HomeMy WebLinkAbout701105005 Wetland DelineationDAVENPORT PROPERTY CRITICAL AREAS REPORT &
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
JEFFERSON COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Prepared for:
Kim Davenport
33 East Toandos Road
Quilcene, WA 98376
Prepared by:
5 Ocean Lane
Copalis Beach, WA 98535
Telephone: 206-909-3575
February 1, 2023
February 1, 2023
Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Report Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 5
Project Location ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Project Purpose and Description ........................................................................................................... 5
Current Site Use and History.................................................................................................................. 5
Study Area .............................................................................................................................................. 6
Methods ......................................................................................................................................................... 7
Wetland Delineation, Identification, and Classification ........................................................................ 7
Wetland Rating ...................................................................................................................................... 8
Stream Classification .............................................................................................................................. 8
Determination of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas .......................................................... 9
Results .......................................................................................................................................................... 10
Existing Information Review ................................................................................................................ 10
Landscape Setting ................................................................................................................................ 10
Watershed Description ........................................................................................................................ 10
Climate, Precipitation, and Growing Season ....................................................................................... 10
Critical Areas Overview ................................................................................................................................ 11
Stream and Wetland Inventory ........................................................................................................... 11
Soil Survey of Grays Harbor County ..................................................................................................... 12
Site Investigation ......................................................................................................................................... 13
Overview of Site Conditions ................................................................................................................. 13
Site Topography and Hydrology........................................................................................................... 13
Vegetation Community ........................................................................................................................ 14
Critical Areas Summary ........................................................................................................................ 15
Wetland A ............................................................................................................................................ 15
Off-Site Wetland B ............................................................................................................................... 17
Wetland Buffer Conditions .................................................................................................................. 17
Stream 1 ............................................................................................................................................... 19
Stream Buffer Conditions..................................................................................................................... 19
Sensitive Plants, Fish, Wildlife, and Habitats ....................................................................................... 20
Critical Aquifer Recharge Area ............................................................................................................. 21
Impacts and Mitigation ................................................................................................................................ 22
Avoidance and Minimization ............................................................................................................... 22
Impacts Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 23
Buffer Averaging .................................................................................................................................. 23
February 1, 2023
2 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
Site Stewardship Measures and BMPs ................................................................................................ 23
Disclaimer .................................................................................................................................................... 25
References ................................................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix A - Figure 1 – Vicinity Map
Figure 2 – Topography, Drainage,
Figure 3 – Wetland/Stream Inventories
Figure 4 – NRCS Soils
Figure 5 – Critical Areas Existing Conditions
Figure 6 – Proposed Development
Appendix B - Wetland Determination Datasheets
Appendix C - Wetland Rating and Wetland Rating Figures (A1-A6)
February 1, 2023
Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property 3
Report Summary
Client: Kim Davenport
33 East Toandos Road
Quilcene, WA 98376
Project site: 6.39-acre site, Parcel No. 701105005 located at 33 East Toandos Road,
Quilcene, Washington 98376.
Critical Area Assessed: Wetland A – Category III
Regulatory Guidance: JCC 18.22.710 and 18.22.730 establishes the following Wetland
categories and buffers (based on moderate-intensity land uses and High
Habitat Function):
Category I Wetland – 75-225 feet with 10-foot minimum building
setback (based on Functions or Special Characteristics);
Category II Wetland – 75-225 feet with 10-foot minimum building
setback (based on Functions or Special Characteristics);
Category III Wetland – 60-225 feet with 10-foot minimum building
setback (based on Functions); and
Category IV Wetland – 40 feet with 10-foot minimum building setback.
JCC 18.22.610 and 18.22.630 establishes stream categories and buffers
for Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs):
Type S Water – 150 feet
Type F Water – 150 feet
Type Np Water – 75 feet
Type Ns Water (>20% slope) – 75 feet
Type Ns Water (<20% slope) – 50 feet
JCC 18.22.310 and 18.22.300 establish classification and protection
standards for Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas as identified by Jefferson
County.
Introduction
This Critical Areas Study was prepared for Kim Davenport, by Convergent Ecosystems (Convergent).
Convergent conducted a site visit on January 17th to detect the presence or absence of wetlands and
streams and then to delineate critical areas on the Project Site in proximity to the proposed development
area. This report is consistent with the requirements of Jefferson County Critical Area Code (JCC 18.22)
for use in septic and building permits or any other permitted land use alterations. This report includes a
full characterization of existing site conditions, critical areas, and buffers, as well as existing information
sources used for determining critical areas.
Field work and report preparation was led by Rosemary Baker, Convergent Ecosystems principal ecologist
and senior internal review provided by professional wetland scientist Mark Merkelbach (#001837) of
Green Earth Operations, Inc.
Project Location
The Project Site is located on the east side of the Washington Peninsula south of State Route (SR) 104 in
unincorporated Jefferson County, Washington. The project location consists of an irregularly shaped lot
abutting the intersection of Coyle Road and East Toandos Road. The Project Site address is 33 East
Toandos Road, Quilcene, WA 98376 (SE ¼ Section 10 of Township 27 N and Range 1 W W.M.) (Appendix
A/Figure 1). The Project Site is a single 6.39-acre parcel (701105005) and located in the Thorndyke Creek
sub-watershed of Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 17 (Quilcene-Snow Watershed).
Project Purpose and Description
The applicant is proposing to build a second, approximately 455 square-foot single-family residence on
the 6.39-acre parcel with an approximately 12-foot-wide driveway access from East Toandos Road. The
current submittal under review is for permitting of the proposed residence’s septic system. The building
design portion of this proposal (house and driveway) is approximate and conceptual for the purposes of
demonstrating and confirming avoidance and minimization and no-net-loss of critical areas and critical
area functions. The purpose of this report is to assess and document the existing critical areas conditions
and the environmental regulatory requirements for this single-family residential development and
associated infrastructure. This documentation informs site development and supports the septic and
building permit process and will be valid for up to five years once approved by the County.
Current Site Use and History
The Project Site is proposed within a currently undeveloped portion of the parcel within undisturbed,
closed-canopy, coniferous forest (Photo 1) (Appendix A/Figures 1, 5 and 6). This parcel was previously
logged and is likely third-growth regenerating forest with a mix of terraces, slopes, and headwater
drainage ways. The west side of this parcel has an existing single-family residence, accessory buildings,
lawn and landscaping, and main driveway accessed from the intersection of Coyle Road and E Toandos
Road. The project area is zoned by the County as RR-20 (Rural Residential) (JCC 2023).
February 1, 2023
6 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
Photo 1. View of closed-canopy Douglas fir dominant
forest in southeastern portion of the property (looking
southeast). Photo taken 1-17-23.
Study Area
The study area for this investigation is limited to the single parcel listed in this report and the extent of
adjoining properties which are known to or may have contiguous or nearby critical areas with buffers
which could extend onto the Project Site (Appendix A/Figures 1, 2, and 4). The on-site investigation was
performed strictly within the project site property boundaries. This study also includes the extent and
observations of aquatic areas and their buffers or any other critical areas within a 300-foot radius of the
proposed Project Site or public from any access roads and rights-of-way. Background research was
conducted on pre-existing critical areas within the Study Area. Within the Project Site, wetland boundaries
were flagged and classified per the guidance required by federal, state, and local agencies. See the
Methods section below for further details.
Methods
Wetland Delineation, Identification, and Classification
Waters of the United States (U.S.), including wetlands, were investigated and delineated within the
project site boundaries consistent with the technical approaches outlined in the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987), the Washington
State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology 1997), and the Regional Supplement to
USACE Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0)
(Environmental Laboratory 2010). The wetland definition provided in the GHCC 18.02 was applied
throughout the study.
In general, wetland delineation consisted of three main tasks: (1) assessing vegetation, soil, and
hydrologic characteristics to identify areas meeting the wetland identification criteria, (2) evaluating
constructed drainage features to determine if they would be regulated as wetlands, and (3) marking
wetland boundaries where those occur on-site, if any.
