DOCSLIB.ORG

I/ General Description and Characterization of the NBS Entity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I/ General Description and Characterization of the NBS Entity > Water > Constructed wetlands and built structures for water management > SWALE I/ General description and characterization of the NBS entity I.1 Definition and different variants existing Definition Swales are broad, shallow, earthen channels designed to slow runoff, promote infiltration, and filter pollutants and sediments in the process of conveying runoff. Swales are often densely planted with a variety of trees, shrubs, and grasses along the bottom and sides of the channel. Two primary vegetated swale design variations exist: dry swales and wet swales. Dry swales: Wet swales: Dry swales are designed with highly Wet swales are essentially linear wetland cells. Their permeable soils and an underdrain to allow design often incorporates shallow, permanent pools the entire stormwater volume to convey or or marshy conditions that can sustain wetland infiltrate away from the surface of the swale vegetation, which in turn provides potentially high shortly after storm events. Dry swales may pollutant removal. A high water table or poorly be designed with check dams that act as flow drained soils are a prerequisite for wet swales. The spreaders and encourage sheet flow along drawback with wet swales, at least in residential or the swale. Because of their highly permeable commercial settings, is that they may promote soil and conveyance capability, dry swales mosquito breeding in the shallow standing water. are more applicable for urban environments. Infiltration is minimal. Dry swale Wet swale (Source: Sustainable storm water management) (Source: Sustainable storm water management) 1 / 5 Grass swales: Enhanced Vegetated Swales: Grass swales are essentially conventional In addition to the required elements of a Vegetated drainage ditches. They typically have milder Swale, the Enhanced Vegetated Swale includes an side and longitudinal slopes than their aggregate bed or trench, wrapped in a non-woven vegetated counterparts. Grass swales are geotextile, which substantially increases volume usually less expensive than vegetated control and water quality performance, although swales. However, they provide far less costs also are increased. infiltration and pollutant removal opportunities. Design of grass swales is often rate-based, as opposed to volume-based. Vegetated swales along residential area (left) and along road (right) (Source: Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Manual) I.2 Urban challenges and sub-challenges related + impacts Main challenges 02| Water management and quality - Removal of urban pollutants through and sub-challenges > 02-1 Urban water management infiltration and vegetative filtering targeted by the > 02-2 Flood management - Reduction of runoff rates and volumes NBS (by increasing flow path lengths and channel roughness) -Decrease of stormwater volume through infiltration Co-benefits and 04| Biodiversity and urban space - Local wild grass and flower species can challenges > 04-1 Biodiversity be introduced for visual interest and to foreseen > 04-2 Urban space development and provide a wildlife habitat regeneration - Swales catch pollutants, which are > 04-3 Urban space management concentrated into a limited and dedicated 05| Soil management zones > 05-1 Soil management and quality Possible negative - - effects 2 / 5 II/ More detailed information on the NBS entity II.1 Description and implication at different spatial scales Scale at which the The NBS is implemented at the neighbourhood scale. Published standards suggest NBS is implemented that the optimal length of vegetated swales is between 30m and 60m (local scale). Impacted scales Neighbourhood scale. II.2 Temporal perspective (including management issues) Expected time for The NBS is directly effective right after its implementation. the NBS to become fully effective after its implementation Life time The lifetime is generally large, around 50 years (The Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association, 1997). Sustainability and A priori, no major impact associated with the life cycle of the NBS. The use phase is life cycle the phase most likely to generate impacts (for example, positive impacts regarding the services provided by the NBS). Management Compared to other stormwater management measures, the required upkeep of aspects (kind of vegetated swales is relatively low. In general, maintenance strategies for swales interventions + focus on sustaining both the hydraulic and pollutant removal efficiency of the intensity) channel, as well as maintaining a dense vegetative cover. Interventions occurring annually (semi-annually the first year) or 48 hours after every major storm event include: - Inspecting and correcting erosion problems, damage to vegetation, and sediment and debris accumulation - Inspecting vegetation on side slopes for erosion and formation of rills or gullies - Inspecting for pools of standing water; dewater and discharge to a sanitary sewer - Mowing and trimming vegetation to ensure safety, aesthetics, proper swale operation, or to suppress weeds and invasive vegetation - Soil clogging by sediments and possible scraping - Inspecting for litter; to be removed prior to mowing - Inspecting for uniformity in cross-section and longitudinal slope - Inspecting swale inlet (curb cuts, pipes, etc.) and outlet for signs of erosion or blockage II.3 Stakeholders involved / social aspects Stakeholders Landowner (private or public) involved in the decision process Technical - Specialized green spaces management firms and gardeners: easy NBS to stakeholders & implement (mechanical digger) networks - The technical stakeholders network for this kind of NBS is well identified Social aspects No particular social bottleneck II.4 Design / techniques/ strategy Knowledge and know- A major concern when designing vegetated swales is to make sure that how involved excessive stormwater flows, slope, and other factors do not combine to produce Or key points for erosive flows, which exceed vegetated swale capabilities. Use of check dams success can enhance swale performance in such situations. Materials involved - If the infiltration capacity is compromised during construction, the first several feet shall be removed and replaced with a blend of topsoil and sand to promote infiltration and biological growth. - Natural wood OR sand, gravel, and sandy loam or stones for check dams, gravel and pipes for underdrain system, if required - Seed and vegetate: dense and diverse selection of native, close-growing, water-resistant plants with high pollutant removal potential. 