Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Wetland Analysis Report for 4 Lots of Short Plat 3045 - PLN General - 11/10/2010
g;52 WETLAND ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE 4 LOTS OF SHORT PLAT 3045 ON SE LYNCH ROAD TO BE KEPT IN THE SHELTON PARCEL FILE Mason County, Washington i Prepared For: Bill Stinchfield and family 8210 SE Lynch Road Shelton, WA 98584 I Prepared By: Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 1015 SW Harper Road Port Orchard, WA 98367 j (360) 876-2403 Revised November 10, 2010 Revised September 7, 2010 June 18, 2008 INDEX PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2 Mason County Soil Survey 2 National Wetlands Inventory 2 Priority Species 2 WETLAND ASSESSMENT 2 Soils 3 Hydrology 3 Vegetation 4 J Wetland Classification 4 Wetland Category 5 Required Buffers 6 Off-Site Wetland Description 6 UPLAND DESCRIPTION 6 J FUNCTIONAL VALUES ASSESSMENT FOR THE DELINEATED WETLANDS 7 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS 9 Buffer Averaging Plan g SUMMARY 11 LIMITATIONS 12 REFERENCES 13 APPENDICES J .i INTRODUCTION The delineated wetland discussed in this report is situated on the 4 lots of(Short Plat 3045) on Lynch Road near Shelton, Mason County, Washington (Appendix A-1). This parcel is located in the NE 1/a of the SE 1/a of Section 29, T 20 N, R 2 W WM. The 22 acre parcel has been short platted into four — 5 acre parcels for the eventual construction of a single family home on each newly created lot. These parcels are situated in a rurally developed area with single family homes on large forested parcels off site to the north and south. Totten Inlet lies to the east of the properties and Lynch Road lies along the west side. There is a well maintained access road that enters from Lynch Road at the southwest comer of Lot 4 acre parcel and continues east along the southern edge down to a single family home that lies on the east end. The topography consists of a shelf on the west side of these properties along Lynch Road. This shelf slopes down moderately to the east and flattens out and ends near the east edge of the parcels. The topography changes into undulating terrain that slopes down slightly to the south with a narrow ravine along the north line of Lot 1. There is a single family home to the north and at least two to the south. Buffer averaging is proposed to accommodate the driveway and the future building/drainfield site for Lot 1. No alteration of buffer is proposed on any of the other four platted lots. These parcels were logged in the past 20 years and they are now dominated by a young mixed forest with moderate to dense shrub and herbaceous layers with some of the larger trees left standing. The forest is currently dominated by bigleaf maple and alder with areas of mixed forest containing Oregon ash, fir, hemlock, cedar and cascara that has a dense shrub layer dominated by salmonberry and blackberry with overgrown logging roads crisscrossing the property. Two wetlands were identified and delineated for the original short plat of the 22 acre parcel. Wetland A is located on the eastern 2/3 these lots and consists of a seasonally flooded, forested wetland with dense scrub/shrub and emergent components. This system continues offsite for a short distance to the north and south. It appears to meet the criteria for a Category III system, because of its moderate size and vegetative diversity, which gives it both potential and opportunity for habitat functions. A 110 foot buffer is required from this wetland because it scores 20 points for habitat functions. Wetland B is a forested sloping wetland located in the northwest comer of Lot 1. It is a Category III wetland that has limited potential and opportunity for habitat functions and only scores 18 points so a 60 foot buffer is required. The wetland boundary was delineated on August 8t1i and 9`h 2003, May of 2008, and again in July of 2010 using the Department of Ecology Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual (Publication#96-94). This manual requires the use of the three- parameter wetland methodology (wetland hydrology, hydrophytic vegetation and hydric soils) when making wetland determinations (see Appendix C for criteria used to make wetland determinations). This site was logged over 18 years ago and has recovered well and is under normal circumstances so the Routine On-Site Method was used to make the on-site wetland boundary determination. This report has been prepared in accordance with the 1 Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance No. 138-06 (CAO) and includes a discussion of the on-site wetlands with respect to the data collected in the field used in conjunction with information obtained from the Mason County Soil Survey and National Wetlands Inventory. It includes the wetland categorization, wetland classification and a functional values assessment. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Mason County Soil Survey The on-site soils are mapped as Ab Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 5-15% slopes on the west edge, Bd Bellingham silt loam 0-3% slopes in a large pocket near the center of the south line, lb Indianola loamy sand 5-15% slopes throughout the center of the property and Rb Rough broken land on the east edge of the property, according to the Soil Survey for the Mason County area, September 1960. Alderwood, Indianola and rough broken soils are not classified as hydric. Bellingham soils are classified as hydric and the delineation revealed wetland conditions in the onsite portion of the mapped soil unit. See Appendix A-3 for this parcel as located on the soil survey and Appendix B for description of the on-site soils. Y National Wetlands Inventory The US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), Squaxin Island Quadrangle does not map any onsite wetlands and maps the shoreline as Estuarine Unconsolidated Shoreline Regularly Flooded. See Appendix A-4 for site located on the NW1 map. Priority Species There are no Washington State Priority 1, 2, or 3 plant or animal species known to exist on the parcel (Washington Natural Heritage Program, 2007/2009 update) nor were any identified during our field survey. The presence of priority species was determined using the printed edition and a data base search was not completed at this time. WETLAND ASSESSMENT This section describes the delineated wetlands with respect to the three parameters as collected in the field and recorded on wetland data forms. Two wetlands were identified and delineated in the property. Wetland A is a forested system across the east half that continues offsite to the north and south. The onsite portion is predominantly forested with a dense underlying scrub/shrub and herbaceous layers. This system is located between low hilltops on the east and west sides of the property and drains slowly to the south for an undetermined distance. Wetland B is located at the northwest corner of Lot 1 and extends south almost to the north property line of Lot 2 and turns north and extends offsite to the north. It is a forested, sloping wetland that has moderate to dense underlying shrub and herbaceous layers. It is reasonably disturbed and lacks a significant connection to other habitats and wildlife corridors. This property was logged a number of years ago and appears to be recovering very 2 well with the exception of Scots broom and blackberry starting to invade along the perimeter of the property. There are two driveways that cut through the wetland along the south property line. One is onsite and the other is just offsite and serves the property to the south. See Appendix A-2a for location of wetland boundary flags and wetland test holes. See Appendix G for Wetland Data Forms 1, 4 5 and lb. The following sections describe the data collected at test holes in the wetland and adjacent upland and used to make the wetland boundary determination. The wetland data is described in this section and each section includes a description of the dominant plant species, the soil profile and whether hydric conditions are present, and the presence/absence of wetland hydrology and/or wetland hydrology indicators. The dominant plant species identified by common and botanical name along with the indicator status (OBL, FACW, FAC, etc. See Appendix D for Definition of Indicator Status) are listed on the back of each data form. The presence of hydric soil conditions is examined in 16 inch soil holes conducted at each test hole. The hydric soil criteria is met when there is a low soil matrix chroma at 10 inches or just below the A horizon. The chromas are determined using damp soil samples that are compared to a corresponding color chip in the Munsell Soil Color Charts. The chromas were _ then recorded on the data sheet using Hue (YR) and Value/Chroma. Any Hue and Value with a low Chroma is typical of hydric (wetland) soils that have developed over time due to inundation or saturation by water. The presence or absence of wetland hydrology and/or wetland hydrology indicators includes the source of hydrology and direction of flow (if evident). Wetland Classification,Wetland Category and Required Buffers follow the description of the wetland and upland data. Soils Wetland A: Test Holes 1, 4 and 5 are completed in Wetland A. Test Holes 1 and 4 revealed a single layer soil profile that consists of a silt loam and has a matrix chroma of 10 YR 2/1 without mottling. Test Hole 5 revealed a two layer soil profile with a 12 inch thick surface horizon consisting of a sandy loam that has a matrix chroma of 10 YR 3/1 without mottling. jThe subsurface horizon extends to the bottom of the hole and consists of a slightly compacted fine sandy loam that has a matrix chroma of 10 YR 5/2 without mottling. IWetland B: Test Hole lb was completed near the center of the Wetland B to document typical wetland conditions. The test hole revealed a single layer soil profile consisting of a sandy silt loam that has a matrix chroma of 10 YR 2/1. Hydrology Wetland A: Hydrology was present during the field investigations as soil saturation to the _ surface soil at each Wetland A test hole with evidence of surface hydrology indicated by surface scouring, sediment stains, algal mats and debris deposits. The source of hydrology for the wetlands appears to be seeps/springs along the west edge of the wetland as well as surface water runoff from upland areas and direct rainfall. There may also be a seasonally 3 1 1 perched water table. Water flows seasonally to the south where it drains into a ditch along the existing road through a culvert under the existing road and continues offsite to the south for an undetermined distance. Wetland B: Hydrology was present as soil saturation with water standing in the hole at a depth of six inches from the surface. There is evidence of standing water in shallow depressions throughout the onsite portion of this wetland system with depths up to 6 inches during the winter months. This wetland is fed by seeps from the adjacent slopes as well as runoff and direct rainfall. Flow of water is down the slope in a northerly direction where it flows into a steep sided ravine that lays offsite to the north. Vegetation Wetland A: This is a large forested wetland system with a few large trees growing on hummocks. The dominant species include Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) FACW; red alder (Alnus rubra) FAC; cascara (Frangula purshiana) FAC-; western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla) FACU and western red cedar (Thuja plicata) FAC with Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) FACU and bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllumn)FACU on ted b salmonbe Rubus ' dominated is �3' hummocks and along the perimeter. The shrub layer Y spectabalas) FAC, hardback (Spa raea dou lasii) FACW' pacific crabapple (Malus�sca ) FACW- and Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) FACU with lesser amounts of salal (Gaultheria shallon) FACU and red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa) FACU growing on hummocks in and along the wetland fringe. The herbaceous layer is dominated by slough sedge (Carex obnupta) OBL; water parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa) OBL; skunk cabbage (Lysachaton ameracanum) OBL; lady fern (AthYrium lix-fe mina ) FAC and creeping g buttercup (Ranunculus repens) FACW with low percentages of cattail (Typha latifolia) OBL and reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) FACW. Wetland B: This wetland is a forested system that has a moderate to dense underlying shrub and herbaceous understory. It is dominated by red alder (A. rubra) FAC and western red cedar (T. plicata) FAC with lower percentages cascara (F. purshiana)FAC- western hemlock (T. heterophylla) FACU; Oregon ash (F. latifolia) FACW; Douglas fir (P. menziesii) FACU and bigleaf maple (A. macrophyllum)FACU on hummocks and along the perimeter. The shrub layer is dominated by salmonberry (R. spectabilis) FAC; hardback (S. douglasii) FACW; and Himalayan blackberry (R. armeniacus) FACU with lower percentages of"salal (G. shallon) FACU and red elderberry (S. racemosa) FACU growing on hummocks in and along the wetland fringe. The herbaceous layer is dominated by slough sedge (C. obnupta) OBL; water parsley (O. sarmentosa) OBL; skunk cabbage (L. americanum) OBL; lady fern (A.filix femina) FAC and creeping buttercup (R. repens) FACW. Wetland Classification The wetlands have been classified according to the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, Cowardin et. Al. December 1979 (1992 reprinted edition). This method of wetland classification represents a 4 1 hierarchical division of wetlands based on their specific attributes (system, class, hydrologic regime). System describes a wetland's association with a body of water (estuarine, I Palustrine, Riverine, etc.), while the class refers to the dominant vegetative community (aquatic bed, emergent, forested). Wetland A and B are classified as Palustrine Forested Seasonally Flooded systems, which is abbreviated PFOC. Wetland Category The Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) requires that identified and delineated wetlands be categorized using the revised 2004 Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Publication#04-06-025). This system utilizes hydrogeomorphic characteristics to determine the potential and opportunity for a particular wetland to perform water quality, hydrologic and habitat functions. It differentiates wetlands into four categories ranging from Category I systems that typically have high potential and opportunity to perform these functions to Category IV systems that have low potential and opportunity to perform the functions. A rating form that asks a series of questions is used to identify the wetland's position in the landscape (sloping, depressional, riverine, etc.) and specific characteristics that would indicate that it has potential to perform the water quality, hydrologic and habitat functions. When the wetland has opportunity to perform the functions, it receives a multiplier of 2. The scores are then added up and a category is assigned based on the number of points received as follows: Category I wetlands score 70 points or greater, Category II systems score between 51-69 points, Category III systems score 30-50 points and Category IV wetlands score less than 30 points. Wetland A: The rating form reveals that this wetland meets the criteria for a Category III system because it scores a total of 42 points. The wetland has low potential/opportunity to perform water quality functions because of its position on sloping terrain so it scores 6 points for this function. It scores 16 points for hydrologic functions because it has both potential and opportunity to perform hydrologic functions. For habitat functions, the wetland scores 20 points because of its large size, diversity in the forested community and close proximity to priority habitat areas. See Appendix E-la for Wetland A Rating form. Wetland B: The wetland rating form reveals that Wetland B meets the criteria for a Category III system because it scores a total of 32 points. The wetland has low potential and opportunity to perform water quality functions so scores only 8 points. For hydrologic functions, this wetland scores 3 points for potential because of its position on a slope but receives the multiplier because it has opportunity to perform this function so it scores a total of 6 points. For habitat functions, this wetland scores 18 points because it has low potential but high opportunity to provide habitat for local wildlife species. See Appendix E-lb for Wetland B Rating Form. 5 Required Buffers The Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) requires varying buffer widths that are based on the point total on the wetland rating system(category), the total score for habitat functions and the intensity of the proposed land use. The newly created lots represent moderate intensity land uses because a single home is proposed on lots larger than 1 acre so moderate intensity buffers are required for these delineated wetlands. Wetland A is a Category III system that scores 20 points for habitat functions on the rating form so a buffer of 110 feet is required from this wetland. Wetland B is also a Category III system but it y scores only 18 points for habitat so a buffer of 60 feet is required. The buffers are measured horizontally from the delineated boundaries and 15 foot building setbacks are required between the edge of the buffer and the future home on Lot 1. Buffer reductions are possible through the averaging process wherein buffers are reduced in one location and increased in another so that the buffer is an average width of 60 or 110 feet for the onsite wetlands. Averaging is proposed for the driveway access and to accommodate the building site on Lot 1. Reductions are proposed along the southern buffer edge of Wetland B and along the northern buffer of Wetland A where it extends onto Lot 1. See Appendix E-2 for required buffer and buffer averaging criteria of the Mason County CAO. Off-Site Wetland Description Wetland A extends offsite to the north and south for an undetermined distance. The offsite portions of this system does not appear to make any significant turns that would cause the buffers to extend onto this property. Wetland B extends offsite to the north for an undetermined distance and since it is on private property it could not be fully examined to determine the extent of wetlands. There do not appear to be any offsite areas of Wetland B lying closer than 60 feet from the north property line so no additional buffers will extend onto this property. UPLAND DESCRIPTION The upland area lies on a shelf along the west edge of the property that slopes down to the east with a low ridge crossing the northeast comer. The original 22 acre parcel was logged within the past 20 years and the lots are dominated by coniferous and deciduous trees with a narrow coniferous zone along the east edge of the parcel. Several of the larger trees were left standing and there are many downed logs and stumps in and along the upland/wetland fringe. The main access road enters the parcel at the southwest comer of Lot 4 and extends east along the south property line onto the eastern 5 acre parcel (not part of this short plat). There is a second access road near the northeast comer and extends east and turns into a series of old skid roads that crisscross the parcel. See Appendix G for upland test holes 2, 3, 6-12 and 2b. See Appendix A-2 for location of upland features and test holes. 6 Vegetation The upland areas around the delineated wetlands are dominated by red alder(A. rubra) FAC; cascara (F. purshiana) FAC-; western hemlock (T. heterophylla) FACU; bigleaf maple (A. macrophyllum) FACU and bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata) FACU with lower percentages of western red cedar (T. plicata) FAC; Douglas fir (P. menziesii) FACU; pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii) UPL and Scouler's willow (S. scouleriana) FAC intermixed. The shrub layer is dominated by salmonberry (R. spectabilis) FAC; Himalayan blackberry (R. armeniacus) FACU; red elderberry (S. racemosa) FACU; salal (G. shallon) FACU; Indian plum (Oemlaria cerasiformes) FACU and hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) FACU with lesser amounts of Oregon grape (Berberis nervosa) UPL; Scots broom (Cytisus scoparius) FACU and ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor) UPL. The herbaceous layer is dominated by sword fern (P. munitum) FACU and trailing blackberry (R. ursinus) FACU with moderate to dense patches of deer fern (Blechnum spicant) FAC+; false lily of the valley (Maianthemum dilatatum) FAC; Dewey sedge (Carex deweyana) FACU and bleeding heart (Dicentra formosa) FACU. Soils and Hydrology The soil test holes completed in the upland areas revealed the presence of non-hydric soil conditions. In general, the soils are gravelly sandy loam in texture and consist of a variety of soil profiles from the past logging activities. Test Holes 9-12 revealed a single layer soil profile to-16 inches deep consisting of a gravelly sandy loam that have matrix chromas ranging from 10 YR 3/3 to 10 YR 5/3 with mottling at Test Holes 11 and 12. Test Holes 2, 2b, 3 and 6-8 revealed two layer soil profiles consisting of a 3 to 12 inch thick sandy loam surface horizons having matrix chromas of 10 YR 3/2 to 10 YR 3/3 without mottling. The - subsurface horizons consist of gravelly sandy loam with matrix chromas ranging from 10 YR 4/3 to 10 YR 5/2 without mottling. Hydrologic indicators were present in Test Holes 6-9 as surface scouring and sediment stained vegetation as a result from old logging roads carrying excess surface water during the rainy season. These hydrologic indicators are presumed to be a result of seasonal rains that are not able to drain through the soils due to the historic logging disturbances. No evidence of prolonged wetland hydrology during the growing season was found in any of the upland areas. Each of the upland Test Holes 2, 2b, 3, and 6-12, were placed in marginal and typical upland areas to determine whether wetland parameters are present. These areas were determined to be non-wetland because they lack positive indicators for each of the three wetland parameters. FUNCTIONAL VALUES ASSESMENT FOR THE DELINEATED WETLANDS Flood control, groundwater recharge/discharge, water quality maintenance, biological support, and many other functions are performed by wetlands. The table below lists the most common values and functions of wetlands and provides a value rating for each function and the rationale used to make the rating determination. 7 Value or Function Rating and Rationale Storm and Flood Water MODERATE Storage Wetlands A and B are situated on wide sloping terrain and there are many small pockets that give both wetlands the potential to store excess water. Because these wetlands are low in the watershed, they have limited opportunity to minimize flooding impacts for downstream areas. Water Quality Protection MODERATE Wetlands A and B receive runoff from the adjacent uplands and because they contain a thick cover of shrub and emergent plants, they have the opportunity to filter pollutants from the water. Since the wetlands are situated along a wide slope with small depressional pockets they also facilitate settling of some sediment. Groundwater Discharge MODERATE-HIGH These wetlands have seep/spring activity occurring along the west edges providing year round hydrology to both systems. Groundwater Recharge MODERATE Because there is a ditch on the south edge of Wetland A, it appears that much of its water drains via the ditch so there is minimal potential for this wetland to recharge groundwater supplies. Wetland B receives most of its hydrology from seeps and springs along the western wetland edge that drains northwesterly eventually into the seasonal stream offsite to the northeast so there is minimal potential or opportunity to recharge groundwater. Biological Support HIGH Although both wetlands are predominantly forested systems, there is high diversity within the three layers of each forest that provides a wide variety of habitats. Both wetlands provide localized habitat areas for a number of small bird and mammal species and provide characteristics important to a wider variety of wildlife species such as seasonally flooded areas and vertical snags. Wetland A is in closer proximity to the marine waters of Totten Inlet so has slightly higher values for biological support and habitat functions. Aesthetic Values MODERATE Educational Values Wetlands A and B are a moderate to large diverse wetlands Recreational Values with moderate buffers that would be valuable to adjacent and future property owners and would provide opportunities for bird watching, hiking, and photography. 