HomeMy WebLinkAboutWetland Delineation Report - PLN General - 5/30/2007 THE WETLAND CORPS — —
Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans - Riparian Restoration - Mitigation • Biological Evaluation
May, 2007 Project# TWC07W342
Page 1 of 16
ARNOLD WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT
1330 NE Collins Lake Drive
Tahuya,Washington
INTRODUCTION
The Wetland Corps has been authorized by Carl Arnold to perform a wetland delineation at
the property located 1330 NE Collins Lake Drive in Tahuya, Mason County, Washington,
(Tax Identification Number 223315100026). The delineation was performed to identify
wetlands and associated buffers within the parcel, due to the recent expansion of an
existing cabin toward a speculated wetland area. The delineation was completed on May
170', 2007.
The subject property is located in the SW '/4 of Section 31, Township 23 North, Range 02
West WM(Figure 1 Vicinity Map). The parcel is slightly greater than one acre in size.
For the purposes of federal, Washington State, and Mason County jurisdictional oversight,
methodology used for the wetland delineation is consistent with the wetland definition
provided in paragraph 25a of the Washington State Wetlands Identification and
Delineation Manual (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997). The sections below
provide: (1) an introduction to the site; (2) a description of methods used in the field
delineation; and, (3)technical results.
GENERAL SITE CONDITIONS
The parcel is bordered to the north and south by residential parcels of similar size, NE
Collins Lake Drive borders the parcel to the east, and timber land borders the parcel to the
west. The eastern half of the parcel contains a small cabin, garage, driveway, and lawn
area. The western portion of the parcel is relatively undisturbed, and contains a
depressional area where a scrub-shrub wetland exists. The parcel contains undulating
topography, comprised of a low to moderate gradient slope down toward the wetland
depression, and also toward NE Collins Lake Drive.
The undisturbed area on the western half of the parcel contains a forested community of
Douglas fir, with a typical understory comprised of salal, Oregon grape, sword fern, and
evergreen huckleberry. The wetland is characterized by a dense understory of spirea,
white willow, slough sedge, and lesser amounts of creeping buttercup.
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Wetland Delineation
TWC No.07W342
May, 2007
Page No.2
METHODOLOGY
Review of Existing Information
Consistent with procedures detailed in the Washington State Wetlands Identification and
Delineation Manual (Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997) (1997 Manual),
preliminary information was gathered on the project site prior to the field review and
delineation. General information sources included: United States Geological Service
(USGS) topographic maps, 1974 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps, the Soil Survey of Mason County Area,
Washington(USDA, 1951), and Mason County's critical areas regulations.
Field Delineation
Methodology used for wetland delineation was consistent with the technical approaches
articulated in the 1997 Manual. This document is the wetland delineation manual that is
used in determining wetland areas when applying state and local government regulations
under the Shoreline Management Act and the Growth Management Act in Washington
State.
The extent and location of suspect wetlands were determined during field work performed
on May 18`h, 2007. Field work was conducted under cloudy skies with an ambient
temperature ranging between 50 and 60 degrees Fahrenheit. The time of year and recent
precipitation history were considered in assessing the extent of the suspect wetland
presumed to exist on site.
Specific field methodology used in determining the extent and location of wetland areas
include:
1. As part of the initial project site reconnaissance, the site was walked to determine
the general extent and location of potential wetland areas;
2. Wetland and upland sample plots were established in the identified potential
wetland areas and in the adjacent upland area; and
3. Wetland boundaries were delineated with flagging by noting localized topography
and vegetation patterns and comparing parameters of hydrology, soil, and
vegetation with data collected at the wetland and upland sample plots.
The project area was investigated and data was collected at three sample plot locations.
Data collected at each sample plot were entered onto a Routine Wetland Determination
Data Form (Washington State Department of Ecology 1997). Copies of data forms for
each sample plot are provided in Appendix A.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Mason County Soil Survey
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Wetland Delineation
TWC No.07W342
May, 2007
Page No.3
The soil survey of Mason County indicates one onsite soil type, (USDA, 1951):
Ab- Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes. 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 60 inches a year. The native vegetation is a dense forest
consisting 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 in 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 basic igneous rock. The Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent
slopes (Ab) is the most extensive, soil of the Alderwood series. It occupies undulating to
rolling moraines.
A more detailed soil description can be found in Appendix B Mason Soil Survey Text.
The Mason Soil Survey map is shown in Figure 4.
National Wetlands Inventory
The USFWS NWI map (online wetlands mapper) shows no wetlands mapped within the
approximate parcel location. (Figure 3. National Wetland Inventory Map).
Department of Natural Resources Water Resource
The Department of Natural Resources Water Resource Map shows no streams in vicinity
of the subject parcel. (Figure 5. DNR Stream Map).
WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS
A portion of one wetland was identified within the northeastern quarter of the parcel. The
entire wetland appears to be approximately 0.5 acre in size, with approximately half of the
total wetland located within the subject property. The main source of hydrology for the
wetland appears to generate from a fluctuating water tables and seasonal runoff. The
wetland has no surface water outlet. The portion of the wetland that is within the property
is flagged with pink ribbon labeled WETLAND DELINEATION. Detailed information
about the wetland vegetation, hydrology and soil characteristics are addressed below.
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepe.com
Arnold Wetland Delineation
TWC No.07W342
May,2007
Page No.4
Onsite wetland,facing east.
Vegetation
The wetland is dominated by a dense shrub layer of spirea (Spiraea douglasii, FACW)
with lesser amounts of white willow (Salix alba, FACW) scattered throughout. The
herbaceous layer contains patches of slough sedge (Carex obnupta, OBL) with lesser
amounts of creeping buttercup(Ranunculus repens, FACW).
The upland vegetation within the parcel includes a scattered overstory of Douglas Fir
(Pseudotsuga menziesii, FACU), and understory species consist of salal (Gaultheria
shallon, FACU), swordfem (Polystichum munitum, FACU), evergreen huckleberry
(Vaccinium ovatum, FACU), brackenfern (Pteridium aquilinum, FACU), and Oregon
grape (Mahonia nervosa, UPL).
Soils
All test pits excavated in the wetland area revealed a single-layer profile consisting of silt
loam with matrix chroma 10YR 3/1 to a depth of 12 inches, with some gravel within the
upper 2-3 inches. Wetland hydric soils are indicated by a low-chroma(equaling one) in all
wetland test pits.