Sampling locations were selected at sites representative of the area. Dominant plant species in each of
the three strata (tree, sapling/shrub, and herb) were identified using northwest flora field guides (Cook
1997 and Pojar 1994). Unless otherwise noted in field data sheets due to local conditions, trees were
identified within a 30-foot radius of an established data plot, scrub/shrub vegetation was identified
within a 10-foot radius, and herbaceous vegetation was identified within a 3-foot radius. A
determination of the presence of hydrophytic vegetation was made at each observation point in
accordance with the USACE guidelines (Environmental Laboratory 2010).
The determination of the presence of hydric soils was consistent with the USACE Regional Supplement
(Environmental Laboratory 2010). The Soil Survey of Jefferson County Area (NRCS 2019) provided
information regarding the general characterization of the soils in the area, the parent material, as well
as series, taxonomy, and subgroup information. Soils were examined to a depth of approximately 20
inches, or the depth at which it could be confirmed that positive indicators were either present or
absent. Soil colors were described in data forms using the Munsell soil color charts’ numbering system
(Munsell Color 2000). This numeric color classification system is used by the USACE Regional
Supplement in determining if hydric soil indicators are present in a sample.
Hydrology data was collected from field observations and reference documents. Annual climate records
and monthly precipitation during site visits were obtained from the Quilcene 5.8 NNE weather station
(NOAA 2023). Upon site inspection, the presence of direct and indirect hydrologic indicators was used to
infer wetland hydrology. Field indicators of wetland hydrology were determined in accordance with the
USACE guidelines (Environmental Laboratory 2010).
Wetlands, if observed, on the subject property were classified according to the USFWS classification
system (Cowardin et al. 1979). This system is based on an evaluation of attributes such as vegetation
class, hydrologic regime, salinity, and substrate. Wetlands were also classified according to the
hydrogeomorphic (HGM) wetland classification system, which is based on an evaluation of attributes
February 1, 2023
8 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
such as the position of the wetland within the surrounding landscape, the source and location of water
just before it enters the wetland, and the pattern of water movement in the wetland (Brinson 1993).
Wetland Rating
Jefferson County Code 18.22.710(2) requires the classification of wetlands using the Washington State
Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Hruby 2014). The rating system assesses
a wetland’s potential to provide water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions at a site-specific level as
well as in relation to existing land use in the surrounding landscape. It also incorporates consideration of
the wetland’s hydrologic and geomorphic conditions into the system by assigning the wetland an
hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classification. This allows for a more accurate rating of how well the wetland
functions based on its position in the landscape, water source, and the flow and fluctuation of the water
once in the wetland. The 2014 Rating System divides wetlands into four hierarchical categories based on
specific attributes such as rarity, sensitivity to disturbance, and our ability to replace them. The
classification hierarchy ranges from Category I wetlands, which exhibit outstanding features (rare
wetland type, relatively undisturbed or a high sensitivity to disturbance, high level of functions) to
Category IV wetlands, which have the lowest levels of function and are often heavily disturbed. The
rating categories are used to identify permitted uses in the wetland and its buffer, to determine the
width of buffers needed to protect the wetland from adjacent development, and to identify the
mitigation ratios required to compensate for potential impacts on wetlands.
When wetlands are encountered, they are rated per Ecology rating system, and wetland buffer widths
determined according to that rating, per JCC 18.22.730(6).
Stream Classification
Washington State defines a watercourse, river, or stream as “any portion of a channel, bed, bank, or
bottom waterward of the ordinary high-water line of waters of the state, including areas in which fish may
spawn, reside, or pass, and tributary waters with defined bed or banks, which influence the quality of fish
habitat downstream. This includes watercourses which flow on an intermittent basis or which fluctuate in
level during the year and applies to the entire bed of such watercourse whether or not the water is at peak
level. This definition does not include irrigation ditches, canals, storm water run-off devices, or other
entirely artificial watercourses, except where they exist in a natural watercourse that has been altered by
humans” (WAC 2020; 220-660-030 [153]).
JCC 18.22.610 and 18.22.640 have established in accordance with the water typing rules contained in WAC
222-16-30 and the following water typing system criteria:
Type S Segments of all waters within their bank-full width, as inventoried as “shorelines of the
state.”
Type F Segments of natural waters other than Type S waters, which are within the bank-full
widths of defined channels or within lakes having a surface area of 0.5 acres or greater
at seasonal low water and which in any case contain fish habitat.
Type Np Segments of natural waters within the bank-full width of defined channels that are
perennial non-fish habitat streams.
Type Ns Segments of natural waters within the bank-full width of the defined channels that are
not Type S, F, or Np waters.
Determination of Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas
The presence of any fish and wildlife habitats of importance on the site were determined based on the
following criteria listed in JCC 18.22.610:
(1) The following are designated as fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas:
(a) Areas where federally listed species (endangered and threatened) and state-listed species
(endangered, threatened, and sensitive species) have a primary association.
(b) Rivers and streams not otherwise addressed under Washington State Forest Practices
regulations (Chapter 76.09 RCW and WAC Title 222).
(c) Commercial and recreational shellfish areas.
(d) Kelp and eelgrass beds.
(e) Surf smelt, Pacific herring, and Pacific sand lance, and other forage fish spawning areas.
(f) Naturally occurring ponds less than 20 acres, including submerged aquatic beds that provide
fish and wildlife habitat.
(g) Lakes, ponds, streams, and rivers planted with game fish by a governmental or tribal entity.
(h) State natural area preserves, natural resource conservation areas, and state wildlife areas.
(i) Species and habitats of local importance designated pursuant to the process delineated in
Article IX (Special Reports) of this chapter.
February 1, 2023
10 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
Results
Existing Information Review
Google Earth aerial imagery, project maps, and critical areas mapping of the area was reviewed prior to
visiting the site in order to identify vegetation patterns, topography, soils, streams, and other natural
resources potentially located within the project boundaries and relevant to this report. The following is a
summary of the known critical areas at the Project Site.
Landscape Setting
The project site is located in a portion of unincorporated Jefferson County approximately 4.6 miles
northeast of Quilcene, WA. In relation to other waterbodies, the project site is 1.13 miles east of Tarboo
Bay (at the north end of Dabob Bay) and the Dabob Bay Natural Area Preserve and approximately 3
miles northwest of Hood Canal. In relation to major landmarks the project site is located approximately
1.23 miles southeast of Rock Point Oyster Farm and 3.77-miles southwest of State Route (SR) 104 at its
closest point. The majority of the historic land cover in the landscape surrounding the Project Site
remains private working timberland with frequent timber harvests. Amidst the varying ages of forest
stands are networks of small sub-watershed streams and wetlands. The Project Site sits within a pocket
of working forest at the crossroads of Coyle Road and East Toandos Road that is slowly converting to
low-density, rural-residential development.
Watershed Description
This project site is located in the Pacific Northwest Region 17 (USGS 5th HUC 171100180704) (USGS
2022) and associated with the Thorndyke Creek-Frontal Hood Canal sub-basin drainage within WRIA 17
(Quilcene-Snow) (Ecology 2023). According to USGS contours and Google Earth elevations, the site is
relatively flat on the west side and then rolling and sloping throughout the eastern half. Elevations range
between 548 to 592 feet above sea level and water generally drains west to east across the site
(Appendix A/Figure 2).
Climate, Precipitation, and Growing Season
The western Puget Sound-eastern Peninsula experiences a mild to moderate temperate climate with
average annual rainfall that can vary widely with elevation, latitude, and proximity to the Olympic
mountains and the Sound. On average the eastern Washington Peninsula-Hood Canal region receives a
wide range of annual rainfall from 19 inches in Port Townsend, WA to 75 inches in Skokomish, WA.
Approximately 4.3 miles northwest of the site, the Quilcene (5.8 NNE), WA station receives 40.45 inches
of average annual rainfall (NOAA 2022). Moderate-heavy precipitation was recorded in the 10 days
preceding the site investigation and wetland delineation (5.2 inches) including the heaviest rainfall day
recorded for January 2023. Additionally, 1.45-inches was recorded in October, 3.63 inches in November,
and 8.52 inches of rainfall were recorded in December prior to the January 17th delineation work (NOAA
2022). The closest local growing season data comes from the Quilcene 2 SW, WA Station approximately
7.22 miles southwest of the Project Site. The Quilcene-area local growing season is approximately 177
days in length, typically from April to October (using the 5 years in 10 criteria and 32° F or higher) (NOAA
2023).