8 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS A short plat was approved for the 22 acre parcel and 4 building lots that range in size from 4.99 acres (Lot 1) to 8.3 acres (Lot 2) were created. All four lot will have direct access from Lynch Road since the building sites are all situated at the west end. The building sites on Lots 2-4 will be situated well outside the required buffer from the wetlands so will have minimal impact on them. Lot 1 is constrained by wetland and buffer from both Wetlands A and B and the buffer of Wetland B constrains access to the building site. The access to Lot 1 Iwill be along the property line shared by it and Lot 2 and because the buffer from Wetland B extends across the line, a reduction is necessary to accommodate the future driveway. I Reduction is also proposed from Wetland A where its buffer extends onto Lot 1 to accommodate the future building and drainfield areas. Buffer reductions are not proposed on any of the other short platted lots because they are not constrained by wetland and buffers as Lot 1. Because each of the lots is at least 5 acres in size and three of the lots will maintain the I required wetland buffers, the impacts to the wetlands on this property will be minimal. Typical impacts are a result of creation of impervious surface on developed properties that Iaffect the storage capacity of the wetland, the water quality protection function and discharge of groundwater. The buffer will be retained in its current forested condition so it will function to remove pollutants and sediments from water generated on impervious surfaces. IThere should be minimal impact to the water quality protection function of this wetland as a result and the storage capacity will probably not be exceeded since water will likely soak into the permeable upland soils within the buffer. The groundwater discharge function could be impacted by the creation of impervious surface on upland outside the buffer because water will no longer be able to percolate into the soils and flow down slope where it can discharge into the wetland areas. The buffer width of 110 feet from Wetland A will be sufficient to provide percolation and discharge into the wetland. The lots are each situated along Lynch Road so have direct access to the building sites and will not necessitate creation of driveways Iacross the wetlands that could further fragment the corridor and habitat conditions. The buffer will function to screen noise and light impacts from the wetland and minimize the ' impacts of future homesite development on wildlife use within the wetland. In general, the project will have minimal adverse impact on wildlife usage within the wetland because the new homes will not fragment the habitat or corridor. Buffer Averaging Plan ' Buffer averaging is proposed on Lot 1 to allow construction of the driveway access from Lynch Road and to accommodate the building and drainfield areas in the middle section because it is severely constrained by the two wetlands. Reductions are proposed along both wetlands with increases proposed adjacent to Wetland B. Wetland buffer width averaging is allowed in the Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance (Section 7.01.068E.2.c. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging) but are subject to the following conditions: 9 a. The total area contained in the buffer after averaging shall be no less than that contained within the buffer prior to averaging. In other words, the mitigation for buffer impacts will be on a minimum of a 1:1 ratio; and b. Buffer averaging will incorporate site conditions to provide measures to increase the functions and values of the wetland buffer beyond what is currently in place; and C. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced to less than 75% of the required with for each of the wetland categories. The buffer reductions on Lot 1 are proposed in two locations (see Appendix A-2b for buffer averaging plan). The first is along the easement that lies on the line between Lots 1 and 2 to permit construction of the driveway within the easement where it lies at the outer edge of the buffer. This reduction is proposed along Wetland B, which lies at the west end of Lot 1, and is the minimum necessary to accommodate the driveway to the building site. The required buffer from Wetland B is 60 feet and the reduction proposes a minimum buffer of 45 feet, which meets the criteria requiring no less than a 75% reduction. The total area of buffer reduction is 1,867 square feet in this location. The second buffer reduction is for the buffer from Wetland A where it crosses onto Lot 1. The required buffer from Wetland A is 110 feet and the reduction proposes a minimum buffer of 82.5 feet. The total area of buffer reduction is 7,023 square feet in this location. Buffer increase is proposed on the east side of Wetland B so that there is increased buffer for this wetland on Lot 1. The total area of buffer increase is 8,890 square feet as it incorporates both proposed reduction areas. The increased buffer provides exactly 1:1 compensation for the reduced buffer based on the overall square footage. The proposed buffer averaging meets Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance Wetland Buffer Width Averaging Criteria A and C automatically with the exact exchange of buffer increase.for the buffer reduction and maintaining the final buffer width at 75% of the required buffer. The reduction of the buffers are necessary to accommodate the features of Lot 1 since it is more constrained by wetland and buffers than the other lots of this short plat. The reduction proposed from Wetland A, which lies mostly on Lots 2, 3 and 4 but extends across the southeastern portion of Lot 1, will not negatively impact the wetland because it comes to a point in this location and this area has lower function than the remainder of the wetland. Even though no additional buffer is proposed from Wetland A as part of the, averaging plan, there will be no loss of buffer function because there is additional buffer afforded to this wetland adjacent to the reduction area due to the position of the wetland on Lot 2 (see Appendix A-2b for buffer averaging plan). Overall, there will be no significant impact to the function of the buffer or wetland as a result of the reduction on Lot 1. The reduction of buffer along the south end of Wetland B also will not negatively impact the wetland function because there will be at least 45 feet of forested remaining between the future driveway and the wetland boundary. The increased buffer adjacent to Wetland B will provide additional protection for this wetland by creating a straight buffer rather than the severely g curvin one that results when the 60 foot buffer is measured from the wetland boundary. Since we humans work better with straight lines, the buffer can be easily 10 identified and marked so that intrusion is less likely than if the buffer remained in its current configuration. This increased buffer also provides good protection for the offsite portions of the wetland system. While buffer reductions are proposed and essentially there will be less buffer in some areas than in others, there will be no significant adverse impact to the wetland as a result of the reductions. Impacts to wetlands as a result of lower buffers can occur however, on this property, the buffer is being averaged with at least 75% of the width maintained in the reduced areas and averaging is proposed to maintain 100% of the buffer on Lot 1. Because the buffer is being averaged and the total buffer area is being maintained, the impacts to the wetlands in the proposed reduction areas will be minimal if not non-existent. The forested vegetation in the reduced buffer areas will be sufficient to provide noise and light protection from the future building site and will provide areas where excess water can percolate into upland soils for eventual discharge into the wetland. There will also be more than enough area and vegetation to maintain the quality of water that happens to flow across the buffers from the developed areas. SUMMARY The delineated wetlands discussed in this report are situated on the four lots of Short Plat No. 3045 on Lynch Road near Shelton, Mason County, Washington. Totten Inlet lies to the east of the lots and Lynch Road lies to the west. There is an existing well maintained access road that enters from Lynch Road at the southwest corner of the short plat and continues east along the southern property line to a 5 acre parcel on the east side. The topography consists of a shelf on the west side of the property along Lynch Road. This shelf slopes down moderately to the north and east and flattens out just before the east edge of the platted lots. A shallow ravine is located between the north line and the single family home further north with a new single family home near the southeast corner and another further to the south. The original 22 acre parcel was logged within the past 20 years and is now dominated by a young mixed forest with moderate to dense shrub and herbaceous layers. The east edge is dominated by alder and cascara while the vegetation on the remaining property is dominated by a mixed forest of fir, hemlock, cedar and bigleaf maple with a dense shrub layer dominated by salmonberry and blackberry with small overgrown logging roads crisscrossing the property. Two wetlands were identified on this parcel and are delineated as Wetland A and Wetland B. They are moderate to large size seasonally flooded forested sloping wetlands each with a moderate to dense shrub and emergent understory that extends a short distance offsite to the north and south. Wetland A meets the criteria for a Category III system scoring 42 points on the attached rating form and rates moderate to high for functional values. The project proposes to maintain all of the 110 foot required buffers except on Lot 1 and the future homes will have minimal impact on the functions of Wetland A despite reduction of the buffer in one location. Wetland B also meets the criteria for a Category III wetland that rates 11 moderate to moderate-high for functional values. It scores less than 20 habitat points on the rating form so a 60 foot buffer is required. Buffer averaging is proposed to permit access to Lot 1 as the buffer from Wetland B extends over the property line shared by Lots 1 and 2. The reduction will be compensated in another location on Lot 1 so that the buffer of Wetland B is an average width of 60 feet. The averaging plan also includes reduction of the 110,foot buffer of Wetland A where it crosses onto Lot 1. The averaging plan appears to meet all of the criteria of the Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance since there is an equal exchange of buffer with a total of 8,890 square feet of buffer reduction in two locations and a total of 8,890 square feet of increase in the southeast buffer of Wetland B. There will be no significant adverse impacts to either wetland as a result of the minor buffer reductions because there is high quality forested buffer remaining in the reduced areas. LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the Bill Stinchfield family., It is important to acknowledge that definition of plant community boundaries is not an exact science. Different agencies and individuals may often disagree on exact boundaries and/or plant community classifications. It is the responsibility of the various resource agencies that regulate development activities in wetlands to make the final determination of wetland boundaries. Therefore, the information presented in this report should be reviewed by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to detailed site planning and/or construction activities. Given the constraints of schedules and scope of work, Wiltermood Associates, Inc. warrants 1 that the work performed is in accordance with the technical guidelines and criteria in effect at the time this report was prepared. The results and recommendations of this report represent professional opinion based upon the information provided by the client, the client's , consultants, and that gathered through the course of this wetland study. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Signed Joanne Bartlett Professional Wetland Scientist 12 i I REFERENCES Cooke Scientific Services, Inc. Wetland and Buffer Functions Semi-Ouantitative Assessment Methodology. Final Working Draft, User's Manual. February 2000. I Cowardin, L., F. Golet, V. Carter. and E. LaRoe. Classification of Wetlands and I Deeywater Habitat of the United States U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS 79/31. 1979. 103 pp. IEnvironmental Laboratory. Corns of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. January 1987. 100 pp. plus appendices - Guard, B. Jennifer. Wetland Plants of Oregon and Washington. Lone Pine Publishing. 1995.. 239 pp. I Hitchcock, Leo C. and Cronquist, Arthur. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. 1973. 730 pp. Hrub , T. 2004. Wetland Rating S Y � stem v for Western Washington-Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication Number 04-06-025. August 2004, Updated October 2008. Lyons, C.P. Trees, Shrubs, and Flowers To Know in Washington. J.M. Dent and Sons Limited. 1977. 211 pp. Mason County Ordinance No. 77-93. Mason County Resource Ordinance. Revised December 27, 2006. Munsell Color. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth, a Division of Kollmorg en � Corporation. 1975. Baltimore, MD. Pojar, Jim and MacKinnon, Andy. Plants of the Pacific Northwes t st Coast; Washington, Oregon, British Columbia & Alaska. Lone Pine Publishing. 1.994. 527 pp. Speare-Cooke, Sarah. A Field Guide to the Common Wetland Plants of Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society. 1997. 417 pp. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wetland Plants of the Pacific Northwest September, 1984. 85 pp. i i 13 1 1 References, continued U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service Web soil survey. Soil Survey-Mason County, Washington. September 1960. 76 pp. plus map sheets. US Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web P � Soil Survey. http:Hwebsoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app[US US Department of Agriculture. Natural Resources Conservation Service. Plant Database. http:Hplants.usda.gov/ US Environmental Protection Agency. Wetlands Evaluation Technique (WET): Volume I: Literature Review and Evaluation Rationale. October 1991 US Fish and Wildlife Service Wetlands Digital Data-National Wetlands Inventory. http://wetlandsfws.er.usgs.gov[NNWindex.html U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National List of Plant Species That Occur In Wetlands: 1988 National Summary. September, 1988. 244 pp. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands, Northwest Supplement (Region 9). 1993. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. 1978. Washington State Department of Ecology. A Guide to Conducting Wetlands Inventories. Publication Number 89-60. December 1989. Washington State Department of Ecology. Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual, Publication No. 96-94. March 1997. 88 pp. plus appendices. Washington State Department of Natural Resources. State of Washington Natural Heritage Plan. 2007/2009 Update. 14 SITE SITE SIT iSITE o� r = Wiltermood APPENDIX A- 1 0 = Associates Inc. VICINITY MAP Port Harper Bd. Port Orchard, WA 96367 r (360) 676-2403 Q r � p � � a C rl v r n r ,ter 00 co \ 1 O g 19COPM, 8 all- n � Ig i \ � r X j 1� A w Q / Yf ° ``ter •�' `(/ / / � .� I Wiltermood VhlalfiAssociates, Inc. 1015 S.W. Harper Road Port Orrhana WA 98367--9306 (360)8762403 Fax(360)876-2053 • !�II :���-�'� :�'?�SsE��• 'v'S 4��U :9Ri._!'i:�,. .. �`�W:tY�,e':�"s. It Ir '%•��c' �� _''•tea. 3 ,-s- 4• `� _ � � � 2 - - -a a '- ��^ 6' - :ice _ '°��'.�'•�•:y"j::�a�„z.'•sit—_a Ile ta kwUl be r�. ;:�.�,__.�• a�• y't..�ys .__ '.r�� '�- f '. mac _ '� Y �t.•L''Yy.t. •._�,.: _ ".. � i� tip`'_ - I . r dS• �9,�: C :1 a '� A• .�'ti .aa..Lre:r ""+.'. ,w n r::` << gbF j t J �T. Fib•T.'- o- fjF 211, IVA f - .. _ , t��i sl � j• - � S f. - e� - L '• .e•L Srti WIF •x. r'• f�•���'"�� �-� ,�±.. 1:�`! II-—•'e" '' - -d•-�ram' ��j/l,• Yt+:m�acG:�L�ry3�y�-:a+._� n'..YaEXy s�w##��j.�f� � � � tee. �+�'f � � r� '� •� r. l ` 1• fi► � �. 2 10 . E .tt IF l„ 1 ram_ ,� 111 1 APPENDIX B MASON COUNTY SOIL SURVEY DESCRIPTION OF SOIL TYPES The soils described in this appendix are excerpts, considered applicable to urban development, taken from the Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Mason County Area, Washington, September, 1960. For further information, see page 16 of the soil survey. Information listed below for Alderwood soils was collected between 1951 and 1960 and uses for the individual soils have probably changed since that time. ALDERWOOD SERIES The Alderwood series consists of brown, well drained, upland soils. They have developed from mixed gravelly glacial till dominated by acid igneous rock. The imbedded gravel is mainly granite and quartzite. Rainfall is 45 to Winches a year. The native vegetation is a dense forest consisting _y almost entirely of Douglas fir and a dense understory of salal, Oregon grape, vine maple, and huckleberry. Northeast of the Hood Canal the understory is mainly rhododendron. Alderwood soils occupy the extensive rolling glacial moraines, and they are the dominant soils of the eastern part of the county. The Alderwood soils are associated with the somewhat excessively drained Everett and Indianola soils and with the moderately well drained Kitsap soils. Shelton and Hoodsport soils differ from the Alderwood soils in that they have developed under high rainfall and from glacial till having a much higher content of the basic igneous rock. The Shelton and Hoodsport soils are more reddish throughout the profile. The Shelton soils are usually deeper to the cemented till than the Alderwood soils. Ab-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 5-15% slopes This is the most extensive soil of the Alder-wood series. It occupies undulating to rolling moraines. In undisturbed areas, a 1 to 2 inch mat of very dark brown, acid organic matter is on the surface. This grades to a thin, dark grayish-brown, highly organic mineral soil. The surface soil consists of a friable, brown medium acid gravelly sandy loam 8 to 13 inches deep. Below the surface soil, to depths ranging from 18 to 24 inches, is a pale-brown gravelly sandy loam that is very friable. Between this layer and the cemented till, is a 3 to 10 inch layer of very pale brown gravelly sandy loam. The cemented till consists of light gray, gravelly sandy loam, and it normally occurs at depths ranging from 24 to 32 inches. It is impermeable to roots and very slowly permeable to water. The cemented substratum tends to restrict the rapid downward movement of moisture. Not more than about 5 percent of this soil has been cleared and is used for crops or pasture. Most of the cultivated acreage is near the inlets of Puget Sound in the vicinities of Arcadia and Allyn. In this area, the Alderwood soils are associated with the better agricultural soils of the Cloquallum, Sinclair, and Kitsap series. Hay, small grains, pasture, fruits, nuts, grapes, and berries are the principal crops grown on the Alderwood soils. Nearly all the uncleared acreage is in second-growth forest 70 to 80 years of age. Shallowness of the compact till often inhibits growth of older trees. This soil is in capability subclass VIs and in site classes 4 and 5 € for Douglas fir. Small areas along the border, where the soil is more than 32 inches deep to compact till, are in site classes 3 and 4 for Douglas fir. APPENDIX B MASON COUTNY SOIL.SURVEY DESCRIPTION OF SOIL TYPES The soils described in this appendix are excerpts, considered applicable to urban development, taken from the Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Mason County Area, Washington; September, 1960. For further information, see page 18 & 38 of the Soil Survey. Bd Bellingham silt loam. This soil is widely distributed over the eastern part of the -- county and is associated with the Cloquallum soils. On the Islands of Case Inlet and Pickering Passage and bordering mainland, it is associated with the Kitsap soils. Permeability of this Bellingham soil is slow. The available water capacity is high. This soil is ponded during winter. Runoff is ponded, and water erosion is not a hazard or is a slight hazard. This soil is used mainly for hay, pasture, woodland, and wildlife habitat. Most of the area if artificially drained. When ponded, this soil serves as a resting area for ducks, herons, and other waterfowl. Plantings of smartweed, wild millet, and bulrush increase waterfowl populations. -A high water table is above or at w the surface throughout the rainy season. This soil if poorly suited to urban development because of depth to the seasonal high water table, seasonal ponding, and the shrink-swell potential of the subsoil. Septic tank drainage fields do not function properly during the wet season because of the seasonal high water table and restricted permeability. Rb Rough Broken The soil, where it has been formed, is shallow, gravely and variable, but has some characteristics of the dominant upland soils in the vicinity. The - vegetation is variable and its composition depends on aspect, seepage and depth of soil. This mapping unit has no agricultural value and should be left in its natural cover to prevent erosion. It is in capability subclass VIIe. APPENDIX B MASON COUNTY SOIL SURVEY DESCRIPTION OF SOIL TYPES The soils described in this appendix are excerpts, considered applicable to urban development, taken from the Soil Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Mason County Area Washington, September,ember, 1960. For further information, see pages 29-30 of the soil survey. Information listed below for Everett soils was collected between 1951 and 1960 and uses for the individual soils have probably changed since that time. INDIANOLA SERIES The soils in the Indianola series are excessively drained, droughty, brown soils of the uplands. They have developed in hummocky and rolling ridges from glacial drift that consisted of loose, porous sand. The sand came mainly from acid igneous rocks. The annual rainfall ranges from 50 to 70 inches and the native vegetation is mainly Douglas fir. Indianola soils occur in the eastern half of the county in association with the Alderwood and Everett soils. They are unlike the Everett soils in that they are not gravelly. They differ from the Alderwood soils in not being gravelly and in having a sandy rather than a cemented substratum. Indianola soils are more nearly like the Lystair soils in the western part of the county. They differ from those soils mainly in having brown and yellowish- brown colors and less basic igneous material in the parent drift. The Lystair soils are brown and reddish yellow, and they occur in an area of higher rainfall. lb Indianola loamy sand 5-15% slopes Stronger relief distinguishes this soil from Indianola sandy loam, 0-5% slopes. Use and management are similar to those of the Indianola loam sand, 5-15% slopes. Crop yields are somewhat higher because the surface soil has a slightly finer texture. The supply of available moisture is slightly greater, but it is still low. This soil is in capability subclass IVs and in site classes 3 and 4 for Douglas fir. Id Indianola sandy loam 0-5% slopes The surface soil is very friable, weakly granular, brown sandy loam. The depth to sand is slightly greater than the Indianola loamy sandy, 5-15% slope, but the rest of the profile is similar. This soil has about the same uses and needs the same management of Indianola loamy sand, 5-15% slopes. Because of the slightly finer texture of the surface soil and greater depth to the sandy substratum, the supply of moisture is slightly higher; consequently, crop yields are generally higher. This soil is in capability subclass IVs and in site classes 3 and 4 for Douglas fir. APPENDIX C: WETLAND DETERMINATION/DELINEATION METHODOLOGY The definition for wetland established by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) was used to determine the presence and extent of wetlands on this parcel. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (1972) states that wetlands are: "Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes,bogs, and similar areas." This criteria is based on the Department of Ecology Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual, the 1987 Corps of Engineers (COE) Wetland Delineation Manual and the 1989 Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation(FICWD). This committee included representatives from the COE, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency, and Soil Conservation Service, to establish technical procedures and guidelines for wetland determination and delineation. These guidelines as set forth in both delineation manuals requires that three technical criterion: (1)hydrophytic vegetation, (2) hydric soils, and (3) wetland hydrology must all be met for an area to be identified as wetland. A general summary of these criterion or parameters as defined within the COE and FICWD manuals include: Hydroph is Vegetation Criterion: This criterion is met when, under normal circumstances 50 percent or more of the composition of the dominant species from all strata are obligate wetland (OBL), facultative wetland (FACW), and/or facultative (FAQ. Hydric Soil Criterion: This criterion is met for any area having soils that are saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (USDA Soil Conservation Service, 1987). Wetland Hydrology Criterion: This criterion is met for any area having permanent or periodic inundation, or soil saturation to the surface, at least seasonally. These three criterion are the basis for all field work and wetland delineation performed on p this parcel. The specific methodology used is outlined in the next section. WETLAND DELINEATION METHODOLOGY The wetland delineation followed the Routine On-site and Intermediate Determination Methods as outlined in each manual. A summary of this method includes: fPlant Community Assessment. The entire project site was initially walked to identify the plant community types present. This provided a rough picture of the type and extent of wetland(s) which exist on site. Also observed and noted were topographical features, I 1 hydrologic flow patterns, and any significantly disturbed areas. It was then determined whethA normal environmental conditions were present, or human modifications had occurred to the wetland. sample areas or points were selected and flagged to, Areas . A series of p Selection of Sample ( ) best characterize the plant communities of suspected wetland and non-wetland areas. The approximate location of these flagged sample points were noted on a map of the project site fo subsequent survey. Characterization of Plant Communities. At each sample point the dominant plant species within the tree, shrub, and herb stratum were identified and noted on a data form. Species we, identified and noted according to Flora of the Pacific Northwest(Hitchcock & Cronquist, 1973 indicator status as listed in the National List of PI a- The estimated percent areal cover and them ( Species that Occur in We tlands: 1988 Washington)were also noted on the data form. It was ve etation criteria was met. When 50% or more of ed whether the hydrophytic g then determm dominant species have an indicator status of OBL, FACW, or FAC, the vegetation is consider' hydrophytic. Characterization of Soils. At each sample point, a hole 16 to 18 inches in depth was dug us'` a spade(an existing soil perk hole was used if available). Soil characteristics (matrix color, mottles, etc.) were examined and noted. It was then determined whether the hydric soil criteri was met. Hydric soil criterion is outlined on page 6 of the FICWD manual and pages 26 to 34 the COE manual. Determination of Hydrology Criterion. At each sample point the presence of inundation by water, soil saturation by water,or other hydrologic field indicators was noted. It was then determined whether the wetland hydrology criterion was met. Wetland Determination. The completed data forms were then examined for each selected sample point within the plant communities. Each plant community meeting the hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soil, and wetland hydrology criteria was considered.wetland. Data forms numbered correspondingly to the sample points located on the final survey drawing. DETERMINATION OF WETLAND-NONWETLAND BOUNDARY After completing the determination method summarized above, the actual boundary between wetland and non-wetland was delineated. This delineation was completed by: 1. recognizing obvious wetland and non-wetland areas, 2. identification of transitional areas between the two areas, 3. final determination of the boundary by further sampling of vegetation, soils, and hydrology. The wetland Boundary was then flagged with numbered orange flags with WB (Wetland Boundary) written on them. The approximate location of these flags was then noted on a map, if available, for subsequent survey. * Important Note: The exact location of the boundary between wetland and non-wetland areas may b. difficult to determine, especially if transition areas are more gradual. In cases such as this the wetlan, boundary is determined, after further sampling, by using the best possible professional judgment. 