Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MEP2007-00105 Fence in Wetland Buffer and Wetland Delineation Report - MEP Permit / Conditions - 2/20/2008
a t o� MASON COUNTY Department of Community Development N Planning Division o P O Box 279,Shelton,WA 98584 J 1e64 (360)427-9670 MASON COUNTY CONDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT February 20, 2008 LILLIWAUP TRUST TO BE KEPT IN THE 1402 3RD AVE PARCELSTE 1318 (- F�LE Parcel No.: 323305147003 323 �Zo -15-1 Li -7od3 Issued: 2/20/2008 Case No.: MEP2007-00105 Project Description: Fence in Wetland Buffer The following critical areas are present on this property: Long-Term Commercial Forest X FWHCA Ch. 17.10.060; Ch. 17.01.110; Mineral Resource Lands Frequently Flooded Areas Ch. 17.01.066; Ch. 17.01.090; 1nholding Lands Landslide Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.062; Ch. 17.01.100; X Wetlands Seismic Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.070; Ch. 17.01.102; Critical Aquifer Recharge Erosion Hazard Areas Ch. 17.01.080; Ch. 17.01.104. This permit,with conditions, is granted pursuant to the Mason County Resource Ordinance (Chapter 17.01 MCC.) Nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances,or regulations applicable to this project. This permit may be rescinded if the permitee fails to complete the project as proposed or fails to comply with the standards of this ordinance. Authorized Local Government Official Date r ► Mason Conditional Environmental Permit 2/20/2008 Case No.: MEP2007-00105 Conditions: 1.) Mitigation and Monitoring shall be followed as outlined in the Long Live the Kings Wetland Delineation Report& Fence Construction Project pg. 12-15. X 2/20/2008 Page 2 of 2 MEP2007-00105 MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Planning Division P O Box 279,Shelton,WA 985U o ' (360)427 9670 186 MEP2007-00105 NOTICE;OF MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT Notice is hereby given that LILLIWAUP TRUST,who is the owner of the described property, has filed an application on 11/06/2007 for a Mason Environmental Permit for the development of: Fence in Wetland Buffer A determination of completeness was made on: 02108/2008 Site Address: 600 N LILLIWAUP ST LILLIWAUP Parcel Number: 323305147003 Location of Project: Within: (quarter section)of Section: 30 Township: 23 N Range: 3 W, W.M. in, Mason County Washington. Said development is proposed at 600 N. Lilliwap St.. Any person desiring to express their view or to be notified of the action taken on the application should notify: MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P O BOX 279 SHELTON,WA 98584 Written comments must be received by 2/8/2008. A decision on the application will be made within 120 days of the date of completeness aerminauon of Nonsignificancc ti.,-.s issued ender WAC 107-11-340. `,Written comments regarcing this =S by 2I8/2008. MEP2007-00105 MASON COUNTY DCD Sent-9EP,A-827,01-001C to(check all that apply)on IL 0 0 a *' Skokomish Tribal Nation WA Department of Ecology Natural Resources Dept. Environmental Review Section ATTN:Marty Ereth PO BOX 47703 5 N 541 Tribal Center Rd. Olympia,WA 98504-7703 Shelton,WA 98584 Quinault Indian Nation 0 U.S.Army Corps of Engineers ATTN: Mark Mobbs SEPA Reviewer PO Box 189 PO Box C-3755 Tahola,WA 98587 Seattle,WA 98124 Squaxin Tribal Nation WA Dept.'ot Fish and Wildlife Natural Resources Dept. ATTN: Margie Schirato(saltwater) 2952 SE Old Olympic Highway 2391 W Deegan Rd. Shelton,WA 98584 Shelton,WA 98584 The Confederated Tribe of the Chehalis WA Dept.of Fish&Wildlife ATTN:SEPA Reviewer ATTN:Gloria Rogers.(freshwater) 420 Howanut Rd. PO Box 695 Oakville,WA 98568 Elma,WA 98541 Shannon Soto 0 WA Dept,of Transportation WA DNR,South Puget Sound Region . Alana Hess`,Development Review Engineer 950 Farman Avenue North. P.O.Box 47440 Enumclaw,WA 98022-9282 Olympia,WA 98504-7440 a Elizabeth Ellis City of Shelton WA DNR,Aquatic Resources 525 West Cote St. PO BOX 47027 Shelton,WA 98584 Olympia,WA 98504-7027 a Office of Archeaology&Historic Preservation {—� Boyd Powers q L�J TTN:Stephanie Kramer WA DNR,SEPA Center P.O.Box 48343 PO BOX 47015 Olympia,WA 98504-8343 Olympia,WA 98504-7015 a0 School District: Olympic Reglori Clean Air Agency 2940-B Limited Ln.NW 0 Mason Cty Public Works ATTN: Olympia,WA 98502 Q Mason Cty Env.Health ATTN: 0 Mason County Transit PO Box 1880 Agent: I�la�✓-4ig Shelton,WA 98584 Applicant: Litt .1402 Sv"'A-ve- S1- IS IS � CIV PERMIT NO.: � O � i DATE RECEIVED: --�'� MASON COUNTY DIrARTMENT OF COMMtr1NrrY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING 9ESOURCE ORDINANCE (Chapter 17.01 MCC) "- 411 N.5TH Street/P.O. Box 279,Shefton, WA 98584 ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT APPLICATION MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT IQ CONDITIONAL USE❑ The purpose of the Resource Ordinance is to protect Mason County's natural resource lands and critical areas and is under the authority of Chapters 36.32, 36.70A, 39.34, 58.17, 76.09, 84.33, 84.34 and 90.58 RCW. PLEASE PRINT 1. Owner: u I I 1 w avD Irv►.<fi Owner Mailing Address: 11402 ? A A,rt. �t 131 Site Address: U D b 15� City:__ pry- state: p: -2-06 r r City: ll�i1AU112 State—JAA _Zip- iewTitle Holder Phone:Daytim� e2 — �'L(* Address: Fire District#: City: State: Zip: Signature: 2. Parcel Nun -5 _ Legal description: Parcel Size: e L�11►v►�Qo►� R1 �',: 3 3. Directions te: �- tS fo 3 t r w IOIN 1,. ` a u E VA State what sections require a permit: In-Holding Lands,Chapter 17.01.062 ❑ 4' Long-Term Commercial Forest,Chapter 17.10.060 ❑ Wetlands,Chapter 17.01.070 Mineral Resource Lands,_Chapter 17.01.066 ❑ Frequently Flooded Areas,Chapter 17.01.090 ❑ Aquifer Recharge Areas,Chapter 17.01.080 ❑ Landslide Hazard Areas,Chapter 17.01.100 Erosion Hazard Areas,Chapter 17.01.104 ❑ Seismic Hazard Areas,Chapter 17.01.102 ❑ Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas,Chapter 17.01.110 0 5. Identify current use of property with existin impmovements: 6. Identify and describe the proposed project,including the type of materials to be used,construction methods,principle dimensions and other pertinent information(Attach addi " al sheets if needed : %Y) 1 }p y. Will there be an alteration of a wetland and/or wetland vegetation area? Yes ❑ No 8. Any water on or adjacent to property: Saltwater ❑ Lake ❑ River ❑ Pond [ Wetland tf- Seasonal Runoff ffi OtherCAI& 9. If septic is located on project site,include records. Connect to septic? ❑ Community Septic? ❑ Public Water Supply? ❑ Well?'j� 10. Type of Job: New Add ❑ Alt ❑ Repair ❑ Demolition ❑ Other This permit is granted pursuant to the Resource Ordinance(Chapter 17.01 MCC)and nothing in this permit shall excuse the applicant from compliance with any other federal, state, or local statutes, ordinances, or regulations applicable to this project,but not inconsistent with the Resource Ordinance. The permit may be rescinded pursuant to the event the permittee fails to comply with the conditions of this ordinance. MASON ENVIRONMENTAL PERMIT: $560.00/$335.00(with another permit) MASON CONDITIONAL USE ENVIR.PERMIT: $1,350.00 HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN: $395.00 ETLANNING\CdcMMMONMENTAI. REVISED OI-16.07 5 Show the followinu on the site plan Lot Dimensions Flood Zones Existing Structures Fences water Lines Driveways Drain Plans Shorelines Septle System Topography Indicate Directional by(N,S,E,W,etc.) Proposed Improvements Easements In relation to plot plan Name N.Flanking Street J .1 APPLICANT TO DRAW SITE PLAN BELOW: �,c;5t,ng kvei K ybond,s GGbf �. . Z a-kS d 6� g 3 � Zp► w�rain (D C) 00 C) � f C 1 t L�gllir�ay� C'� yElar APPjI,ANT T&PRAW TOPONGRAPHY BELOW: N it ►s wrrh tfLCR 01% vC 51"si+G E><� t ko `1' 't.. it W$r of w- e- J s L�Uir�ewQ `� Main d''`1A ACV% W�t1wM Cd We + E*+ 1nU1 A 100p'... -lviat (11/6/2007)Charles McCo III -RE:Lilliwaup ermittin� Pa e 1 From: Charles McCoy III To: Joy Lee Date: 11/6/2007 4:11 PM Subject: RE: Lilliwaup permitting Joy please send the check to: Attention: Permit Assistance Center PO Box 186,Shelton,WA 98584 In the amount of$680 made out to: Mason County Treasurer On the check please write the Mason Environmental Permit Number. MEP2007-WJ05 You could also include a copy of this email with the check V you like. Thanks, Chuck McCoy >>>"Joy Lee"< > 11/6/2007 3:10 PM >>> Thanks so much Chuck! I am so happy to hear that news.Thanks for everything you did to make this happen,we 9Peady appreciate the effort In expediting our permits. Shan we send the payment directly to you or to the treasurer?Either way could you please include the address. Marry thanks,and as soon as we know where to mail it,it will be sent. Again,thank you. 30Y ---Original Message-- From:Charles McCoy III fmailto:ChuckMGco.mason.wa u 1 Sent:Tuesday,:November 06,20071:05 PM To:Barbara Robinson;Grace Miller,Robert Fink,Tammi Wright;Joy Lee Subject:Re:Lilliwaup permitting Hello Joy; I spoke with the Director of Community Development,Barbara Robinson, this morning and we decided that bets your request for a security fence to protect.poadting/theR of listed ESA species could be expedited to allow you to buNd the fence Immediately to deter any continued loss of salmon from your facility. The costs that need to be paid are as folk)ws: Mason County Environmental Permit:$560 Wetland Delineation Review Fee: $120 Total=$680(check made out to Mason County Treasurer) Thank you for your patience in this matter, Chuck McCoy >>> "Joy Lee"<JLeeQltt k.oro> 11/2/200711:13 AM >>> 11/6/2007 Charles McCo III -RE: Lilliwau rmittin " "` Page 2 ' A Good afternoon Chuck. I have been trying to call you this week,but have not been able to get through to you or your voice mail so figured I would resort to the or email.Did you get Ricks message with our estimated cost for the fence? I have not heard back from you,but thought once you had that you were going to call us with the fee total so we could issue a check and get things rolling.Do you need any information or a formal esimtate in writing and somehow oertified?If I can help with anything else please let me know and we will look forward to hearing form you soon. Hope you have a nice weekend and many thanks! Joy -, WErLAND CORD FENCE Parcel 323192400032 Ceuety Prepared for. Left Live The KisP,Lwirsap do Rick Endicott 501 Lalfvanp Sheet UWwaap,WA'98335 Prepared by: Lae Bold snd Hestlur Lsm July,2007 PD Box 2854 BeVak,Washington 98528,E Phone 360-620-0618'Offim Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@pDQPW& m k WIETLAND CORD LONG LIVE T11E KINGS WETLAND DELINEATION&FENCE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TAB OF CATS »»»»..».».........»»»...»..»...»».»».»...»».»...»»»».»..»»»»».».»»»..»...».1 1 GENERALSITE CONDITIONS»»»»»».»»....».»»..»..»»..»..»»»»»........»..»».»».».».»»»»»»......»»»..».»..».»»»».».1 METHOD(?IAGY 2 BACKGROUNDINFORMATION»»...»...............».»»»»»»»...»...»»»»...»»..»»..»»..»»..»».....»..»»»»».»».»»......»..3 WETLAND DELOMATiON RESUL 3 WETLAND&STREAM EVALUATION»»»»».......».......»»»»»»»»....»....».». »...».»»..»»».»»»».»»»»».»..»6 WETLAND&STREAM CONCLUSION 7 >�:NCE CONSTRUCTION pROJECT.....»...».............»».»»...».........»..».»..»».....»..........»»..»»»»..».........»»»»»».»..»..8 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 8 PROPERTYDESCRIPTION».»....».»»»»»»..».»»»».»»»»»»»»»».........»»»».»»........»»»»»»»»»»..».»»».......»....»..8 APPLICABLE SETBA DESCRIPTION OF HABITAT AND SPECIES».»»....»».»».......».....»»...».......»»..»»».».»»»»..».....».....»»......•...»9 ANALYSIS OF ELECT$ 11 MITIGATIONMEASURES.......»...»».»....»...»....»».........».»»»»»».»»».»».......»»...»»»..».......»... »».. 12 MONITORING is SUMMARY...»»..»..»»....»».....»»..»...»».....»....................».........»».»».......»......... .»»»».»...........»...»...»....»»15 REFERS 16 Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Map Figure 3. Nations Wetlad IavmtocY MW Figure 4. Mason County Soil Survey Map Figure S. DNR Water Resource Map ANNAM Appendix A_ Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms Appendix B. Soil Survey Tact Appendix C. Wetland Rang Form PO Box 2954 Bed,WmhWg4m 98529 Cell Phone 360-620-0618 Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad4O@pooplePc.com THE WETLAND CORPS wedand Demo, . Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration • Mitigation • Biological Evaluation July,2007 Project#TWC07W376 Page 1 of 7 LONG LIVE THE KINGS WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT 501 L Wwaup Street Lilliwaup,Washington INTRODUCTION The Wetland Corps has been authorized by Long Live The Kings to perform a wetland delineation at the property located at 501 Lilliwaup Street in Lilliwaup, Mason County, Washington(Tax Identification Number 323192400032). The delineation was performed on July 26,2007 to identify wetlands and associated buffers that would be applicable to the proposed fence installation su mxwding the southeastern portion of the parcel. The subject property is located in the SW 1/4 of Section 19, Township 23 North, Range 03 West WM(Figure 1 Vicinity Map). The parcel is 2.08 acres in size and is roughly square in shape. For the purposes of federal,Washington State,and Mason County jurisdictional oversight, methodology used for the wetland delineation is consistent with the wetland definition provided in paragraph 25a of the Washington Stye Wedwids Identification and Delineation Manual(Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997). The sections below provide: (1) an introduction to the site; (2) a description of methods used in the field delineation;and,(3)technical results. GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS The majority of the parcel is maintained as a fish rearing facility, containing maintenance buildings and a lawn area, partially occupied by hatchery equipment. The parcel appears to be comprised largely of fill material,as a wetland area begins abruptly along the eastern property boundary, and continues south toward the estuary for LilliwauP CFO& draining into Hood Canal. Lilliwaup River is located outside the western property b ►. One stream is located within the central portion of the parcel nmmng southerly, parallel to Ldiewaup Creek. Based on the channel width and gradient,the stream meets criteria for a fishbearing stream. The vegetation within the wetland area is generally cold of red alder, Want mil, lady fern, stinging nettle and skunk cabbage. Vegetation within undisturbed isturbed upland areas within the parcel is comprised of red alder, big leaf maple, salmonberry, swordfern and Indian plum. The property is surrounded by low deity residential land use and PO Box 2854 Belf*,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40(a pe"Iepc.com Long Live The Kings Wetland Delineation TWC No87W37G July,2007 Page No.2 undeveloped parcels_ Topography within the parcel is generally flat. Topography in surrounding areas sly welly toward the estuary associated with Hood Canal. METHODOLOGY Consistent with proce"a defiled in the Wad State Wedw& Identification and Delineation Manual (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997) (1997 Manual), Preliminary information was gathered on the project site prior to the field review and delinestiom General infonmd on sources included: United Stems Geological Service (USGS) topographic maps, 1974 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, the Soil Survey of Mason County Area, W on{USDA, 1951),and Mason CounLy's critical areas regulations. Field Delineation Methodology used for wetland delineation was consistent with the teehnieal approaches mrEi daftd in the 1997 Manual. This docunuft is the wedind deHnwdm manual Chas is used in determining wetland areas when applying state and local government regulations under the Shoreline Management Act and the Growth Management Act in Washington State. The extent and location of suspect wetlands were determined during field work performed on July ZP, 2007- Field work was conducted under cloudy skies with an ambient temp�ira#u- nqM between 70 and 75 degrees Fit. The time of year and recent precipitation history were considered in assessing the extent of the suspect wetland presuined to exist on site. Specific field methodology used in detera fining the extent and location of wetland areas include: 1. As part of the initial project site reconnaissance,the site was walked to determine the general extent and location of pot wetland areas; 2. Wetland and upland sample plots were established in the identified potential vwedand areas and in the a4jwent upland area;and 3. Wetland boundaries were delineated with flagging by noting localized topography and vegetation patterns and comparing parameters of hydrology, soil, and vegetation with data collected at the wetland and upland sample plots. The project area was investigated and data was collected at three sample plot locations. Data collected at each sample plot were entered onto a Routine Wetland Deteamination. Data Form (Washington State Deparunent of Ecology 1994 Copies of data, forms for each sample plot are provided in Appendix A. PU Box 54 ,W so S , tg' Long Live The Kings Wetland Delineation TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.3 Stream Identifistk d t The onsite sl wum were classified.according to the definitions listed in the Mason County Resoucea Ordhwmee which uses the WAC 16.22 031 Interim WaW Typing System. Factors than influence stream typing such as channel width, possibility,of intermittent dry periods, stream gradient and obstructions downstream that would effect fish migration were analyzed to aomaWy days fy the dam. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Mason Qua Soil SuM The soil survey of Mason County indicates two onsite soil types,(USDA, 1951): Soil type one is located within the southernam©A poraw of the parcel,and is identified as Grove grawj& sandy kw^ 0 to S pemeyat slopes (Gh.) — This soil is a somewhat excessively drained soil occupying the large glacial outwash Plains- The soil has deveka'ped fom Vashon glacial drift, modified by inclusions of local basaltic rock and mixed material from the Olympic Mountain glaciers. Rainfall ranges from 60 to 100 inches per year. Vegetation is coniferous forest with an undersotry dominated by lower Vowing awsses,kinnikinnik,and ssowberry, mixed with Huddebery,salal,and Oregon- grape. This soil is strongly to medium acid and less acid with depth. Surface runoff is very slow because of the rapid permeability of the soil and the smooth topography. The soil is in capability subclass VIs. Soil type two has been identified as Grow gravel& saX4 loamy S to 15 percent slopes (Gk).- is in places the surface soil and subsoil of this soil are 3 to 6 inches thinner than those of Clrove gravelly sandy loam,0'to 5 pwv4st slopes. A more detailed soil description can be found in Appendix B Mason Soil Survey Text. The Mason Soil Survey map is shown in Figure 4. Natiogial Wetlands Inventory The USFWS NWI map(online wetlands mapper)shows one identified wetland area in the approximw location of the pal. The wedund is idendfied as R Emet [21 Vidal [EW Emergent [11 Persistent LNI fly flooded (Figure 3. National Wetland Inventory Map). Department of Natural Resources W,W Resource The Department of Natural. Resources Water Resource Map shows several identified ems in the project vicinity. (See FVm 5. DNR Spa Map). The only stream mapped within the property is Lilliwaup Creek. WETLAND DRI.INEATION RULTS One wetland was identified within the subject parcel. The portion of the wetland within the parcel is delineated with pink ribbon labeled WETLAND DELINEATION. The PO Box 2gM BeVrk,W 9 S2 > 36o-62o-0618, 3 21> com : med6L =Who. Long Live The Kings Wetland Delineation TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.4 portion of the wetland within the property is located along the eastern and southern perimeter of the property and contains several channels. Although the wetland is a freshwater wetland, it is associated with an estuarine wetland located south of the parcel, associated with Lilliwaup Creek. (Figure 2. Site Map). In general, the freshwater wetland is comprised mainly of a forested/shrub community dominated by red alder and western red cedar, with an understory comprised of lady fern, stinging nettle, creeping buttercup and skunk cabbage. The entire wetland, including the estuarine portion of the wetland, appears to be approximately 30 acres in size. (See aerial photo below). Approximate parcel vicinity z s c Onsite freshwater wetland RAN qy Estuarine Wetland Figure]. Freshwater wetland connected with estuarine wetland(Photo adapted from Mason County GIS 2005) PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Wetland Delineation TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.5 •y �zc� 75f� � Figure 2. Distinct wetland boundary along eastern property boundary. Veizetation The wetland area within the parcel is dominated by an overstory of red alder (Alnus rubra, FAQ and western red cedar(Thuja plicata, FAQ. The understory within the wetland area contains giant horsetail (Equisetum arvense, FACW), lady fern (Athyrium filix femina, FAQ, salmonberry (Rubes spectabilis, FAQ, stinging nettle (Urtica dioica, FAC), slough sedge (Carex obnupta, OBL), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FACW), water parsley(Oenanthe sarmentosa, OBL), skunk cabbage(Lysichiton americanum, OBL), and himilayan blackberry(Rubus discolor, FACU). The upland vegetation within the undisturbed, vegetatated portions of the parcel includes a scattered overstory of big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum, FACU) and red alder (Alnus rubra, FAQ, with an understory consisting salmonberry (Rubus spectibilis, FACU), himilayan blackberry(Rubus discolor, FACU), beaked hazelnut(Corylus cornuta,FACU), swordfern (Polystichum munitum, FACU), vine maple (Acer circinatum, FACU), Indian plum(Oemleria cerasiformis, FACU), and lady fern(Athyrium filix femina, FAQ. Soils Test pits 1 and 2 excavated in the wetland area revealed a single-layer profile consisting of muck with matrix chroma IOYR 3/1 to a depth of 12 inches. Test pit 3 excavated within a finger of the wetland area revealed a single-layer profile consisting of gravelly silt loam with matrix chroma 10YR 3/1 to a depth of 12 inches. Wetland hydric soils are indicated by a low-chroma(equaling one) in all wetland test pits. The soil profiles observed in known upland test pits were consistent with the mapped soil type, Grove gravelly sandy loam (Gk). Upland test pits exhibited a two-layer soil profile. The upper layer consists of gravelly sandy loam approximately eight to ten inches deep of matrix chromas 10YR 5/3 and lOYR 4/3. The lower profile contained less gravel with PO Box 2854 Benir,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Wetland Delineation TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.6 matrix chromas of 10YR 6/3 and 10YR 5/4. No hydric soil indicators were present in upland soil test pits. Hydrology Hydrology was indicated within the wetland test pits by drift lines, FAC-neutral vegetation, sediment deposits, drainage patterns and water-stained leaves. In addition, the soil test pits within the wetland area revealed inundation up to 12 inches in some areas, soil saturation to the surface and held standing water in the test pits. Upland test pits showed no indicators of wetland hydrology. WETLAND& STREAM EVALUATION The on-site wetland was classified as a depressional wetland per Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (Hruby 2004). Based on functional attributes provided by the wetland, the wetland meets criteria for a Category II Wetland, scoring 66 points on the state rating form, with 28 points in water quality, 16 points in hydrology functions, and 22 points in habitat functions. According to Table 17.01.070 E of the Mason County Resource Ordinance, Category II Wetlands scoring between 20 and 28 points in habitat function on the state rating form require a 150-foot buffer with an additional 15-foot building setback within parcels intended for High Impact Land Use. High Impact Land Use is described in Table 17.07.070 B of the Mason County Resource Ordinance as high-intensity processing such as dairies, nurseries and green houses, raising and harvesting crops requiring annual tilling,raising and maintaining animals. The wetland is continuous with the estuarine wetland south of the parcel, where Lilliwaup Creek drains into Hood Canal. The estuary meets the criteria stated in section SC.1 on the Categorization Based On Special Characteristics section of the state rating form are regulated as a Category II Wetland due to the alteration of the estuary and associated buffer within the last several years. According to Table 17.01.070 E of the Mason County Resource Ordinance, Category II Estuarine Wetlands require a 150-foot buffer with an additional 15-foot building setback within parcels intended for High Impact Land Use. High Impact Land Use is described in Table 17.07.070 B of the Mason County Resource Ordinance as high-intensity processing such as dairies, nurseries and green houses, raising and harvesting crops requiring annual tilling,raising and maintaining animals. The freshwater depressional wetland is treated as part of the estuarine wetland because there is no break in hydrology regime or wetland vegetation. Although the depressional wetland contains freshwater vegetation,the state rating form requires that in the case of an estuarine wetland connecting to a freshwater wetland, the entire area is rated as an estuarine wetland. Since the portion of the wetland that is within the parcel is continuous with the estuarine wetland that meets criteria for a Category II Estuarine Wetland based on Special Characteristics, due to its continuity with the estuary, the freshwater portion of the entire system is regulated as part of the Estuarine Category II wetland. PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Wetland Delineation TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.7 The final rating for the onsite wetland is a Category II Estuarine Wetland, requiring a 150- foot buffer with an additional 15-foot building setback. Stream Typing According the Department of Natural Resources Stream Interim Water Typing System (WAC 16.222.031), the channel running within the central portion of the property is assumed to have fishbearing habitat because the channel is greater than two feet wide and has a slope gradient less than 16 percent. Therefore,the channel meets criteria for a type F stream. All type F streams in Mason County require a 150-foot buffer with an additional 15-foot building setback. Lilliwaup Creek also meets criteria for a type F stream, requiring a 150-foot buffer with an additional 15-foot building setback in Mason County. SU NL4RY I This wetland report documents the presence of a freshwater wetland within the subject parcel,that is regulated as a portion of a Category II Estuarine Wetland south of the subject property. According to Table 17.01.070F of the Mason County Resource Ordinance, the onsite wetland requires a 150-foot buffer with an additional 15-foot building setback for High Impact Land Use. In addition, a fishbearing stream drains southerly through the property. All fishbearing streams in Mason County require a 150-foot buffer with a 15- foot building setback. Lilliwaup Creek meanders outside of the western property boundary, and requires a buffer of 150-feet with an additional 15-foot building setback as well. Thank you for choosing the Wetland Corps as your environmental consultant. If you have any questions,feel free to call. Respectfully submitted, The Wetland Corps I Heather Lane YJ Staff Wetland Specialist 1 I Lee Boad E Senior Ecologist t PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com THE WETLAND CORPS Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration • Mitigation • Biological Evaluation i July,2007 TWC07-376 FENCE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN 501 Lilliwaup Street Lilliwaup,Washington PROJECT DESCRIPTION The details of a Habitat Management Plan for the above referenced property (Parcel No. 323192400032) are discussed in full in this report. The site is found in the SW i/4 of Section 19,Township 23 North, Range 03 West WM(See Figure 1, Site Vicinity Map). The purpose of this Habitat Management Plan (HMP) is to address potential impacts resulting from the proposed construction of an 8-foot tall wood fence that will surround a fish rearing facility, and occupy a linear distance of approximately 710 feet within the southeastern portion of the parcel. The fence will encroach within the Category I Wetland buffer located east of the facility and the type F stream buffer that runs southerly within the central portion of the parcel. The 150-foot buffer associated with Lilliwaup Creek also captures a portion of the proposed fence location. The objectives of this HMP are as follows: ■ To evaluate the potential adverse effects to critical area functions as well as fish and wildlife habitat resulting from the establishment of the fence within the Type F stream buffer and the Category I wetland buffer. Emphasis is placed on the possible loss of habitat for any listed species found to be residing in the vicinity of the parcel. ■ To identify possible mitigation measures that could be implemented to offset the adverse effects resulting from the establishment of the fence within the Type F stream buffer and Category I Wetland buffer. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The parcel is maintained as a fish rearing facility, containing maintenance and office rearing tanks. The parcel a to be buildings and a large lawn area occupied by hatchery g p appears largelyof fill material as a wetland area. begins abruptly along the eastern comprisedgins rup y ng P property boundary, and continues south toward the estuary for Lilliwaup River draining into Hood Canal. Lilliwaup River is located west of the property. One stream is located within the parcel running southerly, parallel to Lillewaup River. Based on the channel width and gradient, the stream meets criteria for a fishbearing stream. The vegetation within the wetland is generally comprised of red alder, giant horsetail, lady fern, stinging nettle and skunk cabbage. Vegetation within undisturbed upland areas is comprised of red alder, big PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40Qpeoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.9 leaf maple, salmonberry, swordfern and Indian plum. The property is surrounding by low density residential land use and undeveloped parcels. Topography within the parcel is generally flat. Topography in surrounding areas slopes westerly toward the estuary associated Hood Canal. APPLICABLE SETBACKS The project site is within the jurisdiction of Mason County. Ordinance 17.01.110 identifies Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas adopted by Mason County, and Ordinance 17.01.070 identifies Wetland Areas adopted by Mason County. The applicable setback for this project is as follows: Habitat Type Buffer Building Setback from Buffer Type F Stream 150' 15' Category II Wetland 150' 15' DESCRIPTION OF HABITAT AND SPECIES Puget Sound Chinook(Oncorhynchus tshawytsha)-Threatened Listed as threatened since March 24, 1999 adult Puget Sound Chinook spawn in several rivers and streams flowing into Puget Sound. The Lillewaup River estuary is listed by the NOAA Fisheries Northwest Region Critical Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington - August 2005 as a Final Critical Habitat Designation. Although the type F stream running through the center of the property is accessible to fish, it does not contain suitable habitat for Puget Sound Chinook due to the limited size and lack of sufficient flow during the spawning period. Adult chinook have been observed spawning in Lilliwaup creek on an intermittent basis. The Lillywaup hatchery has been used to raise Chinook for various restoration programs throughout Hood Canal. No modification to riparian areas or spawning habitat will be necessary for construction of the fence. Therefore, construction of the fence will have no adverse impacts on Puget Sound Chinook. Hood Canal Summer Chum(Oncorhynchus keta)-Threatened Known Hood Canal Summer Chum spawning areas in proximity to the site include Lilliwaup Creek. Summer chum adults are present throughout late summer and early fall while juveniles migrate immediately to the estuary upon hatching. Chum salmon generally prefer medium size gravels that are relatively sand and silt free. No modification to riparian areas or spawning habitat will be necessary for construction of the fence. Therefore, no impacts to summer chum fence are expected. Measures are provided in this report to protect water quality and other habitat features potentially important to all fish species potentially I inhabiting the stream. I f F PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peop1epc.com Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.10 Puget Sound Steelhead(Oncorhvnchus mvkiss)-Threatened Listed as Threatened since May 2007, Puget Sound Steelhead spawn in several streams throughout Puget Sound. Spawning usually occurs in moderate to steep gradient sections of streams, usually in heads of riffles or the tails of pools where hydraulic conditions are conducive to intragravel flow. Side channels and the anterior portions of islands are also used. Spawn timing for summer steelhead runs typically ranges from mid May through October while winter run steelhead are present from December through May. Adequate cover from predation, water temperature, and spawning gravel are important factors for instream habitat,while little is currently known about specific marine habitat requirements. Lower Lilliwaup Creek and the associated estuary is listed in the NOAA Fisheries Northwest Region Critical Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington - August 2005, suitable habitat is present. The project is not of a scale that would impact critical habitat. No modifications to the stream channel are proposed that would negatively impact Puget Sound Steelhead. Bull Trout(Salvelinus malma)-Threatened Bull trout typically inhabit very cold, clear headwater streams at high elevations that are supported by snowmelt. For spawning and early rearing, bull trout require loose, clear gravel,relatively free of fine sediments. There is no documentation of bull trout occurring in Lilliwaup creek or the unnamed stream passing through the center of the property. Although potential habitat may be present, the construction of the fence will in no way modify instream habitat or water quality potentially important to bull trout. Bald Eagle(Haliaeetus leucocephalus)-State listed: Threatened Habitat areas associated with Bald Eagle include uneven aged coniferous stands with some old-growth components. Nests are typically constructed in larger trees with dead or broken tops providing an unobstructed view of nearby water. Snags and trees with exposed lateral limbs,or dead tops are used as perches and defense stations. There are no documented Bald Eagle nesting sites in the vicinity of the project area. The proposed project site will not require the removal of any trees. Recommended plantings addressed in the Mitigation Measures section should improve the potential for use of the site by Bald Eagle in the future. As no important habitat features are to be removed, this project will have no adverse impacts on bald eagles. Marbled Murrelet(Brachyramphus marmoratus)-Threatened Marbled Murrelets are typically associated with coastal habitats and nest in old-growth forests. Murrelets may fly as far as 50 miles inland to nest, however the average distance is roughly 5-miles from nest to sea. It is only during the summer breeding months that they are commonly found inland. During non-nesting seasons they live at sea Murrelets require tall PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528.Cell Phone 360-620-061 g•Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.l 1 mossy trees in coniferous old growth forests with cavities on thick branches where they can construct a cup nest 2040 meters above the forest floor. Murreletts have been documented laying eggs on rocky ground habitats only when a sufficient forest is unavailable. There are no documented nesting sites surrounding the project site. No potential nesting trees are within the project area This project will likely have no adverse impact on Marbled Murrelet given there are no documented nesting sites or potential nesting trees in the vicinity of the project area. Northern Spotted Owl(Shia occidentalis caurina)-Threatened Spotted owls require a large amount of land for their nesting and hunting grounds; pairs may occupy up to 58 sq. km. They are territorial and do not migrate, but they may shift their ' ranges slightly in response to seasonal changes Suitable spotted owl habitat includes trees relatively large in diameter, multi-layered forest canopy with a moderate to high canopy closure in overstory,midstory, and understory, large, tall, live trees with cavities, broken tops, mistletoe, or platforms of branches capable of holding accumulated organic matter suitable for use as a nest. Dead standing trees and fallen decayed trees supporting abundant populations of prey species are critical to spotted owl populations. Currently there are no spotted owl nesting sites documented in proximity to the project site. As spotted owls are currently not present, and the project is of a scale that has no impact on forested components within the parcel,no impacts to spotted owl or their habitat are expected result from the proposed project. ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS The project lies within the regulated buffers of a Type F stream and a Category I Wetland. Project scale in the protected area is as follows; Development Type Habitat Type Project scale Fence Cat I Wetland Buffer&Type F Stream buffer 710 sq. ft. Vegetation Disturbance The fence is proposed within the portion of the ownership that has been maintained as an open lawn and gravel area. With recommended planting of native vegetation described in Mitigation Measures below,the project will likely have a net benefit of vegetation abundance and diversity within the property. Designated Critical Habitat for Salmonids The Lillewaup River estuary is listed by the NOAA Fisheries Northwest Region Critical Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington-August 2005 as a Final Designation. Therefore, Designated Critical Habitat for Salmonids is within the PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 99528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.0ffice Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@ lepc.com Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.12 vicinity of the project area. However, none of the proposed actions are likely to destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Actions described in this plan are not expected to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species. Noise Pollution A slight increase in noise from construction activities is likely to occur during daylight construction hours. No nesting sites are located within the radii of concern that would be impacted by noise associated with the establishment of the fence. Temporary Increase in Sediment and Turbidity During Construction The proposed work has the potential to temporarily increase turbidity and suspended sediment within the project area. Best Management Practices have been recommended to minimize the adverse effects to sediment supply and turbidity during project implementation. Light and Glare The project will not result in an increase in light and glare. Light and glare is commonly only associated with residential construction and land use. No impacts to fish or wildlife use of the site are expected. MITIGATION MEASURES The purpose of the fence is to protect the hatchery facility from vandalism, theft, and other damage. Because ESA-listed species are being raised in the hatchery,the fence is absolutely necessary. The fence has been designed and located to occupy the least amount of area while protecting the facility. Best Management Practices Recommended Best Management Practices for this project are as follows: • Perform any excavation or necessary site preparation work during dry weather. • Install silt fencing between the work area and the wetland and stream to prevent erosion and siltation of waters. • Minimize amount of erodible soils at any given time to the maximum extent feasible. • Do not apply any chemicals when there is a possibility of rain. • Comply with all permits and requirements of governing authority. Silt fence Installation The presence of exposed soil in proximity to regulated waters poses a risk of erosion and siltation during storm events. It is recommended that silt fencing be installed between the work areas and the stream and wetland to avoid siltation of waters. The silt fence should be inspected and repaired if necessary after each storm event. Sediment should be removed from the fence and deposited to an area that will not contribute to regulated waters. r PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618•Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.13 Enhancement Recommendations To compensate for the displacement of buffer associated with this project, the landowners have agreed to utilize the western portion of the parcel that contains the 150-foot type F stream buffer of Lilliwaup River as an off site mitigation zone. It is recommended that a 25- foot strip of the stream buffer currently occupied by a scattered overstory of big leaf maple (Ater macrophyllum) and open lawn area that parallels the stream for 50 feet be enhanced with native vegetation. The enhancement of a moderately dense forested and shrub community within the open area is likely to improve potential for wildlife utilization of the site. The area selected as the mitigation zone occupies an area of approximately 1,250 square feet. . _ Y Figure 1. Mitigation Zone Native Plantings It is recommended that potted plants be used as opposed to bare root seedlings. The following plant species and potted sizes are recommended: Trees: western red cedar(Thuja plicata)- 2 gallon Douglas fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii)-2 gallon Shrubs: Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa)- 1 gallon salal (Gaultheria shallon)— 1 gallon evergreen huckleberry(Vaccinium ovatum) - gallon nootka rose(Rosa nutkana)— 1 gallon salmonberry(Rubus spectabilis)— 1 gallon PO Box 2854 Belfair, Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.14 Pacific Willow(Salix lusida)— 1 gallon Hooker willow(Salix hookeriana)— 1 gallon Scouler willow(Salix scouleriana)— 1 gallon Sitka willow(Salix sitchensis)— 1 gallon beaked hazelnut(Corylus cornuta)— 1 gallon Indian plum(Oemleria cerasiformis)— 1 gallon oceanspray(Holodiscus discolor)— 1 gallon Pacific ninebark(Physocarpus capitatus)— 1 gallon California black currant(Ribes bracteosum)— 1 gallon western thimbleberry(Rebus pare florus)— 1 gallon red elderberry(Sambucus racemosa)— 1 gallon sword fern(Polystichum munitum)— 1 gallon Native Planting Guidelines It is recommended that plantings be installed within the identified mitigation zone to achieve the following densities. A minimum of 1 tree species and five shrub or fern species from the above list are recommended. trees- 10' on center shrubs-4' on center These densities will provide a moderately dense, structurally diverse plant community within the mitigation zone. To fulfill the above mentioned planting density recommendation, the mitigation zone will be planted with a total of 13 trees and 65 shrubs. It is recommended that installation be done as single trees and or clusters of three shrubs, on approximate 10-foot centers. Typically, planting should occur during winter dormancy. The optimum time for planting is during February and March, however, the need to complete the project in a timely manner may call for planting to occur outside optimum time periods. No machinery earthwork will be necessary to implement this enhancement plan; planting holes for specified vegetation installation will be hand dug. No additional clearing or grading should be necessary for site restoration. All installed vegetation shall be marked with colored flagging to facilitate monitoring inspections. The monitoring program is recommended to insure project effectiveness. Invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry, reed canary grass, Japanese knotweed, and English Ivy may invade the enhancement zone. These species are stubborn competitors for light and nutrients and limit success of native plants. Invasive species should be removed from the enhancement zone should they invade. Herbicides should not be used to achieve this due to the proximity to the stream and wetland Persistent cutting during the growing season is sufficient to offset the rhizomes of invasive species if they become a problem. Cost Estimate for Mitigation 4' PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528,Cell Phone 360-620-0618 Office Phone 360-372-2421 boad4O@peoplepc.com i Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.15 The Wetland Corps currently provides erosion control and native planting at an $800.00 minimum rate which would be applied for this site. This cost estimate has been provided as a courtesy and in no way implies that TWC must be contracted to complete this work as a condition of permit approval. MONITORING Monitoring of the site will begin the first fall following native species plantings and maintained on a seasonal basis. The information gathered will provide the following: 1) condition of enhancement zone; 2) the use of the site by wildlife species; 3) any disturbance caused by the construction of the fence and its effect on the protected zone and associated aquatic habitat; 4) any occurrence of exotic species within the mitigation zone; 5) any corrective measures that may be deemed necessary to provide desired conditions. This monitoring will be in effect for the duration of three years. The information gathered will be provided in an annual report and submitted to the Director of Mason County Department of Community Development. SUMMARY This report addresses the effects of the establishment of a fence occupying an area of 710 feet within a portion of the parcel encompassed by the regulated buffers of a Type F stream and Category II Wetland. Best Management Practices are recommended to insure no negative impacts to the stream and wetland. Mitigation recommendations include native plant enhancement of 1,250 square feet of off-site open area within a 25-foot strip that parallels Lilliwaup Creek. No impacts to water quality or stream habitat are predicted. Mitigation Measures, and Best Management Practices, have been identified to avoid, minimize,and mitigate for impacts associated with proposed construction. We trust this information is sufficient for your needs at this time. Thank you for choosing The Wetland Corps as your environmental consultant. If you have any questions feel free to call. Respectfully submitted, Lee Boad Senior Ecologist PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 99528.Cell Phone 360-620-061 g•Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com 2 Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.16 Heather Lane Staff Wetland&Natural Resource Specialist I r PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-061 g•Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com Long Live The Kings Habitat Management Plan TWC No.07W376 July,2007 Page No.17 REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M.,V. Carter,F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service document FWS/OBS-79/31. 