Wetland And Stream Mitigation Report Template

1 -*TEMPLATE 2 (Remember to remove this before submittal.)

3 4 DRAFT/FINAL WETLAND AND STREAM 5 MITIGATION REPORT 6 (If the report is Draft, delete “Final”; if it is Final, delete “Draft.” Delete “and Stream” if there 7 are no streams associated with the mitigation project.) 8 9 10 11 12 Project Name

14 15 16 XXX County, WA 17 OL-XXXX 18 XXXX (XXX) 19 20 21 Prepared by 22 WSDOT ____ REGION 23 24 Month, day, year 25 (Revise month, day, year that document was completed before printing or submitting.) 26 27

28 29 30 WetlandMitRptTemplate-7-20-09.doc 31

2 1 Wetland Mitigation Report Template Guidance 1 (Delete this text box before submitting report.) Important2 Computer Setting This document must be used in Word 2003. To show guidance comments for using the template, click “View” on the main toolbar3 and select “Print Layout.” Click “Tools” on the main toolbar, select “Customize,” and verify that the “Reviewing” box4 is checked on the toolbars tab. A new toolbar for “reviewing” should now be showing. In this new toolbar, verify that the “Final Showing Markup” view appears. Green5 Text = Instruction/Guidance throughout the document (to be deleted prior to submittal) Dark6 Red Text = Example text provided for illustration. Author must revise or delete for specific project. DO NOT COPY AND PASTE RED TEXT – it may not be appropriate for your project. Before7 printing and submitting a final report: 1. Delete all guidance comments prior to printing. To do this, in the red “X” icon in the reviewing toolbar, click “Delete all 8Comments in Document.” 2. 9Delete or replace green guidance text and red example, and replace highlighted text throughout the document. 3. Delete this text box and delete the word “Template” from the cover page. 4.10Update the footer to reflect the date and project name. 5. Update the Table of Contents and the lists of Appendices, Figures, and Tables by clicking in the margin to the left of each 11table and hitting the F9 key (or left click on the table and click “Update Field”); then choose “Update entire table.” Make sure to do this as a final step of every draft. 6.12Fill-in all text highlighted in yellow. Keep13 your discussions brief and to the point. 14 Include only information relevant to the discussion. Avoid cutting and pasting large sections from other documents, such as BAs, unless directed to do so for consistent project descriptions and purposes. 15 Place information only in the most appropriate section. For example - Do not start to discuss mitigation in the impact section. This avoids redundancy, simplifies the reports and makes changes and editing easier. 16 Do not use table information to lead the discussion. Tables should supplement the text, not replace it. The text 17 should lead the reader to the intended conclusion, not the table information.  Use figures, photos, and graphs to supplement the text. Mitigation18 Plan Guidance 19Clearly tell the story of how we are replacing wetland area and function.  When addressing impacts and mitigation be sure to address Critical Area Type, Quantity, and Quality. 20 Sometimes impacts occur to high quality portions of low quality wetland or low quality portions of high quality wetlands. If that is the case, it should be discussed in the impact section. 21 WSDOT Guidelines and Coordination 22 In addition to the template, an EXAMPLE Mitigation Report is available from WSDOT. 23 Get project name, #, purpose/need, and description from Project Engineer or WSDOT Biology Lead.  Verify with Project Engineer or the WSDOT Biology Lead that the entire project site was examined for wetlands and 24 stream impacts including 1) all grading 2) all clearing (cleared not grubbed), 3) storm water detention and treatment facilities, 4) utilities and 5) staging areas, and 6) culverts, driveways, and access roads. Also include indirect impacts 25 from shading. 26 Guide project questions to the engineer and technical questions to the WSDOT Biology Lead. Refer to helpful WSDOT online guidance documents (such as Impact Assessment, Mitigation Area Calculation, Writing Performance 27 Standards) available at: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/mitigation.htm Tailor28 the report to fit your project requirements  For example, do not include information on streams (methods, findings, etc.) if there are no streams in the project 29 corridor. Local regulations may have specific report requirements not included here. Verify that the report meets the local area requirements30 and cite the local code in the Methods section (cite web). Suggested31 Citation Style Manual Council of Scientific Editors Style Manual Committee. Scientific Style Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers. 7th ed. Council32 of Science Editors. 2006. 680 p. http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/publications/style.cfm. [CSE Style Manual]. 33 An online style guide is available at :.

2 3 DRAFT/FINAL WETLAND AND STREAM 4 MITIGATION REPORT 5 (Delete “and Stream” if there are no streams associated with the mitigation project.) 6 7 8 9 10 Project Name 11

13 14 Month, day, year 15 (Revise month, day, year that document was completed before printing or submitting.) 16 17 18 19 20Prepared By: 21 Author’s Name, Title 22 Phone Number 23 Consulting Firm /Region/Cooperating Agency Name 24 25Project Engineer: 26 Project Engineer’s Name and Title 27 Phone Number 28 Region/Cooperating Agency Name 29 30Other Contributors and Role: 31 Name (Role) 32 33

1 Executive Summary 2 3 Provide the following information in one page or less: 4 1. The first paragraph should be the project description and location. Complicated 5 projects may require additional information. 6 2. The next seven or less sentences should describe the impacts. Differentiate 7 between total wetland impacts, those regulated by the U.S. Army Corps of 8 Engineers (USACE) and the Washington State Department of Ecology 9 (Ecology), and those solely regulated by Ecology. Introduce the acronyms 10 “USACE,” “Ecology,” “SR,” and “MP”. Avoid discussing individual wetland 11 impacts in the Executive Summary. 12 3. Lastly, provide an overview of mitigation including the following: 13  Number and location of sites, 14  General strategy 15  Goals 16  How proposed improvements support the functions and environmental 17 processes of the larger watershed restoration goals 18  Proposed buffers for the compensatory mitigation-site (minimum and 19 maximum width and total area) 20  Proposed adaptive management strategy including site management, 21 monitoring, and contingency plans 22  Table 1 – Summary of project wetland impacts and compensatory 23 mitigation 24 25Table 1. Summary of project wetland impacts and compensatory mitigation. 26(EXAMPLE) Region _____ Region Contract Name and Number ##-### ####(###) (NWR only) Township/Range/Section TRS (impact) Permanent Wetland Impact ##.## acres Indirect Wetland Impact ##.## acres Temporary Wetland Impact ##.## acres Permanent Buffer Impact ##.## acres Temporary Buffer Impact ##.## acres XX.XX acres XX.XX acres Jurisdictional Wetland Regulated by USACE Impact Areas Regulated by Ecology (Isolated) and Ecology Mitigation Location Location description, XX County, TRS Total Area of Mitigation Site XX.XX acres Area & Type of Mitigation ##.## acres of Wetland Creation Area & Type of Mitigation ##.## acres of Wetland Re-establishment Area & Type of Mitigation ##.## acres of Wetland Rehabilitation Area & Type of Mitigation ##.## acres of Wetland Enhancement Area & Type of Mitigation ##.## acres of Wetland Preservation

2Project Name i Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

Area & Type of Mitigation ##.## acres of Buffer Enhancement / ###-foot wide buffer Total Area of Mitigation ##.## acres Years of Monitoring X Years 1 2 3EXAMPLE 4The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is proposing to add additional 5lanes on State Route (SR) 000 from the city of Mytown, Mile Post (MP) 3.95, to Yourtown, 6Washington, MP 9.89. Following completion of the project, SR 000 will be a five-lane 7highway between the two cities of Mytown and Yourtown. 8The proposed project will have unavoidable impacts to seven wetlands. Wetland impact will 9total 2.83 acres (Table 1). Of the 2.83 acres of impact, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 10(USACE) and the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) regulate 2.10 acres; 11Ecology alone regulates the remaining 0.73 acre because these wetlands are isolated. Most of 12the proposed project impacts occur to palustrine emergent, Ecology Category III, depressional 13wetlands that are dominated by a monoculture of reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). 14Most of these generally low quality wetlands provide limited levels of hydrologic, water 15quality, and habitat functions. Vegetated buffers around the impacted wetlands are narrow or 16non-functional, and typically dominated by reed canarygrass. 17WSDOT staff took a watershed approach to mitigation by taking a landscape view of the 18Salmon Creek watershed, how it functions, and its need for improvement in developing this 19wetland mitigation report. This assessment identified the following watershed issues in the 20Salmon Creek watershed: 21 1. Poor water quality 22 2. Eroded, incised, and straightened channel, which lacks large woody debris (LWD) 23 3. High sediment load 24 4. Riparian areas degraded by unrestricted grazing livestock 25 5. Reed canarygrass in riparian areas preventing re-establishment of native vegetation 26 6. Wetlands isolated from stream channel by fill 27 7. Wetlands degraded by past land use activities and establishment of reed canarygrass 28The compensatory mitigation will occur at a 16.2-acre site located along Salmon Creek. The 29mitigation provides the following to compensate for project impacts to wetlands: 30 . 2.83 acres of wetland creation 31 . 11.26 acres of wetland enhancement 32 . 2.11 acres of upland buffer enhancement, including riparian areas 33WSDOT proposes to replace the impacted wetlands with Category III created and enhanced 34wetlands dominated by native trees and shrubs. The created wetlands will provide improved 35flood flow alteration and water quality function, and will add habitat functions compared to the 36impacted wetlands. The enhanced wetlands will provide greater habitat interspersion, species 37richness, and improved vegetative structure compared to the condition of the existing wetland 38at the mitigation site. The buffers around the mitigation wetlands will typically be 50 feet wide 39(required for a wetland rated Category III by Washington County) and composed of native trees

2Project Name ii Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1and shrubs. This will improve buffer width, screening, and cover functions compared to the 2impacted wetland buffers. 3The proposed mitigation site will be monitored for ten years. Monitoring, contingency, and 4management plans are described, and will be used to adaptively manage the mitigation site. 5 6 7Table 1. Summary of project wetland impacts and compensatory mitigation. 8(EXAMPLE) Region Eastern Region Township/Range/Section Township 14N and 15N, and Ranges 45E and 46E (impact) Permanent Wetland Impact 2.83 acres Permanent Buffer Impact 1.58 acres 2.10 acres 0.73 acres Jurisdictional Wetland Regulated by USACE Impact Areas Regulated by Ecology (Isolated) and Ecology Mitigation Location Township 14N and 15N, and Range 46E Total Area of Mitigation Site 16.2 acres Area & Type of Mitigation 2.83 acres of Wetland Creation Area & Type of Mitigation 11.26 acres of Wetland Enhancement Area & Type of Mitigation 2.11 acres of Buffer Enhancement/50 foot wide buffer Total Area of Mitigation 16.2 acres Years of Monitoring 10 Years 9 10 11

2Project Name iii Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1 Table of Contents 2 3Executive Summary...... i 4Chapter 1. Proposed Project...... 1 5 1.1 Introduction...... 1 6 1.2 Project Location...... 2 7 1.3 Project Purpose and Description...... 3 8 1.4 Project Schedule...... 3 9 1.5 Responsible Parties...... 3 10Chapter 2. Existing Conditions...... 3 11 2.1 Landscape Setting...... 3 12 2.2 Land Use History...... 4 13 2.3 Watershed Context...... 4 14Chapter 3. Wetland and Wetland Buffer Impact Assessment...... 5 15 3.1 Existing Conditions of Wetlands and Buffers to be Impacted...... 5 16 3.2 Wetland Impacts...... 5 17 3.3 Wetland Buffer Impacts...... 10 18 3.4 Wetland Functions Impacted...... 11 19 3.5 Wetland Impacts Summary Sheets...... 13 20Chapter 4. Stream and Stream Buffer Impact Assessment...... 17 21 4.1 Existing Conditions of Streams to be Impacted...... 17 22 4.2 Stream Impacts...... 18 23 4.3 Stream Buffer Impacts...... 18 24 4.4 Stream Habitat Functions Impacted...... 19 25Chapter 5. Mitigation Strategy...... 21 26 5.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Wetland and Stream Impacts...... 21 27 5.2 Compensatory Mitigation...... 22 28Chapter 6. Compensatory Wetland Mitigation...... 28 29 6.1 Site Location...... 28 30 6.2 Rationale for Site Selection...... 29 31 6.3 Mitigation Site Existing Conditions...... 29 32 6.4 Wetland Mitigation Site Design...... 33 33 6.5 Ecological Benefits...... 38 34Chapter 7. Compensatory Stream Mitigation...... 43 35 7.1 Site Location...... 43 36 7.2 Rationale for Site Selection...... 44 37 7.3 Mitigation Site Existing Conditions...... 44 38 7.4 Stream Mitigation Site Design...... 46 39 7.5 Ecological Benefits...... 48 40Chapter 8. Wetland Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Performance Criteria. .49 41 8.1 Goals...... 49 42 8.2 Objectives...... 49 43 8.3 Performance Criteria...... 50 44 8.4 Monitoring...... 53 45 8.5 Contingency Plan...... 54 46 8.6 Site Management...... 55

