903R86002
  NWRC Open File Report 86-7
  May 1986
   THE FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT
    OF SELECTED  WETLANDS OF
  CHINCOTEAGUE  ISLAND, VIRGINIA
GB
705
.VO
F86
     ind Wildlife Service
     )epartment of the Interior

-------
Regional Center for nnvironment-il Information
            US EPA Region III
               1650 Arch St.
           Philadelphia, PA 19103

-------
                        NWRC Open File Report 86-7
                        May 1986
  THE FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF SELECTED

WETLANDS OF CHINCOTEAGUE  ISLAND,  VIRGINIA


                    by

             William E. Odum
              Judson Harvey
             Lawrence  Rozas
             Randy  Chambers

  Department of Environmental Sciences
   Clark Hall, University of Virginia
     Charlottesville,  Virginia 22903
           Tel.  (804)  924-0560

             Project Officer
            Millicent  Quammen
    National Wetlands  Research Center
     U.S. Fish and  Wildlife Service
          1010 Cause Boulevard
        Slidell, Louisiana 70458

              Performed for
    National Wetlands  Research Center
        Fish and Wildlife Service
     U.S. Department of the Interior
         Washington, D.C.   20240
                Funded  by
   Wetlands and Marine  Policy  Section
  U.S. Environmental Protection  Agency
                Region  3
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
                            U.S, EPA Region III
                            Regional Center for Environmental
                             Information
                            1650 Arch Street (3PM52)
                            Philadelphia, PA 19103

-------
                          DISCLAIMER
     The  use  of  the  Adamus  and  Stockwell  Wetland  Evaluation
Procedure in  this  study for the  U.S.  Fish and  Wildlife  Service
(FWS) does  not imply FWS endorsement  of this method  for evalu-
ating wetland functions.   In April  1987,  a revised  operational
draft of this method is expected for testing and  review,  in which
FWS will participate.
This report may be cited as:

Odum, W. E., J. Harvey,  L. Rozas,  and R. Chambers.   1986.  The
     functional assessment of  selected  wetlands of  Chincoteague
     Island, Virginia.   U.S.  Fish  Wildl.  Serv.  NWRC Open  File
     Rep. 86-7.  127 pp.

-------
                              CONTENTS
Figures	       iv
Table	       iv
Conversion Table	        v

1.   Project Setting	        1
     1.1  Introduction	        1
     1.2  Geology	        1
     1.3  .Hydr ology	        3
     1.4 . Wetland Ecology	        7
2.   Methodology	        10
     2.1  General Procedures	        10
     2.2  Mapping	        12
     2.3  Definitions and Wetland Terminology	        12
     2.4  Aerial Photography	        13
     2.5  Determination of Hydrologic Function	        13
3.   Site Descriptions	        14
     3.1  Chincoteague Ridge/Swales	        14
     3.2  High School East	        27
     3.3  Fowling Gut System	        38
     3.4  Mixed Hardwood Swamp	        56
     3.5  Mire Pond Fill	        66
     3.6  Mire Pond Scrub/Shrub System	        77
     3.7  Ocean Breezes South	        97
     3.8  Chincoteague Channel Marsh	       107
4.   Summary of the Eight Chincoteague  Study  Sites	       116
     4.1  Overall Impression from Field Visits	       116
     4.2  Summary of Adamus/Stockwell Ratings	       116
5.   Comments on the Adamus/Stockwell Technique
     as Related to Chincoteague Wetlands	       119
     5.1  General Comments	       119
     5.2  Specific Comments Concerning  the
          Chincoteague Analyses	       121
6.   Research Needs	       122

7.   References	       125
                                iii

-------
                             FIGURES

Number                                                       Page

 1      Developmental history of Chincoteague Island	       2

 2      Stratigraphy of a typical Holocene barrier island.       3

 3      Hydrologic cycle of a typical Holocene barrier
        island	       4

 4      Major surface drainage areas on Chincoteague
        Island	       6

 5      Location map for selected wetlands on
        Chincoteague Island	      11

 6      Map of Chincoteague Ridge/Swales WIA	      15

 7      Map of High School East WIA	      27

 8      Map of Fowling Gut Systern WIA	      38

 9      Map of Mixed Hardwoods Swamp WIA	      56

10      Map of Mire Pond Fill WIA	      66

11      Map of Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub WIA	      77

12      Map of Ocean Breezes South and Chincoteague
        Channel Marsh WIA's	      97






                              TABLE

Number                                                      Pa9e

  1     Functional significance ratings for  each
        WIA and WIA subdivision evaluated in the
        study	    117

                                iv

-------
     Mul tlply

millimeters (mm)
centimeters (cm)
meters (m)
kilometers (km)
                o
square meters (m )
square kilometers (km )
hectares (ha)

liters (1)
cubic meters (m3)
cubic meters

milligrams (mg)
grams (g)
kilograms (kg)
metric tons (t)
metric tons
kilocalories (kcal)

Celsius degrees
inches
inches
feet (ft)
fathoms
miles (mi)
nautical miles (nmi)

square feet (ft2)
acres           2
square miles (mi  )

gallons (gal)
cubic feet (ft3)
acre-feet

ounces (oz)
pounds (lb)
short tons (ton)
British thermal  units (Btu)
CONVERSION TABLE

Metric to U.S. Customary

       By.

    0.03937
    0.3937
    3.281
    0.6214

   10.76
    0.3861
    2.471

    0.2642
   35.31
    0.0008110
    2
 2205
    1
0.00003527
0.03527
  205
  0
  102
    3.968

    1.8(°C) + 32

U.S. Customary to Metric
     To Obtain

inches
inches
feet
mil es

square feet
square mil es
acres

gal 1ons
cubic feet
acre-feet

ounces
ounces
pounds
pounds
short tons
British thermal
                                       uni ts
                       Fahrenheit degrees
25.40
2.54
0.3048
1.829
1.609
1.852
0.0929
0.4047
2.590
3.785
0.02831
1233.0
28.35
0.4536
0.9072
0.2520
mil 1 imeters
centimeters
meters
meters
kil ometers
kil ometers
square meters
hectares
square kilometers
liters
cubic meters
cubic meters
grams
kilograms
metric tons
kil ocalories
Fahrenheit degrees
    0.5556(°F - 32]
                       Celsius  degrees

-------
                      1.  PROJECT SETTING

1.1  INTRODUCTION

     This  study  was  done  at  the  request of the Region III office
of  the  U.S.  Environmental  Protection Agency  (EPA)  and was
conducted  under  the  joint  guidance  of  that office  and the
National Coastal Ecosystems Team of  the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS).   The assignment was to conduct an assessment  of
the potential hydrologic and ecologic  functions of  eight  wetland
sites on Chincoteague Island, Virginia.  These sites ranged  in
size from approximately 4 ha to 21 ha.  The wetlands included
estuarine emergent and  scrub/shrub along  with  palustrine
emergent,  scrub/shrub, and forested.

     The Adamus/Stockwell  (1983)   assessment  technique was
specified as the method  of  choice.   In addition,  we agreed  to
provide  general  descriptions of the eight  sites and  also  comment
on the apparent  effectiveness  of  the  Adamus/Stockwell  technique
for assessing these wetlands.   These descriptions, assessment
results, and comments are contained in this  report.


1.2   GEOLOGY

1.2.1  Developmental  History

     Chincoteague Island is a coastal barrier island of  recent
geological origin  located at 75°22'  west  longitude and  37°56'
north latitude.  It is approximately 13.3 km  long  and 2.8  km  wide
at its widest point (at Piney Island).  Chincoteague was  formed
2,000 to 4,000 years ago during the mid-Holocene period,  a time
of lower but  rising  sea  level and abundant  sand supply  along the
mid-Atlantic  coast  (Halsey, 1979; Kraft et  al., 1979). The island
is composed of a series of parallel beach  ridges and  swales  that
rise less  than three m above sea level.

     The ridge-swale system  at  Chincoteague  trends  roughly  from
the southwest to the northeast.   The oldest  ridges (formed first)
lie to the  northwest.  The continued  formation of  younger  ridges
(Figure  1) caused  Chincoteague's ancestral  barrier island  to
accrete  towards the southeast.   Approximately 1,000  years  ago the
formation of inlets to the north and  south gave the present-day
shape to the island's  shoreline.  During early colonial times the

-------
tip of Assateague Island grew
Island from direct exposure to
see Figure 1).
  southward,  shielding Chincoteague
  the Atlantic Ocean  (Halsey, 1979;
1.2.2  Stratigraphy

     The shallow geology  of  Chincoteague  Island has not  been
extensively studied.  However, it is likely to be similar  to that
of  other  barrier islands of  similar  age and  developmental
history.  Holocene  barrier  islands are primarily composed  of beds
of sand or  sand and shell with intervening layers of finer sands,
silts  and  organic materials  (Kraft,   1979;  Missimer,  1973;
Bartberger, 1976).  These relatively recent geological  formations
are usually situated on top of confining layers of compacted peat
or beds  of clay and silt  mixed with sand  (Kraft  et  al.,  1979;
Bartberger, 1976;  Missimer,  1973;  Wiegle, 1974).  The confining
layers underlying barrier   islands are usually located  six to ten
meters  below  sea level.   Figure  2 is  a profile  view  of  the
stratigraphy of a typical  Holocene  barrier  island.
               OCEAN CITY
                       WALLOPS
                                       'OCEAN CITY
    Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Figure 1.   Developmental  history  of Chincoteague Island (modified
from Halsey, 1979).

-------
             Figure  2.   Stratigraphy of a
             typical  Holocene barrier island
             (from Kraft  et al., 1979).
     Below  the first confining  layer at Chincoteague are a series
of deep,  sandy aquifers and aquicludes which extend  downward to
the crystalline  rock basement  which occurs about 7,000  ft below
sea level  (State Water Control  Board,  1975).
1.3  HYDROLOGY

1.3.1  Groundwater

     Chincoteague Island  is  underlain by  five  or more  sandy
aquifers  enclosed  by relatively  impervious  sediments  which
function  as aquicludes  (Department  of  Agriculture,  1975;
Environmental Protection Agency,  1982).   Only the two nearest the
surface (The Pocomoke and the Manokin) hold appreciable  fresh
water resources.  These aquifers  are located between 30 and 90  m
below  the surface  at Chincoteague  (Biggs, 1970; State  Water
Control Board,  1975).  Near the  surface, the unconfined,  water
table  aquifer may  be as  much as 6  to  9 m  thick  before  it
intersects  the first  aquiclude.  The  water reserves  of  this
aquifer are  brackish (State Water Control Board,  1975) except for
some localized lenses of freshwater that occur above sea  level
(Grant Goodell  -  pers. comm.).  Unlike the  Pocomoke and Manokin
aquifers which are recharged with freshwater some 50 to 100  km to
the  northwest  (Biggs, 1970),  the water  table  aquifer  is

-------
recharged locally  by precipitation.   Saltwater  contamination  of
the unconfined aquifer  probably occurs  periodically  as  a result
of  severe storm  tides  (Winner,  1978).   The  average  annual
rainfall  is   approximately  105  cm  in the  Chincoteague  area
(Bolyard,  1978).  Yet, the runoff of precipitation rarely occurs
on the  sandy soils of barrier islands {Bolyard et al.,  1979;
Winner, 1978).  Most of the precipitation infiltrates  directly
into the soil whereupon it drains vertically under the force of
gravity through the unsaturated  zone.  Once  reaching the water
table,  subsurface  water moves  laterally in the direction of the
water table surface slope.   This  drainage  generally  follows the
land surface  slope toward the interior  wetland swales  and ponds
or toward  the Bay  waters that surround the  Island.  Discharge
from Chincoteague's water  table  aquifer occurs by evaporation,
transpiration,  seepage into surface water  bodies  which drain
interior portions  of the  island by channel  flow, and  seepage into
the Bay and saltwater  channels that surround  Chincoteague.   A
schematic representation of the hydrologic  cycle of a typical
Holocene barrier island is shown in Figure  3.

     Fluctuations  in the  elevation of  the  water  table   are
controlled by climatic conditions and human activities on  barrier
islands (Kimmel and Vecchioli,  1979).  The  water table rises when
recharge exceeds discharge  and  falls when  the  opposite  condition
prevails.  Natural  recharge of groundwater  is  inhibited  by paving
and compacting soils over large areas and  by  directly channeling
storm  waters off the island.  If  recharge by precipitation is
sufficiently   inhibited,  recharge  will eventually begin  to  occur
laterally by  salt  water  intrusion (Freeze  and  Cherry, 1979;  Bear,
1979) .
        Figure  3.   Hydrologic cycle of a typical
        Holocene  barrier  island  (from Missimer,  1976) .

-------
1.3.2   Surface Water

     Elevations  on Chincoteague  Island  range from approximately
-0.5 to +2.5 m (relative to mean  sea level).  As stated  before the
island possesses  a  ridge and swale  topography related to its
developmental  history.  The parallel systems of ridges  and swales
have  bands of  vegetation  which correspond to  the absolute
elevation  of  the  ridge tops and swale bottoms  as well as the
local height and variability of  the water  table.   Lowland  areas
are composed of  low ridges and wide swales that are seasonally or
semipermanently flooded and primarily  support  wetland vegetation.
Naturally  occurring upland  areas  consist of  higher,  broader
ridges and narrower  swales  which  are characterized  by  less
frequent  incidences of flooding  and a greater  percentage of
upland vegetation.   The topography of much of the lowland area of
the island has been  extensively modified by grading and  filling.
Dredging,  ditching,  and  road construction  have  also  changed
natural drainage patterns on the island.

     Major surface drainage pathways that are relevant to this
study are shown in Figure  4.   Drainage is effectively  divided by
County road 2104 which crosses the island  near  the northeastern
section of the town  of Chincoteague.   North  of 2104  the wetlands
drain primarily toward the  jeep trail ditch.  County road 2102
creates  another surface  drainage divide that  runs lengthwise
through the central portion of the island.   To  the  west of 2102
the system is  drained primarily by  Fowling  Gut.   To the  east
drainage   flows into Andrews Landing Gut  and  several  smaller
creek systems.  The  major drainage systems  will be  described
separately below.

     Historically, surface drainage  into Oyster Bay and Little
Oyster Bay was blocked by filling along the shorelines of these
water bodies; first along County road 2104 and more recently by
dredging and filling of homesites along Oyster  Bay.  Instead of
exiting  into  the  Oyster  Bays, surface  water now drains to the
south  into the jeep  trail  ditch and  then  to  the  west  into
Chincoteague Bay near the High School.   The jeep  trail ditch is
permanently flooded and tidal.  A small diameter culvert under
County road 2101 tends to  maintain  a substantial head of brackish
water which promotes steady drainage into Chincoteague  Bay during
rainy periods.

     Fowling Gut is a natural,  interior drainage  system that runs
lengthwise  across  the  southern two-thirds of the island.  In its
upper  reaches  above Mire  Pond  it  has been   modified  by
channelization; culverting beneath roadways has occurred along
its entire length.  A 1943 U.S.G.S. topographic map and  aerial
photographs from the 1940's indicate that  at  one time Fowling Gut
probably had tidal connections at both the northeast  and
southeast  ends  of the Island.   The tidal  connection at  the
southwest end of the island has been preserved through the use of

-------
CO
                           o
                           •
ain
                 •    *

                 H
                 2    o
                 o    «
                 •?
                 i
•

|
<
          I   '
          h;
          '!l
                                   •H
                                    c
                                   •H
                                    Cn
                                    S-i
         c
         (0
        r-l
         en
 CD
 3
 tn
 n3
 (U
-P
 O
 U
 c
•H
£
U

 c
 o

 en
 (0
 0)
 M
 (0

 cu
 en
 
-------
culverts underneath County roads 2102, 2113,  2103, and 2126 and
State road  175.  However,  flow  has  been substantially  constricted
by the culverts.   A recent  engineering study  (Waterways Surveys
1985)  reported  that Fowling Gut exhibits  tidal effects all along
its length although the amplitude of tidal fluctuations at its
headwaters  are  increasingly diminished.   The timing of peaks and
low tides  are  considerably delayed  relative to the  tides in
Chincoteague  Bay.   The  study also showed  that the  waterway
responds quickly to  even moderate   rainfalls  by  collecting
stormwater  and  shunting  it  over   a  period  of  days  into
Chincoteague Bay.  It is not known whether alterations of the
Fowling Gut system have increased  or  decreased surface drainage
from the interior  portions of the Island.   Pavement drainage and
surface channeling of  stormwater  by road-side ditches  may promote
more rapid  drainage of precipitation following storms.  Seasonal
periodicities  in the volume of water stored  in the Fowling Gut
system have not been studied as well.