Growing season conditions in the Hood Canal/Eastern Olympics foothills rain shadow are colder than
other regions of the Peninsula and Puget Sound with a significantly shorter growing season than other
coastal regions. The USACE Delineation Manual requires that an area must be inundated or saturated
for two consecutive weeks of the growing season in order to have wetland hydrology (Environmental
Laboratory 2010).
Critical Areas Overview
Stream and Wetland Inventory
The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) is compiled by the U.S. Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS 2023). NWI relies upon visual aerial photo interpretation of wetland, stream, and other
aquatic area indicators including hydrologic, vegetation and topographic signatures. Wetlands areas
identified under NWI are also classified in accordance with the Cowardin classification system (Cowardin
et al. 1979). The NWI maps a 0.43-acre freshwater forested/shrub wetland within the project site and
another 0.48-acre freshwater forested/shrub wetland immediately adjacent to the north of the site
(Appendix A/Figure 3). NWI also identifies a seasonal, 1.32-acre, non-fish bearing riverine habitat on-site
and immediately off-site to the east of the project site (Appendix A/Figure 3). This stream system mapped
by NWI is associated with a headwater tributary of the Thorndyke Creek watershed. Numerous other
seasonal, non-fish and perennial fish-bearing stream reaches are mapped by NWI to the north, west, and
south of the Site. NWI also maps large-scale estuarine and marine wetland and Marine Deepwater
habitats along the Dabob Bay shoreline associated with Hood Canal approximately 1.1 miles due west of
the site at its closest point.
Jefferson County has not compiled accessible online inventories (at more local and site scale) of streams,
aquatic areas, drainage basins, wetlands, and environmentally sensitive areas “notice on title” for parcels
which have confirmed critical areas (also known as environmentally sensitive areas) and/or have gone
through development permit and critical areas review process. Jefferson County currently relies on
inventories by agencies such as USFWS (NWI), Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR),
and WA Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and does identify wetlands and streams on the project
site and in the immediate vicinity; these are the same wetlands and streams identified by NWI (Appendix
A/Figure 3). Jefferson County public land records mapping indicates the Project Site is within mapped
within Critical Aquifer Recharge Area (JCC 2023).
The WDNR Forest Application Mapping Tool does not identify wetlands on the property; however, it does
identify a seasonal non-fish bearing, headwater stream in the same orientation as identified by NWI and
Jefferson County (Appendix A/Figure 3). WDNR designates the seasonal, non-fish bearing headwater
stream identified on the Project Site as a Type 5 Water (WDNR 2023a). Approximately 1,550-feet (0.3-
mile) downslope and east of the site WDNR maps this tributary of Thorndyke Creek as a Type 3 fish-
bearing stream.
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) maps the same seasonal, headwater tributary of
Thorndyke Creek on the Project Site. WDFW indicates the Project Site is the origin of this tributary stream
February 1, 2023
12 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
system and maps this same stream as fish-bearing (presumed presence of resident coastal cutthroat) at a
higher point than WDNR, approximately 850 feet downslope to the east of the Site.
Soil Survey of Grays Harbor County
The National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey indicates that the soils within the site are
mapped as Sinclair gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 15 percent slopes (NRCS 2019) (Appendix A/Figure 3). Sinclair
gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 15 percent slope soils are described by United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA) NRCS as dunes moderately well drained and formed on terraces from basal till (USDA 2019).
Sinclair gravelly sandy loam series soils are not listed as hydric in Jefferson County (NRCS 2018).
Site Investigation
Overview of Site Conditions
Two site visits were conducted on January 17, 2023 by Convergent principal ecologist, Rosemary Baker. A
single wetland which for the purposes of this report shall be referred to as “Wetland A” was identified
and documented on-site and a portion of its boundary was delineated (Photos 3-4). Conditions within the
upland buffer landward of the wetland boundary were also investigated (Photos 6-8). No other wetlands,
streams, or critical areas were observed or identified on the Project Site; however, one off-site site
wetland was identified and is discussed below.
Photo 3. View of the forested/saturated edge portion of Wetland A,
looking north. Photo taken 1-17-23.
Photo 4. View of interior seasonally-
flooded zone of Wetland A as well as
the transition zone between forested
and scrub-shrub vegetation, looking
north. Photo taken 1-17-23.
Site Topography and Hydrology
Elevations on the site range between approximately 548 to 592 feet above sea level (USGS 2022; Google
Earth 2023) (Appendix A/Figure 2). Topography at this site is relatively flat in the western half and
transitions to somewhat rolling to sloped in the eastern half. Its highest points occur in the south central
and southeast corner and its lowest occurs within a central depressional area as well as the
northeastern quadrant.
Across this site water flow originates from a combination of direct precipitation, forest sheet flow, a
seasonally high-water table, and overland and intermittent, seasonal stream flow (Appendix A/Figure
2). Regenerating forest and understory vegetation is moderately thick on the majority of this property
with only open gaps and impervious surfaces in the western half where the current residence is located.
Generally, water flows west to east across the site, concentrating in the central interior of the site within
February 1, 2023
14 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
a topographic bowl or depression. During the winter the water table is elevated and excess water flows
from this depression through a narrow outlet on the east side and downslope towards the east property
boundary.
Vegetation Community
The site is primarily dominated by Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) forest with pockets of red alder
(Alnus rubra) along depressions and drainageways. There are two distinct vegetation habitat
communities: 1) closed-canopy upland conifer forest and 2) closed-canopy riparian forest. Below in
Tables 1 and 2 are all plant species inventoried on the Project Site by habitat type.
Table 1. All species observed within the closed-canopy upland conifer forest community:
Common Name Latin Name
Tree
Red alder Alnus rubra
Pacific madrone Arbutus menziesii
Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii
Shrub
Salal Gaultheria shallon
Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor
English holly Ilex aquifolium
Dull Oregon grape Mahonia nervosa
Pacific Rhododendron Rhododendron macrophyllum
Himalayan blackberry Rubus armeniacus
Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis
Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa
Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum
Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium
Perennial/Groundcover
Twinflower Linnaea borealis
Sword fern Polystichum munitum
Western bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum
Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus
Table 2. All species observed within the closed-canopy riparian forest community:
Common Name Latin Name
Tree
Red alder Alnus rubra
Sitka willow Salix sitchensis
Scouler’s willow Salix scouleriana
Shrub
Cascara Frangula purshiana
Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis
Sitka willow Salix sitchensis
Douglas spirea Spiraea douglassii
Perennial/Groundcover
Slough sedge Carex obnupta
Sword fern Polystichum munitum
Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens
Common speedwell Veronica officinalis
Critical Areas Summary
A single wetland was encountered on the Project Site during the January 2023 field investigation. One
wetland was identified just off-site to the north. Below in Table 1 is the critical areas summary.
Table 1. On-site Critical Areas Summary
Critical Area Size Wetland Category1/Water
Type
Habitat
Score
Standard Jefferson
County Buffers2, 3, 4
(ft)
Wetland A 0.38 ac
(16,699 sf)
Category II (based on Functions
Habitat Score) 7 110
Wetland B (off-
site)
0.6-acre
(26,221 sf)
estimated
Category II (estimated) 6 or 7 110 (estimated)
Stream 1 N/A Type Ns (non-FWHCA) N/A 50
1 Wetland rating based on 2014 Update to the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington
(Hruby 2014).
2 Wetland Buffers based on JCC 18.22.380.C.
Wetland A
Wetland A is an approximately 16,699 sf (0.38-acre) closed, depressional wetland located entirely on the
Project Site (Photos 3-4) (Appendix A/Figure 5). Wetland A receives over-land drainage from another
depressional wetland to the north and there is an outlet on northeastern side of Wetland A which drains
high winter flows east and downslope across the Project Site through a seasonal, headwater stream
(Stream 1). In addition to receiving drainage from the off-site wetland to the north, Wetland A captures
direct precipitation and as well as runoff from the surrounding uplands. The outermost portions of
Wetland A were slightly higher in topography with rolling hummocks and dominated by red alders,
willows, salmonberry, Douglas spirea, sword fern, and slough sedge. The interior portions of Wetland A
were dominated by willow and Douglas spirea. Thin-stemmed emergent vegetation as well as thick,
small-diameter woody branches were observed throughout areas which were seasonally ponded. Tree
frogs were observed to be in the immediate vicinity. Wetland A contains habitat which may provide
breeding and rearing habitat for amphibians. Wetland A contains both forested (PFO) and shrub (PSS)
Cowardin classes; however, soil pit data was only collected within the forested class due to excessive
winter flooding.