3 / 5 II.5 Legal aspects related In France, rainwater management is regulated by several articles of the civil code. In particular, some areas have to delimited: • areas for which soil sealing must be limited, • areas for which collection, storage or even treatment are necessary, • flood risk areas (in order to implement flood prevention practices). II.6 Funding Economical aspects Range of cost The cost of installing and maintaining swales varies widely with design variability, local labour / material rates, real estate value, and contingencies. In general, swales are considered relatively low cost control measures. The Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association (1997) gives construction costs (per linear foot) from $4.50 to $8.50 (from seed) or from $15 to $20 (from sod), annual operations and maintenance costs (per linear foot) of $0.75, and a total annual cost (per linear foot) from $1 (from seed) to $2 (from sod). Costs, which include activities such as clearing, grubbing, levelling, filling, and sodding (if required), may range from $8.50 to $50.00 per linear foot depending on swale depth and bottom width (South-eastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, 1991). Origin of the funds Depending of the owner of the land (can be public or private). (public, private, public- private, other) II.7 Possible combinations with other kinds of solutions (other environmental friendly solutions or conventional ones) Check dams and berms can be installed across the flow path of a swale in order to promote settling and infiltration. Check dams are recommended for vegetated swales with longitudinal slopes greater than 3%. Check-dams create a series of small, temporary pools along the length of the swale, which make it much more effective at mitigating runoff. The frequency and design of check- dams in a swale will depend on the swale length and slope, as well as the desired amount of storage/treatment volume. Check dams along a vegetated swale (Source: Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Manual) 4 / 5 III/ Key elements and comparison with alternative solutions III.1 Success and limiting factors Success factors - The effectiveness of a vegetated swale is directly related to the contributing land use, the size of the drainage area, the soil type, slope, drainage area imperviousness, proposed vegetation, and the swale dimensions. - Swales are most efficient when their cross-sections are parabolic or trapezoidal in nature. Swale side slopes are best within a range of 3:1 to 4:1 and shall never be greater than 2:1 for ease of maintenance and side inflow from sheet flow. - Swales are easy to incorporate into landscaping - Low capital cost - Maintenance can be incorporated into general landscape management - Pollution and blockages are visible and easily dealt with. Limiting factors - The soil base for a vegetated swale must provide stability and adequate support for proposed vegetation. When the existing site soil is deemed unsuitable (clayey, rocky, coarse sands, etc.) to support dense vegetation, replacing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Field Indicators of Hydric Soils
    United States Department of Field Indicators of Agriculture Natural Resources Hydric Soils in the Conservation Service United States In cooperation with A Guide for Identifying and Delineating the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Hydric Soils, Version 8.2, 2018 Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States A Guide for Identifying and Delineating Hydric Soils Version 8.2, 2018 (Including revisions to versions 8.0 and 8.1) United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils Edited by L.M. Vasilas, Soil Scientist, NRCS, Washington, DC; G.W. Hurt, Soil Scientist, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL; and J.F. Berkowitz, Soil Scientist, USACE, Vicksburg, MS ii In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident. Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
    [Show full text]
  • South Fox Meadow Drainage Improvement Project
    VILLAGE OF SCARSDALE WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK COMPREHENSIVE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT SOUTH FOX MEADOW STORMWATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT In association with WESTCHESTER COUNTY FLOOD MITIGATION PROGRAM Rob DeGiorgio, P.E., CPESC, CPSWQ The Bronx River Watershed Fox Meadow Brook Bronx River Watershed Area in Westchester 48.3 square miles (30,932 acres) 15 Sub-watersheds Percent of undeveloped land in the Watershed 3.3% (0.8 acres in Fox Meadow Brook (FMB) FMB watershed) 928 acres (5.7% of watershed) Bronx River Watershed Fox Meadow Brook George Field Park High School Duck Pond Project Philosophy and Goals •Provide flood mitigation within the Fox Meadow Brook Drainage Basin. •Reduce peak run off rates in the Bronx River Watershed through dry detention storage. •Rehabilitate and preserve natural landscapes and wetlands through invasive species management and re- construction. •Improve water quality. • Petition for and obtain County grant funding to subsidize the project. Village of Scarsdale Fox Meadow Brook Watershed SR-2 BR-4 SR-3 BR-7 BR-8 SR-5 Village of Scarsdale History •In 2009 the Village completed a Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan. •Critical Bronx River sub drainage basin areas identified inclusive of Fox Meadow Brook (BR-4, BR-7, BR-8). •26 Capital Improvement Projects were identified, several of which comprise the Fox Meadow Detention Improvement Project. •Project included in Village’s Capital Budget. •Project has been reviewed by the NYS DEC. •NYS EFC has approved financing for the project granting Scarsdale a 50% subsidy for their local share of the costs. Village of Scarsdale Site Locations – 7 Segments 7 Project Segments 1.