2 APPENDIX D DEFINITION OF PLANT INDICATOR STATUS The following plant indicator status categories and their symbols are derived from the Wetland Plant List, Northwest Region, USFWS, Washington, D.C. (Reed, 1988) Symbol Definition of Plant Indicator Status OBL Obligate wetland.plants are nearly always found in wetlands (estimated probability 99% or more) FACW Facultative wetland plants usually found in wetlands (estimated probability 67-99%) FAC Facultative plants are equally likely in wetlands and uplands (estimated probability 34-66%) FACU Facultative upland plants usually in uplands (estimated probability 67799%) UPL Upland plants are nearly always in uplands (estimated probability 99% or more) NI Not indicated plant species are not determined due to lack of sufficient information NL Not listed in the "National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands" indicating the lack of information for this species. Note: The "National List of Plant species that Occur in Wetlands" uses a plus (+) or minus (-) sign to specify a higher or lower portion of a particular wetland indicator frequency for the three facultative-type indicators...). (from section 2.5, page 6; Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands) A, Wetland name or number APPENDIX E-la WETLAND RATING FORM-WESTERN WASHINGTON — Version 2-Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Name of wetland(if known): S�j J,b;�e(6 — yj 1'1Q Date of site visit: Rated by >:ve r"o— Trained by Ecology? .Yes-X No Date of training — SEC: 2a TWNSHP: 20N RNGE: 2.w Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes_ No Map of wetland unit: Figure A-L Estimated size }/- gaues SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland I II III X IV Category I=Score>=70 Score for Water Quality Functions 0 Category II=Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 1 fo Category III=Score 30-50X Score for Habitat Functions 20 Category IV= Score<30 TOTAL score for Functions 4 Z Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I II Does not Apply-K Final Category (choose the "highest'category from above) g Summary of basic information about the wetland unit a Wetland Unit has Special Wetland HGM Class Characteristics used for Rating Estuarine De ressional Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine Bog Lake-fringe Mature Forest Sloe X Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal None of the above Check if unit has multiple HGM classes present Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 1 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number Does the wetland unit 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. Check List for Wetlands That May Need Additional Protection YES NO in addition to the protection recommended for its category) SPL Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. X SP2. Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands see p. 19 of data form). X SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? X SP4. Does the wetland unit 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 in a local management plan as having special significance. To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the HydrogeomoMhic Class of the wetland being rated The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into 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. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington [rated,- he hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being you probably have 4.unit with multiple IIGM'lasses. In this case,identify whichrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply,and go to Question 8. y 1.Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides(i.e. exce t durin floods ? -( go to 2 YES—the wetland class is Tidal Fringe p g ) 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 Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called 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.The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source(>90%)of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. ®--gd to 3 YES—The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a"Flats"wetland,use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface)at least 20 acres (8 ha) in size; �_At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft(2 m)? O go to 4 YES—The wetland class is Lake-fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the eptire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? V 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.. ZThe water leaves the wetland without being impounded? NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep). NO -go to 5 (YE The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 3 version 2 August 2004 Wetland name or number lk 5.Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The unit is in a valley, or stream channel,where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river 1 The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO-go to 6 YES—The wetland class is Riverine h 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year. This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO—go to 7 YES—The wetland class is Depressional 4 7.Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious {_ natural outlet. NO—go to 8 YES—The wetland class is Depressional i C_ 8.Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain,or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT(make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within 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 unit being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than 10%of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM Class to Use in Ratingl Slope+Riverine Riverine Slope+Depressional Depressional Slope +Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional+Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional Depressional +Lake-fringe De ressional Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater Treat as ESTUARINE under } wetland wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 4 August 2004 1 version 2 • I i WETLAND UNIT t �► �, lk Jr Ir rae , � „ � . r jj + ♦. err -XI Nll-m� lie , r If Tv-g yj PROPERTY BOUNDARY WETLAND UNIT SLOPING I' OFFSITE WETLAND SLOPING ROADS & TRAILS OFFSITE STREAM I ti PROPERTY AFTER SURVEY (REVISED) — I Wiltermood Associates, Inc. � Q 1015 SAY Harper Rd. FIGURE ' Port Orchard, SPA 98367 (360) 876-2403 WETLAND VEGETATION �3�� e•s� tea'`^' e- low- Ail'Y �» •� t ! d r � y r' �" i; �,� �i► tea �, 'yam}� <<�� 1 it y� � �i �• i y r Jv 'r'E •,` r ' ;��, i+fit � � It low y w PROPERTY BOUNDARY WETLAND UNIT SLOPING OFFSITE WETLAND SLOPING FORESTED VEGETATION CLASS ROADS & TRAILS OFFSITE STREAM PROPERTY AFTER SURVEY (REVISED) -- Wiltermood Q i_W ` = Associates, Inc. � Q 1 1015 SW Harper Rd. FIGURE 2 , Port Orchard, SPA 98367 (360) 876-2403 WETLAND HYDROPLRIODS 0 p7 14.11,4 T lieIV w lb if �rirw,a iaa 1c:- fEa as rr _r ,=siai''--.� i � rii >•i y , � ���.' f ♦ i�., y. ♦" ,�� , mod', ' � "t ',,. .Y f ♦♦ �l i t � � F � i q1. w . .�y .a- f s 'y - !'; s..�r f IF 44 1p nor 7- PROPERTY AFTER SURVEY (REVISED) �- PROPERTY BOUNDARY WETLAND UNIT SLOPING --- - m I OFFSITE WETLAND SLOPING ROADS & TRAILS ^ SEASONALLY FLOODED HYDROPERIOD ^' ROADS & TRAILS I Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 1015 SAP Harper Rd. FIGURE 3 ' Port Orchard, YEA 98367 (360) 876-2403 �- 61 WETLAND DUFFLRS • �r ��.-'a 7-:-:•�E�...t"r,ll�, "_!�[�r7��. 1 :. F� ��_ � � � � '�Y'" r �" �3. • b W_ " r 11►► i s A i' � �t��i { .. �f.�' �jlr�� �« f'f �r'� •Y ��f A T� ` � .;_ .•�•`. , ����V•\1 w �� _ ..� to '�. ,6 =IVA � .46 w o i PROPERTY BOUNDARY PROPERTY AFTER SURVEY (REVISED) - - WETLAND UNIT SLOPING - -- ti OFFSITE WETLAND SLOPING ROADS & TRAILS UNDISTURBED BUFFERS OFFSITE STREAM 1 Wiltermood 0 Associates, Inc. TC� Q+ 1015 SAP Harper Rd. FIGURE 4 Port Orchard, RYA 98367 (360) 876-2403 Wetland name or number S Slop Wetlands Points. WATER,QUALITY VUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (only.1'score — per box) im rove water quality J� S S 1.Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.64) S S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of unit: 4Y Slope is 1%or less(a I%slope has a I foot vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft horizontal distance) points=3 Slope is 1%-2% points=2 Slope is 2%- 5% points= l Slope is greater than 5% omfs=0 S S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface(or duff layer)is clay or organic (use NRCS definitions) YES=3 points =0 points Q S S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Figure— Choose the points appropriate for the description that best f is the vegetation in the wetland. Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface(>75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 inches. Dense,uncut,herbaceous vegetation>90%of the wetland area oin s Dense,uncut,herbaceous vegetation> 1/2 of area points=3 Dense,woody,vegetation>'/2 of area points=2 Dense,uncut,herbaceous vegetation> 1/4 of area points= 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation points=0 b Aerial photo or map with vegetation polygons S Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above 1 1 S S 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p.67) 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 ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants coming from several sources, but any single source would qualify as opportunity. — Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft — Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland — Tilled fields, logging,or orchards within 150 feet of wetland . — Residential,urban areas,or golf courses are within 150 ft upslope of wetland multiplier — Other YES multiplier is 2 ® multiplier is 1 S TOTAL -Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from S l by S2 b Add score to table on p. 1 Comments Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 11 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number S SIope Wetlands Points. HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS - Indicators that the wetland unit functions to (01�y t score per box) reduce flooding and stream erosion S 3.Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and stream (see p.69) erosion? SS 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms. Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fit conditions in the wetland. (stems of plants should be thick enough (usually> 118in), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows) Dense,uncut,rigid vegetation covers >90%of the area of the wetland. oirits=6 Dense,uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/2 area of wetland points=3 Dense,uncut, rigid vegetation> 1/4 area points= 1 More than 1/4 of area is grazed,mowed,tilled or vegetation is not rigid points=0 S S 3.2 Characteristics of slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood flows: The slope wetland has small surface depressions that can retain water over at least 10%of its area. (ED points=2 NO points=0 S Add the points in the boxes above 1j 1 s S 4.Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? see p. 70) Is the wetland in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows? Note which of the following conditions apply. — Wetland has surface runoff that drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems — Other multiplier (Answer NO if the major source of water is controlled by a reservoir(e.g. wetland is a seep 2- that is on the downstream side of a dam) YES multiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 5 TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S 3 by S 4 1 Add score to table on p. 1 Comments Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 12 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number These questions apply to wetlands of all'HGM classes Points (only t score HABITAT FUNCTIONS-Indicators that unit functions to provide important habitat per box) H 1. Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure(seep. 72) Figure— Check the types of vegetation classes present(as defined by Cowardin)-Size threshold for each class is Y4 acre or more than 10%of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. Aquatic bed Emergent plants Scrub/shrub(areas where shrubs have>30%cover) _Forested(areas where trees have>30%cover) If the unit has a forested class check if The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata(canopy,sub-canopy, shrubs,herbaceous, moss/ground-cover)that each cover 20%within the forested polygon Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. If you have: 4 structures or more points=4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points=2 2 structures points= 1 1 structure points=0 H 1.2. Hydroperiods (seep. 73) Figure_ Check the types of water regimes(hydroperiods)present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10%of the wetland or%acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points=3 _X—Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present points=2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present oint= 1 Saturated only 1 type present points=0 Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to,the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to,the wetland Lake fringe wetland =2 points Freshwater tidal wetland=2 points Map of hydroperiods H 1.3. Richness of Plant Species(seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 f 2. (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� List species below ifyou want to: 5- 19 species points= 1 <5 species points=0 2- Total for page 14 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number H 1.4.Interspersion of habitats(seep. 76) Figure, Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes(described in H 1.1),or the classes and unvegetated areas(can include open water or mudflats)is high,medium,low,or none. C) o one=0 poi-n-t-s`� Low= 1 point Moderate=2 points [riparian braided channels] ] High =3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always"high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes D H 1.5. Syecial Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that,are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the -number of points you put into the next column. K Large,downed,woody debris within the wetland(>4in. diameter and 6 ft long). k 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(or ditch_in,or contiguous with the unit, for at least 33 ft (1 Om) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope)OR signs of recent beaver activity are present(cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least''/a acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated(structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25%of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTE: The 20%stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. �{ H 1. TOTAL Score- potential for providing habitat 8 Add the scores from H1.1, H1.Z H1.3, H1.4, HI.S Comments Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number H 2. Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (seep. 80) Figure_ Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating. See text for definition of "undisturbed" — 100 in(330R)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing,no landscaping,no daily human use) Points=5 — 100 in(330 ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas, or open er > 50% circumference. Points=4 — 50 in(I MR)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water>95% circumference. Points=4 — 100 m(33OR)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water>25% circumference, . Points=3 — 50 m(170ft) of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water for> 50%circumference. Points=3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above — No paved areas(except paved trails) or buildings within 25 m(80R)of wetland>95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points=2 — No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for>50%circumference. Light to moderate grazing, or lawns are OK. Points=2 — Heavy grazing in buffer. Points= 1 — Vegetated buffers are<2m wide(6.6ft)for more than 95%of the 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 Aerial hoto showin buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) 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 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 roods,paved roads, are considered breaks in the corridor). YES =4 points (go to H 2.3) T�=H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undistu go to H 2.2.2 c rbed and unbroken vegetated corridor it riparian or upland)that is at least 50ft wide,has at least 30%cover of shrubs or s J turd connects to estuaries, other wetlands or undisturbed uplands that are at least 25 sire? OR a Lake-fringe wetland, if it does not have an undisturbed corridor as in points (go to H 2.3) NO=H 2.2.3 wetland: 't`` S nv(81an) of a brackish or salt water estuary OR 3 mi of a large field or pasture(>40 acres)OR 1 nu of a lake greater than 20 acres? YJF$ 11 int Z NO=0 points Total for page b .Washington 15 August 2004 Wetland name or number H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW(seep. 82) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330R(100in)of the wetland unit?NOTE: the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. These are DFW definitions. Check with your local DFW biologist if there are any questions. . ,-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 7.6 in(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)>81 cm(32 in)dbh or>200 years of age. Mature forests: Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm(21 in)dbh; crown cover may be less that 100%;crown cover may be less that 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 grasses and/or forbs form the natural climax plant community. Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15-2.0 in(0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt,andesite,and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. Caves: A naturally occurring cavity,recess,void,or system of interconnected passages Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy 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. 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 0.5ppt. during the period of average annual low flow.Includes both estuaries and lagoons. XMarine/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 2 priority habitat = oinf,:::� If wetland has 1 priority habitat=1 point No habitats=0 points Note:All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this 3 list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H 2.4 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number H 2.4 Wetland Landscape (choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within '/z mile, and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed(light grazing between wetlands OK,as is lake shore with some 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 wetlands within '/z mile points=5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within '/2 mile,BUT the connections between them are disturbed omts=3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within '/2 mile points=3 There is at least 1 wetland within '/z mile. points=2 There are no wetlands within '/Z mile. points=0 H 2. TOTAL Score- opportunity for providing habitat Add the scores om H2.I,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 L 2 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 Total Score for Habitat Functions —add the points for H 1,H 2 and record the result on P. 1 20 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 i Wetland name or number CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 1 Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? — The dominant water regime is tidal, — Vegetated, and — With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO X SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge,National Park, National Estuary Reserve,Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat.I Environmental,or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC.332-30-151? YES =Category I NO go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES=Category I NO.=Category II Cat. I —The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat. II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10%of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating (UII). The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a IRI Category I. Do not,however, exclude the area of Spartina in - determining the size threshold of 1 acre. —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. —The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number A- SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Cat.I 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 unit 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. 79)and go to SC 2.2 NO SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES =Category I NO K not a Heritage Wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) Does the wetland unit(or any part of the unit)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 functions. 1. Does the unit 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 the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)?Yes- go to Q. 3 No -go to Q. 2 2. Does the unit 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 Q. 3 No -Is not a bog for purpose of raring 3. Does the unit 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 36% of the total shrub and herbaceous cover consists of species in Table 3)? Yes—Is a bog for purpose of rating No- go to Q.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16"deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog"plant species in Table 3 are present,the wetland is a bog. 1. Is the unit 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)? 2. YES = Category I Now Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands (seep. 90) Does the wetland unit 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 functions: — Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/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 average diameters(dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay, decadence,numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES= Category I NO not a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons (seep. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? — The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks — The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains 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 NOS not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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%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 feet) YES=Category I NO=Category II Cat. II Wetland Raring Form—western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Wetland name or number SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? YES -go to SC 6.1 NO-knot 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 0 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 once acre or larger? YES= Category II NO-go to SC 6.2 Cat. II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 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.l Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 � Wetland name or numberj WSJ APPENDIX E-lb i WETLAND RATING FORM-WESTERN WASHINGTON Version 2-Updated July 2006 to increase accuracy and reproducibility among users Updated Oct 2008 with the newhW,�D�FW definitions for priority habitats Name of wetland(if known): L o�" I - �N ��1,1�(a v\A Date of site visit: 2 q-r Rated by OcL UC��,X,,i 161 C X 4 - Trained by Ecology? Yes�c No_ Date of training LLSL-0L iSEC:Zd TWNSHP:'Z(-)/y RNGE: 2 uJ Is S/T/R in Appendix D? Yes_ No Map of wetland unit: Figure Estimated size Z aLl re C SV&L TxE SUMMARY OF RATING Category based on FUNCTIONS provided b wetland g rY P Y I II III IV Category I=Score>=70 Score for Water Quality Functions Category H=Score 51-69 Score for Hydrologic Functions Category III=Score 30-50 Score for Habitat Functions ' Category IV=Score<30 TOTAL score for Functions 3Z Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland I II Does not Apply_L Final Category (choose the"highest" category from above) El Summary of basic information about the wetland unit Wetland"Unit has Special Wetland HGM Class Cltaraeteristics: used for Ratio Estuarine De ressional Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine Bog Lake-fringe Mature Forest Sloe X" Old Growth Forest Flats Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal Interdunal I None of the above Check if unit has multiple — HGM classes present i1term o c:d Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 1 = version 2 To be used with Ecology Publication 04-06-025 soci ,tee, 1015 S.W. Harper Road 1 Port Orchard, WA 983rT9.306 1 (360)876-2403 Fax(360)<4i Wetland name or number �. Does the wetland unit 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. Mbeek ,><st f W Wetlands That Mai 1�Teed Additional Proteehon YES NO in addition to the protection recommended":for it$ ca -------------- o SP 1.Has the wetland unit been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or Endangered animal or plant species (TIE species)? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented"means the wetland is on the appropriate state or federal database. SP2.Has the wetland unit been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented"means the wetland is on the appropriate state database. Note: Wetlands with State listed plant species are categorized as Category I Natural Heritage Wetlands see p. 19 of data form). SP3. Does the wetland unit contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW for the state? SP4. Does the wetland unit 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 in a local management plan as having special significance. �C To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the Hydrogeomorphic Class of the wetland being rated. - The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands into 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. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 2 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number Classification of Wetland Units in Western Washington If the hydrologic criteria listed.in each gnestion do not apply to the.entire unit being. rat probably have_a unit:with multiple HGM classes: In tliis case,identify which hydrologic criteria in questjons l-7 applx and go to Question 8« 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit 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 Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were called 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. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%)of water to it. G dwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO—go to 3 YES—The wetland class is Flats ------------ If your wetland can be classified as a"Flats"wetland,use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet both of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any vegetation on the surface) at least 20 acres(8 ha)in size; At least 30%of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft(2 m)? O go to 4 YES—The wetland class is Lake-fringe(Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _ The wetland is on a slope(slope can be very gradual), ___LThe 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 type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3ft diameter and less than oot deep). NO-go to 5 S=The wetland class is Slope Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 3 August 2004 __ version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The unit is in a valley, or stream channel,where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river The overbank flooding occurs at least once every two years. NOTE: The riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding. NO-go to 6 YES—The wetland class is Riverine 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds,or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year. This means that any outlet, ifpresent, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO—go to 7 YES—The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding. The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched,but has no obvious natural outlet. NO—go to 8 YES—The wetland class is Depressional 8.Your wetland unit seems to,be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM clases. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT(make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within 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 unit . being rated. If the area of the class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90%of the total area. HGM Classes within the wetland unit being rated =. HGM Class to Use in Rating Slope+Riverine Riverine Slope+Depressional Depressional Slope+Lake-fringe Lake-fringe Depressional+Riverine along stream within boundary Depressional Depressional+Lake-fdn e Depressional. Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater Treat as ESTUARINE under wetland wetlands with special characteristics If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 4 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number A01 S S160e Wedtinda Points CATER -77777 ,C UUAi,ZT UNCTIONS, Indicators that the wetland unit futictrons to - t°�y Imp MYe water t1 S S 1.Does the wetland unit have the potential to improve water quality? (see p.64) S S 1.1 Characteristics of average slope of unit: Slope isl%or less(a 1%slope has a 1 foot vertical drop in elevation for every 100 ft horizontal distance) points=3 Slope is 1%-2% points=2 Slope is 2%-5% Slope is greater than 5% points=0 S S 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface(or duff layer)is clay or organic (use MRCS definitions) YES=3 points O 0 points S S 1.3 Characteristics of the vegetation in the wetland that trap sediments and pollutants: Figure 2__, Choose the points appropriate for the description that bestfits the vegetation in the t.A wetland.Dense vegetation means you have trouble seeing the soil surface(>75% cover), and uncut means not grazed or mowed and plants are higher than 6 inches. Dense,uncut,herbaceous vegetation>90%of the wetland area points=6 Dense,uncut,herbaceous vegetation> 1/2 of area points= Dense,woody,vegetation>%z of area points=2 Dense,uncut,herbaceous vegetation> 1/4 of area points= 1 Does not meet any of the criteria above for vegetation points=0 3 Aerial photo or map with vegetation polygons S Total for S 1 Add the points in the boxes above S S 2.Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p.67) 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 ofpollutants. A unit may have pollutants comingfrom several sources, but any single source would quay as opportunity. — Grazing in the wetland or within 150ft — Untreated stormwater discharges to wetland — Tilled fields,logging,or orchards within 150 feet of wetland multiplier -4 Residential,urban areas,or golf courses are within 150 ft upslope of wetland — Other Z (Vultiplier is 2 NO multiplier is 1 S TOTAL-Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from S1 by S2 Add score to table on p. 1 Comments Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 11 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Alm ,s Wetland name or number Slope Wetlands = - -_ Points:: HYDR.QL C FUNCTIONS Indacakors that thn wetland unit faar r tions to (ocly t reduce flooding and stream erosion PC S 3.Does the wetland unit have the potential to reduce flooding and stream (see p 68) erosion? ® S S 3.1 Characteristics of vegetation that reduce the velocity of surface flows during storms. Choose the points appropriate for the description that best fit conditions in the wetland. (stems of plants should be thick enough(usually> 1/8in), or dense enough, to remain erect during surface flows) Dense,uncut,rigid vegetation covers >90%of the area of the wetland. points=6 Dense,uncut,rigid vegetation> 1/2 area of wetland poin =3 Dense,uncut,rigid vegetation> 1/4 area points=� More than 1/4 of area is grazed,mowed,tilled or vegetation is / not rigid points=0 l S S 3.2 Characteristics of slope wetland that holds back small amounts of flood flows: The slope wetland has small surface depressions that can retain watez_over at least 10%of its area. YES points= NO points=0 S Add the points in the boxes above S S 4.Does the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? see p. 70) Is the wetland in a landscape position where the reduction in water velocity it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or erosive flows? Note which of the following conditions apply. — Wetland has surface runoff that drains to a river or stream that has flooding _ problems — Other multiplier (Answer NO if the major source of water is controlled by a reservoir(e.g. wetland is a seep Z that is on the downstr m side of a dam) YES multiplier. 2 NO multiplier is 1 S TOTAL -Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from S 3 by S 4 Add scare to table on p. 1 (� Comments Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 12 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number T'friese questions apply to wetlands of all$Gt classes.:: FOM (only t score HABITAT FUNCTIONS,--Indicators tlia unit functioms ik rovideimportanthabitat max) H 1.Does the wetland unit have the potential to provide habitat for many species? H 1.1 Vegetation structure(see P. 72) Figure Check the types of vegetation classes present(as defined by Cowardin)-Size threshold for each Q r,.��_ class is 114 acre or more than 10%of the area if unit is smaller than 2.5 acres. 1 Aquatic bed Emergent plants Scrub/shrub(areas where shrubs have>30%cover) _Forested(areas where trees have>30%cover) If the unit has a forested class check if. �C The forested class has 3 out of 5 strata(canopy,sub-canopy,shrubs,herbaceous, moss/ground-cover)that each cover 20%within the forested polygon Add the number of vegetation structures that qualify. If you have: 4 structures or more points=4 Map of Cowardin vegetation classes 3 structures points=2 2 structures points= 1 structure points=0 H 1.2.Hydroperiods(seep. 73) Figure_ Check the types of water regimes(hydroperiods)present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10%of the wetland or'/,acre to count. (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods) Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present points=3 _Seasonally flooded or inundated 3.types present points=2 Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present om Saturated only only 1 type present points=0 Permanently flowing stream or river in,or adjacent to,the wetland Seasonally flowing stream in,or adjacent to,the wetland Lake fringe wetland =2 points Freshwater tidal wetland=2 points Map of hydroperiods H 1.3.Richness of Plant Species(seep. 75) Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 f12. (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 Mobil, reed canarygrass,purple loosestrife, Canadian Thistle If you counted. > 19 species points= List species below if you want to: 5- 19 species points= 1 <5 species points=0 2 Total for page Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 13 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number H 1.4.Interspersion of habitats(seep. 76) Figure Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion between Cowardin vegetation classes(described in H 1.1),or the classes and unvegetated areas(can include open water or AVV mudflats)is high,medium,low,or none. O one=0 points Low= 1 point Moderate=2 points �• [riparian braided channels] High =3 points NOTE: If you have four or more classes or three vegetation classes and open water the rating is always"high". Use map of Cowardin vegetation classes 01 H 1.5. Special Habitat Features: (seep. 77) Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number ofpoints you put into the next column. Large,downed,woody debris within the wetland(>4in.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(or ditch)in,or contiguous with the unit,for at least 33 ft (10m) Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30degree slope)OR signs of recent beaver activity are present(cut shrubs or trees that have not yet turned grey/brown) At least Y4 acre of thin-stemmed persistent vegetation or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated(structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25%of the wetland area in each stratum of plants NOTE.- The 20%stated in early printings of the manual on page 78 is an error. H 1.TOTAL Score- potential for providing habitat I 1 Add the scores from H1.1, H1.2, H1.3, H1.4, H1.5 I 1 Comments Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 14 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 'I Wetland name or number H 2.Does the wetland unit have the opportunity to provide habitat for many species? H 2.1 Buffers (see P. 80) Figure Choose the description that best represents condition of buffer of wetland unit. The highest scoring _ criterion that applies to the wetland is to be used in the rating.See text for definition of "undisturbed." — 100 m(330ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water >95% of circumference. No structures are within the undisturbed part of buffer. (relatively undisturbed also means no-grazing,no landscaping,no daily human use) Points=5 —� 100 in(330 ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water > 50% circumference. T oin = 50 m(170ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water>95% circumference. Points=4 — 100 in(330ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water>25% circumference,. Points=3 — 50 in(170ft)of relatively undisturbed vegetated areas,rocky areas,or open water for> 50%circumference. Points=3 If buffer does not meet any of the criteria above — No paved areas(except paved trails)or buildings within 25 m(80ft)of wetland>95% circumference. Light to moderate grazing,or lawns are OK. Points=2 — No paved areas or buildings within 50m of wetland for>50%circumference. Light to moderate grazing,or lawns are OK. Points=2 — Heavy grazing in buffer. Points=1 — Vegetated buffers are<2m wide(6.6ft)for more than 95%of the 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 Lr Aerial photo showing buffers H 2.2 Corridors and Connections (seep. 81) 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 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 H2.3) NOS go to H 2.2.2 H 2.2.2 Is the wetland part of a relatively undisturbed and un oken vegetated corridor (either riparian or upland)that is at least 50ft 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 abov . S=2 0' (go toH2.3) NO=H2.2.3 H 2.2.3 Is the e and: within 5 mi(81am)of a brackish or salt water estuary OR within 3 mi of a large field or pasture(>40 acres)OR within 1 mi of a lake greater than 20 acres? 2 YES=1 point NO=0 points Total for page L Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 15 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number H 2.3 Near or adjacent to other priority habitats listed by WDFW(see new and complete descriptions of WDFWpriority habitats,and the counties in which they can be found,in the PHS report httn://wdfw.wa.zovlhablphslist.htm) Which of the following priority habitats are within 330ft(100m)of the wetland unit?NOTE.- the connections do not have to be relatively undisturbed. - Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 0.4 ha(1 acre). Biodiversity Areas and Corridors:Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 152). Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock Old-growth/Mature forests: (Old-growth west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least 2 tree — species,forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings;with at least 20 trees/ha(8 trees/acre)>81 cm(32 in)dbh or>200 years of age. (Mature forests) Stands with average diameters exceeding 53 cm(21 in)dbh;crown cover may be less that 100%; crown cover may be less that 100%;decay,decadence,numbers of snags,and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon white Oak: Woodlands Stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158). Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.' Westside Prairies: Herbaceous,non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie(full descriptions in WDFWPHS reportp. 161). Instream:The combination of physical,biological,and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. Nearshore:Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore,and Puget Sound Nearshore.(full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report:pp. 167-169 and glossary in Appendix A). Caves:A naturally occurring cavity,recess,void,or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils,rock,ice,or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. Cliffs: Greater than 7.6 m(25 ft)high and occurring below 5000 ft. - Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.15 -2.0 m(0.5 -6.5 ft), composed of basalt,andesite,and/or sedimentary rock,including riprap slides and mine tailings.May be associated with cliff's. Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife.Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of>51 cm(20 in)in western Washington and are>2 m(6.5 ft)in height. Priority logs are>30 cm(12 in)in diameter at the largest end, and>6 m(20 ft) long. If wetland has 3 or more priority habitats=4 points If wetland has 2 priority habitat - pomts If wetland has 1 priority habitat= point No habitats=0 points Note:All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list. Nearby wetlands are addressed in question H2.4 Wetland Rating Form-western Washington 16 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 1 Wetland name or number H 2.4 Wetland Landscape(choose the one description of the landscape around the wetland that best fits) (seep. 84) There are at least 3 other wetlands within''/2 mile,and the connections between them are relatively undisturbed(light grazing between wetlands OK,as is lake shore with some 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-ftinge wetlands within'/z mile points=5 There are at least 3 other wetlands within'/z mile,BUT the connections between them are disturbed poin —3 The wetland is Lake-fringe on a lake with disturbance and there are 3 other lake-fringe wetland within'h mile points=3 There is at least 1 wetland within'/2 mile. points=2 _. There are no wetlands within'/z mile. points=0 H 2. TOTAL Score - opportunity for providing habitat 1 1 Add the scores from H2.I,H2.2, H2.3, H2.4 1 ( Z 1 TOTAL for H 1 from page 14 Total Score for Habitat Functions —add the points for H 1,H 2 and record the result on . 1 Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 17 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Please determine if the wetland meets the attributes described below and circle the appropriate answers and Category. Wetland Type Category Check off any criteria that apply to the wetland. Circle the Category when the appropriate criteria are met. SC 1.0 Estuarine wetlands (seep. 86) Does the wetland unit meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? - - The dominant water regime is tidal, — Vegetated, and — With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt. YES = Go to SC 1.1 NO SC 1.1 Is the wetland unit within a National Wildlife Refuge,National Park, National Estuary Reserve,Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Cat.I Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? YES =Category I NO go to SC 1.2 _ SC 1.2 Is the wetland unit at least 1 acre in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? YES=Category I NO=Category II Cat.I —The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking, ditching, filling, Cat.II cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10%cover of non-native plant species. If the non-native Spartina spp. are the only species that cover more than 10%of the wetland, then the wetland should be given a dual Dual rating(M. The area of Spartina would be rated a Category II while the rating relatively undisturbed upper marsh with native species would be a UII Category I. Do not, however, exclude the area of Spartina in determining the size threshold of 1 acre. —At least 4 of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un-mowed grassland. —The wetland has at least 2 of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 18 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number SC 2.0 Natural Heritage Wetlands (seep. 87) Natural Heritage wetlands have been identified by the Washington Natural Heritage Cat.I 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 unit 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 WNHP/DNR) S/T/R information from Appendix D_ or accessed from WNHP/DNR web site _ YES —contact WNHP/DNR(see p. 79)and go to SC 2.2 NO SC 2.2 Has DNR identified the wetland as a high quality undisturbed wetland or as or as a site with state threatened or endangered plant species? YES=Category I NO not a Heritage Wetland SC 3.0 Bogs (seep. 87) IDoes the wetland unit(or any part of the unit)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 functions. 1. Does the unit 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 the soil profile? (See Appendix B for a field key to identify organic soils)?Yes- go to Q. 3 No -go to Q. 2 2. Does the unit 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 Q. 3 No-Is not a bog for purpose of rating 3. Does the unit 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 Q.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16"deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the "bog"plant species in Table 3 are present, the wetland is a bog. 1. Is the unit 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)? 2. YES= Category I No Is not a bog for purpose of rating Cat. I Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 19 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number .. SC 4.0 Forested Wetlands(seep. 90) Does the wetland unit 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 functions. — Old-growth forests: (west of Cascade crest) Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 .- trees/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 average diameters(dbh) exceeding 21 inches (53cm); crown cover may be less that 100%; decay,decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth. YES= Category I NO_Lnot a forested wetland with special characteristics Cat. I SC 5.0 Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons(seep. 91) Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? — The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or,less frequently,rocks — The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains 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- not a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1 Does the wetland meets 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 %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 feet) YES=Category I NO=Category U Cat.H Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 20 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 Wetland name or number SC 6.0 Interdunal Wetlands (seep. 93) Is the wetland unit west of the 1889 line(also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? r 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-Copahs-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 once acre or larger? YES=Category H NO—go to SC 6.2 Cat.II SC 6.2 Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 acre,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 acre? YES =Category III Cat.III Category of wetland based og.Special Characteristics Choose the:"hrgliest"rating 1f wetlaniitfalTs into several categories, and record on If you answered NO for all eg enter:"Not A livable"on .l. Wetland Rating Form—western Washington 21 August 2004 version 2 Updated with new WDFW definitions Oct.2008 APPEN DIX E-2 Mason County Resource Ordinance-Wetlands 17.01.070 AS APPROVED BY THE Board of County Commissioners— December 27, 2006 MASON COUNTY RESOURCE ORDINANCE WETLANDS 17.01.070 WETLANDS The purpose of this section is to avoid, or in appropriate circumstances, minimize, rectify, reduce or compensate for impacts arising from land development and other activities affecting wetlands; to maintain and enhance the biological and physical functions and values of wetlands with respect to water quality maintenance; stormwater and floodwater storage and conveyance; fish and wildlife habitat; primary productivity, recreation, education and historic and cultural preservation. When avoiding impacts is not reasonable, mitigation shall be implemented to achieve a no net loss of wetlands in terms of acreage, function and value. A. CLASSIFICATION The following shall be classified as wetland areas: Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas. However, wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands, if permitted by the county-er—t . B. DESIGNATIONS The following lands, shorelands and waters of Mason County are hereby designated under RCW 36.70A.060 and RCW 36.70A.170, as critical areas requiring immediate protection from incompatible land uses: Wetlands and their vee+a+we aF buffer as specified by Section 17.01.070.E. In making a determination regarding a wetland, Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual (Ecology #96-94), or as amended hereafter, shall serve as the technical resource guide on determining if an area possesses hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and/or wetland hydrology. 1. The following are designated as regulated wetlands under this Chapter: a. All areas described in Section 17.01.070.A.; b. Wetland pPonds less than twenty acres; C. Wetlands created as mitigation, and those modified for approved land use activities, including their submerged aquatic beds. 2. The following are designated as non-regulated wetlands: Artificial man made wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street or highway. III ;Ve_t_1a d_s_ of less than 2,500 squaFe feet OF GategeFy 1V wetlaR s of less than 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 1 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 a Exempt wetlands that are isolated and less than 1,000 square feet in area where it has been shown by the applicant that they are not associated with a riparian corridor, they are not part of a wetland mosaic and do not contain habitat identified as essential for local populations of priority species identified by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. b No measures to avoid impacts for Category III and IV wetlands between 1,000 and 4,000 square feet are required if they meet all the following criteria: (1) Wetland is not associated with a riparian corridor, and (2) Wetland is not part of a wetland mosaic, and (3) Wetland does not score 20 points or greater for habitat in the 2004 Western Washington Rating System, and (4) Wetland does not contain habitat identified as essential for local populations of priority species identified by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. C. Impacts allowed under this provision to these wetlands will be fully mitigated as required in mitigation section. 