84 pp. Washington, D.C. Hitchcock,L.C. and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press.. 730 pp. Hruby, T., 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington—Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication#04-06-025. Munsell Soil Color Charts, 1998. GretagMacbeth. New Windsor,New York. Pojar,J.and A. MacKinnon, 1994.Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone PinePublishing. 528 pp. Vancouver,British Columbia. Speare-Cooke, S., 1997. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society. 417 pp. e US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Pierce County Area, Washington. September, 1977. I' US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. 1978. Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997. Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication#96-94, various pagination. Olympia, Washington. Washington State Department of Ecology, 1993. Washington State Wetlands Rating System, Western Washington Second Edition. 61 pp.Ecology Publication#93-74. Olympia, Washington. { Washington State Department of Ecology, 1999. Methods for Assessing Wetland Functions for Reverine and Depressional Wetlands in the Lowlands of Western Washington. Ecology Publication#99-115. Olympia, Washington. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993.National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands Region 9—Northwest. Resource Management Group PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com a topozone ::ryfa l,"S.Y. Mqu a YMw b% 37 oil 0 1 mile I !r` f tA C Approximate Parcel Location \ ter= FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP Project Name: LLTK Wetland DeVHMP Location: Lilliwaup,Washington Project: TWC07-W376 72 Client: LLTK THE WETLAND CORPS Date: 07/07 dm cq O o Cd to U o •� o to rA w C° w $ °o o 'c tn A, O � o ® 3tagglaS Suipimg 'tb c i +aamnq loo3-01 T Pugl;3vj J&4Go2ajej walft '` ♦ ` wo r..r _ 3 o c dib MEW IL .,Z Ll E > Q.d vt- X 0x o � F, 3 ui 14 Q co O co 3 3 O a W m = = z d = max wclo w C o 0. LL ;. (DCCMfn �, aaaUA = d1 �t o = - � 3 r - _ 0 LU o CO) M M � o _ V a � •V 7 �rT^/I En a tf {� f� a Z � 9 Z 10 < < o � z � H a 8 i b 3 : c g m y it i t c s. �y O O ' S a � tJ C.1 � w .0 �. CL • ❑ � w f 2 942 799944 799946 13 1 a 999 +99924 +999 Approximate parcel v% location , try .a +9990 904 7 $0$ $ Puget-so,nil + 82 +9898 98986 y coo SIRE�1i5 SOILS TR--NSPORTATION H�:dric Soils • F Paved Roail � v �h'_alu tt'at_r Type 1-_ �;�asa side; Higwy Unstable Stream Ty Unknown(East side) Hi¢blc Erodible �` Unpaved Road - 3h LTn:ui:e& �Road(.S'lllfaCe LTlllillt�\I'll) Stream Water T':�e __�.j'4��2.t side; Erodible 3_giu}. / stream Tvpe L:knor;n(.E'est side; No Data or Gravel Piss ,�'•� Abatidotled Road tea'°i irplimied Road Trail FIGURE 5 DNR STREAM MAP Project Name: LLTK Wetland Del/HMP Location. Lilliwaup,Washington N jmV Project: TWCO7-W376 THE Z%"LTL�N D CQ R P—%� Client: LLTK Date: 07/07 5 i � t Approximate Parcel Location Onsite Soil Conditions based on Mason County Soil Survey Subject Site Soils: Soil type one is located within the southernmost portion of the parcel,and is identified as Grove gravelly sandy loam,0 to 5 percent slopes(Gh.)—This soil is a somewhat excessively drained soil occupying the large glacial outwash plains. The soil has developed from Vashon glacial drift,modified by inclusions of local basaltic rock and mixed material from the Olympic Mountain glaciers. Rainfall ranges from 60 to 100 inches per year. Vegetation is coniferous forest with an undersotry dominated by lower growing mosses,kinnikinnik,and snowberry,mixed with Huckleberry,salal,and Oregon-grape. This soil is strongly to medium acid and less acid with depth. Surface runoff is very slow because of the rapid permeability of the soil and the smooth topography. The soil is in capability subclass VIs. Soil type two has been identified as Grove gravelly sandy loam, S to IS percent slopes(Gk).-is in places the surface soil and subsoil of this soil are 3 to 6 inches thinner than those of Grove gravelly sandy loam,0 to 5 percent slopes. A more detailed description of this soil can be found in the Mason County Soil Survey Text(1951). FIGURE 4 SOIL SURVEY Project Name: LLTK Wetland DeVHMP AAW Location: Lilliwaup,Washington Project: TWC07-W376 Client: LLTK THE NNr FTL-%,N D CORP-IS Date: 07/07 APPENDIX A Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms I I i I i I I Routine Wetland Determination DATA FORM 1 (RevisoM WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual Project/Site: Lillewaup Hatchery Date: 7/27/2007 Applicant/owner: Long Live The Kings County: Mason Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA S/T/R: 19 T23N R03W Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: herbaceous Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: A Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID:Wetland Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S=shrub; H = herb;V=vine) Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Ranunculus nepens H FACW Equisetum fluviatile H OBL Oenanthe sannentosa H OBL Lysichiton americanum H OBL HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: %of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC: >50% Check all indicators that apply and explain below: ❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database El Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Rationale for decision/Remarks: >50% of dominants OBL, FACW & FAC HYDROLOGY iIs it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No „j Based on: July Drift Lines: No Drainage Patterns: Yes Depth of inundation: Up to 2" Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No Channels <12n.: No Depth to free water In pit: 4 inches FAC Neutral: Yes Water-stained Leaves: No Depth to saturated soil: 0" Check all that apply&explain below: Other(explain): ❑ Stream, lake or gage data X Aerial photographs ❑ Other Wetland hydrology present? Yes Rationale for decision/remarks: Primary and secondary indicators present I SOILS Map Unit Name: Gk-Grove gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained Field observations confirm mapped type? No Profile Description Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile II' inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description) 0-12 10YR3/1 muck �I G Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ❑ Histosol ❑Matrix chroma<_2 with mottles ❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions ❑Sulfidic Odor ❑High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ❑Reducing Conditions ❑ Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List X Gle ed or Low-Chroma =1 matrix El Other(explain in remarks Hydric soils present?Yes Rationale for decision/Remarks:Gleyed muck 1 Wetland Determination I Hydrophytic vegetation present?Yes Hydric soils present? Yes Wetland hydrology present?Yes Is the sampling int within a wetland?Yes Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators present for all three wetland parameters. t NOTES: Plot located near in tact fence on southern portion of ownership. Revised 4197 'i !I I •i Routine Wetiand Determination DATA FORM 1 (ReVISOCO WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual Project/Site: Lillewsup hatchery Date: 7/26/07 Applicant/owner: Long Live The Kings County: Mason Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA S/T/R: 19 T23N R03W Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed(atypical situation)? No Transect ID: A Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Upland Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S=shrub; H = herb;V=vine) Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Alnus rubra T FAC Acer circinatum S FACU Acer macrophyllum T FACU Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ I Polstichum munitum S FACU I Oemleria cerasiformis S FACU Vaccinium ovatum S FACU HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: %of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC: < 50% Check all indicators that apply and explain below: ❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiologicaltreproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database ❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Rationale for decision/Remarks: <50%of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No Based on: July Drift Lines: No Drainage Patterns: No Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No Channels<12n: Depth to free water in pit: > 16 FAC Neutral: No Water-stained Leaves: No I I Depth to saturated soil: > 16 Check all that apply&explain below: Other(explain): ❑ Stream, lake or gage data X Aerial photographs ❑ Other Wetland hydrology present? No Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators present SOILS Map Unit Name: GK-Grove gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: somewhat excessively drained Field observations confirm mapped type?Yes I Profile Description Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile inches unsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match descriDt o 0-4 5YR3/3 Gravelly Sandy Loam 4-16 5YR4/3 sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ❑ Histosol ❑ Matrix chroma<_2 with mottles ❑Histic Epipedon ❑Mg or Fe Concretions ❑Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ❑ Reducing Conditions ❑Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List ❑Gle ed or Low-Chroma =1 matrix Other(explain in remarks `3 Hydric soils present?No a Rationale for decision/Remarks:No indicators present. Wetland Determination Hydrophytic vegetation present?No Hydric soils present? No Wetland hydrology present?No Is the sampling int within a wetland?No RationalelRemarks: Positive wetland indicators not present for all three wetland parameters. NOTES: Revised 4197 I I q t Routine Wetland Determination DATA FORM 1 (Revh;OC9 WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual Project/Site: Lillewaup Hatchery Date: 7/27/2007 Applicant/owner. Long Live The Kings County: Mason Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA S/T/R: 19 T23N R03W Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: herbaceous Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: #e-> Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID:Wetland Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S=shrub; H = herb;V=vine) Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Dominant Plant S ies *Stratum %cover Indicator Alnus rubra T FAC Lysichiton americanum H OBL Equisetum fluviatile H OBL Oenanthe sarmentosa H OBL Athyrrum fflix-femine H FAC Ranunculus repens H FACW Urticula dioica H FAC HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: %of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC: > 50% Check all indicators that apply and explain below: ❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database ❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Rationale for decision/Remarks: >50%of dominants OBL, FACW &FAC HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No Based on: July Drift Lines: Yes Drainage Patterns: Yes Depth of inundation: Up to 8" Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No 1 Channels<12it: No Depth to free water in pit: 4 inches FAC Neutral: Yes Water-stained Leaves: No s Depth to saturated soil: 0" Check all that apply&explain below: Other(explain): ❑ Stream, lake or gage data X Aerial photographs ❑ Other Wetland hydrology present? Yes Rationale for decision/remarks: Primary and secondary indicators present SOILS Map Unit Name: Gk-Grove gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained Field observations confirm mapped type? No Profile Description Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description) 0-12 10YR3/1 Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ❑ Histosol ❑Matrix chroma<2 with mottles ❑ Histic Epipedon ❑Mg or Fe Concretions ❑Sulfidic Odor ❑High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ❑ Reducing Conditions ❑ Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List X Gle ed or Low-Chroma =1 matrix Other(explain in remarks Hydric soils present?Yes Rationale for decision/Remarks:Gleyed muck Wetland Determination Hydrophytic vegetation present?Yes Hydric soils present? Yes Wetland hydrology present?Yes Is the sampling int within a wetland?Yes Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators present for all three wetland parameters. NOTES: Plot located near in tact fence on southern portion of ownership. Revised 4197 Routine Wetland Determination DATA FORM 1 (Revised WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual Project/Site: Lillewaup hatchery Date: 7/26/07 Applicantlowner. Long Live The Kings County: Mason Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA S/T/R: 19 T23N R03W Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed(atypical situation)? No Transect ID: B Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Upland Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S=shrub; H= herb;V=vine) Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Alnus rubra T FAC Corylus comuta S FACU Acermacrophyllum T FACU Rubus discolor S FACU Rubus spectabilis S FAC+ Polystichum munitum S FACU Oemlena cerasiformis S FACU Vaccinium ovatum S FACU HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: %of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC: < 50% Check all indicators that apply and explain below: ❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database ❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Rationale for decision/Remarks: <50%of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No Based on: July Drift Lines: No Drainage Patterns: No Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No Channels<12n.: Depth to free water in pit: > 16 FAC Neutral: No Water-stained Leaves: No i Depth to saturated soil: > 16 Check all that apply&explain below: Other(explain): ❑ Stream, lake or gage data X Aerial photographs ❑ Other j Wetland hydrology