     Dredging and spoil  placement at  the headwaters of Andrews
Landing Gut in addition to the recent  development of a trailer
park to the north have isolated a  large section of  salt  marsh
from  surface  water exchange  with Fowling  Gut.  Recent  road
construction between Andrews Landing and  Black Point  Landing has
further isolated this wetland from regular tidal exchange with
Assateague  Channel.  Two,  small-diameter culverts under the new
road  are  flap gated  to impede  tidal  influence  and  promote
drainage of the marsh.

     The wetlands chosen for study on  Chincoteague were only a
small  subset of  a  large,  interconnected,  and, in many places,
disturbed system  of swales, seasonal ponds  and ditches.  Many of
the wetlands are  topographically  isolated from surface  water
exchange with  the jeep  trail ditch,  Fowling Gut, and Andrews
Landing Gut during most times of the year.  The sandy underlying
substrate  does,  however, promote  water exchange between  the
wetlands and  the water table  aquifer.   Depending  upon  local
topographic variation and  recent  climatic conditions, isolated
wetlands can  accept groundwater  discharge  from surrounding
uplands or  recharge the groundwater system.  During extremely wet
periods, overflow and redistribution of  surface  water to  tidal
channels can  occur.
 1.4  WETLAND ECOLOGY

 1.4.1  Vegetation

     The interior  wetlands of Chincoteague Island exist primarily
 in  the elongate  swales  between  the  relict beach  ridges and
 intertidal  marshes fringe the island's circumference and tidal
 waterways.  Depending  upon  the  proximity to Chincoteague  Bay and
 the  presence or absence of a  tidal connection,  salinities  in

-------
these wetlands  range from almost  totally freshwater to  fully
marine.   Based  upon  the  classification of Cowardin et  al.  (1979),
there are five  general  wetland types  present on Chincoteague
Island;  (1)  estuarine emergent,  (2) estuarine scrub-shrub, (3)
palustrine emergent,  (4)  palustrine  scrub-shrub,  and  (5)
palustrine  forested.

     The ends of the  swales which abut Chincoteague Bay  and most
of the wetland  margins of Fowling Gut are dominated by estuarine
emergents such  as Spartina alterniflora. Spartina patens,  and
Distichlis  spicata.   Two  wetland  shrubs  dominate  the  vegetation
in more  elevated areas:  marsh elder (Iva frutescens) and salt
bush (Baccharis halimifolia).  Wax myrtle (Myrica cerifera) is
present at  the  wetland-upland transition.

     Surface water salinities  decrease markedly as the  swales are
traversed toward the interior  of  the island.   The wetland plant
communities,  in turn, become increasingly dominated by  brackish
and freshwater   species  including various  sedges  (Scirpus  spp.)f
cattails (Typha spp.), smartweeds  (Polygonum  spp.), water  dock
(Rumex verticillatus), marsh  hibiscus (Hibiscus  moscheutos)  and
seashore mallow (Kosteletzkya virginica).   Marsh elder dominates
the higher,  shrub zones  in these palustrine wetlands.  Hardwoods
that can withstand seasonal  flooding  have  attained  dominance in
some wetlands.   Red  maple (Acer  rubrum)  is the most common tree
species in  these situations although slippery elm  (Ulmus rubra),
sweet  gum  (Liquidambar  styraciflua).   and  water  oak  (Ouercus
nigra)  are  also  important  constituents  in  the  overstoi^y of  well
developed,  palustrine forested wetlands.   Areas which have been
filled or otherwise  disrupted are usually covered with a thick
stand of reed grass  (Phragmites australis).

1.4.2  Fish Communities

     Fish are  present in Chincoteague's wetlands only where an
open connection  exists between  the swales and the estuary.   Where
connections are absent, there is a lack of fish communities in
these wetlands,  which may  experience a complete drying up  of the
swale  pools during extended  drought.   Where  surface   water
connections to  the  estuary  exist,  the fish  communities  are
dominated by typical estuarine forage fishes such as killifishes
(Fundulus spp.),  and sheepshead minnow  (Cyprinodon  variegatus) .
and juveniles of commercially  important  species such as  bluefish
(Pomatomus  saltartix).  menhaden  (Brevoortia tyrannus).  spot
(Leiostomus xanthurus). and  Atlantic  croaker  (Micropogonias
undulatus).    Estuarine  invertebrates  such  as blue  crabs
(Callinectes sapidus) and grass shrimp  fPaleomentes  pugio)  are
also present.   Dense  concentrations  of marine and  estuarine fish
use the marshes  and  tidal creeks  of  estuarine wetlands as primary
nursery habitats  (McHugh, 1966;  Cain and Dean, 1976; Weinstein,
1979;  Bozeman   and  Dean,  1980;  Rozas   and  Hackney,  1983).  A
wetland system   the size  of Chincoteague,  however, does  not have

                              8

-------
sufficient  freshwater discharges  like  a  riverine system's to
support  anadromous species such as  shad and striped bass.

1.4.3 Avian Communities

     Chincoteague Island is situated within the Atlantic Coast
Flyway,  a migratory bird corridor which is heavily used by a wide
range of  avian  groups.   Depending  on the time  of year,  many
different species of  birds  may be observed using  the  wetland
resources of Chincoteague Island for feeding and resting. Very
large populations of swans,  geese,  and dabbling ducks have been
reported for the Chincoteague vicinity along with  smaller numbers
of diving and sea ducks (Odum et al., 1984).   The  extent of local
use is controlled by  the size  of  the wetland and the types of
food sources present (particularly freshwater plants).  Plants of
particular importance  to  waterfowl  include  Scirpus spp.,
Polygonum  spp.,  and  Echinochloa  w^a 11 e r i,  all  of which  are
abundant on Chincoteague.  Herons,  egrets, and other  wading birds
are common summer inhabitants  of  Chincoteague's wetlands.   They
forage  primarily in  estuarine,  emergent  wetlands  for  their
preferred diet of small fish.   In  addition, a  large  number of
seed-eating birds such as blackbirds, and insectivorious birds
such as  flycatchers,  are  known to use palustrine wetlands similar
to those on Chincoteague (Odum  et  al., 1984).

-------
                        2.  METHODOLOGY

2.1   GENERAL  PROCEDURES

     Eight sites  on  Chincoteague  Island were  selected by EPA for
evaluation (Figure  5).  Wetland  evaluations  were  made using the
methodology   described in  A  Method  for  Wetland  Functional
Assessment (Adamus  and Stockwell 1983).   The evaluations began
with a field  investigation.  Each site was visited at  least twice
during field trips to Chincoteague Island  in  August and September
of 1985.   Very wet  conditions  were  prevalent  at the sites during
August following  the recent passage of Hurricane Danny.   Normal
to dry conditions were  present during September.

     During the field investigation,  each site  was  surveyed on
foot.   The dominant  vegetation  was  identified,  soils  were
examined, and notes were made on the physiochemical (salinity,
water depth,   pH)  and biological   (fish and wildlife observations)
factors that are  relevant to the  evaluation procedure.

     The major wetland types within each  site were identified as
defined by Cowardin et al.  (1979).   As defined in the specified
assessment technique,  each site   was considered to be a separate
Wetland Impact Area  (WIA) a term that is synonymous with "wetland
study area."  Two exceptions  exist:   the Fowling Gut and Mire
Pond  Scrub-Shrub Systems  were  separated  into  estuarine  and
palustrine  portions  based  on the  findings   of  the  field
investigations and each portion was  evaluated separately.

     After the field investigation  was completed, the questions
from Adamus (1983) on Forms A and B  were answered  and recorded on
Response Sheets Al  and Bl,  respectively,  for  each  WIA.  Comments
were recorded  where  necessary  to  clarify  interpretations of some
questions on  Forms  A and B.

     These data  were used  to  assess each WIA for the following
functions (Sections  2.1.2 and  2.2.2,  in Adamus 1983):

     Groundwater  Recharge and  Discharge
     Flood Storage
     Shoreline Anchoring
     Sediment  Trapping
     Long-Term and Seasonal  Nutrient Retention
     Downstream and  In-Basin Food Chain Support

                              10

-------
  N
:   •-•/•:•?*:
     /    '• * '    i

-,       .#1  I
           . A- " /
            */:
•
9
~m
CO
••»
•
a
•o
K
•
3
O
0
•
|
£
O
1
<



•
Ul
o
o
£
U
CO
£
O
I
1
CD


E
•
•
>>
co
3
rt
Fowling (
i
0

a
*
co
irdwoodi
•a
a
K
i
i
a


•
co
«
CO
a
a
£
CO
1
o
3
u
CO
^
e
o
a.
•
i
1
£
O
co
•
•
N
•
•
a
c
9
•
U
O
I
1 Mirth
9
•
£
O
•
3
a
Chlncotoi
i
u. a x



WJ
H
0)
3
in
(0
(U
-P
o
0
c
-H
u
£
o
tn
                                             (U
                                             (U
                                             -P
                                             o
                                             (U
                                             rH
                                             0)
                                             01

                                             1-1
                                             O
                                             a
                                             c
                                             o
                                             •H
                                             -P
                                             rfl
                                             U
                                             O
                                             in

                                             QJ
                                             ^
                                             3
                                             Cn
                                             -H
   11

-------
     Fishery  Habitat
     Wildlife Habitat
     Active Recreation
     Passive  Recreation and Heritage

Form C was not used in  this project in accordance with previous
agreements with EPA and FWS.   The ratings  that resulted from this
assessment were recorded  on Summary  Sheet D for  each WIA.

     The results  of the site evaluations are summarized in table
form  in  Subsection 4.2.   A  site description,  Forms  Al and Bl,
Summary Sheet D,  and  Comments  regarding questions on Forms A and
B are  provided in Chapter 3  for  each  WIA.  The  Adamus (1983)
method should be  consulted for  the  questions answered on Forms Al
and Bl and the keys used to derive the ratings  on Summary Sheet D.


2.2  MAPPING

     Maps in  this document do not meet mapping specifications and
are  for  schematic purposes only.   These maps  (Figures 6-12)
should  not   be  used  for   Federal or  State   jurisdiction
determination.


2.3  DEFINITIONS  AND WETLAND TERMINOLOGY

     Wetlands terminology  is from Cowardin et al.  (1979).
Definitions  of terminology from Adamus and Stockwell  (1983) are
as follows.   See  original reference  for  detailed explanation.

     Basin -  The aquatic area  is  composed of  the wetland plus
          adjoining deep open water,  if any.

     Functional Watershed  -  (This  term is  not described for each
          site on Chincoteague because of  its  vague nature.)  The
          total of  all areas, including the subwatershed, as well
          as  areas lower  and perhaps higher,  which drain into a
          focal point  where  the effect  of the wetland's services
          to  society would hypothetically  be felt  to the greatest
          degree.

     Subwatershed -  The  terrestrial areas whose runoff drains
          into the wetland or  basin,  and  not  into lakes, streams
          or  wetlands  which  are not contiguous  to  the wetland or
          basin.

     Wetland  Impact Area  (WIA)  - The portion  of the wetland that
          will experience any of  a series of  possible changes
          (described in Adamus and Stockwell, 1983).   For the
          purposes  of this study,  the chosen wetland study sites
          are the WIA's.

                              12

-------
2.4  AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY

     Recent  aerial  photography  was  provided  by  the EPA.
Historical photography from  as  early as  1943  came  from the
photographic  collection at the University  of Virginia.


2.5  DETERMINATION OF HYDROLOGIC FUNCTION

     Detailed hydrological studies were  outside  the scope (and
budget)  of this  study.  Numerous  observations were made during
periods  of seasonally low and  high water.  Statements made  in the
site description  sections  are based on our  experience  as
hydrologists  and  represent only our expert opinion.  Estimations
about hydrologic circulation,  flood storage capacity, groundwater
recharge and  discharge and nutrient retention  capacity were made
before calculating the Adamus  values.
                              13

-------
                     3.   SITE  DESCRIPTIONS

3.1  CHINCOTEAGUE RIDGE/SWALES  STUDY SITE

3.1.1  Qualitative Site Description

     Physical description.   This  WIA (Figure  6) is composed of a
series  of low  upland  ridges  and shallow swales covering
approximately  13 ha.   These  ridges and  swales  run  roughly
northeast  to southwest.   Some of  the swales have open water, some
have shrub  communities,  and  some  have emergent  vegetation.
Historical photography shows that the  swale  wetland areas at the
northern  and  eastern end  of  the  site were  once connected to
estuarine  emergent  wetlands.   This  connection has been  blocked-
off by  the construction of the  road, borrow pit,  and  filled areas
in the  Oyster Point  development to the north and northeast.  To
the south  and southwest the ridges  and  swales run  unimpeded until
they strike  the so-called jeep trail and jeep trail ditch which
runs east  and west near the high school.

     Definitions.  The WIA consists of the site as  outlined by
EPA.  The  sub-watershed consists of the various ridges which run
from the  northeast  to the  southwest.   The  basin for this site
extends to the  jeep  trail ditch which lies approximately  500 m to
the south of the site.   Some surface water  leaves the  site via
the swales and  drains into  the jeep trail ditch  (but  only  during
very wet periods) and then drains westward into Chincoteague  Bay.
The  culverted  outlet  of  the  jeep  trail  canal  allows  some
intrusion of saltwater  during periods of  dry weather  and high
tides.   Salinity measurements  indicate that tidal influences
extend  only  a short  distance northeastward into the swales.

     Qualitative  vegetation description.  Vegetation  on this site
breaks down into basically two types - the wetland dominated
swales  and the  pine  forest  dominated ridges.   The swale  wetlands
which  lie to  the  north and  northeast side  of the  site  are
dominated  by emergent vegetation largely dictated by  the former
estuarine characteristics  of  the  site.  This includes  Spartina
patens. Distichlis  spicata.  Scirpus  olneyi. and  the  seashore
mallow (Kosteletzkya virginica).   Further south these  swales are
dominated  by Iva and other  shrubs  including  Myrica.    The swales
which  lie on  the southwest and western side of the  site are
dominated  by  somewhat different plants  such as  Hibiscus.
Polygonum  (which dominates  many  of  the sites), Kosteletzkya, the

                              14

-------
      N
    Figure 6.  Map of Chincoteague Ridge/Swales WIA showing
    wetland  (w) and upland  (u) areas.  Major outlets are
    indicated by solid arrows which depict the direction of
    water movement from the  site.  Broken arrow indicates an
    ephemeral inlet from a borrow pit to the northeast.
swamp  rose,  Rosa, palustris. and  a  variety of other primarily
freshwater  wetland  plants.  There is  no S. patens nor Distichlis.
In other words, the wetlands at this  site appear to fall into two
groups - those to  the north and northeast  which were formerly
connected  closely  to the emergent  estuarine  wetlands to the
northeast and those to the west and  southwest which apparently
had a much  more  tenuous connection and were  much further  removed
from estuarine influence.  Along the northern edge of  this site
                              15

-------
there  is  a great  deal  of  Phraqmites associated  with  the
disruption which has occurred around the Oyster Point development
and the borrow pit.  The ridges,  which are  considered upland,
are dominated by loblolly pine  (Pinus taeda). tangles of poison
ivy (Toxicodendron  radicans),  and greenbriers (Smilax  spp.).
There are also scattered shrubs  such,  as   wax myrtle  (Myrica
cerifera).

     Wetland classification.  The ridge areas are upland.   The
swales are  made up  of several  classifications.   The shrub areas
are classified  as  palustrine  scrub/shrub.   The areas  of  the
swales  (north and northeast  end  of  site)  which were  formerly
estuarine can be classified  either  as  estuarine  or  palustrine
scrub/shrub,  depending upon  vegetation type.   We  recommend
palustrine since the vegetation appears to be changing to  this
type.   Similarly, areas of emergent vegetation can be classified
as palustrine  or  estuarine.

