HomeMy WebLinkAbout934500013 Critical Areas Report
Bluejay Lane CAR
Port Ludlow, WA
Prepared for
Liz Callen
6833 NE Buck Lake Road
Hansville, WA 98340
(360) 638-1215
CRITICAL AREAS REPORT
May 23, 2022
Prepared by
Ecological Land Services
1157 3rd Avenue, Suite 220A • Longview, WA 98632
(360) 578-1371 • Project Number 3727.01
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................1
METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................................1
SITE DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................................................................2
VEGETATION ...................................................................................................................................2
SOILS ................................................................................................................................................3
HYDROLOGY ....................................................................................................................................4
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY .................................................................................................4
JEFFERSON COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS ...........................................................................................4
CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................................4
WETLAND CATEGORIZATION ..................................................................................................... 4
STREAM TYPING.......................................................................................................................... 4
CRITICAL AREA REGULATIONS .................................................................................................. 5
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND IMPACT DETERMINATION ............................................................ 5
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................6
TABLE
Table 1: Summary of Critical Areas and Buffers
FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Existing Conditions
Figure 3 Proposed Conditions
Figure 4 NRCS Soil Survey
Figure 5 USFWS National Wetlands Inventory
Figure 6 Jefferson County Critical Areas Map
Figure 7 Wetland Rating Form-150’Offset
Figure 8 Wetland Rating Form-1 km Offset
Figure 9 Wetland Rating Form-303(d) and TMDL
Photoplates Site Photos
APPENDIX A
Wetland Determination Data Forms
APPENDIX B
Western Washington Wetland Rating Form
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
ii
SIGNATURE PAGE
The information and data in this report were compiled and prepared under the supervision and
direction of the undersigned.
___________________________
Joanne Bartlett, PWS
Professional Biologist
Emma Crockett
Biologist
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report 1
INTRODUCTION
Ecological Land Services, Inc. (ELS) was contracted by Liz Callen to complete a wetland delineation
and update the critical areas report for two adjacent parcels on Bluejay Lane, Jefferson County Tax
Parcel Numbers 934500013 and 934500014, in Port Ludlow, Washington. The lots are within a
portion of Section 9, Township 27 North, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian, in Jefferson
County, Washington (Figure 1). This report summarizes the findings of the wetland delineation
according to the Jefferson County Unified Development Code, Chapter 18.22, Critical Areas
(JCUDC) for delineation methodology, wetland categorization, and required buffer widths.
METHODOLOGY
The wetland delineation followed the Routine Determination Method according to the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the
Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains,
Valleys and Coast Region, Version 2.0 (U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center,
2010). The OHWM of the stream was determined according to guidance from the Washington State
Department of Ecology document, Determining the Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline
Management Act Compliance in Washington State (Anderson et. al. 2016). The OHWM is defined
as a mark “on all lakes, streams, and tidal waters . . . found by examining the bed and banks and
ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long
continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting
upland, in respect to vegetation” (Anderson et. al. 2016). The OHWM is determined by assessing
three main criteria: 1) the presence or evidence of hydrology, 2) the soil, substrate, and/or
geomorphological changes, and 3) changes in vegetation. Indicators for each criterion differ
depending on the environment (lake, stream, tidal).
The Routine Determination Method examines three parameters—vegetation, soils, and hydrology—
to determine if wetlands exist in a given area. Hydrology is critical in determining what is wetland,
but is often difficult to assess because hydrologic conditions can change periodically (hourly, daily,
or seasonally). Consequently, it is necessary to determine if hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils
are present, which would indicate that water is present for long enough duration to support a wetland
plant community. By definition, wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface
or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil
conditions. Wetlands are regulated as “Waters of the United States” by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE), as “Waters of the State” by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology),
and locally by Jefferson County.
To determine the presence or absence of wetlands in the study area, ELS biologists collected data
on vegetation, hydrology, and soils. An initial site visit was conducted on September 8, 2016 during
which one wetland was identified along the stream channel just offsite to the west, only coming onto
the southwest corner of the property. Vegetation, hydrology, and soil data was collected in 2016 at
six test plots to verify the wetland boundary and characterize the site conditions (Appendix A). ELS
biologists returned to the lots on April 15, 2022 to confirm previous findings and determined that
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report 2
the wetland boundary and ordinary high water mark of the stream had not changed so data collected
in 2016 was used to verify the wetland boundary delineation. ate.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The lots are located along the south shore of Squamish Harbor and south of Port Ludlow in Jefferson
County, Washington. The study area is made up of two 0.24-acre lots that are situated at the
northwest end of Bluejay Lane. The lots are relatively square with their west boundaries following
the curve of the road. As part of the project, the lots will be combined to create one, 0.48-acre lot.
The properties to the south and west are composed of undeveloped forest, but all other surrounding
properties are residentially developed. The study area is entirely undeveloped aside from initial
clearing for site preparation (Photoplates 1 and 4).
The topography generally slopes from a high ridge west of the lots steeply down towards a trough
that lies outside the west boundary of the lots, and slopes steeply up again to a terrace by the east
boundary line (Figure 2) (Photoplates 2 and 3). The land also slopes gently from north to south. A
4-inch culvert then conveys the water under an old road easement that follows the west side of the
wetland (Photoplate 2). Water falls from the suspended culvert, flows across a gentle slope through
upland forest before draining into the north end of the wetland where it becomes primarily a stream
channel. (Photoplate 1 and 5). Surface water onsite drains to the south and into the wetland at the
bottom of the trough. Prior to clearing, both lots were predominantly vegetated by deciduous trees
with some isolated conifer trees, a relatively bare shrub layer, and dense herbaceous growth
(Photoplates 1, 2, and 5). Trees and shrubs remain within the buffer of the stream south and west of
the proposed building site.