present? No Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators present SOILS Map Unit Name: GK-Grove gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: somewhat excessively drained Field observations confirm mapped type?Yes Profile Description Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description) 0-4 5YR3/3 Gravelly Sandy Loam 4-16 5YR4/3 sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ❑ Histosol ❑Matrix chrome 5 2 with mottles ❑ Histic Epipedon ❑Mg or Fe Concretions ❑Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ❑ Reducing Conditions ❑Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List ❑Gle ed or Low-Chrome =1 matrix E3 Other(explain in remarks Hydric soils present?No Rationale for decision/Remarks:No indicators present. Wetland Determination Hydrophytic vegetation present?No Hydric soils present? No Welland hydrology present?No Is the sampling int within a wetland?No Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators not present for all three wetland parameters. NOTES: Revised 4197 Routine Wetland Determination DATA FORM 1 (Revised WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual Project/Site: Lillewaup Hatchery Date: 7/27/2007 Applicant/owner. Long Live The Kings County: Mason Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA S/T/R: 19 T23N R03W Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: shrub Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: C Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID:Wetland Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S=shrub; H = herb;V=vine) Dominant Plant Species "Stratum %cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Alnus rubra T FAC Equisetum fluviat►7e H OBL Urticula dioica H FAC Athyrium Mix-femina H FAC Ranunculus mpens H FACW Lysichiton americanum H OBL HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: %of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC: >50% Check all indicators that apply and explain below: ❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database ❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain) I Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes Rationale for decision/Remarks: >50%of dominants OBL, FACW &FAC HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No Based on: July Drift Lines: Yes Drainage Patterns: Yes Depth of inundation: Up to 10" Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No Channels<12n: No Depth to free water in pit: 4 inches FAC Neutral: Yes Water-stained Leaves: No Depth to saturated soil: 0" Check all that apply&explain below: Other(explain): ❑ Stream, lake or gage data X Aerial photographs ❑ Other Wetland hydrology present? Yes Rationale for decision/remarks: Primary and secondary indicators present SOILS Map Unit Name: Gk-Grove gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained Field observations confirm mapped type? No Profile Description Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description) 0-12 10YR3/1 Silt loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ❑ Histosol ❑Matrix chroma 5 2 with mottles ❑Histic Epipedon ❑Mg or Fe Concretions ❑Sulfidic Odor ❑High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ❑ Reducing Conditions ❑ Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List X Gle ed or Low-Chroma(=1)matrix Other(explain in remarks Hydric soils present?Yes Rationale for decision/Remarks:Gleyed muck Wetland Determination Hydrophytic vegetation present?Yes Hydric soils present? Yes Wetland hydrology present?Yes Is the sampling int within a wetland?Yes Rationals/Remarks: Positive wetland Indicators present for all three wetland parameters. NOTES: Plot located near in tact fence on southem portion of ownership. Revised 4197 Routine Wetland Determination DATA FORM 1 (Revisoo WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual) Project/Site: Lillewaup hatchery Date: 7/26/07 Applicant/owner: Long Live The Kings County: Mason Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA S/T/R: 19 T23N R03W Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: Forested Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: C Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Upland Explanation of atypical or problem area: VEGETATION (For"strata, indicate T=tree; S=shrub; H = herb; V=vine) Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species 'Stratum %cover Indicator Alnus rubra T FAC Acer macrophyllum T FACU Rubus discolor S FAC+ Polystichum munitum S FACU Rubus spectabilis S FACU Urtica dioica S FAC- HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS: %of dominants OBL, FACW, &FAC: <50% Check all indicators that apply and explain below: ❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database ❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain) Hydrophytic vegetation present? No Rationale for decision/Remarks: <50%of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC HYDROLOGY Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No Based on: July Drift Lines: No Drainage Patterns: No Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No Channels<12n.: Depth to free water in pit: > 16 FAC Neutral: No Water-stained Leaves: No Depth to saturated soil: > 16 Check all that apply&explain below: Other(explain): ❑ Stream, lake or gage data X Aerial photographs ❑ Other Wetland hydrology present? No Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators present SOILS Map Unit Name: GK-Grove gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: somewhat excessively drained Field observations confirm mapped type?Yes Profile Description Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description) 0-4 5YR3/3 Gravelly Sandy Loam 4-16 5YR4/3 sandy loam Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply) ❑ Histosol ❑Matrix chroma<2 with mottles ❑ Histic Epipedon ❑Mg or Fe Concretions ❑Sulfidic Odor ❑High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils ❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils ❑ Reducing Conditions ❑Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List ❑Gle ed or Low-Chroma =1 matrix Other(explain in remarks Hydric soils present?No Rationale for decision/Remarks:No indicators present. Wetland Determination Hydrophytic vegetation present?No Hydric soils present? No Wetland hydrology present?No Is the sampling oint within a wetland?No Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators not present for all three wetland parameters. NOTES: Revised 4197 L APPENDIX B Soil Survey Text GROVE SERIES The Grove series consists of somewhat excessively drained, reddish-brown gravelly soils. It occupies the large glacial outwash plains. The Grove soils have developed from Vashon glacial drift, modified considerably by inclusions of local basaltic rock and mixed material from the Olympic Mountain glaciers. The rainfall ranges from 60 to 10 inches a year. The vegetation is coniferous forest, with an understory dominated by the lower growing mosses, kinnikinnick, and snowber ry, and these mixed with huckleberry, salal, and Oregon-grape. The droughtresistant manzanita is especially- common on the Grove soils. The cover is not so profuse nor so rank as that on the adjacent Shelton and Hoodsport soils. Logged areas restock slowly to Douglas-fir, and some pure stands of lodgepole pine are on these soils. The Grove soils occur in the western part of the county, in association with the Shelton and Hoodsport soils. Grove soils differ front the Everett soils farther east in their parent material and in having redder surface soil and subsoil. Grove gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes (Gk).-In places the surface soil and subsoil of this soil are 3 to 6 inches thinner than those of Grove gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes. Use and suitability.-The use of this soil is similar to that of Grove gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes. Like that soil, it is best suited to forestry. The soil is in capability subclass VIe;it is in site classes 4 and 5 for Douglas-fir. Grove gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes (Gh).-This soil occupies nearly level out-wash plain. In forested areas there is a 1- to 2-inch layer of needles, leaves, twigs, roots, and moss. The lower part is moderately decomposed and very dark grayish brown. The surface soil consists of reddish-brown, gravelly sandy loam, 6 inches thick. It is very friable, is single grained, and contains a few small, round shot. The upper part of this layer contains a few firm, irregular, more reddish aggregates. The next layer extends to depths ranging from 12 to 14 inches. It is similar to the surface soil, except that it is more gravelly, contains less shot,and the gravel is stained and coated with dark reddish-brown fine material. The subsoil is a light-brown, very gravelly loamy sand. It is loose, is single grained, and contains no shot. At depths ranging from 24 to 32 inches, the subsoil grades to the substratum of loose gravel, cobbles, and sand. The dominant colors are gray. grayish brown, yellowish brown, and light brown. Much of the gravel is highly stained with nearly black and reddish-brown material. In places the upper 24 inches of the substratum is compact or weakly cemented. Included with this soil are about 250 acres occurring on gently sloping fans,colluvial slopes,and terraces. The parent material of the included soils is a mixture of local basic igneous rock and mixed glacial material. The profile is similar to that of Grove gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes, but it differs in being brown and yellowish brown, more variable in texture and in degree of stratification, and in containing much angular and subangular gravel. This soil is strongly to medium acid and less acid with depth. Surface runoff is very slow because of the rapid permeability of the soil and the smooth topography. Use and suitability.-Except for a very small acreage in farms producing mainly for the farm household, this soil is in forest, a use for which it is best suited. Because of droughtiness and low fertility, it is not suitable for hay or pasture. In suitability, this soil is similar to the Everett gravelly sandy loam, 0 to 5 percent slopes, except that it is in classes 3 and 4 for Douglas-fir, partly PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372- 2421•boad40@1a peoplepc.com because of the higher rainfall. Areas in young Douglas-fir are managed for Christmas trees. The soil is in capability subclass VIs. PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372- 2421•boa&o@peoplepc.com Appendix C Washington State Wetland Rating System Form PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372- t 2421•boad40@peoplepc.com WETLAND RATING FORM—WESTERN WASHINGTON Name of wetland(if known): LLTK Wetland Delineation Location: SEC: 19 TWNSHP:23N_ RNGE:3W (attach map with outline of wetland to rating form) Person(s)Rating Wetland: H.Lane Affiliation: TWC Date of site visit: 7/26/07 SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I II X III IV Category I= Score>70 Score for Water Quality Functions 28 Category II= Score 51 -69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 16 Category III= Score 30—50 Score for Habitat Functions 22 Category IV= Score<30 TOTAL Score for Functions 66 Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland I II X _ Does not apply Final Category(choose the"highest'category from above") II Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated. Estuarine De ressional X Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine Bog Lake-fringe Mature Forest Slope Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above X Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below? If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland. SP1. Has the wetland been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species (TIE species)? X For the purposes of this rating system, "documented"means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2. Has the wetland been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented"means the X wetland is on the appropriate state database. SP3. Does the wetland contain individuals ofPriority species listed.by the WDFW or the state? X SP4. Does the wetland have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example,the wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program,the Critical Areas Ordinance,or X in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland beingrated. ated The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key below. See p.24 for more detailed instructions on classifying wetlands. Wedand Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 1 of 8 Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington Wetland Name: LLTK Wetland Date: 7/26/07 1. Are the water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides(i.e. except during floods)? NO—go to 2 YES—the wetland class is Tidal Fringe If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt(parts per thousand)? YES—Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO—Saltwater Tidal Fringe(Estuarine) If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Rtverine wetlands. If it is a Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions,and this separation is being kept in this revision. To maintain consistency between editions,the term"Estuarine"wetland is kept. Please note,however,that the characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed(see p. 2. Is the topography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source(>90%)of water to it. 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 wetland meet both of the following criteria? The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water(without any vegetation on the surface)where at least 20 acres(Sha)are permanently inundated(ponded or flooded); At least 30%of the open water area is deeper than 6.6(2 m)? NO—go to 4 YES—The wetland class is Lake-fringe(Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria? X The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual). The water flows through the wetland in one direction(unidirectional)and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow,or in a swale without distinct banks. X The water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO—go to$ YES—The wetland class is Slope 5. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel,where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The flooding should occur at least once every two years,on the average,to answer"yes". The wetland can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO—go to 6 YES—The wetland class is Riverfae 6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface,at some time of the year. This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO—go to 7 YES—The wetland class is Depresalonai 7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depressional and no stream or river running through it and providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched,but has no obvious natural outlet. No—go to 8 YES—The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. 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. Sometimes we find characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland. 