DOCSLIB.ORG

April 19, 2021 SENT VIA EMAIL ([email protected])

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
April 19, 2021 SENT VIA EMAIL (Mmichelena@Buttecounty.Net) April 19, 2021 SENT VIA EMAIL ([email protected]) Mark Michelena, Senior Planner Butte County Development Services Department Planning Division 7 County Center Drive Oroville, CA 95965 RE: Comments on Mitigated Negative Declaration for Proposed Tentative Parcel Map TMP19-0002 Dear Mr. Michelena: This letter is submitted on behalf of the North Chico Neighborhood Safety Group (“NCNSG”) regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration (“MND”) for the George Nicolas Tentative Parcel Map TMP19-0002 (“Project”). This group is working to address issues in North Chico relating to flood hazards and other quality of life issues for existing communities, including new development proposals that could worsen flooding, and cause other unmitigated environmental impacts. I. BACKGROUND The application to develop this parcel with four single-family homes was initially submitted in February 2019. Later that same month, the Autumn Park subdivision was flooded due to Keefer Slough overtopping its banks. Water rushed through Mr. Nicolaus’ orchard, and down the fire lane that borders Autumn Park, west of Garner Lane. From the fire lane, water rushed down Bosc Drive to Magness and Anjou Courts. Flood waters came within 15 feet of front doors, and were 4 feet deep. Mark Michelena April 19, 2021 Page 2 of 23 Flood waters from Keefer Slough flowing Flood waters flowing down fire lane on down Bosc Drive (2/14/19) south side of Nicolaus orchard (2/27/2019) Subsequent to the flooding, NCNSG wrote to the Butte County Board of Supervisors (“Board”) regarding its concerns with the regional flooding, outdated FEMA mapping and the two development proposals submitted by Mr. Nicolaus and his affiliates. (See Exhibit A, NCNSG Letter to the Board, dated December 4, 2019.) In early 2020, the Board considered imposing a temporary moratorium on certain development within the 100-year floodplain. NCNSG supported adoption of the temporary moratorium, given the flooding risks in the area. (See Exhibit B, NCNSG Letter to the Board, dated February 10, 2020.) At the request of NCNSG, MBK Engineers wrote to the Board, to explain that the parcel proposed for Tentative Parcel Map TMP19-0002 (among others) should be included in the moratorium area due to flooding risks. (Exhibit C.) Ultimately, instead of adopting a temporary moratorium, the Board directed staff to carry out nine measures to help address flooding and drainage concerns in North Chico. By November 2020, only one of the nine actions had been completed, leaving the region still at significant risk for future flooding. (Exhibit D.) This Project would convert portions of an existing orchard in an area subject to significant and chronic flooding to four (4) residential parcels. The development of these parcels would likely exacerbate local flooding, may lead to the release of untreated or partially-treated human waste from the septic systems when flooded, further stress the groundwater table, and pose safety risks due to inadequate emergency access, among other impacts. The proposed Project would result in potentially significant impacts that are inadequately disclosed and mitigated in the MND. As explained herein, the MND is inadequate under the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq. [“CEQA”]), and should not be adopted. The Planning Commission has issued a notice that it would consider approval of the Project on April 22, 2021. From the perspective of NCNSG, there has been Mark Michelena April 19, 2021 Page 3 of 23 inadequate time to fully review the proposed Project and the MND, and April 22 is too soon for a hearing on the Project. In the future, please provide this office notice of all actions on this Project. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21092.2; Gov. Code, § 65092.) Should the Planning Commission proceed to consider the MND on April 22nd, NCNSG requests that the Planning Commission determine that the MND provides an inadequate basis upon which to make any decision, and require further review of the Project’s environmental impacts in a full Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) in accordance with the minimum requirements of CEQA. II. THE MND DOES NOT MEET MINIMUM CEQA STANDARDS The MND is entirely inadequate to support approval of the Project. Preparation of a full environmental impact report (“EIR”) is required prior to any action being taken on the Project. A. Standards Applicable to Mitigated Negative Declarations The MND fails to include relevant information and fully