Technical Report Literature Review Of Wetland Evaluation Methodologies


PB85-186 922
 vvEPA
 United States
 Environmental Protection
 Agency
                                  Region 5
                                  230 South Dearborn Street
                                  Chicago, Illinois 60604
                                                   September 1 984
                                                   905R84106
                                                              / j
                   Water Division
Technical Report
JJlerature Review
Of Wetland  Evaluation
Methodologies
     Wetland Site Types: Palustrine
        |f—PALUSTRINE
          WETLAND
                PALUSTRINE  WETLAND
                      Upland —
                     Ve g e t a 11 o n
                                       -Up I and
                                       Vegetation
i^-Up land —
 Vegetation
t-Swamp and/or
   Marsh

	Trees and
   Shrubs
       a High water level
       b Average water level
       c Low water leve
       	Ground water levels
       s - Seasonal surface outflow
       P Persistent surface outflow
                                                       courtesy Environment Canad

-------
           TECHNICAL REPORT



          LITERATURE REVIEW

                   OF

   WETLAND EVALUATION JCTHODOLOGIES
             Prepared  by:



U. S. ENVIRONNENTAL  PROTECTION AGENCY

               Regi on  5

      230 South Dearborn  Street

       Chicago, Illinois   60604
        With Assistance  from:



             WAPORA,  Inc.

         35 East Wacker  Drive

       Chicago, Illinois  60601
                    r.;. :  j'-^'-'.r, rt.i rtct-^ion Agencjj]
                    f-,:o.c:>  V i  •:.  • •;
                    ?•-  '; J- .,••:•'"     •  -.  -" ..cot
                    Cni,, .:.. !.,.:--.-.-:  C/JGO-1

-------
U,3. Environment '.d , ,i.-_'_lion Agenc^

-------
T                                         TABLE OF CONTENTS
              TABLE OF CONTENTS	   I

              LIST OF TABLES	 ill

              LIST OF FIGURES	..	   v

              1.0  INTRODUCTION	   1
                   1.1  Background	   1
                        1.1.1  Federal Requirements  	   2
                        1.1.2  State and Local Requirements 	   4
                   1.2  Rationale for Present Study	   5
                   1.3  Objectives	   5

              2.0  GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES PLAN-RELATED
                   IMPACTS ON WETLANDS	   9
                   2.1  Primary Impacts	  10
                   2.2  Cumulat ive Impact s	  15

              3.0  LITERATURE REVIEW	  17
                   3.1  U.S. Water Resources Council (WRC) Study	  17
                        3.1.1  Habitat Function	  19
                        3.1.2  Hydrologic Functions	  19
                        3.1.3  Agricultural/Silvicultural Functions	  21
                        3.1.4  Recreation and Heritage Functions	  21
                        3.1.5  Geographic Features	  22
                        3.1.6  Personnel Needs/Administrative Conditions	  22
                        3.1.7  Data Requirements	  22
                        3.1.8  Red-Flag Features	  23
                        3.1.9  Flexibility/Responsiveness	  24
                        3.1.10 End-Products/Evaluation Summary	  24
                        3.1.11 Field Testing	  24
                        3.1.12 Applicability of Methodologies to Agency
                               Needs	  25
                        3.1.13 Conclusions and Recommendations of the WRC
                               Study	  26
                   3.2  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Literature Review	  27
                        3.2.1  Checklists	  27
                        3.2.2  Matrices	  28
                        3.2.3  Networks	  41
                        3.2.4  Mapping	  41
                        3.2.5  Indices	  56
                        3.2.6  Habitat Assessment Methods	  60
                             3.2.6.1  Corps of Engineers Wetland Evaluation
                                      Methodology	  60
                             3.2.6.2  Corps of Engineers Habitat Evaluation
                                      System (HES)	  61
                             3.2.6.3  U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat
                                      Evaluation Procedure	  65
                             3.2.6.4  Michigan DNR Wetland Evaluation
                                      Checklist Technique	  69
                        3.2.7  Ecosystem Modeling	  71

-------
                       TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONCLUDED)

                                                                 Page

     3.3  Other Methodologies	  71
          3.3.1  Federal Highway Administration Study	  71
          3.3.2  Wisconsin DNR Method	  77
          3.3.3  Ludwig and Apfelbaum Matrix Method	  77
          3.3.4  US Office of Technology Assessment Study
                 (Mitigation)	  81
               3.3.4.1  Examples of Wetland Impact Mitigation..  82
               3.3.4.2  Feasibility of Wetland Impact
                        Mitigation	   88
          3.3.5  USEPA Indirect Impact Analysis Method	   90
          3.3.6  USEPA Secondary Impact Analysis Methodology...   92
          3.3.7  State of New Jersey Bureau of Regional Plan-
                 ning Indirect Impact Analysis Methodology	   97
          3.3.8  The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources/
                 Canadian Wildlife Service Methodology	   97

4.0  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS	  102
     4.1  Conclusions	  102
     4.2  Recommendations	  104
          4.2.1  Incorporation of Screening Method into Facil-
                 ities Planning	  104
          4.2.2  Baseline Evaluation:  Screening Method
                 Requirements	  107
          4.2.3  Impact Analysis:  Screening Method Require-
                 ments	  108
          4.2.4  Recommended Screening Method	  Ill

REFERENCES  	  113
APPENDIX A:    Summary of construction related impacts to
               wetlands as identified by previous studies
APPENDIX B:    Summary tables from WRC study
APPENDIX C:    Abstracts of wetland evaluation methodologies
               reviewed in Lonard et al. (1981)
APPENDIX D:    Additional studies reviewed by Lonard et al.
               (1981) that did not meet screening criteria
APPENDIX E:    Scale-weighted checklists developed by
               Nelson et al. (1982)
APPENDIX F:    Example HQI curves used by HES (USCOE 1980)
APPENDIX G:    FHWA method - selected forms (Adams 1982)
APPENDIX H:    Quantitative methods for determining wetland values
               (from Ludwig and Apfelbaum, unpublished)
APPENDIX I:    Pollution coefficients from Zimmerman (1974)
APPENDIX J:    New Jersey (1975) indirect analysis
               methodologies
APPENDIX K:    Procedure recomended by USCOE to evaluate dredge and
               fill sites (from Nelson et al. 1982)
APPENDIX L:    Ontario Government Biological Method
APPENDIX M:    Ontario Government Checklist
                                    ii

-------
                              List of Tables
Table                                                                 Page

3.2-1.    Fish and Wildlife Service checklist of potential envi-
          ronmental alterations resulting from dredge and fill
          activities	       29

3.2-2.    Part of a checklist used by the US Fish and Wildlife
          Service to assess impacts of dredging and filling
          projects	       30

3.2-3.    Part of a scaling checklist used to assess impacts of
          upland disposal of dredged materials 	       31

3.2-4.    Assessment scale-weighting checklists for type, scale,
          and timing factors associated with dredge and fill
          activities	       32

3.2-5.    Descriptive matrix illustrating physical and chemical
          impacts of river channel dredging  	     34/35

3.2-6.    Critical factors used in rating and determining recovery
          index	       58

3.2-7.    Critical factors used in determining the inertial index.       59

3.2-8.    Criteria for scaling eight factors reflecting wetland
          values for water purification  	       62

3.2-9.    Ecological problems related to dredged material disposal
          and features of applicable modeling methods  	       72

3.3-1.    Key parameters for defining wetland functional values   .       79

3.3-2.    Wetland evaluation matrix devised by Ludwig and
          Apfelbaum	       80

3.3-3.    Examples of onsite mitigation practices useful for
          filling and bulkheading  	       83

3.3-4.    Examples of mitigation practices applicable to excava-
          tion and fill for construction of highways through
          wetlands	       84

3.3-5.    Examples of mitigation measures for control of wetland
          filling due to soil erosion and siltation	       85

3.3-6.    Examples of mitigation measures for eutrophication from
          sewage effluents discharged in wetlands  	       86
                                    iii

-------
Table                                                                 Page
3.3-7.    Examples of mitigation measures for control of temporary
          adverse effects from pipeline installation 	      87

3.3-8.    Outline of method used by the New Jersey Bureau of
          Regional Planning to assess indirect sewerage system
          impacts	      98

4.1-1.    Sources of wetland data	     109
                                    iv

-------
List of Figures
figures
1.2-1.

2.1-1.

2.1-2.

3.2-1.

3.2-2.

3.2-3.

3.2-4.

3.2-5.

3.2-6.
3.2-7.

3.2-8.

3.2-9.

3.2-10.

3.2-11.

3.2-12.

3.2-13.



This portion of the analysis constitutes the screening
method yet to be developed by USEPA 	
Summary of major direct impacts of WWTP construction/
operation on water resouces 	
Summary of the major types of impacts of wastewater on
wetlands identified by USEPA 	
Interaction matrix linking project activities with
associated environmental elements or effects 	
Impact severity matrix for scaling comparative impacts
at two alternative sites for marina construction ....
Protion of Leopold interaction matrix with instructions
for scaling and weighting impacts 	 	 .
Matrix for linking dredge and fill activities with
physical and chemical effects 	
Matrix for linking physical-chemical effects of dredge
and fill projects with adverse biological effects . . .
Diagram of a freshwater aquatic food web 	
Pictorial diagram of energy transfer in a typical
riverine forested wetland 	
Diagram of energy transfer model for a typical
riverine forested wetland 	
Network illustrating various habitat components for a
riverine or lacustrine cover type at four levels ....
Network diagram of relationships among components of a
channel catfish habitat suitability model 	
Network analysis of the sequential effects of a dredging
project on coastal ecosystems 	
Decision tree illustrating effects of surface mining
and associated dredging and filling 	
Map of a wetland area under consideration for construc-
tion of a marina involving channel dredging and mooring
basin at two alternative sites 	
Pages

7

12

13/14

36

37

38

39

40
42

43

44

45

46

47

48


50

-------
Figures                                                               Pages

3.2-14.   US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inven-
          tory classification scheme 	       51

3.2-15.   Sample from a 1:24,000 scale habitat classification
          map showing wetlands in Colorado 	       52

3.2-16.   Features of the "palustrine1* wetland system - part of
          the wetland classification scheme used by the US Fish
          and Wildlife Service 	       53

3.2-17.   Ecological "key" map illustrating erosion potential for
          a northwest coastal area watershed   	       54

3.2-18.   Areas of Wisconsin in which wetlands have been or are
          currently being mapped 	       55

3.2-19.   Detailed steps in preparing a "HES"  	       64

3.2-20.   Generalized evaluation procedure for employing HEP ...       66

3.2-21.   Relationship between baseline conditions, conditions
          without a proposed action, conditions with a proposed
          action and net impact	       68

3.2-22.   Portion of MDNR wetland evaluation checklist 	       70

3.3-1.    The relationships between the concepts of opportunity,
          effectiveness, and significance in evaluation of wetland
          values and functions	       75

3.3-2.    Flow chart of the method developed by Adamus (1983) to
          evaluate baseline conditions in wetlands and effects of
          highway construction	       75

3.3-3.    Hypothetical cost comparison using three different
          mitigation measures to alleviate disruption of surface
          and subsurface drainage due to highway construction on
          wetland fill	       89

3.3-4.    Method presented by Zimmerman (1974) to assess indirect
          impacts of wastewater facilities 	       91

3.3-5.    Definitions of various sub-boundaries within the geo-
          graphic area affected by 201 wastewater planning ....       93

3.3-6.    Illustration of the concept of the "sub-area," or those
          portions within the economic area which are most likely
          to be affected by 201 planning	       95

3.3-7.    Example situations whereby wells located near a wetland
          may or may not be directly hydrologically connected  . .       96
                                    vi

-------
Figures                                                              Pages

4.2-1.    Method used by Reed and Kubiak (1983)  to  incorporate
          wetland evaluation into the facilities planning process       105
                                   vii

-------
1.0  INTRODUCTION


1.1  Background


     Wetland  communities  are ecologically,  recreationally,  and aestheti-
cally important systems  that may  be affected by implementation of waste-

water management planning  activities in USEPA Region V.   The presence of
wetlands  and the  specific  type  of  wetland which may  be affected  by a
wastewater project, however,  may be difficult to determine objectively in
such cases  because of  differences  in:   (1)  definitions of  what  exactly
constitutes  a "wetland"  ;  and (2) differences in the degree of biological
training of  the evaluator.   Problems of wetland definition involve estab-
lishing  both the  areal  extent  and  type  of wetland.  Differences in the
amount  of  biological  training  possessed  by a project reviewer result in
varying interpretations of wetland values.  Often, persons with minimal or
no biological training are required to make such determinations and a val-
uable area may be overlooked.


     During  the course of the development of a facilities plan, therefore,

potentially  valuable wetlands may not be objectively evaluated, depending
on who  is  conducting  the review.  This can lead to adverse effects during
construction and operation  phases of a given project.   A method is there-
fore needed  which  can  be employed by  Federal  and State  and/or their con-
sultants  agency personnel   who  are  not  necessarily  trained  in  wetland
  This document  uses the wetland definition developed  by Cowardin et al.
(1979) and  currently employed by  USEPA.  This definition  is  as follows:
"Wetlands are  lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems
where the  water  table  is  usually at  or near  the surface or  the land is
covered  by  shallow water.   For  purposes of this classification wetlands
must  have  one  or  more  of the  following three attributes:  (1)  at least
periodically,  the  land supports predominantly hydrophytes, (2)  the sub-
strate is  predominantly undrained hydric  soil, and (3)  the substrate is
nonsoil  and  is saturated with water  or covered by shallow water at some
time during the growing season of each year."

-------
ecology to objectively screen wetland values and potential adverse effects
of  individual  projects  on wetlands.   However, at  present,  no consistent,
standardized methodology  has been developed  for  screening  potential im-
pacts  of  these  activities  on  wetlands in USEPA Region V.   This  report
provides  a  review  of  available  methods for  assessing such  impacts,  in
order  to  provide  the  basis  for:   (1)  selecting  an  existing  screening
methodology which  may  be suitable  for use in Region V;  (2)  selecting an
existing methodology  which  may  be  modified for this same purpose;  or (3)
allow development of a new screening method.

     The concern for  developing  an  objective  standardized method of eval-
uating  impacts of  wastewater  treatment projects  on wetlands has  arisen
historically from the protection which these natural communities  have been
afforded  by numerous  Federal,  state  and local  laws and  regulations.
Communities and  organizations that  plan to  build and operate  treatment
systems that may affect  wetlands  are confronted  with an  array of legal
considerations.  These result from requirements of the Federal Clean Water
Act, the Rivers  and Harbor  Act of 1899, two Executive Orders, and certain
precedents  being  established  within the states.   These  will be  briefly
reviewed here  in order  to provide a suitable  background for the  remainder
of the present  report.

1.1.1  Federal  Requirements

     When most Federal  laws  and  policies for  protection  of  wetlands were
adopted, multiple  uses  for  such areas were not  considered.   The  regula-
tions were adopted  primarily to remove these areas from development consi-
derations  and  to discourage  activity which could damage natural  wetlands.
The  following  sections  briefly  outline  the protection afforded wetlands
under the  major Federal laws.

     The Clean Water Act.   The Clean Water Act  provides  broad  statutory
authority  for  protecting  wetlands and other waters  of  the  United  States,
and  establishes  an institutional framework for  implementing  wetland pro-
tection.  This  framework  includes the  facilities  planning  process under
Title II,  the Section 303 water quality standards process, the Section 402

-------
National  Pollutant  Discharge Elimination  System (NPDES)  permit program,
and the  Section 404  Dredge  and  Fill permit program.  The facilities plan-
ning process  provides  for a detailed review of  the impacts of wastewater
treatment  projects  on sensitive environmental resources,  while  the water
quality  standards establish limits on levels of  pollutants  in the waters
of the  United States.   However, primary protection  of  wetlands  is imple-
mented through the 404 permit program and the NPDES permit program.

     The Section 404 permit prevents destruction or alteration of wetlands
by regulating activities  which  result in the disposal  of  dredged or fill
materials  in  wetland  areas.   While the 404 permit protects wetland areas,
it is  actually a regulation of dredge and fill  activities.   If there is
not  placement of dredge  or fill  material,  no  permit  is  needed.   A 404
permit  could  be  necessary if a new  facility  required dredging activities
in natural  wetlands  or if outfall structures were  to be constructed in a
wetland  that  is  considered  to be within the  waters of the United States.

     Under  Section 402 of the Clean Water Act,  the discharge of effluents
directly to the navigable waters, including wetlands, of the U.S. requires
an NPDES  permit  and  a program to monitor  the  discharge.   Under this sec-
tion of  the Act,  most municipal treatment facilities must provide waste-
water treatment at secondary or  higher levels.

     The Rivers and Harbors Act  of 1899.  Section 10  of  this Act requires
that  all  persons  who  wish to build any structure or undertake any type of
work in the  navigable waters of  the United States  first  obtain a permit
from the  Corps of Engineers.   When built within the navigable  waters of
the United  States, a  Section 10 permit will be required for the construc-
tion or  placement of  piers, wharfs, weirs, booms, breakwaters, bulkheads,
revetments,  jetties,   and  any  permanent  or  semi-permanent  obstacle  or
obstruction.  A Section 10 permit is also required for any modification of
a  navigable  water  of  the  United  States.   These modifications  include
dredging, excavating, filling, and the disposal of dredge spoil.

-------
     Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands.  Under Executive Order
11990, actions taken by Federal agencies must minimize the degradation of
wetlands and must  preserve and enhance the natural  and  beneficial values
of wetland areas.  For communities wishing to use natural wetlands as part
of  their wastewater  treatment systems or  for projects  involving direct
wetland  elimination  by  filling,  and where  no practical  alternative  has
been  identified, this  Executive Order  presents  the  issue of  what con-
stitutes  "degradation"   (lowering  of  the natural values  of  the  system
beyond acceptable levels).  Certain interpretations of the Order have also
held that the  mandate not only prohibits the  use  of a natural wetland as
part  of  a  wastewater treatment  system,  but  that  it also  restricts  the
discharge  of   fully  treated  effluents  to  wetland  areas,  except  under
special  situations.   The  interpretation  of the  degree  of  "lowering"  of
wetland values varies with the agency or individual  conducting  the eval-
uation, however.

     Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management.    Executive  Order 11988
requires Federal agencies  to  avoid  any direct  or  indirect  support  of
floodplain  development.   The  Order  also directs Federal  agencies  to pro-
vide leadership in acting to:   (1) reduce the risk of losses due to flood-
ing; (2) minimize the impact of floods on human safety and health;  and (3)
preserve the  natural  and  beneficial  value of  floodplains.  Many  natural
wetlands are  located  within  the 100—year floodplain,  as are many areas
that communities  might consider suitable for the development of artificial
wetlands.

1.1.2  State and  Local Requirements

     Wetland areas are  also protected under a variety of  state  and local
regulations.  State statutes  frequently  address water quality, floodplain
development, and wetlands  protection.   Language  in an  approved  Coastal
Zone Management Plan may prohibit wetland degradation on the coastal areas
of  Region V states.   Local regulations may also protect  wetlands  through
zoning regulations,  subdivision restrictions,  building  codes, sanitation
codes,  conservation  districts,  or  special-use permit regulations.   Deed
restrictions may  also exist for individual sites.

-------
1.2  Rationale for Present Study

     Although wetlands are  protected  by laws and Executive  Orders  as de-
scribed above,  several unresolved issues regarding the effects  of  waste-
water treatment  facility  construction and operation on wetlands may arise
during the 201  planning  process.   Issues of primary concern are:  (1) how
to  objectively  define existing baseline conditions within  a wetland;  and
(2) how  to accurately assess  the direct and cumulative impacts  of  a 201
project on wetlands.

     A variety of methodologies have been developed and used for assessing
baseline  conditions and  the  impacts of  various activities  on  wetlands.
However, no consistent evaluation methodology is currently being employed
by  all government  agencies  within USEPA Region  V during  facilities  plan-
ning.  As  a.  result, a wide variety  of  values (or lack of  values)  may be
ascribed to wetland communities during completion of baseline assessments.
In  addition,  analyses of potential  impacts also have  varied widely with
respect to scope and depth.

     In short, large differences may result in the quality of the environ-
mental  analysis  conducted   on wastewacer  treatment  projects  involving
wetlands.   Nevertheless,  it  is desirable that a consistent methodology for
screening potentially adverse  effects of such activities be developed for
use by  planning agencies and  organizations, so that objective  and well-
balanced  facilities planning  decisions  can be  made.   This  is  essential
especially in view of the ecological, recreational, and  aesthetic  values
associated with natural wetlands and the various Federal,  state,  and local
protection they  are afforded.  The  rationale for  the  present  study  has
thus emerged from the need for such a methodology.

1.3  Objectives

     The specific  objectives of  this  report are to review  and summarize:
(1) direct and cumulative impacts that may result from implementation of a
facilities plan;   (2)  the available  literature concerning methodologies
that  have  been  developed to evaluate  wetland  ecosystem baseline  condi-

-------
tions; and  (3)  methodologies  that assess Impacts of various  human activ-
ities on wetlands.   Ultimately,  this information will  be used by USEPA to
develop  an objective  impacts screening  methodology  for  use  during  the
facilities  planning  process.   Figure 1.2.1 illustrates how  the screening
method could  be incorporated  into  the -existing  facilities  plan process.

     Prior  to  instituting the screening  method, it is  assumed  that  the
engineering  consultant who  is  preparing  the  facilities  plan  will  know
generally whether or not  wetlands are within the study area.   If wetlands
are  present,  then the  screening method would  be instituted.   The method
would  necessarily  consist of two sequential  sub-parts.   The  first  step
would  require  determination  of  the  functions  and values  associated  with
the existing wetland(s) and  the  location and areal  extent  of these areas.
Functions and values would include  hydrological, geological, and biologi-
cal characteristics  listed in Figure 1.2-1.   The next  step of the screen-
ing method  would require an  analysis of potential  secondary  and primary
impacts  of  the  facilities  plan   implementation on  wetland  functions  and
values as defined in the first phase of the screening method.

     If no  adverse effects were  anticipated, the results of the screening
analysis would  be summarized  in  the facilities  plan.  If  adverse impacts
were implicated, further issue specific studies might be required prior to
submittal of the facilities  plan in order to identify the expected nature
and  severity  of the effects  of  project  implementation.  An  alternative
pathway would be to  include  the  results of  the screening  analysis in the
facilities  plan  and  to use  it as the basis for further planning decisions
and  possible  mitigation (Figure  1.2-1).  The screening method will ulti-
mately enable  agencies,  planners,  and  consultants  to  identify critical
aspects of  wetlands  that  might warrant further study,  and is not intended
to  be a  detailed  and  time  consuming technique.   Additional  detailed
studies  would  be  required  only if  their  use  were mandated  because of
potentially adverse effects  or lack of data.

-------
M^«





00
e
•H
c
e
Permit/pla
decisions
^^••IH















1
«-«
f-» l-l
U 0
a «*j
«w
u X
ecu
•H at c
§v
00
Include result
ities plan doc
submitcal to a












^^fc^






u
S
u -g
u C
0. 0)
t-H
Adverse impacts
on valuable wet















x
T)
3

(fl
•o

•H
rt

Further more del
may be required














d
ot
•H -H
U (Q

•H U
sl

(A

nclude results j
Ian document foi
o agency
M O. 4J

                            fl)       O
                            CL         -O
                            01    * U  (A
                            (A  X O  C
                            i-  *-      O
                            01  «J  T3 v4
                        oo -a
                       C  «M
                       U  -H
                       0>
                               E«
                               3 <
                       C  0) -r4
1'.
*J  U        01
     SO*     V  OC     C
    4-.     « I-      O
    **-.     M  «      ^H      C  *-»
u-i  nj     t0.fi      w  00  o  fi  u
 o       J3u      u  e *H  o  fli  *J
     X    UtO      « T-4  4J  O. u  n}
 W r-4     Ol  -H      *J  Q.  C  O- "^  U  '
 C »-*     h>t}aiOO'V3J3f-'
 0)  «            oc w  «)  *J  w  w  J3
        (U  D.   C  C "
 oo £
 C  f4
1-4  I*J  '
 «  V
D  -a
                                         o  en f^  >i  01   u
                           T3  c  at
                           ai  o ~o
                           >  -H
                                *  0)
                               u  4J
                               C  X
u_,
O
1
01 (A 01
U -H >
a w ft
X J-»
(fl t-H t-l S
*J « tfl (A
o c c -a
3 « o> c
•a « 
B n
VJ «H U OC
•H « e c
^ W I) -H
fl S -o
OOM-i C 3
•H1 0 -(
t* X •-< C
0> V. > -H
) a) C
C C V u)
60 E 'H 01
C -^ -H tj
U ^ R) fl)























4J
C
Ol
en
£
a
u
o
ui
-o
c
fl)
4J
01
5


^^^•H



















w
•H
(fl
X
^-1
c
n
•a
c
it
u
S
01
JZ
kl
3
*4-<

O
c

-------
     The  remainder  of  this  document  is  divided  into three  sections.
Section 2.0 reviews  potential impacts on wetlands which may result from
various activities  associated with facilities  plan implementation.  Both
direct  and  cumulative  impacts  are  discussed.   Section 3.0  summarizes
recent  literature concerning methods  for evaluating  baseline conditions
and impacts of man's activities on wetland systems.   Section 4.0 presents
conclusions about the methods reviewed and recommendations for the devel-
opment of a screening  methodology  for use in Region V by facilities plan-
ners and agency personnel.

-------
2.0  GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES PLANNING IMPACTS ON WETLANDS

     The objective of this section is to provide a brief description of the
types  of  impacts which  can result  on  wetlands due to  implmentation  of a
facilities plan.  The purpose of this review is to provide a background for
the  literature  review  of  wetland  assessment  methodologies presented  in
Section 3.0.  Appendix A contains additional summary information concerning
major impacts which may result from construction activities within wetlands
due to dredge  and fill activities and other  types  of  construction.  Since
the types of direct impacts of these types of activities are similar to the
effects of  a wastewater  treatment  project,  this summary can be  used  as a
means of understanding some of the effects of the latter.

     Several terms need to be first defined in order to clarify the discus-
sions  that   follow.   These  include  the  terms   primary  impacts,  secondary
impacts, and cumulative impacts.  Primary impacts are defined here as those
which result directly from a construction activity.   Secondary impacts Is a
term that has been used in the past by facility planners to signify effects
of induced  growth on natural and man-made resources.   The  typical defini-
tion  is  that  secondary  impacts  are those  produced by  population growth
induced  by   the  availability of  wastewater  treatment facilities.  To  be
consistent  with  the Council  on Environmental  Quality's  (CEQ)  guidelines,
however,  the present study  includes the term  secondary  impacts  as a sub-
category of  cumulative  impacts.   By definition, the CEQ identifies cumula-
tive impacts as  follows (CEQ regulations 29  November  1971,  effective  date
30 July 1979 - 40 CFR Parts 1508.7 aw 1508.8):

     "Cumulative impact is the impact on the environment which results from
the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and
reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or
non-Federal) or  person undertakes such other actions.   Cumulative impacts
can  result   from  individually minor but collectively  significant actions
taking place over a period of time."  "Effects include":
     (a)  "Direct effects, which  are caused  by the action and occur at the
          same time and place".

-------
     (b)  "Indirect effects, which are  caused  by the action and  are later
          in time or farther  removed  in distance,  but are still reasonably
          foreseeable.    Indirect  effects  may  include   growth  inducing
          effects  and  other  effects  related  to  induced  changes  in  the
          pattern  of  land  use,  population density  or  growth rate,  and
          related  effects  on  air and water  and  other  natural  systems,
          including ecosystems."

     Under this definition,  a direct  impact is  synonymous  with primary,  and
secondary impacts are synonymous  with Indirect effects, or those  produced
by induced  changes.   For consistency,  the present study utilizes  the  CEQ
definitions.

     An example of a direct  cumulative impact  related  to  facilities plan-
ning would be the removal of a specified amount of  wetland habitat to allow
for  construction  of several  sewage treatment plants  and  associated inter-
ceptor  systems  within a  large geographical area.   The direct  cumulative
impacts  on  wetlands  in  this  case could  be defined,  for  example,  as  the
total number of acres of habitat directly eliminated  by construction of  all
plants, lagoons, and interceptors (and the resulting  ecological, hydrologi-
cal,  and  water quality related  impacts).  Indirect  cumulative  impacts in
this case would  be defined  as the number  of acres of wetlands affected by
Induced growth  produced by  several facilities  within the  larger  geograph-
ical region.   Both types  of  cumulative effects (direct and indirect) would
be expressed either as  total acres eliminated (and  resulting impacts) or as
a percentage of  the total  available  wetland acreage  within a  defined area
(such  as  the service area  or larger  geographical region).   A method  for
assessing cumulative impacts  of USCOE  Section 10 and 404 activities  has
been prepared  (Coates 1981)  but is not reviewed here.  Adamus (1983) also
briefly  discussed various means  to  assess  cumulative impacts of  highway
construction activities  on wetlands.

2.1  Primary Impacts

     Direct  impacts  of  facilities  plan  implementation   on  wetlands  may
result from construction of sewage treatment plants,  lagoons,  interceptors,
and  pump  stations.   For detailed  discussions  of  general  construction  im-
                                   10

-------
pacts,  the reader  is referred  to  the  citations  in the  bibliography by
Darnell  et al.  (1976)  and Nelson  et  al.  (1982b).   Wetlands  may  also be
affected by wastewater discharges (USEPA 1983).

     The  major  types  of  direct  impacts  that wastewater  treatment  plant
(WWTP) construction and operation may have on water quality are illustrated
in  Figure 2.1-1.  Vegetation  removal,  encroachment, alteration  of hydro-
logic regime,  and  reduced water quality would  all  have  adverse effects on
wetland values.

     Direct elimination  of wetland habitat or  encroachment  of  a. treatment
facility  at  the  edge of  a  wetland could  disturb or  eliminate  wildlife
habitat,  and  produce increased  erosion  and  sedimentation.   Interceptor
construction may result in direct habitat elimination where pipelines cross
wetlands.    Construction  of  an interceptor  crossing a wetland  may also
cause temporary  increases  in  runoff and erosion, producing increased sedi-
mentation  within a wetland.   Increased sedimentation (from human activity)
may have  direct  biological effects, either on wetland plants or on aquatic
organisms, by  direct  smothering or by producing increased turbidity (simi-
lar effects also may result from WWTP interceptor construction).  Construc-
tion of a wastewater treatment plant or interceptor across or adjacent to a
wetland may also block water  sheet  flow or  interfere in various ways with
the overall water  balance (budget)  of these  communities.   These interfer-
ences could  include  groundwater, surface water,  precipitation,  and evapo-
transpiration inputs and outputs.  Because almost every ecological function
of  wetlands  is  linked  directly  with  the  hydrologic  regime  (i.e.,  the
balance between all water inputs and outputs), activities such as intercep-
tor construction have  the potential  for producing  a  variety  of  adverse
physical, chemical, and biological impacts on wetlands.

     Discharges  of  treated wastewater into  wetland ecosystems may have a
variety of impacts.   These were recently reviewed  in detail in a Region V
publication    entitled   The  Effects of Wastewater Treatment Facilities on
Wetlands in the Midwest (USEPA  1983).  The major impacts on wetlands iden-
tified therein are listed  in  Table 2.1-2 and  are  not discussed further in
the present review.
                                   11

-------
   Table 2.1-2.  Summary of the major types of Impacts of wastewater on

        wetlands identified by USEPA (1983).
      Type of Impact
                     Description
   Change in Hydro-
    logic Regime
•  Nutrient Cycling
   Accumulation of
   other.dissolved
   substances (in-
   organic ions, sul-
   fur compounds, BOD
   loading by non-toxic
   organisms, etc...)

   Trace metal
   Accumulation
•  Accumulation of
   refractory chemi-
   cals (i.e, surfac-
   tants, phenols,
   pesticides)

•  Soils and Sediments
•  Plant communities
•  Animal Communities
Sequential changes in all wetland features, pos-
sibly including nutrient cycling, sedimentation
rates, erosion patterns, plant and animal coamun-
ity composition, overall water budget; effects
ultimately depend on loading rate, discharge
quality, size and type of receiving wetland.

Most wetlands studied to date achieve good removal
of nitrogen via denitrification; phosphorus removal
is more variable and a less well known process;
wastewater application alter rates of nutrient
cycling in largely unknown ways.

Wetlands have some ability to assimilate organic
loading 4- other compounds but changes in soil
chemistry (i.e., pH changes etc.,) may result,
producing shifts in dominant plant types.
Some metals do accumulate within wetlands, others
are less well retained; bioaccumulation affected
by various physical/chemical factors.

Wetlands typically accumulate such compounds;
long-term ecological effects poorly known.
Potential erosion, channel creation; chemical
leaching; litter buildup.

Shifts in species composition, areal distribution;
changes in biomass, production; changes in detrital
cycling; transfer of potentially toxic materials
in food chain.

Changes in wildlife, animal, and fish populations
may result directly from changes in plant community,
alteration of water levels or reduced water quality;
increases in insect disease carrying vectors possible
but not well known; benthic invertebrate communities
may shift to more pollution tolerant forms.
                                       13

-------
Table 2.1-2.  Summary of the major types of impacts of wastewater on
     wetlands identified by USEPA (1983) (concluded).
   Type of Impact

•  Protected Species
*  Health/disease
   Over loading/ stress
                                              Description
                            Possible adverse effects due to reduced water
                            quality, changes in plant community structure,
                            habitat elimination.

                            Viruses, bacterial and parasite related diseases
                            all potential, but very poorly studied area.

                            Potential for increased stress on receiving wetlands
                            due to added pollutants; resulting in reduced
                            production, shifts in metabolic (energy flow)
                            pathways; effects largely dependent on relation
                            between amount of loading and size of wetland.

-------
2.2  Cumulative Impacts


     Cumulative impacts  of construction grants  project  implementation may
include the additive  direct  effects of individual WWTPs and  their  associ-

ated infrastructure  or the indirect effects of  induced  growth.   Construc-
tion and  operation of WWTPs  and associated interceptors  can result  in a

variety  of secondary  induced growth  impacts.   These  include  effects  on
water  quality  and quantity due  to construction  and operation,  or  direct

wetland habitat elimination  caused by land use  changes.   Indirect  impacts
produced by changes  in water  quality and/or quantity may  include  the fol-

lowing (inferred from Zimmerman 1974):


     •  Positive impact can occur by improving  water quality by elimi-
        nating or  reducing direct discharges to wetlands  and hydrolog-
        ically  connected  areas,  thereby  improving  ecological  and
        recreational values;

     •  Potentially adverse impacts from induced development resulting
        in  increased  overland  runoff,  erosion,  and  sedimentation.
        Development  increases   the  amount of   impervious  surface,
        reduces recharge  areas  for  groundwater,  increases runoff  of
        pollutant-laden stormwater and  erosion from bare construction
        sites,  possibly   resulting  in  adverse  effects  on  wetlands;

     •  Potentially adverse effects may occur because of  increased use
        of  surface  and  groundwater.   Decrease  in recharge  area  may
        affect  wetlands.   The  overall  balance  between  surface  and
        groundwater may alter wetland water budgets.

     Potential indirect effects  on  wetlands due to land  use changes caused

by induced growth could  include  the following  (based on information given
in Zimmerman 1974):
          Direct wetland  habitat elimination  due to  construction  of
          new residential,  commercial,  or  industrial facilities  and
          infrastructure because of growth induced by the availability
          of new sewage treatment facilities;  and

          Construction of  new residential, commercial,  or industrial
          facilities and  associated  infrastructure  adjacent to  wet-
          lands  as a result of induced growth producing:

              encroachment  effects  on  wildlife  (spraying,   noise,
              human presence),
              blocking of  surface sheet  flow  or  other  hydrologic
              effects  (drainage, etc...),
          -    increased pollutant loadings,  and
              other impacts as described in  Section  2.1.
                                   15

-------
     The actual  indirect cumulative  impacts  on wetlands within  a service
area will  depend on the rate  and  direction of induced growth.   Since  the
total acreage of  land  affected by induced growth is much greater than that
required  to construct  the WWTP  and  associated  infrastructure,  indirect
cumulative impacts from facilities plan implementation will typically be of
far greater  magnitude  and  extent  than the primary (direct) impacts.   In
effect, indirect  impacts are  an extension and amplification of  the primary
impacts, but extending  over a larger geographical  area.   Indirect impacts
on wetlands will  be  focused,  however, within  the areas of greatest project
growth and development.  Effects  of  induced growth are therefore typically
of far greater significance than primary impacts.   At present,  no methodol-
ogies are available specifically for  analysis  of indirect effects of facil-
ities  plan implementation  on wetlands.   Available methods for  assessing
these generalized  effects  of  types  of impacts are  summarized  in Sections
3.3.5 through 3.3.7.
                                   16

-------
3.0  LITERATURE REVIEW

     This  section summarizes the  recent literature  concerning  freshwater
wetland  evaluation  methodologies.   Methods for  evaluating  baseline  condi-
tions  (physical,  chemical and  biological)  as well  as  project-related im-
pacts are included.

     Sections 3.1 and 3.2 summarize two major literature reviews on wetland
impact assessment methodologies  that  have  been prepared recently.   Section
3.3 summarizes information on other methodologies available for evaluating
impacts  on wetlands  not included  (for the  most part)  in the two  major
reviews summarized in Sections 3.1 and 3.2.

3.1  U.S. Water Resources Council (WRC) Study

     The publication  by  the  U.S. Water Resources Council  (WRC)  (Lonard et
al.  1981)  is  significant because  it  constitutes  the  primary source  of
documentation of  pre-1981 literature.   The report is a  detailed review of
previously published  wetland evaluation procedures.   It was  prepared for
the WRC  by the  U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers  Waterways  Experiment Station
(WES)  at Vlcksburg,  Mississippi (the  reader should note  that  to  avoid
duplication,  only a few of the final 20 papers selected for detailed analy-
sis in the WRC study are discussed in detail again in the present  report).
The procedure used  by the WES  team was to first screen a  large number of
potential  wetland  evaluation methodologies in order to determine  if they
fell into one or  more of the following functional categories:
  Major Functional Categories
  Habitat
Related Functional Subcategories
Common wetland plant and animal
  species
Endangered, threatened, or rare plant
  and animal species
Game species:
  - aquatic, terrestrial, avian
Commercial species
Nongame species
                                  17

-------
  Hydrologic
  Recreation
  Agriculture/Silviculture
  Heritage
Floodwater conveyance and storage
Wave energy dissipation and shoreline
  protection
Ground and surface water supply,
  including recharge and discharge
Water quality, including waste assim-
  ilation and sediment trapping

Water-oriented activities such as
  canoeing.  Other activities such as
  photography, bird watching, and
  camping

Cultivated crops
Pastureland, hay crops, forestry
Peat

Landscape:
  - natural and unique areas
  - open space

Cultural:
  - archaeological sites
  - historical sites

Scientific:
  - research
  - education
     The  study  also  examined  the advantages  and  disadvantages  of  each

selected methodology, identified where  methodologies were not available or
were of  limited  value  for defining wetland functions, and  prepared  recom-

mendations for  improving the consistency  of  available  wetland  evaluation
methodologies.  Twenty documents were selected which met the screening cri-
teria listed  above.  These  were then analyzed in  further  detail to  deter-

mine:
          What wetland functions were analyzed;
          Geographic applicability;
          Personnel requirements;
          Data requirements;
          "Red Flag Features";
          Method flexibility;
          End products;
          Type of field work required; and
          Possible administrative uses.
                                  18

-------
     A profile  of  each methodology was developed  from  this analysis and a
series of  tables  was developed summarizing the  information.   These tables
are provided in Appendix B.  Abstracts of the 20 final methods selected are
presented in Appendix C.

3.1.1  Habitat Function

     Of  all  methodologies  reviewed,  those  involving  ecological  habitat
evaluations were determined to be the most thoroughly developed.  Twelve of
the 20 methods  reviewed dealt with habitat evaluation.  Appendix Table B-l
lists the  types of habitat functions included by  each of the 12 methodol-
ogies.   Habitat  functions included  abundance, distribution,  and diversity
of plant and animal populations; presence of rare and/or protected species;
and  types  and  abundance  of  game  and commercial  species of  animals.   At
least five of  the  20 methodologies presented require use of an interdisci-
plinary evaluation team.

     Although well developed methods for evaluation of habitat function are
available,  the WRC study concluded that there is much room for improvement
since each method is  often  based  on various assumptions which  need to be
made  because  of  major  gaps  in scientific  knowledge.   For  example,  some
methods assume  that  selected groups of diverse plant or animal species are
reflective  of  overall habitat  value.   Other types  of  assumptions  include
the following:  (1) that plant community structure defines wildlife habitat
requirements;   (2)  that  there  is a  positive  relationship  between  habitat
diversity  and  wildlife  species  diversity;  and  (3) that there  is  a corre-
lation between  interdispersion of  vegetative  and wildlife  diversity (New
England Research,  Inc. 1980).

3.1.2  Hydrologic  Functions

     The WRC  team  concluded  that  although the hydrologic  regime is  of
central importance in the functioning of all wetlands, wetland hydrology is
in general  poorly  understood and difficult to study because of its complex-
ity.   Analysis of  the hydrologic regime for a wetland requires measurements
                                  19

-------
of  water  quality,  groundwater  recharge,  storm  and floodvater  storage,
surface and groundwater discharge,  and  evapotranspiration.   These measure-
ments require substantial  expenditure of  labor and funds as well as use of
sophisticated  equipment.    Considerable  error  may  also  be  involved  in
attempting to establish a hydrologic budget (Winter 1980, 1981).

     Because of this basic lack of knowledge concerning wetland  hydrology,
few hydrology evaluation  methodologies  have been developed  (Lonard  et al.
1981).  The  data  base on wetland hydrology  is small.  Existing  data are
also  usually  contradictory or  incomparable,  are qualitative, and/or have
been submitted to  subjective interpretations (Stearns, Conrad, and Schmidt,
Consulting Engineers  1979).   More  research is required before  the hydro-
logic functions of  wetlands  can be well understood.   Carter  et  al.  (1979)
identified five areas  in  which research on wetland hydrology is required.
These include:
        Improvement of existing measurement techniques;
        Determining hydrologic inputs and outputs;
        Improvement  of  understanding  of soli-water-vegetation  rela-
        tionships in wetlands;
        Long-term studies of wetland hydrology; and
        Development of models.
They concluded  that  evaluation criteria must be developed  before adequate
management decisions regarding wetland hydrology can be made.   However, de-
velopment  of  these criteria  will  ultimately require  additional  research.
The  ultimate  goal  should  be  to develop  an  evaluation  system  that  will
enable assessment of wetland hydrological values.   O'Brien and Motts (1980)
listed 29  factors  that are hydrogeologically significant in  wetlands, and
suggested  combinations of  these  that could be used to classify wetlands in
various ways.

     Appendix Table  B-l  lists specific  hydrologic parameters  that  can be
measured  according  to several  methodologies  reviewed  by Lonard et  al.
(1981).  Three  of  the methods require an interdisiplinary team.  Lonard et
al.  (1981) recommend  that  the methods of Reppert  et  al.  (1979) and Schul-
diner et al. (1979) be employed as a general means  of evaluating impacts on
                                  20

-------
wetland  hydrologic  functions.   The  method  described  by  Reppert et  al.
(1978)  assigns  qualitative  values  (high, moderate  or  low) to  individual
hydrologic variables, including parameters for:  (1) water quality improve-
ment; (2) groundwater  recharge;  (3)  storm and floodwater storage;  and  (4)
shoreline  protection values.  The  method developed  by Schuldiner et  al.
(1979) includes baseline data needs,  sampling techniques,  data sources,  and
requires expertise for each hydrologic parameter to  be measured.   Impacts
are displayed in flow charts and matrices.

3.1.3  Agricultural/Silvicultural Functions

     These  wetland  functions  include  provision of  forestry or food  pro-
ducts. Lonard et  al. (1981) concluded that many of  the issues surrounding
these wetland functions  are related  to defining harvest value.  No method-
ology was identified that documented the harvest value of a wetland,  but a
good  data  base exists  for determining standing crops  of  trees and  agri-
cultural  plants  (Nierlng  and Palmlsano  1979).  Only  one  methodology  was
identified  that  should   be  used to  evaluate  silvicultural  functions  of
wetlands (USDA  1978) (Appendix Table B-l).  However, the method applies to
the coast of  Massachusetts and would have to be modified for applicability
in  USEPA Region  V.   No methods for  specifically  assessing  agricultural
functions were identified.

3.1.4  Recreation and Heritage Functions

     Lonard et  al.  (1981)  concluded  that few methodologies were identified
that  address  recreation and  heritage  values  of wetlands.   Such functions
include a wide  range of values such as  boating, fishing,  photography,  and
camping, and also historical, cultural, and aesthetic values.

     Four methodologies  (Appendix Table  B-l)  were  identified that  evaluate
the recreation  function.  Two other similar methods  also  were identified,
but these  require use of an interdisciplinary  team.  Five other  method*
were identified that require an interdisciplinary team to identify heritage
values (Appendix  Table B-l).   Niering  and Palmlsano  (1979)  suggest a  pro-
cedure for development of recreation and heritage evaluation methodologies.
                                  21

-------
     Lonard et_ al_. (1981) recommended that the method developed by the USDA
(1978) for coastal  Massachusetts  be used in the future to evaluate recrea-
tion functions.   Again,  however,  this method must be  modified in order to
be applied  in other areas  of  the country.   The method  of  Smardon (1972),
later included in a methodology developed by Larson (1976),  was recommended
for evaluation of heritage  functions.  Smardon's method could also be used
as  the  basis for  developing  means  of  evaluating  other  "sociocultural"
aspects of wetlands (Lonard e£ jLJL 1981).

3.1.5  Geographic Features

     Lonard et  al.  (1981)  identified methodologies developed for several
geographic regions,  including  the  glaciated northeast,  southeast coastal
area,  freshwater  wetlands  in the lower  Mississippi  River drainage system,
and for Arkansas.   Eight methods (Appendix Table B-2) were identified which
could be used (or modified for application)  to inland and coastal wetlands.
Some of these methods,  however, would require major revisions to adapt them
to a different geographic area.

3.1.6  Personnel Needs/Administrative Conditions

     All  of   the  methods identified  by Lonard  et_ al. (1981)  require the
expertise of  an  individual who  has  "the  technical  skills  to  perform  a
wetland evaluation" or  the  expertise of an  interdisciplinary  team of spe-
cialists (Appendix Table B-3).   The team approach usually requires a major
commitment of labor.  The  method of Galloway et_ al_.  (1978)  (Appendix Table
B-3)  uses a   team of laymen representing local interests in addition to  a
resource manager and the technical interdisciplinary  team.

3.1.7  Data Requirements

     Lonard et  al.  (1981)  reported  that  the amount  of data  required  to
conduct  each  of  the  wetland  evaluation methods  reviewed  varied greatly
(Appendix Table B-4).   Projects involving use of an Interdisciplinary team
                                  22

-------
require  the  largest  amounts  of  data.   Small-scale projects  (typically
involving  regulatory actions)  require  far  less data.   Almost  all methods
require  at a  minimum, maps,  aerial  photographs,  and  some type  of  field
survey.

     The "habitat"  type  methods  (for example, the USFWS Habitat Evaluation
Procedure  and  the  USCOE  Habitat  Evaluation System) require data on vegeta-
tion  type  and distribution.  Both vegetation  and  hydrologic  methods  typi-
cally must be monitored on a seasonal basis.

     All methods reviewed  by Lonard et al. (1981) require value judgments
by  an indivudual or  a team of specialists.  Value  judgments are  based on
the results of field experience  and judgment of the evaluator.   Some  qual-
itative data are typically required in order to make  such judgments in most
of  the methods reviewed.  Appendix Table B-4  summarizes additional infor-
mation concerning data requirements.

3.1.8  Red-Flag Features

     Red-flag features include those wetland characteristics that represent
an  outstanding natural  or cultural value.   Examples include  presence of
protected  plant or  animal  species,  unique  geological  features  or  other
biological  resources  (for  example,  highly diverse  or  rare habitats),  or
presence of archaeological resources of high value.

     Seven methods  were  identified  by Lonard et al.  (1981) as  including a
red-flag  feature that  identify  "key,  sensitive wetland  functions."   The
red-flag features are  listed in  Appendix Table B-5.   Galloway (1978)  iden-
tified nine  "initial  indicators" of  wetland value.  Methods developed by
Carson (1976), Gupta and  Foster (1973), and Smardon (1972) use the red-flag
concept  extensively.   Schuldiner  e± al.  (1979) employed  Carson's  (1976)
list  of  red-flag  features  in developing a  manual  for assessing  highway
impacts on wetlands.   According  to  Carson's method,  if  a  wetland contains
even  a single  red-flag  feature  it should  be  preserved.   Lonard &t^ al.
(1981) note, however,  that nearly  all wetlands  would possess at least one
such feature, and that assignment  of red-flag values is  extremely subjec-
tive.
                                  23

-------
3.1.9  Flexibility/Responsiveness

     Lonard jit aj^.  (1981)  identified three methods that were  flexible and
responsive but that  also  generated  relatively quick answers and were based
on  limited amounts  of data  (Appendix fable  B-6).   These  include  Carson
(1976), Reppert et^ jQ.  (1979),  and  USFWS (1980).  Longer-term  methods and
interdisciplinary  team methods  require  much more  data  and  much  longer
periods  of time  to provide an  evaluation.   Six  of  the  methods  involved
differentiating between  "major"  and "minor" impacts  (Appendix  Table B-6).

3.1.10  End-Products/Evaluation Summary

     Fourteen  of  the  20  methodologies  reviewed by  Lonard et al.  (1981)
present a  means  for converting  site-specific data into a numerical index
for  rating the value  of  wetlands  (Appendix Table B-6).   The  typical end-
product  is a  narrative  describing  the  overall  value  of the wetland  as
"low," "moderate,"  or  "high."   The  method of Galloway (1978)  uses  a com-
puter and presents the  summary in a  graphics display.   HEP (USFWS 1980) can
be done manually  or by computer, but  the manual  method is far more labor-
ious.  Two other  methods (Schuldiner  et^ al. 1979;  Solomon et^ al.  1977)
include a  flow chart and  matrix (or a coefficient  matrix) (Appendix Table
B-6).

     The WRC study  noted  that  use of  a numerical  rating system may result
in regulatory  difficulties where low  values are assigned (because  such a
rating implies  that a wetland  would have little value).   However,  such a
rating system has  the  advantage  of  presenting results  of  complex  analysis
in a summary form that  is more usable for resource managers.

3.1.11  Field Testing

     Lonard eit al.  (1981)  concluded that there is a need for field testing
of the various methodologies  for evaluating wetlands  (Appendix Table B-5)
and that decision-makers should be actively involved in this process.  This
will ultimately lead to  improvements in the quality of resource management
decisions.   The  study recommended  that  further  field testing  of quanti-
                                  24

-------
tative methods such as HEP and HES as well as purely qualitative methods be
tested and compared in the future.

3.1.12  Applicability of Methodologies to Agency Needs

     The applicability of  the methods reviewed by  Lonard  et al. (1981) to
the needs  of  various  government agencies is  summarized  in Appendix Tables
B-7 and  B-8.  Agency  requirements include:  (1)  project planning  and  site
selections; (2)  regulatory actions;  (3)  impact  assessments;  (4) resource
management; and  (5) acquisition needs (the needs listed in Appendix Tables
B-7 and  B-8 were assigned by Lonard £t_ al^.  (1981), and not necessarily by
the original creators of each methodology).

     Several  methods  were determined to be  applicable  to  project planning
and site selection  procedures (Appendix Table B-7).  Most of these require
an  interdisciplinary  team and (usually) relatively large  amounts of field
data.   Methodologies  useful  in regulatory  actions generally  require  less
data since they  are  used to  produce answers  in short time periods.  These
methods require "moderate levels of technical skills, data requirements and
degrees  of accuracy,"   but  do  require an  experienced resource manager.
Eleven methodologies were  identified that address regulatory actions.   Six
methods  reviewed  involve on-site  impact  assessments,  and  all  of  these
methods  require  use  of  an  interdisciplinary team.   Seven  methods  were
identified that  would meet management needs, and  these  have only moderate
time and data requirements (Appendix Table B-7) .

     Twelve of  the methods  reviewed by Lonard  et al.  (1981) require low
levels  of  man-power  and data  and  could be  used  to determine  mitigation
procedures.  Methods such as HEP (USFWS 1980), HES  (USCOE 1980), and Schul-
diner et^ a^.  (1979) include mitigation but the full level analysis requires
more extensive amounts of data (Appendix Table B-7).

     Lonard et^ _al. (1981)  also identified eleven methods that define means
by  which  wetlands can be  acquired  for  preservation.   None  require  large
amounts of data or manpower.   Fried (1974) presented a method for acquiring
wetlands in  the state of New  York,  as well as discussion  of the monetary
value of wetlands.
                                  25

-------
3.1.13  Conclusions and Recommendations of the WRC Study


     Lonard et  aJL.  (1981)  concluded their report by making a set of recom-

mendations  concerning  means  of improving  the existing  methodologies for

evaluating  wetlands.   The  primary  conclusions are as  follows  (quoted di-

rectly from Lonard et al. 1981):
     •  Progress is being  made  in the improvement of wetlands habitat
        evaluation instruments and no specific actions are recommended
        at this time;

     •  A  two-phased  approach should be taken  to  improve  the assess-
        ment of hydrology  values  of wetlands that include the identi-
        fication  of  scientific  data gaps  and  the development  of  a
        specific  research  program  that addresses  technical  gaps  as
        they are related to management needs;

     •  No  specific  immediate  recommendations are  made  concerning
        agriculture,  recreation,  and heritage  functions  of wetlands.
        However,  the  study  team  recommended  actions that  should  be
        considered in the future;

     •  Criteria and  parameters that emphasize specific wetland types
        and regions should be developed for inclusion in methodologies
        that were originally developed for widespread use;

     •  Personnel skill  levels  should  be  stated  for  new  or existing
        methodologies;

     •  Data requirements  are spelled  out  fairly  well  for most wet-
        lands evaluation procedures; therefore, no recommendations are
        made to improve this feature of evaluation instruments;

     •  Red flag features should be used to indicate wetlands that re-
        quire further detailed analysis;

     •  A well-organized field testing program should not be conducted
        at  the  present time  until  inconsistencies of  individual me-
        thodologies are  identified  and  improved.   Field  testing ex-
        periments  should  continue  on  individual  methodologies  in  a
        variety of geographical areas and wetland types; and

     •  Various state  and Federal agencies  involved  in wetlands man-
        agement activities  should assess and  communicate  their needs
        for  specific   evaluation  instruments   to  authors   of  method-
        ologies.
                                  26

-------
     The study reviewed several additional reports on wetlands that did not
meet  the  screening criteria  and  evaluation standards applied.   These are
listed  in  Appendix D.   These documents were either  not  methodologies for
evaluating wetland  functions,  or  they evaluated wetlands  on a purely mone-
tary basis.

3.2  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Literature Review

     The  U.S.  Fish  and Wildlife  Service  (Nelson  et^ al.  1982c)  recently
published a manual  designed  to assist state governments  in developing and
implementing  fish and  wildlife requirements  of the Section 404 program
(Nelson  et_ al.  1982c).  The manual includes a major section that reviews
available  methods  for   evaluating  impacts  of  404  activities on aquatic
resources  (including  wetlands).   Since these methods could also be used to
address  primary   impacts  of   201  activities, they  are presented here  in
summary form.  This  section  summarizes the information presented in Nelson
et  al.  (1982c)  concerning available  impact evaluation methods.   Although
not all  methods  discussed  may apply specifically to  wetlands,  most do, or
could  be modified  to be  used in  wetland  assessments.   In  addition,  the
review  provides   a  useful  presentation  of  the range of  types  of methods
available.

     The types of methods  reviewed include:  (1) checklists; (2) matrices;
(3) networks; (4) mapping;  (5) indices; (6) habitat assessment systems; and
(7) ecosystem  modeling  (note:  where  these methods  have  already  been re-
viewed  in  this  report   they  are  cross-referenced  to previous  sections).

3.2.1  Checklists

     Checklists are  the simplest  means  of identifying potential environ-
mental impacts.   The  advantages  of checklists are:  (1) they aid the evalu-
ator's memory, ensuring  that  the analysis is complete; and (2)  the method
helps  in identifying important  issues.   The main  disadvantages  are  that
major impacts may be  overlooked if they are not included  on the checklist,
and that the checklist is strictly a qualitative means of  assessing impacts
                                  27

-------
(and Is  thus  of  limited value in quantifying degree of impact).   The study
identified  four  types  of checklists  that can  be  used  in  environmental
impact assessments.  These include:  (1)  simple;  (2) descriptive;  (3) scal-
ing; and  (4)  scale-weighting  checklists  (Canter  et^ &L. 1977).  The simple
checklist  provides a  list  of  impacts  that  could  occur but  a  means  of
further  interpretation  if not included  (Table 3.2-1).   In  addition  to  a
list  of  potential project  impacts,  the  descriptive  checklist  may  also
provide a means of subjectively estimating the degree of probability of any
potential  adverse  impacts  (Table  3.2-2).   In the scaling checklist,  the
expected degree of  impact is  estimated for each expected parameter (Table
3.2-3).  When  a weighting factor is assigned to each  parameter,  the scale
checklist  becomes  scale-weighted (Table 3.2-4).   Weights may be assigned
mathematically or  subjectively.   Appendix E  includes the  set  of scale-
weighted  checklists  developed  in  Nelson  et al.  (I982c) to  address  four
additional impact  categories  (physical  factors;  chemical  factors; biologi-
cal factors;  land  and  water  use;  and other  factors)  associated with 404
activities.  Many of these relate directly to the effects  of  sewer pipeline
construction and other  activities  commonly associated with 201 plan imple-
mentation.

3.2.2  Matrices

     In  the matrix method,   a  set  of  cause-and-effeet  relationships are
depicted by cross—referencing baseline conditions  against a  list  of poten-
tial impacts.  Matrices  differ from checklists in that they relate specific
project actions to  individual impacts  (i.e.,  the matrix is more specific).
The primary advantage  of  the  matrix is that it provides a systematic means
of  evaluating  project  impacts.   Most  matrices also use  numbers  to assess
the degree or magnitude of potential impacts.   The advantages of  the matrix
are that:  (1)  they are useful as a  means  of  preliminary analysis (i.e.,  a
screening  tool); and (2)  they provide for a more thorough consideration of
all potential  impacts,  including the interactions of  various  project com-
ponents  in  producing   specific  environmental  effects  (Greenberg  et  al.
1978).   The  main  disadvantages  are that:  (1) analytical  "overkill" (over-
analysis  of minor  or   irrelevant  issues)  may  result; (2)  it is  hard  to
compare  alternatives with a  matrix system  (a shortcoming especially rele-
                                  28

-------
     _ 1.  Filled waterway or marshes
     _2.  Deepening
     _ 3.  Obstructing
     _4.  Shoaling
     _5.  Segmentation
     _6.  Habitat Isolation
     _ 7.  Draining wetland
     _ 8.  Flooding wetland
     _ 9.  Bulkhead, dike, levees
     JO.  Diversion of freshwater
           sources
     _11.  Modification of tidal
           intrusion
_12.   Modification of water
      circulation
_13.   Increased fertility
_14.   Reduced fertility
_15.   Increased turbidity
_16.   Noxious odor
_17.   Tributary flow control
_18.   Saltwater barrier
_19.   Convert to fresh water
_20.   Modification of substrata
_21.   Pollution (specify type)
_22.   Shoreline erosion
 23.   Other
Table 3.2-1.  Fish and Wildlife Service checklist  of  potential environmental
     alterations resulting from dredge and fill activities  (from Hubbard and
     Blair 1979).
                                     29

-------
 II.  Environmental Impacts                              Yes     Maybe      No


 1.  Water.  Will the proposal result in:

 a.  Changes in currents, or the course or
    direction of water movements, in fresh waters?     	    	    	

 b.  Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
    or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?    	    	    	

 c.  Alterations to the course or flow of flood
    waters?                                            	    	    	

 d.  Change in the amount of surface water in any
    water body?                                        	^    		

 e.  Discharge into surface waters, or in any
    alteration of surface water quality, including
    but not limited to temperature, dissolved
    oxygen, or turbidity?                              	    	    	

 f.  Change in the quantity of ground waters,
    either through direct additions or withdrawals,
    or through interception of an aquifer by cuts
    or excavations?                                    	    	    	

 g.  Deterioration in ground water quality, either
    through direct injection, or through the
    seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents,
    waterborne virus or bacteria, or other
    substances into the ground water?                  	    	    	
Table 3.2-2.  Part  of a checklist used by the U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service to
        assess  impacts of dredging and filling projects (from Hubbard and Blair

        1979).
                                        30

-------
Impact
                                                Anticipated Magnitude of Impact
                                                 Very     Moderately      Less
severe
severe
severe
A.  Ground water quality
Factors
1.  Leachate production and potential
    migration to ground water
2.  Water table fluctuations which can
    result in leachate production
3.  Intense or extended precipitation
    resulting in leachate production
  Table 3.2-3.  Part of a scaling  checklist used to assess impacts of upland disposal
          of dredged materials  (from SCS Engineers 1977).
                                          31

-------
Classes of
Factors in Level
of Adverse Impact
Individual Factors for Consideration
Factor
Scale
(0-3)
1
Scallng-3
Factor? Weighting
Weight Product
(1-5) (0-15)
Type of operations:

• GENERAL NATURE
• STRUCTURAL
FEATURES

• DREDGING4 AND DIS-
CHARGE EQUIPMENT

• TRANSPORTATION
ROUTES AND
EQUIPMENT

Scale of operations:

• STRUCTURAL
FEATURES
Maintenance, continuation of existing
work, or new work?

Open water, wetland, or confined upland
disposal?
Dredging or excavating,* fill, or spoil
disposal?
Temporary roads, pipelines, navigation
channels, or stream diversions?

Mechanical or hydraulic equipment?
Potential overflow or handling discharge?
Hopper dredges, barges, pipelines, or
trucks?
Open water, wetland or upland routes?
How extensive is road, pipeline, channel,
dike, dam and bulkhead construction?
TRANSPORTATION4 What transportation distances?4
• MATERIAL
PLACEMENT
Timing of operations:

• DURATION

• SCHEDULING
What volume of truck or barge traffic or
pipeline transport?
What surface area and average depth of
material removal4 or placement?
What average or maximum change in substrate
or soil excavation?
What portion of a productive, sensitive or
unique area affected?
Long-term and continuous or short-term and
periodic or seasonal?

Are critical periods or seasons avoided
(heavy rain, wind or waves, low flows;
migration, spawning, nesting, and rearing)?

SUBTOTALS
1. Level of impact for each factor is scaled insignificant (0), minor (1), moderate (2), or
major (3).
2. Factor weight from low (1) to high (5) is assigned based on relative importance of each
factor.
3. Scale value is multiplied by numerical weight.
4. Not explicitly covered under Section 404 of Clean Water Act.
Table 3.2-4. Assessment scale-weighting checklists for type, scale.and timing
factors associated with dredge and fill activities (Nelson and Associates
Inc., 1981).
32

-------
vant to facilities planning);  (3) the matrix analysis centers not on inter-
pretation of  impacts but merely on impact  identification;  and  (4)  eval-
uation consistency may vary between persons conducting the analysts.

     A  variety  of  matrix types  has been  developed.   These include:  (1)
descriptive/interaction  types;  (2)  scaling  and scale-weighted  types;  and
(3) stepped matrices.  An example of the descriptive matrix method is given
in Table 3.2-5.  In this method  (Yorke  1978),  the  first descriptive matrix
relates various project  activities  to  physical-chemical impacts.  A second
matrix  is  then used  to translate these into biological  impacts.   The  Im-
pacts are described verbally in all cases (although the USFWS may ultimate-
ly  develop  a  quantitative  means  of conducting  this  analysis).   In  the
interactive matrix (Figure 3.2-1) potential impacts associated with project
features are  cross-referenced  with bullets.   In  the scaling  type matrix
(Figure 3.2-2),  project  activities  are  rated with respect to  their poten-
tial to produce impacts.  In this method, impacts at alternate sites can be
effectively compared  with a single format.  Scale-weighted matrices can be
used  to assign an  indication  of the magnitude and  relative  importance of
various  impacts  (Figure  3.2-3).   The  advantage  of this method  is  that
trade-offs  of various   alternatives  are  identified effectively  (Boiling
1978).  The method  also distinguishes  between impact magnitude and import-
ance (Greenberg et al. 1978).

     In  the  stepped matrix approach,  a series  of  interlinked  impact  ma-
trices  are  used  to  analyze  chains of  interactive,  physical,  chemical  and
biological   events  (the  Yorke  method  discussed above  is actually  a  two-
generation stepped matrix) (Yorke  1978).   Because the Yorke  method derives
impacts based on scientific literature  and formally catalogs this informa-
tion, it has  been  cited as  being more objective than other matrix methods.
Trial et al.  (1980)  adopted and modified  this method as  a  water resource
planning tool.   The method can  also be used to predict  long-term "chain"
reaction impacts,  an advantage directly relating to 201  projects.   Nelson
et  al.  (1982c)  produced a dual  matrix  for use  in 404  related  projects
(Figures 3.2-4 and 3.2-5).
                                  33

-------
  PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL
   CHARACTERISTIC
                     ASSOCIATED IMPACT
  Depth and Stage
  Water Surface
  Area
  Channel
  Configuration
  Water
  Velocity
  Temperature
  Suspended
  Solids
Channel enlargement eliminates the diversity of water depths
associated with natural meandering channels.  Pools and
riffles are replaced by uniformly deep or uniformly shallow
reaches of channels.  Enlarged channels will carry a greater
percentage of flow during floods which will reduce the depth
and duration of flood plain overflow.  If the channels are
deepened, stages will be lowered during dry periods which
will promote the drainage of adjacent wetlands.

Deepening will create nearly uniform surface areas through-
out the year.  The shallow water zone near the banks which
is exposed during dry periods and inundated during wet
periods will be reduced in area.  Widening will increase
surface area and the variability of water surface area.
Spoil areas resulting from the excavations will reduce the
flood plain area subject to periodic flooding.

Enlargement will create uniform conditions.  Pools, riffles,
undercut banks, and other diverse habitats will be elimi-
nated.

Mean water velocities will be reduced because of an increase
in cross-sectional area.  Velocities will be more uniform
throughout the cross section.  Areas of high and low
velocity will be eliminated.

Widening will increase water temperature and the range of
temperatures because of the greater water surface area, the
reduced velocity, and the elimination of shade by removal
of stream bank vegetation.  These actions increase the
effect on insolation.  Deepening will have minimal impact on
temperature as long as stream bank vegetation is not dis-
turbed.  Disposal of excavated or dredged material in the
adjacent flood plains will increase water temperature
because stream-side vegetation is usually removed or des-
troyed by the construction equipment or suffocated by the
deposits.

The construction phase of channel enlargement will increase
the concentration and discharge of suspended solids at the
site and downstream.  This will increase the rate of sedi-
ment deposition in the channel and/or flood plain at down-
stream sites.  Sediment discharge will decrease after con-
struction, but it may persist at higher than normal levels
for a number of years as the stream channels adjust to new
flow regimes.  Reaches of deepened channels may become sinks
and aggrade  rapidly with fine sand and silt.
Table 3.2-5. Descriptive matrix illustrating physical and chemical impacts of
        river  channel dredging (enlargement)  (from Yorke 1978).
                                          34

-------
  PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL
    CHARACTERISTIC
                     ASSOCIATED IMPACT
  Bed Material
  Dissolved
  Substances
  Light
  Transmissivity
  Flow
  Variability
Both widening and deepening will disrupt the equilibrium of
the stream channel and the bed material and create a period
of constantly changing bed conditions.  Deepening will
remove the armor layer of the stream bed, which will cause
an increase  in bed material movement until large particles
restabilize  the surface.  Channel widening may increase bed
load as additional fine bed material is available for trans-
port or it may decrease the bed load and cause deposition
because the  increased cross-sectional area severely reduces
the competence of the channel for transporting bed material.
Removal of organic material from the bed will reduce both
food sources and the diversity of substrates available to
benthic organisms.  Removal of stream-side vegetation during
construction may reduce substantially the source of detritus
that is added to the system annually.
Construction will increase the total dissolved solids eroded
from newly exposed soils.  Nutrients, pesticides, heavy
metals, and other substances that were bound to bottom sedi-
ments may be released to the system.  The disturbances of
organic bed material and the release of nutrients may
increase the biochemical oxygen demand and cause oxygen
deficiencies downstream.  Enlargement, particularly deepen-
ing, may promote increase in agricultural drainage and con-
comitant increases in salts, nutrients, and pesticides with
surface runoff.  Increased channel capacity will  reduce
overflow and the use of the flood plain for assimilation of
organic nutrients and wastes.

