975). Figure 4 is the Lower
Duckabush River map from Williams demonstrating fish barriers observed in 1975. Pink
and chum are the primary salmonids found in the lower river. Both stocks are rated as
healthy (WDFW 1994). Fall Chinook and coho are also present but currently their stocks
are depressed (WDFW 1994).
3.2 FIELD DELINEATION
The project site was investigated by a thorough field review of the topographic low areas
in the site. After wetlands in low areas were identified and delineated, observations
through the remainder of the project corridor were investigated for the presence of
wetland indicators. Upon discovery of a wetland indicator, the process of confirming the
presence of all three wetland parameters was completed. A wetland boundary
determination was made upon positive confirmation of the three wetland parameters.
The top of bank of the Duckabush River was flagged and also surveyed. Ordinary High
Water (OHW) was slightly below these locations in places but close given the dynamics
of the river.
In July 2002 Wood Surveying & Associates, Inc. professionally surveyed the boundary
of the wetland that AES had delineated on the property. AES has reviewed the surveyor's
drawing that shows the wetland area (Figure 5) and found it accurate with respect to the
flags placed in the field. As part of the field effort, AES prepared modified Washington
State Department of Ecology wetland data forms, presented herein as Tables 1 through 4,
to show plant species (abundance and dominance), soil type, and hydrology indicators.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 7
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
N
1
(AhF) Ahl very gravelly loam, 50-70 percent slopes,
(Bg) Belfast silt loam,
(GoC) Grove very gravelly loamy sand, 0-15 percent slopes, and
(Rh) Riverwash
FIGURE 2. SOIL SURVEY OF JEFFERSON COUNTY
(USDA, NRCS formerly SCS, 1975)
22 ACRE DUCKABUSH PROPERTY WETLAND DELINEATION
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Applied Environmental Services, Inc.
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
2 km NW of Duckabush, Washingtont United States 20 3un 1994
USGS
FIGURE 3.22 ACRE DUCKABUSH ROAD WETLAND DELINEATION
TERRASERVER 1994 AIR PHOTO
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 9
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
FIGURE 4.22 ACRE DUCKABUSH ROAD WETLAND DELINEATION
WILLIAMS ET AL 1975
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 10
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
FIGURE 5.22 ACRE DUCKABUSH ROAD WETLAND DELINEATION
AS SURVEYED BY WOOD SURVEYING, JULY 2002
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 1- DATA FORM
ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD
Field Investigator(s): Lisa Berntsen Date: June 30, 2002
Project/Site: 22 acres off of Duckabush Road County: Jefferson
Applicant/Owner: Berntsen State: Washington
Plant Community #/Name: Vegetation Area 1--located outside Wetland A at flag #2
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes X No __ (If no,
explain.)
Have the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes __ No X
(If yes, explain.)
VEGETATION
**Shaded Areas Indicate Dominant Species In Each Stratum**
Dominant Plant Species (Scientific and Common) Ind. Status % Cover Stratum
1. Alnus rubra red alder FAC 100 T
2 Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry FACU 20 S
3. Rubus spectabilis salmonberry FAC+ 20 S
4. Urtica dioicia stinging nettle FAC+ 40 H
5. Ranunculus repens buttercup FACW 60 H
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 80%
Check indicators that apply:
__ Visual observation of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation/saturation
Physiological/reproductive adaptations
X Wetland plant database
__ Morphological adaptations
Technical literature
X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
Other
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No__
Rationale: More than 50 percent of the vegetation was found to be hydrophytic.
SOILS
Series/phase: Mapped as Ahl very gravelly loam
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes __ No X
Profile Description at Soil Pit 1: Color/Mottle/gley/texture/depth
(outside Wetland A at flag #2) 10YR 2/2 - no mottle or gley - thru pit to 18"
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 12
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 1 - DATA FORM - continued
Hydric soil indicators: (check all that apply)
Histosol __ Matrix chroma < 2 with mottles
__ Histic Epipedon __ Mg or Fe Concretions
Sulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content (sandy soil)
__ Aquic Moisture Regime I Organic Streaking (sandy soil)
__ Reducing Conditions __ Hydric Soil List (national/local)
__ Gleyed/Low Chroma __ Other
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes __ No X
Rationale: A series of soil pits were dug in a line relative to the slope of the topography. This soil pit was
found to be outside of the wetland boundary due to lack of hydrology and hydric soil conditions.
Downslope of this soil pit, other soil pits exhibited hydric conditions.
HYDROLOGY
Current growing season? Yes X No__
Depth of inundation: X none present __ inches (from surface)
Depth to free water in soil pit: X none present __ inches (from surface)
Depth to saturated soil: X none present __ inches (from surface)
Check those that apply:
__ Aerial photograph
__ Stream, lake or gage data
Water-stained leaves: Yes __ No X Water marks: Yes __ No X
Oxidized root channels: Yes __ No X Drift lines: Yes __ No X
Sediment deposits: Yes __ No X FAC Neutral: Yes __ No X
Drainage patterns: Yes __ No X Local soil survey: Yes __ No X
Other indicator(s): Yes __ No X
(If yes, explain.)
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes __ No X
Rationale: Saturated soil and the presence of hydrology were not observed.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes X No__
Hydric soils present? Yes __No X
Wetland hydrology present? Yes __ No X
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes __ No X
Rationale: All of the wetland parameters have not been met.
Comments: This area was identified as outside of the wetland boundary. Table 2 presents site data
collected adjacent to this vegetation unit that was judged to be inside the wetland boundary.
Table adopted from the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (1997)
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 13
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 2- DATA FORM
ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD
Field Investigator(s): Lisa Berntsen Date: June 30, 2002
Project/Site: 22 acres off of Duckabush Road County: Jefferson
Applicant/Owner: Berntsen State: Washington
Plant Community 4//Name: Vegetation Area 2--located inside Wetland A near flag #-2
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes X No__
(If no, explain.)
Have the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes __ No X
(If yes, explain.)
VEGETATION
**Shaded Areas Indicate Dominant Species In Each Stratum**
Dominant Plant Species (Scientific and Common) Ind. Status % Cover Stratum
1. Alnus rubra red alder FAC 100 T
2. Rubus spectabilis salmonberry FAC+ 30 S
3. Athyriumfilix-fimina lady fern FAC 5 S
4. Lysichitun americanum skunk cabbage OBL 10 H
5. Scirpus microcarpus small fruited bulrush OBL 40 H
6. Ranunculus repens buttercup FACW 40 H
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 100%
Check indicators that apply:
X Visual observation of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation/saturation
Physiological/reproductive adaptations
X Wetland plant database
__ Morphological adaptations
X Technical literature
X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
Other
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No __
Rationale: All plant species observed are adapted to survive in wetland conditions.
SOILS
Series/phase: Mapped as Ahl very gravelly loam
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes __ No X
Profile Description at Soil Pit 2: Color/Mottle/gley/texture/depth
(inside Wetland A near flag #2) 10YR 2/1 - through 18"- water present
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 1 4
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 2 - DATA FORM - continued
Hydric soil indicators: (check all that apply)
Histosol __ Matrix chroma _< 2 with mottles
__ Histic Epipedon __ Mg or Fe Concretions
Sulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content (sandy soil)
Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking (sandy soil)
__ Reducing Conditions __ Hydric Soil List (national/local)
X Gleyed/Low Chroma __ Other
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes. X No__
Rationale: The soil was found to be low chroma with water present at the surface.
HYDROLOGY
Current growing season? Yes X No __
Depth of inundation: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Depth to free water in soil pit: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Depth to saturated soil: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Check those that apply:
__ Aerial photograph
Stream, lake or gage data
Water-stained leaves: Yes __ No X Water marks: Yes __ No X
Oxidized root channels: Yes __ No X Drift lines: Yes __ No X
Sediment deposits: Yes __ No X FAC Neutral: Yes __ No X
Drainage patterns: Yes __ No X Local soil survey: Yes __ No X
Other indicator(s): Yes No X
(If yes, explain.)
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes X No__
Rationale: Positive hydrology was observed in the soil pit in late June 2002, indicating wetland conditions.
Soil color was dark with low chroma.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
[-Iydrophytic vegetation present? Yes X No __
Hydric soils present? Yes X No __
Wetland hydrology present? Yes X No__
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes X No __
Rationale: All three wetland parameters have been met.