disclose Project impacts as required by CEQA. In particular, several potentially significant impacts are associated with the Project, necessitating preparation and circulation of an EIR prior to any further proceedings by the City regarding the Project. Under CEQA, an EIR is required whenever substantial evidence supports a “fair argument” that a proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, even when other evidence supports a contrary conclusion. (See, e.g., No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68, 74 [No Oil I].) This “fair argument” standard creates a “low threshold” for requiring the preparation of an EIR. (Citizens Action to Serve All Students v. Thornley (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 748, 754.) Thus, a project need not have an “important or momentous effect of semi-permanent duration” to require an EIR. (No Oil I, supra, 13 Cal.3d at 87.) Rather, an agency must prepare an EIR “whenever it perceives some substantial evidence that a project may have a significant effect environmentally.” (Id. at p. 85.) An EIR is required even if a different conclusion may also be supported by evidence. The fair argument test is the least deferential to the lead agency; importantly, “substantial evidence in the record supporting a fair argument” is not the same as the deferential “substantial evidence” standard applicable to the adequacy of EIRs. (No Oil I, supra, 13 Cal.3d at 82–87.) The fair argument test is a question of law, not fact, and the courts owe no deference to the lead agency’s determination. Review is de novo, with a preference for resolving doubts in favor of environmental review. (Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903, 927 [Pocket Protectors].) Mark Michelena April 19, 2021 Page 4 of 23 To lawfully carry out a project based on an MND, a CEQA lead agency must approve mitigation measures sufficient to reduce potentially significant impacts “to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur.” (Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14 [“CEQA Guidelines”], § 15070, subd. (b)(1), emphasis added.)1 This is assured by incorporation into a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (“MMRP”). (Pub. Resources, Code, § 21081.6(a)(1).) “The purpose of these requirements is to ensure that feasible mitigation measures will actually be implemented as a condition of development, and not merely adopted and then neglected or disregarded.” (Federation of Hillside & Canyon v. City of Los Angeles (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 1252, 1261.) Furthermore, an agency cannot hide behind its own failure to gather relevant data. Specifically, “deficiencies in the record [such as a deficient initial study] may actually enlarge the scope of fair argument by lending a logical plausibility to a wider range of inferences.” (Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296, 311 [Sundstrom].) For example, in Sundstrom, the court held that the absence of information explaining why no alternative sludge disposal site is available “permits the reasonable inference that sludge disposal presents a material environmental impact.” (Ibid.) Substantial evidence of a fair argument may come in various forms. Comments from experts presenting evidence that significant impacts may occur is generally considered to be substantial evidence. (See Sierra Club v. California Dept. of Forestry (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 370; see also City of Livermore v. Local Agency Formation Comm’n (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 531, 541.) Opinions, based on relevant expertise, that a project could have significant effects also qualifies as substantial evidence of a fair argument. (See County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v. County of Kern (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1582–1587 [expert predictions by three separate “sludge generators” constituted a fair argument that the project would have significant environmental effects] [County Sanitation Dist. No. 2]; Pocket Protectors, supra, 124 Cal.App.4th at 34 [planning 1 A lead agency may satisfy its CEQA obligations by preparing an MND instead of an EIR if: (1) revisions in the project would mitigate the effects of the proposed project to a point “where clearly no significant effects on the environment will occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.5.) The City must also adopt a legally adequate MMRP in compliance with CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15074, subd. (d).) To comply with CEQA the MMRP “shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21081.6, subd. (a)(1); CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15074, subd. (d), 