2Project Name iv Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1Chapter 9. Stream Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Performance Criteria....57 2 9.1 Goals...... 57 3 9.2 Objectives...... 57 4 9.3 Performance Criteria...... 58 5 9.4 Monitoring...... 58 6 9.5 Contingency Plan...... 59 7 9.6 Site Management...... 60 8Chapter 10. References...... 61 9 10 11 12 Figures 13 (Your List of Figures will be corrected when you update the above field (after figures are 14 entered in the body of the document). Right-click in the gray area and select “Update Field,” 15 then click “Update Entire Table.”) 16 17Figure 1. Project vicinity map...... 2 18Figure 2. Project corridor map...... 2 19Figure 3. Typical stream that the project will impact...... 19 20Figure 4. Typical stream buffer that the project will impact...... 20 21Figure 5. Map showing the location of the mitigation site in relation to the project impact site. 22 ...... 28 23Figure 6. Aerial photograph of the mitigation site and surrounding properties...... 32 24Figure 7. Photo of ______Wetland Mitigation Site...... 33 25Figure 8. Map showing the location of the stream mitigation site in relation to the project 26 impact site...... 43 27Figure 9. Aerial photograph of the stream mitigation site and surrounding properties...... 46 28Figure 10. Photo of ______Stream Mitigation Site...... 46 29

2Project Name v Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1 Tables 2 (Your List of Tables will be corrected when you update the above field (after tables are 3 entered). Right-click in the gray area and select “Update Field,” then click “Update Entire 4 Table.”) 5 6Table 1. Summary of project wetland impacts and compensatory mitigation. (EXAMPLE)...... i 7Table 1. Summary of project wetland impacts and compensatory mitigation. (EXAMPLE)....iii 8Table 2. Wetland size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project...... 7 9Table 2. Wetland size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project. (EXAMPLE) 10 ...... 8 11Table 3. Permanent wetland impact summary by classification...... 9 12Table 3. Permanent wetland impact summary by classification. (EXAMPLE)...... 9 13Table 4. Wetland buffer size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project...... 10 14Table 4. Wetland buffer size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project. 15 (EXAMPLE)...... 11 16Table 5. Impacted wetland functions...... 12 17Table 5. Impacted wetland functions. (EXAMPLE)...... 12 18Table 6. Wetland # impact summary...... 14 19Table 6. Wetland 15-LF impact summary. (EXAMPLE)...... 15 20Table 7. Stream # impact summary...... 17 21Table 8. Stream and Stream Buffer Area Impacts...... 19 22Table 8. Recommended mitigation ratios for projects in Western Washington.*...... 23 23Table 8. Recommended mitigation ratios for projects in Eastern Washington.*...... 24 24Table 9. Mitigation area recommendations per Wetland Mitigation in Washington State 25 (Ecology et al. 2006a)...... 25 26Table 9. Mitigation area recommendations per Wetland Mitigation in Washington State 27 (Ecology et al. 2006a). (EXAMPLE)...... 25 28Table 10. Mitigation area required per local jurisdiction.*...... 25 29Table 11. Mitigation site wetland summary...... 30 30Table 11. Sunny Road Mitigation Site wetland summary (EXAMPLE)...... 31 31Table 12. Stream impact and mitigation...... 32 32Table 13. Groundwater monitoring well data from wells located onsite...... 34 33Table 13. Test pit soil and groundwater data collected at the Sunny Road Mitigation Site, 34 August 4, 2005. (EXAMPLE)...... 35 35Table 14. Plant list proposed for wetland creation and enhancement areas...... 36 36Table 14. Plant list proposed for wetland creation and enhancement areas. (EXAMPLE)...... 37 37Table 15. Plant list proposed for upland buffer areas...... 37 38Table 15. Plant list proposed for upland buffer areas. (EXAMPLE)...... 38 39Table 16. Wetland functions provided by various areas of the mitigation site...... 39 40Table 16. Wetland functions provided by various areas of the mitigation site. (EXAMPLE). .40 41Table 17. Comparison of the typical wetland functions at impacted wetlands and mitigated 42 wetlands...... 41 43Table 17. Comparison of the typical wetland functions at impacted wetlands and mitigated 44 wetlands. (EXAMPLE)...... 42 45Table 18. Stream impacts and proposed mitigation...... 45 46Table 19. Plant list proposed for the stream buffer enhancement areas...... 47

2Project Name vi Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1Table 20. Wetland mitigation monitoring report recipients...... 53 2Table 21. Stream mitigation monitoring report recipients...... 59 3 4 Appendices 5 6Appendix A — Wetland Impact Plan Sheets 7Appendix B — Mitigation Site Wetland Memo 8Appendix C — Mitigation Site Soil Boring Logs 9Appendix D — Mitigation Site Hydrology Data 10Appendix E — Mitigation Site Plan Sheets 11Appendix F — Wetland Rating Form for Anticipated Mitigation Site Conditions at the end of 12 Monitoring 13 14 15 Acronyms and Abbreviations 16 17Ecology Washington State Department of Ecology 18LWD large woody debris 19MP mile post 20NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service 21NWI National Wetlands Inventory 22PEM palustrine emergent 23PUS palustrine unconsolidated shore 24PFO palustrine forested 25PSS palustrine scrub-shrub 26SR state route 27USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 28USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 29WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation 30WRIA Water Resource Inventory Area 31 32 Add or delete acronyms and abbreviations as necessary 33

2Project Name vii Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1Chapter 1. Proposed Project

2 1.1 Introduction

3 Summarize the following in one paragraph:

4  Try to use a one sentence project description. 5  State the purpose of the report—mitigation for project impacts to wetlands (and 6 minor impacts to streams). A separate Stream Mitigation Report should be used 7 to document mitigation for major impacts to streams. 8  List the permits the report will be used for – be specific. 9 10EXAMPLE 11The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) proposes to widen State Route 12(SR) 000 to a five-lane facility between the cities of Mytown (MP 3.95) and Yourtown, 13Washington (MP 9.89) (Figure 1). The proposed project will impact wetlands during 14construction. This report identifies the project impacts to wetlands and describes a proposal to 15mitigate for those unavoidable impacts. 16 17This report will be used to obtain the following permits: 18 . U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit 19 . Washington Department of Ecology Section 401 Water Quality Certification 20 . Washington County Critical Areas Ordinance 21 22Observed conditions are discussed in the Wetland and Stream Assessment Report (Smith and 23Jones 2005). This mitigation report addresses project impacts and their mitigation. The 24following documents and guidelines were used in preparation of this report: 25 . Wetland and Stream Assessment Report (Smith and Jones 2005) 26 . WSDOT Wetland Mitigation Guidance (WSDOT 2007) 27 . Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1 (Sheldon et al. 2005) 28 . Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2 (Granger et al. 2005) 29 . Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 1 (Ecology et al. 2006) 30 . Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 2 (Ecology et al. 2006) 31 32

2Project Name 1 Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1 1.2 Project Location

2 Include nearest city or landmark, county, section, township and range, Water Resources 3 Inventory Area (WRIA), river basin and sub-basin. Refer to project location maps, 4 Figures 1 and 2. Introduce “WRIA” acronym. 65

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

GROUP any drawings in separate document first. (Delete this text box before inserting photo, leaving only the drawing canvas beneath.)

Use photos as required throughout the report. They need to be relevant and descriptive Label photos as Figures. Revise the subsequent figure numbers as required.

7Figure 1. Project vicinity map. 8 (Copy from Wetland and Stream Assessment Report.) 9 10 11 FIGURE PLACE HOLDER 12 13 GROUP any drawings in separate document first. (Delete this text box before inserting photo, leaving only the 14 drawing canvas beneath.) 15 16 Use photos as required throughout the report. 17 They need to be relevant and descriptive Label photos as Figures. 18 Revise the subsequent figure numbers as required. 19 20 21 22 23 24Figure 2. Project corridor map. 25 (Copy from Wetland and Stream Assessment Report.) 26 27

1 1.3 Project Purpose and Description

2 Project purpose can be copied from the Wetland and Stream Assessment Report, 3 Biological Assessment, or obtained from the design engineer and is typically one 4 paragraph. This is sometimes referred to as “project need.” 5 6 The project description can be obtained from the Project Engineer or Environmental 7 Coordinator. The description has to be consistent with other documents and permits. 8 Some simplification may be helpful but avoid changes—two paragraphs or a bullet list 9 unless the project is large and complex. Include type of construction and size of project 10 (acres).

11 1.4 Project Schedule

12 Include a sentence or two that describes when the design will be completed, submittal 13 for permits will occur, and when construction will commence. Also include anticipated 14 length of construction period, if known.

15 1.5 Responsible Parties

16 Briefly describe who will administer construction, any partnerships, and who is 17 responsible for monitoring, maintenance, and long-term stewardship and ownership. 18 19 20Chapter 2. Existing Conditions

21This chapter summarizes the landscape setting, existing conditions of the wetlands and streams 22within or near the project setting, and watershed conditions.

23 2.1 Landscape Setting

24 Briefly describe the following conditions within the project vicinity: 25  General topography and landforms 26  Land use and zoning 27  Vegetation zone (Franklin and Dyrness, 1973) 28  General vegetation (along the roadway and on properties adjacent to the 29 roadway) 30  Soils

31 2.1.1. Streams 32 Briefly describe the existing streams in the project area, stream number, stream type, 33 fish species present (if appropriate), and location relevant to the project.

1 2.1.2. Wetlands 2 Briefly describe the wetlands adjacent to the project, wetland rating, HGM 3 classification, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification. Reference 4 the Wetland and Stream Assessment Report. This section is only an overview of the 5 existing wetlands, not a copy of the Wetland and Stream Assessment Report.

6 2.1.3. Buffers/Uplands 7 Briefly describe the conditions of the buffers of the wetlands and streams discussed 8 previously. Include general conditions and vegetation. If there are forested uplands 9 areas present (not associated with streams or wetland buffers), describe those also.

10 2.2 Land Use History

11 Describe the historic land uses as they relate to wetlands, streams, and buffers.

12 2.3 Watershed Context

13 This section is necessary to briefly summarize or discuss in more detail the landscape 14 perspective and watershed issues. The purpose of this section is to provide a base for 15 future discussions on how the mitigation design supports watershed functions and how a 16 watershed approach was used to develop the mitigation site design. A brief description 17 of current watershed goals and watershed conditions including limiting factors affecting 18 for streams and wetlands, and watershed issues including but not limited to, flooding, 19 water quality, fish habitat, development impacts, erosion and sedimentation, wildlife 20 connectivity, etc. Sources of watershed information may be available from the 21 following: 22  Watershed planning documents (basin plans, restoration plans) may be available 23 online with information for the relevant WRIA. 24  Salmon Habitat Limiting Factors reports are being developed by the Washington 25 State Conservation Commission (WCC) for most major watersheds in Washington. 26 Contact WCC at: http://salmon.scc.wa.gov/index.html 27  Local priorities might be outlined by local tribes, governments (cities and 28 counties), and resource management organizations, such as Natural Resources 29 Conservation Service (NRCS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM), or U.S. Forest 30 Service. 31 32 33

1Chapter 3. Wetland and Wetland Buffer 2 Impact Assessment

3This chapter summarizes the landscape setting, the existing conditions of the wetlands to be 4impacted, and the assessment of impacts to wetlands and functions related to the proposed 5project. 6

7 3.1 Existing Conditions of Wetlands and Buffers to be 8 Impacted

9Summaries of existing conditions for each wetland and buffer that will be impacted are 10provided in the Wetland Impacts Summary Sheets (Section 3.8). Refer also to the Wetland and 11Stream Assessment Report (author, date) for more details about each wetland, including rating 12forms and field data forms. (Use the WSDOT sensitive area naming convention as 13directed/adapted by the WSDOT Region Biologist.) 14 15Wetlands were classified using: 16 . USFWS system (Cowardin et al. 1979) 17 . Hydrogeomorphic Classification system (Brinson 1993) 18 . Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Eastern or Western Washington 19 (Hruby 2004) 20 . Local Jurisdiction Wetlands Ordinance, Chapter ## (Local Jurisdiction, date) 21 22The condition of wetland buffers was qualitatively assessed using the following criteria: 23 . Dominant land use (e.g., agriculture, residential, commercial, industrial). 24 . Dominant buffer vegetation type (tree, shrub, herb, vine, un-vegetated). 25 . Estimated percent cover of invasive plants by species.

26 3.2 Wetland Impacts

27 For guidance on permanent, temporary, and indirect impacts to wetlands, refer to 28 WSDOT Wetland and Buffer Impact Guidance available online at: 29 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/mitigation.htm.

30 3.2.1. Permanent Wetland Impacts 31The proposed project will result in unavoidable permanent impacts to # wetlands (Table1).

32 Describe how the wetlands will be impacted; how the proposed roadway improvements 33 will remove wetland area, total impact areas, and who regulates it. 34 35 Wetland impacts are shown on the Wetland Impact Plan Sheets (Appendix A). Refer to 36 this appendix. 37

1 Describe the types of wetlands impacted (rating, USFWS classification, HGM) and 2 refer to Tables 2 & 3. 3 4 Permanent impacts result in the permanent loss of wetland or waters of the state. 5 Placement of fill in a wetland to construct a road is considered a permanent impact 6 (Ecology et al. 2006).

7 3.2.2. Temporary Wetland Impacts 8 Define the project’s temporary impacts to wetlands. Temporary wetland impacts occur 9 when vegetation is cut during construction activities, for construction access roads, 10 fence installation, retaining wall construction, etc. Temporary wetland impacts 11 typically do not involve soil disturbance. Temporary wetland impacts can be short- or 12 long-term in duration depending on the vegetation disturbed and/or the duration of the 13 impact. Refer to WSDOT Wetland and Buffer Impact Assessment Guidance.

