· DSL In-Lieu Fee Program 2014 Report Introduction The DSL In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Program instrument was approved on February 2, 2009 and provides the framework for how the ILF Program

Oregon Department of State Lands

Statewide In-Lieu Fee Program

2014 Report

Tamara Quays Baltic Rush Tidal Marsh. Photo by GreenPoint Consulting 7/01/14.

Prepared by: Dana Hicks

DSL Mitigation Specialist (503) 986-5229

[email protected] December 10, 2013

mailto:[email protected]

DSL In-Lieu Fee Program 2014 Report

Introduction The DSL In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Program instrument was approved on February 2, 2009 and provides the framework for how the ILF Program operates. Program modifications were approved April 3, 2012. Additional program modifications are requested in this report (Exhibit F). This report includes an account of income, disbursements, and interest earned with respect to the ILF Program Account. This account is part of the Oregon Removal-Fill Mitigation Fund (ORFMF). The report then provides required information for each approved project, as applicable:

a. A report that includes the Corps, DSL, or other agency permit number, the amount of authorized impacts, the amount of required compensatory mitigation, the amount paid to the ILF Program, and the date the funds were received from the permittee;

b. An accounting of expenditures for the ILF project; c. The balance of advance credits and released credits at the end of the report period for

each resource type, and any changes in credit availability (including additional credits released).

d. The annual monitoring report (if the monitoring period has not ended). e. A description of any remedial action items implemented during the prior year. f. An explanation if performance standards are not being met and any adaptive

management strategies undertaken in the last year, or planned for the upcoming year.

ILF Program Report Oregon’s fiscal year runs from July 1 of the previous year through June 30 of the following year. The accounting report for the ILF Program Account is included as Exhibit A. There are three program account numbers within the ORFMF that are involved in the ILF Program:

1. 40904 is the ILF Program Account and holds all earnings from credits sold. Earnings to the account through credit sales in FY 2014 were $144,635.68 and include a credit of 0.016 credits from Half Mile, 0.24 credits sold from Tamara Quays, 0.68 credits sold from Pixieland, 0.29 advance credits sold from the Lower Columbia ILF Service Area (Clear Lake) and 0.8 advance credits sold from the Umpqua Interior Foothills. Expenditures to ILF approved projects in FY 2014 totaled $511,050.17.

2. 40905 represents the contingency fund for the ILF Program. This fund acts as a financial assurance to meet mitigation requirements for credits sold. The balance of this fund is to be equal to 30% of the statewide average cost for in-lieu fee mitigation multiplied by the number of credits sold from ILF projects in their monitoring phase. As of June 30, 2014, a total of 8.005 credits had been sold from active projects. The in-lieu fee rate is $75,000 for FY 2014, which would require the balance to be $180,117.06. However, DSL requests that the contingency requirement for credits sold from Half

1 of 369

Mile Lane be waived. DSL dedicated an additional $103,775.25 from PIL Account 40911 to the project in July 2014 (FY 2015) for adaptive management needs associated with beaver activity. Since there have been 3.505 credits sold from Half Mile Lane, the remaining number of credits sold as of June 30, 2014 is 4.5 credits and requires a contingency fund balance of $101,250.00. The contingency fund balance is currently $131,133.36.

3. 40911 (formerly 40901) represents funds from the State’s payment in-lieu program and are non-federal deposits made prior to Corps approval of the ILF program. There were no direct expenditures to ILF projects in FY 2014, however the negative balance for project expenditures of $366,414.49 is covered by this account (see Exhibit A) until credits are sold to repay the funds.

ILF Projects Report

Half Mile Lane

Appendix B includes credit sales and fund expenditures, and the 2014 monitoring report for Half Mile Lane. Construction of Half Mile Lane was completed in September 2010 with adjustments in 2011 and 2012 to the southwest wetland to improve flow to and through outfalls. In 2013, DSL was granted a minor instrument modification to allow vegetation monitoring in 2013 (year 2) to be evaluated according to the Year 3 performance standards, and that the requirement for 2014 (year 3) vegetation monitoring be removed. Monitoring for 2014 consists of photo points, a wetland delineation light, and post-project ORWAP assessment. The monitoring report also includes results from the cross-section survey which was not available in time for 2013 reporting. Monitoring results are summarized in Exhibit B-3 Management activities over the last year focused on vegetation management, including harvest and installation of small pole cuttings, and installation of small bare root plants. Maintenance included spraying and hand cutting non-natives. Total expenditures for the project as of the end of FY 2014 are $729,467.75.52. An additional $103,775.25 was awarded to the grant to Clean Water Services in May 2014 to allow them to address adaptive management needs associated with beaver activity. This brings the total grant amount to $901,298.02. Beaver remain active at the site. A beaver dam downstream of the project continues to back up surface water into the emergent wetland area upstream of the bridge during much of the year. At high winter flows, water can reach Half Mile Lane (road) near the southeast corner of the project. In 2013, Clean Water Services installed a pipe through the beaver dam to help maintain flow levels and the project team is evaluating whether this provides enough relief to manage threat of future damages. This flow device remained in place and active in 2014 and there have been no instances of water flowing across Half Mile Lane since it was installed. However, there have not been any high precipitation events either. Beaver dams are also present near the top of the project. These small dams push stream flows east through the wet prairie area during higher flows. Flows re-enter the constructed stream channel slightly downstream. The project team anticipated beaver activity at the site during the

2 of 369

design phase and considers the effects beneficial to channel diversification, energy dissipation, flow modulation, and providing variable depths. Surface water connectivity at the site is good, as evidenced in photo monitoring and the cross-section surveys, with all wetlands connected to Roderick Creek throughout the year and perennial flow in Roderick Creek. No incising of the stream channel or erosion around the bridge is apparent. To date, 56% of credits have been released from the Half Mile Lane project, totaling 6.806 wetland ratio credits. Exhibit B includes the Half Mile Lane credit ledger and shows that 3.505 wetland ratio credits have been sold for $283,521.25. There were no sales in FY 2013, however a credit of 0.016 credits and $1,114.32 was given to Tualatin Parks and Recreation District for a project that was not built (NWP 2011-242; 47271-RF) and the DSL permit was closed. These credits were added back to the ledger as approved by Tom Taylor (Portland Corps District). The current credit balance is 3.301 wetland ratio credits. Exhibit B includes the post-project wetland delineation light and the post-project ORWAP results. The post-project wetland delineation was conducted by SWCA Environmental Consultants in June 2014. As directed by DSL, the wetland delineation should be a “light” method that is treated as an amendment to the formal delineation prepared for the pre-project mitigation plan approved by the Corps of Engineers. The wetland delineation light indicates the final acreage of wetland and waters achieved at the site is 24.18 acres (Table 1). This is 0.06 acres over what was predicted. Table 1 shows that an additional 0.38 credits have been achieved at Half Mile Lane over what was predicted (Table 1). This increase is due primarily to the buffer area (originally credited at 10:1) achieving wetland criteria and thus being credited as wetland creation (1.5:1). In addition, DSL did not request any credit for the stream area under the wetland credits. The baseline area of the ditched stream was 0.52 acres (pre-wetland delineation as Attachment B of the Half Mile Lane Instrument, SWCA 2009). The post-delineation area of the stream channel is 0.99 acres. Since no stream credit protocol is currently approved, DSL requests that the gain of 0.47 acres of waters be credited at a ratio of 3:1 (enhancement), for 0.16 wetland credits. Therefore, DSL asks that the Corps approve the new total credit total of 12.69 credits at Half Mile Lane. The Half Mile Instrument included a pre- and predicted post-project assessment of functions and values using ORWAP version 2.0. Version 2.0.2 came out shortly after that to fix model errors that affected the scores. Therefore, Paul Adamus converted the scores to version 2.0.2 using the same answers to the questions. In June 2014, SWCA Environmental Consultants used version 2.0.2 to review wetland functions and values achieved at the site. Tables 2 and 3 summarize the pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project scores for the specific functions and the grouped functions, respectively. DSL considers scores within ±1 point to be insignificant. Therefore, only phosphorus retention is measurably different between what was predicted and what is actually occurring on the site. This is due to differences in answers to F8 (Extent of persistent surface water), F9 (onsite surface water isolation), F58 (soil composition in pit), and F60 (ground irregularity). SWCA found that a portion of the site retained surface water in areas that are not connected to the stream in the dry season. They also determined that the soil composition in the area checked was clayey, and found that there was extensive microtopography at the site.

3 of 369

Table 1. Wetland Mitigation Type and Credit Acres at Half Mile Lane (SWCA: Results Table 4, 2014) Wetland Mitigation Type

Pre-construction Acres

Ratio Target Credit Acres

Post-construction Acres

Credits Achieved

Restoration 9.30 1:1 9.30 9.06 9.06 Creation 1.92 1.5:1 1.28 3.05 2.03 Enhancement (farmed) 1.09 2:1 0.55 1.21 0.61

Enhancement 0.40 3:1 0.13 0.30 0.10 Buffer 6.42 10:1 0.64 5.21 0.52 Agricultural Use Buffer 4.99 20:1 0.25 4.36 0.21

Roderick Creek (0.52)1 0.99 Total 24.12 12.15 24.18 12.53 1Water acreage was not separately accounted for in the instrument and first year monitoring report table of target acreage. Filled waters were calculated as wetland restoration rather than enhancement. Credit should be given for the additional water acreage on the site. The ORWAP and wetland delineation results also result in more functional wetland acres achieved under the Willamette Partnership Pilot. Table 7 of the Half Mile Lane Instrument (DSL 2013) shows the original calculations. However, the baseline acres of wetlands used was 2.51, which includes the 0.52 acres of waters as well as wetland area delineated north of the property area. DSL proposes updating the baseline acreage to 2.01 (1.49 acres of wetland plus 0.52 acres of waters). Table 4 shows the updated functional wetland acres calculations for baseline and actual post-project conditions. Activities at Half Mile Lane in 2014-2015 will likely include:

• Continued vegetation management including spot spray and collection and installation of small bareroot plants, plugs and bulbs.

• Installation of a bypass culvert in the southeast corner of the project to provide flow relief during higher flows.

• Potential installation if needed of a steel sheet over a section of Half Mile Lane if it is weakened from beaver tunneling.

4 of 369

Table 2. A comparison of pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project ORWAP scores for specific functions at Half Mile Lane.

Pre-Project Scores for Enhancement

Predicted Post-Project Scores

Actual Post-Project Scores

Specific Function Relative Effectiveness

Relative Value

Relative Effectiveness

Relative Value


Relative Value

Water Storage & Delay

2.38 6.25 3.00 6.25 2.96 6.67

Sediment Retention & Stabilization

3.96 2.65 4.42 3.48 5.38 4.77

Phosphorus Retention

2.14 4.00 4.86 4.83 8.34 6.58

Nitrate Removal & Retention

4.08 3.53 5.17 4.19 5.13 6.26

Thermoregulation 2.22 10.00 3.61 10.00 2.94 10.00

Carbon Sequestration

2.00 2.59 2.92

Organic Matter Export

6.22 6.30 6.34

Aquatic Invertebrate Habitat

4.23 5.25 5.80 6.51 6.02 6.59

Anadromous Fish Habitat

4.83 10.00 6.51 10.00 6.59 10.00

Non-anadromous Fish Habitat

2.60 6.67 3.14 6.67 3.78 6.67

Amphibian & Reptile Habitat

3.59 6.67 4.07 6.67 4.33 6.67

Waterbird Feeding Habitat

3.97 2.33 5.03 2.33 5.51 4.00

Waterbird Nesting 0.00 1.75 0.00 1.75 5.05 3.00

5 of 369

Habitat

Songbird, Raptor & Mammal Habitat

5.25 2.33 6.38 2.33 6.30 4.00

Pollinator Habitat 4.66 4.17 6.85 4.17 7.62 4.17

Native Plant Diversity

2.03 3.50 4.46 4.56 6.81 6.00

6 of 369

Table 3. A comparison of pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project ORWAP scores for grouped functions at Half Mile Lane.




Specific Function


Relative Value


Relative Value

Relative Effalfectiveness

Relative Value

Hydrologic Function

2.38 6.25 3.00 6.25 2.96 6.67

Water Quality Group

4.08 10.00 5.17 10.00 8.34 10.00

Fish Support Group

4.83 10.00 6.51 10.00 6.59 10.00

Aquatic Support Group

5.25 4.17 6.30 6.67 6.34 6.67

Terrestrial Support Group

2.22 10.00 6.85 4.56 7.62 6.00

Table 4. Wetland Functional Acres Using ORWAP under the Willamette Partnership Pilot. ORWAP Grouped Services Baseline Actual Post-Project

Hydrologic Function 2.38 2.96

Water Quality Group 4.08 8.34

Fish Support Group 4.83 6.59

Aquatic Support Group 5.25 6.34

Terrestrial Support Group 2.22 7.62 Average 0 to 1 scale 0.47 0.64 Acres of Wetland 2.01 14.61 Functional Acres 0.94 9.35 Net Credits 8.41

7 of 369

Tamara Quays Appendix C includes credit sales, fund expenditures and the 2014 monitoring report for Tamara Quays. Construction of Tamara Quays was completed in Summer 2009 and focused on reestablishment of appropriate tidal elevations, removing of dikes and filling ditches, and relied primarily on natural vegetation establishment in tidal marsh areas. Monitoring in 2014 included vegetation, a wetland delineation light, and post-project ORWAP assessment. Management activities at Tamara Quays focused on vegetation. There were no project reimbursements during FY 2014. Expenditures have been $107,972.92. Natural processes have been restored at Tamara Quays and native vegetation continues to establish throughout the site according to sampling in 2014 conducted by Green Point Consulting Exhibit C-3). Their data show that total plant cover is now equal to that measured in the undisturbed reference area (96%); the average native herbaceous cover in the tidal area was 54% in 2014, up from 27% in 2012; and native herbaceous cover in shrub-dominated habitats is 67%. Green Point Consulting measured woody cover in the shrub-dominated habitat at an average of 16%, an 11% increase since 2012. While woody cover did not meet the year 5 standard, the report notes that woody cover includes planted as well as volunteer shrubs and trees, and there were more than 2,000 stems per acre. Green Point Consulting mapped vegetation communities in 2014 (Exhibit C-3). They found that native-dominated associations occupy the majority (71%) of the area, with soft rush, common cattail alliances occupying 24% and 15.7% of this area, respectively. The report states that non-native associations occupy 18.7% of the area, primarily where the site was ungraded, and includes reed canarygrass (11.6%) in less saline areas and creeping bentgrass (7.2%) in more brackish areas. A post-project wetland delineation was conducted by Green Point Consulting in 2014 (ExhibitC-3, Appendix 7). As directed by DSL, the wetland delineation should be a “light” method that is treated as an amendment to the formal delineation prepared for the pre-project mitigation plan approved by the Corps of Engineers (DSL 2010). Green Point Consulting used the biennial tidal inundation (the 50% exceedance elevation) to establish the upper extent of tidal hydrology, and of soils following the 2010 Regional Supplements procedure 4e for problematic soils. This method was used because soils at the site had been disturbed by grading during restoration. NOAA’s South Beach tide station is nearest gage to Tamara Quays with extreme water level data, which was used by Green Point Consulting and the Estuary Technical Group at the Institute for Applied Ecology to establish a 50% exceedance level of 10.43 feet (3.18 meters). Green Point Consulting used the 10.5 ft elevation at Tamara Quays from the as-built survey conducted by the US Forest Service. They found that the boundary of hydrophytic vegetation in the field was almost always higher than the 50% exceedance elevation by approximately 1 ft. DSL proposes establishing the wetland boundary to follow the 10.5 ft (3.2 m) elevation contour. Therefore, the total wetland area achieved is 14.83 acres, which is less than was predicted. This difference is because the highest measured tide elevation was used as the predicted, post-project boundary. The highest measured tide line is the extent of DSL jurisdiction. Therefore, these additional acres may be used DSL to provide mitigation for authorized impacts to upland areas

8 of 369

that fall below the highest measured tide elevation (14.8 ft NAVD 88). Table 4 shows the adjusted credit acres at Tamara Quays. Green Point Consulting determined that wetlands at the site are primarily estuarine, irregularly flooded emergent and forested wetlands (E2EMP, E2FOP) with a few areas along the banks of Rowdy Creek classified as regularly inundated (E2EMN). In September 2014, Green Point Consulting used ORWAP Version 2.0.2 to review wetland functions and values achieved at Tamara Quays. Tables 3 and 4 summarize the pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project scores for the specific functions and the grouped functions, respectively. DSL considers scores within ±1 point to be insignificant. Therefore, there were no differences between the predicted and actual functions and values achieved by the project. The credit ledger for Tamara Quays is shown in Exhibit C-1 reflects the adjusted number of potential credits. There have been 2.08 credits released for the project. Note that DSL also requested release of 11% of the credits (0.48) in the 2013 Annual Report based on meeting Year 4 performance standards; however these credits have not been released by the Corps Portland District, although results have not been disputed. DSL also requests a release of 11% of the credits with acceptance of this fifth year monitoring report. In total, this accounts for release of 70% of the credits in total; or 2.16 credits. Therefore, DSL requests that 0.08 credits be released. Exhibit B includes the Tamara Quays credit ledger and shows that 0.24 credits were sold for $18,000 in FY 2014. The total number of credits sold by the end of FY 2014 was 1.81 credits for a credit balance of 0.27 credits. A total of $134,950.00 has been collected from credits sold. Table 4. Wetland Mitigation Type and Credit Acres at Tamara Quays Wetland Mitigation Type


Ratio Target Credits


Adjusted Credits

Restoration 3.0 1:1 3.0 0.83 0.83 Enhancement 14.0 3:1 4.67 14.0 4.67 Subtotal 17.0 7.67 14.83 5.50

DSL cost proportion 0.56 (DSL is contributing $318,593 of the total project cost of $564,691).

Total 4.33 3.08

9 of 369

Table 5. A comparison of pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project ORWAP scores for specific functions at Tamara Quays





Relative Value


Relative Value


Relative Value


2.64 1.83 0 1.83 0 1.83


5.39 5.44 5.15 5.51 5.15 5.51


7.94 6.14 5.90 5.97 5.90 5.97


4.21 4.13 4.36 3.99 4.00 3.99

Thermoregulation 1.94 6.67 0 6.67 0 6.67


3.15 7.81 7.81


6.19 7.22 7.41


6.23 6.63 3.8 9.38 3.80 10.00


0.00 10.00 6.5 10.00 7.15 10.00


2.90 6.67 6.77 6.99 7.23 7.40


3.72 3.33 0 6.67 0 6.67


4.62 10.00 3.99 10.00 4.79 10.00

Waterbird Nesting 4.64 6.67 0 7.50 0 7.50

10 of 369

Habitat


6.63 6.67 9.38 6.67 9.38 6.67



2.95 5.00 6.42 7.74 6.43 7.95

11 of 369

Table 6. A comparison of pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project ORWAP scores for grouped functions at Tamara Quays.

Pre-Project Scores Predicted Post-Project Scores


Specific Function


Relative Value


Relative Value


Relative Value

Hydrologic Function

2.64 1.83 0 1.83 0 1.83

Water Quality Group

7.94 6.67 5.90 6.67 5.90 6.67

Fish Support Group

2.90 10.00 6.67 10.00 7.23 10.00


6.23 10.00 7.22 10.00 7.41 10.00


6.63 6.67 9.38 7.74 9.38 7.95

Pixieland Appendix D includes credit sales and fund expenditures for Pixieland. Construction of Pixieland was completed in 2011 and consisted of dike removal, removal of fill, stream channel reconstruction, and filling excavated ponds. Because elevations are higher than at Tamara Quays, all graded areas were planted. Activities in FY 2014 focused on vegetation management. To date, 30% of the credits have been released totaling 2.32 credits. DSL requested release of 0.80 credits in the 2013 Annual Report based on meeting 2013 performance standards; however these credits have not been released by the Corps Portland District to date, although results have not been disputed. The Pixieland credit ledger shows that 0.68 credits were sold for $51,000 during FY 2014 (Exhibit B-1). These were the first credits sold from Pixieland. Site visits indicate that performance standard 3.2 is being met, however USFS was not able to conduct photo monitoring this year. Photo monitoring will be conducted in 2015. No additional credit release is requested at this time. Advance Credit Service Areas The Lower Columbia River area has a maximum of 10 advance credits available. Appendix E shows that 0.29 credits were sold for $21,750 in FY 2014. The total number of credits sold by the end of FY 2014 was 0.86 credits for a credit balance of 9.14 credits. A total of $63,930 has

12 of 369

been collected from credits sold. A project, Clear Lake, has had a preliminary prospectus review by the IRT and a mitigation plan will be developed in 2015 for IRT consideration. The Umpqua Interior Foothills area has a maximum of 15 advance credits available. Appendix F shows that 0.08 credits were sold for $55,000 in FY 2014. This leaves a balance of 14.2 credits. No credit sales have occurred in other approved advance credit service areas, however DSL is only accepting credit sales in the Wilson Trask Nestucca ILF area currently.

13 of 369

References Green Point Consulting. 2014. 2014 Monitoring Report for Tamara Quays Project. December 1,

2014. Oregon Department of State Lands. 2010. Mitigation Plan for Half Mile Lane Project. Modified

on December 12, 2013. SWCA Environmental Consultants. 2014. Half Mile Lane In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Site Year 3

Wetland Delineation Light T1N, R4W, Section 21, Portion of Tax Lot 700, Washington County, Oregon.

14 of 369

Exhibit A

ILF Account Summary

Corps Approved In-Lieu Fee Program Account (40904) Fiscal Year Fiscal Month Transaction Description Amount 2010 2010 Total $0.00 2011 1 July Sold 0.32 credits, Half Mile Lane $26,560.00 Sold 0.23 credits, Half Mile Lane $18,446.00 2 August Sold 0.92 credits, Half Mile Lane $76,360.00 Sold 0.081 credits, Half Mile Lane $6,496.20 Repay seed money to PIL account 40901 -$89,485.14 Transfer funds to contingency account -$37,317.06 7 January Sold 0.16 credits, Half Mile Lane $12,832.00 10 April Sold 0.28 credits, Half Mile Lane $22,456.00 Sold 0.453 credits, Half Mile Lane $36,330.60 Sold 0.008 credits, Half Mile Lane $641.60 11 May Sold 0.66 credits, Half Mile Lane $52,932.00 Sold 0.74 credits, Tamara Quays $59,348.00 12 June Sold 0.29 credits, Half Mile Lane $23,258.00 2011 Total $208,858.20 2012 4 October Repay seed money to PIL account 40901 -$152,358.96 Transfer funds to contingency account -$93,816.30 7 January Sold 0.016 credits, Half Mile Lane $1,114.32 10 April Sold 0.83 credits, Tamara Quays $57,602.00 11 May Sold 0.09 credits, Half Mile Lane $6,246.00 12 June Sold 0.003 credits, Half Mile Lane $222.85 2012 Total $(180,990.09) 2013 19 February Sold 0.20 credits, Lower Columbia (Clear Lake) $14,800.00 16 May Sold 0.37 credits, Lower Columbia (Clear Lake) $27,380.00 22 May Sold 0.01 credits, Half Mile Lane $740.00 2013 Total

15 of 369

2014 17 July Reimburse APP47271, 0.016 credits, Half Mile Lane -$1,114.32 25 September North Coast Land Cons., Clear Lake Property Purchase -$449,789.17 22 October Sold 0.24 credits, Tamara Quays $18,000.00 25 Sold 0.29 credits, Lower Columbia ILF $21,750.00 13 November Sold 0.68 credits, Pixieland $51,000.00 19 North Coast Land Cons., Clear Lake expenses -$51,750.00 31 March Salmon Drift WC, Pixieland expenses -$9,511,00 30 June Sold 0.8 credits, Umpqua Interior Foothills ILF $55,000.00 2014 Total $(366,414.49)

16 of 369

Exhibit B

Half Mile Lane

1. Credit Ledger

2. Project Budget Tracking

3. 2014 Monitoring Report

17 of 369

Exhibit B-1: Half Mile Lane Credit Ledger

18 of 369

Half Mile Lane Credit Ledger

Area 3: Non-Agricultural Use Buffer

Area 4: Agricultural Use Buffer

Wetlands Wetlands Salmon Temperature Wetlands Wetlands Wetlands Wetlands

(ratio acres)(functional acres)

(functional linear feet) (kcal/day)

(ratio acres)

(functional acres) (ratio acres) (ratio acres)

Potential Credits 2.83 1.53 705 64,384 8.43 4.53 0.64 0.25Credit Release Ledger

4/21/2010 15% Credit Release 0.42 0.23 105.75 9657.6 1.26 0.68 0.1 0.049/13/2010 15% Credit Release 0.43 0.23 105.75 9657.6 1.27 0.68 0.09 0.044/8/2011 15% Credit Release 0.42 0.23 105.75 9657.6 1.26 0.68 0.1 0.04

2/14/2013 11% Credit Release 0.311 0.168 77.55 7082.24 0.927 0.498 0.07 0.028

Total of Released Credits 1.581 0.858 394.80 36055.04 4.717 2.538 0.36 0.148

Debit LedgerDate Permitee Corps Permit DSL Permit Sale Price

7/23/2010 D.R. Horton 1998-01364RF-16136/ ENF-7026 $26,560.00 0.32 0.18

7/27/2010City of Forest Grove 2005-00155 RF-34123 $18,446.00 0.09 0.05 0.1 0.04

8/2/2010Hillsboro School District 1J 2002-00204

RF-25273/ RF-37547 $76,360.00 0.07 0.03 14.1 1287.7 0.85 0.45

8/24/2010

Abe Turki, Washington County DLUT 2010-64 44144-GA $6,496.20 0.081 0.04 20.25 1849.33

1/31/2011City of Sherwood 2010-00475 45793-RF 12,832.00$ 0.03 0.016 0.09 0.04

4/6/2011 THPRD 2010-00568 45969-RF $22,456.00 0.28 0.15

4/11/2011West Hills Development 2010-80 44166-RF $36,330.60 0.313 0.17 0.1 0.04

4/25/2011Clean Water Services 2011-29 46124-RF $641.60 0.008 0.004

5/3/2011 City of Hillsboro 2010-436 45636-RF $52,932.00 0.66 0.355

5/31/2011

Tualatin Hills Parks & Recreation District 2011-94 46405-RF $23,258.00 0.29 0.156

Area 1: Floodplain and Channel Area 2: Wetland

Credit Ledger Half Mile Lane September 04, 201319 of 369

1/19/2012

Tualatin Hills Parks & Recreation District 2011-242 47271-RF $1,114.32 0.016 0.009 4 365.30

5/18/2012

Tualatin LTC Properties II LLC NWP 2011-510 48431-RF $6,246.00 0.09 0.05 22.48 2053.19

6/4/2012Columbia River Trust 48103-RF $222.85 0.003 0.002 0.8 73.06

5/22/2013Station Ventures LLC 2012-208 50633-RF $740.00 0.010 0.005 2.50 228.05

8/4/2014

Bonneville Power Administation NWP 2013-370 55991-RF $3,753.51 0.049 0.027 12.24 1117.46

9/15/2014Norman W Gerlach Trust NWP 2014-219 56499-FP $1,500.00 0.02 0.011 4.99 456.10

1/19/2012

Tualatin Hills Parks & Recreation District 2011-242 47271-RF ($1,114.32) -0.016 -0.009 -4 -365.30

11/28/2014 City of Hillsboro 2013-115-1 54934-RF $7,500.00 0.100 0.054 24.97 2280.52

Total Debits 0.423 0.22 102.33 9345.41 2.841 1.53 0.29 0.12

Credit Balance 1.158 0.64 292.47 26709.63 1.876 1 0.07 0.028

Credit Ledger Half Mile Lane September 04, 201320 of 369

Exhibit B-2: Half Mile Lane Project Budget Tracking

21 of 369

Gales Creek-Half Mile Lane Approved Budget

PRE-GRANT DSLWetland delineation Pre-Grant 6,927.14$

PROJECT GRANT

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION*Functional assessment 1,465.21$ Wetland design/permitting 62,234.00$ Bridge design 47,250.00$ CWS project management 2,800.00$

Phase IIPlan Update 500.00$ CWS project management 700.00$ TOTAL 114,949.21$

EASEMENTSurvey 5,150.00$ Legal description, legal review and recording 3,466.00$ Easement purchase (reflects budget increase) 150,000.00$ CWS project management 1,400.00$ TOTAL 160,016.00$

CONTRACTED SERVICESSite prep perimeter mow Sept 09 1,050.00$ Site prep perimeter spray Oct-10 451.72$ Site prep perimeter spray Apr-10 600.00$ Site prep perimeter spray Jul-10 600.00$ Site prep perimeter spray Aug-10 600.00$ Bridge or culvert purchase and installation 35,775.00$ Earthwork, large wood and erosion control (142,047) + Erosion control (23,799)-478.80 (endowment) 165,367.20$ Disc (2 treatments on part of field) 950.00$ Broadcast spray 1,330.00$ Seed spreading 1,425.00$ Harrow 380.00$

Page 1 of 16 22 of 369


PRE-GRANT DSLHerbaceous plugs and bulb installation 2,808.00$ Oak/Wetland bare-root planting 104.00$ Oak/Wetland plant staking 40.00$ Scrub and riparian forest bare-root planting 5,720.00$ Maintenance spot spray 3,325.00$ Optional maintenance spot spray 3,325.00$ Perimeter maintenance broadcast spray 600.00$ CWS or Contractor project mangt. 3,000.00$

Phase II (Oct 2011-June 2014)Seed spreading/drilling 337.50$ Maintenance spot spray 4,200.00$ Maintenance spot spray 4,200.00$ Maintenance mow 1,920.00$ Herbaceous plugs and bulb installation 8,060.00$ Bare-root planting 1,248.00$ Maintenance spot spray 4,200.00$ Maintenance spot spray 4,200.00$ Maintenance spot spray 4,200.00$ CWS or Contractor project mangt. 1,400.00$ Bypass culvert purchase and instalation 20,623.00$ Steel plate purchase and installation 2,500.00$ Establishment mow and spray Sep-13 4,976.25$ Planting--Install plugs, rhizomes, bulbs Oct-13 2,160.00$ Planting--Harvest small pole cuttings Mar-14 190.00$ Planting--Install small pole cuttings Mar-14 170.00$ Planting--Install small bare root plants Mar-14 1,250.00$ Hourly spray Apr-14 3,400.00$ Hourly hand cut Jun -14 1,900.00$ Hourly spray Jun-14 3,400.00$ Project management 850.00$ Herbicide allowance 500.00$

Phase III (July 2014-Oct 2016)Maintenance-Hand pull weeds Jul-14 5,800.00$ Maintenance-spot spray Sep-14 3,400.00$ Planting-Install small bareroot plants Jan-15 2,800.00$

Page 2 of 16 23 of 369


PRE-GRANT DSLMaintenance-spot spray Apr-14 3,400.00$ Maintenance-Hand pull weeds Jul-15 5,800.00$ Maintenance-Spot spray Jul-15 3,400.00$ Maintenance-spot spray Oct-15 3,400.00$ Planting-small bareroot plants Jan-16 1,400.00$ Planting-cuttings Jan-16 1,500.00$ Maintenance-spot spray Apr-16 3,400.00$ Maintenance-hand pull weeds Jul-16 2,900.00$ Maintenance-spot spray Jul-16 3,400.00$ Maintenance-spot spreay Sept-16 3,400.00$

CONTINGENCY (includes $800 not new) 5,059.00$ TOTAL 352,394.67$

SUPPLIES/MATERIALSNative Seed--prairie 11,000.00$ Native Seed--riparian 2,880.00$ Herbaceous plugs and bulbs 5,400.00$ Oak seedlings 240.00$ Bamboo states 60.00$ Bare-root trees and shrubs 15,840.00$

Phase II (Oct 2011-June 2014)Native seed 675.00$ Herbaceous plugs and bulbs 18,600.00$ Bare-root trees and shrubs 2,880.00$

Phase III (July 2014-Oct 2016)2014 plugs 3,600.00$ 2014 bareroot plants 2,500.00$ 2015 bareroot plants 5,000.00$ 2016 bareroot plants 2,500.00$ TOTAL 71,175.00$

Page 3 of 16 24 of 369


PRE-GRANT DSLPOST IMPLEMENTATION REPORTINGWetland delineation, assessment - post-treatment 10,000.00$ Vegetation monitoring, reporting 3,000.00$ Conservation Registry fees 11,636.00$ CWS project management 1,400.00$

Phase IIVegetation monitoring, reporting 12,000.00$ CWS project management 2,800.00$ TOTAL 40,836.00$

ENDOWMENT 155,000.00$

TOTAL ALL CATEGORIES 901,298.02$

Page 4 of 16 25 of 369

Gales Creek-Half Mile Lane

PRE-GRANTWetland delineation Pre-Grant

PROJECT GRANT

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION*Functional assessmentWetland design/permittingBridge designCWS project management

Phase IIPlan UpdateCWS project management TOTAL

EASEMENTSurveyLegal description, legal review and recordingEasement purchase (reflects budget increase)CWS project managementTOTAL

CONTRACTED SERVICESSite prep perimeter mow Sept 09Site prep perimeter spray Oct-10Site prep perimeter spray Apr-10Site prep perimeter spray Jul-10Site prep perimeter spray Aug-10Bridge or culvert purchase and installationEarthwork, large wood and erosion control (142,047) + Erosion control (23,799)-478.80 (endowment)Disc (2 treatments on part of field)Broadcast spraySeed spreadingHarrow

Request #1 (CWS)

Request #2 (Markit)

Request #3 (CWS)

Request #4 (CWS)

Request #5 (Markit)

Request #6 (CWS)

04/01/10 03/07/10 08/01/10 10/01/10 03/01/116,927.14$

1,465.21$ 28,700.24$ 26,785.07$ 5,558.04$

39,053.15$ 10,587.50$ 2,800.00$

-$ -$ 32,965.45$ 65,838.22$ -$ 16,145.54$

6,335.00$ 750.00$ 1,531.00$

150,000.00$

157,866.00$ 750.00$ -$ -$

1,650.00$ (1,217.81)$ 919.53$

600.00$ 1,200.00$ 1,343.03$

33,953.50$

10,713.77$ 135,461.90$ 1,350.00$

642.62$ 1,430.00$

Page 5 of 16 26 of 369


PRE-GRANTHerbaceous plugs and bulb installationOak/Wetland bare-root plantingOak/Wetland plant stakingScrub and riparian forest bare-root plantingMaintenance spot sprayOptional maintenance spot sprayPerimeter maintenance broadcast spray CWS or Contractor project mangt.