15097, subd. (a).) The City may not simply rely on a “summary” that merely relists the various mitigation measures in the absence of a discussion of implementation or evidence that the measures will be enforced. Mark Michelena April 19, 2021 Page 5 of 23 commission’s findings of fact and testimony of an architect regarding project consistency with applicable land use policies constituted fair argument of significant environmental effects].) Substantial evidence can also come in the form of public comments, so long as such comments are based on personal observations on nontechnical subjects. (Id. at 937– 39 [personal observations by area residents constitute evidence of a fair argument of significant aesthetic impacts].) For each resource area discussed below, there is substantial evidence supporting a fair argument of a potentially significant impact.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Elkhorn Slough Estuary
    A RICH NATURAL RESOURCE YOU CAN HELP! Elkhorn Slough Estuary WATER QUALITY REPORT CARD Located on Monterey Bay, Elkhorn Slough and surround- There are several ways we can all help improve water 2015 ing wetlands comprise a network of estuarine habitats that quality in our communities: include salt and brackish marshes, mudflats, and tidal • Limit the use of fertilizers in your garden. channels. • Maintain septic systems to avoid leakages. • Dispose of pharmaceuticals properly, and prevent Estuarine wetlands harsh soaps and other contaminants from running are rare in California, into storm drains. and provide important • Buy produce from local farmers applying habitat for many spe- sustainable management practices. cies. Elkhorn Slough • Vote for the environment by supporting candidates provides special refuge and bills favoring clean water and habitat for a large number of restoration. sea otters, which rest, • Let your elected representatives and district forage and raise pups officials know you care about water quality in in the shallow waters, Elkhorn Slough and support efforts to reduce question: How is the water in Elkhorn Slough? and nap on the salt marshes. Migratory shorebirds by the polluted run-off and to restore wetlands. thousands stop here to rest and feed on tiny creatures in • Attend meetings of the Central Coast Regional answer: It could be a lot better… the mud. Leopard sharks by the hundreds come into the Water Quality Control Board to share your estuary to give birth. concerns and support for action. Elkhorn Slough estuary hosts diverse wetland habitats, wildlife and recreational activities. Such diversity depends Thousands of people come to Elkhorn Slough each year JOIN OUR EFFORT! to a great extent on the quality of the water.
    [Show full text]
  • Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics: Year 2 Annual Report Michael S
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons SERC Research Reports Southeast Environmental Research Center 2010 Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics: Year 2 Annual Report Michael S. Ross Southeast Environmental Research Center & Department of Earth and Environment, Florida International University James B. Heffernan Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University Jay P. Sah Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University Pablo L. Ruiz Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University Adam A. Spitzig Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/sercrp Part of the Earth Sciences Commons, and the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Ross, Michael S.; Heffernan, James B.; Sah, Jay P.; Ruiz, Pablo L.; Spitzig, Adam A.; and Isherwood, Ewan, "Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics: Year 2 Annual Report" (2010). SERC Research Reports. 100. http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/sercrp/100 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the Southeast Environmental Research Center at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in SERC Research Reports by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Michael S. Ross, James B. Heffernan, Jay P. Sah, Pablo L. Ruiz, Adam A. Spitzig, and Ewan Isherwood This report is available at FIU Digital Commons: http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/sercrp/100 Year 2 Annual Report: Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics Date of Submission: By: Michael S. Ross, Southeast Environmental Research Center & Department of Earth and Environment, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th ST, Miami, FL 33199 Tel 305-348-1420; Fax 305-348-4096; Email: [email protected] James B.