One wetland was identified along a portion of the perennial stream that flows southerly through the
steep trough offsite to the west. The wetland begins where the culvert conveys surface water into the
stream and continues south through the forested slope along the channel before ending at another
culvert beneath Bluejay Lane (Figure 2). Most of the wetland unit lays offsite, but crosses onsite at
the very southwest corner of the south lot. The stream is not providing hydrology to Wetland A
which is a forested, sloping system that occurs on both sides of the stream (Photoplates 2 through
4).
VEGETATION
Wetland A is a forested system with a relatively sparse shrub layer and well-developed herbaceous
understory . The wetland vegetation was dominated by red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC) and western
red cedar (Thuja plicata, FAC) in the tree layer, with overhanging cover of bigleaf maple (Acer
macrophyllum, FACU) trees that were rooted in the upland. The shrub layer was dominated by
salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis, FAC). The herbaceous layer was dominated by youth-on-age
(Tolmiea menziesii, FAC), lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina, FAC), and field horsetail (Equisetum
arvense, FAC).
The upland vegetation was dominated by bigleaf maple and red alder with a sparse cover of western
red cedar in the forest canopy. Salmonberry, Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus, FAC), and
bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata, FACU) saplings dominated the shrub layer with lower
occurrences of grand fir (Abies grandis, FACU) saplings, western red cedar saplings, and bigleaf
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report 3
maple saplings. The herbaceous layer was dominated by trailing blackberry (Rubus ursinus, FACU)
and youth-on-age, with lower percentages of sword fern (Polystichum munitum, FACU), wood fern
(Dryopteris expansa, FACW), lady fern, Dewey sedge (Carex deweyana, FAC), and field horse tail.
There was an isolated area of slough sedge (Carex obnupta, OBL) on the slope east of the wetland
(Boundary Flags A-15 and A-16) that was determined to be upland for lacking hydric soil and
wetland hydrology indicators.
The dominant vegetation found onsite is recorded on the attached wetland determination data forms
(Appendix A). The indicator status, following the common and scientific names, indicates how likely
a species is to be found in wetlands. Listed from most likely to least likely to be found in wetlands,
the indicator status categories are:
▪ OBL (obligate wetland) – Almost always occur in wetlands.
▪ FACW (facultative wetland) – Usually occur in wetlands, but may occur in non-wetlands.
▪ FAC (facultative) – Occur in wetlands and non-wetlands.
▪ FACU (facultative upland) – Usually occur in non-wetlands, but may occur in wetlands.
▪ UPL (obligate upland) – Almost never occur in wetlands.
▪ NI (no indicator) – Status not yet determined.
SOILS
As referenced on the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS 2022) website, the soil
mapped on the lots is limited to Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (Figure 4). Kitsap silt loam
is a moderately well drained soil that formed on terraces from lacustrine deposits and/or marine
deposits. This soil is not subject to flooding or ponding and the depth to the water table is about 18
to 36 inches below ground surface. Because Kitsap soils are moderately well drained and are never
ponded or flooded, they are not classified as hydric1 (NRCS 2022).
The soil profile evaluated in the wetland consisted of fine sandy loam with brown to gray (10YR 3/1
to Gley1 4/5GY) soil matrix colors. Brown orange to bright orange (10YR 3/6 to 10YR 5/8)
redoximorphic features were present in the soil at 5 to 10 percent concentration. The soil profile met
hydric indicator A11, Depleted Below Dark Surface.
The evaluated upland soils were composed of sandy silt loam to gravelly sandy loam with brown to
yellow-orange (10YR 3/1 to 2.5Y 4/3) matrix colors. None of the upland test plots met hydric
indicators because they lacked a depleted layer and redoximorphic features. The colors and textures
observed in the upland test plots are relatively consistent with the description of Kitsap silt loam
mapped on the soil survey.
1 Areas mapped as hydric soils do not necessarily mean that an area is or is not a wetland—hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation, and
hydric soils must all be present to classify an area as a wetland.
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report 4
HYDROLOGY
The wetland was saturated during both the September 2016 and April 2022 site visits and the stream
that meanders through the wetland had water flowing. The wetland was confined to the banks of the
channel in several places, but most of the wetland unit was slightly wider than the channel. The
primary sources of hydrology to the wetland include groundwater discharge from the upland slopes,
surface water runoff, and direct precipitation. The stream does not provide primary hydrology to
the wetland because it remains saturated even when water within the stream is not flowing.
Additionally the wetland is situated on relatively steep slopes that prevent stream water from
flooding the wetland. Upland test holes dug near the wetland boundary (Test Plots 4, 5, and 6) did
not contain water or evidence of wetland hydrology.
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY
The National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map does not indicate the presence of any wetlands on or
adjacent to the lots (Figure 5). ELS biologists disagree with the mapping because wetland was
identified and delineated west of the lots2.
JEFFERSON COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS
The Jefferson County Critical Areas map (JC 2022) does not indicate the presence of any critical
areas onsite (Figure 6). ELS biologists disagree with the mapping because the stream was observed
flowing through the wetland.
CONCLUSIONS
WETLAND CATEGORIZATION
The wetland is situated on sloping terrain along a portion of the perennial stream that flows through
the forest west of the lots. It was rated according to Washington State Wetlands Rating System for
Western Washington-2014 Update (Rating System) (Hruby 2014). The wetland scored 13 points on
the rating form and is considered a Slope, Category IV, forested wetland based on functions
(Appendix B).
STREAM TYPING
ELS biologists observed and recorded the presence of a Type N water flowing through the forest
before exiting a culvert beneath Bluejay Lane south of the lots. During the September 2016 site visit,
the stream was flowing because of 0.88 inches of precipitation occurring between September 1st and
September 8th, which represented 79 percent of the amount for the entire month of September
(NOWData 2022). During the April 2022 visit after substantial precipitation (2.32 inches from April
1st to April 15th), the stream was flowing at a low rate (Photoplates 1 and 5). The stream is less than
2 feet wide on average so is classified as a Type N water and because it is seasonally flowing, it is a
Type Ns water.