Phase II (Oct 2011-June 2014)Seed spreading/drillingMaintenance spot sprayMaintenance spot sprayMaintenance mowHerbaceous plugs and bulb installationBare-root plantingMaintenance spot sprayMaintenance spot sprayMaintenance spot sprayCWS or Contractor project mangt.Bypass culvert purchase and instalationSteel plate purchase and installationEstablishment mow and spray Sep-13Planting--Install plugs, rhizomes, bulbs Oct-13Planting--Harvest small pole cuttings Mar-14Planting--Install small pole cuttings Mar-14Planting--Install small bare root plants Mar-14Hourly spray Apr-14Hourly hand cut Jun -14Hourly spray Jun-14Project managementHerbicide allowance

Phase III (July 2014-Oct 2016)Maintenance-Hand pull weeds Jul-14Maintenance-spot spray Sep-14Planting-Install small bareroot plants Jan-15

Request #1 (CWS)

Request #2 (Markit)

Request #3 (CWS)

Request #4 (CWS)

Request #5 (Markit)

Request #6 (CWS)

04/01/10 03/07/10 08/01/10 10/01/10 03/01/112,592.00$

300.00$ 1,500.00$

Page 6 of 16 27 of 369


PRE-GRANTMaintenance-spot spray Apr-14Maintenance-Hand pull weeds Jul-15Maintenance-Spot spray Jul-15Maintenance-spot spray Oct-15Planting-small bareroot plants Jan-16Planting-cuttings Jan-16Maintenance-spot spray Apr-16Maintenance-hand pull weeds Jul-16Maintenance-spot spray Jul-16Maintenance-spot spreay Sept-16

CONTINGENCY (includes $800 not new)TOTAL

SUPPLIES/MATERIALSNative Seed--prairieNative Seed--riparianHerbaceous plugs and bulbsOak seedlingsBamboo statesBare-root trees and shrubs

Phase II (Oct 2011-June 2014)Native seedHerbaceous plugs and bulbsBare-root trees and shrubs

Phase III (July 2014-Oct 2016)2014 plugs2014 bareroot plants2015 bareroot plants2016 bareroot plantsTOTAL

Request #1 (CWS)

Request #2 (Markit)

Request #3 (CWS)

Request #4 (CWS)

Request #5 (Markit)

Request #6 (CWS)

04/01/10 03/07/10 08/01/10 10/01/10 03/01/11

800.00$ -$ -$ 2,869.53$ 10,295.96$ -$ 180,073.05$

1,478.00$

8,122.50$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 9,600.50$

Page 7 of 16 28 of 369


PRE-GRANTPOST IMPLEMENTATION REPORTINGWetland delineation, assessment - post-treatmentVegetation monitoring, reportingConservation Registry feesCWS project management

Phase IIVegetation monitoring, reportingCWS project managementTOTAL

ENDOWMENT

TOTAL ALL CATEGORIES

Request #1 (CWS)

Request #2 (Markit)

Request #3 (CWS)

Request #4 (CWS)

Request #5 (Markit)

Request #6 (CWS)

04/01/10 03/07/10 08/01/10 10/01/10 03/01/11

2,400.00$ 882.00$

-$ 2,400.00$ -$ -$ 882.00$ -$

6,927.14$ 2,400.00$ 193,700.98$ 76,884.18$ 882.00$ 205,819.09$

Page 8 of 16 29 of 369



PROJECT GRANT





Request #7 (CWS)

Markit invoice

Request #8 (CWS)

Request #9 (CWS)

Request #10 (CWS) Request #11

03/01/11 05/10/11 06/30/11

7/31/2012 (billed to FY2012)

7/31/2013 (billed to FY2013) 08/20/14

1,400.00$ -$ 1,400.00$

956.00$

3,648.39$ 5,000.00$

1,615.00$

540.00$

Page 9 of 16 30 of 369





Request #7 (CWS)

Markit invoice

Request #8 (CWS)

Request #9 (CWS)


03/01/11 05/10/11 06/30/11

7/31/2012 (billed to FY2012)

7/31/2013 (billed to FY2013) 08/20/14

1,060.80$ 3,600.00$

6,695.40$ 2,660.00$

5,723.00$ 560.00$

328.83$ 871.00$

1,045.00$ 275.00$ 9,400.00$ 6,877.00$ 5,002.65$

2,852.16$ 3,604.56$ 1,377.00$

3,264.00$ 3,416.00$

2,176.00$ 750.00$ 3,248.00$

4,976.25$ 2,160.00$

190.00$ 170.00$

1,250.00$ 3,383.00$

931.00$

680.00$ 114.08$

Page 10 of 16 31 of 369







Request #7 (CWS)

Markit invoice

Request #8 (CWS)

Request #9 (CWS)


03/01/11 05/10/11 06/30/11

7/31/2012 (billed to FY2012)

7/31/2013 (billed to FY2013) 08/20/14

-$ 15,903.62$ 38,281.36$ 16,936.81$ 19,278.33$

4,658.00$ 980.50$

127.47$ 10,455.98$ 6,368.48$

6,855.29$ 9,585.48$ 2,128.27$

4,000.00$ 2,351.35$

-$ 11,436.48$ 18,009.24$ 11,713.75$ 6,351.35$

Page 11 of 16 32 of 369




ENDOWMENT


Request #7 (CWS)

Markit invoice

Request #8 (CWS)

Request #9 (CWS)


03/01/11 05/10/11 06/30/11

7/31/2012 (billed to FY2012)

7/31/2013 (billed to FY2013) 08/20/14

3,000.00$ 2,350.09$ 552.87$

1,400.00$

-$ 552.87$ -$ -$ 3,000.00$ 3,750.09$

155,000.00$

155,000.00$ 552.87$ 28,740.10$ 56,290.60$ 31,650.56$ 29,379.77$

Page 12 of 16 33 of 369



PROJECT GRANT





Total Balance

6,927.14$ -$

1,465.21$ -$ 61,043.35$ 1,190.65$ 49,640.65$ (2,390.65)$ 2,800.00$ -$

-$ -$ -$

114,949.21$ -$

7,085.00$ (1,935.00)$ 1,531.00$ 1,935.00$

150,000.00$ -$ 1,400.00$ -$

160,016.00$ -$

432.19$ 617.81$ 919.53$ (467.81)$ 600.00$ -$

1,200.00$ (600.00)$ 1,343.03$ (743.03)$

34,909.50$ 865.50$

154,824.06$ 10,543.14$ 1,350.00$ (400.00)$ 2,257.62$ (927.62)$ 1,430.00$ (5.00)$

540.00$ (160.00)$

Page 13 of 16 34 of 369





Total Balance

3,652.80$ (844.80)$ 3,600.00$ (3,496.00)$

-$ 40.00$ 6,695.40$ (975.40)$ 2,660.00$ 665.00$ 5,723.00$ (2,398.00)$

560.00$ 40.00$ 2,999.83$ 0.17$

-$ 1,320.00$ (982.50)$ 9,400.00$ (5,200.00)$

11,879.65$ (7,679.65)$ 2,852.16$ (932.16)$ 4,981.56$ 3,078.44$ 3,264.00$ (2,016.00)$ 3,416.00$ 784.00$ 2,176.00$ 2,024.00$ 3,998.00$ 202.00$

-$ 1,400.00$ -$ 20,623.00$ -$ 2,500.00$

4,976.25$ -$ 2,160.00$ -$

190.00$ -$ 170.00$ -$

1,250.00$ -$ 3,383.00$ 17.00$

931.00$ 969.00$ -$ 3,400.00$

680.00$ 170.00$ 114.08$ 385.92$

-$ 5,800.00$ -$ 3,400.00$ -$ 2,800.00$

Page 14 of 16 35 of 369







Total Balance

-$ 3,400.00$ -$ 5,800.00$ -$ 3,400.00$ -$ 3,400.00$ -$ 1,400.00$ -$ 1,500.00$ -$ 3,400.00$ -$ 2,900.00$ -$ 3,400.00$ -$ 3,400.00$ -$ -$

800.00$ 4,259.00$ 283,638.66$ 68,756.01$

6,136.00$ 4,864.00$ 980.50$ 1,899.50$

8,122.50$ (2,722.50)$ -$ 240.00$

127.47$ (67.47)$ 16,824.46$ (984.46)$

-$ -$ -$ 675.00$

16,440.77$ 2,159.23$ 2,128.27$ 751.73$

-$ -$

4,000.00$ (400.00)$ 2,351.35$ 148.65$

-$ 5,000.00$ -$ 2,500.00$

57,111.32$ 14,063.68$

Page 15 of 16 36 of 369




ENDOWMENT


Total Balance

-$ 10,000.00$ 5,350.09$ (2,350.09)$ 3,834.87$ 7,801.13$ 1,400.00$ -$

-$ -$ 12,000.00$ -$ 2,800.00$

10,584.96$ 30,251.04$ -$

155,000.00$ -$

758,847.52$ 142,450.50$

Page 16 of 16 37 of 369

Exhibit B-3: Half Mile Lane 2014 Monitoring Report

38 of 369

2014 Monitoring Report: Half Mile Lane, DSL In-Lieu Fee Project

Photo by SWCA Consultants, 2014 December 26, 2014 Prepared by: Dana Hicks Mitigation Specialist, Oregon Department of State Lands with information supplied by Clean Water Services, SWCA Environmental Consultants and Waterways Consultants, Inc.

39 of 369

Mitigation Monitoring Annual Report—Half Mile Lane 1. Mitigation Monitoring Report Cover Sheet

1: Project Name Identifiers: DSL Permit # 44043__ Corps Permit #__2010-00048__ Permittee Clean Water Services___ County_Washington_________ Report Date_December 26, 2014_ Monitoring Year 1 2 3 4 5 Date Removal-Fill Activity Completed_N/A____________ Date mitigation was completed: Grading Sept 2010 plus modifications Planting April 2011__ Date(s) of data collection: _December 2013 to December 2014_ Report prepared by: Dana Hicks, DSL; Data collected by Clean Water Services and Waterways Consulting Inc. 2: Monitoring Report Purpose: This monitoring report is for a project that includes: (check all that apply):

Compensatory freshwater, non-tidal wetland mitigation for permanent wetland impacts.

Compensatory estuarine wetland mitigation for permanent wetland impacts. Only non-wetland compensatory mitigation. Only mitigation for temporary impacts that had a monitoring requirement. Voluntary wetland enhancement, creation or restoration (General authorization or

individual permit) not funded with money from DSL’s wetland mitigation fund. Voluntary wetland enhancement, creation or restoration (General authorization or

individual permit) funded with money from DSL’s wetland mitigation fund. Mitigation Bank Report Other _DSL ILF Project—Half Mile Lane____________________________

3: Results: (add more rows if needed)

Performance standards (verbatim from permit)

Fully Met? (Y/N)

Comments/Reason for shortfall (mark NA if doesn’t apply this year)

1. 1.1— Elevations, as demonstrated in the as-built, are as outlined in the grading plan.

Y As-built conditions were summarized in the report submitted January 23, 2011. Adaptive management was subsequently done in 2011 and 2012. No additional grading work was conducted in 2014.

2. 1.2—A longitudinal profile will be surveyed to demonstrate that the upper transitional reach is <1.1%, the middle reach is <0.4%, and the lower transition reach is no greater than 0.6% grade. The survey will be completed in the third year following construction (2014), and may need to be repeated if headcutting is observed in the stream channel, or inspection of grade control features show evidence of elevation changes.

Y The longitudinal profile was completed in 2013 and included in the 2013 monitoring report. Upper transitional reach = 0.77% Middle reach = 0.43% Lower reach = 0.51%

40 of 369

3. 1.3—Four cross sections will be surveyed to demonstrate that wetland areas are no more than 12” above the thalweg of the Roderick Creek. Surveys should be completed three years following construction and following flows greater than a 10-year discharge event, as determined using Gales Creek gages.

Y Four cross sections were surveyed in January 2014 and the water surface elevation is all within the 12” requirement. Cross sections 1, 3 and 4 show that the bed elevation is within 12” of the wetland elevation. Cross section 2 falls below that elevation, however the measure fell within a pool. The stream does not appear to be incising and the adjacent wetlands are retaining wetland hydrology.

4. 2—Photo or video monitoring at established points will show that surface water is present in the stream channel during the summer, and is longitudinally continuous in the upstream and downstream direction, during years of normal precipitation.

Y No breaks in surface water flow have been observed by the project manager or are apparent in photos or records from August 2014 from the wetland and waters delineation. Stream area during August was delineated at 0.99 acre (SWCA 2014).

5. 3—Photo or video monitoring during monitoring years 1, 3, and 5 will show that surface water is flowing through at least 5 of the spillways at flows greater than a 1.2-year event, as determined by Gales Creek gages.

Y Photo documentation shows eight connection points during December 2014.

6. 4.1—The as-built demonstrates that the bridge structure meets fish passage criteria established by the National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Region (February 2008) and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ORS 635-412-0035), unless alternative designs are approved by those agencies.

Y As-built conditions were summarized in the report submitted January 23, 2011.

7. 4.2—Photo or video monitoring shows an absence of cutting, washing around, or erosion at the bridge structure.

Y There is no apparent cutting, washing around, or erosion at the bridge.

41 of 369

8. 5—Visual estimates and photo or video documentation in monitoring years 1, 3, and 5 will demonstrate that at least 75% of surface water on the site is connected to the stream channel rather than isolated in pools.

Y All areas are connected to the stream channel during the wet season. The standard is shown as met because the project objectives (see Section B (2) item 5) state that surface water connectivity was targeted during the wet season. During the dry season, the south end of the site may have seasonal water connection to the stream channel. While Google Earth Images show all areas connected in June 2013, SWCA Consultants determined that 25 to 50% of the site was in isolated pools in their answer to ORWAP question F9 during June 2014.

9. 6—The as-built demonstrates that floodplain roughness structures and hummocks were constructed as shown in the approved designs, and vegetation in the riparian zone is planted as outlined in the planting plan.

Y As-built conditions were summarized in the report submitted January 23, 2011.

10. 7.1—The project will have a minimum of 12.71 acres of riverine flow-through wetland by year 5, as determined by a delineation during spring of a year when precipitation has been near normal.

Y A wetland delineation was conducted in June 2014 by SWCA Environmental Consultants. Their results show that 13.62 acres of riverine wetland have been achieved at the site.

11. 7.2—In herbaceous wetlands and the understory of shrub-dominated and forested wetlands outside of the floodplain zone, the relative percent plant native cover, including bare substrate, is at least 40% in year 1 and at least 50% in years 2, 4 and 5.

N/A

42 of 369

12. 7.3— In herbaceous wetlands, the relative invasive plant cover, including bare substrate, is no more than 10% in monitoring years 1, 3, 4, and 5. There may be up to an additional 10% relative cover of reed canary grass in herbaceous wetlands in each of these years. In the understory of shrub-dominated and forested wetlands, the relative invasive plant cover, including bare substrate, is no more than 30% in years 1, 2, 4 and 5.

N/A

13. 7.4—In shrub-dominated habitats, the cover of native shrubs is at least 10% by year 1, 20% by year 2, and 30% by year 5. Native species volunteering on the site may be included, dead plants will not count.

N/A

14. 7.5—In shrub-dominated habitats, the cover of invasive shrub species is no more than 10% in monitoring years 1, 2, 4, and 5.

N/A

15. 7.6—The density of live, native trees in forested habitats is at least 435 per acre, equivalent to 1 tree every 100ft2 in monitoring years 1, 2, 4, and 5. Native species volunteering on the site may be included, dead plants do not count.

N/A

16. 7.7-- No more than 5% of the live tree count should be comprised of invasive species in monitoring years 1, 3, 4, and 5.

N/A

43 of 369

17. 7.8-- By Year 2 and thereafter, there are at least 6 different native species. To qualify, a species must have at least 5% average cover, and occur in at least 10% of the plots sampled.

N/A

18. 7.9--The moisture index in herbaceous, shrub-dominated, and forested habitats is <3.0 in monitoring years 1, 2, 4, and 5.

N/A

19. 8.1— A conservation easement is recorded and a long-term management plan has been approved.

Y The conservation easement was approved on March 30, 2010 as part of the mitigation plan. The long term management plan was submitted on March 14, 2011 and approved by the Corps on April 8, 2011.

20. 8.2—In upland buffer areas within the Conservation Zone, relative native plant cover, including bare substrate, is at least 40% in year 1 and at least 50% in years 2, 4 and 5.

N/A

21. 8.3—In upland buffer areas within the Conservation Zone, relative invasive plant cover, including bare substrate, is no more than 40% in year 1 and no more than 30% in years 2, 4, and 5.

N/A Invasive plant cover in the upland buffer and scrub shrub area combined is 16%.

. 4: Further Actions: Remedial work recommended Yes No Deed Restriction or other protection instrument attached Yes No Final Monitoring Report? Yes No Requesting release or partial release of credits? Yes No

44 of 369

2. Half Mile Lane ILF Project Mitigation Plan Purpose and Overview A. Location. Half Mile Lane is located in the rural Gales Creek area approximately 3 miles northwest of Forest Grove in Washington County. The project is at 01N 4W Section 21; Latitude 45.549, Longitude –123.186. From Highway OR-8 and B Street, travel west 4.8 miles. Turn left onto NW Roderick Road and travel 0.1 miles then take a left onto NW Half Mile Lane and travel 0.5 miles. The ILF site is on the right side of the road. B. Mitigation goals and objectives. This mitigation project is intended to compensate for wetland and stream impacts within the Tualatin basin through the DSL In-Lieu Fee Program. Project objectives identified in the mitigation plan are:

1) The reconstructed stream channel retains appropriate grades and cross sections to achieve project goals.

2) The reconstructed Roderick Creek channel should have continuous flow in part of its bed all year long during years of normal precipitation.

3) Roderick Creek is hydrologically connected to its floodplain when flows are greater than 44.3 cfs.

4) Fish can pass into and out of the project area during the majority of flows. 5) During the wettest time of the year, at least 75% of surface water is in or connected to a

flowing channel that leaves the site 6) During peak annual flow, the surface water that flows through the channel and floodplain

encounters measurable resistance from fairly rigid vegetation or channel-clogging debris, and follows a fairly indirect path from entrance to exit.

7) Maximize wetland and stream acreage based on existing and perceived historic wetland condition:

a. The 2.51 acres of waterways delineated on the site have been hydrologically manipulated through ditching, construction of berms along the creek, and subsurface drainage. The natural/historical functions will be returned to 1.49 acres of these areas to result in a gain in resource function. This area therefore meets the federal definition of “rehabilitation” and the DSL definition of “enhancement”.

b. Of the acreage in (a) above, 1.05 acres meets the DSL definition of “enhanced cropped wetland” because it is regularly plowed, seeded and harvested in order to produce a crop for market.

c. An additional 9.30 acres of the site contains hydric soils based on field investigations and is likely the historic flow path of Roderick Creek. The natural/historic physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the site will be returned to this area, resulting in a gain in resource function and area. This area therefore meets the federal definition of “re-establishment” and the DSL definition of “restoration.”

d. Additional wetland acreage can be established in 1.92-acres of fringe areas that are currently upland. These areas do not have hydric soils, but do have soils with hydric inclusions and textures ranging from silt loam to silty clay loam. Physical, chemical, and biological characteristics should be possible based on the geomorphology and hydrology, and meet the federal definition of “establishment” and the DSL definition of “creation.”

8) The project is protected in perpetuity from inconsistent land uses and buffer areas are in place to help protect the functionality of the project.

45 of 369

9) The reconstructed stream channel retains appropriate grades and cross sections to achieve project goals.

C. Maintenance and management actions. Management activities over the last year focused on vegetation management, including harvest and installation of small pole cuttings, and installation of small bare root plants. Maintenance included spraying and hand cutting non-natives. Clean Water Services installed a small diameter pipe through the beaver dam downstream of the bridge in 2013 to help regulate flows and prevent high water flow over Half Mile Lane and through the old waterline (City of Forest Grove) as occurred in 2012. Water has not flowed over the road since the device was installed. D. Monitoring methods. Four cross sections were surveyed at Half Mile Lane by Waterways Consulting Inc. in January 2014 to determine connectivity between Roderick Creek and the surrounding wetlands. A post-project wetland delineation was conducted in June 2014 by SWCA Consultants. As directed by DSL, the wetland delineation should be a “light” method that is treated as an amendment to the formal delineation prepared for the pre-project mitigation plan approved by the Corps of Engineers. The Half Mile Instrument included a pre- and predicted post-project assessment of functions and values using Oregon Rapid Wetland Assessment Protocol (ORWAP) version 2.0. Version 2.0.2 came out shortly after that to fix model errors that affected the scores. Therefore, Paul Adamus converted the scores to version 2.0.2 using the same answers to the questions. In June 2014, SWCA Environmental Consultants used version 2.0.2 to review wetland functions and values achieved at the site. Photo monitoring in 2014 was conducted by Clean Water Services. The photo frame descriptions and photo documentation for 2013 are included in Appendix B. 3. Results Cross sections 1, 3, and 4 show that the elevation difference between the thalweg of channel and the adjacent wetlands are less than 12”. Cross section 2 intersected a ~2.5 ft deep pool in the channel, so the bed of the stream was greater than 12” below the wetland. Cross section results are included in Appendix A. The wetland delineation light indicates the final acreage of wetland and waters achieved at the site is 13.62 acres (Table 1), plus buffers and the stream. The wetland area is 0.91 acres of wetland over what was predicted. Table 1 shows that an additional 0.38 credits have been achieved at Half Mile Lane over what was predicted (Table 1). This increase is due primarily to the buffer area (originally credited at 10:1) achieving wetland criteria and thus being credited as wetland creation (1.5:1). Note that DSL did not request any credit for the stream area as part of the mitigation plan. The baseline area of the ditched stream was 0.52 acres (pre-wetland delineation as Attachment B of the Half

46 of 369

Mile Lane Instrument, SWCA 2009) and the area achieved (to ordinary high water) is 0.99 acres. Table 1. Wetland Mitigation Type and Credit Acres at Half Mile Lane (SWCA: Results Table 4, 2014) Wetland Mitigation Type




Credits Achieved


Enhancement 0.40 3:1 0.13 0.30 0.10 Buffer 6.42 10:1 0.64 5.21 0.52 Agricultural Use Buffer 4.99 20:1 0.25 4.36 0.21

Roderick Creek (0.52)1 0.99 Total 24.12 12.15 24.18 12.53 1Water acreage was not separately accounted for in the instrument and first year monitoring report table of target acreage. Filled waters were calculated as wetland restoration rather than enhancement. Credit should be given for the additional water acreage on the site. ORWAP results (Tables 2 and 3) show that the functions and values anticipated at the site have been achieved, with phosphorus retention significantly (greater than 1 point) higher than predicted. Phosphorus retention scores were higher due to:

• (F8) More of the site having surface water during the dry season due to beaver activity than was anticipated in the pre-ORWAP scoring,

• (F9) 25%-50% of this surface water being in isolated pools rather than connected to the stream channel,

• (F58) The soil composition in the pit dug being clayey rather than loamy as was answered in the pre-function assessment. Mapped soils on the site include silty clay loams and silt loams.

• (F60) There was extensive, rather than minimal, microtopography at the site.

Photo documentation shows that the site continues to mature. All surface water on the site during the wet season is connected to Roderick Creek and eight flow connection points were documented. There is no evidence of incision of the stream channel. Table 2. A comparison of pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project ORWAP scores for specific functions at Half Mile Lane.





Relative Value


Relative Value


Relative Value

47 of 369


2.38 6.25 3.00 6.25 2.96 6.67


3.96 2.65 4.42 3.48 5.38 4.77


2.14 4.00 4.86 4.83 8.34 6.58


4.08 3.53 5.17 4.19 5.13 6.26

Thermoregulation 2.22 10.00 3.61 10.00 2.94 10.00


2.00 2.59 2.92


6.22 6.30 6.34


4.23 5.25 5.80 6.51 6.02 6.59


4.83 10.00 6.51 10.00 6.59 10.00


2.60 6.67 3.14 6.67 3.78 6.67


3.59 6.67 4.07 6.67 4.33 6.67


3.97 2.33 5.03 2.33 5.51 4.00

Waterbird Nesting Habitat

0.00 1.75 0.00 1.75 5.05 3.00


5.25 2.33 6.38 2.33 6.30 4.00


48 of 369


2.03 3.50 4.46 4.56 6.81 6.00

49 of 369

Table 3. A comparison of pre-project, predicted post-project, and actual post-project ORWAP scores for grouped functions at Half Mile Lane.




Specific Function


Relative Value


Relative Value

Relative Effalfectiveness

Relative Value

Hydrologic Function

2.38 6.25 3.00 6.25 2.96 6.67

Water Quality Group

4.08 10.00 5.17 10.00 8.34 10.00

Fish Support Group

4.83 10.00 6.51 10.00 6.59 10.00


5.25 4.17 6.30 6.67 6.34 6.67


2.22 10.00 6.85 4.56 7.62 6.00

4. Conclusions and Recommendations A. Project status. The mitigation project is in compliance with all performance standards. B. Recommendations

Project managers are continuing to monitor the site and focus on vegetation management. A design has been prepared for 2, 24” culverts that would convey the 2-5 year storm flows, given the flows through Roderick Creek and over/under the beaver dam downstream of the bridge, with a 1 foot freeboard for the road. These may be installed in 2015.

5. Appendices A. Cross section survey (Waterways Consulting Inc.) B. Photo documentation and location map (Clean Water Services) C. Wetland Delineation Light (SWCA Consultants) D. ORWAP Post-Project (SWCA Consultants)

50 of 369

Appendix A: Cross-Sections

Cross-sections were conducted by Waterways Consulting Inc. in January 2014

51 of 369

52 of 369

\

LEGEND A2 CONT!lOL POINT

CROSS SECTION

CONmOL POINTS fQilU ~ ~ fl.fY. 1127 20000.00 20000.00 9J.02 1 697501.89 7514316.54 212.J6 2 697256.13 751 4206.67 210.55 J 697612.85 7514200.38 211.90 4 697400.27 7513980.98 214.74 5 697653.99 7514167.97 212.07 6 697556.99 7513840.47 215.46 7 697958.12 7513866.07 213.05 a 697587.52 7513814.11 216.00

1002 697662.77 7514619.04 212.79

SITE PLAN SCALE: 1" : 1 00'

~ REBAR REBAR REBAR REBAR REBAR REBAR REBAR REBAR REBAR REBAR

Vl c z :5 tu ~ w z :5 w .....

LL ..... <( :I:

~

z :5 0..

~ z a: 0 t:: z 0 ::i! Cl)

c z ::s t:;:;

==

h !;;"" :::>0

~~ !I~ ~ 0

~ z ii2 g z 0 ~ m a: <( w >

:..

c

FIGURE

1.0

53 of 369

214

~ I l 212 --v. _> 210

208 0+00 0+50 1+00

v

I

- - -- v

1--- -\ / --... ?