Comments:
Table adopted from the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (1997)
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 1 5
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 3- DATA FORM
ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD
Field Investigator(s): Lisa Berntsen Date: June 30, 2002
Project/Site: 22 acres off of Duckabush Road County: Jefferson
Applicant/Owner: Berntsen State: Washington
Plant Community g/Name: Vegetation Area 3--located inside Wetland B at flag #-2
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes X No__
(If no, explain.)
Have the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes __ No X
(If yes, explain.)
VEGETATION
**Shaded Areas lndicate Dominant Species In Each Stratum**
Dominant Plant Species (Scientific and Common) Ind. Status % Cover Stratum
1. Alnus rubra red alder FAC 30 T
2. Salix lasiandra Pacific willow FACW+ 50 T
3. Acer macrophyllium big leaf maple FACU 20 T
4. Acer circinatum vine maple FAC- 10 S
5. Urtica dioicia stinging nettle FAC+ 30 H
6. Lysichitun americanum skunk cabbage OBL 60 H
7. Oenanthe sarmentosa water parsley OBL 5 H
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 66%
Check indicators that apply:
X Visual observation of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation/saturation
__ Physiological/reproductive adaptations X Wetland plant database
__ Morphological adaptations X Technical literature
X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
Other
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No__
Rationale: Greater than 50% of the vegetation in this vegetation area was found to be hydrophytic.
SOILS
Series/phase: Mapped as Ahl very gravelly loam and Riverwash
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes __ No X
Profile Description: Color?Mottle/gley/texture/depth
10 YR 2/1 - to 18" water @ surface
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 16
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 3 - DATA FORM - continued
Hydric soil indicators: (check all that apply)
Histosol __ Matrix chroma _< 2 with mottles
__ Histic Epipedon __ Mg or Fe Concretions
Sulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content (sandy soil)
Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking (sandy soil)
Reducing Conditions __ Hydric Soil List (national/local)
__ Gleyed/Low Chroma X Other
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes X No __
Rationale: Although the soil mapped for this area is not hydric, the surface water and saturated soil
conditions indicate that the soil is hydric.
HYDROLOGY
Current growing season? Yes X No __
Depth of inundation: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Depth to free water in soil pit: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Depth to saturated (damp) soil: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Check those that apply:
__ Aerial photograph
__ Stream, lake or gage data
Water-stained leaves: Yes No X Water marks: Yes X No __
Oxidized root channels: Yes No X Drift lines: Yes X No __
Sediment deposits: Yes X No __ FAC Neutral: Yes __ No X
Drainage patterns: Yes __ No X Local soil survey: Yes __ No X
Other indicator(s): Yes __ No. X
(If yes, explain.)
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes X No __
Rationale: Water was present in the wetland and soils were saturated to the wetland boundary.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes X No __
Hydric soils present? Yes X No __
Wetland hydrology present? Yes X No __
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes X No __
Rationale: All of the wetland parameters have been met.
Comments: The wetland lies in a distinct depression and appears to be highly influenced by the Duckabush
River.
Table adopted from the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (1997)
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 1 7
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 4- DATA FORM
ROUTINE ON-SITE DETERMINATION METHOD
Field Investigator(s): Lisa Bemtsen Date: June 30, 2002
Project/Site: 22 acres off of Duckabush Road County: Jefferson
Applicant/Owner: Berntsen State: Washington
Plant Community g/Name: Vegetation Area 4--located inside Wetland C at flag #-2
Do normal environmental conditions exist at the plant community? Yes X No __
(If no, explain.)
Have the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes __ No X
(If yes, explain.)
VEGETATION
**Shaded Areas Indicate Dominant Species In Each Stratum**
Dominant Plant Species (Scientific and Common) Ind. Status % Cover Stratum
1. AInus rubra red alder FAC 20 T
2. Thuja plicata cedar FAC 60 T
3. Acer macrophyllium big leaf maple FACU 10 T
4. Rubus spectabilis salmonberry FAC+ 60 S
5. Lysichitun americanum skunk cabbage OBL 100 H
Percent of dominant species that are OBL, FACW, and/or FAC: 80%
Check indicators that apply:
X Visual observation of plant species growing in areas of prolonged inundation/saturation
__ Physiological/reproductive adaptations
X Wetland plant database
__ Morphological adaptations X Technical literature
X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
Other
Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes X No__
Rationale: Greater than 50% of the vegetation in this vegetation area was found to be hydrophytic.
SOILS
Series/phase: Mapped as Ahl very gravelly loam
Is the soil on the hydric soils list? Yes __ No X
Profile Description: CoIor/Mottle/gley/texture/depth
10 YR 2/1 - to 18" water @ surface
Applied Environmental Services, Inc.
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
TABLE 4 - DATA FORM - continued
Hydric soil indicators: (check all that apply)
Histosot __ Matrix chroma < 2 with mottles
__ Histic Epipedon __ Mg or Fe Concretions
Sulfidic Odor __ High Organic Content (sandy soil)
__ Aquic Moisture Regime __ Organic Streaking (sandy soil)
Reducing Conditions __ Hydric Soil List (national/local)
__ Gleyed/Low Chroma X Other
Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes X No__
Rationale: Although the soil mapped for this area is not hydric, the surface water and saturated soil
conditions indicate that the soil is hydric.
HYDROLOGY
Current growing season? Yes X No __
Depth of inundation: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Depth to free water in soil pit: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Depth to saturated (damp) soil: __ none present 0 inches (from surface)
Check those that apply:
__ Aerial photograph
__ Stream, lake or gage data
Water-stained leaves: Yes __No X Water marks: Yes X No__
Oxidized root channels: Yes __ No X Drift lines: Yes X No__
Sediment deposits: Yes X No __ FAC Neutral: Yes __ No X
Drainage patterns: Yes __ No X Local soil survey: Yes __ No X
Other indicator(s): Yes No X
(If yes, explain.)
Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes X No __
Rationale: Water was present in the wetland and soils were saturated to the wetland boundary.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes X No __
Hydric soils present? Yes X No __
Wetland hydrology present? Yes X No __
Is the plant community a wetland? Yes X No __
Rationale: All of the wetland parameters have been met.
Comments: The wetland lies in a distinct depression and appears to be highly influenced by the Duckabush
River.
Table adopted from the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (1997)
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 1 9
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS WETLANDS
Wetland B and C are pristine wetland systems containing mature conifers and hardwoods
with a well developed understory of native high habitat value vegetation. Both are
situated at the toe of a significant slope and are large in size. Wetland B is directly
connected to the Duckabush River near the western edge of the property. Water from this
wetland was directly discharging to the river. A fisherman's trail was found through
Wetland B as it bordered the river. Elk and other ungulates also take advantage of this
route as evidenced by the tracks.
Wetland C is located on the eastern edge of the property beginning and ending offsite.
The flagged portion of Wetland C is at the toe of the slope that borders the existing, well
developed road. Wetland C, within the property boundaries, remains intact with a full
canopy of cedars and hardwoods. Wetland C encroaches west into the property below
Wetland B (not hydrological connected from a wetland perspective) but terminates in a
lobe with the majority of the wetland continuing offsite to the east. The connection
between this wetland and the river was not identified. Offsite to the east, some wetland
clearing, associated with the high tension power lines, had occurred.
Wetland A is a small spring fed system originating on a shallow slope of the hillside.
This wetland, while also containing some mature hardwoods, was maintained by previous
landowners. It has been reported by people familiar with the site (personal
communication with Linda Tudor - real estate agent speaking for the owner) that the
people that homesteaded this property perhaps used this wetland as their water source.
Observations onsite support this conclusion. A small pond was dug at some time in the
past. Sidecast material was used to create the road and make a berm west of the pond.
The wetland boundary is the well developed road along the south. The water for this
wetland originates from multiple locations along the slope, not a single point source.
,.
The lower bench of this property has been identified as floodplain but contains no
associated wetlands within the boundaries of the subject parcel.
The Cowardin classification for the subject wetlands are:
SYSTEM: Palustrine, CLASS: Forested,
Tables 1 -4 (above) present vegetation data that support this classification.
4.2 WETLAND CATEGORIZATION
Following the classification specified by Jefferson County Unified Development Code,
Section 3, Land Use Districts, the following classifications would apply for the wetlands
associated with the subject property. Ratings forms for these wetlands are found in the
appendix.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 20
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
Wetland A is classified as a Category llI wetland, yet non-jurisdictional due to its
small size (approximately 7200 sf).
Wetland B is classified as a Category I wetland.
Wetland C is classified as a Category I wetland.