A soil pit was excavated within a representative portion of the forested class present in Wetland A
(Appendix A/Figure 5). Within data plot (DP) 1 (Photos 5), the top three inches of soil consisted of duff.
From three to six inches below the surface the soils was a dark brown (10YR 3/3) gravelly sandy loam.
From six to nine inches below ground surface, soils were a dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) gravelly sandy
loam. From nine to beyond 16 inches soils were a grayish brown (10YR 5/2) gravelly sandy loam. Soils
within this sample plot did not meet any hydric soil indicators due to the lack of observable redox
February 1, 2023
16 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
concentrations; however, due to the extent of flooding and excessively wet soils it is possible redox
concentrations were present even though none were observed. It is also possible that soils within Wetland
A remain saturated throughout the growing season with little water table fluctuation which would create
the presence of prominent redox concentrations. This sample plot was the best possible location for
acquiring sample soil data. Observations of topography, hydrology, and hydric vegetation as well as the
presence of the depleted soil layer starting at 9 inches were used to determine wetland presence and
delineate the edge.
Photo 5. View of the soil profile from Wetland A at
WA-DP1. Photo taken 1-17-23.
Primary wetland hydrology indicators of surface water (A1), high-water table (A2), and saturation (A3),
were all encountered at WA-DP1. A secondary hydrology indicator (D2 – Geomorphic position) was also
present within the sample plot. Other indicators such as inundation visible on aerial imagery (B7) and
sparsely vegetated concave surface (B8) were observed in other nearby portions of Wetland A.
Applying the western WA wetland rating system’s 2014 update, Wetland A meets the criteria for a
Category III wetland (based on Functions) and a habitat score of 7 (Appendix C). In accordance with JCC
18.22.380.C., wetlands of this type are assigned a standard 110-foot buffer when moderate-intensity land
uses are proposed.
Off-Site Wetland B
Wetland B is an approximately 0.6-acre closed, depressional wetland located entirely off-site to the
north (Appendix A/Figure 5). Wetland B is similar in classification and categorization to Wetland A.
Similarly to Wetland A, Wetland B likely contains both forested and scrub-shrub Cowardin vegetation
classes which are visible from aerial photos. From USGS contours/topography it appears off-site
Wetland B drains to Wetland A. Off-site Wetland B is the uppermost origin of the headwaters of the
seasonal tributary of Thorndyke Creek which occurs on the Project Site flowing intermittently west to
east. Similarly to Wetland A, off-site Wetland B likely meets the criteria for a Category III wetland (based
on Functions) and a habitat score of either 6 or 7. Wetland B is located off-site to the north with
significant enough distance from the north property line that it could not be observed from within the
Project Site. Therefore, its wetland criteria and conditions are estimated or presumed based upon
desktop analysis and best professional judgement. In accordance with JCC 18.22.380.C., wetlands of this
estimated type are typically assigned a standard 110-foot buffer when moderate-intensity land uses are
proposed (Appendix A/Figures 5 and 6). Although the buffer of off-site Wetland B’s does not occur in
proximity to the proposed project, its buffer is depicted on the Project Site in order to inform the Client
and any relevant future development.
Wetland Buffer Conditions
In applying Wetland A’s 100-foot buffer and off-site Wetland B’s (presumed) 110-foot buffer, the central
portion of the Project Site is encompassed by this combined wetland buffer (Appendix A/Figure 5). The
wetland buffer consists of relatively undisturbed, third-growth, closed-canopy conifer forest dominated
by Douglas fir with minor components of red alder, a thick shrub-understory dominated by evergreen
huckleberry and a thick ground coverage dominated by salal and western sword fern with well-drained
dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) gravelly sandy loam soils on slopes (Photos 6-8). There are small
diameter snags and logs and habitat connectivity in the surrounding landscape remains in-tact where
roads and clearcuts do not represent significant breaks in vegetative cover.
February 1, 2023
18 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
Photo 6. View of the buffer of Wetland A, looking south (towards East
Toandos Road). Photo taken 1-17-23.
Photo 7. View of soil profile from the upland data
point (WA-DP2). Photo taken 1-17-23.
Photo 8. View of upland soil test pit (WA-DP2)
indicating well-drained winter conditions. Photo
taken 1-17-23.
Stream 1
Stream 1 is a seasonal, intermittent stream which conveys high flows in winter downslope from Wetland
A to the base of an old logging road (Photos 9-10) (Appendix A/Figure 5). During the January
investigation Stream 1 conveyed steady surface flow from the seasonally ponded portion of Wetland A
and was observed functioning as the outlet for Wetland A. Given observations of high water table and
flooding within Wetland A but also lack of consistent scour, sediment, bed, and bank within Stream 1,
this stream likely only conveys surface flow in winter or during extreme storm and snowmelt. Stream 1
does not receive stormwater discharges or runoff. Stream 1 is a Type Ns watercourse in accordance with
JCC 18.22.630 and is assigned a standard 50-foot protective buffer.
Photo 9. View of surface flow in delineated section
of stream 1 between Wetland A and the old
logging road, looking east. Photo taken 1-17-23.
Photo 10. View of delineated section of Stream 1
where winter surface water was observed flowing
west to east, looking west towards Wetland A from
the old logging road. Photo taken 1-17-23.
Stream Buffer Conditions
In applying the 50-foot buffer for Stream 1, a significant portion of the central and northeast portion of
the property is encompassed by either wetland, stream, or combined buffer (Appendix A/Figure 5). The
stream buffer, much like the wetland buffer consists of relatively undisturbed, third-growth, closed-
canopy conifer forest dominated by Douglas fir, evergreen huckleberry, red huckleberry, salal and
western sword fern (Photos 11-12). There are little to no invasive species, snags and logs occur
throughout the forested buffer, and there is relatively undisturbed habitat connectivity throughout the
February 1, 2023
20 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
surrounding landscape. In general, the stream buffer is in-tact and providing abundant riparian-upland
water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions for the upper Thorndyke Creek watershed.
Photo 11. View of the buffer of
Wetland A and Stream 1 at the old
logging road crossing, looking south
towards the proposed Project Area.
Photo taken 1-17-23.
Photo 12. View of the buffer of Stream 1 and Wetland A on the down
slope side of the old logging road and where Stream 1 goes sub-
surface/intermittent. Looking east. Photo taken 1-17-23.
Sensitive Plants, Fish, Wildlife, and Habitats
According to the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Washington Natural
Heritage Program (WNHP) database, there are no threatened/endangered, unique, and high-quality
ecosystems present in the section, township, and range in which the site is located (S10/T27N/R1W)
(WDNR 2021).
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) data identifies a
freshwater forested/shrub wetland on the Project Site in the same location as NWI, WDNR, and Jefferson
County (WDFW 2023a). PHS data also maps four other wetlands in the project area off-site to the north,
west, and south. PHS also identifies a listed occurrence of Northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis) on the
project site. This listed occurrence is mapped at the township level, meaning Northern spotted are likely
to occur within the same township; however, this listing is not site specific. Based upon observation made
during the site visit on January 17th, 2023, northern spotted owl may occasionally migrate through the
Project Site; however, there is no sufficient nesting habitat on the Project Site. WDFW SalmonScape online
mapping shows no presence of fish within Thorndyke Creek on or within 300 feet of the Project Site
(WDFW 2023b).