Construction activities will reduce light transmissivity at
the site and at downstream locations because of increased
sediment loads.  This condition may persist for many years
as stream banks adjust to new flow regimes.  A more effi-
cient channel and ancillary drains will increase runoff and
the silt and clay loads which will reduce light trans-
missivity.

The range in water discharge will  increase.  Peak flows will
be higher and low flows will be lower.   Improved channel
conveyance will cause flood waters to move quickly through
enlarged channels and concentrate at some point downstream.
This results in higher peak discharges and a shorter dura-
tion of flooding.   Deepening a channel  will  increase drain-
age from adjacent flood plains, which will  increase the rate
of ground water discharge and decrease the amount of water
available to sustain base flow during dry periods.   The
deepened channel  also may penetrate through an impermeable
or semi-impermeable layer beneath the stream bed, resulting
in dewatering the channel  as water is discharged  to the
ground water system.
Table 3.2-5.  Descriptive matrix illustrating physical and  chemical impacts of
        river channel dredging (enlargement) (from Yorke 1978)  (concluded).
                                        35

-------
ACTIVITIES
ENVIRONMENTAL
EVENTS
CM
1
I-
a
Q
O
CO
0>
CM
n
It)
WATER
QUALITY
1.BOD
2. Dissolved Oxygen
3. Nutrients
4. Pathogens
5. Ftoatables
6. Odors and Tastes
7. Color
8. Toxicity
9. Dissolved Salts
10. Suspended Solids
11. Radiological
12. Temperature
13. pH Buffering
14. Ground Water
AIR
QUALITY
15. Particulates
16. Gases
17. Erosion
18. Deposition and Accretion
PHYSICAL
PROCESSES
19. Subsidence
20. Hydraulics
21. Devegetation
22. Infiltration
23. Ponding
24. Photosynthesis
BIOLOGICAL
PROCESSES
25. Consumers, Food Chain
26. Decomposition
27. Preaation
Figure 3.2-1. Interaction matrix linking project activities with associated
environmental elements or effects (Texas Department of Water Resources
1977).
36

-------
Study
Area
Project Activity
of Impact
Dredging
Channel
Widening and
Straightening
Pier and Piling
Construction
Road
Construction
Increased
Turbidity
Nutrient
Loading
Evaluative
Parameter
Depth (ft)
Extent (ft)
and Bank
Habitat
Area (sq ft)
and Habitat
Affected
Length (ft)
and Habitat
Affected
Suspended
Solids
(mgl)
Nitrate and
Phosphate
Levels
(mgl)
Ste#l
Current
Parameter
Value
8-12
0
0
0
Low
Low
Projected
Parameter
Value
25
0
300
100
(dirt)
Medium
Medium
Habitat
Affected
• Lake
•Sand Bar
Mud Flats
None
•Lake
• Uplands
• Lake
• Lake
Impact
Seventy
1
3
0
0
0
1
1
Site #2
Current
Parameter
Value
12
100
0
0
Medium
Low
Projected
Parameter
Value
40
140
0
0
High
High
Habitat
Affected
• Stream
Channel
• Wetlands
• Beach or
Banks
•Banks
None
None
• Stream
Channel
•Lake
• Stream
Channel
• Lake
Impact
Seventy
2
3
2
2
0
0
2
1
2
2
Key
 -1  Beneficial
  0  No impact
  1  Slight detriment
2  Significant adverse impact
3  Severe adverse impact
* Impact severity will be evaluated based on guidelines for each parameter associated with a given habitat type.
  Figure  3.2-2.  Impact  severity matrix for  scaling  comparative  impacts at  two
     alternative sites  for marina construction  (from Nelson et  al. 1977).
                                            37

-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. Identify all actions (located across the top of the matrix) that are part
of the proposed project.

2. Under each of the proposed actions, place a slash at the intersec-
tion with each item on the side of the matrix if an impact is possible.

3. Having completed the matrix, in the upper left-hand corner of each
box with a slash, place a number from 1 to 10 which indicates the
MAGNITUDE of the possible impact: 10 represents the greatest
magnitude of impact and 1, the least (no zeroes). Before each
number place + if the impact would be beneficial. In the lower right-
hand corner of the box place a number from 1 to 10 which indicates
the IMPORTANCE of the possible impact (e.g. regional vs. local):
10 represents the greatest importance and 1, the least (no zeroes).
The text which accompanies the matrix
should be a discussion of the significant
impacts, those columns and rows with
large numbers of boxes marked and
individual boxes with the larger num-
bers.
SAMPLE MATRIX
A. MODIFICATION OF REGIME
.a 6
PROPOSED ACTIONS
S
PHYSICAL AND

EMICAL CHARACTERIS
EAR
a-. Mineral resources
b. Construction materials
c. Soils
d. Land form
e. Force fields and background raaiation
f . Unique physical features
a. Surface
b. Ocean
2. WATER
c. Underground
d. Quality
e. Temperature
f. Recharge
g. Snow, ice and permafrost
Figure 3.2-3. Portion of Leopold interaction matrix with instructions for
scaling and weighting impacts (from Greenberg et al. 1978).
38

-------
                                      in
                                      •*->
                                      u

                                      Vf-
••- c
TO gj


j. -5
3 0)
•u in

•O "O
9) 9)
 in
•O
                                                (O



                                              +J 3
       'f (J
                                          O) 0) "O
                                          iw &» 'P-
O r-
d't— •

     O  4->
     C U
     
E o o a>
VI •!- ••-
•^ vi -M
E o  c)
a; oj at -u
                                                           o
                                                           +3
                                                             -u o
                                                                                  a>
                                                                                  o
                                                                                  ai
                                                        !«• 4^ GJ
                                          U
                                          C C
                                              >— 3
                                              U_ CO
(Q ^3 ^J ^P
i— a)
3 irt -O X)
u  a>
•r- Ol S_ S-
-M S- <1J tU
S_ O 4-> 4->
II
O 
IO

O)

t
(U




1
0)
                                         <-> 1-4 u_ co a. •—
                            (O
C C


•51
W 'w
•P •(->
3 C
C O
   u
in
1/1 u
0) -r-
O X
X O
c .^*
+•» E Q Q«
c  O S
O 4J CO -^
U C   X
   (O -O Q.
•o c ai
v f w -o
N E IQ 0)
••" IO (U S-
•^ +j i. aj
•r- C O •!->
X O C —
O O i—i -------
             CO

             a
             O co
             -M C
             c o
             O T-
             0 4->
             -v (0 C
             CO 3 O
             4J 4J -P-
             C O 4->
             O) 3    (O J=
     J. 4J
  C -M a  ^
O O 0) co
                                                            O) O)
                                                            e s.
                                                            ••-3
                                                            O>4J
   0) Ol O
   CO T3
•o -o
OJ
«/)
1C
                                               CO 
   O 3 XJ &.
   C •— 3 -i U. tO Q.
  S cu t.
O> 0) 4-> S-
  i— <0 3
•0  T3
(T3 0) d) d;
0» i- S. S.
                    TJ
                    gj


                    Ol
                                                                   (J
                                                                  0)

                                                                  U
                     0)
                     co
                   01 IQ
                    0)
                   fO r—

                  ^ 2!
^S
e c

.21
5- 
•F; $. O 3
S 00 C
W -F- ^v^v
4J EQO
C  O Q
o 4-» ca ^^
u c   i
   n T3 ex
•a c a>
at •«- co -o
N E «» a>
•r-  i. 
-------
3.2.3  Networks

     In a  network,  sequential  relationships between project activities and
subsequently,  physical,  chemical and biological  effects,  are established.
In  essence,  the network  is an  expanded  matrix,  but  the  network analysis
allows cumulative impacts  to be analyzed (Jain e_t^  ai^.  1981).  The primary
advantage  of  network analysis is that  it can be used  to  show how several
impacts are produced  by individual  actions (Golden e_t _al_.  1979).  However,
networks also  tend to  become  too large and confusing  (Duke  et^ aJU  1977).

     Three general  types of network methods include:  (1) food  webs;  (2)
energy transfer  models; and  (3) analytical networks  (including "decision
trees").   Foodweb models (Figures 3.2-6, 3.2-7,  and 3.2-8)  may be either in
pictorial  or diagrammatic  form.   While these would be  useful in depicting
baseline conditions in  wetlands  or  other community types,  they would be of
limited value  for  detailed impact analysis.  The analytical  network (Fig-
ures  3.2-9,   3.2-10  and  3.2-11)  are  an effective  means of  determining
cause-and-effect relationships between  project  activities  and interrelated
impacts.   They can  also be used as an effective means to analyze secondary
and  tertiary   (terms  here used  to  define  chain  reaction  impacts and  not
induced growth impacts)  effects  (Figure 3.2-11).   A decision tree utilizes
a  dichotomizing  "yes/no"  key  to determine  impacts (Figure  3.2-12).   The
decision tree may be used to ensure that exhaustive coverage of all project
impacts is  achieved and  as a means of flagging  potentially  important  and
major issues surrounding project implementation.

3.2.4  Mapping

     Various methods  are  available  in which mapping can be used to analyze
impacts  on water  resources including  watersheds,   wetlands, and  aquatic
ecosystems. The advantages  of  using mapping for conducting impact analysis
include:  (1)  the  ability  to  depict spatial  distribution  of  impacts;  (2)
ability to  depict  habitat  types,  sensitive areas  (i.e.,  wetlands)  or  key
resources;  and (3)  ability  to  compare projected impacts of various project
alternatives.   Specific mapping techniques include:  (1) habitat classifica-
tion  and  ecological   maps;   (2)   analytical  overlays;  and  (3)  photo-
interpretation.
                                  41
-------
                                                                      Uttoral Fauna
          I
       Bacteria
          I

          I  Autotrophic
            Phytoplankton
!      I
                                              Autotrophic
                                              Littoral Flora
                                            Bacteria
\
\
Bacteria
\
ia
S
\

i
Bacteria
1
: 1
a 1
1
•
j












                                       Nutritive Substances
Figure 3.2-6. Diagram of a  freshwater  aquatic food web  (from Welch -1952)
                                              42
-------
00
 o
 CO
•o
 0)
 -------
                                                       Export Downstream
     cc
     111
     o

O
     5
     (9

                                                       v     V

                                               ^         I	/— T1
                                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                                      }->
                                                                                                                      M-l
0)



•o
0)
4-1
CO
0)
1-1
O
-------
Level
  1
                                Cover Type
                           (Riverine or Lacustrine)
Level
  2
                     r_
 Riffles.
  Runs
(Riverine)
  Pools,
Backwaters
 (Riverine)
                                           A
 Littoral Zone
- Near Shore -
 (Lacustrine)
                                            A
                                                                                 Limnetic Zone
                                                                                 - Open Water -
                                                                                  (Lacustrine)
                                                              A
Level
  3
Level
  4
                  L

On a
Substrate


In Water
Column


                 Rocky
                Substrate
                      L
                     Plants
                      \
                    Mud, Sand,
                   Plant Debris
                       Holes,
                      Cavities
 Figure 3.2-9.  Network illustrating various habitat components for a riverine
       or  lacustrine  cover type at four  levels Cfrom USFWS 1980).
                                                 45
-------
                                    Model Components
Model Variables
                                    Food
                                    Cover
  Channel Catfish
                                    Water Quality
                                                                          Percent pools
                                                                          during average
                                                                          summer flows
                                                                          Substrate type
                                                                          in riffle-run
                                                                          segments
                                                                          Maximum monthly
                                                                          average turbidity
                                                                          in summer
                               (V.)
                                                                                             (V,)
                                                                                             (V,
                                                                                             (V.)
                               (V,)
                               (V,)
                                                                          Average midsummer
                                                                          water temperature
                                                                          in pools, backwaters
                               (V.)
                               (V,
                                                                                             (V.)
                                   I Reproduction
                                                                          Percent cover
                                                                          during average
                                                                          summer flows
                               (V.)
                               
-------
                                                                                         to

                                                                                         0)
                                                                                         u
                                                                                         CO
                                                                                         ;>,
                                                                                         03
                                                                                         O
                                                                                         CO
                                                                                        4J
                                                                                         co
                                                                                         m
                                                                                         o
                                                                                         o

                                                                                         c
                                                                                         o
                                                                                        u
                                                                                        
                                                                                        M

                                                                                        00
47
-------
                        MAN'S
                        ACTIVITY
                          Coastal
                          Construction
                          Inland
                          Construction
   SECTOR
   DEVELOPMENT
                          Excavation of
                          Canals
                          dredging and Spoil
                          Disposal
                          Excavation
                          Draining
                          Devegetation
ENVIRONMENTAL
EVENTS

 Biological Oxygen Demand


 Dissolved Oxygen
                                                   Nutrients
                                                   Odors and Tastes
                                                   Color
                                                   Toxicity
                                                   Dissolved Salts
                                                   Suspenced Solids
 Temperature
                                                   pH Buffering
                                                   Erosion
                                              IV
                                                   Ponding
                                                   Photosynthesis
                                                                            x
                          x
                          x
                                                   Deposition and Accretion
                                                   Hydraulics
                                                   Oevegetation
                                                   Infiltration
                          x
                                                                                     USES
                                                                                     RESTRICTED

                                                                                      Aesthetics
                                                                                      Commercial Fishing
                                                                                      Manculture
                                                                                      Recreation
                                                                                      Preservation of Fish Wildlife
                                                                                      Transportation
                                                                                      Recreation
Residential Construction
                                                                                      Preservation of Fish Wildlife
                                                                                      Aesthetics
                                     Commercial Fishing
                                                                                      Manculture
                                                                                      Recreation
                                                                                      Preservation of Fish Wildlife
Consumers Food Chain
Decomposition ^ l^
\\
Predatiort x/ \\
Aesthetics
\^ Commercial Fishing
,\ Manculture
                                                                                      Recreation
                                                                                      Preservation of Fish Wildlife
Figure  3.2-12.  Decision tree  illustrating  effects  of surface mining  and  associated
       dredging and  filling  (Texas Department  of  Water Resources  1977).
                                                        48
-------
     Maps  are a  particularly good  means  of  depicting habitat  types  and
project-related effects on  existing  natural habitats.  An example is shown
in  Figure  3.2-13,  in which  two  alternate sites for  a  proposed marina are
depicted.  The effects of each plan on existing wetlands can easily be seen
from this  map.   The USFWS has recently developed  a habitat classification
scheme that  can  be used in defining wetlands  in USEPA Region V (Lonard et
al. 1981)  (Figure 3.2-14).  An example of the application of this system by
the USFWS  National Wetland  Inventory  is shown  in Figure  3.2-15.   Figure
3.2-16 is  an illustration of one of the  major USFWS habitat types as pre-
sented in  Cowardin et^ j]L. (1979).  Ecological "key" maps are also available
and can  be used  to depict wetland or  other resources within a larger geo-
graphical  area (Figure  3.2-17).   However, these may be prepared at a smal-
ler  scale.   Key  maps  are  useful because  they  identify  major  important
resources  within a given (large) geographic area in a small amount of text.
Such a map could prove valuable in  conducting  cumulative  impact analyses.

     Map  overlay techniques  have been used  for many  years as  an  impact
evaluation technique.   In this  method,  mylar overlays  of  either baseline
conditions  or project alternatives  are  superimposed on  a base  map.   For
example,   baseline  distribution  of   wetland  types  within  a  facilities
planning service area  could  be prepared on one overlay.  Impacts of alter-
native interceptor configurations could then be determined by superimposing
areas  of  projected  induced  growth  on  the  existing  wetland  distribution,
thereby illustrating which areas would be affected either directly (habitat
elimination)  or  indirectly  (i.e.,  urban  runoff,   etc...).   Methods  of
mapping  environmental resources  of all types (including wetlands) with the
aid of  a  computer are available  through the  USFWS (USFWS  1979).   These
include  digitizing geographic information  through the Wetland Analytical
Mapping  System  (WAMS),  and an  interactive  system  called  Map  Overlay  and
Statistical System  (MOSS) (however,  these systems require an existing data
base which  is not  yet complete for  the midwest).   The  USEPA1 s EPIC labor-
atories  also provide  a means of  mapping wetlands  using  color  and  color
infra-red photography.  The  State of  Wisconsin will have mapped all of that
state's  wetlands  at a  scale  of 1:24,000 (1  inch = 2,000 feet)  by  1 July
1983 (Figure 3.2-18).
                                  49
-------
          Open Bay
          Wet Meadow
          Fresh Marsh
          Sand Dunes
   '^7VVi Dredged Mooring Basin
   3TZTIZ Dredged Access Channel
   —   -• Access Road
          Marina Site
          Access Highway
Figure 3.2-13.  Map of a wetland area under  consideration  for construction of
     a marina involving channel dredging and  mooring basin at .two alternative
     sites  (in Nelson et al.  1982c, adapted from Reppert  et al. 1979).
                                           50
-------
      i— M*rm« -
1
a.
u-
s
Q
z
<
I
<
u
                                       • Inter tidal -
        -Estuarine-
                                       -Subtidal-
                                       -Intertidal-
— Riverine -
                                       - Tidal -
                                 - Lower Perennial •
                                 -Upper Perennial -
                                       -Intermittent •
      —Lacustrine -
                                       -Limnetic •
                                       - Littoral-
      i— PaluJtrme-
                                                                  Class

                                                                i—Rock Bottom
                                                                I—Unconsolidated Bottom
                                                                (— Aquatic Bed
                                                                I-Reef

                                                                r— Aqua tic Bed
                                                               J-Reef
                                                               "[-Rocky Shore
                                                                I— Unconsolidated Shore

                                                                r—Rock Bottom
                                                                I—Unconsolidated Bottom
                                                               "1—Aquatic Bed
                                                                L-R«ef
- Aquatic Bed
-Reef
-Streambed
- Rocky Shore
- Unconsolidated Shore
- Emergent Wetland
-Scrub-Shrub Wetland
- Forested Wetland

- Rock Bottom
- Unconsolidated Bottom
- Aquatic Bed
- Rocky Shore
- L'nconsoiidaced Shore
- Emergent Wetland

-Rock Bottom
- Unconsolidated Bottom
- Aquatic Bed
- Rocky Shore
- Unconsolidated Shore
- Emergent Wetland

- Rock Bottom
-Unconsolidated Bottom
-Aquatic Bed
-Rocky Shore
- Unconsolidated Shore

-Streambed
                                                                  ERock Bottom
                                                                  Unconsolidated Bottom
                                                                  Aquatic Bed

                                                                 -Rock Bottom
                                                                 -Unconsolidated Bottom
                                                                 - Aquatic Bed
                                                                 - Rocky Shore
                                                                 - Unconsolidated Shore
                                                                 - Emergent Wetland

                                                                 - Rock Bottom
                                                                 -Unconsolidated Bottom
                                                                 - Aquatic Bed
                                                                 -Unconsolidated Shore
                                                                 -Moss-Lichen Wetland
                                                                 - Emergent Wetland
                                                                 -Scrub-Shrub Wetland
                                                                 - Forested Wetland
  Figure  3.2-14.  U.S.  Fish and Wildlife  Service National Wetlands  Inventory
          classification  scheme   (from Cowardin et  al.  1979).
                                                              51
-------
        PFIX  \v\  u
                                                                         •\
                                                                   /    '*J«
                                                                  -\	V
Figure  3.2-15. Sample from a  1:24,000 scale habitat classification map showing
     wetlands in Colorado (from OSFWS National Wetlands Inventory)
                                      52
-------
  8««pag«
                                   a TEMPORARILY FLOODED
                                   b SEASONALLY FLOODED
                                   c SEMIPERMANENTLY FLOODED
                                   d INTERMITTENTLY EXPOSED
                                   e PERMANENTLY FLOODED
                                   < SATURATED
   HIGH WATER
AVERAGE WATER
   LOW WATER
Figure  3.2-16. Features of  the "palustrine" wetland system- part of  the wet-
     land classification scheme used  by the U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service
     (from Cowardin et al.  1979).
                                            53
-------
                                                                                   10 mi
                                                             EROSION POTENTIAL
                                                                 (tons/mi* yr)
                                                      AGRICULTURAL
NON-AGRICULTURAL
                                                                      II . I  I I  40-90


                                                                              90-140


                                                                              140-200


                                                                              200-300


                                                                              300-500
Figure  3.2-17. Ecological  "key" map illustrating erosion potential for  a
     northwest coastal area watershed (from Proctor et al.  1978).

                                           54
-------
                                 WISCONSIN  WETUNDS  INVENTORY
                                        MAP STATUS  3-31-83
|    | Available
     In Progress
     Scheduled for
     Completion: 6-30-841
      Figure 3.2-18. Areas of Wisconsin in which wetlands have been or are currently
          being mapped (from WDNR 1982).
                                    55
-------
3.2.5  Indices

     An index  is  defined  as any combination of  individual  arithmetic  mea-
surements  (usually  of  varying  characteristics) that allows for  an  overall
description of the  value  or nature of a natural  phenomenon.   For example,
the Shannon-Wiener  diversity index  provides  a single number that indicates
both  equitability  and  species richness  (number of  species)  of a  given
biological  population  (typically   benthic  invertebrates,  zooplankton  or
phytoplankton).   Various   indices   have  also  been  developed that  define
habitat  values or  functions  (including  wetlands).    Indices  are  useful
because: (1) different geographical areas and time periods can be compared;
and (2)  different  alternatives can be compared.   Their  disadvantages in-
clude: (1)  possible confusion  of  indices with the primary data (Simpson et
al. 1960) from which they are derived; and (2)  aggregation of data that may
conceal potential  impacts (Duke et^ al^. 1977).

     Three  general  types  of   indices  are available  for  possible  use  in
evaluating impacts on wetlands.  These include habitat suitability indices,
species diversity indices,  and risk assessment indices.  The Habitat Suit-
ability Index  (HSI) was developed  by the USFWS as the basis of the Habitat
Evaluation Procedure (HEP) and was  discussed  in Section 3.1 (this method is
also discussed in Section 3.2.6).   The HSI combines four measures of habi-
tat value  (food,  cover,  water quality,  and  reproduction)  into  one  index
that  is  an indicator  of  overall  habitat quantity  and  quality.   The basic
procedure in conducting HEP is to  first  define the habitat and/or subhabi-
tats  present  within  the   study  area.  For  wetland systems  this requires
determination  of  the  areal extent  of different vegetation types and  open
water areas.   The suitability  of  each subhabitat for supporting a selected
group of  ecologically or  economically important species is  determined by
using the  HSI.  The index is  developed  from  species-specific mathematical
models that use physical  and  chemical data collected on  the  project site.
The models  define  the  habitat requirements  of  select  species.  To  date,
models for  some  30 species of terrestrial  and aquatic  animals  have  been
developed  by  the USFWS.   The HSIs  are  used  in  combination with data on
areal extent  of  each  subhabitat  to  obtain  the number of  "Habitat  Units"
(HUs) that are available.   The HUs  reflect the overall quality and quantity
                                  56
-------
of habitats on the project site or in the study area for individual species
and/or groups of  species.   Impacts are determined by estimating changes in
HUs over  time  —for example,  alteration of the areal extent and biological
populations as a result of construction.

     Species diversity  indices  are generally used to analyze  data on sam-
ples of  populations or  organisms.   As  previously mentioned,  they usually
combine  information on equitability as well as  species richness.   Several
types  of  indices  are  available that provide different  measures  of diver-
sity.   These  include  the  Shannon-Wiener,  Simpson,  Brillouns index,  and
approximate  and  hierarchical indices  (Kaesler et  al.  1978;  Krebs 1972).
Also available  are  the  Mason Index (Mason 1979) and the  Sequential  Index
(Lind  1979).   Since these  indices are  primarily concerned  with  submerged
aquatic systems,  they are not further addressed in this report.  They could
be  used   in  detailed  site-specific  studies of  individual  wetland (pool)
areas,   but would not be useful as an initial screening tool.

     Risk  assessment indices  measure the qualities  of  ecosystems  to  with-
stand  stress  (Cairns   and  Dickson  1980).   These  qualities  include:  (1)
vulnerability to  irreversible damage;  (2) degree of  elasticity or ability
to  recover from  damage;  (3)  inertia or ability to  resist  displacement of
structural and  functional characteristics;  and (4)  resiliency (the number
of times recovery  can occur after displacement).   Two types of risk assess-
ment indices,  the inertia  index and the recovery index, have been devel-
oped.  The recovery  index provides a measure of ecosystem  elasticity,  and
is  a  rough  measure of  the  ability of  a  system  to recover  from damage
(Cairns  and  Dickson  1980).   Table 3.2-6  summarizes  factors thought  to
determine the rate of recovery of an aquatic ecosystem from a perturbation,
as well as the  formula for calculating the recovery index (from Cairns  and
Dickson 1980).

     The inertia index  provides a numerical estimate of the ability  of an
ecosystem to  resist displacement or perturbation.   Critical factors used to
rate an ecosystem's inertial ability and the formula for the inertial  index
are given  in Table  3.2-7.   A  similar  procedure  is used to calculate  the
inertial   and  recovery  indices.    For further information  concerning  these
indices the reader is referred to Cairns and Dickson (1980).
                                  57
-------

(a) Existence of nearby
epicenters
(b) Transportability of
dissemules
(c) Condition of habitat
(d) Presence of residual
toxicants
(e) Chemical -physical water
quality
(f) Regional management
capabil ities
1
Poor
Poor
Poor
Large
amounts
Severe
disequilibrium
None
RATING
2
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Intermediate
amounts
Partially
restored
Present
3
Good
Good
Good
Small
amounts
Normal
Strong
Recovery index = axbxcxdxexf

400-729:  chances of rapid  recovery excellent
55-399:   chances of rapid  recovery fair  to  good
<55:      chances of rapid  recovery poor

Note:  Each factor can have a  rating of 1, 2 or 3.   The  highest possible
recovery index is 729 or 36, where each of the 6  factors have the highest
rating of 3.
Table 3.2-6.  Critical factors used in rating and determining recovery  index
        (from Cairns and Dickson 1980).
                                         58
-------
                                                     Rating
                                                       2
  (a)   Tolerance  of indigenous
       organisms  to variable
       environment

  (b)   High  structural  and
       functional system
       redundancy
Poor
Poor
Moderate
Moderate
Good
Good
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Mixing capacity
Hard, well -buffered
water
Closeness to ecological
threshold
Regional management
capabilities
Poor
Poor
Close
Poor
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
margin
of safety
Moderate
Good
Good
Substantial
margin
of safety
Good
 Inertial -index =axbxcxdxexf

 400-729:   inertial stability  high
 55-399:    inertial stability  fair  to good
 >55:       inertial stability  poor

 Note:  Each factor can  have a  rating of  1,  2 or  3.   The  highest  possible
 inertial index is 729 or  36,  where each  of  the 6 factors have  the  highest
 rating of  3.
Table 3.2-7.  Critical  factors used in determining the inertial index (from
        Cairns and Dickson  1980).
                                        59
-------
3.2.6  Habitat Assessment Methods

A  variety  of habitat  assessment methods have  been developed  that  can or
have been applied to wetlands (Lonard &t_ _al_. 1981).  This section discusses
two methods  developed  by the U.S. Army  Corps of  Engineers (Reppert et al.
1979; USCOE  1980),  the  USFWS  Habitat Evaluation  Procedure  (HEP)  (briefly
mentioned above), and the Michigan DNR wetland checklist procedure.

     The advantages of  such  habitat-based methods are that  they  provide a
standard  and  comprehensive  means   of   scientifically  evaluating  wetland
values.    They are  particularly  useful  where  detailed  site-specific  in-
formation  is needed (The MDNR  method does  not require the  extent of data
that the USFWS and  USCOE methods require).   The  disadvantages  (except for
the  Michigan DNR method) are  that  these methods require collection of a
significant  amount  of  on-site  data  by a  team of  biologists.  The level of
effort can vary greatly, but nevertheless, these methods would probably not
be  employed  unless  adverse  effects  on  a wetland of very high value were
projected.

     3.2.6.1  Corps of Engineers Wetland Evaluation Methodology

     The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Rempert ejt^ _al_. 1979) has developed a
methodology  for  evaluating  wetlands  that involves two  approaches:  deduc-
tive and comparative analysis.   This method was summarized in tabular form
in Section 3.1.  This section briefly summarizes the method.

     In the  deductive  portion  of the analysis,  a systematic,  qualitative
method is  used to evaluate functional wetland values.  A narrative summary
is prepared  that  describes  how the wetland conforms or does not conform to
the evaluation criteria.   In the comparative analysis the degree to which
two  or  more wetlands  satisfy  criteria  regarding  functional  ecological
characteristics and cultural features is evaluated.  This is a quantitative
procedure  that  allows  comparison of several  alternative sites.   A final
number  is  obtained  that represents the  total of  individually evaluated
features.   This  number is  used as  the  basis  for  the  comparative rating.
                                  60
-------
     Both approaches rely  on  descriptive functional or cultural character-
istics.  Functional characteristics  include  those that define the value of
a  wetland  for  purification  of  surface water,  groundwater recharge,  or
shoreline protection.

     Cultural  values  would include  aesthetics, agricultural use,  recrea-
tional  use,  or  commercial  fisheries  production.   The deductive  method
assigns such  values using  a qualitative checklist, whereas the comparative
method  uses habitat  mapping  and  a  scaled  checklist.   Table 3.2-8  is  an
example of  one  scaled  checklist  used  to  evaluate the  water purification
function of a wetland.   In this example, eight different factors are evalu-
ated according to  the  criteria listed as having high (3), moderate (2),  or
low  (1)  value.  These  values  are summarized  to  obtain  a  total which  is
indicative of the relative water purification function.

     3.3.6.2  Corps of Engineers Habitat Evaluation System (HES)

     The Habitat Evaluation System  (HES)  was  developed  by the  U.S.  Army
Corps  of  Engineers for use  in water  resource project  permitting  (USCOE
1980).   HES is a method for evaluating  existing  and  future habitat condi-
tions  with  and without a  proposed  project,  and is  based  on a  series  of
curves that define key habitat characteristics of  aquatic  species  inhabi-
ting the  project  area.   The curves relate an  index (called  the  Habitat
Quality  Index,  or HQI)  to  various  parameters  or   characteristics  that
reflect the quality of the study area with respect to supporting aquatic  or
terrestrial life.  For aquatic systems, six curves relating  HQIs to  various
parameters have been developed.   These are:   (1) fish species associations;
(2) stream sinuosity;  (3)  total dissolved solids; (4)  turbidity; (5)  chemi-
cal type;  and  (6)  benthic  diversity.  The curves for some of these  parame-
ters are presented in  Appendix F.

     The general steps in applying  an  aquatic  HES  to  a  project are  as
follows:
                                  61
-------
Eva!
A.
1.









2.



B.
1.


2.


3.





4.


C.
1.


2.






uative Factors
Wetland Type
Hydro period









Vegetation density



Area! and Waste Loading Rel
Total wetland size


Proportion of water surface
area in wetland area (acres
hectares)
Proportion of tidal inlet,
river channel or bay water
volume flowing through wet-
land, or overland runoff
retained in the system
(cfs, mgd)
5-day BOD loading (Ibs BOO/
acre/day)

Criteria

• Semi-diurnal intertidal
• Perennial riverine
• Irregularly-flooded
intertidal
t Permanently-flooded
lacustrine
t Intermittently-flooded
riverine
• Intermittently-flooded
lacustrine or palustrine
• Dense (coverage > 80%)
• Moderate (coverage
50-80%)
• Open (coverage 20-50%)
ationships
> 100 ac
10-100 ac
1-10 ac
40-60%
60-75%
> 75%
> 50%
25-50%
< 25%



• 5-15 Ibs
• 15-25 Ibs
• > 25 Ibs
Value

High (3)
High (3)
Moderate (2)

Moderate (2)

Low (1)

Low (1)

High (3)
Moderate (2)

Low (1)

High(3)
Moderate (2)
Low (1)
High (3)
Moderate (2)
Low (1)
High (3)
Moderate (2)
Low (1)



High (3)
Moderate (2)
Low (1)
Geographical and Other Locational Factors
Frost-free days


Location with reference to
known pollution sources





• > 250 days
• 175-250 days
• < 175 days
• Below known source of
municipal waste discharge
• Above known water intakes
• Below area of non-point-
source pol lution
• Below known industrial
waste discharges
High (3)
Moderate (2)
Low (1)
High (3)

High (3)
Moderate (2)

Low (1)

Table 3.2-8.  Criteria for scaling eight factors reflecting wetland values for
        water purification (Reppert et al.  1979).
                                         62
-------
        Obtain habitat type acreages;
        Derive HQI scores;
        Derive Habitat Unit Values (HUVs);
        Project HUVs for future with and without proposed project;
        Use HUVs to assess impacts of project alternatives; and
        Determine mitigation measures.
     Figure  3.2-19  illustrates  the  various  detailed  steps required  to
complete a HES.   Under the Habitat Evaluation System (HES), the quality of
aquatic  and  terrestrial habitats  are defined on  the  basis of established
relationships between  the habitat  variables  listed above  and the Habitat
Quality  Index (HQI).   HQIs are multiplied by available  habitat  type acre-
ages to  yield Habitat  Unit Values  (HUVs).  The  HUVs  are the overall indi-
cator  of both habitat  quality and quantity.   Under HES,  changes in HUVs
produced by  changes in  habitat acreage or  type may be  used to determine
impacts  of various project alternatives.

     Site-specific data  are  required  to determine HQIs for baseline condi-
tions  under  the  HES.    Future  HQIs and HUVs  are determined  by combining
information on  project  design  (for example, changes  in acreage resulting
from land use changes,  etc.) with data concerning projected changes in key
habitat  variables  (for  instance,  turbidity).   Data on changes in  key pro-
ject variables  may be  obtained in a  variety of ways  ranging from on-site
measurements, modeling,  or  literature  reviews.   Therefore,  a  range  of
effort may  be involved  to complete an HES procedure that  is dependent on
the size of the  project and degree of  quantification desired.

     A  potential  concern  with HES is the  scientific credibility  of  the
results.   While  many  of  the  HES  calculations  are  based  on  assumptions
similar  to those  used  in HEP,  accurate development  of  regionalized curves
and the  use  of  weighting factors will ultimately determine the credibility
of this  method.   Presumably  these factors could be computerized, but their
reasonableness must still be considered by Expert biologists before putting
them to use.
                                  63
-------
                           Obtain Land Use/Habitat
                      Acreages for Existing Conditions
                                     1
                           Stratify Project Area by
                            Land  Use/Habitat Types
                             Select Key Variables
      Conduct Literature
        Review  to Obtain
           HQI  Scores
  Conduct Field
   Sampling to
Obtain HQT Scores
              Develop Future Land
             Use/Habitat Acreages
             For With and Without
              Project Conditions
       Develop Future HQI
       Scores for the With
       and Without Project
           Conditions
                           Calculate Habitat Unit
                             Values for With and
                               Without Project
                                 Conditions
                                     I
                            Calculate Impacts of
                            Each Alternative Plan
                          In Teras of Habitat Unit
                           Values by Comparing the
                          With and Without Project
                                  Condition
                           Develop Mitigation Plan
                            For Each Alternative
                            Plan Using Calculated
                           Impacts in Habitat Unit
                           Values, if Appropriate
Figure 3.2-19. Detailed steps in preparing  a  "HES" (.from USCOE 1980)

                                       64
-------
     3.2.6.3  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat Evaluation Procedure

     The Habitat  Evaluation  Procedure  (HEP) (USFWS 1980) is a  method  that
utilizes physical, chemical, and biological information to characterize the
biological  carrying  capacity  of  terrestrial  and  aquatic  systems.   HEP
provides a means  of evaluating baseline habitat conditions and the ecolo-
gical  impacts of  various  project alternatives.  The application  of  HEP is
relatively straight-forward  but  requires  evaluation of the site  by a  team
of at  least  three biologists trained in the procedure.  The  overall proce-
dure is  similar  to HES,  except  that the  two  methods  are based on somewhat
different assumptions.

     The basic procedure  in conducting an HEP is to first define the habi-
tat and/or  subhabitats present within  the study area (Figure  3.2-20).   For
wetland  systems  this requires  determination  of the areal extent of pools
and vegetation types.  The suitability of each sub-habitat for supporting a
selected group of ecologically or economically important species is deter-
mined  by using  what  is  termed  a  "Habitat Suitability  Index  (HSI)."   The
index  is developed from  mathematical models that use physical and chemical
data collected on the project  site to  define carrying capacity of individ-
ual species.  To  date, models  for some 30 species of terrestrial and aqua-
tic animals  have  been developed by the USFWS.  The  information generated
concerning  carrying capacity  is  used  to  define  the overall  quantity and
quality of habitat in a given area.

     The HSIs are  used  in combination with  data  on  areal extent  of  each
subhabitat to obtain the  number of  "Habitat Units" (HUs) that are avail-
able.   The HUs reflect  the overall quality and quantity of habitats on the
project site or  in the  study area for  individual  species and/or groups of
species.   Impacts are determined  by estimating changes  in  HUs  over  time
—for  example, alteration  of the physical habitat  as a result of construc-
tion (Figure  3.2-20).  For wetland projects this  would  involve projecting
the changes  in  acreage of individual  habitat  types  caused  by a proposed
project.    The numbers  of  acres  of  habitat  are  calculated  for each  of
several target years, and  the  resulting HUs are then computed.   A graph of
available HUs with and without the project may be constructed  to visually
                                  65
-------
      Determine the applicability
                 of HEP
              (Chapter 2)
         Define study limits
            (Chapter 3)
           Determine baseline
             Habitat Units
           (Chapters 4 and 5)
   Compare baseline
      areas
(Chapters 4 & 5!
; i i uc/

a/-
      Determine future Habitat
         Units (Chapter 5)
      Compare
 proposed actions/
  (Chapter 5)
                             Determine Relative Value
                                Indices  (optional)
                                   (Chapter 6}
     LJ
      Develop compensation plans
             if appropriate
             (Chapter 7)
Figure 3 2-20. Generalized evaluation procedure for employing HEP (Jrro* USFWS
     198ib) (Chapters indicated refer to the USPVS HEP manual, not the present

     study).
                                       66
-------
illustrate  the  effects  of the proposed activity over time (Figure 3.2-21).
HEP also  provides  a means of developing trade-offs and compensations using
similar projections (these are not discussed further here).

     The  primary  disadvantage of  using the HEP  is that  large  amounts of
site-specific  data may  be required  if impact quantification is desired.
These data  must be obtained by a team of at least three biologists trained
in  HEP.   For  the  semi-quantitative method in which  the full-scale models
are not employed, the need for extensive data is not a problem.  However, a
full-scale HEP  requires a substantial investment of labor and funds.

     The  main  advantage  of using HEP is that  a  number of numerical models
are available  and  are continually being developed by the USFWS so that the
method can  be  applied  in any region where the  evaluation species occurs.
In  addition,  computer programs  for both the models and the impact analysis
are currently  available  for large main-frame computers.  The USFWS is also
currently developing  HEP  software  for  use on  microcomputers so  that the
technique can  be used by other organizations (Bruce  Bell,  USFWS HEP coor-
dinator,  Atlanta,  Georgia, personal  communication).   An additional advan-
tage  of  using HEP  is that  a  range of HSI models are  available  that allow
for  a varied  level  of  effort  to complete an  analysis for  a  particular
project.  HEP  is also  advantageous because it provides  a quantitative or
semi-quantitative means  of analyzing the  potential impacts  of  a project.
This provides  a common  ground for discussion between reviewing agencies or
between biologists, hydrologists,  and engineers  working on a project.  The
USFWS is  actively  funding the HEP system and in the future plans to use it
as the primary means of assessing baseline conditions and impacts.  This is
an additional reason favoring its incorporation by other agencies, since it
would provide a common means of conducting impact analysis and for agencies
to  discuss  specific aspects  of  permit  decisions  (especially mitigation).

     HEP  also  provides  a means  of analyzing trade-offs of project alterna-
tives, as well  as a  means  of  conducting compensation analyses.   These
methods are given  in  USFWS's  manual ESM 102 and  are not discussed further
here.   However,  these methods are  extremely valuable  when  setting permit
conditions or in considering consequences of project alternatives and means
to minimize impacts (especially for large projects).
                                  67
-------
           Baseline year HU's
                                                           Predicted  conditions
                                                           without  proposed action
                             Predicted conditions with proposed action
                 20
100
                                 Target years
Figure 3.2-21.  Relationship  between baseline conditions, conditions with-
     out a proposed action,  conditions with a proposed action and net im-
     pact (from USFWS  1980b),
                                 68
-------
     3.2.6.4  Michigan DNR Wetland Evaluation Checklist Technique

     The MDNR checklist method provides a means of evaluating the status of
existing wetlands  as  well as potential  project-related  impacts  on wetland
structure and areal extent.   The method is specific to wetlands  and is not
strictly applicable to  aquatic  systems (with the possible exception of the
fisheries portion).   The method  examines  six basic  features  of wetlands,
including:  (1) hydrologic functions (classification, flood reduction value,
drainage changes);  (2)  soil  characterizations (texture, coloration,  mot-
tling,  water table,  hydric  soils,  organic/mineral  soils);   (3)  wildlife
habitat/use evaluation  (utilization, interspersion,  vegetative cover); (4)
fisheries  habitat/  use  (utilization,  vegetation type); (5)  nutrient re-
moval/recycling functions  (storage/release);  and  (6)  removal  of suspended
sediments.    A portion  of this  checklist  is  shown  in Figure  3.2-22.   A
second  part  of  the  analysis includes  consideration  of public  interest
concerns.   This  method  also includes  brief consideration  of cumulative,
cultural/historic and economic impacts.

     To conduct the first portion of the analysis, a. checklist procedure is
followed for each of the six functional areas to be evaluated.  A numerical
rating system is used to rank the quality of the site with respect to each
ecological function.  For  wildlife and fisheries, a  rating  system is used
in which a  composite  score is determined for several groups of species and
their respective ecological uses of the wetland.   The rating system is used
to  evaluate the wetland  before  and after  construction.  A  one-day site
visit is required to conduct this evaluation.

     The advantages  of using this method  are that it:  (1)  requires  a low
level of effort; (2)  provides a ready means of quantifying baseline condi-
tions, which  enables  a  more objective  impact  analysis; and  (3)  includes
consideration of  non-ecological  impacts such as  effects on  cultural and
economic resources.   A disadvantage is  that  the  method may  not  be  quite
detailed enough  to provide the  type of  data needed  for  a  more  scientific
evaluation.  However,  as a quick screening method, it should be given close
consideration for future  use  (possibly by slight expansion or modification
it could be useful  in 201-type project reviews as a screening tool).
                                  69
-------
PART I.  Cont'd.
II. SOIL DESCRIPTION
  1. If a modern soil survey  is available, list the soil types of the wetlands:
  2. Soil Inspection — Dig a 24" deep hole and determine:
     A.  Depth  to water table:	inches (NR = Not Reached)
     B.  If site  is inundated, average water depth:	inches.
     C.  Depth  to start of  mottling:	inches (NR = Not Reached)

  3. Soil Classification — Classify the soil (either A or B)
     A.  D ORGANIC (greater than 20% organic matter and deeper the 12".)
       1. D MUCK (highly decomposed, original plant parts not recognizable.)
       2. D PEAT (largely undecomposed, plant parts readily recognizable.)
     B.  D MINERAL (less than  20% organic matter or if  greater than 20%, shallower than 12").
       1. Describe the  soil horizons, from the surface down.




DEPTH
0 to
" to
" to
TEXTURE'



COLOR'











TEXTURE' COLOR'
S — sand CL— clay loam R— red RB— reddish
SL— sandy loam C— clay BR— brown GB— grayish
LS— loamy sand RC— rock/cobbles B— black RY— reddish
L — loam CS — cobbly sand Y— yellow note other
SIL— silt loam note other G — gray
brown
brown
yellow


III. WILDLIFE USE/HABITAT EVALUATION

A. Wildlife Use Rating: (complete the table below)


Waterfowl
Other game birds
Wading birds
Shorebirds. Gulls, Terns
Non-game birds
Raptors
Furbearers
Other mammals
Rwnng
Young
B.tor.








Art..
;j '•'«'»

- -• .---.
• " • -/-
[.,• --

K -.,—
£-^is
^
Belot.








Altw
!>"•-£•
'•" "' \

., '• . •';
i'-.i.-i-
-T--
• -iV..
uliLSLJ
Cow
B«lor«








Alwr
l-"S»
''•". .:-".'
t '• -.">"'•
* ' w- ?""
'-.-r-s>-i
• V-1;'
•-,-.'-H-
ii^ii
TOTALS
Wilrtlifo use ration RFFORP nrninrt = T°T*I- =
SuB-ToUl
B.lor.









AfMr
v.f.i-C'-
**>:-:(•
?:.-"-=*"
>'•:"/•-
'*':>," :
••;•"•' v
fx-'^
**: ?.'."•
OLtA
= 1 	 1
Commtiat











                                         24
                                      TOTAL
                                                  24
    Wildlife use rating AFTER project
                                       24 	24
   B. VEGETATIVE INTERSPERSION RATING  =1       I

   C. VEGETATIVE COVER TO OPEN WATER RATING =

   D. COMMENTS:  	
   Biologist's Signature (if applicable)
. Date.
       Figure 3.2-22.  Portion  of MDNR wetland evaluation checklist  (MDNR 1980).
                                                       70
-------
3.2.7  Ecosystem Modeling

     The USFWS study summarized information on available methods for model-
ing aquatic  ecosystems  (including wetlands) (Table 3.2-9).  Modeling could
be  employed  as a  means of analyzing primary,  secondary  or cumulative ef-
fects of 201 projects on wetlands.  Two general types of modeling, physical
and mathematical, are available.  Most of the methods listed in Table 3.2-9
apply  to aquatic  ecosystems.   However, the  methods for  modeling habitat
creation listed  in Table 3.2-9 would apply directly to wetlands mitigation
techniques.  Modeling  is considered to be an  expensive  and labor-intensive
means  of  evaluating baseline  conditions and  potential  effects of project
activities  on  wetlands.  As  such,  it  would  be impractical  as a  rapid
screening method for use in USEPA Region V projects.

3.3  Other Methodologies

     Sections  3.1  and 3.2  provided reviews of the majority  of the metho-
dologies that  have  been developed to assess  impacts  of  various activities
on  wetlands  in USEPA Region V and elsewhere.  Most  of  the literature re-
viewed  dealt  with  primary impacts assessment  methods  developed  prior  to
1981.  This section reviews other types of methods that have been developed
subsequent to  1981 or  that  deal with  other  types of  impacts  on wetlands
that  need  to  be  considered  during the course  of facilities  planning.  In
particular,  cumulative  impacts, secondary impacts, and mitigation are im-
portant aspects of the review process that need to be addressed.

3.3.1  Federal Highway Administration Study

     The Federal  Highway Administration (FHUA) has  published a two-volume
series of a wetland evaluation procedure (Adamus and Stockwell 1983;  Adamus
1983).  Volume I  presents a state-of-the-art review  of  wetland functions.
These  include  groundwater  recharge  and  discharge,  flood   storage  and
desynchronization,  shoreline  anchoring and dissipation of erosive forces,
sediment  trapping,  nutrient  retention  and  removal,  food chain  support
(detrital export),  habitat for  fish  and wildlife, and active  and passive
recreation.  The  manual is applicable  to all  wetlands  in the 48 conter-
                                  71
-------
                                             Applicable Modeling Approaches

                                            Physical          Mathematical
      Ecological Problem Areas
B
M
SE    DO  CHEM  PHYTO  ECO
Land and Confined Disposal

Colonization and ecological succession
Biological productivity
Species diversity
Material cycling*
Return flows and receiving water
  impacts

Habitat Creation

Colonization and ecological succession
Biological productivity
Species diversity
Material cycling*
Artificial establishment techniques

Open-V.'ater Disposal

Pelagic
• Oxygen budget analysis
t Biological productivity
0 Species diversity
• Material cycling*

Benthic
                           •**
                                 **
                                 **
                                 **
     *
     *
     *
     *
                                 **
                                 **
                                 **
                           __     **
                           **     **
                                 **
• Direct smothering of benthic
organisms
• Colonization and ecological
succession
• Biological productivity
• Species diversity
t Material cycling*
Pollution Criteria Development

*
*
* *
* *
* *
**
**
**
* ** ** **
Notes:  B = bioassays; M = microcosms; SE = scaled ecosystem;  DO  =  dissolved
oxygen; CHEM = chemical; PHYTO = phytoplankton; ECO = ecosystem.

*State of the art ready for application with only minor adaptations.
**State of the art not ready for application but development for  selected
purposes is feasible.
+Includes contaminant mobilization and transport.
 Table 3.2-9.  Ecological problems related to dredged material disposal  and  features
         of applicable modeling methods (from Hall et al.  1976).
                                          72
-------
minous states, and  uses  the U.S. Fish and  Wildlife  Service definition and
classification system. It examines the validity, interactions, and possible
significance  thresholds  for  the functions, as  well as  documenting  their
underlying  processes.   With  appropriate  qualifying information,  wetland
types are  ranked  for each function.  Wetland types ideal for each function
are  identified  and  illustrated.  Potential impacts  of  highways  upon  each
function are described and, where available, possible thresholds are given.
Factors that regulate impact magnitude, such as location, design, watershed
erodibility,  flushing   capacity,   basin   morphology,   biotic  sensitivity
(resistance and  resilience),  recovery capacity, and wildlife refugia,  are
explained.  Cumulative impacts  and  social factors affecting wetland signi-
ficance are discussed.   Effects of  the following factors  on wetland  func-
tion  are  documented:   contiguity,  shape,  fetch,  surface  area, area  of
watershed  and drainage  area,  stream order,  gradient,  land  cover,  soils,
depositional  environment,  climate,  wetland  system,  vegetation  form,  sub-
strate,  salinity,  pH, hydroperiod,  water  level  fluctuations, tidal  range,
scouring,  velocity,  depth, width,  circulation,  pool-riffle ratio,  vegeta-
tion  density,  flow  pattern,  interspersion,  human disturbance,  turbidity,
alkalinity, dissolved oxygen,   temperature, and  biotic  diversity.  Because
of  the  great  length  of  Volume  I,  it will not  be further discussed  here.
Volume  II presents  a methodology  for screening  each  of  the  functional
values of wetlands as described in Volume  I.

     The  methodology is  in fact three separate procedures,  including the
following:
     •  Procedure I (Threshold Analysis)  estimates  the relative like-
        lihood  that  a  single wetland  is of  high,  moderate,  or  low
        value for each function;
     •  Procedure II  (Comparative  Analysis)  provides  a framework for
        estimating whether one wetland  is likely to be more important
        than another for each function;  and
     •  Procedure III (Mitigation  Analysis)  provides  a framework for
        comparing  mitigation  alternatives   and  evaluating   their
        "reasonableness."
                                  73
-------
     The  threshold  analysis must be  completed first.   The  last  two  pro-
cedures are employed only  If Procedure I does not allow adequate determin-
ation of  functional value.  The method  is based on the assumption  that a
wetlands  value  includes three components.   These are:  (1)  "opportunity"
(whether  a wetland  has  a chance to fulfill  a given function);  (2) "effec-
tiveness"  (probability   that a  wetland is  productive  in  maximizing  the
opportunity of  fulfilling  a given  function); and  (3)  "significance"  (the
degree  to which the function  performance is  valued  by society).   Figure
3.3-1 summarizes the interaction of  these three characteristics.

     To complete Procedures I and II,  the evaluation goes through two basic
steps.  In  Step 1, the evaluation uses  three series  of questions  called
"predictor inventories".  The first series is used to evaluate  opportunity
and effectiveness,  the second series determines significance,  and the third
series reviews impact  related factors.   In the second step,  the  information
assembled in  the three  predictor  inventories is evaluated to  determine a
rating  of  functional   significance for each function.  In  Procedure  I,
"interpretation keys"  are  provided  to  help translate the data  into  state-
ments  concerning  functional  significance.    A   detailed  diagram  of  the
methodology is shown in Figure 3.3-2.   Example sheets of forms A, B,  and C,
as well as all subsequent forms included in the method,  are  included  in Ap-
pendix G  in order  to  illustrate the substantial  amount of  effort required
by this technique.  In  general,  the procedure can  be used  for:  (1)  deter-
mining  sensitivity  of  alternate corridors;  (2)   assigning mitigation  mea-
sures  that  are  consistent  with wetland  values;  (3) choosing  replacement
wetlands  of  equal  functional  value  if replacement  is desired;  and  (4)
allocating the appropriate  level of  effort to any further detailed studies,
if required.

     The  output  of  the  methodology  is  used to screen wetland  functions and
is not  intended  to  be  used for detailed site studies.   Rather,  the  method
should be used  to  choose from a large  array of choices and  possible  prior-
ities  for later,  detailed studies.  The  analyses result in a rating  of
high, moderate,  or low with respect to the significance of  analysis  of a
                                  74
-------
Figure 3.3-1.  The relationships between  the concepts of opportunity,  effective-
     ness, and significance in evaluation of wetland values and  functions
     (from Adamus  1983).

r AMSWM
FOKWC
*.«•
-
'

I T«ANSCAT«
•OKMA1
•UtONSES
USING KIVS
IP 90
                                                  MCOKO ON SUMMAUT SHUT 0 ». «l
                                                  IUSX (IPAMATC SNICT 0 '00 CACM WIA AND ?IM( 'MAUf I
                                                                 •UIA • wccland imp«cc are*
Figure 3.3-2.  Flow chart of the method  developed by Adamus  (1983)  to evaluate
     baseline  conditions in wetlands  and effects of highway  construction.

                                          75
-------
function,  and potential  impacts.   However,  the method  only assures  the
probability that such  functions  exist.   Other significant features of this

method that are as follows (quoted from Adamus and Stockwell 1981):
     The  probability  ratings  (HIGH,  MODERATE, LOW) in Procedure  I do
     not have statistical correlates.   In other words,  a "LOW" rating
     has not been  proven to mean that fewer  than,  say,  10 percent of
     all wetlands will satisfy the condition;

     Nevertheless,  the ratings are not merely relative.   Depending on
     the function, perhaps  60-80  percent  of the wetlands described in
     the literature as having  a  particular function might be assigned
     a rating of "HIGH"  by  this  key.   The key is usually quite rigor-
     ous in its  stipulations  for  arriving at a HIGH or  LOW rating for
     a function; the  user may find that a large number  of evaluations
     result in ratings of MODERATE;

     Procedures  I  and II  are constructs  of  the  available  technical
     literature and hence are only,  at best, as good as  the literature
     base, which  in many areas  is deficient.  Thus, while  most  wet-
     lands described  as  being of  high value in  the  literature would
     also  be  rated HIGH by Procedure I,  the converse  is  not neces-
     sarily true,  i.e.,  areas rated  HIGH by this  procedure  will not
     necessarily,  upon further detailed analysis,  always be  found to
     be of high value;

     Large wetlands which  are rated  LOW or  MODERATE by these proce-
     dures might  be just as  important as  small  wetlants  rated HIGH.
     However,  because  few wetland functions can  be quantified,  it is
     inappropriate  to  multiply ratings  by  acreage  to  give  a total
     value.  Thus,  it  is  best whenever possible to compare wetlands of
     similar size;

     Where several  wetlands  are  being evaluated,  they should also be
     of similar hydro-period and  system and located in  the  same  eco-
     region;

     The  procedure  is especially applicable  to  "strip  takings" which
     alter only part  of  a  wetland.   Unlike existing methodologies, it
     differentiates the  extent to which  a function  is  ascribable to
     the wetland versus  the  basin in which it happens  to be located.
     The  importance of this  distinction  to  wetland  function is  dis-
     cussed by Cowardin (1979).  The procedure assumes that, if either
     the wetland impact area or the basin (i.e., adjacent deep waters)
     are  rated  HIGH  for a  particular function,  the overall rating
     should be HIGH,  due to the interrelatedness  of  the system.   The
     procedure  is  also  unique in its  incorporation  of  seasonal and
     tidal variation;
                                  76
-------
  •  The  procedure does  not  provide  for  a synthesis  of individual
     functional  values into  an  overall wetland  value,  because  the
     weights of individual functions (e.g., whether the user should be
     more concerned with the wetland's value for nutrient retention or
     for  wildlife  habitat, both  of MODERATE probability)  varies ac-
     cording  to  the user's  priorities.   If an overall  value must be
     assigned, perhaps the best guideline is for this to be synonymous
     with  the weeland's highest  functional significance  rating;  and

  •  The  development of  this procedure should be viewed as an ongoing
     process.  Although  it is perhaps the  most accurate procedure of
     its  type available at  this  time,  future revisions may  be made.
     Users  are encouraged  to forward  their suggestions  the Federal
     Highway Administration as well as the authors.

     Despite the fact that the FHWA method is portrayed as a "rapid screen-

ing" technique, a  substantial amount of effort (several days)  is required
to complete  an evaluation.  This factor should be considered in the future
by USEPA  if it desires to employ the FHWA method.


3.3.2  Wisconsin DNR Method


     The  Wisconsin Department of  Natural  Resources  (USCOE  1983)  has pre-

pared  a  wetland evaluation  methodology in cooperation  with  the U.S. Amy

Corps  of  Engineers, Rock  Island  Illinois  District.   The method  is to be
used as   a  screening  technique  in  projects involving  wetlands  that  are

reviewed  by  the  state  during permitting and facilities planning.  The WDNR
methodology  is  in fact  a modification of  the  FHWA  method  (Adamus  and

Stockwell  1983,  Adamus 1983)  presented in  Section  3.3.1 of  this report.
Although  the WDNR  method  is very  similar  in general  format to  the FHWA

method,   it  is  tailored  specifically  to   biological   characteristics  of
Wisconsin wetlands (i.e., the method includes plants and animals that occur

specifically  in Wisconsin  and focuses  specifically on Wisconsin wetland
community types) (W. Marlett, WDNR, personnel communication).   In addition,

the WDNR method is shorter than the FHWA method, and requires a lower level
of effort to complete  (the  FHWA method requires several  days  of effort).


3.3.3  Ludwig and Apfelbaum Matrix Method


     Ludwig and Apfelbaum (unpublished) created a matrix method to evaluate

the functional aspects  of  wetlands.  The method is based on the assumption
                                  77
-------
that functional wetland  values  can be measured (quantified and used as the
basis  to  evaluate  baseline conditions).   The ultimate  objective  of  the
authors is  to have  resource  managers use the method  in  everyday planning
and administration.  The  specific  objectives  of the study are  as follows:
  •  To  be  able to measure  and  value the functions of wetlands  on a
     case-by-case basis;
  •  To  develop a  list of  standard  parameters  which when  measured
     provide an index of wetland  value;
  •  To develop a system that is  usable by anyone able to use standard
     methods of measurement and procedures;
  •  To devise a wetlands assessment system in which a numerical index
     is  generated  as  a measure  of  baseline  value,  and by which a
     researcher  is  able  to compare  wetlands to  each other,  and  to
     predict the impacts of  proposed  uses or modification both in the
     short-term ( 50 years) and the long-term ( 50 years);
  •  To place the burden of proof on any person,  agency,  or organiza-
     tion that  seeks to use,  modify, or  manage  any  wetland for any
     purpose  to prove   that  it   is  in   the  public—as  well as  the
     private—interest to use the wetland as proposed;  and
  •  To stimulate the  scientific  community to consider proper weight-
     ing, methodologies for  valuing, and  measurement of  each para-
     meter .
     A set  of 24 parameters associated with wetlands which can be measured
and which define wetlands  functional values were  developed (Table  3.3-1).
These  are  divided  into  four main  sub-divisions:  biological, hydrological
and human use,  and  resistance to disturbance (Table 3.3-1 and Appendix H).
     In this method,  a  maximum and minimum numerical value  is assigned to
each of the  24  parameters,  and these are then  summed to provide an aggre-
gate score for each of the three major subdivisions.   Specific quantitative
methods for  determining  individual  scores  and score sheets are provided in
Appendix H.

     The method is  applied  by use of a matrix (Table 3.3-2).  In the first
column, baseline values  from  each of the four major categories are presen-
ted.   Subsequent  columns include  projections of values  over the  next  50
years with and without the proposed project.   Columns for presenting values
                                  78
-------
        Table 3.3-1.   Key parameters  for defining wetland  functional values
I.    BIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS

      A.  Plant Diversity (Species Richness)
      B.  Plant Productivity (Measured as Annual Rate of Primary Production)
      C.  Plant Communities
      D.  Animal Diversity (Species Richness)
      E.  Animal Productivity (Actual Carrying Capacity as a Nesting-Brooding-
          Rearing Habitat)
      F.  Migratory Species Habitat (Value as Temporary Habitat)
      G.  Presence of Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species
      H.  Critical Habitat(s) Rating (Local, Regional, Statewide)
      I.  Ecosystem Wholeness Rating

II.   HYDROLOGICAL PARAMETERS

      A.  Physical and Configurational Attributes
          1.   Flood Control/Amelioration Function
          2.   Sediment Trap Function
          3.   Surface Water Storage Function
          4.   Groundwater Recharge Function
          5.   Biomass Sink and Storage Function
          6.   Watershed Importance Rating
      B.  Physio-Chemical Attributes
          1.   Water Quality, Bacteria, BOD/COD, Nutrients, pH, Heavy Metals, etc.
          2.   Cation Exchange and Storage Capacities

III.  HUMAN USE PARAMETERS

      A.  Aesthetic Values
      B.  Present Value of Wetland Products and Services
      C.  Potential Value of Competitive Human-Controlled Uses
      D.  Recreation Values
      E.  Rareness of the Wetland Resource, Local and Statewide
      F.  Management Potentials for Long-Term Maintenance in Present Form
      G.  Holistic Ecosystem Importance Rating

IV.   OVERALL SYSTEM RESILIENCE TO DISTURBANCE
                                     79
-------
je
CO
rl

at
OH

XJ bv
*• IT\
W 4J
1 B

£"
1-1
33
*•• ^^
OB O
O •
£ W
ftl


00
d
•a
>
•d
d
^4 cd
rs 1
^ ^
35

o
as
D
5

CO

2
H
§



















CU
3

5*

<4H 0)
•H 4J t>
« 60 4J
3 -H
r-l 4J O
^il*3


CU
rH
CO



. M-l
00 -H
3
O i-l
m co
>

y
•H
CO
1-1
V4
4J
d
H

M-l
•H O
«M
CU
3 *J
i-H M-l
a] CU
> rJ





















•d °
3 iH

CU CO
tf-rf
CO 4J
6S
V
4J iH
d^^
«u
0) -H
4J 09
M oo
Pd O
CO
< -o
CU
II

O ft4

*T3
m cu
^a
CU O
00 h
D ft.


cu
S3
iH CQ

> O



d°«
•H *O
4J d
0) 0)
•H M
X E^
ta
o>
« fl)
•H 3
« iH
00 CO
*>
I.
J§
X r-l
(^ (Q









CO
cu
4J
Wetland Parame

^D C^ T^ ^0

i i +



*T oo *« *^
CM r-l i-l r-l






CM 1-4
1 1 1 1




i-l





r-l r-l O r-l
1 1 1





p} o m r*
CN 0





vO h-




0 0
CM CM









4J
fB Oft
pB OS
4-S
« CU
Critical Habit
Ecosystem Whol

i-4 f**» r^ O

1 1 1



r-l 00 i-l r-l






r-l
1
1 1










O r-l O O
1





CM <• CM r-l
r-4




CM m CM r-l
••4



CM CM r-l CM





d
0 S
i-l O
4J 1-1
y 4->
d u
c,-2!
d PM
a o  .H 4J
ci o xj co
3 d u
fa * 3 **
4) H Qb Q)
Biomass Storag
Watershed Impo
Water Quality
Cation Exchang

oo o oo in oo CM r-
CM r-l
i + + + I I +



oo oo * * *-j t*^ ^j ^)
i-H CM CO CO r-l i-l CM

1



CM 0
r-l CM r-l CM r-l
1 + + + 1 + 1




CO CO CO
1 +




CM m -* co in i— i co
I + + + I + I





« H p2
CO CO CO
> o 01 1-1 a
H 3 CD 4J CU
M O S r-l CO d 4J
0) i-l O CO  d *J >s
i-H O O 41 O W
to d y H t-i Pi o
> O W ed efl 0
o d os 4-1 w
0 W H O d
•H CO -rl 01 CU y
4J 4J i-l 4J O § 1-1
01 d 4-1 CO M 5 4-1
J2 01 a  y ca d r-t
cu H o oi at eg o
«! PW ft, pi P4 33 »

CO

+


ffl
vU
CO






CM
1










CO
1





CN
CO




m
CO



o







d°
•H
4J
41
y
d
Q)
•H
r-l
Ecosystem Resi

r-l tO
CO



«* ff\
•^ f*!
CO




a*
r^» co
i-H
1



»•«
m CM
r-l





vO CO
r-l
1 1





r» *fr
i—i in
co



CO l*»
co m
CO


CM O
oo O
m r-i






.
CO
4J
a
O CM
00
8< in

CO M-l
CO O
Sum of Values
Relative Score
maximum Score




















1
CO
•jj
MH
a
<^
•a
d
erj

60
•H

3
S*,
,O

••rj
Ol
ca
1-1
O)

X
•H
I-l
4-1
d
o
•H
4J
CO
3
r-l
CO

4>
1
CO
r-l
4-1
»


CN
CO
CO
JQ
TVDI3010IS
TYDIDOIOHQAH
asn NVWHH
               80
-------
with  mitigation are also  included.   The  method also  includes  a means of
estimating  the effects  of  changes  in  the surrounding  watershed  on the
wetland, and   a means  of differentiating  between  a projected trends  base-
line  (natural  wetland  changes  without project)  and  baseline  conditions
(wetland  values at  time  Y,  regardless of natural  successional  or  other
changes).

     The advantage  of  the system is that  it provides an objective means to
assess wetland values.   This allows for more realistic and objective permit
or planning decisions to be made.  However, as can  be seen by reviewing the
tables  in  Appendix H,   the  method  also  requires  detailed  site-specific
data-gathering  on  a variety  of wetland features.   Therefore, the method is
not a screening method  but  rather  is  intended for  use on  a highly  site-
specific basis.  This  also implies that the cost and labor reqirements for
this  approach  would  be  high.  The matrix,  however, could  provide a useful
means of summarizing "red flag" features.

3.3.4  US Office of Technology Assessment  Study  (Mitigation)

     The Oceans and Environment  Program,  Office  of Technology Assessment
(US Congress)  is currently  preparing  a study  that  includes  a  literature
review of dredge and fill construction and development impacts on wetlands,
feasibility of  wetland creation  and restoration,  and  means  of  mitigating
impacts of  human activity on wetlands  (Nelson _et^ al_.  1982e).   Because of
the importance  of  the  subject, this section reviews the portion of the OTA
study dealing  with measures  to  mitigate  impacts  on wetlands.   The  study
includes the  following four  main aspects of mitigation:   (1)  examples of
types of mitigation;  (2) feasibility of mitigation;  (3)  strategies avail-
able for implementation of mitigation measures;  and (4) Section 404-related
mitigation  measures.   The following sections  briefly  summarize  the  first
two of these four areas as presented in Nelson et^ _aJL. (1982e) (the last two
areas are not within the scope of this review).
                                  81
-------
     3.3.4.1  Examples of Wetland Impact Mitigation

     Mitigation  may  include  a  variety of  the  following measures:   (1)
avoiding wetland impacts altogether during planning or construction phases,
or determining means to reduce impacts; or (2) compensation for unavoidable
on-site impacts by creation of wetlands off-site.   The OTA study considered
types of mitigation that could be accomplished at  each of several orders of
magnitude of  impact.   A  "first  order of  magnitude"  impact would include
total  wetland  elimination.   Examples given  include  filling,  bulkheading
draining, and  clearing.   Table  3.3-3 summarizes various means  to mitigate
these types of  impacts.   Second  order magnitude impacts which  are defined
as those which  occur  over longer periods of time.   These could include for
example, hydrological  effects resulting from blocking  of drainage  due to
highway construction  or  drainage  of wetlands due  to access canal dredging.
Mitigation  measures for  these  types  of  activities  are  listed  in  Table
3.3-4.  Third-order magnitude 404-related  impacts  are  defined  in the OTA
study as those  resulting in long-term soil and substrata effects.  Many of
these  are  also relevant  to facilities  planning.   An example  of a third-
order  impact  would include gradual filling of a wetland  due  to increased
sedimentation from a surrounding disturbed area.  Table  3.3-5 lists ways to
mitigate such  impacts.   Fourth-order  impacts were identified as those that
result  in  water quality  degradation  over the  long-term,  and  which result
from  effects  of  sewage effluents (eutrophication) or deterioration  due to
other  activities  (peat  mining  is used  as an  example  in  the  OTA study).
Table 3.3-6 lists measures to mitigate these types of  impacts.

