HomeMy WebLinkAboutHMP - HMP Habitat Managment Plan - 5/30/2007 THE WETLAND CORPS `
Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans , Riparian Restoration • Mitigation • Biological Evaluation
R-EC, IV
Jut, 1 V flib/
DAVIES HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN MASON COUNTY
Parcel# 123291401000 #T&R-D c110__�10
Mason County,Washington
Prepared for:
Drew Davies
PO Box 1095
Allyn,WA 98524
Prepared by:
Heather Lane and Lee Boad
May,2007
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
}
THE WETLAND CORPS "
Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans - Riparian Restoration • Mitigation • Biological Evaluation
DAVIES HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................1
2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION...............................................................................................3
3.0 APPLICABLE SETBACKS..................................................................................................3
4.0 DESCRIPTION OF HABITAT AND SPECIES.................................................................3
5.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS....................................................................................................5
6.0 MITIGATION MEASURES.................................................................................................6
7.0 MONITORING ....................................................................................................................10
8.0 SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................10
Figures
Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Site Plan
Figure 3. National Wetland Inventory Map
Figure 4. Mason County Soil Survey Map
Figure 5. Department of Natural Resources Water Resource Map
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May, 2007
Page 2
The road grade enters the parcel from Old Belfair Highway and parallels the southern property
boundary, extending to the eastern portion of the property. The road crossing is the only access to
the eastern portion of the parcel, as a Category I Wetland prohibits access and occupies
approximately 5 acres within the property. A wetland report titled "Davies Wetland Delineation and
Analysis Report" has been prepared to address specific wetland characteristics, rating and
jurisdictional status.
The purpose of this Habitat Management Plan (HMP) is to address impacts resulting from the
completed expansion of an access road by clearing vegetation and placing fill over an existing road
grade that crosses a type F stream and the entire associated 150-foot buffer. Many of the
recommendations in this report are also discussed in the Davies Restoration Plan prepared for the
expansion of the road within the wetland and associated buffer, which overlap the stream buffer. 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 alteration of the access road within the Type F stream and 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 alteration of the access road within the Type F stream buffer.
2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The entire parcel is 10.84 acres in size, and contains a single-family residence within the westernmost
portion of the parcel. The recently expanded road grade enters the parcel from Old Belfair Highway,
paralleling the southern property boundary to the eastern side of the parcel. The eastern portion of the
parcel contains a relatively undisturbed, open upland area with some forested components. The
Category I wetland system occupies nearly 5 acres within the majority of the western and central
portion of the parcel, and extends northeast off the property for several acres. The stream enters the
parcel by draining into the southeastern portion of the wetland, and exits the parcel westerly via a
culvert under Old Belfair Highway.
The vegetation theme within the undisturbed upland portions of the parcel contain red alder, cascara,
Himalayan blackberry, swordfern, tall buttercup, stinging nettle, grasses, and bleeding heart. The
wetland contains several different vegetative communities ranging from an herbaceous community
comprised of soft rush, slough sedge and spreading rush, to a shrub-dominated community comprised
of spirea, willows, salmonberry, ladyfern and skunk cabbage. The entire wetland contains a scattered
overstory of red alder, Oregon ash and cascara. Topography throughout the property is comprised of a
low-gradient slope from both the east and west sides of the property down toward the depressional
wetland area.
The property is surrounded by moderate-density residential land use.
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May,2007
Page 3
3.0 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.
The applicable setback for this project is as follows:
Habitat Type Buffer Building Setback from Buffer
Type F Stream 150' 15'
4.0 DESCRIPTION OF HABITAT AND SPECIES
4.1 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. Although the stream may be accessible to Puget Sound Chinook,
suitable habitat is not present due to the limited size and lack of sufficient flow during the spawning
period. This project is not likely to have adverse impacts on Puget Sound Chinook due to the lack of
suitable habitat and proposed mitigation. This stream is not listed as final designations in the NOAA
Fisheries Northwest Region Critical Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in
Washington - August 2005, however, the lower union river is. Measures are provided in this plan to
protect water quality and aquatic habitat downstream. No impacts to water quality are predicted with
proposed mitigation.