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 being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10%classify the wetland using the first class. Slope+Riverine Riverine Slope+De ressional Depressional Slo e+Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressionaj+Rives along stream within bomdary ftrcsWonal De ressional+Lake-fringe Depressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special freshwater wetland characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary,classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 2 of 8 D 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality. (seep 38) t ;" 9 D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: • Wetland is a depression with no surface water outlet............................................................points=3 • Wetland has an intermittently flowing,or highly constricted,outlet.....................................points=2 1 • Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet.........................................................................points= l • Wetland is flat and has no obvious outlet and/or outlet is a ditch.......................................... pints= 1 2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay,organic,or smells anoxic(hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). YES points=4 NO points=0 4 D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation(emergent,shrub,and/or forest class): • Wetland has persistent,ungrazed vegetation>=95%of area...............................................points=5 • Wetland has persistent,ungrazed vegetation>_ %2 of area...................................................points=3 5 • Wetland has persistent,ungrazed vegetation>= 1/10 of area...............................................points= 1 • Wetland has persistent un azed vegetation< 1/10 of area.................................................. pints=0 D 1.4 Characteristics o seasona pop mg or mun ation: This is the area o the wetland that is pop a or at least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is ermanent y ponded. Estimate area as the average condition 5 out of 10 years. NOTE: See text f r indicators of seasonal and permanent inundation. 4 • Area seasonally ponded is> 1/2 total area of wetland...........................................................points=4 • Area seasonally ponded is> 1/4 total area of wetland...........................................................points=2 • Area seasonallyponded is< 1/4 total area of wetland...........................................................points=0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 14 D 2 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 44) Answer YES if you know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or surface water coming into the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams,lakes or groundwater downgradient from the wetland? Note which of the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants. Grazing in the wetland or within 150 ft Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft.of wetland A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas,residential areas,farmed fields,roads,or clear-cut logging X Residential,urban areas,golf courses are within 150 ft. of wetland Multiplier Wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multi lier is 1 ♦ TOTAL—Water Ouality Functions Multiply the score from D1 by D2• then add score to table on P. 1 28 D 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.46) D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland: • Wetland has no surface water outlet.............................................. points=4 • Wetland has an intermittently flowing,or highly constricted,outlet................................... pints=2 1 • Wetland is flat and has no obvious outlet and/or outlet is a small ditch.................................points= 1 • Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet.........................................................................voints=0 D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. • Marks of ponding are 3 ft. or more above the surface...........................................................points=7 • The wetland is a"headwater wetland"................................. ...........points=5 • Marks of ondin between 2 ft.to<3 ft.from surface................................................................. • M R.te► .1 ie........ points=5 3 ............................................................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......................... ....... oints=0 ......................................................... D 3.3 Contribution-of—wetland to storage m t e watershed: Estimate the ratio o upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland itself. • The area of the basin is less than 10 times the are of wetland...............................................points=5 • The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the wetland..................... ...points=3 3 .................... • The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the wetland....................................points=0 • Wetland is in the FLATS class basin=the wetland by definition ......................................points=5 Total for D 3 Add the Points in the boxes above 8 D 4 Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p. 49) Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage,or reduction in water velocity,it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate, tide gate,flap valve,reservoir etc.OR you estimate that more than 90%of the water in the wetland is from groundwater. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply. X Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems. Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or Multiplier stream that has flooding problems Other 2 YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 ♦ I TOTAL—Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D3 by 134;then add score to table on p. 1 16 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 3 of 8 H 1 Does the wetland have the aotential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure(see P. 73): Check the types of vegetation classes present(as defined by Cowardin) if the class covers more than 10%of the area of the wetland or 114 acre. Aquatic Bed _. Emergent plants Scrub/shrub(areas where shrubs have>30%cover) 1 X Forested(areas where trees have>30%cover) X Forested areas have 3 out of 5 strata(canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs,herbaceous,moss/ground-cover Add the number of vegetation types that qualify. If you have: 4 types or more...points=4 3 types..points=2 2 es................points= 1 1 type....points=0 H 1.2 Hydro periods(see p.74): Check the types of water regimes(hydroperiods)present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10%of the wetland or 114 acre to count(see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). X Permanently flooded or inundated X Seasonally flooded or inundated 4 or more types present.....points=3 X Occasionally flooded or inundated 3 types present..................points=2 3 Saturated only 2 types present..................points= 1 X Permanently flowing stream or river in,or adjacent to,the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in,or adjacent to,the wetland Lake-fringe wetland.................=2 points Freshwater tidal wetland.........=2 points H 1.3 Richness of Plant Species(seep. 76): 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) You do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian Milfoil, reed canarygrass,purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle. If you counted: > 19 species.......................points=2 5— 19 species....................points= 1 1 List species below(optional): <5 species.........................points=0 H 1.4 Interspersion of Habitats(seep. 77): Decided from the diagrams below whether interspersion between types of vegetation(described in H1.1),or vegetation types and unvegetated areas(can include open water or mudflats)is high,medium, low,or none. O None=0 points Low= i point Moderate=2 points 2 [npanan braided channels] High =3 points Note: If you have 4 or more vegetation types or 3 vegetation types and open water,the rating is always "hi " H 1.5 Special Habitat Features(see p. 78): Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of point AMERN WWI', you put into the next column. X Large,downed,woody debris within the wetland(>4 in.diameter and 6 ft. long) Standing snags(diameter at the bottom>4 inches)in the wetland _ Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft.(2m)and/or overhanging vegetation extends at least 3.3 ft.(lm)over a stream for at least 33 ft. (lOm) 3 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 X At least 1/4 acre o thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated(structures for egg-la tng by am hibians) X Invasive plants cover less than 25%of the wetland azea in each stratum of plants H 1 TOTAL Score—potential for providing habitat Add the points in the column above 10 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 4 of 8 rrw• 1� � _.._ $2 Does the wetland have the oouortunity to provide habitat for many species? � « ` H 2.1 Buffers(see P. 81): Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of"undisturbed". 100m(330 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water >95%of circumference. No developed areas within undisturbed part of buffer (relatively undisturbed also means no grazing). points=5 X 100m(330 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas or open water >50%circumference....................................................................................................points=4 50m(170 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water >95%circumference....................................................................................................points=4 100m(330 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water >25%circumference....................................................................................................points=3 3 _ 50m(170 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water for>50%circumference...............................................................................................points=3 If buffer does not meet any of the three criteria above: No paved areas(except paved trails)or buildings within 25m(80 ft)of wetland> 95%circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK..................................points=2 No paved areas of buildings within 50m of wetland for>50%circumference. Light to moderate grazing or lawns are OK...................................................................points=2 Heavygrazing in buffer.................................................................................................points=1 _ Vegetated buffers are<2m wide(6.6 ft)for more than 95%circumference (e.g.tilled fields,paving,basalt bedrock extend to edge of wetland) points=0 Buffer does not meet any of the criteria above...............................................................points=1 H 2.2 Corridors and Connections(seep. 82) H 2.2.1 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor(either riparian or upland)that is at least 150 ft.wide,has at least a 30%cover of shrubs,forest or native undisturbed prairie,that connects to estuaries,other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 250 acres in size? (Dams in riparian corridors, heavily used gravel roads,paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES=4 points(go to H 2.3) NO=go to H 2.2.2 H.2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and unbroken vegetated corridor(either riparian 2 or upland)that is at least 50 ft.wide,has at least 30%cover of shrubs or forest,and connects to estuaries,other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 acres in size? OR a lake- fringe wetland,if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in the question above? VIM—2 points(go to H 2.3) NO=go to H 2.2.3 H.2.2.3 Is the wetland: • Within 5 mi(8km)of a brackish or salt water estuary OR • Within 3 miles of a large field or pasture(>40 acres)OR YES= 1 point • Within 1 mile of a lake greater than 20 acres? NO=0 points Wetland Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 5 of 8 H 2.3 Near or adiacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW(see p. 83): Which of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft.(100m)of the wetland? (See text for a more detailed description of these priority habitats.) X Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.8 ha(2 acres) Cliffs: Greater than 7.6m(25 ft)high and occurring below 5000 ft. Old-growth 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 20 trees/ha(8 trees/acre)>81cm (32 in)dbh or>200 years of age. X Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53cm(21 in)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. Prairies: Relatively undisturbed areas(as indicated by dominance of native plants)where greases j and/or forbs form the natural climax plant community. _ Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15—2.Om(0.5—6.5 ft), composed of basalt,andesite,and/or sedimentary rock,including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. j Caves: A naturally occurring cavity,recess,void,or system of interconnected passages. !' Oregon white Oak: Woodlands stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy 4 coverage of the oak component of the stand is 25%. Urban Natural Open Space: A priority species resides within or is adjacent to the open space and uses it for breeding and/or regular feeding;and/or the open space functions as a corridor connecting other priority habitats,especially those that would otherwise be isolated;and/or the open space is an isolated remnant of natural habitat larger than 4 ha(10 acres)and is surrounded by urban development. X Estuary/Estuary-like: Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands,usually semi-enclosed by land but with open,partly obstructed or sporadic access to the open ocean,and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff from the land. The salinity may be periodically increased above that of the open ocean by evaporation. Along some low-energy coastlines there is appreciable dilution of sea water. Estuarine habitat extends upstream and landward to where ocean-derived salts measure less than 0.5 ppt.during the period of average annual low flow. Includes both estuaries and lagoons. X Marine/Estuarine Shorelines: Shorelines include the intertidal and subtidal zones of beaches,and may also include the backshore and adjacent components of the terrestrial landscape(e.g.,cliffs, snags,mature trees,dunes,meadows)that are important to shoreline associated fish and wildlife and that contribute to shoreline function(e.g., sand/rock/log recruitment,nutrient contribution,erosion control). If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats.=4 points If wetland has 1 priority habit...= 1 point If wetland has 2 priority habitats..............=3 points No habitats...............................