3. Owners and applicants with non-regulated wetlands are strongly urged to cooperate voluntarily in this plan of wetland protection, using the guidelines in this ordinance and in materials provided by the Department of Community Development. C. PROCEDURES 1. Responsibilities for the determination of wetland boundaries: — a. Formal determination of wetland boundaries is the responsibility of the County. The responsibility to provide.all necessary and accurate data to the County for its determination rests with the applicant. This information will include a field delineation by a qualified wetland professional applying the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual(Ecology#96-94) or as amended hereafter. When, in the opinion of the Director, sufficient information exists from the County's wetland 4 inventory, or other sources, the requirement for a full or partial delineation may be waived. For instance, in some cases, the applicant may only be required to determine the wetland boundary, or portion thereof, of the wetland system. The Director shall determine when a permit application is required and what additional information may be necessary. Wetland delineations shall be performed in accordance with the procedures as specified in the Washington State Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual(Ecology #96-94), or as amended — hereafter. Evidence documenting the results of any boundary survey, or other submitted data, may be required by the Director. b. Mason County, at a fee, when requested by the applicant, or the affected party, may perform the delineation in lieu of direct action by the applicant. Mason County may use hydrology, soils, plant species, and other data, and consult with biologists, hydrologists, soil scientists, or other experts, as needed, to perform the delineation. The County shall make a good faith effort to provide this service, consistent with budgetary constraints and available in-house expertise, for smaller projects and especially for those property owners with lesser financial capabilities. C. Where Mason County performs a wetland boundary determination at the — request of the applicant, it shall be considered a final determination unless contested. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 2 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 d. Where the applicant has provided a determination of the wetland boundary, the Director shall verify the accuracy of, and may render adjustments to, the boundary delineation. e. In the event the boundary delineation is contested by the applicant or affected parry, the Department of Ecology, or a mutually agreed upon party, shall settle the dispute. D. LAND USES 1. Mason Environmental Permit Required Uses and Activities A Mason Environmental Permit shall be obtained from the County, using the administrative review process in this Chapter, prior to undertaking, in a regulated wetland or its vegetation aFeabuffer, for the following activities. a. In all regulated wetlands, the removal, excavation, grading, dredging, dumping, discharging, or filling of any material; or the draining or flooding of the site, except where undertaken for maintenance (but not construction)of drainage ditches or for emergency repair; b. The construction of stormwater management facilities;or C. The driving of pilings; d. The placing of obstructions; e. The construction, reconstruction, demolition, or expansion of any structure; f. The destruction or alteration of wetlands and wetland �regetatier► afeabuffer through clearing, harvesting, shading, intentional burning, or planting of vegetation that would alter the character of a designated wetland or vegetatiGR aFe buffer, provided that this subsection shall not apply to the following activities undertaken in a manner which minimizes impacts: (1) The harvesting or normal maintenance of vegetation in a manner that is not injurious to the natural reproduction of such vegetation; (2) The removal or eradication of noxious weeds so designated in Chapter 17.10 RCW or other exotic, nuisance plants; (3) Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs and percolation tests; (4) The construction or trails which shall be unpaved when located in the buffers and elevated when located in wetlands, which are not intended for motorized use, and which are no wider than three (3) feet, unless additional width is necessary for safety along a precipice, steep hillside, or other hazardous area. See section 17.01.070.E.6.c. for additional details on regulated (but permitted)trail activity. (5) Emergency services or repairs for health and welfare; or (6) Activities of a mosquito control district. (7) The removal of a danger tree, provided that such removal is mitigated by planting in the vicinity of the removed tree a total of six(6)new trees, each of a minimum three (3)feet in height and each of the same species or native species as the removed tree. If the replacement tree planting is judged to be unnecessary to replace the canopy structure of a vegetation area, the Director may request the applicant leave or place the danger tree within the vegetation area as habitat. g. Activities that result in a significant change of water temperature, a significant change of physical or chemical characteristics of wetlands water sources, including quantity, or the introduction of pollutants. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 3 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 2. Activities Permitted without a Mason Environmental Permit The following uses shall be allowed, in addition to those defined in General Exemptions (see Section 17.01.130), within a wetland or wetland ve^��n afeabuffer to the extent that they are not prohibited by the Shorelines Management ACT of 1971 (Chapter 90.58 RCW), Federal Water Pollution Control Act(Clean Water ACT), State Water Pollution Control Act(Chapter 90.48 RCW), State Hydraulic Code (RCW 75.20.100-.140), Forest Practices Act (Chapter 76.09 RCW and Chapter 222-16 WAC) or any other applicable ordinance or law and provided they are conducted using best management practices, except where such activities result in the conversion of a regulated wetland or wetland YegetatieR aFeEbuffer to a use to which it was not previously subjected and provided further that forest practices and conversions from forest land shall be governed by Chapter 76.09 RCW and its rules: a. Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife; b. Outdoor recreational activities that do not have a significant adverse impact on the wetland and its related vegetation aFeabuffer; C. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops, or alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography,water conditions or water resources; d. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities, including farming, - horticulture, aquaculture, irrigation, ranching or grazing of animals. Activities on areas lying fallow as part of a conventional rotational cycle are part of an ongoing operation. Activities which bring an area into agricultural use are not part of an ongoing operation. An operation ceases to be ongoing when the area in which it was conducted has been converted to another use or has lain idle hydF919g.Gal Fegime are neeessaFy •e Fesume 9p&Fa#9R&-for more than five years unless that idle land is registered in a federal or state soils conservation program. Forest practices are not included in this definition. e. The maintenance (but not construction)of drainage ditches; f. Education, scientific research, and use of nature trails; g. Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, percolation tests and other related activities. In every case, wetland impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately restored; and h. The following uses are allowed within wetlands and/or wetland buffer, provided that any required permits or approvals are obtained and further provided that wetland impacts are minimized and that disturbed areas are immediately restored: (1) Normal maintenance, repair, or operation of existing serviceable structures, facilities, or improved areas. Maintenance and repair does not include any modification that changes the character, scope, or size of the original structure, facility, or improved area and does not include the construction of a maintenance road; and (2) Minor modification of existing serviceable structures within a vegetatieR buffer zone where modification does not adversely impact wetland functions. (3) Repair or reconstruction of damaged or destroyed structures within two years of the damage or destruction. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 4 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 E. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 1. Wetlands Rating System A four-tier wetlands rating system is hereby adopted as the rating system for Mason County. Wetlands veget@tiGR ^r^^buffer widths, wetland activities and replacement ratios shall be based on this rating system. Procedures for applying the wetland rating system are set forth in the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington, revised 2004, or as amended hereafter, c^^^^d c-,r+,^^ Washington State Department of Ecology(PUbrGatie,#93 :74) as .. edified tie..,, , a. Wetlands shall be categorized as follows.- Table 17.01.070 A 1) Category I Wetlands. Category I wetlands are those regulated wetlands that include but are not limited to rare unique wetland types that are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands and that contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime Category I wetlands score 70 points or more out of 100 on the wetlands ratings systems. 2) Category II Wetlands. Category II wetlands are those regulated wetlands that score between 51-69 points out of 100 on the wetlands ratings system 3) Category III Wetlands. Category III wetlands are those regulated wetlands that score between 30-50 points on the wetlands ratings system 4) Category IV Wetlands. Category IV wetlands are those regulated wetlands that score less than 30 points out of 100 on the wetlands ratings system '' 5) Wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas to mitigate conversion of other wetlands. 6) Mosaic wetlands as defined in 17.01.240. *Non-Regulated Wetlands. Isolated wetlands under 1,000 square feet which are not associated with a riparian corridor, not part of a wetland mosaic and not essential habitat of a priority species as identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Please refer to Appendix A or the Department of Ecology publication for more information. aATEvvDV�1 WETLANDS plant andrsr'Afildlife speGies- G9RGeRtF@tiGR-_. - RGgs and f6f�s 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 5 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 �I Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 CATEGORY 11 WETLANDS 9Re Of the f9llE)WiRg:) 2. BeGUMeflted ppieFityhabitats and/9F spesieS FeG9gRzed by state ageneies. _ A .With RifiGaRt habitat value (Greater thaneraI try 22 POORtS O the I' 5. Ulo+lan.do identified a a Qatege II e land of IA-Gal SigRifiGaRGE- F 111 WET-LANDS i. WetlaRGIS whepe the SigRifiGaRt habitat value SG9Fe is equal tG E)F less thaR 21 pGiRtS 9R i' the WashiaatGR State WetlaR dS Rat'Rg 1-.,rm 2. \A et'@Rdc •.daatifie d a a Qatege , III Wetland Of L,aal c aifi^an^a 3. €stuarine wetlands less th@R o;e acre" CATEGORY III 1AMETI AAIDS (A w etlaR d is .-ideFe l a Gategap,1V if it meets a eRe of the f9lleWiR, \ p +. Ssdentifr. Nagle Gene d —-- g; seft f+S4 Spirea deUglagii hard- ha,.l, r bunk hn,S4 T)Fpha laifeiia EattaiWl p r,rraaa WateP a eGtinn to otFeaR; lakes, Fivers 9F etheF�dc 2. Wetland Buffers a Buffer Widths. Wetland buffers shall be required for all regulated wetlands. Any wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for approved wetland alterations shall also include a the standaFd vegetati^^ aF^^buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland. The buffer widths are established by adjusting a base width for the category of wetland at the site for the habitat value as scored by the wetland rating system and for the land use intensity of the proposed activity. All buffers shall be measured horizontally from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. The width of the wetland ^^tat;^a areabuffer shall be determined by the following process: 1) The wetland is categorized according to wetland ratings system category as shown in Table 17.01.070 A; 2) Table 17.01.070 B rates examples of different land uses for intensity of impacts to wetlands. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 6 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 3) The width of the buffer is determined based on the habitat value scored by the wetland on the wetland rating system and on the land use intensity of the proposed use as shown in Tables 17 01 070 C D, E,or F. Wetland gate 95 feet IIII IIII -- 14 V IIIIIIII�IIIIN 50 feet �V II NN ��II pp��ppqq��mm pp��pp��v,,..etat;eR n Fea �I�I�IIII�I�IuI�III��I�IIIIIIII�uI�IV �et13261E Table 17.01.070 B. Ratings of impact from land uses Rating of impact from proposed Examples of land uses that cause the impact based on common.zoning changes in land categories use High Commercial, Urban, Industrial, Institutional, Retail Sales Residential subdivisions with more than 1 unit/acre, New agriculture(high-intensity processing such as dairies, nurseries and green houses raising and harvesting crops requiring annual tilling, raising and maintaining animals) New transportation corridors. High intensity recreation (golf courses ball fields) hobby farms 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 7 of 23 —' New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 i Mason County Resource Ordinance-Wetlands 17.01.070 I Rating of impact from proposed. Examples of land uses that cause the impact based on common zoning I changes in land categories use Moderate Single-family residential lots residential subdivisions with 1 unittacre or less, Moderate-Intensity Open Space(parks), New agriculture (moderate- intensity such as orchards and hay fields),Transportation enhancement projects Low ' Forestry, Open space(low-intensity such as passive recreation and natural resources preservation, minor transportation improvements) ' Table 17.01.070 C: Width of buffer required to protect Category IV wetlands. Category IV Wetland Characteristics Buffer Width by impact of land use ' Score for functions<30 points Low Moderate- High-50 feet Table 17.01.070 D: Width of buffers required to protect Category III wetlands. Wetlands scoring between 30 and 50 points on the wetlands rating system. Category III Wetland Characteristics Buffer Width by impact of land use Moderate level of function for habitat Low-7 f (score for habitat is 20-28 pts.) Moderate-110 feet Hi h-. 150 feet Category III wetlands not meeting Low 4 f above criteria(score for habitat is less Moderate-60 feet thn2 High-Mijeel Table 17.01.070 E: Width of Buffers required to protect Category 11 wetlands_Wetlands scoring between 51 and 69 points on the wetlands rating system. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 8 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 Category II Wetland Characteristics Buffer Width by imoact of land use(amlV most rotective High level of function for habitat Low- 150 feet (score for habitat is 29-36 pts.) Moderate-.200 fee Hi h-_2 25 feet Moderate level of function for habitat Low-.75 fee (score for habitat is 20-28 pts.) Moderate-110 fee Hi h- 150fee High level of function for water Quality improvement Low 75 feet and low for habitat(score water quality is Moderate-90 feet 24-32 pts and habitat is less than 20) High-j feet Estuarine Low-75 feet Moderate 110 feet High-15Q feet Category Il wetlands not meeting above criteria Low-50 feet Moderate-75 fee High-1 f t Table 17.01.070 F: Width of Buffers required to protect Category I wetlands.Wetlands sconna oyeLIQ points on the wetlands rating systeM Category I Wetland Characteristics Buffer Width by impact of land use(apply mbst protective) Natural Heritage Wetlands and Boas Low-125 feet Moderate- 190 feet High-250 feet Forested Buffer size to be based on score for habitat functions or water quality functions see below. Estuarine and Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Low- 100 feet Moderate-200 feet High 25Q feet - _High level of function for habitat(score for habitat Low- 150 feet is 29-36 pts.) Moderate-225 feet Hi h-250 feet Moderate level of function for habitat(score for Low-Z5Jt habitat is 20-28 pts.) Moderate- 110 feet Hi h-200 feet 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 9 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 High level of function for water Quality improvement Low 50 fee (WQI)(score is 24-32)and low for habitat I score Moderate-75 feet for habitat is less than 20 points) High- 1 Category I wetlands not meeting any of the I above Low 50 feet criteria Moderate-75 feet High - 2) ' st9sk feedlet 200 feet(79 m) 3. Increased Wetland Buffer`legstati^^ ^F^^Width ' The Administrator shall require increased standard vegetatien ^-^^buffer widths or may require other conditions be placed on the development on a case-by-case basis when ^ IaFgeF vegetati9R aFea is necessary to protect wetland functions and values based on local conditions. This determination shall be supported by appropriate documentation showing that it is reasonably related to protection of the functions and values of the regulated wetland. Such determination shall be attached as a permit condition and shall demonstrate that: a) A larger vegetatioR areabuffer is necessary to maintain viable populations or critical habitat of threatened or endangered species living within the subject wetland(s) boundaries; or b) The adjacent land is susceptible to severe erosion and erosion control measures otherwise required will not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts; or c) There are other nearby wetlands or critical areas and adjustments to the buffers would prevent fragmentation of the habitat or is otherwise if the necessary to preserve the structure, function ' and value of the wetland, or- d) The buffer is poorly vegetated due to lack of vegetation or invasive or non- native species being the dominant cover. Conditions would include enhancement of the area a larger buffer, or both I 4. Wetland Vega etat;9R ApeaBuffer Width Averaging The boundary of the veget tiea a;eabuffer may be modified by averaging veg tat eR a buffer widths. If �e+�R aFabuffer averaging is used, the following conditions must be met: a. The total area contained in the +ve^^�tiGR a,eabuffer after averaging shall be no less than that contained within the veg9tati9R aFeabuffer prior to averaging_ln other words, mitigation for buffer impacts will be on a minimum of a 1: 1 ratio; and b• "^^etat*G^ aFeaBuffer averaging will incorporate site conditions to the wetIm;e to provide measures to increase the functions and values of the wetland buffer beyond what is currently in place; and I 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 10 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance-Wetlands 17.01.070 C. In no instance shall the ve etatiGR aF buffer width be reduced to less -- than 1/4 of the required width for each of the wetland categories. IS8-feet f r.Qatogwy 1_74}mt fop Gatos eFy 11 GF 25 feet fee Gate.g GF'e III eF IV 5. Wetland Buffer Reduction The width of the buffer may be reduced for proposed land uses with high- intensity impacts under the following conditions: a. For wetlands that score moderate or high for habitat(20 points or more for the habitat functions),the width of the buffer may be reduced to that required for moderate-intensity impacts provided that: (1) A relatively undisturbed, vegetated area corridor at least 100-feet -, wide is protected between the wetland and any other Priority Habitats as defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. Protection of the corridor shall be assured by a conservation easement. (2) Measures to minimize the impacts of the land use shall be applied. Examples of these measures are shown in Table X. b. For wetlands that score less than 20 points for habitat, the buffer width can be reduced to that required for moderate-impact land uses provided that measures to minimize the impacts of the land use shall be applied. Examples of these measures are shown in Table X. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 11 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 i I (New Table) TABLE X Examples of measures to reduce impacts to wetlands. I Examples of Activities and Uses that Cause Examples of measures to'%linirnize Impacts i Disturbance Disturbances Lights • Parking lots • Direct lights away from, etlaad ! • Warehcases I a Manufacturing • Residential poise • %lanufactnuing •Locate acti-.'ity that generates noise ati ar a Residential from:setland Toxic runoff- • Parking lots • Route all new..untreated runoff away from i Roads vetland while ensuring stietiand is not de:i•atered • 1lanufacturing • F�esi3eatial areas • =stablish cosecants limiting me of pesticides;vithin 150 ft of,vetland • Application of agricuitival 0 Apply integrated pest manaeernent pesticides • Landscaping I Storm:rater • Parking lots • Retrofit- c mruater detention and treatment runoff • Roads for rcadi,and existing adjacent • �lanrifacttu'irrg development I • Residential area • ?izsent channelized flow ficnt la--ni that I duectiv enter_the buffet • Comme-rcial i • Landscaping I Change in • Impermeable surfaces • Infiltrate or treat,detain_and disperse into ;.'titer regime a Lan:ns buffer new runoff from imper 6ous • Tilling surfaces and ne::°la,:ns Pets and • Residential areas • F,'se prisacy fencing:plant dense:-egetation human to delineate buffer edge and to disccura?e disturbance disturbance using egeiaticu appropriate for the ecoregion_place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract Dust • Tilled fields • uw best management practices to control dust *These examples are not necessarily adequate for minimizing ttsic z,moffif tL'eatened or endangered species are 1 resent at the site. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 12 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 — 56. Wetland` egeta+i^^ ^F^^B.uffer Conditions Except as otherwise specified, wetland buffers shall be retained in their natural condition. Where vege#at+e -afeabuffer disturbance has occurred during construction, revegetation with native vegetation may be required. 57. Permitted Uses In A Wetland` egetatieR ^.^^Buffer Regulated activities shall not be allowed within a vegetatioR areabuffer except as follows: a. Activities that are permissible within a wetland shall be permissible within a wetland vegetatien-afeabuffer; and b. Stormwater management facilities (bioswales and dispersal trenches) only when required to allow a reasonable use of the property. Encroachment into the vegetatiGR ^ buffer shall be the minimum necessary and will be permitted only within the outer twenty-five (25)feet or outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the veget2tiGR ^reabuffer, whichever is more restrictive. C. Other passive activities such as recreational trails and tot lots are also permitted within the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the vegetatioR afeabuffer. d. Selective commercial timber cutting will be limited to the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of Category I and II wetland buffers and fifty percent (50%) of Category III and IV wetland buffers. No more than thirty percent (30%) of the merchantable trees may be harvested in this area on a one-time-only basis as associated with a land use conversion application. The thirty percent(30%)harvest must be representative and maintain an intact forest community character. The percentage and species distribution of all trees must be consistent before and after the selective timber harvest: 8-7. Building Setback Lines A building setback line of fifteen (15) feet is required from the edge of any wetland vegetation afeabuffer. Minor structural intrusions into the area of the building setback may be allowed if the Administrator determined that such intrusions will not negatively impact the wetland. F. MITIGATION FOR WETLAND IMPACTS As a condition of any permit allowing alteration of wetlands and/or wetland buffers, the County shall require that the applicant engage in the restoration, creation or enhancement of wetlands and their buffers in order to offset the impacts resulting from the applicant's actions. GempeRsaties , alysis (iR that^.a^.^f pFefeFeR e) If wetland or wetland buffer impacts are proposed, a sequence of review must be considered. First, the applicant must consider avoiding the wetland or wetland buffer. If the applicant can not avoid the wetland or wetland buffer, they must consider reducing (or minimizing)the impact. Impacts which can not be avoided must be mitigated as provided in this ordinance. Mitigation for buffers shall be on a minimum 1:1 ratio. Approval of the mitigation plan shall be signified by a notarized memorandum of agreement signed by the applicant and Director of the Department of Community Development or designee, and recorded with the Mason County Auditor. The agreement shall refer to all requirements for the mitigation proiect. The County may suspend or revoke a permit if it finds that the applicant has not complied with the conditions or limitations set forth in the permit or has exceeded the scope of work set for in the permit. The overall goal of any compensatory project shall be no net loss of wetlands function and acreage 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 13 of 23 . New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 1. iFnparts +e + as_ +„� s. Wetland mitigation ratios are illustrated in the following Table 17.01.070 H: Table 17.01.070 H: Wetland Miti ation Re lacement Ratios Table. 