HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetland Delienation 701191000WESTECH COMPANY
Environmental Consulting - Site Permitting
WETLAND DELINEATION
212 WAMPUM POINT ROAD
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL # 701-19-100
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTO
c
CCE WE
AUG 2 9 2018
JEFFERSON COUNTY
REPT OFCOMMIMITVnrvrtno an"
August 2018
G. Bradford Shea, Ph.D., Trevor Shea
Submitted to:
JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, Washington 98368
Submitted by:
WESTECH COMPANY
P.O. Box 2876
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
P.O. ®ox 2876- Port Angeles, Washington 98362 - Telephone: (360) 665-1333
email: brad@westechcompany.com
WETLAND DELINEATION
212 WAMPUM POINT ROAD
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL # 701-19-1000
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
August 2018
G. Bradford Shea, Ph.D., Trevor Shea
Copyright 2018 by G. Bradford Shea, Westech Company —All Rights Reserved
Submitted to:
JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street
Port Townsend, Washington 98368
Submitted by:
WESTECH COMPANY
P.O. Box 2876
Port Angeles, Washington 98362
CONTENTS
CHAPTER/SECTION PAGE NO.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1
2.0 METHODS
6
3.0 WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS
g
3.1 Existing Conditions
g
3.2 Description of Wetlands
13
3.3 Land Uses and Habitat Values
14
3.4 Wetland Types and Buffers
14
3.5 Jefferson County wetland Map
16
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
17
4.1 Conclusions
17
4.2 Recommendations
17
5.0 REFERENCES
18
TABLES
Table 1 — List of Plant Species. on -Site Wetland
g
Table 2 — Site Soils
12
FIGURES
Figure 1 — Location Map
2
Figure 2 — Vicinity Map
3
Figure 3 — Parcel Map
4
Figure 4 — Project Site Plan
5
Figure 5 -- Soil Map
11
Figure 6 -- Wetland Map with Soil Test Pits and 110' Buffer
15
APPENDICES
Appendix A — Site Photographs
A-1
Appendix B —Wetland Data Form
B-1
Appendix C — Wetland Rating Form
C-1
WW1562-WampumPtWD700081618/mas i
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Property (Site) is located at 212 Wampum Point Road, in Jefferson County
Washington. The Property is owned by A.J. Schwagler and Jacqueline Schwagler at 233
Alice Road, Port Angeles, Washington. It is recorded as Assessor's Parcel # 701-19-1000.
The Site lies within Jefferson County, Washington in the Northeast Quarter of Section 19
of Township 27 North, Range 1 West, W.M. (Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4). The Site is located
approximately 1.3 miles east of the town of Quilcene in an unincorporated area of
Jefferson County. The Site is located on the eastern shoreline of Quilcene Bay on Hood
Canal (Jefferson County 2018x).
The Property is a long, roughly rectangular shaped parcel, with the developed portion
being a wider portion at the south end of the parcel (see Figure 3). The Site lies generally
east of the Mean Higher High Water Mark (MHHW).
The developed portion of the Property is surrounded by a seawall and is about 135 feet
wide (east to west) on the south side, widening to 180 feet in width on the north side. It is
roughly 180 feet long (north to south) on the east side and nearly 300 feet long on the west
side with an average width of 168 feet and an average length of 230 feet or 0.88 acres in
the developed area (Zenovic 2018). The total lot size is listed as 4.18 acres including a
steep, undevelopable portion north and east of the developed area and east of the
Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) (Jefferson County 2018b). The Parcel location is
shown in Figures 1-4. Site photographs are shown in Appendix A.
The Parcel extends to the low bank beach front, with a rock seawall and a cobble -sand
beach. An existing driveway provides vehicular access to the Property from Wampum
Point Road (off of East Quilcene Road). There is an existing residence which is proposed
for a 1,150 square foot addition on the southeast and east sides, away from Quilcene Bay.
The Property has an existing septic system. Quilcene Bay lies to the west of the OHWM.