4.3 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE HYDROLOGY AND SOILS
Hydrologic characteristics of these three wetlands are fairly simple and defined. Water
discharges from the toe or the side of the steep slopes and creates wetland characteristics
below this point. At some location, the wetland discharge into the Duckabush River,
either on or offsite.
Soil permeability also influences the duration of inundation and soil saturation. For
example, clay-rich soil absorbs water more slowly than sandy or loamy soil; therefore,
clay-rich soil has lower permeability and a longer period of saturation.
The Soil Survey of Jefferson County (USDA, NRCS formerly SCS, 1975) has identified
four soil types associated with the site, one mapped within the area where the wetlands
were found (Ahl very gravelly loam). This soil type may be typical of the areas
surrounding the wetlands but does not resemble the soils found within each of the onsite
wetlands. The Jefferson County soil survey document describes this soil type as a dark
red loam (2.5YR 3/6). This soil type was not found in, or within, the vicinity of the
wetlands.
4.40FFSITE WETLANDS
Wetland B and C continue offsite. Wetland B continues to the west while Wetland C
continues to the east.
4.5 WETLAND FUNCTION
Several researchers and wetland scientists have developed assessment methods for
wetland functions (Reppert et al. 1979, Adamus 1983, Adamus et al. 1987). Physical
characteristics, topography, water flow (hydrology), watershed location, vegetation,
wildlife species use and adjacent land use are considered in these assessments. The
relative importance of each individual function is identified by the percentage
contribution to the overall system. The result of each of these efforts has shown, in
practice, that professional judgment is very important in assessing wetland functions and
care must be taken to eliminate as much bias as possible. Perhaps Ischinger (1992)
describes wetland functions and their assessment best.
"...wetland function is a biological, chemical or physical attribute or
process that occurs in wetlands as a result of geomorphic, topographic,
physiographic and hydrologic position in the landscape. Many of these
functions also occur in upland and aquatic ecosystems at different
temporal and spatial rates or scales--others are unique to wetlands.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc.
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
Wetland functions are bounded by source and vector of water, geomorphic
setting, hydrodynamics, and water chemistry ....
Wetland functions are in dynamic equilibria with their watersheds subject
to successional processes and catastrophic events such as floods, fire, or
human activities. Wetland size, continuity, and contiguity to other
wetland, upland, and aquatic ecosystems are important to functional
performance at the basin, regional, and continental landscape levels."
A wetland is typically assessed by assigning a percentage rating to each of the following
six functions that it provides:
Water Quality Improvement: Wetlands help maintain and improve water quality of
rivers and other water bodies naturally by filtering out nutrients, waste, and sediment.
Storm and Floodwater Control: Wetlands reduce the damaging effects of flood flows
by temporarily storing floodwaters, slowing flood velocities, and reducing peak flood
flow.
· Groundwater Recharge/Discharge: Wetlands provide groundwater recharge or
discharge through a complex system of geology, soils, and surface topography.
· Biological Support: Wetlands provide productive systems used for nesting,
spawning, rearing, and feeding for a variety of species.
· Hydrologic Support: Wetlands maintain the stability and integrity of the water system
by providing a hydrologic connection to lakes or streams.
· Shoreline Protection: Wetland vegetation prevents severe erosion by reducing the
impact of waves and current on the upland areas.
In this report, as noted previously, wetland functions are depicted by a pie chart to
illustrate various functions that are directly related to the wetland's unique combination
of physical characters. A high functioning wetland will be shown as a well-balanced pie
chart. When one function significantly outweighs other functions, the wetland lacks
certain aspects that promote multiple functions.
The pie chart below (Figure 6) illustrates the overall assessment of the functions
associated with all wetlands on the subject property. The relative importance of each
individual function is identified by the percentage contribution to the overall system.
Physical characteristics, topography, hydrology, watershed location, vegetation, species
use and adjacent land use were considered in this assessment.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 22
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
FIGURE 6: WETLANDS A, B AND C FUNCTION PIE CHART
· Storm and Floodwater Control: These wetlands provide low storm and floodwater
control function. Rainfall, direct runoff, and shallow groundwater discharge result in
the hydrology in these wetlands. These wetlands help to regulate a portion of the
discharge into the Duckabush River. Wetland B and the offsite portion of C provide
for significant stormwater attenuation.
· Biological Support: These wetlands provide moderate to good wildlife habitat and
associated biological support. The land surrounding the property and wetland is
sparsely developed and provides access for terrestrial animals to the wetland. Elk and
other ungulate tracks were noted during the delineation. The wetland structure itself is
very high in complexity with forested components, flooded as well as saturated areas,
standing snags, and a dense riparian edge. The steep slopes do confine the wetland
and slightly restricts migration into and out of the wetland by smaller amphibian
species.
· Hydrological Support: There are no direct linkages from Wetland A to any surface
water drainages. There is a direct linkage from Wetlands B and C to the Duckabush
River. This function is rated a moderate for these wetlands.
· Water Quality Improvement: These wetlands rated low in water quality improvement
due to their location in a pristine, fairly undeveloped area. Runoff from surrounding
slopes that enters the wetlands is not likely to contain much pollutant load.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 23
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
· Groundwater Discharge: Groundwater discharge is the most significant function of
all three onsite wetlands. The large size of Wetland B and C likely contribute a
significant amount to water to the Duckabush River. Wetland A, while small,
supports a permanent pond thorough groundwater discharge.
· Shoreline Protection: Shoreline protection is not a function of these wetlands.
4.6 WETLAND VALUES
Wetland values are determined from observations of ecological importance, wetland size
and location, and the existing impacts associated with the wetland as a result of human
presence. Wetland values depend upon perceptions and opinions of individuals and
society as a whole. As with wetland function, much professional judgment and care must
be taken to minimize bias from each independent assessment. Smardon (1988) has
identified the following socioeconomic values of wetlands that are useful in developing
an overall understanding of wetland importance.
· Aesthetic Sensory Experience
The quality of the sensory experience in the landscape is related to a complex range of
factors. Factors determining aesthetic value include access to the wetland, spatial
relationship to the vicinity, and the physical, biological, and hydrological characteristics
of the wetland. Although the visual experience is stressed, other sensory experience is
not discounted.
· Recreational Quality
Recreational experience in wetlands is partially determined by the type of wetland
encountered. Factors, which influence the recreational quality, include water flow
velocity, water depth, stream pattern complexity, wetland contiguity and size, physical
access, water quality, and floral and faunal species.
· Natural Heritage and Cultural Values
Natural heritage and cultural values apply to wetlands that have current historic and
cultural significance, or have documented potential for future cultural, educational or
scientific use.
· Open Space Value
Wetlands become open space in the landscape because of their wetness, soil conditions
and inaccessibility. They define or break up developed areas. Even if a wetland system
is totally degraded from a biological or hydrologic aspect, it still has this value. Factors,
which determine the open space value, include size, location, access, setting and
proximity to other habitat areas.
The values of these wetlands would, in general, be classified as very high because of their
pristine nature and location within the watershed. Natural heritage and cultural values are
also classified as minimal since the site does not lie in an area of significant scientific
research or Native American use. Aesthetic value of the wetlands is high to the proposed
purchasers of the property but limited to the public because of their location.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 24
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
4.7 DUCKABUSH RIVER
The Duckabush River borders approximately 800 feet of the subject property along the
southern and western edges. The western edge has shown some bank cutting in the past
year in the vicinity of Wetland B. Skunk cabbages from Wetland B are currently under
water. Discussions with Jeff Davis (WDFW 2002) supported our observations. He
confirmed that the side channel that borders the subject property now takes roughly 50
percent of the flow of the river. Rock outcrops along the southern property boundary
appear to keep the channel in place and prevents meandering.
Salmonids utilize the lower Duckabush River, with the lower 2.3 RM as the most
productive. The SASSI report (1994) documented that late fall chum and pinks runs are
both healthy while the coho and steelhead are depressed.
Again, the top of bank (which in most cases, was similar to OHW), was flagged and
surveyed as part of the field effort. No development is planned or proposed within 150
feet of the river. No development is planned within the floodplain of the Duckabush
River which is found between 26 and 30 foot elevation (FEMA 1982).
The PHS map has not been used for this wetland delineation report but elk habitat is
noted on the Jefferson County critical areas GIS database. Salmonids are present as
identified above. Mr. Davis stated that harlequin duck, osprey and eagle would likely be
found on the PHS search of the area (personal communication 2002).