4.2 Hood Canal Summer Chum (Oncorhynchus keta)- Threatened
Hood Canal Summer Chum spawning areas in proximity to the site include the Union River and,
historically, the Tahuya River. Recovery efforts are in place to restore naturally spawning summer
chum populations to the Tahuya system while the Union stock remains healthy. Summer chum are
present from August to mid October in the lower Union River. The type F stream within the parcel is
within the lower Union River watershed which is part of the Summer Chum ESU. Measures are
provided in this plan to protect water quality and aquatic habitat downstream.
4.3 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.
The onsite stream does not contain suitable habitat due to the limited size and lack of sufficient flow
during the spawning period. Given the lack of suitable habitat, the project is not likely to have any
adverse impacts on bull trout.
4.4 Puget Sound Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss)- 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
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May,2007
Page 4
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.
The Type F stream within the parcel may support suitable steelhead rearing habitat although
documentation of their presence is not available. The recommendations provided in this report are
intended to protect water quality and aquatic habitat important to all native fish species including
steelhead.
4.5 Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)-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. Based on
vegetation in surrounding areas, the proposed project required the displacement of shrub and
herbaceous vegetation, but did not likely remove any trees. As no important habitat features have
been removed, this project will have no adverse impacts on bald eagles.
4.6 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 mossy trees in coniferous
old growth forests with cavities on thick branches where they can construct a cup nest 20-40 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 did not likely have any adverse impact on
Marbled Murrelet given there are no documented nesting sites or potential nesting trees in the
vicinity of the project area.
4.7 Northern Spotted Owl (Stria 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
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 ceil:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May,2007
Page 5
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. Given the forested
components, the area has the potential to eventually contribute to spotted owl habitat. However, the
potential for usage is largely dependant on surrounding land-use and the maintenance and
preservation of larger forested areas in proximity to the property.
As spotted owls are currently not present, and the project is of a scale that had no impact on forested
areas that represent typical spotted owl habitat, no impacts to spotted owl or their habitat are
expected to have resulted from the completed project.
5.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS
The project lies within a Type F stream and associated buffer. Project scale in the protected area is
as follows:
Development Type Habitat Type Project scale
Fill over access road Type F Stream&Buffer 1000 sq. ft.
5.1 Vegetation Disturbance
Approximately 1000 square feet of vegetation was displaced for the road expansion within the
stream buffer. Based on the surrounding vegetative community, the vegetation removed for the
project was likely shrub and herbaceous species including salmonberry, lady fern, tall buttercup, and
bleeding heart. Mitigation described in Section 6.4 is recommended to compensate for the
vegetation removal.
5.2 Designated Critical Habitat for Salmonids
This stream is not listed as final designations in the NOAA Fisheries Northwest Region Critical
Habitat Designations for West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington - August 2005.
Designated Critical Habitat for Salmonids is not within the project area. Therefore, none of the
completed actions are likely to destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. The
completed work is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species.
5.3 Noise Pollution
A slight increase in noise from construction activities was likely to occur during daylight
construction hours. No nesting sites for threatened or endangered species are located within the radii
of concern that would be impacted by noise associated with the expansion of the access road.
5.4 Temporary Increase in Sediment and Turbidity during Construction
The completed work has the potential to temporarily increase turbidity and suspended sediment
within the project area. This is primarily due to the exposed erodible soil. Best Management
Practices have been recommended in Section 6.4 to minimize future adverse effects to sediment
supply and turbidity caused by project implementation.
PO Box 2854, Belfair, WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May, 2007
Page 6
6.0 MITIGATION MEASURES
6.1 Avoidance Mitigation
The location of the replaced culvert for the stream crossing was determined according to the
location of the previous stream crossing. In addition, rather than creating a new access road, the
original access road was expanded by placing additional fill over the original access road.
6.2 Restoration Measures
Phase 1. Removal o Fill
In order to attain the surface area of the stream buffer that existed prior to alteration, it is
recommended that the portion of fill and/or sluff material occupying areas outside of the original
road grade be removed. Best Management Practices addressed in Section 6.4 should be diligently
applied during fill removal. Immediately following the removal of fill, it is recommended that the
exposed soil be hydroseeded to minimize erosion and begin vegetative recruitment as quickly as
possible.