The Property is designated as "Suburban" by the Jefferson County Shoreline Master
Program (Jefferson County 2018c). This shoreline designation requires a 150 foot
setback from OHWM plus an additional 10 foot setback for structures.
Mr. Schwagler contracted with Westech Company (Westech) to delineate the Estuarine
Wetland along the edge of the Site. Field investigation of the wetlands was conducted by
Mr. Trevor Shea and Mr. Paul Ruben during July 2018..The Project Site was found to
contain a Category II Estuarine Wetland based on special characteristics rather than
functions. -Data-sheets-for the -Wetland -are s own in -Appendix B. The Department of
Ecology Rating Form can be found in Appendix C.
The proposed project is classified as a moderate intensity land use under the Jefferson
County Critical Areas Code. This code directs that Category ll estuarine wetlands have a
110 foot buffer (JCCAC Chapter 18.22.290). Chapter 3.0 of this report contains results of
the delineation.
WW1562-WampumPtWD, RPT/0801518/mas
T-)
C -
C13
16
4
73'
0
4-1)r
m
PLA—V
I
*®-JI
CAP
\ \ � ���` ��
00 co
CD CD
C\j C\j
C: ?:4)
(u
0- (D
E
0
CL
Z3
0
W
a)
0
C)
C)
co
IL
1w IMCIA
2
15
lit, 4
A/I
z
a_
LLJ
P1
a
CL
'
L-
C0
L
R)
LL
------------
---------------------
:r----------- ----------
- -
lm-13�1 'ino
-
-
-LSV3
U.J <
M
f�o
U) cy
I
to
X
0
Z N <<
't
-j x
AS
2
15
lit, 4
A/I
z
a_
LLJ
P1
a
CL
'
L-
C0
L
R)
LL
2.0 METHODS
Wetlands were delineated in the field based on field methods recommended in the
Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (DOE 1997). Wetland
rating was accomplished according to the Guidelines of the Jefferson County Critical
Areas Code (Jefferson County 2018b), and the Washington State Wetlands Rating
System (Western Washington) (DOE 2014). Methods for delineation were essentially
those recommended by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for Routine On -Site
Field Method of delineation of wetlands (USACE 1989, 2010). Guidelines and
requirements of the Jefferson County Critical Areas Code were applied as applicable.
Wetland plants were primarily identified in the field, with subsequent collection and keying
when necessary. Plants were identified using the following sources:
Hansen's Northwest Plants Database 2018
USDA NRCS Plants Database 2018
Pojar and Mackinnon 2004
Cooke 1997
Lyons 1997
Taylor 1995
Guard 1995
Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973
Keying of plants using magnifying lenses and dissecting microscope was used as
necessary. Determination of wetland indicator status utilized regional keys published by
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and updated by the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) (USFWS 1988, USDA 2018).
Herbaceous plants were found to be well into the growing season and in good condition
within the wetland. The wetland area was dominated by Lyngbye's sedge (Carex
lyngbyei) in the herb layer and did not have a canopy or shrub layer. Field investigations
were conducted during the dry season (July 2018).
Soils were determined through field examination. Soils were dug or augured to depths of
up to 18 inches using a wetland shovel and standard augur. Soil consistency was
determined by feeling for grain size and texture. Soil moisture was determined at that
time. In the event of saturated conditions in the hole, depth to standing water was noted.
Soil color was determined through comparison of field samples with standard Munsell
Color Charts (Munsell 2009). Soil was also examined for presence of mottles, gley and
other indicators of anaerobic soil oxidation.
WW 1562 -Wampum PtWD. RPT/0801518/mas
Hydrologic conditions were determined through examination of topographic relief and
drainage patterns. Soil moistness was determined by hand as indicated above and in the
event of standing water; depth to standing water was noted.
Initial field surveys were carried out by Mr. Trevor Shea and Mr. Paul Ruben during July
2018. These surveys included identification of plants, wetland habitats, soils and
hydrology.