     Substrates,  water  salinity.   Soils  underlying the site are
composed of  sand or sandy loam  with a thin layer  of organic
matter  ( 10 cm).  Ridge soils may also contain some loam along
with sand.   Salinities  (during average conditions)  ranged from 3-
5 ppt. at the  south end of the swales to 0.5-1.0  at the north end
of the site.

     Wildlife use.  The more open ends of the swales (at their
northeastern ends)  appear to be moderately  to  heavily used by
wading  birds  and migratory  waterfowl.  The  narrow ends of the
swales, particularly where dominated  by  shrubs, were not  observed
to be used  by  waterfowl during the study period.   There was ample
evidence of use  by  raccoons  and  other small and medium-sized
mammals.   There were  few   indications of   fish utilization,
indicating  that these areas  may occasionally dry  out completely
and that their connection with  areas of repopulation  such as the
estuary are far  removed.

     Hydrologic  functions.  In general, surface drainage is to
the  south  and southwest to  the  jeep trail and  eventually to
Chincoteague  Bay,  but only  during very wet  conditions.   The
former  drainage connection  to  the north and northeast has been
blocked by  the Oyster Point development.  In  fact,  during  periods
of heavy rain there appears to be a  small  amount of  sheet  flow
from  the borrow pit across the road and into the northern part of
this  site.   During  dry  periods  much of the  drainage at  this  site
occurs  vertically  into  the  near-surface water  table aquifer
system, indicating  a  high  ground  water recharge  potential.
Because of  the numerous swales, this  site also appears  to have a
high potential for both flood  water storage  and nutrient
retention.
                              16

-------
 3.1.2  Adamus and Stockwell Evaluation:   Chincoteague Ridge/Swales

Summary Sheet 0

This form is 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, 8, or  C)  In  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-
sociated  analyses.   For the evaluation  of  each function's Effectiveness, enter whichever  rating is
higher—That for the basin  or that for  the  WIA.  The evaluation of  the impact vector  1s optional.
EVALUATION TIME FRAME (PRI
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE*
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE*
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING*
SEDIMENTTRAPPING*
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM-
SEASONAL"
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-BASIN"
FISHERY HABITAT
WARMWATEH"
COLDWATEV4
COLDW.RIVERINE'4
ANAOROMOUS RIV.
SPECIES" 	
WILD LIFE HABIT AT
GENERAL DIVERSITY--
WATERFOWL GP" 1
WATERFOWLGP." 2
speoes" Wood Duck
SPPriF«?'«
SPECIES"
ACTIVE RECREATION"
SWIMMING
BOAT LAUNCHING
POWER BOATING
CANOEING
SAILING
PASSIVE RECREATION
AND MERIT AGE"
I IMPACT VECTOR RATING"
•/POSTl
EFFECTIVENESS'
moderate
moderate
liah
n'ah
moderate
moderate
high
moderate
moderate
low
high
Breeding
NA
moderate


low
low
low
low
low
••.•;::-::;;.:J.:,;.''-::;.:-*S:;::.?:


OPPORTUNITY*
moderate

low
low
moderate
high
hiah


Winter
Moderate
moderate





.MITIGATION PLAN •
FUNCTIONAL RATING'
moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate
high
hiah
moderate
moderate
low
high
moderate
moderate
moderate


low
low
low
low
low
• - " • •• "-:' /:•• ' •


SIGNIFICANCE'
moderate
moderate
hiah
moderate
hiah
high
moderate
moderate
moderate


moderate
moderate


FUNCTIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE*
moderate
moderate
nign
mpderate
hiah
very high
very hiah
moderate
moderate
low
high
moderate
moderate
moderate


low
low
low
low
low
moderate

FOOTNOTES
Ihese  entries  will  be based  on  analyses  in  the  following parts of Volume II (numbers correspond to
footnotes above):
'•Forms A. Ai  (p. 6. 51); 2'Sect1on 2.1.2.2.  (p. 97); 3'Forms B,  81  (p. 38, 54);  4'Section

2.1.2.?.  (p. 97); ^Interpretation key in  Section 2.1.2.1. p. 57; 6>p. 59; 7'p. 60;  8*p.  62;  9*p.

64; 10-p. 67;  U'p. 67; I2'p. 69; 13'p.  71; 14-p. 73; I5'p. 75; 16'p. 79; 17'p. 80;  l%.  84;

I9'p.  91; 20-p. 92; 2l'p. 93.
                                               17

-------
Chincoteaaua  "".idqe/Gwales

Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
FUNCTIONAL OPPORTUNITY  AND
This sheet 1$  the  appropriate place for recording
the responses  CO correspond Ing questions  In  For*
A.   A  'yes'  (Y). or  'no*  (N)  response «j$t  be
circled for ill  parts  of each question, even  when
the response  seems  obvious.   This  response sheet
has  two  major  columns—"WlA* «nd  'BASIN",   ind
within each of  these,  three  subcolumns  entitled
**•. •«".  and *0*. which address, when relevent, the
seasonal   changes In  some of  the predictors,  as
follows:

     > co 1 umn   responses  are  those   addressing
     either  l»)  the average  annual  condition,  or
     (b)  the  condition  Intermediate between  the
     wettest  and driest  annual  conditions  (e.g.,
     late  June In  most Prairie pothole  wetlands).
     or   (c)   the   condition  of   maximum  annual
     standing  crop  of  wetland plants,  or (d)  If
     tidal, the  average daily mid-tide condition.

     H 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.                  "

     0 column  responses  are those addressing  what
     the  area would  look like during  either  the
     drjest 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 examole,  question  2.1.1  should  first  be asked
and answered  in  the  content of the  WIA's (wetland
impact area's) average condition,  then 1n 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 V/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 WIA or basin, but not both.
                                      BASIN
                                   I    W
                                                     5«.c.
                                                     Set C4 ">i rv, t r, f
                                               18

-------
                   %
ChincotGa^ue  Ridge/Swales
0. •
            WIA
             W
                                IASIH
 2.1.1
 2.1.2
 2.2.1
 2.2.2
              H
              (S)
 3.1
 4.1
 AJL
       I15L
 S.I
                                             5ee. com
C.I
to
                            Y N
                            T !l
                                             See  C*
mtn
T T*
t.l
8.2
                                             set c
     T  T*
                            f H
                            r N
                                                   C "Him g-r>T
 20.
 F1«1d-tyt»e Data
 22.
 22.
 22.
 22.
 22.
 22.
    .1
    .2
    .3
    .4  Y
    .5
                     4
                                       19

-------
22.3
22.3.1
22.3.2
22.3.3
22.3.4

-------
"hincoteaque  Ridge/Swales
10
41.1.1
41.1.2
41.1.3
41.2
41.2.1
41.2.2
41.2.3
41.3
41.3.1
41.3.2
41.3.3
                                      21

-------
Chincoteague Ridge/Swales
MIA
0. 1 1 V 0
49.1 ~
49.2 .-» ^_
50. CTJH CxJll fYJN
51. YQJ)
Detailed Data
,
52.1.1 Y *l jJlt
52.1.2 Y IP *T
52.2.1 ON
52.2.2 Y .//*
53.2 Y NJ WA
54.1 	 Y~O 	 7 	
54^2 Y*J ^/"
55. YttJ /
56. HA
57.1 Y N*\
57.2 Y»/ ..iu
57.3 Y N V MR
57.4 Y *J '
53.1 Y N-j
58.2 Y H/ u/.
58.3 Y N > I*/*
58.4 V N^
59.1
59.2
60.1
60.2
60.3
ii.i V M U/A
61 ? Y II If*

all ^
63.2
64.
65. rpn ,
66.1 Y * JU
66.2 Y 1 Nln
67.1 Y N J/A
67.2 Y « ^/n
68.1 V N JIA
68.2 Y W */"
Derived Resoonses
69.1 Y N
89.?^ Y H
70,1 . Y X
70.2 Y N
71.1 Y *
71.2 Y »»
72.1 Y N
72.2 Y H
73.1 Y N
73.2 Y 1
74.1 Y «
74.2 Y H
75.1 Y H
75.2 Y H
IAS1H
i V
0
JfNJ
CYiir






Y 1
•

i : Hh
Y 1 4ll^
* ^^


*/* ?!
J/A

Y H

IA 'H
H^ TI
ki/ A T H
r*/ *^ v •
V/A Y •
A/ n v N









•5e.fi- Orm
S«c c*.
Set C«^"











S 6ft co»-nrr






rr»e.o-V- -f-fe
r*»*-A- f
^^











to -r St>Tt





After responses to all possible qu
have been recorded above, turn t
38). You «m( as an option) retur
(1n Section 2.1.2) to Interpret
soonses.
* N/A (Not Applicable) \
questions that are not
to the site or question
we have no measurements

•rr\
•TVr*
-w>











I





cstions (Form A)
o For« B (page
•n to this sheet

ased for
relevant
3 for which





                               22

-------
 Chincoteaque  Riuge/Cwales
 Response Sheet 61


 THRESOLD ANALYSIS:  SIGNIFICANCE

 This sheet  Is  the appropriate place for  recording
 the  responses  to the corresponding  questions  In
 Form 8.  Circle Y (yes) or N (no), being careful
 to note that the order of Y and N below frequently
 reverses.
General
Nutrient
                                Fish food Chain/
                                Habitat .
36.
                                            23

-------
Form "A"  Comments  (Chincoteague Ridge/Swales)

1.1           Slight drainage from northern borrow pit during
              high water periods

1.1           (Basin)  Drainage  into  jeep trail ditch occurs  from
              High School East borrow  pit  during normal and wet
              periods

1.2           (Basin)  Jeep trail  is tidal  from Chincoteague Bay
              eastward for at least 1 km

1.3           (Basin)  Under  dry  and  normal  conditions tidal
              waves may extend  toward  site  through  swale
              accesses but does not reach  it

1.3.1         "Inlet"  from drainage  basin during wet periods

5.2           See  site  map (Figure 6) and definitions  for  this
              site

6.1-6.2        We  are  considering only  the  swale areas as
              wetlands  (pine  ridges are not wetlands)

7             Predictor not used

8             Sub-watershed = forest ridges.  Within WIA,  ridges
              along swales contiguous  with jeep trail ditch and
              developed area  along jeep trail ditch

9             Predictor not used

22.1          Although site is predominantly  forested,  there are
              extensive areas of  emergent wetlands within the
              site

23.1-23.9     Forest  soils  (which predominate  in area)  are
              sands; swale areas have  sandy  soil bottoms  with  a
              surface layer of organic material

26.1-26.11     Refers only to  swales

26.1-26.11     (Basin) While  much of the wetland  areas in  this
              area are  intermittently exposed, the jeep trail
              canal is  both permanent  and also  tidal near
              Chincoteague Bay

34            This refers to swales  and  excludes  ridge areas
              which are not considered wetlands
                              24

-------
36             Estimated with  no measurements;  shallow  swale
               waters are  probably  poorly oxygenated due  to
               excess organic matter on the  bottom

39.5           Filled  area  (dike)  has  prevented  movement  of
               fishes from estuarine creeks

39.6           Jeep trail canal

41.1           Answers refer to  wetland areas (swales)

43             The only  sheet flow  into the site occurs during
               flooding periods  when small amounts of water flow
               from the borrow pit south across the dike

44             Considering vegetated areas along Chincoteague Bay

50             Evidence  of  duck use and feeding on species such
               as Polygonum. Scirpus.  etc.

51             Answered  "no" because  no open water with a  depth
               greater than 6  ft within WIA
52.2          High areas have ^E^iiiiia p.a.:fcgns, Polygonum,  Iva.
              There are no low areas

64            Bottom of swales may  not always be above 5 pm
                              25

-------
Form "B" Comments (Chincoteague Ridge/Swales and High  School
East)

1             Answers depend  upon  whether  potential  future
              development takes  place.   Future  development  not
              taken  into consideration unless imminent (present
              development underway)

2             Answered relative to specific  impact  areas,  not
              general area

5-7           Water  supply from  mainland.  Human use considered
              only (e.g., aspect  of natural recharge to maintain
              vegetation not considered)

8             Chincoteague  Ridge/Swale  Site is significantly
              larger than the High  School  East site; of more
              importance to the island's  aquifer

12 + 14       Seems  to be asking same question only for fish and
              wildlife only, not other functions

15            Judged  to be not economically  feasible

18            Probably - but need to  consult predicted storm
              surge  maps for Chincoteague

23-29         All wetlands ranked as  low  opportunity

30            High quality water interpreted to mean classified
              as potable water source

32            Outlet pipe of  jeep trail ditch (basin of both
              sites)  could require  maintenance clearing

3,11,16,       Official designations unknown.  Answered 17,30,54
17,30,54      tentatively based on  impression (followed with
              question mark)

10            Answers necessarily a matter of  opinion

15,22,26,      Net experience  with  small,  unincorporated
42,53,55,60    communities such as Chincoteague show that wetland
              functions tend to be undervalued or  ignored,  and
              not replaced  if compromised.    The  lack  of
              comprehensive planning for the island  suggests
              that methods such as  zoning or  transferring rights
              away from  the  most important wetlands will not be
              undertaken

76            Chincoteague Ridge/Swales  site has high potential
              for out of classroom learning  (school located next
              door)
                               26

-------
3.2  HIGH SCHOOL EAST  STUDY SITE

3.2.1  Qualitative  Site Description

     Physical description.   The  site  (Figure  7)  covering
approximately four ha is composed  of  a large borrow pit  from
which  fill for the high  school  site was taken.   In  addition,
there is an area of shrubs and small trees which was extensively
altered.   Historical  photography shows that  these alterations
occurred some time  between 1949-59.  Previously these  areas  were
Chincoteague ridge and swale terrain.  The boundary of the site
on the western and northwestern side runs along the edge of the
high school  fill.   The northern  boundary is the  so-called jeep
trail  which runs  across  the island.   The eastern side  of the
boundary runs through a forested area close to another smaller,
open water area which  lies off the site.

     Definitions.  The WIA consists of  the  site  as outlined by
the EPA  (boundaries described  above).   The  basin for  this  site
includes the borrow pit, the ditch which runs from  the borrow pit
to the  jeep  trail, and  the  jeep trail ditch  itself as  it  runs
west  into Chincoteague  Bay.   The  sub-watershed  for the  site
consists of one  or  two ridges of large pines which  lie  along the
southeast  edge  of  the site and forested areas which  lie to the
south and southeast of the site.
                    High  School Atheletlc field
Figure 7.   Map of High School East WIA  showing wetland (w)  and
upland (u) areas.  Major outlet is indicated by arrow that depicts
the direction of water movement  from the site.
                              27

-------
     Qualitative vegetation description.   There is an area of
emergent wetlands  which lies around the borrow pit.   This is
dominated by Phraamites. Spartina patens.  Iva and other shrubs
and wetland plants.  Much of the site consists  of  a  disturbed
shrub/scrub  community  along  with limited areas  identifiable as
remnant upland  ridges dominated by  loblolly pine and  swales
dominated  by  red  maples.   The cover  in the disturbed areas
consists of  honeysuckle, wax myrtle,  poison  ivy,  greenbriar, and
occasional  mid-sized loblolly pines.

     Wetland classification.  Most  wetlands at  this  site are
palustrine scrub/shrub and palustrine forested  wetlands.  The
emergent wetland areas around  the borrow pit  are  estuarine
emergent  (due to  daily  incursions of  estuarine water through the
ditch from  the  jeep trail ditch).

     Substrate, salinities.   Soils underlying  the site are  sand
or sandy loam with  a thin layer of organic matter.   Upland areas
may also contain some  loam.   Salinities in the  borrow pit and
associated ditches may range as high as 20-25  ppt during dry
periods.  Palustrine wetland adjacent to  the borrow pit  usually
have salinities below 1 ppt and rarely above 5 ppt.

     Wildlife use.  There is  ample evidence  of use by waterfowl,
small mammals,  and  fishes at this site.   Both  the  borrow  pit and
the borrow pit to the  east of  the site appear to be utilized by
ducks  and  wading  birds during much  of the  year.   There is
evidence of use  by animals such as  raccoons, rabbits and other
small mammals throughout the site.  Because of the connection and
close  proximity  of the jeep trail ditch and Chincoteague Bay
there  appears to be considerable access  to the  borrow pit and
ditches by  estuarine fishes.