4.8 IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL
This wetland delineation has been performed in conjunction with the preparation for the
SPAAD plan for the site. Re-establishment of a home on the site will result in some
environmental impact to the site. Wetland, river and floodplain field survey and
delineation performed by AES and Wood Surveying are shown on Figure 5. According
to the current single family development proposal, no wetlands will be filled with the re-
establishment of a building site on this property. Wetland buffers are currently affected
by the existing road onsite and will also be affected by the installation of a well, septic
system and future home.
Wetlands B and C are jurisdictional Category I wetlands. Wetland A is a non-
jurisdictional Category m due to its small size. Wetland buffers for B and C are either 75
or 150 feet depending on the grandfather issue.
A critical point that needs to be considered in the development, or redevelopment, of one
homesite on this property is that Jefferson County documents have already established the
presence of a home on the site. In 1977 a road easement was recorded (attached in the
Appendix) that stated:
Whereas it is necessary to create and provide an easement for roadway for
purposes of ingress, egress and utilities, across the property described above, and
to burden said property and make said easement appurtenant, thereto ...... over the
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 25
22 Acre Parcel off the Duckabush Road, Wetland Delineation Report
existing road in a westerly direction through the SE1/4, of the SE V2 of the NE1/2
of Section 17, T25N, R2W to a point 255 feet from a house now owned .....
Seconarily, in 1990, the centedine of the access road into the property, from the
Duckabush Road, was also recorded, further establishing the continued existence of a
homesite on the subject property (easement also attached in the Appendix).
Both of these recorded documents point to the presence and continued use of the property
as a homesite. The buildings onsite also support this (See Figure 5 and photographs in
the Appendix). This is important to the development (redevelopment?) of home on this
property because the layout of the critical areas onsite (Duckabush River, floodplain,
wetlands, steep slopes) make it impossible to put the building footprint outside of all
those critical area buffers (See Figure 5). The new wetland buffer regulations are
especially onerous. It is likely, through use of the previous wetland regulations, through a
grandfather situation, to comply with previous wetland buffer regulations. Some buffer
averaging or reduction may also be required with that scenario.
Short-term and long-term impacts could occur as a result of implementing the proposed
project. Short-term impacts are impacts that could occur during the construction phase of
the project. Long-term impacts primarily include impacts that could occur as a result of
storm water runoff and from removing wetland buffer and upland vegetation from the
site.
A number of septic perc test holes have been established on this site. All have yielded
insufficient soil depth to allow for a conventional gravity system. At this point, both the
primary and reserve systems are to be located on a flat bench east of Wetland A adjacent
to the northern property boundary. A pumped system with an alternative treatment are
likely to be required for this property. At a later date, upon further investigation of onsite
soils in association with the actual building permit, if it is found that there is suitable
room on the intermediate bench for the septic system, a revision to the site plan will be
requested.
Similarly, two potential well sites have been identified. The applicant will attempt to use
at least one of these two locations in establishing a viable water source for the property.
In conclusion, this 22 acre parcel, while appearing large, is severely encumbered by
critical areas (wetlands, Duckabush River, floodplain and steep slopes). This SPAAD is
tied around receiving approval to locate a homesite on the central bench of the property in
the vicinity of the existing structures.
Applied Environmental Services, Inc. 26
Kent, D.M. (ed.). 1994. Applied Wetlands Science and Technology. Lewis Publishers,
Boca Raton.
King County Surface Water Management Division. 1994. Final East Lake Sammamish
Basin and Non-point Action Plan. Seattle, WA.
Kollmorgen Corporation. 1988. Munsell soil color charts. Munsell Color, Macbeth
Division of Kollmorgen Corporation. Baltimore.
National Geographic 2001 National Geographic Topographic program Washington
Pojar, Jim and Andy MacKinnon, et al. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast
Washington, Oregon, British Columbia and Alaska. 1994. Lone Pine Publishing,
Canada.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest
(Region 9). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9), Washington,
D.C.
Reed, P.B., Jr., Peters, D., Goudzwaard, J., Lines, I. and Weinmann, F. 1993.
Supplement to List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9).
December 1993. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Supplement to Biological Report 88
(26.9), May 1988, Washington, D.C.
Reppert, R.T., W. Siglio, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland values
- concepts and methods for wetlands evaluation. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute
for Water Resources Research Report 70-R 1, Fort Belvoir.
Smardon, R.C. 1988. Aesthetic, recreational, landscape values of urban wetlands. Pages
92-96 in J. Kusler, editor. National Symposiums: Urban Wetlands. Berne, New York.
Terraserver.com 2002 online air photo Duckabush, Washington, United States 1994
U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service (USDA, NRCS formerly SCS). 1988. Hydric soils
of the State of Washington.
:... U.S.D.A., NRCS formerly SCS. Jefferson County Soil Survey. 1975.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1989. A guide to conducting wetland
inventories. Olympia.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1991. Washington State wetlands rating
system for western Washington. Publication #91-57. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1993. Washington State wetlands rating
system for western Washington. Publication #93-74. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands
Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication #96-94. Olympia.
Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1994. Salmon and Steelhead Stock
Inventory. Olympia, Washington.
United Stated Fish and Wildlife Service. 1987. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
Map. Online www.ecos.fws.gov/nwi.mapplet/summap.html.
Williams 1975. A Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization. Washington
Department of Fisheries.
Figure 10nsite Shed
Figure 2 Collapsed Building
Figure 3 Barn - Labeled and Chicken Coop on Map
Figure 4 Existing Road in Vicinity of Wetland A
Wetlands Rating Office Data Form
Background Information:
Name of Rater: ~.ifq0~.~--~v'm{-~3~vl Affr}ia}io-n: ~',T~ Date: ~j/~[O ~
Gover~,ent Juris~ction of wctl~d: ~t~~~ ~~
Locaaon: 1/~:~ or 1/4 S: ~ SEC: ~NSHP: ~u RNGE:
souRcEs OF INFORMATION: (Check ~1 sources ~at apply)
Site visit: ~ USGS To~ Map: ~ ~I map: ~Aerial Photo: ~Soils su~ey: ~'
O~er: Describe:
When office anWor field data forms ~e complet~ enter Category here: }~
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS BELOW. If the source agency Data Catagory
idenlifies the wetland as satisfying any of ~e questions bch)w, Source (the highest
circle ~e category in "CA,GORY" column, qualifies)
Cato~ory I Ouestions
A. Is the wetland in a Section and Subsection ~at has b~n docu- DNR - Yes: Next
mented ~ a habitat ~at performs a liI~ sup~)~ ~nction for any State Natural ~n
or F~erflly listed ~reatened or Endanger~ plant or animfl s~cies'? Heritage;~Ntr~o t~ ~
For the put,scs of Ibis rating system, "documcnt~" means the and~ Qudsfio
welled is on ~e appropriate state database. WDW
NOTE: ~e raOng of a wetland is incomplete in most cas~ wi~out
~s d~umentafion.
B. Does ~e wetl~d cont~n in~viduals of F~eral or State-listed DNR- Yes: Category I
~eaten~ or End~ger~ plant s~ies; OR Natur~ No: Next
Does ~e wefl~d contain document~ occurenc~.of t'~eral Heritage' Question
or ~ate-list~ ~eaten~ or End~ger~ wildlife and
s~cies manag~ by the WasMngton Dep~ment of Wildlife? WDW
C. Dt~s the welled contain documented occurences of State or WDW; Yes: Category I
Federally lisled ~ealcned or Endangered fish s~cics, OR rac~s WDF No: Next
of fish, managed by ll~e Washington Depa~ment of Wildlife Question
or the Wastfington Dcp~ment of Fisheries?