     The highest order of magnitude of  impact  identified  in  the OTA study
was the fifth order.  This includes short-term physical/chemical effects of
construction, such  as  increased  turbidity  during  pipeline laying or direct
habitat elimination.   Examples  of appropriate  mitigative  measures identi-
fied are shown in Table 3.3-7.
                                  82
-------
     Table 3.3-3.   Examples of onsite mitigation practices useful for filling and
          bulkheading  (adapted from  various  sources  in  Nelson  et  al.  1982).
    Activity
Filling
	Mi t ig a t i on Concept
   To achieve flushing of finger-fill
   canals, avoid dead ends, sharp el-
   bows, and mean low depths over 4
   to 6 feet
      Reference
Hicks et al. 1975
                  •  Clean, unpolluted materials should
                     be used for fill

                  •  All material should be retained by
                     dikes or bulkheads

                  •  The top and outside bank of the
                     dikes should be vegetated

                  •  There should be a vegetative buf-
                     fer strip at the outer limits of
                     the fill to stabilize the soil
                     surface
                                         Hubbard and Blair 1979
                                         Canter et al. 1977
                                         Canter et al.  1977
                                         Canter et al.  1977
Bulkheading
   After filling, the new surface
   should be prepared with fertilizer,
   lime, mulch, or topsoil as needed
   for successful seeding

   Should be considered only when rip-
   rap or vegetative shore protection
   is infeasible
                                                           Canter et al.   1977
Hubbard and Blair 1979
                     Should be located landward of the
                     ordinary high water or wetland-
                     upland edge and not reflect wave
                     energy so as to destroy productive
                     bottom
                                         Hubbard and Blair 1979
                     Should be designed to avoid inter-
                     ference with littoral drift and
                     natural deposition of sand and
                     sediment
                                         Hubbard and Blair 1979
                     Retain or establish a buffer strip
                     of vegetation between the  bulkhead
                     and shoreline
                                         Carrol 1976
                     Material  used to backfill bulkheads
                     should not be dredged from aquatic
                     or wetland areas
                                         Hubbard and Blair 1979
                     Shore banks behind bulkheads  should
                     be graded  back or terraced  to con-
                     trol  erosion
                                         Hubbard and Blair 1979
                                       83
-------
Table 3.3-4.   Examples of mitigation practices applicable to excavation and fill
     for construction of highways through wetlands (various sources in Nelson
     et al. 1982c).
    Activity
Excavation
and Filling
        Mitigation Concept
      Reference
Wetland crossings should be built
on elevated structures that pre-
serve natural drainage patterns;
pilings are better than fill to
ensure passage of water, nutrients,
and organisms

Pervious fill may be preferred over
impermeable solid fill, in combina-
tion with culverts
Canter ejt al.   1977;
Carrol 1976
                                                           Nelson et al.  1982c
                     Culverts large enough to pass flood
                     flows should be set at depths in
                     highway fill necessary to provide
                     fish passage during low flow

                     Use many smaller culverts as
                     opposed to a few larger culverts
                     to promote freer flow

                     Sediment traps should be installed
                     to prevent sediment from leaving
                     the site
                                      Nelson et al. 1982c
                                      Mulvihill et al. 1980
                                      Hubbard and Blair 1979
                     Stabilize causeway banks and dis-
                     turbed upland slopes with vegeta-
                     tion or rock armor

                     Construction should be timed to
                     avoid breeding, spawning, and
                     nesting seasons, and to coincide
                     with low flows

                     Construct terrain under bridges to
                     allow movement of wildlife
                                      Nelson et al. 1982c
                                      Hubbard and Blair 1979
                                      Swanson 1979
                                  84
-------
Table 3.3-5.  Examples of mitigation measures for control of wetland filling due
     to soil erosion and siltation (various sources in Nelson et al. 1982c).
    Activity
Soil Cultivation
or Disturbance
        Mitigation Concept
      Reference
Clearing of vegetation for construc-
tion should be restricted to what is
absolutely essential

Exposed soil should be protected
through revegetation, mulching,
filter cloth, or riprap armor

Surface roughening (scarification)
may be useful in reducing surface
runoff over periodically disturbed
soils
Hubbard and Blair 1979
                                                           Hubbard and Blair 1979
                                                           Nelson  et  al.  1982a
                                                           Logan 1982
                     Use diversion features such as
                     rock-lined channels,  runoff con-
                     trol berms,  and terraces to divert
                     runoff from erodable  surfaces
                                      Canter et al.   1977
                     Incorporate settling basins  or
                     retention ponds  into storm dis-
                     charge systems

                     Provide windbreaks or vegetative
                     buffer strips to reduce  soil
                     erosion
                                      Banner 1979
                                      Sampson 1979
                     Control  overgrazing  within wetland
                     interiors  and  watersheds  to reduce
                     erosion
                                      Committee on Impacts
                                      of  Emerging  Agricul-
                                      tural  Trends 1982
                                 85
-------
Table 3.3-6.  Examples of mitigation measures for eutrophication from sewage
              effluents discharged in wetlands (various  sources  in Nelson
              et al.  1982c).
    Activity
        Mitigation Concept
      Reference
Sewage
Treatment
Pre-treat effluent to remove con-
stituents contributing to eutrophi-
cation, particularly phosphorus

Use holding tanks to allow efflu-
ent application after growing
season in order to reduce cyclic
eutrophication

Do not apply sewage effluents to
wetlands that have poor flushing
capabilities

Vary the points of discharge into
the wetland to improve effluent
assimilation

Provide dikes and outflow control
structures to avoid undesirable
low or high water and to allow
periodic flushing

Culture a plant such as water
hyacinth within a primary discharge
basin; periodically harvest to
remove excess nutrients
Benforado 1981
                                                           Benforado 1981
                                                           Steen and Ton 1981
                                                           Benforado 1981
                                                           Benforado 1981
                                                           Duffer and Moyer 1978
                                  86
-------
Table 3.3-7.  Examples of mitigation measures for control of temporary adverse
     effects from pipeline installation (various sources in Nelson et^ _al_.  I982c).
    Activity
        Mitigation Concept
      Reference
Pipelaying
Ditching
Alternate routes around wetlands
should be employed for pipeline
crossings when possible

Use existing access trails,
natural corridors, pipeline
rights-of-way and ditches,
where possible

Conduct heavy equipment operations
atop mats or floating barges

Pipeline ditches should be back-
filled as near as practicable to
the original marsh elevation with
original dredge

Pipeline corridors and other dis-
turbed sites should be revegetated
with wildlife food and cover crops
to prevent erosion
Hubbard and Blair 1979
                                                           Stone et ajl.  1979;
                                                           Maiero,  Castle and
                                                           Grain 1978
                                                           Hubbard and Blair 1979
                                                           Longley,  Jackson and
                                                           Snyder 1981;  Hubbard
                                                           and Blair 1979
                                                           Steen and Ton 1981
                                      87
-------
              Factor
     Site specific vs.  general
     prescription for mitigation
       Reason That Factor
       Limits Mitigation
     Application,  monitoring,  and
     enforcement of  BMPs
     Prevalence of secondary and
     cumulative impacts
     Technological/management
     capabilities
     Cost
Standard permit conditions, nation-
wide or regional permits and Best
Management Practices (BMPs) may
overlook specific impacts on wet-
lands .

Indiscriminate BMP application,
monitoring, enforcement may
overlook site-specific impacts.

Secondary impacts such as release
of toxics during dredging in addi-
tion to elevated turbidity often
go unnoticed, make it hard to miti-
gate; cumulative effects may go
unnoticed but may be sublethal;
mitigation limited to primary ef-
fects avoids such impacts.

Wide variation in ability or
willingness of managers to actually
implement mitigation effectively.

Mitigation cost may be required of
some developers but not others,
resulting in inequities; may make
project infeasible; land acquisi-
tion costs may be high; mainte-
nance costs may be high; uncer-
tainties of success of mitigation
also a factor; long-term mainte-
nance cost/cost effectiveness may
be much greater than initial dev-
velopment costs (Figure 3.3-3).
     3.3.4.2  Feasibility of Wetland Impact Mitigation


     Factors Limiting Success.     Various   factors  can  act  to  limit  the

feasibility  of  wetland  mitigation  activities.   The  OTA  report cites  the

following factors:


     Technical Feasibility of Mitigation Measures.      The OTA  study  noted

that some  activities may be  feasible  to  mitigate whereas others  are not.

The  potential  primary,  secondary,  and  other impacts must  be  well  under-

stood,   however  before  they  can be  mitigated.   Examples  of  mitigatable
                                  88
-------
     Figure 3.3-3.  Hypothetical cost comparison using three different mitigation
          measures to alleviate disruption of surface and subsurface drainage due
          to highway  construction on wetland  fill (from Nelson et  al.  1982c).


   Cost Category         	Relative Cost and Effectiveness	


Construction Cost   Low   	*	High


Maintenance Cost    Low	*	High


Cost-Effectiveness

  10-year           Low	•	High


  100-year          Low	•	High
                         Key to mitigation measures:
                         • = Culvert through fill
                           = Bridge on piers
                           = Pervious fill
                                       89
-------
effects  include  removal  of  contaminated  sediments  in lake  restoration
projects  (a  CG  or WWT)  example related  to  WWTP projects would  include
selection  of  alternative  interceptor  routes  that  produce the  smallest
amount of direct or indirect wetland habitat disturbance).   Activities that
are infeasible to mitigate completely are cited as including direct habitat
elimination (filling,  bulkheading).   Off-site restoration or marsh creation
can  be accomplished,  but  at a  greater  cost, which  may not be  feasible.

     Cost.  Mitigation costs vary widely and depend on  the  required plan-
ning and design, capital outlays, maintenance, and monitoring requirements.
Fencing  is  listed  as  an  example  of  an  inexpensive mitigation  measure,
whereas  projects  involving  restoration of old disturbed areas  or creation
of new  wetlands  are the most costly.  Such  costs  must be considered rela-
tive  to  the  useful economic life  of an  individual  project,  however,  to
determine the actual cost/benefit ratio.

3.3.5  USEPA Indirect  Impact Analysis Method

     USEPA  (Zimmerman,  1974) prepared a  manual for  determining  indirect
socioeconomic  impacts  of  sewage  treatment  facilities  construction  and
operation.  The  manual  includes  sections  that  describe methods  to define
indirect  impacts  on water  resources and land resources,  two  impact cate-
gories that could directly affect wetlands.   The general types of potential
indirect  effects  on wetlands were discussed  in  Section  2.2.   This section
summarizes  the methods  used to  address water  and land  resource  impacts
presented in Zimmerman (1974).

     The  overall  method presented by Zimmerman  (1974)  to  address indirect
impacts  is  shown  in  Figure  3.3-4.   The  initial  step  is to  project  the
magnitude  and  direction of  population  growth, and  associated  types  of
development (industrial, commercial, or  residential).   Indirect impacts on
wetlands  due  to  this  induced  growth may  then be determined.  Pollutant
loadings from non-point runoff  may be estimated by use of so-called "pollu-
tion coefficients."  The coefficients are used to predict changes in pollu-
tion  levels  with  and  without  the  proposed  waste  treatment  facility
(Figure 3.3-4).   The  levels of  expected pollution are  then compared with
                                  90
-------
m (X
3 CO
T3 >s O r-l
C k 4J -HO
H-
ao
c
i CO C 4-> M >
1-1 CD 3 O CD
• »-1 S r-l <4-l Q
•H C T-l CX, i— 1
.4->ooo o 
CX

•O r-
cu a
4-> -H
0 f-
CD 4-
•P-> IT
/— \
13
4-* CD
C in 4-»
t CD CO
e ft cu
cx i e
O CD -r-l _
^-1 0 4->
O 3 CD (H
JH -0 > 3 fn

4-> O 5-1
3 -H O
i-i JH C
»-i 4J C O C
O cO O -i-t O
£X S -H 4-J -H
V 4J CO 4J
13 4-> > 3 o U
CD c: xi o c
N CD -H r-l 3
•H -H cH i-H tU
i-H O 4-> <
cfl -H tn •
ft *« -H
4J J-i CD *4-( Q
T3 X C 0 .CO 1 4J
a> 5s
4-> CO
O i-l
a> t-<
•r-i-H
O 0
M C
cx <


/





CO <4-i • 	 ^ CU O
E 4-> O U
CX A
o cu co r
i-i co S
CJ C -H
> C3 4->
CD J3
Q CJ

*V





\







c
HO /
o e
<4H fX
C 0
o  O >
3 -H CO
—i H Q
_j j^i
^^ ^^
. O CO 13
' 	 ^o. S .« — '
•H O CJ
OS 60 CD
^ i *•* , — _^
4-* R T-l
O CO O
H JC ft
u a,
                                                                                                   co
                                                                                                   4->
                                                                                                   C3  4-»
                                                                                                   3   O
                                                                                                   t-i   O
                                                                                                   CO  'f~\
                                                                                                   >   o
                                                                                                   CD   r4
                                                                                                   CD  CX
                                                                                                   0£
                                                                                                         *
                                                                                                       in

                                                                                                       *l
a.
T3  C
 CD  O
 4-> -H
 O  4->
 <1>  cct
     O  3
CO  O
oo e
c -H
CS  40
                 fi
                                                                                                                                                                    K
                                                                                                                                                                    CJ
                                                                                                                                                                    U
                                                                                                                                                                    re
                                                                                                                                                                    t-i
                                                                                                                                                                    0)
                                                                                                                                                                    CD
                                                                                                                                                                    CO
                                                                                                                                                                O

                                                                                                                                                                CO
                                                                                                                                                               4-1
                                                                                                                                                                u
                                                                                                                                                                <9
                                                                                                                                                                P-
                                                                                                                                                                   4J
                                                                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                                                                                                   0>
                                                                                                                                                                   CO
                                                                                                                                                                   CO
                                                                                                                                                                   0)
                                                                                                                                                                   CO
                                                                                                                                                                   03
                                                                                                                                                                   CO

                                                                                                                                                                   O
                                                                                                                                                                   4-1
                                                                                                                                                                   gj
                                                                                                                                                                  •13
                                                                                                                                                                   
-------
various  standards,  criteria,  guidelines,  etc...  to determine  if "excess"
pollution might result  in  impacts on wetlands.   It is not clear at present
what  the term  "excess" exactly  signifies,  however,  since water quality
standards for discharges or  allowable amounts of non-point runoff have not
yet been developed.

     The  "pollution  coefficient"  is  actually expressed  in  units of waste
generated per unit of economic activity (production or  employment).   This
allows  estimates  of the total  amounts of pollution generated  per unit of
land (i.e.,  geographic sub-units)  to be determined.  Pollution  ratios under
alternative  spatial  arrangements  can also be compared.   Coefficients have
been developed by Zimmerman (1974) for two major categories (industrial and
residential/commercial).  Coefficients are further subdivided into "direct"
pollution discharge  types  (point source)  and  "indirect" pollution  types
(non-point  source).   USEPA  (1978)  presented methods  to  assess  pollution
from agriculture and  mining,  not  included in the  Zimmerman  (1974) report.
Appendix  I  presents the methods  used by Zimmerman (1974) to  generate the
industrial and residential/commercial  pollutant  coefficients.   These coef-
ficients  could  be  used to  predict  secondary  impacts  on  projects  where
wetlands are involved.

3.3.6  USEPA Secondary Impact Analysis Methodology

     USEPA  (1978)  published  a  manual  for analyzing  indirect impacts of
wastewater  treatment  facilities that  included a section  on  wetlands.  The
method  requires  initial determination of long-term projections in popula-
tion and land-use changes.    Possible  areas that include wetlands  and could
be  subject  to  effects of  induced growth are  then identified.  To make the
population and land-use  projections,  the boundaries of the  study area are
first  established.  This  requires use  of specialized   terminology.   The
"service  area"  is defined as the area  in which growth  is  induced  by the
treatment facility over  and  above that which  would occur in the absence of
the project (Figure 3.3-5).  The service area  is defined by the communities
served  by  the  treatment facilities  and is available  from  the  facilities
plan.   The  service  area lies within a larger  area  called the  "economic
area"  (Figure 3.3-5).   This  may constitute either a  standard  metropolitan
                                  92
-------
                                                                                 I
                                                                                 01
                                                                                 tfl
                                                                                "O
                                                                                 0)
                                                                                 O
                                                                                 a)
                                                                                 n)
                                                                                 01
                                                                                JS
                                                                                 a.
                                                                                 c>o
                                                                                 o
                                                                                 (U
                                                                                 t>0
                                                                                 C
                                                                                •H
                                                                                 10
                                                                                 
-------
statistical area, an  individual  county,  or a multiple-county region linked
or associated with  a  city.   "Growth areas" are potentially competing areas
with  similar  growth characteristics as  the service area,  but  which would
experience any  additional  development over  and above that  induced  within
the service area  (Figure 3.3-5).  The growth areas have  several character-
istics, including:

     • Similar availability of undeveloped land with good development
       potential;
     • Proximity to developed areas;
     • Comparable land prices;
     • Shopping/recreation  opportunities; and
     • Similar community attitudes towards future growth.
     A fourth area,  termed  the "sub-area" is defined  as the portions of the
economic  area likely  to experience induced growth (Figure  3.3-6).   Deter-
mination  of  the  sub-area  is  usually done  on  the  basis  of  professional
judgment using all the available  baseline information.   The sub-area is the
critical area for determining secondary impacts.

     To determine impacts  on wetlands, the distribution  of these habitats
within the economic area are first mapped on an overlay.   Possible wetlands
that overlap with sub-areas  are  then identified by  superimposing the wet-
land and   sub-area  overlays.   This allows determination  of  areas that may
be  directly  eliminated  by induced  growth or  areas  that may  produce en-
croachment, hydrologic,  or pollutant runoff impacts on  adjacent wetlands.
The  acreage  of  affected  wetland  can  be determined  by  planimetry  and
expressed  either  as total acres  or as  a percentage of  the total wetland
available in the watershed  or economic area.   The manual also suggests that
hydrologic impacts  may  be  roughly estimated by conducting a well survey in
the vicinity of the affected area.  If  wells  are  very shallow and located
adjacent  to a wetland,  it  is probable that  the well is replenished by the
wetland  (Figure  3.3-7).   In contrast,  if the wetland  is recharging  an
underground  aquifer not  hydrologically  connected with  the wetland,  the
wells would not be affected (Figure 3.3-7).
                                  94
-------
                                                                                  
                                                                                     o
                                                                                     CM
                                                                                 (X
                                                                                 01
                                                                                 U

                                                                                 o
                                                                                 •J
                                                                                      >^
                                                                                     r-H
                                                                                      OJ
0)
o
s
                                                                                      CJ
                                                                                     •rl

                                                                                     •s
                                                                                60
                                                                                •H
95
-------
Figure 3.3-7. Example situations whereby wells located near a wetland may or
        may not be directly hydrologically connected (from USEPA 1978).
                                         96
-------
3.3.7  State of New Jersey Bureau of Regional Planning Indirect Impact
       Analysis Methodology
     The New  Jersey  Bureau of Regional Planning  (1975)  published a metho-
dology  for  assessing indirect  impacts of  wastewater  treatment facilities
construction  and  operation.  The  method is  outlined  in Table  3.3-8,  and
presented in  more  detail in Appendix  J.  Although  the method is primarily
socioeconomic, it  is  a comprehensive  planning tool and describes means for
including wetlands.  No specific method is provided for evaluating baseline
conditions  or  for  determining the specific  types or magnitudes of impacts
expected to result on wetlands (see Appendix J).  Rather, this method pro-
vides a  means of  identifying situations where induced growth might produce
encroachment on wetlands,  wetland habitat elimination, or increased runoff
and  erosion on wetlands  within a. service area.  Since the method is essen-
tially self-explanatory, it will not be discussed further here.

3.3.8   The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources/Canadian Wildlife
        Service Methodology
     The  Canadian  government  (Ontario  Ministry  of  Natural  Resources/
Canadian  Wildlife  Service  1983)  has  developed  an evaluation  system  for
wetlands south of  the pre-cambrian shield.  The method provides a means of
objectively  establishing  the  functions,  values  and  areal  extent  of  a
particular  wetland.   The  document includes a description of  the method as
well as  a  users manual.   It is  a relatively detailed  approach which  re-
quires a substantial expenditure of labor to complete.   The method requires
completion  by  a  qualified  biologist  with  knowledge  of  local  flora,
knowledge  of   aerial   photographic  interpretation  of  wetland  extent  and
boundaries, and general  knowledge concerning wildlife.  It also requires a
minimum of two weeks of training to become familiar with the method.

     The method considers four components of wetland values including:  (1)
biological  values;  (2)   social  values;  (3) hydrological  values  and  (4)
special  feature values.   Each  value  category is rated by  the  method  and
assigned a  score of from 0 to  250  points.   The advantage of  such a large
"point  spread" is that  it  is  more   sensitive  to   subcomponent  wetland
features,  and allows  more accurate  evaluation  of "minor"  values (those
assigned only  a  few  points).   The  system also weights  scores  within each
                                   97
-------
                 EXPLANATION  OF THE METHOD  FOR  EVALUATING
            SECONDARY  IMPACTS OF  REGIONAL SEWERAGE  SYSTEMS

The  purpose of  investigating the seven  categories in these  guidelines in the order  suggested is  to
gain  an understanding of the  growth-induced impacts which  may result from each  of  the  alterna-
tive  systems which have been  proposed. It  is necessary to determine the probable  rate and pattern
of growth in the service area which  will result from each  alternative and  then to  analyze the im-
pacts of  that growth. Following is a summary of the rationale  behind  the guidelines.

SECTION  I
Determine pressure for development.  To get an indication  of the amount  of pressure  for  develop-
ment in  the area, determine what development has  occurred since  1960 and what is  happening
now.  Separate  by type of land use.  This will  help to determine whether or not there will be a
high  rate of growth  once  the  sewers are in. Trends should be  adjusted for  short-term influences.

SECTION  li

Measure vacant,  developable land. To get an idea  of how  much growth could occur,  determine
how  much  vacant, developable  land  there is. Also indicate natural  and physical limitations of  the
land  for  development.

SECTION  III

Compare  proposal with existing plans. To see  if the proposed  project conflicts in  any way with
existing plans,  compare a  map  of the service area showing  the  location of the proposed  system
with  plans and future land use plans of municipalities, counties and  the State, including plans for
highways, parks, reservoirs, and environmentally critical areas. (Include  such  agencies as the New
Jersey  Highway and  Turnpike  Authorities and  the Atlantic  City Expressway.)

SECTION  IV
Evaluate  municipal attitude toward growth.  The level of land use planning in an area will be
decisive in determining potential secondary  impacts  so it  is necessary to evaluate  the  quality  of
the planning effort which  is being carried out in  each  municipality. A checklist of indicators  is
given  with which to  measure  the degree of  commitment to  basic planning objectives.

SECTION V
Estimate  growth.  While it  is difficult to estimate growth  when  counties and  municipalities have
tended to simply accommodate growth as it comes  along  rather than setting limits and specifying
timed stages for development,  this task  must be carried out in as  enlightened a manner  as possible.
It  is  necessary to estimate the  amount and  pattern  of growth  which will  occur in the ten years
after construction. This estimate will be based mainly on  previously  gathered information, such  as
the amount  of vacant, developable land, municipal policies and attitudes,  the pressures for develop-
ment  in  the area, and the development trends, e.g., PUDs.

SECTION VI
Measure  impact.  All  the previous steps lead  up to this one, which should be considered the  heart
of the analysis.  Using the  estimates  of the  pattern  and rate of growth above, describe the potential
impacts of  this growth on the  individual municipalities and  the region.

SECTION VII

Weigh  alternatives. This section should  be  a thorough evaluation of the alternative  proposals  in
terms of  the long-range  impacts discussed in the previous  section.  If possible it should  conclude
witn  a recommended  project  proposal which would  have  the least  adverse impact  while adequately
solving the  current water  quality  problems  of  the area. The possibility that  all alternatives repre-
sent  too  large  a solution to existing problems should not  be ignored.
Table  3.3-8.  Outline of  method  used by  the New Jersey Bureau of  Regional
      Planning (UJBRP 1975)  to assess indirect  sewerage system impacts.
                                               98
-------
wetland  component evaluated  according  to  the  importance  of  each.   More
weight  is  assigned to  values  such as  breeding areas or habitats  for en-
dangered species, for example.   The weighted values were the result of over
2  years of  field testing,  and consultation  with experts.   The  weighted
values have therefore been readjusted and reviewed extensively.

     The biological  component  includes  the  following three subcomponents:
(1)  productivity;  (2)  diversity;  and (3) size.   Productivity is evaluated
by estimating  five values,  including (1) growing  degree days (from estab-
lished  map),  (2)  wetland soil  type (from soil maps and field confirmation)
(3)  type  of wetland  (bog,  fen, carr,  swamp or marsh); (4)  site  (physio-
graphic  type  according  to  Cowardin's  method)  and (5) nutrient status  of
surface water  (chemical  testing  of total dissolved solids  and conductivity
required).  Diversity  is evaluated by considering number of  wetland types
present; types of vegetation communities, diversity of surrounding habitat,
nature  of  adjacent wetlands,  and  interspersion with  open  water.   Size  is
evaluated  by  relating   extent  and  quality  of the  wetland.  A  detailed
summary  of the  biological  evaluation  method  is  included in Appendix L.

     The  social  component  of  the  method  evaluates   four  wetland  charac-
teristics,  including:   (1)  resources with  cash value (timber,  rice, com-
mercial  fish,  bullfrogs,  snapping turtles  and  fur   bearers);  (2)  recre-
ational activities (intensity  of  use for hunting; nature  study/ apprecia-
tion, fishing  or boating); (3)  aesthetics   (rating of landscape distinct-
ness, absence of  human disturbance);  (4)  education   and public  awareness
(frequency  of  educational use, types  of facilities and programs,  use for
research);  (5) proximity to urban  areas (distance);  (6) ownership/accessi-
bility  (degree of accessibility  for  various  types  of public or  private
ownership)  and (6)  size (correlates  size   score  with other  social  value
scores directly in a  table).

     The hydrologic  component  addresses the  following four  values:   (1)
flow stabilization; (2) water  quality improvement;  and (3)  erosion control.
The  flow  stabilization  evaluation includes  making estimates  of water de-
tention due to surface area.   This  evaluation is based on size of catchment
basin above  wetland  in  relation to  total extent of other  bodies  of  water
                                  99
-------
draining  into  the  wetland,  the  size of  any  adjoining  lakes or  rivers,
location/size of detention areas  within  30 Km above or below  the wetland,
land use  characteristics and  size.   The  flow stabilization evaluation also
includes making an  estimate of  flow augmentation (based on size of  wetland
and relative position in the watershed).

     The water quality improvement sub-component is evaluated by analyzing:
(1) short term nutrient  removal  capability (soil type; flooding  depth and
frequency; ratio of  emergents to  submerged vascular plants;  land  use); (2)
long term nutrient removal  capability (based on organic sediment character-
istics);  and  (3)  erosion  control  (erosion  buffering and  sheet  erosion
functions).   Several hydrologic  functions which have been  included in other
methods were omitted from this method. These include groundwater recharge,
role of organic soils  in hydrology, surficial geology, and drag effects of
vegetation in  detaining  flood waters.  The rationales  for  these  omissions
are also provided.

     The special features component considers the following wetland values:
(1) rarity and/or  scarcity; (2)  significant features and/or fish and wild-
life habitats; and  (3)  ecological age.   Rarity/scarcity is evaluated based
on  a  scale  of known  relative  scarcity  of  wetlands in  different  physio-
graphic  provinces  (regardless of  wetland type)  (on a scale  of  5  to 35,
where 35  is  very  scarce and 5 is not scarce).  Also included in this eval-
uation  is  a similar  estimate  for  rarity  of specific  wetland type within
each  province.   Other  considerations include  individual species  rarity,
breeding  habitat  for  provincially  significant and/or  endangered species,
traditional  migration  or  feeding  habitats  for  endangered  species,  and
regionally important species.

     The  evaluation  of  significant  features  and/or fish  and  wildlife
habitat includes  consideration  of: (1) nesting  colonial  waterbirds (known
nesting/feeding areas  and history of nesting); (2)  winter  cover  for wild-
life;   (3)  waterfowl  staging;   (4)  waterfowl  production;  (5)  migratory
passerine stopover  area; (6) significance for fish spawning  and rearing;
and (7)  unusual geological or  surficial features.  Items 2 through 6 are
                                  100
-------
based on  an estimate  of  whether the wetland is  of  national  (provincial),
regional or local  significance,  and  the relative value of each function at
these levels.

     The ecological age component  is based on the assumption  that systems
that require long  periods  of time to develop ecologically  would  also take
the  longest  time to  recover or  restore.  Under  this  assumption,  bogs are
weighted the highest,  fens  next  highest, swamp/carrs the next  highest, and
marshes the lowest.

     As a means  of  summarizing the Canadian method,  the final  checklist as
it has been developed is included here as Appendix M.
                                  101
-------
4.0  CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1  Conclusions

     The objectives of the present study were to review the existing liter-
ature  concerning  available  methodologies  to  assess  baseline  conditions
within wetland ecosystems and impacts of CG related activities on wetlands.
The  ultimate  objective  of  USEPA  Region  V  is   to  use  the  information
assembled  in  this review  to  develop a  method that can  be used  by state
agencies, facilities planners and  other organizations  in screening adverse
effects on wetlands  that potentially could result from implementation of a
given  facilities  plan  (the method  could also  be used for other  types of
projects).  Identification of potentially adverse impacts (red flags) would
allow  determination  of issues that  would lead to the requirement  of more
detailed,  site-specific  studies.    Therefore,  the  screening  methodology
would not involve extensive quantitative analysis.

     The need  for  such a methodology has arisen  because  of the great dif-
ferences in the scope and emphasis of environmental assessments of wetlands
prepared  during the  facilities  planning  process  in  the  past.    In many
instances, the numerous  biological, physical-chemical  and social values
associated with  individual  wetlands  potentially  affected by  wastewater
treatment developments  have not  been identified.   A methodology  is there-
fore required  that objectively screens  a broad range of wetland values and
functions and  that accurately flags  potential effects  of a facilities plan
on these values  and  functions.   This approach will help fully address NEPA
concerns and   avoid  violation  of  the  various  laws and  regulations  that
protect wetlands from damage or degradation (including  the Clean Water Act,
two executive orders, and other similar  laws or regulations).

     On the basis  of the literature review in  Section  3.0, it can be con-
cluded that a  large  number of  methodologies for  assessing  various  aspects
of wetland values  and  functions  have   been  developed.   No single method
reviewed, however, meets the requirements of a quick screening technique to
determine a broad  spectrum of wetland values and  functions and the poten-
                                  102
-------
tial  for  adverse  effects  of  construction grant-related  activities.   The
vast  majority  of  the  methods  reviewed  deal  with site-specific  means  to
evaluate baseline ecological functions.  These methods (such as HEP or HES)
are  highly detailed  and  require a  significant  amount of  labor  (although
both  HEP  and  HES  can  be  greatly scaled  down).   The method  developed  by
Adamus  (1983)  most  closely  approximates the  screening  method required  by
USEPA  Region V  states  for facilities  planning,  because  it determines the
values  and  functions of  a  wide variety of wetland  characteristics,  in-
cluding  ecology, soils, hydrology and  recreation.  However, in its present
state  the  method of  Adamus (1983),  although defined  as  a rapid assessment
technique,  is  in reality rather lengthy  and requires  several  days to com-
plete.   It would thus  be feasible  for use primarily only for major pro-
jects.   The State  of Wisconsin is currently modifying  this method so that
it  is  not  so  extensive.   The  WDNR method  should  be  obtained  and reviewed
for  possible  adaptation for use by other states since it addresses a rela-
tively complete range of wetland values and functions.   All other methods
reviewed in the present study, however, dealt with a limited number of wet-
land features  of one general type or strictly with ecological characteris-
tics.

     An additional conclusion is that no methodologies have yet been devel-
oped that  specifically  address  the detailed indirect cumulative impacts of
induced  growth  on  wetlands within  the  "economic  area" affected  by such
growth (see Section  3.3.7).  Methods developed to date have included only a
very general evaluation of possible effects, such as the number of acres of
habitat  directly eliminated,  possible  hydrologic  impacts,  or  "presence  or
absence"  criteria.    Secondary  impacts,  however,  are  typically  the  most
significant  result   of  facilities  plan implementation.   This is  because
induced  growth affects  a much  larger  geographical  area  than  the actual
habitat  eliminated  or  disturbed  by  construction and operation of a waste
treatment  system.  Methods  are   available  for  determining  the nature  and
extent of expected population increases and land use changes resulting from
induced  growth,  as   well  as  the  impacts  of such changes on water quality
resulting  from increased non-point  erosion and  sedimentation,  industrial
activity,  or changes in point  discharges.  What is now required is a means
to screen  such impacts  and link them directly to the possible effects they
may have on wetlands.  An additional area  not  typically  included in eval-
                                  103
-------
uating the effects of facilities plans on wetlands is the subject of direct
cumulative impacts.  According  to  definitions used in the  present  litera-
ture  review,  direct  cumulative effects  differ  from indirect  cumulative
effects of  induced growth in that  the latter deal only with  the economic
area  affected by  an individual  waste  treatment  system.  Direct  cumulative
effects would  include  the total combined  primary impact  of  two  or  more
individual  treatment  systems within  a larger  geographical area or  basin
encompassing several economic  areas  (see  Section 3.3.7  for definition of
the  term  "economic areas").  Both  direct and  indirect  cumulative  impacts
are  difficult  and time-consuming  to  evaluate,  however,   because  of  the
larger  geographic areas  involved  and  the  consequent requirement  of  more
labor  and resources to complete  the analysis.  Nevertheless,  facilities
planning  potentially could have  adverse cumulative effects on wetlands and
assessment of this type of effort should be incorporated  at some  level into
the proposed screening  methodology.

4.2  Recommendations

4.2.1  Incorporation of Screening Method into Facilities  Planning

     A methodology needs to be  developed that will  enable agency  staffs,
planners  and/or   their   consultants  to  evaluate  baseline conditions  and
determine potential adverse impacts on wetlands during the  course of facil-
ities planning.   A possible  outline for the method was presented in Figure
1.2-1.  Whatever   method  is  developed, it  is recommended  that  it be  in-
tegrated  into the planning process  at an early  phase.   The method of Reed
and  Kubiak  (1983) who  developed  a  means  for  incorporating a  wetland/
wastewater discharge review process into facilities planning, could also be
modified  and used.  Figure 4.2-1 summarizes their approach which is  based
on  the "degradation" concept.   Because it  represents the  only  published
attempt to date that concerns the integration of legal, regulatory,  and ad-
ministrative constraints into the process of wetland impact evaluation, the
approach  is  briefly outlined here  (a  similar  logical procedure could be
developed for construction grant projects in general).
                                  104
-------
                        Discharge Location: Wetland Use
                        (Process to be Completed During
                            the Step I Grant Phase)
                                                                   Facility Planning
                                                                   Process:  Step  1
                              Groundwater or
                             Effluent Impact
                               Evaluation
                           Controlled
                           Degradation
Non-Degradati
     Policy
              Selection
              Criteria
                                               Engineering
                                                •Evaluation
                                                                      Water Quality
                                                                      Standards
                                                                      Effluent
                                                                      Limitations
Figure A.2-1.   Method  used by Reed and Kubiak (1983) to incorporate
     wetland evaluation  into the facilities planning process.
                                    105
-------
     The Reed and  Kubiak  method provides a means  of  determining discharge
suitability early in the planning process, and is based on the requirements
of the water quality standards process and limitations specified in Section
402 permit  procedures.  The  initial  step in this method  is  to apply appro-
priate screening criteria to determine the quantity and quality of effluent
discharged, as  well as the cost-effectiveness of  the  wetland alternative
(no screening criteria were given in the paper).

If, following the  initial screening,  a natural wetland  alternative  is  not
determined  to  be  feasible, feasibility  of other  modes of  discharge  (to
surface  water  or  groundwater)  need  to be  identified.   If  an  artificial
wetland is determined to be feasible,  the impacts on the "receiving waters"
must be determined  in  relation  to existing water quality limitations, just
as  in  the  case of  a conventional discharge.   In some  cases  water quality
limitations may prevent use of an artificial system (Figure 4.2-1).

     If a  natural  wetland is determined to be feasible, then an ecological
evaluation  is needed to  determine  if this alternative  is  compatible with
water quality standards and to  determine if adverse impacts to the wetland
would result (Figure 4.2-1).   This  evaluation should  precede the decision
concerning  use of  a natural wetland for wastewater application.   Use of a
natural wetland  alternative may  not  be feasible if it  is  determined that
such an  alternative  is  incompatible  with the  maintenance of  high water
quality standards  in a  particular receiving stream, for example.  In other
cases it may be determined that water quality will not be degraded signifi-
cantly by  the natural  wetland alternative, and that  it  thus  constitutes a
feasible alternative  as  a  regulated  ("controlled  degradation or enhance-
ment")  discharge.   The  discharge  needs to meet criteria  for  water quality
standards and effluent  limitations, however,  this procedure (Figure 4.2-1)
allows   for  flexibility  in making  permit  decisions  regarding  a  wetland
discharge,  and  also  allows for  discontinuing  a  discharge  if  monitoring
programs show that detrimental impacts are occurring.

     Once  the  wetland  alternative  is  selected,  an  ecological  evaluation
should be  conducted (Figure 4.2-1).   Reed and Kubiak (1983) concluded that
the evaluation should determine:
                                  106
-------
  •  Areal extent and boundaries of the affected wetlands;
  •  Existing  ecological  functions  of  the  receiving  wetland,  and
     importance of the wetland to the surrounding watershed;
  •  Types and quality of plant and animal communities;
  •  Existing  government management  programs  that might  involve the
     wetland; and
  •  Existing regulatory programs that apply to the wetland.
     The  evaluation  of  the existing features of the wetland should include
characterizations of the following factors:

  •  Surface water and groundwater quality;
  •  Hydrologic  regime  (especially  storm  flow  characteristics  and
     groundwater recharge characteristics);
  •  Flood control,  water storage  and  aquifer yield  during  low flow
     periods.
  •  Shoreline  erosion/protection  characteristics  provided  by  the
     wetland; and
  •  Overall ecological  quality  (species  diversity and health; poten-
     tial  recreational,  research,  and  educational  uses;  and socio-
     economic values).
     To  complete the  evaluation,   appropriate  field  studies  can  be per-
formed.  These should include measures of plant and animal species composi-
tion,  abundance,  and diversity.   Methods  for  performing such  detailed
inventories  are  presented in  Reed  and  Kubiak (1983)  and  in  USEPA (1983).
The results  of  the ecological evaluation can be  used  during  the course of
the facility planning process to provide a  detailed basis for determining
potential  impacts  on the  receiving wetland, and for  establishing  the ac-
ceptability of the discharge.

4.2.2  Baseline Evaluation:  Screening Method Requirements

     The  screening  method must  encompass  a broad range  of wetland values
and functions  in order  to  be as  objective as possible.   The majority of
methods used to  date have focused on one  or only a few wetland values and
functions.  The  screening method should allow for a complete  assessment of
                                  107
-------
the  baseline  characteristics  and  their  interaction,   so  that  potential
impacts can  be readily identified.   It is therefore recommended  that  the
following values  and functions be  included in the  screening methodology:

     Groundwater recharge capability;
     Groundwater discharge capability;
     Surface water discharge features  (quality, quality);
     Flood storage potential;
     Flood desynchronization potential;
     Shoreline stabilization function;
     Sediment trapping function;
     Nutrient retention/removal functions;
     Food chain support;
     Aquatic habitat value (quantity/quality);
     Terrestrial habitat value (quantity/quality);
     Uniqueness/rarity in watershed and  region;
     Historical/cultural  value (including  archaeological  resources);
     Presence  of  rare/threatened/endangered plants  or  animals (state
     and federally listed); and
  •  Outstanding geomorphological  features.
     The specific means of screening  a  given  wetland for  the above values
and functions  are not  yet developed.   Adamus  (1983) presents a relatively
high labor-intensive method of quantifying many of  the above characteris-
tics, but a low labor-intensive method has  yet  to be created that addresses
all of  these  functions  and values (possibly the WDNR method will meet this
requirement).   Such  a  method  could  be  developed by modifying and/or com-
bining desirable  features  of  the  various methods reviewed  in Section 3.0.
Nelson  et  al.  (1982c)  recently  developed a  state  guidelines  manual  for
evaluating dredge and  fill projects.   The procedure presented in the USCOE
manual is outline in Appendix K.   Also  included in Appendix K is a copy of
the field report  sheets  used by the  biologist who  conducts the field sur-
vey.   Table 4.1-1  provides a list  of  sources of  information concerning
wetlands which could be utilized in the baseline evaluations.

4.2.3  Impact Analysis:  Screening Method Requirements

     Once the baseline characteristics (functions,  values,  areal extent) of
the  wetland  were established, a  second step  could  be  developed  in which
potential  impacts of  facilities  plan  implementation were screened.  The
screening impact  analysis  should  provide a means of providing an overview
of primary, secondary (induced growth) and cumulative impacts of facilities
                                  108
-------

i *->
Cj
o
£



^

o
i
o c
CJ O

VI —
c: >
2S


T3
c: .
.— cx

0 S CX C
tt> fl
*fl <* XJ T7
3 c e c
u « <— o
••-'ex 01
•o o o
a* o E -=
*c c ^c «
























B
IB Lrt
E ,4! .
£EfeS
£21 £

» O
UH"
O 3 O -
o i— j~ fl
•M fl, "*- CJ
0 t-
o u c
o fl c
0 *•- O
tg-Sg
O — t— i-
f— Cj
i-
4-» C) CX
(U (O T) I
'
••- c; *e
3 f" — -

.— X> O

y cy O +
5-*- .c i
__) 14- Q. <








<
to o
83
C 1

"Jo's c
•5..SE
TJ t,
O C^TJ
O (0 C
*— fl
".Jf.
TJ*T -M
C c. i/>
^ .£
•*-* C O
%— **~
W O TJ
0 t- =
(U fl
en *—
c -
— CJ r—
CX C, fl r-
CX O 1-
fl »— 3
Z w> *>
o
J
/I
3
J

a. ID
jC
o
0 13

^ S
< 0













1
1 W> 1
fl — O
*•» TJ 3
22 5
t/>
^— fl f—
• •- t —
O O
ist ti> tn
4-»
O ^ O
O O 0
*J 1- *J
tJ O "3
c ««- c
isvi
5j .^- »g CJ
•W ^- cri •*->
C> •(- o c* :
Q J3 CXO 4-










t.
fa
^
•«o
•D

T3
C
fl
i~ e
C> "fl en
a— E
CX (0
CJ T3 t
*J O C,1
fl 0 O
to C cx


fl
3
cn
4>

•M
C
OJ
c
CX fS
CJ
i- u
O fl
e «*-
r °
(U C
*J O
1 C —









o

L.
u.
„
C I CJ
•r- J. tO
*- * o
o *— <^i
v* TJ *J CD
CX O C 10
t. 0 O =3
O — E
O L- flJ
>> . fl* s <
e cn c o z
L. C (Q *^ LU


i
o
t.
I- Oi
o ^
•*- *-»
o
O.TJ
IS
Cj en
cr c .
S— c
c o
o —
•e fl
c .—
TJ -^- 3
rs o. t-

"S

IA
K
c
IQ




Ci


^
> 1

^TS

•r- >^- **-
CDD O •*
O t
o o o
S-5S d


•
§4f (
cn <
cfe
f t
O d> ^
4J *- t
Sw
•o 


c
CJ
*J
fl

^
g



J -
r CT
? e
i
^
c
n n
:| 5
rt 5
w> c
J -— • —
» fl
ji ¥
ii §
TJ •—
DC «-
= i
s^; . TJ
^- c
U fl 
3 fl C p
fl S
x o> **
- > v» ex
i> •— c  o **
M

fl
M
8.
e
Q.
4->
1
O
O
>
«
c/
4-»
. «,
V 3
£•5
i- >
fl UJ
^
0

w>
CJ
c
fl
jr





-1
u
0*
— 4J •«
fl 1 fl

o^"c oL



""•^ *sx
O^ ^> 0.
V>— O 3


s «•
c t
fl
U
At 41
u .e
X J« 3
•C3 O O
§ es
s •§••
O> J3 *—
9
Ol O U
C • C 0
•*" W ••" C
EgE-i
StJSo.
£?££
ifi   VI •»-
•S)   3
tn'   >.-

4-» TJ O  >


C*?  -  W
O ^— «/l  flj


•O i_ T3  fl

fl  .51«;

   *j
3 at c  >, QI
O enO  *J cn
         .
      0 -^- >» -0 -0
      . x: *^ c
      nm •*-  "O
        C— C -*J
                                                                 » OO
                                                                  m-*
                           VI VI U
                           a*t) o
                           cx c
                              -
                           •»- O T
                           Q. CX
   cx c

   o o

 l/> r—
 rS <«- TJ
 01   C
 t. 4-» fl
 rC 'J t—
   O *-»
=  "-» Ol
 «/ O S
 C L
 O CX •

 k^g

XJ fl *J
 O TJ fl
 O C >
,- fl O
                                                                                             4> C T> o   O
                                                                                             N O C C   -^  .


                                                                                                O •*-*>/'      U
                                                                                             *O TJ (J —
                                                                                             o c u
  »-

fl
                                                                                              • •«••—   -^- •
                                                                                              ^« S u   *"
                                                                                                          - trt e
                                                                                                          e^- S
                                                                                                          O f— I.
»„•„•
pr
f
ie
nsion
locat
                                                                                                          -U
                                                                                                          in 3 «/>
                                                                                                          C* L C>
                                                                                                          »rt 4J L.
                                       22
                                       cn-o
                                                                                                         fl 3,-       O O
                                                                                                         O O -3       > if
                                                                                                         oc u—      uj cn
«» >,"» -c £
i/i — ts>  T) 4^ W» C
*-> fl c fl a.—
v. a-fl y fl cx
"5 §«£ g 2-
O W fiJ *• 4» E
S w* • (rt
S^^SSSS
"lES"SS"
c b t o *» o
<->•» o c e 01 >
^SkSS5 =
-.'cj" n

SS

CNN
fl* S
ec -^ •-*

|l
c
•o tjj
fl X—
«1
15
C V
U VI
C T>
0
•r- W W»
4-» C «i
s=r
§S5
"£ -§
"S5
C
.-^ ^j
•O r— C
O fl
"C £?*j
fl t. «
=- « Jr
s
&
cx
f
w»
i.
CI
c
1^
4t «i
s=


g

8?
T-
• L



^
i
i
tft

"«
Jj
^

iyi
*•?
IS
p
u *
%£
O *
i£
5 .
C IA
iS.
•°^
II
=4
OJ 4-»
**
= >•
15
sg
S3




•o o c
ill
fe£l



—
3
1"
1
b.
U
S
5

L
v *
s*
••"S*
4C


0}
4-1
<0
•a
•a
c
ed
iH
4J
01
9
o
CO
Cl)
o
>j
3
0
(A
r-l
I
^
U
R)
H









TJ   i—.
J-J I
                                                   *-> o ••-
                                                    * o en
                                                   4J — 0
                                                   t/» U. •—
     >i a*
.ii^f^
en c —  3
o o o  o
	 l_  W»
O *J T)  O
i. fl >V«
^-^^  w
— ** ^  °

3s5s
                                                                                                    o es 3
                                                                                                    *-» wi o
                                                                                                    O 3 VI
                                                                                                    ex.  . t.
                                                                                                    ^35
                                                                                                                     5
                                                                                                                                       o o
                                                                                                                                    *-
-------
plan  implementation on  wetlands.   All impacts  analyzed  should  relate  to
possible alterations in  defined  baseline  values and functions (see above).
The initial step in analyzing these effects would identify:
     The amount and  quality  of  wetland, if any,  to  be  directly elim-
     inated or encroached on  by alternative treatment plant sites and
     interceptor routes;
     The amount and quality of wetlands to be eliminated or encroached
     on within  sub-areas  in  which  induced growth is most  likely  to
     occur as  a result of  implementation of various facilities plan
     alternatives;  and
     The amount and  quality  of  wetland to be eliminated or encroached
     on due to  both  primary  and secondary impacts within an "economic
     area" and the surrounding river basin or geographical area (i.e.,
     cumulative effects).
     The first item listed above provides information concerning how alter-
native  treatment  system  construction and  operation  plans  will  directly
affect  existing wetlands  (i.e., primary  impacts).   Alternatives  could be
screened and evaluated initially relative to their potential effects.  This
can be  done  by superimposing proposed facility overlays onto wetland maps.
The second item is  probably the most important,  since induced growth will
usually have greater  impacts (secondary  impacts) than treatment facilities
themselves.  Secondary  impacts  require  some type of projection of popula-
tion  and  land use  changes.   A  rough idea of secondary  impacts of various
alternatives could  be obtained  by  superimposing overlays of  sub—areas of
induced growth (interceptor routes into undeveloped land) over wetland maps
for the affected  economic  area.   This information could  be  obtained from
existing  and  proposed zoning, including building  permit applications, and
building  plans  on  file.   Cumulative impacts are  much harder  to  estimate
because of the larger geographical area involved.  A method similar to that
presented in Galloway et^ _al. (1978) could possibly be used, but such methods
are costly and labor-intensive.

     The  screening  method  would identify which wetlands within an economic
area  would  be eliminated  directly  or would be  encroached upon by primary
and secondary  development  caused by a particular alternative.  The screen-
ing method  also should  identify which of the various  functions and values
                                  110
-------
identified in the baseline review would be altered, and the possible magni-
tude of  such  impacts.   For example, if the  wetland of concern was identi-
fied as  having a highly valuable function as an  aquifer recharge area or
perhaps  as  a cultural  or recreational resource,  this  would be recognized
and  means  of  avoiding  such  impacts  could  be  incorporated  during  the
planning  phase  (possibly involving  choosing  an  alternative cost-effective
treatment  facilities  configuration  that  does  not  impact  the  wetland).

     The  screening  method should also enable the  planning or agency staff
to identify available scientific methods to study particular issue areas in
depth at a later date.  If, for example, the effects of a WWTP discharge on
a  receiving  wetland  were  an  issue,  the  screening process  would provide
references  concerning  possible more detailed  scientific  methods  to assess
such impacts  (these were summarized in USEPA, 1983).   These methods could
be  referenced  during  the  planning  process  and incorporated into  a con-
struction or post-construction monitoring program.

     The results of the wetland screening evaluation could be incorporated
directly  into the  Facilities  Plan if  no  adverse  impacts  were predicted.
The  agency  would  then  have  a  more sound basis  for making an  objective
decision  with regard to  implementing the project.  If  adverse impacts on
valuable  wetlands  were predicted,  the agency could request  that  more de-
tailed  issue-specific   studies  be conducted  (for  example studies  of the
effects  of   wastewater   discharge  on  ecology,   the  affects  of  hydrologic
changes  on  aquifer functions,  or effects on  protected  species).   The re-
sults of  these  more detailed issue specific  studies could be incorporated
into  the facilities  plan,  and  used as the  basis for  determining either
which  alternative   should be  funded or  which possible  mitigative actions
should be used (Figure 1.2-1).

4.2.4  Recommended Screening Method

     Figure 1.2-1  presented a  general outline  of  how a  screening method
could be incorporated for use  in permitting and  planning activities within
USEPA Region V.   It is recommended that such a method be developed and that
it then  be  incorporated into  the facilities  planning  process.  The method
                                  111
-------
could  be  developed  by utilizing  the  most  advantageous  features  of  the
approaches  presented  in  Section 3.0,  and then  integrating this  into  the
overall planning process,  in  a manner  similar to  that  recommended by Reed
and  Kubiak  (1983).   This  will  lead  to  improved  facilities  planning
decision-making  relative   to  effects  of  wastewater treatment  projects  on
valuable wetland resources in Region V.
                                   112
-------
                                  REFERENCES
Adamus, P.R.   1983.   A method for wetland  functional  assessment:   Volume II.
     prepared  by  Center  for Natural Areas for Federal Highway Administration,
     U.S.  Department  of  Transportation, 138  pp.  Report  No.  FHWA-IP-82-24.

Adamus,  P.R.   and  L.T.   Stockwell.   1983.   A method  for  wetland functional
     assessment:   Volume  I.  Critical  Review and  Evaluation  Concepts.  Pre-
     pared  by  Center  for Natural  Areas for Federal  Highway  Administration,
     U.S.  Department  of  Transportation, 181  pp.  Report  No.  FHWA-IP-82-23.

Allen, K.O.,  and  J.W.  Hardy.  1980.  Impacts of navigational dredging on fish
     and  wildlife:  A  literature  review.   U.S.  Fish and  Wildlife  Service,
     Office of Biological Services, FWS/OBS-80-07.

Banner, A.  1979.   Mitigation under the Corps regulatory program.  Pages 396-
     399 ^n:   Swanson, R.G., ed.  1979.  The Mitigation Symposium:  A National
     Workshop  on  Mitigating Losses  of  Fish and  Wildlife Habitats.   USDA,
     Forest Service,  Rock Mountain Forest and Range  Experiment Station, Fort
     Collins,  Colorado.  Generic Technical Report RM-65.

Bara, M.O., Tiner,  R.W.,  Jr., and D.C. Newkirk.  1977.  Guidelines for Evalu-
     ating Proposed Wetland Alternations in South Carolina.  S.C.

Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories.  1974.  A Technique for Environmental
     Decision  Making  Using Quantified Social and Aesthetic Values.   Publica-
     tion No.  BNWL-1787, Richland, Washington.

Belknap,  R.K., and J.G.  Furtado.  1967.   Three Approaches to Environmental
     Resource Analysis.  The Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC.

Benforado, J,   1981.  Ecological  considerations in wetland treatment of muni-
     cipal wastewater.   In;   Richardson, B., ed.  1981.  Selected Proceedings
     of the Midwest Conference  on Wetland Values and Management.  June 17-19,
     1981.  Radisson  St.  Paul  Hotel.   Minnesota  Water Planning  Bs., Water
     Resources  Research  Center,  Univ.  of  Minnesota, Upper  Mississippi River
     Basin Commission, Great Lakes Basin Commission.

Benson, D., and R.F.  Perry.  1965.  An Acre of Marsh in Worth.   The Conserva-
     tionist,  pp 30-33.

Brown, A.,  et  al.   1974.   Rare and endangered  species,  unique  ecosystems and
     wetlands,  Department  of Zoology  and Department of  Botany  and Bacteriol-
     ogy, University of Arkansas,  Fayetteville, Arkansas.

Cairns, J., Jr.,  and  K.L.  Dickson.  1980.   Risk  analysis  for  aquatic ecosys-
     tems.  J|n:  Biological  Evaluation of Environmental Impacts:  Proceedings
     of a  1976 Symposium  of the  Ecological  Society of America and  American
     Institute  of  Biological Sciences.  Council  on  Environmental  Quality and
     U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  FWS/OBS-80-26.
                                    113
-------
Carrol, A.   1976.  Developers  handbook.   Connecticut Department  of Environ-
     mental Protection.  Hartford, Connecticut.  NTIS - PB 262-985.

Carter, V.   1979.  Hydrologic  and  hydraulic  values,  In;   Clark,  J.,  and J.
     Clark, ed.   Scientists'  Report—The  National Symposium on Wetlands, Lake
     Buena Vista, Florida, November 6 to 9, 1978.

Carter, V.,  et al.   1979.   Water resources  and wetlands  (Theme  Paper), In;
     Wetland Functions  and  Values:   The State of  Our Understanding, American
     Water Resources  Association, Technical Publication,  Series  79-2,  Minne-
     apolis,  Minnesota.

Coates, V.T.  (principal investigator).   1981.  Methodology for the Analysis of
     Cumulative Impacts of  Permit Activities Regulated by the U.S. Army Corps
     of  Engineers.    Final  handbook.   ACOE  Institure  Water Resources,  Ft.
     Belvoir, VA.

Committee  on Impacts  of  Emerging  Agricultural   Trends.   1982.    Impacts of
     emerging  agricultural  trends on  fish  and   wildlife  habitat.   Board on
     Agricultural and Renewable  Resources,  Commission on  Natural Resources,
     National  Research  Council.   National  Academy  Press.  Washington,  DC.

Commonwealth of  Virginia.  1974.   Wetlands  Guidelines,  Marine  Resources Com-
     mission, Newport News,  VA.

Coordinating Council  on  the   Restoration  of  the Kissimee  River  Valley and
     Taylor Creek-Nubbin  Slough Basin.  1978.   Environmental Quality Through
     Wetlands Utilization,  Proceedings  of  a  Symposium on Freshwater Wetlands,
     Tallahassee, FL.

Canter, L.W., E.H.  Klehr, J.W. Lagures, L.E.  Streebin,  G.D.  Miller, and D.R.
     Cornell.  1977.  An assessment  of  problems associated with evaluating the
     physical,  chemical,  and  biological  impacts  of discharging fill material.
     U.S.  Army  Corps of  Engineers.   Waterways  Experiment  Station.  D-77-29.

Cowardin,  L.M. et al.   1979.   Classification of  wetlands  and deepwater habi-
     tats of  the United  States.   U.S. Fish  and Wildlife  Service, Office of
     Biological Services.   FWS/OBS-79-31.

Darnell, R.M., W.E.  Pequegnat,  B.M.  James, B.J.   Benson, and  R.A.  Degenbaugh.
     1976.   Impacts  of  construction  activities  in  wetlands  of  the  United
     States.   EPA-600/3-76-045.   U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency, Wash-
     ington,  DC.  393 pp.

Dee, N.,  et  al.   1973.  Environmental evaluation system  for water resources
     planning.   Water Resources Research 9 (3): 523-534.

Duffer, W.R., and J.E.  Moyer.  1978.  Municipal  wastewater aquaculture.  U.S.
     Environmental Protection Agency, Office  of Research and Development, Ada,
     Oklahoma EPA - 600/2-78-110 (NTIS - PB 284-352).
                                    114
-------
Duke, K.M. et  al.   1977.  Environmental quality assessment in multi-objective
     planning.    U.S.  Bureau of Reclamation, Engineering  and  Research Center.

Foster,  J.H.   1978.   Measuring  the  Social Value of  Wetland  Benefits,  The
     National Symposium on Wetlands, Lake Vista, Florida, University of Massa-
     chusetts,  Amberst, MA.

Fried,  E.   1974.  Priority rating of wetlands  for acquisition.  Transactions
     of the Northeast Fish and Wildlife Conference 31: 15-30.

Fritz,  W.R.   1978.   Tertiary Treatment of  Wastewater Using Cypress Wetlands;
     Summary and Final Report.   Boyle  Engineering Corporation,  Orlando, FL.

Galloway, G.E.   1978.   Assessing  man's  impact on  wetlands.   Sea Grant Publi-
     cation No. UNC-SG-78-17 or UNC-WRRI-78-136, University of North Carolina,
     Raleigh, N.C.

Golden,  J.  et  al.   1979.   Environmental impact data book.  McGraw-Hill, New
     York.

Golet,  F.C.   1973.   Classification  and evaluation of  freshwater wetlands as
     wildlife habitat  in  the glaciated  northeast.   Transactions of the North-
     east Fish and Wildlife Conference 30: 257-279.

Gosselink, J.G.,  Odum, E.P.,  and R.M.  Pope.   1974.   The  Value of the Tidal
     Marsh.   Publication  No.  LSU-SG-74-03,  Center   for  Wetland  Resources,
     Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA.

Greenberg, M.R., R.  Anderson, and  G.W.  Page.    1978.   Environmental impact
     statements:   resource  papers for college geography  (No.  78-3).   Associ-
     ation of American Geographers, Washington, DC.

Gupta, T.R.  1972.  Economic Criteria for Decisions on Preservation and Use of
     Inland Wetlands  in Massachusetts.   Journal of the Northeastern Agricul-
     tural Economics Council, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp 201-210.

Gupta,  T.R.,  and J.H.  Foster.   1973.  Valuation  of  visual-cultural  benefits
     from freshwater  wetlands in Massachusetts.   Journal of  the Northeastern
     Agricultural Council 2(2): 262-273.

Hall, R.W., H.E.  Westerdahl,  and  R.L. Eley.  1976.   Application of ecosystem
     modeling  methodologies  to  dredged   material   research.    U.S.   Army
     Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station (D-76-3).

Hicks, D.B.,  T.R. Cavender, B.J. Carrol, R.L. Raschke, and P.M. Murphy.  1975.
     Finger-fill  canal  studies, Florida  and North Carolina.  U.S. Environmen-
     tal Protection Agency.   Athens,  GA.   EPA 904/9-76-017 (NTIS PB 265-645).

Hill, D.  1976.  A Modeling Approach to  Evaluate Tidal Wetlands.  Transactions
     of  the  Wildlife Management Institute's Forty-First  North American Wild-
     life and Natural Resources Conference,  Washington DC.
                                    115
-------
Boiling,  C.S.,  ed.  1978.  Adaptive environmental  assessment  and management.
     John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Hubbard,  D.E.,  and C.L.  Blair.   1979.  Review  of  Fish  and Wildlife Service
     responses to  Section 10/404 permit applications.   South  Dakota Coopera-
     tive Wildlife Research Unit.

Jain, R.D., L.V.  Urban and G.S. Stacey.  1981.  Environmental  impact analysis:
     a  new  dimension in  decision  making.   Van  Nostrand Reinhold,  New  York.

Kaesler,  R.L.,  E.E.  Herricks, and J.S.  Grossman.  1978.  Uses  of  indices of
     diversity and hierarchical  diversity  in stream surveys,  pp.  92-112 In;
     K.L. Dickson, J.  Cairns,  Jr., and R.J.  Livingston  eds.   Biological Data
     in  Water Pollution  Assessment:   Quantitative  and  Statistical Analysis.
     Symposium sponsored  by The American  Society  for Testing and Materials,
     June, 1977.   ASTM Special Publication No. 652.

Kibby,  H.V.   1978.   Effects of wetlands on water quality.  Proceedings of the
     Symposium on  Strategies  for Protection and Management of  Floodplain Wet-
     lands  and  Other  Riparian Ecosystems.    General  Technical   Report  No.
     CTR-WO-12,  U.S.  Department of  Agriculture, Forest  Service,  Washington,
     DC.

Krebs,  C.  1972.  Ecology.   The  experimental  analysis  of distribution and
     abundance.  Harper and Row.  New York.  694 pp.

Larson,  J.S.   (ed.)    1976.   Models for  assessment  of   freshwater wetlands.
     Publication Number  32, Water   Resources  Center,  University  of Massachu-
     setts, Amberst,  Massachusetts

Larson, J.S.   1973.   A Guide to Important Characteristics and Values of Fresh
     Water Wetlands  in the  Northeast.   No.  31,  University of Massachusetts,
     Amberst,  MA.

Larson,  J.S.   In Press.   Wetland  value assessment—state  of  the  art.   Pro-
     ceedings   of  the International Wetlands  Conference,  Indian  National Sci-
     ence Academy, New Delhi, India.

Larson, J.S.,  and O.L. Loucks, eds.  1978.   Workshop report on research
     priorities for wetland ecosystem analysis.  The National  Wetlands Techni-
     cal Council, Grant No. DFB 77-25382.

Lind, O.T.  1979.  Handbook of common methods in limnology, 2nd ed..
     C.V. Mosby Co.,  St. Louis, Missouri.

Lonard, R.I.,  E.T. Clairain, R.T. Huffman,  J.W. Hardy, C.D. Brown, P.E.
     Ballard  and  J.W.  Watts.  1981.   Analysis of  methodologies  used for the
     assessment  of wetland values.  Final  Report.  Prepared by Environmental
     Laboratory U.S.  Army Corps of  Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station for
     U.S.  Water  Resources  Council,  Washington,  DC,  variously paged,  with
     Appendices.
                                    116
-------
Longley, W.L., R. Jackson, and B. Snyder.  1981.  Managing oil and gas activi-
     ties  in coastal  environments:   refuge  manual.   U.S.  Fish  and Wildlife
     Serivce.  Coastal Ecosystems Project.  FWS/OBS-81-22.

Ludwig, J.F., and S.I. Apfelbaum.  Unpublished.  A new matrix system for valu-
     ing  wetland  -  an  administrative  tool   for  vegetation, management  and
     development  of wetlands.  Unpublished manuscript  prepared  by Ecological
     Research Services, Inc.  Iron Run, Michigan.

Lynch, K.  1962.  Site planning.  MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Mason,  W.T.,  Jr.   1979.   A rapid procedure  for assessment  of surface mining
     impacts to  aquatic  life.  U.S.  Fish and Wildlife Service, Eastern Energy
     and Land Use Team.

Michigan  Department of Natural  Resources (MDNR).    1980.  Manual for wetland
     evaluation  techniques:   operational  draft.   Division  of  Land Resource
     Programs, Lansing, Michigan.  29 pp.

Mulvihill, E.L.,  C.A.  Francisco,  J.B.  Glad, K.B. Roster,  R.E.  Wilson, and 0.
     Beeman.   1980.  Biological impacts of minor shoreline  structures on the
     coastal environment:  state  of  the art review.  Volume  I.  U.S. Fish and
     Wildlife Service, Coastal Ecosystems Team.  FWS/OBS-77/51.

Nelson,  R.W.,  G.C. Horak  and G.B.  Shea.   1977.   Assessment  of the environ-
     mental impact  of certain controversial federal permit applications within
     the central  coastal  region of California; Technical proposal in response
     to RFP FWS 1-77-16.

Nelson,  R.W.,  J.F.  Orsborn,  and W.J. Logan.   1982a.   Planning and management
     of mine-cut lakes at surface coal mines.   USDI, Office of Surface Mining,
     Technical Services and Research.

Nelson, R.W., G. B. Shea, W.J. Logan, and E.G. Weller.  1982b.  The nature and
     mitigation  of  wetland ecological impacts  from  construction and develop-
     ment.  Draft  report  prepared for Oceans and Environment Program.  Office
     of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress,  Washington, DC, variously paged.

Nelson, R.W., G.B. Shea, and W.J. Logan.  1982c.  Ecological  assessment and re-
     duction of impacts from inland dredge and fill operation.  FWS/OBS-82-19.

New  England  Research,  Inc.  1980.   Investigation of  the relationship between
     land  use  and wildlife abundance, Volume  I:  Literature  Survey, Contract
     No. DACW 72-79-C-0024.

New Jersey Bureau of  Regional Planning.  1975.  Secondary impact of regional
     sewage systems.  Volume I.   June 1975.   Variously paged.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.  Undated.  Freshwater
     Wetland Maps and Classification (Draft).
                                    117
-------
Ontario Ministry  of  Natural Resources and Canadian  Wildlife  Service,  Ontario
     Region.  1983.  An evaluation system for wetlands of Ontario south of the
     precambrian shield.  First Edition.   Variously paged.

Niering, W.A., and A.W.  Palmisano.   1979.  Use values:  harvest and heritage.
     In:   Clark,   J.  and  J.  Clark,  eds.   Scientists'   Report—The  National
     Symposium on  Wetlands,  Lake  Buena  Vista, Florida, November 6 to 9, 1978.

O'Brien, A., and  W.  Motts.   1980.  Hydrogeologic evaluation of wetland basins
     for land use planning.   Water Resources Bulletin 16: 785-789.

Proctor, S.M.  et  al.   1978.   An ecological  characterization of  the  Pacific
     Northwest  coastal   region.   U.S.  Fish  and  Wildlife Service,  National
     Coastal Ecosystems Team.  FWS/OBS-79/11.

Reed, D.M.  and T.J.  Kubiak.   1983.  An  ecological  evaluation  procedure  for
     determining wetland  suitability for wastewater  treatment and discharges
     (draft manuscript).  In:  Ecological Considerations in Wetlands Treatment
     of Municipal  Wastewaters,  Proceedings of a Workshop, June 23-25, Univers-
     ity of Massachusetts, Amherst.   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and USEPA.