14 3.2.3. Indirect Wetland Impacts 15 Indirect impacts are actions that can reduce wetland area and/or wetland functions. If 16 your project does not have indirect impacts, include a statement that none were 17 identified for the project. Refer to guidance on indirect impacts as noted in the WSDOT 18 Wetland and Buffer Impact Guidance document. A wetland that is completely 19 impacted will not have indirect impacts.

20 21 22

1Table 2. Wetland size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project. Wetland Impact Area Wetland Classification Wetland Wetland (acre) Size A Local Percent CowardinB HGM EcologyC (acre) Permanent Temporary Indirect JurisdictionD Impacted

Total 2A) Wetland locations from project beginning to end: rt = right side of the highway and lf = left side of highway. 3B) Cowardin, et al. (1979) or National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Class based on vegetation: PUS = Palustrine Unconsolidated Shore; PEM = Palustrine Emergent; PSS = 4 Palustrine Scrub-Shrub; PFO = Palustrine Forested. 5C) Ecology rating according to Hruby (2004). 6D) List local jurisdiction ordinance. 7E) Isolated wetlands – Washington State Department of Ecology jurisdiction only. (Insert superscript “E” for these wetlands, if applicable, or delete this line.) 8 9 In the “Total” row, only show the total areas of wetland impacts. If the indirect impacts result in a loss of wetland area, they 10 will need to be included in the Total Permanent Wetland Impact sum.

1Table 2. Wetland size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project. (EXAMPLE) Wetland Impact Area Wetland Classification Wetland (acre) WetlandA Size Washington Percent CowardinB HGM EcologyC (acre) Permanent Temporary Indirect CountyD Impacted PEM/PSS/ Depressional 5-LT III III 1.05 1.05 100 - - PFO Closed Depressional 7-LT PEM/PSS II III 0.10 0.10 100 - - Outflow Depressional 10-LT PEM IV III 0.23 0.23 100 - - Outflow Depressional 15-LT PEM III III 1.00 0.49E 49 - - Closed Depressional 17-LT PEM III III 1.65 0.58 35 0.05 - Outflow Depressional 19-RT PEM III IV 1.20 0.14 12 - - Closed Depressional 20-RT PEM III IV 1.40 0.24E 17 - - Closed

Total 2.83 0.05 0 2A. Wetland locations from project beginning to end: RT = right side of the highway and LT = left side of highway. 3B. Cowardin et al. (1979) or National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Class based on vegetation: PEM = Palustrine Unconsolidated Shore; PEM = Palustrine 4 Emergent; PSS = Palustrine Scrub-Shrub; PFO = Palustrine Forested. 5C. Ecology rating according to Hruby (2004). 6D. Wetlands rated according to Washington County Wetlands Ordinance, Chapter 9.03 (Washington County 1994). 7E. Isolated wetlands – Washington State Department of Ecology jurisdiction only 8 9

1Table 3. Permanent wetland impact summary by classification. Wetland Impact Percent of Total Wetland Classification Class * Area Wetland Area ** (acre) POW PEM USFWS PSS (Cowardin et al. 1979) PFO PAB Total I Washington II Department of Ecology III (Hruby 2004) IV Total I Local Jurisdiction *** II (Include name of Local III Jurisdiction) IV Total Slope Hydrogeomorphic Depressional Class Riverine Total 2 * Add or delete wetland classifications as necessary. 3 ** Percentage of total in wetland class. 4 *** Only necessary if different from Ecology rating, some adjustments to the table may be 5 necessary here depending on the local code. 6 7Table 3. Permanent wetland impact summary by classification. (EXAMPLE) Wetland Impact Percent of Total Wetland Classification Class Area Wetland Area (acre) POW 0 0 PEM 1.68 59.4 USFWS PEM/PSS 0.10 3.5 (Cowardin et al. 1979) PEM/PSS/PFO 1.05 37.1 Total 2.83 I 0 0 Washington II 0.10 3.5 Department of Ecology III 2.50 88.3 (Hruby 2004) IV 0.23 8.1 Total 2.83 I 0 0 II 0 0 Washington County III 2.45 86.6 (1994) IV 0.38 13.4 Total 2.83 Hydrogeomorphic Slope 0 0 Class Depressional Closed 1.92 67.8 Depressional Outflow 0.91 32.2

Riverine 0 0 Total 2.83 1

2 3.3 Wetland Buffer Impacts

3 Define impacts to wetland buffers. Refer to WSDOT impact guidance documents 4 available online at: 5 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/mitigation.htm 6

7 3.3.1. Permanent Buffer Impacts 8The proposed project will permanently impact ## acres of wetland buffer (Table 4). 9 10 Include a description of the types of buffer vegetation impacted and provide 11 approximate areas by vegetation type if possible.

12 3.3.2. Temporary Buffer Impacts 13The proposed project will temporarily impact ## acres of existing wetland buffer (Table 4). 14 15 Include a description of the proposed construction activities that will affect each buffer 16 area, the vegetation impacted, and the length of the temporary impact. 17 18Table 4. Wetland buffer size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project. Buffer Impact Area Wetland Classification D Buffer Width (acre) Wetland A Local D Ecology B Jurisdiction (feet) Permanent Temporary C

Total 19A. Wetland locations from project beginning to end: RT = right side of the highway and LF = left side of highway. 20B. Hruby (2004). 21C. Wetland rating according to Local Jurisdiction wetlands ordinance (Local Jurisdiction, date). 22D. Wetland buffers according to Local Jurisdiction wetlands ordinance (Local Jurisdiction, date). 23

1Table 4. Wetland buffer size, classification, and area impacted by the proposed project. 2 (EXAMPLE) Buffer Impact Area Wetland Classification Buffer Width (acre) C WetlandA Washington (feet) C Ecology B Permanent Temporary CountyC 5-LF III III 50 0.31 0.00 7-LF II III 50 0.10 0.00 10-LF IV III 50 0.12 0.00 15-LF III III 50 0.31 0.00 17-LF III III 50 0.35 0.00 19-RT III IV 25 0.10 0.00 20-RT III IV 25 0.82 0.00 Total 2.11 0.00 3A. Wetland locations from project beginning to end: RT = right side of the highway and LF = left side of highway. 4B. Hruby (2004). 5C. Per Washington County wetlands ordinance, Chapter 9.03 (Washington County 1994). 6

7 3.4 Wetland Functions Impacted

8 Summarize the following in a couple of paragraphs: 9  Name the functions assessment method used. Wetland functions should usually 10 be evaluated using Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects 11 (Null et al. 2000). 12  Describe the typical level of functions provided by the wetlands. 13  Grouping wetlands of similar HGM classes or functions may be useful to simplify 14 discussion of functions impacted. Functions can also be separated into function 15 categories (hydrologic, water quality, and habitat) similar to the Washington 16 Wetland Rating System (Hruby 2004). 17  Discuss how removal of wetland area and vegetation will reduce or eliminate 18 wetland functions – be specific. 19 20EXAMPLE 21Wetland functions were evaluated using the Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for 22Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000). 23 24In general, most of the wetlands to be impacted provide low to moderate levels of water quality 25and hydrologic functions, and a low level of habitat functions (Table 5). 26 27

1Table 5. Impacted wetland functions. Wetland Function/Valuea ## ## ## ## ## ## Flood Flow Alteration Sediment Removal Nutrient and Toxicant Removal Erosion Control & Shoreline

Stabilization Production & Export of Organic

Matter General Habitat Suitability Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates Habitat for Amphibians Habitat for Wetland-Associated

Mammals Habitat for Wetland-Associated

Birds General Fish Habitat Native Plant Richness Educational or Scientific Value Uniqueness and Heritage 2a “-” means that the function is not present; “X” means that the function is present and is of low quality; and “+" 3means the function is present and is of high quality. 4 5Table 5. Impacted wetland functions. (EXAMPLE) Wetland Function/Valuea 7lf 10lf 15lf 17lf 19rt 20rt Flood Flow Alteration X X X X + X Sediment Removal X X X X X X Nutrient and Toxicant Removal X X X X X Erosion Control & Shoreline ------Stabilization Production & Export of Organic ------Matter General Habitat Suitability - X X - X X Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates ------Habitat for Amphibians X X X - X - Habitat for Wetland-Associated ------Mammals Habitat for Wetland-Associated ------Birds

General Fish Habitat ------Native Plant Richness ------Educational or Scientific Value ------Uniqueness and Heritage ------1a “-” means that the function is not present; “X” means that the function is present and is of low quality; and “+” 2means the function is present and is of high quality. 3

4 3.5 Wetland Impacts Summary Sheets

5The impacts to wetlands and associated functions that would result from the proposed project 6are summarized in the sheets that follow (Tables # to #). 7 8 Use WSDOT Wetland Functions Characterization Tool for Linear Projects (Null et al. 9 2000) to develop text to describe impacted wetland functions. 10

1 (Insert wetland impacts summary sheet for each wetland to be impacted. Keep each to 2 one page) 3Table 6. Wetland # impact summary. Wetland Impacts Summary Sheet Local Jurisdiction WRIA Ecology Rating (Hruby 2004) Local Jurisdiction Rating Local Jurisdiction ## feet Insert photo of impacted wetland area Buffer Width (identify impacted portion with red dashed Wetland Size ## acres line and label). Cowardin Classification HGM Classification Wetland Rating System Pts. Water Quality Score ## Hydrologic Score ## Habitat Score ## Total Score ## Wetland and Buffer Impact Summary Permanent ## acres (#% of Wetland #) Wetland Impacts Temporary 0 Indirect 0 Permanent 0 Buffer Impacts Temporary 0 Dominant Vegetation Impacted Soils Series Impacted Hydrology Impacted Wetland Functions Impact Summary Use information from the Wetland Functions Characterization Tool For Water Quality Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000) to describe functions impacted. Use information from the Wetland Functions Characterization Tool For Hydrologic Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000) to describe functions impacted. Use information from the Wetland Functions Characterization Tool For Habitat Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000) to describe functions impacted. 4

1Table 6. Wetland 15-LF impact summary. (EXAMPLE) Wetland Impacts Summary Sheet Local Jurisdiction Washington County WRIA Palouse WRIA 34 Ecology Rating III (Hruby 2004) Washington County III Rating Washington County 50 feet Buffer Width Wetland Size 1.00 acre Cowardin Palustrine emergent Classification (PEM) HGM Classification Depressional closed Wetland Rating System Pts. Water Quality Score 20 Hydrologic Score 16 Habitat Score 5 Total Score 41 Wetland and Buffer Impact Summary Permanent 0.49 acre (49% of Wetland 15lf) Wetland Impacts Temporary 0 Indirect 0 Permanent 0.31 acre Buffer Impacts Temporary 0 Dominant This wetland is classified as palustrine emergent but presently is a farmed Vegetation Impacted wetland planted with winter wheat. Soils Series Caldwell silt loam Impacted Hydrology Impacted Ponding that occurs from late winter to spring would be partially impacted. Wetland Functions Impact Summary The impacted portion of Wetland 15lf provides a moderate level of water quality functions, similar to the overall wetland. The wetland is a small depressional closed system and impounds surface water run-off from snowmelt and rain. Water Quality The wetland receives direct untreated stormwater from SR 000. The area is currently in agricultural use and is cultivated, planted and harvested during the growing season. The wetland is a monoculture of winter wheat. The impacted portion of Wetland 15lf provides a moderate level of hydrologic functions, similar to the overall wetland. The wetland probably receives most of Hydrologic its hydrology from road run-off during snowmelt and rain events. There is no outlet to the wetland and it does impound water that might otherwise flow into Paradise Creek. The impacted portion of Wetland 15lf provides a low level of habitat functions, similar to the overall wetland. The wetland contains only one vegetation class dominated by a monoculture of winter wheat. The wetland is within 0.5 miles of several of other wetlands within the project area. There is no buffer on the Habitat wetland, it extends to the toe of slope of SR 000, and is frequently disturbed from farming activities. The bi-annual disturbance of cultivation and harvest, along with the proximity to SR 000, reduces its habitat functions. In addition, the landscape position is isolated and the wetlands within the general area have severed connections due to human development. 2

1This chapter summarizes the existing conditions of the streams to be impacted, and the 2assessment of impacts to streams related to the proposed project. 3 4 Include this chapter only if the project will result in minor stream impacts, such as 5 related to bridge or culvert replacements. If the project will result in major stream 6 impacts, do not include this chapter, and instead use WSDOT’s Stream Mitigation 7 Report Template. For guidance on stream mitigation, refer to WSDOT’s Stream 8 Mitigation Report Template, available online at: 9 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/mitigation.htm 10

1Chapter 4. Stream and Stream Buffer Impact 2 Assessment

3This chapter summarizes the landscape setting, the existing conditions of the streams and 4stream buffers to be impacted, and the assessment of impacts to streams and functions related 5to the proposed project.

6 4.1 Existing Conditions of Streams to be Impacted

7 Briefly summarize stream information from Wetland and Stream Assessment Report. 8 9Table 7. Stream # impact summary. Location WA Stream Catalog # Local Jurisdiction WRIA DNR Type Local Jurisdiction Only if different from Rating Ecology Rating Local Jurisdiction As required by local Buffer Width jurisdiction Photo Fish Species Likely fish species based on knowledge of watershed, fish barriers and habitat conditions.