     Hydrologic functions.  During wet periods, water  appears to
drain into  this site from the south and  southwest by sheet  flow.
There  is a  drainage ditch  which connects the borrow pit  in  this
site  with  a similar  pit to  the east.   There  appears  to be
drainage  from the eastern areas through the  drainage ditch to the
borrow pit  at this  site  during wet periods.   Surface flow  leaves
the site via the drainage ditch which  connects the borrow pit
with the  jeep trail ditch and ultimately  Chincoteague Bay.   There
is some tidal  fluctuation as far up the drainage ditch as the
borrow pit.  During dry periods drainage  in palustrine areas
probably  occurs vertically into the  surface  aquifer.

     Because of the extent of wetland and borrow pit area,  this
site  probably  has moderate to high  ground  water  recharge
potential and high flood water storage potential.  The wetland
vegetation  and  soils  should  produce high  nutrient  retention
potential.
                              28

-------
 3.2.2  Adamus and Stockwell Evaluations:   High School  East
Summary Sheet 0

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) in 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-
sociated  analyses.   For the evaluation  of each  function's Effectiveness, enter whichever rating is
higher—That  for the basin or that for  the  WIA.  The evaluation of the impact  vector  is optional.
/"BASIN 	 	
EVALUATION TIME FRAME (PRf
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE1
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE*
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING1
SEDIMENTTRAPPING1
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM"
SEASONAL"
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-BASIN"
FISHERY HABIT AT
WARMWATER"
COLDWATER"
COLDW.RIVERINE"
ANADROMOUS RIV.
sppr.ps-. Winter FT.*
WILDLIFE HABIT AT
GENERAL DIVERSITY"
WATERFOWL GP." 1 **
WATERFOWL GP" 2
SPFCIFS" Wnflfi Hurk
sppniPS"
SPECIES"
ACTIVE RECREATION"
SWIMMING
BOAT LAUNCHING
POWER BOATING
CANOEING
SAILING
PASSIVE RECREATION
AND MERIT AGE"
IMPACT VECTOR HATING"
W
yposn
EFFECTIVENESS1
moderate
moderate
hiqh
hiah
modprafp
moderate
hiqh
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
high
breeding
NA
moderate


low
moderate
low
low
1 nij


;IA

OPPORTUNITY1
moderate

low
low
moderate
high
hi nh


winter
moderate
NA
moderate





p
.MITIGATION PLAN f
FUNCTIONAL RATING1
moderate
moderate
moderate
mnrtprafp
mnrlpratp
high
high
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
high
moderate
moderate
moderate


low
moderate
low
low
low


pojprrr

SIGNIFICANCE1
moderate
hiah
hiah
mnrlpratp
hi gh
hioh
hiah
moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate


moderate
moderate

^\

FUNCTIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE*
moderate
hiah
hiah
mndpratp
high
very high
very high
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
high
moderate
moderate
moderate


low
moderate
low
low
low
moderate

FOOTNOTES
These entries will  be  based on analyses  in  the following  parts of Volume II  (numbers correspond  to
footnotes above):
i-Forms  A. Al (p. 6. 51); 2'Sect1on  2.1.2.2. (p.  97);  3'Forms B, 81 (p. 38.  54); 4'Section 2.1.2.?.
(p.  97);  ^Interpretation key in Section 2.1.2.1. p. 57;  b'D. 59; 7'p. 60; 8>p.  62; %. 64; 10t
ll'p. 67; 12'p.  69;  13'p. 71; U'p.  73;  15'p. 75; 16'p. 79;  17'p. 80;  18'p. 84;   lf
2l'p. 93.
*Winter Flounder    **Winter  Only
                                                                                   91;2S.
D. 67;

 92;
                                               29

-------
 Kiah  School  East

 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
        FUNtTIONAL  OPPORTUNITY  AW
This Sheet  1s  th« appropriate plaet for recording
the responses  to corresponding  questions  In  For*
A.   A  "yes*  (Y). or  -no"  (N)  response wit  be
circled for all  parts  of each question, even when
the response  seems  obvious.   This response sheet
has  two  major  columns--"VIA"  and "BASIN",  and
within each of  these,  three  subcolumns  entitled
•£". "V.  and "0", which address,  when relevtnt, th«
seasonal   changes in  some of  the  predictors,  as
follows:

     I column   responses   are   those   addressing
     either(a)  the  average annual condition,  or
     (b)   the   condition  Intermediate  between the
     wettest  and driest annual  conditions  (e.g.,
     late   June  in most Prairie pothole  wetlands),
     or   (c)   the condition  of  maximum   annual
     standing  crop  of wetland plants,  or  (d)  1f
     tidal, the average daily mid-tide condition.

     H column responses  are  those  addressing  what
     the   area  would  look  like  (a)  during  the
     wettest  time of  an  average year,  or  (b)  if
     tne   area  is tidal, what  it would look  like
     during  an   average daily  high tide  (flooded)
     condition.                  "

     0 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 fids  (exposed) condition.

For example, question  2.1.1  should  first be asked
and answered in  the  context  of the HIA'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 T/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 WIA or basin,  but  not  both.
 Q. •
MIA
 W
                                      BASIN
                                   S   W     0
 Qffice-tyoe Data
                                                       St.C
                                               30

-------
High  Gchool  East
0. •
            UIX
             V
                                 BASIM
 2.1.1
 2.1.2
 2.2.1
 2.2.2
fljN
 Yjffi
0N
 Y®
             Y 3
            0.1
w * •
H
  .1
 4.2
 5.1
                                                 set
 6.1
  •*
                                                  See
 1.1
 l.t
                            V H
                            T !l
S.I
I*
                                   N
                                                  Set
 10.1
 10.2
 10.3
 10.1
                             Y II
                             Y II
                                                   Se
                                                              ^
 11.1
 11.2
 12.1
                             r i
                             Y
                            Yffl
                                                see
                                                 see
                                                 Sec
                                                 S««.
                                                 S**
                                                                -M
i^
 19.
 F<«ld-tyoe Data
 22.1
 22.1.1
 22.1.2
 22.1.3
 22.1.4
 22.1.5
                                        31

-------
I-iigh  School  East
 9. *
MIA
 V
   BASIN
1   V    Q
 22.2
 22.2.1
 22.2.2
 22.2.3
 22.2.4
                                            ^S«.«.
                                                      C W»> '^ *•*>!
                                                      •p.
  28.1
  28.?
 157
 T5T
  30.2
                                         32

-------
TT.iah  School East
 41.1
 41.1.1
 41.1.2
 41.1.3
 41.2
 41.2.1
 41.2.2
 41.2.3
 41.3
 41.3.1
 41.3.2
 41.3.3
                                           33

-------
:hool  East
VIA
0. * I V 0
49.1
49.2 t _,
50. YfS Y® YdB
51. Y<|)
Detailed Data

52.1.1 Y lV,A
52.1.2 Y MjNA
52.2.1 fl>N
52.2.? OJM
53.1 Y •» .J*
53.2 Y N Nfl
54.1 Y N .1.
54.2 Y N l»ft
Si. Yffi 1
5*. ^ A/fc
57.1 YN-v^n
57.2 Y N / JA
57.3 TaV/Vfl
57.4 Y N J '
53.1 Y N .
58.2 Y N kJA
58.3 Y N P*"
58.4 V N
59.1
59.2
tt.3
(0.1
M.2
60.3
•1.1 T II ^
U.9 Y N /VH
6?. Y « ^fl
63.1
63.2
«4.
«5. dK
66.1 T N ./»
««.? T H TVAl
67.1 T I /A
67 2 T N WA
68.1 Y N ./.
68.2 Y N /VA
Derived Besoonses
69.1 Y N
7«






v N


i: lift
. '•
;: ^


//fl ;:
A//» T H

A/fl !
»/A II
A/A :

Afte
38).
SPOn





SC.C C*t
Stt Cow-
5"«e c











see c^r






f\ W\ *?. W* •{*
wi tn*3C -pt
r*nri /»•>«. »\T











irtT-e^vi- fo^-^L






& ^"^v^v
fv^
fo^-rv^








i








r responses to all possible questions (Form A)
been recorded above, turn to Form B (page
You wll1( as an option) return to this sheet
Section 2.1.2) to Interpret the above re- •
ses .









                         34

-------
 High  School East
Response Sheet B1

THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:   SIGNIFICANCE

This sheet  Is  the appropriate  place  for recording
the responses  to the  corresponding  questions  in
Form 8.  Circle Y (yes)  or  N  (no),  being careful
to note that the order  of Y  and N below frequently
reverses.
                                 Nutr ient
Recharge
T.   YN-2-Ste
                                 61.  YQP
                                 62. <3>N
                                 63.  Y<5
                                 64. G/N
                                 65.  Y(Jb
                                 66.  Y ffli
                                 67.  N©
                                                35

-------
Form "A"  Comments (High School East Study Site)

1.1           Water enters this site through ditch  from borrow
              pit/wetland area to the east except  during dry
              periods

1.1           (Basin)  Drainage  into  jeep trail ditch from other
              areas during normal and wet periods

1.2           (Basin) Jeep trail ditch is tidal for at least a
              kilometer from Chincoteague Bay east

1.3           (Basin)  Tidal waves  move up  jeep trail  ditch
              during dry and normal conditions

5.2           See site  map (Figure 7) and definitions for this
              site

6.1-6.2        The combination  of borrow pit, drainage ditches,
              and wetlands exceeds 2 ha but is less than 16 ha

7             Predictor not used

8             Sub-watershed =  forested ridges within WIA and
              developed area along jeep trail ditch.  Basin area
              = greater than 20% area of sub-watershed

9             Predictor not used

15.0          Much  of the sub-watershed is scrub/shrub along
              with considerable areas of forest

16.0          Disturbance (school construction,  land grading,
              borrow  pit)  occurred    more   than 10 years ago.
              Because  of  extensive  areas  of  scrub/shrub
              (vegeation  less than 6  m  tall),  area is  not
              predominantly forest

22.2          While  pines make up  a  significant part  of the
              vegetation,  Myr  ica is the dominant vegetation.
              Probably in a few years pines  will dominate

23.1-23.9     Soils are predominantly sand;  however,  there are
              spots  under  the borrow  pit  and under  certain
              wetland areas where  there  is  a thin  layer  of
              organic material on top of the sand

24.1-24.6     Salt water  intrusion  occurs  along the jeep trail
              and  into the borrow  pit  during normal  and dry
              periods
                              36

-------
26.1-26.11     Borrow pit and canal  are permanently flooded.  WIA
               is seasonally  flooded

34             Mean depth is  difficult to estimate (borrow pit =
               deep;  other  wetlands  =  very  shallow):  this  is our
               best guess (ridges  and  sub-watershed ignored)

35.2           Unvegetated  area  (borrow pit) is greater than 8 m

36             These  are  estimates:  we have no measurements

39.6           Jeep trail canal

42             Area of  borrow pit  and  canals exceed 10% of WIA

44             Considering  areas along Chincoteague Bay

50             Some duck  activity  and  food, but not 10% of  area

51             Answered  "no" because  there  is  no  open  water
               (defined as  greater than 2 m) in the WIA

52.2           Tree dominated wetland  = low (primarily red  maple)
               Phragmites.  etc. =  high

64             Bottom of  borrow  pit, and  canal may not always be
               above 5  ppm due to accumulated organic matter on
               the bottom
                              37

-------
3.3
FOWLING  GUT SYSTEM STUDY SITES
3.3.1  Qualitative Site Description

     Physical description.  This is  a  complex site  (Figure  8)
covering 21 ha and consisting of many  parallel ridges and  swales,
emergent  freshwater marshes,  and  emergent  estuarine marshes
adjacent to Fowling Gut.   Because  of this complexity we have
divided the site into two  sections (estuarine and  palustrine).
The estuarine portion consists of the western side of the site
which is composed of estuarine emergent  marshes  associated with
Fowling Gut.  The palustrine portion consists of the  eastern side
of the site and  is dominated by freshwater palustrine wetlands
and pine ridges.  The site has been  altered on all four sides by
development and  the encroachment of  houses,  filled areas, and
borrow pits.

     Definitions.  The WIA consists of the site as outlined by
the EPA.  The basin  for  the estuarine portion includes Fowling
Gut from its origin to Mire Pond.  The basin  for the palustrine
portion includes  the estuarine  portion and  Fowling Gut, although
it should be noted  that surface drainage  from  the palustrine
 Figure 8.  Map of  Fowling Gut System V7IA  showing wetland (w)
 an.d upland (u)  areas.  Major outlet is  indicated by arrow
 that depicts  the direction of water movement from the site.
 Estuarine and palustrine portions of the  WIA are separated
 by dotted line.

                             38

-------
portion  occurs only during wet,  rainy periods.   The sub-watershed
for both sites  consists of the forested ridges and  developed
homesites  within close proximity to the  wetland impact areas and
basins.

     Qualitative vegetation description.   The emergent estuarine
wetlands  in  the estuarine portion  are dominated  by Spartina
patens.  Distichlis spicata. Iva. Scirpus robustus  and Spartina
alterniflora.  Phragmites dominates along the northwestern corner
of  the  site and  along  the  northern  edge of  the site  where
considerable  disruption  and filling has  occurred.   The wetlands
on  the  palustrine  portion   are  dominated  by  Hibiscus.
Kosteletzkva.  Typha  and  Spartina  patens  in certain  areas.
Walter's millet  (Echinochloa walteri) dominates a small marsh at
the northern end of the  site.  The borrow  pit ponds  which lie
along the  eastern side  of  the site are surrounded  by  Typha.
Peltandra.  and red maples.

     Wetland classification.   The forested ridge areas in both
sites are  upland  communities.   The   estuarine  wetlands  are
estuarine  emergent.   The  palustrine  wetlands are palustrine
emergent.

     Substrate,  water  salinity.   Substrates  underlying  these
areas are  largely sandy or sandy loam soils with small  amounts of
accumulated  organic  matter near  the surface  (  15  cm).   Water
adjacent to and in Fowling Gut has a salinity  of approximately
10-20 ppt  depending upon the amount of recent rainfall.  Water in
the interior areas of the palustrine portion has a salinity of
from 1 to 4 ppt.

     Wildlife use.  There are numerous  signs (footprints,   feces,
etc.)  of use  by  waterfowl including  black  ducks  and wood ducks
and wading birds at both sites.  There  is much evidence of both
juvenile and  salt marsh fishes  in  the ponds  and  wetlands adjacent
to Fowling Gut.   Most areas of  the site are apparently utilized
by raccoons and other  small mammals.

     Hydroloaic functions.  The  estuarine  portion  experiences
limited,  daily  tidal exchange with Fowling Gut.  During  wet
periods  drainage is principally out of  the  wetland and southeast
along Fowling Gut.  The palustrine portion,  under  dry conditions,
drains  internally into the water table aquifer.   During wet,
rainy periods there  are several small  surface  outlets  to the
estuarine  portion and ultimately to Fowling  Gut.   Because of
these characteristics  the palustrine  portion probably  has  a very
high groundwater recharge potential.  Both portions of the site
probably have  high  flood  storage and  nutrient  retention
potential.
                              39

-------
                                                     Fowling Gut System
3.3.2   Adamus and  Stockwell  Evaluations:
         • Estuarine Portion

Summary Sheet 0

This form 1s  the appropriate  place  for recording the ratings that result  from use of the Interpreta-
tion procedures  and keys  In  Sections  Z.I.2. and  2.Z.2.   As each  analysis  1s  completed, enter Its
rating (high,moderate,  or  low;  or A,  8,  or  C)  In 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  MIA).   Then  enter  the data,  using the numbered  footnotes to help locate the as-
sociated  analyses.   For the  evaluation of  each  function's Effectiveness, enter whichever rating Is
higher—That for the basin  or  that for the WIA.  The evaluation of the  impact vector Is optional.
/'RASIN WIA PRO.JFrr ~"\
FA/AiuATinNTiMeFPAMP 62;  'p. 64; 10-p. 67;

 U'p.  67; «-p. 69; 13'p. 71; U'p.  73; «-p.  75; 16> 79; 17'p. 80; I8'p.  84; "-p. 91; 2°'p.  92;
 21.
    p. 93.
*  Blue  Fish, Hard  Clam,  Winter  Rounder
                                               40

-------
 Fowling  <^ut  System  -  Estuarine Portion

Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
FUfCTIONAL OPPORTUNITY AND
     Sheet Is  the  appropriate  p1«ct  for  recording
the  responses  to  corresoondlng questions In  For*
A.   A  "y«"  (t)  or  "no"  (N)  response  wst bt
circled for «11 parts  of  each  question,  even  when
the  response  seem  obvious.   This response sheet
his  two  major  columns—'WIA' and  'BASIN'.   and
within each of these,  three  subcolumns  entitled
•I*. '«". and "0*. which address, when re I event, tht
seasonal   changes  In  some of  the predictors, as
follows:

       column,   responses   are  those  addressing
             ,
     either  (a)  the average annual condition, or
     (b)  the  condition  Intermediate  between the
     wettest  and  driest annual  conditions  (e.g.,
     late  June  in  most Prairie pothole  wetlands),
     or   (c)   the   condition   of  maximum   annual
     standing  crop of wetland  plants,  «r (d) If
     tidal, the average daily mid-tide condition.

