Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan - PLN General - 8/30/2022 RUSSELL & ASSOCIATES LAND USE CON_SU'_Tjn11, Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan Loudon Property 21 Northeast Creekview Place Mason County parcel #22331-50-00061 Prepared for: American Home Center 406 1081h Street South Tacoma, Washington 98444 Prepared by: / Russell and Associates 5015 North 261h Street Tacoma, Washington 98407 August 2022 RUSSELL&ASSOCIATES eric@russellandassociates.net 360.789.3607 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan Loudon Property 21 North Creekview Place Mason County Parcel #22331-50-00061 INTRODUCTION This report discusses the identification, delineation and classification of wetlands associated with the Loudon property, a parcel located in the northeastern portion of Mason County, northwest of the community of Belfair (Figure 1,Vicinity Map). The purpose of this wetland analysis report and restoration plan is to delineate and categorize any wetlands associated with the site, which is proposed for single family residential development(Figure 2,Site Map). Mason County is reviewing the site under permit #BLD2022-00582, and has determined that a wetland is present on the site. The County also determined that some disturbance to the buffer and likely to the wetland itself has occurred. This assessment includes a plan to remove fill material from the critical areas, and restore the area to the greatest extent possible. This analysis is required by the Mason County Resource Ordinance,Chapter 8.52 when any development is proposed in or near critical areas, including regulated wetlands or fish and wildlife areas. This parcel is subject to Chapter 8.52.110 as amended and implemented by Mason County. SETTING The site is located in Mason County, in the southeast quarter of Section 31, Township 23 North, Range 2 West, W.M. The project area is made up of one parcel, Mason County parcel #22331-50-00061, which is 0.95 acres in size. . The site is addressed as 21 North Creekview Place. The property is a rectangular shaped parcel, and is bounded by single family residential development to the south and west, and by an undeveloped site on the north. North Creekview Place forms the eastern boundary and provides access to the parcel. There is no existing development on the property with the exception of an installed septic system in the northeastern portion of the site. An existing cleared area is present in the eastern end of the site,just east of the existing onsite sewage system. Figure #1 . Project Vicinity Map N Hill A, LL— % 4 T —7�FT 8/8/2022, 11:54:49 AM 1:6,118 0 0.05 0.1 0.2 mi County Boundary 0 0.07 0.15 0.3 km No Filled L7 Tax Parcels (Zoom in to 1 :30,000) Sources Esn. HERE, Garmin. USGS, Intermap. INCREMENT P NRCan, Esri Japan, METE Esri China (Hong Kong), Esn Korea, Esn (Thailand). NGCC,(c)OpenStreetMap contributors.and the GIS User Community Mason County WA GIS Web Map Application County of Kitsap,Bureau of Land Management,Esn,HERE.Garmin,GeoTechnologtes,Inc..Intermap.NGA,USGS I PROJECT SITE PLAN CLIENT NAME Jerry Loudon SITE ADDRESS 21 Northeast Creekview Place PARCEL NO., 223315000061 NORTH SCALE 1"=40' RUSSELL AND ASSOCIATES 5015 NORTH 26TH STREET TACOMA,WASHINGTON 98407 (360)-789-3607 • SEPTIC SYSTEM DESIGNS • SITE AND SOIL EVALUATIONS • WETLAND DELINEATION AND MITIGATION - ---- —-- ------ ��1 / o h 2t' 'Vic �F �Cla�et� �f Figure 2. Site map of the project area. 4 Surrounding land use in the project vicinity is mainly moderate density single family residential development; the parcel is part of the Collins Lake development. The plat is located within an area with large undeveloped tracts that are mainly managed as commercial forestlands. Topography of the property slopes downward from east to west along the eastern edge of the site. The central portion of the site is relatively flat, but rises from east to west along the western boundary of the parcel. The surrounding area generally slopes downward from north to south,with Collins Lake located south of the site in a large depressional area. Existing topography in the eastern end of the site has been somewhat modified by earthwork activities. Drainage on the site appears to generally correspond to surface topography,with subsurface and surface runoff directed from east to west across the eastern end of the site. There is a broad depressional area that extends across the central portion of the parcel. Drainage from this depressional is likely directed to the south, eventually draining into Collins Lake on the south side of Collins Lake Drive. Soils in the project vicinity were mainly formed in glacial till, glacial outwash, and in depressional areas. Soils across the site are mapped by the Natural Resource Conservation Service in the Pierce County Soil Survey (USDA, 1979), as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8-15 percent slopes. The Alderwood series is described as being moderately well drained, having been formed in mixed gravelly glacial till. It is a very common soil series mapped across Mason County. A typical profile of the Alderwood series is described as having a surface layer of very dark brown gravelly sandy.loam that is 6 inches thick. The upper 9 inches of the subsoil is dark brown gravelly sandy loam. The lower 15 inches is dark brown very gravelly sandy loam. A weakly cemented hardpan is at a depth of about 30 inches. It is strongly cemented and crushes to very gravelly loamy sand. The Alderwood series is not classified by the NRCS as a hydric soil (NRCS, 1991). Actual soils observed across the project site are somewhat consistent with the soil survey mapping and descriptions in the eastern end of the site, although soils are very gravelly and generally more coarse in texture than the typical Alderwood series description. Soils across the central portion of the site are flooded, and appear to be inconsistent with the Alderwood series description. Soils were observed only in the eastern end of the site. Soils in this area are Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan 5 generally 10YR 4/3, 10YR 5/3, or 10YR 4/4 in color in the upper 12 inches of the soil profile, and are a very gravelly sandy loam or a gravelly sand in texture. Soils evaluated to the west of the building site are more indicative of seasonal or permanent inundation, and were flooded during evaluation of the site in early July. Soils were only able to be evaluated along the edge of the inundated area. Evaluation was further complicated by the disturbed nature of the area, where recent soil disturbance has taken place. Soils observed in this area 10YR 2/2 or 10YR 3/1 in color, with redoximorphic features (iron soft masses, depleted matrices, oxidized root zones) observed within 12 inches of the soil surface. Vegetation across nearly the eastern end of the site has been heavily impacted by the clearing and earthwork that has taken place.. Species observed along the north and south edges of the lot in the eastern end of the site are indicative of well drained soils. Species observed include Douglas fir trees, red alder, trailing blackberry, Himalayan blackberry,bracken fern, osoberry, and cutleaf blackberry. Species