Data sheet numbers for sample plots taken in upland next to wetland Description Briefly describe stream channel characteristics (e.g., incised with silty bottom). Salmon Stock Summarize. Inventory Data Provide a brief assessment of fish habitat conditions presence of pools and riffles, Fish Habitat meanders, and cut banks. Stream Channel Stream width (bankfull width). LWD Presence and general size. Flow Describe water flow levels during your field visit. Riparian/Buffer Describe buffer vegetation and shading of stream. Condition Downstream Describe any known downstream fish barriers. Fish Barriers 10

1 4.2 Stream Impacts

2 4.2.1. Permanent Stream Impacts 3 Refer to Wetland Impact Plan Sheets (Appendix A). 4 5 Discuss the impacts to streams. Include stream types, quantity of stream (either in 6 linear feet or square feet), and quality of streams impacted. Include discussion of 7 temporary impacts if applicable.

8 4.2.2. Temporary Stream Impacts 9 Describe the construction impact that will affect the stream, how it will affect the 10 stream, how long it will occur, and how it will be restored.

11 4.2.3. Indirect Stream Impacts 12 Describe how the indirect impact will occur, how it will affect the stream, and how it 13 will be mitigated.

14 4.3 Stream Buffer Impacts

15 Briefly describe the stream buffers on site, including the following: 16  Buffer type (forested, shrub, pasture) impacted 17  Quantity and quality of buffer impacts to wetlands 18  Impacts to buffer functions 19

20 4.3.1. Permanent Buffer Impacts 21The proposed project will permanently impact ## acres of stream buffer (Table 4). 22 23 Describe the activity that will reduce stream buffer and the vegetation impacted.

24 4.3.2. Temporary Buffer Impacts 25The proposed project will temporarily impact ## acres of existing stream buffer (Table 4). 26 27 Describe the construction activity that will affect the stream buffer, what vegetation is 28 affected, how long the impact will occur, and how it will be restored.

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

2Figure 3. Typical stream that the project will impact. 3 Photo of typical stream impacted. More than one photo may be necessary. Identify 4 wetland in photo. 5 6Table 8. Stream and Stream Buffer Area Impacts. Stream Impacts Stream Buffer Impacts X County Stream Name Permanent Temporary Permanent Temporary Classification Impacts Impacts Impacts Impacts (linear feet/acre) (linear feet/acre) (linear feet/acre) (linear feet/acre)

Totals 7

8 4.4 Stream Habitat Functions Impacted

9 Summarize the following: 10  Stream habitat functions impacted by the project 11  Fish species affected (with an emphasis on salmonids) 12  Use of habitat by fish species 13  Quality of habitat for providing the functions 14

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

2Figure 4. Typical stream buffer that the project will impact. 3 Photo of typical stream buffer impacted. More than one photo may be necessary. 4 Identify wetland in photo. 5

1Chapter 5. Mitigation Strategy

2The mitigation strategy described in this chapter involves avoidance, minimization of wetland 3impacts, and compensatory mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts. 4 5 Follow the steps in the mitigation sequencing process when describing the mitigation 6 strategy. Remember that compensatory mitigation is one of the last steps in this 7 process. 8

9 5.1 Avoidance and Minimization of Wetland and Stream 10 Impacts

11WSDOT has avoided and minimized impacts to wetlands and wetland buffers to the greatest 12extent practicable. Total avoidance was not possible due to constraints associated with safety 13and design guidelines. Impacts were minimized primarily through site-specific design 14techniques including (list impact reduction techniques). Compensatory mitigation will replace 15wetland area and functions lost as a result of these unavoidable impacts. 16 17Ways in which impacts to wetlands have specifically been minimized during the roadway 18design include the following: 19 20 Describe the specific steps taken to avoid and minimize wetland impacts. If possible, 21 include the amount of impact reduced by avoidance and minimization steps. The 22 agency reviewers request more specific details in this section than they previously did. 23 Avoidance includes the steps taken that will prevent impacts to wetlands and streams. 24 Minimization includes those steps taken that will reduce impacts to wetlands and 25 streams. Methods to avoid and minimize impacts include the following, among others: 26  Route selection 27  Road alignment 28  Bridging 29  Retaining walls 30  Steeper side slopes 31  Reduce shoulder widths 32  Timing of project 33  Alternative stormwater treatment (i.e., non-pond treatment) 34 35 36(EXAMPLE) 37Wetland 10lf 38 . This wetland will be totally impacted during construction. Avoidance and/or 39 minimization at this location would have resulted in additional impacts to the Salmon 40 Creek riparian corridor including relocation of the channel. 41Wetland 15lf

1 . Design standards of 4:1 slopes were replaced with 2:1 slopes with guardrail to reduce 2 wetland impacts by 0.50 acre.

35.2 Compensatory Mitigation

4 5.2.1. Regulatory Requirements 5 Wetland Mitigation Requirements

6 Discuss regulatory requirements for wetlands. Provide rationale for proposed 7 mitigation ratios by discussing the following: 8  Compliance of mitigation ratios with Ecology recommendations 9  Compliance of mitigation ratios with local ordinances 10  Timing of mitigation construction in relation to impacts 11  Differences in category or class between impacted wetlands and proposed 12 mitigation site 13  Requirements of Executive Orders 14  Manner and rationale in which indirect and temporary wetland impacts will be 15 mitigated

1Table 8. Recommended mitigation ratios for projects in Western Washington.* 2 Delete table if project is in eastern Washington. 3 Delete rows and columns in table that do not apply to the project. Re- Re- Category establishment establishment Re- and Type Rehabilitation or Creation or Creation Enhancement establishment of Wetland Only (R/C) and (R/C) and Only or Creation Impacts Rehabilitation Enhancement (RH) (E) All 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and Category 1.5:1 3:1 6:1 1:1RH 2:1 E IV All 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 2:1 4:1 8:1 Category III 2:1RH 4:1 E 4:1 Category II Rehabilitation Case-by-case Case-by-case Case-by-case Case-by-case Estuarine of an estuarine wetland 1:1 R/C and 2:1 2:1 4:1 RH Compensation Compensation Not Category II Compensation Not considered must be must be considered an Interdunal must be an option interdunal interdunal option interdunal wetland wetland wetland All other 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 3:1 6:1 12:1 Category II 4:1RH 8:1 E Category I 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 6:1 12:1 24:1 Forested 10:1RH 20:1 E Category I based on 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 4:1 8:1 16:1 score for 6:1RH 12:1 E functions Category I 6:1 R/C not R/C not Natural Not considered Rehabilitation considered considered Case-by-case Heritage possible of a Natural possible possible site Heritage site 6:1 Category I R/C not R/C not Not considered Rehabilitation Coastal considered considered Case-by-case possible of a coastal Lagoon possible possible lagoon 6:1 R/C not R/C not Category I Not considered Rehabilitation considered considered Case-by-case Bog possible of a bog possible possible 6:1 Category I Rehabilitation Case-by-case Case-by-case Case-by-case Case-by-case Estuarine of an estuarine wetland 4* Ecology et al. (2006a) 5

1Table 8. Recommended mitigation ratios for projects in Eastern Washington.* 2 Delete table if project is in western Washington. 3 Delete rows and columns in table that do not apply to the project. Re- Re- Category establishment establishment Re- and Type Rehabilitation or Creation or Creation Enhancement establishment of Wetland Only (R/C) and (R/C) and Only or Creation Impacts Rehabilitation Enhancement (RH) (E) All 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and Category 1.5:1 3:1 6:1 1:1RH 2:1 E IV All 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and Category 2:1 4:1 8:1 2:1RH 4:1 E III Category II 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 4:1 8:1 16:1 Forested 4:1RH 6:1 E 2:1 4:1 Compensation Compensation 1:1 R/C and 2:1 Category II must be must be RH Case-by-case Case-by-case Vernal pool seasonally seasonally ponded ponded wetland wetland All other 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 3:1 6:1 12:1 Category II 4:1RH 8:1 E Category I 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 6:1 12:1 24:1 Forested 10:1RH 20:1 E Category I based on 1:1 R/C and 1:1 R/C and 4:1 8:1 16:1 score for 6:1RH 12:1 E functions Category I 6:1 R/C not R/C not Natural Not considered Rehabilitation considered considered Case-by-case Heritage possible of a Natural possible possible site Heritage site 6:1 R/C not R/C not Category I Not considered Rehabilitation considered considered Case-by-case Alkali possible of an alkali possible possible lagoon 6:1 R/C not R/C not Category I Not considered Rehabilitation considered considered Case-by-case Bog possible of a bog possible possible 4* Ecology et al. (2006a) 5 6According to the Local Jurisdiction Wetlands Ordinance (Local Jurisdiction, date), the 7following standard ratios shall apply to creation/restoration/enhancement of wetlands, which 8are disturbed on this project: 9 10 List the compensatory mitigation ratios as outlined in the local jurisdictions’ Critical 11 Areas Ordinance. This may include simple ratios per the impacted wetland category or 12 be a copy of the Ecology ratios (Table 8) and be separated by mitigation type (creation, 13 re-establishment, rehabilitation, enhancement, or preservation). Provide a simplified

1 version of the CAO mitigation ratios that addresses the mitigation type proposed and 2 the category of the wetlands impacted. 3 4The results of applying the recommended mitigation ratios for Ecology et al. (2006a) and Local 5Jurisdiction are shown in Tables 9 and 10, respectively. Applying the Ecology mitigation ratios 6for creation with enhancement results in ## acres of wetland creation and ## acres of wetland 7enhancement (Table 9). Applying the Local Jurisdiction mitigation ratios results in ## acres of 8wetland creation or restoration (Table 10). 9 10Table 9. Mitigation area recommendations per Wetland Mitigation in Washington State 11(Ecology et al. 2006a). Direct Creation/Re-establishment of Enhancement of a Category # Wetland Impacts a Category # Wetland Wetland Ecology Proposed Proposed Area Wetland Ratio Creation Ratio Enhancement (acres) Category Area (acres) Area (acres)

Total 12 13Table 9. Mitigation area recommendations per Wetland Mitigation in Washington State 14(Ecology et al. 2006a). (EXAMPLE) Direct Creation/Re-establishment of Enhancement of a Category III Wetland Impacts a Category III Wetland Wetland Ecology Proposed Proposed Area Wetland Ratio Creation Ratio Enhancement (acres) Category Area (acres) Area (acres) II 0.10 1:1 0.10 4:1 0.40 III 2.50 1:1 2.50 2:1 5.00 IV 0.23 1:1 0.23 1:1 0.23 Total 2.83 2.83 5.63 15 16Table 10. Mitigation area required per local jurisdiction.* Direct Creation or Restoration of a Wetland Impacts Category ___ Wetland Local Proposed Jurisdiction Area Ratio Creation Wetland (acres) Area (ac) Category I II III IV Total 17* Local jurisdiction Wetlands Ordinance (Local jurisdiction, date). 18

1 Wetland and Stream Buffer Mitigation Requirements

2 See local jurisdiction Wetlands Ordinance for buffer mitigation requirements. 3 4 Stream Mitigation Requirements

5 Refer to the WSDOT Stream Mitigation Report Template for guidance on stream 6 mitigation ratios, available online at: 7 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/mitigation.htm. 8

9 5.2.2. Project Mitigation Proposal 10 This is intended to provide a summary section or table of all mitigation requirements 11 and the proposed mitigation. The mitigation requirements list all state and local 12 jurisdiction requirements including mitigation area, type (HGM), rating, classification 13 (USFWS), and buffer width. Include minimum wetland functions to be provided. 14 15 The mitigation proposal will state the location of the mitigation site, the mitigation type, 16 mitigation area, HGM, rating, classification ((USFWS), buffer width, and functions to 17 be provided. This section should provide a succinct summary of agency requirements 18 and how these requirements are met with the mitigation proposal. 19 20The proposed project will adversely impact a total of ## acres of 21depressional/slope/riverine/esturine/lacustrine fringe/flat wetland area, Category I/II/III/IV, 22PFO/PSS/PEM/PAB/POW, (## acres of permanent, ## acres of temporary, ## acres of indirect 23impacts). These impacts will reduce or eliminate the following wetland functions: ____, ____, 24____. 25 26To satisfy the Governor’s Executive Order 89-10, Ecology/USACE joint guidance, and (local 27jurisdiction) CAO requirements, WSDOT will create/re-establish/rehabilitate ## acres of new 28Category II/III (HGM) wetland, enhance ## acres of existing Category # (HGM) wetland to a 29Category II/III/IV wetland, and enhance ## acres of wetland buffer area. The created and 30enhanced wetland will provide the following wetland functions: ____, ____, ____. The 31mitigation site will have a ____ foot wide upland buffer. 32 33 In the preceding paragraph, revise the mitigation type, category, and HGM as necessary 34 to reflect your mitigation proposal. 35

365.2.2 Project Mitigation Proposal (Example) 37The proposed project will permanently impact 2.83 acres of depressional wetland and 1.58 38acres of buffer area. This impact will reduce primarily flood flow alteration, sediment removal, 39and nutrient/toxicant removal functions in the basin. Additional minor impacts to wetland 40functions include erosion control, organic matter production and export, general habitat 41suitability, and native plant richness. 42

1To satisfy the Governor’s Executive Order 89-10, Wetland Mitigation in Washington State 2(Ecology et al. 2006a), and Washington County CAO requirements, WSDOT will create 2.83 3acres of new Category III depressional outflow/riverine wetland, enhance 11.26 acres of 4existing Category IV depressional wetland to a Category III wetland, and enhance 2.11 acres of 5wetland buffer area. The created and enhanced wetland will provide functions exceeding the 6impacted wetlands and will include flood flow alteration, sediment removal, nutrient and 7toxicant removal, erosion control and shoreline stabilization, Organic matter production and 8export, general habitat suitability, habitat for aquatic invertebrates, amphibians, and wetland- 9associated birds, and native plant richness. The mitigation site will contain a 50 foot wide 10upland buffer. 11

12 5.2.3. Temporary Wetland and Buffer Impact Restoration 13Describe the proposal for the restoration of the temporary wetland and buffer impacts.