0+50 1+00

216 !',, $ I ,vi-214 --- __ ;a --- - --212

210 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50

216

I ! -l' I 214 - - - -- -- - - ', ::y ,..<> 212

210 0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50

I I ~BSERVEILWStN 1§-Mtt -- ~ ! --, -1+50 2+00 2+50

f § §!!S£BllE!LWSLO..UL.tZ/14 --- --- I

1+50 2+00 2+50

-1-- vi I -

OB.SEBY.EJLWSUJLl.LlZ/ !!: -2+00 2+50 3+00

--I

v OBSERVElLWS£...ll@}! 4 1 ---- -!-- ----

2+00 2+50 J+OO

l 214

212

210

208 2+81

I 216

214

-- 212

210 3+42

!-J+50

I

216

214

212

210 J+69

V\ c z s ~ 3: w z s w .....

LL ..... < :I:

"" z 0 Ei .... "" ~ a: u ~ z a: g z 0 :E "" Cl z

~ .... ~

t!) z a: g z 0 ~ m a: ~ >

0

FIGURE

2.0

54 of 369

PHOTO # 1: CROSS SECTION # 1 PHOTO #2: CROSS SECTION #2

;,

• li!

h ~a :s I ..

0

PHOTO #J: CROSS SECTION #J NOTES:

PHOTO #4: CROSS SECTION #4 FIGURE 1. PHOTOS TAKEN FROM EAST SID£ OF CHANNEL

3.0

Appendix B: Photo Documentation and Map

All photos were taken by Clean Water Services in December 2014

55 of 369

1

Half Mile Lane Roderick Creek Photo Monitoring Framing Descriptions: Photos 1, 2 and 3: GPS: 123° 11’ 16.255” W 45° 32’ 56.376” N (Stand to the east of southernmost alder in the linear cluster of alders). Directions: 1- large dead snag in center of frame 2- peak of ridge in right corner, smallest possible skyline all the way across top of frame

3- farm house at right side, peak of ridge in left corner, smallest possible skyline all the way across top of frame

Photos 4, 5, 6 and 7: GPS: 123° 11’ 13.972” W 45° 32’ 54.843” N (Stand five feet southeast of the multi-trunked maple that is the last tree in the mixed stand of ash and maple adjacent to the old creek channel). Directions: 4 – peak of ridge at left side, farm house at right side, smallest possible skyline all the way

across top of frame 5- peak of ridge at left side, farm house at left side, smallest possible skyline all the way

across top of frame 6- large cottonwood at center of frame, smallest possible skyline all the way

across top of frame 7- large cottonwood at left of frame, smallest possible skyline all the way

across top of frame Photos 4, 5, 6 and 7: GPS: 123° 11’ 3.92” W 45° 32’ 50.089” N (Stand at the center of the bridge). Directions: 8 – power pole at left side of the frame with smallest possible skyline all the way

across top of frame 9- stream channel centered in frame with smallest possible skyline all the way

across top of frame 10- peak of ridge at right side, smallest possible skyline all the way across top of frame 11- peak of ridge at left side, smallest possible skyline all the way across top of frame

Photo Monitoring Locations

56 of 369

2

Photo 1: Before Photo 2: Before




57 of 369

3


Photo 11: Before

58 of 369

59 of 369

Half Mile Lane - Roderick Creek Wetland

Disclaimer: Not intended as definitive property description. All users of this information should perform a separate investigation of conditions before commencing any plan, design, construction, watershed enhancement activities, or other wo rk. There are no warranties, expressed or implied, including the warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, concerning this information.

\

0

' ' '

' ' '

Exhibit B Feet

80 160 320 ~ Clean Wat~ Services

Photo Point 1: 2014

Photo Point 3: 2014

Photo Point 5: 2014

Photo Point 2: 2014

Photo Point 4: 2014

Photo Point 6: 2014

60 of 369

Photo Point 8: 2014

Photo Point 10: 2014

Beaver chew

Photo Point 9: 2014

Photo Point 11: 2014

Connection A

61 of 369

Connection B

Connection D

Connection F

Connection C

Connection E

Connection G

62 of 369

Connection H

63 of 369

Appendix C: Wetland Delineation Light Report

64 of 369

HALF MILE LANE IN-LIEU FEE MITIGATION SITE YEAR 3 WETLAND DELINEATION LIGHT

T1N, R4W, SECTION 21, PORTION OF TAX LOT 700 WASHINGTON COUNTY, OREGON

Prepared for

Clean Water Services Rich Hunter and Anil Devnani

2550 SW Hillsboro Highway Hillsboro, Oregon 97123

503.681.3638 and 503.681.3632

Prepared by

SWCA Environmental Consultants 1220 SW Morrison Street, Suite 700

Portland, Oregon 97205-2235 503.224.0333

www.swca.com

August 2014

SWCA Project No. 24801.01

65 of 369

This page intentionally left blank.

66 of 369

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 1

A. LANDSCAPE SETTING AND LAND USE .................................................................................... 1

B. SITE ALTERATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 1

C. PRECIPITATION DATA AND ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 1

D. METHODS ........................................................................................................................................ 2

E. DESCRIPTION OF ALL WETLANDS AND OTHER NON-WETLAND WATERS .................... 3 Wetlands ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Non-wetland Waters ......................................................................................................................... 4

F. MAPPING METHOD ........................................................................................................................ 4

G. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................... 4

H. REQUIRED DISCLAIMER .............................................................................................................. 5

I. LIST OF PREPARERS ....................................................................................................................... 5

Appendices A. Maps

Figure 1. Site location map. Figure 2. Wetland and waters delineation map. Figure 3. Photo point location map. Figure 4. Wetland delineation map by mitigation type. Figure 5. Wetland comparison map.

B. Literature Cited and References Used C. Site Photographs D. Precipitation Data E. Wetland Determination Data Forms F. Vegetation List

Tables Table 1. Observed Precipitation Data (inches) ............................................................................................. 2 Table 2. Antecedent Precipitation Data (inches) .......................................................................................... 2 Table 3. Summary of Wetland Soils and Hydrology Indicators by Plot ...................................................... 4 Table 4. Wetland Mitigation Type and Credit Acres ................................................................................... 5

67 of 369


68 of 369

Introduction

SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by Clean Water Services (the District) to conduct a wetland delineation “light” on the subject site, which consists of a portion of tax lot 700 on tax map 1N 4 21, located northwest of Forest Grove near Gales Creek, in Washington County, Oregon. The subject site is in its third year post-construction as an in-lieu fee (ILF) mitigation site for the Oregon Department of State Lands (DSL). The site is located west of 4036 NW Half Mile Lane, and the site’s centroid latitude and longitude are 45.548618°W and −123.186508°N.

SWCA conducted the baseline pre-construction wetland delineation in 2009 (SWCA 2009) and delineated hydric soils on the site a year earlier (SWCA 2008). This third-year wetland delineation “light” report is considered an amendment to the pre-construction delineation and does not repeat any background information. The mitigation site project area is smaller than the project area delineated prior to mitigation site construction, which included tax lot 700 to the north. Our study area boundary is approximately 19.82 acres (Figure 1 in Appendix A), and does not include the agricultural use upland buffer in the northeast corner of the tax lot.

The ILF mitigation site was constructed during the summer of 2010 (DSL 2011; Appendix B contains all literature cited and references used) and the project re-meandered Roderick Creek through the site, per the ILF instrument modification proposal (DSL 2010). Monitoring reports have been prepared for Years 1 and 2 (DSL 2012, 2013a). Site photographs are included in Appendix C.

A. Landscape Setting and Land Use OAR141-090-0035 (7)(a)

Extensive wetlands were restored, enhanced, and created on both sides of Roderick Creek in 2010 (Waterways Consulting 2010). Upland buffers are present to the east and west of the site, and are characterized as both non-agricultural use and agricultural use buffers.

B. Site Alterations OAR141-090-0035 (7)(c)

Beaver have actively engaged with the site and have produced many small dams causing local shallow ponding, in addition to a larger dam on the downstream portion of Roderick Creek to the south of the site. The height of that dam was lowered in November 2012, and a pipe was installed to keep waters from flooding the road along the southern border of the site.

C. Precipitation Data and Analysis OAR141-090-0035 (7)(i)

The WETS (short for wetlands climate analysis) station used to obtain precipitation data for the project vicinity is the Hillsboro, Oregon, OR3908 station. Average annual rainfall according to the WETS table for the Hillsboro station is 38.53 inches. Precipitation data for SWCA’s site visits and preceding periods are shown in Tables 1 and 2.

69 of 369

Table 1. Observed Precipitation Data (inches)

Field Date (2014)

Observed Rainfall on Field Date

Observed Rainfall 2 Weeks Prior to Field Date

Observed Rainfall for the Water Year-to-Date (YTD)/Calendar YTD

Departure from Average* Water YTD/Calendar YTD

June 10 0 0.15 23.34/18.66 −13.10/−1.39 June 26 0.46 0.34 24.20/19.52 −12.97/−1.26 Data Sources: Observed precipitation data were obtained from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)/National Weather Service (NWS) preliminary climatology data for the Hillsboro Weather Station Forecast Office Station (NWS 2014). * Average based on the climate normal period 1981–2010.

Table 2. Antecedent Precipitation Data (inches)

Prior Months Normal Average*

30% Chance Will Have Less Than More Than

Observed Precipitation

Within Normal Range?

May 1.90/2.28 1.13 2.30 1.70 Yes (89%/75%) April 2.46/3.01 1.69 2.94 3.42 Above (139%/114%) March 3.93/3.73 2.96 4.59 6.07 Above (154%/163%)

* First average is based on the climate normal period 1971–2000 used for the 70th percentile normal ranges used in the WETS tables; second average is based on the current climate normal period 1981–2010.

The recorded antecedent precipitation for Hillsboro was within the normal range for May and above normal for March and April 2014. Precipitation data are included in Appendix D. The wetland delineation was conducted near the end of the typically wet rainy season; secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were used only in Plot 1.

The delineation was conducted during the growing season (March 11 to November 16 according to the Forest Grove WETS table and February 23 to November 18 according to the Hillsboro WETS table).

D. Methods OAR141-090-0035 (7)(d-e), (g-h), (16)(a-b), (f), (d) or (g), (17), and (19-20)

The methodology used for determining the presence of wetlands and delineating wetland boundaries followed the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0) (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Corps] 2010). The National Wetland Plant List 2014 (Lichvar et al. 2014) was used to assign the regional wetland indicator status.

Recently developed wetlands may have problematic hydric soils because of the recent grading disturbance of the mitigation activity; therefore, the delineation followed the procedure outlined in Chapter 5 of the regional supplement for difficult wetland situations.

Fieldwork was conducted on June 10 and 26, 2014, by C. Mirth Walker and Stacey Reed. Soils, vegetation, and hydrology were recorded at 20 sample plot locations on standardized wetland

70 of 369

determination data forms (Appendix E) to document site conditions. Thirteen plots were determined to be wetland and seven plots were determined to be upland.

The outside wetland boundary was flagged in the field with pink “wetland delineation” wire whip flags and surveyed with a Trimble GeoExplorer XT global positioning system (GPS) unit. Plot locations were flagged with yellow wire whip flags and GPS surveyed. The interior upland peninsula and the ordinary high water mark of Roderick Creek were also GPS surveyed but were not flagged in order to preserve their natural undisturbed character.

The project is located on the Gales Creek, Oregon, National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map, and soils mapped on the site consist of the following units:

• McBee silty clay loam (Unit 30), hydric Cove and Wapato inclusion; • Verboort silty clay loam (Unit 42), hydric; • Willamette silt loam, 3% to 7% slopes (Unit 44B), hydric Dayton inclusions; and • Woodburn silt loam, 0% to 3% slopes (Unit 45A), hydric Dayton inclusions.

Actual restoration and creation areas were calculated based on the delineated hydric soils (SWCA 2008) rather than the mapped hydric soils (Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS] 2014).

E. Description of All Wetlands and Other Non-Wetland Waters OAR141-090-0035 (2), (7)(b), and (17)

Wetlands

Wetlands were delineated on both sides of Roderick Creek, totaling 13.62 acres (4.89 acres on the west side and 8.73 acres on the east side). The wetland plant species and habitat structure are diverse. The wetland is dominated by tufted hairgrass, spiked bentgrass, marsh meadow-foxtail, dense sedge, meadow barley, California wild oat grass, and field horsetail in the herbaceous layer and clustered rose, red osier dogwood, Douglas’ meadowsweet, Pacific willow, Oregon crabapple, and Pacific ninebark in the shrub layer (a list of vegetation with common and scientific names and wetland indicator status is included in Appendix F). Oregon ash is present and will likely increase based on the seed source located along the primary beaver pond that is located in the upstream linear remnant of the Roderick Creek channel.

Of the 13 wetland plots, seven used the “other” indicator for problematic hydric soils where indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology were present (Plots 1, 2, 8, 10, 11, 12, and 15). The remaining six plots met the F6 Redox Dark Surface (Plots 4, 7, 14, and 20) or F3 Depleted Matrix (Plots 5 and 6) hydric soil indicators. Plot 6 also met the A11 Depleted Below Dark Surface hydric soil indicator.

Hydrology indicators for most of the wetland plots were primary indicators from Group A (direct observation of surface water, high water table, or saturated soils: Plots 2, 4, 7, 11, 12, 17, and 20) or Group B (evidence of recent inundation such as algal mats and surface soil cracks: Plots 6, 8, 10, and 15). Only one plot, Plot 1, relied on secondary indicators of wetland hydrology (geomorphic position and facultative [FAC]-neutral test). Extensive ponding is present throughout portions of the wetland. A summary of the wetland soils and hydrology indicators is tallied in Table 3.

71 of 369

Table 3. Summary of Wetland Soils and Hydrology Indicators by Plot

Indicator Soils F6 Soils F3 Soils Other Primary Hydrology Group A

Primary Hydrology Group B

Plot P4, P7, P17, P20

P5, P6 P1, P2, P8, P10, P11, P12, P15

P2, P4, P7, P11, P12, P17, P20

P5, P6, P8, P10, P15

Wetland boundaries were delineated based upon the presence of hydrophytic vegetation, indicators of hydric soils, and evidence of wetland hydrology and were closely linked to topographic elevation of the contoured wetland mitigation site. The boundary was generally distinct and reliable. Creation areas were the most difficult to delineate, and we generally relied upon surface soil cracks as the indicator of wetland hydrology.

Upland plots consisted of Plots 3, 9, 13, 14, 16, 18, and 19. All upland plots had hydrophytic vegetation except Plot 18. The only upland plot that had hydric soils was Plot 13. A paired plot to Plot 9 was not documented because wetlands on both sides of the constructed upland berm peninsula were dominated by obligate (OBL) and facultative wetland (FACW) plants (soft-stem club-rush, red-tinge bulrush, also known as small-fruit bulrush, broad-leaf cat-tail, American slough grass, common spike-rush, northern water-plantain, Oregon ash seedlings, soft rush, and Douglas’ meadowsweet.

Non-wetland Waters

Roderick Creek flows south through the subject site, and the re-meandered channel and remnant beaver pond total 0.99 acre. The ordinary high water mark of the stream was typically distinct; beaver dams have increased the width of the channel in some areas.

F. Mapping Method OAR141-090-0035 (7)(f), (11), (12), (13), (18), and (22)

The GPS location data for the wetland and water boundaries and plot locations were collected using a Trimble GeoExplorer XT Mapping Grade GPS unit and imported into a geographic information system (GIS) for map preparation. Accuracy for all mapped features is estimated at 1 meter or less based on the manufacturer’s reported tolerance for the instrument and the post-processing report. Digitized mapping and cartography were completed in ArcGIS 10.2, and the wetland delineation results are shown on Figures 2, 3, and 4 in Appendix A.

G. Results and Conclusions OAR141-090-0035 (7)(j)

The project study area size is 19.82 acres. The total delineated wetland was 13.62 acres, split into 4.89 acres west of the creek and 8.73 acres east of the creek. Roderick Creek was delineated as 0.99 acre. The non-agricultural use buffer inside our study area boundary was delineated as 5.21 acres.

Table 4 shows the type of wetland mitigation and achieved credit acres. To be consistent with the target credit acres in the instrument and the first-year monitoring report, this table includes the agricultural use buffer remainder portion in the northeast corner of the tax lot, which was outside of

72 of 369

our study area boundary. This area was calculated in our GIS database as 4.36 acres rather than 4.99 acres.

Table 4. Wetland Mitigation Type and Credit Acres

Wetland Mitigation Type




Credits Achieved


Enhancement 0.40 3:1 0.13 0.30 0.10 Buffer 6.42 10:1 0.64 5.21 0.52 Agricultural use buffer 4.99 20:1 0.25 4.36 0.21

Roderick Creek (0.52)* 0.99 Total 24.12 12.15 24.18 12.53

* Water acreage was not separately accounted for in the instrument and first-year monitoring report table of target acreage. Filled waters were calculated as wetland restoration rather than enhancement.

Figure 5 shows the comparison of the prior wetland and waters delineation with the current wetland and waters delineation.

H. Required Disclaimer OAR141-009-0035 (7)(k)

This report documents the investigation, best professional judgment, and conclusions of the investigators. It is correct and complete to the best of our knowledge. It should be considered a Preliminary Jurisdictional Determination of wetlands and other waters and used at your own risk unless it has been reviewed and approved in writing by the Oregon Department of State Lands in accordance with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 141-090-0005 through 141-090-0055.

I. List of Preparers

Stacey Reed assisted with the fieldwork. Matt Vesh assisted with data entry. Melissa Katz-Moye prepared the GIS map of the plots and wetland and water boundaries, and the wetland mitigation type overlay maps.

C. Mirth Walker, PWS Senior Wetland Scientist

73 of 369


74 of 369

APPENDIX A

Maps Figure 1. Site location map.

Figure 2. Wetland and waters delineation map.

Figure 3. Photo point location map.

Figure 4. Wetland delineation map by mitigation type.

Figure 5. Wetland comparison map.

75 of 369


76 of 369

Figure 1. Site location map.

77 of 369

Half Mile Lane Mitigation Site Third Year Wetland Delineation

Washingt on County, Oregon

USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangle: Gales Creek, OR (1 979)

SeiViCe Layer Credits Copyright© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed

:::~~1;,0:0:0 ::::2:,000 Feet Meters

500 250

OREGON

SWCA ENV IRONMENTAL CON SU LTANTS

1220 SW Morrison, Suite 700 Portland. OR 97205-2235

www_swca _com 5032 24 0333

Project: 24801.01 July 24, 2014


78 of 369

Figure 2. Wetland delineation map.

79 of 369


Washington County, Oregon

Sample Plot

Taxlots

GPS data collected by SWCA us1ng a Tnmble 6000 GeoXT utilizing Flooglight Technology TM , accuracy +I- 1 meter.

SeN ice Layer Credits Source Esri, DlgltaiGiobe, GeoEye, 1-cubed, Earthstar Geographies, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmappmg, Aerognd, IGN , IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community

OREGON

SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS


www.swca .com 503224 0333

Project: 24801.01 July 24, 201 4


80 of 369

Figure 3. Photo point location map.

81 of 369



Sample Plot

Photo Point

GPS data collected by SWCA using a Trimble 6000 GeoXT utilozmg FloogiJght Technology n.c, accuracy +1- 1 meter

SeJVJce Layer Credits: Source: Esn, DigitaiGiobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographies, CNES/Airbus OS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, I GN, IGP, sw1sstopo, and the GIS User Commumty

SWCA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS

1220 SW Morrison, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205-2235

www.swca .com 503224.0333

July 28, 2014


82 of 369

Figure 4. Wetland delineation map by mitigation type.

83 of 369



Tax lots

GPS data collected by SWCA using a Trimble 6000 GeoXT utiltzmg Floogllght Technology™, accuracy +/- 1 meter

Service Layer Credrts: Source: Esn, OigitaiGiobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, Earthstar Geographies, CNES/Arrbus OS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, I GN, IGP, swrsstopo, and the GIS User Communrty

150 300

::::~~~~::::::::~F~eet 50

OREGON

SWCA ENV IRONMENTAL CON SU LTA NTS


www.swca.com 503224 0333

July 24, 2014


84 of 369

Figure 5. Wetland comparison map and photo point location map.

85 of 369



D 201 4 Wetland delineation

D Upland

Taxlots

Service Layer Credits Source: Esri, D~gitaiGiobe, GeoEye, 1-cubed, Earthstar GeCIQraphics, CNES/Airbus OS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, AerCigrid, I GN, IGP, sw1sstopo, and the GIS User Commumty

OREGON

SWCA ENVIRONMENTA L CONSULTA NTS

1220 SW M orrison, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205~2235

www.swca .com 503224.0333

July 28, 2014


86 of 369

APPENDIX B

Literature Cited and References Used

87 of 369


88 of 369

Adamus, P.R. 2001. Guidebook for Hydrogeomorphic (HGM)-based Assessment of Oregon Wetland and Riparian Sites: Statewide Classification and Profiles. Salem: Oregon Department of State Lands.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Available at: http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/wetlands/classwet/.

Department of State Lands (DSL). 2010. Oregon Department of State Lands Statewide Fee- In-Lieu Instrument Modification Proposal. Mitigation Plan for: Half Mile Lane Project. January 28, 2010. Salem, OR: Department of State Lands.

———. 2011. As-Built Report, Half Mile Lane In-Lieu Fee Project, Washington County, Oregon. Prepared by Dana Hicks, Mitigation Specialist. January 23, 2011. Salem, OR: Department of State Lands.

———. 2012. 2012 Monitoring Report: Half Mile Lane, DSL In-Lieu Fee Project. Prepared by Dana Hicks, Mitigation Specialist. December 1, 2012. Salem, OR: Department of State Lands.

———. 2013a. Oregon Department of State Lands Statewide In-Lieu Fee Program 2013 Report. Prepared by Dana Hicks, Mitigation Specialist. December 20, 2013. Includes 2013 Monitoring Report: Half Mile Lane, DSL In-Lieu Fee Project dated December 1, 2013. Salem, OR: Department of State Lands.

———. 2013b. Removal-Fill Guide. A Guide to the Removal-Fill Permit Process. Salem: Oregon Department of State Lands. Available at: http://www.oregon.gov/dsl/PERMITS/docs/Removal_Fill_Guide_May_2013.pdf. Accessed June 12, 2013.

———. 2013c. Administrative Rules for Wetland Delineation Report Requirements. Effective January 1, 2013. Salem: Oregon Department of State Lands. Available at: http://arcweb.sos.state.or.us/pages/rules/oars_100/oar_141/141_090.html.

Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1. Online edition. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Available at: http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/wetlands/pdfs/wlman87.pdf.

Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List: 2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41:1–42. Available at: http://www.phytoneuron.net/ and http://wetland_plants.usace.army.mil/. Accessed April 25, 2014.

National Weather Service (NWS). 2014. Portland, OR. Available at: http://www.weather.gov/climate/index.php?wfo=pqr. Accessed June 27, 2014.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2006. Hydric Soils List: Washington County, Oregon.

———. 2014. Web soil survey. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/.

89 of 369

SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA). 2008. Hydric Soil and Wetland Mitigation Site Evaluation, Wilms-Kral Site, 4036 NW Half Mile Lane, Forest Grove, Oregon. Prepared for Clean Water Services. Portland, OR: SWCA Environmental Consultants.

———. 2009. Gales Creek Half Mile Lane Site Wetland and Water Delineation Report, Washington County, Oregon. T1N, R4W, Section 21, Portion of Tax Lot 700 and 600. Prepared for Clean Water Services. Portland, OR: SWCA Environmental Consultants.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1992. Gales Creek, Oregon. 7.5-minute National Wetlands Inventory map. Color infrared aerial photography flown 7/82 at 1:58,000. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 1979. Photorevised 1992. Gales Creek, Oregon. 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle. 1:24,000. Reston, VA: U.S. Geological Survey.

Waterways Consulting. 2010. Kral Property Roderick Creek and Gales Creek Restoration Plan. 100% Submittal. Prepared for Clean Water Services. Portland, OR: Waterways Consulting.

X-Rite. 2000. Year 2000 revised washable edition, Munsell soil color charts. Grand Rapids, MI: X-Rite.

90 of 369

APPENDIX C

Site Photographs

91 of 369


92 of 369

Photo A. Algal matting near wetland Plot 2.

Photo B. Typical soil cracking noted in drier wetland areas.

93 of 369

Photo C. View southwest from upland Plot 9 on berm (OBL-FACW dominated).

Photo D. View northeast from upland Plot 9 on berm (OBL-FACW dominated).

94 of 369

Photo E. Typical ponding in wetter areas on June 26, 2014.

Photo F. Roderick Creek.

95 of 369

Photo G. View north along eastern wetland boundary (pink flag – upland on right).

Photo H. View west along northern wetland boundary (pink flag – upland on right).

96 of 369

Photo I. View south at southeastern wetland boundary (pink flags – upland on left).

Photo J. View east along southern wetland boundary (pink flag – upland on right).

97 of 369

Photo K. View northwest of beaver pond in remnant creek channel.

Photo L. Downstream beaver dam on pond.

98 of 369

APPENDIX D

Precipitation Data

99 of 369


100 of 369

These data are preliminary and have not undergone final quality control by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Therefore, these data are subject to revision. Final and certified climate data can be accessed at the NCDC - http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov.

Climatological Report (Daily)

000 CDUS46 KPQR 271154 CLIHIO

CLIMATE REPORT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE PORTLAND OREGON 454 AM PDT FRI JUN 27 2014

...................................

...THE HILLSBORO OR CLIMATE SUMMARY FOR JUNE 26 2014...

CLIMATE NORMAL PERIOD 1981 TO 2010 CLIMATE RECORD PERIOD 1929 TO 2014

WEATHER ITEM OBSERVED TIME RECORD YEAR NORMAL DEPARTURE LAST VALUE (LST) VALUE VALUE FROM YEAR NORMAL .................................................................. TEMPERATURE (F) YESTERDAY MAXIMUM 68 507 PM 102 2006 75 -7 72 MINIMUM 59 1159 PM 34 1935 49 10 57 AVERAGE 64 62 2 65

PRECIPITATION (IN) YESTERDAY 0.46R 0.34 1931 0.03 0.43 MONTH TO DATE 0.86 1.29 -0.43 SINCE OCT 1 24.20 37.17 -12.97 SINCE JAN 1 19.52 20.78 -1.26

SNOWFALL (IN) YESTERDAY 0.0 MONTH TO DATE 0.0 SINCE JUN 1 0.0 SINCE JUL 1 0.0 SNOW DEPTH 0

Page 1 of 3National Weather Service - Climate Data

7/9/2014http://www.nws.noaa.gov/climate/getclimate.php?wfo=pqr

101 of 369

DEGREE DAYS HEATING YESTERDAY 1 4 -3 MONTH TO DATE 113 141 -28 SINCE JUL 1 4991 4991 0

COOLING YESTERDAY 0 1 -1 MONTH TO DATE 3 12 -9 SINCE JAN 1 10 18 -8 ..................................................................

WIND (MPH) HIGHEST WIND SPEED 14 HIGHEST WIND DIRECTION W (270) HIGHEST GUST SPEED 17 HIGHEST GUST DIRECTION W (270) AVERAGE WIND SPEED 5.2

SKY COVER POSSIBLE SUNSHINE MM AVERAGE SKY COVER 0.9

WEATHER CONDITIONS THE FOLLOWING WEATHER WAS RECORDED YESTERDAY. HEAVY RAIN RAIN LIGHT RAIN FOG HAZE

RELATIVE HUMIDITY (PERCENT) HIGHEST 93 200 AM LOWEST 58 600 PM AVERAGE 76

..........................................................

THE HILLSBORO OR CLIMATE NORMALS FOR TODAY NORMAL RECORD YEAR MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE (F) 75 91 1951 MINIMUM TEMPERATURE (F) 49 34 1965

SUNRISE AND SUNSET JUNE 27 2014..........SUNRISE 525 AM PDT SUNSET 905 PM PDT JUNE 28 2014..........SUNRISE 525 AM PDT SUNSET 905 PM PDT



102 of 369

- INDICATES NEGATIVE NUMBERS. R INDICATES RECORD WAS SET OR TIED. MM INDICATES DATA IS MISSING. T INDICATES TRACE AMOUNT.

The U.S. Naval Observatory (USNO) computes astronomical data. Therefore, the NWS does not record, certify, or authenticate astronomical data. Computed times of sunrise, sunset, moonrise, moonset; and twilight, moon phases and other astronomical data are available from USNO's Astronomical Applications Department (http://www.usno.navy.mil). See http://www.usno.navy.mil/USNO/astronomical-applications/astronomical-information-center/litigation for information on using these data for legal purposes.



103 of 369




CLIMATE REPORT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE PORTLAND OREGON 440 AM PDT WED JUN 11 2014

...................................

...THE HILLSBORO OR CLIMATE SUMMARY FOR JUNE 10 2014...


WEATHER ITEM OBSERVED TIME RECORD YEAR NORMAL DEPARTURE LAST VALUE (LST) VALUE VALUE FROM YEAR NORMAL .................................................................. TEMPERATURE (F) YESTERDAY MAXIMUM 74 505 PM 91 1932 71 3 70 MINIMUM 44 456 AM 37 1945 48 -4 42 AVERAGE 59 60 -1 56

PRECIPITATION (IN) YESTERDAY 0.00 0.54 1990 0.06 -0.06 MONTH TO DATE 0.00 0.56 -0.56 SINCE OCT 1 23.34 36.44 -13.10 SINCE JAN 1 18.66 20.05 -1.39

SNOWFALL (IN) YESTERDAY 0.0 MONTH TO DATE 0.0 SINCE JUN 1 0.0 SINCE JUL 1 0.0 SNOW DEPTH 0



104 of 369

DEGREE DAYS HEATING YESTERDAY 6 6 0 MONTH TO DATE 43 64 -21 SINCE JUL 1 4921 4914 7

COOLING YESTERDAY 0 1 -1 MONTH TO DATE 0 2 -2 SINCE JAN 1 7 8 -1 ..................................................................

WIND (MPH) HIGHEST WIND SPEED 17 HIGHEST WIND DIRECTION NW (320) HIGHEST GUST SPEED 26 HIGHEST GUST DIRECTION NW (310) AVERAGE WIND SPEED 7.9


WEATHER CONDITIONS THE FOLLOWING WEATHER WAS RECORDED YESTERDAY. NO SIGNIFICANT WEATHER WAS OBSERVED.


..........................................................



- INDICATES NEGATIVE NUMBERS. R INDICATES RECORD WAS SET OR TIED.



105 of 369




CLIMATE REPORT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE PORTLAND OREGON 440 AM PDT SUN JUN 1 2014

...................................