Wetlands were determined based on the Routine On -Site Field Method used by
Washington Department of Ecology and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wetlands
were determined by a combination of vegetation, soil and hydrology indicators.
Spe6 f'ic4ransect and quadrat points were sampled along apparent wetland edges.
Various points were sampled for vegetation, soil and hydrology in order to determine
wetland boundaries. Appendix A contains site photographs and Appendix B contains data
forms for two sample points (one wetland and one upland) from a typical area of the
delineated wetlands. Appendix C contains the Rating Form.
Wetlands were staked in the field by 24 and 48 inch wooden stakes, or flagged on trees or
shrubs as appropriate. Wetland boundaries were indicated by use of "Wetland Delineation
Boundary" flagging tape tied to the wooden stakes or trees. Yellow tape was used on the
western boundary of the property to indicate shoreline OHWM, which coincided with the
wetland boundary along the base of the existing dprap seawall. All boundaries were
staked and/or flagged every 25-30 feet. Buffer zones near the proposed project area were
mapped using GPS measurements on aerial photos.
WW1562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 7
3.0 WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS
3.1 Existing Conditions
The Site is a developed lot containing an existing residence, garage, shed and septic
system located along at the northern end of Wampum Point Road on Quilcene Bay in
Jefferson County, Washington (Figures 1 and 2). The Site extends north from the end of
the road and lies at an elevation of approximately 0-10 feet above mean sea level (msl).
The Site features are shown in Figures 3 and 4.
Jefferson County maps shows that one wetland is adjacent to the Project Site (Jefferson
County 2018a). Westech's field investigation found the wetland to be a Category II
estuarine wetland that lies adjacent to the developed portion of the property, continuing
north along the undeveloped portion of the property. This is an estuarine wetland
dominated by Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbey,),
Vegetation
The Site is currently developed as a residential property, but was historically a lumber mill
site, which has resulted in the presence of an existing seawall and packed soils composed
of imported fill material. These compact soils have limited vegetation in the developed
portion of the Site.
To the north, in the undeveloped areas, the Site is forested. Here, the Site's vegetation
consists of all three layers (canopy, shrub and herb), with upland forest vegetation
adjacent to the shoreline and inter -tidal estuarine wetlands. Forest vegetation is shown in
Table 1 as upland vegetation.
The dominant trees in the upland area are Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesil) and
western red cedar (Thuja plicata), while the dominant shrubs are sword fern (Polystichum
munitum) and salal (Gaultheria shallon). Dominant herbaceous plants include dandelion
(Taraxacum offcinale), Oxeye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare) and mixed grasses. A list of
plants found at the Site is shown in Table 1.
The wetland vegetation was found to be comprised of only a few species (low diversity).
Vegetation is dominated by Lyngby's sedge (Carex lyngbeyr), with a mixture of non-
dominant plants such as spearscale (Atriplex patula) and gumweed (Grindelia integrifolia).
Wetland vegetation is also shown in Table 1.
WW1562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 8
TABLE 1. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES: ON-SITE WETLANDS
Conirndn"Name
Scientific Name
_W Wetland
' Andicafir,,,
L n b e's sed a
Carex 1 n b er
0131-
BLPacific
Pacificreed rass�
Calama rnstis nufkaensis
FACW
_ Puget Sound mweed
Grindelia rote rifolia
A enfina a edii
Atti lex patule
FACW
FACW
FACW
Pacific siiverweed_
Spear saltbush
_
Upland
Douglas fir
Pseudotsuga menziesii
FACU
Sig leaf maple
Acer macrophyllum
FACU
FAC
_
Western red cedar
_ Thujaplicata
Scotch broom
4 Cystisus scoparius
FACU
Dandelion
Taraxacum offcinale
FACU
Oxeye daisy
Leacanthemum vulgare
FACU
Salal
Gaufheria shallon
FACU
Red alder
Alnus rubra
FAC
Sword fern
Pol stichum munitum
FACU
'Indicators: UPL = Upland plant, FACU= Facultative Upland Plant (more upland than
wetland), FAC = Facultative (borderline wetland plant), FACW = Facultative Wetland
Plant (prefers wetland conditions), OSL = Obligate (only found in wetlands)_
WW1562-WampumPtWD Tabl/081518/mas
Soils
"Hydric soils" is a name for soils commonly found in wetlands. These soils are identified
mainly by morphological features such as color patterns, organic matter accumulation,
or observation of inundation. A soil may be considered hydric if it is inundated (flooded
or ponded) for at least one continuous week during the growing season in most years
(USACE 2010). Westech staff looked for field indicators of hydric soil conditions as
recommended by the Corps. If one or more of these indicators was present in the
wetlands, the soil was considered hydric (USACE 2010).