1Chapter 6. Compensatory Wetland Mitigation

2 There should be one chapter for each mitigation site. If there is more than one site, the 3 title should include the name of the mitigation site, such as “North Creek Wetland 4 Mitigation Site.”

5This chapter describes the key elements of the proposed compensatory mitigation site.

6 6.1 Site Location

7 Provide a brief description of the location, including nearest city or landmark, STR, 8 size, and relationship to impact wetlands. Also include information for site ownership. 109

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

11Figure 5. Map showing the location of the mitigation site in relation to the project impact 12site. 13 (Sometimes this can be shown in Figure 1; in which case this figure can be eliminated.)

14 6.1.1. Landscape Position 15 Summarize the following in two paragraphs or less: 16  Landscape location 17  Site topography 18  Relationship to other water bodies, streams, rivers, lakes, and estuaries 19  Hydrologic connections 20  Existing wetlands onsite 21  Existing streams onsite

1 6.1.2. Ecological Connectivity 2 Describe connectivity of mitigation site to other ecological areas and habitat types (e.g., 3 streams, wetlands, uplands).

4 6.1.3. Historic and Current Land Use 5 Include historic land uses and zoning designations, appropriate for the discussion of 6 mitigated wetland, stream, or watershed functions. Discuss current land uses and 7 zoning designations on the mitigation site and adjacent lands. Include relevant 8 comprehensive plan designations (e.g., Agricultural Production Districts, Preserved 9 Farmland and Open Space). 10

11 6.2 Rationale for Site Selection

12 Discuss the rationale of site selection, how the site was chosen and why. Also include 13 how the site fits with the environmental needs in the watershed. If watershed or 14 regional planning efforts exist for the area, explain how the selection of the 15 compensation site is consistent with those plans. Provide site selection in terms of how 16 the selection of this site provides opportunity to replace functions impaired or missing 17 in the watershed and/or supports overall watershed restoration goals (overall 18 improvement of aquatic resources within the watershed). Refer to Watershed Context 19 (Section 2.3) for watershed goals and watershed limiting factors discussion. 20

21 6.3 Mitigation Site Existing Conditions

22 Provide a general summary of existing conditions at the mitigation site.

23 6.3.1. Uplands 24 Discuss the uplands in one to three paragraphs as it applies to the proposed mitigation. 25 Describe the soil type and classification, texture, color, structure, permeability, and 26 organic content. Refer to boring logs or test pit data in Appendix C. Describe also the 27 plant communities, dominant species, and invasive species present. (Reference the list 28 in the Appendices. Discussion should be limited to dominant plant communities that 29 exist on the site prior to construction.)

30 6.3.2. Wetlands 31 Describe condition of wetlands if any exist at the mitigation site. Refer to the 32 Mitigation Site Wetland Memo, which should be included as Appendix B. 33 Discuss in several paragraphs the wetlands on-site (Include wetland memo, data sheet, 34 and rating forms in the appendix and reference in this section) 35  Classification –USFWS, Local, Ecology , and HGM 36  Hydrology 37  Soils (as in Section 6.4.1 Uplands) 38  Dominant vegetation and invasive species present 39  Buffer condition

1  Wetland functions 2 3Table 11. Mitigation site wetland summary. Location Local Jurisdiction _ County WRIA Ecology Rating

(Hruby 2004) XX County Rating XX County Buffer Width ## feet Wetland Size ## acres photo of wetland Cowardin Classification HGM Classification Wetland Rating System Pts. ## Water Quality Score ## Hydrologic Score ## Habitat Score ## Total Score

Dominant

Vegetation Soils Hydrology Rationale for

Local Rating

Describe functions per Wetland Functions Characterization Tool Functions of Entire Wetland For Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000).

Buffer Condition 4 5 6

1Table 11. Sunny Road Mitigation Site wetland summary (EXAMPLE). Wetland is located on the south side of the site adjacent to Salmon Location Creek. Local Jurisdiction Washington County WRIA Palouse WRIA 34 Ecology Rating IV (Hruby 2004) Washington County IV Rating Washington County 25 feet Buffer Width Wetland Size 11.26 acres Cowardin Palustrine emergent Classification (PEM) Depressional flow- HGM Classification through Wetland Rating System Pts. Water Quality Score 6 Hydrologic Score 4 Habitat Score 11 Total Score 21 Dominant Reed canarygrass Vegetation The surface 10 inches of soil in this wetland has a matrix color of very dark gray (10YR3/1). Below this depth, the matrix color is dark gray Soils (10YR4/1) with grayish brown (10YR5/2) soft masses that are common, coarse, and distinct. Donald (1980) mapped this soil as Caldwell series. Surface water connection to Paradise Creek. Watermarks, sediment Hydrology deposits and drainage patterns were evident during site visits.

Rationale for Ecology rating and Washington County rating are the same for this Local Rating wetland. The existing wetland provides wetland functions including a high level Functions of of sediment removal, medium level of flood flow alteration, and Entire Wetland medium level of general habitat suitability.

Buffer Condition Narrow and dominated by non-native herbaceous vegetation.

2 6.3.3. Stream 3 Describe condition of stream if one exists at the mitigation site. Refer to the Mitigation 4 Site Wetland Memo, which should be included as Appendix B. 5 6 Discuss the on-site stream in several paragraphs, including the following information: 7  Stream class 8  Fish use 9  Habitat quantity and quality 10  Water quality

1  Riparian conditions 2 3 Describe the functions provided by the existing stream on the mitigation site. 4 5Table 12. Stream impact and mitigation Impact * Functions Affected Mitigation ** Functions Improved

6 * Describe impact quantity, quality, and type. 7 ** Describe the mitigation in quality, quantity, and type

8 6.3.4. Wildlife Habitat and Use 9 Briefly discuss the following in a paragraph, as it applies to the proposed mitigation: 10  Existing wildlife habitat 11  Existing wildlife use 12  Endangered, threatened, sensitive and candidate animal species that are known to 13 occur in the general area 14 15 Alternatively, the Biological Assessment may be referenced instead of discussing the 16 last bulleted items. 1817

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

19Figure 6. Aerial photograph of the mitigation site and surrounding properties. 20

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

2 3Figure 7. Photo of ______Wetland Mitigation Site. 4 More than one photo may be necessary. If available add an air photo figure. 5

6 6.4 Wetland Mitigation Site Design

7 Refer to Mitigation Site Plan Sheets (Appendix E). 8 9 Include a general description of the proposed mitigation design, proposed wetland 10 communities and acreages, buffer communities and acreages and the design strategy 11 that will be used to establish the wetland mitigation site. Also include a brief discussion 12 of how the mitigation design responds to watershed needs/functions and what proposed 13 design elements will provide watershed functions. Review watershed conditions and 14 limiting factors in Section 2.3.

15 6.4.1. Site Hydrology 16 Describe the site’s hydrology by including the following: 17  Describe the proposed groundwater and surface water sources and characteristics 18 and data source. 19  Provide a qualitative description of the proposed water regime - frequency and 20 duration of flooding, inundation, or soil saturation. 21  Describe how the hydrologic data supports the proposed water regime. 22  Describe how the created wetlands will not "take away" hydrology from any 23 wetlands planned to be preserved or enhanced. 24  Contact the Department of Ecology Water Resources Section, if the project may 25 result in withdrawal of surface or groundwater, to determine whether a water right 26 permit is needed, and provide documentation to that effect. Information on water 27 rights can be found online at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wr/rights/water- 28 right-home.html. 29  Include a table of groundwater level data. 30  Refer to the hydrology data in Appendix D.

1 (If using hydrology from an existing wetland, do not alter the existing wetland’s 2 hydroperiod unless it is an intentional part of the mitigation strategy and results in an 3 increase of wetland functions.) 4 5 Stream Flow

6 Discuss the stream flow modeling (HEC-RAS) and reference to stream modeling report 7 in the appendix. 8

9 Groundwater

10 Discuss the groundwater data collection. What period was data collected? Discuss data 11 shown in Table 13. 12

13Table 13. Groundwater monitoring well data from wells located onsite. Date Well #1 * Well #2 * Well #3 * Well #4 *

14 * Use the naming convention noted on the boring log or piezometer number. 15 16To document soil textures and groundwater elevations, # test pits were dug (or hand 17excavated?) onsite in Month/day/year (Table 12). 18

1Table 13. Test pit soil and groundwater data collected at the Sunny Road Mitigation Site, 2August 4, 2005. (EXAMPLE) Pothole 1 0-20" 10YR 4/1 silt loam with faint/fine (10%) 10YR4/4 redoximorphic features 20"-54" 10YR 4/1 silty clay loam with faint/fine (10%) 10YR4/4 redoximorphic features 54"-80" Gley 1, 4/N silty clay loam with (35%) 10YR4/6 redoximorphic features groundwater (free water) at 67" when dug, at 60" after ~10min layer 3 showing mass depleted clays Pothole 2 0-14" 10YR 4/2 silt loam with no redoximorphic features 15"-51" 10YR 4/1 silty clay loam with faint/fine (5%) 10YR4/6 redoximorphic features 51"-60" 10YR 4/2 sandy clay loam groundwater (free water) at 60" when dug, at 54" after ~10min signs of saturation at 52" Pothole 3 0-13" 10YR 3/2 silt loam with no redoximorphic features 13"-31" 5YR 4/6 silt loam, minor sand with no redoximorphic features 31"-64" 10YR 4/1 sandy-gravel with no redoximorphic features (*) free water at 64" charred cedar log at ~20" (*) later viewed mottled soils in pile from later digging Pothole 4 0-47" 10YR 3/2 fine sandy-loam with no redoximorphic features 47"-79" Gley1, 4/N loam with coarse (50%) 10YR3/4 redoximorphic features water seeps observed at 50"; free water at 52" gleyed soils start at 47", very depleted matrix Pothole 5 0"-32" 10YR 3/2 silt loam with no redoximorphic features (*) 32"-64" 2.5Y 4/4 loam with no redoximorphic features saturation at 58" (*) faint redoximorphic features were seen during delineation on 8-4-06 3

4 6.4.2. Invasive Species Control Strategy 5 Discuss how the design incorporates a strategy for controlling invasive species. 6 Describe the methods that will be used to control invasive and exotic plants during site 7 preparation if they exist in the vicinity, as well as controlling them once the site is 8 constructed.

9 6.4.3. Grading Design 10 Discuss the following aspects of the grading design: 11  Describe soil logs from an on-site evaluation (Appendix C). Describe anticipated 12 soils at depth of excavation. If there is to be no excavation, then describe soils at 13 the surface. 14  Discuss soil amendments needed to support plant growth. 15  Describe similarities to hydric soils or anticipated changes toward hydric soil 16 characteristics (e.g., texture, organic matter content, low infiltration). 17  Describe how grading will achieve the proposed hydrologic regime.

1  Describe how the anticipated hydroperiod will interact with the proposed grading 2 (Will the site be inundated during part of the year? If so, to what depth? Will the 3 site have saturated soils? If so, when and for how long?). 4  Refer to the Mitigation Site Plan Sheets (Appendix E) and the proposed plant lists 5 (Tables 14 & 15).

6 6.4.4. Planting Design 7 Describe the planting design, by doing the following: 8  Describe plant communities that will be planted on-site and rationale for choice 9 (include plant list). (Refer to mitigation goals/objectives and development of 10 functions that are intended.) 11  Discuss natural revegetation from existing seed bank and natural recruitment from 12 nearby sites. Include any invasive species present on nearby sites. 13  Explain the proposed plant communities in relation to the anticipated hydroperiod 14 and soils. 15  Describe the basis for the plant species used, such as nearby reference sites or 16 historic aerial photos. 17 18Table 14. Plant list proposed for wetland creation and enhancement areas. Community Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status Composition Emergent Wetland Community (PEM)

Scrub-shrub Wetland Community (PSS)

Forested Wetland Community (PFO)

1Table 14. Plant list proposed for wetland creation and enhancement areas. (EXAMPLE) Community Common Name Scientific Name Indicator Status Composition Scrub-shrub Wetland Community (PSS) Pacific Willow Salix lucida FACW+ 5% Red-osier Dogwood Cornus sericea FACW+ 30% Golden Currant Ribes aureum FAC+ 25% Nootka Rose Rosa nootkana FAC 25% Coyote Willow Salix exigua OBL 10% Scouler's Willow Salix scouleriana FAC 5% Forested Wetland Community (PFO) Douglas Hawthorn Crataegus douglasii FAC 5% Water Birch Betula occidentalis FACW 10% Populus balsamifera ssp. Black Cottonwood FAC 10% trichocarpa Quaking Aspen Populus tremuloides NL 5% Pacific Willow Salix lucida FACW+ 15% Red-osier Dogwood Cornus sericea FACW+ 15% Wax Currant Ribes cereum FAC 10% Golden Currant Ribes aureum FAC+ 10% Nootka Rose Rosa nootkana FAC 10% Scouler's Willow Salix scouleriana FAC 10% 2

3 6.4.5. Habitat Features 4 Discuss habitat features created on-site and targeted wildlife, if applicable.