    [Show full text]
  • WATER-QUALITY SWALES Maria Cahill, Derek C
    OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION SERVICE Photo: Clean Water Services LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT FACT SHEET WATER-QUALITY SWALES Maria Cahill, Derek C. Godwin, and Jenna H. Tilt most Oregon jurisdictions have moved away from grass. hink of a water-quality swale as a rain garden Design elements may vary in several aspects, including in motion: It treats runoff while simultaneously function, vegetation type, and physical setting. Tmoving it from one place to another. The terms “rain garden” and “swale” are often used Water-quality swales (WQ swales) are linear, vegetat- interchangeably, but rain gardens hold runoff and treat ed, channeled depressions in the landscape that convey it, while swales treat runoff as it is conveyed. Depending and treat runoff from a variety of surfaces. Runoff may on the design, the resulting water-quality benefits can be piped or channeled, or it may flow overland to a differ greatly, but water-quality swales generally provide swale. As water passes through the swale, some runoff lower benefit than rain gardens or stormwater planters. may infiltrate, or seep, into the soil. Not all swales are WQ swales. Conveyance swales, Maria Cahill, principal, Green Girl Land Development Solutions; such as ditches, move water from one place to another. Derek Godwin, watershed management faculty, professor, But these are likely narrow channels with no vegetation biological and ecological engineering, College of Agricultural Sciences, Oregon State University; Jenna H. Tilt, assistant and little to no water-quality benefits. WQ swales may be professor (senior research), College of Earth, Ocean, and planted either with grass or landscape plants, although Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University EM 9209 June 2018 Site conditions The channel and linear design of swales make them suitable for roadside runoff capture, although residen- tial areas with frequent, closely spaced driveway cul- verts may not be ideal locations (Barr 2001).
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Lumber (Little Pee Dee) and Waccamaw Rivers
    Natural vegetation of the Carolinas: Classification and Description of Plant Communities of the Lumber (Little Pee Dee) and Waccamaw Rivers A report prepared for the Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources in partial fulfillments of contract D07042. By M. Forbes Boyle, Robert K. Peet, Thomas R. Wentworth, Michael P. Schafale, and Michael Lee Carolina Vegetation Survey Curriculum in Ecology, CB#3275 University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC 27599‐3275 Version 1. May 19, 2009 1 INTRODUCTION The riverine and associated vegetation of the Waccamaw, Lumber, and Little Pee Rivers of North and South Carolina are ecologically significant and floristically unique components of the southeastern Atlantic Coastal Plain. Stretching from northern Scotland County, NC to western Brunswick County, NC, the Lumber and northern Waccamaw Rivers influence a vast amount of landscape in the southeastern corner of NC. Not far south across the interstate border, the Lumber River meets the Little Pee Dee River, influencing a large portion of western Horry County and southern Marion County, SC before flowing into the Great Pee Dee River. The Waccamaw River, an oddity among Atlantic Coastal Plain rivers in that its significant flow direction is southwest rather that southeast, influences a significant portion of the eastern Horry and eastern Georgetown Counties, SC before draining into Winyah Bay along with the Great Pee Dee and several other SC blackwater rivers. The Waccamaw River originates from Lake Waccamaw in Columbus County, NC and flows ~225 km parallel to the ocean before abrubtly turning southeast in Georgetown County, SC and dumping into Winyah Bay.