     M column responses  are those  addressing what
     the  area  would  look like  (a)  during  the
     wettest  time  of  an average, year ,  or  (b) if
     tne  area is  tidal, what  it would look  like
     during  an  average daily  high tide  (flooded)
     condition.

     0 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 Us 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 ar«a's) average condition, then In terms of
its wettest  condition, then  the basin's average
condition, and finally t*ie basin's **ttest condi-
tion.    This  should then be repeated for question
2.1.2.   Because  no r/N choice  is given in either
"0" column,  the area's dry or dormant  condition
need   not  be   evaluate   for   this   question.
Similarly, some  questions  will require responses
only for the MIA or basin, but not both.
               VIA
  Q.  «
              BASIN
            I    U
  Offlce-tyoe Data
                                       Y®  Y®
                                              41
                                                           See

-------
rowlinq  Gut  System  -  Estuarine  Portion
U1A
0. ' I V 0
2.1.1 ON ON
2.1.2 Y Y®
3!»
4.1 ro»
4.2 Y(D
sa
6.1 THI
«.* TS>
Jl!
7.2
8.1
a.2
9.1
9.2
10.1 TOJ
10.2 T ® iJJL
10.3 T €> f A
10. « T A
11.1 Y»
12.1 Y M I.
12.2 Y 1 NA
13.1
13.2 	
U. Y«
15.1 9^
15.2 Y<
15.3 Yl
15.4 Y<
15.5 Y«
15.6 Yl
15.7 . YQ
»
i
i
15. Y H)
17.1 YO)
17.2 YW
j . Y A
< T ft
20.
21.1 tl*0
21.2 Y»
21.2 Y®
21.4 TO
21.5 ®«t
21.6 T(ft
Tftld-tyce Data
22.1 it
22.1.1 Y
22.1.2 Y 1
22.1.3 Y
22.1.4 Y |
22.1.5 Ylr
22.2 Y 1
22.2.1 V 1
1\ Y^!\
H Y N
1 Y N
1 Y N
* Y N
i) Y N
1

IAS1N
i V 0
(J* OM
?A

T$

Y N
T S
of*
V N
Y N



;: ^
Y0





T©

Y N TJK
Y N YJN
Y N YlN
Y N YUI/
YbJ Y&

^ ~~»4 «„,























vSCft Comr>

>5ec ^^^
SC.C C«v»i,
r<^ On





Sec. c«w>.










e^^ r^orrv,

htKt^ A^rv,
^i- f>r^
f-





*^fi-^J| 4-^ r ^v\







^ /
JX "
                               42

-------
Fowling  Gut System  - Estuarine  Portion
 Q. f
HIA
 H
   IA5IN
I   tf
 22.2.2
 22.2.3  TIN
 22.2.4  TN
 22.?.5
   ft*J
 22.3
 22.3.1
 22.3.2
 22.3.3
 22.3.4
 22.4
 22.4.1
 22.4.2  T
 26.1
 26.2
 26.3
 26.4
 26.5
 26.6
 26.7
 26.8
 26.9
 26.10
 26.11
 27.1
 27.2
 28.1
 28.2
 29.
 30.1
 30.2
 31.1
 4M-
 TTi
 32.2
 32.3
 32.4
 32.5
 32.6
 32.7
 32.8
                          Y
                          Y
                          Y
                          Y
                          Y
                                         43

-------
Bowling Gut System -  Estuarine Portion
                               IASIN
                             !   V     0
                          JEJL
 38.1
   9
 39.2
 W.3
 39.4
 ».$
A/A
                                          Set.
 40.
 T«
 41.1.1
 41.1.2
 41.1.3
 41.2
 41.2.1
 41.2.2
 41.2.3
 41.3
 41.3.1
 41.3.2
 41.3.3
 41.4
                Sjlgk.
                19 I*
 44.1
 44.2
               _&H
 45.2
                                        44

-------
Fowling Gut System - Estuarine Portion
MIA
9.1 1 _» 9
49.1
49 2
ho AN HN 0N 1
5l! ' W g«
Detailed Data

52.1.1 Y *} A^A
52.1.2 THJ
52.2.1 Aft
5?. 2.? Tib
53.1 T lU
53.2 Y "f\
54.1 Y ifc
54.2 Y nn
55. V MA
55: 	 HA
57.1 V
57.2 Y |
57.3 Y ^A
57. 4 Y N
M.I y k
58.2 Y N kjfv
58.3 Y H V1"
S8.4 Y M
Sl.l
Sf.2
M.S
M.I
10.2
tp.a
M.I Y I JQ
«.» T • NR
r 1 N klA
§3*1
M.t
«4.
«5. lf>«
M.I ;;* Y «
«« J ^Atn Y i
17.1 ./. Y •
87^ /Vn Y N
68.1 Y ./A
68.2 Y "n
Ocrlvad te eenscs
69.1 Y
6f.2 Y
70.1 V
70.2 Y
71.1 Y
71.2 Y
72.1 Y
72.2 Y
73.1 T
73.2 Y
74.1 Y
74.2 Y
75.1 Y
75.2 Y
IASI*
I tf 0
;K






T ^


\ ^
? M


1* Y •
/JA YI
MA T H

./. Y»
A/A YR
/* ;:
A//I ;:







































































— . — ,. _ Afie
have
JB).
(1«
r responses to all possible questions (porn A) '
been recorded above, turn to Tor* 8 (page
Tou «111( as an option) retuin to this sheet '
Section 2.1.2) to Interpret the above re-
soonscs.








                              45

-------
Fov/ling  Gut  Svstem  -  Estuarine Portion


Response Sheet B1

THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:  SIGNIFICANCE

This sheet  1s  the  appropriate  place for recording
the responses  to  the  corresponding  questions  In
Form 8.  Circle Y (yes)  or N  (no), being careful
to note that the order  of Y and N  below frequently
reverses.
Gener
Recharge
Discharge
         S«c.
         See
22. £J)Y

Shorel ine
Anchor i na
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Sediment
Tr aoDi 12
N
N
N Set
                                Nutrient
                                Retention
                                Fish Food Chain/
                                Habitat
                                Wildlife
                                Habitat
                                Active
                                Recreation
                                ST.  Y
                                62.
                                63.  YJ
                                64.
                                65.  Y<
                                66.  Y(
                                67. (5>
                                Passive
                                             46

-------
Form "A" Comments  (Fowling Gut System - Estuarine Portion)

WIA            =  area  inside dashed  line  answers  concerning
               specific  wetland  characteristics  refer to wetland
               areas only within WIA (Figure 8)

Basin          =  WIA  +  Fowling Gut from  origin to Mire Pond
               (bordering the Mire Pond fill site and  the Mire
               Pond Scrub-Shrub System)

1.1            At  least  two  confined channels deliver water from
               4B  to 4A  during wet conditions

2.2.1          WIA constricted because  most  exchange with Fowling
               Gut occurs through a narrow tidal  channel

7              Predictor not used

8              Sub-watershed  = all areas that drain into Fowling
               Gut from  origin to Mire  Pond

5.2            See site  map (Figure 8) and  definitions for this
               site

9              Predictor not used

15             Forested  ridges dominate sub-watershed

23             < 30 cm porous organic over  sand

27.1-27.2'      WIA and Basin are tidal  and surrounded  by uplands.
               During  flooding  the  aerial  extent  of  water
               coverage  is only slightly expanded

39.5           Constriction by six  or more small  culverts between
               WIA and Chincoteague Bay

39.6           Nonpoint  discharge around Fowling  Gut
                              47

-------
 3.3.3  Adamus  and Stockwell  Evaluations:   Fowling  Gut  System
         -  Palustrine  Portion

Summary Sheet D

This form is 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,  8, or C) in 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-
sociated  analyses.   For the  evaluation  of  each  function's Effectiveness, enter whichever  rating  is
higher—That for the basin  or  that for the WIA.  The evaluation of the  impact vector is optional.
/"BASIN
EVALUATION TIME FRAME (PRE
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE'
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE*
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING*
SEDIMENTTRAPPING*
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM"
SEASONAL"
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-8ASIN"
FISHERY HABIT AT
WARMWATER14
COLDWATER"
COLDW.RIVERINE"
ANAOROMOUSRIV.
SPECIES" 	
WILDLIFE HABIT AT
GENERAL DIVERSITY"
WATERFOWL GP." 1
WATERFOWL GP." 2
spp-riPS" Black Duck
SPPCIP*;"
SPFCIFS"
ACTIVE RECREATION"
SWIMMING
BOAT LAUNCHING
POWER BOATING
CANOEING
SAILING
PASSIVE RECREATION
AND HERITAGE"
I IMPACT VECTOR RATING"
W
•/POSTI
EFFECTIVENESS'
high
moderate
hiqh
hiah
h-jnh
high
mo HP rate
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
summer
low
low


low
low
low
low
Inw


;IA

OPPORTUNITY'
moderate

high
low
high
high
high


winter
low
low
1 nw





p
.MITIGATION PLAN «
FUNCTIONAL RATING1
h i oh
moderate
high
'moderate
high
high
hiqh
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
low
low
1 nw


low
low
low
low
low


POJFCT

SIGNIFICANCE*
moderate
hiqh
high
high
high
moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate


moderate
hiah

A

FUNCTIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE*
hiah
hiqh
very high
high
very high
high
hiqh
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
low
low
1 ow

low
low
low
low
low
hiah

 FOOTNOTES

 These entries will be  based  on  analyses  in  the following parts of Volume  II  (numbers  correspond  to
 footnotes above):
^Forms  A, Al (p. 6, 51);  2
p. 59; 7'p. 60; 8'p. 62; 9>p. 64; 10'p. 67; ll'p. 67; 12'p. 69; 13'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. 48

-------
 Fowling  Gut  System  -  Palustrine  Portion

 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
        FUNCTIONAL  OPPORTUNITY  AND
This $ht«c  1s  the appropriate place for recording
the  responses  to corresponding questions  tn  For*
A.   A "y«"  (y) «r  "ne"  (**)  response must be
circled for  «11  parts  of each question, even  when
the  response seems  obvious.   This response sheet
h«s  two  major  columns—'WIA' and 'BASIN*,   ind
within each  of  these,  three  subcolumns  entitled
"x", •«". and "0*. which address, when relevent, the
seasonal   changes In  some of  the  predictors, as
follows:

     I column   responses   are  those   addressing
     eitherfa)  the  average  annual  condition, or
     (b)   the  condition  Intermediate between   the
     wettest  and driest  annual conditions  (e.g.,
     late June in most Prairie pothole  wetlands),
     or   (c)   the condition  of   maximum  annual
     Standing  crop  of wetland  plants,  or (d) If
     tidal, the average daily mid-tide condition.

     W column  responses  are  those addressing  what
     the   area  would  look  Tike   (a)  during   the
     wettest  time of  an  average, year.  or (b) if
     tne   area  is tidal,  what  it  would look  like
     during  an average daily  high tide  (flooded)
     condition.                 '

     0 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   examole, question  2.1.1  should  first be asked
and   answered in  the  context  of  the WIA's (wetland
Impact ar«a'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 WIA or basin,  but not both.
 Q. •
WIA
 H
                                     BASIN
                                   I   U     0
 Offlce-tyoe Data
                                              49

-------
Fowling Gut System - Palustrine  Portion
o^i.
           uu
            W
                           IASIN
                         i   V    0
 2.1.1
 2.1.2
 2.2.1
 2.2.2
                           31
rr
I*
Li.
                                                 c
                                                 Vjannm t*^
6.1

H-
7.2
                        Y N
 JL2_
 9.1
 iJ_
y*^
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.1
                       TT
                        Y N
       T S
       T K
       T JL
          ^
 11.1
 IL2_
12.1
ILi
           ?!
 1L
                         ;:
 20.
         Data
 22.2.1
                                   50

-------
Fowling Gut System - Palustrine Portion
                               5T

-------
Fowling Gut System - Palustrine Portion
                        MSIM
                                    see C
                                    -See
                                52

-------
Fowling Gut System - Palustrine Portion
MIA
0. * 1 .« 0
49.1
49.2 A
50. CON «JH (TIN
51. Q/H ^
Detailed Data
i/
52.1.1 Y O Af/A
52.1.2 Y Ij ' ''
52.2.1 YOET
52.2.2 YfiD
53.1 T 1 4,11 A
53.2 Y N Win
54.1 T M k.l/1
54.2 YK Pfr>
55. V N AHA
56.
57.1 T N ..
57.2 T N J/A
57.3 Y N ^'"
S7.4 Y N
54. 1 V N iU
5S.2 YN U\n
58.3 Y N '
58.4 V N
51.1
59.2
5* 3
M.I
M.2
<0.3 	 .
id -V* JA
n t v N wl 0
«?. T « f/n
«3.1 J
Cl.t
M- j-t
«- W
66.1 Y n J A
6«.J Y 1 ~ n
•7.1 Y • J|A
87.? Y II H\n
«8.1 T « J/A
€8.2 Y N Nin
Derived Resoonses
69.1 Y N
69.2 Y *» 	
70.1 T N
70.2 Y N
71.1 Y *
71.? Y H
72.1 Y N
72.2 Y M
73.1 t 91
73.2 Y 1
74.1 Y H
74.2 Y «
7S.I Y «
75.2 Y N
IAS1H
i tf o
;s





i//
ww m


i «*
! *V


* !!
AT/A T •

v|« ;:
MM ; :
iJiA ;:



































































After r
«!>«• h
38). T
(In ?t
sponses


••sponses to all possible quest
ten recorded above, turn to
ou «O1( as an option) retuin
ctlon 2.1.2) to Interpret tl
•


,1ons (Form A)
Tor* B (page
to this sheet
fie above re-



                              53

-------
Fowling  Gut System  - Palustrine  Portion
Response Sheet B1


THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:  SIGNIFICANCE

This  sheet 1s the appropriate  place for  recording
the  responses  to  the  corresponding  questions in
Form  B.   Circle  V (yes)  or  N  (no), being  careful
to note  that the  order  of Y  and N  below frequently
r ever ses .
                               Nutrient
 27.  ©N
 28.  Y(fS>
 29.  (9*

 Sedinent
 Tr aooinn
                               Retention
                               Fish Food Chain/
                               Habitat
                                              54

-------
Form "A" Comments  (Fowling Gut System - Palustrine  Portion)

WIA            = Area  inside dash line (Figure 8)

Basin          =  WIA  +  Fowling Gut  from origin  to Mire  Pond
               bordering the Mire  Pond fill site  and  the  Mire
               Pond scrub-shrub system

5.2            See site  map (Figure 8) and definitions for this
               site

7              Predictor not used

8              Sub-watershed  -  Same as estuarine portion except
               includes developed areas surrounding  WIA  to east

9              Predictor not used

23             < 15 cm porous organic over sand

39.5           Constriction by six or  more small  culverts between
               WIA and Chincoteague Bay

39.6           Nonpoint discharge around Fowling  Gut
Form "B"  Comments (Fowling  Gut  System  -  Estuarine and Palustrine
portions  and Mixed Hardwoods Swamp)

21             Site  E  flooded  daily, not as valuable  for  flood
               storage and desynchronization

17             Ditches from roads and yards drain into site P

17             Ditches from roads  and  yards  drain into  mixed
               hardwoods swamp, Chincoteague Ridge/Swales also

26             For Mixed Hardwoods Swamp Basin  = WIA, sediment
               trapping of little value

                              55

-------
3.4   MIXED HARDWOODS SWAMP

3.4.1  Qualitative Site Description

     Physical  description.   This  site  (Figure 9) encompasses 6 ha
and is very different from  the other sites which we have surveyed
during  the  project.   It  is surrounded on all  four sides  by
intensive suburban  development  on  filled land.   It consists of
several shallow basins separated by four low-lying ridges.   The
basins apparently  were  once  swales  that drained  into  Assateague
Channel during wet  periods.  Vegetation on this  site  is almost
exclusively trees with only a small area of emergent  wetlands.
Although encroachment  has  occurred from all  sides, the  site is
still largely  natural in character.   At the center of  the  site  a
house encroaches on  the area from the south and trailers encroach
from the north so  that the center is very constricted.