Westech staff examined existing National Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) soil
surveys of the Site. The NRCS maps one dominant soil on the Site (NRCS 2018) which
is shown in Figure 5. The soil mapped by the NRCS on the Site is described as follows:
Everett veDLgravelly sandy loam 30 to 50 percent slopes EvE is a somewhat
excessively drained soil associated with Kames, eskers and moraines and
derived from glacial outwash. It has a depth of more than 80 inches to the water
table and a high capacity to transmit water (1.98 to 5.95 in/hr). This soil has a low
water storage capacity in its profile (about 3.2 inches) and no frequency of
ponding or flooding.
Because NRCS soil surveys do not necessarily capture small scale variation, Westech
staff conducted additional field studies of the soils. To examine soils in the wetland
boundaries, Westech staff dug soil pits and observed soil characteristics. These VSH
plots are located within representative upland and wetland areas. The location of these
plots has been marked in the field using wooden stakes tied with blue and white striped
flagging. The soil information taken at these sample points is highlighted in Table 2.
Field investigations found that the on-site soils do not match up to the NRCS
characterization. The wetland test pit (VSH-1) consisted of estuarine mudfiat type soils
(usually characterized by NRCS as "beaches". The upland test pit (VSH-2) consisted of fill
material below 1 inch and hardpan gravel under 4 inches.
Historic records show that the Site was once a lumber yard and is therefore assumed to
have been filled in the past. The wetland soil pit (VSH-1) showed soils with a value/chroma
of 312 (10YR) from 0-12 inches. These soils meet the Corps criterion for hydric soils
described as Thick Dark Surface (Al2), Loamy mucky mineral (F1) and 2 CM Muck (A10).
The soil pit taken in the upland area (VSH-2) consisted of gravelly fill (hardpan) and
therefore did not have a chroma/value. These soils did not meet Corps hydric soils
criterion.
WW1562-WampumPtWD, RPT/0801518/mas 10
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
WW1562-WampumPtWD.APPA/081518/mas A-1
Wetland vegetation showing Lyngby's sedge and spearscale.
WW1562-WampumPtWD.APPA/081518/mas A-3
4) Wetland vegetation showing mudflat soils and gumweed.
WW1562-WampumPtWD.APPA/081518/mas A-4
APPENDIX B
WETLAND DATA FORMS
WW1562-WampumPtWD.APPB/081518/mas B-1
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
Project/Site: Wampum
am um Point cit /Coupty: Jefferson County Sampling Date; 7/12/18
Appiicant/Owner: A.J. Schwan ler _ - W State: WA Sampling Paint: VSH"1 Wetland
Investigator(s): l-revor Shea & Paul Ruben Section, Township, Range: Section 19 Township 27N Range 1 W
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Mudflat Local relief (concave, convex, none): None Slope (%): 1
Subregion (LRR): Northwest Forest Lat: 47°49'4.20"N Long: 122050'56.96'W Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Everett very__gravelly sandy loam T NWI classification: Estuarine
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes -_F�-__ No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are 'Normal Circumstances" present? Yes G 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 _r No _ T
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No Is the Sampled Area
Wetiand Hydrology Present? Yes_ No within a Wetland? Yes G Na
Remarks:
VEGETATION — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: NIA ) % Cover Species? Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
Total % Cover of:
Multioly by;
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
NIA
=Total Cover
Saolin glShrub Stratum (Plot size: NIA
FACU species
X4=
1.
x5=
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
2.