Regional Plan  Association.   1968.  Waste management.  Regional  Plan Associa-
     tion,  New York.

Reppert, R.T., et  al.   1979.  Wetlands  values:  Concepts and methods for wet-
     lands  evaluation.    IWR Research Report 79-R-l,  U.S. Army Engineer Insti-
     tute for Water Resources,  Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

Saucier, R.T.  et  al.   1978.  Dredged  Material Research  Program:   Executive
     overview  and  detailed  summary.  U.S. Army  Corps  of Engineers, Waterways
     Experiment Station (DS-78-22).

Schuldiner,  P.W.,  D.F.  Cope,  and R.B.  Newton.   1979.   Ecological  effects of
     highway fills on  wetlands:  research report and  user's  manual.  National
     Cooperative Highway  Research Program Report Nos. 218A and  218B.   Trans-
     portation  Research  Board,   National  Research  Council,   Washington,  DC.

SCS  Engineers.   1977.    Feasibility of   inland  disposal   of dewatered  dredged
     material:   A  literature review.  U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways
     Experiment Station (D-77-33).

Shabman, L.A.,  S.S.  Batie, and  C.C. Mabbs-Zeno.   1979.   The Economics  of
     Wetlands  Preservation  in  Virginia.   Research Rejport No. A.E., Virginia
     Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg,  Virginia.

Silberhorn, G.M.,  Dawes,  G.M.,  and  T.A.  Barnard.  1974.   Coastal  wetlands of
     Virginia: guidelines for activities affecting Virginia wetlands.  Interim
     Report  No.  3, Virginia Institute   of  Marine Science, Gloucester Point,
     Virginia.

Simpson, G.,  A.  Roe, and R. Lewontin.    1960.   Quantitative  zoology (revised
     ed.).   Harcourt,  Brace and World, Inc., New York.
                                    118
-------
Smardon,  R.C.   1972.   Assessing visual-cultural values  on inland wetlands in
     Massachusetts.   Master of  Science  Thesis, University  of Massachusetts,
     Amberst, Mass.

Solomon,  R.C.,  et  al.  1977.  Water Resources Assessment Methodology (WRAM)—
     impact  assessment  and  alternative  evaluation.   Technical Report Y-77-1,
     Environmental Effects Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment
     Station, CE, Vicksburg, Mississippi.

State of  Maryland Department of Natural Resources.  Undated.  Pages 181-208 in
     Environmental  Evaluation  of  Coastal  Wetlands  (Draft),  Tidal  Wetlands
     Study.

Stearns,  Conrad,  and Schmidt - Consulting Engineers.   1979.   Analysis of se-
     lected  functional   characteristics   of   wetlands.   Contract  No.  DACW
     73-78-R-007, Reston, Virginia.

Steen,  J.,  and J.G.  Ton.   1981.  Atlantic  City wetlands  review.   Volume I.
     Overview  and  Conclusions.   U.S. Army  Corps of  Engineers,  Philadelphia
     District.  NTIS - ADA-97172.

Stone,  J.H.,  L.M.  Lahr,  Jr.,  J.W. Day,  Jr., R.E. Turner,  and P.H.  Templet.
     1979.  Developing management  guidelines  for oil and gas activities:  The
     Louisiana experience.  Coastal Zone Management Journal 6 (1).

Swanson,  R.6.,  Ed.   1979.  The Mitigation Symposium:   A National Workshop on
     Mitigating Losses  of Fish and Wildlife  Habitats.   USDA, Forest Service,
     Rocky Mountain  Forest and Range Experiment Station,  Fort Collins, Colo-
     rado.  Generic Technical Report RM-65.

U.S. Army Corps of  Engineers (USCOE).  1980.   A habitat evaluation system for
     water  resources  planning.    USCOE,  Lower  Mississippi  Valley  Division.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.   1983.  Wetland  evaluation methodology - Wis-
     consin Department  of Natural Resources.  Unreleased  draft report.  Pre-
     pared by USCOE Rock Island District, Rock Island, Illinois in cooperation
     with WDNR, January 1983.

U.S. Army Engineer  Division, New England.  1972.  Charles  River;  main report
     and attachments, Waltham, Massachusetts.

U.S.  Department of Agriculture.   1974.   Environmental  Assessment  Procedure.
     Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC.

U.S.  Department of Agriculture.   1978.   Wetlands evaluation criteria—water
     and  related  land resources of  the coastal region,  Massachusetts.  Soil
     Conservation Service, Amherst, Massachusetts.

U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency.   1978.   Manual for evaluating secondary
     impacts of wastewater treatment facilities.  EPA-600/5-78-003.

U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency.   1980.   EPA consolidated permit regula-
     tions:  definitions;  state program  requirements;  procedures for decision-
     making [Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations,  Parts 122-124].


                                    119
-------
U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency.    1983.   Final technical  report.   The
     effects  of  wastewater  treatment  facilities on  wetlands in  the  midwest
     USEPA Region V, Chicago, Illinois.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).   1977.  Ecological characterization of
     the sea  islands  and coastal  plain of South Carolina and Georgia.   USFWS,
     National Coastal Ecosystems Team.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).  1979. Proceedings of the rapid assess-
     ment  methodology demonstration conference.   USFWS,  Western  Energy and
     Land Use Team.   W/CRAM-79-W36.

U.S. Fish  and Wildlife  Service (USFWS).  1980.  Habitat evaluation procedures
     workbook.  USFWS, Western Energy and Land Use Team.

Virginia Institute  of Marine Science.   Undated.  Evaluation  of  Virginia wet-
     lands (mimeographed).

Welch, P.S.   1952.  Limnology, 2nd Ed.   McGraw-Hill,  New York.

Whittaker,   R.H.   1975.   Communities and ecosystems,  2nd Ed.   McMillan,  New
     York.   385 pp.

Williams and  Works.  1979.   Reuse of  Municipal Wastewater by  Volunteer Wet-
     lands—Interim Report, 1979.   Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Winchester, B.H., and L.D. Harris.  1979.  An approach to valuation of Florida
     freshwater wetlands.  In;  Proceedings  of the Sixth Annual Conference on
     the Restoration and Creation of Wetlands.  Tampa, Florida.

Winter, T.C.   1980.   Uncertainties in  estimating the  water balance of lakes.
     Water Resource Bulletin 17(1):82-115.

Winter, T.C.   1981.   Survey  of errors  for estimating  water and  chemical bal-
     ances of  lake  and  resources.  Pages 224-233 _In;  Proceedings  of the Sym-
     posium on Surface Water Impoundments.  ASCE, June 2-5 1980.   Minneapolis,
     Minnesota.

Yorke, T.H.   1978.    Impact  assessment  of water  resource development  activi-
     ties:   A dual  matrix approach.   U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washing-
     ton, DC.  FWS/OBS-78/82.

Zimmerman, R.  1973.   Industrial  wastewater coefficients (SIC)  and water man-
     agement.  Proceedings of  the 28th  Purdue Industrial Waste  Conference.
     May, 1973.

Zimmerman, R.  1974.  Manual for estimating selected socioeconomic impacts and
     secondary impacts  of sewage  treatment  plant construction  and operation.
     Prepared  for U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency,  Region  II,  Mew York.
     September, 1974.  Variously paged.
                                    120
-------
           APPENDIX A

 Summary of construction related
impacts to wetlands as identified
       by previous studies
-------
     Schuldiner  et  al.  (1979) summarized the  potential  effects of highway
construction  on  wetlands.  The  basic types of  impacts identified  are as
follows:

     •    Impacts associated with surface flows
               Changes in mean water level
               Change in periodicity of flooding
               Changes in circulatory patterns

     •    Impacts associated with sub-surface flows
               Alteration of local water tables

     •    Impacts of channel creation
               drainage of surface water
          -    elimination of periodic flooding and fertilization
               change in retention storage

     •    Impacts  of  interference  with  tidal  flow  (not  applicable  to
          Region V)

     •    Impacts of reduced water quality
               turbidity
               sedimentation
          -    chemical pollution
               temperature

     Impact matrices  were constructed  for  each  of  several  main  types of
construction   activities.    These  matrices   are  depicted   in  Appendix
Figures A-l through A-7  (minus  the tidal matrix).  Many  of  these types of
impacts can occur  from  the construction or operation of wastewater collec-
tion and treatment systems.

     Darnell j£ £^. (1976) summarized a variety of impacts which may result
from construction  activities  within  or  adjacent  to  wetlands.   This study
also has direct  applicability to FP (or CG) related  activities since most
of  the construction  activities  are  generalized.   The following  general
types of activities were analyzed:
                                 A-l
-------
  S1N3W3AOW TVNflVJ


      Oi
         311*00* JO
AllAUDnoOUd AHVQNOD3S


 ONVT13M Nl 3ONVH3
 ONV113M Nl 3ONVMO
 NOUlSOdWOD SSVTD


 ONV1i3/v\ Nl 3ONVHD
 NOIIISOJWOD S3O3dS


   INVId Nl 3ONVHD
3ZIS ONVT13M


  Nl 3ONVH3
        S103JJ3

     1VDIOO1OI9
IN M


EVEl
AN


WAT
CHANGE

PERIODICI
OF


TERN
MODIFICA

CIRCULATOR
TION OF LOC

TABLE LEVELS
DRAINAGE OF

SURFACE WATER
IODIC

ATIO
IMINAIION Of

DING AND FER
IN RET

ORAG
DAMPING

IDAL VARIAT
ALTERATION OF

SALINITY PATTERN
HEMICAL

OLLUTION

                          ^tlMIIIIIII^HMHHBHHM^fl

IGN
                                                                                                         fc    *2
                                                                                                        I
                                                                                                     V

                                                                                                     s

                                                                     8
                                                                                                                                      a
                                                                                                                                     •H
                                                                                                                                 a
                                                                                                                                 to


                                                                                                                                 I
                                                                                                                                      cB
                                                                                                                                      e
                                                                                                                                 a.
                                                                                                                                 e
                                                                                                                                      a
                                                                                                                                      a
                                                                                                                                      CD



                                                                                                                                     £
                                                                                                                                      3
                                                                                                                                      00
                                                                                                                                      13


                                                                                                                                      OJ
                                                                                                                                      a,
                                                                                                                                      a.
                                                          A-2
-------
       S3I33JS
   UIAI1DV K3AV31

 JO lN3w3OVUnO3N3
 S1N3W3AOW IVNflVj


    01 i
  ?3IJ3dS DliVflOV JO
         I *»VQNOD3S

ONVU3M Nl 3ONVH3
ONV113M Nl 3ONVH3
NOIlBOdWOD SSV13

QNV113M Nl 3ONVH3
NOUISOdWOD  S3O3dS

  iNVld Nl 3ONVHD
   3ZIS QNV113M

     Nl 3ONVHD
       S1D3JJ3
   ivDiooioia
IN M

LEVEL
o ***
ii
3|
p
> a
X"
O M

8-

s!
DRAINAGE Of
SURFACE WATER
yo
8 5
S 1!
S £
t <*
o s
IMINAT

DING
IN R

TOR
ALTERATION OF

SALINITY PATIERN
SEDIMENT
CHEMICAL

POLLUTION









r



s


1
§ I





|



:
1
x <
o :
z i
I =


z
9
o
IE
! ^.
1 ?
Z
o
u.
I
• 10
0
: z
| H
j '-
» ..r-lWlll

                       4
                        &••••••••)


O
S o '
It CD

0

8=
a



g
u.
                                                                I
                                                                                                  i
                                                                                                                                M
                                                                                                                                (1)
                                                                                                                               A
                                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                                t-i
                                                                                                                               M-l
                                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                                CO
                                                                                                                                CL
                                                                                                                                CO
                                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                               T-l
                                                                                                                                to
                                                                                                                               CM
                                                                                           fe

                                                                                           X
                                                                                           •H

                                                                                           "8
                                                                                           0)
                                                                                           D.
                                                  A-3
-------






>l
vfl
JM



a
c

i

IMPACT
MAGNITUDf
;









i



E 5

§
g
1 UJ
i z
! K
2
U
Z
u
U)
i
i „

I "I -•
<
E % "^



u
UJ
U.
U.
UJ


§


1
m
3
en

IU
URFAC


-j
u.

                      	I
                            I
                                              
-------
      531 Did!


Q383ONVON3 ON* 3»»>
   UIAI13V «3A¥3fl


  JOiN3W3OV»nC»l3
  S1N3W3AOW WNflVJ

     01
  S3U3JS

  Ainvuow Njaans
         ASWNCO3S


 aNV113M Nl 3ONVH3
 aNY113M Nl 3ONVHD
 NOUISCM»»OD SSV1D


 ONV1I3M Nl 3ONVHD
   INVld Nl 3ONVHD
    3ZIS ONV113M


     Nl 3ONVH3
      S1D3JJ3

    1VDIOOX3I9
                    2 aj
                    u> at

                    n
                                 z
                               S 2
                              §1
                                     O u
5!
3!
is
83
                                                *s
                                                »a
Is
      i
                                                                 H z
                                                                 •s
S5I
iii
                            UMMIMmMIMlMB
                      u



                      u>
C
1
QUALITY
EFFECTS
                                     IIIMIMMIItllll
                                                      i
U)
MAINTE -
NANCE.
UJ
S
                                           A-5
-------
       S3O3dS

03S39NVCIN3 ON* 3SV«
    JUIAI1DV K3AVM


  JO 1NJW3OVW1ODN3
  SIN3W3AOW TVNITVJ

     Ol »3IMV«
         3iivnov jo

            N3oans
           AIJVONOD3S

 QNY113M Nl 3ONVH3
 ONV113M Nl 30NVH3
 NOUISOJWOD SSV13

 ONV113M Nl 3ONVHD
            S3O9dS

   1NV1J Nl 30NVHD
    3ZIS

      Nl 3ONVHD
                       I?
                       ? s
                       uj AC

                       11
                                     o •**
si
< UJ
-
b«

S
Eg
z 5
o 2

H
                          , v <;!


                          -S t
S*
ii
"i
                                                  ,/
                                               5^-v.
                                      52











-!
M




?
4|
*

. i
u Z
< c
s 1











5
OC
1 0
[1



z
p
u
<
£
Ul
t-
z
h-
: r
<
j o
u.
Z
o
u
o
Z
u

u
_J
B
<
r
<
> : ...:

                                 •••••Ml-
                          UJ  2
                          S-  O
                                 I   -
IT
K
5
j.
3
D
O
«
o
a.
u.
UJ
3
a
1 SUPPORTED 1
I ROADWAY 1
§
I BRIDGING 1
                                                                                                I
O z"
5 g
8
I
UJ
t—
z
2
UJ~
z


UJ
S

                                                                         CTl
                                                                         r~
                                                                         en
                                                                 -O
                                                                 i-l
                                                                 3

                                                                 o
                                                                          g
                                                                          M
                                               X
                                              •H
                                               M
                                              .u
                                               (0


                                              u
                                               CJ

                                               O.
                                                                                                                            a)
                                                                                                                            U
                                                                                                                            •H
                                                                                                                            CO


                                                                                                                            cu


                                                                                                                            in
                                                                                                                            3
                                                                                                                            00
                                                                         T3
                                                                          C
                                                                          
-------
Q3S3ONVON3aNV 3»V«
    *1IM1DV >3AV3«
  jO 1N3W 3OVnnODN3
  SlN3W3AO*v
      Ol H1IIIXV1
   S3IJ3JS
                 JO
 QNVU3M Nl 3ONVH3
 aN\rli3/"A Nl 3ONVH3
 NOIJISCUWOD SSV1D
 ONV113M Nl 3ONVH3
 NOIJISOJWO3 S3ID3dS
   INVld Nl 3ONVHD
     3ZIS QNV113M
      Nl 3ONVHD
IN ME
LEVEL
CH
PER
MODIFICATION OF
IRCULATORY PATTER
AITERATION OF LOCAL
WATER TA6l€ LEVELS
DRAINAGE OF
URFACE WATER
Of PE
FERTILI
IMINAT
DING
                                                                     T.
                                                                     UJ ^
                                                                     sS
                                                                     - 2
                                                                     uj w>
                                                                     S
DAMPING Of
IDAL VARIATION
SEDIMENTA
CHEMICAt
POLLUTION
MPE
     cc 2
     i I

                                                                      •

                                   t
LVERT DESIGN.
CAPACITY
                                                           A-7
-------
        S3ID3JS
    A1IAIOV «3AV3«
  SiNawgAOw IVNOVJ

      01 i
                JO

           Nsaons
JUIAU3nOOII
1
u.

                                   i
•z.
a
v>   2
s   1
£   g
g   O
LU
1C
O
u.
O
CHANNELS
IN
WETLANDS
                                                                                     J
                                                                                                                                     cr>
                                                                                                                                    
-------
     •    Onsite activities prior to construction
     •    Construction of access roads
     •    Establishment of construction camp
     •    Materials storage
     •    Clearing of site
     •    Earth excavation and fill
     •    Foundation preparation and construction
     •    Disposal of excess excavated materials
     •    Major construction activity
     •    Site restoration and clean-up.

     A set of specific types of construction activities falling under these
general  headings  was  actually  reviewed  in  Darnell  et  al.  (1976).   The
physical  and  chemical effects  of  each were assembled in a matrix against
one  another  and these were then translated  into  biological effects using
factor rank analysis.  Four major  classes of activities were found to have
the  most significant  impacts.   These  included:  (1)  general  lowland  con-
struction; (2)  mineral  extraction;  (3) dam construction;  and (4) dredging
and  spoil  placement.   The  most  important  impacts  on riparian communities
included:

     •    Loss of riparian habitat
     •    Removal of vegetative cover
     •    Removal of topsoil
     •    Increased surface runoff
     •    Increased soil  erosion
     •    Lowered water table.

     Within the wetland  environment  the most important  effects  (listed by
category) were as follows:

     Circulation

     •    Loss of wetland habitat
     •    Reduction of habitat  diversity
     •    Modification of normal seasonal flow patterns
                                   A-9
-------
     •    Drastic  fluctuation in water  levels and flow rates
     •    Reduction in  flow volume
     •    Increased downstream flooding.

     Sediment
     •    Creation of canals in swamps and marshes
     •    Increase in turbidity
     •    Increase in sedimentation
     •    Clogging of stream riffles
     •    Filling of pool areas
     •    Alteration of bottom topography

     Chemical and Physical Properties

     •    Reduction in light penetration
     •    Elevation of temperature
     •    Modification of natural chemical composition
     •    Increased oxygen demand
     •    Addition of chemical pollutants
     •    Build-up of bottom pollutants
     •    Increase   in   salinity  (in   coastal   estuaries,   marshes,  and
          swamps)

     Appendix  Tables A-8  through  A-12  summarize  available  information
concerning physical and chemical effects of the various construction activi-
ties on wetland.  Appendix Figures A-13 through A-19 summarize the biologi-
cal effects via Impact factor trains.

     Nelson  et  al.  (1982c)  provided an overview of impacts  of  dredge and
fill activities  on inland  wetlands.  Figures A-20  through  A-22 summarize
the results of this discussion.
                                    A-10
-------
    g  .
    •H  (0
    4J   C
       O
    4J
    O
    «)
    <4-( C
    u-i to
    a)
    rH  01

    3s
    •H  13
    S  C
    a)  at

    •S  c
       CO
    •O  -rt
    C  H
    (0  a)
       a
    rH  -H
    (0  t-i
    U
    •H  01
    CO  £
    >> -W

    a c
       o
    >,
    M  CO
    a)  oi
    B  -H
    •H  4J
    H  -H
    CL >
       •H
    01  U
    JS  O
    H  rt
   oo
 X  i
•H <
TJ
 C  D
 5) M
 a. xi
 c.  «
<: H
       4J
 MM  C
 C iH  01
•HOB
 60  CU 0)
•O  01  O
 oi     a
 U <-B  rH
a     o.

     U
  E  a
  10  M
                       UOTJOnJISUOO  TTT.J
                                         8303119
                 UO
           3UB-[d
                                                    aje
                  SuTOBjans
     U f-l
    4-1 4J
    M O
    fi CO
    o
    o
                         X



                         X     X
                                            X  X

                                     X        X
                                                     X  X

                                                     X
               X              X


                   X     XX
                                                                                                    X  X
                                                     xxx
                                                                        XX     XX
                                                                                                    xxx
                                                     XXX
                                                                    xxx
x  x

X  X
                                                     X  X
X

X

X

X

X

X
X

X

X

X

X X

X
   X
xxx
                                                                                                                                    vO
                                                                                                                      to I

                                                                                                                      4-11
                                                                                                                      0)1
                                                             o
                                                             u
                                                                 A-n
-------
o
•rl tO
4J

O

3
M
4J (A

CO

(3
O 0)
O 4J
 o p


 CO 0)
 4>
4J
   O
to
9 (0
O 4J
•H c


SI
> 5

14-1 v>
O -H

05 C
jj g)

O
01 T>
»w c
> 4J

P. C


&:
tg  -------
    e
    o
u
3
M
4J
CO
g -O
O  .



O

O  0)
f-s
4-1 I

n

o
 O -r

 eo  t
 4J  01
 o
 0) T3
•4-1  B
M-l  (I
 01

i-l  0>
    (U
   J2
    O
 at
 o
•H  0)
 W 4=
 >» 4J

 O.  B
   to  (a
   B -H
   •H
   i-i
   o.  >

    0)
                                                   co  45 <4-i
                                                   >> O *4-(
                                                   45     0>
                                                                                -J4.
                                                                    XXX
                                                                                                X  X


                                                                                          X  X

                                                                                             X  X  X  X

                                                                                             X  X  X  X
                                                                                                                 X  X
                                                                                       X

                                                                                    X X

                                                                                    X X

                                                                                    X
                                                                                                          X

                                                                                                 X  X  X X

                                                                                                    XXX
                                                                                                 X  XXX
                                                                       X
                                                                                                 X  X

                                                                                                 X  X

                                                                                                 X  X

                                                                                                 X  X

                                                                                                 X  X

                                                                                                 X  X X X

                                                                                                 X  X
                                                                                       3
                                                                                       a
                                                                                       C
                                                                                      •H
                                                                         I

                                                                         •o
                                                                         at

                                                                   0 t-4  00
                                                                   a  at
                                                                   ai  B  a
                                                                   M  B  at
                                                                   4J  0)  (U
                                                                   to jr  »-i
                                                                      U  4-1
                                                                   4-1     CO
                                                                   O «t-l
                                                                      O  B
                                                                   00     -H
                                                                   B  oo
                                                                   T4.  B  01
                                                                   B i-<  co
                                                                   oi  B  cd
                                                                   4-1  Q)  01
                                                                   HO,)-.
                                                                   O  01  O
                                                                  J=  01  B
                                                                  CO Q  M
                                                                                00
                                                                                c
                                                                                       
                                                                                         M 45
                                                                                         4-1  CO
                                                                                         CO  V4
                                                                                             at

                                                                                         4?  s
                                                                                         C T3
                                                                                          co  to
                                                                                          at  ex
                                                                                          cu  to
                                                                                          4J
                                                                                          4J  B
                                                                                                       co

                                                                                                   O i-l

                                                                                                   4-1 14-1
                                                                                                1-1  B
    CO T3

 cd  a) 43
 4)  C  M
•-I  cd  3
    U 4-1

 O «*-i  B

 B
 o  B  a>
•H  O  CO
AJ -H  tO
 
-------
    C
    o
   •H  a
   4J
    U

   S
   4J CO
   m
   c -a
    O  01
   U

   
 B  C
 0)  0

 O  C
    0
"X3 "H

 0  0
    a
f-i i-i
 0  t-l
 u
•H  0
 03 JC
    CX  C
       o
    0 CU
    B iH
    a >
      •H
    01 4J
   J3 O
   H 0
 X
•H
•o

                            •J3SU03 ujgagm
      4-1

 C i-l  4J B
 B J2 -H i-t
 O CO B H
 4J 0) 1-1 0
 4J M rH CO
 O i*-l 0
^3    CO <4-i

IK o B
 O    iH OC
   C    B
 CX O 01 i-l
 3 i-l co s
 I  4J 0 CU

rH 3 M M
i-l "O O 0
 3 aj B X
« ad M co
                                                                                                             vO
                                                                                                CU
                                                                                                C
                                                                                                V4
                                                                                                a)
                                                                                               p

                                                                                                §
                                                        A-14
-------










"o B B 09
Sou
00 01 U -H
a M jj ja
0 U 0 09
r-* CD .a £
\
/









•o
01
m
a E
0) C
u <•
e c
u
00 4J
0 0
iH 01
0  O 00 C O U 0
oo9i-i oi-rioi eaoi
rHX-a^ ^^a 1-13 U^
' —
a ' r
O 09
•ri •a 09
u e oi
09 09 H 13 X
A* 0 01 U
fi fH B -rt
oi o oi 09 -a
8 0 r-l 01 -H
1-1 a«-i h J3
*O IM ob
01 > o B
1-1 a u a. o)
b 01 -H 09 B
0 0 ^H § ^
U C Ji H 01
^•H ja B TI a t> By






















V
1
1 u
rH b C3
H a ga 3 g «
oio? MBS Ji a a
.e .x o; 3 oi 1-1 ti 3 Boi-H'O
oo aj ^ o 3 c M 5 oi 1-1 -o o
VIO|U<-4 O-HWrH U 4J OJ O
£ O. 09 U -H B B U Hboli-4 U i-l
*J UJ O 0) V r-4 tl h .a > U-HO
0993 OB090I BOW
VIW B W M W^ ^ ^^ B 01

J 1
'o § "o
•H
M U rH
ft §
V
V
t.
1 h
TJ C "
§1-1 B
^ jd e
(* Q.U







g&
Vl U
*J « fl
« -r4 3
U 8 V
-r4 V M
«M -fi 4J iU
^ ° "S
O 
-------
185






f
Inundation of
. flnadnlaln and


3.
*0  U H u M*3<-<« ••> « w • 41 o 4>-o «a-( C "O -H • S b SkW •I4I0.V' T> 0 tl
(2 « > O O«« 5 « •* « JS 41 H4 COO bO« 000 O00
.•rl » » 'Sv'" * "* "* " ** **yv *° " " * OJ8-5 •H-H* rt*<«
t t t
I'f a]
.1! s 1 'j L1
O fl Id 4< *W 4* 0
•H JO » 5  .C ,0 ~ «
« ji > « B • B« » 9 B M
> H B O 13 41 b ••HO0
2)1414) «4 b0 ^4* VOb4
•QO4 -OOt U 3 4I« -H •  <0 -H -rt IX.
1-1 « gr-!4lb 4lb O T3 W
bW *««« ««« »4O«
« I 3 u "° " 2" « •" |{
« -ti « o t5 5 • ' • c & *
o 5 «o*S>H«i b'oa  14J
a. x~x
o
tor train analys:
presented.
SS
Ix 4
1 — 1
1
0)
3
                                                  T3
                                                  C
     A-16
a
(X
-------






r






*M o w
o n a
a a 1-1
CO 3 .0
o tr a
i •"H a (C

N
^














«•
C
f
t

V














u
•H a
en u
o u
21S
1




g
X -0 -H -0

IM w -H a a a
o a a a u a
a -H 41 b .e 41 b o
e .0 > ODOBOU
oa-H 41 bue»<
3 -c u -o a. u x w 1-1
U OI*O VX • OtOI tf4J ••
a MO IMOI-H-OOI
H H O U O Oa O*4U0U
u« -H -H a IM oi .a a a a
3j= uu>BrHBb > aoaSa
o o a o -( o 3 •H«0w-S«*
H 3 .C -H a •* a a W -rl B O TJ
wb C u 3 u S a b b a a B
HOI u T) a £ a T) 01 a 5 « u a 41 a b i-( u a x 41 S a o 3 b
^ V J V. J
S/" -v
A A
1
1 „«•'
B S ° a a* «
U B IM B B B -H
H-H Oil O « O 4)
•t <-t -a -H • -H a
&.-H tH b w ot a a
a a 9 o -n a 3
H" §"£ Sb«M
5 -o av o a a-'O
XB 5 > b 3 oi 5
^

t
4J •
* (C 4J

• b i-l
a. u b
o a -o
y











5
S
2
•H
a
u
g
•(•


1
t-4
3
•rt
•
P
a.
b
O
ig
3
jl
*»
!

on wetlanda
•1 extraction
b
8
•2
-------
186

r~
* gu
o 1-1 a
M u
B (» -H
a o. JJ
o 1-1 a
rH M X
_^
a oi
•a  oi
O >-l 01 O 41 M
0 U 0 0 4J
^•w 0 * *< M B
f 1 floodplains
reduction 	 ^ J no longer
In peak ™ \ subject to — ^ ^
flow 1 flooding



a
u
v4 a
00 U
o a
-H 41
O *M
i-l w
4 01
"\
§ a
§1-1 01
W 0.
w a *J a -H w
«j o u <« u -H uauTiau
o-na oaa -H 3 « n 3 o
ww vihiuo*!-! acrw
ea -D ^3 O 4
oo-a o o -H o 1
4J U B •O 1
SgaB 32 S« §
fl • 9 3 82B5S5-35 2
^ t, S 3 i-isS wx-oa
aubua heu 600ia«OIO)W«-u
•2. §2 li s Is s? sa SB s^ ss
o H S ^o 3 a w a »u*ou«obiu*o
rHOC (UU O *H 3 OC^tO4)f39Plw
C C -H tt« . Ha5.iHC3j3-HjS^«^»
t t t t
0) ' 0» ' « ' '
JH u S n X
3 01 3 M 3 O.
lj CJ WUi-IOIWlH $ Saa MS nS | «
3>w3as o>
Jzi al?y
\^
t
l! a
U 41
a u
•H U
•a a
II
a
s§
0 0

O
?
4J
!
ruction on wetl
4J
0
he immediate downstream effects of dam
ts are presented.
Ln analysis of t
id chemical even
Factor tra
physical ai
vO
!— 1
0)
3
00
X
                                                           vO
                                                            CO

                                                            Q
   A-18
                                                 c
                                                 Qi
                                                 a.
-------



r~
•85.1
552
o cr a
. >H « *

^._— _ -_. 	






























fl rl 5 S
sli sP


J"S B i i?
a -H T3 HH
V^ j
NX1

A
> ^
rH iH
*l*° °l
B 3 8 O -HO
4) X XI 11 C A
§"* 8 !*
^55 SS ^-Sj
vx
t •
.1
41 at 4J
« » o) a
a o a 41
41 H «|
o w o^l
•5 -S 2 5 S ^

l^'~ J

A
e rJMi-l -rl
p 41 T3 01 O 41 41 II
o P a Sow> o
BWP 6 r-i a oi M
• iH(OOOrHIW^i-l4l

' \.s~ \^s~~**^ ^^x™1^

t t ,t
*M W • I O 0)
M-l 1* 00 r-t .*
°4! -51 £3 §1
SS S2* 38 S-
1-1 41 www « ,c » •-<
wl MOOD S. u i -H
w g a 4) Co
9 *« .C *** 41 4) M-t OO*
.00 • o i-i •no u-i a
V y


-rl
W
N
•H
88
01 S
W X
y^ 0) O







fl
tH
15
O *w
2 "•
X
UH w -rt
°32




»Slu
O -rl 9 a
M • *»
a a -H
B O.-O J3
33!, , si; S3 .
^ I
v s ' ' >—
NX
>c
1 -1 .«Jf r
VI *O *O V 0
SO) t) u q 41 iH B 41 41
B -O « 01 -rt 3 O 0 MX)
oi oi q a u B o a -ri >, o 1-1
MOOa 41 3 41 Q* i) w > >* !W.
U r*t a rHTJOOu r-4 80 CO *O l-l
B X 41 41 01 hi O «l 41 0 rS 9
•HO-O hi hi o u M ax x a
V J
NX

/ k
§ g 2 w S
•H -o 3 &, a 3
W 4) W *O In 0>WW
•a a « a 01 w uaH
01 M a H -H o) 9019
s '
01 W 00 H
n -H B oi
S3 US.
S "S » * 2
C 3 5 "M «
^ W j ^ 0 W
NX \/

f A
/•v
1 Iff
B a
•HI IX
1 (3 TJ O
oi o a oi
SC i-l 3 P
O WO
41 -H  41 01
01 P >
p u-i a

^^"^ ./ ^

^ t
§ T
§u a *H H i
ft a w 3 a
U -rl "5 a 41 U 8
(141 WOOON P C 41 41
M 0) O l-l P
3 P -H 41 13 -H O 3
T40B4I atftOw jrfSIBtt
P >W a r-l IM r-l 4) 4lr-l5a
73O!k 41O*M 9
o
IM 01
\/

1
OO-H a
•o u
P H t-l
Q 3 a.

i n
j

£
^
a
N
•rl
r-l
41
B
° /










l-l
a
u
•H
•
>>
*
H
O
*->
a
1
8


«

p,
•o
g
M
1
4*
t
I
S
S
w
B
a
o

B
O
•rt
w
a
N
^H
i-l
41
B
j
U
1*4
O
0)
W
U •
01 *Q
«4 41
U-I W
•8
oi a
£ 41
W p
a.
IH
°s
ai a
analysi
events
B M
38
w i
w B
O U
w
u -a
£ °


•
^
i

0)
3
00
•r-l
X
•H
C
o,
 vO
 0)
rH
 O
 CO
Q
•H
-------
u
1-1 a
CO 4J
o u
iH 01

x oi
§c gg
•na -H -H
W 
•o '5
01 TJ W 09
3 *U -H iH 6
41 TJ X IM 3 41
hi S a 3 0 U
U O N TJ M W
e -H a o -H «
•H  « ox 5 oi MUM p oo o CXTJ oi oi B >, oi x«J
0 i-l 11 VI • >M !-l E B r-l TJ 3 B 3 1H 8 0) -rt tl C •" C T
IS ** i «* 1 0 01 -H «3 410-HS 10 0 h, -H 41 -H 41 0
i i « 3 o « Boofiihior-io'a-H?>»i«co.c^i.
•53 >« 9>« B ec -H 3 oiaau r-iuy M 3 -H hi-H-a :
SUi-iw oi h u x  41 O. T3 -C
lliH OI<-< 41 hi a 41 0
.K B TJ 41 « C 01
w a MOV > 5 a 01 -H c u 3
9 0. » 3 >w 3 « B >M UU 30)3 -H S 2 m 3
TJ O TJ <-l 0) C UfH TJ>O.TJdUOIO.
* a iH 01 B O hi 41 B Ba Oli-IB OOlBhiB
hi 11 IM M IH > W U iH 













u
•H
rH 01
•H hi X
U 01 I
K ^4
u u a
*M O ^
v ^ V 	 k
NX^ ^
t
1 a
u IM hi
B O 01
41 W
•H >, a
hi *J 3
tJ TJ -H TJ
3 41 --I 41 01
C U 0 Tt B OX
3 3 U -rt 3 C
•Q O- TJ hi hi TJ a
a e 4i 41 TJB TIB
41 O OI-HBOI 41 4
OiH OOOI-H UE
3
-------
1-4
U
"o £
•H vl
*
&l
«4 13 X W  a
o  IM
0 & 8 .-I t) 00 8 fHIOKTJiH
B X 8 41 41 ki O 41 41 41 B 3
•H o -o u M o u M a f 4J « 41 -U T3 U «jBB
V,aia)J=tDO)Cc-rlC M vl fl  O. vl M£vlW T<4IB y V*_° •
t^ A A ,--^-s
S? 4, 4, |
5 00 vl 06 -O X, x 41 >M '^
coxa tO K -H 41 W 41 U M M 41 tO ft
O ID C *QB4IK « C Bvl 4) 3 00 C -o u
v<3M 4)tlvl -ia 41 B «vl bB4lbki
•ou uu^jvj a -u <4 UM wwcgu^u
SvieO rScgvlB B 41 O 83 Bvlbcgo*
^00. eg&iiBj ^vlB^ vl«JvvlS'0 o.JL^ »(
TA _l(A| A
F **
1 1 Si «
•H *J 41 I 41 -H 91 O
MB Bo I O *J 3 X
n oj to w ovi i4it04i o
« tj «

A
i vi
* A
1L>
G
5,B^
•H B 4» 41 el
gO vl X •-<
B M 
•w •-(
41 B
u
-1
In analysis o
phyaical and
Su
o a
U 4>
£5
CTi
1
0)
3
00
•H
•o
                                                          Oi
                                                          0)
                                                          C
                                                          I
A-21
                                               0)
                                               a.
                                               0-
-------
                                                Long-Term Impacts





Sediment or Fill
Deposited on
Substrate or
Soil

r n
| Sediment 1
1 Suspended in 1
1 the Water 1
I Column*
L _!
| * See Figure 1.2-2
r ^
Chemical Effects Physical Effects
1
r } c f ^ ^
Increased Increased
Nutrient Contam-
Concen- inant Con-
tration centration

Altered Modified Modified Modified Increased
Elevations, Currents Water Flow and Erosion,
Gradients and Levels and Temper- Turbidity
and Circulation Fluctu- ature and Sedi-
Contours ations Regimes mentation
^ ) ^ ^ J J
1
Biological Consequences
Chronic low-level, sub-lethal
pollution with unknown effects on
reproduction

Potential bioaccumulation of
toxic heavy metals and persistent
organics

Altered pH, dissolved oxygen
balance may harm aquatic
habitat

Contaminant leaching' with
upland disposal may harm habitat
due to oxidation and geochemical
change
Contaminated return flows from
contained disposal sites may
harm aquatic habitat


















ndix
Biological Consequences
Loss of food chain organisms,
especially detrital species

Impaired ecosystem nutrient and
energy exchange
Restricted species aggregation
and migration

Introduction of undesirable
opportunistic species, and
increased predation
Reduced species abundance and
diversity
Extended recovery time for
shellfish
Upland disposal retards
vegetative recolonization and
succession
Wetlands and sensitive aquatic
sites (stream riffles and pools)
may be destroyed



















Figure  A-20.   long-term environmental and ecological impacts from dredge and fill ooerations: Substrate
      and soil effects (adapted by R. Wayne Nelson & Associates, Inc from Allen and Hardy 1980; Saucer et a/.
      1978: and USEPA. 1980).
                                                     A-22
-------
                                     Long-Term Impacts
I	1
I Sediment or Fill   |
I Qeposited on     |
I Substrate or      I
I Soil*             I
          See Figure 1.2-3
                                                Sediment
                                                Suspended in
                                                the Water
                                                Column
                              r
                       Chemical Effects
                 Biological Consequences
                Chronic low-level, sub-lethal
                pollution with unknown effects on
                reproduction

                Potential bioaccumulation of
                toxic heavy metals and persistent
                organics

                Altered pH, dissolved oxygen
                balance may harm aquatic
                habitat
                                                    i
                                               Physical Effects
                                        Biological Consequences
                                       Reduced photosynthesis and
                                       primary productivity

                                       Sight feeding, respiration and
                                       migration may be affected

                                       Adsorbed pathogens may
                                       increase and disease resistance
                                       may lower

                                       Loss of species abundance and
                                       diversity

                                       Habitat conditions enhanced for
                                       undesirable species

                                       Commercial species  may be
                                       rendered unfit for consumption

                                       Many adult aquatic fauna may
                                       tolerate prolonged high turbidity
Appendix
Figure  A-21.    Long-term environmental impacts from dredge and fill operations. Water column effects
      (adapted by R. Wayne Nelson & Associates. Inc. from Allen and Hardy 1980 Saucier et al. and USEPA
      1980).

                                                   A-23
-------
                                                    Short-Term Impacts
                                           L
                                     Sediment or Fill
                                     Deposited on
                                     Substrate or
                                     Soil
                                                Sediment
                                                Suspended in
                                                the Water
                                                Column
                    Physical Effects
                                  Chemical Effects
                                                 Physical Effects
        Burial of
        Substrate
        or Soil
Mismatch
of Partic-
ulates
Deposit of
Fluid Mud
("Fluff")
Release of
Excess
Nutrients







Release of
Toxic Con-
taminants







Oxygen
Sag from
Increased
BOD and
COD
            Biological Consequences
            Forced migration or delayed
            recolonization of indigenous
            species

            Direct smothering of aquatic
            vegetation and benthos

            Fluid mud layer from hydraulic
            discharge may inhibit recolon-
            iration
                       Biological Consequences
                       High contaminant loads from
                       fine-grained hopper dredge
                       overflow may harm biota

                       Nutrient enrichment may
                       cause algal bloom
                                         Biological Consequences
                                         Sensitive habitat (shellfish bed)
                                         or a sensitive life stage
                                         (spawning) may be vulnerable
Appendix
Figure  A-22.     Short-term environmental and ecological impacts from dredge and fill operations: Water
       column, substrate and soil effects (adaoted by R. Wayne Nelson & Associates, Inc. from Allen and Hardy
       1980: Saucier at al.  1978; ana USEPA 1980).
                                                       A-24
-------
     APPENDIX B

   Summary Tables
   From WRC Study
(Lonard ^ jil. 1981)
-------
.2  *
                                           «U.S
                                                         J 2 2
                                                          a, w i
                                                         ••* u *
                                                          u   i
                                                          M V

                                                         •3 - Ji
                        U b tl

                        « U J3
                                           •-* U w
                                           U * v *J      n*a    -  >  « a
• ««<3xi*^a.v      3 *^    >   —i <5 <*
  w|.^. a.   >•--«.—  e  a

£ri»    Qt--Sxu42u<1>^



        1 "^  i "^ ufTwHCCtc
                                  W «N «; w
                          •2  K
                                                  O)uU-i-*  TJ
                                                            "2 S
            * xwl
            O «t fc'

            f 51! -

            «all
                                                                                    i        j
                                                                                    •   9V

                                                                                    -   h  .i
                                                                                    e   *i  u  3
                                                                                    •I   «J  4J «


                                                                                    -  *'..-
                                                                                    41   *9  M O.
                                                                                    w   o  e  o
                                                                                    1   *  •-  fc.

                                                                                    -    -t"

                                                                                    S   &8S>
                                                                                        w   a
                                                                                     »  4*  •
                                                                                           »--O
                                                                                           -9  a
                                                                                        mat
                                                                                                            §u -9
                                                                                                            ma
                                                                                                           v « *
                                                                                                            a » —
                                                                                                            » 3 «l
                                                                                                              i- 0.13
                                                                                                            u M o e
                                                                                                            > ^ -o «
                                                                                                              a. u >
                                                                                                            »   ^
                                                                                                            u  • i *—
                                                                                                              id > o
                                                                                                              O —
                                                                                                             — «U N
                                                                                    S.   t

                                                                                    "   3«  = s

                                                                                    3   1^;?
                                                                                    "c     w    u
                                                                                    <•   t> O J3 —
                                                                                          §a. u **
                                                                                          M  3 V
                                                                                    e   o    « j=
                                                                                    «   U  -   w
                                                                                        «a aa « «

                                                                                    1   .-S 1s
                                                                                    •s.   .23^1

                                                                                    t,   t-°s"
                                                                                    e   " " »._^

                                                                                    -   2a1""!
                                                                                        Sa u  • •
                                                                                          3  - —
                                                                                        V •  U >
                                                                                    e   e    a

                                                                                    I   =: u
                                                                                    I   «•-  >. i-

                                                                                    u  • j= >«3
                                                                                    — ««.-—!
                                                                                    on   — -a w
                                                                                    h«  « w 31 »
                                                                                         ae w w —
                                                                                       w w — * *
                                                                                    «  • • a j: -
                                                                                    **  «   9*   a
                                                                                    «  «B U II 41 -*
                                                                                    u  B « i* rs —
                                                                                       o «i i  a a
                                                                                    "O  O I* b* •« U
                                                                                                       w  t< tt a - •
                                                                                                       A  - -o — -
                                                                                                       ««  w a u u «
                                                                                                                  -
                                                                                                       — ->   ens
                                                                                                        w  ^ « 3 * -
                                                                                                        c  - a - j.
                                                                                                          b — u   e
                                                                                                        «  tt w 3   9
                                                                                                        O  f U T
                                                                                                        o  I e —   -•
                                                                                                       —  3 3   « -
                                                                                                        w  b •» a *- =
                                                                                                        h*      O S 3
                                                                                                        O   •>«.... v
                                                                                                        3  m M ^ —
                                                                                                      • *•  v e * 3 i/
                                                                                                     •?    >% •• ti v M
                                                                                                     ti  •«  u O *• ™ ^
                                                                                                     M  <  v * * > -^
                                                                                                     *  ..  i -o >. — -
                                                                                                     w  -•  4 >«ai - »
                                                                                                     ^ .£    x   tn f
                                                                                                     •o  ^  V     ~~ «
                                                                                                     •
                                                          B-l
-------


















.••*
•a
.I

I
b
ja
M
£

























t>
M
*
b>
£


<



3
I

«ri
1
U
hi
U
i




>
M
O
0
la
•e
x
as








4
X
41
X






1

C
1 c

( •*
e i , i .
£ -0 C-W *
E1** S * -2
ft N
C O 4i 5*
— ' 3 e 41
^ ^ * H
..sis-;:
13". 1*1
> * w • ««
» w




i £






£ 3








i £
• » i-
• • ••* «
- • a -
• « <« • 4
•o j: _ o
— !? • 3 o
w — « b o
•0 Q. C —
* a 5 a -
js 5 o " 2 1
• ** "u b « w a,
ja a > a »
3 <• 0 — w
tf U X
• tl 3
— *" >K*~ "^ ?
w u x a. w ^ w
o J x » e /i

4 w w w M 3 {
» •« - * tj 1> £
W ^ M •« > > W
JJj <
i 7 X
rt
1 ~ fl
' «> e
1 — 4
! . =

10 at -i
i-s* .?uS,I.
S 4 O " *3 TJ 3 > ^ *^ N
— ~«S"§*:5"'J«
•« • UbMMX<«e
« -XXO3«3WS«
* X w ^ « • 1. 1. —
1. w - S • - ^ ?3 «l —
•^•MA^Neee^v

B^Fsif'si31^:
-e i-ssi-slfSs
•OOTJ-V«So-«0




S £






X £
*» 1
y o •* i
S^Sx 2 -
30 *j ^ « - ^ e
»- a a w «i -. o o ~ «!i
ou « w — a. t, —
w — a a •• o o Tr«
•>^*««^i x j» « u
^•4-»Vtflb «*•&«-• 1 * *
— o w a a v * > i a
<• u M x «i .j --. i

-- 0 - 4V «»*M«W|«

1 *
— «
g « •
•i s j .§
•— u • -^
-•••VMS
* . " * ^ ~
u — — i v « g
Z"S5;S 8-
•Q 3 U •« W
S S- -.3
« — - «i > ^
U 
* e w - M -
- e 2 « > >
•< t

•» -3
•
VI

1




I
• -o
1^
M — *
' |w
• e
O ^9
""
«_
"»• e
e e


JSS
«< •» M
• a -a
J S.2,
JB
II — «
1 9 HI. • • 1
* <-• B eti ««••
X C «lb 3 52 W««
U^^'O^^QMO V »MW*
— vis »w •••i^aws
ii' s^nriisii i-
WU *3OM3W««IUw»e «
«l'^^ — C 3 9 X - V « —
u e - v • w 5.M •• •» a.
•^ .. j« -«kb •« •MXOM*^*
o "C t — " = « C t j" -i .- «i S? > j
•>wa*wuwv«^»*^&, s *rf
S3«-I-ial«X-Ci— -
X>*S..2o»ir-J.-S-«^
1""" ° " " *"
§

- -B X .
« x 1 S -
* " ». «2 3 *
•« -- - « "w
1 a-S t t 1 .
^ - ! |' 1-;
c e • c «* %

^ W O L W
x •• - - a, 1

~» o — ^ * —
- - 3 ^ C V J
3 — 9 -* 4 M
T k w i i - C
a >• a.'o u o i
w

*
^

• >



















^
•O
1
|

























r 'i,
                                    B-2
-------
   in

    «

§tt ••* m
— w »
MOO
w v *• *•
-;r:5
*» u *•
*M • *
358-2
!lc;
O
* o.
•
0 V
u
«
e *-
~~
a
s s
V
a *i
«i &
w *«i
*
>» 3
— U
«
g —
O >-
M
«
n •*•
S-i
M «
~>

S^
- $
0 —
4 w
w
•^ >
V i
u u
o
M «M
«t O
e
• i-
*•* >
i i
-?3
«M — U
0 *- «
i*,
^ n a
IS!
a *M r
M 4)
*rf
e •
.2c
N W
JS
•^8-

f «M
1-

1iJS
w o *-* >
3S £.2
o « a "i
?
>. U
** £
^3
^ e"
S.2
>* e
*** &
9 n
r
•«
u
V
**
•J W
9 1
a. a.
                                                                                   5
                                                                                   u
              •*- w  hi a
                      -i
      0 »  C = u -C 0 —  -
      — -^ • O 0 3 0  1- **»•
      j> e « •• •« *o u x ^ • u
^ >* te>
• o « *i
if i i 2
*B3!
                                          B-3
-------
                                                                           a    w — u *«  -< o
                                                                                                        • e


                                                                                                        •c c*
                                                                                                        «v u Cj
                                                                                                        B - w
                                                                                                        — -* 3
                                                                          "».?:=•! s >-2 ?••••= 1 3 1   ? " SI
                                                                                                    J   •

                                                                                     >  J -* tj ^ — N
                                                                                                        i -o v



                                                                                                            o
1
                                                                             »• tl k-
                                                                             c w v
                                                                             - o >
                                                                             XV-*
                                                                             W I- tJ
             ;i
             l*
          •*t I *•    II
          -* m u  i  « 4     _
         • 3 o tei **  e •»* « i  «*
                                     u tt  *   •*•*
 •>«3o«j«4cs*^«'««   e   !  .-?o?~-3-B_--a


      "8 -------   « o o "2 •-  0

     .                  5 r? •• « *^  O. <

«  «  » - u 3 v v w    w
— T»  j v   «   « -a <» • .      .  _      _   _    _    __
ffl*^-^>'M>^^*b^.OXhl'M>W«'«l*VV*'   <«    *^MU
   SMU   kU'MO«Ma
   II  g   -«^ V N e V  «    -•»• «0>«0«-UOOJ33.   > «       e*4 Q*^l « a * e 0

                         8 -• ^22122..! .« Bi "«.
                                        o>e    e   o *- «  *i «^-
                                        arf*M*J O **• •* V O  k***
                                          -a.-owa^ac
                OBj^v*owawoiia«iouo3-^^o    u « .* *> M  >
                      5e o -wii^-^wya.-.^- «<• O*«-<**M  W-M «• uvu
                      • M«« y •» Ot *« Ok « o*« •*- *^ «rf h. >—• w  Q>MW > •*• e -^
                                                                                                       2


                                                                                                        ti
* **  I* V £










b («
w —


eta
II W A
e
— *i  o
— -O  «j
&...
••* U  W -9
U V  •* I*
« TJ  C u

5 -  )l 2
u «  e *
«i 3 — u
          i
                                                                                                        i =
                                                                                            3 u  u

                                                                                            = 5  2

                                                                                            55  i
                                                                                            « V

                                                                                            is*
                                                                                            v k  a

                                                                                            B
  J'ls

  s|il
1  Si 8?
  • MUM
  M
                                                         U


                                                         ac


                                                         e
                                                         o




                                                         j
                                                                                                        r
           M
                                                                     B-4
-------
      >t

      •*l
3
      Ml


      «1s

D. wild-
let*! ion/
y»ti-
a «

9 •
4 a
a-;
a >
>>v •
w 0
J .2
C «

s,
Ea
o e
'M
a w

** «
A ^
w «r
«p e
v •*»
.§
^ •

t
*
Ji
s
w

§

f
e
••

M
§•
5

M W
a M
> '
-t? a *
3 * v **
— *o - J a
S S I J
g'-M
«• — M
« w u X **
o ••* ** <»
« M • •- «4
ti ««-•
•« - -e fc- A
U X W « «*

fi^'i

i
M
•«
^
« >«
•* U
- .G
X W

"^ -5
3 O
•* M
ja «

eiopvent ,
«h stand-
it e»
> ••* >
41 *M «
•Q O

e c
1J> 5
b Q b
o — -
JC ** » •«
M o i)
- e w w

t
^ 'u
t a.

r.
S|
0 "S 4

35-=

t over-
ifiuo-
- under-

u 1 0
O. w
e -9

- a. «


i * >> e
* *« S I *- .£ 0 •« *
M 0 « W O -« U
o a v * £ v
Ck ti - 3 > U Oi —
^ a — o c ti u

» • >•• M ^ w U

««•- f « 15 _ w n
>uw» £a.c-e



« V > X
«l "1 3-«
i > 1 •» 2 i
9 O 0 MO

** s ** i °
> j <3 — b M
O ti O •* > ^
>. £ b — 3
•s s: s at4

        ^ ••      w ••

        s:      2 $
        -* 3      « e >-o

        ts .     s2zz


        5!s,   ?s"5"
        
-------
I
1
1


t





uiltnurd)
u
-
S







(
1

a
c
z
41
to
3
O
V)
7r
ricultui
w
S
to
i


>
*0
to
S



«d
4

e
0
S t 1 i * a, 5
* ft "r- °-
C w e * * *• t, o
- * •? — - a. w .c •
4 W 4i 3 o W 4 •- -
O, to 4 -.—>»- o
-* U tl » M -O — w « 4;
u i - N «« <• •- M
M f W V >•* C 6 •
— -O t* X C l» 0 3 «• -
T3 — -0 — tl «-- t t —
L. v 4 3 c of I to 4
ti v o c «r «* t; o •-* w
*rf 50 «W 4 •« T9 to U .0 ••«
je c
-M e e e i
M 4 •— tl — »
X W 00 O
a — — - « i- -4
*> i t. — • o. c - " >
X '•* ^ *• > •« • « to O
L u v ti a - e * — o ^9 b
4 u £ •— «j uMwa.au
C «r to W • U * 4
-« V O 4 O 4 Vt/> *M w
- u w -9 — . v t* a o •- - « ^
b « ** I* W £ « N«to
*• -o a •- u o ** • u w i*u
-« K -o — ti u — M -a o a.
^ «V 1 « 3 -n tl w — t> C **•
to If C U O1 O *^ M A U <« p
w 1 tv « to a. > *- (k«*» *• o —
a o
•« bk*
i X C • tl t 0. « fl
-* — L * (j -^ - S t •<«
 o a * o *j w - fc ti
3 o — w o - -a v a *iituto
MUeif — U to ** K
«f^3MO«|1l-MMM --J fc W »» W 3
•JU'-wtofc — -T3t* C T3 - « W
• tlto«| ** « > C *- — — »j »0 X »
O
it w* 1
e i i *• u
.a , w « « . t> «wwv
x c o ** ^ x a • o 4 "*•
« a M -o w •-. u *JM u a
«a«e> — w -o KUO* w
'• S J! — "^o* ^ij**"'"
uti»«jti e G »- •*• ••u^javu
o -* c i vti 3 a,^ M a >— w « M
O^U^^SO^UUN l-i **• U "3 to 4j
!X O M N*M«^ «l Q ^-. •«- « * §
rid «
Nh'Ji28'SUI"M ° 2*to
•M «<
U. IM
1 W
OX 1 O *9
*rf * *3 J a ^3 <«
• • a $ o M —
I e «« b ** w I -^ it
• JC85 C a.3wjr5
4t — •- O w •« *M M M
*J O -^ • U > —
x-« ti v ti to «v e ti u
to«^3*»«% O.NbU^C
• u — o — * o c —
- ± "j" 2 a ^.*2a°'
iu3>ti MCb* a..* >•
U N J3 ••* XT> **
•D — • 11 ^ T3 — fc J3 —
to^NM G w > « JJ
tl t> tl *« * AftfO-««
•M U.
to
C  »•» c w
Ul MM
x e • *» w
to 5 C ^ to
A - »
to w t* a -
ti * 4 a. <• s
. .0 to & X O
U 3 > X M W
W - «l 5 SI
*— XJ-9 ^ ~*3 «« to
- ^f « - O — M
e - o m o T> ti
- •» « X «• X
• 3 O W « £ W
o — w a a «
— M « Q « tr^3
* — A 3 u e e
O QoM'VW & >
1 •
i "Sis
J ^ - ' _•
*• a, ti w a
0 > *V M
• o **
o -o v «•*->.
0 tl to 0
••<-«*» a
*rf M tf ••- «)
a to to u
MM33O. »*-*-«** O, T9 O U «•
MJ5«««I "Ol X U ty JS ^- to tj «w
Dw&awM^u atw'Qw >*-iwf v w «M e
au- u *> » 4 «(• « a'D »»«>-£
i t
s.s :s. -
O-**WC41 ««4IW
eiiB-3*S8"w
5 * 3 - i 2 -i 3 - &
S «• § S -3 -5 S -S ° 3
— 41 O O X *
« HI M « 4 4 —
I
«rf %• f *M 1
01 0 • • • ^ =
U • to «d lT*44
W •- V X « £ •*
s^*^ r^S"^5e*:si
- >- o 
3^4l«rf«l ••^•^•MQ*
en- Cn-««»>i«-.a
• 3 > • «««5«-Jto|3
tlV1^1*1* V--*«f>«'VMO>tiw
fc s 5 i - Silo •&>)!-
TJ O
52
If
                                     j
                                     V)

B-6
-------
      3,

      1
^


1
         •O •« •*   I     •   *•
         — •- a   jo     >>   "
         >*•«-•     "  » "
         > * u >. *   •« •-  a.—
          V u — •   C 9 —
          §; i •    — •- ».

         -* --"S   S^2
         w - • T>    Sow
         UOVVJSti  W3
         39-^^WU w  b
         <« _ u a M • o "5 •*
         Si»
f •? "
w £ an
a » —
    list
                                        B-7
-------



















































i
1
03















































































































41
71
3










^•>
^•M
•o a
™ o
b *l
M U

•rt a








"io O
a •«
O rt
•X 10
M U

fifi ^^
1









.,
\

n
a
u







\
K
e




e
c
••ri
^
*]

C


1
Method
ology
Number
b
e o
a M
U b 41
<0 Q.

* >rt 4j
M 41 g
M .U •- -0
41 •- H C
MM 10
M Jt —•
10 -O C "
e 10 ii
0 fl b 3

TJ 4) «J -S
II 3 —
ui -a -rt
3 41 II a
V ID -rt
41 OH 3 M
d e «
•rt 41 —
C Ul n -D
10
u
-3 -9
U 10
•M 41
<«* b e
•rt a. o
T> M -rt
O 41 4J
8 -a n
•rt U
41 3 •-
JD v
W Q,

- e
*•* B
V *
5$
•T J
X-

41
-*
• t^
^C *"•


1 ^
£ "




1 ^
M e
M 10

M rt
M 41
W 3

B 41

90
b e
o •-
«** M
— (0
3
M* ••»»
41 O
M
3 *j ««
a
a.











to
04
.fl
10
u

.04
a.













3;


41 •»
bS 1
3 u b 10
e u 41 i» —
M —I > .O  B -rt
O — — II vw
> M -O
•e ii e x o
II -0 0 M |
M
.
"•
^
U
**
•
X rt
j5
I


«




00
c
••4
^£
e
10
b

b
O

(>-
3 u>

u e

3 U
s*

z
•3
41 M

VM o
^ -rt 00
1 b
M
41 3 b
.a 4i
b .e
u O *J
3

•B M
e 41
10 *rt
-• -o
*•* 9
41 .

"S S 3
0,-rt 41
O 3 Z
•rt O-
41 U B
> 10 •-
S


M b
10 M O
13 10 *rt
•rt J=
U 41 41
b 3 M M
• el

•O -D U 3
4i e ii a
§•---
II 41 O f.
> 3 e u
S



e
i -o o
41 10
>- •* o
d rt

*i b
Jl 41 M
2 1 u
H b 10 41
u c — — i
•rt AJ U O
"o. 3 3 a.
a
^
0>


U

•
Mf
b
h.


«
e

^w
C


g
(«4
M
*V 
"a i £ o
S



• ii
M A
M W
r e o

b 00
0 v 4)
«- 3 b
<«*
^ II ^^
41 M 10
a 3 b
a u
— -u c
ii e u
> 10 M
£












z


X
41
b
10 M
> 41
10 X

" e
« —
2 rt
10 U
o 3
"a o
a


o

tal

• n
w r^
O


in
B-8
^?
(9

5


g
•«4
W
4J (Q
M 4J
3 >->
10
b
« —
2
V y>

£* O
10 U
u
"a. 10

•*
a
1 Z
*J **4 V
3 ^3 W W
-i =5
41 b

10 •-
•rt M u w
— 3 •- 3
a. 6 •«- o
a.



• u
W £
M <->
10 e
r E o

b 00
0 -• 41
>M 3 b
 !0 M
S












Z






41
.a
10
w
a
Q.

• b 1*.
at u j
• n
H 0


10 'C
rt e •
3


-
41
>

*J II
10 ~
b 90

10 -rt
e  41
^ U 5

*•




41

10
•M
"a
o.
<











41
**
J3
!0
U

l«4 ^
O. 41
a a
< c


§
u








z



14
e u
10 b
u >
rs
o o

41 U
— e
A 41
10 U
•rt ••!
"a.'
a


>

s

-00
xr».
2 "


-
*
f

<•
(

»

4



<
H

































^-
r~ w
M 41
41 3.
a. x
x -»
w
•e
•o a
a ••o
 > b b
41 41 O 0
I*. M
0 O
--•2^
^•sls-
Ul 1» -« —
3 3 41 II
> >
II 41 II 41 41
Hill

-3 U U U U
•« O 5 O O
*J b b b b
o. a a a

Ii*^i
• e e n w
< -0 * 10 10
z u u 3 9

•• •:< •;< *- •fr-
it •!< *-
a
-------
nue
 o
u
A
H










41
M







e
•c o
o — •
41 W
b 19
& u
« — •
•8 0,
•H O.



a
0
a «
o u
•M »4
4> a
a; a
<




V*
n
M
19
O
U





•o
e
a
e
H*











e
o
>••
*j
«o
w
(J



i
IS X b
O 00 41
.e o .a
w — s
tl 0 3
c z
1
41 1
.M 41

41 <••" W
u 0 U
41
J= C C
O M 09
^ '^
t* 11
*H
41 u e
o u -o •-
•-•ecu
S
til
1 Z
_> ... 4)
3 -O 10 41
A O 3 £
S »»
41 b
— 41 O 41

<3 >^
•* M 11 *>
ai^ o
*
• 41
«l A
a e
r o o
•M •»»
O -- 41
u-i 3 b

0. 3 b
O «
— •we
w c «
> n oo
41
a









£



4<

J3
a
u
• •4
p-4
a
a
<
•
*
in
<£>
. r^
"> 0\
ft*

e
o •
« -o
W 41
a
_i



00



^
e
n
e

e
•i^
n
M 41
3 b
19
O -»
41 a
u
'" "c
a>






4)
••4
J3
(0
.rt
a.
5"






11
.a
a
u
*»4
^4
a,
5"

11
V*
A
n
u
*•*
p*
O.
^



11
«4
.0
o
u
Mrt
#^
a.
a.
<
• a>
H r-
e«

ae

» .
w •«
b a
V
a. 4j
a 41
41
ae



o»



^
c
1
(A
41


b
41
e •

•u n
3 J
.= 41
U
cn



O



T3
a
K
e

13
• •4
M
V 19
in 41
3 b
19
2. ^
41 n
«4 ^3
a.






«
~^
^
«
,M
a,
$






41
J3
a
u
.*4
^^
a.
a.
<

41
1-4
J3
n
u
 U
^2  O  3 J=
    E  b ^
"•*  4)  O 41   ^*

 0  U  -a in   u
—i  3  ••« 3   ~i
 a. a  -* o   a.
 a.            a.
<             <
  •  41
 M JS

ECO
   •M  -^
 b     M
 O —  »)
>4->  3  b

TJ  41  <->
 v  
 a 3  u
 O     41
-1 -3  S
 41  C  41
 >    n  ao
 u
o
    «1  X
 e  •-  4i
••*  u  —•
 0  —  H
 8E>
U  b  b
 tt  41  41
 X »  >
 ui  o  -
 o  J  a:
 u
u
                                                                                                                                                     |
NA
cab
App
Smardon
1972
Possibly applica-
ble, but devel-
oped for Water
Resources
projects
Applicable
Applicable, but devel-
oped for Water Re-
sources projects


NA
be
fu
l
n
                                                                                                                          *J ••*     M
                                                                                                                          _i  J -o ._  4)
                                                                                                                           a     41  >  b
                                                                                                                           «  W «->  41  3
                                                                                                                              U fl  b -5
                                                                                                                          <-> .C 3     U
                                                                                                                           3  in -N  41  U
                                                                                                                          ^  b n  b  S
                                                                                                                              q >  3  b
                                                                                                                            - B u ~>  a.
Applicable, but deve
oped for Water Re-
sourred planning
projects
C
97
on
al
Sol
e
State of Mary-
land, Oept o
Natural Re-
sources.
Undated
S. Amy En-
gineer Divi-
siun, Lower
Kiss. Valley
(IIES). 1980
-------








































•a
ii
•o
3

U
I
N
41
2
«
H











































41
M









•si
41 «J
a u
10 •->
II -•
•o o










10 *i
e i
o u
•94 'I*
MM







4

M

Q






4
b
O II
w >
II
t) M
II
C "e
••4 K
i:
>» • «
-4 -0
••4MB
• • <•
M U *M
41 M «J>
M 41
1"*






Z
B

1
41 II

M '*4
« •
b n
0 X «

3 £
V **
S-B
10 U II
U •* W

1-4 H 10
a u 4i











«£
X


^
G

"e





3
• P4
§ .1
1 =

S
• b
41 41
a 4
U II
M O
a «J





e
a


i
{j


i i
e •«
u >

^% (3 ti •
b b B

SC — CM
O o«r*
« - - B o>
•0 « U —
a
t
,-o >» b

o oe til
.e a .2! \a
1
4

a


B


II 10
Si!

^3
ii «

jo e
• u
u

•-4 B
1"
•O M
5.«
•H •* 00
•O II
811 b
a
3 b
41 41
O <2 O
S


I
M
m

3C B O
ft f4
b M
O -4 41
•»4 3 b
IM
•O II 1-4
41 to M
a. 3 b
e 4i
— T> a
41 B 41
1"






u

to
u

a.






it
J3
U
^
a

i
••4
1 b
U 00

to •
0.<*4 II
ii e b

** — *

ti a —
M 1 « •-
« • -• 1
JB •"<->•«
« e b
00*0 5 H -«4
B B b 41
•p« <0 41 JS
W — 1 O U
10 • M w
3 B B O
1— O •*• TJ W
« -4 <* 41
> *J B « M
II — 10 00 « 41
^9 *** 9
b c e » a "4
o o •- u u 

— I 41 U O •* II
3 BO M JO <*4
IM ••< l» —« <0 ••<
|-0,<*-


II
2
8
"a
<•











II
2
u

ft
1
1 >.
H.-1.
^^ 41 B U p*it
41 4) ••J  o .u a. «
•^ . O •-
c -o a e --
ii it o a
u •* ii u a
x •- a «
«ft-ss«
«J <0 <0 A J3
e

TS
"ecu
••4
b -• J3
£.2^
b
II « •*
a ii *•
O - 10
7 ti o-

5
1
"O b
B ii e
« M ee
O^
J= II —

(Z — •
•oi/o
• — 0 00

J* > ••
3


ea
"3
«o

e
••4

e
•H
M

W II
3 b

b
O —
tl M
*^ IQ
A O
• o
u
••* ^
— > 6
a
u
~> b
3 O b
U  O
M -H
JO 41 * 00
xSSSb
£
«
B
— 1 -M
10 M
•O b

W >

b 6
O •-

n
•a -o
41 B
0. <0
O -4

v ti
^j
«
•«

o


4i a

JQ B
10 10
u ^+
-*> 


Ok

I
e
0
B

e


41 M
51

b —
O «J>
"SI
41

JD a

U M
*** 4V
-1 0
|«
,-l
.^S3^
•a 3 to o
B -o o M
B U •O
41 i« C B
ja o 10
•o c -•
•O 41 «<
•325!!