     Definitions.   The WIA consists of  the site  as outlined by
the EPA. The  site receives water from adjacent  roads, ditches,
and backyards  and drains  internally into the underlying  water
table aquifer.  In this case the basin equals  the WIA.  The sub-
watershed for  the  site consists of slightly elevated ridges  which
lie between the lower-lying swamps and a fringe  of surrounding
developed land.

     Qualitative vegetation  description.  Most  of the wetland
areas  which lie  in this   site  are dominated by  obligate  or
facultative  wet tree species.   Dominant trees are  red maple (Acer
rubrum)  and  sweet  gum  (Liquidambar  styraciflua)  while  other
                                        .1
       Figure  9.  Map of Mixed Hardwoods  Swamp WIA showing
       wetland (w) and upland (u)  areas.

                              56

-------
 species  such as slippery elm  (Ulmus  rubra).  black gum  (Nyssa
 sylvatica) .  and water  oak  (Quercus nigra) are  present.  The
 slightly elevated  ridges  are dominated by  loblolly pine  (Pjnus
 taeda).  patches of oaks (Querus spp.),  some pines (Pinus spp.),
 dogwood  (Cornus spp.)f  and sassafras (Sassafras albidum).   There
 is a small emergent  marsh in the southeast corner  of the site
 which  is dominated by Hibiscus. Polygonum, and willows  (Salix
 spp.).   In summary, this site is a swamp with lower  lying areas
 dominated by red maples and sweet gum and higher areas by oak and
 pine.

     Wetland classification.   Most of the wetlands  at  this site
 are palustrine forested.   The small  area  of emergent wetland  in
 the southeast corner  of the site is palustrine emergent.

     Substrate,  water salinity.   The  substrates  on the  site are
 sandy  or  sandy loam soils  overlain by  approximately  10-15 cm  of
 organic  mater.ial.  Water  levels  in the  swamp areas fluctuate
 seasonally from a  standing depth of 20  cm to virtually dry during
 drought periods.  Salinities  are well below  1 ppt  (freshwater).

     Wildlife use.  This small site appears to be heavily  used  by
 passerine birds.   Night-herons  were  observed roosting  in the
 emergent wetland areas  in  the southeast corner of  the site. There
 is also evidence of use of the  site  by raccoons and other small
 mammals.  There is  no fishery utilization of this  site.

     Hydrologic functions.  Water appears  to  drain vertically
into the soils underlying  the site.  There is no inlet or  outlet
to the site.   As  a result the  site has a  high  potential  for
ground-water  recharge,  flood water  storage,  and nutrient
retention, but little potential for  ground-water discharge (no
outlet).

     Special note.   This  is  an unusual  site  on  Chincoteague
because of its red maple/sweet gum swamp character.   While there
are other swamp areas  on Chincoteague,  this is one of the best
examples of  this  wetland  type.   In  addition  to aesthetic
qualities, this site  provides an unusual habitat and food chain
support  function  of  a type  which is  relatively  rare on both
Chincoteague  and Assateague Islands.
                              57

-------
 3.4.2   Adamus  and  Stockwell  Evaluations:   Mixed Hardwoods  Swamp
Summary Sheet D

This form Is 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, 3. or C) in 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-
sociated  analyses.   For  the evaluation  of each  function's Effectiveness, enter  whichever  rating is
higher—That for the basin or that for  the  WIA.  The evaluation of the impact vector Is optional.
/"BASIN WIA PHOjprr "\
FVAHIATinNTIMFFPAUF(PPF/pn
-------
 'lixed  Hardwoods

 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
        FUKTIONAL  OrPORTUHtTY  AND
ThU Sheet  1«  tht  appropriate place for recording
the responses  CO corresponding  questions  In  Form
A.   A  *yes"  (Y). or  "no"  (N)  response wst  b«
circled for all  parts  of each question, even when
the response  seems obvious.   This response sheet
has  two  major  columns--'VIA-  and "BASIH'.  and
within each of  these.   thre« subcolurm entitled
•»-. *V. and "0", which address,  when relevent, the;
seasonal  changes  In  some  of the  predictors,  as
follows:

     I column   responses  art   those   addressing
     either (a)  the  average  annual  condition,  or
     (b)  the   condition  Intermediate between  the
     wettest  and driest annual  conditions  (e.g.,
     late June In  most Prairie pothole  wetlands).
     or   (c)   the  condition  of  maximum   annual
     standing  crop of wetland plants,  or  (d)  If
     tidal, the average daily mid-tide condition.

     U 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 U 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 he asked
and answered in  the  context  of the  WIA's (wetland
impact area's) average condition, tfcen  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  fn  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 th« Y1A or basin,  but  not both.
 q. •
UIA
 V
                                      BASIN
                                   tw
 Offlce-tyoe Oata
                                              59

-------
Mixed Hardwoods  Swamp
0. •
       MIX
       W
                  BASIN
                   w    o
 J.I
 3.*
 4.1
 «i.
Sa.
 S.I
            T
  l
 7.2
                                               ,5ee (Lcrrnr vtn4  -f*
•.1
8.2
9.1
                                                           Cay,
                                                                    T
 10.1
 10.2
 10.3
 10. «
  T «
  T !l
  T K
  TIL
A/*
/*"
 13.1
 Hi
                                                                  i-evrr
            _M£_
 20.
 21.1
 21.6
 Ft«1d-tjroe Data
                  -V
                                       60

-------
nixed Hardwoods Swamp
 22.2.2  T
 22.2.3  T
 22.2.4  T
       T
                                   61

-------
Mixed Hardwoods Swamp
 Q. I
 37.1
 17 *
             *«./.
               itn
A/4
 40.
 41.1
 41.1.1
 41.1.2
 41.1.3
 41.2
 41.2.1
 41.2.2
 41.2.3
 41.3
 41.3.1
 41.3.2
 41.3.3
 41.4
 44.1
 44.2
                                         62

-------
Mixed Hardwoods Swamp
VIA
9. I 1 V 0
49.1
49.2 _ A
50. *M) ton TIM
si! fff *r
Detailed Data

52.1.1 T 1*1 »IA
52.1.2 Y 1* N*
S2.2.1 Y®
52.2.? TOJ
53.1 Y 1 A/*
53.? Y K ~n
54.1 T N jJA
54.2 YJL ffn
55. YtSi
56.
57.1 N .
S7.2 N A/A
57.3 N nn
57.4 N
M.I N .
58.2 N A/A
58.3 N »Vf*
58.4 N
59.1
SI.2
W.3
M.I
W.2
(0.3
llll V il .7*
81.? Yd Nn
8T N MA
.1
«3.t
H^ i^h.
««. fj^
66.1 "-^ T * .I*
««.2 T 1 /VA
•7.1 » • • A/A
«7.? T M Nn
68.1 T « 4JA
«8.2 T N /Vn
Derived ftesoonses
69.1 T N
69.2 Y 1 	
70.1 T N
70.2 T N
71.1 T *
71.2 Y 1
72.1 t N
72.2 T N
73.1 T 91
73.2 T 1
74.1 T *
74.2 Y «
75.1 T *
75.2 Y N
IASIN
1 tf 0
Nfe






AM T ^


i » i
:: A/A
;: //«"


A//> ;:
A/A T H

V M
T •
r R
T •
Y N
Y II


After respo
38). You v
soonses.




































































nses to aU possible questions (Form A)
recorded above, turn to For* 8 (page
111 ( as an option) retutn to this sheet
i 2.1.2) to Interpret the above re-






                               63

-------
Mixed Hardwoods  Swanp
Response Sheet B1

THRE910LO ANALYSIS:   SIGNIFICANCE

This sheet  1s  the appropriate place  for  recording
the responses  to the  corresponding questions In
Form 8.  Circle Y (yes)  or  N (no),  being careful
to note that the order  of Y  and N below frequently
reverses.
General
Recharc
Nutrient
Retention
fish Food  Chain/
Habitat
                                 Wildlife
Flood
Storane
Shorel ine
Anchorinc
                                 Active
                                 Recreation
                                 67.
                                 Passive,
                                       ~
                                              64

-------
Form "A"  Comments  (Mixed Hardwoods Swamp)

WIA            = Area  inside dashed line (Figure 9)

Basin          = WIA

1.1-1.3.1      Swamp  is considered to be remnant  of  old swale
               systems blocked  from  original connections by road
               development.  The swamp  therefore has no inlet or
               outlet

5.2            See site map (Figure 9)  and definitions for this
               site

7              Predictor not used

8              Sub-watershed  = pine/oak  ridges  within  WIA +
               narrow band of  developed yards, roads,  ditches
               surrounding this site

9              Predictor not used

15             Developed area dominates  sub-watershed

23             < 10 cm porous organic over  sand

39.6           Road ditches appear to drain into WIA
                              65

-------
3.5   MIRE  POND FILL STUDY SITE

3.5.1  Qualitative Site Description

     Physical description.   Most of  this  site (Figure  10)  is
composed of  historically altered upland areas   (nonwetlands)
dominated  by pines  and shrubs.   The total area of the site  is
about 7 ha.  The  only  wetlands associated with  this  site are a
fringe along  Mire Pond and two small areas of isolated wetlands
near State Route 2126.   About one-third  of  the site has  been
recently altered  through  clearing  of  the understory  and  filling
of wetland  fringe up to Mire Pond.  This  part of the site lies  at
the southwestern edge adjacent to Mire Pond Scrub/Shrub  System
Study Site.
     Definitions.  The WIA consists of the site
the EPA and as described  in  the section above.
as outlined by
 The basin for
                                                .1
             .2
                                               Km
Figure 10.  Map of  Mire Pond Fill Site WIA showing wetland (w) and
upland (u) areas.  Major outlet is indicated by  arrow that depicts
the direction of water movement from the site.

                              66

-------
this site  includes Mire Pond  and  Fowling Gut  up  to  the point
where it empties into Chincoteague Bay.  The sub-watershed for
the site consists of the upland pine,  emergent  fringe marsh,and
shrub-dominated  areas  which immediately surround Mire Pond and
Fowling Gut to the  exit  into Chincoteague Bay.

     Qualitative  vegetation description.  The wetland areas which
lie along Mire Pond are  dominated by Spartina patens.  Distichlis
spicata, and  some S.  alterniflora.   The  higher parts  of this
wetland  consist  of a shrub zone consisting of  Myrica. Iva, and
some Baccharis.   Sections of the wetland lying nearest the study
site which have  been altered by limited  filling  are dominated by
PhragmJ.tes.  The  upland  areas are dominated by pine, small oaks,
shrubs such as Myrica and sumac (Rhus sp.),  and  a variety of less
common shrubs.

     Wetland classification.  The  wetlands  adjacent  to Mire Pond
are estuarine  emergent  and  estuarine scrub/shrub, while  the two
isolated interior wetlands  are palustrine scrub/shrub.

     Wildlife use.  The  upland areas appear to  be used  by
passerine birds and a variety of small mammals. The  estuarine
wetlands and  Mire Pond are used  seasonally by waterfowl  and
shorebirds.  Mire Pond is probably  an important  nursery area for
fishes because of its  connection to the  estuary through  Fowling
Gut.  The small  palustrine wetlands  are  probably  utilized by
small mammals  and passerine birds (we made  no direct observations
in these areas).

     Hydrologic functions.   During   wet periods  this  site drains
from the upland areas down into Mire Pond and through Fowling Gut
to Chincoteague Bay.  This drainage  is  in the form of sheet flow
and is probably very limited.  During dry periods the  wetland
fringe exchanges limited quantities of  water with Mire Pond by
tidal action.  On  the  uplands most drainage  occurs  below the
surface  and vertically within the  site.   For these  reasons, the
site probably  has  moderate potential  for  ground-water recharge
and nutrient retention,  but relatively  moderate  to low value for
flood storage.

     Substrate,  water salinity.  Soils  in the  upland areas are
largely sandy  and sandy  loams. Soils underlying  the  wetlands and
Mire Pond are sand with a thin layer of  surface organic matter.
Salinities  in  Mire  Pond  probably  range  seasonally from 10 to 25
PPt.
                              67

-------
3.5.2  Adamus and Stockwell  Evaluations:   Mire  Pond Fill  Site


Summary Sheet D

This form is 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,  8,  or  C) in 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-
sociated analyses.   For the  evaluation  of  each  function's Effectiveness,  enter whichever rating is
higher—That for the basin  or  that for the WIA.  The evaluation of the  impact vector is optional.
/'BASIN
EVALUATION TIME FRAME (PRE
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE*
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE"
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING*
SEDIMENTTRAPPING*
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM"
SEASONAL"
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-BASIN"
FISHERY HABITAT
WARMWATER"
COLDWATEH"
COLDW.RIVERINE"
ANADROMCUJSRW.-L, uH
«— 7l Hin'n^
WILDLIFE HABIT AT
GENERAL DIVERSITY1*
WATERFOWL GP." I
WATERFOWL GP." 2
sppriFs* Black Duck
p.  64; 10-p. 67;
 U.

 21.
p. 67;

p. 93.
:._  in. 13.   71 .  14.    7-,.
  p. 69;    p.  fl,    p.  /J ,
75;
).  79;
3. 80; l°'p. 84;
.  91;  2°'p.
92;
*  Blue Fish,  Hard Clam, Winter Flounder
                                                68

-------
Mire  Pond Fill  Site

Response Sheet A1
THRESHOLD
EFFECTIVENESS
        FUNCTIONAL OPPORTUNITY AND
This Ihftt 1s  th« appropHatt  plact  for rtcordln?
tht rtsponsts  to  corrtspondlni questions In  For*
A.   A  •yts'  (Y). or  'no' («)  rtsponst wit bt
drdtd for all parts  of  each  question.  tvtn  whtn
tht responst  sttm  obvious.   This response shett
has  two  Major  colons—Til A" and  'BMIir.   and
within tacit of thtst.  thrtt  wbcoluwn  tntUltd
•f. *W.  and TT.  which addrtss. whtn  rtltvtnt, the
setsonal   changes  1n  some of  tht  predictors. as
follows:

     » column   responses   are  those   addressing
     either(a)  the  average annual  condition, or
     (b)   the   condition  Intermediate between   the
     wettest  and  driest  annual conditions  (e.g.,
     late  June in most Prairie pothole  wetlands).
     Or   (c)   the condition   of   maximum   annual
     Standing  crop  of wetland plants,  or (d) If
     tidal, the average daily mid-tide condition.