Critical Aquifer Recharge Area
As stated earlier, Jefferson County indicates this project site as within a mapped Critical Aquifer Recharge
Area. During the site investigation, direct observations were made of the landscape setting and conditions
of the on-site wetland and stream which are headwaters to the Thorndyke Creek watershed. The on-site
wetland likely provides infiltration opportunity and contribution to groundwater resources in the area;
however, the project site does not meet any of the classifications of Susceptible Aquifer Recharge Areas
or Seawater Intrusion Protection Zones (SIPZ), nor is it known to meet the definitions of a Special Aquifer
Recharge Protection Area as outlined in JCC 18.22.310. The proposed project also does not represent a
high-level development impact or use as defined by JCC 18.22.330. Well drilling activities require
protection standards in SIPZ areas; however, this does not apply to this site. The wetland protection
standards being applied and adhered to under this development proposal shall provide the protections
necessary to preserve the quality and integrity of water entering the on-site wetland and stream and of
any such waters infiltrating into the groundwater.
February 1, 2023
22 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
Impacts and Mitigation
All considerations for avoidance and minimization were made during the site designing process and are
provided below along with a rationale for the approach to buffer averaging.
Avoidance and Minimization
The proposed lot design has undergone a critical area impacts avoidance and minimization process
consistent with JCC 18.22. This report demonstrates that the proposed septic design and conceptual
residence design are able to avoid all impacts to the on-site critical areas (Appendix/Figure 6). The project
design footprint utilizes buildable upland areas outside of critical areas to the greatest extent feasible.
The layout of the proposed features have been placed as far outside and southeast of critical areas as
possible in order to minimize wetland buffer impacts to the greatest extent practicable.
The proposed house is small, likely a tiny home, and uses the currently available and most practical area
of the southeast corner of the property outside critical areas. Due to well design specifications and
required setbacks from septic systems and other built structures, the well requires siting in the outer-
most edge of the buffer of wetland A. This is the minimum required impact in order to satisfy all other
design requirements. Under the current proposal, the proposed well location results in unavoidable
impacts to the outer portion of wetland buffer.
Table 2 summarizes how the proposed project design meets the requirements and intent of mitigation
sequencing per JCC 18.22.740:
Table 2. Project Mitigation Sequencing Summary.
Sequencing1 Project Elements
Avoid The development footprint has generally been placed within
the southeast corner of the property and away from critical
areas. The majority of the project is able to avoid impacts to
critical areas with applying the standard 110-foot wetland
buffer. No new impervious surfaces are proposed within
critical areas.
Minimize Applying the standard 110-foot wetland buffer width,
complete impact avoidance was not possible. The proposed
well requires certain setbacks and minimum distance from
other infrastructure that its placement impacts the outer-
most edge of the wetland buffer. This impact is the
minimum necessary to install the well. Buffer averaging is
proposed to avoid and minimize impacts to the wetland
buffer.
Rectify Any vegetation or soils disturbed during construction shall
be stockpiled and replaced in-kind after well installation is
complete.
Reduce or eliminate through
preservation or maintenance
All remaining critical areas on this site will be protected and
preserved; no further development in critical areas is
proposed.
Compensate Through buffer averaging direct impacts to the wetland
buffer are avoided and will not require compensatory
mitigation.
Impacts Analysis
Unavoidable impacts to the buffer of Wetland A and the proposed mitigation measure as allowed by JCC
18.22.730(9) are summarized below in Table 3.
Table 3. Summary of Critical Area Buffer Impacts.
1 Buffer averaging is proposed as allowed per JCC 18.22.730(9)
Buffer Averaging
Through this buffer averaging proposal, the project will avoid all direct impacts to the buffer of Wetland
A (Table 3) (Appendix A/Figure 5). The portion of the wetland buffer proposed for averaging is the
minimum required to allow for placement of the proposed well while maintaining a somewhat regular
and parallel buffer edge relative to the wetland. This buffer averaging proposal does not exceed the
maximum allowed twenty-five percent buffer reduction by code. The proposed buffer averaging actually
results in a net increase in overall wetland buffer area (Table 3). Additionally, as the well installation is a
small footprint with minimal vegetation clearing and land disturbing anticipated and should not require
the removal of trees, there are no known short-term or long-term, significant impacts to wetland buffer
functions. The area added as new wetland buffer along the southwest edge provides additional
protective area at the top of a non-steep slope and adjacent to roadway where impacts from clearing
and land-disturbing often occur, where they have less resilience to such disturbances, but also have
greater access for mitigation and enhancement activities should the need arise.
Site Stewardship Measures and BMPs
In accordance with protection standards for wetlands and buffers within JCC 18.22.730(6), the following
are measures which shall be adhered to in design and construction of the proposed development and in
order to satisfy all requirements for buffer averaging per JCC 18.22.730(9):
• All outdoor lights shall be directed away from the on-site wetland and stream;
• Any noise generating uses or activities shall be located away from critical areas (as needed);
• All roof or other impervious surfaces runoff shall be directed away from the on-site wetland;
Critical Area Impact Type Proposed Mitigation1 No net loss of Critical
Areas
Wetland A
Buffer 1,210 sf buffer reduction 1,230 sf buffer increase +20 sf of net total
wetland buffer
February 1, 2023
24 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
• The use of pesticides shall be kept at a minimum 150’ away from the on-site wetland or stream;
• All channelized drainage flows from landscaping or lawn areas shall be prevented and dispersed
appropriately overland and away from wetlands, streams, and buffers;
• Low-intensity development techniques shall be incorporated to the greatest extent feasible;
• Roof runoff and all stormwater associated with new impervious surfaces shall be allowed to
infiltrate and/or disperse outside of wetlands, streams, and buffers;
• Best management practices shall be used to control dust, stormwater runoff, erosion, and noise
during construction.
Disclaimer
Convergent Ecosystems has prepared this Critical Areas Report at the request of Kim Davenport. The
information contained herein is, to our knowledge, correct and accurate. It should be recognized that the
establishment of stream and wetland boundaries is an inexact science. Streams are subject to weather
patterns, in addition to upstream and downstream activities. Wetlands are, by definition, transition areas,
and wetland boundaries often change with time. The presence of wetland indicators may also vary
depending on the time of year. Additionally, individual professionals may disagree on the precise location
of wetland boundaries and/or the functions and values of a wetland. All stream and wetland boundaries,
classifications, and buffer widths should be considered subject to change until reviewed and approved by
the appropriate regulatory agencies with jurisdiction. Convergent recommends obtaining jurisdictional
approval before completing final site plans and/or beginning construction activities. Final determination
of U.S. federal jurisdiction is the responsibility of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Seattle
District. Wetlands considered to be “Waters of the State” are regulated by Washington State, and
jurisdiction is determined by the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE). Based on USACE and
DOE final determinations, wetland buffer and mitigation requirements must follow Grays Harbor County
code requirements. This report is not intended for use in the application for state and/or federal permits
unless otherwise noted. Convergent is not responsible for the accuracy of information provided by others.
Within the limitations of schedule, budget, and scope of work, Convergent warrants that this study was
conducted in accordance with generally-accepted environmental science practices, including the technical
guidelines and criteria in effect at the time of this study. The results and conclusions of this report
represent the author’s best professional judgment based upon information provided by the project
proponent and information obtained during the course of this study. No other warranty, expressed or
implied, is made.
In the event of any changes in the nature, design, or locations of the project site features, the conclusion
and recommendations in this report would not be valid unless the changes are reviewed and the
conclusions of this report are verified in writing with Convergent. Convergent is not responsible for any
claims, damages or liabilities associated with the interpretation of these findings or reuse of the analysis
without the express written authorization of Convergent.
Convergent and project staff are not attorneys, and this report should not be construed to be a legal
representation or interpretation of environmental laws, rules, or regulations.
February 1, 2023
26 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
References
Cooke, S. 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern
Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society, Seattle, WA.
Cowardin, L.M.V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRue (Cowardin et. al.). 1979. Classification of Wetlands
and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Ecology. 2023. Find your Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) – statewide WRIA finder. Accessed at:
https://ecology.wa.gov/Water-Shorelines/Water-supply/Water-availability/Watershed-look-up.
Accessed on: January 22, 2023.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetland delineation manual. Technical Report Y-87-
1, Environmental Laboratory, Department of the Army, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MI.
Environmental Laboratory. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0). Environmental Laboratory, US
Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MI.
ECY (Washington State Department of Ecology). 1997. Washington state wetland identification and
delineation manual. Publication #96-94. Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA.
Franklin, J.F., Dyrness, C.T. 1973. Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. Oregon State University
Press, Corvallis, OR.