The soil profiles observed in known upland test pits were consistent with the mapped soil
type, Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (Ab). Upland test pits also exhibited a two-layer soil
profile. The upper layer consists of gravelly sandy loam approximately eight to ten inches
deep of matrix chroma 10YR 5/3 and 5YR 4/3. The lower profile contained less gravel
with a matrix chroma of 10YR 6/3. No hydric soil indicators were present in upland soil
test pits.
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Wetland Delineation
TWC No.07W342
May,2007
Page No.5
Hydrolo y
Hydrology was indicated by soil saturation and free water in the test pits during the
growing season, FAC-neutral vegetation, drainage patterns, drift lines, sediment deposits
and water-stained leaves. Upland test pits showed no indicators of wetland hydrology.
WETLAND EVALUATION
The wetland meets criteria for a Depressional per Washington State Wetland Rating
System for Western Washington (Hruby 2004) for the purposes of rating. Based on
functional attributes associated with the wetland including habitat, water quality, and
hydrology functions, it has been rated as a Category III wetland, scoring 46 points on the
state rating form. The score for water quality functions in this wetland is 20, hydrological
functions scored 12, and the score for habitat functions is 14 (see Appendix C for rating
form). According to Table 17.01.070 D of the Mason County Resource Ordinance, the
base buffer width for a Category III Wetlands scoring less than 20 points in habitat
function, within parcels intended for Moderate Impact Land Use require a base buffer
width of 60 feet with an additional 15-foot building setback. Moderate Impact Land Use
is described in Table 17.07.070 B of the Mason County Resource Ordinance as single-
family residential lots or residential subdivisions with 1 unit/acre or less.
WETLAND CONCLUSION
This wetland report documents the presence of a portion of a Category III Wetland at the
subject property. According to Table 17.01.070D of the Mason County Resource
Ordinance, the wetland requires a 60-foot buffer with an additional 15-foot building
setback for Moderate Impact Land Use (single-family residential lots with less than one
unit per acre).
The added building is located 55 feet from the wetland at the nearest point, and occupies
approximately 720 square feet within the wetland buffer and associated setback.
However, a total area of 1736 square feet within the wetland buffer has been cleared up to
24 feet from the wetland boundary at the nearest point. A Restoration Plan had been
prepared which recommends revegetation and maintenance to restore the cleared portion of
the wetland buffer.
We trust this information is sufficient for your needs at this time. Thank you for choosing
The Wetland Corps for this work.
Heather Lane
Staff Wetland Specialist
Lee Boad
Senior Ecologist
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Wetland Delineation
TWC No.07W342
May,2007
Page No.6
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618-Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
The Wetland Corps INVOICE
4440V PO Box 2854
Belfair, WA 98528 Invoice No. 2007-42
360-620-0618 Date: 5-24-2007
Client: Carl and Pam Arnold
1330 Collins Lake Road
Tahuya, WA 98588
Hours Job Description Unit Price Total
8 Arnold Wetland Delineation 75.00 600.00
6 Arnold Restoration Plan $75.00 $450.00
Subtotal: $1050.00
Deposit: NA
Balance Due: $1050.00
Please make all checks payable to The Wetland Corps
If you have any questions concerning this invoice,
call: 360-620-0618
1%interest charged to all invoices not paid within 30-days. The Wetland
Corps reserves the right to file a lien for all services provided for the property if
this invoice is not paid within 90-days. This is an intent to lien notice. If this is
in default and is assigned to a collection agency,the client shall be liable for
collection costs and fees including contingent collection fees charged by the
collection agency in addition to principal interest @ 18%per annum,and all
other charges owing on this account. If legal action is commenced,then
Washington law shall apply. The prevailing party shall be awarded its taxable
costs and reasonable attorney fees.
Ar
THE WETLAND CORPS _�_
Wetland Delineation - Habitat Management Plans - Riparian Restoration - Mitigation - Biological Evaluation
ARNOLD WETLAND DELINEATION
RESTORATION PLAN
Parce1223315100026
1330 NE Collins Lake Drive
Tahuya,Washington
Mason County
Prepared for:
Carl and Pam Arnold
1330 Collins Lake Road
Tahuya,Washington 98588
(360)275-3775
Prepared by:
Lee Boad and Heather Lane
May,2007
Air
'11H WETLAND CORPS - -R,1w '7
Wetland Delineation • Habitat Management Plans • Riparian Restoration - Mitigation • Biological Evaluation
ARNOLD WETLAND DELINEATION& RESTORATION PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARNOLD WETLAND DELINEATION REPORT.................................................................................................................1
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................................I
GENERALSITE CONDITIONS.......................................................................................................................................I
METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................................................1
BACKGROUND INFORMATION....................................................................................................................................2
WETLAND DELINEATION RESULTS..........................................................................................................................3
WETLAND&STREAM EVALUATION........................................................................................................................5
WETLAND&STREAM CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................5
ARNOLDRESTORATION PLAN............................................................................................................................................7
PROJECTDESCRIPTION.................................................................................................................................................7
PROPERTYDESCRIPTION.............................................................................................................................................7
APPLICABLESETBACKS.................................................................................................................................................8
ANALYSISOF EFFECTS..................................................................................................................................................8
RESTORATION MEASURES...........................................................................................................................................8
MONITORING...................................................................................................................................................................12
SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................................................................12
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................................................13
Fi¢ures
Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Site Map
Figure 3. National Wetland Inventory Map
Figure 4. Mason County Soil Survey Map
Figure 5. DNR Water Resource Map
Appendices
Appendix A. Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms
Appendix B. Soil Survey Text
Appendix C. Wetland Rating Form
V V I 1 LAND CO"S
Wetland Delineation - Habitat Management Plans - Riparian Restoration • Mitigation - Biological Evaluation
May, 2007 Project# TWC07W342
ARNOLD RESTORATION PLAN
1330 NE Collins Lake Road
Tahuya,Washington
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This restoration plan has been prepared at the request of Don Parks for the property
located at 1330 NE Collins Lake Drive in Tahuya, Washington. The site is found in the
SW '/4 of Section 31 Township 23 North, Range 2 West (See Figure 1, Site Vicinity
Map).
This report addresses the completed work within 2456 square feet of the 60-foot buffer
and associated 15-foot building setback of a Category III Wetland. The disturbance
entails 1) the removal of vegetation and placement of fill and debris piles up to 24 feet
from the wetland boundary at the nearest point, occupying a total area of 1736 square feet
within the wetland buffer; and 2) the construction of a 1221 square-foot expansion to an
existing building, located 55 feet from the wetland boundary at the nearest point and
occupying a total area of 720 square feet within the wetland buffer and associated
setback. .