     H 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  U  would  look  like
     during an average daily  high tide  (flooded)
     condition.                  "

     0 column  responses are those  addressing  what
     the   area would  look  like during either  the
     driest tine  of the year (questions  pertaining
     to hydrology) or  if  the question pertains to
     vegetation,  therr  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 WJA or basin,  but  not both.
r
 Q. •
WIA
 H
   BASIN
I    W    0
 Offlce-tyoe Data
                                              69

-------
".ire  Pond  Fill  Site
0. •
             UIX
              U
                   •AS1N
                i   v     e
                                                       Corn/we A 't -fon^v.
 ITT
 »
 ii
 *.»
6.1
H-
y.g
                              Y K
 t.l
 8.2
                                                        C rryvrvifcTVr T >f"
 9.1
 9.2
                              Y H
                              Y N
                                                        A
 10.1
 10.2
 10.3
 10.1
 11.1
 11.2
        Y *
        T N
        Y K
        T N
  ,/
A/
ly
       AN
 12.1
 12.2
             Y N
             Y •<
 13.1
 12*2.
 16.
       IPg"
 17.1
 17.2
 1ft*.
 u*.
 20.
                              YCT
 21.1
 21
 21
 21
 21
 21.6
                                                                       -r*>
 fi«ld-tyt>e Data
 22.1
 22.1.1
 22.1.2
 22.1.3
 22.1.4
 22.1.5
                                           70

-------
Mire Pond Fill Site
                              71

-------
Mire Pond Fill Site
 0. I
          MA
          V
  IASIN
i   ¥    0
35.1  (J>N
35.2.1
35.2.2
            (YJN
                                                fjQY iff\tsn
                                                      4L_&
                                            Se*
                         q>n €jn
                                      12

-------
Mire Pond Fill Site
MIA
o. * i v o
49.1
49 2
SO. ON (UN l3N
51. ^N
Detailed Data

52.1.1 Y ri^/fl
52.1.2 IHJ^'"
52.2.1 (S>Jt
52.2.? Y©
53.1 t •« J/A
53.2 Y H W"
54.1 Y N JJA
54.2 Y IL pln
55. Y®
56. _
57.1 (MM
57.2 Y(ft
57 .3 Yn^-M£
3««. Crr*s»
id, C
^CC


ste. c*

Set. Co-
5«< c.
s<-<- c






ervt forrrv



X.e
Or»nrn-cwr


v\mnirr»e*a- /•*"'
wtrvicvjr •jtb-T*
O*vnrvic^jr ^o»



responses to all possible quesi
ten recorded above, turn to
fou «111( as an option) return
Ctlon 2.1.2) to Interpret t















• »v%
^OVtrv\


^\

V
•X
0>



F^Aftc IVftr^t t\
Form 8 (page
fn thic «h*«r
he above re-



                               73

-------
 "lire  Pond  Fill  Site
Response Sheet B1

THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:   SIGNIFICANCE

This sheet  1s  the appropriate  place for recording
the responses  to the  corresponding  questions  In
Form 8.  Circle Y (yes)  or  N  (no), being careful
to note that the order of Y  and N below frequently
reverses.
General
                                 Nutrient
                                               74

-------
Form "A" Comments  (Mire Pond Fill Site)

2.2            Basin's outlet  is constricted where  the Fowling
               Gut Pond enters the dredged portion of Fowling Gut
               (and overly restricted culvert at county  road 2112
               and 2114)

3.1-3.2        Sinuous  because  "basin" includes  all of Fowling
               Gut below Mire Pond

5.2            See site map  (Figure  10) and definitions  for this
               site

7              Predictor not used

8              Sub-watershed =  upland surrounding Mire Pond and
               Fowling Gut to Chincoteague Bay

9              Predictor not used

21             Refers strictly to  the  wetlands in WIA (see
               Methods section)

23.1-23.9      Sediments are sand with shallow layer of porous
               organic

24             This  is an  estimate because  we   lack  salinity
               measurements during droughts

36             No measurements; we have  estimated

38             Culvert at county road 2112 and 2114  causes flow
               blockage at outlet

39.5           Culverts at roads  2112 and  2114 probably  restrict
               access by estuarine fish  to  some  extent

39.6           Significant contribution of freshwater comes from
               storm  water  runoff from developed  areas  (through
               Fowling Gut)  to our basin

52.1           No measurements

52.2           Refers to only wetland areas; Spartina present

56             No data

58             No data          61             No  data

59             No data          64             Estimate.  No data

60             No data          66             Tidal

                              75

-------
67            No data

68            No data
Form "B" Comments (Mire Pond Fill Site, Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub-
Estuarine Portion and Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub-Palustrine Portion)

1             See comments for Chincoteague Ridge/Swale and High
              School  East  Sites  (there  probably will be
              development in upland areas  of  the site)

2             See comments for Ridge/Swales and High School East
              sites.

9             Palustrine portion  of  Mire  Pond  Scrub/Shrub site
              is viewed as a significant recharge area

12            Groundwater discharge from Mire Pond fill and Mire
              Pond  Scrub-Shrub  sites  probably  influences
              salinity in Fowling Gut and  therefore affects
              sport and commercial fishes  in  Fowling Gut

13            Discharge from Mire Pond fill and Mire Pond Scrub-
              Shrub sites probably dilutes septic tank outflow

19            Flooding enhances access by  fishes and waterfowl

44            Mire  Pond  fill and  estuarine portion  of Mire Pond
              Scrub-Shrub sites contain brackish marshes with
              estuarine connection--a prime nursery area

45            Mire  Pond  fill and  estuarine portion  of Mire Pond
              Scrub-Shrub  have anadromous   fish—coastal  mid-
              Atlantic
67            Mire  Pond fill and estuarine portion of  Mire Pond
              Scrub-Shrub have impacts upon Fowling Gut  which
              affect active recreation,  i.e., fishing,  crabbing
21             Estuarine Portion of Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub site
               flooded daily, not as valuable for flood  storage
               and desynchronization

71             In  palustrine portion  of  Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub
               sites  freshwater  swale  wetlands considered
               relatively rare and  of  scientific value

                              76

-------
3.6  MIRE POND SCRUB/SHRUB SYSTEM STUDY SITE

3.6.1  Qualitative Site Description

     Physical description.   The site (Figure 11) covers 5  ha  and
is complex because it consists of a number  of  different types of
wetlands and some upland areas.  For this reason we have  chosen
to divide the  site  into  two sections  (estuarine and palustrine).
The  estuarine portion  consists primarily  of the  estuarine
     T.  /
     Chlncoteague
     Channel
     Figure  11.   Map  of Mire  Pond  Scrub/Shrub System WIA
     showing wetland  (w)  and  upland  (u) areas.  Major
     outlet  is  indicated  by arrow  that depicts the direction
     of water movement from the  site.  Estuarine and
     palustrine portions  of the  WIA  are separated by
     dotted  line.

                                77

-------
wetlands  lying  along Mire Pond.  The palustrine portion consists
of extensive,  but  scattered  freshwater emergent  wetlands and
associated  scrub/shrub wetlands.   The two sections  of this site
have been divided  along the  line  of the pine ridge which runs
from the  northeast  to the southwest down the center of the site.

     Definitions.   The WIA consists of the site as outlined by
EPA.   The basin for the estuarine  site  includes Mire Pond and
Fowling  Gut  to Chincoteague Bay.   At the palustrine site the
basin equals the wetlands because they drain internally under all
conditions but the most extreme storms.  The sub-watershed for
both sites consists of the upland pine-dominated ridges  within
each area and  for the  estuarine site, a fringe of developed land
surrounding Fowling Gut.

     Qualitative vegetation  description.  Vegetation  on these two
sites is  structurally complex.  The  upland areas are  dominated by
pine  forest,  small  oaks,  and shrubs such as  Myrica.   The
estuarine wetlands  are  dominated by Spartina  patens,  Distichlis^
Hibiscus.  a  small  amount   of  S.  alterniflora,  and  some
Kosteletzkya virginica.  The palustrine, emergent wetlands are
dominated  by Hibiscus. Rosa. Rumex,  Scirpus spp.,  Polygonum,
Typha,  and  Kosteletzkya. The  palustrine scrub/shrub  wetlands are
dominated by  willows,  Sumac.  Myrica, and Phragmites (adjacent to
settled areas  to the west).

     Wetlands classification.   The   wetlands associated with the
estuarine site are estuarin-e emergent wetlands  with scattered
areas  of estuarine scrub/shrub.   The palustrine site has both
palustrine  emergent and palustrine  scrub/shrub wetlands.

     Substrate, water salinity.  Substrates in all  of these  areas
are primarily sand  overlain by a thin layer of organic material.
As at  other  sites  on  Chincoteague, the ridges have more sandy
loam.  Salinities  in the palustrine wetlands  are generally less
than 1 or 2 ppt, but salinities in Mire Pond range between 10 and
25 ppt seasonally.

     Wildlife use.  The  estuarine  wetland  areas are  utilized by
the same variety of waterfowl, shorebirds, and fishes as at the
estuarine  portion of  the  adjacent  Mire Pond fill site. The
palustrine emergent wetlands appear  to be  used by waterfowl
seasonally.   The upland areas  and palustrine scrub/shrub wetlands
are used  by a variety  of small mammals and passerine birds.  The
estuarine system consisting  of Mire Pond and adjacent wetlands
clearly  serves as an important  nursery  area  for fishery
organisms.

     Hydrologic functions.   Drainage  from the estuarine  portion
of the site  occurs by  limited  tidal exchange with Mire Pond
during dry and average rainfall  periods.   During  wet periods
drainage  occurs by sheet flow into the pond  and  through  Fowling

                              78

-------
Gut toward Chincoteague  Bay.  During extreme events some surface
exchange  of  water probably occurs with the palustrine site.
Otherwise drainage from the palustrine site is  solely  internal,
either flowing vertically  into  the subsurface sand or collecting
in the two or  three  lower-lying palustrine emergent  wetlands
which lie in  the  center  of the  site.

     Because  of these drainage  characteristics, both portions of
the  site should  have  high  potential  for flood  storage  and
nutrient  retention.   The palustrine  portion because  of  its lack
of an outlet  should have a high ground-water recharge potential
while that of the estuarine portion of the site is probably low
to moderate.
                              79

-------
3.6.2   Adamus and Stockwell  Evaluations:   Mire  Pond  Scrub-Shrub
         System -  Estuarine Portion


Summary Sheet D

This form is the appropriate place for  recording  the  ratings  that result fro* 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) in 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-
sociated  analyses.   For  the evaluation  of each  function's Effectiveness, enter  whichever rating is
higher—That for  the  basin or that for the WIA.  The  evaluation of the impact vector is optional.
                                    , WIA
   PROJECT.
EVALUATION TIME FRAME (PBE
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE1
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE'
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING"
SEDIMENTTRAPPING*
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM"
SEASONAL"
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-BAS1N11
FISHERY HABITAT
WARMWATER"
COLDWATER"
COLDW.RIVERINE"
SPECIES" -ci' ij-jp'pl'*
WILDLIFE HABITA'T
GEN ERAL D 1 VERSJTY"
WATERFOWL GP." 1
WATERFOWL GP." 2
sppriFd" Black Duck


 2l-p. 93.

*  Slue  Fish, Hard  Clam,  Winter Flounder

                                              80
                                                                            . 62; 9'p.
                      64; lo-p.  67;
  p.  60;

80;  18'p. 84; 19-p. 91; 2Q'p.  92;

-------
 Mire Pond  Scrub-Shrub System  -  Estuarine Portion

 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
         FUNCTIONAL OPPORTUNITY AND
 This  sheet  1s the appropriate place for recording
 the  responses to corresponding  questions  In Font
 A.    A  'yes* (Y).  or *no*  (N)  response «J$t  be
 circled  for  all  parts of each question, even when
 the  response seem obvious.   This response sheet
 has   two  major  columns--"WtA-  and 'BASIN",  and
 within each  of  these,   three  subcolumn; entitled
 •I". "«". ind *0'. which address,  when relevent, the
 seasonal  changes  In  some  of the  predictors,  as
 follows:

     I column  responses   are   those   addressing
     either  (a)  the  average annual  condition,  or
     (to)   the  condition  intermediate between the
     wettest   and  driest  annual  conditions  (e.g.,
     late June 
-------
Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub  Svstem -  Estuarine  Portion
Q. •
           WIA
            W    0
  BASIN
i   V
13.1
Hi.
                            Y N
                            Y N
 16.
 17.1
 17.2
 18.
 19.
 20.
 21
 21
 21

 2i
 21.6
                                           See  C-w^rvie^vf- -{*
 F1«1d-tyt>e Data

 22.1
 22.1,
 22.1,
 22.1
 22.1.
 22.1.
 22.2    Y
 22.2.1  Y
 22.2.2  Y
                                       82

-------
Mire  Pond Scrub-shrub System -- Estuarine Portion
 22.3
 22.3.1
 22.3.2
 22.3.3
 22.3.4
                                  83

-------
      Pond  Scrub-Shrub System  -  Estuarine Portion
0. f
             VIA
             w
   IASIN
f   If
 33.3
 33.4
 33.5
 33.6
 33.7
 33.8
             T/fi
              Y
 34.1
 34.2
 34.3
 34.4
 34.5
 34.6
 34.7
 34.8
 35.1
 35.2.1
 35.2.2
 35.?. 3
        (QN
                                               See
                                                             **\
                 ,/»»
38.1
38.2
       Y N  Y II
                           QJH
                 Ste
                                              .5**-
                                               se t
42±,
       Y N  Y R
41.1
41.1.1
41.1.2
41.1.3
41.2
41.2.1
41.2.2
41.2.3
41.3
41.3.1
41.3.2
41.3.3
41.4
43.
44.1
44.2
      "»H  Ti"
45.1
45.2
49.1
49.2
50.
            OJN   /H
                                          84

-------
Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub System - Estuarine ^ortion
NU
0. * 1 V 0
51. Qj« ' '
Detailed Data

52.1.1 Y M A/A
52.1.2 Y N MA
52.2.1 *U*j



""***
re^*4y
°urdme<«ofll

-bmewvks

U.T tnw\**TX
uif ur e,»»i **«t3
'uirtvnwvS


r<.rn«n'1N5

**c™~±S
S*r*^e^j
«*«'tim»w«l'^'























onset to all possible questions (Form A)
recorded above, turn to Form 8 (page
«tll( as an option) return to this sheet
in 2.1.2) to Interpret the above re-






                               85

-------
 Mire  Pond  Scrub-Shrub  Svstem — Estuarins °ortion
 Response Sheet B1
THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:  SIGNIFICANCE

This sheet  Is the appropriate  place for  recording
the responses  to  the  corresponding  questions in
Form 8.   Circle Y (yes)  or  N  (no), being  careful
to note  that the  order  of Y  and N  below frequently
reverses.
General
Shore! ine
Anchorinq
Nutr ient
61.  Y<5
62.  N
63.  Y©
64.  (9N
65.  YfD
66.  Y©
67.  (3>Y

Passive _
                                                               Pov,Jl
                                                                      F;/
                                            86

-------
Form "A"  Comments  (Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub - Estuarine Portion)

2.2       Basin's  outlet is constricted where  Mire  Pond
          joins  the dredged  portion  of  Fowling Gut  (and
          overly restricted culvert at  county roads 2112 and
          2114)  Refers only to wetland area; Spartina present

3.1-3.2   Sinuous because "basin" includes all of Fowling
          Gut

5.2       See  site  map  (Figure 11) and definitions for this
          site

7         Predictor not used

8         Sub-watershed = upland adjacent  to and surrounding
          Mire Pond and Fowling Gut to  Chincoteague Bay

9         Predictor not used

21        Refers strictly to the wetlands  in  WIA  (see
          Methods section)

23.1-23.9 Sediments are sand with shallow  layer  of  porous
          organic

24        This  is  an  estimate  because  we  lack salinity
          measurements during droughts

36        No measurements; we  have estimated

38        Culvert at county road  2112  and 2114 causes  flow
          blockage at outlet

39.5      Culverts  at roads 2112 and 2114 probably restrict
          access by estuarine fish to some extent

39.6      Significant contribution of  freshwater comes  from
          storm  water  runoff  from developed  areas (through
          Fowling Gut)  to this  basin

52.1      No data

53,54     No data                            61     No data

56        No data                            64     Guess

58        No data                            66     Tidal

59        No data                            67     No data

60        No data                            68     No data


                               87

-------
3.6.3   Adamus and Stockwell  Evaluations:   Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub
         System -  Palustrlne  Portion


Summary Sheet 0

This form is 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)  in  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-
sociated  analyses.   For  the evaluation of each function's Effectiveness,  enter whichever rating i^
higher—That for  the  basin or that for the UIA.  The evaluation of the impact vector is optional.
/'BASIN WIA PBOJcrrr "S
EVALUATION TIMP FBAUF (PBP/POSH .
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE1
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE'
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING*
SEDIMENTTRAPPING'
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM"
SEASONAL"
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-BASIN"
FISHERY HABIT AT
WARMWATER"
COLOWATER"
COLDW.RIVEHINE"
ANAOROMOUSRIV.
SPECIES" 	
WILDLIFE HABITAT
GENERAL DIVERSITY"
WATERFOWL GP." 1
WATERFOWL GP." ?
sppciFS" fjlark Ourk
sppr.iPR"
SPECIES'"
ACTIVE RECREATION-
SWIMMING
BOAT LAUNCHING
POWER BOATING
CANOEING
SAILING
EFFECTIVENESS-
high
low
hi ah
hi qh
hi qh
high
high
moderate
moderate
urriBATinniPi »»f •
OPPORTUNITY-
moderate
..::-• ., . • :
high
Inw
mnripratp
high
high

low
summer winter
low*
1 ow 1 ow
low low
1 ow 1 ow
low
low
low
low
"7 nw
P ASSIV E RECREATION tWox*:-: :- -•-.:,: ..:> V. . , >.:.-.. :v:'.- V.,. ': "• \ '.: . .;s '•
AND HERITAGE" f;::.i-:--;::M.::-:v:-..--:.:V.;::'-'--.;:;::''::;-¥ ••••:••.'• V : :'.*::--
FUNCTIONAL RATING'
hi oh
low
hiah
ftinrlpratp
hiqh
high
high
moderate
moderate
low
low
low
low
low
low
low
low
low
T nw
SIGNIFICANCE*
moderate
low
hiah
mnrlpr*afp
hi nh
high
low
moderate
moderate
moderate
?; ;1': *£* S ;r: ' :'.::•;;.; ;i;: J mo de r a te
FUNCTIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE*
high
low
verv high
mnrfpratp
vpry hiqh
very high
vpry high
moderate
moderate
low
,low
low
low
low
low
low
low
low
low
moderate
IMPACT VECTOR RATING" )
FOOTNOTES
These entries  will  6e based on analyses in the following  parts  of  Volume  II  (numbers correspond to
footnotes  above):
 KForms A, Al (p. 6.  51); Z'Section 2.1.2.2. (p. 97); 3'Forms  B,  81  (p. 38, 54); ^'Section 2.1.2.?.