2 The NWI maps should be used with discretion because they are used to gather general wetland information about a regional area
and therefore are limited in accuracy for smaller areas because of their large scale.
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report 5
CRITICAL AREA REGULATIONS
The JCUDC Chapter 18.22.330 Wetland Protection Standards specifies wetland buffers based on
proposed land use intensity, wetland category, and scores for habitat on the rating form. A 15-foot
building and impervious surface setback is also specified from the edge of wetland buffers. The
project involves building a single-family home at the north end of the combined lots, which meets
the criteria in JCUDC for high intensity land use (<1 dwelling unit/acre). The critical area buffers
are summarized in the table on the following page. The stream buffer is based on the Type Ns
classification and its position on grades of less than 20 percent. The wetland buffer represents the
regulated critical area buffer because it extends beyond the 50 foot stream buffer (Figure 3).
Table 1: Summary of Critical Areas and Buffers
Critical Area Category/Type Land Use Required Buffers*
Wetland A
Cat. IV
Slope
Forested
High 50 feet
Stream Type Ns -- 50 feet
*Buffers per JCUDC 18.22.730 (Table 1) and 18.22.630 (Table 1)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND IMPACT DETERMINATION
A single-family home is proposed on the combined lots, which total 0.48 acres. The home is
proposed at the shared property line with the driveway entering near the northeast corner and the
drainfield is proposed north of the driveway (Figure 3). All of the proposed activities are located
outside the buffers so will have no direct impact on the wetland, stream, or the respective buffers.
Additionally, the driveway and drainfield have the potential to affect water quality of streams and
wetlands and by placing both at the north end where they can be as far from the critical areas as
possible. Therefore, this project will not have significant adverse impacts to the wetland, stream, or
the buffers.
LIMITATIONS
ELS bases this report’s determinations on standard scientific methodology and best professional
judgment. In our opinion, local, state, and federal regulatory agencies should agree with our
determinations. However, the information contained in this report should be considered preliminary
and used at your own risk until it has been approved in writing by the appropriate regulatory
agencies. ELS is not responsible for the impacts of any changes in environmental standards,
practices, or regulations after the date of this report.
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
Liz Callen-Bluejay Lane Delineation
Wetland Delineation and Critical Areas Report 6
REFERENCES
Anderson, P.S.; S. Meyer, Dr. P. Olson, E. Stockdale (Anderson et. al.). 2016. Determining the
Ordinary High Water Mark for Shoreline Management Act Compliance in Washington State.
Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #16-06-029. Olympia, WA.
Cowardin, L.M., C. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe (Cowardin et. al.). 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-78/31. U.S. Department of
the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological Services, Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical
Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
Mississippi.
Hruby, T (Hruby). August 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington,
2014 Update. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-029. Olympia,
Washington. Effective January 1, 2015.
Jefferson County. Jefferson County - Public Land Records. Website.
https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/LandRecords/ . Website accessed May 2022.
Jefferson County Unified Development Code (JCUDC). Chapter 18.22 Critical Areas. 2021.
Jefferson County, Washington.
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. WA635 Kitsap County Area. Online
document
https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_MANUSCRIPTS/washington/WA635/0/wa635_text.
pdf . Website accessed May 2022.
Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Washington Hydric Soils List.
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/ .
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed.
J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-08-13. Vicksburg, Mississippi: U.S.
Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. 2022. National Wetlands Inventory. Online document
http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. Website accessed May 2022.
Ecological Land Services, Inc.
May 23, 2022
FIGURES & PHOTOPLATES
47.8423° Latitude
-122.6865° Longitude
5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 1VICINITY MAP5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET0200040001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comLOCATION MAP
WASHINGTON
Study
Area
NOTE:
Quadrangle topographic map from USGS.
PROJECT
VICINITY MAP
SCALE IN MILES
520
Mt. St.
Helens
SKAMANIA
N. Bonneville
Stevenson
Carson
14
WashougalCamas
Vancouver
Battle
Ground
Woodland
Ridgefield
CLARK
5
500
503
205
Kalama
Longview
ToutleCastle
Rock
COWLITZ
504
4Cathlamet
WAHKIAKUM
6
101
401
103
105
PACIFIC
Ilwaco
Long Beach
Ocean Park
South
Bend
Raymond
101Westport
Ocean Shores
Copalis Beach
Pacific Beach
Taholah
Quinalt
Aberdeen
MontesanoElma
Oakville
12
8
105
109
101
GRAYS
HARBOR
Queets
101
Kalaloch
Port
Townsend
Port Ludlow
Quilcene
Brinnon
101
19
104
20
JEFFERSON
CLALLAMForks110
101
113 112
101
112
Port
Angeles
Sequim
Neah Bay
Clallam Bay
Friday Harbor
Blaine
Ferndale
Bellingham
542
542
9
Lynden5
539
SAN
JUAN
WHATCOM
ConcreteAnacortes
Mount Vernon
Sedro-Woolley
5
20
11
530
SKAGIT
Lynnwood
MulkiteoEverett
Marysville
Monroe
Arlington
Darrington
5
9
2522
SNOHOMISH
Mt St Helens
KING
Seattle
Shoreline
90
Carnation
North Bend
Redmond
Enumclaw
Auburn
Issaquah
Burien
Kent
Renton
405
18
169
410
169
202
Mt. Rainier
Eatonville
4
Puyallup
Tacoma
Gig Harbor
165
162
164
161
7
702
507
Roy
DuPont Carbonado
5
5 Olympia
Shelton
Yelm
Tenino
508
Centralia
Chehalis
Pe Ell Morton 12
Toledo
7
505
Winlock
PIERCE
LEWIS
THURSTON
5
5
KITSAP
Poulsbo
3
16
Bremerton
Study Area
Study Area
TP-3
TP-4
TP-1
TP-5 Bluejay LaneWetland A
Category IV
Slope
Forested w/ 3 layers
Saturated Only
Permanently
Flowing Stream
Stream
Type Np
50'50'1
2
3
4
5
6
8
7
9 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
TP-2
NOTE(S):
1.Aerial from Google Earth™.