10
Wetlands Rating Office Data Form (continued)
D. Is the wetland alreadY on record with the Washington Natural DNR- /~_tx~ry I
Heritage Program as a high quality native wetland? Natural ,N(}:Next
H rita e
E. Does the wetland contain documented regionally significant WDW Yes: Category 1
waterfowl or shorebird concentration areas? ¢o: Nex. l~
F. Is the wetland d(xzumenlcd as a Calcgory I Welland of l~ocal l,ocal Yes: Category 1
Category II Questions
G. Is the wetland in a Township, Section and Subsection that has DNR- Yes: Next
been documented as a habitat for any State listed Sensitive plant Natural ~on
or animal species? Heritage
Program; ,,,~uestion K9
and
WDW
H. Does the wetland contain individuals of Slate-listed Sensitive DNR Yes: Cat. II
plant species? Natural No: Ncxl
Hcrilagc Question
I. [)ocs the wetland conlain documented occurcnccs ofTcdcrally ()r WI)W Yes: Cat. I!
state-listed sensitive wildlife species'? No: Next
Question
J. Does the wetland contain documented occurences of state or WDF Yes: Cat. II
federally listed Sensitive fish species'? WI)W No: Next
Question
K. I)oes lhe wetland contain priority species or habilals documenled WI)W Yes: Cal. II
by Washington Department of Wildlife's Priority Habitals and (~I~~
!Species Program ?''~ ' ~
L. Is Iht wclland documcnlcd as a Category II Wclland el' l,ocal I,ocal Yes: Cat. II
Significance? Government
Category III Questions
M. Is the wetland documented as a Camgory III wetland of local Local Yes: Cat. III
,significance. Government
k Rating Field '~
I1
· · Wetlands Rating Field Data Form
Background Information:
Name of wetland (if known): [x.J~,v,,_c~ ~ - ,Dkxc~,do,./,o[4
Government Jurisdiction of wetland: ~4 ~ (~~_ _
I.ocafion: I/~Secfion: ~ of 1/4 S: ~ Section: ,~ Township: ~ ~ Range: ~
Sources of Information: (Check all sources that apply)
Site visit: ~ USGS To~ Map: k NWI map: ~ Aerial Photo: ~ Soils survey:
O~er: Describe:
When ~e Field Data t'orm is complete enter Category here:
Q.1. High Quality Natural Wetland Circle Answers
Answer lMs question if you have adequate inlbrmafion or ex~riencc t() do
If not lind someone wilh ~e ex.aisc to answer Ibc questions. %Ch, it' tl~c
answer to questions la, lb =d lc are all NO, contact the Natural Heritage
program of DNR.
la. Human caused disturbances.
Is ~ere sig~fic~t evidence of human-caused changes to toB)graphy or
hydrology of ~e wetl~d ~ indicated by any of ~e R)llowing conditions?
Consider only changes ~at may have taken place in ~e lmst 5 decades· ~e
impacts of ch~ges done e~lier have probably been stabilized and ~e wetland
ecosystem will be close to reac~ng some new equilibrium ~at may represent
a ~gh qu~ity wetland.
Iai. Ups~eam watershed > 12% impervious. Yes: go to Q.2
1~. Wetland is ditched and water llow is not obst~clcd. Yes: go to Q,2
la3. Wetland h~ been grad~, filled, logged.
la4. Water in wetl~d is controlled by dikes, weirs, etc. Yes: go to Q.2
Wetland is greed. Yes: go to ~.2
11 a~; Oflmr in~cators of ~sturb~ce ~list below~ ~ ~O 0~ ~
25
lb Are there populations of non-native plants which are currently present, YES: go to Q.2
cover more than 10% of the wetland, and appear to be invading native No: go to lc.
populations? Briefly describe any non-native plant populations and
Information source(s):
lc. Is there evidence of human-caused disturbances which have visibly YES: go to Q.2
degraded water quality. Evidence of the degradation of water quality NO: Possible Cat. I
include: direct (untreated) runoff from roads or parking lots; presence, contact DNR
or historic evidence, of waste dumps; oily sheens; the smell of organic
chemicals; or lifestock use. Briefly describe:
0.2. Irreplaceable Ecological Functions: ~-- ~
Does the wetland: ...(~O to all: go to
0) have at least 1/4 acre of organic soils deeper than 16 inches Y~S go tO 2aT"'----~
and the wetland is relatively undisturbed; OR
[Ilf the answer is NO because the wetland is disturbed briefly describe:
Indicators of disturbance may include:
- Wetland has been graded, filled, logged;
- Organic soils on the surface are dried-out for
more than h',.fl f of the year;
- Wetland receives direct stormwater runoff from
urban or agricultural areas.];
OR
O have a forested class greater than I acre; YES': Go to 2b
OR
t~ have characteristics of an estuarine system; YES: Go to 2c
OR
~ have eel grass, I'loaling or non-floating kelp b~s? YES: Go to 2d
2a. Bogs and Fens
Are any of the three following conditions met for the area of organic soil?
2a. 1. Are Sphagnum mosses a common ground cover (>30%) and the
cover of invasive species (see Table 3) is less than 10%?
Is the area ol-'sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils > 1/2 acre'? YES: Category I
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils 1/4-1/2 acre'? YES: Category II
NO: Go to 2a. 3
2a.2. Is there an area of organic soil which has an emergent class with at least
one species from Table 2, ,and cover of invasive species is < 10% (see Table 3)'?
Is the area of herbaceous plants and deep organic soils > 1/2 acre'? YES: Category I
"-' Is the area of herbacexms plants and deep organic soils 1/4-1/2 acre'? YES: Category II
NO: Go to 2a.3
26
2a. 3. Is the vegetation a mixture of only herbaceous plants and Sphagnum
mosses with no scrub/shrub or forested classes'?
Is the area of herbaceous plants, Sphagnum, and deep organic
soils > 1/2 acre? YES: Category I
Is the area of herbaceous plants, Sphagnum, and deep organic
soils 1/4-1/2 acre? YES: Category II
NO: Go to Q.3.
Q.2b. Mature forested wetland.
2b. 1. Does 50% of the cover of upper forest canopy consist of evergreen YES: Category I
trees older than 80 years or deciduous trees older than 50 years? NO: Go to 2b.2
Note: The size of trees is often not a measure of age, and size cannot
be used as a surrogate for age (see guidance).
2b.2. Does 50% of the cover of torest canopy consist of evergreen trees older YES: Go to 2b.3
than 50 years, AND is the structural diversity or'the forest high as NO: Go to Q.3
characterized by an additional layer or' trees 20'-49' tall, shrubs 6' - 20',
tall, and a herbaceous groundcover?
2b.3. Does < 25% of the areal cover in the herbaceous/groundcover or YES: Category I
the shrub layer consist ofinvasiv~exotic plant species from the list on p. 19'? NO: Go to Q.3
Q.2c. Estuarine wetlands.
2cl. Is the wetland listed as National Wildlife Rel:uge, National Park, YES: Category I
National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park, or NO: Go to 2c.2
Educational, Environmental or Scientific Reserves designated under
WAC 332-30-1517 .....
2c.2. Is the wetland > 5 acres; ............................ YES: Category I
Note: If an area contains patches of salt tolerant vegetation that are
1) less than 600 feet apart and that are separated by mudflats that go
dry on a Mean Low Tide, or
2) separated by tidal channels that are less than 100 feet wide;
all the vegetated areas are to be considered together in calculating
the wetland area.
or is the wetland 1-5 acres; ...................................... YES: Go to 2c.3
or is the wetland < 1 acre'? ....................................... YES: Go to 2c.4
27
2c.3. Does the wetland meet at least 3 of the following 4 criteria: ........ YES: Category I
NO: Category II
- minimum existing evidence of human related disturbance such as
diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing or the presence or' non-
native plant species (see guidance/hr definition);
- surface water connection with tidal saltwater or tidal fi'eshwater;
- at least 75% of the wetland has a 100' buffer of ungrazed pasture,
open water, shrub or forest;
- has at least 3 of the following features: low marsh; high marsh; tidal
channels; lagoon(s);woody debris; or contiguous freshwater wetland.
2c.4. Does the wetland meet all of the four criteria under 2c3. (above)?.. YES: Category II
NO: Category III
Q.2d. Eel Grass and Kelp Beds.
2d. I. Are eel grass beds present'? .................................. YES: Category.I
NO: go to 2d.2
2d.2. Are there floating or non-floating kelp bed(s) present with greater than YES: Category I
50% macro algal cover in the month of August or September? ......... NO: Category II
0.3. Category IV wetlands.
3a. Is the wetland: less than 1 acre and,.
hydrologically isolatecl and.
comprised of one vegetated class that is dominated (> 8()% areal cover) ~V
by one species from Table 3 (page 19) or Table 4 (page 20 ) (
3b. Is the wetland: less than two acres
and, hydrologically isolated,
with one vegetated class, and > 90% of areal cover is any combination of YE__~S_: Category IV
species from Table 3 (page 19) ~
3c. Is the wetland excavated from upland and a pond smaller than 1 acre YE.~E.~S.' C~ategory IV
without a surface water connection to streams, lakes, rivers, or other (NO: go to Q-~. )
wetland, and has < (). 1 acre of vegetation.