=0 points H 2.4 Wetland Landscape: Choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile,and the connections between them are (seep. 85) relatively undisturbed(light grazing between wetlands OK,as is lake shore with some if boating,but connections should NOT be bisected by paved roads,fill,fields,or other development.......................................................................................................................points=5 • The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with little disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlandswithin 1/2 mile.....................................................................................................points=5 3 • There are at least 3 other wetlands within 1/2 mile,BUT the connections between them are disturbed............................................................................................................................points=3 • The wetland fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetlands within 1/2 mile points=3 • There is at least 1 wetland within 1/2 mile...........................................................................points=2 ' • There are no wetlands within 1/2 mile.................................................................................points=0 H 2 TOTAL Score—opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores in the columns above 7 ♦ Total Score for Habitat Functions Add the points for H 1 and H 2;then record the result on p. 1 22 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 6 of 8 CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Ci Estuarine wetlands? (see p.87) Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? X The dominant water regime is tidal, X Vegetated,and X With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES =Go to SC 1.1 NO SC 1.1 Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge,National Park,National Estuary Reserve,Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational,Environmental,or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332- 30-151? Cat. 1 YES =Category I NO=go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following conditions? YES =Category I N4=COMMY II Cat.I X The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking,ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing,and has less than 10%cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp,.are only species that cover more than 10%of the wetland,then the wetland should be given a dual rating(I/II). Cat.H The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a Category 1. Do not,however,exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. Dual At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft.buffer of shrub,forest,or un-grazed Ratio or un-mowed grassland g The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, NI or contiguous freshwater wetlands. C2 Natural Heritage Wetlands (see p. 88) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural heritage Program/DNR as either high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support state Threatened,Endangered,or Sensitive plant species. SC 2.1 Is the wetland being rated in a Section/Township/Range that contains a natural heritage wetland? (This question is used to screen out most sites before you need to contact WNHPIDNR.) S/T/R information from Appendix D or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site YES Contact WNHP/DNR(see p. 88)and go to SC 2.2 NO X SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? Cat I YES =Category 1 NO X C3 Boas (seep. 88) Does the wetland(or part of the wetland)meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below to identify if the wetland is a bog. If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its function. 1. Does the wetland have organic soil horizons(i.e. layers of organic soil),either peats or mucks,that compose 16 inches or more of the first 32 inches of soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)? YES=go to question 3 NO=go to question 2 2. Does the wetland have organic soils,either peats or mucks that are less than 16 inches deep over bedrock,or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash,or that are floating on a lake or pond? YES=go to question 3 NO-is Sot a 1009 for purpose of rating 3. Does the wetland have more than 70%cover of mosses at ground level,AND other plants,if present,consist of the"bog"species listed in Table 3 as a significant component of the vegetation (more than 30%of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? YES=Is a bog for purpose of rating NO=go to question 4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hold dug at least 16"deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the"bog"plant species in Table 3 are present,the wetland is a bog. 4. Is the wetland forested(>30%cover)with sitka spruce,subalpine fir,western red cedar,western hemlock,lodgepole pine,quaking aspen,Englemann's spruce,or western white pine. WITH any of the species(or combination of species)on the bog species plant list in Table 3 as a significant component of the ground cover(> 30%coverage of the total shrub/herbaceous cover)? Cat.I YES=Category I NO=Is not a bog for purpose of rating Wetland Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 7 of 8 C4 Forested Wetlands (seep. 96) Does the wetland have at least 1 acre of forest that meet one of these criteria for the 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 function. Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade Crest) Stands of at least two three species forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings;with at least 8 trees/acre(20 trees/hectare) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height(dbh)of 32 inches(81 cm or more). NOTE: The criterion for dbh is based on measurements for upland forests. Two-hundred year old trees in wetlands will often have a smaller dbh because their growth rates are often slower. The DFW criterion is and"OR"so old-growth forests do not necessarily have to have trees of this diameter. Mature forests: (west of the Cascade Crest) Stands where the largest trees are 80—200 years old OR have an average diameters(dbh)exceeding 21 inches(53 cm);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. Cat.I YES=Category I NO=X C5 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons(see p. 92) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? The wetland lies in a depressional adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks gravel banks,shingle,or, less frequently,rocks The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains surface water that is saline or brackish(>0.5 ppt)during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon(needs to be measured near the bottom) YES=Go to SC 5.1 NO X not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking,ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing)and has less than 20%cover of invasive plant species(see list of invasive species on p. 74). At least 3/4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft.buffer of shrub,forest,or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. Cat.I The wetland is larger than 1/10 acre(4350 square ft.) YES=Category I NO =Category II Cat.II C6 Interdunal Wetlands(seep. 94) Is the wetland west of the 1889 line(also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES=Go to SC 6.1 NO X not an interdunal wetland for rating If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: • Long Beach Peninsula--lands west of SR 103 • Grayland-Westport--lands west of SR 105 • Ocean Shores-Copalis—lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 SC 6.1 Is the wetland one acre or larger,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is one acre or larger? YES=Category II NO =go to SC 6.2 Cat.II SC 6.2 Is the wetland between 0.1 and 1 acre,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and I acre? YES=Category III Cat.III Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics ♦ Choose the "highest"rating if wetland falls into several categories, and record on p. 1. If you answered NO for all types enter"Not Applicable"on p. 1 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington(11/04) Page 8 of 8 r Martig Engineering P.O. Box 11850 Olympia,WA 98508-1850 (360) 754-9687 Fax(360) 705-0789 October 9, 2007 PRESENTATION TO BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SUBJECT IMMEDIATE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT FOR SECURITY FENCE PURPOSE TO HALT THE POACHING OF 2-YEAR &4-YEAR OLD ADULT ENDANGERED SPECIES STEELHEAD TROUT LOCATION LONG LIVE THE KINGS LILLIWAUP HATCHERY(Constructed in 1993) 600 N LILLIWAUP STREET PROBLEM LITERAL COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY ORDINANCE REQUIRED STUDIES INCLUDING: 1. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT—ORDINANCE 17.01.100 E. 5.(6) 2. WETLAND DELINEATION REVIEWS 3. HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEWS .. r 1 IYI II mlrifi1170I�firYnllYYririar�wj.+w---__. t • DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEATTLE DISTRICT. CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 3755 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-2255 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Regulatory Branch SEP $ 1992 Long Live the Kings c/o Wayne Daley Kramer, Chin & Mayo, Inc. 1917 First Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101-1027 Reference: 92-4-00819 Long Live the Kings Dear Mr. Daley: We have evaluated your proposal to discharge fill material into approximately 0.5 acres of headwaters wetlands associated with the Lilliwaup Creek drainage located in Section 19, Township 23 North, Range 3 West, near Lilliwaup Falls, Mason County, Washington. Department of the Army regulations dated November 22, 1991, authorize certain activities under nationwide permits. Appendix A to Part 330, Paragraph B (26) of these regulations authorizes discharges of dredged or fill material into nontidal rivers, streams, and their lakes and impoundments, including adjacent wetlands, that are located above the headwaters where the average annual flow is less than 5 cubic feet per second. Similar discharges are also allowed into other nontidal waters of the United States that are not part of a surface tributary system to interstate waters or navigable waters of the United States. The discharge must not cause the loss or substantial adverse modification of more than one (1) acre of wetlands. Based on the results of our evaluation, the proposed fill is authorized by this nationwide permit. We will not require an individual Department of the Army permit, provided the enclosed nationwide permit conditions are met. If additional placement of fill in waters of the United States, including wetlands, is contemplated on this site, you must contact us concerning any additional permit requirements. The following Department of the Army regional conditions apply to this project: 1. The discharge of dredged or fill material which would cause the loss of greater than 2 acres is not authorized by this NWP. An individual permit application must be submitted for discharges greater than 2 acres. 2. The discharge is not authorized in documented habitat for state listed j endangered, threatened or sensitive animal species. 4 P i -2- Prior to placing fill, you must contact the Washington State Department of Ecology to determine whether documented habitat for the state listed species is present. If present, this nationwide permit is not valid and you must contact us again to determine permit requirements. Please contact the Department of Ecology: State Nationwide Permit Coordinator Department of Ecology PV-11, P.O. Box 4770 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 telephone (206) 438-7514 or 459-6038 This verification will be valid for two years from the date of this letter or until the nationwide permit is modified, reissued, or revoked. Nothing in this letter shall be construed as excusing you from compliance with other Federal, State, and local statutes, ordinances, and regulations which may pertain to this work. If you have any questions concerning the requirements of nationwide permits, please contact Ms. Gail Terzi at the letterhead address or by telephone at (206) 764-3495. Sincerely, Robert H. Marti Chief, Processing Section Enclosure i R i i NATIONWIDE PERMIT CONDITIONS General Regional Condition for the State of Washington applicable to all nationwide permits NWP : Any activity or work authorized under these NWP shall not adversely impact onsite mitigation or restoration efforts. 33 CFR Part 330, Appendix A, Section C. GENERAL CONDITIONS: The following general conditions must be followed in order for any authorization by a NWP to be valid: 1. Navigation. No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. 2. Proper maintenance. Any structure or fill authorized shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety. 3. Erosion and siltation controls. Appropriate erosion and siltation controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. 4. Aquatic life movements. No activity may substantially disrupt the movement of those species of 'aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species which normally migrate through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. 5. Equipment. Heavy equipment working in wetlands must be placed on mats or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 6. Regional and case-by-case conditions. The activity must comply with any regional conditions which may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4(e)) and any case specific conditions added by the Corps of Engineers (Corps). 7. Wild and scenic rivers. No activity may occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic River System; or in a river officially designated by Congress as a "study river" for possible inclusion in the system, while the river is in an official study status. Information on Wild and Scenic Rivers may be obtained from the National Park Service and the U.S. Forest Service. 8. Tribal rights. No activity or its operation may impair reserved tribal rights, including, but not limited to, reserved water rights and treaty fishing and hunting rights. j 9. Water quality certification. In certain States, an individual State water quality certification must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(c)). f F k E (b) The notification must be in writing and include the following information and any required fees: (1) Name, address, and telephone number of the prospective permittee; (2) Location of the proposed project; (3) Brief description of the proposed proiect; the project's purpose; direct and indirect adverse environmental effects the project would cause; any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s) , or individual permit(S) used or intended to be used to authorize any part of the proposed project or any related activity; (4) Where required by the terms of the NWP, a delineation of affected special aquatic sites, including wetlands; and (5) A statement that the prospective permittee has contacted: (i) The USFWS/NMFS regarding the presence of any federally listed (or proposed for listing) endangered or threatened species or critical habitat in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project; and any available information provided by those agencies. (The prospective permittee may contact Corps District Offices for USFWS/NMFS agency contacts and lists of critical habitat.) .