...THE HILLSBORO OR CLIMATE SUMMARY FOR MAY 31 2014...


WEATHER ITEM OBSERVED TIME RECORD YEAR NORMAL DEPARTURE LAST VALUE (LST) VALUE VALUE FROM YEAR NORMAL .................................................................. TEMPERATURE (F) YESTERDAY MAXIMUM 76 328 PM 92 2001 70 6 68 MINIMUM 44 439 AM 32 1934 47 -3 46 AVERAGE 60 58 2 57

PRECIPITATION (IN) YESTERDAY 0.00 0.76 1977 0.05 -0.05 MONTH TO DATE 1.70 2.28 -0.58 SINCE OCT 1 23.34 35.88 -12.54 SINCE JAN 1 18.66 19.49 -0.83

SNOWFALL (IN) YESTERDAY 0.0 MONTH TO DATE 0.0 SINCE MAR 1 0.0 SINCE JUL 1 0.0 SNOW DEPTH 0



106 of 369


COOLING YESTERDAY 0 0 0 MONTH TO DATE 7 6 1 SINCE JAN 1 7 6 1 ..................................................................

WIND (MPH) HIGHEST WIND SPEED 17 HIGHEST WIND DIRECTION NW (330) HIGHEST GUST SPEED 21 HIGHEST GUST DIRECTION N (340) AVERAGE WIND SPEED 5.8




..........................................................






107 of 369




CLIMATE REPORT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE PORTLAND OREGON 441 AM PDT THU MAY 1 2014

...................................

...THE HILLSBORO OR CLIMATE SUMMARY FOR APRIL 30 2014...


WEATHER ITEM OBSERVED TIME RECORD YEAR NORMAL DEPARTURE LAST VALUE (LST) VALUE VALUE FROM YEAR NORMAL .................................................................. TEMPERATURE (F) YESTERDAY MAXIMUM 82 353 PM 90 1998 64 18 57 MINIMUM 43 446 AM 28 1949 41 2 34 AVERAGE 63 53 10 46

PRECIPITATION (IN) YESTERDAY 0.00 1.11 1940 0.08 -0.08 MONTH TO DATE 3.42 3.01 0.41 SINCE OCT 1 21.64 33.60 -11.96 SINCE JAN 1 16.96 17.21 -0.25

SNOWFALL (IN) YESTERDAY 0.0 MONTH TO DATE 0.0 SINCE MAR 1 0.0 SINCE JUL 1 0.0 SNOW DEPTH 0



108 of 369



WIND (MPH) HIGHEST WIND SPEED 18 HIGHEST WIND DIRECTION NE (60) HIGHEST GUST SPEED 25 HIGHEST GUST DIRECTION E (80) AVERAGE WIND SPEED 9.0




..........................................................


SUNRISE AND SUNSET MAY 1 2014...........SUNRISE 600 AM PDT SUNSET 819 PM PDT MAY 2 2014...........SUNRISE 558 AM PDT SUNSET 820 PM PDT




109 of 369




CLIMATE REPORT NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE PORTLAND OREGON 441 AM PDT TUE APR 1 2014

...................................

...THE HILLSBORO OR CLIMATE SUMMARY FOR MARCH 31 2014...


WEATHER ITEM OBSERVED TIME RECORD YEAR NORMAL DEPARTURE LAST VALUE (LST) VALUE VALUE FROM YEAR NORMAL .................................................................. TEMPERATURE (F) YESTERDAY MAXIMUM 57 338 PM 76 1987 58 -1 73 MINIMUM 32 559 AM 26 1952 38 -6 41 AVERAGE 45 48 -3 57

PRECIPITATION (IN) YESTERDAY 0.06 1.44 1931 0.12 -0.06 MONTH TO DATE 6.07 3.73 2.34 SINCE OCT 1 18.22 30.59 -12.37 SINCE JAN 1 13.54 14.20 -0.66

SNOWFALL (IN) YESTERDAY MM MONTH TO DATE 0.0 SINCE MAR 1 0.0 SINCE JUL 1 0.0 SNOW DEPTH 0



110 of 369

DEGREE DAYS HEATING YESTERDAY 20 17 3 MONTH TO DATE 548 587 -39 SINCE JUL 1 4244 4114 130


WIND (MPH) HIGHEST WIND SPEED 13 HIGHEST WIND DIRECTION SW (230) HIGHEST GUST SPEED 16 HIGHEST GUST DIRECTION W (250) AVERAGE WIND SPEED 3.8


WEATHER CONDITIONS THE FOLLOWING WEATHER WAS RECORDED YESTERDAY. LIGHT RAIN FOG


..........................................................


SUNRISE AND SUNSET APRIL 1 2014.........SUNRISE 652 AM PDT SUNSET 740 PM PDT APRIL 2 2014.........SUNRISE 650 AM PDT SUNSET 741 PM PDT

- INDICATES NEGATIVE NUMBERS.



111 of 369

State FIPS/County(FIPS): 41067 County Name: Washington Start yr. - 1971 End yr. - 2000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Temperature | Precipitation | | (Degrees F.) | (Inches) | |-----------------------|--------------------------------------| | | | | | 30% chance |avg | | | | | | | will have |# of| avg | |-------|-------|-------| |-----------------|days| total| Month | avg | avg | avg | avg | less | more |w/.1| snow | | daily | daily | | | than | than | or| fall | | max | min | | | | |more| | -------------------------------------------------------------------------| January | 46.2 | 33.7 | 39.9 | 5.76 | 3.70 | 6.93 | 11 | 0.9 | February | 50.7 | 35.2 | 43.0 | 4.72 | 3.17 | 5.65 | 11 | 0.9 | March | 56.4 | 37.7 | 47.1 | 3.93 | 2.96 | 4.59 | 11 | 0.1 | April | 61.7 | 40.4 | 51.1 | 2.46 | 1.65 | 2.94 | 7 | 0.0 | May | 68.0 | 45.1 | 56.5 | 1.90 | 1.13 | 2.30 | 5 | 0.0 | June | 73.2 | 49.9 | 61.6 | 1.46 | 0.87 | 1.78 | 4 | 0.0 | July | 80.2 | 53.3 | 66.7 | 0.61 | 0.22 | 0.76 | 1 | 0.0 | August | 80.8 | 52.3 | 66.6 | 0.93 | 0.25 | 1.12 | 2 | 0.0 | September | 75.9 | 48.0 | 61.9 | 1.61 | 0.72 | 2.03 | 4 | 0.0 | October | 64.6 | 41.5 | 53.0 | 2.68 | 1.45 | 3.27 | 7 | 0.0 | November | 52.4 | 38.1 | 45.2 | 6.03 | 4.07 | 7.21 | 13 | 0.3 | December | 45.9 | 34.0 | 39.9 | 6.44 | 4.44 | 7.67 | 12 | 0.9 | ----------|-------|-------|-------|--------|--------|--------|----|------| ----------|-------|-------|-------|--------|--------|--------|----|------| Annual | ----- | ----- | ----- | ------ | 32.50 | 42.01 | -- | ---- | ----------|-------|-------|-------|--------|--------|--------|----|------| Average | 63.0 | 42.4 | 52.7 | ------ | ------ | ------ | -- | ---- | ----------|-------|-------|-------|--------|--------|--------|----|------| Total | ----- | ----- | ----- | 38.53 | ------ | ------ | 88 | 3.1 | ----------|-------|-------|-------|--------|--------|--------|----|------| -------------------------------------------------------------------------| GROWING SEASON DATES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Temperature ---------------------|----------------------------------------------------- Probability | 24 F or higher | 28 F or higher | 32 F or higher | ---------------------|-----------------|-----------------|----------------- | Beginning and Ending Dates | Growing Season Length | 50 percent * | 1/24 to 12/25 | 2/23 to 11/18 | 4/10 to 10/30 | 336 days | 269 days | 203 days | | | 70 percent * | > 365 days | 2/13 to 11/29 | 4/ 1 to 11/ 8 | > 365 days | 290 days | 222 days | | | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Percent chance of the growing season occurring between the Beginning and Ending dates. total 1948-2002 prcp Station : OR3908, HILLSBORO ------- Unit = inches

Page 7 of 8

5/1/2008Printed for ftp://ftp.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/support/climate/wetlands/or/41067.txt

112 of 369

cmwalker

Text Box

WETS Station : HILLSBORO, OR3908 Creation Date: 09/09/2002 Latitude: 4531 Longitude: 12259 Elevation: 00160

yr jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec annl ------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 48 M0.91 0.52 2.57 2.03 7.56 8.50 22.09 49 1.30 10.03 M3.40 0.54 2.27 M0.32 0.62 0.18 0.54 2.33 M4.25 5.40 31.18 5010.08 5.99 M5.23 1.65 0.35 2.98 0.56 0.88 1.25 8.41 7.32 6.69 51.39 51 9.07 M3.71 M1.70 0.93 M1.47 0.05 0.05 0.34 2.28 5.83 6.20 M6.70 38.33 52 4.90 4.06 M3.30 1.07 0.62 M2.38 0.00 0.07 0.29 0.67 M1.56 6.90 25.82 5311.99 M3.49 3.58 2.13 M2.29 2.49 0.06 M0.83 0.87 2.69 5.44 6.16 42.02 5410.23 5.23 1.09 1.15 1.40 2.53 0.26 1.06 1.29 2.97 5.47 5.05 37.73 55 3.11 2.56 3.25 3.48 0.97 1.18 0.74 0.00 2.05 5.79 M7.64 10.13 40.90 5611.23 M3.03 4.41 0.49 1.31 1.66 0.15 M1.35 1.54 3.38 1.06 M2.42 32.03 57 2.03 4.01 5.98 1.60 2.87 0.97 0.06 0.84 M0.63 2.58 2.89 7.63 32.09 58 5.74 7.09 2.19 3.11 1.32 2.03 0.06 0.00 0.87 2.17 M6.52 5.64 36.74 59 9.46 4.14 4.18 0.81 3.16 2.25 0.97 0.05 2.01 2.12 3.44 3.88 36.47 60 5.14 4.81 5.14 3.54 4.23 0.39 0.00 0.84 0.61 2.98 8.36 2.98 39.02 61 5.39 9.25 8.32 2.45 2.65 0.28 0.26 0.44 0.31 4.96 4.49 6.54 45.34 62 1.05 3.33 4.13 3.54 2.04 0.12 0.01 1.42 1.67 4.36 10.36 2.24 34.27 63 3.69 3.89 5.80 3.95 2.21 2.08 1.14 1.82 0.93 2.80 5.57 4.05 37.93 6411.16 0.38 3.30 0.98 0.67 2.37 0.56 0.34 0.60 1.40 7.26 10.87 39.89 65 7.31 1.89 0.50 2.20 0.82 0.88 0.16 1.30 0.00 1.85 6.85 7.14 30.90 66 7.63 1.73 6.27 0.47 0.50 1.54 0.75 0.31 1.49 3.04 5.71 M9.34 38.78 67 7.20 1.40 4.74 2.12 0.89 0.68 0.00 0.00 0.40 4.67 2.47 4.88 29.45 68 6.24 6.90 3.46 1.34 2.60 2.33 0.29 3.84 2.28 4.72 6.77 11.01 51.78 69 6.87 2.94 0.72 2.17 1.53 2.26 0.03 0.00 2.16 3.54 3.09 8.76 34.07 7011.72 4.11 2.16 1.93 0.96 0.32 0.02 0.09 0.92 2.73 4.88 8.90 38.74 71 5.80 3.41 5.98 3.14 0.74 1.66 0.05 0.50 2.32 2.75 6.05 8.93 41.33 72 6.77 4.18 6.93 3.11 1.12 0.82 0.29 0.54 3.01 0.58 5.31 8.68 41.34 73 4.73 2.31 3.10 1.00 0.85 0.87 0.03 1.11 M3.01 3.02 12.76 9.68 42.47 74 9.64 4.45 6.39 1.98 1.29 0.60 1.88 0.18 0.05 1.66 6.62 7.26 42.00 75 7.94 5.39 4.13 1.65 1.84 0.96 0.94 2.04 0.00 5.75 4.40 6.49 41.53 76 5.53 5.70 4.55 3.11 1.53 0.69 0.55 2.55 0.95 1.22 0.87 1.54 28.79 77 1.02 2.28 3.68 0.74 3.27 0.45 1.05 3.03 3.43 2.49 6.00 8.89 36.33 78 7.12 4.73 1.90 3.20 2.63 0.94 1.13 2.79 3.23 0.54 3.43 2.51 34.15 79 2.57 7.29 2.05 2.01 1.37 0.94 0.08 2.00 2.56 5.34 4.01 6.18 36.40 80 7.96 5.11 2.85 3.07 1.33 2.45 0.24 0.13 1.51 1.52 6.99 9.43 42.59 81 2.22 4.33 2.60 1.81 2.07 2.91 0.18 0.06 2.75 4.13 5.44 10.00 38.50 82 5.62 7.21 3.07 4.27 0.39 1.32 0.50 2.09 3.46 4.58 4.18 10.64 47.33 83 6.39 10.11 6.61 2.55 0.91 1.48 2.81 1.78 0.56 1.27 11.08 M5.86 51.41 84 1.94 4.76 3.79 3.25 3.75 4.38 0.00 0.04 1.36 3.93 11.00 3.16 41.36 85 0.32 2.64 3.55 1.01 0.41 3.04 0.30 1.77 1.68 3.26 3.51 2.37 23.86 86 6.40 6.25 3.47 1.47 2.04 0.21 0.88 0.00 2.37 2.29 5.52 4.56 35.46 87 7.04 4.49 5.89 1.30 1.42 0.37 1.01 0.33 0.14 0.30 2.83 9.33 34.45 88 5.81 1.07 3.17 2.23 2.74 2.46 0.20 0.02 0.85 0.11 8.00 2.65 29.31 89 3.53 M2.28 5.78 0.81 1.90 0.81 0.36 0.45 0.68 1.92 3.15 2.94 24.61 90 9.66 3.68 1.59 1.70 2.11 1.55 0.37 1.07 0.58 3.83 3.57 2.91 32.62 91 3.01 3.84 3.67 4.88 2.34 1.70 0.25 0.65 0.39 1.66 5.66 4.76 32.81 92 4.65 3.70 1.17 4.06 0.13 0.36 0.77 0.31 1.21 2.47 4.54 6.44 29.81 93 4.27 0.87 3.77 5.03 3.52 2.68 1.49 0.16 0.00 1.08 1.26 7.54 31.67 94 4.42 5.06 2.85 1.18 1.15 0.94 0.00 0.42 0.60 4.52 7.02 7.26 35.42 95 8.63 M3.47 5.36 3.89 1.43 1.80 0.98 0.39 1.57 2.91 7.74 8.40 46.57 96 7.56 10.23 2.56 5.00 4.34 0.97 0.58 0.13 2.96 4.22 8.70 13.78 61.03 97 8.92 2.01 6.43 M2.15 1.81 M2.30 0.29 1.47 3.01 5.52 5.98 3.34 43.23 98 8.36 6.64 4.07 1.30 4.77 1.49 0.07 0.00 0.90 2.84 11.01 6.84 48.29 99 7.95 10.31 3.90 1.86 1.81 1.29 0.48 2.01 8.20 4.44 42.25 0 6.98 3.82 3.02 M1.00 1.96 16.78 1 1.10 1.55 0.50 1.59 0.65 3.04 7.68 8.20 24.31 2 ----------

Page 8 of 8

5/1/2008Printed for ftp://ftp.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/support/climate/wetlands/or/41067.txt

113 of 369


114 of 369

APPENDIX E

Wetland Determination Data Forms

115 of 369


116 of 369

Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:

Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:

Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):

Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:

Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks)Are Vegetation 0 ,Soil 0 , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No 0Are Vegetation 0 ,Soil X , 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 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No 0 Is the Sampled Area

Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No 0 within a Wetland? Yes NoPrecipitation prior to fieldwork: Remarks:

VEGETATIONAbsolute Dominant Indicator Dominance Test worksheet:

Tree Stratum (Plot size:__30' r__) % Cover Species? Status Number of Dominant Species 1. 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)2. 03. 0 Total Number of Dominant 4. 0 Species Across All Strata: (B)

0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 20% Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 10% Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 10% Yes FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:

4. 0 OBL species x 1 =

5. 0 FACW species x 2 =

40% = Total Cover FAC species x 3 =

Herb Stratum (Plot size:__5' r__) FACU species x 4 =

1. 80% Yes FACW UPL species x 5 =

2. 20% Yes FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)

3. 0 Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 0 Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation

6. 0 X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%

7. 0 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01

8. 0 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting9. 0 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)

10. 0 5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1

11. 0 Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)

100% = Total Cover 1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustWoody Vine Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) be present.1. 02. 0 Hydrophytic

0% = Total Cover Vegetation Yes X No

% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum Present?

Remarks: Entered by: MAV QC by:

0

0

20

Rosa pisocarpa

Cornus alba

0

5

4

0

200

0%

0

340

Deschampsia caespitosa

Acmispon americanus 140

0

cmw

80%

Half Mile Lane In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Site

3

6/10/2014

P1OR

2.43

Forest Grove/Washington

6080

100

20

Spiraea douglasii

21, 1N, 4W

NAD 1983

Clean Water Services / George Kral

C. Mirth Walker and Stacey Reed

X

44B - Willamette silt loam, 3-7% slopes

0 day of and 0.15 inch two weeks prior in Hillsboro - below normal.

X

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast Region

terrace

A, Northwest Forests and Coast

none

00

117 of 369

SOIL Sampling Point: P1 Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)

% % Type1

100

1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:

Histosol (A1) 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) Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)

Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) X Other (Explain in Remarks)

Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Matrix (F3)

Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Dark Surface (F6)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and

Sandy Mucky 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

Remarks: S = sand; Si = silt; C = clay; L = loam or loamy; co = coarse; f = fine; vf = very fine; + = heavy (more clay); - = light (less clay)

HYDROLOGYWetland Hydrology Indicators: Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)

Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,

High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)

Sediment Deposits (B2) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)

Drift Deposits (B3) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) X Geomorphic Position (D2)

Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)

Iron Deposits (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) X 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 (B7) Other (Explain in Remarks) Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)

Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)

Field Observations:

Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): >19 Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): >19 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): >19 Yes X No (includes capillary fringe)


Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:

cmw

Mitigation site; soils will develop over time.

X

Redox Features

RemarksTexture (inches)

Depth

Color (moist)

0-19

Loc2Color (moist)

SaL7.5YR 3/2

Matrix

118 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 0 That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 0 Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 0 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:






2. 20% Yes FACW Column Totals: (A) (B)

3. 20% Yes OBL Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 5% No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No OBL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation

6. 5% No OBL X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%

7. 5% No OBL to NOL 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01








Beckmannia syzigachne

Myosotis species

0%

cmw

65 130

0 00 0

Deschampsia caespitosa 0 0

Agrostis exarata 95 160

Alopecurus geniculatus 1.68

Epilobium densiflorum

Glyceria X occidentalis

0

X0 day of and 0.15 inch two weeks prior in Hillsboro - below normal.

3

3

100%

30 30

Clean Water Services / George Kral OR P2C. Mirth Walker and Stacey Reed 21, 1N, 4W

terrace concave <3

A, Northwest Forests and Coast NAD 1983

44B - Willamette silt loam, 3-7% slopes 0X 0

0

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Western Mountains, Valleys and Coast RegionHalf Mile Lane In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Site Forest Grove/Washington 6/10/2014

119 of 369


% % Type1

100















X High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)X Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)

Water Marks (B1) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Dry-Season Water Table (C2)


Drift Deposits (B3) 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 (B5) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) FAC-Neutral Test (D5)




Field Observations:

Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 12 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 7 Yes X No (includes capillary fringe)



cmw

X


0-16 7.5YR 2.5/2 SaL to SaCL

Depth Matrix Redox Features

(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist) Loc2 Texture Remarks

120 of 369





Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks)Are Vegetation 0 ,Soil 0 , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes X No 0Are Vegetation 0 ,Soil 0 , 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 0 Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No X Is the Sampled Area

Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes 0 No X within a Wetland? Yes NoPrecipitation prior to fieldwork: Remarks:



0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 45% Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 40% Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 5% No FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:





1. 30% Yes FAC UPL species x 5 =

2. 20% Yes NOL Column Totals: (A) (B)

3. 20% Yes FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 5% No FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FACW 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation

6. 5% No FAC X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%











<3


0


4

0

Half Mile Lane In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Site Forest Grove/Washington 6/10/2014


terrace convex

70 140

80 2405 20

Danthonia californica 20 100

5

Rosa pisocarpa 80%

Cornus alba

Physocarpus capitatus

0 0

15%

cmw

Geranium dissectum 175 500

Epilobium densiflorum 2.86

Daucus carota

Epilobium ciliatum

Holcus lanatus

121 of 369


% % Type1

100





Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Other (Explain in Remarks)


















Field Observations:

Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): >16 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): >16 Yes No (includes capillary fringe)


0-13+ 7.5YR 2.5/3 SiL



X

X


cmw

122 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 10% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 10% Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 5% No FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:

4. 5% No FACW OBL species x 1 =




1. 40% Yes OBL UPL species x 5 =


3. 10% No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 5% No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation










terrace concave 3


44B - Willamette silt loam, 3-7% slopes 0



4

4

Salix lasiandra 100%

Cornus alba

X 000


0 0

Carex densa 0 0


Holcus lanatus 1.85

Populus balsamifera

Spiraea douglasii 40 40

50 100

23 69

17%

cmw

Juncus effusus

Parentucellia viscosa

Equisetum arvense

123 of 369


% % Type1

75 25 C

80 20 C







Thick Dark Surface (A12) X Redox Dark Surface (F6)3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and

















Field Observations:





0-13 10YR 4/1 10YR 4/4 M SiCL

13-16 10YR 4/2 7.5YR 4/6 M SiCL

X


cmw

124 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 40% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 20% Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 10% No FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:


5. 5% No FAC FACW species x 2 =






4. 20% Yes FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 10% No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation

6. 5% No FACU X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%











slope convex 3


0


6



0

Lonicera involucrata 115 230

55 1655 20

Hordeum brachyantherum 0 0

6

Spiraea douglasii 100%

Rosa pisocarpa

Cornus alba

Physocarpus capitatus 0 0

5%

cmw


Deschampsia caespitosa 2.37

Danthonia californica

Equisetum arvense

Daucus carota

125 of 369


% % Type1

95 5 C

80 20 C






Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) X Depleted Matrix (F3)














X Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A) Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)



Field Observations:

Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Yes X No (includes capillary fringe)


0-8 10YR 4/2 7.5YR 4/4 M SiL

8-18 10YR 4/2 7.5YR 4/4 M SiL



X


cmw

126 of 369












5. 2% No FACW FACW species x 2 =





3. 10% No FACU Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 5% No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation










terrace convex 3





4

4

Malus fusca 100%

Spiraea douglasii

X 000


10 40



Acmispon americanus 2.28

Rosa pisocarpa

Cornus alba 0 0

Viburnum opulus 87 174

10 30

25%

cmw

Holcus lanatus

127 of 369


% % Type1

98 2 C

95 5 C






X Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) X Depleted Matrix (F3)

















Field Observations:

Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): Water Table Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): >11 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): >11 Yes X No (includes capillary fringe)




0-8 10YR 3/2 7.5YR 4/6 M SiL

8-11+ 10YR 34/2 7.5YR 4/6 M SiC

X


cmw

128 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 30% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 30% Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 10% No FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:


5. 5% No FACW FACW species x 2 =





3. 5% No FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 5% No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation












terrace none <3


0


3


42 - Verboort silty clay loam 0X 0

0

Spiraea douglasii 145 290

5 150 0


4

Physocarpus capitatus 75%

Malus fusca

Fraxinus latifolia

Cornus alba 0 0

10%

cmw

Geranium dissectum 170 405

Epilobium ciliatum 2.38

Holcus lanatus

129 of 369


% % Type1

98 2 C

90 10 D
























Field Observations:



0-7 10YR 3/2 7.5YR 4/6 M SiL

7-16 10YR 3/2 10YR 4/1 M SiCL



X


cmw

130 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 10% Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 3% No FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 3% No FACW Total % Cover of: Multiply by:






2. 10% No FACU Column Totals: (A) (B)

3. 10% No FACW Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 5% No FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation


7. 1% No FAC 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01








terrace concave <3





2

2

Rosa pisocarpa 100%

Cornus alba

X 000


17 68


Acmispon americanus 109 268

Epilobium densiflorum 2.46

Spiraea douglasii

0 0

76 152

16 48

7%

cmw

Trifolium pratense


Elymus glaucus

Lolium perenne

131 of 369


% % Type1

100


















X Algal Mat or Crust (B4) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Shallow Aquitard (D3)





Field Observations:





0-13+ 7.5YR 2.5/2 SiL

X



cmw

132 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 1% No FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 0 Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 0 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:






2. 20% Yes FAC Column Totals: (A) (B)

3. 15% No NOL Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 10% No FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 10% No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation


7. 2% No NOL 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01

8. 1% No FACU 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting9. 0 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)









X 000


berm convex <3


42 - Verboort silty clay loam 0

0 0

41 82

30 90

2

2

Fraxinus latifolia 100%

Festuca idahoensis ssp. roemeri


Hypericum perforatum

Vicia tetrasperma

Bromus hordeaceus

16 64


Equisetum arvense 104 321

Geranium dissectum 3.09

0%

cmw

133 of 369


% % Type1

100























Field Observations:



0-13+ 7.5YR 2.5/2 SiL



X

X


cmw

134 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 20% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 20% Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 0 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:







3. 20% Yes FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 10% No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FACU 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation










terrace none <3


45A - Woodburn silt loam, 0-3% slopes 0



4

5

Cornus alba 80%

Malus fusca

X 000


Recheck.

5 20


Vicia tetrasperma 130 365

Equisetum arvense 2.81

0 0

70 140

35 105

10%

cmw

Trifolium repens

Prunella vulgaris ssp. lanceolata

Lolium perenne

135 of 369


% % Type1

100























Field Observations:





0-13 10YR 3/2 SiL

X



cmw

136 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 20% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 1% No FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 0 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:







3. 15% Yes OBL Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 10% Yes FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 10% Yes FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation

6. 5% No FACW X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%

7. 5% No OBL to NOL 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01

8. 5% No FACU 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting9. 3% No OBL data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)








Hypochaeris radicata

Beckmannia syzigachne

7%

cmw


Alopecurus geniculatus 2.11

Lolium perenne

Trifolium repens

Plagiobothrys scouleri

Polygonum species

66 132

20 605 20


6

Cornus alba 100%

Malus fusca

18 18

0


6


30 - McBee silty clay loam 0X 0

0


terrace concave <3


137 of 369


% % Type1

100
























Field Observations:



X

Mitigation creation area.


cmw

0-20 10YR 3/2 SiL



138 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 3% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 2% Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 0 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:








4. 10% No FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 10% No FACW 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation


7. 5% No FACU 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01

8. 2% No FAC 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting9. 1% No FACU data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)







terrace concave <3





4

4

Cornus alba 100%

Rosa pisocarpa

X 000


16 64



Festuca idahoensis ssp. roemeri 2.52

0 0

63 126

19 57

7%

cmw


Hordeum brachyantherum

Trifolium repens

Daucus carota

Lupinus polyphyllus

Acmispon americanus

139 of 369


% % Type1

100
























Field Observations:





0-16 10YR 3/2 SiCL

X



cmw

140 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 5% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 0 Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 0 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:








4. 10% No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation


7. 3% No FAC 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01

8. 3% No NOL 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting9. 1% No FACU data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)









X 000


terrace convex <5



0 0

50 100

28 84

3

3

Cornus alba 100%


Cirsium arvense

Plagiobothrys scouleri

Lolium perenne

Geranium dissectum

Lactuca serriola

16 64



Daucus carota 2.71

8%

cmw

141 of 369


% % Type1

100

90 10 C






Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) X Depleted Matrix (F3)

















Field Observations:





0-6 10YR 3/2 SiL

6-16 10YR 4/2 7.5YR 4/6 M SiL

X

X


cmw

142 of 369















1. 20% Yes FACU UPL species x 5 =



4. 20% Yes FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 10% No FACU 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation


7. 5% No NOL 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01








21, 1N, 4W

NAD 1983

Clean Water Services / George Kral

C. Mirth Walker and Stacey Reed

45A - Woodburn silt loam, 0-3% slopes

0.46" day of (broke 1931 record of 0.34"), 0.40" two weeks prior in Hillsboro

Forest Grove/Washington

Daucus carota

cmw

75%

Half Mile Lane In-Lieu Fee Mitigation Site

<3

6/26/2014

P14OR

Vicia tetrasperma

0

60140

40

2035

0

4

3

0

80

X 0

0%


X

25

305

Festuca idahoensis ssp. roemeri

Deschampsia caespitosa 100

5

3.05

none

0

Bromus hordeaceus

Equisetum arvense

0


terrace

A, Northwest Forests and Coast

143 of 369


% % Type1

100

















Drift Deposits (B3) No Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Geomorphic Position (D2)






Field Observations:



0-16

Redox Features

RemarksLoc2 Texture (inches)

Depth

Color (moist)

Matrix

Color (moist)

SiL10YR 3/2

X


X

cmw

144 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 3% No FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 0 Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 0 Total % Cover of: Multiply by:








4. 5% No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FACU 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation

6. 5% No NOL X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%

7. 3% No FACW 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01










terrace none <3


30 - McBee silty clay loam 0X 0

00

X0.46" day of (broke 1931 record of 0.34"), 0.40" two weeks prior in Hillsboro

3

3

Alnus rubra 100%

0 0

68 136

23 695 20



Lotus corniculatus 2.48

Navarretia intertexta

Anthemis cotula

Vicia tetrasperma

Epilobium ciliatum

2%

cmw

145 of 369


% % Type1

80 20 C























Field Observations:





0-16 10YR 3/2 10YR 3/3+ M SiL blocky

X



cmw

146 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 20% Yes FACW That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 20% Yes FACU Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 5% No FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:

4. 5% No FACU OBL species x 1 =







4. 5% No NOL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation










30%

cmw

Geranium dissectum

30 120


Lotus corniculatus 120 340

Daucus carota 2.83

Lonicera involucrata

Symphoricarpos albus 0 0

60 120

25 75

3

4

Physocarpus capitatus 75%

Rubus parviflorus

X 000


sloped terrace concave 3


30 - McBee silty clay loam 0



147 of 369


% % Type1

100























Field Observations:



X

X


cmwVery dry.