2.Wetland, Stream OHWM, and test plots located using handheld GPS capable of submeter accuracy.
3.Buffers per JCUDC 18.22 Critical Areas5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 2EXISTING CONDITIONS5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET040801157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comLEGEND:
Study Area Boundary
Parcel Boundary
Wetland Boundary
Wetland Flag
50' Wetland Buffer
Stream OHWM with Flow Direction
50' Stream Buffer
Test Plot Location
Culvert
TP-1
1
Parcel#: 934500013
Parcel#
:
9
3
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
Bluejay LaneWetland A
Category IV
Slope
Forested w/ 3 layers
Saturated Only
Permanently
Flowing Stream
Stream
Type Np
50'50'1
2
3
4
5
6
8
7
9 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Proposed
House
Proposed
Drainfield
ProposedDrivewayNOTE(S):
1.Wetland, Stream OHWM, and test plots located using handheld GPS capable of submeter accuracy.
2.Buffers per JCUDC 18.22 Critical Areas
3.Site plan provided by Nathan Cleaver Septic Design, Inc.5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 3PROPOSED CONDITIONS5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET040801157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comLEGEND:
Study Area Boundary
Parcel Boundary
Proposed Drainfield
Proposed Driveway
Proposed House
Wetland Boundary
Wetland Flag
Wetland Buffer
Stream OHWM with Flow Direction
Stream Buffer
Culvert
1
Parcel#: 934500013
Parcel#
:
9
3
4
5
0
0
0
1
4
NOTE(S):
1.Map provided on-line by NRCS at web address:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 4NRCS SOIL SURVEY5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET02004001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comLEGEND:
Study Area Boundary
NRCS Soil Boundary
KtC Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes. Not hydric.
Study Area
NOTE(S):
1.Map provided on-line by US Fish & Wildlife Service at web address:
https://www.fws.gov/program/national-wetlands-inventory/wetlands-mapper
No mapped wetlands indicated onStudy Area by US Fish & Wildlife
Service.5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 5USFWS NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET02004001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comEstuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
LEGEND:
Study Area Boundary
Wetlands
Study Area
5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 6JEFFERSON COUNTY CRITICAL AREAS5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET02004001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comNOTE(S):
1.Map provided on-line by Jefferson County at web address: https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/LandRecords/
LEGEND:
Study Area
Study Area Boundary
Critical Areas
DNR Streams & Water Bodies Forest Practices
DNR Water Body Forest Practices
Fish Habitat
Non-fish Habitat
Inventoried Shoreline
DNR Streams Forest Practices
Fish Habitat
Non-fish Habitat
Inventoried Shoreline
Roads
County Road
Private Road
Soils Hydric
Hydric Soil
Wetlands
Wetlands
FEMA Flood Zones
A: High Risk 100yr/1% chance no
Base Flood Elevation (BFE) determined
AE: High Risk 100 year, Base Flood
Elevation has been determined
AE FLOODWAY: High Risk 100 year
Regulatory Floodway
VE: Coastal High Risk 100 year, Base
Flood Elevation has been determined
X: Low to Moderate Risk 500 year
Bluejay LaneWetland A
Category IV
Slope
Forested w/ 3 layers
Saturated Only
Permanently
Flowing Stream
Stream
Type Np
5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 7WETLAND RATING FORM-150' OFFSET5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET01002001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comLEGEND:
Study Area Boundary
Wetland Unit Boundary
150' Wetland Offset
Impervious Surfaces - 5.3%
Study Area
Rating
Question
Description Answer
Slope Wetland
S 1.3 Plant cover of trees, shrubs and herbs Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > 1/4 of the area
S 2.1 Boundary of area w/in 150’ of the
wetland-land uses that generate
pollutants
<10% of the area within 150' in land uses that generate pollutants
S 4.1 Characteristics of slowing water flow <90% of area has dense, uncut, rigid vegetation
S 5.1 Boundary of area w/in 150’ of the
wetland-land uses that generate excess
runoff
<25% of area within 150 feet upslope in land uses or cover that
generates excess runoff.
H 1.1 Cowardin Plant Classes Forested & Forested w/3 canopy layers
H 1.2 Hydroperiods Saturated only and Seasonally flowing stream
H 1.4 Interspersion of habitats Low interspersion of habitats
5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 8WETLAND RATING FORM-1 km OFFSET5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET0120024001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comH2.1 Accessible Habitat
A-U (2.6%)
A-M/L (5.4%)A-M/L
A-U
H2.2 Undisturbed Habitat
U (20.7%)
M/L (49.1%)
H2.3 Land Use Intensity
H (22.3%)
M/L
U
H
A-M/L
A-U
M/L
U
H
LEGEND:
Study Area Boundary
Wetland Unit Boundary
H 2.1. Accessible Habitat Equation
% A-U habitat 2.6% + [(% A-M/L intensity land uses)/2] 2.7%= 5.3%
H 2.2. Total Undisturbed Habitat Equation
% A-U + % U habitat 23.3% + [(% A-M/L + % M/L land uses)/2] 27.3%= 50.6%
Study Area
Wetland A
A-M/L
M/L
U
U
M/L
H
H
A-U
M/L
M/L
M/L
H
H
U
5/19/2022 9:43 AM C:\Users\spencer\Box\ELS\WA\Jefferson\County\3727-Callen\3727.01-Bluejay Lane Delineation\3727.01-Figures CAD Only\3727.01_.dwg spencer N
6
:(DATE:DWN:REQ. BY:PRJ. MGR:CHK:PROJECT NO:Figure 9WETLAND RATING FORM-303(d) and TMDLs5/19/223727.01Bluejay Lane DelineationLiz CallenSection 9, Township 27N, Range 1 E, W.M. Jefferson County, WASTBECJRBSCALE IN FEET0120024001157 3rd Ave., Suite 220ALongview, WA 98632Phone: (360) 578-1371Fax: (360) 414-9305www.eco-land.comWQ Improvement Projects
Approved
In Development
NOTE(S):
1.Map provided on-line by Washington State
Department of Ecology at web address:
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/waterqualityatlas/map.aspx?