Google. 2023. Google Earth Aerial Imagery. Assessed January 2023.
Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update.
(Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology.
JCC. Jefferson County. 2023. Public Lands Records parcel viewer. District information: zoning, critical
areas, and parcel information. Accessed at: https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/LandRecords/. Accessed in
January of 2023.
JCC. Jefferson County Code. 2023. Chapter 18.22 - Critical Areas ordinance. Accessed at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/WA/JeffersonCounty/html/JeffersonCounty18/JeffersonCounty1822.
html#18.22.650 . Accessed in January 2023.
Munsell Color. 2000. Munsell® Soil Color Charts. Year 2000 revised washable edition.
Munsell ® Color. Gretag/Macbeth Publishing. 617 Little Britain Road, New Windsor, NY 12553.
Pojar J. and A. MacKinnon. 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast Washington, Oregon, British
Columbia, and Alaska. Lone Publishing, Vancouver, B.C.
NOAA. 2023. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. WETS table climate information for the
Quilcene 5.8 NNE weather station, Jefferson County. Accessed at: http://agacis.rcc-acis.org/?fips=53027.
Accessed on January 22 and 31, 2023.
NRCS. 2019. NRCS Web Soil Survey. US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation
Service. Accessed at: https://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed in January 2023.
NRCS. 2018. National List of Hydric Soils in Washington. Natural Resource Conservation Service.
Accessed at: https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcseprd1316619.html. Accessed
in January 2023.
Pojar J. and A. MacKinnon. 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast Washington, Oregon, British
Columbia, and Alaska. Lone Publishing, Vancouver, B.C.
USACE. 2016. United State Army Corps of Engineers. Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C.
Melvin. Western Mountains, Valleys & Coast 2016 Regional Wetland Plant List.
USDA. 2007. Hydrologic Soil Groups. Part 630 Hydrology National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service.
USFWS. 2023. U. S. Department of Interior. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory.
Accessed at: http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html. Accessed in January 2023.
USGS. 2021. United States Geological Survey. Online mapping tool for determining stream Hydrological
Unit Codes. Accessed at: https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/. Accessed on January 31, 2023.
WAC. 2021. Washington Administrative Code. Access Washington. WAC 222-16-030.
WDNR. 2023a. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Geologic Information Portal
Interactive Map. Accessed at: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/geologyportal. Accessed on January 31, 2023.
WDNR. 2022a. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Forest Practices Water Typing.
Assessed at: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/forest-practices-water-typing. Accessed in January 2023.
WDNR. 2021. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. Washington Natural Heritage
Program. Accessed at: https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/amp_nh_trs.pdf. Accessed on January 31,
2023.
WDFW. 2023a. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Priority Habitats on the Web. Accessed at:
http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/phsontheweb/. Accessed on: January 2023.
WDFW. 2023b. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. “SalmonScape” mapper. Accessed at:
https://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscape/map.html#. Accessed in January 2023.
February 1, 2023
28 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
APPENDIX A
W Toandos RdCoyle RdTwana RdTarboo Bay Coyle RdToandos RdDa
b
o
b
P
o
st Offic
e Rd
E Toandos RdCarl Johnson RdE Toandos LaneBroshear Rd
0 0.5 10.25 Miles
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS UserCommunity, Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENT P,NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS UserCommunity
^_HoodCanal0 5 102.5 Miles
´FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAPDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Project Site
Map date: 1/25/2023
E Toandos RdCoyle RdE Toandos Ln580575570
565585
590560595600605555610
550
6 1 5
5 4 5580
590
5755
7
5595585 565575615585580585570580590585
5855855855
90
575
575560
575
5855 8 5 585580
585
590
5 7 5
5 6 5
585585585
585 575585560
0 250 500125Feet
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityElevation contours derived from 2019 Oylmpic Peninsula LIDAR DTM.
FIGURE 2: SITE TOPOGRAPHY & DRAINAGEDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
5-ft. Elevation Contours
1-ft. Elevation Contours
Estimated Drainage Flow
C
o
yle
R
d
Toandos RdE Toan
do
s
RdE Toandos Ln0 0.5 10.25 Miles
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community,Jefferson County, WA., Pro-West & Associates, Inc. Jefferson County wetlands andstreams from the County REST Critical Areas layer.https://gisweb.jeffcowa.us/server/rest/services/CriticalAreas/MapServer
FIGURE 3: NWI & COUNTY WETLAND & STREAM INVENTORIESDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/25/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel USFWS NWI
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Riverine
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Estuarine and Marine DeepwaterDNR Streams Forest PracticesFP_WTRTY_C
Fish Habitat
Non-fish Habitat
Inventoried Shoreline
Wetlands
Jefferson County Critical AreasStreams & Wetlands
SnC
DaC
StB
SnD
EvD
KtE
Mm
CkE
Coyle RdE Toan
d
os RdToandos RdE Toandos Ln0 0.25 0.50.125 Miles
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/AirbusDS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE 4: NRCS SOILSDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
NRCS Soils
Jefferson County Area, Washington (WA631)
CkE Cassolary-Kitsap complex, 30 to 50 percent slopesDaCDabob very gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 15 percent slopesEvDEverett very gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopesKtEKitsap silt loam, 30 to 50 percent slopesMmMcMurray and Mukilteo peatsSnCSinclair gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 15 percent slopesSnDSinclair gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopesStBSwantown gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 8 percent slopes
Soil Map Units (USDA, NRCS 2015)
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(
!(
WA-7
WA-6
WA-5
WA-4
WA-3WA-2
WA-1
Stream 1-4Stream 1-3Stream 1-2
Stream 1-1
58057
5
570
585590565595560600605610555615 5506205
4
5
625585
575615565
550600590
55
0
590 560585585570580580
610575 58558057558
5
5
7
5585590
58
0
56
0 5855
9
0
585
585
565
575595
6150 400 800200 Fe e t
Se rvice La ye r Cre dits: Source : Esri, Ma xa r, Ge oEye , Ea rth sta r Ge og ra ph ics, CNES/Airb us DS, USDA, USGS, Ae roGRID, IGN, a nd th eGIS Use r Com m unity Ele va tion contours de rive d from 2019 Olym pic P e ninsula LIDAR DTM.
FIGURE 5: EX ISTING CONDITIONSDa ve nport P rope rty - Quilce ne , WA
Ma p da te : 2/1/2023
´
Site Loca tion - P roje ct P a rce l
5-ft. Ele va tion Contours
!(We tla nd A Fla g s
!(Stre a m 1 Fla g s
We tla nd Bounda ry (de line a te d)
We tla nd Bounda ry (e stim a te d)
We tla nd A - Ca te g ory III (110' b uffe r)
We tla nd B - Ca te g ory II (110' b uffe r)
Stre a m 1 - Stre a m flow ce nte rline
Stre a m flow (e stim a te d/inte rm itte nt)
Stre a m 1 - Type Ns (50’ b uffe r)
OHWM (de line a te d)
OHWM (e stim a te d)
Log g ing Roa d (e stim a te d)
We tla nd A (16,699 sq ft)
Old Log g ing Roa d (e stim a te d)
Offsite We tla nd B
Proposed House455 sq ft(13' x 35')
5
75
580570
585590565 595560600605610
5556 1 5 550620545625550590585600620 5856
1
5
5
7
5575 5705855755 7 5
590
595615585585575 59
0
5 6 5
580
610580585
565585
590 560580
560
550
0 400 800200Feet
FIGURE 6: PROPOSED CONDITIONSDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 2/1/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
5-ft. Elevation Contours
Wetland Boundary (delineated)
Wetland Boundary (estimated)
Wetland A - Category III (110' buffer)
Stream 1 - Streamflow centerline
Streamflow (estimated/intermittent)
OHWM (delineated)
OHWM (estimated)
Logging Road (estimated)
Stream 1 - Type Ns (50’ buffer)
Wetland B - Category II (110' buffer)
Wetland A (16,699 sq ft)
Old Logging Road (estimated)
Offsite Wetland B
Proposed
Reserves; Laterals; Tanks/Lines; Waterline
Power Line
Drainfield
!>Proposed Well
5-ft.BSBL
50-ft.Tank & Transport Setback
100-ft.Drainfield Setback
Proposed House & Driveway (Conceptual)
Proposed Averaged Wetland Buffer-110 ft
Buffer increase (1,230 sq ft)
Buffer reduction (1,210 sq ft)
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS UserCommunity Elevation contours derived from 2019 Olympic Peninsula LIDARDTM.