Phase 2. Vegetative Enhancement
It is recommended that following fill/sluff removal and hydroseeding, the restoration area, outside
of the 12-foot road grade, be restored using native vegetation planting. The restoration of a
moderately dense forest and shrub community within the portion of the stream buffer that currently
lacks shrub and overstory components due to the previous work is intended to improve wildlife
utilization and riparian function of the site. The north side of the road grade, within the portion of
the stream buffer that is west of the stream, is located within a wetland and is recommended to
only be planted with western red cedar, since volunteer herbaceous hydrophytic vegetation will
likely revegetate the area quicker than planted species.
This area occupies an approximately 1000 square feet (750 square-on western buffer and 250
square feet on eastern buffer). It is recommended that plants be installed as described in the
Native Plantings section below.
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
salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis)— 1 gallon
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May,2007
Page 7
Ferns: sword fern(Polystichum munitum)— 1 gallon
Native Planting Guidelines
It is recommended that plantings be installed within the identified restoration zone to achieve the
following densities.
trees- 10' on center
shrubs- 5' on center
ferns-4'on center
These densities will restore the moderately dense, structurally diverse plant community that exists in
undisturbed portions of the parcel. To fulfill the above mentioned planting density recommendation,
the mitigation zone will be planted with 10 trees, 40 shrubs and 12 ferns. Excluding the portion of the
restoration zone within the wetland boundary, it is recommended that installation be done as single
trees and or clusters of three shrubs, on approximate 10-foot centers. Finally, sword fern will be
randomly installed throughout the planting row on average four-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 the planting phase of this restoration plan; planting holes for specified vegetation
installation will be hand dug. No additional clearing should be necessary for site restoration, other
than what is recommended in this HMP and/or the prepared Restoration Plan. 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 restoration zone. These species are stubborn competitors for light and nutrients and
limit success of native plants. Invasive species should be removed from the stream buffer, and/or
restoration zone should they invade. Herbicides should not be used to achieve this due to the
proximity to the stream. Persistent cutting during the growing season is sufficient to offset the
rhizomes of invasive species if they become a problem.
Compensatory Mitigation
Compensatory mitigation is recommended to address the fill to remain over the existing road grade.
The fill will be necessary to elevate the road over the newly installed culvert which is of a much more
suitable size (36" diameter)than what previously existed.
The overstory within the type F stream buffer contains primarily western red cedar(Thuja plicata) and
red alder (Alnus rubra) of similar size and age. Recent logging has substantially reduced the canopy
cover from the riparian area surrounding the stream. To improve the structural diversity, canopy
cover, and increase the potential for wildlife utilization within the stream buffer, it is recommended
that the portion of the type F stream buffer, east of the channel, be enhanced with coniferous
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May, 2007
Page 8
underplantings to eventually provide a more structurally diverse forested community. The area to be
enhanced within the stream buffer will be identified as the Mitigation Zone, and will occupy an area
of 2000 square feet. The location of the Mitigation Zone is parallel to the stream, east of the channel
(See Figure 2. Site Map).
It is recommended that the mitigation zone be enhanced using western red cedar(Thuja plicata). This
is based on light and soil requirements, versatility, and occurrence in proximity to the site. The trees
should be planted an average of 10-feet on center, from 2-gallon containers.
1y r� > 1M�1 � j•� r. �� a'I.trl
>k
v'
i
ov
l RT9"Grn, ,, _ •'�7 +�
Al? ;YIMyj u7 ► rM �� *: a
��`
rf!�t%.�- ,2�!'L _K.', r1Y[1�3Ed' �.�.� � ��• :.z" _ L .�"4
Picture 2. Mitigation Zone
6.3 Repositioning of Culvert
The newly installed culvert appears to be of sufficient size (36" Diameter) to accommodate fish
passage and adequately handle the volume of water present in this system. However, the culvert was
installed in the exact location of the previous crossing which is not the most optimal position for the
culvert. The intake of the culvert sits approximately 2-3 feet to the left bank of the stream channel.
The main flow of the stream backs up behind the fill before it can enter the culvert. This will likely
increase sedimentation and erosion during flood events and has a higher likelihood of failure. It is
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMP
May, 2007
Page 9
recommended that the intake of the culvert be shifted to be centered in relationship to the stream
channel.
Picture 3. Existing culvert placed west of the stream channel location
6.4 Best Management Practices
Recommended Best Management Practices for this project are as follows:
• Perform fill removal and culvert work during dry weather.
• Install silt fencing between the work area and the stream and wetland to prevent erosion and
siltation of waters (See diagram below).