1:1. Reestablishment Wetland Cate-goryRe-establishment Rehabilitation or Enhancement or Creation Creation (R/C) and Only Enhancement E J All Category IV 1.5:1 3:1 1:1 R/C and 2:1 E 6:1 All Category 111 2:1 4:1 1:1 R/C and 2:1 E 8:1 Category II 4:1 rehabilitation of Estuarine Case-by-case an estuarine _Case-bv-case Case-by-case ' wetland All other Category II 3=1 8_1 1:1 R/C and 4:1 E 12.1 Category I 6_1 12:1 Forested 1:1 R/C and 10:1 E 24:1 Category 1 other 4=1 8:1 1:1 R/C and 6:1 E 16:1 Category 1 6:1 rehabilitation of Natural Heritaqe Case-by-case a Natural Heritage Case-by-case Case-by-case site site Category I Case-by-case 6:1 rehabilitation of Ca Coastal Lagoon a coastal lagoon Case-bv-case Case-by-case Category I Case-by-case 6:1 rehabilitation of Bog a boq Case-by-case Case-by-case Category 1 6:1 rehabilitation of Estuarine Case-by-case an estuarine Case-by-case Case-by-case wetland 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 14 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 — PGFeSted 4 $ $ a 2. Wetland Restoration, Creation and Enhancement(see details in 17.01.200 1) 3. The department may increase or decrease the ratios based on one or more of the following: a. Replacement ratios may be increased under the following circumstances: (1)Uncertainty exists as to the probable success of the proposed restoration or creation: (2)A significant period of time will elapse between impact and establishment of wetland functions at the mitigation site: (3) Proposed compensation will result in a lower category wetland or reduced functions relative to the wetland being impacted:or (4)The impact was an unauthorized impact. b. Replacement ratios may be decreased under the following circumstances: (1) Documentation by the applicant provides more certainty that the proposed compensation actions will be successful. For example, demonstrated prior success with similar compensation actions as those proposed, and/or extensive hydrologic data to support the proposed water regime: (2) Documentation by the applicant demonstrates that the proposed compensation actions will provide functions and values that are significantly greater than the wetland being impacted: or (3)The proposed mitigation actions are conducted in advance of the impact and are shown to be successful. 4. Off-Site Compensatory Mitigation. a. Considerations for determining whether off-site mitigation is preferable include but are not limited to: (1) On-site conditions do not favor successful establishment of the required vegetation type, or lack the proper soil conditions, or hydrology: (2) On-site compensation would result in an aquatic habitat that is isolated from other natural habitats or severely impaired by the effects of the adjacent development: (3) Off-site location is crucial to one or more species that is threatened, endangered, or otherwise of concern, and the on-site location is not: (4) Off-site location is crucial to larger ecosystem functions, such as providing corridors between habitats, and the on-site location is not: and (5) Off-site compensation has a greater likelihood of success or will provide greater functional benefits. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 15 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 it Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 l b. When determining whether off-site mitigation is preferable the value of the site- specific wetland functions at the project site such as flood control nutrient retention I sediment filtering, and rare or unique habitats or species should be fully considered c. When conditions do not favor on-site compensation off-site compensatory mitigation should be located as close to the impact site as possible at least within the same watershed, while still replacing lost functions. 4. Monitoring Requirements. Mason County shall require monitoring reports on an annual basis for a minimum of five years and uo to ten years or until the department determines that the mitigation proiect has achieved success. The wetlands mitigation plan shall provide specific criteria for monitoring the mitigation proiect Criteria shall be proiect-specific and use best available science to aid the department in evaluating whether or not the project has achieved success. G. PERMIT REVIEW The basic concern in the permitting process is to avoid and minimize wetland impacts. Permits are issued when the applicant can demonstrate that the activity is both unavoidable and necessary. The applicant must state the purpose of the proposed project, and demonstrate the requirement for a wetland location or access across wetlands, and the reason it cannot be located at other sites, or at another location on- site. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 16 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance-Wetlands 17.01.070 l 17.01.240 DEFINITIONS - 1 (For brevity, only definitions proposed to be changed, added, or deleted are included.) Bog: A unique type of wetland dominated by mosses that form organic peat. Bogs form in areas where the climate allows the accumulation of peat to exceed its decomposition. Bog hydrology is dominated by precipitation rather than surface inflow. The plant community is specialized to survive in the nutrient-poor and highly acidic conditions typical of bog systems. Mitigation, compensatory: "Compensation"or"Compensatory mitigation" means a form of mitigation.that replaces proiect-induced wetland or habitat losses or impacts, and includes, but is not limited to, restoration, enhancement, substitute resources, creation, and preservation. "Substitute Resources" means actions performed to provide for an alternative environmentally - sensitive area. 'Preservation" means actions taken to ensure the permanent protection of existing, high-quality environmentally sensitive areas. Compensation also is not limited to mitigation at or adiacent to the site on which a wetland has been impacted by a regulated activity. Relatively undisturbed vegetated area:A relatively undisturbed vegetated area is one with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion or with one that performs similar functions. If the area is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with invasive species that do not Perform needed functions, then it is not relatively undisturbed. Any heavily used paved or gravel roads, residential areas, lawns,tilled fields, parking lots, or actively grazed pastures would disqualify the area from being"relatively undisturbed."Bridges crossing streams or rivers within the buffer are considered as a"disturbance."Infrequently used gravel or paved roads or - vegetated dikes in a relatively undisturbed buffer, however, can be ignored as a"disturbance." Open water that is not part of the wetland is considered part of the buffer. The open water can be - considered undisturbed unless there is heavy boat traffic there. (Adapted from: Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington-Revised. Washington State Department of Ecology Publication#04-06-025.) -" Wetlands: Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, waste water treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were -- unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street or highway. However, wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands, if permitted by the county or city. yVetlandS Fegulate f Wetlands, Creation or Establishment of: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or -- biological characteristics present to develop a wetland on an upland or deepwater site where a wetland did not previously exist. Establishment results in a gain in wetland acres. Activities typically involve excavation of upland soils to elevations that will produce a wetland hydroperiod, create hydric soils, and support the growth of hydrophytic plant species. Wetlands. Cowardin classification: The first commonly used classification system for wetlands developed in 1979 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Cowardin system classifies wetlands based on water flow, substrate types, vegetation types, and dominant plant species. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 17 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 Wetlands Enhancement or the Enhancement of Wetlands: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a wetland site to heighten, intensify, or improve specific function(s)or to change the growth stage or composition of the vegetation present. Enhancement is undertaken for specified purposes such as water quality improvement, flood water retention, or wildlife habitat. Enhancement results in a change in some wetland functions and can lead to a decline in other wetland functions but does not result in a gain in wetland acres. Activities typically consist of planting vegetation controlling non-native or invasive species modifying site elevations or the proportion of open water to influence hydroperiods, or some combination of these activities. Wetland Estuarine:Wetlands where salt tolerant plant species are dominant and the water regime is influenced by tidal action. The wetlands are usually partially enclosed by land with open, or partially obstructed access to open saline water. In areas where freshwater wetlands grade into estuarine areas, the boundary of the latter extends to an area where the salinity is less than 5 ppt(parts per thousand) during the period of average annual low flow. Wetland, Forested: A wetland class in the Cowardin classification where woody plants taller than 20 feet form the dominant cover. Shrubs often form a second layer , beneath the forest canopy,with a laver of herbaceous plants growing beneath the shrubs. Wetlands, Isolated: Isolated wetlands are generally defined as those wetlands that have no surface water connections to other aquatic resources. For the purposes of this ordinance, wetlands are not regulated as"isolated wetlands" if they are part of a mosaic wetlands. (See "Wetlands, Mosaic"for additional information.) Wetlands, Mosaic: "Wetlands, mosaic"or"mosaic wetlands" means groups of wetlands that. should be rated and regulated as an aggregate.Although each patch the wetlands that make up the mosaic is separated from nearby wetlands by some upland area these wetlands are not regulated as"isolated wetlands"as the term is used in this ordinance. That is, in determining whether a wetland falls into the category of non-regulated wetlands(See Table 17.01.070)the area of the wetland is the area of the mosaic wetland and not the area of an individual wetland component of the mosaic. Guidance for determining when nearby wetlands compose a mosaic - wetland is provided in the Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington— Revised, Washington State Department of Ecology Publication#04-06-025. The patches of wetlands compose a mosaic when 1)the patches are less than one acre in size, 2)the patches are separated from each other by 100 feet or less on average, and 3)the area of the wetlands in the potential mosaic are greater than 50 percent of the total combined area of wetland and upland.An illustration of this analysis of whether the potential mosaic should be considered as a aggregate rather than as individual isolated wetlands is shown below. (The illustration is from the DOE Publication referenced above.) Wetland, Natural Heritage:As defined by the Natural Heritage Program of the Washington State Department of Natural Resources, these are wetlands that are either - high quality undisturbed wetlands or wetlands that support threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant species. Wetland Protection/Maintenance (Preservation) of: Removing a threat to, or preventing the ! decline of wetland conditions by an action in or near a wetland. This includes the purchase of land or easements repairing water control structures or fences, or structural protection such as repairing a barrier island This term also includes activities commonly associated with the term _ preservation Preservation does not result in a gain of wetland acres may result in a gain in functions, and will be used only in exceptional circumstances. 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 18 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 Wetland Restoration or Restoration of Wetlands: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the -goal of returning natural or historic functions to a former or degraded wetland`: For the purpose of tracking net gains in wetland acres, restoration is divided into: • Re=establishment: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural or historic functions to a former wetland. Re- establishment results in a gain in wetland acres (and functions). Activities could include removing fill material, plugging ditches,or breaking drain tiles. • Rehabilitation: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing natural or historic functions of a degraded wetland. Rehabilitation results in a gain in wetland function but does not result in a gain in wetland acres. Activities could involve breaching a dike to reconnect wetlands to a floodplain or return tidal influence to a wetland. (Source: DOE Guidance Document Volumes 1 and 2) .. t 1 1 - , ti `vtieCl.:rc5 ♦ .. - `-11.13r:.. Total wetland area >50°'0 • �_�r 1 ._._.. . .... _tpl rC Total wetland area <50°0 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 19 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance-Wetlands 17.01.070 ' APPENDIX A (NOTE: ALL OF APPENDIX A IS NEW PROPOSED TEXT) The following is from: Hruby,T.2004.Washington State wetland rating system for western Washington—Revised. — Washington State Department of Ecology Publication#04-06-025. Pages 6 to 10. 3. RATIONALE FOR THE CATEGORIES This rating system is designed to differentiate between wetlands based on their sensitivity to disturbance, rarity,the functions they provide, and whether we can replace them or not. The emphasis is on identifying those wetlands: •where our ability to replace them is low, •that are sensitive to adjacent disturbance, •that are rare in the landscape, •that perform many functions well, •that are important in maintaining biodiversity. The following description summarizes the rationale for including different wetland types in each category.As a general principle, it is important to note that wetlands of all categories have valuable functions in the landscape, and all are worthy of inclusion in programs for wetland protection. 3.1 CATEGORY I Category I wetlands are those that 1) represent a unique or rare wetland type;or 2)are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; or 3) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or 4)provide a high level of functions. We cannot afford the risk of any degradation to these wetlands because their functions and values are too difficult to replace. Generally,these wetlands are not common and make up a small percentage of the wetlands in the region. Of the 122 wetlands used to field test the current rating system only 24 (20%)were rated as a Category I. In western Washington the following types of wetlands are Category I. Estuarine Wetlands- Relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre are Category I wetlands because they are relatively rare and provide unique natural resources that are considered to be valuable to society. These wetlands need a high level of protection to maintain their functions and the values society derives from them. Furthermore,the questions used to characterize how well a freshwater wetland functions cannot be used for estuarine wetlands. No rapid methods have been developed to date to characterize how well estuarine wetlands function. Estuaries,the areas where freshwater and salt water mix, are among the most highly productive and complex ecosystems where tremendous quantities of sediments, nutrients and organic matter are exchanged between terrestrial,freshwater and marine communities. This availability of resources benefits an enormous variety of plants and animals.Fish, shellfish and birds and plants are the most visible. However,there is also a huge variety of other life forms in an estuarine wetland:for example, many kinds of diatoms, algae and invertebrates are found there. Estuarine systems have substantial economic value as well as environmental value.All Washington State estuaries have been modified to some degree, bearing the brunt of 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 20 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01,070 development pressures through filling,drainage, port development and disposal of urban and industrial wastes.The over-harvest of certain selected economic species has also modified the natural functioning of estuarine systems. Many Puget Sound estuaries such as the Duwamish, Puyallup, Snohomish and Skagit have been extensively modified. Up to 99% of some estuarine wetland areas in the state have been lost. Estuaries,of which estuarine wetlands are a part, are a"priority habitat"as defined by the state department of Fish and Wildlife. Estuaries have a high fish and wildlife density and species richness, important breeding habitat, important fish and wildlife seasonal ranges and movement corridors, limited availability, and high vulnerability to alteration of their habitat(Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW), http://www.wa.aov/wdfw/hab/phslist.htm, accessed October 15, 2003). Natural Heritage Wetlands—Wetlands that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR as high quality, relatively undisturbed wetlands, or wetlands that support State listed threatened or endangered plants are Category I Wetlands. High quality, relatively undisturbed examples of wetlands are uncommon in western Washington. By categorizing these wetlands as Category I,we are trying to provide a high level of protection to the undisturbed character of these remaining high quality wetlands. Examples of undisturbed wetlands help us to understand natural wetland processes. Furthermore,the presence of rare plants in a wetland indicates unique habitats that might otherwise not be identified through the rating system. Rare plant populations are also sensitive to disturbance, particularly activities that result in the spread of invasive species. The Washington Natural Heritage Program of the Department of Natural Resources(DNR)has identified important natural plant communities and species that are very sensitive to disturbance - or threatened by human activities, and maintains a database of these sites. "These natural systems and species will survive in Washington only if we give them special attention and protection. By focusing on species at risk and maintaining the diversity of natural ecosystems and native species, we can help assure our state's continued environmental and economic health."(DNR http://www.wa.gov/dnr/htdocs/fr/nhp/wanhp.html , accessed October 1, 2002) Bogs-Bogs are Category I wetlands because they are sensitive to disturbance and impossible to re-create through compensatory mitigation. Bogs are low nutrient,acidic wetlands that have organic soils.The chemistry of bogs is such that changes to the water regime or water quality of the wetland can easily alter its ecosystem.The plants and animals that grow in bogs are specifically adapted to such conditions and do not tolerate changes well. Immediate changes in the composition of the plant community often occur after the water regime changes. Minor changes in the water regime or nutrient levels in these systems can have major adverse impacts on the plant and animal communities(e.g. Grigal and Brooks, 1997). In addition to being sensitive to disturbance, bogs are not easy to re-create through compensatory mitigation. Researchers in northern Europe and Canada have found that restoring bogs is difficult, specifically in regard to plant communities(Bolscher 1995, Grosvermier et al. 1995, Schouwenaars 1995, Schrautzer et al. 1996), water regime(Grootjans and van Diggelen 1995, Schouwenaars 1995)and/or water chemistry(Wind-Mulder and Vitt 2000). In fact, restoration may be impossible because of changes to the biotic and abiotic properties preclude the re-establishment of bogs (Shouwenaars 1995, Schrautzer et al. 1996). Furthermore, bogs a form extremely slowly,with organic soils forming at a rate of about one inch per 40 years in western Washington(Rigg 1958). 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 21 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 Nutrient poor wetlands, such as bogs, have a higher species richness, many more rare species, and a greater range of plant communities than nutrient rich wetlands (review in Adamus and Brandt 1990). They are, therefore, more important than would be accounted for using a simple assessment of wetland functions (Moore et al. 1989). Mature and Old-growth Forested Wetlands—Mature and old-growth forested wetlands over 1 acre in size are"rated"as Category I because these wetlands cannot be easily replaced through compensatory mitigation.A mature forest may require a century or more to develop, and the full range of functions performed by these wetlands may take even longer(see review in Sheldon et al. 2004, in press). These forested wetlands are also important because they represent a second "priority habitat"as defined by the state department of Fish and Wildlife. "Priority habitats are those habitat types or elements with unique or significant value to a diverse assemblage of species."(Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW), hftp://www.wa.gov/wdfw/hab/i)hslist.htm, accessed October 15, 2002). NOTE:All wetlands are categorized as a priority habitat by the WDFW. Mature and forested wetlands, therefore, represent two priority habitats that coincide. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons—Coastal lagoons are shallow bodies of water, like a pond, partly or completely separated from the sea by a barrier beach. They may,or may not, be connected to the sea by an inlet, but they all receive periodic influxes of salt water.This can be either through storm surges overtopping the barrier beach, or by flow through the porous sediments of the beach. Wetlands in coastal lagoons are placed into Category I because they probably cannot be reproduced through compensatory mitigation, and because they are relatively rare in the landscape. No information was found on an y attempts to create or restore coastal lagoons in Washington that would suggest this type of compensatory mitigation is possible.Any impacts to lagoons will, therefore, probably result in a net loss of their functions and values. In addition, coastal lagoons and their associated wetlands are proving to be very important habitat for salmonids. Unpublished reports of ongoing research in the Puget Sound (Hirschi et al. 2003, Beamer et al.2003)suggests coastal lagoons are heavily used by juvenile salmonids. Wetlands That Perform Many Functions Very Well-Wetlands scoring 70 points or more(out of 100)on the questions related to functions are Category I wetlands. Not all wetlands function equally well, especially across the suite of functions performed. The field questionnaire was developed to provide a method by which wetlands can be categorized based on their relative performance of different functions. Wetlands scoring 70 points or more were judged to have the highest levels of function.Wetlands that provide high levels of all three types of functions(improving water quality, hydrologic functions, and habitat) are also relatively rare. Of the 122 wetlands used to calibrate the rating system in western Washington, only 18(15%)scored 70 points or higher based on their functions. The questionnaire on wetland functions is based on the six-year effort to develop detailed methods for assessing wetland functions both in eastern and western.Washington. These methods currently represent the"best available science"in rapid assessments of wetland functions. 3.2 CATEGORY II Category If wetlands are difficult,though not impossible;to replace, and provide high levels of some functions. These wetlands occur more commonly than Category I wetlands, but still need a relatively high level of protection. Category II wetlands in western Washington include: 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 22 of 23 New text is underlined,deleted text-is struck through Dec.27,2006 ii Mason County Resource Ordinance—Wetlands 17.01.070 Estuarine Wetlands-Any estuarine wetland smaller than an acre, or those that are disturbed and larger than 1 acre are category 11 wetlands.Although disturbed, these wetlands still provide unique natural resources that are considered to be valuable to society. Furthermore, the questions used to characterize how well a wetland functions cannot be used for estuarine wetlands. Interdunal Wetlands- Interdunal wetlands greater than 1 acre are Category II because they provide critical habitat in this ecosystem (Wiedemann 1984). This resource is important but constitutes only a small part of the total dune system (Wiedemann 1984). No methods have been developed to characterize how well interdunal wetlands function,so these wetlands cannot be rated by a score. Interdunal wetlands form in the"deflation plains"and"swales"that are geomorphic features in areas of coastal dunes. These dune forms are the result of the interaction between sand, wind, water and plants.The dune system immediately behind the ocean beach (the primary dune system)is very dynamic and can change from storm to storm (Wiedemann 1984). For the purpose of rating, any wetlands that are located to the west of the 1889 line (western boundary of upland ownership)are considered to be interdunal. Wetlands That Perform Functions Well-Wetlands scoring between 51-69 points (out of 100) on the questions related to the functions present are Category II wetlands. Wetlands scoring 51- 69 points were judged to perform most functions relatively well, or performed one group of functions very well and the other two moderately well. 3.3 CATEGORY III Category III wetlands are 1)wetlands with a"Imoderate level of functions (scores between 30-50 ' points) and 2)interdunal wetlands between 0.1 and 1 acre in size. Wetlands scoring between 30- 50 points generally have been disturbed in some ways, and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. 