HomeMy WebLinkAboutHMP 990600292Casal Residence
Habitat Management Plan
April 10, 2018
Site Address:
130 Goliah Lane
Port Ludlow, WA
Prepared for:
M. Casal
PO Box 65132
Port Ludlow, WA 98365
JE"EypN COUNTY DGD
�SSESSM�/
MARINE SURVEYS Et ASSESSMENTS
267 Hudson Street
Port Townsend WA 98368
(360)385-4073
marine.surveys.inc@gmail.com
List of Tables
Table 1. NMFS/USFWS Regional Critical Habitat......................................................................................4
List of Figures
Figure1. Vicinity Map................................................................................................................................ l l
Figure 2. Site map with stream delineation, stream buffer, and proposed building footprint ..................... 12
Figure 3. Looking at site from Goliah Road...............................................................................................13
Figure 4. Typical vegetation throughout site..............................................................................................13
Figure 5. Large wood debris on site............................................................................................................14
Figure 6. Type Ns Stream channel bed.......................................................................................................14
Appendices
Appendix A: Ordinary Hight Water Mark Determination....................................................15
Appendix B: USFWS Endangered Species query report(iPaC)............................................20
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development
o Driveway = 263 SQ FT
The residence will be connecting to existing sewer and water and will not require a septic system or drain
field as part of the plan.
Timeframe of construction would be to start as soon as all necessary approvals and permits are received;
construction would be completed within 4-5 months. Project sequencing would proceed as follows: level
the site using an excavator, pour a concrete foundation, construct Doug Fir timber framing, install asphalt
shingle roofing, install fiber cement siding, and complete interior work.
Additional building details will be submitted with the permit application packet.
2.3 Action Area
The action area would include 1/4 mile around the project parcel based on topography, hydrology, and
potential noise impacts.
3. Regulatory Framework
3.1 Pre -Application Consultation Regarding Stream
Pre -application correspondence for the project (Permit # BLD18-00069) has occurred between Michael
Casal (project proponent), Meg Amos of Marine Surveys & Assessments (Biologist), and David Johnson
(Staff with Jefferson County DCD). A letter dated March 9, 2018 to Michael Casal from David Johnson
states that a Type Ns stream bisects the property. Further correspondence indicated that the stream was
determined to be a Ns stream by Ross Goodwin (WA DNR) and Dan Defoe (WDFW) during a site visit
in 2012 for the Port Ludlow Drainage District project. However, the stream could not be found on any of
the standard databases (SalmonScape, National Hydro Dataset, etc). The current status of this stream is
discussed in more detail in Section 4.1.
3.2 Stream Buffer
According to JCC 18.22.270 (7). "The administrator shall have the authority to average buffer widths on a
case -by case basis; provided, that the specific standards for avoidance and minimization set forth in JCC
18.22.350(1) shall apply, and when the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the administrator that
all the following criteria are met:
(a) The total area contained in the buffer area after averaging is no less than that which would be
contained within the standard buffer and all increases in buffer dimension are parallel to the FWHCA.
(b) The buffer averaging does not reduce the functions or values of the FWHCA or riparian habitat, or the
buffer averaging, in conjunction with vegetation enhancement, increases the habitat function.
(c) The buffer averaging is necessary due to site constraints caused by existing physical characteristics
such as slope, soils, or vegetation.
(d) The buffer width is not reduced to less than 75 percent of the standard width.
(e) The slopes adjacent to the FWHCA within the buffer area are stable and the gradient does not exceed
30 percent.
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development
2
4.2 Surrounding Environment
Based on the MSA site visit, the property to the east is developed with a single-family residence, to the
west is undeveloped land, and to the south a community trail system in a designated greenbelt. The north
boundary of the site is along Goliah Lane.
Nearby streams include those identified in WDFW's online Salmon Habitat Map: SalmonScape, queried
March 21, 2018 for areas within 1/4 mile of the project parcel. No fish bearing streams are identified
within '/4 mile of the site. The closest potential habitat is for Coho salmon in an unnamed stream 0.6 miles
southwest of the site. This stream has "potential" Coho habitat that is currently blocked and has had
documented historic presence of Coho salmon.
The upland areas within the project parcel and surrounding area are within boundaries of accessible
habitat for Evolutionary Significant Units (ESU) of the following salmon species:
• Chum ESUs: Summer (Listed as Threatened)— Fall and Winter (Not Warranted for Listing)- in
the upland areas;
• Coho ESUs in the upland areas (Listed as Species of Concern);
• Pink (odd year) (Not Warranted for Listing);
• Summer and Winter Steelhead (Listed as Threatened).