The purpose of this restoration plan is to restore the wetland buffer to its natural state and
P rP
function prior to the recent disturbance. The goal of this plan is to restore the disturbed
zone by removing debris piles left over from construction and planting native vegetation,
identify measures that could further improve the quality of the wetland buffer, and avoid
any adverse affects to the critical area to the extent feasible during restoration
implementation.
The following restoration plan is being provided to be used by Mason County staff, the
client, and/or a landscape professional for implementation purposes. The client will
ultimately be responsible for the implementation and the overall success of this plan.
2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The parcel is bordered to the north and south by residential parcels of similar size, NE
Collins Lake Drive borders the parcel to the east, and timber land borders the parcel to the
west. The eastern portion of the parcel contains a small cabin, garage, driveway, and lawn
area. The western portion of the parcel is relatively undisturbed, and contains a forested
community of Douglas fir, with a typical understory comprised of salal, Oregon grape,
sword fern, and evergreen huckleberry. A depressional Category III Wetland is located
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Restoration Plan
TWC No.07W331
May,2007
Page No.8
within the undisturbed portion of the parcel, characterized by a dense community of spirea
and willows. The property contains undulating topography, comprised of a low to
moderate gradient slope down toward the wetland depression and also toward NE Collins
Lake Drive.
3.0 APPLICABLE SETBACKS
The parcel is within the jurisdiction of Mason County. Ordinance 17.01.070 identifies
regulated Wetlands adopted by Mason County. The applicable setback for this project is
as follows:
The applicable setbacks for this parcel are as follows:
Habitat Type Buffer Building Setback from Buffer
Category III Wetland 60' 15'
4.0 ANALYSIS OF EFFECTS
The disturbed zone lies within the eastern portion of the wetland buffer within the parcel,
and occupies a total area of approximately 1988 square feet. Based on surrounding
vegetation within the buffer that is undisturbed, it is likely that the species removed
during the completed work included salal (Gaultheria shallop), evergreen huckleberry
(Vacinium ovatum), swordfern (Polystichum munitum, FACU), bracken fern (Pteridium
aquilinium) and Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa, UPL). Native plantings have been
recommended in Section 5.1 to compensate for the loss of vegetation.
5.0 RESTORATION MEASURES
Removal of Debris
All debris and trash should immediately be removed from within the wetland buffer and
taken off site. The debris includes several stacks of leftover wood and materials, a metal
barrel, and plastic tarps that should be relocated outside of all regulated setbacks.
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618-Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Restoration Plan
TWC No.07W331
May,2007
Page No.9
NZOpli
IF
k
_ l
PO Box 2854 Belfair, Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Restoration Plan
TWC No.07W331
May, 2007
Page No.10
5.1 Vegetation Restoration
It is recommended that the portion of the wetland buffer that has been displaced,
excluding the portion occupied by the added structure and a surrounding 15-foot building
maintenance area, be planted with native shrub and herbaceous species to restore the
original vegetative community and overall function to the wetland, prior to modification.
The portion of the buffer just southwest of the disturbed zone will be used as a reference
site in the development of the restoration zone (pictured below). The total area to be
replanted occupies approximately 925 square feet.
f
s.
Reference site adjacent to wetland; located southwest of added structure
The following is a list of species to be used for replanting. The species have been chosen
based on their presence within the reference site, tolerance to the onsite soil conditions,
and light requirements. The species chosen will depend on availability and also any
personal preferences by the client and/or landscape professional. Other appropriate native
plant species may be substituted at the discretion of the landscape professional.
Native Plantings
It is recommended that potted plants be used as opposed to bare root seedlings. The
following plant species and potted sizes are recommended:
Trees: western red cedar(Thuja plicata)- 2 gallon
Douglas fir(Pseudotsuga menziesii)- 2 gallon
Shrubs: Oregon grape (Mahonia nervosa)- 1 gallon
salal (Gaultheria shallon)— 1 gallon
evergreen huckleberry(Vaccinium ovatum) - gallon
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Restoration Plan
TWC No.07W331
May,2007
Page No.11
Ferns: sword fern(Polystichum munitum)— 1 gallon
Native Planting Guidelines
It is recommended that plantings be installed within the identified restoration zone to
achieve the following densities.
trees- 10' on center
shrubs- 5' on center
ferns- 4'on center
These densities will restore the moderately dense, structurally diverse plant community
that existed prior to clearing activities. To fulfill the above mentioned planting density
recommendation, the mitigation zone will be planted with 9 trees, 28 shrubs and 20 ferns.
It is recommended that installation be done as single trees and or clusters of three shrubs,
on approximate 10-foot centers. Finally, sword fern will be randomly installed throughout
the planting row on average four-foot centers.
=u �
Y'
Portion of disturbed zone to be planted with native vegetation
(following debris removal).
Typically, planting should occur during winter dormancy. The optimum time for planting
is during February and March, however, the need to complete the project in a timely
manner may call for planting to occur outside optimum time periods. No machinery
earthwork will be necessary to implement this restoration plan; planting holes for specified
vegetation installation will be hand dug. No additional clearing or grading should be
necessary for site restoration. All installed vegetation shall be marked with colored
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618-Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Restoration Plan
TWC No.07W331
May,2007
Page No.12
flagging to facilitate monitoring inspections. The monitoring program is recommended to
insure project effectiveness.
Invasive species such as Himalayan blackberry,reed canary grass, Japanese knotweed, and
English Ivy may invade the restoration zone. These species are stubborn competitors for
light and nutrients and limit success of native plants. Invasive species should be removed
from the wetland buffer, and/or restoration zone should they invade. Herbicides should
not be used to achieve this due to the proximity to the wetland. Persistent cutting during
the growing season is sufficient to offset the rhizomes of invasive species if they become a
problem.
Best Management Practices
Recommended Best Management Practices for this project are as follows:
• Perform site work during dry weather.
• Install silt fencing between the work area and the wetland to prevent erosion and
siltation of waters (See diagram below).
• Minimize amount of erodible soils at any given time to the maximum extent
feasible.
• Do not store any fuel, lubricants, chemicals, or hazardous substances outside
overnight within the project area.
• Comply with all permits and requirements of governing authority.
4' M,
a+smucraH�
sTUI Posr FENCE
l
w rr rvt SProw Mm
Y: �Ma��
FILTER FABRIC
Poleo W.