3.4 CATEGORY IV Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions(scores less than 30 points)and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that we should be able to replace, and in some cases be able to improve. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case.These wetlands may provide some important functions, and also need to be protected. T r_ 2006 RO-Wetlands Final.doc Page 23 of 23 a New text is underlined,deleted text is struck through Dec.27,2006 I eF APPENDIX F Wetland Functions and Values Information It is important that those involved in wetland regulation and management understand their functions and values. Knowledge of these roles can be a key factor in the design and implementation of wetland inventories. Not all wetlands provide each function or value nor do they provide them to the same degree. Variations occur because of wetland type and characteristics, as well as regional and local influences. Some local governments try to distinguish how functions and values relate to their community and region. The following is a brief summary. Water Supply With the growth of urban centers and dwindling water supplies,wetlands are increasingly important as a source of surface and ground water. They can function as recharge areas where water soaks into the soils, replenishing ground water supplies. Wetlands are also areas where ground water moves to the surface through springs and seepage, often collecting in pools and ponds, and supplying critical reserves during periods of drought. Flood Control Wetlands are valuable in reducing the impact of flooding. They have the ability to store and slow the flow of water from upland run-off. If a wetland is associated with a river in a flat valley, the wetland and its vegetation reduces the height and velocity of flood peaks. Some wetland soils can store large amounts of floodwater and gradually release them downstream. Construction in flood plain wetlands causes increase flood heights and rates, and an associated increase in flood damage. Erosion Control Vegetated wetlands serve as natural buffers from the effects of tides, waves, wind and river currents. They dissipate the energy of these erosive forces. The fibrous root systems of wetland plants bind and stabilize banks, protecting the shoreline from erosion. On the coast, they can limit wave generation, slow and absorb the impacts of wave energy, and thereby protect inland areas from storm damage. Construction of bulkheads, rip-rap, and other banked hardening stabilization techniques simply transfer the erosive energy to neighboring areas. Pollution and Sediment Control Wetlands protect and improve the quality of surface and ground waters by removing sediments, nutrients, heavy metals, and hazardous chemicals. Wetlands vegetation filters particulate matter from the water. When moving water comes into contact with vegetation, its flow is slowed and sediment falls out of suspension. The root systems trap the sediment, reducing siltation in downstream water bodies. Substances such as nutrients, pathogens, and many chemicals are often i bound to the surface of sediment particles. Thus, sedimentation reduces both organic and inorganic I pollutants. These pollutants may be released when wetland soils are disturbed. Wetland vascular plants and algae also absorb nutrients and chemicals. The micro-organisms utilize dissolved I nutrients and break down organic matter. Research is underway to determine the impacts of utilizing wetlands as tertiary waste treatment facilities. Wildlife Habitat Wetlands, the interface between land and water, are among the richest wildlife habitats in the world. They,provide the conditions essential for the breeding, nesting, feeding, and protection for many species of waterfowl,mammals,reptiles, and amphibians. These conditions include abundant water, ' diverse and rich vegetation, and adequate cover. Many of these species are "obligates" or dependent upon the wetland for their survival. Some such as the beaver spend their entire lifetimes in the ' wetland environment. Others like the salmon inhabit it for shorter, but critical, parts of their life cycle. Numerous species (such as deer and raccoon) depend on wetlands as a source of drinking water, food, and winter cover. Wetlands are as critical to the needs of these species as they are to those that depend solely on wetland habitat. Though many waterfowl nest primarily in northern _ freshwater wetlands, they use wetlands through out the county while migrating and for over- wintering. Birds such as herons, egrets, rails and harriers depend upon wetlands for their survival. Both salt and freshwater wetlands are important spawning, nursery, feeding, and wintering areas for sport and commercial fish and shellfish. Wetlands also support many endangered plant and animal species. Although wetlands constitute only 5 per cent of the nation's lands, close the 35 per cent of all rare and endangered animal species are dependent upon them. (McMillan, A. 1986) Food Web Productivity Wetlands play an important part in the food web. Coastal wetlands are among the most productive areas in the world. Solar energy is utilized by wetland plants to produce hundreds of pounds of nutrients per acre of salt marsh annually. The vegetation dies, decays, and is broken down to form a nutrient-rich "soup" called detritus. This rich food source is converted by micro-organisms into basic nutrients and elements for use by vascular plants and phytoplankton (minute floating plant life). The phytoplankton are consumed by zooplankton (minute floating animal life). the detritus and plankton's are carried into tidal creeks, and bays and are consumed by invertebrates such as oysters, shrimp and crabs. they in turn are preyed upon by other animals including humans. It has been estimated that 90 per cent of the important commercial marine species either spend their entire lives in estuarine wetlands or require estuaries as nursery grounds (Kusler, J. 1983). Freshwater wetlands also provide food, habitat, and spawning grounds for many other species of fish. Education and Research Coastal and inland wetlands provide unique opportunities for education and scientific research. Due to the land-water interface, diversity of vegetation, topography, and the resulting varied habitats, wetlands are ideal for studying plant and animal life. Because ecological relationships are easily observed, they are excellent locations for teaching environmental science. The complex ecological relationships of wetland systems make them valuable areas for scientific research as well. Recreation and Aesthetic Values Wetlands are areas not only of great diversity but also of great beauty. They provide open space and contrast for both visual and recreational enjoyment, especially valuable in urban areas. Visitors include photographers, bird watchers, hikers, boaters, hunters, fishers and natural history enthusiasts. Appreciation and use of wetlands as a recreational resource is steadily increasing on both a national and state-wide basis. National, wetland-dependent waterfowl are hunted by over 2 million hunters. Nisqually National wildlife Refuge, near Olympia, Washington has had a 300 percent increase on visitor use since 1977. (McMillan, A. 1986) References Washington State Department of Ecology, A Guide to Conducting Wetlands Inventories, 1989 DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: �J�►�Uti� ac.n�- Date: C�s _ Project/Site: County: State: LQP.-,4 Applicant/Owner: S k�VAI e I Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding areas: 6, 'La5 Has the vegetation, soils, and/or by of y been significantly disturbed? Yes _ No If yes, what are modifiers:...) k'dso ,,.. .� ,SOILS Mapped Series: Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol CL icn yQ y / S; lay=.-, Histic Epipedon Gleyed Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes _NO Rationale: Vvtcv low scJ ►"'c t4'rl tV11 HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_NoX- Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes__A_No_Depth to water in test Ole: i'4 Field evidence of surface inund tion or sgil saturation: ,r 01cle sc��.�,k,, _,{� t a G., Is the wetland drolo y criterion met? Yes_X—No Rationale: SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes-A_No Hydrology present? Yes -\ No - Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes X No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species:loc) Is the site a wetland? Yes_ _ o Rationale: r TEST HOLE #_ OF tZ APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST HOLE() kp , ,,,C Wiltermood Associates, Inc. ` See w•�n 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION Port Orchard, WA 98367 .�. , (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species % cover %cover _Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW S Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- 1- '70 Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU —Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC —_Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species _Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Osier Dogwood Coryus stolonifera FACW _Evergreen huckleberry Yaccinium ovatum FACU —Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ _Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU 3 Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Yaccinium parvifolium UPI, English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPI, Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPI, Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species ib Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL It) Lady fern Athyrium frlix femina FAC ism Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL it)_Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC _Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU _Rushes Juncus spp. FACW _Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW _Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW —Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW —Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU Other forb species present: Re PjI Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion et? Yes No WETLAND TYPE: Pal ustrine Riverme Rationale:;- ✓ N.,, �t��� c �, a e� ✓ Lacustrine_�Estuarine Forested X� Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: 'S ze. 'V) S�e.� # !-Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding areas: Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes, what are modifiers: SOILS . Mapped Series:_ ` Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol - D- 3 f012 '3/7 Iva, Histic Epipedon Gleyed iO4K 4 +/ s Sulfidic odor __- Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No x Rationale: sal w�c�G�°( , ,1nmw.c* , �eic� --L..�,L HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_No--L-Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No x Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No -_. Rationale: A10 v, P ,�,P r ; �; p^�- 31 SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No Y Hydrology present? Yes-No-,A Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species: Is the site a wetland? Yes No�� -- Rationale:- ben, d,c L - TEST HOLE # 2 . OF APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST HOLE LkVL AND Wiltermood Associates, Inc. Scc 1015 SW Harper Road (360) 876-2403 SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION Port Orchard, WA 98367 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species % cover %cover _Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC _Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- -Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU _Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Westernhemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC —Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species _Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU _Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW Evergreen huckleberry Yaccinium ovatum FACU _Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ j L_Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU S Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Yaccinium parvifolium UPL _English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean'spray Holodiscus discolor UPL Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC _Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC _Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC _Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC _Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU _Rushes Juncus spp. FACW _Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW —Bracken fem Pteridium aquilinum FACU _Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW ib Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU Other forb species present: io N�c�c�� re111e 51c,.ck4 sin Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: (.off UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation critdrioni et? Yes�No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale: reams o ` h }�c ie Lacustrine Estuarine Forested Scrub/Shrub -- Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: See ycdm SI Ie-t. Date: Y- Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: S Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding areas: 1� b �. 1 f H s the vegetation, soils, and/or H dr logy been significantly disturbed? Yes Now_ If yes, what are modifiers.:1r,aap �� u f "Js.i ;,SOILS . Mapped Series:�� Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? -- Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No De tthh Matrix Mottle Histosol y Q 10A Histic Epipedon Gleyed mot-i t� GoY Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric s. it criterion met? Yes No X - Rationale: So.� HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_No_A__Surface water depth:. Is the soil saturated? Yes No,-Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: A c&),E: Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale: A�cLi ys-a���l ;Y� evv, P; fl� P Hr,,A 1 LX4 k r-1 SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No XC Hydrology present? Yes No- A_ Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes_,A--No , Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species:_ Is the site a wetland? Yes Now_ f Rationale: 11,,,�� �llr�.�� �GrO�1+nP 1-tl/KJ �� UlG4 bP'ek^ m TEST HOLE #_ OF �� _ APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST OLE u.P L&M o �` — Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 1015 SW Harper Road Port Orchard,WA 98367 SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION (360) 876-2403 1 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species % cover %cover _Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW _Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- �( 0 Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU _Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species _Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACU _Black twinberry Lonicera imolucrata FAC+ /k_ZTHimalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU _Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallop FACU Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _ Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU _Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium UPI, English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPI, Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean'spray Holodiscus discolor UPI, _Snowber y Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: kO Dominant Forb Species _Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC _Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC _Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC _Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC _Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU _Rushes Juncus spp. FACW _Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU _Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW Z Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU _Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW —Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU _Other forb species present: Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: UPLAND? X WETLAND? - Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion m19 Yes_X_No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale: �i Lacustrine Estuarine Forested Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: ,wee S�t'CA Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounds g areas: f r Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes .�No If yes, what are modifiers:. Iayea � �� '2J 4rW-5 �ea£� en\'� w 11 —�� —r "SOILS ." .. Mapped Series: Hydric soils list.. Yes No tI dric Inclusion? y Y Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol 1601 . Histic Epipedon Gleyed Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes X _No Rationale: 0Qry ►oL. 5aJ bin(A . 1 C-rV'0�, HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_No--4 Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes x No Depth to water in test h le: r� Field evidence ofsur=cenundation or soil saturation: veq S51'veeziL Isifiewetlandh rology criterion et? Yes No Rationale: 15,� "c i�'A ;�' lc,) err.t SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes X No Hydrology present? Yes '( No r Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes - t Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species: rvd Is the site a wetland? Yes No Rationale: ii gee ��zNn,•c� �r,,�,�I�r� �„rY p�� � } TEST HOLE # OF APPENDIX G 4 LOCATION OF TEST HOLE I-L\�et-% ' — Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 5�� n 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION ' Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species % cover %cover Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC _Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW 3—Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU —Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU _Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species —Hardback Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACU Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- �M Red huckleberry vaccinium parvifolium UPL _English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species '70 Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC _Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL 10 Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC _Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC Sawbeak sedge Carer stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU _Rushes Juncus spp. FACW _Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum' FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW _Sword fem Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU —Other forb species present: 10 I�D-tt" Kle uer Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: IOb UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion met? Yes � No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale: 0,r�.,la� ��,� do r. F �;Fc�S.�i.z✓ Lacustrine Estuarine Forested Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD �1. Field Investigator:_a�t �� • Sl,�� Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding areas:_ ,, U t ,5 6-,q4e �dI �d-- e " � ,, So c. r �acL "' m fta,'tteyl'vegetation, soils, an or hydrolbgy been significantly disturbed? es_ No If yes, what are modifiers: loe.-,kz •-2eYR,� F-rou.. o. SOILS Mapped Series: h) L b D Hydric soils list?: Yes x No X Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol o-Z to I?, 3/ � Scw�v l� Histic Epipedon Gleyed ia`iR s u Sew Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes X No Rationale:_oo,l ©, m x r.L.V-0 HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested- Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded X _Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring, Pond/Lake. Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_NoJ_-Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No/,Depth to water in test ole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: "'c Y;LAe, i Is the wetlan c�t��Ydrologgy criterior} met? Yes X No Rationale:S L'�c, �L,L Lice Qr'' f•"� SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes. No Hydrology present? Yes X No Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes ;, No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species: ' Is the site a wetland? Yes � No r Rationale: ��� f1n��� u�� �k\'d TEST HOLE # OF bZ s� APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST HOLE L � Wiltermood Associates, Inc. �x� }o ul- A W 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION Port Orchard, WA 98367 ' (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species I % cover q0% Lvtc P y `r'° 4e %cover _Pacific willow Salix lastandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC X 20 Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW �L Western red cedar Thujaplicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- E 2)0 Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species jR Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW _Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACU _Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ °1 '30 Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU '1 20 Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium UPL English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species _Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC _Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC J( t5r Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fern Athyrium frlix femina FAC Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC _Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU Rushes Juncus spp. FACW Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW TPA Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW _Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU _Other forb species present: j0� �c re ( rouwr{ Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW, OBL: Z UPLAND? WETLAND? if Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteri met? Yes --�_No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine _Riverine Rationale: r Y Vka, °/, 1,,P5 G ; ✓ Lacustrine Estuarine a5 �^ Forested /t Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: '�?eE' Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding areas: e ,0�-y �Q , S,n w Cf� S t SS Has the vegetation, soils, and/or h drolo y been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes, what are modifiers lo z Mapped Series: �0 C� Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol (,)-IZ A i01� 5A l --)cw 1y fey,µ. Histic Epipedon Gleyed n-I& j3 10 YR S / w,d,la w, Sulfidic odor _ Concretions Is the hydric spil criterion met? Yes No •< Rationale: Soak c,��,,,� A f , �w HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded X Temporarily flooded 'Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_NO � Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No A( Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: A.,oA Z , L,�,� Gwra ,s�,.r a �� Is the wetland Wydrolog criterion met? Yes No X Rationale: tir) SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No Hydrology present? Yes No—,,('_ Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes_,_No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species: Ct2 Is the site a wetland? Yes No ,X Rationale: A1� 3 P �u e �l a� ►'c�lie 1-er5 yui,,o VkCA bee,-, �d c TEST HOLE # OF 1Z -- - — — APPENDIX G a LOCATION OF TEST HOLE �L �` — 1�---�-��1� � Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION , Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION �v Dominant Tree Species e� cover ���/a l.fl�c'(l� � %cover _Pacific willow 1 Salix lasiandra FACW Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC _Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW —iK Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC _Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- o(O Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU —Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC —Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species Ira Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW _Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACU Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ P( (,�`�Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU to Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU �(Z Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU _Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry. Vaccinium parvifolium UPL _English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape _ Berberis nervosa UPL Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL _Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: �A Dominant Forb Species Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU Rushes Juncus spp. FACW Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW J( 2v Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU _Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW _Sword fem Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart' t Dicentra formosa FACU Other forb species present: A,�,e✓��►*�� Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL:q_ UPLAND? X WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation cri rion met? Yes N0 WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale: �r,`�n oP ILe ` en 5 Lacustrine Estuarine �r-C: h C — Forested Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe ent conditions of wetland an st roytndl*ng areas: A d;�k✓I�� hs kie 2,.,6 -- .� ! Vc c yE.� �►ua aUc Kz o acti t vt� Has the vegetation, soils, and/or h drol gy been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes, what are modifiers.,.(dr c g 20 SOILS . Mapped Series: Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No De th Matrix Mo 1e Histosol 0� rZ ioYR 26 :50-441ce- Histic Epipedon Gleyed (Z 1(. P to7k ✓ 5�tiv y t&c� Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No ,r Rationale: , t.►���, HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring— Pond/Lake—Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: ria !. -5 Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_NoXSurface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No J( Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: ALc,I "w M'�e 5uf �' C, SCb..