(ii) The SHPO regarding the presence of any historic properties in the permit area that may be affected by the proposed project; and the available information, if any, provided by that agency. (c) The standard individual permit application form (Form ENG 4345) may by used as the notification but must clearly indicate that it is a predischarge notification (PDN) and must include all of the information required in (b)(1)-(5) of General Condition 13. (d) In reviewing an activity under the notification procedure, the District Engineer will first determine whether the activity will result in more than minimal individual or cumulative adverse environmental effects or will be contrary to the public interest. The prospective permittee may, at his option, submit a proposed mitigation plan with the predischarge notification to expedite the process and the District Engineer will consider any optional mitigation the applicant has included in the proposal in determining whether the net adverse environmental effects of the proposed work are minimal. The District Engineer will consider any comments from Federal and State agencies concerning the proposed activity's compliance with the terms and conditions of F the NWP and the need for mitigation to reduce the proiect's adverse environ- mental effects to a minimal level. The District Engineer will upon receipt of t a notification provide immediately (e.g., facsimile transmission, overnight mail, or other expeditious manner) a copy to the appropriate offices of the USFWS, State natural resource or water quality agency, EPA, and, if appropri- ate, the NMFS. With the exception of NWP 37, these agencies will then have 5 calendar days from the date the material is transmitted to telephone the 3 used to offset the acreage of wetland losses that would occur in order to meet the acreage limits of some of the NWP's (e.g. , 5 acres of wetlands cannot be created to change a 6-acre loss of wetlands to a 1-acre loss; however, the 5 created acres can be used to reduce the impacts of the 6-acre loss) . SECTION 404 ONLY CONDITIONS: In addition to the general conditions, the following conditions apply only to activities that involve the discharge of dredged or fill material and must be followed in order for authorization by the NWP's to be valid: 1. Water supply intakes. No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur in the proximity of a public water supply intake except where the discharge is for repair of the public water supply intake structures or adjacent bank stabilization. , 2. Shellfish production. No discharge of dredged or fill material may occur in areas of concentrated shellfish production, unless the discharge is directly related to a shellfish harvesting activity authorized by NWP 4. 3. Suitable material. No discharge of dredged or fill material may consist of unsuitable material (e.g. , trash, debris, car bodies, etc.) and material discharged must be free from toxic pollutants in toxic amounts (see Section 307 of the Clean Water Act) . 4. Mitigation. Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States must be minimized or avoided to the maximum extent practicable at the project site (i.e., onsite) , unless the District Engineer has approved a compensation mitigation plan for the specific regulated activity. 5. Spawning areas. Discharges in spawning areas during spawning seasons . must be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. 6. Obstruction of high flows. To the maximum extent practicable, discharges must not permanently restrict orimpede the passage of normal or expected high flows or cause the relocation of the water (unless the primary purpose of the fill is to impound waters). 7. Adverse impacts from impoundments. If the discharge creates an impoundment of water, adverse impacts on the aquatic system caused by the accelerated passage of water and/or the restriction of its flow shall be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. 8. Waterfowl breeding areas. Discharges into breeding areas for migratory waterfowl must be avoided to thermaximum extent practicable. 9. Removal of temporary fills. Any temporary fills must be removed in their entirety and the affected areas returned to their pre-existing . elevation. BM-7; NPDCOND 5 STATF OF, o � 4 m x W� 2` O O 1889 a Y STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8711 • (206) 459-6000 September 11, 1992 Long Live the Kings c/o Wayne Daley Kramer, Chin & Mayo., Inc. 1917 First Avenue Seattle, WA 98101-1027 RE: NATIONWIDE PERMIT VERIFICATION #26 92-4-00819, Long Live the Kings Dear Mr. Daley: Thank you for the information regarding Water Quality Certification for the Lilliwaup Creek Drainage project under nationwide permit #26, Discharge into Headwaters and Isolated Waters. The proposed work entails placing fill material into 0.5 acres of wetlands in Mason County. Sandra Manning of my staff has checked the list of endangered, threatened and sensitive species and the location of the project, Section 19, Township 23N, Range 3W, is not documented as habitat for these species. This agency verifies that the project complies with State 401 requirements for nationwide permit #26 (attached) . However, if the project is within shoreline jurisdiction, the applicant must contact their local governmental authority and comply with all Shoreline Management Act requirements in order to be in compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act. The project may proceed as indicated in the Corps letter dated September 3, 1992 that was sent to Ecology. Future fill that exceeds a total of one acre, placed into wetlands at this site will require a Water Quality Certification from Ecology. Contact Sandra Manning at (206) 438-7514. Please note this certification does not exempt, and is provisional upon compliance with other statutes and codes administered by federal, state and local agencies. Sincerely, C_ c / Mar'a Peeler, Supervisor Permit Coordination Unit Environmental Review MVP.slm cc: COE I 0404, s 3 ^I NWP 26. Headwaters and Isolated Waters Discharges 1. The discharge of dredged or fill material affecting up to 1 (one) acre is authorized in headwaters or isolated waters except in documented habitat for State listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive animal species. 2 . The discharge of dredged or fill material affecting 1 (one) to 2 (two) acres in headwaters and isolated waters requires individual State water quality certification. 3 . An individual Corps Section 404 permit and State water quality certification are required for: a. Discharges of dredged or fill material affecting more than 2 (two) acres in headwaters and isolated waters. b. Discharges of dredged or fill material into documented habitat for State listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive animal species. I 7 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PERMIT TO APPROPRIATE PUBUC WATERS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON a Surface Water Aee wA:,eaadenu.aal er Prw:e:am ee ChWw 117.tarn el We *V"In 1917.OW uee wa ft#_SW end"K*N end,e9e.6— trw C+Osanent ee Eeob9y.1 ❑ Ground Water p�ew.ea Ma ,.v �achewso.u. dw.++aaaisd&ow rmemw d9"non-e1.ow.uo. PFMIY DATE APP=11M NUMBER PEAW MAAIER CERTIFICATE►HIRER Jaruary 17, 1991 IS2-27987 S2-27987 P NAME Lilliwaup Trust AWFUM 0114111011 JUAM com 1201 Third Box 7C Seattle Washintet n 981011--3009 The applicant i4 pursuant to the Report of Erandnation which has been accepted by the applicant,hereby granted a permit to approp i. the folloning described public waters of the State of Washington,subject to existing rights and to the lintitadons and provisions set 1 herein. PUBLIC WATERS TO BE APPROPRIATED SOURCE Beardsley Creek IMNAW OF JF SURFACE WAM" Lilliwaup Creek MAXMRMA OUMC FEET PER SECOND MAIWLM GALLONS PHI M"M MA7W N ACR&FEU PER YUR 2.5 11810 *WMTY.TYPE OF USE.PMW OF USE ' 1810 acre-feet per year Fish propagation Year-round, as needed LOCATION OF DIVERSION/WtTHDRAWAL 300 feet north and 600 feet west of the center of Section 19. i� LOCATM%TITAN RMALLEST LBOX SLECAMOM SEO110N TOWN6/BP N. RAWL fL OR WJ W.M. WAM ODUNIY SE'/.NWI/ 19 23 3W Mason RECORDEEPLA TY "r Lot aOlyL OF WA NAAW OF FLAT OR AOOIIOM 4 3 46 2 LEGAL.DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ON WHICH WATER IS TO BE USED That part of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter and of Government L.ot 6 of Section 19,T. 23 1 R.3 W.W.M., in Mason County, Washington, described as follows: COMMENCING at the southwest corner of vacated Lot 3 in Block 46 of Lilliwaup Falls as per plat.there recorded in Volume 2 of Plats, page 10; thence east along the south line of said lot a distance of 83.31 feet the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing east along said south line and line extended 350.00 feet to point on the south line of Lot 16 in Block 47 of said plat;thence north,parallel with the east line of said Bla 4" 225.00 feet; thence west 372.09 feet to the bank of Lilliwaup River; thence southeasterly along said riv batik 226.08 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. PERMIT DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORKS concrete intake structure with a 600 long, pve gravity pipe leauing to a hatchery building,up to twelve cubic foot capacity tanks/raceways, a '/4 acre rearing pond, and an eeluent-setting pond. DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE eEuw rnoJ=n TM DATE: oo r►erE PaoJECT W"M DATE: WAMP PVT To FULL UBE Ev TM DATE: March 1, 1993 March 1, 1994 March 1, 1995 PROVISIONS The issuance of this permit, and subsequent certificate of water right as herein applied for,shall be subject tc preexisting downstream rights. The permit is issued subject to Washington Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife hydraulic project approval The intake shall be screened at all times in accordance with Department of Fisheries and Department o Wildlife screening criteria. The rate of diversion is limited to a maximum of 2 5 cfs. Streamflow of Lilliwaup Creek shall be monitorec continuously. Whenever streamflow values fall below 42 cfs, waters diverted from Beardsley Creek shall bt pumped back to the confluence to eliminate the bypass reach. The Permittee is advised that notice of proof of appropriation of water (under which the final certificate o' water right is issued)should not be filed until the permanent diversion facilities have been installed, together w:' '; a mainline system capable of delivering the recommended quantity of water to an existing or propose( distribution system within the area to be served, and the system is currently in use. The Water Resources Act of 1971 specifies certain criteria regarding utilization and management of the water of the state in the best public interest. Use of water may be subject to regulation at certain times,based on tht necessity to maintain water quantities sufficient for preservation of the natural environment. This permit shall be subject to cancellation should the permittee jail to comply with the above development schedule and/or jail to give►totice to the Department of Ecology ott fomts provided by that Departmetu documentb:g such compliance. Givers under my hand and the seal of this office at Olympia, Washington, this 2nd day of Aori 1 . 19 92 Chuck Clark, Director Department of Ecology ENGINEERING DATA OK 3V by PEWT -2- No.S2-27W P STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PERMIT TO APPROPRIATE PUBUC WATERS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON aSurface Water =.dam a E ,mo aMMen+d anw�w �T.lam+d w.r�Ygn�for ms..na atl w a—ft+na V.Mn.d^a o ❑ Ground Water F...d m nr.ob.o wIIA"P.....d ce.PW sea U—d Ws0M0 on fM IM8,WW MWnd.niY d.rfo..w d.ndw.d rgar..a M Op.f..d d Eedopf•) FPIOFM DATE APPIX'rM NUMSEff P'El" NUMBER CEPfi1GTE MlMBB1 April 1, 1991 S2-28127 I S2-28127 P NAME L:11;waup Trust zvo Wm n yarn 1201 Third Ave Box 7C Seattle Washingt n 98110-3009 ?he applicant is,pursuant to the Report of Examination which has been aceeined by the apptk=4 hereby granted a permit to appropria the following described public waters of file State of Washington,subject to existing rights and to the lineitations aid provisions set of herein. PUBUC WATERS TO BE APPROPRIATED SOW" Unnamed Creek TR9UfAM OF OF SUWACE WAnM Lilliwaup Creek MA1"M CUM FEET PEN SECOND MAid.41M GALLONS PER 1fdAITE MAN"ACI�FEET PEP YEM 0 2 145 wAMM,Tree OF USE.PWW0 OF USE 145 acre-feet per year Fish propagationLOCATION OF DIVERSION/WITHDRAWAL Year-round, as needed AL 2f"I feet south and 500 feet west of the center of Section 19. tOCATEO wmdN IBMAILEfT IEOA►iPlEfinllMOM SECTION TOIM 010 K NY10E.a On W.)WJA Mason N Novwn h 19 23 3W --RECOROEE TWO LOT E46 ME OF ON NA OF RAT OR AW"MR 3 & 47 Volume 2 0f Plats LEGA DF.SCRIFTION OF PR P RTY Ii WMERis TO 51 USED That part of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter and of Government Lot 6 of Section 19,T.23 N R. 3 W.W.M., in Mason County, Washington, described as follows: COMMENCING at the southwest corner of vacated Lot 3 in Block 46 of Lilliwaup Falls as per plat theret recorded in Volume 2 of Plats, page 10; thence east along the south line of said lot a distance of 83.31 feet I the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing east along said south line and line extended 350.00 feet to point on the south line of Lot 16 in Block 47 of said plat;thence north,parallel with the east line of said Bloc 47, 225.00 feet; thence west 372.09 feet to the bank of Lilliwaup River, thence southeasterly along said riot bank 226.08 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. PERMIT DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORKS concrete intake structure with a 6OU Iong, pvc gravity pipe leading to a hatchery building,up to twelve 120 cubic foot capacity tanks/raceways, a '/4 acre rearing pond, and an eeiuent-setting pond. DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE eEow raalECr er Tllli PATE: Cp+PIETE PROAM 8r Trg CATE WATM PVf To PIA!UM BY TM OATS: March 1, 1993 March 1, 1994 March 1, 1995 PROVIStONS The issuance of this permit,and subsequent certificate of water right as herein applied for,shall be subject tc preexisting downstream rights. The permit is issued subject to Washington Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife hydraulic project approval The intake shall be screened at all times in accordance with Department of Fisheries and Department o Wildlife screening criteria. The rate of diversion is limited to a maximum of 2.5 cfs. Streatnflow of Lilliwaup Creek shall be monitorec continuously. Whenever streamflow values fall below 42 cfs, waters diverted from Beardsley Creek shall be pumped back to the confluence to eliminate the bypass reach. The Permittee is advised that notice of proof of appropriation of water (under which the final certificate o' water right is issued)should not be filed until the permanent diversion facilities have been installed, together wo% a mainline system capable of delivering the recommended quantity of water to an existing or propose( distribution system within the area to be served, and the system is currently in use. The Water Resources Act of 1971 specifies certain criteria regarding utilization and management of the water of the state in the best public interest. Use of water may be subject to regulation at certain times,based on tht necessity to maintain water quantities sufficient for preservation of the natural environment. 71tis permit shall be subject to cancellation should the permittee fail to comply wilt the above development schedule and/or fall to give notice to the Department of Ecology on forms provided by that Department documenting such compliance. Given tender my hand and tha seal of this office at Olympia, Washington, this 2nd day of _Apr il , 19 92 Chuck Clark, Director Department of Ecology x ENGINEERING DATA oK� by PEnA•T -2- No.S2-27887 P