5 6.4.6. Buffers 6 Describe the area, width, and intended functions of buffer to be established. Include a 7 table of species to be planted. 8 9Table 15. Plant list proposed for upland buffer areas. Community Common Name Scientific Name Composition

10 11 12Table 15. Plant list proposed for upland buffer areas. (EXAMPLE) Community Common Name Scientific Name Composition Ponderosa Pine Pinus ponderosa 15%

Populus balsamifera ssp. Black Cottonwood 10% trichocarpa Serviceberry Amelanchier alnifolia 10% Mock Orange Philadelphus lewisii 10% Mallow Ninebark Physocarpus malvaceus 10% Choke Cherry Prunus virginiana 5% Wax Currant Ribes cereum 5% Golden Currant Ribes aureum 5% Woods’ Rose Rosa woodsii 10% Blue Elderberry Sambucus cerulea 10% Common Snowberry Symphoricarpus albus 10% 1

2 6.4.7. Site Protection 3 The mitigation plan needs to specify what measures will be taken to protect the site for 4 the long term such as a deed restriction, conservation easement or Native Growth 5 Protection Easement. Also discuss fences, signs, and access barriers.

6 6.4.8. Implementation Schedule 7 Summarize the schedule for implementing the compensatory mitigation. This is 8 extremely important when submitting the report without sufficient hydrologic data to 9 complete the mitigation site design. For these instances, include approximate schedule 10 information on hydrologic data collection; clearing, excavation, and grading; plant 11 installation; and initiation of monitoring. 12

13 6.5 Ecological Benefits

14 6.5.1. Wetland Functions 15The mitigation design will create a Category II/III wetland that will substantially improve (state 16wetland functions) water quality, hydrologic, and habitat functions (Appendix F). Functional 17attributes of the mitigation wetlands that will be improved and added compared to the existing 18impacted wetlands are: 19 20 Improved Functional Attributes—list attributes from Wetland Functions 21 Characterization Tool For Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000). 22 Describe how the mitigation site has the opportunity to provide the function and how 23 the site design will provide the ability to perform the function. Be specific about both 24 site location (opportunity) and site design characteristics (ability). 25 26 New Functional Attributes—list attributes from Wetland Functions Characterization 27 Tool For Linear Projects (Null et al. 2000). 28 Describe how the mitigation site has the opportunity to provide the function and how 29 the site design will provide the ability to perform the function. Be specific about both 30 site location (opportunity) and site design characteristics (ability). 31

1Table 16 shows which functions and values will be present at the mitigation wetland, as well as 2which type of mitigation provides which functions. Table 17 compares, in more specific terms, 3the characteristics of the wetland and buffer areas of the impacted versus mitigation sites. 4 5 Adapt Table 16 to reflect only the types of wetland mitigation provided at the project’s 6 mitigation site, as in the Table 16 example. Complete and adapt Table 17 to best show 7 the strengths of the mitigation site. 8Table 16. Wetland functions provided by various areas of the mitigation site. Wetland Mitigation Areasa Function/Value Creation Enhancement Re-establishment Rehabilitation Flood Flow Alteration Sediment Removal Nutrient and Toxicant Removal Erosion Control & Shoreline Stabilization Production & Export of Organic Matter General Habitat Suitability Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates Habitat for Amphibians Habitat for Wetland- Associated Mammals Habitat for Wetland- Associated Birds General Fish Habitat Native Plant Richness Educational or Scientific Value Uniqueness and Heritage 9a “-” means that the function will not be present; “X” means that the function will be present is of low quality; and 10“+” means the function will be present and will be of high quality. 11

1Table 16. Wetland functions provided by various areas of the mitigation site. 2(EXAMPLE) Wetland Mitigation Areas Function/Valuea Created Enhanced Flood Flow Alteration + + Sediment Removal + + Nutrient and Toxicant Removal + + Erosion Control & Shoreline + + Stabilization

Production & Export of Organic Matter + +

General Habitat Suitability + + Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates + + Habitat for Amphibians + + Habitat for Wetland-Associated + + Mammals

Habitat for Wetland-Associated Birds - -

General Fish Habitat - - Native Plant Richness + + Educational or Scientific Value - - Uniqueness and Heritage - - 3a “-” means that the function will not be present; “X” means that the function will be present is of low quality; and 4“+” means the function will be present and will be of high quality. 5

1Table 17. Comparison of the typical wetland functions at impacted wetlands and 2mitigated wetlands. Comparison of Typical Wetland Functions Provided Function/Value Impacted Wetland Mitigation Site Flood Flow Alteration Sediment Removal Nutrient and Toxicant Removal Erosion Control & Shoreline Stabilization Production & Export of Organic Matter General Habitat Suitability Habitat for Aquatic Invertebrates Habitat for Amphibians Habitat for Wetland- Associated Mammals Habitat for Wetland- Associated Birds General Fish Habitat Native Plant Richness Educational or Scientific Value Uniqueness and Heritage 3

1Table 17. Comparison of the typical wetland functions at impacted wetlands and 2mitigated wetlands. (EXAMPLE) Comparison of Typical Wetland Functions Provided Function/Value Impacted Wetlands Mitigation Site Flood Flow Alteration Low Quality High Quality Sediment Removal Low Quality High Quality Nutrient and Toxicant Low Quality High Quality Removal Erosion Control & Not Present High Quality Shoreline Stabilization Production & Export of Not Present High Quality Organic Matter General Habitat Suitability Low Quality High Quality Habitat for Aquatic Not Present High Quality Invertebrates Habitat for Amphibians Low Quality High Quality Habitat for Wetland- Not Present High Quality Associated Mammals Habitat for Wetland- Not Present Not Present Associated Birds General Fish Habitat Not Present Not Present Native Plant Richness Not Present High Quality Educational or Scientific Not Present Not Present Value Uniqueness and Heritage Not Present Not Present 3

4 6.5.2. Buffer Functions 5 Describe improvements to buffer functions. Describe how the mitigation site has the 6 opportunity to provide the function and how the site design will provide the ability to 7 perform the function. Be specific about both site location and site design 8 characteristics.

9 6.5.3. Watershed Functions 10 Describe improvements to watershed functions. Describe how the mitigation site has 11 the opportunity to provide the function and how the site design will provide the ability 12 to perform the function. Be specific about both site location and site design 13 characteristics. 14

1Chapter 7. Compensatory Stream Mitigation

2 There should be one chapter for each mitigation site. If there is more than one site, the 3 title should include the name of the mitigation site, such as “North Creek Mitigation 4 Site.” If the mitigation site is in the same location and on the same stream as the 5 impacts, Sections 7.1 (7.1.1, 7.1.2, 7.1.3) and 7.3 (7.3.1, 7.3.2, 7.3.3) may be deleted IF 6 this information is included earlier in the report. For projects with stream mitigation 7 sites that are not on the stream impacted or if there are additional stream mitigation sites 8 that were not previously described, these sections will need to remain.

9This chapter describes the key elements of the proposed compensatory mitigation site.

10 7.1 Site Location

11 Provide a brief description of the location, including nearest city or landmark, STR, 12 size, and relationship to impact streams. Also include information for site ownership. 13 It is not necessary to include this section if this information was presented earlier in the 14 report. 1615

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

17Figure 8. Map showing the location of the stream mitigation site in relation to the project 18impact site. 19 (Sometimes this can be shown in Figure 1; in which case this figure can be eliminated.)

20 7.1.1. Landscape Position 21 Summarize the following in two paragraphs or less: 22  Landscape location 23  Site topography 24  Relationship to other water bodies, streams, rivers, lakes, and estuaries

1  Hydrologic connections 2  Existing wetlands onsite 3  Existing streams onsite 4 It is not necessary to include this section if this information was presented earlier in the 5 report.

6 7.1.2. Ecological Connectivity 7 Describe connectivity of mitigation site to other ecological areas and habitat types (e.g., 8 streams, wetlands, uplands). It is not necessary to include this section if this 9 information was presented earlier in the report.

10 7.1.3. Historic and Current Land Use 11 Include historic land uses and zoning designations, appropriate for the discussion of 12 mitigated stream or watershed functions. Discuss current land uses and zoning 13 designations on the mitigation site and adjacent lands. Include relevant comprehensive 14 plan designations (e.g., Agricultural Production Districts, Preserved Farmland and Open 15 Space). It is not necessary to include this section if this information was presented 16 earlier in the report. 17

18 7.2 Rationale for Site Selection

19 Discuss the rationale of site selection, how the site was chosen and why. Also include 20 how the site fits with the environmental needs in the watershed. If watershed or 21 regional planning efforts exist for the area, explain how the selection of the 22 compensation site is consistent with those plans. 23

24 7.3 Mitigation Site Existing Conditions

25 Provide a general summary of existing conditions at the mitigation site. It is not 26 necessary to include this section if this information was presented earlier in the report.

27 7.3.1. Uplands and Riparian Areas 28 Discuss the uplands in one to three paragraphs as it applies to the proposed mitigation. 29 Describe the soil type and classification, texture, color, structure, permeability, and 30 organic content. Describe also the plant communities, dominant species, and invasive 31 species present. (Reference the list in the Appendices. Discussion should be limited to 32 dominant plant communities that exist on the site prior to construction.). It is not 33 necessary to include this section if this information was presented earlier in the report.

34 7.3.2. Wetlands 35 Describe condition of wetlands if any exist at the mitigation site. If no wetlands occur 36 on the stream mitigation site, delete this section. Refer to the Mitigation Site Wetland 37 Memo, which should be included as Appendix B.

1 Discuss in several paragraphs the wetlands on-site (Include wetland memo, data sheet, 2 and rating forms in the appendix and reference in this section) 3  Classification –USFWS, Local, Ecology , and HGM 4  Hydrology 5  Soils (as in Section 6.4.1 Uplands) 6  Dominant vegetation and invasive species present 7  Buffer condition 8  Wetland functions 9 10Table 18. Stream impacts and proposed mitigation Impact * Functions Affected Mitigation ** Functions Improved

11 * Describe impact quantity, quality, and type. 12 ** Describe the mitigation in quality, quantity, and type 13

14 7.3.3. Wildlife Habitat and Use 15 Briefly discuss the following in a paragraph, as it applies to the proposed mitigation: 16  Existing wildlife habitat 17  Existing wildlife use 18  Endangered, threatened, sensitive and candidate animal species that are known to 19 occur in the general area 20 21 Alternatively, the Biological Assessment may be referenced instead of discussing the 22 last bulleted items. It is not necessary to include this section if this information was 23 presented earlier in the report. 2524

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

1Figure 9. Aerial photograph of the stream mitigation site and surrounding properties. 32

PHOTO PLACE HOLDER

4 5Figure 10. Photo of ______Stream Mitigation Site. 6 More than one photo may be necessary. If available add an air photo figure. It is not 7 necessary to include this if it was presented earlier in the report. 8

9 7.4 Stream Mitigation Site Design

10 Refer to Mitigation Site Plan Sheets (Appendix E). 11 12 Include a general description. Discuss the design strategy that will be used to establish 13 the stream mitigation site. List the specific design elements and quantities proposed 14 (e.g., XXX linear feet of channel realignment, # of culvert replacements, X square feet 15 of spawning gravel placement, etc.).

16 7.4.1. Stream Channel Design 17 Discuss the following aspects of the design: 18  Describe the proposed channel design and include new locations, bed gradient, bed 19 material, channel dimensions, channel side slopes, habitat and flow control 20 structures, culverts, and any other physical elements. 21  Discuss the stream flow modeling (HEC-RAS) and reference to stream modeling 22 report in the appendix. 23  Describe soil conditions and include soil boring logs if available. 24  Describe vegetation to be removed. 25  Describe methods to stabilize channel side slopes and other erosion control 26 measures related to the proposed design. 27  Refer to the Mitigation Site Plan Sheets (Appendix E).

28 7.4.2. Stream Buffer Planting 29 Describe the planting design, by doing the following:

1  Describe plant communities that will be planted on-site and rationale for choice 2 (include plant list). (Refer to mitigation goals/objectives and development of 3 functions that are intended.) 4  Discuss natural revegetation from existing seed bank and natural recruitment from 5 nearby sites. Include any invasive species present on nearby sites. 6  Explain the proposed plant communities in relation to the anticipated hydroperiod 7 and soils. 8  Describe the basis for the plant species used, such as nearby reference sites or 9 historic aerial photos. 10  Discuss any soil amendments that will be installed. 11 12Table 19. Plant list proposed for the stream buffer enhancement areas. Community Common Name Scientific Name Composition

14 7.4.3. Invasive Species Control Strategy 15 Discuss how the design incorporates a strategy for controlling invasive species. 16 Describe the methods that will be used to control invasive and exotic plants during site 17 preparation if they exist in the vicinity, as well as controlling them once the site is 18 constructed..

19 7.4.4. Habitat Features 20 Discuss habitat features placed on-site and targeted wildlife, if applicable.