• Minimize amount of erodible soils at any given time to the maximum extent feasible.
• Check all equipment daily for leaks. Refueling and lubrication of equipment should occur off
site. Do not store any fuel, lubricants, chemicals, or hazardous substances outside overnight
within the project area.
• Do not apply any chemicals when there is a possibility of rain.
• Comply with all permits and requirements of governing authority.
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HMV
May,2007
Page 10
A' HIGH
CONSTRUCTION
STEEL POST FENCE
I
--FLOW
10 FT MAX SPACING WITH
WIRE SUPPORT FENCE
6 FT MAX SPACING WITHOUT
WIRE SUPPORT FENCE
FILTER FABRIC
PONDING HT.
FLIER F IC
STEEL POST /0 AU H CURELY
SIDE POST.
-RUNOFF
12" MIN.
4-X6-TRENCH
WTI" COMPACTED
aACRFlLL
Silt Fence Diagram
7.0 MONITORING
Monitoring of the site will begin the first fall following project implementation and maintained on a
seasonal basis. The information gathered will provide the following: 1) condition of plant species
within the stream buffer; 2) the use of the site by wildlife species; 3) any disturbance caused by the
stream crossing and its effect on the protected zone and associated aquatic habitat; 4) any occurrence
of exotic species within the stream buffer, restoration zone, or 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.
8.0 SUMMARY
This report addresses the effects of the completed work within a type F stream and associated buffer,
entailing the placement of fill over an existing access road, which has Bluffed over and expanded the
original 12-foot wide road grade, in addition to the replacement of a culvert for the stream.
Restoration recommendations entail the removal of fill outside of the original 12-foot wide road
grade and vegetative restoration of the previously filled areas within the stream buffer.
Compensatory mitigation is recommended in the form of coniferous plantings within an area of 2000
square feet of stream buffer. Recommendations are also provided to reposition the culvert to more
adequately handle the flow of water and minimize potential for sedimentation and erosion.
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
Davies HM?
May,2007
Page 11
Best Management Practices have been identified to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for impacts
associated with proposed restoration. No impacts to water quality or stream habitat are predicted.
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
Heather ane
Staff Wetland &Natural Resource Specialist
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
REFERENCES
Audobon WatchList. http;//audobon2.org/webapp/watchlist/viewSpecies.
Knutson, K.L., and V.L. Naef. 1997. Management recommendations for
Washington's priority habitats: riparian. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia. 181
PP.
Native Plants for Kitsap County. ftp://kcnTpub3.co.kitsap.wa.us/pw/sw/Native
Policy of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Western Washington
Treaty Tribes Concerning Wild Salmonids. Adopted by Washington Fish and Wildlife
Commission,1997.
Washington State Department of Ecology; William Symington Lake Habitat Analysis. 1998.
PO Box 2854, Belfair,WA 98528 cell:360-620-0618, Office: 360-372-2421 e-mail: boad40@peoplepc.com
�\� ► �.�a ,oil � i � ���� ,� : — --_ �\�\
— ——— ——
I rpftwb aq oq
'Pd
I �x}aQ I�aaoM rJ' PEON JO OmGq"0 �
f i 1 "+easy""o
N bl,000'z�
"Z wonw I ✓
1091
.O!;b I \\ pml}aM 1 K&gw)
51� 109Z 4k
1016 L
00010bI6=1#1"md w1
LE *04da W W*FH
PM Lew wad' I'Q I"pM 50MQ
ii0' 011s I'al Zarod rwrpmall
topozone
t9►200o tl�a+l 1�1r YI:
0 1 mile
24
rSr ram. 1
Approximate Parcel
Location % +
�%kid/
mar tna :}. o, r
�✓ ,, ' ! &�, — --�' r- Hwy 3
•� ... •�I � ;E . �>>•: f r �t^� r mil.