28
Q.4. Significant habitat value.
· . Answer all questions and enter data requested. Circle scores that qualify
4a. Total wetland area acres points
Estimate area, select from choices in the near-right column, and score in the > 200 6
far column: 40- 2(X) 5
L_t~ ,,-q 10 - 40 4
Enter acreage of wetland here: 13 ,~ {acres, and source: ~'CN.(~]'-e.A4 5-l0 3
?
1-5 2
0.1 - 1
< O. 1 0
4b, Wetland classes: Circle the wetland classes below that qualify:
OpenWater: if the area of open water is > 1/4acre,.~'~i'x~x,-,~' ¢'~
Aquatic Beds: if the area of aquatic beds > 1/4 acre, v~ ^
Emergent: if the area of emergent class is > 1/4 acre, \ ~ ~ (J_ # or' classes
1 .....
Scrub-Shrub: il' the area of scrub-shrub class is > 1/4 acre, "x/tx~ c)\$C/ 2 ....... 3
3 ....... 6
Forested: if area of forested class is > 1/4 acre, 4 ....... 8
5 ....... 1{}
Add the number of wetland classes, above, that qualify, and then
score according to the columns at right.
e.g. Il' there are 4 classes (aquatic beds, open water, emergent &
scrub- shrub), you would circle 8 points in the far right column.
4c. Plant species diversity.
For each wetland class (at right) that qualilics in Class # svccies in class Points
4b above, count the number of different plant species Aquatic Bed I ()
you can lind that cover more than 5% of the ground. 2 1
You do not have to name them. 3 2
>3 3
Score in column at far right:
e.g. If a wetland has an aquatic bed class with 3 species,Emergent 1 0
an emergent class with 4 species and a scrub-shrub 2-3 1
~ class with 2 species you would circle 2, 2, and 1 in thc 4-5 2
far column. > 5 3
Note: Any plant species with a cover of> 5%
~ ~ qualifies for points within a class, even lhosc Scrub-Shrub 1
that are not of that class. 2 1
3-4 2
>4 3
Forested 1
2 1
3-4 2
>4 3
29
4d. Structural diversity.
If the wedand has a forested class, add I point if each of the following
classes is present within the forested class and is lanier than 1/4 acrg:
-trees > 50' tall ..................... YES - I
-trees 20'.. 49' tall ......... .......... YES - 1
-shrubs ............................. YES - 1
-herbaceous ground cover ............. YES - 1
Also add 1 point if there is any "open water" or "aquatic bed" class
immediately next to the forested area (ie. there is no scrub/shrub or
emergent vegetation between them). YES - 1
4e. Decide from thc diagrams below whether interspersion between High - 5
wetland classes is high, moderate, low or none? If you think the Moderate - 3
amount o~' interspersion falls in between thc diagrams score accordingly Low - 1
(i.e. a moderately high amount of instcrspcrsion would score a 4,
while a moderately low amount would score a 2)
none low low
moderate moderate high
4f. Habitat features.
Answer questions below, circle features that apply, and score to right:
Is there evidence that the open or standing water wits caused by beavers YES = 2
Is a heron rookery located within 300".) YES = 1
Arc rap[or nest/s located within 300'? YES = 1
Arc there at least 3 standing dead trees (snags) per acre greater than
10" in diameter at "breast height" (DBH)?. YES = 1
Arc there itt least 3 downed logs per acre with a diameter
> 6" t'ot' at least 10' in length?
Arc there area.'-; (vegetated or unvegctatcd) within the wetland that are
pondcd ['or at least 4 months out of thc year, and thc wetland has not
qualified as having an open water class in Question 4b. ?
[4g. Connection to streams. (Score one answer only.) '
!4g. 1. Does the wetland provide habitat for fish at any time o1~' the year AND '
does it have a perennial surface water connection to a fish hearing stream. Y
4g.2 Does the wetland provide fish habitat seasonally AND does it have
a seasonal surface water connection to a lish bearing stream. YES = 4
4g.3 Does the wetland function to exit)fl organic matter through a surface
water connection at all times of the year to a perennial stream. YES = 4
4g.4 Does the wetland function to export organic matter through a surface
water connection to a stream on a seasonal basis? YES = 2
4h. Buffers.
Score the existing buffers on a scale of 1-5 based on the following four descriptions.
If the condition of the buffers do not exactly match the description, score either a
point higher or lower depending on whether the buffers are less or more degraded.
Forest, scrub, native grassland or open water buffers are present for
more than lrXraround 95% of the circumference. 5 Sc~
--
Forest, scrub, native grassland, or open water buffers wider than 1(×)'
for more than 1/2 of the wetland circumference, or a forest, scrub,
grasslands, or open water buffers for more than 50' around 95% of the
circumference. Score = 3
Forest, scrub, native grassland, or open water buffers wider than 1(×)'
tbr more than 1/4 of the wetland circumference, or a tbrest, scrub, native
grassland, or open water bulTers wider than 50' t'or more than 1/2 of the
wetland circumference. Score = 2
No roads, buildings tlr paved areas within 1(×)' ill' the wetland for mt)re than
95% of the wetland circumference. Score = 2
No roads, buildings or paved areas within 25' of the wetland for more
than 95% of the circumference, or
No roads buildings or paved areas within 50' of the wetland for more than
1/2 of the wetland circumference. Score = 1
Paved areas, industrial areas or residential construction (with less than 5()'
between houses) are less than 25 feet from the wetland for more than 95%
of the circumference of the wetland. Score =
31
!4i. Connection to other habitat areas:
Select tile descripli(m which best matches the site being evaluated.
-Is the wetland connected to, or part of, a riparian corridor at least I(X)' wide
connecting two or more wetlands; or, is there an upland connection present >
wide with good forest or shrub cover (>25% cover) connecting it with a
Significant Habitat Area? YES = 5
- Is the wetland connected to any other Habitat Area with either 1) a forested/shrub
corridor < lC)O' wide, or 2) a a corridor that is > 100'wide, but has a low vegetative
cover less than 6 feet in height?
-Is the wetland cOnnected to, or a part or, a riparian corridor between 5{) - I00' wide
with scrub/shrub or forest cover connection to olher wetlands'! YES = 3
- Is file wetland connected to any other Habitat Area with narrow corridor (<1{×)')
of low vegetation (< 6' in height)? YES = 1
- Is the wetland and its buffer (if the buffer is less than 50' wide) completely isolated
by development (urban, residential with a density greater than 2/acre, or industrial)? YES = 0
Now add the scores circled (for O.5a - O.Si above) to get a total.
Is the Total greater than or equal to 22 points?i.., .YES =Cate. e.g~
,D [') (~ NO = Category III "~
Wetlands Rating Office Data Form
Back§round Information:
Name of Rater: (~!$0~r/,"',~-o-~.~ Arfflia'tio-n: ~','T'~C.. Date: ~j/Ic[[O 2...
Government Jurisdiction of wetland: ~-e ~:F:e_~m'~ ~ ~ ~.~
./
Location: -¢ of S: ¢ SEC: 1'7
souRcEs OF INFORMATION: (Check all sources that apply)
Site visit:__v/ USGS Tofo Map: ~//NWI map: __u// Aerial Photo: ~ Soils survey:
Other: Describe:
When office and/or field data forms are completed enter Category here:
ANSWER ALL QUESTIONS BELOW. Il'thc source agency Data Catagory
identifies thc welland as satisfying any of thc questions below, S(~urce (the highest
circle the category in "CATEGORY" column, qualifies)
Category I Questions
A. Is the wetland in a Secti(m and Subsection that has been docu- DNR - Yes: Next
taunted as a habitat that performs a life support function for any Slale Natural Question
or F~erally listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species'? Heritage; F'~>: 'Go t(--f~'~) ~
For thc purtx)scs of this rating syslcm, "documented" means the and--~ Question I) )-
wetland is on the appropriate state database. WDW
NOTE: The rating of a wetland is incomplete in most cases without
this documentation.
i B. Does the wetland contain individuals of F~eral or State-listed DNR- Yes: Category
: Threatened or Endangered plant species; OR Natural Nc): Next
, Does the wetland contain documented occurences of I'~eral Heritage' Question
i or state-listed Threatened or Endangered wildlife and
'species managed by the Wasl'dngton Department of Wildlife? WDW
(2. l)tves thc wetland Contain documenled occurcnces of State or WDW; Yes: Category
Federally listed Thrcalcncd or Endangered fish species, dP, races WDF No: Next
t)f fish, managed by the Washington Department t~l' Wildlil'c Question
or thc Wasl~ington Dcparhncnt iff Fisheries?