21 7.4.5. Buffers 22 Describe the area, width, and intended functions of buffer to be established. Include a 23 table of species to be planted.

24 7.4.6. Site Protection 25 The mitigation plan needs to specify what measures will be taken to protect the site for 26 the long term such as a deed restriction, conservation easement or Native Growth 27 Protection Easement. Also discuss fences, signs, and access barriers.

28 7.4.7. Implementation Schedule 29 Summarize the schedule for implementing the compensatory mitigation. This is 30 extremely important when submitting the report without sufficient hydrologic data to 31 complete the mitigation site design. For these instances, include approximate schedule

1 information on hydrologic data collection; clearing, excavation, and grading; plant 2 installation; and initiation of monitoring. 3

4 7.5 Ecological Benefits

5 7.5.1. Stream and Riparian Functions 6 Describe improvements to the stream and buffer functions. Describe how the 7 mitigation site has the opportunity to provide the function and how the site design will 8 provide the ability to perform the function. Be specific about both site location and site 9 design characteristics. 10 11

1Chapter 8. Wetland Mitigation Goals, 2 Objectives, and Performance 3 Criteria

4The proposed mitigation site will be monitored for 5/10 years to demonstrate that the intended 5goals and objectives are established. Goals describe the overall intent of mitigation efforts, and 6objectives describe individual components of the mitigation site in detail. Performance 7measures and performance standards describe specific on-site characteristics that indicate a 8function is being provided. Performance measures are used to guide management of the 9mitigation site. Performance standards are used to evaluate compliance with regulatory permits 10in the final year of monitoring. Contingency plans describe what actions can be taken to 11correct site deficiencies. 12 13WSDOT uses the adaptive management process to improve mitigation success. Adaptive 14management involves learning from monitoring and implementing management activities, such 15as implementing parts of the site management or contingency plans. Information from 16monitoring is used to direct subsequent site management activities. As part of the adaptive 17management process, mid-course corrections may necessitate a change in vision for the site if 18nature takes its course and things turn out differently than planned. A change in vision may 19require renegotiation with regulators for a new set of performance standards. 20

21 8.1 Goals

22 These are intended to be the overall goals of the mitigation plan and summarize the “big 23 picture.” 24The following is the overall goal for the mitigation project: 25  The proposed mitigation is intended to replace wetland acreage and functions lost or 26 impacted by the proposed project. 27

28 8.2 Objectives

29 Objectives identify specific elements that are undertaken to meet the goals of the 30 project. They provide more detail on how each goal will be achieved, but they do not 31 set specific targets for achievement of those objectives, as performance standards do. 32 One goal may have several objectives. Objectives should identity the following: 33  Type and quantity of mitigation and the functions to be established or enhanced 34  Specific area of wetland mitigation types (e.g., creation, re-establishment, 35 rehabilitation, or preservation) that compensates for permanent direct and indirect 36 impacts to wetlands 37  Buffer enhancement that compensates for the specific area of buffer impact 38  Stream mitigation type(s) that compensate for permanent direct impacts to wetlands 39

1 Note: As it should be, separating areas of creation, re-establishment, rehabilitation, and 2 preservation at the end of the monitoring period is difficult to impossible. Objectives 3 and performance standards should not set specific acreage targets for these zones. 4 Instead, it is more reasonable to address these targets in a more general way with an 5 overall wetland acreage target. 6 7 8(EXAMPLE) 9GOALS 10The goal of the mitigation is to provide a no net loss of wetland area and improve hydrologic, 11water quality, and habitat functions. 12 13OBJECTIVES 141. Increase wetland area at the mitigation site by excavating upland area to create 15 wetland on 2.83 acres and enhance 11.26 acres of existing wetland area. 162. Improve hydrologic functions by increasing wetland area and flood storage 17 capacity; extending wetland hydroperiod; increasing the connectivity of wetlands to Salmon 18 Creek; and increasing cover of woody vegetation. 193. Improve water quality functions by increasing wetland acreage; adding 20 additional vegetation classes and increasing the connectivity of wetlands to Salmon Creek. 214. Improve habitat functions by increasing; the number of vegetation strata; the 22 number of water depth classes; canopy closure over the wetlands; the number of hydrologic 23 regimes; the number of native plant species; the number of plant assemblages; vegetation 24 class interspersion; improve buffer condition; increase the diversity of plant communities in 25 areas currently dominated by reed canarygrass; and connect new wetland areas to Salmon 26 Creek. 275. Improve floodplain and riparian function by re-establishing hydrologic 28 connectivity to Salmon Creek and increasing woody cover directly adjacent to the creek. 29

30 8.3 Performance Criteria

31 Performance measures and performance standards need to be meaningful, measurable, 32 and achievable. Apply the following guidance when developing performance criteria 33  Please review all of the WSDOT’s Performance Criteria Guidance documents prior 34 to writing performance measures or performance standards, available at: 35 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/mitigation.htm. 36  Performance criteria must be reviewed and approved by the WSDOT HQ Wetland 37 Assessment and Monitoring Program for consistency, clarity, and applicability 38 before final draft submittal. 39  Performance criteria should not set specific acreage targets for these zones. Instead, 40 it is more reasonable to address these targets in a more general way with an overall 41 wetland acreage target. 42  Included below are examples of common performance standards. The standards 43 may vary depending on characteristics of the mitigation site and design.

3(EXAMPLE) 4The performance standards described below provide benchmarks for measuring achievement of 5the goals and objectives of the mitigation site. Mitigation activities are intended to meet these 6performance standards within a specified time frame. The performance standards are based on 7function characteristics described in Method for Assessing Wetland Functions (Hruby et al. 81999). These performance standards measure structural attributes that provide a reasonable 9indication of wetland functions. Methods to monitor each performance standard are described 10in general terms. 11

12Hydrologic Performance Criteria 13The hydrologic performance measures/standards help to document and verify that wetland area 14and ground elevations are established according to the criteria specified during the design. 15These directly relate to Objectives 1 and 2. 16

17 Performance Measures

18 Years 1, 3, 5, and 7 19 The soils in the created wetland will be saturated to the surface, or standing water will be 20 present within 12 inches of the surface for at least 4 consecutive weeks (10 percent) of the 21 growing season in years when rainfall meets or exceeds the 30-year average.

22 Performance Standard (final year of monitoring) 23 The wetland area at the mitigation site will be delineated using current methods to assure 24 that the mitigation site contains 2.83 acres of created wetland. 25

26Wetland Vegetation Performance Criteria 27The wetland vegetation performance criteria directly relate to Objectives 2, 3, 4 and 5.

29 Year-1 and Year-3 30 Native, wetland (facultative and wetter) woody species (planted and volunteer) will achieve 31 an average density of at least 4 plants per 100 square feet in the scrub-shrub and forested 32 communities of the created and enhanced wetland areas.

33 Year 3 34 Aerial cover of native, wetland (facultative and wetter) herbaceous plant species will be at 35 least 30 percent in the emergent community of the created and enhanced wetlands.

1 Year-5 2 Aerial cover of native, wetland (facultative and wetter) woody species will be at least 35 3 percent in the scrub-shrub and forested communities of the created and enhanced wetlands. 4

5 Year-7 6 Aerial cover of native, wetland (facultative and wetter) woody species will be at least 50 7 percent in the scrub-shrub and forested communities of the created and enhanced wetlands.

8 All years 9 County-listed Class-A noxious weeds and non-native blackberries (Rubus spp.), Scot’s 10 broom (Cytisus scoparius), and thistles (Cirsium spp.) will not exceed 25 percent aerial 11 cover in the created and enhanced wetlands.

12 Performance Standards

13 Year 10 14 Aerial cover of native woody species will be at least 60 percent in the scrub-shrub and 15 forested communities in the created and enhanced wetlands. 16 17 County-listed Class-A noxious weeds and non-native blackberries (Rubus spp.), Scot’s 18 broom (Cytisus scoparius), and thistles (Cirsium spp.) will not exceed 25 percent aerial 19 cover in the created and enhanced wetlands. 20

21Upland Buffer Vegetation Performance Criteria 22The upland buffer woody vegetation performance criteria directly relate to Objectives 2, 3, 4 23and 5.

25 Year-1 and Year-3 26 Native woody species (planted and volunteer) will achieve an average density of at least 4 27 plants per 100 square feet in the upland buffer.

28 Year-5 29 Aerial cover of native woody species (planted and volunteer) will be at least 30 percent in 30 the upland buffer.

31 Year-7 32 Aerial cover of native woody species (planted and volunteer) will be at least 40 percent in 33 the upland buffer.

1 All years 2 County-listed Class-A noxious weeds and non-native blackberries (Rubus spp.), Scot’s 3 broom (Cytisus scoparius), and thistles (Cirsium spp.) will not exceed 25 percent aerial 4 cover in the upland buffer. 5

6 Performance Standards

7 Year 10 8 Aerial cover of native woody species will be at least 50 percent in the upland buffer. 9 10 County-listed Class-A noxious weeds and non-native blackberries (Rubus spp.), Scot’s 11 broom (Cytisus scoparius), and thistles (Cirsium spp.) will not exceed 25 percent aerial 12 cover in the upland buffer. 13

14 8.4 Monitoring

15WSDOT staff will monitor the mitigation site for 5/10 years after installation. If all the 16performance standards are achieved in less than 5/10 years, WSDOT may terminate monitoring 17with approval of the review agencies. Quantitative monitoring will be completed and 18documented (state which years after acceptance formal monitoring will occur) 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 19years after initial acceptance of the mitigation construction. The site should be evaluated 20informally during the summer following plant installation to assess survival rates and document 21the presence of non-native invasive species. WSDOT HQ Wetland Assessment and 22Monitoring Program will also complete informal (qualitative) assessments of the mitigation 23sites in years (state which years after acceptance informal monitoring will occur) 2, 4, 6, 8 for 24adaptive management purposes, only. Monitoring will be designed to determine if the 25performance measures or performance standards have been met. Monitoring reports will be 26submitted for review and comment to the recipients listed in Table 18 by April following the 27formal monitoring activities conducted the previous year. 28 29Table 20. Wetland mitigation monitoring report recipients. Permitting Agency or Organization Contact Name and Address U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Department of Ecology ___ Tribe of Indians ___ City ___ County Others? 30 31 32WSDOT has established a comprehensive set of monitoring methods that are based primarily 33on Elzinga et al. (1998). The actual methods used to monitor each site are documented in 34annual monitoring reports prepared by WSDOT’s Wetland Assessment and Monitoring

1Program, which is based in the Environmental Services Office in Olympia, Washington. Some 2variation of the methods occurs as techniques are improved, or standards change.

3 8.5 Contingency Plan

4 A Contingency plan is initiated when problems are observed during monitoring that 5 indicates that one of the performance standards may not be met. Contingency plans 6 should anticipate problems and outline actions to address those problems. Typical 7 problems include failed plantings or inappropriate hydrology. 8 9(EXAMPLE) 10WSDOT anticipates the mitigation goals will be accomplished with the construction and 11installation of the mitigation design as shown on the grading and planting plans. Contingency 12actions, however, may be needed to correct unforeseen problems. Contingency revisions 13typically require coordination with the permitting agencies. 14 15As necessary, contingency measures (site management or revisions to performance criteria with 16permitting agency agreement) will be implemented to meet performance measures and 17performance standards. The following describes potential situations that may occur and the 18potential contingencies that might be implemented to correct the problem. Because not all site 19conditions can be anticipated, the contingencies discussed below do not represent an exhaustive 20list of potential problems or remedies. 21 22Hydrology 23Hydrologic problems occurring on a mitigation site are typically the result of either insufficient 24water or excessive water. Insufficient water can occur seasonally during drought conditions or 25can be a long-term problem. Long-term problems can be the result of altered surface water 26flows for mitigation sites reliant on surface water flows as the primary source of hydrology. 27For groundwater driven mitigation sites, typical long-term hydrologic problems that result in 28either excessive or insufficient hydrology can occur from a design based on insufficient 29groundwater data, the establishment of incorrect final grade elevations, or an unperceived soil 30condition that alters groundwater flows. Hydrologic contingency measures will be 31implemented based on observed conditions or monitoring data. Steps to address insufficient or 32excessive hydrology are the following: 33  Clearly identify the source of the problem. 34  Consult with the mitigation design team, including members of Biology, 35 Landscape Architecture, and Hydrology, and the resource agencies to determine an 36 appropriate course of action. 37  Adjust elevations or install water management structures to achieve appropriate 38 hydrologic conditions. 39 40Vegetation 41Problems related to vegetation include plant mortality, and poor growth resulting in low plant 42cover. These problems could be the result of insufficient site management, particularly 43watering in the first few growing seasons, animal browse, competition from invasive species,

1incorrect plant selection, altered site conditions, and vandalism. Contingencies for plant 2mortality and poor plant cover may include the following: 3  Plant replacement – Additional planting may be required to meet plant survival 4 and plant cover requirements. Plant species will be evaluated in relation to site 5 conditions to determine if plant substitutions will be required. 6  Weed control – Control of non-native invasive species may be required to meet 7 survival and plant cover requirements. Weed control methods could include mechanical 8 or hand control, mulching, or herbicide application. 9  Herbivore control – If plant survival or vegetation cover standards are not met 10 because of animal browse, the wildlife responsible will be identified and appropriate 11 control measures will be attempted. This could include plant protection, fence 12 installation, or the use of repellents. However, some pestilent and invasive wildlife 13 species are difficult to avoid. Implementing precautionary measures with design and 14 placement will minimize unwanted species but likely not eliminate them. Wildlife 15 damage and manipulation to plantings and structures should be expected to occur and, 16 with exceptions, it may be necessary to accept the situation and allow the vegetation to 17 mature under these conditions. Occasionally it may be necessary to dissuade or 18 exclude destructive wildlife species. Native species such as beaver may initially have 19 perceived damaging effects on the expected outcome of a mitigation site; however, the 20 site modifications that result from their activities can create functions and habitats 21 suited to several other species. 22  Vandalism – To prevent vegetation disturbance from vandalism, fence installation 23 and sensitive area signage may be installed. 24 Review and revise performance criteria with WSDOT Monitoring Program and permitting 25 agency agreement. 26 27Wildlife Structures 28Wildlife structures will be installed during construction activities, and will be monitored to 29verify presence or absence. The contingency for wildlife structures is to replace or repair 30missing or damaged structures. If habitat structures become vandalized, are missing, or are 31functionally damaged, they will be repaired or replaced as necessary.