c r f
• ., •.�t.,rr;�i. +.;.fir'-�:-�:>;s- �`.�;' � '3 � 1 I"��: N
!`0 .�.••J 'fie =.t'h sr'"A� `f��,:' '� :4 ice, ...- / �
n c� r,Yi - �� ll`✓� ! �•�(i j 1 —y/•.`�
V. v w.J•��1. ,;�'r � �' :n Y. 7 � ♦ �. i � � � O r t� (JJ (QQ�� \J\ �
.1L�J •,,• V i.� l I \ /j5 tj'�7// ,• '� J ,+
001"I
FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP
Project Name: Davies
Location: Belfair,Washington
Project: TWC07-341
Client: Drew Davies
Date: 05i07
THE WETLAND CORPS
Map Legend Approximate
Project Location
CCWUS Claas
COWS States 100K
Lower 40 Welland Polygons
eatunine and ta4"/n0 ONP.&W a "r
bWaHwe and Mmjne W#pand
i
sseehea w e1 9"t Wetland ` ' PU
fresh watu Fesealed'Shl tl WNiand M
11111 take
� !Q
R/�erina 7
r
N
I �
I �
•;. .J � .y L Jl y�r
Figure adapted from NWI
Mapper website Figure 3 National Wetland Inventory Map
Section 29 Township 23N Range 01 W
FIGURE 3 NWI MAP
Project Name: Davies
Location: Belfair,Washington
oA%r Project: TWC07-341
1 Client: Drew Davies
THE WETLAND CORPS Date: 05/07
R �r
f ���..
f
■
Mhrs Approximate
k Ma�oe; Parcel Location
Belfair *.
Onsite Soil Conditions based on Mason County Soil Survey
Subject Site Soil:
The first onsite soil type is identified as: Mukilteo peat,0 to 2 percent slopes(Mg).-The Mukilteo series consists of peat that
is mainly partly decomposed sedges,spirea,twigs,and roots.Peat bogs usually are densely covered by spirea and are generally
free of trees and other shrubs. Intermixed with the spirea are various sedges that form a good part, of the peat material.
Occasionally, Mukilteo peat has a cover of deciduous trees, brush, and shrubs in place of the spirea. Mukilteo peat is
widespread throughout the county, and it comprises the largest part of the upland bogs. This peat is very poorly drained and
often ponded many months of the year. Artificial drainage can be used to remove excess moisture. Mukilteo peat is more acid
and less fertile than McMurray peat. Mukilteo peat, 0 to 2 percent slopes (Mg).- This soil is strongly acid. It is saturated
throughout the year and is difficult to drain.This soil is in capability subclass IIIw.
The second onsite soil type is identified as: Saxon silt loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes (Sa).- The Saxon series consists of
friable,well-drained,brown, silty soils on the uplands. They have developed from Vashon glacial lake sediment similar to that
of the Kitsap soils. Surface drainage is well developed,internal drainage is medium,and the moisture-holding capacity is good.
The rainfall is 45 to 60 inches a year. The vegetation is a dense forest of fir,cedar,and alder,with a dense undercover of salal,
vine maple,bracken fern,and sword fern. Saxon soils differ from the Kitsap soils in having browner surface soil and less dense
subsoil, and in containing shot. Saxon silt loam,5 to 15 percent slopes(Sa)occurs on rolling or gently rolling benches near
Belfair. The slight compaction in this material does not restrict movement of moisture or growth of roots. The soil is deep,
friable,and permeable; it has a good capacity to hold available moisture. This soil is in capability subclass We and in site class
3 for Douglas-fir.
FIGURE 4 SOIL SURVEY
Project Name: Davies
Location: Belfair,Washington
Project: TWC07-341
Client: Drew Davies
THE 1%rETL__'%,ND CORPS Date: 05/07
r
_ry NN
F
Approximate
oximate
F
17 parcel 1 11 84$ 170 B48
+ location +1 +
'J, N
417088 +7 622 17086 +70 8 +70862
Q
� lbs�
„�170800 170PP2 17 4 _ {170 aw +7
3 Union River N
1 - -
x
a Puget Sound F
f4
SIRE kNIS SOILS
H'•dAc Soils
HiQhlt i?n�tablt
stream Ty a Unknown fEa:t-:de'
Stream Water I;pe: (i'e::::de; -
Hi¢hlt Erodible
Stream Tv--We L"=kwum(r'e:t ude; :i�h1z CTu:ab:e&
' :iFhlc&od:ble
11'ater'z:pt C liaugt No Data or Cam•,el Pi-s
FIGURE 5 DNR STREAM MAP
Project Name: Davies
Location: Belfair,Washington
�1V Project: TWC07-341
ILTHE WETLAND CORPS Client: Drew Davies
I Date: 05/07