    [Show full text]
  • Watsonville Sloughs Hydrology Study
    Watsonville Sloughs Hydrology Study Prepared For: Santa Cruz Resource Conservation District Prepared by: In collaboration with: February 14, 2014 WATSONVILLE SLOUGHS HYDROLOGY STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Data Collection Program ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Hydrologic modeling ................................................................................................................................................. 5 1 OBJECTIVES AND TECHNICAL APPROACH ........................................................................................ 8 1.1 Format of this Report ................................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Project Funding ............................................................................................................................................ 8 1.3 Study Objectives ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1.4 Work Plan ................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.5 Acknowledgments .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Drought Contingency Plan May 1, 2021 – September 30, 2021
    State Water Project and Central Valley Project Drought Contingency Plan May 1, 2021 – September 30, 2021 Table of Contents I. Current Hydrologic Conditions ...........................................................................................................4 A. Water Quality ................................................................................................................................. 6 B. SWP and CVP Upstream Reservoir Storage .................................................................................7 C. Biology ..........................................................................................................................................7 i. Salmonids ..................................................................................................................................7 ii. Delta Smelt ................................................................................................................................8 iii. Longfin Smelt .............................................................................................................................9 II. SWP and CVP Operational Considerations .....................................................................................10 A. Health and Safety Requirements ................................................................................................. 10 B. Fish and Wildlife Protections .......................................................................................................10 C. Regulatory and Senior Water
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Planning Implications
    DRAFT 4 City of Goleta, California May 2004 BACKGROUND REPORT NO. 24 Hydrology and Water Quality INTRODUCTION This background report describes the hydrological characteristics of the City of Goleta. The City of Goleta’s hydrological features consist of creeks and associated flood plains, ponds, wetlands, and the Ocean. While this report provides an overview of these resources, other reports examine particular areas or issues in the City in greater depth. These reports include Ellwood Mesa Open Space Plan and the related Environmental Impact Report; Comstock Homes Development and Ellwood Mesa Open Space Plan, March 2004, Goleta Slough Ecosystem Management Plan, December 1997, and Water Quality Analysis Report, County of Santa Barbara, December 2003. PLANNING IMPLICATIONS Since hydrological features shape the land forms of an area, these features contribute to the physical character of the community. Hydrological forces create these land forms through processes such as erosion and flooding. These processes in turn pose constraints and hazards for use and development. Water, as the basis for all life, creates the environment for the community’s biological resources and ecology. Modification of the hydrological system, either by physical alteration or by change in water quality, will affect these biological systems. The potential of adverse impacts associated with development is an important constraint on how land might be used, developed or managed. Water and its quality affects other aspects of the quality of life since water is the basis of many recreational activities. City of Goleta, California XXIV-1 General Plan Report: Hydrology GENERAL TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE The City of Goleta is situated in the western portion of the Goleta Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Subsidence to Estimate Carbon Loss from Deforested and Drained Tropical Peatlands in Indonesia
    Review The Use of Subsidence to Estimate Carbon Loss from Deforested and Drained Tropical Peatlands in Indonesia Gusti Z. Anshari 1,2 , Evi Gusmayanti 1,3 and Nisa Novita 4,* 1 Magister of Environmental Science, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak 78124, Indonesia; [email protected] (G.Z.A.); [email protected] (E.G.) 2 Soil Science Department, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak 78124, Indonesia 3 Agrotechnology Department, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak 78124, Indonesia 4 Yayasan Konservasi Alam Nusantara, DKI Jakarta 12160, Indonesia * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Drainage is a major means of the conversion of tropical peat forests into agriculture. Accordingly, drained peat becomes a large source of carbon. However, the amount of carbon (C) loss from drained peats is not simply measured. The current C loss estimate is usually based on a single proxy of the groundwater table, spatially and temporarily dynamic. The relation between groundwater table and C emission is commonly not linear because of the complex natures of heterotrophic carbon emission. Peatland drainage or lowering groundwater table provides plenty of oxygen into the upper layer of peat above the water table, where microbial activity becomes active. Consequently, lowering the water table escalates subsidence that causes physical changes of organic matter (OM) and carbon emission due to microbial oxidation. This paper reviews peat bulk density (BD), total organic carbon (TOC) content, and subsidence rate of tropical peat forest and drained peat. Data of BD, TOC, and subsidence were derived from published and unpublished sources. We Citation: Anshari, G.Z.; Gusmayanti, found that BD is generally higher in the top surface layer in drained peat than in the undrained peat.