Assessed Waters/Sediment
Water
Category 5 - 303d
Category 4C
Category 4B
Category 4A
Category 2
Category 1
Sediment
Category 5 - 303d
Category 4C
Category 4B
Category 4A
Category 2
Category 1
Subbasins
12 Digit HUC Boundary
Study Area
Study Area
Photo 1 was taken from the southern parcel
looking west downslope towards the
stream. Part of this area has been
prepared for development with ap-
proval.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
Photoplate 1 Site Photos
Liz Callen
Bluejay Lane Delineation
Jefferson County, WA
Photo 3 was taken of the stream during the
April 2022 site visit. This part of the
stream was not yet bordered by wet-
land.
Photo 2 was taken from the stream looking
southeast toward the top of the
slope where the proposed house will
be developed.
DATE: 5/23/2022
DWN: EC
PRJ. MGR: JB
PROJ.#: 3727.01
Photo 4 was taken from the southern parcel
looking south downslope towards
the southern portion of the wetland.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
Photoplate 2 Site Photos
Liz Callen
Bluejay Lane Delineation
Jefferson County, WA
Photo 6 was taken of the culvert that emp-
ties water into Wetland A from be-
neath the old road. The culvert con-
veys water into the main channel
through the wetland.
Photo 5 was taken of the area where Test
Plot 1 was conducted. It was located
on a slope between the high area
near Bluejay Lane and the bank of
the wetland. The area was vegetat-
ed with slough sedge, but did not
meet wetland soil or hydrology pa-
rameters and was determined to be
upland.
DATE: 5/23/2022
DWN: EC
PRJ. MGR: JB
PROJ.#: 3727.01
Photo 7 was taken from the north end of
Wetland A looking at flag A1. The
wetland was situated in a sloping
trough in the northern portion and
confined by slopes on either side.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
Photoplate 3 Site Photos
Liz Callen
Bluejay Lane Delineation
Jefferson County, WA
Photo 9 was taken where Test Plot 5 was
conducted. This area is west of wet-
land flag A9 and contained wetland
vegetation along with low topogra-
phy. Upon investigation, the area
did not meet wetland parameters
and was determined to be upland.
Photo 8 was taken from the east slope of
the wetland looking down at flag
A16. The water was low, but still
flowing during the September 2016
site visit because of the amount of
precipitation occurring prior to the
2016 site visit. This was in the mid-
dle portion of the wetland where the
edges are confined to the stream
channel due to steep slopes.
DATE: 5/23/2022
DWN: EC
PRJ. MGR: JB
PROJ.#: 3727.01
Photo 10 was taken from a cleared area
that has been prepared for further
development upon permit approval.
This area is moderately sloped be-
fore sloping more steeply towards
the west and south.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
Photoplate 4 Site Photos
Liz Callen
Bluejay Lane Delineation
Jefferson County, WA
Photo 12 looks south at a portion of the wet-
land where the topography starts to
slope upward again to the west.
Photo 11 was taken from the south slope
above the stream and wetland. It
looks northwesterly up the slope
toward the future building site.
DATE: 5/23/2022
DWN: EC
PRJ. MGR: JB
PROJ.#: 3727.01
Photo 13 looks north at the portion of the
stream that starts near the four inch
culvert. The neighboring residence
that lies upslope to the north is visi-
ble at the upper edge of the photo.
1157 3rd Ave., Suite 220A
Longview, WA 98632
Phone: (360) 578-1371
Fax: (360) 414-9305
Photoplate 5 Site Photos
Liz Callen
Bluejay Lane Delineation
Jefferson County, WA
Photo 15 was taken in the upland north of
Wetland A and looks southeast to-
wards Bluejay Lane. The stream
continues down the slope and exits
to the east through a culvert under
Bluejay Lane, which lies in the up-
per left quarter of the photo.
Photo 14 also looks north, but was taken
from further upstream where the
slope is more extreme and shows
the orange OHWM flagging.
DATE: 5/23/2022
DWN: EC
PRJ. MGR: JB
PROJ.#: 3727.01
APPENDIX A
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Alnus rubra 70 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 3 (A) 2. Thuja plicata 10 no FAC
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 4.
50% = 40, 20% = 16 80 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 60 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter)
1. Rubus spectabilis 5 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Abies grandis 5 yes FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = 5, 20% = 2 10 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' diameter) UPL species x5 =
1. Carex obnupta 25 yes OBL Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Rubus ursinus 20 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Polystichum munitum 10 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. Athyrium filix-femina 5 no FAC 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01
7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = 30, 20% = 12 60 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 40
Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC and OBL species.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property City/County: Port Ludlow/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9-8-16
Applicant/Owner: Liz Callen State: WA Sampling Point: TP 1
Investigator(s): L. Westervelt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Lat: 47.8421153104198 Long: -122.68661427282 Datum: Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (KtC) NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The property is undeveloped and entirely forested with mature decidious and coniferous trees. The wetland begins west of the west property line and extends along both sides of the stream. Test Plot 1 was located on an upland slope east of the wetland boundary in an area of wetland vegetation.