•
J= B
09 -H
41
b «


b *
O -t


41 -O
a b •-
0 « b
-4 U O

1'"











^
X





II
a
u
^2
a
a



^J
* B
b 10
tl
U » 10

ii x b a
o • n •
B CO S -3
'£


«





















B
S'S
II r*
u a
10
4 r*
II <0

o>





                                            tl
                                            t>
-   B-10
-------
                                 Table 3
              Summary of Salient Features of 20 Evaluation
Procedures for
Personnel Needs

Method-
ology
Number Citation
1 Brown, A. , et
Resource
Manager*
Yes
Interdis-
ciplinary
Team**
No i
Implications Relative
to User Needs
Experts should be con-
         Dee, N., et
           al.   1973
                          No
         Fried, E.
           1974
         Galloway, G. E.
           1978
                         Yes
                          No
         Golet, F. C.
           1973
                         Yes
          suited concerning spe-
          cific problems

Yes     The composition of the
          interdisciplinary team
          is dependent upon the
          nature of the Water Re-
          sources project but
          will include biolo-
          gists, social scien-
          tists, and physical
          scientists

 No     Technical assistance from
          plant and animal ecolo-
          gists would facilitate
          the acquisition of
          habitat-related data

Yes     Minimum requirements for
          an interdisciplinary
          team include an ecolo-
          gist, botanist, zoolo-
          gist, hydrogeologist,
          and a social scientist.
          In addition, the proce-
          dure requires a panel
          of laymen.  Computer
          facilities are required

 No     The resource manager
          should have a good
          background in wildlife
          biology,  ecology, and
          plant systematics
                               (Continued)
**
 Does the procedure require a resource manager for decisionmaking?
 Does the procedure require an interdisciplinary team for decision-
making?
                                                       (Sheet 1 of 4)
                                       B-ll
-------
                        Table 3 (Continued)
Method-
ology
Number
6
Citation
Gupta, T. R. ,
Resource
Manager
Yes
Interdis-
ciplinary
Team
No
Implications Relative
to User Needs
Scenic values of wetlands
        and Foster,
        J. H.  1973
      Kibby, H.  V.
        1978
8
Larson, J. S.,
  ed.  1976
      Reppert, R. T.,
        et al.  1979
                     could be evaluated
                     fairly rapidly by a re-
                     source manager without
                     requiring special train-
                     ing in the use of the
                     procedure

Yes         No     A technician would be
                     helpful if field esti-
                     mation of net primary
                     productivity is re-
                     quired.  A resource
                     manager could make gen-
                     eral evaluations of
                     water quality without
                     a specialized training
                     requirement

Yes        Yes,     A resource manager who
          under      can read maps and use
         certain     stereo-aerial photo-
        conditions   graphs is usually the
                     only personnel require-
                     ment
Yes         No     The resource manager may
                     require field and labo-
                     ratory assistance to
                     implement the proce-
                     dure.  It will be diffi-
                     cult for a resource
                     manager to evaluate all
                     functions
                            (Continued)


                                  B-12
                                                 (Sheet 2 of 4)
-------
                         Table 3 (Continued)
Method-
ology
Number
10
Citation
Schuldiner,
Resource
Manager
No
Interdis-
ciplinary
Team
Yes
Implications Relative
to User Needs
The interdisciplinary
 11
 12
 13
 15
         P.  W.,  et al.
         1979
Stearns,  Con-
  rad, and
  Schmidt -
  Consulting
  Engineers.
  1979
Smardon, R. C.
  1972
Solomon, R. C.,
  et al.  1977
State of Mary-
  land. Dept of
  Natural Re-
  sources.
  Undated
U. S. Army En-
  gineer Divi-
  sion.  Lower
  Miss. Valley
  (HES).  1980
 No
Yes
 No
                          Yes
 No
          team should include
          ecologists, hydrolo-
          gists, planners, geolo-
          gists, limnologists,
          chemical engineers,
          soil scientists, biolo-
          gists, and zoologists

Yes     The interdisciplinary
          team should include hy-
          drologists, biologists,
          chemists, climatolo-
          gists, sanitary engi-
          neers, and possibly
          others
 No     Visual-cultural values
          could be evaluated
          fairly easily by a re-
          source manager without
          requiring special
          training in the use of
          the procedure

Yes     The interdisciplinary
          team should include an
          ecologist, economist,
          engineer, sociologist,
          and an anthropologist

 No     A resource manager with a
          background in wildlife
          biology and plant ecol-
          ogy is required


Yes     The interdisciplinary
          team* should include
          chemists, hydrologists,
          limnologists, ecolo-
          gists, wildlife biolo-
          gists, and botanists
 The authors have indicated that the interdisciplinary team should in-
clude fish and/or wildlife biologists.   Other needed data available in
literature and district files.
                             (Continued)
                                                        (Sheet 3 of 4)
                                 B-13
-------
                         Table 3  (Concluded)
Method-
ology
Number
16
Citation
U. S.
Army En-
Resource
Manager
No
Interdis-
ciplinary
Team
Yes
Implications
to User
The i
jrocedure
Relative
Needs
requires

an
 17
 18
 19
 20
         gineer Divi-
         sion.   New
         England.
         1972
U. S. Depart-
  ment of Agri-
  culture.
  1978
Yes
U. S. Fish and
  Wildlife Ser-
  vice (HEP).
  1980

Virginia Insti-
  tute of Ma-
  ine Science.
  Undated


Winchester,
  B. H., and
  Harris, L. D.
  1979
Yes
Yes
Yes
         interdisciplinary team
         composed of hydrolo-
         gists, ecologists,
         economists, engineers,
         historians, archeolo-
         gists, outdoor recrea-
         tional planners, and
         others

No     An interdisciplinary
         team comprised of a
         plant ecologist, hy-
         drologist, ichthyolo-
         gist, wildlife biolo-
         gist, recreation spe-
         cialist, and a land-
         scape architect could
         facilitate the
         evaluation.  However,
         only a professional
         natural resource
         planner is required
No*    A certified HEP evalua-
         tor is required
No     A resource manager with a
         background in plant and
         animal ecology is the
         only personnel
         requirement
No     A resource manager with
         a general technical
         background is the only
         personnel requirement
 Not required in HEP, but encouraged by the  U.  S.  Fish and  Wildlife
Service by all its employees who use HEP.
                                                        (Sheet  4 of 4)
                                    B-14
-------












































«f

tl
•























































M
tl
b
a

ti
jj

0.
e
o

*J
 Z
U •?•«
r* *J b
*-^ n) 4j
a. <—« «
55 =






•o
ij gj
in o
O —
8 o
*"" i
«i — <
e o
0 U
tJ . b
O M «l
.60.=
~> — I
ti o a
z z
e
o
•H *
U *J  e
tl — O
1 w •-•
So 4 u
73 w IB
.2,- 8
a o
a a e
•H sr •«
IB
>



o IB e
a-- ti t»

u ••«•-« v
M* a ti
x « a-o
O. £41
H - • IB U

ao a. a, « IB
O IB IB t> M
w 8 B b v)
o a •««

.s o u e
— a.— ti o
IB a O <•> o
.- U 41 ... 4J
L, 00 ao— u
tl
«:
w
tl •
-r.
< —

•
S-
O <9
i







>t
B Jj
09
C ^
ti >
E O

U 3
ec u
IB 0
in o
• H
Q
^
IB 1
e B
O -H
M
IB tl
II JO
•^
1 §

M
• C
•o o
V -f4
4J *»
IB IB
4J W
III -M
a
ti •«
e ^
o
z




1
OJ
«J O
^
>.
b 0)
IB •*« •«*
-< O
O u)
«i a
— 00

u to
s
»••



« IB

O U
•« >
k. tl
O in
« 8
£ 2

i u
w O
"" 

ti w

••> u
IB tl
J3
O
**
IB

tl
 i-

« ti
ti j=
v< ••>

c
o

«^
u
tl
^4
O
o
tl IV
J= W
4-1 ->
a o



£» QJ
U u 3
tl U — .
tl tl tl >
6 C vi
flO 00 tl tl
U — h, >
n « — i
flu v) oo w
IB e u
•H tl
• tl >-n
in b «- js
* in B B
S
ji a - a

U -i IB TJ
a. > ja u -n




1
M O tl U
W O« VM -M
a o -i « -~
3 n "t «j
tl ••— tl C
a ti i a— -a •-
IB \ *-*
00 <» *J -M
<*j yj -^ **it
B in 3
IB tl M >»
E 


3 jO 13 •-« tl
« 9s »J b
U IB O J3 O
u 6 *•* o i
<


1
• r*
I/I
M
O
flu

3
iO f~*
i« in
- e B
•a o o
tl Bl -I

IB tl IB
«J W W
in •»«
_>.J

C ^3 -^
O
Z

1
S
B
3 C
T O
• •4
•O «J
e IB

b
V) O

s e
J-
DC tl
"3 >
•^7 «J
IB
tl U
a •-
«.^ w
IB
>


tl
n >
C. i -^

SCw O  B
O X tl 41 IB
w w a. > -
_§ 'J * ^ § „*

— vi w « M u
~« i c 41 >• in tl
IB JC O M */ IB >
- — -• ti a,— 0
<



UJ

• -T
"2 S>
••« ••
^


«


B
IB
M 00
•- e
tl 6
b a
•o B
v o

0 1
U tl
0. g
•V4

t-

















flj
e
0
z




!B 00
^ ^3
bl 3
•^^
^
14 tl
IB 3
C -«

i>
•M U
M N
• •4 -m
V -•
b --
w a
e
N^




1
tl E
•- a.
a a

41

-i B
IB tl
•c a.
tl -5

-• VI
¥1 W
S B
xs
Ul
J

'J
>>
IB
3 00

^ ^ -
T
•J


<,


>
.*4
C
•U
X
in
ti

>H
0-
41

























11
5*
• (•«
(Q
*J
•0t
^j
g
(Q
3
W
•o
V)
^
I





M

U
I

Q.

O

£

^

ti















e
1 41 S
A e o a
O in ^%
o «  in
O 41 41 M
0 3 J= •«
























S
tl
E
IB "3l
9^ .^4
tl
**• 2 V9
O tl
o a
a j --

tl -U >
•J ti
b b
< •" tl
. Is
IB w m
fj b
•0 •- Q.





41

1 •—
11 — J
w 41

IB •? B tn

u x w
U 10 —
0 -------




























1
••4
a
e
3


V
•*
A






























is|
W tl U
<• > z
^ •**
« _t b
«- M «
• ^ _3

T5 B
tl 0
w —
e  a
b -M O O 6
tl •» •-> O fi tl
00-. M 00-1 •
n • • ti
C <« -•  O 2
S* *_. «•
b W MS J« tl
§<« _• -j u *-
a — e • —
I1' —











o
(
e

s


1
M It
 -9 «
. b — e t •* c •v
t<« «-> a « x
tl • W - b
« . .. u ti e •*
bKWB-QMO*
o°??S53!?1
w i i • •-> b u
t-« a - ti as
w >« « ti • a. u
— 00 6 X II •
tO B • b b
M« o e • ti ti
1 	 '

o

u.

-n

41 O<
Mrt ^
0
13
1

1 Irt

MM
ra
b
^^ 41
~ 3









tl
5j
o

1
S "Mri
O n
u w
•«*
tl b
-I
M C
w
B 0

1 ^ -
MM| tl t)
W 3
41 b -t
3 tl «
•
*
0 IS
o «•«
**•
^•* 4o^
•V *•*
"b *
«

si.

• b f^
OS tl 0>
_> •-
1-^ 0
U. '
• X

** s •
a. • -i
3
o


vfl

»•
IQ
b
>> tl
a e
b 00
V u
b Q. b
330
V v> <~-
tl
u o —
b x -M
0. U tl
tl •- «
tl 49 «-i 3









tl
c
o
z




1
00
a* -j
— 1 tl <«
E -S
41 O
a n u

n w •"
> 3 -I
.a n
X u
— > 111 »J
b ^i e
» c ™
S 41 3
•<- S cr
b
Oi
•§ *
tl I«M U
4J 3 b
tl >, 0 IB
% d_l — ** • '
^ 4rf • V «M
l— O tl b --I
e — i oo eu
•« s x
C O -0 «J -J
O •- JS tl —
— • b 0 £ >
-> 41 X •"
• an • ->
B 9 U
— • b tl 3
• 41 tl — -0
C N _i > O
tl •«• « 41 b


•^

a:

•00

•9 3*
-£ —

*


^


**•<
o
» 1 X
«J --J — . .J
« E ^ 6
tl tl Ul
b 41 b M
J2 nj 41 00 l/>
tl U VI (Q tl
b -g ai — b
•^ "3 41 u
tl O b b T3 *
U £ O O tl 41
O M «J >w b KM
b
O.









tl
e
o
i
B

3
O*

•e
M <9

c n
j,
00 tl
•e >
3 •-<
•M*) *>
M
41 ^
3 •->
*
1 <0
1 M «J
41 — - «
b — B tl -3
- (0 « 00
3 — e n x
O" V 11 i^
41 4) b O •-
« n
 u
> •• 00 K
•~ HI O • J
III W _l X
B S 0 -> -3
41 41 -C •- C
X
Ul
• ^^
B1 2

•
™


S 
<









41
e
o
z
i
B

•z

3 —
•*"} 4W>
(Q
4) •_>
>
•o
2 *
-------







































x1™^
•o
tl
3
e

^j
B
O

S^f

^
if
^M
.0
^.

































y)
B 9 IA
O ••> ^
»4 tl
M tl tl
IV > Z
Cl ••*
M 
o. u
• tl

^^
V) O
o u
o
«J *4
IV IV
w 0
• •M
• B
— 0






m
tl

ei

B
£
u

ba

4J
B
tl
s

b
3
M
IV
r


•o
ti
b
3
Q"
tl
B
a
a
O

^*
o
M
1
fr-



o
••*
«**
4
u

T» X b
e w ti
.S 0 JS
|-5|

^i
•M



*J
IA O
i"
00
b a
tl -4
«! ••«
-H
tl 3

H
«
3 1
8 •-<
•0
IV O
W •«*
IV Vi
•a ti

•H
0 tl
o u
b 41

X —
.a o
u
u
•M 41
M JO
IV
a
t
B
 *i
n
tl *a
3 -H
fl
*
„
. s
tt — •
b B
3
0"O
tl B
b m
«i a
« IV
•e -«
%
u
> -
M 
 u O
C *J -O
01 0  w








ON





tw U
O 1 b
iv n
in b
«J O «J
C J3 C
3 IV tl
(V *^ -«H
B 3
ti iv er
> ti
••4 Q
M -• X
B tl b
tl ••" O
U <44 -*
w
W
IV tl
B B
tl O O
A V)
IV W
*J V M
10 I/I IV
3 tl
8 iv —

IV B u
«J O IV
IV
•3 -0 b
C £

00 U
O tl U)

O -- v»
b O IV
T3UA

~


1
IV
•a w
ti -i
n —
a iv
A 3
o'
«
fcl B
B O

X IV
•-< a
^ 'H ^
3 U -O
•"§«
« ••« >
3 b -rt
IV
-*

1
tl
b 1 b
tt tl
X b 
- IV "3
M —
IV IV U
tl b M
«


«M
*"*


1
8


o
U tl
a
X *J tl
b b
a <-< 3
w c -o
n ti ti
41 3 (J
O 4) O
tl — b
c a. a.

















b
IV
41
X



























1 M
M W
S g
b
«•> »
0 M •
a ti u
> IV 41
tl b
• C 
41 4j 41
tl 00 —
c o*
a —
x-~ u
H C° b
b ••< O.
41 B
w •« — <
3 IV IV
b b
41 w tl

H

















tl
B
O
Z
w
«J
c
41

00
•^
3


tl
3

IQ
>

X

b


^
b
a.

— i b
l« tl
••« -o >
>4 B 0
t) » eo o a
s - «-

















|
41

tl 00
b b
•o —
tl
U M
0 tl
b b
O.--I
41 O°
jj
E-

















41
B
0
Z
1
B
IV
3


•o

i!

M IV
U W
C IV
ti -o
E
00 tl
•3 >
3 •-

tl U
3 ••"
IV
>


a
IV
tl
n
x w
b IV
E
.- 01
Q, .-
•M U
U tl
M -3
•o u
b M
S I
B

O r-.

ae.

n .
a — •
o n
— 41
O
(/I


**1
•"•
1
O
• u
41
B -0 b C
•H c O O
4J fl) •£•
vw - B IV
O n O <->
41 •-» C
V) U w tl
*J I- iv B
B 3 B tl
3 0 •-« -»
girt T3 O,
41 b B
IV b O •«





















































M
*•!
C
tl
e
41
b
••4
3
IT
ti
b














b
4i -a
00 b O M
IV n B O 3
e — o <- o
IV — •*•« •••
B iv vx iv
tl IV w — • >
U M- 41 f*
b 00 -O >M
3 tl tl — O
O J3 > •"
M > tl
tl *J jfi 3
b M w "O -*
3 •- B «J
tl 6 3 « >
J=
t-
,
•rt -O 6
S tl 0
•rt o ••«
-H IV W
»• IV
— • Q. U M

S IV
ti -a
g
00 41
•o >
3 ••<
IV
tl w
3 •-
IV
>
—
V)
a 41
IV >
b •»•
00 W
O IV

O 41
£ 00
a. ti
10 ^3

b 41
W —
IV <—
IV
U) C IV
ft. iv -O

r
X <»
blO
iv y o
£ a *^ ti
6 — * U
*•« 41 
-------
•9
V

e
A




: o M
O hi -9
•*4 41
hi 41 41
J ••»
— i A 4)
Si" VI



TS e
41 O

O U
o. u
• 4)
^^
« O
a u
o
••4 4
hi hi
22
'» a
3°


M
41
3
a
•a*
jj
U
41
f-

hl
e
i
u
3
M
4
£


«^j
 b
41 — 41
hi 1-4 ^ h)
4 4) V
hi — V) •
M 4 O 4
caw
SO i 4
M ••* a.
o
z
M
hi
41 e
> v
••4 • hi
hi 60 4
4 ^ hi
« 3 '"*

hi A
C 41 J&
S2*
a* A o
A* U 3
S»» 4 •«
4-14
o -o a >
o


j£
41 »
•«4 * 00
tw u u e
O « 41 •"«
a > — •«
<* 7 o a. •
hi _ U • O
3 4*ht « 41
O hi C
i A A e -
A -O -« O M
a-«c a.
•«• hi • hi
n ••> hi 41 A
C .0 HI 00 hi
hi £ ~* > ^J
X
W

I I u XO
S — «J 41 OO
w > 1 -4 e»»

8 b"^
4i c. «i en
• e o A u

=9



ifi

«
e 0 «i
*O 41 A hi
b w N -o e
41 u —4 .- n v v
> - u e js i a
— g — • o -4 41
oc cr u — hi hi b

4i > a,— > > w
ki U M U b VI U
4 41 e -H a e
J= ••-> 41 *> 41 hi
U O hi kl 4) hi M
Wr X 4 .C X O
4i a. 41 a. hi 41 o
H


SK
r^
^a M
« o
m -x
O hi
O. 4

T3 *^4
e a

4 U
e 4i
0 A
W hi
4 O
U
M
>•
••*
•0 1 U
41 -O A
MOO.
4 O A
£> ~* U

M 4)
hi e oo
e o A «
« u -a
i _x o e
"9, .* w -i
3 U hi
-* A b 41
S 4> »
§••4 hi
U A IM
— a » o
*
£
I 00
41 * O
h) 1 - X>->
•« 41 X 00 O
3 b 00 O 41
 - 41 3 U
•M • U A 00
W hi U W O •
e c 3 -o i o
hi 1 M J3 TJ 41
X
Cil

1 1
e •-
u >

xa v •
P * ^
C w e
< 41 - A •
»» e — «s
• e o oor.
v> — — c o>
00 U Cll —
3



!£

41 •«
JO • V
VI N
X— 41 •-
3 -2 3 "A" M
U b —
41 — e 41
b  o
41 hi VM O 41 O.
*














g
O



1
b
•O O X
M *** **^
4 e •- M
•M Whl
U AS
hi u e w
e > — B
E-rt b 00
hi a-o
A 3
•O hi — •->
a ••«• e
•-1 J O «J
e -H 3
U 10 4J *"4
3 3 A A
— 0- S >
*
M
41

. B 41 U
M O b (U
•»< u •« A eu
M e *o hi b ia
X 41 O A
-BOS »-9
e oo o hi b
e - e ••« oo
•o A M •-! -i e
•< • 41 A
41 0 -« M T3
— hi — o 4i e
h.
hi AM
«l TJ 41  hi
hi 3 —
•Ml '^^ Jffl
ht 4
B 41 JB
4 3
§• A o
e T9
O •- 41 41
A U 3
M hi A •"*
3 A -4 A
u "0 a. >
o
CM
u
i U 41
41 hi w —hi
-O C U b A
A ••* O W J
._- y .^ 4)
n a. 41 JS s TJ
js a a 1 e
a.>hi u A A A
b « 00 00 -
oe e u o o c
o o 4i a M o
hi -i* a* o o —
O hi X hi JS hi
j= A hi a A
a e E
••4 b M • b
-4 fl 41 hi n ^
b hi U — I —
O
*
1
TJ b
C 41 *
A V2 <^*N
a.
£ 41 U
(2 — ^ .
*9 41 O
• — U 00
M 5 > 2
3



00
















































I
jj
M

00 «
e -w
•M b
00 0
3 U


















                                                                             O

                                                                             -»
                                                                             41
                                                                             41
                                                                      M
                                                                      O
                                                                            00
                                                                            e
                                                                      •9
                                                                      41
a
cr
u
eg
                                                                          o e
                                                                          U 41
                                                                          u x
                                                                          o u
                                                                          3 3
                                                                          < o
                                                                         :  31


                                                                          a u
                                                                          e n
                                                                          O 3
                                                                         ••4
                                                                         w ia
                                                                          •9 hi
                                                                          41
                                                                          n
                                                                          e e
                                                                          thl O
hi b O 3
  O - b

0 hi *A M
  3   e
j < • -
e ^ C
3   U -Q
    M 41
    X —

      A
•e b b -
41 3 V U
w hi > -3


:-Sh
                                                                        -
                                            B-18
-------




































<— •
u
3
*•*
U
e
o
u

*4*
V
2
«i




































VI
COM
0 -• -3
.-4 U
4J Oi 01
™ > ae
o •-•
— fl 4)
O.-— M
E OJ 2
>— U



•O C
OJ O
V) •-
o ->
a. * IQ
U i—t ^3 qj
o o e — w
Q ^J Q Aj flj
a.












^
e
0
i

VI
01
o1
e
iC
ti
(«

4J
e
g
£
3
M
n
01
£
e
«


c
*
n a

e fl
E-o

4.
^ >
3 —
a
3 —
^ W
«


^
V
u
•^
3
C<
01


fl
4j
fl
0
0

n
9)
a





•^ 0)
fl *t
'p4 <«4
b VI
f e
IS O

• •
V) M VI
ax: e
n a. o
8 fl -^
• 00 U
MOO)
*j <•" a.
b O 01
o £ e
O. Q.--4

a:


E
0

«J

•J
y
i


••4 )J
4J 1 O
M fl e
^ z w

>— o "y
fl O CO 01

= v a •»
oo 3 •— e
b _. b 3
1 >
>
i^ X b

1 O CO VI


f 21
^ *z
2

>> *— •
rt? (Q
B —
^ -^i
4; *«-i
c ^
• «« 4)
fl a.
w 3
ft v>
O
O
in o
4-1 •->
^
3 01
n a
a:












V
e
o
M
•J
e
i
D
1
"^
01
3

IV
>
j.
•"
b
i

b
a.
u
e
n

O4 W
v
41 >«4
01 U

a a
a o)
b
00-"
1.2
a e
n

« •«
— B
b fl
01


^
• C
b fl

«J •
VI

~ •
c a
£



o

. c >•-
V) O O
O/ '•* fi
^3 w] 4j o 01
O' O fl b *_i
N O. 3 '4- C
- b — . 3
~ 3 fl 01 O
T a. > — ' s
b OJ 03 fl
= B -a « -o
01 O — « 01
oo n a. o *->
fl CL *^
.-0 b b £
CO «l — •
<»'-•<••••—



































ac
c -•
••4 fl
e w
b 3
O 
•« Ol •-
— > -)


ON
f^
a\
^

at

b a
^ •
X -1


















fl
«,/
fl
-3









































































                                       vn

                                       IM
                                        o
                                        01

                                       IW
B-19
-------














M

b
3
•O
41
U
O
b
A.

e
o

u
10
3
1

*Q
e
^4
^J
^

e
(M
e

£(
e

^i
M
41

^
*•
irt 41

41 b!

* !

c
41

X
U
«
^

t

y
41
t

^
1
t
U.

00
f
«M
b.
^
<
X
<

—

O
J
u
«
1
i
Q








M
S

^
M
t)


^j
,•*
41
•x
b.

b.
O

^
V
4)
X








41
b. -0
41
00 06
10

bi

^
41
as











e
0
^
4
*i
••«
u



w
00 -x
e

*of *•*
M fl
4) 3
>«4
•o >

1! -3
•x e
*M «X
41
M b M
<0 41 A
§52
•x o -x
•U M
•M X 41
•W JO -O
3





1
3
•5E£
n 4i
41 4) JK
w b e
•x 4i fl M
w 1 b b
0
•O M T3 .C
anew
H M H 3
— O "0


•»







































41
e
o
z


^
41

"5
^ •"

«
e •

S "*

OD
i
6 IA
•x ia M
i m t i ti
•x «x 'M 41 1^
•»• fl 41 00 b
•x 'x M b b 3
U W T3 3 fl O
41 C C T9 >x M
Q* V W 4J U
M W -« U b OS
o u o o
00 O. 41 b vu b
e 30* 41
•X b -O U
 fl O
— <0 <9 41 41 U b
t) u a. e T3 i» a
£


e » t» w
o -i c -<
.x 0 •» —
- -e fl
41 fl OS
•X M 41
e ac .e
b f,
•0 fl IB X X
41 41 w J3 b
W O3 3 O
(A 00 ^
41 u e e fl
W A -X -X b
'W-il
4< 0 41 S ->

b.



^J
41
-a b
41
00 b
e o
« e
.e — 41
0 B M
4. U§
^3 0
X b v>
So a
~i B
fl

fl fl
£ M 41
*» -o x
B 41 b
1 = s
S tl -x
O M — <
b ti e.
•x b -x
> a o
C tl Ifl
41 b -x
•Q HI
V 41 b e
JB b tl 0

e w

o — *~ s
» S ••
W b M b
e ti oo 4i
41 > fl W
B Tl — 41
tl fl <— -O

til

^
 ^
ij —
^
£3

M
e
•^
^i
g|
w 41
_p
^
^ •«

•2 "5
^4 O
3
«•«
fl U
C W — i
0—3
•x 3 <•«
W M 41
•x 41 M
•W b 3
<


0
1 <»>
41 —
1 b
e ta
o -o M .41
U x« 3 j( •
3 fl 41
(M > 3 b
00— 41 41 rt
e e z 3 r-.
•x X *x ^
W Jt3 tM M x.
W U> O T5
ti -a u e oo
w ti 41 «i fl a
w jc e — -x
•O U b O W b
^j *5 A >•* fl-l *4
MM 3 W ••* V 3
W TD 3 «0 > ^3
••4
b.






































41
e
o
z

;»
ON
«^

t
bl

»
•e
41
'X
b
b.
^^
«J
^5
41 —
•3 O
41
4) —
^
M 41
.- 4;
j;
00 M
e ^
 -x tl -J
•Q tl U >
\) x 41 x v
0 •— J= 00 > f-
Q •> -x 00
b a o 41 we
a. ti p. b .x .-
41 .a 5" 3 s ^/l
^ ti ti
^M VI W

• •s
1 41 >% —
1 tl — ' -1 tl 41
41 •*• "C ^ 3 O C Jd-x
bO-xMCTXtl V.
41 M -x — o tl
3\oe<*« eitioo ^^NW
O •« 3 4J J= nj -D — O
X W 0 - C •— W — 4IUI

~. O b 4; — . — >, C^C
^«4)t)*xtl3 xi*T7 •xfi.ti
<0 — T3U**-O-c:iU WgW
3«eti-xw.eoi- evx
e> M 3 a.— b o o ti
M -a ti -x fl S **


p-l W  e S B Q.— S b jj
a « ti ti s s .a
u. ew-www— u>« w
o-x-eetinflib AVI
b *x ft} ^M O O w U V
O U b, O u U fl *x W • •* w
wio&titieba infl
fl-x4l4) O U tl.fi
U'QbUU^x^W b3
— > bbb dw
b O O» — O b - O 41 3
UCkW 4IUICaOOw *7^
tiS^b^wSa'flS Si!
e fi» w4iflOBvt'7|*x :•«
•X kV.
Z tl
> e
S. tl
bi -
ti
U 4,
tf 3 b
T5 3
\i "9
X 0 tl
• O '-
3 oa u o
O ^* M. b
— o> : a.
— — 4,
fl £ ti
U w .c
•c x -I
o oo ti
f 5il  "
!isl!
                                B-20
-------


































^^
£
3
C
-I
e
o
u
*•*

^^
41
••W
•;
§*"




































M
e
• •4
•J
VI
41
e-

T3
41

u!
b
O
u.
•o
41
4l
*






00
o —
W VI
e 41
4i f-

x -o
U] —
41
«•*
u.








V**
o

JM
c
i
M
4l 41
M b
I/I S
1 IB
1 41
M U.
b M
3 IB
IB U.
(la ^J
oo£
IB
^»
h.


41
a:









c
o

•*
—

u




J_
I II
^
u
^g
41
41
e

M
—
00
e

M
41
•J
•o
*•*
41
U.




«^
9
a
M J5
e
00 —
e
— -c
M M
41 U
-I 3
•»• ••*
41 tS
U.


a >
3
•o a

"3 -J
•a e

(^ B
S 3
•« b
O
41 •'S
b
* IB

HI O
M -•
IfM g
•- O
•e -
4> 3
b JS

M

b
41

j!

•o
41
JS
M
• v
«••

















41

41
41
e

M
—
00
e

M
41
^
f^
41
2




^
O
e

S
00
a
— "S
in M
41 •>
-J 3
4l «
;:

i
41

- £

— w

•3 >~
4i a
•c
3 in ^^

C «3 O\
"" 8 "*
Of •
b .
SX T3
S 4i

Mb-
00 K C
IB W O

*** ^ b
, ,J3
4f V
b j= 41
w i
3 — <-»
J J»


X 4i
41 W -
w e
£|t

C a
4i O 4.
e -s ui
o
X
• b r»
ac 4i e>
«rf ^"
• 01
H _O
. ^

•rf ••
S. 
41
h!




^
O
e
M


.
X
*£

J£ 9*
-a —

X


••k.

u
•o
41
g

n
•••
00
B
^

41
•O
f**
41
U.
w
O
C
X
M 00
*J O

"a "o
«i a
b JS
00 41
e z
.*«
M •
4j ^3
«( 41
1 3
£
u
41
41 —
JS 41
«< M
>*« b
— O

*
o
• • •*•>
•g £|
41 41
M 7
o e
a. «
o
b »
Ob ^
41
b U
4V *M
M W
4) U
*• j;
A -
* s
00 b

«• b»
>— O
•O 41
U (J
4J

b J.

41 e.

UJ
-
' ^o
. 1^
"1 O<

g

M **
b £
•
i


^^

















•
m
n
1 K
•O u JC
41 4*
— Me
«- c -
•M O
•P O 41
1-.S
•- >
e o b
— « 41
•o x

•«• o
— « —
a. o IB

1 O
3 1
I/I b •
3 3 w
3 (I
O t

O J 3

IB 41 <«
b 3

M 41 O
IM b
^^ fll
«~ S b
0 "" .2

41 ^3 b»
b e
41 O
M X

&~ e
5 "
(M 7 4>

^ — a.
• <»
e 10 X

S >
w ^^
b ao1--
o •-
IB "" 4>*

a — c

C "5 b

































(b

•O U

— 6
> — ti

^•g3
e *
* ."'
M <-> t

41 -J
•§1%
O B ^
.C JS
fifi 41 -J
e •« o

o
VI
4; v
5 ! -0
e 4; o

2 a a.


U b 41
41 — b
C.JS 3
IB w

— b 4)
82"
w n —

«, so u

5 *!

> i

^ b b
IB 4) fi
C -3 •


















































^
41 41
b 3
e
S S §
41 — >

SM M
»
^ 4) («

^^ ^ c
41 •-
••H

C > 0
H 41 b

«J — U
a 2
• M J>^
41 00 —
JS O 41
J "o —
00 41 ^
= JS IB
C W b
b a b
41
(., oo Cl


«J ^

S IB IB
••• VI W
fl 3 I/I
8 O ~
b £
O ^* IB
W 0 •^


















































(
W _l 1 OS
W 41 1 — 41 —
JS O S " —
«rf 41 *** 4! ^
•S b ^3
9] £* 00 IV ^
^ • IB "^ " IB
c • — a •
q . w. x —
— . O b M
 w

e 4i 9 b 4, 3
o -i a si — -a
oo ^\ ^s fc fc» ^ •
41 M C 00 S. 41 b
b /» — r _ o
b ^ wl IB C b

js — j > = — a.

!B M — — " 41 41
b Jt — -Jl > J

•2 — x ui 1 "5 —
n — 4. — — 3
X 4. — b _. •- o

^ « b J ji J ui
















                                                      .*•
                                                      I*.
                                                       o
                                                       41
                                                       41
                                                    •B

                                                    e
                                                    O
                                                    U
B-21
-------

































^3
O
•|
g
••*
44
|

ift
«l
"a
f.





























2
*—
M
4)
73

II
••4
b.
b
£


"S
«
z
M
e
M
41
•<
79
41
••*

79
•- 4*
« 79
e 4i
O 41
— e
•« M
79 ••*
79
<
1




-2
0 —
w w
e c
41 f-
>« 79
lil ~
41
£



41 O
.e — i 79
1 W « • D 41
•- b r«- •- M
•873  o«— w «i e
we o f ••«
«*• 4> — e c j:
O •< b ••* 41
3 4i < b *
II) 73 73 M b 0. 3 —
&— II 41 U 79 C
41 41 1* 3 II *
O •- b b U >
o «- a a M • o •-
79 O *l 79 b X
o b u "aw g
*«jSe«3JBtt
< e a — ec o •* &
a.
U







hM
e
w
e
1!
W «l
S b
< 2
i <*
i •«
* bu
41
•W PM
if U.
41
U. 73

M OS
K
b.

I






e
o

•£
0













•
'u

a
M
41
a
41
^
41
b
J3
**
b
e
73
41
&
g
1
.0.
kf ^
. 2
K

*7-«
b *
a. 
ae
e
VI
41

79
41
• •ri

73
— 11
S'73
41
O 41
••* e
•— >JG 41 if
v-- e > — J o u

M "" O C S 73 >.
e «i > <« — e 79
— 4i e •- «
*l  73 X b
« « <^ ••* e « —
«l • W • » <•
00 C/l U •« £
79 V W M73
-• fc» • fi. V •» <•
4» n s • i £ je

£

1
O u
b ia
a. •*

N
b "
*i 2
M e

•o 2
N '
^ e
79 ••
41 vO
b r. 79
O> 41
i- M
-i.
• • o
79 b
ii ii a.

•i W
a f
73 O >
41 N
14 b «
3 if OO
b X
*3 • 0>
JB a. —
u
en

o

"S
1

e
M
.^

M
e

41


79
D
••^
U.












«
o
z






























II
o

1
§«o •
i e M
U 7J •• b
C W *J C
• <* 73 — 41
N — 3 C •
e • • v» — OK
b TS 2. e ao«-
<• « ^ o e 0>
II b (A  79 — W
>
jO

— 79
** U
If M
— O
•J O.
e 3
II b

HI
41 41

73 41
41 V
•
3 *>
b A
0 ^
•C*
w 
O 73 U
O 41 41
b W -l
a. M o
41 b
ii 4j a.

*"






























1
•
u

ti

e

e

2
00
e
0)
4)

73
71


73

O 41
— e
-« ia
79 •-

<
e

.c
oo e w
e •-•
•^ VM
W 79 O II
W 41 b
ii *> e s
•< — I O 79
3 •-« 41
79 M *J U
M 41 if 0
41 b — U
= 'ia
a C u
• if e e
3 — <•« 41
OX b
•rf b 41 U
> If £ 3
41 X *J W
b
a.






























1
i
X W
241 if M
Q b 41
3 U 79


w
41
j«j
M




























^^
73
41
3
g
Q
"






























B-22
-------









































tl

a

u
e
o
u


in
t)
^^
,jfl
H









































00
c
• «.
Aj
in
tl


•o
"tl

tfc

it
o


•^
tl
tl
z







<*. c
o •••
-> M
e ti
x -o
w — •
.JJ
fa.










***
O


e
H
w
n M
ti v
M k.
^ ^
i n
i t)
M fa.
V

a <•

« u.
ti
fa. -o
ti
00 OS
<0

u.


tt
Qfi











e
IB
•M
U

•i XU
0 00 41
5 -2 "a
Z "° z
t*_
v o
— •DUO
u 3 ii i» CO
tl O *J tl 9>
s. y in in —
» ti ti
O — • " OS C
4U '•*
x e: in -o
J3 S 5 C OS
O 3 flJ -*
oo in — • •—
e v •• o«
•* ti -H e U
*J O. 3 fa) O
W 1*4 ted
tl X tl >

C 3 Z .•
•o ti u
-< oo ti x c
tl O JO J3 —
.^4
U.

1
-< t! •- i|
« J Q SC •«
0 ^ C

.0 ti in
tl F- •-* -
t3 jS *•- 3 00
ti •< n q h
in > -3 3
s e A •-*
... ... . n in
00 O. -J .* C
e »i a.co u "i
'•4 W •»* ^S *P4 tl
tl W W > •*
j3 ~< in c u
u •- o * O
•* M in m -H j
OT -S IB > az










































§
o

1 < * XO
C — tl tl 00
bi > a -« 2
ra «J "«i ""
u > .
< «l • • «
41 e w co
• e o M toi
"| 'i » ic S
3


irt

o

w
41 -} 0
3 — C
O* V
a <*• —
3 tl
•a -*
in c —
.•9 fl — "
j
e n
u o •-
w .«
tl 00 00
•- 1 tl .S
O Ui •„
W *J
a. t) w
X tl
ti #J *j
^
1-


ti
•o

*J W *•*
O *J O
o m
V) tl
n -o v.
js ti n

00 U 
e 3 o
•M T3 tl
*< a — >
in 0 o
tl U b
*j a
•a ti ti
— ti j=
ti XJ w
•H
u.

bi
tl 41
> w
i< a
J8 7

T3 O
C O

<*4
41 

1 t
e —
fakl > )
t!*
< n •
^ c
• c o
tfj — —
ao in
=>


vO






^
tl
*J
O
kl
o
*»4

tl
^< w
ja e
— o
(0 "4
M 00
0 tl
a. t*







M
M
>
«

tl
W
n
U •
tl M
J~ (Q
















































e
<«

UJ —






oo
e

u
VI
tl
•^
•O 3
U tl
••* in
•»< 3

— t)
n J3
C
O TJ
••4 *>.
^ 3
•-< O
-r 3

*c


u n
1 t! 41
c in o ••
o c -a i- •
u o c 3 in ti
O IB O U) U
in in IB u
IB -i tl t) Z 3
3 •-< o ce
o •- c «i
00 CO > U .~ T3
e w ti c
— X tl 4J i-l <0 "C
w js 
tl "O ^ T* Ou fN tl

tv








































V
s
!
.^
1 kl
~> 00
u <
a.>— ti
tl O I.
J _l 00
w | a 2
3


f~

tl


•o
-—
3
0
J= U
in *J
IB
Op 3
••4 
in ti
tl
-i O
^
b
tl tl
.= e
u O
U -O
3
U.


e
41
41 J=
j3 in
,•«
in U.
/• .
en
ti
u •
3 a
•o
41 X
U J3
O
a ti
ti n
.c ti









ti ti
 O
b
tl

•- tl
*J Jt

in j:

Jj .M


in a
ti ti
•M ••«

41 tl
e. su
in M

in -
41 W

U* 0
••. >M
«J *J
e u
tl IB
•o
1
"y w
C tl

.C tl
in w.
. 2
w -
=


00



ti
u
IB

"5 a.
•^ ^jj
r* «T*
* >4-
M O
e
o in

W (A
a n
a -Q
3
in ti
in J=
IQ W


JS
•• W
e ti i fa.
tl tl w •» tl
u 6 v> oo • u
•M a. 41 c w —
> o w ui >
u — . u
ti ti oo >- a ti
en > e c 
ti — • ti
ti -s ti vi j: ti
<~ ja a w >-
— « u ...
-H w X O •« — i
•o — — w c -o
-< M IB -•
— oo e v •-
S e ti js in 3
•0 M U t| «
C 3 3 X 41 S
£







•o
ti
•w
tl
tl

in
"*
00
c

*J
vt
tl
«.«

•^
t*^
tl

(b

•o

•-• M
^fc. '^
^J
r-l U
J3 O
•- a
in
in ti
o <«
0.4,
>M
O 00
e
in •«
— ' VI
3 tl
V) "
tl









































g
O
1
•ft
J 1
n IB
2 *®
c u
?!
>


9v



























4j
Wi
o
tl

U
j=
e
• w«
^
tl
M
M
3
U













































tl
U
e
41
-------
































NO
01
1-4
J3
£

































\









n
u
9

£
«
M
01
a

•H
n
§
0)
K

V
J=

•o
a
10
n
a
u
o
cu

^3
H

01
J3


VM
O
X
U
i
M








M
01
hi
9
"S
U
O
hi
a.

o
o
•H
**
9
r^
<0
s

1

«5
^

o
CM

**H
o



















M
M «J
n u
0) CO
II
0) M
hi O
9 a
•0 -H
u
O *Q
h e
(X. 10
€) O
si













2



"0 «
01 hi
$ss
n «o n
€) 4) ^C
C O
»
i-i
s
M
§
8 «
01 Jtf hi
•*4 )
JJ



^
iH
V
•H
JJ
«0

01
ae





^
*j
u
^?
o
M
eu

^3
a
(d







a
o
2
(8
3


i
1
•H
n

o
M
a
M
e
s

fh^
10
u
•H
hi
1


•
fl
Jj
01
.
^
.
1
0
i
73 x *
0 00 01
J3 0 .0
i» ^j ft
** ^^ B
01 o 3
iC SB

"^


















U
1
a

VM
e




u
•H
9
er



|
^
S!

CO
1-4
•H
M
M
£

b
O

h

3








*
ON




















01

*3
M
M
O
0.

M
•H



M
?
n
e





T3
01
•H
|0
4J
a







o
as





i
0>
00
•H
^
10

^4
<0
U
•t«4
u
i
as


•
A

01
„
•
Z
^|
41


CM



















M
U
Six
M 1-4
a a
10 0













i
i o) ^j
0 "'»
w c
•H '9 «O
^ s
01 U

T3
0) «H W
M 10 01
M 44 hi
oi a o
hj U U
a i M








n
o\









































^
u
01
c?
M
a,
^3
0)
n
e
a
o
h
a

^
o















                            a
                            o
                            u
                                          0)
                                          a
                                      CO  O

                                      a  a
                                      T3 -H


                                      •sS
                                      • -.-I  0)
                                    2^  «
                                             u
                                             o
               C"
                M
                     m
                     4J
                      0)
                      01
                                         •*4  0)
                                    9  e  
                                   •O
                                    01
                                    U
                                    O
                c
                <0
               I-I    CO

                s
                                       M  01
                                   JB  (0  (Q

                                   -g«
                                   VX     V4
                                   J3 -^  flj
                                       u  3
                                   73 -H  M
                                   oi  9  a
                                   73  C^  (Q
                                   •H
                                   >  0) -*
                                   o -o  o
                                   w -H -H
                                   a,  >  9
                                       o  o»
                                   M  IJ
                                   •H  a.  »  O  4J
                                   U  4J  «J
                                   10    J3
          01  •
          01 4-»
          % °u
             o
          4j *w
          C3 **H
          O  0)

          C H-i
          (Q  O

         *J JC
             u
          01  0>


          §'


          u^
         •H  O
          9 J3
          O" 10
          01
          W J3
a J3  3
O -H  (Q
•H  X  W
•U  01  <0
(0 i-4
9 <*4  01
l-l    -H
(0  W
>  O  *J
                                   H^  (0
                                    O- cu c*.

                                    V  
                                 0)  01  01  10
                                 u     u  c
                                73 «M  O  co

                                1  °!U
                                    Ot     0)
                                 *J  Q. Of  C
                                 O  ?>J=  -H

                                          01
                                    W  M  b
                                  .  a  01

                                z S O  e
                                          n
          CO  U 73   •
             30-0
          *J  M  CO  01
          co  e     M
          JS  CO  01  41
          W     4J  73
            J*  «  -rt
          73  U -H  M
          4) -i-l  *J  C
          §  9  a  o
          9  9* 01  U
          ta     u
          M  >» 41  41
          91
                73  M
          *J  a
          0)  CO
          0)

             CO
          01 J3
          a  **
       cu  u
       b  CO
       9  a
       •D  B
       01  -H
       U
       O  4)
       b  *J
       a--
          M
       01  I
       "  a
          o
          3  8  .x
             3  oi  1-4
          X (0  O
          co  M  a
          73  CO
                                 01

                                 O
                                      $
B-24
-------










































^^
XI
4)
3
a
•H
W
e
o
u


vO

41
r-l
JD
(0
H










































M
(0 *->
M U

M a
M E
< l-t

U hi
hi O
3 C

41 2Z
U
o xi
hi C
Ou 19

VI hi
01 O
O "-I
O <"
JC





















4rf
2



"O
0) W
1— 1 hi
•i-l U
(o RJ 3
M Jj M
4) 1) C
e a <
41

•H











0
2
CO
c
o
a
M M
41 J* hi
OS U 41

3 M

^

^
r-l W
41 hi
> -X 4)
•H 0 3
*J -H 10
RI s a

41
PC









H
4J
U
3
"O
O
hi
Oi

•o
c







1
44
«3 0) 1
V4 !-* *J
W  VM 'M
•H 4j
hi I'M ^% *fH
a. o *j to
•H -M
i— I 41 —< 3
(Q 3 **H Cy
o~v.au
•H  hi
41 -H X)
§00 M e
0 41 (9
a -H XI r-l

<






e
o
•H
W
19
*J
•i-l
U





1
•o >» u
O 00 4)
.e o .a
4-1 i— f e
4) O 3
z: 2




1^
c^
1-^


•
w

•k
XI
41
•H
hi
c*



en



1 1 41
e -H js
•H *-> *J
C 1
hi 4) -H >,
O XI U ^
C -rl W
•H -i-l hi
6 41 XJ O C
^Q tj 4J
xi 4i e I
e xi >
, >,i«
•^1 -^Q hi o
(9 W (0
£ 4»* XI C £
U 4J •-< «]
.» flj .r^ r— 4)
M Q. **-i Q, •»->
41
^4











10
41











0






1

<44
U O
to
• * W 41
CO *J 3
> 3 FH
BJ O 19

'e. e
W -H >-<
•11 hi 3)
xi a u
•H
U hj hi
•H V 41
J3 W 6
a. 3 s
«J Q, C
u
u





w

•
^

<•
>^
^9
3 eo
O P»
rH ON
^4 1™*
n
c



sj-
























o o
2 2

> n ^a
JJ 41 -H
3 «
4) M M
a c o
O (0 O.

>, IM w
r- O ••<
e o
O 2


^^
i-i in
41 hi
> J^ QJ
•H 0 »
4-1 -rl W
«J 3 C
i— i a1 M (o
41 41
OS >•








^M U W^
O <*•! O
•^
OOr-l 00
C XJ 0
•n -4 -H 4)
*J -I *J 3
CQ J flj rH
1^ !•( (Q
4) >
^ > ^
W •* 19 U
(J *J 41 O •-<
•H «J 3 -M C
W 1— < 1-4 hi 4)
4) 41 (Q 4) U
E h, p. e w
3 3
2 2


C^
r- Xi
^^ C
S3
•n
• • •
o as •->

m • M
U4 H hi
41
• • 4j on
W •









M M
41 41 ^^
*>* ^" ^3
4)
3
i e
CS *H
C C -H 4J
i o o e
js. -4 4J m o
3 JJ W « U
tfl (Q ^i £t V^ ^3 ***™'
c u *4 q
*J £ !*-l 00 -1
hi hi U* >» C U 4J
O 41 41 *J •!-< 4) 41
Q, 4J -H 4J 3 3
4) 41 XI r-t rtj r-<
hi XI C fl) hi  O C
41 41 1-1 O* -4 O
> > *J R) M U -H
•»4 -H 41 U U 41 41 U
4-I4-I34I -HXIAU
«» u 4J hi 3 e e
hi 4) >4H nj 4lf-433
u -n o J B xi
at 4)
»
.
VJ

•
* *™3
SB
A
* C >O
>, O r-

43 U —
••H R)




t*- 00













^
CO

u
(0
O,
E
•i-i

hi
O
e
•H
g
XI
c
R)

hi
O
*^l
R>
a

00
a

M
10
41
M
M
«

hi
O


1—4
3
VH
41
M
3

W
•H

41
U
3
XI
41
U
O

O.

41

^j

^j
Rl
JS

X>
4)

Rl
U
*pH
c


M
iq


e
o
(/>
hi

U
'

(
*™3

.
*—
,— %
iO

VH
O

CM

+j
4>
41
CO


























































































B-25
-------







































X— «
T3
V
3

•H
4J
e
0
u


vO

41
i-l
J3
H



































M
M 4J
M U
41 (0
M O.
W 8
< I-l

41 Vl
U O
3 d
•O -H
41 3C
U
o -o
u d
0K <0

tt Vl
41 0

Q fQ
r


^3
4) W

•* 41
M  41
41 W 41 <4-l Vl
J3 41 i-t «H (B
3 *J a
iH C9 M «1
tS M iH C tJ
Vl -H «H 0
10 41 ID 4J <0
g 4J > 10 r-l
B -r< to b 4J
3 (0 V
M M r* 3
4> -H «0
41 d U iH
> O 41 •* «0
•H > Vl Vl
^ ^* *v4 4J V
m r* 4J § >
Vl d , U
O 80 41
J5 0 U3
4J rM §
U 0 3
x: z


9k



17
41

M
•H

41
U
3
T3
4)
U
0

a

• M
M
U











M
41










O






M

^1
 d
•H (0

U Vi
U O
144 M^
MM n
41 B




























d
o
•H
1 4J
41 U
M 3
d vi
0 4J
U M
d












M
4J
U
(Q
a
E
•H
























































O

41
^H >
« -i-l
Vl 4^
U «J
a 4.)
U -H
00 P^
(0
• 3
M o*
41










0





1 r-l
Vl (0
41 -H
TJ JJ
o d
E 41
4-1
• O

























M
U
41
3
M
d
a

















^^
00
0
rH
0
h
•u
























































3 >-! 0 J= O.J3
O
^H
<4-l

•o •«
4J Q
u to
(0
a, x
a -H
0 U
u *J

r
•

oJ

•
t^
u
d
—4
•o

3
J=
U
CO


\
Q
«



Vl
o






00
d
•H
4^
^^
3
M
d
o












M
d
o
4J
U
d
3



1
~

•
n
k4
u
4<
d
•H
00
d
w



























o
•z.
41
Qt
^\ M
4J 41 41
3 p-i
41 (fl ^
d d •-!
O fl) to
M
>><*•! O
r-l O O,
d
o


^^
f*4 Vl
41 W
> .* 41
•H u 3
4J •!-( M
mad
^^ C^ 'O
41
OS



M
4)

Vl i— I
O (Q
MH ^

« i-l
00 10
d Vl
•H a
4J 4J

§r->





f^
*"•

.
>« T3
Vl 41
<0 4J -H
T3 O MM
d 10 *r4
O D. 4J
u E d
4> -H 41
W T3
r^ *r4
•> VI
r*l *0 4)
l-l -H l-l
(0 4J 10

•H 41 M
Vl 4J rH
O, 41

•- d 41
w 
4J U (0 4J -H
d -H -r4 d *»
41 *-i
                                          o
                                          41
                                          41
                                         CQ
B-26
-------




































s—^
•o
01

e
•H
4-1
B
O
U


^3

01

43

H























































to
10
0)
a
01

•H
m
c
o
ft
M
OJ
OS












































I
O


V
M
CO 4J
CO U
01 CO
w a
M E
< i-i

CU ht
u o
3 C

MI j""t
u

hi C
pj «
in hi
u O
O •->




















O
° JCI S5

CU (0
^~^ "4
•H 4)
CO »

4J G
0 <










0
35




w
i^j 1.
U 01
•H 3:
3 to
O* B
«£

p%
rH M
U M
> Jtf 0)
•H U »
*J -H tf)
<0 3 B
r-l O1 «
OJ
(X









to
±J
u
3
•c
O
(W
(X

•O
Q
W








VM
O

M
00 CO
B OJ
•H 3
tO CO
h) £>

i-4 *•>
CQ CQ
U 4J
•H -H
|l
3
58





B
O
•rl
4-1
CO
4-1
•r*
U




00 01
0 A

O 3
2
•
•O f-4
B co
(0 hi
-t 3
^> *J
hi CO •
to e M
£ OJ
W- U T3
<4H O hi 4J
O 34-1
4-1 O CO
41 O. tO -O
4J OJ OJ B
cfl Q OS 3
CO


^
*•*



















M
OJ
>*






to
U
^t


^\
pt
o;
>
•H
*J
CO
fv^
OJ
fv^





M
OJ
3

CQ
>•

00
B
4^
to
hi

"*O
u
4J
60
U
*
^
tu
OJ
B
00
a
C*3

>>
B
•^

»
CO
d


lO
r*


































M
JM hi
U OJ
•H 2
3 M
cr E








IM
O W 4J • 4-1 XI
B 3 M U iJ 4J
B O O C 4) -H >
O -H JS O ••-) J -^
10 4-l UMt4-l OJ 4-1
-t OJ -H hi -H
A OJJ3"nXl-O 3T3
4JW4-»O-UC*JC
•H CO 'ft hi -r-l O 3 O
2432O4?U>4-4U



hi
OJ
3
o
I-3 ^ O
OJ CO
rt ON
• rt f-i
e ca
o >
•H •
09 • *— N
•H W CO
> W W
O E •— •

























O







to
OJ
&>4










O
J2j





OJ
JS
4-»

H-l
o

u
u
"O
Q
W
a.

•o
B
01
0)

H
U
Cl
OJ
B















































1
•H
M
•H
3
cr
u
CO
M
CO
^

4-1
U
01
— >
o
u
0.





J
•rt OJ
ooa:
B


>«
E
<

,
CO
='


vO




•
B
O
(Q

'>
•H
O

























































CO
•o
B

i-H
01


*+•«
o

B
O
•H
4J





CM
o>
*•«


•
•o
to

00
w
























++
o
s=







o
35


>\
i— i  .* 0)
•it o a
4-1 -r4 C/l
CO 3 C
1-4. cr co
41
OS




«»
J"*
ta oo
(U •-»
a js 3=
.-I O

^ (U
4J T3
rt co a
CO B CQ
U 00
•M >H *
U W OJ
4J U *-^
S ^3 *9
3 Wi
C J= 0)
OJ -H O
B 3 B
O
CO
VM
O

«O
OJ •
E 01
4J U
hi 3
co *J
01 3
a u
•-i ao

CO 30 ON
3


r-»









































^•^
•O
U
3
B
•H
U
1 B
<0 O
W) 3 CJ
3 -M *J s^
0 (0 01
•H > 01
hi 01 A
CO W
> e
u" C?
O — co
«* ca E
c §
M O 3
00 -H to
B 4J
•HUB
4-1 C O
<0 3 -H






















^->

>4M
9
•
4-1 4
a,

OJ
J3
4-1

4J
<0
f7
4-1

T3
01
4-1
CO
(J
•rt
•o
B
•rt

to
CO
J=

gj
u
•r4
^
V
CO
B
O
•it
4J
CO
S
01
M
B
O

i— I
• H
o

w
=}
01
J3
i,.
•(-»•
B-27
-------






































^*l
1
•o

^4
u
e
o
u


NO

01


M *J ID
0) 0) P
fl C5 ^%
01
,_J
1
e .a
•H 4J
M -H C
00 *J 3 O
CO *rt
VM ^ T3 *J
o -H e u
pQ CTJ flj
*J (0

OI 4J 01
S H-l -H W
W O S O
M Oi 01
0) W IX 0 g
(0 « 4J W -H
M O 'i-l pu *J
ca i— i i-i w
ca 4-J oi
••> h 3 3 >
M o a* o o
01







M
01
s^
M
e
o
a
M M
01 M H
06 U 01

cy cs
^r

^^
p-4 M
OI W
> Jtf 01
•f4 U 2
*J -H W
(fl 3 C
i-l O1 «
01
OS









M
U
3
•o
0
u
frl

T3
C
w










a
o
•H
4j
^0
4j
•H
U



1
TJ >, U
O 00 V
£ O J3
oi "o 3
X SB

• 1
IB 0)
£ CM
U 41 O «
01 -i-l > M X>
^ J3 *H *H *M
•H 3 00 I* "O  M >M O 01 C
O 3 CQ *H to ^
>> U *J M
X -l
*J <9 >> I 0) C J3
CO 3 (Q 3 V4 -H (fl
B o- a e cu^ *)
<
0)
u
•H
J^
•0 h 0
d oi oo
(Q CO ON
I"M
J3 01
(0 **^
•H -H •
Cxrf ""^ ^"^
T3 CU
• ^ M
w ^ S

3



00
*"*























O 0







M
O 01


^
—4 M
V M
> .M 01
•H (J »
*J -H M
>
•





fM
flj
1^ u
O --H
oo' o oo
C -i C
•H O 01 •*
JJ U U JJ
(Q 01 C A
1. fl ^
V U
iH > -H i— 1
cfl 'H i*< eg
U *J •* U
•H <8 C -H
U ^ 00 h
01 01 •<-• 01
e u w a
Z 2
01 -O
^ •
3 1 13 3; •
4J -H 01 lJ
•rt U 4J
*j co « oa «
M *O (0
a oi e - -H
i-i e s u M
•H 01 h
 IQ
•* « • V) X
C SC 01 01 0\
•M u x! •C r~
oo*w e u c ON
u o oi e a ~
•H -H



^^ C5
"-1 


                                            <4-4

                                             O
                                             0)
                                             v
                                            J=
                                            en
B-28
-------

































1
t














































1.2
C >
•- tl
W M
'g
ty U
U O
«< *•>•»



C
o
«J
m
M
••«•
-
5





e
w
c

r



e
•
M
41
VI

*
£
^
a.

••«



M
e
•-
u
X
e
*
"3
41
K

?
*
e
?-2

e u
e o

— 41
U **
41 •••
9
a.



e
o
*j
a
M
U


1
•a x b
e «• «
j= o .c
_i _• •

i
n i Jf
•o •- a
x a u t
M <• e b
"* •* 41
«= *rf ""5 V »
.. S " 5 S
i x.s x*
.O -> J3 b
3 «•• -• ^
— «J 3 41 M
~ 3 0 — C
(X 7* U i** -x
Oi
I
1 f
— i 4J C
• > A

iT > <* •*»
M -x a w
i.a *J ••*
n f 91 w
u c T3 c
— u S -o
a. ^ — •-

e

lff«

3
"o,
a


i




41

.3
V
U

"o.
CL
Q

ij
O
Z

w • X
O M V "O  • 41 — • U
o -x 4i ^ e • v
•o » b 5 .e u •
e •- I o «
•• tl 3 4) r3 ••
— X 41 41 -
n —o—4i
U *l tl 3 — — b
•- > I 0- •- C*
a, .a •> b w M "3
a.

X
•X M
f §
.- a H
41 O U
— e


u -^
•« t *
a s •"•>
> *
^ 41 S
O
X


*
w
"
<
32
b
00



—



,JJ
"5
O
••>«
f*
Q*
|l|
w
O
•x.


41
J3
U



Ck
*
O


D

J3
IV
U
a
a.

o
X

•o
f s
b if
"CM
•O U 41

• - o a. —
41 —1 6 ~t
2 a ™ u c
19 b V b
U 41 O -^ 4>
— e c o w

a e a a o
a
^


i
41 41

jsp
13 X O
•- * •
& 41 C
& b 3
"38
- i-S
o
JQ

& •
1 tl 1 It
*•« *rf « b 4f
41 1 41 41 w
41 0 b C X
•0 0 3 - u
-. O H
M - C
41 b 41 « — £
A b« O Ch <*
«J b 41 •» O
U ^ 41 — 1 W b
•^ tl " O *> OU
— a « b — a
3. 0 » fi. 13 <•



•JJ
V
z n
v —




!V
1 •• 1

». b b >J C
'u^oSoauJ
u a. — w v 3
A — — 41 «i — •*
41 «I Z « f »
•• > •- 41 SO
4l4l3CbMOx
— -3 0-— 3 0 0
A u "O -^ w a

••* <•• b 4j O 0 tl **
"3.3>2co.2«3
a.
i
X b 41
SO ^
<- H
b
41 3 C

£ 41 M
n « c i
U 3 >-* M
— ««»<•«
O..G B 0
G.


41

(J
a.
CL,

O
Z




tl




.
a
a.


"
0






41
1
•«
"a.
a
0
^




ti

JO
t
u
\
•J
0
z


,,
e>

w
41
b
U.



(-1



^
•5
u
yv
a

u
o
X


u
A
U


a
a.
u
o


41

U
"a.
a
a
I
i i -
•> K X 1 • 1
» e ti ti b n — ?
u — ^ ti t; o
a, o « » b c o.
B b. 41 P4 -t X b
•M W ^ -^ b ^ 4|
^.-c — — new

41 e w — •»
— ••« * •« 3 « — •««
A93C «a.ee
<« b O <•.•-•«— 41 tl
W 4)"**x^w U I


a-o > 1 « a -a — v







41
J3

•X
a.

|

a <*4 •
b «••
•- X 3
3 41 • «
9* a -«• ti
U -° « 0. b

e — e
*• « « 7 9
41 > a ~
A W b -— •)
n e - .s 3
y 41 s Cb —
M X V b >
a « w • «
SL



U
»
X
9 <>.
(9



^
i

" -
£ e *•
* 3 ? ± e
41 41 A O
J3 w 41 O •»
t '•• A Qb **4
o — a
.- >| X b o-
— 3 3 0 U
& er i <- <•
Cb

1 1 1 M
3 4« C -Q 41 S
C C 41 C — M
JJ -0 0 A »4
ti u M a

2 « « > O V
n u • O.-O
U ••< X l»
-. 4) C — 0 0
a i — *> ». s
a.

e i
A -a i
U —1 U
.. 3 s •; -f x
5-.-.11S
jo 41 ti 9 a, <• •
•)«•*• b
U 3 « •- 41 C 41
— C X b, o >
*• tl 4 A -X >x •«
a, .a i 1 - u x




«


«
u >

a. -*<
a. •?;


-j e
o
e
o
i i\
•tan ^
«J 41 —
2 41
5§Si
« - • • !

• 41 —
r ^ » IT »
£"" > • b i —
< b
S
; s

••%

<••— ' m

<* e
u ^
l i
! «
I 1
i *
•• i
— '
w
J 1
w
|
-* w
*» 9
J »
ti


i« hi
B-29
-------

























^

II
3
S
S
3


2
H



























]j «
X 1
s£
*•* •
at
s*
3 b
ST£



S

•*
«

r





a
i
M
1

e
5
V
M


U

1


g
«•
£
c
1
II
ac
1
e !
•— «*
e u
C II


0. (0
** <(
w -
•^l«
9
\ £



1

s

«
•
' Q,

i , s
js.feZj
ill-*-
II ul 7 II b
A U U b.
(• 9 •«• "O
u o e — v
x « 3 II
*a b* U O ••*
o. o • u *<
<

2
•
JJ
^
1
M
£




J
a
8-
0
X

1,
2

u
'••
"a
a

u
£
« «•
« • u
2 1 33
U b • —
« a u u 4
• 3 £ • > r
8— 1 •» ^ II
« • . s -
• M b II —
25*-? S
4 II
u v a v >*
— • — b ^
i 3 - a o
i

V


4


3.
B,


9
Z
1

' B
I 4 ^

X -j

• f- «•
i -in
i i 35

3
w
g.
4
^
e
X

ti
A
4
MM

|
—
0




A
4
O
a

1

ii
2

S

1

„
S
II II -•
e ii « 4
II b — >, b
W •— 4 £ U II
• MS^Mjie^
S " II 'S JC 3 Sl'o w
T II b X U '-
b u b u ii e —
^^•M «%-^«^7
AU^ •MOO4
4 b 11 — b 3 b
U tl «i — U a— II
•- W > C — II 4 x
I'"


II


^
U

o.
Ob
*

e
z
ca

o*
••

^

s

>•
2
£
M
«l 1 4
•- — II ^
f, a -a v
• ' « s" «

* •- -a * 3
0 — — -0 J
•- 4 3 II 4
— 3 0 - U
a » vi — —
•<
i i e
3 J« c :
CS§ £
•• b b 3 «
M .^ III — 1
A 4 e — u
4 U — 4 «
O •- 4
iSHSr-
a
i
JS C X b.
3 43 4 O
M w f
'• «J III
.. a * — •— c v
||.-«b3w|! ** >J
~* 3 «- 4 I 1 4 3
— T> O IBM— W


II
2
n
u

1

w
«
M
3
O b
b 1 U
U 4 w S
I II "1C
3 b S O 4
S 0 •- U i
ii e ii s E
— a - 4 ii
4 -J 3 1 U
U W — II •«*
r g ; . r
|- •- «

1
•I


if
b

^
•V


e
z


c
^
en

•

e -o
ii
b —
• • l
81 — t
.J >~ TJ
- « - «J
S " Sfl
=2-2
a— * 4
a. 4 o ii
4 3 B :
•0 M >>
u jr -3 —
w M B —
• £ — U
J
•o
>>— 13 1
w 3 n i a
.M 0 — 4 0
— VI *• B — M
.• tl ••« b tl II

A C II — "fl «
4 b n ^ if
•« 3 ^ " b > B
-< O II II O •- V
a— j js — -^ i




e
o
4
U
•a •"
28:
2

u
2
4
VI

a>
a

w
o
z
1
4
^B i
<1 O It «
C - J3 f u
*> •*•
« <« e e
3 <» •*- u
41  X t -
^ 1; k •>
Z * 2 it
r > S S5
& J w 0. «

^_
c


4

•-
"i.
C.


3
Z
w
II

*
1-
* 9^
X r*
0 M
b
L —
                                         ,  2 c
                                         I  -I B
                                             i.
                                           T!
                                           S V
                                           4 b





                                           II
                                           m «.
                                              *
                                            a J
                                            b ..
                                            a.
                                          !  -  i
                                            *•  .«
                                            •3  1
                                            e ji
                                            E  W

                                            5  v
B-30
-------


















































•J
V
3
S
••*
e
<3

«
a
m
t-


































w e
"3 0
U M
Z *s

C W
O ti
•— in

•~ k.
» a.

"5 w
o- o

^





c
o







=



e
1
M
tl
13

C




S


W
01
tl





•- "J U
0, u k»
0.

41
jj
t
 e
^ ^ 41
.a «i e
a e 41
u II w
— X 3*
a. 41 T
a.
*
_•
*

O. r~

t?
e •
73 «


£ V


O


















» w
a Ii
CO U

^ w
••* ^

k.

4)
•- C

w ^











1

M
>* «fl
£. 
-• U

















„
A

(9 O
•O
4>
O k.
00
vi _«;
I*
V A




































u
o

-o

3
>
rt)

o














•o
a



fg
W

,£1
^

C
o




















•n
c
a
accuracy,

































V)

u

c.
E



u
3
T3
hi












V)
tl
3


> n

>>e

o — •

O 41
75
-I O
















^
C


-^ n
JC W -*
»!•-*'«
00 U
technical
for biolo
hydrologi
functions





















A


.^


a.


tj
0
•x.


41

,—

U


O.
Q.

^
O
z
41
A
O
V
'a.
a.
15
j
o






41


IV
LI

w*
ft«
S*
^
O




II

&
n
Ul


ft.
a.

o
X
•1 ><
V K U A
U w 19 Ml
•- a i u i 3 a
33W3tC-k1
er o w u — k. —
41 Q Ot O C O — '
bi9Xt04I.Cie
41 • w u O
••41 73 41 -~ —
«> -C-<<00^73
— - 41 "> a, O*4I
J5 VI S Q — CO L.
fl C — -— • O — —
U4,«rf4l CW»*I3
--H**-— .O-->»ti41
a.uo-'— -J^:>k.
a
*

•3 1
(9
C TJ 90 •
o — = in
.£ ** 41
» *w — 41
» M 3 =
C w — W
k. 75 S oor-
« : o c a>
II •« tj U —


M
^
W) U
^ C i—
00 0 - 00

.e ^ c —
u u —

41 •— 73 J\


a — J 3
u — * 6 *^

-^ 3 *fl w 41
a. cr u — >—
a.