STEP.POSE ONLY
�—RUNOF+
,T
Silt Fence Diagram
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618-Office Phone 360-372-2421•boad40@peoplepc.com
Arnold Restoration Plan
TWC No.07W331
May,2007
Page No.13
7.0 MONITORING
Monitoring of the site will begin the first fall following native species plantings and
maintained on a seasonal basis. The information gathered will provide the following: 1)
condition of reintroduced plant species; 2) the use of the site by wildlife species; 3) any
further disturbances and any effects on the restoration zone and associated aquatic
habitat; 4) any occurrence of exotic species within the buffer; 5) any corrective measures
that may be deemed necessary to provide desired conditions. This monitoring will be in
effect for the duration of three years. The information gathered will be provided in an
annual report and submitted to the Director of Mason County Department of Community
Development.
8.0 SUMMARY
This report addresses restoration for the removal of vegetation within approximately
1988 square feet of the regulated buffer of a Category III Wetland, and the establishment
of a building occupying an area of 720 square feet within the buffer and associated
building setback of a Category III Wetland. Restorative native planting, removal
nonnative debris, and Best Management Practices are recommended to restore the
wetland buffer to its state and function prior to non-permitted work while avoiding
adverse impacts to the extent feasible. No impacts to water quality or aquatic habitat are
predicted.
We trust this information is sufficient for your needs at this time. Thank you for
choosing The Wetland Corps for your environmental needs. If you have any questions
feel free to call.
Respectfully submitted,
The Wetland Corps
��Zj
Lee Boad
Senior Ecologist
Heather Lane
Staff Wetland &Natural Resource Specialist
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528•Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe, 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service document FWS/OBS-79/31. 84 pp. Washington, D.C.
Hitchcock, L.C. and A. Cronquist, 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest.
University of Washington Press.. 730 pp.
Hruby, T., 2004. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington—Revised.
Washington State Department of Ecology Publication#04-06-025.
Munsell Soil Color Charts, 1998. GretagMacbeth. New Windsor,New York.
Pojar,J. and A. MacKinnon, 1994. Plants of the Pacific Northwest Coast. Lone
PinePublishing. 528 pp. Vancouver, British Columbia.
Field i to the Common Wetland Plants o
Speare Cooke, S., 1997. A Fre Guide C f
Western Washington and Northwestern Oregon. Seattle Audubon Society.
417 pp.
US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Mason
County Area, Washington. September, 1951.
US Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. 1978.
Washington State Department of Ecology, 1997. Washington State Wetland
Identification and Delineation Manual. Ecology Publication#96-94,
various pagination. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology, 1993. Washington State Wetlands
Rating System, Western Washington Second Edition. 61 pp.Ecology
Publication#93-74. Olympia, Washington.
Washington State Department of Ecology, 1999. Methods for Assessing
Wetland Functions for Reverine and Depressional Wetlands in the
Lowlands of Western Washington. Ecology Publication#99-115. Olympia,
Washington.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1993. National List of Plant Species that
Occur in Wetlands Region 9—Northwest. Resource Management Group
PO Box 2854 Belfair,Washington 98528-Cell Phone 360-620-0618.Office Phone 360-372-2421-boad40@peoplepc.com
1
J
CovpyM/ MyI
� � A i
rjt�l Irc ��k •9s4 � I t � � � GA�f�
We, j r Nssue
Lake5.
25 29
Belfair-Tahuya Road
I . - I J
- ^•Y
d i rjlCC
f
Approximate Parcel ,:..j S ; N f ,
Location
1 q6 l _ :.._ 'Se -�- • 1__.... ...._.yxa� ' �y ;ll .f NV
f}f
0" 1 mile
jJW7F
FIGURE 1 VICINITY MAP
Project Name: Arnold Wetland Delineation &
Restoration Plan
Location: Tahuya,Washington
72
Project: TWC07-W342
Client: Carl Arnold
THE WETLAND CORPS
Date: 5/07
J
Map Legend
t
J
• COHUS Cities t N
GONUS Suds tOOK
lower 48 Welland Polygons J .PFP55C r' FUBH;;
_.
Eouar.ne and Mafine Oe"water _ OC
Estuarrne and Maria!Wetland J -
freshwNer Emergent WeUand
freshwater forestOWShrub WeUand J -
`' fr"hwatnr Pond 1
lake J
Othef t
RIYlfln! J rP
Vashington
iWIuP Lake oot�en
Digital
t
1
Approximate
Parcel Location
J
Map center:47'26'5'N, 122 58'55'4V
Figure adapted from NWI Figure 3 National Wetland Inventory Map
Mapper website Section 31 Township 23 North Range 2 West
a— -MISSION
FIGURE 3 NWI MAP
Project Name: Arnold Wetland Delineation
/ Location: Tahuya,Washington
Project: TWC07-W342
Client: Carl Arnold
Date:
THE WETLAND CORPS
Note: No No wetlands mapped near parcel vicinity.
i
N ,
r
Approximate
"} *' Parcel '
Locations
Onsite Soil Conditions based on Mason County Soil Survey
Subject Site Soils:
Soil type one has been identified as: Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 30 to 45 percent slopes (Ad).
The Alderwood soils formed in mixed gravelly glacial till dominated by igneous rock. It is found on
undulating to rolling moraines. The soil is well-drained. Rainfall is 40 to 60 inches per year. Everett,
Indianola, and Kitsap soils are included with this soil mapping. This soil is impermeable to roots and
very slowly permeable to water. Native vegetation is a dense forest of Douglas fir with an understory of
salal, Oregon grape, vine maple, and huckleberry. Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 30 to 45 percent
slopes (Ad).-This soil is similar to and adjacent to other Alder wood soils. It occupies gullies and deeply
cut banks of streams. Few of the profile characteristics are uniform. The depth to till, content of gravel,
and nature of the material vary considerably from place to place.
A more detailed soil description can be found in Appendix B Mason Soil Survey Text.
FIGURE 4 SOIL SURVEY
Project Name: Arnold Wet.Del.
Location: Tahnya,Washington
Project: TWC07-W342
Client: Carl Arnold
THE WETL 4ND CORD'S Date: 5/07
Note: Hydric soils not present in project
vicinity.