<;,�� Is the wetland drolo criterion met? Yes�_No Rationale: � 1c.(Ira 'VV "camt -i�Z !�f cr'e,x SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No Hydrology present? Yes No Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species:_ Is the site a wetland? Yes No k Rationale: loll z t',wC ,�rN ti! �,d,�e )t.c" 14?e., TEST HOLE # 1 OF APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST HOLE �` — -- Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 i COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species a % cover q0 k CcooP %cover Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Frarinus latifolia FACW _Western red cedar Thuja plicata. FAC ` Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- I $- 5d Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU _Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species _Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scots broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW _Evergreen huckleberry Yaccinium ovatum FACU _Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ 10 Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _SaW Gaultheria shallop FACU >< W Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Yaccinium parvifolium UPL English ivy Hedera helix FACU Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL _Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU _Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC _Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC -Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC _Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU Rushes Juncus spp. FACW _Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW ,( 10 Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW 5_Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU Other forb species present: Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL:_ g , UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion et? Yes I No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale:_ V1,,,n Lacustrine Estuarine `•�_�A C Forested Scrub/Shrub Emeruent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED . ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: Date: �- Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding as: y '� w Nk,O Has the egetation, soils, ` nd/or hydrology been si ificantly disturbed? Yes No If yes,what are modifiers; Q Zo v,y-,-1 Mapped Series: Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol 4' 5�"4 I In Histic Epipedon Gh�yed — 1� P. l-ay► Suifidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soi N l crit rion met? Yes o ,( Rationale: o r+nct r S HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No A Surface water depth: _ Is the soil saturated? Yes No_Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:__ Is the wetland hydrology criterion et? Yes No Rationale: ,lea 4, c e L.r e k�z �✓� SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No A Hydrology present? Yes No Hydrophytic vegetatica present? Yes _No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species:_ Is the site a wetland? Yes. No Y Rationale: etw � C.✓'e H ey �. _. TEST HOLE # OF t-Z -- — APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST HOLE 'AN — � Wiltermood Associates, Inc. g ' 1015 SW Harper Road Port Orchard, WA 98367 SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species % cover %cover —Pacific willow Sa/ix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC It Oregon ash Fraxinus latfolia FACW iO Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- _Red alder Alnus ruhra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: _ Dominant Shrub Species Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Os,ler Dop Hood Coryus stolon fera FACW Evergreen huckleberry Yaccinium ovatum FACU Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaulthdria.shallon FACU �( Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Yaccinium parvifolium UPL _English ivy Hedera helix FACU Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU _Other shrub species present: 5r LEcL Dominant Forb Species Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanwa OBL Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Spring beauty Clavtunid sibirica FAC Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC x O Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL Lady fern Athyrium ftlix fenrina FAC Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC _Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU Rushes Juncus spp. FACW Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU Soft rush Juncus ejfusus FACW Y IJ Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW )' 20 Sword fem 1.'4stichum munitum FACT.' Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentrd formosa FACU _Other forb species present: STI(�e Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion n T t? Yes_X_No WETLAND TA'PE: Palustrine R Brine _ Rationale: r Lacustrine Estuarine _, r✓ Forested Scrub/Shrub- Emergent Open Water__ Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding are s: n VIA RVA\ fylcoc' Al ornn 1"', rcoec�C`2 . '4L;V 5: , S .r cee "-:�; 'er- �. IrT— l1r ' Has the v getation, goils, and/or hydrolo been significantly disturbed? Yes�_No If yes, what are modifiers.:. I. 1 e� C: (v" oca� BOILS Mapped Series: Q� - R Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No De th Matrix Mottle Histosol l� ltsY "I/� / Sck" I v,-vn Histic Epipedon Gleyed Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No x Rationale: SaA t+ J n)( 4rn to e Vcu HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_No_Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes—No Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation:_mo►4 .5"�I Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No x Rationale:A, C_'C%,�, t -�C_ I'A �1�r�� v 1,6no j-enyA 00 "i SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No__XHydrology present? Yes T No� Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes X No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species:i— Is the site a wetland? Yes No Rationale: b r,re. KC1 a s<J TEST HOLE # Q OF APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST HOLE L A w 00` — Wiltermood Associates, Inc. 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION , Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species ' % cover 100`10 CC�✓ %cover _Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC !I Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW _Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC _Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- 46 Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC —Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species _Hardback Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW Evergreen huckleberry Yaccinium ovatum FACU iO Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU )/2-6 Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Yaccinium parvifolium UPL _English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL _Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU _Other shrub species present: kl,efA4 Dominant Forb Species Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ Cattail Typha latifolia OBL Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC _Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL S- Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC _Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC _Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU _Rushes Juncus spp. FACW 1(:1Z0 Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW _Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU _Reed Canary grass Pholaris arundinacea FACW Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU Other forb species present: Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterio et? Yes-1 No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale:S�c ,lcr l�—� oy �t,e t^.on Lacustrine Estuarine C Forested Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of of wetland and sur+ro�1Y11,ndi11L1'g areas:)' e51e /lJ(:. 0 T - A 1 �.W(:l, , V\ rl Jl. W-1�..1�7 t`({i rti 1 -(,�vl,�(.L vh�l fTR I Y� illo er'5e sLvu&l a e_r Has the vegetation, kils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes,what are modifiers •SOILS Mapped Series: Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No—Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol A 1c)*. INN, Histic Epipedon G1eyed . Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric s it criterion met? Yes No Jt Rationale HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Satu�Oted Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream See p"Spiing Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_No,x Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes Noy( Depth to water intest hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: A-b%o p Is the wetland hydrology riterion met? Yes No Rationale: Ajo L�,�;, r •r,:s r ��, PL1 Cf i^P N fl �tv �rr , SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No A Hydrology present? Yes Now_ Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No A Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species: 25 Is the site a wetland? Yes No--�-�-- 1 i Rationale: at] ��a� iU 2 Qv1 nnv(;w�aTfrS ��ciyP fat 4 �jt��v� tVtk'i� TEST HOLE # is OF APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST HOLE l��t �� Wiltermood Associates Inc. ` . A, t�stirf h`' 1�,�1�1x�►1C wcq�� �c"� ' 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species 0 % cover qQ 5 C-Cim �'.I %cover _Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _ Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC —Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW _Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- 3o Red alder Alnus rubra FAC Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU _Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU -- Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species _Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU _Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW _Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACU _Black twinberry Lonicera imolucrata FAC+ _Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU _Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU _Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium UPL _English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPL _Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU _Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species _Skunk cakbage Lysichitum americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC _Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fern Athyrium filixfemina FAC _Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU _Rushes Juncus spp. FACW Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW X 1-0 Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW t(20 Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary,grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU Other forb species present: Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: T UPLAND? ^ WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation cri non met? Yes Now_ WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverme Rationale: L j, + w ! � c� r o,;-o s Lacustrine Estuarine Forested Scrub/Shrub T� Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of``.wetland yy and surrounding areas: C7{cs.lbt�eS li� b@R.Y\ Cii4 '.oLAJ NL�t�/ PrLO v(1 Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes,what are modifiers.:.. ;,:::-SOILS Mapped Series: Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth' Matrix Mottle Histosol ic`yt( sc,& tmLw. Histic Epipedon �— Gleytd Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes No Rationale: so,, w,R�w x cl,,,r,., HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes—No X Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No X, Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: Ajo AJs Is the wetland hydrolog criterion met? Yes �No X Rationale: Ajor�.��n rs �7 SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No X Hydrology present? Yes No Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species:_ Is the site a wetland? Yes Now_ Rationale:_h .J pa ra,m 2�ed �tc,� n o b� tot_ U TEST HOLE # OF CZ- APPENDIX G LOCAT ON OF TEST HOLE tr 'O �° — — _ Wiltermood Associates, Inc. I wL access e' 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 - COMMON WETLAND AND NON WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species c cover d/o �..P-v�U� %cover _Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW _Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- Red alder Alnus rubra FAC —Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU _Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _ Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species Hardback Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU _Red Osier Dogwood Cornus stolonifera FACW _Evergreen huckleberry Yaccinium ovatum FACU _Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ 1(L.5-Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU _Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU _Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC 20 Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU _Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Yaccinium parvifolium UPI, _English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UPI, Red elderberry Sambucus rocemosa FACU _Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPI, _Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC —Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fem Athyrium filix femina FAC _Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC _Tall manna grass Glyceria elates FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC _Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU Rushes Juncus spp. FACW �10 Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Soft rush Juncus efjusus FACW Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW _Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU Other forb species present: - -tR t M.;4 :Lo Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criteri n met? Yes Nod_ WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale: Less 0a opq rc),-)er— Lacustrine Estuarine Forested Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: Date: Project/Site: County: State: Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding areas: IHas the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes, what are modifiers: SOILS - Mapped Series: Ah- QCl ----T—Na Hydric soils list?: Yes No Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix M ttI Histosol !6 io R��3 l �l� �,if1��,,Histic Epipedon Gleyed Sulfidic odor Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion met? Yes Now_ Rationale: s., HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Pemlanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? YesNo Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes—No X Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: Xlo u. Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No_K Rationale: A)n ri �i;rc ,f� o, gv 1 qL c r Lkge I_,r SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No x Hydrology present? Yes No A Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species: Is the site a wetland? Yes Now_ Rationale: j ��. e br, c bl�� �, fn c-�, t�'� �ICW� 1/1, _e TEST HOLE # OF 2 — APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TEST OLE t-t� �7 — — Wiltermood Associates, Inc. - 4,A�^ z�C' (360) 876-2403 �'� 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION ' Port Orchard, WA 98367 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species % Cover %cover _Pacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Fraxinus Iatifolia FACW _Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara Rhamnus purshiana FAC- Red alder Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU _Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU _Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU _Red Osier Dogwood Coryus stolonifera FACW _Evergreen huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACT) Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ y[ Himalayan blackberry Rubus discolor FACU Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemlaria cerasiformes FAf.,U Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium UP English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Oregon grape Berberis nervosa UI'L _Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Ocean spray Holodiscus discolor UPL Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species _ Skunk cabbage Lysichitum americanum OBL Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ Cattail Typha Iatifolia OBL Spring beauty Claytonia sibirica FAC _Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC _Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Lady fern Athyrium ftlix femina FAC _Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC . Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW _Youth-on-age Tolmeia menziesii FAC Sawbeak sedge Carex stipata FACW Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata' FACU Rushes Juncus spp. FACW 26 Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW _Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW _Sword fem Polystichum munitum FACU Reed Canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW Bleeding heart Dicentra_formosa FACU _Other forb species present: —1 ;�}� C '1; ivr C�w2��1`� Fk - to GCJU Q,11 Ri? �c�1 �CaC,C`� C(iV�ClclFyfi.� t`3- Percent of dominant species FAC, FACW, OBL: UPLAND? WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criterion et? Yes No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine _Riverine Rationale: Lacustrine _Estuarine t.� Forested —Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator: See \�)a ka Date: J \ 2(0 Project/Site: County: v, State: i J Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: d -d Describe current conditions of wetland and surrounding areas:5 � a Has the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes, what are modifiers: SOILS Mapped Series:_ A r rc J loa �' S l S`% Hydric soils list?: Yes Now_ Hydric Inclusion? Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol I 0 Yiz S 0,;/ Lo_ Histic Epipedon Gleyed Sulfidic odor er 1� Concretions Is the hydric soil criterion me ? Yes�_No Rationale:. �,I�J&,,,_, a,21 �TCI�,r HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested n Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring X Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes—No /< Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes Y, No Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: Loc kf Is the wetland rolog criterion et? Yes No Rationale: Sic ' 'c fq -o c3 4 SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes X No Hydrology present? Yes--z<_No [ Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes X No L. Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL species: io a Is the site a wetland? Yes X No Rationale: r TEST HOLE # --" OF -' APPENDIX G LOCATIOI )OF TEST HOLE t, e Pc-. Wiltermood Associates, Inc. n��tiL�� a Ll w Llc A 6 tyoe"r Lv I���6 � 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION , Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species %cover %cover I Pacific willow Salix lucida ssp. lasiandra FACW+ _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW _Western red cedar Thuja plicata FAC _Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara buckthorn Frangula purshiana FAC- I _Lb Red alder yZ e I-6t� Alnus rubra FAC _Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU _Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: Dominant Shrub Species Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU Redosier Dogwood g Corpus sericea FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scopanus FACU _Western crabapple Malus fusca FACW _California huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACU Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ _Himalayan blackberry Rubus armeniacus FACU _Devil's club Oplopanax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallop FACU x Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemleria cerasiformis FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC _Hazelnut. Corylus cornuta FACU ' Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- _Oregon grape Mahonia nervosa FACU English ivy Hedera helix FACU _Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium UPL _Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU _Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor UPL _Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species Skunkcabbage Lysichiton americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL )(J_0 Lady fern Athyrium fulix femina FAC �( Q Slough sedge Carex obnupta OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpzts OBL _Youth-on-age Tolmiea menziesii FAC owlfruit sedge Carex stipata OBL _Foam flower Tiarella trifoliata FAC- Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW+ _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU Soft rush Juncus effusus FACW+ _Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU Rushes Juncus spp. FACW _Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU _Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW _Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU —Reed canarygrass Pholaris arundinacea FACW _Bleeding heart Dicentraformoso FACU _Other forb species present: Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: lb O UPLAND? WETLAND? A Is the hydro hytic vegetation criterio lmet? Yes g No WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine — Rationale: �r t(n•, c o I 1. L: , cC ,r —Riverine 5 Lacustrine Estuarine Forested ,C Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture DATA FORM MODIFIED ROUTINE ON SITE DETERMINATION METHOD Field Investigator:L S r a Date: Project/Site: - County:_[41 sue:., State: w,? Applicant/Owner: Surveyor: D crib/eIl!curr nt conditions f wetlandand surrounding areas: 1c,,,,� ,I0,„ U J Ha the vegetation, soils, and/or hydrology been significantly disturbed? Yes No If yes, what are modifiers: SOILS Mapped Series: al AW-v-)cord �ccAtio 4 <,rivA I Hydric soils list?: Yes No ,c•—( Hydric Inclusion?-� Depth Horizon Color Texture Hydric Soil Indicators Yes No Depth Matrix Mottle Histosol Histic Epipedon Gleyed R 501I LL Sulfidic odor Is the hydric sgil criterion met? Yes No X Concretions Rationale: HYDROLOGY General wetland type or characteristic: Emergent Scrub/Shrub Forested Permanently flooded Seasonally flooded Temporarily flooded Saturated Types of water bodies associated with the wetland: River Stream Seep/Spring Pond/Lake Tidal Drainage ditch/channel Other: Is the ground surface inundated? Yes_No_;�_Surface water depth: Is the soil saturated? Yes No--K_Depth to water in test hole: Field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation: wcriel� Is the wetland hydrology criterion met? Yes No Rationale: /1J eu,- c `v\ A,ca] No, ck h re e��— SUMMARY Hydric soil present? Yes No X Hydrology present? Yes No 1( Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No X Percent of FAC, FACW, and OBL speeies:_�_ Is the site a wetland? Yes No K_ Rationale: l� TEST HOLE # 2� OF `2, APPENDIX G LOCATION OF TFj§THOLE �I(�cAN D � Wiltermood Associates, Inc. T` ° �� ��w~ �� 1015 SW Harper Road SEE REVERSE FOR VEGETATION Port Orchard, WA 98367 (360) 876-2403 COMMON WETLAND AND NON-WETLAND VEGETATION Dominant Tree Species %cover %cover Pacific willow Salix lucida ssp. lasiandra FACW+ _Sitka spruce Picea sitchensis FAC Oregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW _Western red cedar Tlaujo plicata FAC _Quaking aspen Populus tremuloides FAC+ _Cascara buckthorn Frangula purshiana FAC- -Red alder I le e 3-6 Alnus rubra FAC —JR Bigleaf maple Acer macrophyllum FACU Black cottonwood Populus balsamifera FAC _Western hemlock Tsuga heterophylla FACU _Scouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC _Douglas fir Pseudotsuga menziesii FACU _Other tree species present: C�,, t Dominant Shrub Species Hardhack Spiraea douglasii FACW _Snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU _Redosier Dogwood Cornus sericea FACW _Scot's broom Cytisus scoparius FACU Western crabapple Malus fusca FACW _California huckleberry Vaccinium ovatum FACU Black twinberry Lonicera involucrata FAC+ Himalayan blackberry Rubus armeniacus FACU Devil's club Oploponax horridus FAC+ _Salal Gaultheria shallon FACU Salmonberry Rubus spectabilis FAC _Indian plum Oemleria cerasiformis FACU _Nootka rose Rosa nutkana FAC Hazelnut Corylus cornuta FACU Vine maple Acer circinatum FAC- Oregon grape Mahonia nervosa FACU _English ivy Hedera helix FACU Red huckleberry Vaccinium parvifolium UPL �c/0 Red elderberry Sambucus racemosa FACU Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor UPI, Other shrub species present: Dominant Forb Species Skunkcabbage Lysichiton americanum OBL _Stinging nettle Urtica diocia FAC+ _Cattail Typha latifolia OBL _Velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC _Water parsley Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL _Lady fern Athyrium filix femina FAC _Slough sedge Carex obnztpta OBL _Horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC _Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpzts OBL _Youth-on-age Tolmiea menziesii FAC _owlfruit sedge Carex stipata OBL Foam flower Tiarella trifoliata FAC- Tall manna grass Glyceria elata FACW+ _Cat's ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU Soft rush Juncus ejfusus FACW+ _Trailing blackberry Rubus ursinus FACU _Rushes Juncus spp. FACW Bracken fern Pteridium aquilinum FACU Creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens FACW X I Sword fern Polystichum munitum FACU _ _Reed canarygrass Phalaris arundinacea FACW y( yb Bleeding heart Dicentra formosa FACU _Other forb species present: Percent of dominant species FAC,FACW,OBL: 0 UPLAND? x WETLAND? Is the hydrophytic vegetation criten n met? Yes No A' WETLAND TYPE: Palustrine Riverine Rationale: e i ' (.e -e r t` Lacustrine Estuarine ^� C Forested Scrub/Shrub Emergent Open Water Wet Meadow/Pasture