>N >> 1
a J3 n
B u
41 •• J
w — . w, o
•- **4 J3 •- —

.-> O «1 0 k» X-O
^31 V» 41 O *J C
« 41 O "3 '-a
U ^ Ok-- c — —

— k, u c - 3 V
C\< w J3 ^ w 7* 7
a.

41
-O
a
a.
a.
(9
,_,
O
z





41

X)

U

«««
- a>
^"
—
0

i
X >- -<
II 0 •-
O V J« VI
C 3 •/> -
— c

c" ~* a
•^ 41 C* 41
J3 > -•• k«
H — C —
W V) A 3
— e u o*
a -< w u
a.






A
<«
u
a.
a
<«
w
5




U

at
3 (V

k. a*
J"


M^






^3

O
>vt

a.



«4
a
*




X3




a.


^
o
*
u
^3
U
a.
a

-
o
a:
a
i n
U Hj

*-" C
S >» O


••* C . i
— U V 00 U X
X) U .. il <« U
V O ul i 33
••* M *j a -o u a*
— • b W •- C U 4J
O.QC 4j w *q i*| W
CL

V
_

CJ
> r^.
QC f^
e
o


-. ,
to


•*!

4; >
«,
> ->
(9 C
6 V
-3

4J
— O


u -^
.-* u
— v»
Cu 3

<

l i
3 -*
C C


1>

j3 rt
rtr u
u ^
•M W
•S.S
D.

O »<
,—
.. u
41 U
— a
ja M
4 1
u v
••* *J
a. vi
a.






a>


nt


— ^
a.
nT
^
o
z



S3

«j e

• - o
V V


(TJ •

•-^ tn
aS
a,





ti

u
a
a
0

73 -
C "fl

IK -
k* ^l
^ z
r
^** O
0
w
.y ^

1^


^»






•—

(9 ftl
3 T3


fl r— .
M U
• ^ U
4= 2





A>


>,
>
•o u
e -------





























^^
?
1

2






.a

























H
v a
II 0
ii —
it

•-s
u o




e
o
••4
M

X
*



B

I
2


*rf
k
M
H
II

U
It
|






e
e
^
Regulatory Ac

•§
«§
e —
||
x i

"o
b
a.



e
c



«
t


1
*
;J 5jj
b
V 1
•I —
v u a e
n a- o
^ •- It W
u ja o —
3 I S • -5
-2^?g
0. • > •- —




u
^
a.
a.
1


b
5 S-
«— a
41 Q «rf 41
issL
u ii « it a
— « x e •
"i S "! 3 1







„
z
u

1*^
a







4^
Not applicable





2
u
>«*

£


, .
•«§ ~
W • • W



U ° h *•
" US?
3


1



„
2
3
a.
a
e
z




|
,.4
O.
a.
|


«
w*

o
1




41

A
«
u


a








II
It
u
•1*
1
•J

V •
i -S
3-1 -«.
«l — b 0
-"a,.
— •IX —
4 6 H *^
U II X
>• M o e
a. ii u «
a.
<


, »
u ~» c



° ,e
b Ol
* ll 1 ^
to ii ii o*
a


tA

1^
• 1 "1
•o •- ^s
1?J! S 5
JS w -0 0
V ••• CL
i" x.a S «
5-^1
u — — -e u
— |« 3 «j b
— 3 O - 3
e. 0- v •» a.
O>




u
^

a.
e


ii
.0

o
"a
o.
it
i



^
u

^
8
|

—




1 W
w , c
ii ii a i «
a «< a «* —
It »•* W U
e a o —
It ••» v»4 U "*4
WHO «•«
i- 5 2" e r
i s t » s
u ^ • a
— «i > o •o



u 5 «
^S 5
sS s
kl U fi.
s~ a
u e> •
u r
« -«4 U
i


- w
e b
b a


**s
ui •— »•
e —
a








ii
it
w
*a
o.
i i u
e u i o — « i —
WTIUWA V<~•£> «~ —
O 0 ^ f «< OX
• »x « ii — -o e
ii •n c — e o w _
 -. cr





ii
it
!







u
*
u

"o.








!l
^ U
H '•*
:$

X > « W
-• ••» •- It
3 II -1 « II U —
• w ii a.— u w
3 M O X w • n
^11 U II •- ^  b
— « — v e ii o
e. b * at n — -•


ii
u
ils
it M Ov

£ II

v a.
";5
a


«B



41

W
a.
a.





i
b £ «l
1 — *) U ««T3
»
z ...s-srs
A e j< i~ * —
- o c u e n
« •-< it « — a
• w b a • o-
e
o
'•4

It
U
o.
o.
It
1


II
a
it
w
"a.
Q.
It
I




U

^
U
Q.
a.

—
o
z



o u
c > -
•- u
M IA M
C C —
5 * T! •
T9 W b U
x ii e
•• «i a. u
II X it I
— ii u ^ G
it .- -•S .2
u a v a
— T i ^ e1
— v - c c
|--



Wl
II

M
a
it

a
z

»
X
00 •»
M ^»

b b —
II b
* It
• X •
U Q
t! .
C it -I
J



^^
1 ^
i o

c
It •*
II
= S
C JC
S«n
*•
9
^



II
*^
IM
0
II
M
3
U
J!
•J -a
e u
kw
^
X!
u —
M
It -•
w e
b «
a a e
0. S- 0
• •• b •«
w u
o u
« ™" «
^ w
^ a u

u •-
Z -S .
a v M ^
a. » TJ c
n e u it
ii
» >. e t*
— b e
0 b —
>• x tt e
to « • e
0 — 3 5
— 3 —
o «•— a
• O b 3 w
^ X -Q U
e -> o - c
v v -< > -i
I*-'2
2^2.5°-
« it O
b U C -
O W — 0
in— ^
w JB ari e
5« a. v *
« M >
— •n « u
ti • £i —
w — v
t • II b
• u ii a
• — b •
^ X 3 -• —
e o T> *
.2 "" u • M
«< • o c
$« b e —
i a. o 5
O K A " X
• ^ ii 3*
^ i. * -a t
u V <
• -------
ja
 CO

•i-i
 co
   cu
 w

 a
 41

 8
 9
 C7
        (0
        u
       *>
        n
       >i-i
        e


       I
     CO
     w

     M
    •H
oo   a

 V   S
F-l  -O
A  <
   M
   M
   •O
   •c
   (0
               •s
                41
                U
                O
               •o
                £
 o u
   (3
 U I*
 41 3
 M U
 M U

«S<
                    eo
 5!
   M

   D
   41
   U
   O
   M
   04

   e
   o
 2
   CO
   3
               V
               U
              •rt
               3
               cr

              £
               M
               CO
              n
.IS
U X
41 CO
H
        00
       •H
       X
                    eo
   W
   e
   CO
 t*
 CO
                    41
                    >>
                    S9
                                                  (0
                                                  M
                                                  CU
   (Q
   U
 O 41
4J T3

 »8
 o
                                     4t
41
•U
O
sc
                                                      o

                                                      M JS

                                                      CO  C
                                                     ,0



                                                      hi  I
                                                      o »—

                                                     CO
                                 41


                                 CO
                                 M
                                 41

                                 O
 41

 
-------
•o
 41
TJ


 U


I
J3

£
   W

   M

   •C
   41
   U
   O
   M
   0U


   O
               M


               £
O  U
    <0
4)  M
4)  3
M  U
00 U
1-4 r^ i*

CD 2 >

 *•»  * ••*


 •fQ  4i n
 4->     *t
•H   •>•*<
jo  e ja
        «^  M s«>

        ^JSr,
        r»     a
                     •  v
                JS


                o
                                               <0 *O Ot  M -4  <0 CO
                                               JS  4) i-i  4* (0 JS     "O
                                               *—• -H     d ;3 ^  4) d
                                                   M   >-H IM     d  O
                                                               4J  O  -< >»  (X
                                                            r-i  m  C  TJ e  a.
                                                                       «Q  <0


                                                                     •H  41  M
                                                                      >  41  41
                                                                      M  d  >
                                                            O -H
                                                                         <  M
                                                                             M
                                                                 M
                                                     -o  -H |>  c  1-1
                    41 NH^
                           O >-l
         M
               <0
               A
 u  a
*d S

•S3
 41 CO
         M
        eq
 u

 10

 4)

 o
                    4)
                    4J
                    <0
                    41

                    a

                    41
                    •O
               4)
          > 
           r«»  
                                           •  0 , CU

                                                                         ^^•i-l«0   • U  •- )-i  TJ  C  «
                                                                                      rH  «j 3:  3  .          WCO
                                                                                               tn r-4
                                                                      00 -H
                                                         i—  O
                                                                            f03s-'l-ljS   •> 4) -H
                                                                               M     41  w ^ » xi
                                                                               -H -o *j -H  *j  o  «j
                                                                               >C«fnm*JJ=
                                                                U
                                  ^ ^  -T •* **  *rf t	* eo
                                                                                            ..  

 (0
 M
 41
•o
 o
                                                                  4)


                                                                  u
                    o  .
                                                                  (0 4J
                                                                  M d  41
                                                                  41 O  d
                                                                  > a  o
                                                                  41
                                                                  CO
                                                                         d
                                                                         o

                                                                  d  M 2
                                                                  O  O  (0

                                                                  4V     M
                                                                  •H  M  41
                                                                  M T>  «1
                                                                  •*  41  41
                                                                  3  41  M
                                                                  crz a,
                                                              B-34
-------














































^

V
f^
X)
CO
H




























































(0
•rt
^4
OI
j^
(J

e
o
•rt
4j
rt
3

19
^
U

oc.
c
•rt
*J
01
U
2C

*j
o
2

CO
«J
a
S
s
3
U
o
a

1*4
0

^
"4
1}
E

3
CO





































































U
I—I
flj
c
o
• rt
4J
(8
a;
c
o
•rt
OT
•rt
(J
01
a





Ss-h-
U *J
« C
i^ 4;
oi e
c M
O (A
S Or
a at
o us

^
o


W
V
c

rrt
(U
73
•rt
3
00

M
0)
•o
• PH
>
O
14
a

^.J
c
0)
3
u
o
Q




w
4)
£>H



2 <


****
V
C/]
*X7 C
C 0
CO *rt
f-l 4J
4J U
V C
3S 3
pbi




ca
V
^






^<
J>>
oo
o
I—I
0
•o
Jg
4J
U
r




O
2












*»
o
•rt
*J
•rt
U



•
p- 4
ttt

4J
V

*
d
•
s:
u
ea

00
o
(•rt Irf
O V
•0 XI
0 §
V


«Q

1 O
t4 J->
to 3
d a.*J
0 0
•rt 4) C
JJ JS
a 4J w
u  w
4i a o
M *rt O^




















































r^
0\











(0
c
o
•rt
4*1
U
e
3
<*-!

73
C
CO
1-1
44
01
5

U
tJ
(0
3
r-4
(0
>
V






























































*H (0 4)
C <*-i >-> V >*
OOP. 1- ,-t
U 1 JS "O rrt

•o  flj 01 «4-l rrt -rt
^^ Wl rrt O 4>J ^*4
CO *J tJ 01 *rt
•rt 3 ^ S CJ
U. r-l C 01 01
On) -rt O CX
w > 2 to
COO 0)
**-* Ol C J* U
O E Wl O • M
C -H -rt (0 W «

O ti > O, «]U«3t7
•rt -rt i— 1 O -rt O C 01
+J > cO 5 O CX!-rt 3*J3>

O
Q




0
2











0
2











O
2







1 T£
q i
r<*4 (/l
n -u -H
u -o
G 3^
•rt *•(

•o
*J 1) G
cum
S "U *J

u u >
0
Q




O












ca
01
^4










O
2






in
\o
Ov


•a
G •
<0 f**

"o!
a

• ?>
O h
M 01
03



T)


>,
|^
r4
f-S
flj *X3
> 4J
W
4J 3
U3 CQ
(U
4j g
3
X) W

. J
•o
oi xt (a
to co s
w u C
a ftj oi
u a *j















y^^
•o
0)
3

•rt
4,J
C
o
u


































^•N
lO

WH
o

rrt

*J
0)
01

CO
%_/



e>-
w
Of

rrt
(0
^

^
(0

U
a
i
c

jB
4J

^
OI

4J
o

w
•o
o
o- x:
C". CO *J
M 01 OI
01 3 S
hi rrt
3 (0 >>
•O > rQ
01
U rrt M
O <0 C
VJ C 0
CU O -H
•rt .0
U 4-1 CJ
0 8 §
10 3 **4
0) <*4
•rt T5
00*9 C
O C <0
rrt (0 rrt
O rrt 4J
T3 *J 0)
0 01 ft
x: 3
4-1 U
01 CO *J
S w to
U 3
01 U rrt
•O 73 BJ
•rt t3 >
> <0 0)
0
•->.>.
Oi 00 60
O O
4J rrt rrt
a o o
4) 73 -O
BOO
3 X! Xi
U *J 4J
7§ § %
01 4) 0)
x; x; x:
*J 4-1 *J
(OHM
III
•1C JC -t-
B-35
-------





























/-N
•o
41
3
e
•H
^j
C
O
u


ON
41
JO
<0
H
































41
i— I
<0
C
O
•rt
^j
<0
PS
a
o
•H
M
•H
U
41
Q




10 Q
tJ K
a M
0 M
C M
O M
Z <
• M
b « M
O M -*4 >
n- a c
O b U
M >H o a

e — i
•H a.1** 4J
3 IQ O 41 41
oo .e a
4J W 4J
BJ -rl « 41
•Q b b 0 <0
•H 41 <0 3
> &. 41 i-l
O i-4 M (0
b 00 10 O > M
o, e *3 a 41 e
•H W b O
fc» 3 «0 3 O -H
e 41 o a. u *j
41 -H U U
§> 4i *J q
4i a js o 3
0 b -H H G <»4
O
Q

W
41
>•






M
•D e
o o
10 -H
1-4 4J
4J U
41 C
* 3





W
41
^4





^
M
O
0

O
J3
41
r





e
o
•H
Citat




§0
0
—I b
0 41
T3 J3
o e




0
Z




ON
—4 ^»
CO ON
W ^*
M
(0
O •
u e
o
<8 -f4
•H (A
o e
*W g
-H y
 >
4) *J -H 4»
a to u
•H U U O
r-l -H 41 *J
41 i-l "-» M

•H a. o o o
3 CO G *H
00 .41 «J
«W JSt CO O
IflT *H t"* CQ C
41 8 » 3
^3 h ^M
•H 41 • *»
> cu «o e •«
O -H 41 B
a G -S 3 *
•H M U U
C 41 -H -O >
V 'H ^
I 41 a ja *j
U U -rt *J (0
o


M
4t
>"









M
41
^4








0
Z






«»
r-
*W ON
O -«

JS
4J •
1-4 
o
u




IM

I
J3 T3 10
«J 6 KM -H
§ ^2 *0 " "5

10 41 41 41 IM
4. * -5 > °
T3 00  'H 11 ^5
O 4J •<-! O M
U <0 A ** V4
a 3 o 41

*J « 41 <0 <0
0 > J= » >
C 4J t^
» o o -H
C O «J "9 M
4J ^*4 O ^ IV
3 rs 3 xi o u
Q
°

Q
SB










m
41









o
Z




1-4
•H
U
a i u
3 (0 41 41
ob > x:
o o « -ft «j a e
4J x: os -H -H
oo ta 4J N 1 X!
e x; M -H 41 M oe
•H4Je«1^4l300
•O O M i-l 41 0 r»
00*>^>UW«





00

1 41
JO fc. Mb
M <• it e
•M % ^4
i w .
e ^» b M
10 O 41 4) 41
•H M P.^3
•o u S S.'Vo
•H e b >

0 i
b 10 *•» b
Oi *O ft
G ^% 'm *^
W co I—4 O 41
o ^ ^4 e
i o > i

S<*4 4J U
•HUM
•O • U 41 41 M
>. 4) -n oo-o
*J 00 CbXI 00 6
e. o M o 3 
-------






























/••%
•o
V
3
e
•iH
4J
e
o
u
SM'
W
4)
n
H
































4)
(0
a
o

^
ra

e
o
•H
M
•H
U
£3




S a
4> 8
e M
O M
8 41
5 M
O M
se <
i

4^ 1 ^J ^3
41 *J C C
E 4) • 41 «
§f»H
^J
rt» 3 (•> 4> *J
41 rH O 3 C3
•O 00 <9 *O 41
•H C > W B
O *J rH ^3 ^ (9
Ui 0) (9 tJ I* 41
O. 3 B O, U
4J (9 .rt O W
O > *J • Vi
C 41 O 41 W 41
W U 3 -H 41 <9
4) O »M 4J M 3
O >*H 0 M 41
•a u 4i <9 *J
>> O -ri W
*J 00 W-i JO O C9
CO O *J 3
«; rH *CJ
3 *O <9 J3 iQ O
OOr.H>^


M
41
&*






M
•o e
e o
<9 -rl
rH *J
•U U
4i e
3! 3

^
«
o
o
•o
o
41
x:


e
o
• r4
*J
CO
^J
•H
U



00
o
rH U
O 41
o &
j= 3
V
s:




to
V
J>4






0
Z




ao
2

•
X

3t

N
«J
•H




•H



e
41
4J
w >> 41 ia
>N U J5 41 -0

O *J 19 19

41 a O «J **
O M 41
V) M rH
WOO rH ^4
<9 *•» O,-r» O
••n 3 O M
rH O. *> 4)
(Q HQ 23
•rl *» JB <9 <9
*• W H 3 >

<0 M JJ U
C • C -rl

O IH 41 f 0
*» a 3 a
41 rH W O
3 M «9 0 U
(9

O
Z










w
4)







n
41
*"


41

C3
•
•n
-»
* f»
e r<
•H
4) •
W rH
W (0




•••»



1

O
o
b
O»

41
•«
'>
0

P»
*J
O
B
M
41
O
•o
^J
C

3
*

Q
Z










M
41







O
Z




«N
2

.
06

^

<•
«J
a.




j<




4f
T> W
B (9
<9

•U 41

» r-t
M?
a

*J* M
19 19
3 *<
rH 41
<9 B
> S
41 e

U ***
0 6
«H O tJ
•H U
10 *J -H
41 O rH
K e a,
3 5 -H


















































1
4f
j

M
41
(9
3

19
>

^H
O

0
]

^
g

^

o
Z










ca
4)







M
41
>"




v«
•^
OS
-H

t
Q
.
i— i
i-<




"*





V)
M
4)
*J

f
^
4J
B
§

B

>.
rH
B
O

(0
•U
(9
















































1
M
a
W rH
•M (Q
T3 B
O
T3 -rt
8tJ
M B
3
CQ **<
M TJ
41 B
*^O 'Q
> *j
O 4>
U 3
0.
<«H
tJ 0
e
41 B
1 ^
3 -H
1"

W
4)










M
41







O







t
C/3

•
"^
*
O S
M ON





e


B
*H
(Q
B
O
(J

^J
O
M
4)
0
•o
4J
•fH
tJ
3
l^
^
M
41
3
2



















































00
gj
•^4
^J
<9
3
PH
<0
>
41
U
0

41
U
3
73 W
41 T3
U C
O <9
W rH
O> *->
41















































                                    o
                                    en
                                    '01
                                    4)
                                  41

                                  e
                                  I
B-37
-------


































^^
•c
01
3
B
•H
4,>
B
0
 B 4)
O -H •<->
hi 4J 43
a*  H
01
M
01 hi .
O O M
•0 >+* S
o
4-1 0) 'P4
B hi 4J
4) 3 U
| TJ d
3 01 3
U U VM
Q
Q


«
41






U
•0 B
B 0
 V
Q fl ca
W B
41 O
4J *M CJ
fl 0
4J PH
CO 4-1 «J
B 4J
j^ 4) C
hi e 4i
0 4J £
>< hi C
IB O
»au
z
JK
00
o
p-l hi
O 01

4-» Z
01
r




c



Soo
Z B

4-> 'S
01 hi
U 01
p. o
hV B
01 0
^ O
B
•p< CQ
OI
0 4J
4J 3
, ^
M fl
(Q 4J
> «
4J 01
U 4J
a. 4-> TJ
01 CO B
hi «J

41 hi 4J
jfl O 41
4J >l J































"O
*J
m
T3


*
B
0
^
fl











S-.

m
*j
OJ
e
§

B
0
a
3 M
"O
tr B
U co
M PH
10 4-»
43 01
M

O
ht ^ft
3 ^
^J 3
U — 1
U <0
0 >
hi
cu


o
z









M
41








M
41




4J
41
M
<
• a\

ON
» PH
B
it
B •
A PH
(0 fl
CQ





O



1 M
0 -0
hi B
At fl 1
p-l 9)
fl 4J -H
aS'
•H V
<0 00 hi
4-> C U
B -P* 3
O U
U fl 0)
3 B
.U -H O
O fl -H
E > *J
01 U
(0 B
01 hi 3
o o m
•o
W 01 B
S U fl)
01 3 PH

3 41 41
U O 3
O
a


M
01
**








M
41
^*







O





M
2

"S
•> r-^
B
t«4
0 <
J3 >H
41
,£ W
PH 41
•H
CO





a



to
01
3

fl TJ
> 41

^^ (^
P 4J
"8 (Q

^ *J
B 0
O B
E
4)
• - hi
>> 41

^4
u n
•H -O
hi B

*O ^J
41 4)
M 2

•O 41 hi
<4H -H J 41
0 > CO
O 00
41 hi e B
 4)
4) B 41 M
jpj
H


ca
01
*"








w
01
SH







O
Z


^.
w-i r>>
O ON

B
41 •
fl 41
4V hi
U 3
A *-"
CU PH
41 3
o u
• u
CO 00

3





er



hi 4J
O U
**^  41
B 3
-W
ca ca
4) 00 4J
hi B B
3 -H 4)
TJ h, S
4) ra 4i
u a. u
0 oi fl
u u u
a. a. co





















































a

f*^
4J
4)

M
ca
u
u
•o
T3


^
O


M
U
O

B
.91

3
u
o



M
4)
^








O
555








CO
0)
>"



PH
fl
6
41
O
hi
•H
^
B

*
CO

3





**






















(A
O
•rl
U
a
3
VM





























.
^t
U
a
V
00
B
O

4^
U
01
4J \O
o r^
hi a\
a, —











ca
43 G
4-1 0
•H -H
% 4^
U
T3 tS
41 3
^J |^^
fl
•H hi
U O
O <4-l
ca
ca ca
n cu
3
4) PH
hi ft

ca pp.
4) M
3 *->
•o oi
41 B
U O
o e

a.


o
z









M
41








ca
41


O
p*»
ON
**

33
i
De

*
B
O
4J
^
J
s





ca



                                      0)
                                      4)

                                      cn
                                    •U

                                    O
                                    U
B-38
-------

































<^%
•a
di
V
•o
3
•— 1
U
C
3
U
^-/
a\
V
i—t
A
*s
H
































u
i-H
CO
C
o
•H
4_1
CO
OS
c
O
•r4
VI
tiH
U
HI
o






fr-
(« a
4J (n
«j i
a M
O M
§4)
CO
O (n
S5 <
i
4J
OJ

U)
M
U
U
•3 U)
•O 01

c
i-H
M R)
01 C
O O
"O -H
J-)
>> o
CO S
0 3
1-4 IM
O
W *^V
o c
£ nj
^J f»4
01
s:

01
V
>«





V)
•o c
e o
CO -H
i-H *J




O
2^
^ ul -
0) C
^ 3
fo
»^
^
oc
o
^
o
^o
o
JZ
4J
V





c
o
•r"
4J
<0
*J
•H
U



>>
«o
o
1-4 1-
O 4J
•o f
0 E
j= :
+> z
V






M
ft]
W
>•


•u
e
to

, .
<. X

C5 CC
l-i C
U 0)
Jfi 3 Ul
<8 U r-
*J U O>
••H SJ i— i




w




1 M
o -o w «o
U C «J C
a.  01 4J
OJ 3 •-< -f C
•O 4J 0)
•H 00 CJ rH £
> e ti to 4->
O -fl -i-l .H RJ
u jj js u aj
a. m o -H u
3 '*-!. 4.)
4J f-4 OJ -H
O <0 .C 4J U
C > E-> Wl 4J
01 <0 4->
M 03
0) U • 0) S
O O Ul C 01
-O <+•< C -H 4J
0 B w
4-j -i
0) 3 O O
U U WH jJ <4H
o
a

10
0)
>«








Ul
a
>'





o
•V
ff^



•
EC
JC
0
3E
T)
W
c
-------
       APPENDIX C

  Abstracts of Wetland
Evaluation Methodologies
   Reviewed In Lonard
      et al.. (1981)
-------
Citation:
    Brown, A., Kittle, P., Dale, E. E., and Huffman, R. T.  1974.  "Rare and
    Endangered Species, Unique Ecosystems and Wetlands," Departnent of Zoology
    and Department of Botany and Bacteriology.  The University of Arkansas
    Fayetteville, Ark.
Abstract:
    The Arkansas Wetlands Classification System contains a two-part,  multi-
variate approach for evaluating freshwater wetlands  for maximum wildlife pro-
—tion and diversity.   Initially Arkansas wetlands  were qualitatively clas-
sitied as prime or nonprime wetland habitats according to use  by man  "  A nu-
merical value for a wetland was determined by calculating a  subscore  which was
based on the multiplication of a significance coefficient by a determined
weighted value.  The values for each variable were summed and  a total wetland
quantitative value was  obtained for use by decision  makers.
 Citation:
     Dee,  N.,  et  al.   1973.   "Environmenta-1  Evaluation  System  for  Water  Re-
     sources Planning,"  Water Resources  Research, Vol 9,  No. 3, pp 523-534.
      "The  EES  is  a  methodology for conducting  environmental  impact  analysis.
 It  was  developed  by an  interdisciplinary research  team and is  based on a
 hierarchical arrangement  of environmental quality  indicators,  Jn  arrangement
 that classifies the major areas  of environmental concern into  major categories,
 components, and ultimately into  parameters and measurements  of environmental
 quality.   The  EES provides for environmental impact  evaluations in  four major
 categories:  ecology, environmental pollution,  esthetics, and  human interest.
 Thesa four categories are further broken down  into 18  components  aud finally
 into 78 parameters.  The  EES provides  a means  for  measuring  or estimating
 selected environmental  impacts of large-scale  water  resource development  projects
 in  commensurate units termed 'environmental impact units' (EIU).  Results of
 using the  EES  include a total score in ETC 'with1  and  'without' the proposed
 project; the difference between  the two scores is  one  measure  of  environmental
 impact.  Environmental  impact scores developed in  the  EES are  based on the
 magnitude  of specific environmental impacts and their  relative importance.
 Another major  output from the EES is an indication of  major  adverse impacts
 called  'red flags,'  which are of concern of and by themselves. These flags
 indicate  'fragile'  elements of the environment, which  must be  studied in.  more
 detail."   (Author abstract.)
                                            C-l
-------
Citation:
    Fried, E.  1974.  ''Priority Rating of Wetlands for Acquisition,"
    Transactions of the Northeast Fish aau Wildlife Conference, Vol 31,
    ?p 15-30.
Abstract:

    New York State's Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1972 provided $5 mil-
lion for inland wetland acquisition, $18 million for tidal wetlands acquisi-
tion, and $4 million for wetlands restoration.  A priority rating system,
with particular emphasis on inland wetlands, was developed to guide these
programs.  The governing equation was:  priority rating = (P + V + A) * 5,
where the priority rating is per-acre desirability for acquisition,  P  is
biological productivity,  V  is vulnerability, and  A  is additional factors.
Both actual and potential conditions could be rated.  The rating system was
successfully applied to some 130 inland wetlands.  Using a separate equation,
wetland values were related to costs.  (Author abstract.)
Citation:

    Galloway, G. E.  1978.  "Assessing Man's Impact on Wetlands," Sea Grant
    Publication No. UNC-SG-78-17 or UNC-WRII-78-13&, University of
    North Carolina, Raleigh. North Carolina.
Abstract:

    Th3 Wetland Evaluati:n S'-st^T.  '/-^S) proposed by Galloway e.T.pr.asires  a
systems approach  to evaluate man's -impact on a wetland ecosystem.   Impacts  are
determined and compared  for "with" and "without" project conditions.  The
advice of an  interdisciplinary  team as well as the input of local elected
officials and laymen are  included  as part of the WES model.  Parameters  that
make  up a wetland are assessed  at  the macro-level and the results of  the
evaluation are displayed  numerically and graphically with computer-assisted
techniques.


Citation:

    Golet,  F.  C.   1973.   "Classification and Evaluation  of  Freshwater
    Wetlands as  Wildlife Habitat in the Glaciated Northeast,"   Transactions
    of the Northeast Fish and Wildlife Conference,  Vol 30,  pp  257-279-
Abstract:

    "A detailed classification system for freshwater wetlands is presented
along with ten criteria for the evaluation of wetlands as wildlife habitat.
The results are based on a 2-year field study of over 150 wetlands located
throughout the state of Massachusetts.  The major components of the classifi-
cation system include wetland classes and subclasses, based on the dominant
life form of vegetation and surface water depth and permanence; size
categories; topographic and hydrologic location; surrounding habitat types;
proportions and interspersion of cover and water; and vegetative intersper-
sion.  These components are combined with wetland juxtaposition and water
                                           C-2
-------
chemistry  to produce criteria for a wetland evaluatioa.  Using a system of
specifications and ranks, wetlands can be arrayed according to their
wildlife value for decision-making."  (Author abstract.)  "At this point, the
system has been used in numerous states on thousands of wetlands; recent re-
visions have resulted in such use."  (F. C. Golet)
 citation:

     Gupta, T.  R. ,  and Foster, J.H.   1973-   "Valuation of Visual-Cultural
     Benefits from Freshwater Wetlands in Massachusetts," Journal of the
     Northeastern Agricultural Council, Vol 2, No 2, pp 262-273.


 Abstract:

     The authors suggested an alternative to the "willingness to pay" approaches
 fo*" measuring the social •'} lv.es of r.2tural open space and recreational re-
 sources.  The method combines an identification and measurement of the physical
 qualities  of the resource by landscape architects.  Measurement values were
 expressed  in the content of the political  system and current public views.
 The procedure is demonstrated by its application to freshwater wetlands in
 Massachusetts.
Citation:

    Kibby, H. V.  197S.  ''Effects of Wetlands on Water Quality,'1 Proceedings
    of the Symposium on Strategies for Protection and Management of Flocdplain
    '^etla^Js and Other Riparian Ecosystems,  General Technical Report No. CTR-
    WO-12, U. S. Department of Agriculture,  Forest Service, Washington, D. C.
Abstract:

    wetlands potentially aave significant effects on water quality.  Signif-
icant amounts of nitrogen are assimilated during the growing season and then
released in the fall and early spring.   Phosphorus, while assimilated by wet-
lands, is also released throughout the year.  Some potential management tools
for evaluating the effect of wetlands on water quality are discussed.  (Author
abstract.)
Citation:

    Larson, J. S. (ed).   1976.  "Models for Assessment of Freshwater Wetlands,"
    Pub. No 32 Water Resources Research Center, University of Massachusetts,
    Amherst, Mass.
Abstract:

    Four submodels for relative and economic evaluation of fr=shvater wet
are presented within a single, three-phase eliisinative model.  The submodels
treat wildlife, visual-cultural, groundwater, and economic values.


                                          C-3
-------
    The wildlife and visual-cultural models are. based on physical character-
istics which for the most part can be measured on existing maps and aerial
photographs.  Each characteristic is given values by rank and coefficient.  A
relative numerical score is calculated for the total wetland characteristics
and used to compare it with a broad range of northeastern wetlands or with
wetlands selected by the user.  The groundwater model places wetlands in
classes of probable groundwater yield based on surficial geologic deposits
under the wetland.
    The economic submodel suggests values for wildlife, visual-cultural aspects,
groundwater, and flood control.  Wildlife values are derived from the records
of state agency purchases of wetlands with sportsmen's dollars for wildlife
management purposes.  Visual-cultural economic values are based on the record
of wetland purchases for open space values by municipal conservation commis-
sions.  Groundwater values stem from savings realized by selection of a
drilled public water supply over a surface water scurce.  Flood control values
are based on U. S. Army Corps of Engineers data on flood control values of the
Charles River, Massachusetts, mainstream wetlands.
    The submodels are presented within the framework of an overall three-
phase eliminative model.  Phase I identifies outstanding wetlands which should
be protected at all costs.  Phase II applies the wildlife, visual-cultural, and
groundwater submodels to those wetlands which do not meet the criteria for
outstanding wetlands   Phase III develops the economic values of the wetlands
evaluated in Phase II.
    The models are intended to be used by local, regional, and state resource
planners and wetland regulation agencies.  (Author abstract.)
 .itation:
    Reppert,  R.  T. ,  et ai.   1979.   "Zetland Values:   Concepts  and Methods for
    Wetlands  Evaluation,'' IVR Research Report 79-R-l.  U.  S.  Army Engineer
    Institute for Water Resources,.Fort Belvoir,  Virginia.
Abatract:

    The evaluation of wetlands is based on the analysis of their physical,
b.;logical,  and huaan u^s characteristics.   The report discusses lilies e func-
tional characteristics and identifies specific criteria for determining the
efficiency with which the respective functions are performed.
    Two potential wetlands evaluation methods are described.   One is  a non-
quantitative method in which individual wetland areas are evaluated based on
the deductive analysis of their individual functional characteristics.  The
other is a semiquantitative method in which the relative values  of two or
more site alternatives are established through the mathematical  rating and
summation of their functional relationships.
    The specific functions and values of wetlands which are covered in this
report are (1) natural biological functions,  including food chain productivity
and habitat, (2) their use as sanctuaries,  refuges,  or scientific study areas,
(3) shoreline protection, (4) groundwater recharge,  (5) storage  for flood and
storm water, (6) water quality improvement, (7) hydrologic support, and
(8) various  cultural values.  (Author abstract.)
                                            C-4
-------
 Citation:

     Schuldiner, P. W. ,  Cope, D.  F. ,  and Newton, R.  B.   1.979.   "Ecological
     Effects of Highway Fills of Wetlands," Research Report.   National Co-
     operative Highway Research Program Report No.  21SA, Transportation Re-
     search Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.  C.

     and

     Schuldiner, P. W.,  Cope, D.  F.,  and Newton, R.  B.   1979.   "Ecological
     Effects of Highway. Fills of wetlands,"  User's  Manual.   National Co-
     operative Highway Research Program Report No.  21SB, Transportation Re-
     search Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.  C.


 Abstract:

     The two reports include a Research Report and a User's  Manual that were
 prepared to provide, in concise format, guidelines  and information needed for
 the determination of the ecological effects that may result from the place-
 ment of highway fills on wetlands and associated floodplains and to suggest
 procedures by which deleterious impacts can be minimized or avoided.  The
 practices that can be used to enhance the positive  benefits are also discussed.
 Both reports cover the most common physical, chemical, and  biological effects
 that the highway engineer is likely to encounter when placing fills in wet-
 lands and displays the effects and their interactions in a  series of flow-
 charts and matrices.
 Citation;

     Stearns, Conrad and Schmidt - Consulting Engineers.   1979.   "Analysis of
     Selected Functional Characteristics of Wetlands," Contract
     No. DACW73-78-R-0017, Reston, Virginia.


 Abstract;

     The investigation, focused on identifying factors  and criteria for assessing
 the wetland functions of water quality improvement,  groundwater recharge, storm
 and floodwater storage, and shoreline protection.   Factors  and  criteria  were
 identified that could be used to develop procedures  to assist  Corps  personnel
 in assessing the value of general wetland types  and  of specific wetlands in
 performing the functions indicated.   To the extent possible, procedures  were
 then outlined that allow the application of these  criteria  to  specific sites.


    This procedure involved a three-phase study of functional wetlands at four
selected sites.

    Phase I - Nationwide Survey of Material Fluxes Through Wetlands.   This
phase would be an extensive short-term data collection effort to ootain  infor-
mation on material fluxes through many different types of wetlands in)der widely
varying conditions.
                                        C-5
-------
    Phase II - Model Development and Verification.  This phasa utilizes the
data base and output from Phase I to formulate and calibrate deterministic
models for the water quality improvement functioning of wetlands.

    Phase III - Detailed and Long-Term Field Studies.  This phase includes
pure and applied research.  The results of Phases I and II will indicate what
factors are useful for predicting the water quality improvement functioning of
wetlands and those factors that seem to be important but need more study to be
fullv understood.
 Citation;

     Smardon, R. C.   1972.  "Assessing Visual-Cultural Values on Inland Wetlands
     in Massachusetts," Master of Science Thesis.  University of Massachusetts.
     Amherst, Mass.
Abstract;

    This study deals with the incorporation of visual-cultural val"»s of
inland wetlands into the decision-making process of land use allocation of
inland wetlands in Massachusetts.  Visual-cultural values of inland wetlands
may be defined as visual, recreational, and educational values of inland wet-
lands to society.  The multivariate model is an eliminative and comparative
model which has three levels of evaluation*.  The first level identifies those
wetlands which are outstanding natural areas or have regional landscape
value or are large wetland systems.  These wetlands have top priority for
preservation.  The second level is a rating and ranking system.  At this
stage the combined natural resource values of the wetland are evaluated.
Wetlands with high ratings or.rank from this level are eliminated and have
the next highest priority for preservation or some sort of protection.
The third level evaluation considers the cultural values (i.e., accessibility,
location near schools, etc.) of wetlands.  The model is designed to be
utilized at many different levels of decision making.  For example, it can be
used by state agencies, town.conservation commissions, and conceivably could
be used by other states in Northeastern United States.  (Author abstract.)
Citation;

    Solomon, R.  C.,  et al. 1977.   "Water Resources Assessment Methodology
    (WRAM)—Impact Assessment and Alternative Evaluation." Technical Re-
    port Y-77-1, Environmental Effects Laboratory, U.  S.  Army Engineer
    Waterways Experiment Station, CE,  Vicksburg,  Miss.


Abstract;

    The U. S. Army Crops of Engineers  has been directed by various legislation,
acts,  and regulations to conduct  systematic and comprehensive environmental
planning for its activities.  The ciirust of this  study has been to pull
together the state of the jrt and to synthesize a VRAM for impact assessment
and alternative  evaluation.   A review  of 5* impact assessment methodologies
revealed that none entirely satisfied  the needs or requirements for the Corps'
water resources  projects and programs.  However,  salient features contained
in several of the methodologies were considered pertinent for inclusion in
-------
 WRAM.   One of the  features  consisted of weighting impacted variables and scal-
 ing the impacts  of alternatives.   The resulting weighted and scaled values are
 multiplied to obtain final  importance values.   The weighted rankings technique
 is the basic weighting and  scaling tool used in this  methodology.   It consists
 of developing relative importance coefficient values  for each variable,  as-
 signing alternative choice  coefficient values to each alternative  in relation
 to its impact on each variable,  and displaying the products in a final coeffi-
 cient  matrix. Principal components of WRAM include assembling an  inter-
 disciplinary team; selecting and  measuring assessment variables; identifying,
 predicting,  and  evaluating  impacts and alternatives;  and documenting the
 analysis.   Although WRAM is presented for use by the  Corps in water resources
 management,  it does- have general  applicability to other resource management
 agencies.
Citation:

    State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources.  Undated.  "Environ-
    mental Evaluation of Coastal Wetlands (Draft),"  Tidal Wetlands Study,
    pp 181-208.
Abstract:

    The Maryland scheme for the evaluation of coastal wetlands is based on
the recognition of 32 distinct types of vegetation in the marshes and
swamps of tidewater areas of the state..  Rankings of vegetation tvpes were
developed and parameters for the evaluation of specific areas of wetlands were
described.   The application of the scheme is explained and demonstrated.
Guidauce is provided for the interpretation of results.  The application of
the Maryland scheme requires a detailed inventory of the types of vegetation.
in the area selected for evaluation.
 Citation:

     U. S. Army Engineer Division. Lower Mississippi Valley.   August 1930.
     "A Habitat Evaluation System for Water Resources Planning,'1 U.  S.  Army
     Corps of Engineers, Lovrer Mississippi Valley Division,  Vicksburg,  Miss.

 Abstract;

     A methodology is presented for determining the quality of major habitat
 types based on the description sn-i quantification of habitat characteristics.
 Vilues are compared for existing baseline conditions,  future conditions with-
 out the project,  and witn .alternative project conditions.   Curves,  parameter
 characteristics,  and descriptive information are included  in the a-pendices.
 The Habitat Evaluation System (HES) procedure includes the  following steps for
 evaluating impacts of a water resource development project.   The steus include:
 (I) obtaining habitat type or land use acreage,  (I) deriving Habitat Quality
 Index scores, (3) deriving Habitat. Unit Values (4) projecting Habitat  Unit
 Values for the future with and without project conditions,  (5} using Habitat
 Unit Values to assess impacts of project alternatives, and  (6) determining
 mitigation requirements.


                                       C-7
-------
Citation:
    U. S. Army Engineer Division, New England.  1972.  ''Charles River.
    Main Report and Attachments," Waithan, Mass.
Abstract:
    The study was a long-term project directed by the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers to study the resources of the Charles River Watershed"in eastern
Massachusetts.  It.had an empnasis on how to control flood damages in the
urbanized lower watershed and how to prevent any significant flood damage in
the middle and upper watershed.   Seventeen crucial wetlands were identified.
Various aspects of the watersned were studied in an interdisciplinary fashion.
 Citation:
     U.  S.  Department of Agriculture.   1978.   "Wetlands  Evaluation Criteria-
     Water  and Related Land Resources'of the  Coastal  Region,  Massachusetts,"
     Soil Conservation Services,  Amherst,  Mass.   01002.
 Abstract:

     A portion of the document (Appendix S)  contains  criteria used to evaluate
 major wetlands in the coastal region of Massachusetts.   Each of the 85 wet-
 lands which was evaluated was subjected to  map study and a field examination.
 Ratings were assigned based on point values obtained for various attributes.
 A rationale for each evaluation item was developed to explain the development
 of the criteria.
 Citation:
     U.  S.  Department of Agriculture.   1973.   "Wetlands  Evaluation Criteria—
     Water  and Related Land Resources  of  the  Coastal  Region,  Massachusetts,"
     Soil Conservation Service,  Amherst,  Mass.   01002
 Abstract:

     The study addresses  water resource  problems,  alternatives,  and needs
 tlir^ugn 1990.   Results will be useu  to  prepare  a  state  water ana  feia^ed land
 resources  plan.   Appendix 3,  Wetland Evaluation Criteria,  describes a procedure
 used to evaluate 85 wetlands  in the  coastal  region.   Point values  on a 1 to
 10 (low to high) scale were assigned to seven functional values permitting a
 total index value number.   The criteria were developed  by an interdisciplinary
 team of USDA specialists.
                                     C-8
-------
  Citation:

      U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.  1980.   "Habitat Evaluation Procedures
      (HEP) iManual (102 ESM)," Washington, D.  C.


  Abstract:

      HEP is a method which can be used to document the quality and quantity
  of available habitat for selected wildlife species.   HEP provides information
  for two general types of wildlife habitat comparisons:  (1) the relative value
  of different areas at the same point in time; and (2) the relative value of the
  same area at future points in time.  By combining the two types of comparisons,
  the impact of proposed or anticipated land and water changes on wildlife
  habitat can be quantified.  This document describes  HEP, discusses some prob-
  able applications, and provides guidance in applying HEP in the field.
 Citation;

     Virginia Institute cf Marine Science.   Undated.   "Evaluation of Virginia
     Wetlands" (Mimeographed).
 Abstract:

     The authors presented a procedure to evaluate the wetlands of Virginia.
 Two bro.au categories of crite-ia were utilized in evaluating the ecological
 significance of wetlands:  tne interaction of wetlands with the marine environ-
 ment and the interaction of the wetland with the terrestrial environment.  The
 following formula was developed to demonstrate the incorporation of the various
 factors into the relative ecological significance values:
Citation:

    Winchester, 3. H. ,  and Harris, L. D.  1979.  ''An Approach re Valuation of
    Florida Freshwater Wetlands,'1 Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Conference on
    the Restoration and Creation of Wetlands, Tampa, Florida.
Abstract:

    A procedure was presented for estimating the relative ecological and func-
tional value of Florida freshwater wetlands.  Wetland functions evaluated by
this procedure include water quality enhancement, water detention, vegetative
diversity and productivity, and wildlifa habitat value.  The field parameters
used in the assessment were wetland size, contiguity, structural vegetative
diversity, and an edge-to-area ratio.   The procedure was field tested and was
time- and cost-effective.   Allowing flexibility in both the evaluative criteria
used and the relative weight assigned to each criterion, the methodology is
applicable in any Florida region for which basic ecological data are available.
(Author abstract.)


                                            C-9
-------
             APPENDIX D

         Additional Studies
  reviewed by Lonard et^ jJU (1981)
that did not meet screening criteria
-------
Shabraaa, L. A., Batie, S. S., and Mabbs-Zeno, C.  C.  1979.  "The Economics of
Wetlands Preservation in Virginia," Research Report No.  A. E. 38, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg,  Virginia.

Silberhorn, G. M. , Down, G. M., and Barnard, T. A., Jr.   1974.  "Coastal Wet-
lands of Virginia/Guidelines for Activities Affecting Virginia Wetlands,"
Interim Report No. 3, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point,
Virginia,

U. S. Department of Agriculture.  1974.  "Environmental  Assessment Procedure,"
Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D. C.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1976.  "Environmental Assessment Per-
spectives," EPA-600/2-76-069, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Wharton, C. H.  1970.  "The Southern River Swamp - A Multiple Use Environment,"
Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Georgia State  University.

Whitaker, G. A., and McCuen, R. H.   1975.  "A Proposed Methodology for Assessing
the Quality of Wildlife Habitat," Department of Civil Engineering, University
of Maryland, College Park, Maryland.

Williams and Works.  1979.  "Reuse of Municipal Wastewater by Volunteer Wet-
lands - Interim Report, 1979," Grand Rapids, Michigan.
                                      D-l
-------
                 Documents That Did Not Satisfy the Screening
                       Criteria and Evaluation Standards


Bara, M. 0., Tiner, R. W., Jr., and Newkrik, D. C.  1977.  "Guidelines for
Evaluating Proposed Wetland Alterations in South Carolina," South Carolina
Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, Columbia, South Carolina.

Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratories.  1974.  "A Technique for Environmental
Decision Making Using Quantified Social and Aesthetic Values," Publication
No. BNWL-1787, Richland, Washington.

Belknap, R. K., and Furtado, J. G.  1967.  "Three Approaches to Environmental
Resource Analysis," The Conservation Foundation, Washington, D. C.

Benson, D., and Perry, R. F.  1965.  "An Acre of Marsh is Worth," The Con-
servationist, pp 30-33.

California Coastal Commission.  1979.   "Statewide Interpretive Guidelines for
Wetlands and Other Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (Draft),"
San Francisco, California.

Conimonwealth of Virginia.  1974.  "Wetlands Guidelines," Marine Resources
Commission, Newport News, Virginia.

Coordinating Council on the Restoration of the Kissimmee River Valley and
Taylor Creek-Nubbin Slough Basin.   1978.  "Environmental Quality through Wet-
lands Utilization," Proceedings of a Symposium on Freshwater Wetlands, Talla-
hassee, Florida.

Foster, J. H.  1978.  "Measuring the Social Value of Wetland Benefits," The
National Symposium on Wetlands, Lake Vista, Florida, University of Massachu-
setts, Amherst, Massachusetts.

Fritz, W. R.  1978.  "Tertiary Treatment of Wastewater using Cypress Wetlands;
Summary and Final Report," Boyle Engineering Corporation, Orlando, Florida.

Gosselink, J. G.,, Odum, E.  P., and Pope, R. M.   1974.   "The Value of the Tidal
Marsh," Publication No. LSU-SG-74-03,  Center for Wetland Resources, Louisiana
State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Gupta, T. R.  1972.  "Economic Criteria for Decisions on Preservation and Use
of Inland Wetlands in Massachusetts,"  Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural
Economics Council1 Vol 1, No. 1, pp 201-210.

Hill, D.  1976.  "A Modeling Approach to Evaluate Tidal Wetlands," Transactions
of the Wildlife Management Institute's Forty-First North American Wildlife and
Natural Resources Conference, Washington, D. C.

Larson, J. S.  1973.  "A Guide to Important Characteristics and Values of
Freshwater Wetlands in the Northeast," No. 31,  University of Massachusetts,
Amherst, Massachusetts.

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.  Undated.  "Fresh-
water Wetland Maps and Classification (Draft)."
                                      D-2
-------
Shabraan, L. A., Batie, S. S., and Mabbs-Zeno, C. C.  1979.   "The Economics of
Wetlands Preservation in Virginia," Research Report Xo.  A.  E.  38, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg,  Virginia.

Silberhorn, G. M. , Down, G. M., and Barnard, T. A., Jr.   1974.   "Coastal Wet-
lands of Virginia/Guidelines for Activities Affecting Virginia  Wetlands,"
Interim Report No. 3, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point,
Virginia.

U. S. Department of Agriculture.  1974.  "Environmental  Assessment Procedure,"
Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D. C.

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency.  1976.  "Environmental Assessment Per-
spectives," EPA-600/2-76-069, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory,
Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Wharton, C. H.  1970.  "The Southern River Swamp - A Multiple Use Environment,"
Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Georgia State  University.

Whitaker, G. A., and McCuen, R. H.  1975.  "A Proposed Methodology for Assessin
the Quality of Wildlife Habitat," Department of Civil Engineering, University
of Maryland, College Park, Maryland.

Williams and Works.  1979.  "Reuse of Municipal Wastewater  by Volunteer Wet-
lands - Interim Report, 1979," Grand Rapids, Michigan.
                                      D-3
-------
            APPENDIX E

    Scale-weighted Checklists
developed by Nelson et al. (1982)
-------

Classes of
Factors in Level
of Adverse Impact


Individual Factors
for Consideration

Factor^
Scale
(0-3)

Facto r2
Weight
(1-5)
Scaling-3
Weighting
Product
(0-15)
      Water dynamics:

      • TOPOGRAPHY OR
        BATHYMETRY
      • FLOW AND
        CIRCULATION
                Increased substrate or soil
                elevations obstructing or
                diverting natural  drainage?
                Changing currents  or stream
                flows?
                Changing circulation patterns?
                Changing water level fluctua-
                tions?
GROUND WATER4   Modify water tables or flows?
                Disrupt aquifers,  springs, or
                wells?
      Particulates:

      •  PARTICLE  SIZE
        AND DENSITY

      •  SEDIMENTATION
        AND TURBIDITY
                Similar at extraction and
                disposal  sites?
                Probable sedimentation,
                mounding, and substrate
                burial?
                Probable erosion,  sediment
                suspension, transport and
                turbidity?
                SUBTOTALS
      1.   Level  of  impact  for each  factor  is  scaled  insignificant  (0), minor  (1),
      moderate  (2), or major (3).
      2.   Factor weight  from low  (1)  to  high  (5)  is  assigned  based on  relative
      importance of each factor.
      3.   Scale  value is multiplied by numerical  weight.
      4.   Not explicitly covered  under Section 404 of  Clean Water Act.
Appendix Table  E-l. Assessment scaling-weighted checklist for physical environ-
     mental factors in dredge and fill operations (from Nelson and Associates
     Inc.  1981).
                                            E-l
-------
       Classes of
    Factors  in Level
   of Adverse Impact
     Individual  Factors
      for  Consideration
                  Scaling-3
Factor'   Factor?  Weighting
Scale    Weight    Product
(0-3)     (1-5)      (0-15)
   Water Quality:

   t SURFACE WATER
     GROUND WATER4
   Sediments:

   t CONTAMINANT
     CONCENTRA-
     TIONS
Probable decreased dissolved
oxygen or change in pH?
Increased nutrients, promoting
salinization or eutrophication?

Increased bioavailability of
toxic or hazardous substances?
Oxidized contaminants in diked
upland sites, polluting the
return flows?
Oxidized contaminants in diked
upland sites leaching into
aquifers?
Migrating to open water?
Toxic or hazardous contami-
nants potentially present in
dredged or fill material?
At higher concentrations than
at discharge site?

With increased bioavailability?
SUBTOTALS
   1.  Level of impact for each factor is scaled insignificant (0), minor (1),
   moderate (2), or major (3).
   2.  Factor weight from low (1) to high (5) is assigned based on relative
   importance of each factor.
   3.  Scale value is multiplied by numerical weight.
   4.  Not explicitly covered under Section 404 of Clean Water Act.
Appendix Table E-2, Assessment sealing-weighting  checklist for chemical environ-
     mental  factors in dredge and fill operations (from Nelson and Associates
     Inc.  1981).
                                          E-2
-------
        Classes of
      Factors in Level
     of Adverse  Impact
  Individual Factors  for  Consideration
                  Sealing-3
Factor^   Factor'   Weighting
Scale    Weight     Product
(0-3)    (1-5)     (0-15)
     Site values:
     t ECOSYSTEM  EFFECTS
     • HABITAT VALUES
     • POPULATION  VALUES
     t SEASONAL  EFFECTS
     Special  resources:

     • SPECIAL  AQUATIC
       SITES
     • OTHER  PRIME
       HABITATS
Short-term disruption or  long-term loss of
productivity and diversity?
Smothering of benthic biota without recolo-
m'zation, or with recolonization where a
system is stable and  resilient?
Chronic or acute physiological stress or
bioconcentration from toxic contaminants?
Displacement, conversion  or loss of value
of wetlands, lakes and  streams, and at
diked upland sites?4
Loss of species abundance and community
productivity and diversity?
Of critical  or preferred  food sources and
escape cover?
Transmission of disease organisms or para-
sites in dredged or fill  material?
Displacement or disruption of migration
routes or wintering sites?
Of spawning, nesting, breeding and rearing
sites?
Displacement,  conversion or modification of
productive,  sensitive or unique wetlands?
Sand or mud  flats or vegetated shallows?

Riffle-and-pool  stream  segments?
Wildlife sanctuaries or refuges?
Displacement,  conversion or modification of
productive,  sensitive or unique natural
lakes or ponds?
High value upland sites used for diked
disposal?4
Critical habitat of threatened or
endangered species?
SUBTOTALS
     1.   Level  of  impact for each factor is  scaled  insignificant (0), minor (1),  moderate  (2), or
     major (3).
     2.   Factor weight from low (1) to high  (5)  is  assigned based on relative importance of each
     factor.
     3.   Scale  value is multiplied by numerical  weight.
     4.   Not  explicitly covered under Section  404 of Clean Water Act.
Appendix  Table  E-3,  Assessment  scaling-weighting checklist for  biological and
      ecosystem  factors in dredge and fill  operations (from Nelson and Associates
      Inc.  1981).                                 t-3
-------
      Classes  of
   Factors  in  Level
  of Adverse Impact
     Individual Factors
      for  Consideration
                  Scaling-3
Factor1   Factor2  Weighting
Scale    Weight    Product
(0-3)     (1-5)      (0-15)
  Land and water
  use:

  • COMPATIBILITY
  Special
  resources:
  • FISHERIES
  • WATERFOWL
    AND GAME
  • UNIQUE SITES
Use of finished disposal or
fill site consistent with
surrounding water and land
use?4
Dependent on water access or
siting?
Identified as suitable or
unsuitable for dredged
material or fill discharge?4
Displacement or disruption of
valuable sport fish popula-
tions?

Commercial fish or shellfish
populations?

Displacement or disruption of
valuable waterfowl populations?

Game bird and mammal popula-
tions?
Displacement or disruption of
valuable landscapes or views?

Historic or archeological
sites?

SUBTOTALS
  1.   Level  of impact for each factor is scaled insignificant (0), minor (1),
  moderate (2), or major (3).
  2.   Factor weight from low (1) to high (5)  is assigned based on relative
  importance of each factor.
  3.   Scale value is multiplied by numerical  weight.
  4.   Not explicitly covered under Section 404 of Clean Water Act.
Appendix Table E-4. Assessment scaling-weighting gbecKlist  for  land or water
     use and other cultural factors in dredge and fill operations  (from Nelson
     and Associates Inc. 1981).
                                          E-4
-------
             Classes of
          Factors in Level
        of Beneficial Impact
  Individual  Factors  for  Consideration
                 Scaling-3
Factor'   Factor?  Weighting
Scale    Weight    Product
(0-3)    (1-5)     (0-15)
        Available actions
        to minimize
        adverse effects;5

        • STRUCTURAL
          FEATURES
        • DREDGING4 AND DIS-
          CHARGE EQUIPMENT
        t MATERIAL PLACEMENT
        t OTHER ACTIONS  OR
          MEASURES

        Habitat development:

        • NEW HABITAT
        • HABITAT
          RESTORATION
Piers, culverts  or pervious fills to
maintain circulation?
Check dams or current  deflectors to control
increased flows?
Bank or dike cover and stabilization to
control scouring and erosion?
Low-impact bucket, draghead or cutterhead
design?
Low-impact discharge pipe design, submerged
diffusers or silt curtains?
Low-ground-pressure vehicles or equipment?
Disposal in coves, depressions or thalweg
to reduce flow obstruction, or in diked
upland sites?4
Retention of fines inside dikes4 with
settling, coagulation,  dewatering, filters
and weirs?
Impervious liners and  caps to prevent
leaching, or leachate  collection and
treatment?
Other materials, equipment, structures,
routes, scheduling, etc.?
Creation of marsh  or other wetlands?

Nesting or barrier islands or upland
contained sites?4

Mud flats, sand  bars, or vegetated shallows?

Improvement of drainage and circulation?

Improvement of stream riffles and pools?
Improvement of substrate for benthic biota
or fish spawning?

SUBTOTALS
        1.  Level  of impact  for each factor is scaled insignificant  (0), minor (1), moderate (2), or
        major (3).
        2.  Factor weight  from low (1) to high (5)  is assigned  based on relative importance of each
        factor.
        3.  Scale  value  is multiplied by numerical  weight.
        4.  Not  explicitly covered under Section 404 of Clean Water  Act.
        5.  Alternative  discharge si~ss require separate assessment.
Appendix  Table  E-5.  Scaling-weighted checklist  for  enhancement, compensation  and
      mitigation factors  in dredge  and fill operations  (.from Nelson  and Associates
      Inc.  1981).
                                                      E-5
-------
    Seal ing-Weighting Checklists
                                               Seal ing-
                                               Weight ing
                                   Weighting    Product
                                   Subtotals'   Subtotals
    Table 6.1-A—Operations type, scale
                 and timing factors

    Table 6.1-5--Physical environmental
                 factors

    Table 6.1-6--Chemical environmental
                 factors

    Table 6.1-7—Biological and ecosystem
                 factors

    Table 6.1-8--Land or water use and
                 other cultural factors
    ADVERSE IMPACT TOTALS'
    Table 6.1-9--Enhancement, compensation
                 and mitigation factors
    BENEFICIAL IMPACT TOTALS4
                                                                     Overall Level
                                                                       of Adverse
                                                                         Impacts
                                                                     Overall Level
                                                                     of Beneficial
                                                                        Impact^
    1.  Add all factor weights in each of six checklists and enter in this column.
    2.  Add all seal ing-weighting products and enter in this column.
    3.  Sum the factor weights and products for the five adverse impact checklists
    on this line.
    4.  Sum the factor weights and products for the beneficial impact checklist on
    this line.
    5.  Divide total products by total weights and enter in the box (nearest
    tenth); interpret the result using the key below.
    Key:
0.0-0.9
1.0-1.7
1.7-2.3
2.4-3.0
"Insignificant"
"Minor"
"Moderate"
"Major"
Appendix Table  E-6. Assessment summary for all factors  of  adverse and beneficial
     impact  from  dredge and fill activities (from Nelson and Associates Inc. 1981).
                                             E-6
-------
       APPENDIX F

   Example HQI Curves
used by HES (USCOE 1980)
-------
F-l
-------
-------


""
- f

*~









~V"r~
-ft-
T —




i
-~r


..



.-J n_
-f~-
1 V
-H-
i



i
~--t-
t"
i

i ,
1 1
44.
! 1


1 1

A \

i !
i 1

, (
t ^
-4-*
iH
i i

' i
T
i


—
44
4*
J.;

1 i
r*

ll

4--

1
i
HI:
t
-k
in
.„

•••»•.




*T~
!










— i-

















-t~ —

~t
~"

j L
i i
i

i


_L_L_
H


1
1

1
1
~^~"
~r
: '

t f
i 1
i
1 r
1 1
1 1
1



rr
IT
i •

i.i.

t
1 1
H
..i_
4-
T
LL
-i-

44-

-*-_«-
~ *••• t'-
111 ll 1H >i i




























i

•
T
4-


j 	



i

i

i
T



i

|



1

1



1

|
11
1
I
1




i

i








- -
~r



-fc.ll.ILJK


































-
r













































i
r
\-


T"
r

















i










i


!
~r
i


1


















I


i i



'

1


i i
i, i
;

l
i



I



'

r
k-
T--
T
i-r

















.,.,
T











1

I
-T~

|
I













f






i
• 1
!|

j
I
|
l
|
|

1













J_
—t—
4-
4-
i

-f



i









\ i

i









i
...
l
H1

' i

i
i !
!


-
1









1













|- r
L i !

i
t~|-
i
!



1 J
{


1





— j- -
i44
ftl

1 i •
— 'r~4
dd
.»i..^ - j-





























|

•|
I



i
~~t
i
i
























|

1

£^













f
- -4-

"t

• 4


















































































—

1-
r
(
h
r
L-




























.



1 —
~1
j
1
I








I
1
1
,
|

j
'

t


1
1
I


< i
t ~












I
1





-+
--
(4

U-
$
c






























1
• 1






















1
1

1
1


1
1

1

1

1

1
1

1






-y

fr


\-
i-
D















































































/
/

-
r-

i
-
r~
t-














































































^
r

^~

-
i

r
i
s













































































/





C

t
-












































































j







-



+.









































































/
f








-


•
I
w



















































































-
-
-
f
-
ti






































































/
f















t
^





































































/












-
1-



j:
a



































































(*















-
•~
-

o

































































.
/
f













_
L
-

-
I
* —


















































































1-
-
-
-
-
~_
































































/

















-
.
-

-
t—
»•-
:































































/
f

















L
_
-
-
--
—
—






























































A




















-

































































f




















\~



\-
^
~
t-




























































A
























-
t
^
-



























































4





















_
-
h
u

.
P
r


























































jf(






















r

\
-

-

u
























































/

























-


1
-
•-
3























































/


























""
J

r
-
h























































/



























-
-
•
~
-
>—
3






















































/


























"
i_i
-
__
-
-
•
-•i
=





















































J





























r

-
-





















































j























H





_
H
-1



^



















































/
























r





^
H
-
L


-

















.









„






















/































n—
-
_




















































/



































••
H

















































f







































MB














































I/

































:
:
-
-

:

MM
r













































































-

h

-
L.


-1
—












































A





































h-
r1
-
J
-]
-
•M










































f






































—
~
-
-.
— r
-1
HMI









































J










































~-

-
Mm








































y












































-:









































f









































—
-
—4

—
\
im





































,
f















































-,
~
MM




































t












































1
=
-t

-
_
_




































f













































~





IMH

































/
'












































-

-1
~
_
4
J
-i
-
1
••1
































/
r














































...
-1
^
-4
i
_,
4
1
i
MM






























/




















































_
;
4
Ij
:1
•h




























|(
























































-
J
~
•M



























^

























































-

MM











-





_J






>
r


























































_

-i
-i
-
•Hj

















..




7
/
r





























































-I
— •
..
u^



















,
/

































































-
~
KN















J
f1
*




































































_
-
^•i










i
/
/
f
'









































































£
a
to
at
p
+ .
1
8?G
^ ^
*° ^
2

t-



8^O


QG>
3


LL.













r-."5
«*"
7
X.
3

^™
^**
Q
SM"k
S
QC




o

^











*o
fs^








O






CN




F-3
-------
                       CVI
F-4
-------

• ••
w -•















































































1











































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































"1







4
4
1


•
4
1




|





1




































































u.
h









)
•M

y

JJ



v
j.





||
X
^
—

I
































\- _































-1-







(
1
1



(
1


1
1

1














































|
J_J




































r

•
j
r
!i

bi
53
<
ffl
'J























































































a



*
























































































(



(
f


i
i

1











































































r








3

i
^
•;
'0

«
*B

tfl
•j






N



































































:
-











•



H















































































h-






<
(
•



^



i
»








<



































































-
r









r

i
•
3
1


^

CB
7






"*i
















































































»

















































































-
-









(



(



i
i




























































J



























i
i
7!
71



^










f
































































f




















.
i
*







^






























































2
2 I
2 _,
























r
*

"jT
i
E
2





























•
i
i- -




























Z
2
2 _i





























































L



~{~ -
•ta • _H

























^






























































































f






























































































/






























































































/





























































































7
"3





































































T



j
1





















































































i
'



i
> t j
7 1
i '
1 1
H-(
th
' 1




























































































i

-t































































































:



























































































-



d
-H
—





-






















































































"

-j
^






























































































-4
—i
^H
































































































"















































































1












1_

1




















































































1
1






1
-r

s
-L_L






























































































i
I±
J.







































































































































j







-









































J_L

,

^•4
^


























































































i
-t
i
"

_i
-t
_t



















































r~


r
























j









i
~P
~^"


i_
-i_

                                            u
                                             I
                                             UJ
                                             Of
                                             oe

                                             g
                                             u.
F-5
                       (VI

                       O
-------
crrT""-f--


•j-H 	



i
- i ^ i
" "T™

i f
•j_:::±i:
I i
. * <

_i_

1 1
i -
t 	



i
7~



1


1
Y_ \
i i
i
._j_ 	
i '

i ( i
••rr i
! l
N
i r I
\-- -4-
	 1 	
' !
~1 	 r
tit i '
[ j
i
i
-i i r -'-
i ~" ^ "

f i
i i
._(_ _..p —
~r i r
i 1 -
I t 	 \
\
r
r
i j
j j

T ~- -~

i ^
*r '
1
i
' ' i
• i i r i
j
' 	 |
•i
i l it
1 • ill'
1 ' * 1 L
I II
-\ r i- i i
ii! -\
\ i *
i ~
l
-L ' r
• i i i
:±::nrti

- r - M

- - -Mi
	 Lj. .,
— X r U-

EESEp :E
It 	
r




i
11
i



i i *^
t


. r
ii
i ^f i
__4 	
t

i i
- -t. . T"
± j _f d-
-IJZI -I. ' 7J
. _ T 	 L -,
_j i — (.

__4_. . -IL47
r
„ , ^
i
	 i 	 !_

~t~ r
1- i
• i~t 1 '
1 1 -
| j_

i t
r '
j


*™ i
l • ' | r
l i ' t l
HT Tf---
^- "' X -T--T -
" 1
M II
	 	 n ' ,_
~ ~r -| 1 T
	 1 1
j
111
I
4- _ -_ H
! .
Tt7_L X-T
ill! i ' r
i i. l i 1 !
T~U 4X41
'4 4-4-
447! Xtt
1 r r ' r"! t
j . ',..1 j
74
4 " . ' .
-f 	
1 •
lit' 1 1
] 1 ! [ i M
! 1 i i ,. !
••; M t r •
i ! ' ' i 1
j i I 1 i i 1
M '
- - - -L
. P
1 1 1 1 1 1
' ! i T i :
i l i i if
. r~ i i . ' i
T T TT-\
1 1 1 1 I
xjli ~±~"n.
4±t - X -HI
IT44-I. ",_ r
l t ' • ; i
~r --rrf
1 I '


-T


r




|









. 1







i

\:
\

\
V







1

1
H
f











i .
|




1
r
4-1
i i
1
i i
1 1





i

T
1


1
'
|
i -
| i

i '
|~i
"T t
ii



,
rr
•
1















f

1
1
















^
L
>

1
I














I
1














1
1


|
|
i
'
1
1
1
1
|
1
]

1
(
1
I.
t1
1

"1






































































I
1


1

1









1
I


|

J.



i.
