    [Show full text]
  • Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater, and Related Habitats of the United States (Version 3)
    Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater, and Related Habitats of the United States (version 3) U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE - ECOLOGICAL SERVICES DIVISION OF BUDGET AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT BRANCH OF GEOSPATIAL MAPPING AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT FALLS CHURCH, VA 2204 REVISED JULY 2020 1 Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their support and contributions: Bill Kirchner, USFWS, Region 1, Portland, OR; Elaine Blok, USFWS, Region 8, Portland, OR Brian Huberty, USFWS, Region 3, Twin Cities, MN; Ralph Tiner, USFWS, Region 5, Hadley, MA: Kevin Bon, USFWS, Region 6, Denver, CO; Jerry Tande, USFWS, Region 7, Anchorage, AK; Julie Michaelson, USFWS, Region 7, Anchorage, AK; Norm Mangrum, USFWS, St. Petersburg, FL; Dennis Fowler, USFWS, St. Petersburg, FL; Jim Terry, USFWS, St. Petersburg, FL; Martin Kodis, USFWS, Chief - Branch of Resources and Mapping Support, Washington, D.C. and David J. Stout, USFWS, Chief - Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation, Washington, D.C. Peer review was provided by the following subject matter experts: Dr. Shawna Dark and Danielle Bram, California State University - Northridge. Robb Macleod, Ducks Unlimited, Great Lakes and Atlantic Regional Office, Ann Arbor, MI; Michael Kjellson, Dept. Wildlife and Fisheries, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD; and Deborah (Jane) Awl, Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, TN. This document may be referenced as: Dahl, T.E., J. Dick, J. Swords, and B.O. Wilen. 2020. Data Collection Requirements and Procedures for Mapping Wetland, Deepwater and Related Habitats of the United States. Division of Habitat and Resource Conservation (version 3), National Wetlands Inventory, Madison, WI. 91 p.
    [Show full text]
  • National Wetlands Inventory
    3/23/2016 Wetlands Mapper National Wetlands Inventory Ecological Services ES Home About Us Species Wildlife and Habitat Conservation Development and Energy FWS Regions Library Newsroom NWI Menu Wetlands Mapper NWI Home The Wetlands Mapper integrates digital map data with other resource information to produce timely and relevant management and decision support tools. We recommend looking at the following prior to launching a map: Wetlands Data » Please read the Disclaimer, Data Limitations, Exclusions and Precautions, and Status and Trends » the Wetlands Geodatabase User Caution. Wetlands Layer » Refer to the following links for documentation and answers to frequently asked New: Wetland Mapping questions: Other Topics » Projects Mapper! Wetlands Mapper Documentation and Instructions Manual (PDF) Frequently Asked Questions: Wetlands Mapper (PDF) Click below to open the Mapper. National Wetlands Frequently Asked Questions web page Printing maps with the Wetlands Inventory Mapper (PDF) Mapper Introduction Contact Information » VIDEO: How to find and use the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service's Wetlands Mapper Help and Contacts Click Here to Open the Wetlands Mapper* (data last modified on October 1, 2015; best viewed by maximizing your browser window) To beta test our new HTML5 (non­Flash) mapper on your desktop, click here (FAQs). Frequently Asked Please note: Questions When in the wetlands mapper, you can change major geographic regions by using the "Zoom to: select" pull down menu located at the upper right side corner. For help with the new mobile mapper location function, please read this FAQ. Adobe Flash™ is required to access the Wetlands Mapper. Please visit the Adobe Flash Player website (http://www.adobe.com/products/flashplayer/) to download the latest version of the player.