0-16 10YR 3/2 SiL crumbly



148 of 369


















4. 5% No FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FACW 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation


7. 3% No FACW 3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01

8. 2% No FACU 4 - Morphological Adaptations1 (Provide supporting9. 0 data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)







0%

cmw

Trifolium pratense

Epilobium densiflorum

Juncus bufonius

Navarretia intertexta

Prunella vulgaris ssp. lanceolata

7 28



Deschampsia caespitosa 2.14

0 0

93 186

0 0

3

3

100%

X 000


terrace concave <3





149 of 369


% % Type1

90 10 C














X Surface Water (A1) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2,










Field Observations:

Surface Water Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 2 Water Table Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 5 Wetland Hydrology Present? Saturation Present? Yes X No Depth (inches): 0 Yes X No (includes capillary fringe)


X


cmw2" deep surface water observed nearby sample plot.

0-16 10YR 3/1 7.5YR 3/4 M SiCL



150 of 369






SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc. Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes 0 No X Hydric Soil Present? Yes 0 No X Is the Sampled Area




0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 5% Yes FACU That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 5% Yes FACW Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 5% Yes FACU Total % Cover of: Multiply by:






2. 10% No FACW Column Totals: (A) (B)


4. 5% No FACU Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 0 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation

6. 0 2 - Dominance Test is >50%






0% = Total Cover Vegetation Yes No



X35%

cmw

Daucus carota

25 100


Epilobium ciliatum 80 210

Anthemis cotula 2.63

Abies grandis

0 0

55 110

0 0

2

4

Symphoricarpos albus 50%

Physocarpus capitatus

X 000


terrace convex <3





151 of 369


% % Type1

100























Field Observations:



X

X


cmwDry.

0-16 10YR 3/2 SiL



152 of 369










0% = Total CoverSapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size:__10' r__) Percent of Dominant Species1. 20% Yes FACU That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)2. 20% Yes FAC Prevalence Index worksheet:3. 10% Yes FAC Total % Cover of: Multiply by:





1. 40% Yes FAC UPL species x 5 =

2. 10% No FACW Column Totals: (A) (B)

3. 10% No FAC Prevalence Index = B/A =

4. 10% No NOL Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 5% No FAC 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation










25%

cmw

Geranium dissectum

Dipsacus fullonum

20 80


Epilobium ciliatum 125 405

Lolium perenne 3.24

Salix scouleriana

0 0

10 20

85 255

3

4

Symphoricarpos albus 75%

Alnus rubra

X 000


terrace convex <3





153 of 369


% % Type1

100

100























Field Observations:



X

X


cmwDry.

0-10 7.5YR 3/3 SiL

10-16 10YR 3/2 SiL



154 of 369


















4. 10% No FACW Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators: 5. 10% No NOL 1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation










0%

cmwScirpus microcarpus (OBL) and Juncus effusus (FACW) immediately downslope of plot.

Epilobium ciliatum

Vicia tetrasperma

0 0



Hordeum brachyantherum 2.45

Rosa pisocarpa

0 0

100 200

35 105

5

5

Spiraea douglasii 100%

Cornus alba

X 000


terrace concave <3


42 - Verboort silty clay loam 0



155 of 369


% % Type1

95 5 C















High Water Table (A2) 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)X Saturation (A3) Salt Crust (B11) Drainage Patterns (B10)









Field Observations:



X


cmw

0-16 10YR 3/2 7.5YR 3/4 M SiCL



156 of 369

APPENDIX F

Vegetation List

157 of 369

Half Mile Lane ILF Mitigation Site Wetland Delineation SWCA Project No. 24801.01


119

SWCA Environmental Consultants Project No. 24801.01

Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status

Native and Invasive, Noxious

American deerweed Acmispon americanus FACU nativespiked bent Agrostis exarata FACW nativenorthern water-plantain Alisma triviale OBL nativered alder Alnus rubra FAC nativemarsh meadow-foxtail Alopecurus geniculatus OBL nativeSaskatoon service-berry Amelanchier alnifolia FACU nativeAmerican slough grass Beckmannia syzigachne OBL nativesoft brome Bromus hordeaceus FACU non-nativedense sedge Carex densa OBL nativeCanadian thistle Cirsium arvense FAC invasive, noxiousred osier Cornus alba FACW nativeCalifornia wild oat grass Danthonia californica FAC nativeQueen Anne's-lace Daucus carota FACU non-nativetufted hair grass Deschampsia caespitosa FACW nativeFuller's teasel Dipsacus fullonum FAC invasivecommon spike-rush Eleocharis palustris OBL nativeblue wild rye Elymus glaucus FACU nativefringed willowherb Epilobium ciliatum FACW nativedense-flower willowherb Epilobium densiflorum FACW nativefield horsetail Equisetum arvense FAC nativeRoemer's fescue Festuca idahoensis ssp. roemeri FACU nativeOregon ash Fraxinus latifolia FACW nativecutleaf geranium Geranium dissectum NOL non-nativewestern mannagrass Glyceria X occidentalis OBL native common velvet grass Holcus lanatus FAC non-nativecreambush Holodiscus discolor FACU nativemeadow barley Hordeum brachyantherum FACW nativecommon St. John's-wort Hypericum perforatum FACU noxioushairy cat's-ear Hypochaeris radicata FACU non-nativelamp rush Juncus effusus FACW nativedagger-leaf rush Juncus ensifolius FACW nativeprickly lettuce Lactuca serriola FACU non-nativecommon duckweed Lemna minor OBL nativeperennial rye grass Lolium perenne FAC non-nativefour-line honeysuckle Lonicera involucrata FAC nativebluepod lupine, bigleaf lupine Lupinus polyphyllus FAC nativeholly-leaf Oregon-grape Mahonia aquifolium FACU nativeOregon crabapple Malus fusca FACW nativebay forget-me-not Myosotis laxa OBL nativeneedle-leaf pincushion-plant Navarretia intertexta FACW nativePacific water-dropwort Oenanthe sarmentosa OBL nativeyellow glandweed Parentucellia viscosa FAC non-nativereed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea FACW invasivemockorange Philadelphus lewisii NOL native

Half Mile Lane

June 10 and 26, 2014Vegetation List

120

SWCA Environmental Consultants Project No. 24801.01

Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status

Native and Invasive, Noxious

Pacific ninebark Physocarpus capitatus FACW nativemeadow popcorn-flower Plagiobothrys scouleri FACW nativegreat plantain Plantago major FAC non-nativeknotweed or smartweed Polygonum species OBL to NOL -Ponderosa pine Pinus ponderosa FACU nativebalsam poplar Populus balsamifera FAC nativelance selfheal Prunella vulgaris ssp. lanceolata FACU nativeOregon white oak Quercus garryana FACU nativeclustered rose Rosa pisocarpa FAC nativewestern thimble-berry Rubus parviflorus FACU nativePacific willow Salix lasiandra FACW nativeScouler's willow Salix scouleriana FAC nativered elder Sambucus racemosa FACU nativesoft-stem club-rush Schoenoplectus tabernaemontani OBL nativered-tinge bulrush Scirpus microcarpus OBL nativeDouglas' meadowsweet Spiraea douglasii FACW nativecommon snowberry Symphoricarpos albus FACU nativewestern arborvitae (western red cedar) Thuja plicata FAC nativered clover Trifolium pratense FACU non-nativewhite clover Trifolium repens FAC non-nativebroad-leaf cat-tail Typha latifolia OBL nativehighbush-cranberry Viburnum opulus FACW nativeslender vetch Vicia tetrasperma NOL non-native

Wetland Indicator Status and taxonomy for the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region per the National Wetland Plant List 2014v1.Accessed April 25,2014. http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/NWPL/

Native per Hitchcock & Cronquist 1973 and http://plants.usda.gov/Invasive per Clean Water Services 2008: http://www.cleanwaterservices.org/PermitCenter/DesignAndConstruction/default.aspx Noxious per ODA 2014: http://www.oregon.gov/ODA/PLANT/WEEDS/lists.shtml

WETLAND INDICATOR STATUS - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast RegionOBL

FACW

FAC

FACU

UPL

NOL Not Listed - Plants that are not on the National Wetland Plant List are assumed to be UPL

Facultative Upland Plant - Usually occur in non-wetlands (non-hydrophyte), but may occur in wetlands

Upland Plant - Almost always occurs in uplands (non-hydrophyte), almost never occurs in wetlands

Obligate Wetland Plant – Almost always occurs in wetlands (hydrophyte), rarely in uplands

Facultative Wetland Plant - Usually occur in wetlands (hydrophyte), but may occur found in non-wetlands

Facultative Plant – Occurs in wetlands (hydrophyte) and uplands (nonhydrophyte)

121

http://rsgisias.crrel.usace.army.mil/NWPL/

http://plants.usda.gov/

http://www.cleanwaterservices.org/PermitCenter/DesignAndConstruction/default.aspx

http://www.oregon.gov/ODA/PLANT/WEEDS/lists.shtml

Appendix D: ORWAP Post-Project

122

Version 2.0.2. April 2010. orwap_calculator_v2.0.2_May_2012_HalfMileLane_2014_0930.xls CoverPg 9/30/2014

CoverPg: Basic Description of Assessment ORWAP version 2.0.2 May 2012

Site Name: Half Mile Lane ILF Mitigation Site Post Assessment

Investigator Name: C. Mirth Walker and Stacey ReedDate of Field Assessment: June 10 and 26, 2014County: WashingtonNearest Town: Forest GroveLatitude (decimal degrees): 45.5486Longitude (decimal degrees): -123.1865TRS, quarter/quarter section and tax lot(s) T1N, R4W, Section 21, TL 700Approximate size of the Assessment Area (AA, in acres) ~19.82AA as percent of entire wetland (approx.) 100%If delineated, DSL file number (WD #) if known Wetland Delineation Light conducted

June 201442 - Verboort silty clay loam (hydric)30 - McBee silty clay loam (Cove and Wapato)45A - Woodburn silt loam 0-3% (Dayton)

44B - Willamette silt loam 3-7% (Dayton)44C - Willlamette silt loam 7-12% (Dayton)9 - Chehalis silty clay loam, occasional overflow, (Wapato)8C nearby - Chehalem silty clay loam (Cove, silty clay loam surface)PEM, REMPSS, RSSPFO, RFOPAB, RABROW

HGM Class (Scores worksheet will suggest a class; see manual section 2.4.2)

Riverine (slope)

If tidal, the tidal phase during most of visit:What percent (approx.) of the wetland were you able to visit? 100What percent (approx.) of the AA were you able to visit? 100Have you attended an ORWAP training session? If so, indicate approximate month & year.

Yes, March 2010

How many wetlands have you assessed previously using ORWAP (approx.)? 5 (reviewed by Stacey Reed [10+])

Soil Map Units within the AA (list these in approx. rank order by area, from WSS web site or published county survey; see manual)

Soil Map Units surrounding and contiguous to the AA (list all present in approx. rank order by area; see manual)

Cowardin Systems & Classes (indicate all present, based on field visit and/or aerial imagery): Systems: Palustrine =P, Riverine =R, Lacustrine =L, Estuarine =EClasses: Emergent =EM, Scrub-Shrub =SS, Forested =FO, Aquatic Bed (incl. SAV) =AB, Open Water =OW, Unconsolidated Bottom =UB, Unconsolidated Shore =US

Comments about the site or this ORWAP assessment (attach extra page if desired):

123

Form FieldF version 2.0.2 April 2010 orwap_calculator_v2.0.2_May_2012_HalfMileLane_2014_0930.xls FieldF 9/30/2014 1 of 16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

A B C D EDate: June 10 and 26, 2014

Site Name: Half Mile Lane ILF Mitigation Site Post Assessment Investigator: C. Mirth Walker with Stacey Reed

# Indicator Conditions Data Explanations, Definitions

Does the AA contain, or is it part of, any of these wetland types? Mark "1" next to all that apply. W

Tidal wetland: receives tidal water at least once during a normal year, regardless of salinity, and dominated by emergent or woody vegetation.

0 tidal = level of surface water fluctuates every ~6 hours on a daily basis in response to tides. [All functions, as classifier]

Lacustrine wetland: an undiked non-tidal wetland bordering a body of standing open water that is >20 acres.

0 open water = surface water that contains no vegetation (except perhaps floating-leaved or completely submersed species). [WBN+]

Fringe wetland: an undiked "shoreline" wetland bordering persistent open water that is >3 times wider than the wetland (includes most tidal, lacustrine, large riverine, some others).

0 [WSv-, T-, FA+,FR+, WBF+]

NONE of above 1

F2 Does the AA contain, or is it part of, any of these wetland types? Mark "1" next to all that apply. Consult the "Rare Wetland Type" reported for the general vicinity by the Oregon Explorer web site, but be aware that those may not apply to the exact AA you have delimited.

W

Bog or Fen: contains a sponge-like organic soil layer which covers most of the AA AND often has extensive cover of sedges and/or broad-leaved evergreen shrubs (e.g., Ledum ). Often lacks tributaries, being fed mainly by groundwater and/or direct precipitation.

0 [CS+,Sens+]

Playa, Salt Flat, or Alkaline Lake: a non-tidal ponded water body usually having saline (salinity >1 ppt or conductivity >1000 µS ) or alkaline (conductivity >2000 µS and pH >9) conditions and large seasonal water level fluctuations (if inputs-outputs unregulated). If a playa or salt flat, vegetation cover is sparse and plants typical of saline or alkaline conditions (e.g., Distichlis , Atriplex ) are common.

0 See file ORWAP_SuppInfo, worksheet P_Salt for species typically occurring in tidal or saline conditions. [PR+,CS+,INV+,FA-,FR-,AM-,WBF+]

Hot spring (anywhere in Oregon): a wetland where discharging groundwater in summer is >10 degrees (F) warmer than the expected water temperature.

0 [FA-]

Native wet prairie (west of the Cascade crest): a seasonally inundated wetland, usually without a naturally-occurring inlet or outlet, and dominated primarily by native graminoids often including species in column E.

0 Deschampsia caespitosa, Danthonia californica, Camassia quamash, Triteleia hyacinthina, Carex densa, C. aperta, and/or C. unilateralis [PDv,CQc]

Presence of Specific Wetland Types

Wetland Type of Conservation Concern

Field F data form. ORWAP version 2.0.2 May 2012. In the Data column, change the 0 (false) to a 1 (true) for the best choice, or for multiple choices where allowed and so indicated. Answer these questions primarily based on your onsite observations and interpretations. Do not write in any shaded parts of this data form. Answering some questions accurately may require conferring with the landowner or other knowledgable persons, and/or reviewing aerial imagery. Although accuracy will be greater if questions are answered for the entire wetland (not limiting only to the part potentially affected by a project), most questions may be answered for just part of a wetland-- the assessment area (AA). HOWEVER, questions with a W in the gray box in column D must be answered for the ENTIRE wetland of which the AA is a part.

F1

124


14

15

16

17

18

19

20

2122

A B C D EVernal pool (Willamette Valley): a seasonally inundated wetland, underlain by hardpan or claypan, with hummocky micro-relief, usually without a naturally-occurring inlet or outlet, and with native plant species distinctly different from those in slightly higher areas, and often including species in column E.

0 Downingia elegans, Isoetes nuttallii, Triteleia hyacinthina, Eleocharis spp., Eryngium petiolatum, Plagiobothrys figuratus, Plagiobothrys scouleri, Grindelia nana, Veronica peregrina, Lasthenia glaberrima , Cicendia quadrangularis, Kickxia elatine, Gnaphalium palustre, and/or Callitriche spp.[PDv]

Vernal pool (Medford area): a seasonally inundated acidic wetland, underlain by hardpan, with hummocky micro-relief, usually without a naturally-occurring inlet or outlet, and having concentric rings of similar native vegetation, often including species in column E.

0 Downingia vina, Isoetes nuttalli, Pilularia americana, Triteleia hyacinthina, Eleocharis spp., Eryngium petiolatum, Plagiobothrys brachteatus, Plagiobothrys scouleri, Grindelia nana, Veronica peregrina, Alopecurus saccatus, Lasthenia californica, Deschampsia danthonioides, and/or Callitriche spp. [PDv]

Vernal pool (Modoc basalt & Columbia Plateau): a seasonally inundated wetland, usually without a naturally-occurring inlet or outlet, located on shallow basalt bedrock and often having species in column E.

0 Blennosperma nanum, Camassia quamash, Epilobium densiflorum, Callitriche marginata, Cicendia quadrangularis, Eryngium vaseyi, Psilocarphus brevissimus, and/or Sedella pumila. [PDv]

Interdunal wetland (Coastal ecoregion): a seasonally inundated wetland, usually without a naturally-occurring inlet or outlet, located between sand dunes where wind has scoured the sand down to the water table (deflation plain), and often with significant cover of native species in column E.

0 Carex obnupta, Argentina egedii, Juncus lesueurii, J. nevadensis, J. falcatus, Sisyrinchium californicum, and/or Salix hookeriana [PDv]

Mature forested wetland (anywhere): a wetland in which mean diameter of trees (d.b.h., FACW and FAC species only) exceeds 18 inches, and/or the average age of trees exceeds 80 years, or there are >5 trees/acre with diameter >32 inches.

0 To qualify, the diameter of >18 inches must be the mean measured from at least 10 trees. [PDv]

Ultramafic soil wetland (mainly southwestern Oregon): a low-elevation wetland, usually with a sponge-like organic soil layer, occurring in an area with exposed serpentine or peridotite rock, and/or in soils with very low Ca:Mg ratios.

0 [PDv]

Wooded tidal wetlands with >30% cover of trees and shrubs. A wetland inundated at least once annually by tides and often dominated by woody plant species.

0 The plant species may include Sitka spruce, crabapple, and/or others [PDv]

Undiked tidal freshwater wetland: an emergent or wooded wetland inundated at least once annually by tides and with surface salinity <0.5 ppt during most of spring and summer, and which has never been diked.

0 [PDv]

NONE of above 1

125


23

242526272829

30

31

32

33

34

3536

37

383940

41

424344454647

A B C D E

The percent of the vegetated part of the AA that is "low marsh" (covered by tidal water for part of almost every day) is:>95% of the AA 050-95% of the AA 025-50% of the AA 01-25% of the AA 0<1% or none of the AA (high marsh only) 0This tidal wetland is (select one): Wcontiguous to a non-tidal palustrine wetland that contains surface water at least seasonally, and mostly not separated by a dike or other barrier, allowing fish access to both wetlands during spring.

0

contiguous to a non-tidal palustrine wetland that contains surface water at least seasonally, but mostly separated by a dike or other barrier, yet still allowing fish access to both wetlands during spring.

0

not contiguous to a non-tidal palustrine wetland that contains surface water, but has an inflowing stream that allows fish during the springtime to access a non-tidal wetland < 1 mile upstream.

0

not contiguous to a non-tidal palustrine wetland that contains surface water, but has an inflowing stream that allows fish during the springtime to access a non-tidal wetland > 1 mile upstream.

0

not contiguous to a non-tidal palustrine wetland, and lacks an inflowing non-tidal stream that provides fish access to an upstream wetland that contains surface water at least seasonally.

0

Select one:during 4 of the last 5 years most of the AA has been covered year-round with surface water, but that part went mostly dry during at least one unusual event.

0

during 4 of the last 5 years most of the AA has been dry year-round on the surface (i.e., saturated only below the surface), but during at least one unusual event most of that part was flooded, even if only briefly.

0

neither of above 1unknown 0

F6 Saturated-only Wetland No part of the AA is ever inundated (contains at least 1 inch of water above the land surface) for more than 14 consecutive days during a normal year. That is, it is a saturated-only wetland. If true, mark "1" here, then SKIP TO F39 (Herbaceous Extent)

0 [classifier for all functions]

During normal years, the percent of the AA that is inundated only seasonally (more than 14 consecutive days but no more than 9 months, or in tidal wetlands is "high marsh" that is inundated by tides fewer than half the days in any month) is:

>75% of the AA 050-75% of the AA 125-50% of the AA 05-25% of the AA 0<5% of the AA, or none 0

Tidal-Nontidal Hydroconnectivity

Interrupted Hydroperiod

Include any natural channels within the marsh that are inundated at least once daily by tide. See file ORWAP_SuppInfo, worksheet P_LowTidal. [WS-,OE+,POL-,INV+,FA+,FR+,WBF+,WBN-,SBM-,PD-]

contiguous= abutting, with no major physical separation that prohibits free exchange or flow of surface water, if any is present. See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. [FA+,WBF+,WBN+,PD+]

[PR-,NR-,CS-,OE+,INV+,FR-,WBF+,WBN+,PD+]

Low Marsh

Seasonal Water Extent Flood marks (algal mats, adventitious roots, debris lines, ice scour, etc.) are often evident when not fully inundated. Also, such areas often have a larger proportion of upland and annual (vs. perennial) plant species. Vegetation may be patterned in concentric or parallel zones, as one moves outward & away from the deepest part of the wetland or channel. Although useful only as a general guide, the NRCS county soil survey descriptions of the predominant soil types usually includes information on flooding frequency and saturation persistence. [WS+,SR+,NR+,CS+,OE+,INV-,FA+, AM-, Sens+]

F3

F4

F5

F7

Is part of the site tidal? If yes, answer next 2 questions. If no, SKIP TO # F5.

126


4849505152

5354

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

6768

A B C D EWhen the AA’s surface water is at its lowest annual level, the percent of the AA still containing surface water (whether obscured by vegetation or not) is: >95% of the AA 050-95% of the AA 025-50% of the AA 11-25% of the AA 0None of the above, and the AA contains or is part of a fringe wetland, SKIP to F10 0

None of the above, and not a fringe wetland, SKIP to F10 0When the AA’s surface water is at its lowest annual level (for tidal wetlands = annual lowest tide), the percent of the surface water that is in or connected to flowing channels that exit the AA, compared to surface water that is outside of channels and their floodplains (e.g., in small depressions that do not connect annually to the channel if any), is:

all (100%) located in channels, swales, or other areas with a surface water connection to a river, lake, or estuary at all times of year

0

75-99% in or connected to channels, swales, or contiguous lake/ estuary, 1-25% in isolated pools 0

50-75% in or connected to channels, swales, or other areas with a surface water connection to a river, lake, or estuary at all times of year, 25-50% in isolated pools

1


0


0

all located in isolated pools or a single isolated pond from which no surface water exits when levels are lowest

0

During the wettest time of a normal year, the percent of the surface water that is in or connected to ditches, swales, or flowing channels that exit the AA, compared to surface water that is in isolated pools that do not connect annually to channels or swales (if any), is:

all (100%) located in channels, swales, or in other areas with a wet-season surface connection to channels or to a contiguous lake or estuary

0


50-75% in or connected to channels, swales, or contiguous lake/ estuary, 25-50% in isolated pools

0

25-50% in or connected to channels, swales, or contiguous lake/ estuary, 50-75% in isolated pools

0


all located in isolated pools or a single isolated pond from which no surface water exits 0

Onsite Surface Water Isolation (Wet Season)

Extent of Persistent Surface Water (Dry Season)

Onsite Surface Water Isolation (Dry Season)

For tidal sites, consider the condition at annual lowest tide. See DSL web site for general maps of waters that may be tidal. Swales and channels are areas that have surface flow for at least 2 consecutive days per year. Swales are less distinct (broader and flatter in cross-section) than channels. [WS+, SR+,PR+,NR+,OE-,T-, INV+,FA-,FR+,AM+,WBF+,WBN+,Sens+]

For tidal sites, consider the condition that would exist at annual lowest tide. Indicators of persistence may include fish, some dragonflies, beaver, and muskrat. In the county soil survey, the NRCS descriptions of the predominant soil types may include information on saturation persistence in those types. [WS-,PR-,NR-,CS-,POL-,INV+,FR+,AM+,WBF+,WBN+,SB-]

For tidal sites, consider the condition at mean high tide. See DSL web site for general maps of waters that may be tidal. Swales and channels are areas that have surface flow for at least 2 consecutive days per year. Swales are less distinct (broader and flatter in cross-section) than channels. Sites fed by unregulated streams that descend on north-facing slopes tend to remain wet longer into the summer, especially in montane snow-fed areas.[WS+, SR+,PR+,NR+,CS+,OE-,INV+,FA-,FR+,AM+,WBF+]

F9

F10

F8

127


697071727374

7576777879

80

81

82

83

84

85

86878889

90

91

A B C D EF11 During most years, the difference in surface water level between the driest and wettest time of

year in most of the area that is not inundated year-round is:

>6 ft change 03-6 ft change 01-3 ft change 00.5 - 1 ft change 1<0.5 ft or no change (stable) 0

F12 When present, surface water in most of the AA is usually:

>6 ft deep 02-6 ft deep 01-2 ft deep 00.5 - 1 ft deep 1<0.5 ft deep (but >0) 0

F13 When present, surface water in most of the AA usually consists of (select one):

One depth class (use the classes in F12) that comprises >90% of the AA’s inundated area 0

One depth class that comprises >50% of the AA's inundated area 1

Neither of above 0

F14 Ponded nontidal water deeper than 3 ft covers at least 1 acre or >5% of the AA during (check all that apply):

most of the period (generally, November-April) when waterfowl are migrating or wintering, and/ or amphibians are in aquatic phases

1

most of the period (generally, May-August) when waterfowl are breeding 0neither of above (no ponded water >3 ft deep is that extensive) 0impossible to tell 0Visualize the extent and distribution of ponded open water within the AA, relative to the distribution of the most dominant form of partly-submerged vegetation (herbaceous or woody, with stems and leaves >4" above the water surface). Visualize this as it occurs during May of most years. In the table to the right, first estimate the percent open water (left column) in the AA, then its distribution (secondary header). Select the highest applicable number and enter it in column D. See photographs in Appendix A of manual. If the AA has no ponded water during May, score it "1." If this is a fringe wetland, assume Open Water is >70%.

5

Note: Ponded open water is surface water that is not visibly flowing and contains no vegetation (except perhaps floating-leaved or completely submersed species) and is not beneath a canopy of trees or shrubs. For tidal sites, consider the condition at average mid-tide.

Predominant Water Fluctuation Range

Depth Class Distribution

Deep Spots

Predominant Depth Class

Open Water Interspersion With Partly Inundated Vegetation

Estimate these proportions by considering the gradient and microtopography of the site. See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. For tidal waters, estimate at mean high tide. [INV+,FR+,WBF+,WBN+]

[AM+, WBN+]

[NR+,OE+,INV+,FA+,FR+,WBF+,WBN+]

[WS+,PR-,NR+,CS-,OE+,INV-, AM-,WBN-]

"Usually" means the majority of the weeks during which the AA is at least partly inundated. This question is asking about the spatial median depth that occurs during most of that time, even if inundation is only seasonal or temporary. If inundation in most but not all of the AA is brief, the answer will be based on the depth of the most persistently inundated part of the AA. Include surface water in channels and ditches as well as ponded areas. See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. For tidal sites, assess the condition as it exists at mean high tide. [SR+,PR+,CS-,OE-,T+,INV-,FA+,FR+,WBF-,WBN-,PD-,Sens-]

F15

128


9293

94

9596

97

98

99

100101

102103104105

106

107

108109

110

111

A B C D EF16 When surface water enters the AA, it enters as (select all applicable choices):

flow moving in streams, ditches, other channels 1surface water exchanged broadly as overflow with contiguous waters such as an estuary, lake, or river

1

water pumped into or intentionally diverted to the AA, e.g., as part of a stormwater dispersion system, irrigation practice, or drainage tile outlet

0

groundwater, runoff, and direct precipitation 1F17 Select one: W

Part of the wetland contains strong evidence of groundwater discharges at the wetland surface during summer: (a) Springs are observed or are shown on Wetland Explorer map, or (b) water is cooler in summer and warmer in winter than in other local wetlands, or (c) measurements from shallow wells indicate groundwater is discharging to the wetland.

0

Part of the wetland has less definitive evidence of discharging groundwater during summer. Wetland has no perennial tributary and is on organic, sandy, or gravelly soil (as determined in F58) AND has one or more: (a) outflow is present and persists during most of the summer or (b) on a natural slope of >5%, or (c) very close to the base of a natural slope steeper than 15%, and longer than 300 ft, or (d) located at a geologic fault, or (e) has rust deposits, colored precipitates, or dispersible natural oil sheen, or (f) within a mile of the top of a HUC4 watershed (see Wetland Explorer for boundaries).

0

Neither of above is true, although some groundwater may discharge to or flow through the wetland, and wetland is in a region of eastern Oregon with mean annual precipitation of less than 20 inches.

0

None of the above 1F18 The most durable surface water connection between the wetland and the closest contiguous

and/or downslope surface waters is:W

persistent (>9 months/yr), or daily tidal exchange 1seasonal (14 days to 9 months/yr, not necessarily consecutive) 0temporary (<14 days, not necessarily consecutive) 0none -- the wetland lacks an outlet. If so, mark "1" here and SKIP TO F25 (Sheltering of Water). 0

F19 During major runoff events, in the places where surface water exits the wetland it is: W

impeded by a pipe, culvert, tidegate, narrowly breached dike, berm, beaver dam, or other obstruction (other than natural topography), or water is pumped out of the wetland (e.g., for irrigation)

1

not impeded by anything other than (possibly) natural topography 01

W

Groundwater

Outflow Duration

Inlet+Outlet

Outflow Confinement

Inflow

The connection may be via a ditch, pipe, tidegate, or culvert as well as through a natural channel, floodplain, or overflow area. Do not rely only on topographic or NWI maps to show this; inspect while in field. The frequencies given are only approximate and are for a "normal" year. The inundation need not occur during the "growing season." See photographs in Appendix A of manual. [WS-,SR+,PR+,NR+,CS-,OE+,T+,FA+,FR+,Sens-]

The inflow and outflow from the wetland may be via a shallow ditch, pipe, or culvert, or as overbank flow in a floodplain (which counts as both an inlet and outlet). Do not rely only on topographic or NWI maps to show this; inspect while visiting the site.

If discharging groundwater in summer is warmer than ambient air temperature, answer "None of the above." [NR+,CS+,T+,POL+,INV+,FA+,AM+,HGM]

"Impeded" means causing a delay or reduction in water velocity or volume. "Major runoff events" would include biennial high water causes by storms and/or rapid snowmelt. [WS-,SR+,PR+,NR+,CS-,OE+,FA+,FR+,Sens-]

[HGM, Sens]

F20 Either the wetland has BOTH an inlet and outlet with seasonal or persistent surface flow, or the wetland is fringe or tidal. If so, enter "1" here and continue. If neither condition met, enter "0" here and then SKIP to F25 (Sheltering of Water).

129


112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121122123124125126

127128129130131132133

134135136137138139140

A B C D EDuring peak annual flow, most of the surface water that flows through the AA:

encounters little or no vegetation, boulders, or other sources of friction, or no flowing water is present

0

mostly encounters herbaceous vegetation that offers little resistance, and water follows a fairly straight path from entrance to exit (few internal channels, only slight meandering)

0

mostly encounters herbaceous vegetation that offers little resistance and follows a fairly indirect path from entrance to exit (non-channelized flow or many internal channels, or very braided or tightly meandering)

0

encounters measurable resistance from fairly-rigid vegetation (e.g., cattail, bulrush, woody plants) or channel-clogging debris, and follows a fairly straight path from entrance to exit.