1





|









|
1








. '
\
V


1


I
1



1



1
1
1




1






1


1
1

1
1
1

1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
"t

1
'
-;
1
i












































*















1








|









.
P
\



I

•
J
1
r-

!














































































i






i
i


^•


i

r
i
i

i
1
•














































L
'


































i

1


t


^-
I




i
















































s
\










1
1
t
1
1












j
1
1

1
1
1


i
,


-7-

j

-*-




















































^





























i
i
i

i

i
i

i
i_
r

i
i-
1
i

LJ-




























i




















L
\
^






i
i












i
i
1
i
'
i



| i

i i
i i
i ,
i i
1 j
\ -

\
r
T r
1 1

























N-



















1









\
V



\
'
1

1











t]
t
1
1
1


f





i_

•T
*'
1


1

























































S
















1
1
1
1

1

1
1
1



1
1


t
1
(-
1

r
t
i

























































^











i

i



1
1



1





i
r


r
t
1

E'


_

























































^





1



I
1


1

1
1



!
«
1
1



1



i
t


r
i


-1-

























































1^
y





i
1







1
i
i

i

1
1
•
i
I


1

:-

1
'
-f
•|
•T





























































^



















i

1
I


1
1

'-
t


^
































































k
'


















i
1



I
r
i
r
r
r

r

































































'x










1






1
1


i


i

,
! "
*
1

t-
t~























i
r
!
•


1




























i
i
[




V
r

I



1
1
1
l
1
I



1



i

,
n
"?•
-f-

r

IL
H-
f


































































k





















i
1
^
r

r






































































V
'











1
!
i







1
1
r

h

i




























S





















































\


\
\


i
•-



I
t

L_





























i
i
1
i
1




















i
i






|




i
J
V


i
i



i
i



i


!




,
t

I.
~f~



































I
1
|














1







,








1
|

V
>




1 1
1
1
1 I
!

i

i



i +
' r



K
K
rr




























I





i




•
i























i
i

1


i
|

\
1 1











|

~r~

1
r~
,

~r -

•h










































































k

































































































.
s




l

i

!
!
1
r
r
t—






—











































































.
V


1
1






-

k_
-
-

',—
^—
•-
























"1




















































^
>






1



r-

f
1—

t
















































































i.
^



i



i

r

r~

























I
|
l
1
1
I










|

|

|




i



I




i


1
4'

1

i

|
l
[

I
1
l




1
1
I
1
1
^L
\

|



1
1

- —
T

~*~
— .
"~t~
"t -
1LI


































|
!



t
1C


l




,
___i_
i



t
i
_i_
1

, i
1 1

1
i












i


4 | {

.
V
\
\
y


f



* 1 1
r-^-t-

r+T
^rr































i
r






~i
*

1


i








j

.
I
I
1



















i
t
;



t

L
v
\
^
1

- - f—

	 _

- -i.'t '





















































l_ 1















t










i









V

r
•(
t-
r
h-






































n



















































f-
-
r
\
•
P
r-
4 -





































h1







































1
{
1

1
:
t
i

1
1
1
r
i
T-
"^
t
A
-\

9 O
•o x
^.
z



>•
H-
t/>
ec
ULI
>



c/>

^ u
O uj
V %:
^ w?


12
^5
^
in
Of
H-
V)

•
00

5"
Of
ZD
« o
°- IZ
n ""






^^^
^


X


z
••~
nf
UJ
^ >
9<
CN UJ
>
>•


o



<
X
CO







o
t_

















F-6
-------
         APPENDIX G

FHWA Method - Selected Forms
        (Adamus 1982)
-------
Form A


 Functional Opportunity and Effectiveness

The 75 questions 1n this predictor  Inventory  Mill
 ultimately-be used to Indicate whether there  Is  «
 high,  moderate,  or  low likelihood of  the  area (a)
 having a chance to perform each  function,  and (b)
being  effective 1n performing each.   When  reading
 the questions,  be sure  to  review  the footnotes
 located  beneath  the  question  and  Indicated  with
one or  more asterisks.   The  rationale for  each
question 1$  explained  In  the  corresponding  num-
bered  section of  Chapter 3, Volume 1.

 If  a field visit to the wetland  is  impossible and
no  historic  field data exist, you may nonetheless
conduct  an  evaluation  by  answering  questions  1
through   21.   and  possibly   a  few  others  which
follow,  in  the  office.  The resulting estimates
will  be less  accurate.   Begin  using Form A after
 first  reviewing  the   instructions  on  the corre-
 sponding form, 'Response Sheet Al" (page 51).

A.  Office-Type Data

Questions  1-21   below   can   usually   be   answered
before visiting the wetland.

1.   CONTIGUITY.    Does   channel  flow  (braided or
     confined) enter or  leave  the  	* through  a
    constricted or unconstricted:

     1.1  nontidal inlet?'*
     ITT  nontidal outlet?"
    ITT  tidal outlet?
         I.3.1_  with   a   freshwater   (tidal   or
                nontidal) inlet  present as  well?
    GRe, GDe, FSe, SAo, STo,  STe, FC,  FH , WH , AR,
   (!!*••

*"	" as  used  throughout Form  A indicates  that
the question  should first be  answered  by mentally
inserting the term "basin" and circling the Y or N
response  in  the  "basin" column  of  Form  Al;  and
then   answered  by  mentally  inserting  the  term
"wetland  impact  area   (WIA)"  and  circling  the
response  in  the  "WIA"  column  of Form Al.   For
examole, the WIA  in Figure  3  below has an (uncon-
str  icted) outlet  but  no inlet, whereas the basin
has an inlet but no outlet.
••If the basin or WIA is a cove on nontidal water,
the  entrance  to  the cove should  be  considered an
"outlet" and  "inlet"  should  be answered  affirma-
tively  only   if   a  stieam  enters the  cove  from
another side.
•"These abbreviations, as used throughout  Form A,
cross-reference   the   functions  for   which   the
question  is   important,   and  are  as  follows:
e-effectiveness,  o»opportunity,   m»mitigation   of
impact,  GR»groundwater   recharge,  G0»groundwater
discharge,  SA«$horeline  anchoring and  dissipation
of  erosive  forces,  FS*flood   storage   and  desyn-
chronization,  ST«sediment   trapping.  MR«nutrient
retention  and  removal,  FC»food   cnatn  support,
FH-ffshery habitat, w»wildlife  habuat, AR«active
recreation.
                                            Basin
 FIGURE 3. ILLUSTRATION OF WIA AND BASIN

2.  CONSTRICTION OF BASIN OR WIA.
    2.1  Is the 	's inlet*:
         2.1.1  Tacking or constricted?**   (iwst
                basins  with predominantly  channel
                flow input of surface water)
         2.1.2  unconstricted?"*    (-most  basins
                with   predominantly   sheet   flow
                Input of  surface water)
                 	's outlet*:
                lacking  or  constricted?**  (-wost
                basins  with predominantly  channel
                flow output of  surface  water)
         2.2.2  unconstricted?**    («wost  basins
                with   predominantly   sheet   flow
                output  of surface  water)
   GRe, 5De, FSe, STe.  FC. m
•If basin is  connected only tidally,  consider  the
connection on the ocean side to be an  outlet.
••As a gross  guideline, constricted-less than one-
third  the  maxiiwm  width of   the 	__;  uncon-
str icted«gr eater than  two-thirds the maximum width
of  the  	.    Some  inlets   or  outlets may  be
neither.   Measure width  in  a  direction perpendi-
cular to flow.

3.  »APE OF  BASIN.
    Is the basin generally:
    3.1  sinuous or  irregularly shaped*, or mostly
         surrounds a series of  Islands?
    3.2  rounded or mildly elliptical?**
   GfieTCDe, FSe. STe,  FC, FH,  WH. m
*If  riverine,  sinuosity  index should  be greater
than   about   1.5,   if  lacustrine  or  pa lustrine.
shoreline development  index should be greater than
about 8.0.
••If riverine,  sinuosity  index  should be less than
1.0;   if   lacustrine  or   palustrine,  shoreline
development index should  be less than  about 1.5.
If  desired,  a  definition of these indices can be
found in Volume I, Chapter 3  (p. S3 ).

4.  FETCH and EXPOSURE.   (Skip  question if greater
    than  801  of  wetland's  perimeter  abuts  open
    water.)   Is the WU:
    4.1  sheltered from most winds and waves?*
    47?  unsheltered"*
   SSoTSTo, STe. FC, * , AR,  m
•Consider WIA sheltered   if:  (a)  greater  than  80t
of   its   perimeter   is  surrounded  by  upland  or
wetland  vegetation  outside  the  WH;  or   (b)   the
greatest  unobstructed  open water  distance,  drawn
as  a  straight line extending  outward from the  WIA
                                                      6
                                                    G-l
-------
Form B


Responses  to the  77  questions In  this  form Mill
ultimately be used to  Indicate the  social signifi-
cance  of  the evaluated area.   All questions may be
answered  1n  the  office.   For best results, you
should be  familiar with economic growth trends and
planning  activities  In  .the vicinity of  the wet-
land.

The significance  Inventory  Is  not derived from the
technical  literature,  but simply from a considera-
tion of  social  factors which  make wetlands Impor-
tant.   No  effort Is  made  to  specify  which such
factors are  most  critical,  as  this  varies greatly
among  localities.   Because the possibilities for
social  impacts  are  virtually   endless,  the ques-
tions  presented  are   merely  illustrative  of the
many issues  which  should be considered in weighing
wetlands significance.

Once questions  1  and 2 have been answered, you may
be   selective  in   which  following   groups  of
questions  to answer, depending on which functions
are of greatest  interest.  Begin  using this forn
after   first  reviewing  the  Instructions  on  the
corresponding form.  Response  Sheet   Bl  (page 54).
When finished with Forms B  and Bl you may turn to
Form C  (page 46)  if you  desire  Impact Information,
or if not, to section 2.1.2  on  page  97.

GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE
1.   If the  highway were not to be  constructed, is
     the wetland  impact  area (UIA) within the next
     20 years likely  to be subjected  to any   of
     the  following  Impacts  which  would'  result
     either  from  other developments,   or  from
     essentially  permanent  or long-term  natural
     processes:

     1.1  filling  1n,   drainage,  constriction  of
          flow,  or flooding?  (e.g.. from agricul-
          tural   drainage,  rapid  eutrophication,
          blockage of  flow  by  landslides  or dams,
          flooding by  beaver  or Increased  urban
          runoff,   or  removal   of  vegetation  by
          fire,    harvest.   Insects,   or   larger
          herbivores).

     1.2  sediment or  turbidity increase  of more
          than 10X above normal background levels?
          (e.g.,   from   increased   runoff   from
          naturally  or  artificially  devegetated
          drainage area,  introduction of  carp,  or
          geophysical events)

     1.3  extensive  channelization?   (e.g.,  for
          agricultural  drainage)

     1.4  extensive pavinq  (more than 5 X increase
           in paved area?) of suhwatershed?  (e.q.,
          for residential development)

     1.5  Increased  exoosure    to  wind  and  sun?
          (e.g.,   resulting   from   riparian  tree
          mortality due  to harvesting,  herbivores,
          fire,  etc.)
     1.6. Increased  disturbance  of wildlife-.and
          fish?  (caused  by  other  development or
          Increased access)

2.   Have  substantial  private  or public expendi-
     tures been  made  for the  protection,  manage-
     ment, or  establishment of the WIA?   (e.g.,
     previous  costs   to   resource  agencies  for
     conservation   purchase,    seeding,   fencing.
     stocking,  fishway installation, water quality
     Improvement,  Improved  access.  Impoundment,
     taxes, legal defense,  etc.)

SIGNIFICANCE QUESTIONS SPECIFIC  TO GROUND  HATER
RECHARGE

Official Recognition

3.   Does  the UIA  drain  directly to or  overlay an
     aquifer presently designated or under consi-
     deration by EPA  as  a "Sole  Source Aquifer"
     under the  Clean Water Act?

4.  Is  the WIA  located  within or  drain directly
    to,  an  area  mapped,  actively  managed,  or
    regulated by USGS, state,  or  local  interests:
    as  a "potential  ground water  recharge area"?
    (or similar  t»tminology).

Uses (Demand)

5.   Will  any  user  depend  solely on  the WIA's
     aquifer  for  water  supply?   (Lacking  better
     data,   assume that   areas  within  3  miles
     downs lope of  the  wetland  will be most depen-
     dent  on the WIA's contribution to the aqui-
     fer.)

6..  W111  the   aquifer  be  exploited   faster by
     present or  future development than 1t can be
     replenished?     (If  specific   data lacking,
     consider whether  region generally is expected
     to have future ground water deficits.)

7.   Will  future  developments  which are  expected
     to  occur  above  the wetland  basin (with or
     without the  highway)  significantly decrease
     the  recharge  capacity of  these upland areas
     (e.g.,  by  paving),  and consequently increase
     the  relative  importance  of the wetland basin
     for recharge?

Relative Contribution  (Supply)

8.   Is the  unaltered  WIA's  contribution of  water
     to the regional aquifer much mote significant*
     than  the   recharge   contribution  from  other
     existing or  planned recharge  sources  (e.g..
     Other  wetlands, frrestrial environment)?
      •This may be suggested by the following:

      --the  unaltered  WIA will comprise more than 2
      S of the  functional watershed
      —the  soils  of  the  functional  watershed will
      have   rapid   runoff  (e.g.,   steeo  slopes.
                                                       38
                                                           G-2
-------
FormC

Responses  to the  38  questions  In  this form  will
ultimately be used to Indicate, very roughly, the
probability  that  the  highway  project  Mill alter
the hydrologlc  or  biological  regime of a wetland.
Most questions  may be  answered In the office using
basic  engineering  data for  the proposed project.
as  well  as  rudimentary  field  data on  the  bio-
logical   co«nun1t1es.   . The  questions  are  not
specific to  any wetland function, since almost any
highway activity can  affect any wetland function.
If any question seems  1rrelevent to the wetland or
highway project  being  considered,  skip 1t.  Begin
using  this  form after briefly reviewing Response
Sheet  Cl  (page  54).  After  completing  Form  C,  turn
to Section 2.1.2.  (page 56).

A. LOCATION

ml.  Will the highway be  routed (Includes widening
     of existing routes):

     •1.1  downslope   of  the  basin,  on  nonwet-
           land soil?
     ml.2  entirely upslope of the  basin
     ml.3  within   the basin.  Its   tributaries,or
           outlets?

•2.  If upslope of the basin, will  the highway be
     oriented more parallel  to  the short axis t>f
     the wetland than  to Its  long axis? (especial-
     ly Important  1f  wetland circulation or water
     budget Is runoff-dominated).

m3.  Will the highway  be routed mostly:

     m3.1   parallel  and  on  or tangential  to  (within
            200 ft) the wetland-upland edge?
        m3.1.I  and wetland  circulation and water
                budget are runoff dominated?
     m3.2    parallel   and  tangential   to   (within
             200 ft) the wetland-deepwater edge?
        m3.2.1  and wetland  circulation 1s  tidally
                dominated?
     m3.3    across deep water?
        m3.3.1  and wetland  circulation  1s domi-
                nated- by   gradient  currents  or
                wind?
     m3.4    near  the  usual  windward  side  of the
             basin?
        m3.4.1  and circulation 1s  wind-dominated
                in  the basin?
     m3.5    at   or   close   to  the  (freshwater)
             Inlet*?
        m3.S.l  and wetland  circulation  1s  domi-
                nated   by  tides  or  gradient   cur-
                rents?
     m3.6    at or close to the outlet*?
        »3.6.1  and wetland  circulation  1s domi-
                nated   by  tides  or  gradient  cur-
                rent?
     m3.7    at or close to the tidal outlet?
        m3.7.1  and  circulation  Is dominated by
                tides?
•For purposes  of this  analysis,  constricted  points
In  a basin should be considered basin  "Inlets*  er
•outlets,*  and the  basin divided by the  constric-
tion should be  evaluated  as two distinct basins.
A  'constricted point" may  arbitrarily be defined
as  one  with a  width of less than 30  percent  of the
mean width of  the basin (see Glossary, page  HS).

•4.  Will  the  highway  cross  the  basin and  Its
     floodplaln   In   a   direction   more   near'y
     perpendicular than  parallel to  the major flow
     whether that flow  be directed  along-  shore.
     onshore,  or  offshore,  and  whether  its  energy
     source be runoff, wind,  ground  water,  tide or
     basin currents?

•5.  Will  the  highway cross the basin at   one  of
     Its  ends  or Intermediate constricted points?
B.  DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES

•6.  Will the basin be crossed:

     •6.1    totally by bridge?
     •6.2    totally by culverted fill?

•7.  If  the  basin will  be spanned at  least parti*
     by a bridge  (1f not, don't answer):

     •7.1  U111  the  bridge  be high  enough above
           the  water  to  allow  light  to  ente-
           beneath it?
     •7.2  Will  the  total  cross-sectional  area  c*
           pilings  located  within  the  basin arc
           Its   floodplaln  (or  within  100   ft
           upslope  from  shoreline,  whichever  is
           greater)  be   the  minimum  necessary  tc
           support the structure?
     •7.3  Will  pilings  be of a  streamlined  shar*
           relative to the current?
     •7.4  Will  the  channel  be deepened,  widenec,
           or  selectively  cleared  to  offset the
           reduction   In    cross-sectional    are*
           unavoidably caused by the pilings?

mfi.  If  the basin  needs  to be  crossed at  leas'
     partly on fill (1f  not,  don't answer):
     •8.1  W111 culverts be  of a  size,  spacing arc
           elevation  relative  to  low  flows  tr
           adequately assure not  only the  Integr5-
           ty of  the highway, but also to mainta:-
           normal   water   levels,   normal    fl in-
           direction and  periodicity,  and noraa"
           frequency and  nearly  normal  magnitus*
           of flushing and  low flows  through t~«
           wetland?
     m6.2  W111  the basin  be  crossed  in  such  e
           manner that "mud  waves" are unlikely  tr
           occur?   (e.g., will   crossing  be  at  i
           point  where   sediments underlying  t**
           fill   are  of  a   type  least  likely  tr
           buckle and create  "mud waves').
     •8.3  W111 permeable fill be used?
     •B.4  Will  the  basin's fill oe  of the
           texture as the substrate?
                                                     46   6-3
-------
 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
FUNCTIONAL OPPORTUNITY  AND
This sheet 1s the  appropriate  place  for  recording
the responses to  corresponding questions  1n  Form1
A.   A  "yes" (Y)  or  "no" (N)  response iwst  be
circled for all  parts  of each  question,  even when
the response  seems obvfous.   This  response sheet
has  two  major   columns--"UIA"  and  "BASIN",  and
within  each of these, three subcolumns entitled "x
", "W", and "0", which address, when relevent, the
seasonal  changes   1n  some  of  the predictors,  as
follows:

     3  column  responses   are   those   addressing
     either (a)  the average annual  condition,  or
     (b)  the  condition  Intermediate  between  the
     wettest  and  driest  annual  conditions  (e.a.,
     late  June  in  most Prairie pothole wetlands),
     or   (c)  the   condition   of  maximum  annual
     Starding ctoo of wetland plants, or  (d)  if
     tidal, the  average daily mid-tide condition.

     W column responses  are those addressing what
     the  area  would  look  like  (a)  during  the
     wettest  time  of  an  average year, or  (b)  if
     the  area is  tidal,  what  it would  look like
     during  an  average  daily  high tide  (flooded)
     condition.

     D column responses  are those addressing what
     the  area would  look  like  during either  the
     driest time of the  year (questions pertaining
     to hydrology)  or  if the  question pertains to
     vegetation, then  during   the dormant time of
     the  year.   If the  area  is  tidal, "0" refers
     to Its daily  low tide  (exposed) condition.

For example,  question  2.1.1 should first be asked
and answered  in  the context of the  WIA's (wetland
impact  area's) average condition, then in terms of
its  wettest  condition,  then  the  basin's  average
condition,  and  finally the basin's wettest condi-
tion.   This  should then be repeated  for question
2.1.2.   Because no Y/N  choice is given  in either
"0"  column,  the  area's dry or  dormant  condition
need   not   be    evaluated  for   this   question.
Similarly,  some questions will  require  responses
only for  the  'JIA or basin, hut not both.
r
Q. »

X
Office-tyce
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.1.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
Y N
Y N
Y M
Y 1
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
WIA
W 0
Data
Y N Y N
Y S Y N
Y N Y N
Y 1 Y •<
Y M
Y N
Y 1
Y 1
	 -1J

X

Y N
Y N
Y N
Y •<
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
BASIN
W

Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y H
Y N
Y N
Y N
^v
D

Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N




Q.
J.
3.
4.
4.
b.
.L.
f
1
•)
\
2
1
>
X




V
Y


N

6.1
6.2
7.
7,
8.
8.
9.
9.
10
10
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
Ib
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
I/
;?
18
19
1
2
1
2
1
2
.1
.2
.3
.f
.1
.2
.1
.2
.1
.2
.
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7
.
.1
.2
.
T
















Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y


Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y



N
N
N
N
N
N


N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
WIA
W D



Y
Y





Y
Y










N
N





N
N







20-.
21
21
21
21
21
21
.1
.2
•>
!i
.5
.6

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
S
N
N
N
N
N


Field-type Data
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
??
22
22
22
22
22
22
22
??
??
22

.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.'
.3
.3
.3
.3
.3
.4
.4
4
.5
.6

.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.1
.2
.3
.4
.S
.1
.2
.3
.4
.1
?



Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

N
N
N
N
N
N
N
S
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

N
N
N
N
N
N
N i
S (
N
N
N !
N
N 1
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
*


X

BASIN
W D
Y
Y
N
N



V
Y
N
N

Y
Y

Y
Y
N
N

N
N

Y
Y


N
N




Y
Y
Y

N
N
N











i N

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
r
N
N
N
N
N
N
M
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N

Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N

                                                      51
                                                          6-4
-------
 Response Sheet B1
                       Response Sheet C1
 1>1RE»OLD ANALYSIS:  SIGNIFICANCE

 This  sheet  1s  the  appropriate  place for  recording
 the  responses  to  the corresponding  questions In
 Form  B.   Circle Y (yes) or N  (no), being careful
 to  note  that the order of Y and N below frequently
 reverses.
                                  Nutrient
 Recharae
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Y S
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y "I
N Y
Discharge
ITT
     N y
Shore! ine
Anchor ing
23.
24.
25.
25.
27.
2=.
29.
Tr ao
JU.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
N Y
"lent
pinq
Y N
Y N
Y H
Y N
Y N
Y N
N Y
                                  Retention
$}.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
Y N
Y N
Y N
y N
Y N
N Y
Fish Food Chain/
Habitat
43. Y N
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
Y N
Y H
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
y H
Y N
N Y
                                  Wildlife
                                  Habitat
                                  54.
                                  55.
                                  56.
                                  57.
                                  58.
                                  59.
                                  60.
       N
       N
     Y N
     Y N
     N Y
Active
Recreation
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
                                  69.
                                  70.
                                  71.
                                  72.
                                  73.
                                  74.
                                  75.
                                  76.
                                  77.
                                  78.
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
N Y
     Y N
     Y N
     Y N
     Y N
     Y N
       N
       N
                       THRES10LD ANALYSIS:  IMPACT VECTOR

                       This sheet Is the appropriate place for recording
                       the  responses  to  the  corresponding  question  In
                       Form C.  Circle Y (yes) or N (no).
ml.l
•1.2
ml. 3
•2.
m3.1
•3.1.1
m3.2
•3.2.1
•3.3
•3.3.1
m3.4
•3.4.1
•3.5
•3.5.1
•3.6
•3.6.1
m3.7
m3.7.1
m4.
m5.
nS.l
m6.2
m7.l
m7.2
m7.3
m7.4
m8.1
mS.2
m6. 3
mS.4
m9.
Y N
Y N
Y H
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
y N
y N
Y N
y H
Y N
Y N
y N
y N
Y N
y N
Y N
Y N
y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
•10.1
•10.2
•11.
•12.1
•12.2
•13.
•14.
•15.
•16.
•17.
•18.
•19.
•20.
•21.
•22.
•23.
•24.
•25.
•26.1
•26.2
•27.
•28.
•29.
•30.
•31.
m32.
•33.
•34.
•35.
•36.
•37.
•38.
Y N
V N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y H
Y N
V N
YN
Y N
V N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y N
YM
Y *
Y N
Y N
Y N
Y H
Y H
y N
Y H
Y N
Y N
y N
                  Turn to Section 2.1.2 after  completing this form
                  (see p. 56).
Next, turn to  Form C  (page 46).
                                                    54
                                                         G-5
-------
Summary Sheet D

This form 1s the appropriate place  for  recording the  ratings  that  result from use of the Interpreta-
tion procedures and  keys In Sections  2.1.2.  and  2.2.2.   As  each analysis  Is  completed,  enter Its
rating (high.moderate, or low;  or A.  B, or C) 1n the  relevant box until all boxes  for  functions of
Interest are filled.

Begin by labeling the context of the analysis (pre- or  post- construction, with or without mitigation,
name of  basin  and  WIA).   Then enter the data, using  the  numbered footnotes to  help  locate the as-
sodated analyses. For the evaluation of each function's Effectiveness, en
ilgher—That for the basin or that for the WIA. The evaluation of the Impact v
ter whichever rating 1s
rector Is optional.
/"BASIN WIA ppnjprr ~"\
EVALUATION TIMF FRAME (PBEVPOSn MITIGATION PI AN «
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE'
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE'
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING'
SEDIMENT TRAPPING'
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM"
SEASONAL"
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-BASIN"
FISHERY HABITAT
WARMWATER"
COLDWATER"
COLDW.RIVERINE"
ANADROMOUSRIV.
WILDLIFE HABIT AT
GENERAL DIVERSITY"
WATERFOWL GP."
WATERFOWL GP."
SPFCIFS"
SPECIES"
ACTIVE RECREATION"
SWIMMING
BOAT LAUNCHING
POWER BOATING
CANOEING
SAILING
PASSIVE RECREATION
AND MERIT AGE"
IMPACT VECTOR RATING"
EFFECTIVENESS1






OPPORTUNITY1











FUNCTIONAL RATING'











SIGNIFICANCE9
FUNCTIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE'
1





i













  FOOTNOTES

      These entries will  be  based on analyses in the following parts of  Volume  II  (numbers correspond to
      footnotes  above):
             A.  Al  (p.  6,  51); 2'Section 2.1.2.2. (p. 97);  3'Forms  B, Bl  (p. 38, 54); 4'Section

     2.1.2.?.  (p. 97);  ^Interpretation fcpy in Section 2.1.2.1.  p.  57; 6-p. 59; 7'p. 60; 8>p. 62; 9'p,.

     64; 10-p. 67;  ll'p. 67; 12'p. 69; I3'p. 71; 14'p. 73;  15'p. 75; 16'p. 79; 17'p. 80; 18'p. 84;

     19'p.  91; 2°'p.  92; 2l'p. 93.
                                                      55
                                                           G-6
-------
Ground Water Discharge Key
*. Effectiveness per unit area for discharge
^
The probability that ground water discharged to the basin or wetland exceeds recharge (deep or shallow) to
the ground water on a net annual basis 1s:
potentially HIGH 1f: A * (B or C(l. 2.3.4)) below*
•For the discharge function, use only the Information in the
lacking, use information In the "W" column or (least priority) "
(office data) (field visit data) (detailed data)
A. either 56 N or
(26.1Y/.9Y/.10Y)

B. most of 39.3Y.
the fol- 61.1Y.62Y
lowing
OR
C. most of
the fol-
lowing:
1. any 2.2.2Y,
of the 32.1N,
following 41. 4N
2. plus (1.2Yor 1.3Y).
3. any 9.2Y.12.1Y,
Of the 29N,
following 65Y
•*
4. most
of the
follow-
ing (3.1Y «• 5.2Y),
18Y.
(23.8N or 32. 5Y)


1 column of Response Sheet Al; 1f this 1s
D* column.
Summary Description
plezometrlc measurements (no recharge).
permanently flooded.

dam upstream.
chemical and thermal Indicators of discharge





unconstricted outlet.
flows removed quickly.
basin not densely vegetated.
outlet present
low in watershed, steep subwatershed,
very stable flow or water level.
porous underlying strata




lithologically diverse subwatershed.

not silty
potentially LOW if: I or II (A . B , C , 0 . E) below
(office data) (field visit data) (detailed data)
I. 56Y
- OR
II. most
of the
follow-
ing
A. 1.2N
B. (I7T.1Y or 32. 1Y or 41. 4Y)
C. 65N
D. 9.1Y
E. most (3.1N+5.1Y), 18N
of the (23.8Y or 32. 1Y)
follow-
ing
Summary Description
recharge measured high





no outlet
flows not rapidly removed
no porous underlying strata
high in watershed
not lithologically diverse
silty


potentially MODERATE 1f rated neither HIGH nor LOW above.
b. Opportunity oer unit area for discharge: Opportunity for
\^extensive geologic data.
discharge cannot be predicted without very j
                                          59  S-7
-------
^ Harvested Waterfowl: Breeding Habitat Key
trove Conditions (office diu)
firouo 1
Croup 2:
(blert duet.
wood duck}
Crow 3:
(ntrojnstrs)
Group «:
(goldtntrt.
rfM-n*dO
Groups S t 6:
(pri1r1t dlvtrs)
Grouo 7:
(Canada
ooose)
firouo 9:
(whiitllnq
ducts)
tU tht following
plus «»Jt of
Wit following
lit tile following.
plus test of
Wit follMinq
all Uw following
plus two of the
fol lowing
ill the following
plus three of tne
following
111 the follow
«"9
plus tost »f the
following
•11 ttlc following
plus nost of
following
111 the following
IS. IN.
(l.W + 1.2M). 6.2Y.
10. 1M,
(1S.4Y or .7T),
(1S.1Y or .2Y).
(1.1Y or 1.2Y),
5. HI. 10.1N.
(1S.1Y or .2Y),
(1.1Y or 1.2Y). 5.2Y,
9.2N,
(15. !Y or .it or
10. IN,
0.1Y or 1.2Y),
6.W.
5. IN, 15. IN,
(1.1N »1.2N),S.2Y,
5.2Y. 10. IN,
(15.4Y or .7Y),
(15.4V or 15. 7Y),
5. IN.
10. IN.
(1.1Y *].2Y). 3. IT
(«.2Y or 10. 31),
15. 4Y.
(field vUU diu) (det«11*d d.t.)
22. IN, «1.2Y. 44. 2N.
34. IN. 34. 4N,
SOY. 58.2Y
49. 2Y.
44. 11.
39.6N,
(26.3Y/.4Y/.6Y).
z$T 	
(23.3Y/.4Y). 37Y
41. 4N. 49. IN.
34. IN, 34. 4N.
5BV~ 51.2N. 58.2N
(22.1Y/.7Y). 37Y.
(»TT!7/'nr). 44. 2N,
(26.1Y/.2Y/.8Y),
2"nrto"lic7 onTy)
34JY.
26. 1Y. (41.1Y/.2Y).
37Y.
29N (except hooded)
22. !Y or .JYJ, 41. 4N.
(26.U/.2Y/.8Y1.34.3Y
34. 3Y. 4«.1N
41.2Y. 44. 1Y, 49. 2Y. 53Y,
37Y
22.1N. H.3Y 
-------
 Impact Vector Key
 Unlike the  keys  for wetland  functions,  the  Impact  key 1s  not  substantially derived from technical
 literature.   This  1s  because the  number  of published  articles  dealing with  ecological  Impacts of
 highways, and In  particular  the highway-related  or  natural  factors which mitigate or aggravate highway
 Impacts,  1s too  small.   Only for  sediment  transport  has  research been sufficient to allow development
 of quantitative  predictive models.   Results of the  few  available ecological research  studies are
 presented in Tables  19   and 20   of Volume I.

 Thus, the  impact key  1s  almost  entirely  relative,  with  the "low  Impact" condition serving  as a
 benchmark  and  consisting  of  the  best  circumstances possible  for  a  highway-wetland  Interaction.
 Although  this  presents  an  extraordinarily  difficult  standard to  achieve,  the consequences  of not
 meeting   it  are minor  1n  terms of  the  overall  procedure, since  the  impact  vector  rating is merely
 advisory.  For example,  only  highways  which (a) are downslope from wetlands,  or  (b)  are upslope and
 are very well  designed,  or  (c) cross wetlands entirely on  tall pilings (bridges), receive a rating of
 LOW impact, and then only if the wetland  is of a type which 1s  not highly sensitive.  A rating of HIGH
 Impact 1s  automatically assigned  1f the  wetland 1s crossed entirely on fill, regardless of whether It
 1s adequately  culverted  and optimally located.  Projects Involving  widening of existing roads are
 considered  equally  with  projects Involving new rights-of-way,  although their ultimate  ratings may
 differ.

 The major  purpose  of  the  key is  to focus  attention on  factors  which might mitigate highway-wetland
 Impacts.    These  factors  fall  under  the following categories:   design, location, erosion and transport
 of sediment  to wetland, sediment export from  wetland,  inherent  sensitivity of vegetation and fish,
 vegetation  and fish community's  adaptedness  to stress, vegetation and  fish  recovery capacity, and
 oresence  of multiple stresses  to vegetation and  fish.   All  are  discussed in Chapter 5 of Volume 1.

'The  probability  that  highway  construction  will  result in  measurable  long term alteration  (either
 adverse   or  beneficial)of  the wetland's  hydrologic  or  biological environment  over  an area  at least
 double that occupied by the  right-of-way  is:
 potentially LOW if:  I  or  II  (Al-3  +  Bl-5 + Cl-3) or  III  (Al-3 «• B + C * D)*

 •Numbers  below with the  prefix  "m"  refer  to responses on Response Sheet Cl (page  54); other numbers
 refer  to  responses on  Response Sheet Al (page 51 ).   For the other numbers, use only the information in
 the column  of Response  Sheet  Al  which corresponds to the  expected  season of  construction (W«wet,
 0«dry,  x»intermediate). Also, for  the underlined responses, use only the "WIA" responses from Response
 Sheet  Al  to arrive at  a rating for the WIA,  recording it at the bottom of Summary Sheet D (page 55).


           (office data)    (field visit data)    (detailed data)   Summary Description

 I.  Route  is entirely downslope from  basfn and:
 All  of
 the  fol-  ml.lY.m3.7N,
 lowing
          mil.IN,11.IN
                                                       downslope, not near outlet, no temporary
                                                       diversions,
                                                       gradient not gradual
•OR
 II. Route  is entirely upslope from basin and:

 IIA. All of the following (1*2+3) below:
 (1.) All
 of the
 follow-
 ing
m3.1N,

«llN,ml3N,

ml4N.ml5.lY,
ml6Y,ml7N,
ml8N,m20N
                                -V
location=not parallel and tangential
to upland edge,
design=no flow diversions, equipment
out of wetland,
good sediment control, revegetation,
buffer strip, minimize bare earth
seasonal scheduling, wetland not used
for storm water
(•good mitigation of primary runoff
factors'!	A  	
                                                      93   G-9
-------
Impact Vector Key (continued)
  (2.)plu$  11.2Y or
           17.1*
  (3.)plu$  m2Y,11.2Y.


  most*     12.IV.17.IN,     39.IK.

                            40Y
  •Ignore  this  series  if basin has no  Inlet.
                                                       gently sloped subwatershed
                                                       soils not highly credible

                                                       (•erosion * transport: primary factors
                                                       that reduce loading)

                                                       parallels short axis, gently sloping
                                                       subwatershed,

                                                       trlbs. gently sloped, not channelized.
                                                       Impervious soils,
                                                       pool-riffle ratio good upstream,
                                                       not scavenging sediment, Impervious soils,
                                                       (•erosion + transport: secondary factors
                                                       that reduce loading)
  118.  Plus all of the following:

  (1) all    (1.2Y/.3Y).     32.IN.



  (2) either


  (3)
  (4)most
  of the
  follow-
  Ing
2.2.IN.

3.IN,
4.1N.8.1Y.
10.3Y.13.1N,
                          23.8N.29Y,

                          30.2Y,
                          31.2Y
                          43N,
            (21.1N/.2N),    45.1Y,
  (5)most of
  the fol-
  lowing
                           26.1Y.29Y.
                           IOT,52.1N,59.1N,
                           (24.1Y or 24.5Y)
                                                       outlet, not stagnant, not anoxlc
                                     «23N              flushing consequences minor downstream
                  not aquatic bed or If so,
m24Y),            species are sediment-tolerant,

57.IN,            plant "adaptedness" (TSS not low),
59.IN,59.2N,      nutrients not too great or little.
.m29Y              no response to analogous alteration,

                  unconstrlcted outlet, substrate coarse.
                  flashy,
                  basin not sinuous, big tidal range.
                  unsheltered, big subwatershed, scoured,
                  large stream order, steep basin, not
                  sheet flow,
57.2N,            not lacustrine/palustrine. steep edge.
                  not turbid,
67.IN."75.IN"     output exceeds input, not a sediment trap
                  (•sediment export: secondary factors
                  that reduce loading)

m24Y,m25N,        plants are sediment-tolerant, not near depth
                  (light) threshold.
RI25.1Y,           plants are not flood-sensitive,
                  permanently flooded, flashy.
                  diverse plant forms, not oligotrophic,
"75.1Y"           sediments accumulate
                  (•good plant recovery capacity/adaptedness
                  to stress).
                  salinity not stressing,
"72.1Y"           erosion not stressing
                  (•lessened multiple stresses)
IIC.  Plus  all  of  the  following  (answer  only  if  impact  on  freshwater  fish needs to be determined).

                                               m30Y.m31N,

                                               m32N.
 (1) most
 af the
 fol low-
 ing
                           22. 8Y.
                           32. IY.
                           23.1Y.29Y,
                                               64N),
                                               "75. IY"
                                               m34Y
                                                             J
                                                       fish  sediment-tolerant,  not  geographically
                                                       peripheral .
                                                       fish  do  not  require  currents,
                                                       (•fish not inherently  sensitive)
                                                       substrate  is  mud/organic,
                                                       stagnant,
                                                       anoxic sediments,
                                                       flashy basin, basin  is sediment trap,
                                                       historical resistance  to  stress,
                                                       («fish may ^ie "adapted"  ta stress^ __
                                                             r

                                                        94   G-10
-------
Impact Vector Key (continued)
  2)plus   (1.1Y/.2Y/.3Y).
  ll of    lOTnr.          26.1Y.
all
the fol-
lowing
                           39.5N,
                                               «38.

                                               60. IN
 (3)plus   5.2Y.9.2Y,
 most of   10.3Y,
 the fol-
 lowing
                          40.2Y.


                          36Y,

                          46.IK.
                                                64Y,
                                                60.2N.60.3N,
                                                m36Y.n37N,
basin has outlet or Inlet,
not a headwater stream, basin permanently
flooded.
no barriers to fish movement, stocking
conducted,
no fish kills
(•good recolonlzatlon potential:
primary factors)

large basin, low 1n watershed.
stream order Is 4+, good pool-riffle ratio.
(•good recolonlzatlon, potential:
secondary factors)
no anoxia problems,
no algal blooms, no 1ce cover,
not unshaded,
depth distribution will change little,
fish not near salinity or temperaure thresh.
(•lessened multiple stress)
 OR-
III.  One part  of  route 1s upslope from basin,  and another  part crosses  it entirely by bridge  (I.e.,
no fill used within basin or floodplain)  and:  A (1+2+3)  + B + C + 0

                                                                fewest  possible pilings,
                                                                minimal flow diversions during  construction.
                                                                equipment kept out of wetland
                                                                (•good  primary design factors)
           m7.2Y,mllN or
 of the    (ml2.1+2Y)
 follow-
 ing
 (2)none
 of the
 follow-
 ing
                          mS.l.lY,

                          m3.2.1Y,
                          m3.4.1Y,
                          m3.5.1Y.m3.6.1Y;
                          m3.7.lY.
 (3)most   m4N,m5N,
 of the
 fol-
 lowing
          m7.1Y,m7.3Y,
          m7.4Y.ml2.1Y,
           ml2.2Y
if runoff-dominated, route not tangential to
upland edge
if tidal, not tangential to open water edge
if wind dominated, not on windy side
if current-dominated, not near Inlet or outle
If tides dominate, not near pass
(•minimize flow regime interference)
highway routing parallels flow,
no crossing at constriction,
minimal shading, streamlined pilings,
cross-sec, area maintained, minimal
flow diversion

(•minimal flow and light interference)
 3.+ conditions in Part IIB above are met
 C.+ conditions in Part IIC above are met (if knowledge of impact on freshwater fish is desired)
 D.+ conditions in Part IIA above are met
 potentially MODERATE if:  I or II(A or B) or III (A or (B + C)) or IV (A + B + C (1-3)) below

 I.  Route is entirely downslope from basin and:11.2Y             («downslope gradient Is gradual).
 OR
  II. Route is entirely upslope from basin and:
     A. conditions in Part IIA above are met
                                                       95
-------
Impact Vector Key (continued)
     OR

     B. conditions in Part IIB and (if knowledge of Impact on freshwater fish 1s desired)  conditions in
 IIC are met
 OR
 III. Route is both upslope from wetland and crosses it entirely by bridge and:  (A or  B) + C below)

      A. conditions in Part IIA above are met

      OR

       B. conditions  in  Part  IIB and (if knowledge of freshwater fish impact Is desired) conditions in
 IIC above are met
      C. conditions in Part IIIA above are met
 OR
 IV. Route  is both  upslope  from wetland  and  crosses It by a  combination  of bridge and fill  (in  any
 ratio) and: (A + B * C below)

 All of the following:

 A. conditions in Part IIA above are met
 3. conditions in Part 113 and (if knowledge of impact on fish is desired)  IIC above ara met
 C. All of the following:

 (1) all  of yie following:

           m8.1Y,mS.2Y,
           m9N,(mllNor
           mllY*ml2.1Y,
           ml2.2Y),ml3N,
 (2) most of the following:

           m7.1Y,m7.3Y,
           m8.3Y,,n8.4

 (3) none of the following:

           -nS.l.lY,

           m3.2.1Y.
           m3.4.1Y,
           m3.5.1Y.

           ra3.7.1Y
adequate culverting. no mud waves,
no access canals.
minimize damage from channel diversion,
equipment kept out of wetland
fill design: secondary factors
If runoff-dominated, highway tangential
to upland edge,
if tidal, tangential to open water edge,
if wind-dominated, not on windy side,
if currents dominate, not near inlet
or outlet
if tides dominate, near pass
 potentially HIGH impact if:

      I.  Wetland or flood plain is crossed entirely on fill

      OR

      II. Probability of wetland impact is rated neither LOW nor MODERATE above
                                                      96
                                                                  6-12
-------
                    APPENDIX H

QUANTITATIVE METHODS FOR DETERMINING WETLAND VALUES
     (from Ludwig and Apfelbaum unpublished).
-------
            Table      Methods of measuring,  categorizing,  and
                valuing of wetland resources.

Plant Diversity
By thorough species inventory work, determine the presence and dominance
of species in the plant communities.  Wetlands should be mapped under
the dominant species concept of Whittaker (1975), and species richness
measured two ways—as nean diversity per sampled quadrat and as total
species found in the wetland.  These diversity numbers and species are
to be referenced against the total number of species possible in the
particular wetland as determined by literature search or competent
botanists knowledgeable about the particular wetlands under study.
Numerical Score:  1 to +20.

Plant Productivity
By measuring the annual rate of primary production in the wetland as grams
of carbon fixed per square meter per year, the actual primary production
of the wetland community can.be measured against other wetlands, drylands,
and agricultural lands, and the projected impact of the proposed use
assessed.  If possible, the four most significant primary producers should
be measured independently.  Numerical Score:   1 to +20.  Primary production
less than 500g/m /y   should be scored +1.  Production at or above
3000/nr/y~l scored +20.

Plant Communities
Determine the size, extent and spatial distribution of the plant communities
by careful mapping.  Wetlands with a single plant community should be rated
+1, with 10 or more distinct communities rated +20.  Follow the methods of
Whittaker (1975) in determination of coiCTunity type.  Changes in plant com-
munities can be monitored over a long period to measure ecosystem changes.

Animal Diversity

3y a thorough inventory of all vertebrates and the most important invertebrates
using the area, the aninal species richness should be measured.  Emphasis
should be placed on aquatic (associated) species, such as molluscs, fish,
anphibians, rails, beavers, etc.  Standard methods such as fish seining or
shocking, marrjnal trapping on grid, a breeding bird census, etc., should be
used.  Numerical Score:  1 to +30.  In order to score highly, species
diversity should be high in all taxa.
                                  H-l
-------
                Table      Methods of measuring, categorizing, and
                    valuing of wetland resources (concluded).

E.  Animal Productivity

    For each animal species breeding in the wetland,  the size  of the population
    on a number per hectare basis should be estimated.   Emphasis should be
    placed on such species that must use the wetland  for reproduction,  e.g.,
    smallmouth bass, sora rail, beaver, although all  breeding  species should  be
    estimated.  These estimates should be referenced  to other  wetland areas and
    tothe bodies of water to which aquatic species  move (Exanple:   Marshland
    raised fish moving to a lake for adult life.).  Numerical  Score:  0 to +20.
    To score highly, the wetland should have high local and regional significance.

F.  Migratory Species Habitat and Cover Provided to Local Non-Vetland Requiring
    Species

    Many animals use certain wetlands casually for  cover, (e.g., deer), may—but
    do not have to—breed there, (e.g., Red-winged  Blackbird), or as a migratory
    stop-over (e.g., Sandhill Cranes).  The importance  of the  particular wetland
    for the welfare of these species should be measured by systematic observations.
    Mark-recapture studies may be needed to separate  some resident from transient
    species.  Numerical Score:  1 to +15, partly subjective.  To score highly the
    wetland should provide a significant volume of habitat for these species.

G.  Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species

    The preservation of these species is required under Michigan and Federal  law.
    The presence of an endangered species can  stop  any proposal  to
    use wetlands.   The presence of rare or threatened species  may require special
    studies or efforts to transplant and reestablish  potentially icpacted species
    elsewhere.  Credit for providing habitat for such fragile  species should  be
    given to proposals if such mitigation is possible.   Numerical Score:  1 to +30.
    One or nore endangered species = +30; +15 for each  threatened species present;
    .+5 for each rare species present.

H.  Critical Habitat(s) Ratings
    Some wetland types are abundant locally, but rare statewide.  Essential
    habitat for certain species (e.g., Double-crested Cormorant, Forester's Tern)
    may be cordon locally (e.g., Great Lakes islands),  but exceedingly rare state-
    wide.  This critical habitat and potential critical habitat should be referenced
    to rare, threatened and endangered species on a statewide  basis.  Potential
    critical habitat development for these species  should be'credited to the
    proposed development if an applicant can demonstrate this  to be a likely  result
    of implementing the proposed development.  Numerical Score:  1 to +20.

I.  Ecosystem Wholeness Rating
    Few surviving wetlands support the full complement  of plants and animals  that
    they once did.  Others are widely invaded by a Eurasian flora which has altered
    their character.  This rating is a partly subjective rating developed by  a
    qualified ecologist from parameters A-G (above) on  the biological completeness
    and stability of the specific vetland in question:   This is the holistic
    judgment of the ecosystem's completeness and overall health in its present
    condition, under present  trends of use and protection.  Numerical Score:
    1  to +20.
                                       H-2
-------
   Table       Summary of biological parameters weighting system.

                                      Miniaua Score       Maxiir.un Score
Plane Diversity                           + 1                 +30
Plant Productivity                        + 1                 +20
Plant Communities                         + 1                 +20
Animal Diversity                          + 1                 +30
Aniaal Productivity                       + 1                 +20
Migratory & Local Species Cover           + 1                 +15
   Habitats
Rare, Threatened & Endangered Species     + 1                 +30
Critical Habitat(s) Ratings               + 1                 +20
Ecosystem Wholeness Rating                + 1                 +20
         Total Range of Scores            + 9                +205
                                  H-3
-------
                  Table      Hydrological parameters.
Physical and Configurational Attributes

1.  Flood Amelioration Function

    Determine the specific flood control role and  function  of  the wetland  in
    question.a*   Determine the temporal storage  capacities  together with
    effects on downstream watersheds and discharge volumes  (NOTE:   Such
    estimates are often required in permit applications  as  part  of  Flood
    Plain Zoning or delineation.).   Numerical Rating:  1 to +20.  Give the
    wetland a rating of +20 if it can store 50%  or mere  of  a 10-year flood
    in its watershed for 24 hours,  or a proportionately  lower  score to +1
    as this capacity decreases to 1% of 10-year  flood.

2.  Sediment Trap Function
    Through field measurements of total suspended  solids or turbidity, estimate
    the annual sedii^r.t load input and output of the  specific  wetland in
    question.  Relate these data to upstream watershed size and  estimate
    importance of specific wetland as sediment trap.  If >75%  of sediment  load
    is captured give the wetland a perfect score of +20, scaling the score
    downward to 0 if no sediment trap function is  measurable.

3.  Surface Water Storage Function

    Measure the normal capacity of the wetland to  store  surface  water as  acre
    foot per acre of wetland surface.  Determine normal  rates  of evapotrans-
    piration on a seasonal basis to determine effects on downstream watershed
    flows if any.  Measure this function against the  size of  the upstream
    watershed.  If 75% of water provided by the  upstream watershed  is stored
    less evapotranspiration, give the wetland a  rating of +15  with  a propor-
    tionately lower score down to +1 to 5% or less water storage capacity
    less evapotranspiration with reference to the  upstream watershed.

4.  Groundwater Recharge Function
    Determine the areal extent of the wetland.  Measure  its function as a
    recharge area for the uppermost aquifer through determination of its
    capacity to infiltrate waters from the upstream watershed  into  the first
    subsurface aquifer.  Measure by means of soil  permeabilities above the
    first clay or fragiopan layer immediately below the  wetland*s own bottom
    seal.  Relate this recharge rate to the amount of water available for
    infiltration from the upstream watershed.  If  10% of annual  watershed
    volume infiltrates in wetland,  rate at +20,  less  so  as groundwater
    recharge function decreases to zero with reference  to the watershed.
a.
  An example of an accepted standardized manual for such estimates is
  Conger (1971), "Estimating Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in Wisconsin",
  which is applicable in Wisconsin.
                                    H-4
-------
                Table      Hydrological parameters  (continued)
A.  Physical and Configurational Attributes
    1.  Flood Amelioration Function

        Determine the specific flood control role and function  of  the wetland  in
        question.a*   Determine the temporal storage capacities  together with
        effects on downstrean watersheds and discharge volumes  (NOTE:   Such
        estimates are often required in pensit applications  as  part  of  Flood
        Plain Zoning or delineation.).   Numerical Rating:  1 to +20.  Give the
        wetland a rating of 4-20 if it can store 50% or acre  of  a 10-year  flood
        in its watershed for 24 hours,  or a proportionately  lower  score to +1
        as this capacity decreases to 1% of 10-year flood.

    2.  Sediment Trap Function
        Through field measurements of total suspended solids or turbidity, estimate
        the annual sedir^r.t lead input and output of the specific  wetland in
        question.  Relate these data to upstream watershed size and  estimate
        importance of specific wetland as sediment trap. If >75%  of sediment  load
        is captured give the wetland a perfect score of +20, scaling the  score
        downward to 0 if no sediment crap function is measurable.

    3.  Surface Water Storage Function

        Measure the normal capacity of the wetland to store  surface  water as acre
        foot per acre of wetland surface.  Determine normal  rates  of evapotrans-
        piration on a seasonal basis to determine effects on downstream watershed
        flows if any.  Measure this function against the size of  the upstream
        watershed.  If 75% of water provided by the upstream watershed  is stored
        less evapotranspiration, give the wetland a. rating of +15  with  a  propor-
        tionately lower score down to +1 to 5% or less water storage capacity
        less evapotranspiration with reference to the upstream  watershed.

    4.  Groundwater Recharge Function

        Determine the areal extent of the wetland.  Measure  its function  as a
        recharge area for the uppermost aquifer through determination of  its
        capacity to infiltrate waters from the upstream watershed  into  the  first
        subsurface aquifer.  Measure by means of soil permeabilities above  the
        first clay or fragiopan layer immediately below the  wetland's own bottom
        seal.  Relate this recharge rate to the amount of water available for
        infiltration from the upstream watershed.  If-10% of annual  watershed
        volume infiltrates in wetland,  rate at +20, less so  as  groundwater
        recharge function decreases to  zero with reference  to the watershed.
    a.
      An example of an accepted standardized manual for such estimates is
      Conger (1971), "Estimating Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in Wisconsin",
      which is applicable in Wisconsin.
                                        H-5
-------
               Table      Hydrological  parameters  (concluded).
    5.   aiomass  Sink and  Storage Function.

        Normally wetlands accumulate organic matter due co higher prinary
        production  than export and decomposition.  Accumulated organic peats
        have  important effects on water storage volumes and influence water
        quality  treatment or  degradation of output waters.  Measure the rate
        of accumulation by corlag che sediments; measure the organic matter
        content  water holding capacity and classify the peats/soils with
        standard sapric-humic soils methods.  If peats-organics are present
        in a voluRe>50% of the water volume stored, rate as +10, less so if
        lesser amounts of organics are found.

    6.   Watershed Importance  Rating

        Determine the size of the wetland and its upstream watershed; if the
        sum of both is greater than 5000 hectares,rate at 4-25; if of lesser
        size, down  to 100 hectares, rate downward to +1 in proportion to the
        5000  hectares standard.  This arbitrary size-dependent rating which
        includes the upstream watershed insures that river and most lake
        margin marsh lands receive higher ratings than small perched water-
        table wetlands.

3.   Physio-Chemical Attributes

    1.   Water Quality Functions

        Measure  the standard  parameters of bacteria, BOD/COD, nutrients, pH,
        heavy metals, IDS, TSS of inlet and outlet water seasonally at peak,
        normal and  low flow periods.  Rate improvement or lowering of water
        quality  on  an annual  basis with a -20 to +20 scale paying greatest
        attention to nutrients, heavy metals and oxygen demand.  Numerical
        Rating:  -20 to +20.  NOTE:  This is a  measure of the potential for
        cost-free natural water  treatment service.  If the absolute value of
        this  potential service - $2,000/hectare/year, rate as +20, with lesser
        ratings  assigned  to lesser dollar values downward to -20 for water
        quality  degradation equal to a cost of  $2,000/hectare/year if the water
        were  treated to bring it up to EPA standards.

    2.   Cation Exchange .and Storage Capacities

        Measure  wetland cation exchange capacity, ion storage capacity, buffer
        capacity and adsorption-chelation capacities under both aerobic and
        anaerobic conditions. Determine the loading factors  (capacities)  that
        the wetland can absorb without significant loss of its essential bio-
        logical  functions. Numerical Rating:   1  to +20.  Measure against  the
        size  of  the upstream  watershed and its  water quality.  KOTE:  This  is a
        measure  of  the potential for cost-free  natural water  treatment  service.
        If  the absolute value of this potential service » $2,000/hectare/year,
        rate  as  +20, with lesser ratings assigned to lesser dollar values  down-
        ward  to  +1  for no measurable exchange  function.


                                      H-6
-------
     Table
Summary of hydrological weighting system parameters.
Functional Category
Flood Amelioration
Sedi-ent Trap
Surface Water Storage
Groundwater Recharge
Bioraass Storage
Watershed Importance
Water Quality
Exchange Capacity
     Total Range of Values
                             + 1
                                0
                             +1
                             •t-1
                             + 1
                             •r 1
                             -20
                             -i- 1
                             -13
Xa:ci~ua Scare
    +• 20
    •I- 20
    -r.15
    + 20
    + 10
    + 25
    •»• 20
    4- 20
    +150
                                    H-7
-------
                        Table      Human use parameters.
A.  Aesthetic Values
    Generate a subjective judgment of the overs.il aesthetic value of the wetlands
    system in question.  Consider size, biological diversity,  setting and human
    use potential in this rating.  Defend the subjective judg-.ent with expository
    material prepared with reference to the measurable parameters.  Range: 1-30.

B.  Present Value of Wetland ?roducts ar.d Services
    Calculate the present value of the wetland in .question on both a short (0-50
    years) and long tern basis (50-500 years).  Consider che real dollar value
    of each of the products (e.g., waterfowl, fish production, natural plant
    foods) of" the wetland plus the value of whatever services (e.g., sediment
    Crap, water quality improvement, etc.) to environmental quality are provided.
    Rate the value on a 1-30 basis with +30 equal to a value in 1978 dollars of
    $3,000. per acre, anc+1 equal to $100. or less per acre.

C.  Rate the Potential Zcor.o~.ic Value of Various Potentially Competitive Uses of
    the Wetland in Question

    Include the follcvir.g uses at" ainiaua over a short term?<50 years,and long
    tera basis, 50-500 years:  a.)  Existing wetlands function and use; b.)
    Most likely wetlands function, and use given existing development (or non-
    developceat) trends in its watershed; c.)  If converted to agricultural uses;
    d.)  If used for proposed development purposes.  Maka a short tern and a long
    Cera projection of the economic returns to society for the wetland in question
    under the four options above.  Numerical value: 1-30 with 1 an overall value
    equal to the wetland's intrinsic value if left alone.  To earn a +30 rating,
    the proposed use jnust return to society* five times the intrinsic value of the
    wetland over the long tara perspective (500 years).  Schedule ratings in pro-
    portion to the five zizes x 500-year standard; these ratings can be deter-
    mined on a 50 x 50-ya.a.r projection as vail.

D«  Recreation Values

    Measure recreational values of the wetland under study by examining existing
    and potential hunting, fishing and boating uses including indirect affects
    such as value as a rearing area for sport fish and game species.  Consider
    all possible uses of the existing wetland, and those most likely to be
    developed, used and preserved.  Rate values from 1 to +30.  Measure this
    service in terms of +1 for no measurable recreational value to +30 for 60
    person-days of recreational use per hectare of wetland per year.
*I«07E:  The intent is to insure that what is measured is the long term, economic
 value which accrues to society in exchange for the loss of cose-free services  (3)
 and not simply the short term return on investment to the proposer.


                                      H-8
-------
                   Table      Human use  parameters  (concluded).


 E.  Rareness of Che Weeland Resource

     Decarmine che rareness of the specific wetland type and biological
     resources under study on a local and statewide basis.  If the wetland
     is unique, race it +30, if abundant, +5.  Rareness should be referenced
     to hydrology, species present, and the specific biological communities
     present,  tlnique « +30; Very Rare * +25; Rare - +20; Uncomsion » +15;
     Common » +10; and Abundant « +5.

 F.  Manage-en: ?ocer.;ial

     Deterrdne whether  it is possible to maintain the wetland in its present
     form given available, realistic management options and existing develop-
     ment trends.  For  example, if a high value wetland of small size will
     certainly be encircled and its watershed afflicted with high density
     urbanized land uses in the short term, tzany desirable zianagez&nc options
     and wildlife species will be irrevocably lost regardless of what occurs
     in the wetland in  question.  Rating from 0 to -20, with 0 if the wetland
     can be maintained  substantially as is for >50 years, and -20 if other
     development actions in the short ( < 50 years) will do severe damage to
     the wetland regardless of specific actions taken in the wetland,   ("Severe
     damage" is defined here as a 502 loss of baseline wetland values.).
     Include in this rating a consideration of cost to maintain the system as
     is given the development trends in the wetland's watershed..

 Gt  Holistic £cosys_ten Importance Rating

     Develop an holistic ecosystem importance rating that is the weighted sum
     of plant diversity, animal diversity, critical habitat rating, watershed
     importance rating, aesthetic value rating, ar.d economic value rating
     divided by n-l=5.  Ecosystems are known to consist of the species present,
     their environment plus their symbioses and interactions.  Only in. a. high
     quality wetland will all six of these factors be high and, hence,
     symbioses high.  Rating Valua:  1-27.	

IV.  OVERALL  SYSTEM  RESILIENCE TO DISTURBANCE

     Overall  ecosystem resilience to natural and human disturbance  is basically  a
     measure  of  the  fragility of the wetland system in question.   Some  systems
     (e.g.,  the  acid bog lake or the alkaline fen) are exceedingly  fragile systems
     that  can be destroyed by a significant change in just one factor  (pH).  Other
     systems,  such as mature marshlands with significant peat  accumulations, can
     absorb many environmental insults and still retain much of their essential
     character through time.  Rate as 4-50 a system that can tolerate or resist
     deleterious fire, watershed alteration, and various pollutants and +1 a system
     that  virtually  any  natural disaster of human pollution will  surely destroy.
     This  is  basically a measurement of a wetland's ability to persist.   This is
     partly a subjective rating that must be done by a qualified  ecologist on an
     holistic basis  based on the observations made in categories  I-III above, a
     review of relevant  ecological literature (e.g., van der Valk and Davis, 1978)
     and experience with wetlands.
                                        H-9
-------
      Table
  Summary of human use parameters weighting  system.
Human Use Parameter
Aesthetic Values
Econosic Values
Value of Competitive Uses
Recreational Values
Resource Rareness
Management: Potential
Holistic Zcosysten Values
    Total Range of Values
                            Xlniaua Value
                                + 1
                                -r 1
                                •f 1
                                + 1
                                •*• 5
                                -20
                                + 1
                                -10
    Table
Summary of parameter weighting  for major  categories.
       I*   Biological Parameters
      II.   Rydrological Parameters
     III.   Hunan Use Parameters
      tV,   Wezland TUsiiiar.ca Rc.ti::g

                Total Range of Values Possible
                                                   Range of Values
+ 9
-13
-10
 14
                                           to    -i-205
                                           to    -f-150
                                           to    +177
                                           co    -r 50
      co
                                                T-532
                                  H-10
-------
                 APPENDIX I
Pollution Coefficients from Zimmerman (1974)
-------
                   Industrial Pollution Coefficients

     An approach for estimating direct industrial pollution for air, water,
and solid wastes is outlined in the summary matrix below.

     Direct  industrial  wastewater  coefficients  for estimating  potential
pollution from  process  water are given for a selected set of 40 industries
in  Tables  C-4  through  C-7  in  Appendix  C  from Zimmerman  (1973).   These
industries are  generally considered  the  largest generators  of wastewater
and water  pollutants of  all industries.  Table C-4  gives  coefficients for
wastewater volumes  by  industry.  Table C-5 compares wastewater volumes from
literature  sources  to   actual  reported  wastewater  discharge figures  in
permits  required  under the Federal Water Pollution  Control  Act Amendments
of  1972  (the National  Pollutant  Discharge Elimination  System).   A fairly
good correspondence is noted.  Table C-6 gives water pollutants in terms of
concentrations  and  Table C-7 gives them  in terms  of pounds  per  pound of
industrial output.  The code for data quality in these tables is:

                        Data Reliability Index
     1 ™  Data represent  the convergence  of  many  independent  inven-
          tories,  each  consisting  of  a large sample  taken  over rela-
          tively  long   periods  of  time  and  at  frequent  intervals.
     2 -  One  or  two   inventories  with  a large number of  samples.
     3 -  Plant operating experience  for  several  plants consisting of
          24-hour   composite  samples   taken  at  frequent  intervals.
     4 -  Plant operating experience for only  a  few  plants,  consisting
          of 24-hour composite  samples over a limited  range  of time,
          or an estimate based on national averages.
     5 *  Data based upon grab samples only.
                                1-1
-------
                                                                             01 TJ   .
                                                                             y  d  co
                                                                            •H  efl  0)
                                                                            4-1     -H
                                                                            
y
o
u
f"
d
o
SB


g
0
1
!3









1 *J
cd d
rH CO
•H 4J
ex 9
0 rH •
O rH CO
U O M
CU O
4J
. M y
 cu
>> CO T-l
d co y
eO > i-l
ex m
g p IH
5 o cu
y IH o
y y
S co
w cu n
eu rH eu
CU 43 4J
CO CO CO
v_x 4J »
cO
4J
•^
ex
co >,
y co
»•>. "O
rH H
CO 0)
60 (X

O
CO













M
^
13
co « d
PH r-| 0
•H -H
eu n 4J
 X
O d O CU iH
<4-l iH 14-1 rH TJ













§
o
d
&
d
&




M
cu no
y >, 9 <4-i -d
d V" H eu
§co ex n I*
d d cu
VJ O •» O >
O -H CO -H O
y-t 4J T3 co y
U tfl tl CO
CU 4J (fl iH 4J .
PH CO -O g O CO
C S C t3
0) •" CO r4
y co 4J I-H co co
M TJ n CO rH TJ
3 M i-l CO d
O CO CU 4J i-l CO
co ^ y d ^ 4-1
d u cu cu co
S cfl 3 4J 4J
0) 4J O O CO >»
S5 CO CO P- S 43



1
9 1 •»<
H rJ co en
4-1 P cu eu en
4-1 O H 4-1 00 1
CU CO rH CO O
co 1-1 > a) s
W -H (1) 43 O O
CO rH 4J IJ (-1
o eu o d cu >4-i
TJ ex o ex
4J i-l -H 00
H 9 CU 4J 0) d
3 oo y 9 > -H
CO S rH M 00
d 4J TJ rH 4J d
o d eu o cd co
cj cu ^ ex d n
cO
4J
•H
ex
co >%
^^
•
H H
co eu
oo ex

o
to
* " a
cu
•H • CU
rH r^ 4J
£X U i-|
ex d n
9 co d
co y o
§ aT§
U JJ *-i
UH CO ««
S L.
•d «
JS •«
U ^ a
« ^ -H
* d y
** co
S eo-d
s t-» a
O cO
00
c .-**
in iT n
00 m CO
CO 2 rS
•aati
a .
. CO
cu co cu
rfl CU -H
a i-l 4J
,3 4J iH
y 4J rH
^i«
v-/ CO
•w
>.
r< CO ^
4J CU F?
-.. I 1 p*
S3 m «
9 w •)
•o S ^
J3 * d
•H S
co co
a -H
O M rt
M eu o
4-1 4J p
CU IH
14-1
cu * cu
• 1 y xj
4J ^ 4J
M »
S^"§
r4
_, Cfl •
^ O co
•rj J5 0,
rt "° **
S M °°
* S
y >
CO
18 rrt f3
-------
     Potential water pollutants can be reduced to actual pollutants by:  1)
substituting effluent guidelines  where they exist and  2)  reducing them by
the  percentage  of  known removal  efficiencies  of  various  wastewater treat-
ment systems.

     Indirect water  coefficients  can be calculated in  a  manner similar to
that  suggested  for  residential  and  commercial  development  in  the  next
section.

             Residential/Commercial Pollution Coefficients

     Direct  water  pollution from residential  and commercial facilities is
generally  averaged  for combined  residential and  commercial  development at
approximately 150 gallons per capita per day of wastewater and at about .08
to .14 pounds per capita per day for biological oxygen demand.

     Direct air pollution is estimated almost exclusively as fuel usage and
coefficients for various kinds of fuel are given in the Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors.

     Direct  air  pollution  from  residential  and  commercial  activity in
addition to  resulting  from fuel usage consists of air pollutants generated
during solid waste disposal.  Particulate emissions for alternative methods
of disposal are:

          Open burning 	   50-100 Ib/ton
          Poor apartment house incineration 	   about 50 Ib/ton
          Good apartment house incineration 	   10-20 Ib/ton
          Average municipal incineration 	   20-30 Ib/ton
          Good municipal incineration 	   10-20 Ib/ton
               (Regional Plan Association, 1968, p. 93.)

     Preliminary  solid  waste  coefficients,   based   upon  the  New  York
Metropolitan area  figures  are  .51  to  .68 tons per  capita per  year for
residential  solid  wastes and  .75 to  1.75  tons  per employee  per  year for
business solid wastes,  which includes light industry and commercial wastes
(Regional Plan Association, 1968,  p.  91).
                                1-3
-------
     The  increase  in indirect  potential  water pollution  generation takes
the form  of  increased  runoff from impervious surface created by new devel-
opment.   Runoff  is a function  of  the intensity of rainfall,  the  slope of
the  land, land  cover,  and  the size  of the  drainage area.   The  general
formula for computing runoff is:

                                R - CIA

where  C  is the coefficient  of  runoff,  I the intensity of rainfall,  and A
the  size  of  the drainage area  in  acres.   Some of the values  of  the terms
for specific types of development are given in Table 1 below.

     The  runoff equation  only estimates the volume of water that  will run
over the  land instead  of being absorbed  by it  given  a certain  level of
development.   The  impact  of  the development really has  to be expressed as
the  difference  between  the   amount  of  runoff  that  would  occur were  the
development not to take place and if it does take place.  Furthermore,  the
runoff equation does not give the amount of water pollutants  carried by the
water  runoff.  A number of studies have been done to measure the pollutant
content of  runoff, and coefficients  can be  developed from  those  studies
done in areas analogous to the area to be studied.