The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) range maps indicate
several unprotected species that occur within this watershed, including a variety of mammals including
coyote, bobcat, beavers, bats, voles, and shrews.
4.3 Washington State Priority Habitat and Species
A query of the site with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitat and
Species (PHS) database indicates no species or habitats of concern within'/4 mile of the project site.
4.4 Federal ESA -Listed Species and Critical Habitat
A range of fish, marine mammal, and bird species listed under the Endangered Species Act may occur, or
may have critical habitat, within the proposed action area. The designated critical habitat within the
project footprint and action area is presented below in Table 1.
Table 1. NMFS/USFWS Regional Critical Habitat
NMFS/USFWS Critical Habitat
Project
Footprint
Action
Area
Chum Salmon Critical Habitat - Freshwater (NOAA, 2005)
N
N
Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat - Freshwater (NMFS, 2005)
N
N
Final Nearshore Rockfish Critical Habitat (NMFS, 2014)
N
N
Final Deepwater Rockfish Critical Habitat (NMFS, 2014)
N
N
Leatherback Sea Turtle Critical Habitat (NMFS, 2012)
N
N
Green Sturgeon Critical Habitat (NMFS, 2009)
N
N
Marine Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (NOAA, 2005)
N
N
Marine Critical Habitat Hood Canal Summer -run Chum Salmon (NMFS,
2005
N
N
Sockeye Salmon Critical Habitat (NMFS, 2005)
N
N
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development 4
5.2 Wildlife
Wildlife barriers or loss of connectivity are not expected to occur from the proposed building which will
be in the area of the property closest to the road. The majority of the parcel will be protected by the
stream buffer. Additionally, the area to the south of the parcel is a green belt preserved for a community
trail system. Open space will also be maintained between the proposed residence and developments on
neighboring properties that can easily be traversed by wildlife.
5.3 Stream Function
Development along stream shorelines can alter physical processes and ecological function, including
potential adverse effects on sedimentation, erosion/accretion, and water quality. Increased run-off from
the building area or any increase in impervious surfaces can increase the potential for erosion; however,
development will be in the area of the property closest to the road and outside of the protective stream
buffer.
5.4 Noise
Some temporary increases in ambient noise will be generated during development of the property. Noise
generated during construction is not expected to impact wildlife or ecosystem function in the long term.
5.5 Water Quality
Increased run-off from the building area or other impervious surfaces could occur with development on
the property. Avoidance and minimization measures described in the following section include reducing
the square footage of new impervious surfaces and locating the development away from the stream.
6. Conservation and Protection Measures
The following measures are in place to avoid and reduce impacts to ecological function at the site:
Avoidance Measures:
In order to provide additional area to the protective buffer north of the onsite stream, the project
proponent has opted for an administrative setback variance to reduce the front yard setback from
20 feet down to 13 feet.
■ Reduced footprint of development (from 3,269 sq ft to 2,093 sq ft) and alternative configuration
of house.
o Foundation Footprint = Reduced from 2,499 SQ FT to 1,399 SQ FT
o Roof Area = Reduced from 2,613 SQ FT to 1,830 SQ FT
o Deck = Reduced from 216 SQ FT to 0 SQ FT
o Driveway = Reduced from 440 SQ FT to 263 SQ FT
• The residence (or building envelope, in this case) is located in the least environmentally
damaging location relative to the stream and buffer.
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development
Drainage and Erosion Control: a Silt Fence will be installed around the perimeter of the
development during construction to prevent loose soil from entering the stream and stream buffer.
Grading: The parcel is relatively flat and no significant regrading will occur.
Vegetation Retention:
o Clearing of trees, understory and stumps will only occur where necessary to complete the
proposal involved in the project application.
o Trees and understory lying outside of road rights-of-way and utility easements shall be
retained (except for hazard trees) during clearing for roadways and utilities; provided,
that understory damaged during approved clearing operations may be pruned.
o Damage to vegetation during initial clearing activities shall be minimized by directional
felling of trees to avoid critical areas and vegetation to be retained.
Additional avoidance and minimization measures recommended for the applicant as part of this HMP
include:
A temporary barrier fence will be placed during construction along development area boundaries
to prevent machinery and other equipment from disturbing the stream buffer.
Trees felled for construction will be placed on site, parallel to stream to mark the buffer boundary
on the north side of stream.
7. Conclusions
Avoidance measures in this project include locating the building as close to the road as possible, reducing
the size of the proposed building, and establishing a protective stream buffer in which the native
vegetation will be retained. Based on our review of the proposed Casal residential development, the
existing conditions on site, and the conservation measures, MSA concludes that there will be no
significant adverse impact to the habitat function or value of the onsite stream, assuming
recommendations put forth in this Habitat Management Plan are implemented.