+7 202 +700204 Approximate +7 �+ �
Fparcel
location
t 7 84 1707286 t 707208 1707380
1707282
FCallinsLaka F ' +.N
U �
11 726 17072154 1707266 1 268 1707
4 + � t t t � u y + F F
f
N a
4
F Nowall Lake
17072 47248 07340
+ +
•s+
fi N. 0U6 i J -////5
SOILS
STREAMS H,:dnc Soils TRANSPORTATION
Stream Water Type 1 east side) Highly Unstable ~Pared Road
Stream Type U=kuanm ;East side) Highly Erodible , '[ npaved Road
_L•gaiy Un:t'Ke F
/ _ s_g�:E2 ble Road(Stuface UiilUv-, r711
Stream ?,ater T•:�e _-{OX-est side) No Data or Gra:el Pies
Stream T�:pe nlmawn(West side) L� Abandoned Road
Orphaned Road
Trail
FIGURE 5 DNR STREAM MAP
Project Name: Arnold Wetland Delineation
Location: Tahuya,Washington
Project: TWC07-W342
VIC Client: Carl Arnold
THE IV ETL A.N D CORPS Date: 5/07
Note: No streams mapped in project vicinity.
APPENDIX A
Routine Wetland Determination Data Forms
Routine Wetland Determination
DATA FORM 1 (Revised)
WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Arnold Wetland Delineation Date: 5/18/07
Applicant/owner: Carl Arnold County: Mason
Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA
S/T/R: 31 T23N R02W
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: forested/shrub
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: 1
Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Upland
Explanation of atypical or problem area:
VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V= vine)
Dominant Plant Species *Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum % cover Indicator
Psuedotsuga menziesii T FACU
Gaultheria shallon S FACU-
Vaccinium ovatum S FACU
Pteridium aquilinum S FACU
Polystichum munitum S FACU
Mahonia nervosa S FACU
HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS:
% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: < 50%
Check all indicators that apply and explain below:
❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations
areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database
❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
X Technical Literature
❑ Other(explain)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? No
Rationale for decision/Remarks: < 50% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC
HYDROLOGY
Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No
Based on: May Drift Lines: No Drainage Patterns: No
Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No
Channels <12n.:
Depth to free water in pit: > 16 FAC Neutral: No Water-stained Leaves: No
Depth to saturated soil: > 16
Check all that apply & explain below: Other(explain):
❑ Stream, lake or gage data
X Aerial photographs
❑ Other
Wetland hydrology present? No
Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators present
i
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Ab-alderwood gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained
Field observations confirm mapped type? Yes
Profile Description
Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil profile
inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description)
0-8 10YR 4/3 Gravelly sandy loam
8-16 10YR 6/3 Sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply)
❑ Histosol ❑ Matrix chroma<2 with mottles
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions
❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Reducing Conditions ❑Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List
❑Gleyed or Low-Chroma(=1)matrix ❑ Other(explain in remarks
Hydric soils present?No
Rationale for decision/Remarks: No indicators present.
Wetland Determination
Hydrophytic vegetation present? No
Hydric soils present? No
Wetland hydrology present?No
Is the sampling point within a wetland? No
Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators not present for all three wetland parameters.
NOTES:
Revised 4/97
Routine Wetland Determination
DATA FORM 1 (Revised)
WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Arnold Wetland Delineation Date: 5/18/2007
Appiicant/owner: Carl Arnold County: Mason
Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA
S/T/R: 31 T23N R02W
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: Scrub-shrub
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: 1
Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Wetland
Explanation of atypical or problem area:
VEGETATION (For`strata, indicate T= tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V= vine)
Dominant Plant Species "Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species "Stratum % cover Indicator
Spiraea douglasti S FACW
Salix alba S FACW
Carex obnupta H OBL
HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS:
% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: > 50%
Check all indicators that apply and explain below:
❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations
areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database
❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
X Technical Literature
❑ Other(explain)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes
Rationale for decision/Remarks: > 50% of dominants OBL& FACW
HYDROLOGY
Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: Yes
Based on: April Drift Lines: Yes Drainage Patterns: Yes
Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root (live roots) Local Soil Survey: No
Channels <12n.: No
Depth to free water in pit: 10 inches FAC Neutral: Yes Water-stained Leaves: Yes
Depth to saturated soil: 3 inches
Check all that apply& explain below: Other(explain):
❑ Stream, lake or gage data
X Aerial photographs
❑ Other
Wetland hydrology present? yes
Rationale for decision/remarks: Primary and secondary indicators present.
SOILS
Map Unit Name_ Ab-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained
Field observations confirm mapped type? No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile
inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description)
0-10 10YR 3/1 Silt loam
Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply)
❑ Histosol ❑ Matrix chroma 5 2 with mottles
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions
❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Reducing Conditions ❑ Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=1)matrix ❑ Other(explain in remarks
Hydric soils present?Yes
Rationale for decision/Remarks: Low-chroma= 1 in the entire soil profile
Wetland Determination
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Yes
Hydric soils present? Yes
Wetland hydrology present?Yes
Is the sampling point within a wetland?Yes
Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators present for all three wetland parameters.
NOTES:
Revised 4/97
Routine Wetland Determination
DATA FORM 1 (Revised)
WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Arnold Wetland Delineation Date: 5/18/07
Applicant/owner: Carl Arnold County: Mason
Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA
S/T/R: 31 T23N R02W
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: forested/shrub
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: 2
Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Upland
Explanation of atypical or problem area:
VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V= vine)
Dominant Plant Species *Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum % cover Indicator
Psuedotsuga menziesii T FACU
Gaultheria shallon S FACU-
Vaccinium ovatum S FACU
Mahonia nervosa S FACU
Polystichum munitum S FACU
HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS:
% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: < 50%
Check all indicators that apply and explain below:
❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations
areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database
❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? No
Rationale for decision/Remarks: < 50% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC
HYDROLOGY
Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No
Based on: May Drift Lines: No Drainage Patterns: No
Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No
Channels <12n:
Depth to free water in pit: > 16 FAC Neutral: No Water-stained Leaves: No
Depth to saturated soil: > 16
Check all that apply & explain below: Other(explain):
❑ Stream, lake or gage data
X Aerial photographs
❑ Other
Wetland hydrology present? No
Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators present
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Ab-alderwood gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained
Field observations confirm mapped type?Yes
Profile Description
Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile
inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure, etc. (match description)
0-8 10YR 5/3 Gravelly sandy loam
8-16 10YR 6/3 Sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply)
❑ Histosol ❑ Matrix chroma_<2 with mottles
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions
❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Reducing Conditions ❑Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List
❑ Gleyed or Low-Chroma(=1)matrix ❑ Other(explain in remarks
Hydric soils present?No
Rationale for decision/Remarks: No indicators present.