10
Wetlands Rating Office Data Form (continued)
D. Is the wetland already on record with the Washington Natural DNR- Y~es; C la!.qgory I
Heritage Program as a high quality native wetland.'? Natural ~o: Ncx. t~
E. Does the wetland contain documented regionally significant WDW Yes:Category 1
waterfowl or shorebird concentration areas?
F. Is the wetland d(x:umentcd as a Calcgt)ry I Wethmd or 1,deal l,{~cal Yes: (.:atcgory 1
Significance? Government K,,~Que~
Category I! Questions
!G. Is the wetland in a Township, Section and Subsection that has DNR- Yes: Next
been documented as a habitat Ibr any State listed Sensitive plant Natural ~tion
or animal species? Heritage
Program; Question K9
and
WDW
H. Does the wclland contain individuals of Statc-lislcd Sensitive DNR Yes: Cat. II
plant species? Nalural No: Next
Heritage Question
I. l)()es the wetland conlain documented occurenccs of'federally ()r WI)W Yes: Cal. Il
state-listed sensitive wildlife species'? No: Next
Question
J. Does the wetland contain documcnled occurcnccs el'state or WDF Yes: Cat. II
federally listed Sensitive fish species'? WDW No: Next
Question
K. Docs thc wetland contain priority species or habilals documented WI)W Yes: Cal. II
by Washington Dep~ment ol'Wildlifc's Pri(,rity Habitals and
Species Program ?
ii,. Is thc welland documented as a Caicg~ry II Wclland of l,ocal l,ocal Yes: Cat. 1I
Significance? Gc)vernxncnt
Category I11 Questions
M. Is the wetland documented as a Category Iii wetland of local Local Yes: Cat. Iii
significance. Government ~dX,~
11
Wetlands Rating Field Data Form
Background Information:
Nameot'wetland(ifknown): [,,O~v~d ~ -.~(34..~,~/ooO[.4, -0/~..xl/-~ _
Government JUrisdiction of wetland: '-~4~ ~ ¢.GX/,_a/xlt-%_
I.ocation: I/,~.Section:. ~ of 1/4 S: ~,/~ Section: i-7 Township: 7[0~-t*j Range: _~["-) --
Sources of Information: (Check all sources that apply)
Site visit: ~'~ USGS Topo Map: ~- NWI map: ~ Aerial Photo:
Other: __ Describe:
When The Field Data Ibrm is complete enter Category here:
O.1. High Quality Natural Wetland Circle Answers
Answer this question ii' you have adequate infi)rmatiim or experience to
It' not lind someone wilh the expertise to answer thc questions. Then, it' the
answer to questions la, lb and lc are all NO, contact the Natural Heritage
program of DNR.
la. Human caused disturbances.
Is there significant evidence of human-caused changes to tOlxlgraphy or
hydrology of the wetland as indicated by any of the Ibllowing conditions?
Consider only changes that may have taken place in the la.st 5 decades. The
impacts of changes done earlier have probably been stabilized and the wetland
ecosystem will be close to reaching some new equilibrium that may represent
a high qu',.dity wetland.
lal. Upstream watershed > 12% impervious. Yes: go to Q.2
la2. Wetland is ditched and water flow is n(~l obstructed. Yes: go to Q.2
la3. Wetland h~ been graded, filled, logged. Yes: go to Q.2
la4. Water in wetland is controlled by dikes, weirs, etc. Yes: go to Q.2
la5. Wetland is grazed. Yes: go to Q.2
1 a6. Other indicators of disturbance (list below) Yes: go to Q.2
25
lb Are there populations of non-native plants which are currently present, YE~_: go to Q.2
cover more than 10% of the wetland, and appear to be invading native 'qq-6: g~
populations? Briefly describe any non-native plant populations and (~
Information source(s):.
lc. Is there evidence of human-caused disturbances which have visibly YES: go to Q.2
degraded water quality. Evidence of the degradation of water quality~~'~'~ '.
include: direct (untreated) runoff from roads or parking lots; presence, .
or historic evidence, of waste dumps; oily sheens; the smell of orgardc
chemicals; or lifestock use. Briefly describe:
0.2. Irreplaceable Ecological Functions:
l)oes the wetland: (NO to all: go to Q.3)
O have at least 1/4 acre of organic soils deeper than 16 inches YES go It) 2a.
and the wetland is relatively undisturbed; OR
[IIf the answer is NO because the wetland is disturbed briefly describe:
Indicators of disturbance may include: .
- Wetland has been graded, filled, logged;
- Organic soils on the surface are dried-out for
more than hall' of the year;
- Wetland receives direct stormwater runoff from
urban or agricultural areas.];
OR
I~ have a forested class greater than 1 acre; Y...~ES': Go.to 2b.o.~2b.._~
OR
~ have characteristics ti'an estuarine system; YES: Go to 2c
OR
, O have eel grass, floating or non-lloating kelp beds? YES: Go to 2d
2a. Bogs and Fens
Are any of the three following conditions met for the area of organic soil?
2a. 1. Are Sphagnum mosses a common ground cover (>30%) and the
cover of invasive species (see Table 3) is less than 1()%?
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils > 1/2 acre'? YES: Category I
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep orga~c soils 1/4-1/2 acre? YES: Category II
NO: Go to 2a. 3
2a.2. Is there an area of organic soil which has an emergent class with at least
one species from Table 2, and cover of invasive species is < 1{)% (see Table 3)?
Is the area or herbaceous plants and deep organic soils > 1/2 acre'? YES: Category I
Is the area of herbaceous plants and deep organic ~)ils 1/4-1/2 acre'? YES: Category II
NO: Go to 2a.3
26
2a. 3. Is the vegetation a mixture of only herbaceous plants and Sphagnum
mosses with no scrub/shrub or forested classes7
Is the area of herbaceous plants, Sphagnum, and deep organic
soils > 1/2 acre? YES: Category I
Is the area of herbaceous plants, Sphagnum, and deep organic
soils 1/4-1/2 acre? YES: Category II
NO: Go to Q.3.
Q.2b. Mature forested wetland.
2b. 1. Does 50% of the cover of upper forest canopy consist of evergreen ,.~YYES: Category I '%~
trees older than 80 years or deciduous trees older than 50 years? NO: Go to 2b.2
Note: The size of trees is often not a measure of age, and size cannot
be used as a surrogate for age (see guidance).
2b.2. Does 50% of the cover of forest canopy consist of evergreen trees older YES: Go to 2b.3
than 50 years, AND is the structural diversity of the forest high as NO: Go to Q.3
characterized by an additional layer or'trees 20'-49' tall, shrubs 6' - 20',
tall, and a herbaceous groundcover?
! 2b.3. Does < 25% of the areal cover in the herbaceous/groundcover tlr YES: Category I
the shrub layer consist of invasive/exotic plant species from the list on p. 19'?NO: Go Itl Q.3
Q.2c. Estuarine wetlands.
2ci. Is the wetland listed as National Wildlife Relhge, National Park, YES: Category I
National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park, or NO: Go to 2c.2
Educational, Environmental or Scientific Reserves designated under
WAC 332-30-1517 .....
2c.2. Is the wetland > 5 acres; ............................ YES: Category I
Note: If an area contains patches or' salt tolerant vegetation that are
1) less than 600 feet apart and that are separated by mudllats that go
dry on a Mean Low Tide, or
2) separated by tidal channels that are less than I00 feet wide;
all the vegetated areas are to be considered together in calculating
the wetland area.
or is the wetland 1-5 acres; ...................................... YES: Go to 2c.3
or is the wetland < 1 acre'? ....................................... YES: Go to 2c.4
27
Wetlands. Rating Office Data Form
Background Information:
Name of Rater: ~ASqC,-- ~yrLr/,-'x{-T>~ Af£flia~io-n: ~S¢~-'~',Tm-c.- Date: ~/Ic{[o 2__
Location: 1/,~S: '-~ of 1/4 S: k} ~:: SEC:
souRcEs OF INFORMATION: (Check all sources that apply)
Site visit: V" USGS Tope Map: V//NWl map: t./Aerial Photo: t--"w Soils survey: c"'/
Other: Describe:
When office and/or field data forms are completed enler Category here: "~
ANSWER ALI. QUESTIONS BEt.OW. If the source agency Data Catagory
identifies the wetland as satisfying any of thc questions below. Source (the highest
circle lhe category in "CATEGORY" column, qualifies)
Category I Ouestions
A. Is the wetland in a Seclion and Subsection that has been docu- DNR - Yes: Next
mented as a habitat that performs a life suplx>rt function for any Stale Natural Qg_estion
or Federally listed Threatened tlr Endangered plant or animal species'? Heritage;f'"'~. ~"¥'%
For the pmp{)ses of this rating system, "documented" means the and ~x Quesfio
wetla_nd is on the appropriate state database. WDW
NOTE: The rating of a wetland is incomplete in most cases without
this documentation.