3.
4.
5.
NIA
=Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: Wetland Area)
1.
Lyngbye's Sedge (Carex lyngbyei)
30
Y OBL
2,
Pacific reedgrass (Calamagrostis nutkaensis) 15
Y FACW
3
Puget Sound gurnweed(Grindelia integrifolia) 10
N FACW
4,
Pacific silverweed (Argentina egedii)
5
N FACW
5.
Spear saltbush (A triplex patula)
5
N FACW
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
65
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: N/A �)
1.
2.
50
NIA = Total Cover
%Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Remarks;
US Army Corps of Engineers
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 2 (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100 e.. (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multioly by;
OBL species
x 1 =
FACW species
x2=
FAC species W_
x3=
FACU species
X4=
UPL species
x5=
Column Totals:
(A) (B)
Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
2 - Dominance Test is X50%
3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
_ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants'
_ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? YesR� No
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast — Version 2.0
SOIL,
Wampum Point
Sampling Point: VSH-1 (Wetland
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox f=eatures
(inches) — Color (moist) % Color (moist) %_ - Type_ ioc Texture Remarks
9-12,' _ = 10YR 100 Mucky m d -
'Type: C=Concentratiosi, D=Depletlon, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)
_ Histosol (Al)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Black Histic (A3)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
_ Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
_ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Thick Dark Surface (Al2)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
_ Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type: N/A
2Location: PL=Pare Lininp, M=Ma
Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc
G 2 cm Muck (A10)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF1 2)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
31ndicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Depth (inches): N/A _ I Hydric Soil Present? Yes G No
Remarks:
--___-__
HYDROLOGY
yveuana t•iyarology indicators:
Prirriary_Icdicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more regutredl
!,V Surface Water (Al)
— Water -Stained Leaves (69) (except
_ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,
High Water Table (A2)
MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 4113)
4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3)
Salt Crust (1311)
__._ Drainage Patterns (1310)
_ Water Marks (131)
_ Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (132)
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 (134)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iran Deposits (85)
_ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
FAC -Neutral Test (D5)
_ Surface Solt Cracks (136)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
_ Inundatlon Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
_ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
1
Surface Water Present? Yes _ O"�_ No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes _RL No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes CV* Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photoE
Weiland Hydrology Present? Yes C No
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast -Version 2.0
APPENDIX C
WETLAND RATING FORM
WWI 562-WampumPtWD.APPC/081518/mas C-1
Wetland name or number Wampum Point - Wetland A
RATING SUMMARY -Western Washington
Name of wetland (or ID #): Wampum Point - Wetland A Date of site visit: 7/13/18
Rated by Trevor Shea Trained by Ecology?G Yes No Date of train ing1112016
HGM Class used for rating Estuarine Wetland has multiple HGM classes?—Y C 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 11 (based on functions_ or special characteristics G )
1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
Category I — Total score = 23 - 27
Category II — Total score = 20 - 22
Category III — Total score = 16 -19
Category IV W-- Total score = 9 -15
FUNCTION .
Improving
Water Quality
Hydrolo9 c
Habitat,
Wetland of High Conservation Value
Circle the appropriate ratings
Bog
:Site Potential
H M L
H M L
H M L
(Landscape Potential
H M L
H M L
H M L
1 Il 111 IV
Value
H M L
H M L
H M L
TOTAL
Score Based on
Ratings
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
CHARACTERISTIC
CATEGORY: .