0

encounters measurable resistance from fairly-rigid vegetation (e.g., cattail, bulrush, woody species) or channel-clogging debris, and follows a fairly indirect path from entrance to exit.

1

F22 During most of the time open water is present in the AA, vegetated areas within the AA, where they are contiguous to open water, are:wider than the contiguous open water 1

narrower than the contiguous open water (i.e., fringe wetlands) 0

F23 The average width of vegetated area in the AA that separates adjoining uplands (if any) from contiguous open waters (if any) is:

>300 ft, or no contiguous upland or open waters (not even temporary) 0100-300 ft 025-100 ft 15-25 ft 0<5 ft 0

F24 The percent of the AA's water edge, if any, that has undercut banks that are partially visible above the water is:>75% 050-75% 025-50% 01-25% 1<1%, or no definable water edge is present 0cannot estimate 0

F25 At mid-day in summer, the area of surface water within the AA that is shaded by herbaceous or woody vegetation, incised channels, streambanks, or other features also present within the AA is:

>75% of the water 050-75% of the water 025-50% of the water 15-25% of the water 0<5% of the water 0(surface water is typically absent in summer or during low tide) 0

Sheltering of Water

Vegetated Zone Absolute Width

Throughflow Complexity

Vegetated Zone Relative Width

For tidal sites, consider the condition at mean low tide. For all sites, consider the aspect and surrounding topographic relief as well as vegetation height and density. [T+,FA+]

This mainly refers to surface water that moves between the inlet and outlet. Some judgment is required in assessing straight vs. indirect flow path. See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. [WS+,SR+,PR+,NR+,CS+,INV+,FA+,FR+,WBF+,WBN+]

open water = surface water that contains no vegetation (except perhaps floating-leaved or completely submersed species) when viewed from above. May include channels, ditches, ponded areas, regardless if seasonal, persistent, or temporary. For tidal areas, assess condition as it exists at mean high tide [SRv+,PRv+,NRv+, CS+,OE-,Sens-]

Note: For most sites larger than 10 acres and with persistent water, measure the width using aerial imagery rather than estimate in the field. For tidal areas, assess condition as it exists at mean high tide. [SR+,PR+,NR+, CS+,OE-,WBN+,Sens-]

Undercut Banks water edge= streambank (both sides) or other edge between open water and soil. undercut= indented such that surface water flows beneath a canopy layer of soil, tree roots, or sod. At tidal sites, assess this at mid-tide. [FA+,FR+,AM+]

F21

130


141142143

144

145

146147

148

149150151152153154

155

156

157158

159

160

161

162163

A B C D EF26 The number of downed wood pieces thicker than 4 inches that remain only partly underwater

during most of the spring or early summer, thus potentially serving as basking sites for turtles, birds, or frogs, is:Several 1Few or none, or AA never has any surface water at that time 0

F27 Select all that apply: WDuring early summer the wetland contains a floating vegetation mat suitable for nesting birds and isolated from the shore by water depths >3 ft. Or AA is an island with similar isolation and a gently-sloping water edge that is mostly vegetated.

0

During early summer the wetland contains (or is) an island with a gently-sloping water edge, that is mostly bare and is isolated from the shore by water depths >3 ft.

0

Neither of above 1F28 The maximum extent of mudflats or unwooded shortgrass areas within the AA during

shorebird migration and wintering (generally August through through April (and for tidal AAs, during mean low tide) is usually:

none, or <100 sq. ft, and there are none that cover >10,000 sq. ft anywhere within 300 ft of the AA

0

none, or <100 sq. ft, but some that cover >10,000 are within 300 ft of the AA 0100-1000 sq. ft. within AA 11000 – 10,000 sq. ft. within AA 0>10,000 sq. ft within AA 0

F29 Which of the following is most true:Wind or boats frequently generate waves of >1 ft near the AA, those waves are intercepted by the wetland, and structures behind the AA are protected from wave erosion

0

Wind or boats frequently generate waves of >1 ft near the AA, those waves are intercepted by the wetland, but there are no structures behind the wetland

0

Neither wind nor boats frequently generate waves of >1 ft near the AA 1

Select all that apply:a regularly-used boat dock is present within or contiguous to the AA 0

a regularly-used boat dock is not within the AA, but there is one within 300 ft of the AA and there is a persistent or tidal surface connection between the dock and the AA

0

large ships that empty ballast water are regularly present in nearby contiguous waters 0

the AA has a persistent or tidal surface water connection (>9 mos./yr, via ditch, pipe, channel, tidegate, or floodplain) to a nearby perennial stream, river, lake, or estuary

1

none of the above 0

Vectors for Waterborne Pests

Waves

Shorebird Feeding Habitats

For tidal sites, consider the condition at mean high tide. Only the wood that is at or above the water surface is assessed because of the impracticality of assessing underwater wood accurately when using a rapid assessment method. [FA+,FR+,AM+,WBF+,SBM+]

Abovewater Wood

Islands

F30

These areas must have (a) no vegetation (bare/ fallow), or herbaceous cover comprised mainly of grasses shorter than 4 inches during some part of this period, and (b) soils are saturated or are covered with <1" of water during some part of this period, and (c) no detectable surrounding slope (e.g., not the bottom of an incised dry channel), and (d) no substantial areas of shrubs or trees. See photograph in Appendix A of manual.This addresses needs of most migratory sandpipers, plovers, stilts, avocets, curlews, and godwits. [WBF+]

Erosive wave conditions often occur where adjoining open water has a fetch (uninterrupted distance) of greater than approximately 1 mile in the direction of the strongest and most frequent wind. [SRv+, PD-, STR+]

island = terrestrial or wetland area larger than 400 sq.ft, and smaller than 1 sq. mi, and separated from "mainland" by water deeper than 3 ft over a distance of >50 ft during early summer. [AM+,WBF+,WBN+]

[SRv+, FA-,FR-,AM-,PD-,STR+]

131


164165166

167

168169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176177178179180

181182

183184185186

187

188189

A B C D EThe following are known or likely to have reproducing populations in this AA, its wetland, or in water bodies within 300 ft that connect to the AA at least seasonally. Select all that apply:

non-native amphibians (e.g., bullfrog) or reptiles (e.g., red-ear slider) 1carp 0other non-native fish (e.g., bass, gambusia, walleye, crappie, brook trout) 1

non-native invertebrates (e.g., New Zealand mudsnail, mitten crab, rusty crayfish) 0

nutria 0none of above, or unknown 0

F32 Ice-free During most years, most of the AA's surface water does not freeze, or freezes for fewer than 4 continuous weeks, or surface water is absent most winters.

1 [WS+,PR+,NR+,CS+,OE+,FR+,WBF+,Sens-]

1

F34 No Scum During most summers, less than 80% of the AA's water surface is covered by floating algae, duckweed, and other non-rooted aquatic plants, AND no major fish kills occur. If no surface water is present in summer, mark "1" in column D.

1 If wetland can be visited only during winter, it may not be possible to answer this question with much certainty unless local sources are contacted or indicators (e.g., dried remains of algae) are found. [PR+,FA+,PD+,CQ+]

SAV (submerged & floating-leaved aquatic vegetation) occupies an annual maximum of:

>95% of the surface water area 050-95% of the surface water area 025-50% of the surface water area 05-25% of the surface water area 0<5% of the surface water area. Mark "1" here and SKIP TO F39 (Herbaceous Extent). 1

F36 The areal cover of SAV at mid-summer is comprised of:mostly invasive SAV species (see list in column E). Mark "1" here and underline the species in column E. Then SKIP to F39.

0

mostly non-invasive species 0impossible to tell 0

F37 Considering just the SAV species that are native:one or two of those species together comprise >50% of the SAV cover. Mark "1" here and write names of dominant species in column E.

0

no two of the native SAV species together comprise >50% of the SAV cover 0

impossible to tell 0

SAV Native Species Dominance

Submerged & Floating-leaved Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)

SAV Invasive vs. Non-invasive Cover

For F32 to 34, if the statement is true, enter a "1" in column D. Otherwise that should be a "0"

[PD-, CQ-, Sens-]

During most of the summer, the AA contains more than 0.25 acre of ponded non-tidal surface water that is deeper than 1 ft, or is within 300 ft of such an area and the intervening habitat is not developed (roads, etc.). Or nesting within the AA by ducks, geese, or swans has been proven.

SAV = herbaceous plants that characteristically grow at or below the water surface, i.e., whose leaves are primarily and characteristically under or on the water surface during most of the part of the growing season when surface water is present. Some species are rooted in the sediment whereas others are not. If pond lily (Nuphar ) is the predominant species, consider its maximum extent only during the period when surface water is present beneath the leaves. For tidal sites, consider the condition during mean high tide. [INV+,FA+,FR+,AM+,WBF+,PDc,CQc,SENSc]

F35

Non-native Aquatic Animals

Ponded ThresholdF33

Invasive SAV species include: Egeria densa (Brazilian elodea), Hydrilla verticillata , Myriophyllum aquaticum (parrotfeather watermilfoil), Cabomba caroliniana (fanwort), Nymphaea odorata (white pondlily). For known distributions of these in your county, see: http://www.weedmapper.org/maps.html [PD-,CQ-,Sens-]

Assume non-native fish to be present if wetland is associated with a nearby reservoir, fish pond, or perennial stream flowing through an agricultural or residential area. Assume bullfrog, nutria, and/or carp to be present if (a) the AA contains persistent water or is flooded seasonally by an adjoining body of permanent water, and (b) not a forested wetland, and (c) in western Oregon, elevation is lower than about 3000 ft. In the ORWAP_SuppInfo file, see Inverts_Exo worksheet for more complete list of non-native invertebrates or Oregon, and WetVerts worksheet for more complete list of fish that are not native to Oregon. You may also consult: http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/default.aspx http://www.dfw.state.or.us/conservationstrategy/invasive_species.asp [INV-,FA-,FR-,AM-,CQ-]

F31

[WBN+]

132


190

191

192193

194

195196197198199

200

201202203204205

206

207

208

209210211

212

213

214215216

217

A B C D EOf all the SAV species in this AA:all are species that are common among Oregon's wetlands and lakes. 0at least one native species is a SAV plant that is not common among Oregon's wetlands and lakes, and it covers >1% of the SAV area or >100 sq. ft. See file ORWAP_SuppInfo, worksheet P_UnCom. Mark "1" in next column and write names of the species in column E.

0

impossible to tell 0

F39 The areal cover of herbaceous plants during mid-summer is:

>95% of the vegetated part of the AA 050-95% of the vegetated part of the AA 125-50% of the vegetated part of the AA 05-25% of the vegetated part of the AA 0<5% of the vegetated part of the AA. Mark "1" here and SKIP TO F44 (Woody Extent). 0

F40 When the areal cover of herbaceous plants is at an annual maximum, those plants are:

overwhelmingly graminoids (>80% cover of grasslike plants) 0mostly graminoids (50-80% cover) 1mostly non-graminoids (e.g., forbs, ferns) (50-80%) 0overwhelmingly (>80%) non-graminoids 0

F41 The maximum annual areal cover of herbaceous plants is:

overwhelmingly (>80% cover) non-native species, of which >10% are species considered invasive (see column E). Mark "1" in next column and write names of dominant invasive species in column E. Then SKIP to F43.

0

overwhelmingly (>80% cover) non-native species, but <10% are considered invasive (see column E). Mark "1" in next column and write names of dominant non-native species in column E. Then SKIP to F43.

0

mostly (50-80%) non-native species, regardless of invasiveness. Mark "1" and SKIP to F43. 0

mostly (50-80%) native species 0overwhelmingly (>80%) native species 1

F42 Of just the herbaceous (forb and graminoid) species that are native:one or two native species together comprise >50% of the areal cover of native herbaceous plants at any time during the year. Mark "1" in next column and write names of dominant native species in column E.

0

no two of the native species together comprise >50% of the areal cover of native herbaceous plants

1

F43 Of all the herbaceous species in this AA:all are species that are common among Oregon's wetlands. 1at least one native species is not common among Oregon's wetlands and it covers >1% of the AA's herbaceous area or >100 sq. ft (either contiguous or scattered). See file ORWAP_SuppInfo, worksheet P_UnCom. Mark "1" in next column and write names of the species in column E.

0

Herbaceous Species Dominance

Herbaceous Extent

Graminoid vs. Forb Cover

Herbaceous Native vs. Non-native Cover

Herbaceous Plant Species Ubiquity

SAV Species Ubiquity

Note: In the next 4 questions, "herbaceous" does not include SAV or herbaceous plants growing under a woody canopy, unless that canopy covers >80% of the vegetated part of the AA. If the AA is farmed, estimate herbaceous cover (including crops) as it would exist under maximum cover conditions during the majority of the last 5 years.

F38 [PD-, CQ-, Sens-]

This question and several others (F37, 38, 42, 48, 49) are used as "placeholders" until a Floristic Quality Assessment index can be developed for Oregon. Much information on distribution and frequencies of plant species is available from the Oregon Flora Project: www.oregonflora.org/ [POL-,PD-,CQ-,Sens-]

graminoids= grasses, sedges, rushes, reeds, burreed, cat-tail, and other grasslike plants . Remember to focus only on plants not beneath a woody canopy, unless that canopy occupies >80% of the AA. If possible this should be assessed during mid-summer. [POLL-]

In the file ORWAP_SuppInfo, see P_Invas worksheet for list of invasives and P_Exo for non-native species list. For known distributions of invasive plants in your county, see: http://www.weedmapper.org/maps.html Remember to focus only on plants not beneath a woody canopy. [POL-,PD-,CQ-,Sens-]

Remember to focus only on plants not beneath a woody canopy. [POL-,PD-,CQ-,Sens-]

herbaceous = forbs, graminoids, ferns, liverworts, moss. Can include crops. Do not include submersed and floating-leaved aquatics (SAV) in the category of "herbaceous", or when defining the "vegetated part" of the site. Note: For sites larger than 10 acres, this should be determined from aerial imagery rather than estimated in the field. [POLc,INV+,WBF+,WBN+,PDc, CQc,SENSc]

133


218219220221222223

224

225226227228

229

230

231

232

233234

235

236

237238239240

241

242243244

245

A B C D EF44 Within the AA, woody vegetation (shrubs, trees, woody vines) occupies:

>95% of the vegetated part of the AA 050-95% of the vegetated AA 025-50% of the vegetated AA 15-25% of the vegetated AA 0<5% of the vegetated AA 0

F45 Where surface water is present during the wettest time of year, the AA's woody vegetation occupies:>95% of the area within 100 ft of the surface water 0

50-95% of the area within 100 ft of surface water 025-50% of the area within 100 ft of surface water 05-25% of the area within 100 ft of surface water 1<5% of the area within 100 ft of surface water; mark "1" here. If F44 is also <5%, then SKIP TO F50 (Woody Diameter Classes).

0

F46 The woody vegetation (if any) within the AA is:

clumped in fairly distinct bands or patches mostly separate from herbaceous vegetation, and most patches or bands are large (>1 acre including contiguous upland woody veg). Or nearly the entire AA is wooded. Isolated shrubs or trees are few.

0

clumped in fairly distinct bands or patches mostly separate from herbaceous vegetation, and most patches are small (<1 acre including contiguous upland woody veg).

1

dispersed quite evenly amid the herbaceous vegetation, in many small patches, or many isolated shrubs or trees.

0

F47 Within parts of the AA having shrubs or woody vines, the areal cover is: overwhelmingly (>80%) non-natives that are categorized as invasive (see column E). Mark "1" in next column and write names of dominant invasives in column E. Then SKIP to F49.

0

overwhelmingly other non-natives. Mark "1" in next column and write names of dominant non-native shrubs/ vines in column E. Then SKIP to F49.

0

mostly (50-80%) non-natives. Mark "1" in next column and write names of dominant non-native shrubs/ vines in column E. Then SKIP to F49.

0

mostly (50-80%) natives 0overwhelmingly (>80%) natives 1

F48 Of just the shrub & woody vine species that are native:one or two of the native species together comprise >80% of the native shrub & vine cover. Mark "1" in next column and write names of dominant species in column E.

0

no two of the native species together comprise >80% of the native shrub & vine cover 1

F49 Of all the shrub & woody vine species in this AA:all are species that are common among Oregon's wetlands. 1at least one native species is not common among Oregon's wetlands and it covers >1% of the AA or >100 sq. ft See file ORWAP_SuppInfo, worksheet P_UnCom. Mark "1" in next column and write species in column E.

0

Shrub & Vine Species Dominance

Shrub & Vine Species Ubiquity

Woody Extent Along Water Edge

Cover of Woody Invasives

Woody Distribution

Woody Extent Within the AA

[POL-,PD-,CQ-,Sens-]

Note: For sites larger than 10 acres, this should be determined from aerial imagery rather than estimated only in the field. Vines are twining or climbing plants with relatively long stems, and can be either woody or herbaceous. Include Himalayan blackberry. [CS+,POLc,SBM+,PDc,CQc,SENSc]

[SBM+]

"contiguous to" means separated by less than one tree height. The separation may be caused by herbaceous vegetation, persistent water, roads, buildings, or bare soil, but not shrubs. [SBM+, CQ+, Sens+]

In the file ORWAP_SuppInfo, see P_Invas worksheet for list of invasives and P_Exo for non-native species list. Woody invasives include: Hedera helix, Ailanthus altissima, Buddleja spp., Cytisus spp., Rubus armeniacus (discolor), Rubus laciniatus, Tamarix spp., Umbellularia californica, Robinia pseudoacacia. For known distribution of some invasives in your county see: http://www.weedmapper.org/maps.html [POL-,PD-,CQ-,Sens-]

[POL-,PD-,CQ-,Sens-]

134


246247248249250251252253254255256257

258

259260261262263264

265

266

267268269270

271272273274275276

277278279

A B C D EF50 Select all the types occupying >5% of the wooded part of the AA or >5% of its wooded upland

edge if any. deciduous 1-4" diameter and >3 ft tall 1evergreen 1-4" diameter and >3 ft tall 1deciduous 4-9" diameter 1evergreen 4-9" diameter 0dead standing 4-9" diameter 1deciduous 9-21" diameter 0evergreen 9-21" diameter 0dead standing 9-21" diameter 0deciduous >21" diameter 0evergreen >21" diameter 0dead standing >21" diameter 0Lacks woody vegetation, or none of above occupy >5% of the wooded part of the AA or 5% of the length of the upland edge.

0

F51 Within the vegetated part of the AA, the cover of nitrogen-fixing plants (e.g., alder, sweetgale, legumes) is:<1% or none 01-25% 025-50% 150-75% 0>75% 0

F52 The percent of the vegetated part of the AA, excluding areas that are never inundated, which contains one or more of these plants: Alisma spp., Beckmannia spp., Polygonum spp. (natives only), Potomogeton (Stuckenia) spp., Ruppia spp., Sagittaria spp., Sparganium spp., Zostera spp., is:

<1% or none, and none are known to occur commonly within the same wetland or within 300 ft of this AA

0

<1% or none, but some are known to occur commonly within the same wetland or within 300 ft of this AA

0

1-10% 010-50% 1>50% 0

F53 The last time that >5% of the AA's vegetation cover was burned or harvested for hay or timber was:0-12 months ago, and this occurs almost annually within part of the AA 00-12 months ago, but was not an annual (or near-annual) event 01-5 years ago 0>5 years ago, or never 1unknown 0

F54 Within the stratum (herbaceous, shrub, or tree) that covers the most onsite area, the wetland plants during maximum annual cover condition are mostly:

of nearly uniform height (+ or - 20% of average) 0of very diverse heights (e.g., short & tall forbs, short & mid-height grasses) 1

History of Fire or Vegetation Removal

Height Uniformity of Dominant Stratum

N Fixers

Waterfowl Food Plants

Woody Diameter Classes wooded upland edge= where woody plants are located within one tree-height of the wetland-upland boundary. Measurements are the d.b.h., which is the tree diameter at 4.5 ft above the ground. If visited only in winter, consider "dead standing trees" to be those that are mainly without bark. Include woody vines such as Himalayan blackberry. [CS+,POL+,INV+,AM+,WBN+,SBM+,Sens+]

[WBF+,WBN+]

[PR-,NR-,CS-,OE+,POL-,WBF+,PD+]

e.g., If dominantly herbaceous, then "diverse heights" might include both short and tall forbs, some non-woody vines, and mid-height graminoids. See photograph of a vertically diverse herbaceous stratum in Appendix A of manual. [POL+,INV+,WBN+,SBM+, PD+]

For a more complete list see file ORWAP_SuppInfo, worksheet NFIX. Do not include algae.

135


280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289290291

292

293

294

295

296

297298299

300301

302303

A B C D EF55 Consider the parts of the AA that usually are not inundated in May, or are inundated by tides at

least once annually. Viewed from 6 inches above the soil surface, the condition in most of this area during May is:little or no (<5%) bare ground or plant litter (thatch) is visible between erect stems or under canopy. This can occur if ground surface is extensively blanketed by moss, graminoids with great stem densities, or plants with ground-hugging foliage.

0

some (5-20%) bare ground or litter is visible. Herbaceous plants have moderate stem densities and do not closely hug the ground.

1

much (20-50%) bare ground or plant litter is visible. Low stem density and/or tall plants with little near-ground foliage. May be mostly woody plants, woody vines, cattail, bulrush, sparse annuals.

0

mostly (>50%) bare ground or accumulated plant litter. Or, during May the entire AA is constantly under water.

0

F56 Most of the edge between the wetland and upland is (select one): W

Linear: a significant proportion of the wetland's upland edge is straight, as in wetlands bounded by partly or wholly by dikes or roads

0

Convoluted: Wetland perimeter is many times longer than maximum width of the wetland, with many alcoves and indentations ("fingers")

0

Intermediate: Wetland's perimeter either (a) is only mildly convoluted, or (b) mixed -- contains about lengths of linear and convoluted segments.

1

F57 The extent of inclusions of upland within the AA (as indicated by their topography, plants, and/or soils) is:Many (e.g., wetland-upland "mosaic") 0Few or none 1

F58 The composition of the soil in the soil pit at the ground surface (uppermost soil layer and excluding the duff layer, see protocol in ORWAP Manual, section 2.3.2) is:

duff layer= leaves, woody material, and live or dead roots, moss that has undergone partial decomposition. [PR,NR,CS,OE, PD, Sen]

Loamy : includes silt, silt loam, loam, sandy loam 0

Clayey : includes clay, clay loam, silty clay, silty clay loam, sandy clay, sandy clay loam 1

Organic : includes muck, mucky peat, peat, and mucky mineral 0

Coarse : includes sand, loamy sand, gravel, cobble, stones, boulders, fluvents, fluvaquents, riverwash

0

F59 The number of downed wood pieces longer than 6 ft and with diameter >6", and not persistently submerged, is:Several ( >5 if AA is >10 acres, or >2 for smaller AAs) 1Few or none 0

F60 The number of animal burrows, mounds, hummocks, boulders, upturned trees, islands, natural levees, dry channels, pits, wide soil cracks, and microdepressions (in parts of the AA that lack persistent water) is:Several (extensive micro-topography) 1Few or none (minimal microtopography; <1% of the area that isn't persistently inundated); e.g., many flat sites having a single hydroperiod

0

Intermediate 0

Downed Wood

Soil Composition in the Soil Pit

Upland Edge Shape Complexity

Upland Inclusions

Bare Ground & Accumulated Plant Litter

Ground Irregularity

See illustrations in Appendix A of the ORWAP manual . [NR+,SBM+]

[NR+,AM+,SBM+]

Estimates of "plant litter" cover should include only the litter and woody debris that would be visible from a height of 6 inches above the soil surface. Emphasis should be on plant litter that has remained from prior years ("thatch"), not recent. Erect plant stems should not be counted as plant litter, even if dead. "Bare ground" that is present under a tree or shrub canopy should be counted. It includes unvegetated soil, rock, sand, or mud between stems if any. See photographs in Appendix A of manual for examples. Wetlands that are dominated by annual plant species tend to have more extensive areas that are bare or covered only by plant litter, during minimum annual cover conditions. [SR-,PR-,NR-,CS-,OE-,POL-,INV-.AM-,SBM-,Sens+]

include driftwood. [POL+,INV+,AM+,SBM+]

"microtopography" refers mainly to vertical relief of <1 m and is represented only by inorganic features, except where plants have created depressions or mounds of soil. See photographs in Appendix A of manual for examples. [WS+,SR+,PR+,NR+,CS+,POL+,INV+,AM+,SBM+,PD+]

136


304305306307

308

309

310

311

312313314315316317318319320321322

323324325

326

327

328

329

330331

A B C D EF61 The gradient along most of the AA's water flow paths (both sheet and channel flow) is:

>10% 06-10% 02-5% 1Flat (<2%, no slope or flow is ever apparent, or AA is an estuarine fringe wetland). Includes most depressional sites

0

F62 Fish Access From Offsite Small fish (e.g., stickleback, minnow) from elsewhere in the watershed can access part of this AA for at least 2 days during most years or are known to already be present onsite.

1 Although incomplete, the species maps may be helpful at: http://map.streamnet.org/ or http://query.streamnet.org/ [INV-,FA+,FR+,AM-,WBF+]

F63 Nesting or Roosting Structures

Within the AA or within its wetland or within 300 ft of AA, there are bridges, buildings, caves, or ledges with openings/ crevices, well-maintained bird or bat boxes, elevated platforms, or other artificial structures suitable for nesting by some native bird or bat species.

1 e.g., open buildings for barn swallows, bridges for cliff swallows, wood duck boxes, goose nesting platforms, sheltered places for bees and wasps [POL+,SBM+]

F64 Cliffs, Banks, or Beaver In the AA or within its wetland or within 100 ft of the AA, there are elevated terrestrial features such as cliffs, stream banks, excavated pits, or pumice walls (but not riprap) that extend at least 6 ft nearly vertically, are unvegetated, and potentially contain crevices or other substrate suitable for nesting or den areas. Or there is evidence that beaver have used this AA (e.g., gnawed limbs).

1 [POL+,SBM+]

F65 The maximum percent of the wetland that is visible from the best vantage point on public roads, public parking lots, public buildings, or public paved paths that adjoin or are within 300 ft of the AA (select one) is:>50% 125-50% 0<25% 0

F66 Most of the AA is (select one):in public ownership 1in private ownership 0

F67 For most of the AA, permission for access is normally given or allowed:to anyone, mostly unrestricted 0to anyone, but significant restrictions (e.g., limited dates, permit required) 0only on a case-by-case basis, but with few other restrictions 1only on a case-by-case basis, with restrictions (e.g., limited dates, permit required) 0

seldom or never 0(do not know) 0

F68 Assuming access permission was granted, select all statements that are true of this AA as it currently exists:Walking is physically possible in >5% of the AA during most of year, e.g., free of deep water and dense shrub thickets

1

All or part of the AA (or an area within sight of the AA and within 100 ft) would be physically accessible to people in wheelchairs, e.g., paved and flat

0

Maintained roads, parking areas, or foot-trails are within 30 ft of the AA, or the AA can be accessed most of the year by boat

1

F69 Plants, animals, or water in the AA have been monitored for >2 years, unrelated to any regulatory requirements, and data are available to the public. Or the AA is part of an area that has been designated by an agency or institution as a benchmark, reference, or status-trends monitoring area.

1

(do not know) 0

Ownership

Public Access

Sustained Scientific Use

Non-consumptive Uses - Actual or Potential

Internal Gradient

Visibility

[PU+]

[PU+]

[PU+]

In all cases, this question assumes that permission for access may be limited to certain activities. [PU+]

[PU+]

Except in isolated wetlands (no outlets), this is not the same as the shoreline slope. It is the elevational difference between highest and lowest points within the site, divided by the flow-distance between them and converted to percent. If most of the surface water is impounded within the site, the gradient is the gradient of the water surface, not the gradient of the submerged substrate. See diagram in Appendix A. If available, use a clinometer to measure this. [WS-,SR-,PR-,NR-,CS-,OE+,AM-,WBF-,WBN-]

137


332333334335336337338339340341342

343344345346

347348349350351

352353354

355356

357358359360361

362363364365

366

A B C D EF70 Recent evidence was found within the AA of the following potentially-sustainable consumptive

uses. Select all that apply.low-impact commercial timber harvest 0low-impact grazing 0commercial harvesting of hay or mushrooms 0waterfowl hunting or furbearer trapping 0fishing (including shellfish harvest) 0None of the above 1

F71 Wells that currently provide drinking water are:Within 500 ft and downslope from the AA or at same elevation 1500-1000 ft and downslope or at same elevation 0>1000 ft downslope, or none downslope, or AA is tidal, or no information 0

F72 Excessive accumulation of sediment has caused frequent problems for large boats, with shoaling necessitating frequent dredging, in waters that are located:

contiguous to the AA, or <1 mile downslope from the AA 01-5 miles downslope 0>5 miles downslope, or no shoaling, or no boats, or no information 1

F73 The percent of the AA's vegetation cover that normally grows taller than 4 inches but which has been persistently reduced to less than that height by mowing (many times per year), plowing, and/or grazing by domestic or wild animals is:

>95% 050-90% 05-50% 0<5%, or grazing/ mowing does not cause the described condition 1

F74 The part of the AA almost never visited by humans during an average year probably comprises:

>95% of the AA 050-95% 15-50% and inhabited building is within 300 ft of the AA, or <5% and no inhabited building is within 300 ft of the AA

0

none of the above 0F75 The part of the AA visited by humans almost daily for several weeks during an average year

probably comprises:

>95% of the AA 050-95% 05-50% 0<5% 1

F76 Along the AA's boundary with upland, the percent of the upland edge (within 10 ft of AA) that is occupied by species that are marked as invasive in the Plants worksheet is:

most (>50%) of the upland edge 0much (5-50%) of the upland edge 0some (1-5%) of the upland edge 1none of the upland edge (invasives apparently absent), or AA is not within 10 ft of upland 0

Domestic Wells

Devegetation

Consumptive Uses (Provisioning Services)

Core Area 2

Weed Source Along Upland Edge

Core Area 1

Sediment Removal

If unknown, assume this is true if there is an inhabited structure within the specified distance and the neighborhood is known to not be connected to a municipal drinking water system (e.g., is outside an Urban Growth Boundary), or if crops are irrigated annually and the site is distant from a major water body. [NRv+]

"Low impact" means adherence to Best Management Practices such as those defined by NRCS and other agencies. Evidence may consist of direct observation, or presence of physical evidence (e.g., recently cut stumps, fishing lures, shell cases), or communication with the land owner or manager. [PS+]

[SRv+]

[OE-,INV-,AM-,WBN-,SBM-,PD-,CQ-]

Judge this based on proximity to population centers, roads, trails, accessibility of the AA to the public, wetland size, usual water depth, and physical evidence of human visitation. Exclude visits that are not likely to continue and/or that are not an annual occurrence, e.g., by construction or monitoring crews. See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. [AM+,WBF+,WBN+,SBM+,PD+,STR-]

Exclude visits that are not likely to continue and/or that are not an annual occurrence, e.g., by construction or monitoring crews. See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. [AM-,WBF-,WBN-,SBM-,PD-,STR+]

Some of the most common invaders along upland edges of Oregon wetlands are Himalayan blackberry, knotweed, sweetbrier rose, Russian olive, English ivy, nightshade, pepperweed, medusahead, white clover, ryegrass, quackgrass, false brome, bentgrass, dandelion, oxeye daisy, pennyroyal, bull and creeping thistles, tansy ragwort, poison hemlock, and teasel. See file ORWAP_SuppInfo, worksheet P_Invas. If a plant cannot be identified to species (e.g., winter conditions) but its genus contains an invasive species, assume the unidentified plant to also be invasive. If vegetation is so senesced that apparently dominant edge species cannot be identified even to genus, answer "none". [PD-,STR+]

138

orwap_calculator_v2.0.2_May_2012_HalfMileLane_2014_0930.xls OF 9/30/2014 Form OF, Version 2.0.2, April 2010 1 of 11

1

2

3

45

67

8

9

10111213141516

171819202122

A B C D EDate: 9/30/2014 Site Name: Half Mile Lane ILF Mitigation Site Post Assessment

# Indicator Conditions Data Explanations, Definitions

The AA is all or part of a mitigation site used explicitly to offset impacts elsewhere (0= no, 1= yes)

1

(no information) 0The AA is part of or contiguous to a wetland on which public or private organizational funds were spent to preserve, create, restore, or enhance habitat mainly as part of a voluntary effort not used explicitly to offset impacts elsewhere (0= no, 1= yes)

0

(no information) 0D3 Historically Lacking Trees This AA (a) is not along (or in the biennial floodplain of) a large stream or river where riparian

woodlands would be typical and (b) had a Presettlement vegetation class not dominated by trees as indicated by the Wetlands Explorer web site: www.oregonexplorer.info/wetlands/ORWAP . Enter 1 if both are true, 0= if not.