    [Show full text]
  • Elkhorn Slough Tidal Wetland Project Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve Elkhorn Slough Foundation
    Elkhorn Slough Tidal Wetland Project Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve Elkhorn Slough Foundation Management of Tidal Scour and Wetland Conversion in Elkhorn Slough: Partial Synthesis of Technical Reports on Large-Scale Alternatives: Hydrology, Geomorphology, Habitats and Engineering Water Quality June 2010 Note: This is a living document. Forward comments and questions to Bryan Largay: [email protected] The following individuals wrote this document: Bryan Largay, Erin McCarthy The following individuals provided review and comments: Robert Curry, Ed S. Gross, Ken Johnson, Quinn Labadie, Jessie R. Lacy, Erika McPhee Shaw, Kerstin Wasson, and Andrea Woolfolk Management of Tidal Scour and Wetland Conversion in Elkhorn Slough Hydrology, Habitats and Water Quality: Effects of Five Alternatives Overview Project scope Elkhorn Slough, one of the largest coastal estuaries in California and host to over 750 species of plants and animals, is undergoing rapid ecologic change: in 60 years the channel has deepened by 500 percent and hundreds of acres of salt marsh have died back or are deteriorating. The Elkhorn Slough Tidal Wetland Project, a collaborative effort of about 100 scientists, managers and key stakeholders, was established in 2004 to advance the understanding of the processes and potential solutions to these rapid habitat changes. Ecosystem services provided by the slough and its watershed are threatened by water quality impairment, invasive species, watershed development, freshwater diversion and other stressors, which are the subject of coordinated parallel efforts to steward the resource. The Tidal Wetland Project is a planning process focused on the tidal portion of the ecosystem. Through consensus, this process established goals of preserving and restoring priority habitats including salt marsh, tidal creeks, tidal brackish marshes and soft sediment habitats.
    [Show full text]
  • Six Mile Slough Wetland Restoration Project
    Six Mile Slough Wetland Restoration Project Waterfowl taking flight Northern leopard frog Thomas R. Biebighauser Robin Annschild February 6, 2016 Six Mile Slough Wetland Restoration Project Report Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Drainage History ............................................................................................................................. 5 Enlarging the outflow of Kootenay Lake: .................................................................................. 5 Crowsnest Railroad ..................................................................................................................... 6 Ranch Operations ........................................................................................................................ 8 West Duck Lake Dike ............................................................................................................... 11 Libby Dam ................................................................................................................................ 12 Wetland Compartments ............................................................................................................ 13 River Bank Low Places ............................................................................................................. 16 Summary of Impacts to Six Mile Slough .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Characterization of Woody Wetland Vegetation Communities Along Gum Slough
    VEGETATION APPENDIX Characterization of Woody Wetland Vegetation Communities along Gum Slough Submitted to: Southwest Florida Water Management District Submitted by: 4030 Boy Scout Boulevard Tampa, Florida 33607 August 2010 Executive Summary The purpose of this study was to characterize relationships among vegetation, soils, and elevations in wetlands along Gum Slough, in Sumter County, Florida, and assist the Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) in establishing minimum flows and levels (MFLs) for the river. Vegetation classes, plant species importance, soil characteristics, and elevations were characterized along 8 transects within the upper reaches of Gum Slough. The study corridor extended 1.6 miles downstream from Transect PHABSIM1 and the slough flows 3.5 miles farther downstream to its confluence with the Withlacoochee River. Vegetation. The permanent ground water flows and clear water of the spring-fed Gum Slough differentiate it from streams and rivers dominated by surface water flows. Unlike many coastal springs rivers, such as the Homosassa and Crystal rivers, Gum Slough has a well-developed floodplain characterized by extensive seasonally and sometimes semipermanently inundated swamps. The floodplain vegetation associated with Gum Slough is similar to vegetation described for parts of the Withlacoochee River floodplain (SWFWMD 1997). Differences in vegetation classes along Gum Slough study corridor were measured using importance values (IVs) that were calculated using tree species density and basal area and subsequently provided a relative measure of species dominance (no units). Differences in species and species importance were significant between the 6 vegetation classes identified along Gum Slough (Wilcoxon Signed Rank test, p < 0.01). Six vegetation classes were characterized as wetland classes and a single upland class was identified.