Estuarine
I II
Wetland of High Conservation Value
1
Bog
I
Mature Forest
1
Old Growth Forest
1
Coastal Lagoon
I II
Interdunal
1 Il 111 IV
None of the above
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Score for each
function based
on three
ratings
(order of ratings
is not
important)
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
1
Wetland name or number Wampum Point - Wetland A
H+C M Classification ®f 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, you
probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in
questions 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 5 -the wetland class is Tidal Fringe - go to 1.1
1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
5 it - Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe
utter' T idal Fringe use the forms for Ri>verine wetlands. If it
is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to
score funct=ions for estuarine wetlands.
2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater
and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit.
NO - go to 3 YES - The wetland class is Flats
Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form far Depressional wetlands.
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 any
plants 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 verygradual),
_The water flaws through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from
seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks,
.The water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
NO-goto5
YES - The wetland class is Slope
NOTE: Surface water does notpond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small -and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft
deep).
5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
,_.The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that
stream or river,
._,_The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Forn1- Effective January 1, 2015
'Wetland name or number Wampum Point - Wetland A
NO - go to G YES - The wetland class is Riverine
NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not
flooding
b. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the
surface, at sometime during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher- than the interior -
of the wetland.
NO-goto7
YES - The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank
flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be
maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural
outlet.
NO - go to 8 YES - The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM
classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small
stream within a DepressionaI wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY
WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT
AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the
appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the
wetland unit being scored.
NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or
more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2
is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the
total area.
HC3M classes within the wetland unit
being rated
HGM c1a55.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-rther
class of freshwater wetland
Treat as
ESTUARINE
Ifyou 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 Rating Systein for Western WA: 2019• Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015
Wedan.d name or number Wampum Point - Wetland A
TION BASED
Wetland Type
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met_
SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands
Category
plies the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
C4 The dominant water regime is tidal,
G Vegetated, and
With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland Yes
SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area
Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-'10-151?
Yes = Category I Go to SC i.2
o -
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?
MThe wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less
than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)
Cat.
—At least'/ 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 o r
Cat. II
contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes= CategoryI o = Category 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
Cat. I
SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value?
Yes= CategoryI No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland?
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
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 an 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.
Cat. I
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 Category I bog No = Is not a bog
Wedand Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16
Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
C
- FI
' 4 n of
, ► r
TABLE 2. SITE SOILS
Location/Depth Type
VSH-1 (Wetland)
0-12" Mucky mud
VSH-2 (Upland)
0-311 Gravelly Fill
Hardpan
Value/Chroma
1 OYR 3/2
N/A
N/A
WW1562-WampumPtWD.Tab2/081518/mas 12
Hydrology
Numerous factors (e.g., precipitation, topography, soil permeability, and plant cover)
influence the wetness of an area. The water source for the on-site Wetland (A) comes
mainly from tidal action in Quilcene Bay. Additional water may enter the wetland from
direct precipitation, runoff from uphill areas surrounding the wetland and groundwater
sources.
Field investigations were taken during the dry season (July) which can normally create
false negatives with hydrological indicators. However, since this is an estuarine
wetland, water is supplied by tidal action which regularly inundates the wetland area.
Thus wetland hydrology is present, normally to approximately the Ordinary High Water
Mark, or the Mean Higher High Water Mark, which seem to approximately match the
wetland boundary on this Site.
Hydrologic indicators observed in a soil pit in the Wetland included water marks (B1),
water stained leaves (139) and Inundation visible from aerial imagery (B7). The soil pit
dug in the upland area had no standing water or saturation and was comprised of
hardpan gravel and is not rated as hydric (USACE 2010). Adjacent upland soils showed
no saturation in the root zone.
The wetland test pits found evidence of soil saturation in the root zone above 18 inches.
This meets the Corps criterion for wetland hydrology. Upland test pits did not show signs
of wetland hydrology.
3.2 Description of Wetlands
Westech's field investigations determined that one estuarine wetland is located on and
adjacent to the property. Two soil test pits were taken and buffers were determined using
GPS measuring software. Figure 6 shows the wetlands and buffers.