    [Show full text]
  • Destin Harbor, Joe's Bayou, and Indian Bayou Water Quality
    FLORIDA RECIPIENT City of Destin, Florida Destin Harbor, Joe’s Bayou, and Indian AMOUNT $3,593,600 Bayou Water Quality Improvement LEVERAGE This project includes six projects in three focal areas included in the City of Destin’s $50,000 Master Stormwater Management plan to improve surface water quality in Destin LOCATION Harbor, Joe’s Bayou, and Indian Bayou that directly feed into the southwestern Okaloosa County, Florida portion of Choctawhatchee Bay. As part of the project, the City of Destin will establish roadside swale systems to provide treatment for shallow aquifer recharge ANNOUNCEMENT DATE November 2014 prior to discharge, construct exfiltration systems to provide stormwater treatment, and repair poorly performing culverts. Choctawhatchee Bay is a 27-mile-long estuary that PROGRESS UPDATE supports diverse aquatic and wetland habitats. No new or significant work to report. (April 2015) Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) habitat decline is a significant limiting factor for the overall productivity of the Choctawhatchee Bay, and efforts to improve water quality through the reduction of sediment input into the bay is anticipated to improve the viability of SAV in the western portions of the bay. Seagrass beds in Choctawhatchee Bay support diverse populations of fish and invertebrates, including many recreational and commercial species such as shrimp, eastern oysters, spotted seatrout, gulf menhaden, red drum, blue crab, gulf flounder and mullet. This work is complementary to additional stormwater treatment projects being supported through other oil spill settlement funds. The Gulf Environmental Benefit This suite of Fund, administered by the projects will National Fish and Wildlife complete the Foundation (NFWF), supports actions identified projects to remedy harm and in the City of eliminate or reduce the risk of Destin’s Master harm to Gulf Coast natural Stormwater resources affected by the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
    [Show full text]
  • Age, Extent and Carbon Storage of the Central Congo Basin Peatland Complex Greta C
    LETTER doi:10.1038/nature21048 Age, extent and carbon storage of the central Congo Basin peatland complex Greta C. Dargie1,2*, Simon L. Lewis1,2*, Ian T. Lawson3, Edward T. A. Mitchard4, Susan E. Page5, Yannick E. Bocko6 & Suspense A. Ifo6 Peatlands are carbon-rich ecosystems that cover just three per We combined a digital elevation model (DEM; from the Shuttle cent of Earth’s land surface1, but store one-third of soil carbon2. Radar Topography Mission, SRTM) to exclude high ground and Peat soils are formed by the build-up of partially decomposed steep slopes, radar backscatter (from the Advanced Land Observation organic matter under waterlogged anoxic conditions. Most peat is Satellite Phased Array type L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar, found in cool climatic regions where unimpeded decomposition ALOS PALSAR) to detect standing surface water under forest, and is slower, but deposits are also found under some tropical swamp optical data (from Landsat Enhanced Thematic Mapper, ETM+ ) to forests2,3. Here we present field measurements from one of the categorize likely swamp vegetation, to identify areas to prospect for world’s most extensive regions of swamp forest, the Cuvette peat (Extended Data Table 1). We identified nine transects (2.5–20 km Centrale depression in the central Congo Basin4. We find extensive long) within an approximately 40,000 km2 area of northern Republic peat deposits beneath the swamp forest vegetation (peat defined of the Congo (ROC), each traversing more than one vegetation type as material with an organic matter content of at least 65 per cent within waterlogged regions, and collectively spanning the range of non- to a depth of at least 0.3 metres).
    [Show full text]
  • Medway Estuary and Marshes
    Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS) Categories approved by Recommendation 4.7 (1990), as amended by Resolution VIII.13 of the 8th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2002) and Resolutions IX.1 Annex B, IX.6, IX.21 and IX. 22 of the 9th Conference of the Contracting Parties (2005). Notes for compilers: 1. The RIS should be completed in accordance with the attached Explanatory Notes and Guidelines for completing the Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands. Compilers are strongly advised to read this guidance before filling in the RIS. 2. Further information and guidance in support of Ramsar site designations are provided in the Strategic Framework for the future development of the List of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Wise Use Handbook 7, 2nd edition, as amended by COP9 Resolution IX.1 Annex B). A 3rd edition of the Handbook, incorporating these amendments, is in preparation and will be available in 2006. 3. Once completed, the RIS (and accompanying map(s)) should be submitted to the Ramsar Secretariat. Compilers should provide an electronic (MS Word) copy of the RIS and, where possible, digital copies of all maps. 1. Name and address of the compiler of this form: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY. DD MM YY Joint Nature Conservation Committee Monkstone House City Road Designation date Site Reference Number Peterborough Cambridgeshire PE1 1JY UK Telephone/Fax: +44 (0)1733 – 562 626 / +44 (0)1733 – 555 948 Email: [email protected] 2. Date this sheet was completed/updated: Designated: 15 December 1993 3. Country: UK (England) 4. Name of the Ramsar site: Medway Estuary and Marshes 5.