0 If the openness of the surrounding landscape is due almost entirely to agriculture and other human activities occurring within the past century, do not answer affirmatively. This question is used as a classification variable mainly to set appropriate expectations for the extent of surrounding forest cover. [INVc,FAc,FRc,SBMc,PD,CQc,SENSc]

D4 Enclosed by Roads Draw a circle of radius of 2 miles centered on the AA. Within that circle, do paved roads completely encircle the AA? (0= no, 1= yes)

0 See illustration in Appendix A of the manual. Consider only paved roads expected to have at least 1 vehicle per hour, and which are visible in aerial imagery regardless of width. Presence of culverts or bridges along the roads is irrelevant. Do not consider other potential barriers to wildlife movement (e.g., large rivers, fields). A circle of any radius can be placed on aerial imagery at http://tnm2beta.cr.usgs.gov/viewer . Click on Imagery, then GIS Toolbox, Advanced, RangeRing. [AM-,SBM-,Stress+]

The distance from the center of the AA to the nearest road with an average daytime traffic rate of at least 1 vehicle/ minute is:>1 mile 00.5- 1 mile 01000-2600 ft 1500-1000 ft 0100-500 ft 0<100 ft 0Draw a circle of radius of 2 miles centered on the AA. Including the AA itself, the cumulative amount of forest (regardless of patch sizes) is:<5% of the circle 05 to 20% 020 to 50% 050 to 80% 1>80% 0

Forested= woody vegetation currently taller than 20 ft, and with >70% canopy closure. [SBM+]

D5 Estimate the traffic rate using your judgment and considering the road width, local population, alternate routes, and other factors. [AM-,WBN-,SBM-, PD-,STR+]

Distance to Nearest Busy Road

Forest Landscape Extent

Office Data Form (OF). ORWAP version 2.0.2 May 2012. Answering many of the following questions requires viewing aerial imagery and maps, covering an area up to within 2 miles of the AA. In the Data column, change the 0 (false) to a 1 (true) for the best choice, or for multiple choices where allowed and so indicated. Do not write in any shaded parts of this data form. Questions whose cells in column D have a "W" MUST be answered only for the ENTIRE wetland. Italicized indicators pertain only to wetland values. Although some land cover types (e.g., crops) can vary greatly from year to year, report only the conditions known to prevail during the majority of the past 5 years, or if unknown, then the conditions found in the available aerial imagery. Please do not attempt to fill out this data form until you're familiar with the accompanying manual.

D2

D1

D6

Mitigation Investment

Conservation Investment

[PUv+]

voluntary= WRP, CRP, land trust easements with partial public funding, etc. Locations of some sites are shown online at: http://www.conservationregistry.org/ . Also, locations of OWEB-funded projects are mapped at http://www.oregonexplorer.info/owri_vistool/Intro.aspx [PUv+]

139


23

24

252627

2829303132

33

3435363738

39

40

41

424344454647

A B C D EThe minimum distance from the AA edge to the closest forested tract or corridor larger than 100 acres is:

<100 ft, or 100-300 ft and not separated from the AA by stretches of open water, bare ground, lawn, or impervious surface that are wider than 150 ft.

1

100-300 ft and separated from the AA by stretches of open water, bare ground, lawn, or impervious surface that are wider than 150 ft.

0

300-1000 ft 0>1000 ft 0

D8 The largest patch or corridor within 0.5 mile of the AA edge that is forested (and not separated from the AA by roads, fields, etc. that create a gap wider than 150 ft), occupies:

<1 acre of forest 01-10 acres 010-100 acres 0100-1000 acres 0>1000 acres 1

D9 Within a 2-mile radius measured from the center of the AA, the percent of the land that has natural land cover (see definition on right) is:

<5% of the land 05 to 20% of the land 020 to 60% of the land 060 to 90% of the land 1>90% of the land 0

D10 Within a 2-mile radius measured from the center of the AA, the area that is not "natural land cover" or water is mostly:impervious surface, e.g., paved road, parking lot, building, exposed rock 0

bare pervious surface, e.g., dirt or gravel road, plowed fields, dunes, recent clearcut or landslide

0

cultivated row crops, orchards, vineyards, tree plantations 1artificially landscaped areas or lawn 0grassland grazed or mowed to a height usually shorter than 4 inches 0other 0(none of above; land cover is >90% natural land cover) 0

Forest Tract Proximity

Size of Nearby Forest

Natural Land Cover Extent

Type of Land Cover Alteration

Natural land cover includes wooded areas, native prairies, sagebrush, vegetated wetlands, as well as relatively unmanaged commercial lands such as ryegrass fields, hayfields, lightly grazed pastures, timber harvest areas, and rangeland. It does not include water, row crops (vegetable, orchards, Christmas tree farms), residential areas, golf courses, recreational fields, pavement, bare soil, rock, bare sand, or gravel or dirt roads. Natural land cover is not the same as native vegetation. It frequently includes a dominance of non-native plants (e.g., cheat grass, Himalayan blackberry). Although some land cover types (e.g., crops) can vary greatly from year to year, report only the conditions known to prevail during the majority of the past 5 years, or if unknown, then the conditions found in the available aerial imagery. [AM+,SBM+)

[POLv-,AM+,SBM+]

D7 forested tract= a land cover patch that has >70% tree cover. A corridor is simply an elongated forested patch that is not narrower than 150 ft at any point. "Not separated" from the AA means not separated by roads or other features that create a tree canopy gap wider than 150 ft. [SBM+]

The patch or corridor may either be entirely or only partially within the 0.5 mile distance. Disqualify any patch or corridor of forest where canopy thins to <70% cover, or where the forested patch becomes separated from the AA by a tree canopy gap of >150 ft or where the forested corridor narrows to less than 150 ft width. See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. Patch area can be measured at http://tnm2beta.cr.usgs.gov/viewer (GIS Toolbox, Advanced) or estimated online in GoogleEarth using the following guidelines: 1 acre is about: 200 ft on a side (if square)10 acres is about: 660 ft on a side100 acres is about: 0.5 mile on a side1000 acres is about: 1 mile on a side [SBM+]

140


48

49

50

51

5253

545556575859

60

61626364

656667686970

71

72737475

A B C D ED11 The minimum distance from the AA edge to the edge of the closest tract or corridor of

natural (not necessarily native) land cover larger than 100 acres, is:

<100 ft, or the AA contains >100 acres of vegetation, or >100 acres of natural land cover is connected to the AA and is not separated from it by stretches of open water, bare ground, lawn, or impervious surface that are wider than 150 ft.

1

<100 ft, but separated from the wetland by stretches of open water, bare ground, lawn, or impervious surface that are wider than 150 ft.

0

100-300 ft; and not separated from the wetland by stretches of open water, bare ground, lawn, or impervious surface that are wider than 150 ft.

0

100-300 ft, but separated from the wetland by stretches of open water, bare ground, lawn, or impervious surface that are wider than 150 ft.

0

NONE of the above 0D12 The largest patch or corridor that is natural land cover and is within 0.5 mile of the AA

edge, and not separated from the AA by roads etc. that create gaps wider than 150 ft, occupies:

<1 acre 01-10 acres 010-100 acres 0100-1000 acres 0>1000 acres 1

D13 Within 0.5 mile of the center of the AA, the AA and vegetation of the same form that is contiguous to the AA together provide (select all that apply):

the largest patch of currently ungrazed, unmowed, and unshaded herbaceous vegetation 0the largest patch of unshaded shrubland (excluding plantations) 0the largest patch of deciduous or evergreen trees (excluding plantations) 0NONE of above 1

D14 Draw a circle of radius of 2 miles centered on the AA. The amount of herbaceous openland is:

<5% of the land 05 to 20% 120 to 50% 050 to 80% 0>80% 0

D15 The distance from the AA edge to the closest patch of herbaceous openland larger than 1 acre is:

<100 ft, or the AA contains >1 acre of such cover, or is contiguous to >1 acre of such cover 1

100 to 300 ft 0300 to 1000 ft 0>1000 ft 0

Proximity to Natural Land Cover

Size of Largest Nearby Tract or Corridor of Natural Land Cover

See definition of herbaceous openland above, and photographs in Appendix A of manual.. Must be in flat terrain. [POLv+,WBF+]

Natural land cover includes wooded areas, native prairies, sagebrush, vegetated wetlands, as well as relatively unmanaged commercial lands such as ryegrass fields, hayfields, lightly grazed pastures, timber harvest areas, and rangeland. It does not include water, row crops (vegetable, orchards, Christmas tree farms), residential areas, golf courses, recreational fields, pavement, bare soil, rock, bare sand, or gravel or dirt roads. Natural land cover is not the same as native vegetation. It frequently includes a dominance of non-native plants (e.g., cheatgrass, Himalayan blackberry). [POL+,INV+,AM+,SBM+,Sens-]

This question will require field verification. In all cases, the patch may be entirely within the wetland, or may cover only part of the wetland but extend into contiguous upland. Likewise the patches to which it is being compared may be entirely or only partially within the 0.5 mile radius. There is no minimum size limit. [POLv+,AMv+,WBNv+,SBMv+,PDv+]

The patch or corridor may either be entirely or only partially within the 0.5 mile distance. Disqualify any patch or corridor of natural land cover where it becomes separated from the AA by a gap of >150 ft, if the gap is comprised of impervious surface, bare dirt, or lawn, or if the natural land corridor narrows to less than 150 ft. [POL+,AM+,WBN+,SBM+, Sens-]1 acre is about: 200 ft on a side (if square)10 acres is about: 660 ft on a side100 acres is about: 0.5 mile on a side1000 acres is about: 1 mile on a side

Herbaceous openland can include (for example) pasture, herbaceous wetland, meadow, prairie, ryegrass fields, row crops, plowed land, herbaceous rangeland, golf courses, grassed airports, and hayfields but only if they are known to be in flat terrain (almost no noticeable slope). Do not include open water of lakes, ponds, or rivers. See photographs in Appendix A of manual. In dry parts of the state, croplands in flat areas are often irrigated and are distinctly greener in aerial images. [POLv+,WBF+]

Herbaceous Open Land in Landscape

Proximity to Open Land

Local Wetland Uniqueness

141


76777879808182

83848586878889

9091929394959697

9899

100101102103

A B C D ED16 Draw a circle of radius of 2 miles centered on the AA. Including water ponded in the AA

itself or in a fringing water body, the amount of non-tidal water that is ponded during most of the year is:<5% of the circle, located in 5 or fewer ponds or lakes 1<5% of the circle, located in >5 ponds or lakes 05 to 30%, located in 10 or fewer ponds or lakes 05 to 30%, located in >10 ponds or lakes 0>30%, located in 15 or fewer ponds or lakes 0>30%, located in >15 ponds or lakes 0

D17 The minimum distance from the AA edge to the closest non-tidal wetland, pond, or lake that is larger than 1 acre, is ponded most of the year, and is not part of the same associated wetland, pond, or lake, is:<300 ft, and connected with a natural land corridor 0<300 ft, but no uninterrupted natural land corridor 0300-1000 ft, and connected with a natural land corridor 0300-1000 ft, but no uninterrupted natural land corridor 0>1000 ft, and connected with a natural land corridor 0>1000 ft, but no uninterrupted natural land corridor 1

D18 The distance from the AA edge to the closest (but separate) non-tidal body of water that is ponded during most of the year and is larger than 20 acres (about 1000 ft on a side) is:

<1 mile 01-5 miles 1>5 miles 0

D19 The distance from the AA edge to the closest tidal body of water is:<1 mile 01-5 miles 0>5 miles 1

D20 Using the Web Soil Survey procedure described in the ORWAP manual, the rating of the soil map unit which occupies the largest percentage of the zone 200 ft uphill from the AA is:

very severe 0severe 0moderate 0slight 1(could not determine) 0

Ponded Water in Landscape

See the ORWAP manual for instructions on how to obtain this information online. [SRv+, Sens+]

Ponded water = any surface water that is not obviously part of a river, stream, or tidal system. Include herbaceous (emergent) wetlands larger than 1 acre if they are inundated and water is ponded at least seasonally. Also include waters such as sloughs that are ponded most of the year but connected seasonally to rivers. Consult the online wetland maps at Wetland Explorer and note wetlands that are not obviously intersected by streams and are not estuarine [AM+,WBF+,WBN+,SBM+,Sens-]

If multiple smaller water bodies are separated by <150 ft they may be combined when evaluating acreage. "Uninterrupted" means no impervious surfaces wider than 150 ft interrupt the corridor. "Natural" land corridor means a corridor comprised of natural land cover as defined in D9 above. Consult wetland maps, considering only those polygons whose water regime may be "permanent," "intermittently exposed," or "semipermanent" (codes F, G, or H on NWI maps). [AM+,WBF+,WBN+,SBM+,Sens-]

Large Ponded Water Proximity

Tidal Proximity

Upslope Soil Erodibility Risk

Ponded Water Proximity

[CS+,WBF+]

If multiple smaller water bodies are separated by <150 ft they may be combined when evaluating acreage. Consult wetland maps, considering only those polygons whose water regime may be "permanent," "intermittently exposed," or "semipermanent" (codes F, G, or H on NWI maps). [WBF+,WBN+,Sens-]

142


104105106107108109110

111

112

113

114115116

117118119120121122

A B C D ED21 Using the Web Soil Survey AOI tool to measure it, what is the area of the largest patch of

emergent, shrub, or forest vegetation within the entire wetland of which the AA is a part? Use just the dominant class. See instructions in last column.

<0.1 acre 00.1 - 1 acre 01 to 10 acres 110 to 100 acres 0100 to 1000 acres 0>1000 acres 0

D22 From the Wetlands Explorer web site (see Manual), note the 12-digit code number for this wetland's HUC6 (Hydrologic Unit Code, i.e., watershed). Then turn to the HUC4, HUC5, and HUC6 worksheets in the ORWAP_SuppInfo file. Compare the extent of the wetland's dominant vegetation form (from above) with that of the largest wetlands of the same class in the same HUC4 (first 8 digits), the same HUC5 (first 10 digits), and the same HUC6 (12 digits). Enter "1" for all that apply below:

the vegetated part of this wetland is as large or larger than any of its class mapped in its HUC4 watershed

0


0


0

none of above 1data are inadequate (NWI mapping not >90% completed in HUC) 0

D23 Turn to the HUCbest worksheet in the ORWAP_SuppInfo file. Using the HUC code noted from the web site, is this AA located in one of the HUCs that are listed as having a large diversity of wetland types relative to area of wetlands (column 3), or a large number (column 4) or area (column 5) of wetlands relative to area of the HUC? Enter "1" for all that apply below:

yes, for the HUC4 watershed 0yes, for the HUC5 watershed 0yes, for the HUC6 watershed 0none of above 1data are inadequate (NWI mapping not completed in HUC) 0

"type diversity" was based on Cowardin system and class (e.g., Palustrine emergent). Note that data are lacking for some HUCs. Because the diversity of types, number of wetlands, and proportional area of wetlands are highly intercorrelated, the criteria used to define "large" were based on the residuals of regression of those variables against wetland area or numbers in the associated HUC. Thus, the relative rather than the absolute number of types or number of wetlands in the HUC was the basis for judging "large," and the top 5% of the residuals was used to identify the most outstanding wetlands in each category. [AM+, WBF+, WBN,+ SBM]+

When drawing the polygon around the patch, exclude vegetation of the same patch type if separated by a gap created by open water, a road, dike, or upland that is wider than 150 ft. [WBF+, WBN+, SBM+, POL+, Sens-]

"of its type" means Cowardin system and class. First determine size importance in HUC6 and if criteria met, then also screen for importance in HUC5 and if met then in HUC4. Alternatively, instead of checking the worksheets, you may go to the Wetland Explorer web site, locate this wetland, activate the boundaries for wetlands plus the HUC4, 5, and 6, and then determine visually if this is the largest wetland of its class. Note that data are lacking for some HUCs. Also note that a HUC4 is the same as an 8-digit HUC, a HUC5 is the same as a 10-digit HUC, and a HUC6 is the same as a 12-digit HUC. [WBFv+, WBNv+, SBMv+]

Wetland Size Uniqueness in Watershed

Extent of Dominant Vegetation Class in Wetland

Wetland Number & Diversity Uniqueness

143


123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

A B C D E

D24 Compared to extent of wetland that may have been originally present at this location (just prior to settlement in 1851), the current wetland is:

W

same size and boundaries, approximately. For example, wetland boundary may be nearly identical to hydric soil boundary

0

smaller (50-99% of the original size) and/or severed (by roads, dikes, drained soils, etc) from a few historically connected wetlands that may no longer exist. Soil map may show hydric soil extending somewhat beyond current wetland boundary.

0

much smaller (<50% of the original size) and/or extensively severed (by roads, dikes, drained soils) from many historically connected wetlands that may no longer exist. Soil map may show hydric soil extending far beyond current wetland boundary.

1

larger (due to damming of stream or runoff, excavation, removal of obstructions, irrigation, etc. that floods soils not mapped as hydric) or has been connected to wetlands from which it existed in isolation just prior to settlement.

0

no wetland is known to have been present at this location originally (no hydric soil is mapped and presettlement vegetation was not wetland; the entire wetland may have resulted from impoundment, excavation, or regrading of upland soils)

0

D25 Go to the Oregon Wetlands Explorer web site or other sources noted below and use those to help determine each of the following:

See section 2.2.8 of the ORWAP manual.

a) the AA is within or is connected to (at least seasonally) a stream or other water body within 0.5 mile that has been designated as Essential Indigenous Anadromous Salmonid Habitat (ESH)

1 You must use information not contained on the Wetlands Explorer web site to determine if such a connection exists at least seasonally. If no mapped ESH is near the AA but ODFW has confirmed the accessibility of the AA by salmonids and the presence of salmonids in nearby waters, this question may be answered affirmatively. Many potential blockages along streams are shown in maps that may be downloaded from: http://nrimp.dfw.state.or.us/nrimp/default.aspx?pn=fishbarriermaps

b) the AA is within or contiguous to a Special Protected Area managed by a conservation group or designated as specially protected for conservation by a state or federal resource agency,

0 This includes BLM Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) or Outstanding Natural Area (ONA), Federal Research Natural Area (RNA) or Special Interest Area (SIA), or Natural Heritage Conservation (NHCA), Land Trust and Nature Conservancy Preserves, and others.

c) the AA is within or contiguous to a Wetland Priority Area as determined partly by ODFW 0 As recognized by the Oregon Wildlife Conservation Strategy or the Oregon Natural Heritage Program

d) the AA is within an IBA (Important Bird Area, as officially designated) and listed in the IBA worksheet in the ORWAP_SuppInfo file

0

NONE of above 0

"Originally present" means immediately prior to widespread settlement of the region by western cultures (generally, about 1850). See ORWAP manual (section 2.2.8) for instructions on how to see hydric soils in the vicinity. If the hydric soil map units that intersect the wetland are together much larger than the wetland, assume fragmentation has occurred. If possible, also see maps of pre-settlement vegetation (available from ORNHIC for parts of Oregon), and topography. [CQ+]

Historical Hydrologic Connectivity

To answer most of the following questions, you must obtain specific information from web sites or agencies as indicated in the Manual or in the last column (E). In a few cases you may need to also examine aerial imagery. In the Data column (D), change the 0 (false) to a 1 (true) for the best choice, or for multiple choices where allowed and so indicated.

Special Conservation Designations of the Wetland or Local Area

144


136

137

138

139

140

141

142143

144

145

146147148

149

150

151152153

154

155

156157

158

A B C D ED26 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site, the score for occurrences of rare non-

anadromous fish species in the vicinity of this AA is:

high (≥ 0.75 for maximum score, or ≥ 0.90 for this group's score sum), or there is a recent (within 5 yrs) onsite observation of any of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

intermediate (i.e., not as described above or below) 1

low (≤ 0.33 for both the maximum score this group's score sum, but not 0 for both) 0

zero for both this group's maximum and its sum score, and no recent onsite observation of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

D27 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site, the score for occurrences of rare invertebrate species in the vicinity of this AA is: high (≥ 0.75 for maximum score, or for this group's score sum), or there is a recent onsite observation of any of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

low (< 0.75 for maximum score AND for this group's score sum, but not 0 for both) 0zero for both this group's maximum and its sum score, and no recent onsite observation of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

1

D28 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site, the score for occurrences of rare amphibian or reptile species in the vicinity of this AA is: high (≥ 0.60 for maximum score, or >0.90 for score sum), or there is a recent onsite observation of any of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

intermediate (i.e., not as described above or below) 1low (≤ 0.21 for maximum score AND <0.15 for score sum, but not 0 for both) 0zero for both this group's maximum and its sum score, and no recent onsite observation of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

D29 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site, the score for occurrences of rare nesting waterbird species in the vicinity of this AA is: high (≥ 0.60 for maximum score, or ≥1.00 for this group's score sum), or there is a recent onsite observation of any of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

intermediate (i.e., not as described above or below) 0low (≤ 0.09 for maximum score and for score sum, but not 0 for both) 0zero for both this group's maximum and its sum score, and no recent onsite observation of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

1

D30 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site, the score for occurrences of rare non-breeding (feeding) waterbird species in the vicinity of this AA is: high (≥ 0.33 for maximum score, or there is a recent onsite observation of any of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

low (< 0.33 for maximum score and for score sum, but not 0 for both) 0zero for both this group's maximum and its sum score, and no recent onsite observation of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

1

Species include: Painted Turtle (S2), Northwestern Pond Turtle (S2), Clouded Salamander (S3), Oregon Slender Salamander (S2), Larch Mountain Salamander (S2), Siskiyou Mountains Salamander (S2), Cope's Giant Salamander (S2), Cascade Torrent Salamander (S3), Columbia Torrent Salamander (S3), Coastal Tailed Frog (S3), Inland Tailed Frog (S2), Northern Red-legged Frog (S3), Foothill Yellow-legged Frog (S2), Cascades Frog (S3), Northern Leopard Frog (S1), Oregon Spotted Frog (S2), Columbia Spotted Frog (S2), Great Basin Back-collared Lizard (S3), Desert Horned Lizard (S3), Night Snake (S3), Common Kingsnake (S3), Ground Snake (S3). [AMv+]

Species include Pit-Klamath brook lamprey (S3), Miller Lake lamprey (S1), Klamath lamprey (S3), Malheur mottled sculpin (S3), Margined sculpin (S3), Slender sculpin (S3), Alvord chub (S2), Tui chub (S), Borax Lake chub (S1), Speckled dace (SS), Oregon chub (S2), Umpqua chub (S2), Modoc sucker (S1), Klamath smallscale sucker (SS), Warner sucker (S1), Shortnose sucker (S1), Pit Sculpin (S1), Klamath Lake Sculpin (S3), Bull Trout (S3), Blue Chub (S3), Umpqua Dace (S3), Lahontan Redside (S2), Klamath Largescale Sucker (S3), Tahoe Sucker (S1), Lost River Sucker (S1), Sacramento Perch (S3). Note that for some of these species, only specific geographic populations are designated. S1 is the most imperiled, S3 less so, according to ratings by the Oregon Natural Heritage Information Center. [FRv+]

Species include: Red-necked Grebe (S1), Am. White Pelican (S2), Snowy Egret (S2), Barrow's Goldeneye (S3), Bufflehead (S2), Yellow Rail (S1), Sandhill Crane (S3), Snowy Plover (S2), Black-necked Stilt (SS), Long-billed Curlew (S3), Franklin's Gull (S2), Caspian Tern (SS). [WBNv+]

"Non-breeding" mainly refers to waterbird feeding during migration and winter. [WBFv+]Feeding (Non-breeding) Waterbird Species of Conservation Concern

Amphibian or Reptile of Conservation Concern

Nesting Waterbird Species of Conservation Concern

Invertebrate Species of Conservation Concern

Non-anadromous Fish Species of Conservation Concern

145


159

160

161

162

163

164

165166

167

168169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

178179

A B C D ED31 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site, the score for occurrences of rare songbird,

raptor, or mammal species in the vicinity of this AA is:

high (≥ 0.60 for maximum score, or >1.13 for score sum), or there is a recent onsite observation of any of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

intermediate (i.e., not as described above or below) 0

low (≤ 0.09 for maximum score AND <0.13 for score sum, but not 0 for both) 0


1

D32 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site, the score for occurrences of rare plant species in the vicinity of this AA is: high (≥ 0.75 for maximum score, or > 4.00 for score sum), or there is a recent onsite observation of any of these species by a qualified observer under conditions similar to what now occur

0

intermediate (i.e., not as described above or below) 0low (≤ 0.12 for maximum score AND < 0.20 for score sum, but not 0 for both) 0


1

D33 According to the Wetlands Explorer web site:The AA is tidal, or is either (a) not within a 100-yr floodplain of a river, or (b) there are no inhabited buildings or cropland within 2 miles downslope that are within the 100-yr floodplain. Mark "1" then SKIP TO D35.

0

Inhabited buildings within 1 mile downslope from the AA also are within the 100-yr floodplain

1

Croplands but no inhabited buildings are within 1 mile downslope from the AA, and that cropland is also within the 100-yr floodplain

0

Inhabited buildings within 1-2 miles downslope from the AA are also are within the 100-yr floodplain

0

Croplands but no inhabited buildings are within 1-2 miles downslope from the AA, and that cropland is also within the 100-yr floodplain

0

No floodplain data are available, and damage from river floods has not been known to have occurred within 2 miles downgradient. Mark "1" then SKIP to D35.

0

D34

Between the AA and any floodable buildings or cropland located within 2 miles downslope:river flow is regulated and there are many seasonally ponded areas capable of storing water. 0

river flow is regulated or there are many seasonally ponded areas capable of storing water. 0

NONE of the above 1

Downslope Storage

Do not consider pasture or hayfields to be "cropland." See the ORWAP manual for instructions on how to obtain this information online at http://www.oregonexplorer.info/wetlands/ORWAP [WSv+]

[PDv+]

Floodable Property

"Seasonally ponded areas" includes (for example) detention ponds, reservoirs, and depressional wetlands [WSv-]

Songbird, Raptor, Mammal Species of Conservation Concern

Species include: Bald Eagle (SS), Northern Goshawk (S3), Swainson's Hawk (S3), Ferruginous Hawk (S3), Peregrine Falcon (S1), Band-tailed Pigeon (S3), Flammulated Owl (S3), Burrowing Owl (S3), Spotted Owl (S3), Great Gray Owl (S3), Short-Eared Owl (SS), Common Nighthawk (SS), Lewis's Woodpecker (S3), White-Headed Woodpecker (S2), Black-Backed Woodpecker (S3), American Three-toed Woodpecker (S3), Pileated Woodpecker (SS), Olive-sided Flycatcher (S3), Willow Flycatcher (SS), Horned Lark (SS), Purple Martin (S2), White-breasted (Slender-billed) Nuthatch (SS), Blue-gray Gnatcatcher (S3), Varied Thrush (SS), Loggerhead Shrike (S3), Yellow-breasted Chat (SS), Chipping Sparrow (SS), Brewer's Sparrow (SS), Vesper Sparrow (SS), Sage Sparrow (SS), Grasshopper Sparrow (S2), Western Meadowlark (SS), Fringed Myotis (S2), Long-Legged Myotis (S3), California Myotis (S3), Silver-haired Bat (S3), Hoary Bat (S3), Spotted Bat (S2), Townsend's Big-eared Bat (S2), Pallid Bat (S2), Red Tree Vole (S3), Kit Fox (S1), Ringtail (S3), American Marten (S3), Fisher (S2), Columbian White-Tailed Deer (SS) . [SBMv+]

Plant Species of Conservation Concern

146


180

181

182

183

184

185186

187

188

189190191192

193

194

195

196

197198199200

A B C D ED35 According to Wetlands Explorer map showing this AA's position within its HUC4 (8-digit)

watershed, the AA is [see last column and Manual for specific guidance]:

in the upper one-third of its watershed 1

in the middle one-third of its watershed 0

in the lower one-third of its watershed 0

D36 Based on the definition and protocol in the ORWAP manual, the area of the wetland of which this AA is a part, relative to the wetland's contributing area (CA) is:

W

<1% of its CA (true if wetland is tidal, or along major river, or has many tributaries, or gets substantial water drawn from other surface water bodies, e.g., flood irrigation)

1

1 to 10% of its CA 010 to 100% of its CA 0

Larger than the area of its CA (wetland has essentially no CA, e.g., isolated by dikes with no input channels, or is in terrain so flat that a CA can't be delineated). SKIP TO D40.