     These potential  pollutant  figures could  be transformed  into  actual
figures using the degree of  treatment generally  accomplished for storm
water runoff.

                           A (Drainage Area)

     Drainage areas can be identified and  measured from a USGS topographic
map, or from engineering studies if these are available.

     The  amount of acreage and impervious  surface generated  by residential
development that results from population growth has to be determined before
the runoff  equation can  be  applied to estimate  indirect  water pollution.
Acreage can be estimated from zoning maps or from coefficients of space use
per housing unit by housing type.
                                1-4
-------
                                Table I

          Estimated Values for Terms In the Runoff Equation*

                       C (Coefficient of Runoff)


Residential Development                                C
     10 families per acre                           0.3-0.5
     40 families per acre                           0.5-0.7
     More than 40 families per acre                 0.7-0.9

Commercial Development0                             0.9
          d
Open areas
     "Macadam, compacted earth and                  0.7
       gravel, without plant growth
     Impervious soil, with plant cover              0.5
     Lawns and planted areas, with normal           0.2
       soil
     Woods"                                         0.1

                       I (Intensity of rainfall)

                               I - K/t+b

where I = rainfall in inches per hour, t « average duration of storms
in minutes, and K and b are coefficients assuming the following
values:

     Residential development in New Jersey (based on 5 and 10 year
     storms which Lynch recommends for these areas):

                              K - 131-170
                              b - 17-19

     Commercial development (based on 25 and 50 year storms which
     Lynch recommends for these areas):

                              K - 230-250
                              b = 24-27
^Source:  K. Lynch, 1962, p.  173-175.
 Included impervious areas, lawns, etc.
 Assumes that commercial development is  entirely impervious and has a
 zero slope.  Includes parking lots, access roads, and roofs.
 Assumes a zero slope.  For slopes, coefficient should be increased.
                                1-5
-------
Extent  of  Impervious  surface  for  the  area  has  to  be  estimated  by
population density and housing type.

     In order  to  apply the runoff equation to commercial  development,  the
extent of commercial  development  in acreage that will accompany population
growth has  to  be  estimated.   This can be  estimated  in the following ways:

     (1)  From  zoning  maps:   commercially  zoned  land can  be  measured.
     (2)  From  modifications  of  coefficients such  as  the following  for
          shopping centers:

     	Population Served	       	Selling Area	
     Neighborhood Center (10,000)             40,000 sq. ft.
     Community Center (20,000-100,000)       100,000-300,000 sq.  ft.
     Regional Center                         50,  75 or 125  acres
                                             (depend of amount of
                                             expansion planned)
     Source:  Lynch, 1962, p.  327-328.

     Once acreage is determined,  the amount of impervious surface has to be
estimated in order to obtain a value of C for the runoff equation.   It must
be remembered that the degree of  impervious surface for commercial develop-
ments depends upon the layout of  the development.

     Another indirect form of pollution from residential, commercial or any
other kind  of development  is  the loss  of soil or  erosion caused  by the
action of water  on land exposed  during construction,  or whose  capacity to
resist water movement has been reduced  because of changes in slope or cover
of the  land.  The  amount of soil lost  per acre of exposed land  during a
given storm  period  can  be estimated from an equation,  called the Universal
Soil  Loss  Equation,  originally  developed  by  the  Agricultural  Research
Service for  erosion from  agricultural  activity.   The general form  of the
equation is as follows:

                      Soil loss =RxKxSLxC
                                1-6
-------
     where,
          R -  rainfall Intensity or the average annual rainfall index
               for the area
          K -  a scale factor for soil erodability
         SL -  slope length and the angle of the slope
          C -  soil cover


     Details   on  the   precise   application  of   the  equation  can   be

obtained   from  the   US  Department   of   Agriculture's  Soil   Conserva-

tion Service.
                                1-7
-------
                      APPENDIX J
New Jersey (1975) indirect impact Analysis Methodology.
-------
               GUIDELINES FOR  EVALUATING SECONDARY IMPACTS
                          OF REGIONAL SEWERAGE  SYSTEMS
The  environmental  assessment which accompanies each facilities  plan  must include a discussion of
the secondary impacts of the proposed  facility.  According to  federal  regulations,  secondary  impacts
include  changes  in  the  intensity  and distribution of  the  population, and changes  in the human use
of the land.  Because secondary impacts are a measure of long-range and  lasting effects  of a project.
analysis of secondary impact should  be  at  least  as lengthly and detailed as that for primary impacts.
The  following guidelines .are offered  to  assist in addressing this  question.

1.   Growth  Experience  of the Service Area
     A.  .  Describe  the  growth experience  of each municipality  and the whole study area since
           1960, including changes  in size  of-population, types  of residential development, types
           of industrial  and  commercial development, and  changes  in other major uses of land,
           such  as  farming. Map this information.

     B.    How does this growth experience  in  the  service area compare  with the rest of the
           county and  with  the  state as a  whole in  terms of population,  employment,  building
           permits  granted,  industrial development?

     C.    Rank  in  order of importance the  major factors influencing growth  in  the area and give
           rationale behind  choices; for example:
                proximity to metropolitan  areas
                accessibility  — highways, public transport
                natural  resources —  water  supply,  aquifers, prime farmlands
                natural  features  — mountains, streams, ocean
                inexpensive land
                buiidable land
                public  facilities
                etc.

     D.    Determine the degree of development activity in each municipality  in  the sewer service
           area by  showing how much development  by type —  commercial,  single family  residential,
           apartments, PUDs,  industrial, etc.,  has been approved in the past  two  years.  Look  also
           outside the specific  service area  for  indications of development pressure in the region
           including planned capital facilities.
           1.    Based on recently proposed subdivisions  and building  permit  applications,
                estimate the amount of  residential development that  is likely  to  be  con-
                structed in the next few years.  Determine the number of potential dwelling
                units which  will probably  be built without the  proposed  project.
           2.    Indicate lands  which are known to  be held by  speculators and developers. In
                New Jersey a  copy of every deed recorded with the County Clerk's Office is
                sent back  to the municipality.  So  information relating  to changes in ownership
                should  be available at  municipal offices.  The  county  agricultural agent will be a
                useful source of information  in  this  regard

II.   Existing Land  Use
     A.    On map  or photo quad of the  service area at U.S.G.S.  scale, map publicly owned
           lands,  floodplains, wetlands,  etc.

     B.    Map undeveloped  lands  and  determine the number  of vacant acres. Subtract publicly
           owned lands, floodplains, wetlands, slopes  exceeding 15%, etc.  to  determine the number
           of  vacant, developable  acres in each  municipality and in service area.
                                                J-l
-------
      C.    List any  major deterrents  to  growth, both natural  and other, e.g., lack  of water  supply,
            lack of sewers, bad  drainage,  difficult  terrain, stream  loading limitations, etc.
            {This information will have already been obtained  for  the  inventory  of  natural  resources
            required  in the preparation of a facilities  plan.)
      0.    At same  scale as above, preferably  as  an  overlay, map current zoned densities,  taking
            these from each municipality's zoning  map and ordinance.  Deduce from  this current
            zoned capacity of the service area.

111.   Relationship  to Future  Plans
      A.   Study future  land use plans where they exist of each municipality in the service  area.
           Indicate the status of these plans.  Are they  official, adopted plans? When were they
           prepared and  adopted? If no  plans exist, review  the zoning ordinance. If neither exists,
           so note.
      B.    Describe all other applicable planning for the service area,  including regional and county
           future  land use plans, state highway  plans, state  open space plans, plans  for  environment-
           ally critical areas, i.e., floodplains, wetlands,  coastal  zones,  etc. Confer particularly  with
           county  planners for this  overview.  Are local  plans consistent  with these  county, regional
           and State  plans? Point out major discrepancies.  Separate  planned expenditures from
           general  plans.
      C.    How does the provision of the  proposed facility  relate to the above  plans?  Does  it
           propose sewers in areas designated  for  conservation, open space, recreation  or  in environ-
           mentally critical  areas? Where  conflicts exist,  how is the  system designed to deal  with
           them?

IV.   Status of  Planning  in  Each  Municipality
      A.    What  is the attitude  toward growth in each  of the participating municipalities?  Determine
           this by  examining municipal records, interviewing public officials, planning consultants,
           citizens, and reviewing area newspapers.
      B.    How much  has each  municipality in  the service area  spent  on planning  in each of the
           last five years? Show the relationship between  the  amount  of vacant, developable land
           they have  and the amount of money they  spend for planning.
      C.    Describe the degree  to which  each municipality  has, dealt with  the following checklist
           of basic planning  elements:
           1.    Inventory of natural resources,  including geology,  soils, topography, water  quality,
                water supply.
           2.    Open  Space Needs Study and  Open Space Plan.
           3.    Housing Needs  Study and  Housing Plan.
           4.    Collector Sewer  Master Plan.
           5.    Adopted  Master  Plan  which  encompasses the ?bove  elements.
           6.    Provisions in zoning ordinance providing for "timiny of development." clustering,
                PUD and PURD.
           7.    A  six-year capital program.
           8.    Describe  municipalities' current  debt  status  and  capacity.

      D.    Evaluate the consistency  of the municipalities'  land use ordinances and their plan.
           (Note inconsistencies  in terms  of impact on  system  design.)
      E.    Examine the records  of the Zoning Boards of  Adjustment  for the  past  five (5) years
           in  the  service area.
                                                    J-2
-------
           1.    What  is the frequency of use  or  "d" variances?
           2.    To what extent are they a departure from  the plans  and adopted  land  use regula-
                 tions,  note especially:
                 a.    changes in density
                 b.    marked changes in  type  of  use
                 c.    marked changes in  waste discharge characteristics of permitted uses

           3.    Discuss  the  potential impact on  system design where  significant Zoning  Board
                 activity  has  been occurring.

V.   Estimating Growth
      The  Environmental Assessment  must take into account the assumption that  putting through
      sewer interceptors will  stimulate pressures for development. The growth which will  follow
      the construction  of the project must  be estimated in order to deduce the potential impacts
      on natural  resources, public services, fiscal policy and the character of the area.

      A.   For each alternative  indicate on a map of  the service area  (no smaller than U.S.G.S.
           scale) the location and  size of proposed  sewer lines and  treatment  plants.  Aerial
           photographs available  at  (J.S.C.S. scale,  24,000:1, is a useful base on which to lay
           out proposed systems.
           In light  of  municipal  policies, proposed developments, and  amount  of  development
           pressure  discussed above and with careful  analysis of the vacant, developable  land
           which will  be served  by the proposed  system,  estimate the  population which  will
           occur in the  service  area  within the 10 years following  the construction of the  pro-
           posed  project. This could be a range  rather than a  single figure. It  will  be necessary
           to estimate the spatial pattern, density and general housing  types which will  probably
           occur. Where assumptions are  made, they  should  be clearly  stated and justified.

      B.    For purposes  of comparison, also estimate an  ultimate population for the service area
           based  on the design  size of the pipes,  assuming full capacity use.  Evaluate  the engineer's
           assumptions about per capita use and  peak flows as well as his  methods for  computing
           pipe  sizes.

      C.    Under current  state and  local  policies  toward zoning, floodplains, critical areas, septic
           tanks  and package treatment, what  growth  would occur  if the project  were not  con-
           structed  using  the  10 year time frame.

VI.   Measuring Potential  Impact of  the Proposed  Facility  (and Alternatives).
      Using growth estimates  from  Section V. A.,  determine  the potential impacts of development
      on:  regional economic patterns, transportation, local  sewer collector systems, health  services,
      solid  waste  disposal, schools, municipal fiscal structure, air  Quality, water supply,  flooding,
      water quality downstream effects  and the character  of  the region.
      A.    The impact  of each of these should be analyzed  for  each municipality  in the service
           area using referenced  standards.
           1.    Regional  economic patterns. What will  be the impact  (positive  and  negative) of
                growth on the following  economic activities'  agriculture, industrial development,
                retail  business and services?  This  analysis should include geographic as well  as
                measured aspects.
           2.    Transportation.  How many additional  cars for  residents, commuting-in  traffic  and
                service vehicles will be generated' What new  roads  and  road  widenings will be
                necessary to  serve  this additional  traffic?  Estimated  pattern of  development under
                Section V.A   of  these  Guidelines will  be useful here. Approximate  costs. How will
                the byden be divided  up between federal, state, county and local  government?
                                            J-3
-------
                 Will a  public transportation system be possible within the  region if it  doesn't
                 exist now'
           3.    Local sewer collector systems.  How much  sewerage  will have to  be constructed
                 by each municipality? Estimate costs. Add costs  of local system  to costs of
                 regional system to  produce estimated  total cost to users 10 years  after construc-
                 tion of regional project. Is the cost high  enough  to  create pressure for mora
                 users'
           4.    Health  Services.  Estimate demand for  hospital beds, nursing home  beds,  and other
                 services as  identified  by the State Comprehensive  Health Planning Agency.
           5.    Solid waste disposal.  Estimate  the amount of solid waste {tons per month)  which
                 will have to be collected and  disposed of. Ars there plans for dealing with  this?
                 Have sites  been chosen? What  will  be aporoximate yearly costs for facilities and
                 operations?  Are there available  approved  disposal  areas  in the  area?
           6.    Schools. How  many additional  school  children  can be anticipated?  Using the
                 estimated number  of additional housing units in  V.A. and  accepted standards for
                 the  number of school children  per  unit.'  Based on current cost  per school child
                 per  year in each  municipality,  estimate  future annual operating and construction
                 costs.  Relate the  latter  to debt section  below.
           7.    Municipal fiscal structure.  What are the anticipated effects  of  increased  population
                 on the fiscal position and tax  rates of each  municipality. Indicate  whether  or  not
                 there might be an  increased financial  burden on  residents and if so, to what de-
                 gree. (Again, it may  be  necessary  to discuss  this  in terms  of a  range of possibili-
                 ties.)^  What are the  capabilities of  the towns with respect  to  their current  and
                 future  debt capacity  characteristics?
           8.    Clean air. -What is  existing  air  quality in the region based  on  current readings  for
                 particulates, photo  chemical oxidants and  sulphur  oxides? With anticipated  growth
                 what would be the  projected  amount  of deterioration in air quality  in  regard  to
                 these three  parameters?  Is this  within the  bounds of the EPA air  quality incre-
                 ment standards?
           9.    Watsr supply.  What are  the current sources of potable  water and what is  the
                 adequacy of such  sources  for  meeting estimated  future  population  needs? Deter-
                 mine what other sources might be  available, how they  might  be brought into
                 use  and the aporoximate cost  involved. Is depletion  of  streams  or wastewater
                 loading a concern  in planning  for future  water  supply'
          10.    Flooding. To what extent will  the  amount and speed of run-off be increased  by
                 estimated changes  in land use,  and what  effect will  this increased  run-off have
                 on frequency  and  magnitude of floods for  25-year  storm,  for 50-year  storm?^
          11.    Water quality.  What  are the anticipated effects on stream  quality and  underground
                 water quality  of  the run-off and  increased wasteload resulting from  the  estimated
                 development?
          12.    Character of the  region. Would there  be any significant  changes  in the appearance
                 or functioning  of  the region which should be  documented?

      B.   What are the most  significant problems which can be foreseen as  the  result  of  the
           above described  impacts  of growth?  Describe them at  length.
1. See Explanatory  Notes at end  of guidelines.
2. See Explanatory  Notes at end  of guidelines.
3. See Explanatory  Notes at end  of guidelines.

                                               J-4
-------
      C.    ts the design and construction schedule of the proposed facility compatible with phasing
           of growth in the individual municipalities and  in  the  region, or will  large areas be opened
           up  all at once?

VII.  Weighing  Alternatives
      A.    Which of the alternative proposals  best  minimizes adverse secondary impacts while
           providing an adequate  solution to  the water  quality problems of the area?

      B.    It is  possible .that  each of the proposed alternatives represents  too 'arge a  solution
           in relation to existing  problems,  thus threatening  the  area with  unnecessary secondary
           impacts. If  this is  the  case, indicate  ways in which you  feel the project might be
           revised, scaled  down or staged and still  solve  the water quality  problems of the  area.

VII.  Qualifications  of Consultants
      A.   It is  apparent that  preparation of an  analysis  of secondary  impacts should  be a  team
           effort. Identify  persons who  prepared the statement and their qualifications in  the
           fields of planning,  traffic  engineering, economics, hydrology, sanitary  engineering,  etc.
                                                 J-5
-------
           APPENDIX K

 Procedure recommended by USCOE
to evaluate dredge and fill sites
    (from Nelson et al. 1982)
-------
   Determine if advanced
   identification of sites suitable
   or unsuitable for discharge is
   applicable (§230.SO(a| I
                                         Determine if a General Permit is applicable
                                         under §404(b)(1) or if Best Management
                                         Practices (BMP's) apply under §208(b)(4) of the
                                         Clean Water Act [§230 5(b)l
                                                            I
fnOetermine potential overall level of impact and
 appropnate level of effort and olan for
 assessment, based on proiect significance and
 complexity (§230 6(b)j
Determine relevance of the
various guidelines and
whether to curtail or
abbreviate the evaluation
(§230 6(c)|
                                      I  (^Examine practicable alternatives having          '
                                      I   potentially less damaging conseauences to the     |
                                         aduatic ecosystem [ §230 5(c>]
PREASSESSMENT PHASE: STEP 1
                                                                 K-l
-------
                  1-ssS
                  ® « c <=
K-2
-------
                                              etermme potential overall level of impact and
                                          appropriate level of effort and plan for
                                       I  assessment, based on project significance and
                                       I  complexity [§ 230 6(b)]
                                                                                       "I
  Discharge prohibited where
  alternative with less impact is
  available, considering cost.
  technology and logistics
  [§230 10(a)J
   Smallest practicable mixing
   zone is required, consistent
   with type and amount of
   material, method and rate of
   discharge, depth and current,
   etc  [§230  1 1(f)J
   Biological components to
   consider are threatened and
   endangered species, fish.
   crustaceans and moHusKs.
   food chain organisms
   mammals  biras  reptiles.
   ampmbians (§230 30- 321
           2f)Examine practicable alternatives having
           potentially less damaging consequences to the
           aquatic ecosystem ( §230 5(c)J
r
                                         (D
3) Delineate candidate discharge site(s)
consistent with preliminary mixing zone
determination (§230 5(d)|
          (T/Evaluate potential impacts on physical and
           chemical components of the aquatic ecosystem
           at candidate sitets) ( §230 5(e)j
                                                u
          (Jyldenttfy and evaluate potential impacts on
           cntical biolpgical characteristics,  special aquatic
           sites, and human use of the aouatic ecosystem
           at candicate site(s) (§230 5(f)|
                                                           Discharge effectively
                                                           prohibited where associated
                                                           use in a special aquatic site
                                                           is not water dependent
                                                           §230
Components to consider are
physical substrate.
suspended oarticulates,
water quality, water
circulation and levels
(§23020- 24]
                                                           Special aouatic sites to
                                                           consider are sanctuaries and
                                                           refuges, wetlands, mud flats.
                                                           vegetated shadows, stream
                                                           nffles and pools (§230 40- 45]
                                           Human uses to consider are recreational and
                                           commercial fisheries and water-related
                                           recreation, esthetic resources, parns and
                                           preserves (§230 51- 54]
ASSESSMENT PHASE: STEPS 2-5
                                                                 K-3
-------
   Factual determinations cover
   physical substrate, water
   circulation and levels.
   suspended participates.
   chemical contaminants.
   aquatic organisms, cumulative
   and secondary effects
   [§230.111
                                           5)ldentify and evaluate potential impacts on
                                           critical biological characteristics,  special aquatic
                                           sites, and human use of the aquatic ecosystem      I
                                           at candidate siteis) [ § 230 5(f)]
                                                              T
Q>)Review sufficiency of project information
  needed 'o document factual determinations and
  perform pre-testing evaluation [§230 5(g)|
                                          ^Conduct pre-testing evaluation of materials to
                                           be discharged for potential physical
                                           incompatibility and chemical contamination using
                                           pollution records, previous test results, and
                                           "reason to believe' test: assign a category for
                                           testing {§230 S(h),§>230.62(a)]
Pre-testing evaluation covers
extraction site pollution
pathways, including runoff.
percolation or spills of tox c
or hazardous substances.
and point-source discharge
(§23061(3)1
                                                                                         ~1
                                          ^Conduct appropriate chemical-biological 'ests if
                                           chemical contamination is a reasonable             '
                                           probability [§230 5(i)l                            '
                                               	I
ASSESSMENT PHASE: STEPS 6-7
                                                                 K-4
-------
   Category 1 dredged matenal
   and Category 5 fill with no
   contaminant concentrations
   above background level
   require no testing
   [§23062(b), §23063(a)]
                                                                                      "1
^/Conduct pre-testing evaluation of matenals to
 be discharged for potential physical                •
 incompatibility and chemical contamination, using    |
 pollution records, previous test results, and        .
 "reason to believe" test, assign a category for      |
 testing [§230 5(h), §230 62(a)|                 i
   Category 2 dredged matenal
   with concentrations above
   background but no more
   available than at discharge
   site requires sediment and
   water column chemical tests
   (§230.62(c) (1), (2)]; mixing
   zone calculation required
   [§23064(a(]
                                         (£)Conduct appropnate chemical-biological tests if
                                           chemical contamination is a reasonable
                                           probability [§230.5(0]
n
*i
Category 4 dredged material with bioavailable
contaminants in potentially harmful
concentrations requires water column and
sediment bioassays with optional
bioaccumulation test (§230 62i'e)(t),(2)|: mixing
zone calculation required for water column
bioassay  [ §230 64(a)l
                                                         Category 3 contained
                                                         dredged matenal with
                                                         concentrations in return water
                                                         above background requires
                                                         water column chemical tests
                                                         with mixing zone
                                                         (§23062(d) (1), §230.64(a)}
                                                          Category 6 fill material with
                                                          concentrations above
                                                          background and potential
                                                          leaching requires water
                                                          leachate chemical test
                                                          [§23063/b)(1)J
TESTING PHASE; STEP 8
                                                           K-5
-------
   Physical-chemical actions to
   consider are limiting location.
   type, volume, rate, timing,
   depth, mounding or
   dispersion of discharge.
(Conduct appropriate chemical-biological tests if
 chemical contamination is a reasonable
 probability 1 §230.5(0]
  using submerged diffusers
  and silt screens in open
  water;
"|    '
  diking, lining, capping, and
  planting contained sites: etc
  (§230.70- 74]
         (9)ldentify appropriate, practicable actions or
           changes to the project plan to minimize adverse
           effects of discharge (§230.50)]
                                                     P
                                                                     Biological actions to consider
                                                                     are avoiding unique or critical
                                                                     habitats, including special
                                                                     aquatic  sites:
          I0)wake and document factual determinations.
           including the kind, degree and duration of
           physical chemical and biological effects
           (§230 5(k)
                                                            avoiding sensitive seasons of
                                                            life cycle stages or fishing,
                                                            hunting and trapping:
                                                            restoring or developing mud
                                                            flat, marsh, island or other
                                                            habitats, etc
                                                            (§230.75- 77]
             Physical substrate composition and contours
             ( §230.11(3));
             water levels and circulation and other hydrolic
             factors [§230 11(b)j;
             characteristics of suspended particulates and
             turbidity (§230 11(c)].
             chemical   concentration,  bioavailabihty  and
             toxicity. including final mixing zone (§230 1 1(d).(f)].
                                        survival or recolonization of indigenous biota, and
                                        change of ecosystem structure or function
                                        (§230 11 (e)].
                                        cumulative effects from a number of similar or
                                        nearby discharges (§ 230.11 (g)]:
                                        secondary effects induced by change in land and
                                        water use, etc. (§230 1 l(h)[
DETERMINATION PHASE: STEPS 9-10
                                                                K-6
-------
   Discharge prohibited where
   alternative with less impact is
   available, considering cost.
   technology and logistics
   (§230.10(a)J
   Discharge prohibited if water
   quality limits exceeded
   beyond mixing zone or for
   toxic substances, or if
   threatened or  endangered
   species jeopardized
   [§230
                                        I (lO)Make and document factual determinations.
                                        |   including the kind, degree and duration of
                                        I
                                           physical, chemical and biological effects
                                        | _ (§ 230.
         .5W1

P
(n)MaKe and document findings of compliance or
  non-compliance by comparing factual
  determinations with restrictions on discharge
  [§ 230.5(1))
                     I
^2)Certify unconditional compliance or specify
  appropriate, practicable conditions to mmurize
  adverse effects, or specify reasons for non-
  compliance — not meeting one or more
  restrictions on discharge, or insufficient
  information to judge compliance (§ 230 12(ai|

Discharge prohibited if
aquatic ecosystem degraded
through persistent or
permanent effects on
valuable biota, special aquatic
Sites, fishing and hunting.
and ecosystem diversity.
productivity, etc.
({ 230.10(01
Discharge prohibited unless
a* practicable, appropriate
steps taken to minimize
adverse effects [§ 230 iO(d)|
                                           Document /actual determinations and adaptation
                                           of guidelines to the project evaluated
                                           (§230
DECISION PHASE: STEPS 11-12
                                                                     K-7
-------
               SECTION 10/404 PERMIT APPLICATION FIELD REPORT
                      U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Date of Inspection
Reporting Biologist^
Public Notice No.	, (dated)

Investigation Type:  Section 10	404	

Applicant's Name and Address:


Waterbody and Location of Work:


Purpose of Work (describe):
  Water-Dependent:   Yes	No
  Public Benefit:    Yes      No"
Description of Proposed Project (append maps depicting habitat types and copy
of project plans):
  Percent of work completed (if any)
Fill  or Spoil  Area:
  Dimensions
  Total  Acreage_
    Acreage above m.h.w._
    Acreage below n.h.w.
  Method(s) to retain materials
  Method(s) to prevent erosion
  Intended use of filled area
Dredge or Borrow Area:
  Dimensions
  Total  Acreaae
    Acreage above m.h.w.
    Acreaae below m.h.w.
Necessity for particular depth and/or width_
Type of materials to be excavated	
Quantity of materials to be excavated                            (cubic yards)
Quality of materials to be excavated         (polluted)          (non-polluted)
  Type of pollutant_	

                                       K-8
-------
 Intended use of excavated area
MethodTs) of excavation
Type(s) of equipment to be used_
List of private, state and federal  fish, wildlife and recreation  lands  in  area
of project influence:
List of existing industrial, residential  or other developments  in  area  of
project influence:
Extent of development on adjoining properties (i.e.,  bulkheading,  filling,
etc.):


Habitat Description Within Work Area:
                                                      	Acreage*
                                               (%)     Dredged    Filled    Other
A.  Vegetated Wetlands
    (Habitat type	)**
    1.  Predominant Emergent Plant Species
    2.   Predominant Non-Emergent Plant
        Species
B.  Non-Vegetated Wetlands
    (Habitat type	)
C.   Bottom type (i.e.., sand, gravel,  mud,  shell,  etc.),  including  depth and
    value as habitat:

*Sources of data (i.e., estimate,  planimeter, etc.)	
**
  Use type in accordance with  Circular  39,  "Wetlands of  the  United States."
                                       K-9
-------
Environmental Alterations Which Would Result from Work;
                                          Significant     Insignificant    None
 1.  Filled waterway or marshes             	         	       	
 2.  Deepening                              	         	       	
 3.  Obstructing                            	         	       	
 4.  Shoaling                               	         	       	
 5.  Segmentation                           	         	       	
 6.  Habitat isolation                      	         	       	
 7.  Draining wetland                       	         	       	
 8.  Flooding wetland                       	         	       	
 9.  Bulkhead, dike, levees                 	         	       	
10.  Diversion of freshwater sources         	         	       	
11.  Modification of tidal  intrusion         	         	       	
12.  Modification of water circulation      	         	       	
13.  Increased fertility                    	         	       	
14.  Reduced fertility                      	         	       	
15.  Increased turbidity                    	         	       	
16.  Noxious odor                           	         	       	
17.  Tributary flow control                 	         	       	
18.  Saltwater barrier                      	         	       	
19.  Convert to fresh water                 	         	       	
20.  Modification of substrata              	         	       	
21.  Pollution (specify type)               	         	       	
22.  Shoreline erosion	
23.  Other                                  	         	       	
                                     K-10
-------
 Fish and Wildlife  Resources Within Project Area  (list important species and
 Identify primary habitat use as to (F)-feeding,  (S)-spawning, (M)-migration,
 (N)-nursery,  (R)-resting, or (W)-wintering):

 Fish                                   Shellfish
Waterfowl                              Shore and Wading Birds
Mammals                                Rare and Endangered Species
Others
                                          K-ll
-------
Utilization of Fish and Wildlife Resources in Work Area* (describe and
quantify, if possible, use of important species):
  Harvest
    Sport fishing
    Commercial fishing
    Hunting
    Trapping

  Non-Consumptive Uses
    Wildlife observation
    Photography
    Research
    Education

  Special Uses
    Aquaculture
    Shell collecting
    Sanctuary
    Other

Project Effect on Public Use in Area (i.e.,  access, esthetics,  etc.):
Biological  Significance of Area (describe  briefly  the  importance  or relation-
snip of proposed work to fish and wildlife in  area of  influence,  including  any
existing fish and wildlife management areas or plans for  such  developments):
 Sources of data
                                         K-12
-------
Potential Direct or Indirect Effect of Environmental Alterations on Fish and
Wildlife Resources and Their Use:
Conclusion(s):

  Permit application should be:

  1.   Denied (summarize reasons).
  2.   Denied  pending  preparation  and  review  of EIS  (summarize  reasons)
  3.   Modified  (specify  conditions  and  summarize  reasons)
 4.   Issued  as proposed  (summarize  reasons).
                                          K-13
-------
Field Reconnaissance Data:

  Investiqator(s)                         Agency
  Date(s)  of Investigation                Times  of Investigation
  Method(s)  of Investigation  (boat,  aerial,  motor  vehicle, on  foot,  etc.)
  Field Conditions  in  Project  Area
    Sky cover:   (  )  clear   (  )  overcast    (  )  cloudy
    Wind:   direction	speed	(.71.p.h.)
    Temperature:   air	(°F)(°C)
                water	(°F)(°C)
    Salinity	ppt
    Other  water analyses	
    Tidal  stage	
    Water condition  (clear,  turbid,  stained, etc.)_
    Sampling  results (append data  sheet,  if any)

    Photo information (attach photos)
                                       K-14
-------
    APPENDIX L

Ontario Government
 Biological Method
-------
                                 - 7 -
                     THE EVALUATION OF WETLAND VALUES

         In Chis evaluation, wetland values are grouped into four
separate components.  These are biological, social, hydrological and
special features.  Each component is evaluated individually and
separately from the others.  The biological, social and hydrological
components may each generate a total of 250 points.  The special features
component may generate extremely high scores (i.e. in excess of 1,000)
but the likelihood of such high scores is extremely low.

         With 250 possible points for each component one can develop a
more sensitive point spread within "subcomponents" than if a lower
maximum number had been cnosen.  The adoption of the high maximum total
also permits "minor" values (ones to which only few points are allotted)
Co be more accurately included in the evaluation.

         Within each component, subcomponent values have been weighted to
reflect their relative importance (relative to each other).  Some values
are widely considered to be of major importance as for example, breeding
habitat for an endangered species.  At the other end of the scale are
what might be termed as '"minor" values, that is, ones which in any total
point scale should properly be allocated only a few points.  This
evaluation takes the position that even "very minor" wetland values
should be evaluated and included in the overall assessment because the
evaluation seeks to be comprehensive.  To avoid the measurement of known
values (assuming, of course, that the information is practicable to
collect) would appear to be contrary to the need to optimize accuracy.

         In no case was the number (value) chat was assigned to a
variable arrived at lightly.  The weighted values are the end product of
a process involving numerous reviews and adjustments over a 2 year period
made under the guidance of  the Canaca/Ontario Steering Cotrmittee on
Wetland Evaluation.  There was rr.ucn field testing, consultation with
outside "experts", and consiaeraoie deliberation.  Thus, experience and
calculated judgement about  the relative importance of the accepted
variables is the basis for  the credibility of the numbers.
                      1.0.  _BIOLOGICAL COMPONENT

         The biological component is evaluated under three major
subcomponents, namely proauctivity,  diversity and size.  Productivity is
evaluated by examining 5 interrelated values, namely growing degree days,
wetlana soils, kind of wetland types, site, and nutrient status of
surface water.  Diversity is evaluated by studying 6 characteristics:
                                     L-l
-------
                                 - 8 -
number of wetland cypes,  vegetation communities, diversity of surrounding
habitat, proximity to other wetlands, interspersion and open water
types.  Size is evaluated by tying its value closely to wetland quality.

1.1. PRODUCTIVITY VALUES

         Biological productivity provides a measure of the ability of a
certain area to produce a crop of living organisms.  Biological
productivity may be either primary (if produced by chlorophyll-bearing
organisms) or secondary or tertiary (if produced by non-chlorophyll
bearing organisms).  The form of "wetland energy" that is available to
wildlife is that derived from primary productivity.  Herbivorous wildlife
(plant eaters; secondary productivity) consume this plant matter and are
eventually themselves consumed by carnivorous wildlife (meat eaters;
tertiary productivity).  For this reason, primary production is a good
indicator of the overall biological productivity; cl.j more energy
available, the more consumers the ecosystem can support.  Because primary
productivity provides a good general approximation of both secondary and
tertiary productivity and because with certain exceptions (see 4.2) the
evaluation of secondary and tertiary productivity would be a complex and
time-consuming matter, only primary productivity is measured in the
Biological Component.

1.1.1.  Growing Degree-Days

         Broadly speaking, the greater the amount of organic material or
"bioraass" that a community of plants can produce, the more becomes
available for the use of man and of-all forms of life that depend
directly or indirectly on plants for food.  The single most important
factor contributing to the production of bioraass is temperature (Lieth
and Whittaker 1975; Edey 1977).  Thus, in southern Ontario, most species
of plants growing in their natural environment will produce more biomass
at say 15° Celsius than they would at 10°C.  As well, in areas of
Ontario where average daily temperature is higher and the frost free^
season is longer, a greater diversity of plant species can also be
found.  This means that,  in general, more species of animals can be
sustained by those wetland plant communities chat grow in areas with more
favourable temperature regimes.  An index which shows the contribution of
warmer temperatures to plant growth has been created (Brown, McKay and
Chapman 1963; Edey 1977) by recording the seasonal accumulation of
"Growi ig Degree Days" (GDDs).  The reason that this base temperature is
chosen for the index is because in temperate climates plant growth
essentially stops at lower temperatures.

         The concept of growing degree days assumes that plant growth is
related directly to the average daily temperature.  It ignores soil
                                         L-2
-------
                                 - 9 -
temperature, differences in the pattern of nighc and day temperature and
other variations causea by the stage of growth.  The degree days for each
day are added together, or accumulated, throughout the growing season
(Edey 1977).

         Thus we can say that the higher the number of GOOs the greater
is the amount of biomass that plants in an area can produce by
photosynthesis.  Of course, other factors can severely influence the
responses of various plant species in any particular wetland.  For
example, the availability of water,  nutrients, light, water body
morphology, rate of grazing or harvesting, nature of drainage, kinds of
life forms present, and so on.  But as a general rule the direct
correlation between GDDs and plant biomass production is a positive one.

         The number of GODs across the landscape of southern Ontario is
known (Brown, McKay and Chapman 1968).  This means that GDDs can be
correlated with geographical position of each wetland and it is for this
reason that the GDD index is considered to be a generally applicable
attribute to wetland evaluation in the province.

         The geographical variation in GDDs in southern Ontario is mapped
in Figure 1.  The  figure shows the lowest means are found in more
northern and interior upland regions while the highest are found on Pelee
Is land.
Evaluation:
               Growing Degree Days
               2800 to 3200
               3200 to 3600
                 >3600
 4
 8
14
20
                                               (Maximum possible * 20)
         Wetland complexes should be evaluated by determining the
GDD's at the approximate centre of the complex.
1.1.2.  Soils

         The contribution of soil type to productivity is well
established both in agriculture and forestry.  The inclusion of soils
in the determination of wetland productivity is based on the
                                 L-3
-------
                                 - 10 -
assumption Chat in wetlands higher biological productivity would
result when certain soil capability groups are present.  Mineral soils
are considered to be more valuable to productivity than organic soils
even though it was the presence of a wetland environment that created
the organic soils in the first place.
Evaluation:
         Clays, loams or silts
         Organic
         Undesignated
                     Z of area x 10
                     Z of area x  6
                     Z of area x  0

                        (Maximum possible • 10)
         la wetland complexes the evaluator should aim at determining
the fraction of area occupied by the 3 categories fo- the complex as a
whole.
1.1.3.  Type of Wetland

         Wetlands may be comprised of different kinds of ecosystems
such as marshes, swamps, bogs or fens.  These are known as wetland
types.  The types are defined in the Procedures Manual (Part II).
Type of wetland provides one of the best measures of primary
productivity.  It is veil established that different ecosystems have
different rates of productivity (Leith and Whittaker 1975) and
wetlands are no exception (Greeson, Clark and Clark, 1979; Richardson
1979).  Richardson (1979) studied th'e net primary productivity of a
variety of wetland types and derived the following average figures:
cattail marshes 24.7 metric tonnes per hectare per year (ra.t./ha/yr.);
sedge marshes 21.0 m.t./ha/yr; swamp forests  10.4 m.t./ha/yr., and
bogs, fens and muskegs 9.3 m.t./ha/yr.

         In this evaluation we recognize marshes, swamps, carrs,  fens
and bogs.  Definitions of these wetland types are given in Part II as
modified from Zoltai (1975) and others.  Percent cover (of area)  of
each wetland type in'the wetland is to be determined as this will
provide a more accurate assessment of productivity.
Evaluation:
         Bog
         Fen
         Carr
         Swamp
         Marsh
Z of area
Z of area
Z of area
Z of area
Z of area
x  4
x  6
x 10
x 12
x 20
                                                (Maximum possible • 20)
                                         L-4
-------
                                 - 11 -
         In wetland complexes Che percenc of area occupied by each
wecland type (in all individual weelands of Che complex) should be Che
Basis for Che evaluation of cype of wecland.
1.1.4.  Sice

         The physiographic position of a wecland in Che landscape
defines ics sice.  Four sice locations are defined in chis
Evaluation.  These are Lacustrine; Riverine, Palustrine and Isolated.
Wetland scientists differ somewhat in precisely how each of these four
terms are defined (Cowardin et. al. 1979; Reid and Wood, 1976).  The
definitions used in this Evaluation are presented in Pare II.  As
well, the four sice locations are illuscraced in Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5
in jPart II.

         The contribution of site to primary productivity is derived
from Che following consideracions.  The race of flow of wacer is
greater in Riverine wee lands and  cherefore more nucrients can flow
through and be in contact with vegetation than in Isolated or
Lacustrine wetlands.  Thus more plant material can be produced in
Riverine wetlands, particularly near rivermouths  Chan in wetlands
having a more limited nutrient source.  The further downstream, the
richer the nutrient concentration (Hynes, 1970).  Many Lacustrine
marshes, depending on location in the lake, are also very productive
aue to che local accumulation of nutrients.

Evaluation:

* Isolated                                   % of area x  2
- Palustrine with intermittent outflow       Z of area x  4
- Palustrine with permanent outflow          Z of area x  4
- Riverine (near headwaters)                 Z of area x  6
- Riverine (mid-river)                       Z of area x  8
- Riverine (.near mouth)                      Z of area x 10
- Lacustrine (at river mouch)                Z of area x 10
- Lacustrine (on enclosed bay)               % of area x  6
- Lacustrine (exposed to lake)               Z of area x  4

                                                (Maximum possible =10)

         In evaluating wecland complexes for sice, Che same
consideracions apply as in 1.1.3. above.
1.1.5.  Nutrient Status of Surface Water

         Water that is more charged wich dissolved solids and
nutrients can proauce more biomass than water with fewer nutrients.
                                 L-5
-------
                                 - 12 -
Water quality provides an indication of the habicaC suitability of a
wetland for certain plants, aquatic invertebrates,  fish and wildlife.
Measurement of total dissolved solids (T.D.S.) by means of specific
conductance can be used to detect man-induced changes in wetlands.
Conductivity measurements are interpreted as a measure of the
fertility of the water and have become a standard,  reliable method of
measurement.

         Other means of measuring the nutrient status of water in «
wetland have been extensively utilized, such as pH; total alkalinity;
dissolved oxygen; transparency and turbidity, along with T.D.S. and
specific conductance, as well as direct measures of phosphates,
nitrates, etc.  However these measurements would be too time consuming
for use in this evaluation.

Evaluation:

         local Dissolved Solids (T.D.S.) after temperature conversion
(mg./l).

                <100     mg/1                -  0
              100 to 500   mg/l              - 20
              501 to 1,500 mg/l              - 10
                >l,500    mg/l               -  0

         (Maximum possibly for Nutrient StatusofSurficial Water » 20)

                (Maximum possible for  1.1. PRODUCTIVITY VALUES - 80)
 1.2.  DIVERSITY VALUES

         Wetlands which contain many kinds of aquatic and terrestrial
 habitat together with a relatively large number of wetland plant
 species will invariably also attract far more animal species than
 wetlands containing more uniform environments and monocultures of
 plants (Greeson et. al. 1978).   Wetlands with greater diversity meet
 the  living requirements of more species.  They provide alternate food
 sources for host and prey, parasites and predators and more readily
 permit either the temporary or permanent survival of many species.   In
 short, whatever are the causes or the benefits of diversity it is
 considered to be of paramount value because more wildlife species,
 often in great abundance, can be found  in diverse environments.
                                         L-6
-------
                                 - 13 -
         Diversity values of a wetland are evaluated under six
different categories:  number of wetland types, vegetation
communities, diversity of surrounding habitat, proximity to other
wetlands, interspersion and open water types.


1.2.1.  Number of Wetland Types

         The more wetland types chat are present within a single
wetland, the more diverse the habitat available for wildlife.  Hence,
Che greater Che diversity of wildlife species in the wetland as a
whole.  GoLet (1976) considered a number of wetland types to be a very
important contributor Co total diversity.  A wetland containing more
Chan one wetland type should not be confused with a wetland complex;
Che latter may or may not be comprised of different wee land types but
Che individual wetlands are always separated by non-wetland
environments.
Evaluation:

Number of Types

         One          -  3
         Two          *  6
         Three        »  9
         Four or Five * 12

                                                (Maximum possible • 12)
1.2.2.  Vegetation Communities

         Vegetation communities are the most important measure of
diversity.  This is because more than any other factor, plants can
satisfy every major requirement of wildlife except water.  Vegetation
provides nesting materials and sites, protection from predators, food,
places to roost, loaf, isolation during the breeding season,  etc.  The
more kinds of vegetation communities present,  and the greater the
number of vegetation strata, the more valuable is the wetland.  Many
studies have shown that for the large majority of species, differences
in vegetation are more important to quality wildlife habitat  than
differences in individual plant species making up the plant
communities.  Most wildlife species are adapted primarily to  one or a
                                L-7
-------
                                 - 14 -
complex of Life forms and, as a result, wildlife diversity in any area
is closely related to life form diversity which in this evaluation is
measured through vegetation communities.

Evaluation;

         Give two points for each single strata subform, three for
each double strata community and four for each triple strata community
present in the wetland.

         In wetland complexes, each wetland in the complex should be
mapped for its vegetation communities.  In other words all the
wetlands in the complex should be treated as one for purposes of
evaluating vegetation communities.

                                              (Maximum allowable • 30)
1.2.3.  Diversity of Surrounding Habitat

         Wetlands cannot be evaluated in isolation from surrounding
habitat since not only do many wetland species need certain kinds of
upland habitat during some periods in their life cycle but many upland
species make use of the wetland either daily or at certain times of
the year.  In general, the greater the diversity of habitat
immediately surrounding the wetland the greater will be Che wildlife
value of the wetland.  Highly diverse upland habitat may include a
mixture of agricultural fields, both pastured and cultivated, fence
rows or shelterbelcs with protective cover, forests, abandoned
farmland, lakes, creeks or ponds, and an undulating terrain.  Intense
human activity adjacent to a wetland may deter many species from ever
utilizing the wetland.  Surrounding natural habitat may serve as a
"buffer", reducing disturbance of wildlife and satisfying s.ome of
their requirements.  Many animals may use wetlands for a specific
period in their life cycle and unless the wetland is easily accessible
to them, it serves them little purpose.

Evaluation:

      - Ten or more kinds of surrounding habitat
        including forested land                                     10

      - Six to nine kinds of surrounding habitat
        including forested land                                      7
                                        L-8
-------
                                 - 15 -
      - Two to five kinds of surrounding habitat
        including forested Land                                     4

      - Surrounding habitat made up of row crop
        agriculture                                                 I

         In the case of individual wetlands this variable pertains to
all uplands within 1.5 km of the wetland; in wetland complexes,
surrounding habitat pertains to uplands between and among the
different wetlands of the complex as well as lands up to 1.5 km from
the edge of any wetland of the complex.

                                               (Maximum possible • 10)
1.2.4.  Proximity to Other Wetlands

         Where wetlands are located so near to each other that
wildlife can cove from one to another to take advantage from time Co
time of more favourable habitat, food suppply, etc. then the value of
a wetland is enhanced (Golet 1976).  Wetlands connected hydrologically
by surface water are the most valuable.  Obviously, wetlands within a
defined wetland complex are all proximal to each other.

Evaluation:

         In the case of individual wetlands this variable pertains to
all wetlands within 1.5 km; in the case of wetland complexes proximity
pertains to wetlands within the complex.

(a)  Wetland Complexes                                             10

(b)  Single Wetlands
 -  hydrologically connected by surface water to
    other wetlands (diff. dominant type) or open
    water within 1.5 km.
                                    OR
 -  hydrologically connected by surface water to
    other wetlands (same dominant type) within .5 km.              10

 -  hydrologically connected by surface water to
    other wetlands (diff. dominant type) or open
    water body from 1.5 to 4 km away;
                                    OR
 -  hydrologically connected by surface water to
    other wetlands (same dominant type) from
    .5 to 1.5 km away;
                                    OR

                                  L-9
-------
                                 - 16 -
 -  Within .75 km of ocher wetlands (diff.  dominant type) or op«n
    water body, but not hydrologically connected by surface
    water.                                                          6

 *  Within 1 kra of other wetlands, but not
         hydrologically connected by surface water.                 2

 -  No wetland within 1.5 km.                                       0

                                               (Maximum possible "10)
1.2.5.  Interspersion

         Interspersion is an expression of the araouuc of "edge"
available to wildlife.  Edge is defined as the rather abrupt
transition zone or ecotone between any two vegetation forms or
subforms as for example, the area where floating vegetation contacts
emergents, emergents contact shrubs or trees,  etc.  Most wildlife
species depend upon more than one habitat type and often prefer the
"edge" areas between different habitat types.   Often, the number of
species and the population density of some of  the species are greater
in the ecotone than in the communities flanking it (Odura, 1971).  As
the iaterspersion of wetland vegetation increases, diversity of
habitat is enhanced.

Evaluation:

                        Type 1-6
                        Type 2-12
                        Type 3-20
                        Type 6-28

         In evaluating wetland complexes for interspersion one should
examine the degree of interspersion in each wetland in the complex,
then draw a conclusion as to which interspersion type might best
describe the complex as a whole.  A subjective decision is required.

                                                (Maximum possible • 28)
 1.2.6.  Open Water Types

         This  index describes another facet of the edge effect - the
 relative proportion and areal configuration of open water to vegetated
 areas.  This may be critical to  the survival of certain wildlife
                                        L-10
-------
                                 - 17 -
species, especially waCerfowl thac thrive besc when there is  dense
cover for nesting and open water for feeding, a cover-to-water ratio
approaching 1:1 is optimal (Golet, 1976).
Evaluation:
                        No open Water
                        Type 1
                        Type 2
                        Type 3
                        Type 4
                        Type 5
                        Type 6
                        Type 7
                        Type 8
 0
 8
 8
14
20
30
 8
14
 3
                                             (Maximum possible » 30)

                   (Maximum possible for 1.2, DIVERSITY VALUES » 120)
1.3.  SIZE (Biological Component)

         Wetlands are often valued for their size, since the larger a
wetland the more likely it will contain various valuable features or
expressions.  In this evaluation the value given to a particular
wetland for its size is always closely tied to quality of the wetland
and Che besc measure of wetland quality is considered to be
diversity.  In contrast, the use of primary productivity variables
appear Co be irrelevant or misleading.  Thus a large "poor quality"
wetland made up of only cattail mats is considered to be considerably
less valuable than another of the same size which contains abundant
Open water, is highly interspersed and provides a stopover place for
migrating waterfowl, for example.  The value of size is therefore
closely correlated with diversity, all of whose component values are
"size dependent".  Thus, diversity when coupled with size appears to
provide an excellent indicator of the "biological" value of a
vecland.  In the evaluation, a special table has been prepared aimed
ac quantifying the value of size as a function of diversity. The
relation between size and the size-dependent diversity score is not
linear; adjustments have been made in the table to ensure that large
bue low diversity wetlands do not receive high scores for size and
also Co ensure that small, highly diverse wetlands receive extra size
points.  Making size a function of diversity would appear to optimize
the accuracy of the size values.
                                    L-ll
-------
                   - 18 -
SIZE (BIOLOGIAL COMPONENT) EVALUATION TABLE
No. of
Total Diversicy
Score

Hectares* 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70
<2
2
4
8
12
17
23
28
37
49
62
81
105
L37
178
233
302
393
511
665
863
1, U3
1,460
1,898
>2
- 4
- 8
- 12
- 17
- 23
- 28
- 37
- 49
- 62
- 81
- 105
- 137
- 178
- 233
- 302
- 393
- 511
- 665
- 863
- 1,123
- 1,460
- 1,898
- 2,467
,467
4
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
3
9
9
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
17
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
14
15
16
17
13
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
24
25
10
12
13
15
16
13
19
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
35
36
37
39
40
(Maximum possible
* Intervals for
size were arrived at
category is less Chan
Che
che
4ch adds
previous
groupings Co
be

identical

4 (i.e.
maximum
2 hectares,
8 co 12)
number x
16
17
21
22
23
24
26
27
29
31
33
35
37
39
41
43
45
46
47
48
43
49
49
50
50
for 1.3
in the
26
28
30
32
34
36
38
41
43
45
46
47
43
49
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
, SIZE
35
38
40
42
44
46
48
49
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50



71-80 81-90 91-120
42
44
46
48
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
48
49
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
(Biological ComDonent
following manner: Che first
che second adds 2,
Thereafter
a factor of
be created. Wee lands
for comparative

(Maximum
larger
, all
1.3.
than 2
che third
intervals are
This
,467
permitted
hectares
adds 3,
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
) - 50)
size
and
a product of
25 size

are deemed Co
purposes.
DOSS
ible for
1.0,
BIOLOGICAL COMPONENT * 250)
                                 L-12
-------
         APPENDIX M
Ontario Government Checklist
-------
           AN EVALUATION SYSTEM




                   FOR




           WETLANDS OF ONTARIO




     SOUTH OF THE PRECAMBRIAN SHIELD
              FIRST EDITION
      PART III.  WETLAND DATA RECORD
             WILDLIFE BRANCH




         OUTDOOR RECREATION GROUP




  ONTARIO MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES




                   AND




CANADIAN WILDLIFE SERVICE, ONTARIO REGION




    ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION SERVICE




            ENVIRONMENT CANADA
                MARCH 1983
     Disponible ggalement en frangaia
                    M-l
-------
(i).

(ii).
                                WETLAND DATA RECORD
         WETLAND NAME  AND/OR NUMBER
         ADMINISTRATIVE  REGION
.  AND DISTRICT
         OF ONTARIO MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES
(iii).    CONSERVATION AUTHORITY JURISDICTION
         If not 'within a designated Conservation Authority,  check here

(iv).    COUNTY AND REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY	

(v).     TOWNSHIP   	

(vi).    LOTS AND CONCESSIONS
(vii).   MAP AND AIR PHOTO REFERENCES

         (a)  Longitude and Latitude 	

         (bj  U.T.M. Grid Reference Zone:
                                                         Grid:
         (c)   National Topographic Series Scale and Map Number(s) & Name
         (d)
              Air  Photos

              (1)   Date  photo taken	
              (2)   Scale  of air photos   	
              (3)   Flight and plate numbers
(viii).   WETLAND SIZE AND BOUNDARIES

         (a)   Single contiguous  wetland area:

                                          OR

         (b)   "Wetland Complex"  comprised of


              Wetland Number (for
              reference purposes)

              Wetland No. I
              Wetland No. 2
              Wetland No. 3
              Wetland No. 4
              Wetland No. 5
              Wetland No. 6                  [
              Total size of
              wetland complex:
                                                                     hectares
                                                    individual wetlands as follows:.
                                                 Size of each wetland
                                                 in the complex

                                                         hectares
                                      M-2
-------
                                  - 2 -
                       1.0.  BIOLOGICAL COMPONENT
1.1.  PRODUCTIVITY VALUES
1.1.1.  Growing Degree-Days
         Numb«r of accumulated growing degree days  (check  one)
                        <2800
                      2800 - 3200
                      3200 - 3600
                        >3600
1.1.2*  Soils                                         Estimated Z of Area
         - Loams, clays or silts  (mineral)              ___________
         - Organic                                      _______________
         - UndesignaCed                                 ____________
1.1.3.  Type of Wetland
         (check one or wore)                          Estimated Z of Area
                 Bog                                     ______________
                 Fen                                     	
                 Carr                                    _______________
                 Swamp                                   	
                 Harsh
1.1.4.  Site
         (check one or more)                          Estimated Z of Area
                 Isolated                                	
                 Palustrine with  intermittent  outflow   	
                 Palustrine with  permanent outflow      ______________
                 Riverine  (near headwaters)             ______________
                 Riverine  (mid-river)                    _______________
                 Riverine  (near mouth)                   _______________
                 Lacustrine  (at rivermouth)             	_
                 Lacustrine  (on enclosed bay)            _______________
                 Lacustrine  (exposed to lake)            ______________
                                         M-3
-------
1.1.5.  Nutrient Status of Surface Water
         Wrice conductivity bridge reading and calculate T.D.S. at  25o
         as per tables in Appendix VI of 1.1.5. in the Procedures Manual.

         Initial Specific conductance      Total Dissolved  Solids
         Micromhos/cm                      T.D.S. Temperature  Conversion
         (umhos/on)                        (mg/1)
1.2.  DIVERSITY VALUES
1.2.1.  Number of Wetland Types
         _______ one
              _ two
               three
               five
1.2.2.  Vegetation Communities
         (a) Single Stratum Subforms  (check)         Dominant Species
             _______ Deciduous Trees             	
             	 Coniferous Trees            	
             _     Dead Trees                  	
             	 Tall Shrubs                 	
             ^^^^ Low Shrub's                  ________^________________
             	 Herbs                       	
             _     Mosses                      	
             	 Robust Emergents            	
             _     Narrow-leaved Eraergents     	
             	 Broad-leaved Emergents      	
             _______ Floating Plants                      _
             	 Free-floating Plants        __	
             	 Submergents                 	
         (b) Double Strata Subforms  (list)
             Upper Stratum                               Lower Stratum
                                    M-4
-------
                                  - 4 -
         (c) Triple Strata Sub forms (list)
             Upper Stratum        Middle Stratum       Lower Stratum
1.2.3".   Diversity o£ Surrounding Habitat
         (check all appropriate items)
         	 row crops
         _____ pasture
         _____ abandoned agricultural land
         	 deciduous forest
         _____ coniferous forest
         	 urban or cottage development
         	 pits, quarries or mining waste disposal
         	 open lake or deep river
         ______ fence rows with cover, or  shelterbelts
         	 terraine undulating or hilly  with ravines
               creek(s)
1.2.4.   Proximity to Other Wetlands
         (check one or more)
         	 hydro logically connected by surface water to  other wetlands
             (dif£. dominant type)  or open water within 1.5  km.
                                           OR
         	 hydrologically connected by surface water to  other wetlands
             (same dominant type) within .5 km.

         ___ hydrologically connected by surface water to  other wetlands
             (diff. dominant type)  or open water body  from 1.5  to  4  km
             away;
                                           OR
         ___ hydrologically connected by surface wacer to  ocher wetlands
             (same dominant type)  from .5 to 1.5 km away;
                                           OR
         ___ Within .75 km of other wetlands (diff. dominant type) or
             open water body, but not hydrologically connected  by  surface
             water;

         	 Within 1 km of other wetlands, but  not hydrologically
             connected by surface water.

             no wetland within 1.5  km.
                                      M-5
-------
                                  - 5  -
1.2.5.   Interspersion
         (check one)
         	 Type I             	 Type 3
         	 Type 2             	 Type 4
1.2.6.   Wetland Open Water Types
         (check one)
         Enter type as per map in Figure 10
         	 No open water
         	 Type 1                      	Type 5
         	 Type 2                      	 Type 6
         	 Type 3                      	Type 7
         	 Type 4                      	 Type 8
1.3.  SIZE (Biological Component)
      (refer to viii)
         	              hectares
                        2.0.   SOCIAL COMPONENT


2.1.  RESOURCE PRODUCTS WITH CASH VALUE


2.1.1.  Timber
         .         51 to 1002 of the wetland is a swamp with many mature
                  trees (over 10 m. tall).
         .         10 to 50% of the wetland is a swamp as above
         	   wetland has few, small or no trees
         Source of information: 	


2.1.2.  Wild Rice
                  wild rice present in the wetland
                  wild rice not present
         Source of Information:
2.1.3.  Commercial Fish (Bait Fish and/or Coarse Fish)
                  fish harvested from the wetland (as per MNR)
                  abundant during at least part of the year
                  not abundant or only occasional
                  habitat not suitable for fish
         Source of Information:
                                M-6
-------
                                  - 6 -
2.1.4.  Bullfrogs
         	 Present
         	 Absent
         Source of Information:
2.1.5.  Snapping Turtles
         	 Present
         	 Absent
         Source of Information:
2.1.6.  Fur Bearers (check if present)
         	  muskrat          _____
         _______  raccoon          _____
         ________  beaver
         Source of Information:
                         mink
                         other
2.2.  RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES  (check appropriate column)

                   	Tyoe of Wetland Associated  Use
 intensity of Use
 Hunting       Nature       FishingCanoeing/Boating
           Appreciation
	    or Study	
High
Moderate
Low
None Known
Not Possible
2.3.  AESTHETICS
2.3.1.  Landscape  Distinctness
         ^_^____ clearly distinct
                indistinct
                                        M-7
-------
2.3.2.   Absence of Human Disturbances
     2.3.2.1.   Level of Disturbance
                    human disturbances  absent or  nearly  so;
                    one or several  singular  or  localized disturbances;
                    moderate disturbance  or  localized water  pollution;
                    impairment of natural quality intense  in some  areas
                      or severe localized water pollution;
                    extremely intense disturbance or water pollution
                      severe and widespread.
     2.3.2.2.   Types of Disturbances
            	 roads
            _______ utility corridor
            ______ buildings
            ^^^_^ channelization
            _______ drainage
            ______ filling
                    water pollution
                    other:
2.4.  EDUCATION AND PUBLIC AWARENESS
2.4.1.  Educational Uses
                Frequent   -  an average of 2 or more  visits  per year by
                              one or more school groups,  local clubs for
                              the purpose of studying  the animals,
                              plants, environment,  etc.
                Infrequent -  use by organized groups  (one visit or less
                              per
                              year or only casual visits)
                tfo known visits
             List groups utilizing the wetland

                     Name of Group              Source of Information

             (a) 	      	
             (b) 	      	
             Cc>
2.4.2.  Facilities and Programs (check one)
                staffed interpretation center with shelters, trails,
                literature
                no interpretation center or staff, but a system of
                self-guiding trails and observation points; brochures may
                be available
                no facilities or programs
                                           M-8
-------
                                  - 8 -
2.4.3.   Research and Studies (check one)
                one or more wecland-related scientific research papers
                  published in a scientific journal;
                one or more reports written outlining some aspect of the
                  wetland's natural resources;
                no reports or papers.
         List scientific papers, reports, ec.
         (a)
         (b)
         (c)
2.5.  PJK3XIMITY TO URBAN AREAS (check one)
         _____ in an urban or suburban area
         _____ <10 km from a population center greater than 10,000
         _____ 10 Co 60 km from a population center greater than 10,000
         	 isolated or relatively remote
2.6.  OWNERSHIP/ACCESSIBILITY
2.6.1.  Ownership
         Z of Area (estimate)
         _________   public land with unrestricted access
         ^^^^^^   public land with restricted access
         _________   private, but open to the public for limited activities
         _________   private club, closed to public
         	   private and restricted


2.6.2.  Accessibility (check one)
         	   easily accessible at most times by road or waterway
         	   easily accessible only at certain times of the year
         __________   limited accessibility and moderate effort required
         	   access difficult


2.7.  Size (Social Component)

         ______^   hectares (refer to viii)
                                       M-9
-------
                                  - 9  -


                      3.0   HYDROLOGICAL COMPONENT


3.1.  FLOW STABILIZATION


3.1.1.  Detention Due to Surface Area
3.1.1.1.  Size of catchment basin above wetland outflow in relation Co
          total size of all wetlands,  reservoirs and lakes above the
          wetland.

          Catchment Basin Size 	 sq. km.
3.1.1.2.  Total Size of all Detention Areas (Lakes, Reservoirs and
          Wetlands) Draining into the Wetland (in sq. km.)

          List Detention Areas                          Size
                                                 Total  	 sq. km.


3.1.1.3.  Size of Adjoining Lake (Lacustrine wetlands only)

          ______ hectares or _______ sq. km.


3.1.1.4.  Size o£ Adjoining River (Riverine Wetlands only)  (check one)

          	  Wetland located on the Ottawa, St. Lawrence, Niagara,
                  Detroit or St. Clair Rivers.
          ...       Wetland not on any of the above rivers.
 3.1.1.5.  Location and size of detention areas  (lakes,  reservoirs  and
          wetlands) wichin 30 '
-------
                                  - 10 -
    (a)  Detention areas above Che wetland (Wichin 30  km.)

    Name and/or Number   Distance upstream        Size   Cumulative  Size
    of Detention Area    from wetland  (in km.)
    (b)  Detention areas below the wetland (Within 30 km.)

    Name and/or Number   Distance downstream      Size   Cumulative  Size
    of Detention Area    from wetland (in km.)
3.1.1.6.   Land use along river or stream shoreline for 20 km below the
          wetland (for Palustrine and all Riverine Wetlands except those
          located along the 3 large rivers).

         	  km.  village, town or urban
         ^^^^^   "   actively farmed agricultural
         	   "   forested
         	   "   abandoned by agriculture
         	     "   other (state)
           40      "   «  Total in km. (i.e. 20 km on each side of the
                                           river or stream)
3.1.1.7.  Size (Hydrological Component) (see viii) 	 hectares
3.1.2.  Flow Augmentation

         Wetland Catchment basin 	 sq. km.  (See 3.1.1.1.)
         Wetland Area as a Z of Catchment Basin Size      Z
-------
                                  - 11 -


3.2.  WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT


3.2.1.  Short Term Removal of Nutrients from Surface Water
     3.2.1.1.  Site Type (see 1.1.4. and check one)
         	 Isolated
         _________ Palustrine with intermittent outflow
         __^____ Palustrine with permanent outflow
         	 Riverine (near headwaters)
         	 Riverine (mid-river)
         	 Riverine (near mouth)
         _______ Lacustrine (at rivermouth)
         _______ Lacustrine (on enclosed bay)
         	 Lacustrine (exposed to lake)
     3.2.1.2.  Actual Wetland Area with Robust Ernergents and Submergents
              (check one)
         	     0 or <5
         	     5 -   50
         	    51 -  100
         	   101 -  250
         	   251 -  500
         	   501 - 1000
                 >1000 hectares
     3.2.1.3.  Land Use in Catchment Basin (check one)
         __       mainly agriculture and/or urban
         	 roughly 40-60% agriculture; remainder forested or
                   or abandoned agriculture
         	 mainly forested
3.2.2.  Long Term Nutrient Trap (check one)
     ^^^^_^ wetland Located on an active delta
     ________ wetland lacustrine - rivermouth but without
             obvious delta
     ________ wetland with organic soils occupying 50% or more
             of the area
     _______ wetland with organic soils occupying less than
             502 of the area
                               M-12
-------
                                  - 12 -
3.3.  EROSION CONTROL


3.3.1.  Erosion Suffer
     3.3.1.1.  Riverine Wetlands (check principal vegeCacion form)
         ^^^^^ Trees or Shrubs
         	 Emergencs
         ________ Submergence and Floating
         	 Non-vegecaced or nearly so
     3.3.1.2.  Lacustrine Wetlands (check principal vegetation fora)
         ________ Forest or Shrubs
         ________ Emergencs
         ^_______ Submergents and Floating
         	 Non-vegecaced or nearly so

     3.3.1.3.  Fetch (Lacuscine Wetlands and/or Riverine wetlands on
                        any of the 5 large rivers)
         Maximum distance
         	  <2 km
         	 2-8 km
         	  >8 km
         	 barrier beach present
3.3.2  Sheet Erosion
         For all except Lacustrine wetlands
         (check Che appropriate square)
                             R Factor Value
Wetland Size
sq. tan. <50 51-75
100
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
>20
                                       M-13
-------
                                -  13 -


                   4.0.   SPECIAL FEATURES COMPONENT

4.1  RARITY AND/OR SCARCITY


4.1.1.   Individual Wetlands
        Name of physiographic unit:  	
        Number of unit:       	
4.1.2.  Wetland Type Representation (check one or more)
        marsh                	
        swamp and/or carr     	
        fen                  	
        bog                  	
4.1.3.   Individual Species


     4.1.3.1.  Breeding  habitat for an  endangered animal or plant species;

                     Name of Species            Source of Information
             (i) __JZII_IIIL__   __ZZZZZZZZZZ_
             (2)                  	   	_~
     4.1.3.2.  Traditional migration or  feeding habitat  for an endangered
              animal species:

                      Name of Species            Source of Information
             (1)	
             (2)
     4.1.3.3.  Breeding or  feeding habitat  for a provincially significant
              animal species;

                      Name of Species           Source  of  Information
              (1)	
              (2)
     4.1.3.4.  Provincially  significant plane species:

                      Name  of Soecies           Source of  Information
              (1) 	                         '
              (2)
                                     M-14
-------
     4.1.3.5.  Regionally significant species:

                       Name of Soecies
              (1) 	
              (2)
              (3) 	
              (4)
Source of Information
4.2.  SIGNIFICANT FEATURES AND/OR FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT
4.2.L.  Nesting of Colonial Waterbirds (check one)

         __________ currently nesting; species name(s) 	
         	 known to have nested within past 5 years;
                     species name(s)
                   active feeding area
                   none known
        Source of Information:
4.2.2.  Winter Cover for Wildlife (check only highest level of significance)
         __________ Provincially signficant for Deer 	, Moose 	
         _________ Regionally significant for Deer         , Moose
         .          Locally significant for Deer            , Moose ______
         ___^	 Good winter cover for other species (list): 	
                   Poor winter cover
        Source of Information:
4.2.3.  Waterfowl Staging (check only highest  level of significance)
           .        Canadian significance
         	 Provincial significance
         ________ Regional signficance
         ^^^^^^^ Little or no significance
        Source of Information:
4.2.4.  Waterfowl Production (check only highest level of significance)
         ___________ Provincial significance
         	 Regional significance
         ________ Local significance
        Source of Information:
4.2.5.  Migratory Passerine Stopover Area (check one)
         	 Highly significant
         ________ not singularly significant
        Source of Information:
                                            M-15
-------
                                   -  15  -
4.2.6.  Significance for  Fish  Spawning and Rearing (check one)
         	 Regional  Significance
         	 Presenc
         ________ Unknown
         	 Not  possible
         Species and Source  of Information: 	
4.2.7.  Unusual Geological  or  other Surficial Features

         Feature                               Source of  Information

         (1) 	        	
         (2)              	
4.3.  ECOLOGICAL AGE
         Type of Wetland                      I Area
         	 Bog
         	 Fen
         ________ Swamp/Carr
                  Marsh
 INVESTIGATORS
(a)
(b)
(c)
 AFFILIATION
 DATE
 ESTIMATED TIME  DEVOTED TO COMPLETING THE FIELD  SURVEY IN "PERSON HOURS'
                                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1984-756-894/437
                                         M-16
-------