    [Show full text]
  • April 26, 2021 the Honorable Eric Holcomb Governor of Indiana Dear Governor Holcomb, the Undersigned 110 Organizations and Indiv
    April 26, 2021 The Honorable Eric Holcomb Governor of Indiana Dear Governor Holcomb, The undersigned 110 organizations and individuals are writing to respectfully request your veto of SEA 389, the bill that substantially reduces protection of Indiana’s remaining wetlands. This bill opens the door to irrevocable impacts on our rich natural history and puts the wellbeing of millions of Hoosiers at risk, now and well into the future. We acknowledge that the existing wetlands law, written in 2003, is due for review and revision to improve how it functions. In fact, many of the signatories to this letter were among the 90 diverse organizations - from business and conservation groups, to agricultural and municipal leaders - which signed a letter to legislators several weeks ago offering concrete policy alternatives to SB 389. Those alternatives were not incorporated, and instead, SEA 389 makes changes to the wetlands law that would do substantial harm to Indiana’s water future. SEA 389 would place the vast majority of Indiana’s remaining state-jurisdictional wetlands in jeopardy (more than 500,000 acres). The resulting wetland losses would, without question, cost the state dearly in increased flooding and erosion, loss of groundwater recharge and water supplies, water purification, safe recreation and tourism opportunities, and loss of the diverse wildlife that makes Indiana special. Revision of Indiana’s wetlands law must be done in a careful and considered manner with the full array of knowledgeable stakeholders at the table. While SEA 389 would create a reasonable wetlands task force, it does so after making a major change in the law, which is not a sound policy process.
    [Show full text]
  • National Wetland Inventory User Report 1 :100000 Map Area
    NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY USER REPORT 1 :100000 MAP AREA MAP AREA: CLEVELAND SW 1 :100,000 NAME: CLEVELAND SOUTH STATE: oHio NORTH CENTRAL REGION uS. Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Bulldiny, Fort Snaing Twin Cities, Minnesota 55111 USER REPORT NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE REGION 3 PREPARED BY RONALD E . ERICKSON REGIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY COORDINATOR U .S . FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE FEDERAL BUILDING, FORT SNELLING TWIN CITIES, MINNESOTA 55111 USER CAUTION Maps for this 1 :100,000 scale map were prepared primarily by stereoscopic analysis of high altitude aerial photographs . Wetlands were identified on the photographs based on vegetation, visible hydrology, and geography in accordance with Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, Cowardin, et al ., 1979 . The aerial photographs reflect conditions during the specific year and season when they were taken . Some small wetlands and those obscured by dense forest cover may not be included on the map document . In addition, there is a margin of error inherent in the use and interpretation of aerial photographs . Thus a detailed on-the-ground and historical analysis of a single site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries established through photographic interpretation . Federal, State, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different manner than that used in this inventory . There is no attempt, in either design or products of this inventory, to define limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any local, State, or Federal government or to establish the geographical scope of regulatory programs of government agencies .
    [Show full text]
  • Piedmont Upland Depression Swamp
    Piedmont Upland Depression Swamp Macrogroup: Central Hardwood Swamp yourStateNatural Heritage Ecologist for more information about this habitat. This is modeledmap a distributiononbased current and is data nota substitute for field inventory. based Contact © Gary P. Fleming (Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation Natural Heritage Program) Description: A forested swamp of wetland oaks occurring in small, shallow basins in upland settings where water pools due to limited soil drainage. Most examples are isolated seasonally- flooded wetlands dominated by wetland oaks (pin oak, swamp white oak, laurel oak, willow oak, overcup oak), but a few are treeless or open-canopied ponds. Vegetation is zoned with an outer ring of trees, a more interior ring of shrubs (buttonbush, heaths, greenbrier), vines, and wetland graminoids and ferns, and a central area with or without standing water year round depending on precipitation. Sphagnum moss is sometimes extensive in parts of the pools. State Distribution: MD, VA Total Habitat Acreage: 21,559 Ecological Setting and Natural Processes: Percent Conserved: 4.7% Occurs on nearly level Piedmont uplands with clay hardpans State State GAP 1&2 GAP 3 Unsecured and shallow seasonal flooding. Most known examples are on State Habitat % Acreage (acres) (acres) (acres) mafic bedrock. Flooding depth is typically shallow (< 25 cm). VA 98% 21,055 36 900 20,118 Soils are typically loamy clays. There is substantial variation MD 2% 505 1 76 427 among the pools, related to substrate, basin morphology, and geographic location. Similar Habitat Types: Piedmont Hardpan Woodland & Forest is closely related by the importance of an impermeable clay hardpan and the preference for mafic bedrock, and some intermediate gradations occur.
    [Show full text]