    [Show full text]
  • The Influence of Hydrology on Everglades Ridge And
    INFLUENCE OF HYDROLOGY ON EVERGLADES RIDGE AND SLOUGH SOIL TOPOGRAPHY By ERIC JORCZAK A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006 Copyright 2006 by Eric Jorczak To the Florida Everglades: live long and prosper ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge all those who assisted me in the completion of my thesis. They include my supervisory committee chair (Mark Clark), and my supervisory committee members (Wiley Kitchens and Jim Jawitz). I would also like to thank Chris Lewis (the best Everglades plant collector this side of the Mississippi) and all other associates of the Wetland Biogeochemistry Laboratory. I extend special thanks to my parents and family who support me in many ways. Long days on the road and longer days amidst the Everglades merriment were shared with many field workers, with much of the help from Charles “MacGyver” Campbell. Lastly, I thank my research site, the Everglades, for providing generally favorable field conditions. Reliable field instruments allowed this project to be completed in a relatively low-blood-pressure fashion. This research was funded by the Critical Ecosystem Studies Initiative, administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iv LIST OF TABLES...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • South Slough Reserve Brochure and Trail
    institutions. Bookstore and more. and Bookstore shows how the environment responds to the changes. the to responds environment the how shows fi eld trips, often in partnership with other training training other with partnership in often trips, eld fi purchases at the Friends of South Slough Slough South of Friends the at purchases habitat has been restored, continued monitoring monitoring continued restored, been has habitat publications, and offers workshops, conferences or or conferences workshops, offers and publications, of South Slough and receive discounts on on discounts receive and Slough South of help scientists understand what to do. After a natural natural a After do. to what understand scientists help Slough provides technical consulting, develops develops consulting, technical provides Slough of the estuary and forest. Join the Friends Friends the Join forest. and estuary the of monitoring before a restoration project begins can can begins project restoration a before monitoring professionals whose decisions affect the coast. South South coast. the affect decisions whose professionals glimpses of the past, and spectacular views views spectacular and past, the of glimpses streams and tidal channels, as well as species. Careful Careful species. as well as channels, tidal and streams managers, elected offi cials, community leaders and and leaders community cials, offi elected managers, Slough Interpretive Center for fascinating fascinating for Center Interpretive Slough Researchers are learning to restore salt marshes, marshes, salt restore to learning are Researchers The Coastal Training Program assists resource resource assists Program Training Coastal The history and coastal ecology. Visit the South South the Visit ecology. coastal and history 4,800 acres of land and water are a living laboratory.
    [Show full text]
  • PMSD Wetlands Curriculum
    WWEETTLLAANNDDSS CCUURRRRIICCUULLUUMM POCONO MOUNTAIN SCHOOL DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This curriculum was funded through a grant from Pennsylvania’s Growing Greener Program administered through the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. The grant was awarded to the Tobyhanna Creek/Tunkhannock Creek Watershed Association to support ongoing watershed resource protection. The views herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. Special appreciation is extended to the Pocono Mountain School District, especially Mr. Thomas Knorr, Science Supervisor, and Dr. David Krauser, Superintendent of Schools for their support of and commitment to this project. Project partners responsible for this project include: a Pocono Mountain School District a Tobyhanna Creek/Tunkhannock Creek Watershed Association a Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection a The Nature Conservancy Science Office a Monroe County Planning Commission a F. X. Browne, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 WETLANDS – WHAT ARE THY EXACTLY? 2 WETLAND TYPES 4 WETLANDS CLASSIFICATION 7 PENNSYLVANIA WETLANDS 13 THE THREE H’S: HYDROLOGY, HYDRIC SOILS, AND HYDROPHYTES 15 ARE WETLANDS IMPORTANT? 19 THE FUNCTIONS AND VALUES OF WETLANDS 20 WETLANDS PROTECTION 22 DETERMINING THE WETLANDS BOUNDARY 26 TOBYHANNA CREEK/TUNKANNOCK CREEK WATERSHED ASSOCIATION 28 REFERENCES 30 HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT #1 – TEST YOUR WETLAND IQ: WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT WETLANDS????? HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT #2 – USING PLANT IDENTIFICATION GUIDES HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT #3 – POSITION PAPER FIELD STUDY #1 – FORESTED WETLANDS FIELD STUDY #2 – THE BOG APPENDIX A – PLANT PHOTOGRAPHS – BOG SITE APPENDIX B – PLANT KEYS – BOG SITE APPENDIX C – WETLANDS DELINEATION FIELD DATA SHEETS APPENDIX D – BOG SITE FIELD DATA SHEETS APPENDIX E – GLOSSARY OF TERMS INTRODUCTION Wetlands have not always been a subject of study.
    [Show full text]