The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutWetland Delineation 701191000 Part 1WE TECH COMPANY Environmental Consulting Site Permitting Sir WETLAND DELINEATION 212 WAMPUM POINT ROAD ASSESSOR'S PARCEL # 701-19-1 JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHING` D.Gra August 2018 G. Bradford Shea, Ph.D., Trevor Shea Submitted to: C CSL 0dI AUG 2 9 2018 JEFFERSON COUNTY ��'� fiFC:i7�i�711NIT411Cdrrrnnnarerr 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. Box 2876 Port Angeles, Washington 98362 - Telephone: (360) 565-1333 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 8 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 is TABLES Table 1 — List of Plant Species. on -Site Wetland 9 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-WampumPtWD,TOC/081618/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 2018a). 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 Wetiand 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 shown 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 4-j I.- LLJ ch 0 ZD IC m• cch V cr r•Tj - J-6 m WW — m O - 19 P ;71 air cc E rr. in 0 m (D. E ia CL 10 C LA 7� jr 4-j I.- LLJ ch 0 lb - ft LU t2 2 Marr �rrkad ,.I" �. 1 1y .'y Lwff _v R 6 u V) Q CL W H U) C CL N /2 1 — Ili LM — 00 00 IT— CD 0 N N M O C� o N t U N � N V? 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 MRCS 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 lyngbyer) in the hertz 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. WW1562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 6 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. Specific- transect 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 riprap 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. WW1582-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 menziesir) and western red cedar (Thuja plicafa), while the dominant shrubs are sword fern (Polystichum munitum) and salal (Gaullheria 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 lyngbeyi), with a mixture of non- dominant plants such as spearscale (Rthplex patula) and gurnweed (Grindelia inlegrilblia). Wetland vegetation is also shown in Table 1.. WWI 562-WampumPtWD.RPT/080151$/mas TABLE 1. LIST OF PLANT SPECIES: ON-SITE WETLANDS Carnmron Name ---- Scientific Nairm Indicator-.: Lyngbye's sed e Wetland__ -Carex lynpei 0131- BLPacific Pacificreedgrass _ Calama rostis nutkaensis FACW Puget Sound gumweedGrindelia int hfolia FACW Pacific silverweed Argentina egedii Atnplex patula FACW FACW _Spear saltbush Douglas fir Upland Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Big leaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU FAC Western red cedar ° Thuja plicata Scotch broom Cystisus scoparius FACU Dandelion Taraxacum offcinale FACU Oxeye daisy Leacanthemum vulgare FACU Salal Gautherra shallon FACU _ Red alder rubra FAC Sword fern _Alnus 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), OBL = Obligate (only found in wetlands). WW1562-WampumAtWD.Tab1/081518/mas 9 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 (NRCS) 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 very ravell sand 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 tired 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 mudflat 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 hydrin soils criterion. WW1562-WampumPtWD, RPT/0801518/mas 10 Location/Depth TABLE 2. SITE SOILS Type VSH-1 (Wetland) 0-12" Mucky mud VSH-2 (Upland) 0-3" 1 Gravelly Fill Y+"rd An Value/Chroma 1 OYR 3/2 N/A N/A VWV1 562-WampumPtWD.Tab21081518/mas 12 lHvdrologv 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 (137). 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 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 WW 1562-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-WampumPtW D, RPT/0801518/mas 14 tR m 0 a c c� CL V5 CD H �3 CL c� c m a� c 0 CL E CL E c� cD a� L LE co 00 0 0 N N A L M ca � W O N U va O O a? O CD 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 II estuarine wetland. A Category II 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). WW1562-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 II 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 Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society. Seattle, Washington. Google Earth. 2018. Online mapping software. www.googleearth.com. Imagery date July 30, 2017. Europa Technologies. Guard, J. 1995. Wetland Plants of Oregon and Washin ton. Lone Pine Publishing. Renton, Washington. Hansen's. 2018, Hansen's Northwest Native Plant Database. www.nwplants.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. htt://www,co.'efferson.wa.us/idms/ma server.shtml Jefferson County. 2018b. Critical Areas Code website_ http://www.co.iefferson.wa.us/ commdevelopment/Critical%20Areas%200rdinance%20Web%2OFiles/CAOrd03- 0317-08.pd T 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 (NRCS). 2018. Soil survey website. http,.//websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.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 Cows of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains Valleys and Coast Region (Version 2.01. Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program, Environmental Laboratory. Vicksburg, Mississippi. WWI 562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 18 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 198711989. Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineatinq Jurisdictional Wetlands. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2018. (Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) Plants Database. http://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 Ratin System for Western Washington. Publication #14-06-029. Olympia, Washington. WWI 562-WampumPtWD. RPT/0801518/mas 19 APPENDICIES WW1 562-WampumPtWD.RPT/0801518/mas 20 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 Point _ _ _ city/county: Jefferson County sampling Date: 7/12/18 Applicant/Owner: A.J. Schwagler State: WA Sampling Point: VSH-1 (Wetland Investigator(s):Trevor 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: 47049'4.20"N - Long: .122°50'56.96' W _^ Datum: NAD 83 Soil Map Unit Name: Everett Very gravelly Sandy loam _ T NWI classification: Estuarine Are climatic / hydrologle conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes __[Vj_ No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes G No Are Vegetation , Sail 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 Hydric Soil Present? Yes P? No Is the Sampled Area Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes �No within a Wetland? Yes G No VEGETATION -- Use scientific names of plants. Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: ]'ree Strj3tym (Plot size: N/A ) % Cover Species? to Number of Dominant Species 1. That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Total Number of Dominant 2 - •-• 3. Species Across All Strata: _-- (B) 4. _ NIA Percent of Dominant Species 100 NIA = Total Cover That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B) Sa2linul.Sfhrub Stratum (Plot size: ) Prevalence Index worksheet: 1., -- - .......... "' -'- "" Total %Cover of Multiply by: 2. _ OBL species x t = 3 FACW species x 2 = �„ 4 FAC species W_ x3= FACU species x 4 = N/A_ = Total Cover Herb Stratum (Plot size: Wettand Area) UPL species X5= _ 1. Lyngbye's Sedge (Carex lyngbyei) Y OBL Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A = _30_ 2, Pacific reedgrass (Calamagrostis nutkaensls) 15 Y _ FACW WFACW 3. Puget Sound gumweed(Grindelia integritolia) 10 N Hydrophytic Vegetaition Indicators: 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 2 - Dominance Test is X50% 4, Pacific silverweed (Argentina eC, jedll) 6 N FACW 5. Spear saltbush (Atriplex patula} 5 N FACW 5• - 3 - Prevalence Index is 53.0' T, W - - 7• - 4 - Morphological Adaptations' (Provide supporting g data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) g_ 5 - Wetland Non -Vascular Plants' 10. ^ f _ Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain) 11. 'indicators of hydric soil and wetiand hydrology must be present, unless disturbed or problematic. ......- — - -- 65 = Total Cover Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: N/A ) 1• _ �F Hydrophytic 2, Vegetation Present? Yes �_ No 50 NIA = Total Cover Bare Ground in Herb Stratum US Army Corps of Engineers 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 ncltes Color oistj_ % Color fntc Texture. Remarks -1'3L=yB 100 6�uckv rizt�d or Coated Sand Grains. Hydric Soll Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) _ Histosol (Al) _ Sandy Redox (S5) w_ Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) _ Black Histic (A3) & Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) — Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) _ Depleted Matrix (F3) Thick Dark Surface (Al2) Redox Dark Surface (F6) Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) _ _ Depleted Dark Surface (177) Sandy Gleyed Matrix (34) _ Redox Depressions (F8) Restrictive Layer (if present): Type: N/A _.._..._ _ Depth (inches): N/A Remarks: HYDROLOGY Indicators for Problematic Hydric Sc �0 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. Hydric Soil Present? Yes G No-- ... P Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required: check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) EV Surface Water (Al) _ Water -Stained Leaves (69) (except _ Water -Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2,4A, and 413) 4A, and 4B) Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11 ) _ _ Drainage Patterns (B10) Water Marks (131) _ Aquatic Invertebrates (613) — Dry -Season Water Table (C2) Sediment Deposits (B2) — Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) — Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Drift Deposits (133) — Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) — Geomorphic Position (D2) Algal Mat or Crust (134) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) _,_, Shallow Aquitard (D3) _ Iron Deposits (65) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) — FAC -Neutral Test (D5) W Surface Soil Cracks (136) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) ^ Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A) r Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (137) Other (Explain In Remarks) — Frost -Heave Hummocks (D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (68) Field Observations: I Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes Na Depth (inches): Saturation Present? Yes_ No Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No -(includes capillary fringe Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0 APPENDIX C WETLAND RATING FORM WW1 562-WampumPtWD,APPC/081 518/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: 7113/18 Rated by. Trevor Shea Trained by Ecology?G Yes No Date of training11/2016 HGM Class used for rating Estuarine Wetland has multiple HGM classes?—Y G 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 NI (based on functions_ or special characteristics G ) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 Category 11– Tota I score = 20 - 22 Category 111– Total score = 16 - 19 Category IV – Total score = 9 -15 FUNCY10 _ Improving 'Vllater Ctuallty-� Hydro.6919 Hat lPt Wetland of High Conservation Value Circle the appropriate ratings Bog ;Site Potential H M L H M L H M L 1 Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L None of the above Va I ue H M L H M L H M L ;TOTAL:`: Score Based on rRatings _ 7. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog 1 Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest 1 Coastal Lagoon 1 II Interdunal 1 Il III 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 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington For questions 1 7, Elie criteria describe. d Must apply to the entire -unit being rated. IfFthe hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, yo probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes: 'in this case; idenfifk which Hydrologic criteria in cltze.stions 1-7 app! a>«d,go to Question d. 1, .Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO - go to 2 ,S -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)? Q -Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe 1 iter Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions 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 for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without 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 flows 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 not pond 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). S. 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 Form - Effective January 1, 2015 W eland 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 -go to 7 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-goto8 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 Depressional 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. HGM classes within the wefland.univ: being rated HGM class.to use in rating. Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any -other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE Ifyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or ifyou have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating; System for Western WA: 2019• Update 4 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015