S9 T27N R1E WM
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: TP 1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-1 Duff Forest litter
1-3 10 YR 3/3 100 sa si lo No redoximorphic features
3-16 10YR 5/8 100 sa si lo No redoximorphic features
sa - sandy
si - silty
lo - loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: This soil profile contains a bright surface layer and bright chromas below that do not meet the definition of depleted and lack redoximorphic features.
Therefore the hydric soil criteria is not met.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Hydrology was not present during the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Acer macrophyllum 70 yes FACU Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. Alnus rubra 15 no FAC
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4.
50% = 42.5, 20% = 17 85 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 33 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter)
1. Rubus spectabilis 20 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Thuja plicata 10 no FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. Rubus armeniacus 5 no FAC OBL species x1 =
4. Acer macrophyllum 5 no FACU FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = 20, 20% = 8 40 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' diameter) UPL species x5 =
1. Rubus ursinus 80 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Carex deweyana 10 no FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Polystichum munitum 10 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. Athyrium filix-femina 5 no FAC 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01
7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = 52.5, 20% = 21 105 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is not met because there is less than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property City/County: Port Ludlow/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9-8-16
Applicant/Owner: Liz Callen State: WA Sampling Point: TP 2
Investigator(s): L. Westervelt Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Lat: 47.8423948637797 Long: -122.68655311591 Datum: Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (KtC) NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The property is undeveloped and almost entirely forested with mature decidious and coniferous trees. The wetland begins west of the west property line and extends along both sides of the stream. Test Plot 2 was located on an upland slope east of the wetland boundary in the same location as one of the septic soil logs.
S9 T27N 1E WM
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: TP 2
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-4 10YR 3/2 100 gr sa lo No redoximorphic features
4-16 10 YR 5/3 100 sa si lo No redoximorphic features
gr - gravelly
sa - sandy
si - silty
lo - loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: This soil profile contains a bright surface layer and bright chromas below that do not meet the definition of depleted and lack redoximorphic features.
Therefore the hydric soil criteria is not met.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Hydrology was not present during the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Acer macrophyllum 80 yes FACU Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Alnus rubra 5 no FAC
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4.
50% = 42.5, 20% = 17 85 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter)
1. Rubus spectabilis 25 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = 12.5, 20% = 5 25 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' diameter) UPL species x5 =
1. Tolmiea menziesii 90 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Athyrium filix-femina 10 no FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Equisetum arvense 5 no FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01
7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = 52.5, 20% = 21 105 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property City/County: Port Ludlow/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9-8-16
Applicant/Owner: Liz Callen State: WA Sampling Point: TP 3
Investigator(s): L. Westervelt Section, Township, Range: S9 T27N R1E WM
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Lat: 47.8423580479648 Long: -122.68697313305 Datum: Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (KtC) NWI classification: PFOB
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The property is undeveloped and almost entirely forested with mature decidious and coniferous trees. The wetland begins west of the west property line and extends along both sides of the stream. Test Plot 3 was located in the north wetland boundary by boundary flag A-1 and A-2.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: TP 3
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-14 10YR 3/1 95 10YR 3/6 5 C M fine sa lo
14-16 Gley1 4/5GY 90 10YR 5/8 10 C M fine sa lo
gr - gravelly
sa - sandy
si - silty
lo - loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: This soil profile contains a dark surface layer and gleyed chromas below that meet the definition of depleted. Therefore the hydric soil criteria meets A11,
Depleted Below Dark Surface.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): surface
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Hydrology was present during the site visit evident in the saturation of the soil profile to the surface.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Acer macrophyllum 80 yes FACU Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2.
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4.
50% = 40, 20% = 16 80 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 25 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter)
1. Rubus spectabilis 10 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Prunus emarginata 5 yes FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = 7.5, 20% = 3 15 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' diameter) UPL species x5 =
1. Rubus ursinus 90 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Carex deweyana 10 no FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Polystichum munitum 10 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01
7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = 55, 20% = 22 110 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is not met because there is less than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property City/County: Port Ludlow/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9-8-16
Applicant/Owner: Liz Callen State: WA Sampling Point: TP 4
Investigator(s): L. Westervelt Section, Township, Range: S9 T27N R1E WM
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Lat: 47.8423174588258 Long: -122.68702901124 Datum: Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (KtC) NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The property is undeveloped and almost entirely forested with mature decidious and coniferous trees. The wetland begins west of the west property line and extends along both sides of the stream. Test Plot 4 was located on the old road easment west of the wetland boundary by boundary flags A-2 and A-3.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: TP 4
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 3/1 100 silt loam No redoximorphic features
6-16 2.5Y 4/3 97 10YR 4/6 3 C M silt loam
gr - gravelly
sa - sandy
si - silty
lo - loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: This soil profile contains a dark surface layer and bright chromas below that do not meet the definition of depleted. Therefore the hydric soil criteria is not
met.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Hydrology was not present during the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Acer macrophyllum 65 yes FACU Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Alnus rubra 5 no FAC
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 3 (B) 4.