APPENDIX B
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: 10 m.r.) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Alnus rubra 85 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 4 (A) 2. Salix sitchensis 5 no FACW
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 4.
50% = , 20% = 90 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 80 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 5 m.r.)
1. Spirea douglassii 25 yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Rubus spectabilis 10 yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = 17.5, 20% = 7 35 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m.r.) UPL species x5 =
1. Carex obnupta 30 yes OBL Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Polystichum munitum 20 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. 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% = , 20% = 50 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. N/A
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = 0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 50
Remarks:
Project Site: Davenport Property City/County: /Jefferson Sampling Date: 1-17-2023
Applicant/Owner: Kim Davenport State: WA Sampling Point: WA-DP1
Investigator(s): Rosemary Baker Section, Township, Range: SE 1/4 Sec 10, T27N, R1W
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Depression Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 2
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.841875 Long: -122.780119 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Sinclair gravelly sandy loam 0-15% slopes NWI classification: PFO/PSS
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:
Data plot located at southern tip of Wetland A within topographic bowl. Data plot is for PFO portion of wetland. PSS section totally flooded and inaccessible.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: WA-DP1
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
0-3 10YR 2/2 100 Duff Thick roots
3-6 10YR 3/3 100 GSL gravelly sandy loam
6-9 10YR 4/4 100 GSL gravelly sandy loam
9-16+ 10YR 5/2 100 GCL gravelly clay laom
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
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: Could not see redox concentrations in the depleted layer from 9-16". This locations was the best available location to sample wetland soils given the level
of surface flooding. Soils were too wet to observe redox or possible that soils remain saturated from 9-16" with little water table fluctuation through the
growing season in order to produce redox features. This area was clearly within the wetland boundary due to the presence of wetland hydrology,
hydrophytic vegetation, and similar elevation as the center of the wetland.
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): 4"
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes
No
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches): surface
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe) Yes No Depth (inches): surface
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks: Wetland was excessively flooded due to recent, heavy winter storms. Surface and sub-surface saturation from high water table was observed 10-20' further
south beyond the wetland boundary and in multiple locations. Surface flooding also present to the edge of the wetland; therefore, soils were excessively we
and challenging to observe redox concentrations. Wetland conditions presumed.
Project Site: Davenport 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: 10 m.r.) Absolute % Cover Dominant Species? Indicator Status Dominance Test Worksheet:
1. Alnus rubra 75 yes FAC Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 1 (A) 2. Pseudotsuga menziesii 25 yes FACU
3. Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 5 (B) 4.
50% = , 20% = 100 = Total Cover Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 20 (A/B) Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 5 m.r.)
1. Vaccinium ovatum 15 yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet:
2. Vaccinium parvifolium 2 no Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
3. OBL species x1 =
4. FACW species x2 =
5. FAC species x3 =
50% = , 20% = 17 = Total Cover FACU species x4 =
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 1 m.r.) UPL species x5 =
1. Polystichum munitum 40 yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)
2. Gaultheria shallon 20 yes FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =
3. Rubus ursinus 10 no 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% = , 20% = 70 = Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. N/A
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?
Yes No 2.
50% = , 20% = 0 = Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 30
Remarks:
Project Site: Davenport Property City/County: /Jefferson Sampling Date: 1-17-2023
Applicant/Owner: Kim Davenport State: WA Sampling Point: WA-DP2
Investigator(s): Rosemary Baker Section, Township, Range: SE 1/4 Sec 10, T27N, R1W
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): hillslope Local relief (concave, convex, none): concave Slope (%): 12-15
Subregion (LRR): A Lat: 47.841828 Long: -122.78025 Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: Sinclair gravelly sandy loam 0-15% slopes NWI classification: None
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:
Data plot located ~45 feet south of DP1 on upland forested slope.
US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
SOIL Sampling Point: WA-DP2
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
0-2 10YR 2/2 100 Duff Undecomposed organics/duff
2-16 10YR 4/4 100 GSL gravelly sandy loam
1Type: C= Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
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: No hydric soil indicataors present. Data plot located well out side of wetland boundary on hillslope..
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: Soils dry and loose. No wetland hydrology indicators present.
Project Site: Davenport Property
February 1, 2023
30 Critical Areas Report and Residential Development Proposal – Davenport Property
APPENDIX C
E Toandos R
dE Toandos Ln0 300 600150Feet
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE A1: COWARDIN PLANT CLASSESDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
Wetland Boundary (delineated)
Wetland Boundary (estimated)
Stream 1 - Streamflow centerline
Streamflow (estimated/intermittent)
OHWM (delineated)
OHWM (estimated)
150-ft Wetland Radius
Cowardin Plant Classes
Palustrine forested (PFO)
Palustrine scrub-shrub (PSS)
575570 5655
8
0
585
5 60
0 120 24060Feet
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics,CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community
FIGURE A2: HydroperiodsDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
5-ft. Elevation Contours
Wetland Boundary (delineated)
Wetland Boundary (estimated)
Stream 1 - Streamflow centerline
Streamflow (estimated/intermittent)
OHWM (delineated)
OHWM (estimated)Hydroperiods
Saturated
Seasonally flooded
0 500 1,000250Feet
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA,USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Elevation contours derived from 2019 OlympicPeninsula LIDAR DTM.
FIGURE A3: CONTRIBUTING BASINDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
5-ft. Elevation Contours
1-ft. Elevation Contours
Wetland Boundary (delineated)
Wetland Boundary (estimated)
Stream 1 - Streamflow centerline
Streamflow (estimated/intermittent)
OHWM (delineated)
OHWM (estimated)
Wetland A (16,699 sq ft)
Contributing Basin (17 acres)
Co
yle
R
d
Toand
o
s R
d
E T oa n d o s Rd
Twana WayE Toandos Ln0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and theGIS User Community Elevation contours from Jefferson County GIS REST.
FIGURE A4: 1-KM HABITATDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
Wetland A (16,699 sq ft)
1-km radius (815.3 acres)
1-km Habitat
Accessible Relatively Undisturbed (35.5%)
Accessible Low & Moderate Intensity (8.9%)
Non-Accessible Relatively Undisturbed (34.7%)
Non-Accessible Low & Moderate Intensity (19.7%)
High Intensity - Roads (1.2%)
Coyle RdToandos RdE Toa
ndo
s RdE Toandos LnBroshear Rd
Bacteria
0 1 20.5 Miles
Service Layer Credits: USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation Program, Geographic NamesInformation System, National Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and NationalTransportation Dataset; USGS Global Ecosystems; U.S. Census Bureau TIGER/Line data; USFS Road Data; Natural Earth Data; U.S.Department of State Humanitarian Information Unit; and NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, U.S. Coastal ReliefModel. Data refreshed May, 2020.
FIGURE A5. 303d IMPAIRED WATERSDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
Wetland A (16,699 sq ft)
303(d) Listings (None within 1 mile)
Waterbody Listings
Sediment Listings
Coyle RdToandos RdE Toan
dos
RdE Toandos LnBroshear Rd
0 1 20.5 Miles
Service Layer Credits: USGS The National Map: National Boundaries Dataset, 3DEP Elevation Program, Geographic NamesInformation System, National Hydrography Dataset, National Land Cover Database, National Structures Dataset, and NationalTransportation Dataset; USGS Global Ecosystems; U.S. Census Bureau TIGER/Line data; USFS Road Data; Natural Earth Data; U.S.Department of State Humanitarian Information Unit; and NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information, U.S. Coastal ReliefModel. Data refreshed May, 2020.
FIGURE A6. TMDL WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTSDavenport Property - Quilcene, WA
Map date: 1/30/2023
´
Site Location - Project Parcel
Wetland A (16,699 sq ft)
TMDL
Tarboo Creek Temperature TMDL
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 1 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
Name of wetland (or ID #):Date of site visit:1/17/23
Rated by Trained by Ecology? Yes No Date of training Sep-08
HGM Class used for rating Wetland has multiple HGM classes? Yes No
NOTE: Form is not complete with out the figures requested (figures can be combined ).