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development
WDFW. (2015a). Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) on the Web. Retrieved March 25, 2018 from
http;//api)s.wdfw.wa. aQv/plisontlieweb/
WSCC. (2002). Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Limiting Factors Water Resource Inventory Area 17
Quilcene-Snow Basin. Washington State Conservation Commission.
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development 10
Figure 2. Site map with stream delineation, stream buffer, and proposed building footprint.
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development 12
Figure 5. Large wood debris on site.
Figure 6. Type Ns Stream channel bed.
� — -W, I
MSA - Habitat Management Plan - Casal Residential Development 14
Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) Determination for
Michael Casal, Parcel # 990600292,130 Goliah Lane, Port Ludlow, WA
Introduction
On March 30, 2018, Meg Amos of Marine Surveys & Assessments conducted an Ordinary High
Water Mark (OHWM) survey at Michael Casal's property in Jefferson County; parcel number
990600292 (Figure 1 of the HMP). This delineation of the stream banks is required by Jefferson
County in order to determine a protective buffer of 100' for proposed development on the
property.
Methodology
Upon arrival at the property, site pictures were taken (Figure 1A) and a general description of the
site was made. The survey was conducted between 1450 and 1720 hours. A Suunto compass
adjusted to a declination of 15 degrees, 41 minutes east and a 100' tape were used to measure
angles and distances to marked locations along both sides of the stream. The measurements were
tied into the survey monument on the SW corner of property.
Findings
The OHWM was identified by using the field indicators for stream channels (changes in soil
composition, plant communities and topography). Wire flags and pink ribbon were used to mark
points along the stream bank on both sides at the OHWM. A point was set for each change in
direction along the course of the channel between the subject property's west and east
boundaries. An initial measurement and angel was calculated from the SW property corner to the
first flags on both sides of the channel, beginning on the west side of property. Subsequent points
were measured from markers 1 and IA (Figures 2A -3A).
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development 16
Figure 2A. OHWM Field Survey
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development 18
Appendix B:
USFWS iPaC Endangered Species Report
MSA • Habitat Management Plan • Casal Residential Development
20
3/27/2018 IPaC: Explore Location
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of
project level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.
Additional areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of
the species range if the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a
dam upstream of a fish population, even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly
impact the species by reducing or eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move,
and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near
the project area. To fully determine any potential effects to species, additional site-specific an
project -specific information is often required."
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary
information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may present in the area
of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any
Federal agency. A letter from the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can
only be obtained by requesting an official species list from either the Regulatory Review section in
IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website
and request an official species list by doing the following:
1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (if directed to do so}.
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Crick REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed specie's' and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the
U.S. Fish and -Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA Fisheries!).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this
list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for apecies under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also
shows species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the lis ingis atus page for more
information.
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Birds
NAME STATUS
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/5HTZPRI7LFDPJFQWKVJUROLNM4/resources 2/12
3/27/2018
IPaC: Explore Location
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory
birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing
appropriate conservation measures, as described mbelow.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
• Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
bircls-of-conservation-concern.php
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-togl_s-end-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds
http://www.fws.ggyLoaj
. viVThe birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the S Birds
of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn
more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ
below. This is not a list of every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird
on this list will be found in your project area. To see maps of where birders and the general public
have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit E -bird tools such as the E -bird data
mapping tool (search for the name of a bird on your list to see specific locations where that bird
has been reported to occur within your project area over a certain timeframe) and the E -bird
Explore Data Toon (perform a query to see a list of all birds sighted in your county or region and
within a certain timeframe). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and
models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available.
Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about
your migratory laird list can be found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to
reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at
the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME
BREEDING SEASON (IFA
............... .....-1...................... ...............
BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED
1"..",.......... 11...1.1 .............
FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE
- .......................................................................... ..........................
BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR
................................ ......................
PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN
..........-..........................11-...........,....,,..,.,,
THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED,
......
WHICH IS AVERY LIBERAL
............. 11-1-1--.1.111.1-1
ESTIMATE OF THEDATES INSIDE
............ ......1-.._.................
WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS
............1.....1.11 .
ACROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE.
--.1.1 .................I--..............
"BREEDS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES
1111......1.11..1..........................1..1...11._..1..11...1.......................................-
THATTHE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY
...................................................,,................,....,.....,....,..,, -.
BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)
................. _ ..........,...................................................................1111...