Wetland Determination
Hydrophytic vegetation present?No
Hydric soils present? No
Wetland hydrology present?No
Is the sampling point within a wetland?No
Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators not present for all three wetland parameters.
NOTES:
Revised 4/97
Routine Wetland Determination
DATA FORM 1 (Revised)
WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Arnold Wetland Delineation Date: 5/18/2007
Applicantlowner: Carl Arnold County: Mason
Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA
S/T/R: 31 T23N R02W
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: Scrub-shrub
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: 2
Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Wetland
Explanation of atypical or problem area:
VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T= tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V= vine)
Dominant Plant Species *Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum % cover Indicator
Spiraea douglash S FACW
Salix alba S FACW
Carex obnupta H OBL
HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS:
% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: > 50%
Check all indicators that apply and explain below:
❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations
areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database
❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
X Technical Literature
❑ Other(explain)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes
Rationale for decision/Remarks: > 50% of dominants OBL & FACW
HYDROLOGY
Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: Yes
Based on: April Drift Lines: Yes Drainage Patterns: Yes
Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No
Channels <12in.: No
Depth to free water in pit: 8 inches FAC Neutral: Yes Water-stained Leaves: Yes
Depth to saturated soil: 2 inches
Check all that apply & explain below: Other(explain):
❑ Stream, lake or gage data
X Aerial photographs
❑ Other
Wetland hydrology present? yes
Rationale for decision/remarks: Primary and secondary indicators present.
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Ab-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained
Field observations confirm mapped type? No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil profile
inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description)
0-10 10YR 3/1 Silt loam
Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply)
❑ Histosol ❑ Matrix chroma_<2 with mottles
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions
❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Reducing Conditions ❑ Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma(=1) matrix ❑ Other(explain in remarks
Hydric soils present?Yes
Rationale for decision/Remarks: Low-chroma= 1 in the entire soil profile
Wetland Determination
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Yes
Hydric soils present? Yes
Wetland hydrology present?Yes
Is the sampling point within a wetland?Yes
Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators present for all three wetland parameters.
NOTES:
Revised 4/97
i
Routine Wetland Determination
DATA FORM 1 (Revised)
WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Arnold Wetland Delineation Date: 5/18/07
Applicant/owner: Carl Arnold County: Mason
Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA
S/T/R: 31 T23N R02W
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: forested/shrub
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: 2
Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Upland
Explanation of atypical or problem area:
VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S = shrub; H = herb; V=vine)
Dominant Plant Species *Stratum % cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum %cover Indicator
Psuedotsuga menziesii T FACU
Gaulthena shallon S FACU-
Vaccinium ovatum S FACU
Mahonia nervosa S FACU
Polystichum munitum S FACU
HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS:
% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: < 50%
Check all indicators that apply and explain below:
❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations
areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database
❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
X Technical Literature
❑ Other(explain)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? No
Rationale for decision/Remarks: < 50% of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC
HYDROLOGY
Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: No
Based on: May Drift Lines: No Drainage Patterns: No
Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No
Channels <12n:
Depth to free water in pit: > 16 FAC Neutral: No Water-stained Leaves: No
Depth to saturated soil: > 16
Check all that apply & explain below: Other(explain):
❑ Stream, lake or gage data
X Aerial photographs
❑ Other
Wetland hydrology present? No
Rationale for decision/remarks: No indicators present
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Ab-alderwood gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained
Field observations confirm mapped type? Yes
Profile Description
Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture, concretions, Drawing of soil profile
inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description)
0-8 10YR 4/3 Gravelly sandy loam
8-16 10YR 6/3 Sandy loam
Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply)
❑ Histosol ❑ Matrix chroma<2 with mottles
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions
❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Reducing Conditions ❑Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List
❑ Gleyed or Low-Chroma (=1)matrix ❑ Other(explain in remarks
Hydric soils present?No
Rationale for decision/Remarks: No indicators present.
Wetland Determination
Hydrophytic vegetation present?No
Hydric soils present? No
Wetland hydrology present?No
Is the sampling point within a wetland?No
Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators not present for all three wetland parameters.
NOTES:
Revised 4197
Routine Wetland Determination
DATA FORM 1 (Revised)
WA State Wetland Delineation Manual or 1987 Corps Wetland Delineation Manual
Project/Site: Arnold Wetland Delineation Date: 5/18/2007
Applicant/owner: Carl Arnold County: Mason
Investigator(s): H. Lane State: WA
S/T/R: 31 T23N R02W
Do normal circumstances exist on the site? Yes Community ID: Scrub-shrub
Is the site significantly disturbed (atypical situation)? No Transect ID: 3
Is the area a potential problem area? No Plot ID: Wetland
Explanation of atypical or problem area:
VEGETATION (For*strata, indicate T=tree; S= shrub; H =herb; V=vine)
Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator Dominant Plant Species *Stratum %cover Indicator
I Spiraea douglasri S FACW
Sal&alba S FACW I ;
Carex obnupta H OBL
HYDROPHYTIC VEGETATION INDICATORS:
%of dominants OBL, FACW, & FAC: > 50%
Check all indicators that apply and explain below:
❑ Visual observation of plant species growing in ❑ Physiological/reproductive adaptations
areas of prolonged inundation/saturation X Wetland plant database
❑ Morphological adaptations X Personal knowledge of regional plant communities
X Technical Literature ❑ Other(explain)
Hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes
Rationale for decision/Remarks: > 50% of dominants OBL& FACW
HYDROLOGY
Is it the growing season? Yes Water Marks: No Sediment Deposits: Yes
Based on: April Drift Lines: Yes Drainage Patterns: Yes
Depth of inundation: No inundation Oxidized Root(live roots) Local Soil Survey: No
Channels <12ii: No
Depth to free water in pit: 9 inches FAC Neutral: Yes Water-stained Leaves: Yes
Depth to saturated soil: 2 inches
Check all that apply&explain below: Other(explain):
❑ Stream, lake or gage data
X Aerial photographs
❑ Other
Wetland hydrology present? yes
Rationale for decision/remarks: Primary and secondary indicators present.