Wetland boundaries were determined by first noting likely areas of topographic and
vegetative distinction between wetland and uplands. The Site vegetation was found to
transition from upland to wetland in a relatively abrupt fashion near the Ordinary High
Water Mark, as expected in an estuarine wetland. Evidence of hydric soils was checked
along the apparent wetland boundary. Westech staff noted the presence of clay and
mudfiat soils along the edge of the wetland-.-
Westech
etland
Westech staff also noted the presence of hydrological indicators. Westech staff noted
areas with evident characteristics of wetland hydrology, including tidal action. These are
places where the presence of water has an overriding influence on characteristics of
vegetation and soils due to anaerobic and/or chemically -reducing conditions. Observed
WW1562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 13
hydrologic indicators included a water table or periodic saturation at the surface (See
Figure 5 and Appendix B).
The vegetation, soils, and hydrology of the Site are described in more detail in the
previous subsections. Results of these three factors at two test pits (one in the wetland,
and one in the upland area) are summarized in Table 2 and a data sheet for VSH-1 is
contained in Appendix B. VSH-2 was found to be sparsely vegetated with mixed grasses
and soils were gravel hardpan with no saturation. Figure 6 shows the location of the
wetland relative to nearby features. Site photographs are shown in Appendix A.
3.3 Land Uses and Habitat Values
Wetlands are transitional areas between upland and aquatic environments where water is
present long enough to form distinct soils, and where specialized, water -tolerant plants
grow. Wetlands serve a variety of functions such as transferring surface water into the
ground, thereby recharging groundwater supplies. Wetlands trap water along with
sediments and pollutants providing storm -water detention and filtration; mitigate flood
impacts; and provide wildlife habitat.
Wetland buffers are important because they reduce the adverse impacts of adjacent land
uses on wetlands. The buffers serve to stabilize soil and prevent erosion, filter suspended
solids, nutrients and toxic substances and moderate impacts of storm -water runoff. As
such, buffers serve to preserve wetland functions. They also provide important habitat for
wildlife living in and around the wetland.
The Property is currently zoned RR -5 and is surrounded by a mixture of undeveloped
forest (to the north and east), shoreline features (Quilcene Bay to the west) with single-
family residences to the south. The proposed project is an addition to an existing single
family residence on the southern end of the property (Figure 6). This type of project is
considered as a moderate intensity land use.
3.4 Wetland Types and Buffers
The buffer sizes to be applied at this Site are governed by the Jefferson County Critical
Areas Code. In order to establish buffer sizes, Jefferson County requires that wetlands be
rated using the Washington State Department of Ecology's Wetland Rating System for
Western Washington (WDOE 2014). In this system, wetland ratings are based on:
1) Water Quality Function (i.e., Does the wetland have the ability to improve water
quality?)
2) Hydrologic Function (i.e., Does the wetland decrease flooding and/or erosion?)
3) Habitat Function (i.e., Does the wetland provide habitat for many species?)
WWI 562-WampumPtWD,RPT/0801518/mas 14
In Washington, wetland rating categories are based on the rarity of the type of wetland, our
ability to replace it, its sensitivity to adjacent human disturbances, and the functions it
performs. The objective of the rating system is to divide wetlands into groups that have
similar needs for protection. Specialized wetlands, including estuarine wetlands, are rated
in accordance to their Characteristics rather than specific functions, since these are known
to be highly functioning wetlands.
Wetland A was rated as a Category Il estuarine wetland. A Category 11 wetland is required
to be given a 110 foot buffer with a moderate intensity project within Jefferson County.
Figure 6 shows the Wetland's buffer zone.
3.5 Jefferson County Wetland Map
Jefferson County has mapped a wetland lying in Quilcene Bay to the west of the property.
Jefferson County's mapping appears to be roughly accurate. However, the wetland is
somewhat intermittent, with some areas of un -vegetated mudflat (Figure 6).