Source of base aerial photo/map
OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY III (based on functions or special characteristics )
1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS
Category I - Total score = 23 - 27 Score for each
Category II - Total score = 20 - 22 function based
X Category III - Total score = 16 - 19 on three
Category IV - Total score = 9 - 15 ratings
(order of ratings
is not
important )
M M 9 = H, H, H
L H 8 = H, H, M
L M Total 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
2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland
XNone of the above
Coastal Lagoon
Interdunal
Value
Score Based on
Ratings 5 4 7 16
L
CHARACTERISTIC Category
Estuarine
Wetland of High Conservation Value
Bog
Mature Forest
Old Growth Forest
Depressional & Flats
RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington
List appropriate rating (H, M, L)
HydrologicImproving
Water Quality
MSite Potential
Landscape Potential
Habitat
M
FUNCTION
Davenport Property - Wetland A
Rosemary Baker
GIS
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 2 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
Maps and Figures required to answer questions correctly for
Western Washington
Depressional Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes A1
Hydroperiods A2
Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods)A2
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)A1
Map of the contributing basin A3
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)A5
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)A6
Riverine Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
Hydroperiods
Ponded depressions
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure)
Map of the contributing basin
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
Lake Fringe Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
Slope Wetlands
Map of: Figure #
Cowardin plant classes
Hydroperiods
Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants
(can be added to another figure)
Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure)
1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including
polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat
Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website)
Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web)
To answer questions:
D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4
D 1.4, H 1.2
D 1.1, D 4.1
D 2.2, D 5.2
D 4.3, D 5.3
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
D 3.1, D 3.2
D 3.3
To answer questions:
H 1.1, H 1.4
H 1.2
R 1.1
R 2.4
R 1.2, R 4.2
R 4.1
R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
L 1.2
L 2.2
L 3.1, L 3.2
L 3.3
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
R 3.1
R 3.2, R 3.3
To answer questions:
L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4
S 3.1, S 3.2
S 3.3
S 4.1
S 2.1, S 5.1
To answer questions:
H 1.1, H 1.4
H 1.2
S 1.3
H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3
A4
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 3 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
For questions 1 -7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated.
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
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?
NO - go to 4 YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual ),
The water leaves the wetland without being impounded.
NO - go to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope
5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria?
The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years.
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.
If 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.
At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m).
HGM Classification of Wetland in Western Washington
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.
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;
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.
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).
The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding
from that stream or river,
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.
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 4 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
NO - go to 7 YES - The wetland class is Depressional
NO - go to 8 YES - The wetland class is Depressional
NOTES and FIELD OBSERVATIONS:
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.
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.
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.
Riverine
Treat as
ESTUARINE
Slope + Lake Fringe
Depressional + Riverine along stream
within boundary of depression
Depressional + Lake Fringe
Riverine + Lake Fringe
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
Slope + Riverine
Slope + Depressional
Depressional
Depressional
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.
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other
class of freshwater wetland
HGM class to
use in rating
Riverine
Depressional
Lake Fringe
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 5 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
points = 3
points = 2
points = 1
points = 1
Yes = 4 No = 0
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > ½ of area points = 3
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1
Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants < 1/10 of area points = 0
D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation:
This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual.
Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4
Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2
Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0
Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 9
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12 - 16 = H 6 - 11 = M 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges?Yes = 1 No = 0 0
Yes = 1 No = 0
D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland?Yes = 1 No = 0 1
Source Yes = 1 No = 0
Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above 1
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 or 4 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Yes = 1 No = 0
Yes = 1 No = 0
Yes = 2 No = 0
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Value If score is: 2 - 4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 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
the unit is found )?
D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic
(use NRCS definitions ).
D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested
Cowardin classes):
D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not
listed in questions D 2.1 - D 2.3?
D 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?
D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate
pollutants?
D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list?
D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society?
0
0
0
0
3
DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS
0
0
Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality
D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality?
2
Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet
that is permanently flowing
Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly
constricted permanently flowing outlet.
Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with
no surface water leaving it (no outlet).
Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a
permanently flowing ditch.
4
D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site?
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 6 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland:
points = 4
points = 2
points = 1
points = 0
Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7
Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5
Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3
The wetland is a “headwater” wetland points = 3
Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1
Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in)points = 0
The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5
The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3
The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0
Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5
Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above 10
Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12 - 16 = H 6 - 11 = M 0 - 5 = L Record the rating on the first page
D 5.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges?Yes = 1 No = 0 0
D 5.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff?
Yes = 1 No = 0
Yes = 1 No = 0
Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
points = 2
points = 1
Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin.points = 1
points = 0
There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland.points = 0
Yes = 2 No = 0
Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above 0
Rating of Value If score is: 2 - 4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
0
0
D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land
uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)?
The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by
human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland
cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why
0
0
5
D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the
outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the
deepest part.
D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of
upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself.
D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best
matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest
score if more than one condition is met.
D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood
conveyance in a regional flood control plan?
Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation
D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion?
2
Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water
leaving it (no outlet)
Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet
that is permanently flowing
Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly
constricted permanently flowing outlet
Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a
permanently flowing ditch
3
D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic function of the site?
D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society?
The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down-gradient into areas
where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds):
Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-
gradient of unit.
Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-
gradient.
DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 7 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat
H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat?
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
Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover)1 structure: points = 0
If the unit has a Forested class, check if:
H 1.2. 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
Saturated only 1 types present: points = 0
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
H 1.3. Richness of plant species
If you counted:> 19 species points = 2
5 - 19 species points = 1
< 5 species points = 0
H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats
None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points
All three diagrams
in this row are
HIGH = 3 points
2
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).
1
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 1
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.
These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes.
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 1.1. 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.
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 8 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
H 1.5. Special habitat features:
Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long)
Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland
Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above 9
Rating of Site Potential If Score is: 15 - 18 = H 7 - 14 = M 0 - 6 = L Record the rating on the first page
H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat function of the site?
H 2.1 Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit).
Calculate:
35.5 % undisturbed habitat + (8.9 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2 ) = 39.95%
If total accessible habitat is:
> 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3
20 - 33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2
10 - 19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1
< 10 % of 1 km Polygon points = 0
H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland.
Calculate:
70.2 % undisturbed habitat + (28.6 % moderate & low intensity land uses / 2 ) = 84.5%
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
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 1km Polygon is high intensity points = 0
Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above 6
Rating of Landscape Potential If Score is: 4 - 6 = H 1 - 3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page
Site meets ANY of the following criteria:points = 2
It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)
It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species
Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) with in 100m points = 1
Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0
Rating of Value If Score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page
Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of
points.
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
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)
4
It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the
Department of Natural Resources
1
Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H
1.1 for list of strata )
3
3
0
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 .
It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or
animal on the state or federal lists)
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 9 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).
Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.
Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.
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.
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 ).
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 ).
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 ).
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.
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.
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.
Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are
addressed elsewhere.
WDFW Priority Habitats
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.
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).
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.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 10 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
Wetland Type Category
Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. List the category when the appropriate criteria are met.
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.
Yes = Category I No - Go to SC 1.2
SC 1.2.Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions?
Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV)SC 2.1.
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 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 to SC 2.4 No = Not WHCV
SC 2.4.
Yes = Category I No = Not WHCV
SC 3.0. Bogs
SC 3.1.
Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No - Go to SC 3.2
SC 3.2.
Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No = Is not a bog
SC 3.3.
Yes = Is a Category I bog No - Go to SC 3.4
SC 3.4.
Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog
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.
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?
CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
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?
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.
Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation
Value and listed it on their website?
Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of
Wetlands of High Conservation Value?
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 .
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?
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?
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?
Wetland name or number A
Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update
Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 11 WSDOT Adapted Form - March 2, 2015
SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands
Yes = Category I No = Not a forested wetland for this section
SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons
Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon?
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 larger than 1/10 ac (4350 ft2)
Yes = Category I No = Category II
SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands
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.
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.
Yes = Category III No = Category IV
Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics
If you answered No for all types, enter “Not Applicable” on Summary Form
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.
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.
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)?
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?
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,
rocksThe 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)
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).