SOILS
Map Unit Name: Ab-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam Drainage Class: well-drained
Field observations confirm mapped type? No
Profile Description
Depth Matrix color Mottle colors Mottle abundance Texture,concretions, Drawing of soil profile
inches Munsell moist Munsell moist size and contrast structure,etc. (match description)
0-10 10YR 3/1 Silt loam
Hydric Soil Indicators: (check all that apply)
❑ Histosol ❑ Matrix chroma<_2 with mottles
❑ Histic Epipedon ❑ Mg or Fe Concretions
❑ Sulfidic Odor ❑ High Organic Content in Surface Layer of Sandy Soils
❑Aquic Moisture Regime ❑ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
❑ Reducing Conditions ❑ Listed on National/Local Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma(=1)matrix ❑Other(explain in remarks
Hydric soils present?Yes
Rationale for decision/Remarks: Low-chroma= 1 in the entire soil profile
Wetland Determination
Hydrophytic vegetation present?Yes
Hydric soils present? Yes
Wetland hydrology present?Yes
Is the sampling point within a wetland?Yes
Rationale/Remarks: Positive wetland indicators present for all three wetland parameters.
NOTES:
Revised 4197
1
APPENDIX B
Soil Survey Text
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 60 inches a year. The
native vegetation is a dense forest consisting 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 in 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 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.
Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 5 to 15 percent slopes (Ab).-This is the most
extensive, soil of the Alderwood 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. It has a weak granular structure and contains numerous rounded shot. Below the
surface soil, to depths ranging from 18 to 24 inches, is a pale-brown gravelly sandy loam
that is very friable, is single grained; and contains small to moderate amounts of shot .
Between this layer and the cemented till is a 3- to 10-inch layer of very pale brown
gravelly sandy loam. It contains no shot and is firmer but has the same texture as the
layer above. However, it is faintly to distinctly spotted and horizontally streaked with
brown and yellow. 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 first few inches is usually laminated and streaked
with reddish brown and yellow. Below this, to a depth of many feet, the till is uniformly
cemented, fairly uniform light gray, and medium to strongly acid. A thin mat of roots
often lies over the till. The cemented substratum tends to restrict the rapid downward
movement of moisture. Use and suitability.-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. The lack of subsoil moisture damages crops in
summer. For this reason, early maturing, short-season crops are suited best to this soil.
Yields of all crops are usually fairly low because of low fertility and the dry summers.
Pastures produce good forage in spring and late in fall if proper plants are used and
management is good. The deeper soils are suited best to fruits, nuts, and grapes. The
uncleared and remote areas are better suited to forestry than to cultivated crops. Nearly
all the uncleared acreage is in second-growth forest 70 to 80 years of age. Shallowness to
the compact till often inhibits growth of the older trees. The soil, however, is well suited
to production of Christmas trees. Douglas-fir readily restocks in thick stands containing
trees of good form. Stands of small trees are often thinned and pruned to maintain good
form of growth. The growing of Christmas trees has expanded rapidly in the past few
years and is now one of the important industries in the county. It is one of the proper uses
of the cutover lands that are not in a high site class. Alder-wood soils need barnyard
manure, green manure, nitrogen, or legumes to maintain a fertility for crop production.
Phosphate fertilizers and green manure or barnyard manure greatly improve fertility.
Nitrogen fertilizer is often applied with barnyard manure or when cover crops are plowed
under. The fertilizer furnishes additional nitrogen needed to hasten decay of the organic
matter. 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 C
Washington State Wetland Rating System Form
WETLAND RATING FORM—WESTERN WASHINGTON
Name of wetland(if known): Arnold Wetland
Location: SEC: 31 TWNSHP:23N_ RNGE:2 W_ (attach map with outline of wetland to rating form)
Person(s)Rating Wetland: H. Lane Affiliation: TWC Date of site visit: 5/21/07
SUMMARY OF RATING
Category based on FUNCTIONS provided by wetland
I II III X IV
Category I= Score>70 Score for Water Quality Functions 20
Category II= Score 51 - 69 Score for Hydrologic Functions 12
Category III= Score 30—50 Score for Habitat Functions 14
Category IV= Score<30 TOTAL Score for Functions 46
Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTCS of Wetland
I II Does not apply X
Final Category(choose the"highest" category from above") III
Check the appropriate type and class of wetland being rated.
Nba
Estuarine De ressional X
Natural Heritage Wetland Riverine
Bog Lake-fringe
Mature Forest Slope
Old Growth Forest Flats
Coastal Lagoon Freshwater Tidal
Interdunal
None of the above X
Does the wetland being rated meet any of the criteria below?
If you answer YES to any of the questions below you will need to protect the wetland according to the
regulations regarding the special characteristics found in the wetland.
Check List for Wetlands that Need Special Protection, YES NO
and That are Not Included in the Rating
SP 1. Has the wetland been documented as a habitat for any Federally listed Threatened or
Endangered plant or animal species(TIE species)? X
For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the wetland is on the appropriate
state or federal database.
SP2. Has the wetland been documented as habitat for any State listed Threatened or Endangered
plant or animal species? For the purposes of this rating system, "documented" means the X
wetland is on the appropriate state database.
SP3. Does the wetland contain individuals of Priority species listed by the WDFW or the state? X
SP4. Does the wetland have a local significance in addition to its functions? For example, the
wetland has been identified in the Shoreline Master Program, the Critical Areas Ordinance, or X
in a local management plan as having special significance.
To complete the next part of the data sheet you will need to determine the
Hydro eg omorphic Class of the wetland beingrated.
ated.
The hydrogeomorphic classification groups wetlands in to those that function in similar ways. This simplifies the questions
needed to answer how well the wetland functions. The Hydrogeomorphic Class of a wetland can be determined using the key
below. See n. 24 for more detailed instructions on classifvina wetlands.
Classification of Vegetated Wetlands for Western Washington
Wetland Name: Arnold Wetland Date: 5/9/07
1. Are the water levels in the wetland usually controlled by tides(i.e. except during floods)?
NO—go to 2 YES—the wetland class is Tidal Fringe
If yes, is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)?
YES—Freshwater Tidal Fringe NO—Saltwater Tidal Fringe(Estuarine)
If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is a
Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is rated as an Estuarine wetland. Wetlands that were call estuarine in the first and second
editions of the rating system are called Salt Water Tidal Fringe in the Hydrogeomorphic Classification. Estuarine
wetlands were categorized separately in the earlier editions, and this separation is being kept in this revision. To
maintain consistency between editions, the term "Estuarine" wetland is kept. Please note, however, that the
characteristics that define Category I and II estuarine wetlands have changed(see p. ).
2. Is the topography within the wetland flat and precipitation is only source(>90%) of water to it.
NO—go to 3 YES—The wetland class is Flats
If your wetland can be classified as a"Flats" wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands.