50% = 35, 20% = 14 70 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 67 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter)
1. Rubus spectabilis 20 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = 10, 20% = 4 20 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' diameter) UPL species x5 =
1. Tolmiea menziesii 65 yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Athyrium filix-femina 10 no FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Polystichum munitum 10 no FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. Equisetum arvense 5 no FAC 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01
7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = 45, 20% = 18 90 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is met because there is greater than 50% dominance by FAC species.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property City/County: Port Ludlow/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9-8-16
Applicant/Owner: Liz Callen State: WA Sampling Point: TP 5
Investigator(s): L. Westervelt Section, Township, Range: S9 T27N R1E WM
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Lat: 47.8417389449192 Long: -122.68678321124 Datum: Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (KtC) NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The property is undeveloped and almost entirely forested with mature decidious and coniferous trees. The wetland begins west of the west property line and extends along both sides of the stream. Test Plot 5 was located on the old road easment west of the wetland boundary by boundary flag A-9.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: TP 5
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-6 10YR 3/1 100 silt loam No redoximorphic features
6-16 2.5Y 4/3 97 10YR 4/6 3 C M silt loam
gr - gravelly
sa - sandy
si - silty
lo - loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: This soil profile contains a dark surface layer and bright chromas below that do not meet the definition of depleted. Therefore the hydric soil criteria is not
met.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Hydrology was not present during the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Acer macrophyllum 40 yes FACU Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 2 (A) 2. Alnus rubra 10 no FAC
3. Thuja p[icata 10 no FAC Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 4 (B) 4.
50% = 30, 20% = 12 60 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 50 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 20' diameter)
1. Rubus spectabilis 5 yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Rubus armeniacus 5 yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = 5, 20% = 2 10 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 5' diameter) UPL species x5 =
1. Rubus ursinus 80 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Carex deweyana 5 no FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Dryopteris expansa 5 no FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
4. 1 – Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
5. 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
6. 3 - Prevalence Index is <3.01
7. 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 8.
9. 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
10. Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
11. 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic. 50% = 45, 20% = 18 90 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1.
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0
Remarks: The hydrophytic vegetation criterion is not met because there is not greater than 50% dominance by FAC and FACW species.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property City/County: Port Ludlow/Jefferson Sampling Date: 9-8-16
Applicant/Owner: Liz Callen State: WA Sampling Point: TP 6
Investigator(s): L. Westervelt Section, Township, Range: S9 T27N R1E WM
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 1-3%
Subregion (LRR): MLRA 2 Lat: - Long: - Datum: Trimble
Soil Map Unit Name: Kitsap silt loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (KtC) NWI classification: UPL
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology , naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes No Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Remarks:
The property is undeveloped and almost entirely forested with mature decidious and coniferous trees. The wetland begins west of the west property line and extends along both sides of the stream. Test Plot 6 was located east of the wetland boundary by boundary flags A-14 and A-15.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: TP 6
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type1 Loc2 Texture Remarks
0-1 Duff Forest litter
1-3 10YR 3/3 100 sa si lo No redoximorphic features
3-16 10YR 5/8 100 sa si lo No redoximorphic features
gr - gravelly
sa - sandy
si - silty
lo - loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix, RC=Root Channel
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 2 cm Muck (A10)
Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) Red Parent Material (TF2)
Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) Redox Depressions (F8)
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Type:
Depth (inches):
Remarks: This soil profile contains a bright surface layer and bright chromas below that do not meet the definition of depleted and lack redoximorphic features.
Therefore the hydric soil criteria is not met.
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Water-Stained Leaves (B9)
High Water Table (A2) (except MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)
Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stresses Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches):
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Hydrology was not present during the site visit and there was no evidence to indicate wetland hydrology.
Project Site: Bluejay Lane Property
APPENDIX B
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
1
RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington
Name of wetland (or ID #): Wetland A Date of site visit: 4/15/2022
Rated by J Bartlett Trained by Ecology? X Yes No Date of training 11/2014
HGM Class used for rating Slope Wetland has multiple HGM classes? _Y X N
NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined).
Source of base aerial photo/map Google Earth
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY IV (based on functions X or special characteristics _)
1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
Category I – Total score = 23 – 27
Category II – Total score = 20 – 22
Category III – Total score = 16 – 19
X Category IV – Total score = 9 – 15
FUNCTION Improving
Water Quality
Hydrologic Habitat
Circle the appropriate ratings
Site Potential H M L H M L H M L
Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L
Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL
Score Based on
Ratings
4 4 5 13
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
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
CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY
Estuarine I II
Wetland of High Conservation Value I
Bog I
Mature Forest I
Old Growth Forest I
Coastal Lagoon I II
Interdunal I II III IV
None of the above X
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
2
Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2
Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2
Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3
Riverine Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4
Hydroperiods H 1.2
Ponded depressions R 1.1
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2
Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1
Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3
Lake Fringe Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3
Slope Wetlands
Map of: To answer questions: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 2, 7
Hydroperiods H 1.2 2, 7
Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 2, 7
Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
(can be added to figure above)
S 4.1 7
Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 7
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 8
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 9
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 9
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
3
HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington
For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated.
If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, 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 YES – 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)?
NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe
If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater 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
If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without 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?
X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual),
X 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, X The water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small 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 name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
4
NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine
NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not
flooding
6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the
surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior
of the wetland.
NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is 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 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 wetland unit
being rated
HGM class to
use in rating
Slope + Riverine Riverine
Slope + Depressional Depressional
Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream
within boundary of depression
Depressional
Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional
Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other
class of freshwater wetland
Treat as
ESTUARINE
If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have
more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the
rating.
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
5
SLOPE WETLANDS
Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality
S 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality?
S 1.1. Characteristics of the average slope of the wetland: (a 1% slope has a 1 ft vertical drop in elevation for every
100 ft of horizontal distance)
Slope is 1% or less points = 3
Slope is > 1%-2% points = 2
Slope is > 2%-5% points = 1
Slope is greater than 5% points = 0
0
S 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions): Yes = 3 No = 0 0
S 1.3. Characteristics of the plants in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants:
Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fits the plants in the wetland. Dense means you
have trouble seeing the soil surface (>75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher
than 6 in.
Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > 90% of the wetland area points = 6
Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > ½ of area points = 3
Dense, woody, plants > ½ of area points = 2
Dense, uncut, herbaceous plants > ¼ of area points = 1
Does not meet any of the criteria above for plants points = 0
1
Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above 1
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12 = H 6-11 = M X 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page
S 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site?
S 2.1. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft on the uphill side of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants?
Yes = 1 No = 0
0
S 2.2. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in question S 2.1?
Other sources Yes = 1 No = 0
0
Total for S 2 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1-2 = M X 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
S 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society?
S 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the
303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0
0
S 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where water quality is an issue? At least one aquatic resource in the basin is
on the 303(d) list. Yes = 1 No = 0
1
S 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality? Answer YES
if there is a TMDL for the basin in which unit is found. Yes = 2 No = 0
0
Total for S 3 Add the points in the boxes above 1
Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H X 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
6
SLOPE WETLANDS
Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream erosion
S 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and stream erosion?
S 4.1. Characteristics of plants that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms: Choose the points appropriate
for the description that best fits conditions in the wetland. Stems of plants should be thick enough (usually > 1/
8 in), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows.
Dense, uncut, rigid plants cover > 90% of the area of the wetland points = 1
All other conditions points = 0
0
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 1 = M X 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
S 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the hydrologic functions of the site?
S 5.1. Is more than 25% of the area within 150 ft upslope of wetland in land uses or cover that generate excess
surface runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0
0
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 1 = M X 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
S 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
S 6.1. Distance to the nearest areas downstream that have flooding problems:
The sub-basin immediately down-gradient of site has flooding problems that result in damage to human or
natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds) points = 2
Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient points = 1
No flooding problems anywhere downstream points = 0
1
S 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan?
Yes = 2 No = 0
0
Total for S 6 Add the points in the boxes above 1
Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H X 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
13
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes.
HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat
H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat?
H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the
Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold
of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked.
Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4
Emergent 3 structures: points = 2
Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1
X Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0
If the unit has a Forested class, check if:
X The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover)
that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon
1
H 1.2. Hydroperiods
Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover
more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods).
Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3
Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2
Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1
X Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0
X Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland
Lake Fringe wetland 2 points
Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points
1
H 1.3. Richness of plant species
Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft2.
Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name
the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle
If you counted: > 19 species points = 2
5 - 19 species points = 1
< 5 species points = 0
1
H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats
Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or
the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you
have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high.
None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points
All three diagrams
in this row
are HIGH = 3points
1
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
14
H 1.5. Special habitat features:
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points.
Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long).
Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland
X Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m)
over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m)
Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree
slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered
where wood is exposed)
At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are
permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians)
X Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of
strata)
2
Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 6
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M X 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site?
H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit).
Calculate: % undisturbed habitat 2.6% + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] 2.7% = 5.3 %
If total accessible habitat is:
> 1/ (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 3
20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2
10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1
< 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0
0
H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland.
Calculate: % undisturbed habitat 23.3 + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] 27.3 = 50.6 %
Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2
Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1
Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0
3
H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If
> 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2)
≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0
0
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above 3
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H X 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society?
H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score
that applies to the wetland being rated.
Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2
⎯ It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
⎯ It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) ⎯ It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species ⎯ It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources ⎯ It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a
Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan
Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1
Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0
Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H X 1 = M _ 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
15
WDFW Priority Habitats
Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can
be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington.
177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/)
Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is
independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.
⎯ Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha). ⎯ Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and
wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).
⎯ Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
⎯ Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi-
layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200
years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less
than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that
found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.
⎯ Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above).
X Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and
terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. ⎯ Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet
prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above).
X Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.
⎯ Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and
Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report –
see web link on previous page).
⎯ Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.
⎯ Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. ⎯ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite,
and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.
⎯ Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to
enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western
Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft
(6 m) long.
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed
elsewhere.
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
16
Wetland Type
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the category when the appropriate criteria are met.
Category
SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands
Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands?
⎯ The dominant water regime is tidal,
⎯ Vegetated, and
⎯ With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes –Go to SC 1.1 No= Not an estuarine wetland
SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area
Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332 -30-151?
Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2
Cat. I
SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
⎯ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less
than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25)
⎯ At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
⎯ The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or
contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II
Cat. I
Cat. II
SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)
SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High
Conservation Value? Yes – Go to SC 2.2 No – Go to SC 2.3
SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value?
Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland?
http://www1.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/wnhpwetlands.pdf
Yes – Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No = Not a WHCV
SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on
their website? Yes = Category I No = Not a WHCV
Cat. I
SC 3.0. Bogs
Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key
below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions.
SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either peats or mucks, that compose 16 in or
more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No – Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are less than 16 in deep
over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating on top of a lake or
pond? Yes – Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog
SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30%
cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No – Go to SC 3.4
NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by
measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the
plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog.
SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar,
western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the
species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy?
Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog
Cat. I
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
17
SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands
Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA
Department of Fish and Wildlife’s forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate
the wetland based on its functions.
⎯ Old-growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered
canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of
age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more.
⎯ Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the
species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm).
Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section
Cat. I
SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
⎯ The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from
marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks
⎯ The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt)
during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs to be measured near the bottom)
Yes – Go to SC 5.1 No = Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon
SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions?
⎯ The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less
than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100).
⎯ At least ¾ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-
mowed grassland.
⎯ The wetland is larger than 1/ ac (4350 ft2) 10
Yes = Category I No = Category II
Cat. I
Cat. II
SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands
Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If
you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions.
In practical terms that means the following geographic areas:
⎯ Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103
⎯ Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 105
⎯ Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109
Yes – Go to SC 6.1 No = not an interdunal wetland for rating
SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M
for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No – Go to SC 6.2
SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger?
Yes = Category II No – Go to SC 6.3
SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac?
Yes = Category III No = Category IV
Cat I
Cat. II
Cat. III
Cat. IV
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015
18
Wetland name or number
This page left blank intentionally