WWI 562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 16
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Conclusions
The Wetland is dominated by emergent vegetation interspersed with un -vegetated or
lightly vegetated tidal flats. The Wetland was classified as a Category If estuarine wetland,
requiring 110 -foot buffers under the Jefferson Critical Areas Code (Chapter 18.22.290) for
moderate -intensity developments. This Wetland buffer is shown on Figure 6. The
proposed Project Area is within this buffer. The proponent is seeking a Variance for the
relatively small house addition which is proposed, based on the square footage and the
fact that the addition is on the portion of the home facing away from the wetlands and
Quilcene Bay.
4.2 Recommendations
Figure 6 shows locations of mapped wetland as staked on the Site. Required 110 -foot
buffer zones adjacent to the wetlands are also shown on this Figure.
Any construction activities on the Site should be conducted with erosion control features in
place. A construction fence (silt fence or equivalent erosion control measure) should be
placed between the construction area and the wetland edge prior to any grading for the
Project. Placement of the fences should be based on locations of critical areas (wetlands
and the associated buffer zones) as delineated and described in this report and as staked
by Westech staff in the field. Grading activities should not take place after September 30
or before May 1 without all possible erosion control measures in place.
Other standard drainage and erosion control measures should be undertaken in
accordance with County regulations (Jefferson County 2018c). Such measures would
include placement of straw wattles, haybales and silt fences or similar control devices
between the construction area and the wetland.
WW1562-WampumPtWD. RPT/0801518/mas 17
5.0 REFERENCES
Cooke, S.S. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western. Washington
and Northwestern Ore on. Seattle Audubon Society. Seattle, Washington.
Google Earth. 2018. Online mapping software. www. oo leearth.com. Imagery date
July 30, 2017. Europa Technologies.
Guard, J. 1995. Wetland Plants of Oregon and Washington, Lone Pine Publishing.
Renton, Washington.
Hansen's. 2018. Hansen's Northwest Native Plant Database. www.nw lants.com
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of
Washington Press. Seattle, Washington.
Jefferson County. 2018a. Online Interactive Mapping website.
http://www.co.'efferson.wa.us/idms/mapserver.slitml
Jefferson County. 2018b. Critical Areas Code website. http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/
cai-nmdevelopment/Critical%20Areas%200rdinance%2OWeb%20Files/CAOrd03-
4317-08.pdf
Jefferson County, 2018c. Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program. Chapter 18.25 of
the Jefferson County Code.
www.codepublishing.com/WA/JeffersonCounty/html/JeffersonCounty.
Lyons, C. P. 1997. Wildflowers of Washington. Lone Pine Publishing. Renton,
Washington,
Munsell Color. 2009. Munsell Soil Color Charts, Munsell Color. Grand Rapids, Michigan
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2018. Soil survey website.
hot ://websoilsurve .sc.e ov,usda. ov/A /HomePa e.htm.
Pojar, J. and A. MacKinnon. 2004. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone Pine
Publishing Company. Redmond, Washington.
Taylor, R. 1995. Northwest Weeds. Mountain Press Publishing Company. Missoula
Montana.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Coms of
Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains Valleys and Coast
Re gion_(Version.2�. Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, Environmental
Laboratory. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
WWI 562-WampumPtWD_RPT/0801518/mas 18
U.S. Army Carps of Engineers (USACE). 1987/1989. Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington,
D.C.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2018. (Natural Resource Conservation Service
(MRCS) Plants Database. http:l/plants.usda.goy/java/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1988. National List of Species that Occur in
Wetlands; Region 9 (and Supplement). Biological Report 88(26.9). Portland,
Oregon.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1985. Quadrangle Map of Quilcene, Washington_
Published 1953, Scale 1:24,000. Denver, Colorado.
Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE). 2014. Washington State Wetlands Rating
System for Western Washington. Publication #14-06-029. Olympia, Washington.
WW1562-WampumPtWD. RPT10801518/mas 19
APPENDICIES
WW1562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 20