32 8.6 Site Management

33 Describe planned site management by discussing the following: 34  Description of and rationale for each management activity planned 35  Schedule for each activity (where applicable) 36  Eradication of all Class A noxious weeds 37  Containment and removal of above ground biomass for Class B Noxious Weeds 38  Plans for supplemental watering (amount, frequency & duration) 39  Strategy for plant replacement, mulching, trash removal, habitat structure repair, 40 etc. 41 42(EXAMPLE) 43WSDOT will manage the site annually for the first 10 years. Site management activities shall 44include noxious weed control and may include mulching, fertilizing, supplemental watering,

1maintaining access, repairing damage from vandals, correcting erosion or sedimentation 2problems, or litter pickup. Reed canarygrass dominates the watershed and suppression/control 3of this invasive plant will require careful site preparation and active site management. While 4complete elimination of reed canarygrass from the mitigation site may not be possible, it should 5be managed sufficiently to ensure survival of the native planted species until they can 6effectively compete. The first year of plant establishment includes supplemental water and care 7of all replacement plants installed during the first year. 8

1Chapter 9. Stream Mitigation Goals, 2 Objectives, and Performance 3 Criteria

4The proposed mitigation site will be monitored for five years to demonstrate that the intended 5goals and objectives are established. Goals describe the overall intent of mitigation efforts, and 6objectives describe individual components of the mitigation site in detail. Performance 7measures and performance standards describe specific on-site characteristics that indicate a 8function is being provided. Performance measures are used to guide management of the 9mitigation site. Performance standards are used to evaluate compliance with regulatory permits 10in the final year of monitoring. Contingency plans describe what actions can be taken to 11correct site deficiencies. 12 13WSDOT uses the adaptive management process to improve mitigation success. Adaptive 14management involves learning from monitoring and implementing management activities, such 15as implementing parts of the site management or contingency plans. Information from 16monitoring is used to direct subsequent site management activities. As part of the adaptive 17management process, mid-course corrections may necessitate a change in vision for the site if 18nature takes its course and things turn out differently than planned. A change in vision may 19require renegotiation with regulators for a new set of performance standards.

20 9.1 Goals

21 These are intended to be the overall goals of the mitigation plan and summarize the “big 22 picture.” 23The following is the overall goal for the mitigation project: 24  The proposed mitigation is intended to replace stream and riparian buffer functions 25 lost or impacted by the proposed project.

26 9.2 Objectives

27 Objectives identify specific elements that are undertaken to meet the goals of the 28 project. They provide more detail on how each goal will be achieved, but they do not 29 set specific targets for achievement of those objectives, as performance standards do. 30 One goal may have several objectives. Objectives should identity the following: 31  Type and quantity of mitigation and the functions to be established or enhanced 32  Specific area of mitigation types that compensates for permanent direct and indirect 33 impacts to streams 34  Buffer enhancement that compensates for the specific area of buffer impact 35 36 Objectives and performance standards should not set specific acreage targets for these 37 zones. Instead, it is more reasonable to address these targets in a more general way with 38 an overall wetland acreage target.

1 9.3 Performance Criteria

2 Performance measures and performance standards need to be meaningful, measurable, 3 and achievable. Apply the following guidance when developing performance criteria 4  Please review all of the WSDOT’s Performance Criteria Guidance documents prior 5 to writing performance measures or performance standards, available at: 6 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/mitigation.htm. 7  Performance criteria must be reviewed and approved by the WSDOT HQ Wetland 8 Assessment and Monitoring Program for consistency, clarity, and applicability 9 before final draft submittal. 10  Performance criteria should not set specific acreage targets for these zones. Instead, 11 it is more reasonable to address these targets in a more general way with an overall 12 wetland acreage target.

13 9.3.1. Stream Channel Re-alignment 14Include performance criteria for each stream mitigation type proposed (e.g., channel re- 15alignment, culvert replacement, spawning bed gravel installation, etc.)

16 9.3.2. Riparian Buffer Enhancement 17Include performance criteria for the buffer vegetation. WDFW typically requires specific 18performance criteria as stated in the HPA conditions. Also, refer to local CAO for 19requirements.

20 9.4 Monitoring

21WSDOT staff will monitor the mitigation site for five years after installation or until 22performance standards have been met. If all the performance standards are achieved in less 23than five years monitoring, WSDOT may terminate monitoring with approval of the review 24agencies. Quantitative monitoring will be completed and documented at one, three, and five 25years after initial acceptance of the mitigation construction. The site should be evaluated 26informally during the summer following plant installation to evaluate survival rates and 27document the presence of non-native invasive species. WSDOT will also complete informal 28(qualitative) assessments of the riparian vegetation on years two and four for adaptive 29management purposes only. WSDOT has developed stream-monitoring protocols, which 30would be implemented yearly for a total of five years. The monitoring plans will be designed 31to determine if the performance measures or performance standards have been met. If they 32have not been met, adaptive management will be implemented. Monitoring reports will be 33submitted for review and comment to the appropriate agencies (Table 7) by April in years two, 34four, and six.

1Table 21. Stream mitigation monitoring report recipients. Regulatory Agency or Organization Contact Name WDFW USACE DOE Whatcom County

2 9.5 Contingency Plan

3WSDOT anticipates the mitigation goals will be accomplished with the construction and 4installation of the mitigation design as shown on the grading and planting plans. Contingency 5actions, however, may be needed to correct unforeseen problems. 6 7Other contingency revisions also require coordination with WDFW, USACE, and Ecology. 8Any same-species replacements made after permit issuance can be mentioned in the next 9monitoring report. Any substantive changes must be coordinated with WDFW, USACE, and 10Ecology before replacement. 11 12As necessary, contingency measures (i.e., adaptive management options) will be implemented 13to meet performance measures and performance standards. The following describes potential 14situations that may occur and the potential contingencies that might be implemented to correct 15the problem. Since not all site conditions can be anticipated, the contingencies discussed below 16do not represent an exhaustive list of potential problems or remedies. 17 18 Vegetation 19Problems related to vegetation include plant mortality, and poor growth resulting in low plant 20cover. These problems could be the result of insufficient site management, particularly 21watering in the first few growing seasons, animal browse, competition from invasive species, 22incorrect plant selection, altered site conditions, and vandalism. Contingencies for plant 23mortality and poor plant cover may include: 24 . Plant replacement – Additional planting may be required to meet plant survival 25 and plant cover requirements. Plant species will be evaluated in relation to site 26 conditions to determine if plant substitutions will be required. 27 . Weed control – Control of non-native invasive species may be required to meet 28 survival and plant cover requirements. Non-native knotweeds shall not be present at 29 the stream sites. If non-native knotweeds are observed on site, they will initiate 30 eradication measures. Weed control methods could include mechanical or hand 31 control, mulching, or herbicide application. 32 . Herbivore control – If plant survival or vegetation cover standards are not met 33 because of animal browse, the wildlife responsible will be identified and appropriate 34 control measures will be attempted. This could include plant protection, fence 35 installation, or the use of repellents. 36 . Vandalism – To prevent vegetation disturbance from vandalism, fence 37 installation and sensitive area signage may be installed. 38

1 Habitat Structures 2Habitat structures such as LWD and large boulders will be installed during construction 3activities, and will be monitored to verify presence/absence.

4 9.6 Site Management

5WSDOT will manage the site annually for the first five years. Site management shall include 6noxious weed control and may include plant replacement, mulching, fertilizing, supplemental 7watering, and maintaining access, repairing damage from vandals, correcting erosion or 8sedimentation problems, or litter pickup. The first year of plant establishment includes 9supplemental water and care of all replacement plants installed during the first year. 10Management of the site will continue until it has been determined that performance standards 11have been met. WSDOT will retain ownership of the sites in perpetuity. 12

1Chapter 10. References

2Books, Journal Articles, Reports: [Author(s). YEAR Title. Publisher/Source. Volume: Page 3 begin-Page end].

4Correspondence: [Author(s). Date. Subject. Agency/Company. Pp. (pages)].

5Phone: [Contact Name. Date. Subject. Agency/Company. Phone Number. Result/Action].

6E-mail: [Contact Name. Date. Subject. Agency/Company. E-mail address. Result/Action].

7 8Brinson, M.M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for Wetlands. Technical Report 9 WRPDE-4. US Amy Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. 10Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. Laroe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and 11 Deep Water Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS 12 79/31. 13Elzinga, C. L., D. W. Salzer, and J. W. Willoughby. 1998. Measuring and Monitoring Plant 14 Populations. Bureau of Land Management Technical Reference 1730-1, BLM/RS/ST- 15 98/005+1730. 16Franklin, J.T. and C.T. Dyrness. 1973. Natural vegetation of Oregon and Washington. USDA, 17 Forest Service, Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-8. 18Governor of the State of Washington. 1989. Executive Order EO 89-10, “Protection of 19 Wetlands.” December 11, 1989, Olympia, WA. 20 http://www.digitalarchives.wa.gov/governorlocke/eo/eoarchive/eo89-10.htm 21Granger, T., T. Hruby, A. McMillan, D. Peters, J. Rubey, D. Sheldon, S. Stanley, E. Stockdale. 22 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing 23 Wetlands. Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-008. Olympia, 24 WA. [April 2005] http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0506008.pdf. 25Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State wetland rating system for Eastern Washington – Revised. 26 Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-15. 27 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0406015.pdf 28Hruby, T. 2004. Washington State wetland rating system for Western Washington – Revised. 29 Washington State Department of Ecology Publication # 04-06-15. 30 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0406025.pdf 31Null, W., G. Skinner, and W. Leonard. 2000. Wetland Functions Characterization Tool For 32 Linear Projects. Washington State Department of Transportation, Environmental Affairs 33 Office. Olympia, WA. [June 2000] http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/B92BE0D4- 34 9078-4EFC-99DA-3C0EA4805E2F/0/bpjtool.pdf 35Sheldon, D., T. Hruby, P. Johnson, K. Harper, A. McMillan, T. Granger, S. Stanley, and E. 36 Stockdale. 2005. Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science.

1 Washington State Department of Ecology. Publication #05-06-006. Olympia, WA. 2 [March 2005] http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0506006.pdf. 3Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and 4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006a. Wetland Mitigation in 5 Washington State – Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance (Version 1). Washington State 6 Department of Ecology Publication #06-06-011a. Olympia, WA. [March 2006] 7 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0606011a.pdf. 8Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District, and 9 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10. 2006b. Wetland Mitigation in 10 Washington State – Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1). Washington State 11 Department of Ecology Publication #06-06-011b. Olympia, WA. [March 2006] 12 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/pubs/0606011b.pdf. 13Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). 2008. Wetland Guidelines. 14 Washington State Department of Transportation, Environmental Affairs Office. Olympia, 15 WA. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Environment/Biology/Wetlands/guidelines.htm. 16 17 18

1Appendix A — Wetland Impact Plan Sheets 2 3 4

2Project Name Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1

1Appendix B — Mitigation Site Wetland Memo 2[Include if a wetland has been identified at the Mitigation Site] 3 4

1Appendix C — Mitigation Site Soil Boring Logs 2[include if applicable] 3 4

1Appendix D — Mitigation Site Hydrology Data 2Include relevant hydrology data: 3  water budget 4  groundwater monitoring well data 5  HEC-RAS results from stream-supported wetlands 6  Monthly average precipitation data and snowfall for area (required for mitigation 7 designs relying on precipitation and surface water flows. 8

1Appendix E — Mitigation Site Plan Sheets 2[Include relevant plan sheets] 3 4  Schematic Mitigation Plan (Showing location of mitigation types: creation, re- 5 establishment, rehabilitation, enhancement, and/or preservation.) 6  Grading Plan (Include existing and proposed elevation contours, spot elevations 7 for low points, high points, slopes, and structures.) 8  Cross Section (Provide section drawings, which show the relationship of 9 topography, the water regime, and vegetation. Show anticipated water levels during 10 the dry and wet season. The Corps typically requires two cross-sections, minimum) 11  Planting Plan [Include plant community composition (% of each species per plant 12 community).] 13  Habitat Structures 14

2Project Name Month Day, Year 3Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report 1 2

1Appendix F — Wetland Rating Form for 2Anticipated Mitigation Site Conditions at the 3end of Monitoring 4 5 6

3Project Name Month Day, Year 4Wetland and Stream Mitigation Report