3. Does the wetland meet both of the following criteria?
The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of open water(without any vegetation on the
surface)where at least 20 acres(8ha)are permanently inundated (ponded or flooded);
At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 (2 m)?
NO—go to 4 YES—The wetland class is Lake-fringe(Lacustrine Fringe)
4. Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria?
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?
NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these types of wetlands except occasionally in very small and
shallow depressions or behind hummocks(depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 foot deep).
NO—go to 5 YES—The wetland class is Slope
5. Is the wetland in a valley, or stream channel,where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river? The
flooding should occur at least once every two years, on the average, to answer"yes". The wetland can contain
depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding.
NO—go to 6 YES—The wetland class is Riverine
6. Is the wetland in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time of the year.
This means that any outlet, if present is higher than the interior of the wetland.
NO—go to 7 YES—The wetland class is Depressional
7. Is the wetland located in a very flat area with no obvious depressional and no stream or river running through it and
providing water. The wetland seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but
has no obvious natural outlet.
No—go to 8 YES—The wetland class is Depressional
8. Your wetland seems to be difficult to classify. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine
floodplain, or a small stream within a depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. Sometimes we find
characteristics of several different hydrogeomorphic classes within one wetland boundary. Use the following table to
identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within your wetland.
NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area
of the wetland being rated. If the area of the second class is less than 10%classify the wetland using the first class.
—Slope+Riverine Riverine
—Slope+Depressional Depressional
Slope+Lake-fringe Lake-fringe
Depressional+Riverine along stream within boundaryDe ressional
Depressional+Lake-fringe Depressional
Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of Treat as ESTUARINE under wetlands with special
freshwater wetland characteristics
If you are unable still to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or you have more than 2 HGM classes
within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating.
WATEIhQUALM FUNCTIONS hm u am fiat wed famAum to'amprow water
D 1 Does the wetland have the potential to improve water quality?(see p.38)
D 1.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland:
• Wetland is a depression with no surface water outlet...........................................................points=3
• Wetland has an intermittently flowing,or highly constricted,outlet.....................................points=2 3
• Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet.........................................................................points= 1
• Wetland is flat and has no obvious outlet and/or outlet is a ditch.........................................points= 1
D 1.2 The soil 2 inches below the surface is clay,organic,or smells anoxic(hydrogen sulfide or rotten eggs). 0
YES points=4 NO points=0
D 1.3 Characteristics of persistent vegetation(emergent,shrub,and/or forest class):
• Wetland has persistent,ungrazed vegetation>=95%of area..............................................points=5
• Wetland has persistent,ungrazed vegetation>= %:of area...................................................points=3 3
• Wetland has persistent, ungrazed vegetation>= 1/10 of area...............................................points= 1
• Wetland has persistent,ungrazed vegetation< 1/10 of area..................................................points=0
D 1.4 Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation: This is the area of the wetland that is ponded for at
least 2 months, but dries out sometime during the year. Do not count the area that is permanently
ponded Estimate area as the average condition S out of 10 years. NOTE: See text r indicators of
seasonal and permanent inundation. 4
• Area seasonally ponded is> 1/2 total area of wetland..........................................................points=4
• Area seasonally ponded is> 1/4 total area of wetland..........................................................points=2
• Area seasonally ponded is< 1/4 total area of wetland..........................................................points=0
Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above 10
li>! 7 Does the wetland have the opportunity to improve water quality? (see p. 44)
Answer YFS if vote know or believe there are pollutants in groundwater or sitrfaCe water coming into
the wetland that would otherwise reduce water quality in streams, lakes or groundwater downgradient
from the wetland? ,Note which oJ-the following conditions provide the sources of pollutants.
Grazing in the wetland or within i 50 ft
v iitrCiitCd Stvriu WatCr diS�.harg�.a LO wCtinud
_ Tilled fields or orchards within 150 ft.of wetland
A stream or culvert discharges into wetland that drains developed areas,residential areas, farmed
fields,roads,or clear-cut logging
X Residential,urban areas,golf courses are within 150 ft.of wetland Muhiplier
"wetland is fed by groundwater high in phosphorus or nitrogen
Other
L
YES multiplier is-2 NO multiplier is 1
♦ TOTAL—Water Quality Functions Multiply the score from DI by 132;then add score to table on p. 1 r 20
HYDROLOGIC FUNCTIONS—indicators that wetland functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation.
D 3 Does the wetland have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? (see p.46)
D 3.1 Characteristics of surface water flows out of the wetland:
• Wetland has no surface water outlet.....................................................................................points=4
• Wetland has an intermittently flowing,or highly constricted,outlet.....................................points=2 4
• Wetland is flat and has no obvious outlet and/or outlet is a small ditch................................points= 1
• Wetland has an unconstricted surface outlet.........................................................................points=0
D 3.2 Depth of storage during wet periods. Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet.
• Marks of ponding arc 3 ft.or more above the surface...........................................................points=7
• The wetland is a"headwater wetland".................................................................................points=5
• Marks of ponding between 2 ft.to<3 ft.from surface.........................................................points=5 3
• Marks 1 < _
ark at east 0.5 ft.to 2 ft.from surface...................................................................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.........................................................................................points=0
D 3.3 Contribution of wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of upstream basin contributing
surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland itself.
• The area of the basin is less than 10 times the are of wetland...............................................points—5 5
• The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the wetland...........................................points=3
• The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the wetland....................................points=0
• Wetland is in the FLATS class basin=the wetland by definition .....................................points=5
Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above 12
D i P"Q the wetland have the opportunity to reduce flooding and erosion? p 11)
Answer YES if the wetland is in a location in the watershed where the flood storage,or reduction in water
velocity,it provides helps protect downstream property and aquatic resources from flooding or excessive and/or
erosive flows. Answer NO if the water coming into the wetland is controlled by a structure such as flood gate,
tide gate,flap valve,reservoir etc.OR you estimate that more than 90%of the water in the wetland is from
groundwater. Note which of the following indicators of opportunity apply.
Wetland is in a headwater of a river or stream that has flooding problems.
Wetland drains to a river or stream that has flooding problems
Wetland has no outlet and impounds surface runoff water that might otherwise flow into a river or Multiplier
stream that has flooding problems
Other 1
YES muitipiier is 2 NO muitipiier is i
♦ TOTAL—Hydrologic Functions Multiply the score from D3 by D4;then add score to table on p. I 12