B. Does the wetDmd contain individuals of Federal or State-listed DNR- Yes: Category I
Threatened or Endangered plant species; OR Natural No: Next
Does the wetland contain documented occurences of federal Heritage' Question
lot state-listed Threatened or Endangered wildlife and
species managed by the Wast-fington Department of Wildlife? WDW
C. 1)ocs thc wetland contain documented occurcnces of Stale or WDW; Yes: Category I
Federally lisled Threatened or Endangered fish species, (.)R races WDF No: Next
of fish, managed by the Washinglon Department of Wildlife Question
or the Washington Department of Fisheries?
10
Wetlands Rating Office Data Form (continued)
D. Is the wetland already on record with the Washington Natural DNR- ,~Y,,ef C tcaL~ry I
Heritage Program as a high quality native wetland? Natural rqo: Next
Heritage
E. Does the wetland contain documented regionally significant WDW Yes:Category 1
waterfowl or shorebird concentration areas.9
F. Is lhc wetland d<x:umenlcd as a Calcgory I Well:md of l.ocal l.ocal ~y 1
Significance? Govcrnmcn~
Category II Questions
G. Is the wetland in a Township, Section and Subsection that has DNR- Yes: Next
been documented as a habitat for any State listed Sensitive plant Natural ~tion
or animal species? Heritage
Program; ,,,~u estion K~)
and
WDW
H. Does the wetland contain individuals et State-lislcd Sensitive DNR Yes: Cat. II
plant species? Natural Nt~: Next
Heritage Qucslilm
· Does the wetland contain documented occurcnccs t)l"fcdcrally or WI)W Yes: Cat. 11
state-listed sensitive wildlife species'? No: Next
Question
J. Does the wetland contain documented occurcnccs {~l'slate or WDF Yes: Cat. II
federally listed Sensitive llsh species'? WDW No: Next
Qucslion
'K. Does thc wetland contain priority species or habilats documented WI)W Yes: Cal. 11
by Washington Department of Wildlife's Priority Habitats alld (~"~~
Species Program?-- -- · x
I~. Is the wetland documented ms a Calcgory II Wclland t)l' I,ocal l,ocal Yes: Cal. II
Significance? Govcrnlncnt (~,~Qucs~
Category II! Questions
M. ts the wetland documented as a Category III welland of local Local Yes: Cat. III
significance. Gt~vernment
("Rating Fiel~
11
· · Wetlands Rating Field Data Form
Background Information:
Government Juristic.on of wotla.d: ,
I.ocadon: 1/¢Secdon:
Sources of Information: (Check all sources that apply)
Site visit: ~ USGS To~ Map:
O~er: Describe:
When The Field Data form is complete enter Category here:
Q.1. High Quality Natural Wetland Circle Answers
Answer this question il' you have adequate inl'ormati{m or experience to do
If not lind someone with the expertise to answer the questions. Then, if the
answer to questions la, lb and lc are all NO, contact the Natural Heritage
program of DNR.
la. Human caused disturhances.
Is there significant evidence of human-caused changes to topography or
hydrology of the wetland as indicated by any of the following conditions'/
Consider only changes that may have taken place in the last .5 decades. The
impacts of changes done earlier have probably been stabilized and the wetland
ecosystem will be close to reaching some new equilibrium that may represent
a high quality wetland.
lal. Upstream watershed > 12% impervious. Yes: go
la2. Wetland is ditched and water llow is riot obstructed. Yes: go to Q.2
la3. Wetland has been graded, filled, logged. Yes: go to Q.2
la4. Water in wethmd is controlled by dikes, weirs, etc. Yes: go to Q.~
laS. Wetland is grazed. Yes: go to Q2
la6. Other indicators of disturbance (list below' ~~.2
(..~_No: go to
25
"- cover more than 10% of the wetland, and appear to be invading native ( No:g(~
populations? Briefly describe any non-native plant populations and '----
Information source(s):
lc. Is there evidence of human-caused disturbances which have visibly ( YES: go t0.~
degraded water quality. Evidence of the degradation of water quality NO: Possible Cat. I
include: direct (untreated) runoff from roads or parking lots; presence, contact DNR
or historic evidence, of waste dumps; oily sheens; the smell of organic
chemicals; or Ii?es_Cock use. Briefly describe:
0.2. Irroplacoablo Ecolo[lical Functions:
l)oes the wetland: (NO to all: go to Q.3)
,,- O have at least 1/4 acre of organic soils deeper than 16 inches YES go to 2a
and the wetland is relatively undisturbed; OR
[IIf the answer is NO because the wetland is disturbed briefly describe:
~ Indicators of disturbance may include: .
- Wetland has been graded, filled, logged;
- Organic soils on the surface are dried-out for
_ more than hall' of the year;
- Wetland receives direct stormwater runol't' from
urban or agricultural areas.];
OR
a forested class greater than 1 acre;
have
OR
O have characlcrislics {it' an estuarinc system; YES: Go to 2c
OR
~ (D have eel grass, floating or non-lloatine kelp beds? YES: Go to 2d
2a. Bogs and Fens
Are any of the three following conditions inet for the area of organic soil?
2a. I. Are Sphagnum mosses a common ground cover (>30%) and the
cover tie invasive species (sec Table 3) is less than 10%?
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils > 1/2 acre'? YES' Category I
Is the area of sphagnum mosses and deep organic soils I/4-1/2 acre? YES' Category II
NO: Go to 2a.3
2a.2. Is there an area or' organic soil which has an emergent class with at least.
one species t'rom Table 2, and cover ofinw~sivc species is < 10% (see Table 3)'i
ls the area of herbaceous plants and deep organic soils > 1/2 acre'.; YES: Category I
Is the area of herbaceous plants and deep organic soils 1/4-1/2 acre'? YES: Category II
NO: Go to 2a.3
26
2a.3. Is the vegetation a mixture of only herbaceous plants and Sphagnum
· ' mosses with no scrub/shrub or forested classes?
Is the area of herbaceous plants, Sphagnum, and deep organic
soils > 1/2 acre? YES: Category I
Is the area of herbaceous plants, Sphagnum, and deep organic
soils 1/4-1/2 acre? YES: Category II
NO: Go to Q.3.
Q.2b. Mature forested wetland.
2b.1. Does 50% of the cover of upper fi)rest canopy consist of evergreen YES: Category I
trees older than 80 years or deciduous trees older than 50 years? NO: Go to 2b.2
Note: The size of trees is often not a measure of age, and size cannot
be used as a surrogate for age (see guidance)·
2b.2. Does 50% of the cover of forest canopy consist ot' evergreen trees older, ~: Go to 2b.3._....9
than 50 years, AND is the structural diversity or' the forest high as NO: Go to Q.3
characterized by an additional layer of trees 20'-49' tall, shrubs 6' - 20',
tall, and a herbaceous groundcover?
2b.3. Does < 25% of the areal cover in the herbaccous/groundcover
the shrub layer consist of invasiv~exotic plant species from the list on p. 19'?~~~ND: Got() Q.3
Q.2c. Estuarine wetlands.
2ci. Is the wetland listed as National Wildlife Rel'uge, National Park, YES: Category I
National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park, or NO: Go to 2c.2
Educational, Environmental or Scientific Reserves designaled under
WAC 332-30-1517 .....
2c.2. Is the wetland > 5 acres; ............................ YES: Category I
Note: If an area contains patches of salt tolerant vegetation that are
1) less than 600 feet apart and that are separated by mudllats that go
dry on a Mean Low Tide, or
2) separated by tidal channels that are less than 100 feet wide;
all the vegetated area.s are to be considered together in calculating
the wetland area.
or is the wetland 1-5 acres; YES: Go to 2c.3
or is the wetland < 1 acre?. YES: Go to 2c.4
~7