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/5HTZPRI7LFDPJFQWKVJUROLNM4/resources 4/12
3/27/2018
IPaC: Explore Location
Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufus Breeds Apr 15 to Jul 15
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https.�IL'f=1 .rw_=g vo /ecp/specieslBDBZ
Semipalmated Sandpiper Calidris pusilla Breeds elsewhere
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Short -billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus Breeds elsewhere
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
http; L.//ecos.fvvs,gov/ecp/si, ,--,/9480
Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus Breeds elsewhere
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
0�1
the continental USA and Alaska.
b_tt[ls.Ile[Qs.f rs,govlecp_ species19483
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be Used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds.
Probability of Presence (■)
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in your project's counties
during a particular weep of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4 -week months.) A taller bar
indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to
establish a level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the
presence score if the corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the
week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that
week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was
found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence
is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence
across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted
Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any
week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it
is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of
presence score.
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/5HTZPRI7LFDPJFQWKVJUROLNM4/resources 6/12
3/27/2018
Golden Eagle
Non -BCC Vulnerable
...................1111..........................
(This is not a Bird of
................................................
Conservation
................................
Concern (BCC) in this
area, but warrants
.............................................
attention because of
..................................................
the Eagle Act or for
.............................................
potential
susceptibilities in
.........................................
offshore areas from
.................................................
certain types of
....................................
development or
t11.............................
a.ivities.)
............
Lesser Yellowlegs
IPaC: Explore Location
iYiki(l� iliYYlk ili.lilY ✓�Ydici� s,_.._® � _= sz�� "�:�� �.�i6.fl --
BCC Rangewide
....................................
(CON) (This Is a Bird
................................................
of Conservation
.......................................
Concern (BCC)
...................................
throughout Its range
..........................................
In the continental
...........................................
USA and Alaska.)
........................................
Marbled Godwlt�
BCC Ran ewide
(CON) (This Is a Bird
of Conservation
.......................................
Concern (BCC)
...................................
throughout Its range
...........
In the continental
..........................................
USA and Alaska.)
Olive -sided
Flycatcher
BCC Rangewlde
.....................
(CON) (This Is a Bird
................................................
of Conservation
......................................
Concern (BCC)
....11 a .........................
throughout Its range
In the continental
-1111..-1111 W ..........................
USA and Alaska.)
Red -throated Loon
BCC Rangewide
11SA and; Alaska }
Rufous
Hummingbird
BCC Rangewide
....................................
(CON) (This is a Bird
................................................
of Conservation
.......................................
Concern (BCC)
...................................
throughout its range
......1..........111..
in the continental
...........................................
USA and Alaska,)
.........................................
Semipalmated
Sandpiper
BCC Rangewide
....................................
(CON) (This is a Bird
................................................
of Conservation
.......................................
Concern (BCC)
...................................
throughout its range
in the continental
...........................................
USA and Alaska.)
.........................................
---- -- �-11-. __-- --1-111111 1 0-
111-11 1 0061 11 TONT ON 1111 Till
��1111�11��`II �liil I I1 VIII
---- ---- ----1-11111111--
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/5HTZPRI7LFDPJFQWKVJUROLNM4/resources 8/12
3/27/2018
IPaC: Explore Location
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or
year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The The Cornell Lab of Ornitl-oology, All About Birds Bird
Guide, or (if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology N oropical
Birds guide. If a bird entry on your migratory bird species list indicates a breeding season, it is probable that the
bird breeds in your project's counties at some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is
indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are_ h *r pi col lselyill.loll t)I-.(0111 (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range
anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the
continental USA; and
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because
of the Wigle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas
certain types of development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to to avoid and minimize Impacts to all birds efforts should be made, In" a1rtICU]ar, to
g p tY P � p
avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewlide cOncern. For
more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and.iminimizemigratory bird
Impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore prof lM
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of
bird species within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal
also offers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.
Alternately, you may download the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS
Integrative Statistical Modeling andPrf%tiveap r�r g of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the
Atlantic QVtgr Cgntingntal Shgjl p(pt cGyV44page.
Bird tracking data can also provide addltional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year,
including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on
marine bird trackcjng data, •see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Sjegel or Pam
Ito
What if l have eagles on my Ilst?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the
BGEPA should such impacts occur.
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/5HTZPRI7LFDPJFQWKVJUROLNM4/resources 10/12
3/27/2018
IPaC: Explore Location
inventory, to define the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish
the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in
activities involving modifications within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal,
state, or local agencies concerning specified agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may
affect such activities.
�O�
https://ecos.fws.gov/lpac/location/5HTZPRI7LFDPJFQWKVJUROLNM4/resources 12/12