observed across the central portion of the site are indicative of seasonal saturation or inundation. Species observed across this area include: red alder and Sitka willow saplings, hard hack, and slough sedge. Hydrology observed on the project site is mainly the result of surface water retention. The central portion of the site is part of a relatively flat depressional basin, which may have an outlet to the south, but retains surface water into the summer months . No groundwater seeps or springs were observed during project field work, but they may be present in the western portion of the site and were not detected. WETLANDS Field work to identify and delineate wetlands on the project site was completed during site visits in July of 2022. Wetland determinations were made using observable vegetation, hydrology, and soils in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), and the Washington State Wetlands Delineation Manual (Ecology,1997). A single wetland has been identified and extends across the central portion of the site. The wetland is also shown on the site map (Figure 2), and has been classified according to the USFWS system(Cowardin et al. 1979), and categorized in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology rating system (WSDOE, 2014). A rating form for the wetland is found in Appendix #1. Data sheets are presented in Appendix #2. Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan 6 Wetland 1 Palustrine Scrub Shrub Broadleaf Deciduous Seasonally Flooded (PSS1E) - - Category III Wetland #1 is a depressional wetland system that extends over the majority of the project site, excluding the eastern third of the site and the western edge. The wetland is mainly a depressional wetland but may have some characteristics of a slope system, as drainage is generally directed in only one direction (from north to south). The eastern edge was delineated in relation to the proposed building site, but the remaining boundary is well defined by vegetation type changes in the central portion of the site. The wetland is dominated by shrub vegetation, with some herbaceous species also present. Based on delineation and site and aerial photography review, the total size of the rated wetland area is less than one acre. The wetland was rated as a Category III wetland using the 2014 Washington Department of Ecology Revised Western Washington rating system and Pierce County Critical Areas Ordinance,Title 18E, due to its specific scores for water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions. The wetland is dominated by a variety of species. Species observed onsite within the wetland include: red alder, Sitka willow, hard hack, Nootka rose, slough sedge, and creeping buttercup. A small portion of the wetland along the eastern edge has been filled by recent earthwork on the site. This area totals approximately 300 square feet and is shown on the site plan prepared for the site. Hydrologically, the wetland is supported by drainage from offsite to the north, as well as by surface water retention from the surrounding upland areas. There is likely an outlet at the south end of the system, directing drainage from the wetland into Collins Lake on the south side of Collins Lake Drive Saturation and inundation(along with indicators of saturation, including water marks, redoximorphic features, oxidized root zones) were observed in various areas within the onsite wetland area. Soils in the area of wetland #1 are mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,8- 15 percent slopes. Soils within the wetland are not consistent with the Alderwood series description. Soils observed were mainly 10YR 2/2 and 10YR 3/1 muck (histic epipedon) in the upper 6-8 inches, and 10YR 3/1 or 10YR 4/1 compact gravelly loam (till) with redoximorphic features from 6-18 inches. The wetland functions to provide floodwater storage, sediment/toxicant Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan trapping, wildlife habitat, and groundwater discharge and recharge. Under Mason County Critical Areas Ordinance,Chapter 8.52, Category III wetlands require an 80 foot buffer from the delineated edge of the wetland, based on the proposed land use intensity (high), and the individual scores of the wetland related to habitat function. IMPACTS The site is heavily constrained by the extent of wetland. If the standard 80 foot wetland buffer were to be applied to the onsite wetland, the site would essentially be unbuildable, as there would be insufficient room for both a single family residence, and the area necessary for an onsite sewage system drainfield on the site. Due to the duration of surface water within the wetland, there is a 100 foot surface water setback from this area to an onsite sewage system drainfield. Due to this necessary setback, the drainfield area (and reserve area) were located in the extreme eastern end of the site to adhere to this requirement. There is also a setback from the drainfield (and reserve area), as well as the septic tank and pump chamber, to a single family residence. Due to these requirements, the area available to site the single family residence on the site is extremely limited. Due to the constraints summarized above, the homesite is proposed to be located west of the existing onsite sewage system. Due to the extent of the wetland onsite, the proposed homesite is approximately 27 feet from the wetland at its closest point. A 15 foot back yard is proposed from the edge of the proposed residence to allow for construction and reasonable long term maintenance of the residence. This results in a 12 foot wetland buffer at the closest point from the wetland to the edge of the proposed residence. In addition to the constraints summarized above, earthwork has already taken place onsite and some disturbance of the eastern edge of the wetland has occurred. An area of approximately 300 square feet within the wetland boundary has been filled. MITIGATION Mitigation measures should include, but not be limited to, the following: 1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or part of an action; 2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts; Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan 8 3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; 4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; 5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; 6. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. Mitigation efforts for this project consist of removing the fill material from the wetland itself(approximately 300 square feet of area),and by re-grading the area within the proposed reduced wetland buffer to establish reasonable slopes adjacent to the wetland area. Following removal of the fill from the wetland area and regrading of the buffer, the disturbed buffer area will be replanted. GENERAL MITIGATION STRATEGY The goal of this mitigation plan is to remove fill from the wetland area, establish reasonable grades within the proposed wetland buffer area, and replant the proposed buffer area with native trees. Because the wetland has sufficient hydrology, the disturbed portion of the wetland will be allowed to revegetate naturally. No substantial changes to the general hydrologic patterns of the wetland is expected following development. The proposed areas of wetland fill removal and buffer enhancement are shown on Figure#3. Work will consist of planting trees within the buffer area to re- establish native vegetation cover within this area. Due to the disturbed, open nature of the proposed buffer area to be replanted, as well as the dry soils in this ' area, it will be difficult to reestablish vegetation within this area. Because of this, only Douglas fir is proposed to be planted in this area. This will begin to establish shade and help to facilitate soil development so that other species can become established. GRADING PLAN Proposed grading for this project consists of removing the fill material from the wetland to re-establish the native grade within this area. The proposed buffer area will also need to be regraded to no steeper than a 4:1 slope to allow vegetation to become re-established and to prevent erosion and rapid runoff into the wetland area. The area of wetland that has been filled is approximately 300 square feet. The area of proposed wetland buffer that needs to be re-graded is approximately 1000 square feet. Both areas are shown on Figure #3. Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan Buffer Enhancement Planting Schedule S ecies Size Condition Quantity Spacing Douglas fir 1 gallon 2'-3' Container 25 8 feet on center % eft, C _C,/_ lam/ -� , l mat FO —41 Am Figure 3. Proposed mitigation site plan. 10 PLANTING PLAN Species that are proposed to be used in the wetland buffer are limited to Douglas fir, for the reasons previously summarized (dry soils,exposed, open area). Plant species to be used, as well as their quantities, size,condition, and approximate spacing will be determined and shown on the planting plan, which is attached as Appendix A. Planting work will be done in late fall or winter (November-March) to maximize survival of planted species. Plant material to be used will be obtained from local sources (within the southern Puget Sound basin), and will be native materials. Irrigation, which is sometimes used through the first growing season to aid in plant establishment, is likely to be necessary for this project, but could easily be provided from the proposed residence, as the buffer enhancement area is relatively small and is located close to where the residence will be located. No invasive species are currently present in the proposed buffer enhancement areas or the onsite wetland area. Some Himalayan blackberry is present in the project vicinity. These areas will need to be regularly monitored to assure this species does not take hold in the buffer enhancement areas and impact the proposed plantings. GOALS & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The general goal of this mitigation effort is to restore approximately 1,000 square feet of proposed wetland buffer but planting native trees, which will help to begin restoring wildlife habitat and water quality functions. The following summarizes the performance standards that the wetland buffer enhancement area must meet: • 100 percent survival (or replacement) of planted tree species at the end of year one. Non-invasive volunteer species are acceptable in the total count credited toward survival of planted trees. • Vegetative success must equal or exceed 80 percent survival of planted species at the end of year three, and or additional planting (and monitoring) to achieve such. • If invasive species (i.e., reed canarygrass) coverage poses a threat to the overall viability of the restored buffer area, control measures will be implemented. Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan 11 MAINTENANCE & MONITORING PLAN The following bullet points list features of the buffer enhancement project which will or may require on-going maintenance. Although it strives to include all potential maintenance needs, unforeseen problems are likely to arise. Therefore, it is essential that the site be monitored at least 2 times a year during the first two growing seasons following construction to assure that maintenance or corrections are promptly made. The site will be monitored in years 1 thru 2 at least twice a year. If the site has not made sufficient progress (as defined by the success standards), then contingency actions will be implemented, and monitoring may need to continue beyond the prescribed three years. • Loss of tree species for various reasons-replace or replant as needed. • Presence of reed Cana ass, Himalayan blackberry, or other invasive rY�' Y n'Y species - mow or hand pull monthly May-August,wick with approved herbicide as needed in late June/early July. • Poor growth of upland buffer plants-apply slow release balanced fertilizer. Monitoring will occur regularly to measure the success of the wetland creation project and determine if the goals have been met. The following monitoring documentation will occur: Vegetative Survival - Due to the limited scope of the project and the relatively small number of planted species, a total count of live plants will be made at each monitoring visit. Photo stations- Due to the small area to be restored, the entire area can be representatively covered with two photographs points, one in the southern portion and a second in the northern portion of the buffer area. Due to the simplicity of the project, an email can be sent to Mason County at the end of the growing season (no later than October 15) with photographs and text outlining the development of the area and whether it is meeting the required performance standards. An annual email with photographs will be provided to the County for the three year monitoring period. Due to the relative simplicity of the plan, the homeowner or their designee can perform the site maintenance and monitoring. Access to the site will be provided to allow Mason County regulatory personnel to evaluate the success of the mitigation if necessary. Any substantive deviations from the approved mitigation plan(plant substitutions, etc.) are to be approved by the County prior to implementation. Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan 12 CONTINGENCY PLAN In the event that the goals and objectives are not met by the third year (or at any time during the monitoring period), contingency measures must be taken. These include but are not limited to replanting dead plants, hydrologic manipulation, irrigation, mulching of plants, weed control, trash removal, erosion repair, and any other practices necessary to meet the goals of the mitigation plan. Recommendations to correct deficiencies will be made after each site visit by the homeowner or monitoring biologist. Problems identified will be fixed in a timely and responsible manner. I I I I I III I II Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan 13 REFERENCES Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS 79/31. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. "Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways j Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. i i Franklin,J.T. and C.T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. USDA, Forest Service, Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-8. i i Reed, P.B.,Jr. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 (26.9). 89 pp. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1960. Soil Survey of Mason County Area, Washington. USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. Misc. Publication #1491. Washington State Department of Ecology. 2014. Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Western Washington (Revised). Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identifcation and Delineation Manual. Publication#96-94. Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan 14 Appendix 1. Wetland Rating Form. Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan Wetland name or number RATING SUMMARY - Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID#): Lousa� 7v->�-vy U-"- Date of site visit:5 2611- Rated by 1, S93 r�L Trained by Ecology?_Yes_No Date of training mu" � HGM Class used for rating SS-O" +4-- Wetland has multiple HGM classes?_Y 'i% N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map C31 S C Le £Ap1m OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY J%"' (based on functions_or special characteristics_) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I —Total score = 23 - 27 Score for each Category II —Total score = 20-22 function based on _Category III—Total score = 16- 19 ratings three Category IV—Total score = 9 - 15 (order of ratings is not FUNCTION Improving Hydrologic Habitat important) Water Quality 9 = H,H,H Circle the appropriate ratings g- H,H,M Site Potential H M L H L H M 7= H,H,L Landscape Potential L H L I M 7= H,M,M Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL 6= H,M,L 6= M,M,M Score Based on 5= H,L,L Ratings ! 5= M,M,L 4= M,L,L 3 = L,L,L 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form-Effective January 1,201S Wetland name or number Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure# Cowardin plant classes D 1.3,H 1.1, H 1.4 1 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet(can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 lot Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge-including H 2.1,H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin(from Ecology website) D 3.1,D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found(from web) D 3.3 j Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure# Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland(can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants R 1.2,R 4.2 Width of unit vs.width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2,R 2.3,R 5.2 1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge-including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found(from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure# Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland(can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge-including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d)listed waters in basin(from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found(from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure# Cowardin plant classes H 1.1,H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense,rigid trees,shrubs,and herbaceous plants S 4.1 (can be added to figure above) Boundary of 150 ft buffer(can be added to another figure) S 2.1,S 5.1 1 km Polygon:Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge-including H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat Screen capture of map of 303(d)listed waters in basin(from Ecology website) S 3.1,S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found(from web) S 3.3 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2 Rating Form-Effective January 1,201S Wetland name or number I HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington For questions 1-7,the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated,you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case,identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply,and go to Question 8. 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO -go to 2 YES- the wetland class is Tidal Fringe -go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO- Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES-Freshwater Tidal Fringe Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO -go to 3 YES-The wetland class is Flats Ifyour wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at anytime of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; _At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO - go to 4 YES-The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? 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, The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO -go to 5 YES-The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually<3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The unit is in a valley, or stream channel,where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 Wetland name or number NO - go to 6 YES -The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at sometime during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO -go to 7 YES- e wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO -go to 8 YES-The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit HGM class to being rated use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream Depressional within boundary of depression Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other Treat as class of freshwater wetland ESTUARINE lfyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or ifyou have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form—Effective January 1,201S Wetland name or number ,._-' DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1.Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key)with no surface water leaving it(no outlet). points=3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing oatletr1 Goints=22 Wetland has an unconstricted,or slightly constricted,surface outlet that is permanently flowing points=1 _ Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key),whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points=1 D 1.2.The soil 2 in below the surface(or duff laver)is true clay or true organic(use NRCS definitions).Yes=4 No=0 D 1.3.Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants(Emergent,Scrub-shrub,and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent,ungrazed, plants>95%of area poin 5 Wetland has persistent,ungrazed, plants>% of area point"s=3 Wetland has persistent,ungrazed plants>'/,,)of area points=1 S Wetland has persistent,ungrazed plants<1/10 of area points=0 D 1.4.Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months.See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is>%total area of wetland o� ints= Ak Area seasonally ponded is>'/<total area of wetland points=2 Area seasonally ponded is<Y total area of wetland points=0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 1 9 Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12-16=H try 6-11= M _0-5= L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes=1 No=0 D 2.2. Is>10%of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes=1 No=0 D 2.3.Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? ; es=1 o=0 D 2.4.Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1-D 2 ? Source Yes=1 0=0 (0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above Z Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_3 or 4=H -D-ILor 2= M _0=L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly(i.e.,within 1 mi)to a stream, river, lake,or marine water that is-on the 3 303(d)list? es=1 o=0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? s- No=0 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality(ons if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes=2 = O Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4=H _1=M _0=L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 Wetland name or number L_ DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation 0 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1.Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it(no outlet) points=4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing ou a oint Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key),whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points=1 Z Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted,surface outlet that is permanently flowing points=0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet p�_in Marks of ponding between 2 ft to<3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet p Marks are at least 0.5 ft to<2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points=3 The wetland is a "headwater"wetland points=3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points=1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft(6 in) points=0 D 4.3.Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed:Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points=5� The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit o 3-� The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points=0 S> Entire wetland is in the Flats class points=5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:_12-16=H P<-.611=M _0-5=L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes=1 No'=0 D 5.2. Is >10%of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes= No'=0 D 5.3. Is more than 25%of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human Ian uses resi ential at >1 residence/ac, urban,commercial, agriculture,etc.)? Yes= o=0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:_3=H _ or 2=M _0=L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0.Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1.The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down-gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources(e.g., houses or salmon redds): • Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points=2 • Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points=1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points=1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why points=0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points=0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes=2(No=0 �7 Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above J Rating of Value If score is:-2-4=H _1= =0=L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 Wetland name or number ',-- These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1.Structure of plant community:Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of/.ac or more than 10%of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac.Add the number of structures checked. _Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points=4 Emergent 3 structures: points=2 bl Scrub-shrub(areas where shrubs have>30%cover) 2 structures: points=1 _Forested(areas where trees have>30%cover) 1 structure: points= 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 H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes(hydroperiods)present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10%of the wetland or Y.ac to count(see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). P'LPermanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points=3 i>'-S-e-asonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points=2 _Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points=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 H 1.3.Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ftz. Different patches of the some species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil,reed canarygrass,purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted:>19 species points=2 5-19 species oints=r,_. <5 species points=0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes(described in H 1.1),or the classes and unvegetated areas(can include open water or mudflats)is high, moderate,low,or none.If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. Oo one=0 points Low=1 point Moderate=2 points All three diagrams in this row ., are HIGH=3points Q31 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 3 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 Wetland name or number H 1.5.Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. _Large,downed,woody debris within the wetland (>4 in diameter and 6 ft long). _Standing snags(dbh >4 in)within the wetland _Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft(2 m)and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft(1 m) over a stream (or ditch)in,or contiguous with the wetland,for at least 33 ft(10 m) _Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (>30 degree slope)OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) At least X ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) Invasive plants cover less than 25%of the wetland area in every stratum of plants(see H 1.1 for list of Z strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is:_15-18=H _7-14=M Y_0-6=L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1.Accessible habitat(include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit).Calculate: %undisturbed habitat +[(%moderate and low intensity land uses)/210�;_= Z S- % If total accessible habitat is: >'/3(33.3%)of 1 km Polygon points=3 20-33%of 1 km Polygon points=2 10-19%of 1 km Polygon points=1 <10%of 1 km Polygon points=0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: %undisturbed habitat_+[(%moderate and low intensity land uses)/21__ % Undisturbed habitat>50%of Polygon oints'= Undisturbed habitat 10-50%and in 1-3 patches points=2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50%and>3 patches points=1 J Undisturbed habitat< 10%of 1 km Polygon points=0 H 2.3.Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If >50%of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points=( 2) <_50%of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points=0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above v Rating of Landscape Potential If score is_4-6=H _1-3=M _<1=L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws,regulations,or policies?Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points=2 — It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m(see next page) — It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species(any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) — It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species — It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources — It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan,or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats(listed on next page)within 100 m points=1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points=0 Rating of Value If score is:_2=H _1=M '--0=L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA:2014 Update 14 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 Wetland name or number I WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW(see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats,and the counties in which they can be found,in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.2008. Priority Habitat and Species List.Olympia,Washington. 177 pp.htLI2://wdfw.wa.gov/pLiblications/00 165 AvdtwQ0 16S.pdf or access the list from here: http:f/wdfw wa.uov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft(100 m)of the wetland unit: NOTE. This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat. — Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac(0.4 ha). — Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report). — Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. — Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest-Stands of at least 2 tree species,forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings;with at least 8 trees/ac(20 trees/ha) >32 in(81 cm) dbh or>200 years of age.Mature forests-Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in(53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay,decadence,numbers of snags,and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth;80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest, — Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p.158-see web link above). — Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. — Westside Prairies: Herbaceous,non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie(full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 -see web link above). — Instream: The combination of physical,biological,and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. — Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore,Open Coast Nearshore,and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report- see web link on previous page). — Caves: A naturally occurring cavity,recess,void,or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils,rock, ice,or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. — Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft(7.6 m)high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. — Talus:Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5-6.5 ft(0.15-2.0 m),composed of basalt,andesite, and/or sedimentary rock,including riprap slides and mine tailings.May be associated with cliffs. — Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavityexcavation use b wildlife.Priori snags have a diameter at breast height of> 20 in(51 cm)in western / Y Priority g Washington and are>6.5 ft(2 m)in height. Priority logs are>12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end,and>20 ft (6 m)long. Note:All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland Rating System for Western WA:2014 Update 15 II Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 Wetland name or number A CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS 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 Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? —The dominant water regime is tidal, —Vegetated,and —With a salinity greater than 0.5 ppt Yes-Go to SC 1.1 N =Not a tuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Re erve, Natural Area Preserve,State Park or Educational, Environmental,or Scientific Reserve designated under WAC 332-30-151? Cat.I Yes=Category I No-Go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed(has no diking,ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing,and has less than 10%cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina,see page 25) Cat.1 —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.II —The wetland has at least two of the following features:tidal channels,depressions with open water,or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes=Category I No=Category II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of WP tlands of High Conservation Value? Yes-Go to SC 2.2 ._ Go to SC 2.3 Cat. SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? �� Yes=Category I N/ a=Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? -� http://wwwl.dnr.wa.gov/nhp/refdesk/datasearch/�wnhpwetiands.pdf Yes—Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 No =Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Value and listed it on their website? Yes=Category I No=Not a WHCV SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland(or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs?Use the key below. If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons,either peats or mucks,th c ose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes-Go to SC 3.3 No 7.9b to SC 3.2 SC 3.2. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils,either peats or mucks,that are les n 16 in deep over bedrock,or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash,or that are floatingoNo- of a lake or pond? Yes-Go to SC 3.3 not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70%cover of mosses at ground level,Aast a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes=Is a Category I bog No- Go to SC 3.4 NOTE:If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory,you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present,the wetland is a bog. Cat. SC 3.4. Is an area with peats or mucks forested(>30%cover)with Sitka spruce,subalpine fir,western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine,quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce,or western white pine,AND any of the species(or combination of species)listed in Table 4 provide more than 30%of the cover under the canopy? Yes=Is a Category I bog No=Is not a bog Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 Wetland name or number A SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats?If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. —old-growth forests(west of Cascade crest):Stands of at least two tree species,forming a multi-layered canopy with occasional small openings;with at least 8 trees/ac(20 trees/ha)that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height(dbh)of 32 in(81 cm)or more. —Mature forests(west of the Cascade Crest):Stands where the largest trees are 80-200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diamet exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes= Category I No= of a forested wetland for this section Cat.I SC 5.0.Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? —The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks,gravel banks,shingle,or, less frequently,rocks —The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded wate that is saline or brackish(>0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (need easured near the bottom) Cat. Yes-Go to SC 5.1 No= of a wetland in a coastal lagoon SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking,ditching,filling,cultivation,grazing),and has less than 20%cover of aggressive,opportunistic plant species(see list of species on p. 100). Cat.II —At least Y,of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub,forest,or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. —The wetland is larger than 1/10 ac(4350 ftZ) Yes=Category I No=Category II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line(also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas: — Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 — Grayland-Westport:Lands west of SR 105 Cat I — Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes-Go to SC 6.1ONot an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form(rates H,H,H or H,H,M Cat.II for the three aspects of function)? Yes=Category I No-Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2.Is the wetland 1 ac or larger,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes=Category II No-Go to SC 6.3 Cat.III SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac,or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes=Category III No=Category IV Cat.IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics ` If you answered No for all types,enter"Not Applicable"on Summary Form Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form-Effective January 1,2015 i Figure 1 . Hydroperiod, plant class, outlet location, 150 foot extent 5 � d r' '4 aiu tland' h r t .e 4 ti 'e a JI 8/5/2022, 2:16:28 PM 1:1,529 0 0.01 0.03 0.05 mi County Boundary Tax Parcels (Zoom in to 1 -30,000) 0 0.02 0.04 0.08 km Source.Esn.Maxar,Earthstar Geographics,and the GIS User Community No Filled Contours 5 ft Mason County WA GIS Web Map Application Maxar.Microsoft Figure 2. Contributing Basin ww Contributing- I f , p J R Outr ,Aw OD 3 8/5/2022, 2:20:21 PM 1-1,529 0 0.01 0.03 0.05 mi LA County Boundary Tax Parcels (Zoom in to 1:30,000) 0 0.02 0.04 0.08 km No Filled Contours 5 ft Source.Esn,Maxar,Earthstar Geographics,and the GIS User Community - Mason County WA GIS Web Map Application Maxar,Microsoft I 41 ,� *r i 1 KM extentlot 7 r • 1 t let r1� `� .► rat Q, '• .�' 4i � s. � � y �Y �1 ,'ter^4 - �- �r -•• a NE,Golli slake ur ,�/ +s� �/ -•• vi•w •j 4N v W Dk * %.tyE 5un�ow^. ! to uYa R ��aM,&NO 815/22,2:33 PM Mason County I Washington State Department of Ecology JAM DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mason County State of Washington Ecology homepage>Water&Shorelines>Water improvement>Total Maximum Daily Load process> Directory of projects> Mason County Water quality improvement projects Select the waterbody or pollutant name to find more information about the specific project. Black River Ammonia-N EPA approved Lawrence Sullivan BOD(5-day) 360-690-4665 Lawrence Sullivan Black River Fecal Coliform EPA approved 360-690-4665 Total Lawrence Sullivan Black River EPA approved Phosphorus 360-690-4665 Ammonia-N BOD(5-day) Lawrence Sullivan Chehalis River y EPA approved Dissolved 360-690-4665 Oxygen Chehalis River- Fecal Coliform EPA approved Lawrence Sullivan Upper Chehalis Temperature 360-690-4665 Cranberry,Johns, Lawrence Sullivan Temperature Under development and Mill Creeks 360-407-6389 Oakland Bav and Lawrence Sullivan Fecal Coliform EPA approved Hammerslev Inlet 360-407-6389 Skokomish River tributaries: • Purdy Creek EPA approved and • Weaver Lawrence Sullivan Fecal Coliform Has an implementation Creek plan 360-407-6389 • Ten Acre Creek • Hunter Creek Totten/Eld Inlets Fecal Coliform EPA approved and Lawrence Sullivan Tributaries Temperature Has an implementation360-407-6389 plan Union P,iver Fecal Coliform EPA approved and Scott Bohling https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/ershare/wq/WaterQuaIitylmprovement/TMDL/MasonCounty.htm 1/2 15 Appendix 2. Field Data Forms. Loudon Property August 2022 Wetland Analysis Report and Restoration Plan WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Western Mountains,Valleys and Coast Region Project/Site: Loud on--Creekview Place City/County: Mason County Sampling Date: 7.12.22 Applicant/Owner: Loudon State: WA Sampling Point: #1 Investigator(s): E. Russell Section,Township, Range: Section 31 Township 23 North,Range 2 West WM Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Valley/Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): gradually sloping Slope(%): 0-8 Subregion(LRR): Northwest Forests and Coast(LRR A) Lat: 47.262 Long: 122.5901 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 8-15 percent slopes NW I Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"Present? Yes No x Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes x No Is the Sampled Area Yes x No Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No within a Wetland? Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No Remarks: three parameter criteria met. VEGETATION Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Use scientific names.) %Cover Species? Status? Number of Dominant Species That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC:1. 2 (A) 2 Total Number of Dominant 3 Species Across All Strata: 2 (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species Total Cover: 0 That Are OBL,FACW,or FAC: 100% (A/B) Shrub Stratum Prevalence Index Worksheet: 1. Spiraea douglasii 40 yes FACW Total%Cover of Multiply by: 2 OBL species x1 = 0 3 FACW species x2= 0 4 FAC species x3= 0 5 FACU species x4= 0 Total Cover: 40 UPL species x5= 0 Herb Stratum Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B) 1. Carex obnupta 50 yes OBL Prevalence Index=B/A= 2. 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 X 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6 3-Prevalence Index is :53.0' 7 4-Morphological Adaptationl (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9 5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 10 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation'(Explain) 11, Total Cover: 50 Woody Vine Stratum 'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 1 be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 2 Hydrophytic Total Cover: 0 Vegetation %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 %Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Present? Yes x No Remarks:dominance test not met. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys and Coast-Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features inches Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type, LocZ Texture Remarks 0-9 10YR 2/2 100 muck histic epipedon 9-16+ 10YR 4/1 80 7.5YR 4/4 20 C M glacial till Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion,RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. zLocation: PL=Pore Lining,M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: _ Histosol(Al) _ Sandy Redox(S5) _ 2 cm Muck(A10) _ Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Stripped Matrix(S6) _ Red Parent Material(TF2) _ Black Histic(A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(except MLRA 1) Other(Explain in Remarks) Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) _ Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Depleted Below Dark Surface(Al 1) Depleted Matrix(F3) _ Thick Dark Surface(Al2) _ Redox Dark Surface(F6) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Muck Mineral(S1) Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy gleyed Matrix(S4) Redox Depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes x No Remarks: Hydric soil incicators observed. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(any one indicator is sufficient) Secondary Indicators(2 or more required) x Surface Water(Al) _ Water-Stained Leaves(139)(except _ Water-Stained Leaves(139)(MLRA 1,2, _ High Water Table(A2) MLRA 1,2,4A and 413) _ 4A and 413) _ Saturation(A3) _ Salt Crust(611) _ Drainage Patterns(610) x Water Marks(61) _ Aquatic Invertebrates(613) _ Dry-Season Water Table(C2) _ Sediment Deposits(132) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) _ Drift Deposits(63) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3)_ Geomorphic Position(D2) x Algal Mat or Crust(B4) _ Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) _ Iron Deposits(135) Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils(C6) _ FAC-Neutral Test(D5) _ Surface Soil Cracks(B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)(LRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds(D6)(LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Frost-Heave Hummocks(D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes x No Depth(inches): 2 Water table Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes x No (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge,monitoring well,aerial photos,previous inspections), if available: Remarks:hydrology and indicators observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys and Coast-Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM—Western Mountains,Valleys and Coast Region Project/Site: Loudon--Creekview Place City/County: Mason County Sampling Date: 7.12.22 Applicant/Owner: Loudon State: WA Sampling Point: #2 Investigator(s): E. Russell Section,Township,Range: Section 31 Township 23 North Range 2 West WM Landform(hillslope,terrace,etc.): Valley/Floodplain Local relief(concave,convex,none): gradually sloping Slope(%): 0-8 Subregion(LRR): Northwest Forests and Coast(LRR A) Lat: 47.262 Long: 122.5901 Datum: WGS 84 Soil Map Unit Name: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 8-15 percent slopes NWI Classification: Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no,explain in Remarks) Are Vegetation x Soil x or Hydrology x significantly disturbed? Are"Normal Circumstances"Present? Yes No x Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed,explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS— Attach site map showing sampling point locations,transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No x Is the Sampled Area Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x within a Wetland? Yes No x Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x Remarks: Area is upland based on adjacent undisturbed areas. Area heavily impacted by earthwork. VEGETATION Absolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet: Tree Stratum (Use scientific names.) Cover Species? Status? Number of Dominant Species 1 That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: 0 (A) 2 Total Number of Dominant 3 Species Across All Strata: (B) 4. Percent of Dominant Species Total Cover: 0 That Are OBL, FACW,or FAC: #DIV/0! (A/B) Shrub Stratum Prevalence Index Worksheet: 1 Total%Cover of: Multiply by: 2 OBL species x1 = 0 3 FACW species x2= 0 4 FAC species x3= 0 5 FACU species x4= 0 Total Cover: UPL species x5= 0 Herb Stratum Column Totals: 0 (A) 0 (B) 1 Prevalence Index=B/A= 2. 3 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 4 1 -Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation 5 ##### 2-Dominance Test is>50% 6 3-Prevalence Index is 53.0' 7 4-Morphological Adaptationl (Provide supporting 8 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet) 9 5-Wetland Non-Vascular Plants' 10 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation'(Explain) 11. Total Cover: 0 Woody Vine Stratum Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must 1 be present,unless disturbed or problematic. 2 Hydrophytic Total Cover: 0 Vegetation %Bare Ground in Herb Stratum 0 %Cover of Biotic Crust 0 Present? Yes x No Remarks:Vegetation removed by disturbance. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys and Coast-Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point: 2 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix Redox Features inches Color(moist) % Color(moist) % Type' LoC2 Texture Remarks 0-10 Fill 100 gravel sand fill over native soil 10-19 10YR 4/3 100 grav snd loam 19-26 10YR 4/4 100 grav snd loam 'Type: C=Concentration,D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix,CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. ZLocation: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix. Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3: _ Histosol(Al) Sandy Redox(S5) _ 2 cm Muck(A10) _ Histic Epipedon(A2) _ Stripped Matrix(S6) _ Red Parent Material(TF2) _ Black Histic(A3) _ Loamy Mucky Mineral(F1)(except MLRA 1) _ Other(Explain in Remarks) _ Hydrogen Sulfide(A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172) _ Depleted Below Dark Surface(Al 1) _ Depleted Matrix(F3) _ Thick Dark Surface(Al 2) _ Redox Dark Surface(176) 3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and _ Sandy Muck Mineral(S1) _ Depleted Dark Surface(F7) wetland hydrology must be present, _ Sandy gleyed Matrix(S4) Redox Depressions(F8) unless disturbed or problematic. Restrictive Layer(if present): Type: Depth(inches): Hydric Soil Present? Yes No x Remarks: No hydric soil indicators observed. Well drained soils under fill. HYDROLOGY Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators(any one indicator is sufficient) Secondary Indicators(2 or more required) _ Surface Water(Al) _ Water-Stained Leaves(69)(except _ Water-Stained Leaves(69)(MLRA 1,2, _ High Water Table(A2) MLRA 1,2,4A and 46) 4A and 413) _ Saturation(A3) _ Salt Crust(1311) _ Drainage Patterns(610) _ Water Marks(131) _ Aquatic Invertebrates(1313) _ Dry-Season Water Table(C2) _ Sediment Deposits(132) _ Hydrogen Sulfide Odor(Cl) _ Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery(C9) _ Drift Deposits(63) _ Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots(C3)_ Geomorphic Position(D2) _ Algal Mat or Crust(84) Presence of Reduced Iron(C4) _ Shallow Aquitard(D3) _ Iron Deposits(65) Recent Iron Reduction in Plowed Soils(C6) _ FAC-Neutral Test(D5) _ Surface Soil Cracks(B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants(D1)(LRR A) _ Raised Ant Mounds(D6)(LRR A) _ Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery(137) Other(Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks(D7) Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface(138) Field Observations: Surface Water Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Water table Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Saturation Present? Yes No Depth(inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No x (includes capillary fringe) Describe Recorded Data(stream gauge, monitoring well,aerial photos, previous inspections), if available: Remarks: No hydrology or indicators observed. US Army Corps of Engineers Western Mountains,Valleys and Coast-Version 2.0