0

D37 The proportion of the CA comprised of buildings, roads, parking lots, other pavement, exposed bedrock, and other impervious surface is about :

W

>25% 010 to 25% 0<10%, or wetland is tidal 1

D38 The cumulative area of seasonally ponded areas in the same CA is: WMuch (>10x) greater than the area of this wetland (plus any contiguous pond or lake), or inflow is strongly regulated by dams etc.

1

Somewhat greater than the area of this wetland (plus any contiguous pond or lake) and flows to wetland are not strongly regulated

0

Less than the area of this wetland (plus any contiguous pond or lake), or wetland is tidal, or no upslope wetlands/ ponds and no inflow regulation

0

D39 A relatively large proportion of the precipitation that falls farther upslope in the CA reaches this wetland quickly as runoff (surface water), as indicated by the following: (a) input channel is present, (b) CA slopes are steep, (c) input channels have been straightened, (d) upslope wetlands have been ditched extensively, (e) land cover is mostly non-forest, and/or (f) most CA soils are shallow and/or have high runoff coefficients). This statement is:

W

Mostly true 0Somewhat true 0Mostly untrue, or wetland is tidal 1

Contributing Area (CA) Percent

"Seasonally ponded area" includes (for example) detention ponds, reservoirs, and depressional wetlands [WSv-,SRv-,PRv-,NRv-]

Unvegetated Surface in the Contributing Area

Upslope Storage

[WSv+,SRv+,PRv+,NRv+]Transport From Upslope

Relative Elevation in Watershed

1) Which end of the HUC4 is the bottom? Where streams join, the “V” that they form on the map points towards bottom of the HUC.2) If the AA is closer to the HUC4's outlet than to its upper end, and is closer to the river or large stream that exits at the bottom of the HUC4 than it is to the boundary (margin) of the HUC4, then check "lower 1/3” If not near that river, check "middle 1/3".3) If the AA is not in a 100-yr floodplain, is closer to the HUC4 upper end than to its outlet, and is closer to the boundary (margin) of the HUC4 than to the river or large stream that exits at the bottom of the HUC4, then check "upper 1/3” 4) For all other conditions, check "middle 1/3".The CA is basically the upslope area that has the potential to deliver water to the wetland. The CA boundary typically does not cross any streams or ditches except the one at the wetland outlet (if any). Remember that if the wetland is flooded as little as once every 2 years by river flow, the CA includes all upslope areas that feed that river. If the wetland is on the fringe of a pond or lake, compare the area of that water body to its contributing area -- not the area of the wetland compared to only the wetland's contributing area. For most wetlands, and especially ones containing tributaries, the first choice will be the most appropriate. For AA's that are intercepted by a mapped stream, delineation and area calculation for the CA will be done automatically at this USGS web site: http://streamstats.usgs.gov/orstreamstats/index.asp . Enter the coordinates, zoom to scale of 1:24000 or finer, click on the stream, and click on Basin Delineation, then BasinChar. [WSv+,SRv+,PRv+,NRv+, Sens+]

[WSv-,SRv-,PRv-,NRv-]

147


201202203204205206207

208209210211212213

214

215

216217218219220221222223

224

225226

227228229230231232233

A B C D ED40 Within 1 mile upstream from the wetland, at least one of the major sources of surface water

to this wetland (at least seasonally) has been designated as Water Quality Limited (303d) for at least one of the parameters below. Obtain from web site only -- do not guess. Select all that apply.

W

total suspended solids (TSS), sedimentation, or turbidity 0phosphorus 1nitrate or ammonia 0toxics, dioxin, heavy metals (iron, manganese, lead, zinc, etc.) 0temperature 1None of above, or degraded water cannot reach wetland, or no data. 0

D41 Within 1 mile downstream or downslope from this wetland, there is at least one stream or other water body that has been designated as Water Quality Limited (303d) for at least one of the parameters below. The water body need not be connected to the AA. Obtain from web site only -- do not guess. Select all that apply.

W

total suspended solids (TSS), sedimentation, or turbidity 0phosphorus 1nitrate or ammonia 0toxics, dioxin, heavy metals (iron, manganese, lead, zinc, etc.) 0temperature 1None of above, or no data. Mark "1" then SKIP TO D43. 0

D42 At least part of the AA is connected to the downstream 303d water mentioned in D41 above:

for 9 or more continuous months annually (persistent water in a stream, ditch, lake, or other water body)

1

intermittently (at least once annually, but for less than 9 months continually) 0Not connected, or connected less than annually 0

D43 According to the ODEQ LASAR database, the AA is within:the source area for a surface-water drinking water (DW) source 0the source area for a groundwater drinking water source 0Neither of above 1

D44 The AA is (select all that apply):within a designated Groundwater Management Area (ODEQ), see maps in Appendix A of ORWAP manual.

0

within a designated Sole Source Aquifer area (EPA): the North Florence Dunal Aquifer. See map downloadable from: http://oregonstatelands.us/DSL/WETLAND/or_wet_prot.shtml

0

NONE of above 1D45 According to the PRISM Data Explorer (see ORWAP manual for instructions), annual

precipitation in the vicinity of the wetland has normally been:

<10 inches per year 010-12 inches per year 013-19 inches per year 020-47 inches per year 048-77 inches per year 1>77 inches per year 0

[NRv+]

Obtain online as explained in Manual from: http://gisdev.nacse.org/prism/nn/index.phtml These categories reflect the 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentiles of all points in a comprehensive spatial grid of annual precipitation points in Oregon, for the years 1971-2000. [INVv+,AMv+,WBFv+,WBNv+,SBMv+,PDv+,Sens-]

Mean Annual Precipitation

Groundwater Risk Designations

Known Water Quality Issues in the Input Water

See the ORWAP manual (section 2.2.7) for instructions on how to obtain this information online at http://deq12.deq.state.or.us/lasar2/default.aspx [SRv+,PRv+,NRv+,TRv+,INV-,WBF-,WBN-,STR+]

See the ORWAP manual (section 2.2.7) for instructions on how to obtain this information online at http://deq12.deq.state.or.us/lasar2/default.aspx [SRv+,PRv+,NRv+,TRv+,INV-,WBF-,WBN-,STR+]

persistent water= flows for more than 9 months during most years. [SRv+,PRv+,NRv+,TRv+,INV-,WBF-,WBN-,STR+]

See the ORWAP manual (section 2.2.7) for instructions on obtaining this online from http://deq12.deq.state.or.us/lasar2/default.aspx [NRv+]

Drinking Water Source (DEQ)

Known Water Quality Issues Below the Wetland

Type of Outflow Connection to 303d

148


234235236237238

239240241242243244245

246247

248

249250251252253

254

A B C D ED46 The phosphorus loading rank of the county in which the AA is located is: (select one); see

WQprob worksheet in ORWAP SuppInfo file. top 4 in Oregon (Marion, Malheur, Umatilla, Linn) 0top 18 (see Table 6 in WQprob worksheet in file ORWAP_SuppInfo) 1bottom 18 (see Table 6 in WQprob worksheet) 0bottom 4 (Josephine, Hood River, Lincoln, Clatsop) 0

D47 The nitrogen loading rank of the county in which the AA is located is: (select one); see WQprob worksheet in ORWAP SuppInfo file. top 4 in Oregon (Marion, Malheur, Umatilla, Linn) 0top 18 (see Table 7 in WQprob worksheet) 1bottom 18 (see Table 7 in WQprob worksheet) 0bottom 4 (Curry, Josephine, Lincoln, Clatsop) 0

D48 The AA's relative position in the estuary is (SKIP if nontidal):lower 1/3 (often on a bay and distant from the head-of-tide of a major river; includes most saline tidal wetlands)

0

mid 1/3 0upper 1/3 (near the head-of-tide of a major river; includes most brackish and fresh tidal wetlands)

0

D49 The usual maximum water-surface salinity during high tide in summer in the main channel or bay closest to the AA is (SKIP if nontidal):>30 parts per thousand (undiluted seawater) 05-30 ppt (mesohaline, polyhaline) 00.5 - 5 ppt (oligohaline) 0<0.5 ppt (fresh) 0no data for nearby locations found at the ODEQ LASAR web site or from other sources 0

Answer these final two questions only if the AA is tidal.Estuarine Position

County Rank for Phosphorus Loading

If you don't know it, determine which county the wetland is in from the ODEQ web site ttp://deq12.deq.state.or.us/lasar2/default.aspx as explained in Manual. Data used for these rankings are from a national survey by USGS and represent the combined inputs (kg of P per sq. km.) from fertilizer (2001) and livestock (average of the years 1982, 1987, 1992, and 1997). [PRv+]

County Rank for Nitrogen Loading

Refer to Estuary Salinity maps at http://oregonstatelands.us/DSL/WETLAND/or_wet_prot.shtml or (preferably) determine this from field measurement or from data at the ODEQ LASAR web site (see ORWAP manual for instructions on accessing those data). [SR-,PR-,CS+,OE+,FA-,PD-]

Determine county from a map or online from http://deq12.deq.state.or.us/lasar2/default.aspx as explained in Manual. Data used for these rankings are from a national survey by USGS and represent the combined inputs (kg of N per sq. km.) from fertilizer, livestock, and atmospheric deposition of N during 2001. [NRv+]

[WSv+,PR+,PD+]

Salinity

149

FieldS 9/30/2014 Form FieldS version 2.0.2 April 2010 1 of 5

Site Name: Half Mile Lane ILF Mitigation Site Post Assessment Investigator: C. Mirth Walker (with Stacey Reed)

Date: June 10 and 26, 2014

XX

X

Severe (3 points) Medium (2 points) Mild (1 point) Pts

Spatial extent of resulting wetter condition >95% of AA or >95% of its upland edge (if any)

5-95% of AA or 5-95% of its upland edge (if any)

<5% of AA and <5% of its upland edge (if any)

2

When most of AA's wetter condition began <3 yrs ago 3-9 yrs ago 10-100 yrs ago 3

Score the following 2 rows only if the wetter conditions began within past 10 years, and only for the part of the AA that got wetter.

Inundation now vs. previously persistent vs. seldom persistent vs. seasonal slightly longer or more often 3

Average water level increase >1 ft 6-12" <6 inches 2

sum= 10

final score= 4

Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pts) Mild (1 pt) Pts

Spatial extent of resulting wetter condition >20% of the AA 5-20% of the AA <5% of the AA 0

When most of AA's wetter condition began <3 yrs ago 3-9 yrs ago 10-100 yrs ago 0

Score the following 2 rows only if the wetter conditions began within past 10 years, and only for the part of the AA that got wetter.

Inundation now vs. previously persistent vs. seldom persistent vs. seasonal slightly longer or more often 0

Average water level increase >1 ft 6-12" <6 inches 0

sum= 0final score= 0

S1

S2

changes not related directly to humans, e.g., beaverIf any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below, assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items in creating a wetter water regime that still persists in the AA. To estimate that, contrast it with the condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present. The sum and final score will compute automatically.

If any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below, assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items in creating a wetter water regime in the AA. To estimate that, contrast it with the condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present.

Wetter Water Regime - Internal CausesIn the last column, place an X next to any item that is likely to have caused a part of the AA to be inundated more extensively, more frequently, more deeply, and/or for longer duration than it would be without that item or activity. (The items you check are not used automatically by ORWAP. They are included simply so they may be considered when evaluating the factors in the table beneath them).

an impounding dam, dike, levee, weir, berm, road fill, or tidegate -- within or downgradient from the AA, or raising of outlet culvert elevation.

plugging of ditches or drain tile that otherwise would drain the AA (as part of intentional restoration, or due to lack of maintenance, sedimentation, etc.)

excavation within the AA, e.g., artificial pond, dead-end ditch

vegetation removal (e.g., logging) within the AA

Field S data form. ORWAP version 2.0.2 May 2012

0 if Sum= 0, (1 pt) if Sum= 1-4. (2 pt) if 5-6. (3 pt) if 7-8. (4 pt) if 9-10. (5 pt) if >10.


excavation or reflooding of upland soils that adjoined the AA, thus expanding the area of the AA

removal of a water control structure or blockage in tributary upstream from the AA

compaction (e.g., ruts) and/or subsidence of the AA's substrate as a result of machinery, livestock, or off road vehicles

changes in the CA that are not related directly to humans, e.g., channel migration, landslides, forest die-offs, seismic activity

removal of timber or phreatophytes in the CA or along the AA's tributaries

In the last column, place an X next to any item occurring in the CA (including channels flowing into the AA) that is likely to have caused a part of the AA to be inundated more extensively, more frequently, more deeply, and/or for longer duration than it would be without that item or activity. Remember that if the AA is flooded as little as once every 2 years by river flow, the CA includes all upstream areas of that river.

pavement, ditches, or drain tile in the CA that incidentally increase the transport of water into the AA

* Score these 2 rows only for the part of the AA that got wetter, and only if the wetter conditions began within past 10 yrs

Wetter Water Regime - External Causes

subsidies from stormwater, wastewater effluent, septic system leakage, or irrigation water (direct or via seepage)

* Score this row only for the part of the AA that got wetter, and only if the wetter conditions began within past 10 yrs

150


Drier Water Regime - Internal Causes

Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pt) Mild (1 pt)

Spatial extent of AA's resulting drier condition >95% of AA or >95% of its upland edge (if any)

5-95% of AA or 5-95% of its upland edge (if any)

<5% of AA and <5% of its upland edge (if any)

0

When most of AA's drier condition began <3 yrs ago 3-9 yrs ago 10-100 yrs ago 0

Score the following 2 rows only if the drier conditions began within past 10 years, and only for the part of the AA that got drier.Inundation now vs. previously seldom vs. persistent seasonal vs. persistent slightly shorter or less often 0

Water level decrease >1 ft 6-12" <6 inches 0


Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pts) Mild (1 pt)Spatial extent of AA's resulting drier condition >20% of the AA 5-20% of the AA <5% of the AA 0

When most of AA;s drier condition began <3 yrs ago 3-9 yrs ago 10-100 yrs ago 0

Score the following 2 rows only if the drier conditions began within past 10 years, and only for the part of the AA that got drier.

Inundation now vs. previously seldom vs. persistent seasonal vs. persistent slightly shorter or less often 0

Water level decrease >1 ft 1-12" <1 inch 0


S3

S4

changes not related directly to humans

instream water withdrawals from tributaries whose water would otherwise reach the AA

ditches or drain tile in the AA or along its edge that accelerate outflow from the AA lowering or enlargement of a surface water exit point (e.g., culvert) or modification of a water level control structure, resulting in quicker drainage

Drier Water Regime - External CausesIn the last column, place an X next to any item within the CA (including channels flowing into the AA) that is likely to have caused a part of the AA to be inundated less extensively, less deeply, less frequently, and/or for shorter duration that it would be without those.

If any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items in creating a drier water regime in the AA. To estimate that, contrast it with the condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present.

proliferation of phreatophytes (woody plants with deep roots and high transpiration, e.g., juniper, autumn olive) or crops with high transpiration rates that are near the AA

accelerated downcutting or channelization of an adjacent or internal channel (cut below the historical water table level)

withdrawals (e.g., pumping) of natural surface or ground water directly out of the AA (not its tributaries) placement of fill material

groundwater withdrawals that divert water that would otherwise reach the AA

relocation of natural tributaries whose water would otherwise reach the AA a dam, dike, levee, weir, berm, or tidegate that interferes with natural inflow to the AA

deep ripping (e.g., with plows) that severs an underlying hydrologically-confining soil layer


If any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items in creating a drier water regime in the AA. To estimate that, contrast it with the condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present.


In the last column, place an X next to any item located within or immediately adjacent to the AA, that is likely to have caused a part of the AA to be inundated less extensively, less deeply, less frequently, and/or for shorter duration that it would be without that item.

151


Altered Timing of Water Inputs

Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pts) Mild (1 pt)Spatial extent within the AA of timing shift >95% of AA 5-95% of AA <5% of AA 0

When most of the timing shift began <3 yrs ago 3-9 yrs ago 10-100 yrs ago 0

Score the following 2 rows only if the altered inputs began within past 10 years, and only for the part of the AA that experiences those.

Input timing now vs. previously shift of weeks shift of days shift of hours or minutes 0

Flashiness or muting became very flashy or controlled

intermediate became mildly flashy or controlled

0


X

Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pts) Mild (1 pt)

Usual toxicity of most toxic contaminants industrial effluent or 303d* for toxics

domestic effluent, cropland, or 303d for nutrients

mildly impacting (livestock, pets, low density residential)

2

Frequency & duration of input frequent and year-round frequent but mostly seasonal infrequent & during high runoff events mainly

2

AA proximity to main sources (actual or potential) 0-50 ft 50-300 ft or in groundwater in other part of contributing area

2


S5

S60 if Sum= 0, (1 pt) if Sum= 1-4. (2 pt) if 5-6. (3 pt) if 7-8. (4 pt) if 9-10. (5 pt) if >10.

0 if Sum= 0, (1 pt) if Sum= 1-3. (2 pt) if 4-5. (3 pt) if 6-7. (4 pt) if 8. (5 pt) if 9.

fertilizers applied to lawns, ag lands, or other areas in the CA

dumping of large amounts of wood, leaves, grass clippings, trash into the AA or its tributaries artificial drainage of upslope lands

stormwater or wastewater effluent (including failing septic systems), landfillsIn the last column, place an X next to any item -- occurring in either the AA or its CA -- that is likely to have accelerated the inputs of nutrients, contaminants, or salts to the AA

* categorized by ODEQ as Water Quality Limited (303d) and toxic substances are listed by ODEQ as one reason. See item D40 in data form OF.

increased pavement and other impervious surface in the CA

reflooding of soils that had been dry for many years fire retardants from aerial firefighting

straightening, ditching, dredging, and/or lining of tributary channels in the CA discharges of irrigation water to the AA, applied at times when natural runoff typically is not significant

irrigation water discharges into the AA, including saline seeps

erosion of nutrient-rich or contaminated soils

Accelerated Inputs of Nutrients, Contaminants, and/or Salts

In the last column, place an X next to any item that is likely to have caused the timing of water inputs (but not necessarily their volume) to shift by hours, days, or weeks, becoming either more muted (smaller or less frequent peaks spread over longer times, more temporal homogeneity of flow or water levels) or more flashy (larger or more frequent spikes but over shorter times).

otherIf any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items on the timing of water inputs to the AA. To estimate that, contrast it with the condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present.

flow regulation in tributaries or water level regulation in adjoining water body, or tidegate or other control structure at water entry points that regulates inflow to the AA

livestock, dogs

other human-related disturbances within the CA sources not related directly to humans, e.g., fire, extensive cover of nitrogen-fixing plants (e.g., alder), concentrations of waterbirds or other wildlifeIf any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items in generating loads of nutrients, contaminants, or salts reaching the AA. To estimate that, contrast it with the condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present.

chemical wastes from mining, oil/ gas extraction, other industrial sources

oil or chemical spills (not just chronic inputs) from nearby roads

pesticides applied to lawns, ag lands, roadsides, or other areas in the CA, but excluding spot applications for controlling non-natives in the AA

152


Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pts) Mild (1 pt)Erosion in CA extensive evidence, high

intensity*potentially (based on high-

intensity* land use) or scattered evidence

potentially (based on low-intensity* land use) with little

or no direct evidence

0

Recentness of significant soil disturbance in the CA current & ongoing 1-12 months ago >1 yr ago 0

Duration of sediment inputs to the AA frequent and year-round frequent but mostly seasonal infrequent & during high runoff events mainly

0

AA proximity to actual or potential sources 0-50 ft, or farther but on steep erodible slopes

50-300 ft in other part of contributing area

0

sum= 0

final score= 0

Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pts) Mild (1 pt)Spatial extent of altered soil >95% of AA or >95% of its

upland edge (if any)5-95% of AA or 5-95% of its

upland edge (if any)<5% of AA and <5% of its

upland edge (if any)0

Recentness of significant soil alteration in AA current & ongoing 1-12 months ago >1 yr ago 0

Duration long-lasting, minimal veg recovery

long-lasting but mostly revegetated

short-term, revegetated, not intense

0

Timing of soil alteration frequent and year-round frequent but mostly seasonal infrequent & mainly during scattered events

0

sum= 0

final score= 0

S7

S8

In the last column, place an X next to any item present in the CA that is likely to have elevated the load of waterborne or windborne sediment reaching the AA from its CA. erosion from plowed fields, fill, timber harvest, dirt roads, vegetation clearing, fires

other human-related disturbances within the CA

erosion from livestock or foot traffic in the CA stormwater or wastewater effluent sediment from gravel mining, other mining, oil/ gas extraction

erosion from construction, in-channel machinery in the CA

Excessive Sediment Loading from Contributing Area

excavation

accelerated channel downcutting or headcutting of tributaries due to altered land use

erosion from off-road vehicles in the CA

natural processes within the CA, e.g., streambank erosion, landslides, erosion of erosion-prone soils especially following fire, floods


If any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items in increasing the amount or transport of sediment into the AA. To estimate that, contrast it with the condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present.

livestock and other sediment- or soil-disturbing animals, e.g., carp, nutria, wild boar, people on foot fill or riprap, excluding small amounts of upland soils containing organic amendments (compost, etc.) or small amounts of topsoil imported from another wetland tillage, plowing (but excluding disking for enhancement of native plants)

If any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items in altering the AA's soils. To estimate that, contrast it with the soil condition if checked items never occurred or were no longer present.

* high-intensity= plowing, grading, excavation, erosion with or without veg removal; low-intensity= veg removal only with little or no apparent erosion or disturbance of soil or sediment

artificial water level or flow manipulations sufficient to cause erosion or stir bottom sediments

Soil or Sediment Alteration Within the Assessment AreaIn the last column, place an X next to any item present in the AA that is likely to have compacted, eroded, or otherwise altered the AA's soil compaction from machinery, off-road vehicles, or mountain bikes, especially during wetter periods leveling or other grading not to the natural contour

dredging in or adjacent to the AA boat traffic in or adjacent to the AA and sufficient to cause shore erosion or stir bottom sediments


natural processes within the AA, e.g., trampling by concentrated wildlife, shore or streambank erosion, landslides, normal erosion of erosion-prone soils especially following fire, floods.

153


Severe (3 pts) Medium (2 pts) Mild (1 pt)Spatial extent of veg removal >95% of AA or >95% of its

water edge5-95% of AA or 5-95% of its water

edge<5% of AA and <5% of its

water edge if any0

Frequency of significant veg removal regularly during most of the year

a few times a year annual or less 0

Biomass recovery after each removal > 20 yrs 2-20 yrs <2 yrs 0


S9

If any items were checked above, then for each row of the table below assign points (3, 2, or 1) in the last column that describe the combined maximum effect of those items on the amount of vegetation cover in the AA.

removal of woody debris

natural processes concentrated within the AA, e.g., wind & wave scouring, windthrow, insect or disease infestations, fires, beaver damage, natural erosion, intensive grazing by deer, elk, geese.

plowing, regrading

0 if Sum= 0, (1 pt) if Sum= 1-3. (2 pt) if 4-5. (3 pt) if 6-7. (4 pt) if 8. (5 pt) if 9.

Vegetated Cover Removal Within the Assessment Area

herbicides, excepting spot applications for controlling non-native plants in the AA

shading from large artificial structure, e.g., bridge, boardwalk, dock other human-related disturbances within the AA

In the last column, place an X next to any item present in the AA that is likely to have caused less canopy or ground cover, or less vegetation biomass, or less wood generally. If only the species composition (not total cover or biomass) changed, do not check any of these items.

mowing

clearing, logging, excepting removal of woody vegetation from native prairies grazing by livestock

154


367368369370371372

373374375376377

378379380

381382383384385

386387388389390391

392

393394395396

A B C D EF77 Within 100 ft upslope of the AA's wetland-upland boundary, the percent of the upland that

contains natural (not necessarily native) land cover is:

>90%, or there is no upland boundary 060 to 90% 030 to 60% 15 to 30% 0<5% 0

F78 Within 100 ft upslope of the AA's wetland-upland boundary, the upland land cover that is not natural (as defined above) is mostly:

impervious surface, e.g., paved road, parking lot, building, exposed rock 0bare pervious surface, e.g., dirt road, dike, dunes, recent clearcut, landslide 0cultivated row crops or orchard 1artificially landscaped areas or lawn 0grain fields, or grassland grazed or mowed to a height usually shorter than 4 inches 0

other 0(buffer is >90% natural land cover or AA occupies all of an island) 0

F79 Along the AA's wetland-upland boundary and extending 100 ft uphill, the slope of the land is mostly:<1% (flat -- almost no noticeable slope, or there is no upland boundary) 02-5% 15-30% 0>30% 0

F80 Within 10 ft of ponded surface water (if any) in early summer, the percent of the herbaceous area (wetland or upland) that has a gentle or moderate slope (less than 5% slope) is:

>75% 150-75% 025-50% 01-25% 0<1%, 0 (ponded surface water in early summer covers <1% of AA, or AA is tidal, or no herbaceous vegetation is present near ponded water)

0

F81 How likely is it that any or all of this AA will persist as a wetland (not necessarily of the same type) if an existing dike or berm, water control structure (e.g., dam, weir), or pumping/ diversion system that now helps sustain it -- and is within 1 mile of the AA -- was removed or became inoperable?

Very likely, or no such feature is present (greater sustainability potential) 1Somewhat likely -- part but not all of the AA would remain a wetland 0Unlikely or not at all (lower sustainability potential) 0

Natural Land Cover in Buffer

Independently Sustainable Hydrology

Buffer Slope

Edge Slope

Type of Land Cover Alteration in Buffer

[INV-,FA-,AM-,WBN-,SBM-,PD-,STR+]

See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. If several isolated pools are present in early summer, estimate the percent of their collective shorelines that has such a gentle slope. [AM-,WBN-]

If all such human activities and structures disappeared, would the site still be a wetland? [WSv,SRv,PRv,NRv,INVv,AMv,WBFv,WBNv,SBMv,PDv+]

Natural land cover includes wooded areas, sagebrush, vegetated wetlands, prairies, as well as relatively unmanaged commercial lands such as hayfields, lightly grazed pastures, and most rangeland. It does not include water, row crops (vegetable, orchards, Christmas tree farms), residential areas, lawn, pavement, bare soil, gravel or dirt roads. Natural land cover is not the same as native vegetation or undisturbed soil. It frequently includes a dominance of non-native plants (e.g., ryegrass, Himalayan blackberry). If the entire site is an island without an upland edge, select the last choice. [POL+,INV+,FA+,FR+,AM+,WBN+,SBM+,PD+,Sens-]

See diagram in Appendix A of the manual. If the described area contains a disturbance feature, estimate instead the slope between the wetland-upland boundary and the most extensive such feature. Disturbance feature = building, paved area, recently cleared area, dirt road, lawn, intensely grazed pasture, orchard, vineyard, annually-harvested row crops [Sens+]

155

orwap_calculator_v2.0.2_May_2012_HalfMileLane_2014_0930.xls Scores 9/30/2014

ORWAP SCORES SHEET version 2.0.2 May 2012Site Name:Investigator Name:Date of Field Assessment:Latitude (decimal degrees):

Specific Functions:Relative Effectiveness of

the FunctionRelative Values of the Function

Water Storage & Delay (WS) 2.96 6.67Sediment Retention & Stabilization (SR) 5.38 4.77Phosphorus Retention (PR) 8.34 6.58Nitrate Removal & Retention (NR) 5.13 6.26Thermoregulation (T) 2.94 10.00Carbon Sequestration (CS) 2.92Organic Matter Export (OE) 6.34Aquatic Invertebrate Habitat (INV) 6.02 6.59Anadromous Fish Habitat (FA) 6.59 10.00Non-anadromous Fish Habitat (FR) 3.78 6.67Amphibian & Reptile Habitat (AM) 4.33 6.67Waterbird Feeding Habitat (WBF) 5.51 4.00Waterbird Nesting Habitat (WBN) 5.05 3.00Songbird, Raptor, & Mammal Habitat (SBM) 6.30 4.00Pollinator Habitat (POL) 7.62 4.17Native Plant Diversity (PD) 6.81 6.00

GROUPED FUNCTIONS Group Scores (functions)Group Scores

(values)Hydrologic Function (WS) 2.96 6.67Water Quality Group (WQ) 8.34 10.00Carbon Sequestration (CS) 2.92Fish Support Group (FISH) 6.59 10.00Aquatic Support Group (AQ) 6.34 6.67Terrestrial Support Group (TERR) 7.62 6.00Public Use & Recognition (PU) 4.52Provisioning Services (PS) 0.00

OTHER ATTRIBUTESWetland Ecological Condition (CQ) 3.98Wetland Stressors (STR) 5.49Wetland Sensitivity (SEN) 5.83

HGM Class - Relative Probabilities (select max)

Estuarine 0.00Riverine 5.50Slope 2.69Flat 0.00Depressional 0.00Lacustrine 0.00

Half Mile Lane ILF Mitigation Site Post AssessmC. Mirth Walker and Stacey ReedJune 10 and 26, 201445.548618

156

orwap_calculator_v2.0.2_May_2012_HalfMileLane_2014_0930.xls Scores 9/30/2014

Longitude (decimal degrees):

(identical to Water Storage and Delay function and value scores)(maximum of scores for SR, PR, NR, and T)

(maximum of scores for OE, AM, INV, WBF, and WBN)(maximum of scores for FA and FR)

(click on this cell to see this attribute defined)(click on this cell to see this attribute defined)

(maximum of scores for PD, POL, and SBM)

(identical to Carbon Sequestration score above)

ment

-123.186508

157

9,028

0.3

Half Mile Lane Post Restoration; Assessment Area

This map is a user generated static output from the Oregon Explorer MapViewer (http://tools.oregonexplorer.info/oe_map_viewer/Viewer.html?

Viewer=OE) and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map mayor may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.

6,500

© Oregon Explorer (http://oregonexplorer.info)

0.2

THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION

1:

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere

Miles0.20 0.10

NotesCompleted by Dana Hicks, DSL, May 19, 2014

LegendHydrologic Boundaries: 4th Level (HUC8)Rivers (1:100k) (Framework)Streams (Framework)States & Provinces

Other States and ProvincesOregon

36,112

1.1

Half Mile Lane Post Restoration; Contributing Area

This map is a user generated static output from the Oregon Explorer MapViewer (http://tools.oregonexplorer.info/oe_map_viewer/Viewer.html?

Viewer=OE) and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map mayor may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.

26,001

© Oregon Explorer (http://oregonexplorer.info)

0.8

THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION

1:

WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere

Miles0.80 0.41

NotesCompleted by Dana Hicks, DSL, May 19, 2014

LegendHydrologic Boundaries: 4th Level (HUC8)Rivers (1:100k) (Framework)Streams (Framework)States & Provinces

Other States and ProvincesOregon

Documents

· DSL In-Lieu Fee Program 2014 Report Introduction The DSL In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Program instrument was approved on February 2, 2009 and provides the framework for how the ILF Program