 (p.  97); ^interpretation key 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;  I2'p. 69; 13'p. 71; 14'p. 73; 15'p.  75; 16'p. 79; 17'p. 80; 18'p. 84;  I9'p. 91; 2°'p. 92;

 2"up.  93.       *Low  sediment  no open  water


                                               88

-------
Mire  Pond Scrub-Shrlib  Svstem - Palustrine  Portion
 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
        FUNCTIONAL  OPPORTUNITY  AND
This sheet  1$  tht  appropriate  place for recording
the  responses  to corresponding questions  1n  For*
A.   A 'yes'  (Y). or  "no* (N)  response wst  b«
circled for  ill  parts  of  each  question. «ven  when
the  response seems  obvious.   This  response  sheet
has  two  major  columni---VIA-  «nd  "BASIH*.  md
within CKh  of  these,  three  subcolumns  entitled
•»". "V". and *0". which address, when re I event. th«
se-ssonal  changes In  some  of  the predictors,  «
follows:

     1  column  responses   are   those   addressing
     either  (a)  the  average annual  condition, or
     {b)   the  condition  Intermediate  between  the
     wettest and  driest annual conditions (e.g.,
     late  June in most  Prairie pothole  wetlands),
     or   (c)   the  condition   of  maximum  annual
     Standing  crop  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
     tne  area  is tidal, what  it  would look   like
     during  an average daily  high tide  (flooded)
     condition.

     0 column  responses are those addressing what
     the  area  would look  like during either the
     driest  ti«ie 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 WtA or basin,  but  not both.
  Q.
VIA
 W
                                      BASIN
                                   I    W
  Offlce-tyoe Data
                                               89

-------
M.ire Pond Scrub-Shrub  Svstem  -  Palustrine Portion
0.  «    I
 2.1.1  QJ'
 2.1.2   YjQ
 2.2.1  <
 2.2.2
            UlA
                              IASIH
                            i    v
            Y<
            OH
                                                                 -p
J.I
3.2
47T
«.*.
5.1
5.7
                                            Jet
                                                          liw
6.1
6.2
  i
 7.2
                          Y N
                          TN
                                             see
6.1
8.2
9.1
9.2
                          V II
                          r N
                                              5e<
 10.1
 10.2
       T a
       t II
       r,5
 15:1
      -SR'   A/A
12.1
1U-
            Y H
            Y N
13.1
Iii_
                          ;:
                               M
I*
 16.
      3121
 17.1
 17.2
Jfii.
11,
       Y N
 20.
 ii
 21
 21
 21
 21
 21.6
 Field-tree Data
 22.2.1
                 4-
                                                              •f-ft
                                      90

-------
Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub System -  Palustrine Portion
                                                            	'
                              91

-------
Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub Svstem  - Palustrine  Portion
                 rffi>
 38.1
 38.2
T N
                   TCI/
                                           See
 40,
 41.1.1
 41.1.2
 41.1.3
 41.2
 41.2.1
 41.2.2
 41.2.3
 41.3
 41.3.1
 41.3.2
 41.3.3
 41.4
                         ra
                         T
                    N
                   T M
  N
Y H
                                      92

-------
Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub Evstem •  Palustrine Portion
MIA
0.* I « 0
49.1
49 2
so. iiiA tdu nib
51. Y« ^
Detailed Data

52.1.1 Y •» A/fl
52.1.2 Y IL A/A
52.2.1 YftJ
52.2.2 Yip
53.1 Y> klrt
53.? Y N •"
54.1 Y K .1*
54.2 YJL |Vn
55. Y|S) ,
56. ATA
57.1 Y N
57.2 Y N JK
57.3 Y N fin
57.4 Y N
M.I r N ,
58.2 Y N J*
SB. 3 V N IVH
58.4 V N
55.1
£5 A/A
w.i ..
60.2 A/A
60.3 ~"
rfti » « 77 A
U.* t N /vn
62. V « AIA
M.I
83.2
«4. —
«5. /Y*
66.1 ^^ Y n .JQ
66.? Y i Arn
67.1 Y K 4/A
87.2 Y H "H
68.1 Y « *//»
68.2 Y N /*H
Derived Kesoonses
69.1 Y N
69.2 Y 1
70.1 . V X
70.2 Y N
71.1 Y *
71.? Y *
72.1 Y N
72.2 Y N
73.1 T *
73.2 Y •«
74.1 T N
74.2 Y N
75.1 Y H
75.2 Y N
IAS1N
i M 0
¥&






Y H


!
T
T
Y «
T
T


V/l ?!
HA I •

A/A ;:
^A ;:
VA ;:



»ft.r
have
38).
(1n S






#0 Open
HO WCA.
SCt Co
A/o rvie
AJo irv\ t



/Uo nie«
A/o A
A/o m
Vo n-




yo m<
A/o
/I/O





w*vkv-
UtCwntn-l-S
mrnerff
Is5«.r?m«*-
«Aii.v- t,nr\C



Su.r«iooev\
1 «a5U<0^«*^"
CiJtA^emcyxT
*OM.«-«/»m««Jl




CJoK-Cm**/^
o^^/-
oMt






4-e v rv»
k
v-^



fi





i
	 j

K
i

.
responses to ill possible questions (Form A)
been recorded above, turn to Form 8 (page
You *111( as an option) retuin to this sheet
ectlon 2.1.2) to Interpret the above re-
s.






                               93

-------
 Mire  Pond Scrub-Shrub  System - Palustrine  Portion
Response Sheet B1


THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:  SIGNIFICANCE

This  sheet 1s  the appropriate  place for  recording
the  responses  to the  corresponding  questions  in
Form  8.   Circle Y (yes) or  N  (no), being careful
to  note that the order of Y  and N below frequently
reverses.
General
Nutr ient
36.
                                           94

-------
Form "A"  Comments  (Mire Pond Scrub-Shrub:   Palustrine)

1             We  are  assuming that there is no inlet or outlet
              due to  isolation by road without culvert  (drainage
              was formerly to the south)

2.2           Basin = WIA

5.2           See site map  (Figure  11) and  definitions for this
              site

6.1-6.2       Wetland area includes  scrub/shrub area  west of
              basin

7             Predictor not used

8             Sub-watershed  = narrow  fringe  of  upland
              surrounding WIA

9             Predictor not used

21            Refers strictly to the wetlands  in WIA

22            Scrub/shrub area (west of ponds)  exceeds  (but only
              slightly)  the emergent wetland  areas  within the
              ponds

23.1-23.9     Sediments are sand with shallow layer of porous
              organic

26            May be a  small area  near  road (dike) which is
              permanently flooded.   Also  may be scrub/shrub
              areas which are temporarily  flooded

36            Although we  have no  estimates,  the  amount  of
              accumulated organic matter  suggests  that  the D.O.
              levels are probably low  in the summer

39.4          Road/dike  construction  has  impounded  wetlands at
              this site

44            There is no wetland-water edge

51            No open water

52.1          No measurements

52            Refers only to wetland area

53            No measurements

54            No measurements

                              95

-------
58             No measurements
59             No measurements
60             No measurements
61             No measurements
64             Guess
66             No measurements available
67             No outlet
68             No outlet
                               96

-------
3.7  OCEAN  BREEZES SOUTH STUDY  SITE

3.7.1  Qualitative Site Description

     Physical  description.   This site  (Figure  12)  covers
approximately  17 ha  and lies  at the  southwest corner of
Chincoteague Island,  just  southwest of a  recently constructed
trailer court.

     The southeast corner of Chincoteague was formerly a large
estuarine marsh  (as shown in a 1943 U.S.G.S.  topograph map).  The
Ocean Breezes South Study Site has been extensively altered in
the  last  few years  in an attempt  to develop the  site  for
commercial  purposes.  Much of the  former estuarine marsh land has
been filled and  bulldozed.  A dead-end canal resulted from fill
placed during the early years  of disturbance.  This triangular
site is currently bounded on two sides  by roads  and  on  the third
side by the trailer court, so there is very little way  for tidal
salt water  to  flow into and out of the  site.   The only tidal
outlets are (1)  a  small tidal  creek which flows  under the road
almost due south into the nearby Andrews Landing Gut  and  (2) a
culvert connecting Chincoteague Channel to Fowling Gut at the
northwest end of the study area.   The first creek is  blocked by a
  CHINCOTEAGLT CHANNEL
   N
Figure 12.   Map of Ocean Breezes South  (right) and Chincoteague
Channel Marsh (left) WIA's showing wetland  (w) and
undifferentiated  (ud) areas.  Channels  (c)  are shown and
major outlets are indicated by arrows that  depict the
direction of water movement from the sites.

                              97

-------
"flap gate" which  allows water  to  drain the site  freely  but
impedes flow into the site.  This one-way "flap gate" is highly
detrimental  in that it impedes  tidal  flow and access by fishes to
the wetland portion of the site while allowing  outgoing tidal
waters to drain  out.

     Definitions.  The WIA consists  of the  site  as outlined by
the EPA.   The basin for the site includes marsh and tidal creeks
which flow southward into Andrews  Landing Gut and northwestward
into Chincoteague Channel.  The sub-watershed consists of  the
higher, artificially  filled areas within the site and  several
low-lying pine ridges that have  persisted since disturbance.

     Qualitative vegetation description.  The remaining areas of
estuarine wetlands within the  interior of the site are  covered
with a  combination  of Spartina  patens.  S.  alterni flora.
Distichlis. and a few other salt  marsh plants.   The  filled  and
altered upland areas are bare in some areas and have a thin cover
of shrubs such as Myrica, Ivaf  and Baccharis.  A few  small pines
are also scattered over this area.

     Wetland classification.   The  wetlands  at  this site  are
largely estuarine emergent wetlands.

     Substrate,  water  salinity.  The substrate of this site is
almost entirely  sand.  Under the remaining estuarine wetlands
there  is  a  layer  of organic material  (5-50  cm) overlying  the
sand.  The water entering and  leaving the site through  the  two
remaining tidal outlets is  typical estuarine water  with  a
salinity of  15-30 ppt.  There are  a few cut-off, temporary pools
of water which  fluctuate according to rainfall conditions.

     Wildlife use.   The areas  which remain as estuarine  marsh
continue  to serve a nursery function for fishes and estuarine
invertebrates.  These wetlands are also utilized by waterfowl  and
shorebirds.  (The filled areas have passerine  birds and occasional
shorebirds.  Evidence  of small mammals (e.g.  raccoons) can be
found throughout  the site.

     Hydrologic functions.  Water drains from the site  through
two  outlets -- one to  Fowling  Gut to  the northwest  and one to
Andrews  Landing Gut  to the  south.  The  latter  is severely
impaired by  the aforementioned  "flap gate" which if removed would
allow  normal tidal  flow to the estuarine wetlands  within  the
site.   Much of  the precipitation   which falls  upon the site
probably  infiltrates through  the sand  fill into the  surface
brackish  aquifer and  then moves  laterally into the estuarine
wetlands and creeks.  Therefore, this  site should have a moderate
to high ground-water  recharge and  discharge  potential  along with
a high nutrient  retention potential.  Flood storage,  because of
filling,  is  probably only of moderate potential.


                              98

-------
 3.7.2   Adamus  and  Stockwell  Evaluations:   Ocean Breezes  South


 Summary Sheet 0

 This  form is 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.  8,  or  C)  in  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  UIA).   Then enter the data,  using  the  numbered footnotes to help locate the as-
 sociated analyses.   For the evaluation of  each function's Effectiveness,  enter whichever rating is^
 higher—That for the basin  or that for the WIA.  The evaluation of the  impact vector  Is optional.
PVAIIIATlriMTIUPPOAUP/PBF/PQSn MITIGATION PI AM •
FUNCTION
GROUND WATER RECHARGE1
GROUND WATER DISCHARGE'
FLOOD STORAGE'
SHORELINE ANCHORING'
SEDIMENT TRAPPING'
NUTRIENT RETENTION
LONG-TERM"
SEASONAL-
FOOD CHAIN SUPPORT
DOWNSTREAM"
IN-8ASIN"
FISHERY HABIT AT
WARMWATEH'4
CCLDWATER'4
COLDW.RIVERINE14
ANAOHOM^flfl h Hd>
SPECIES" r-1 "in n *
WILDLIFE HABITAT
GENERAL DIVERSITY"
WATERFOWL GP." 1
WATERFOWL GP." 2
sppriPS" Common Fgret

SPECIE?"
ACTIVE RECREATION"
SWIMMING
BOAT LAUNCHING
POWER BOATING
CANOEING
SAILING
PASSIVE RECREATION
AND HERITAGE"
EFFECTIVENESS' OPPORTUNITY-
low moderate
FUNCTIONAL RATING*
low
Inw • •! low
hi ah high
hirjn mndpratp
mnrtprstp hinh
moderate high
mnrfpratp high
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
suirmer winter
moderate **
. low low
1 ow 1 ow
high
low
low
low
low
low


high
high
hinh
high
hi nh
moderate
moderate
low
moderate
moderate
low
low
high
low
low
low
low
low
..•-,..-.: ,;,,:;- .-:-:-.:•;;
SIGNIFICANCE1
moderate
high
mndprat-p
hinh
hinh
high
moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate
moderate
FUNCTIONAL
SIGNIFICANCE*
low
low
high
vorv hinh
\IOY-\I hi nh
very high
\iar\f hi nh
moderate
mn dp rate
low
moderate
moderate
low
low
high
low
low
low
low
low
moderate
IMPACT VECTOR RATING"
 FOOTNOTES
These entries  will  be based on analyses  in  the following  parts of  Volume II (numbers  correspond  to
footnotes  above):
 '•Foims A, Al  (p. 6.  51). 2>Section 2.1.2.2.  (p. 97); 3'Foims B. 81 (p. 38. 54); 4'5ection  2.1.2.?.

 (p.  97); ^Interpretation key 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; 13'p. 71; I4'p. 73;  15'p. 75; 16'p. 79; 17'p. 80; 18'p. 84. "-p. 91; 2°'p. 92;
 21.
    p. 93.
*  Blue  Fish, Hard  Clam,  Winter  flounder   **Artificia1 Water  Fluctuation
                                               99

-------
 Ocean  Dreezes  Couth

 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
        FUKTIOKAL OPWTUWITY AND
 This  sheet  1$ the appropriate place for recording
 the  responses to  corresponding  questions  In Fort*
 A.    A  "yes* (Y). or  "no"  (N)   response  nwst be
 circled  for  all  parts of each question, even when
 tht  response seems  obvious.   This response sheet
 has   two  major  columns—'VIA'  and  'BASIN',   ind
 within  each  of  these,  three subcolums  entitled
 *5'.  *W". and '0*. which address,  when relevant.  th«
 seasonal  changes  tn  some  of the  predictors.  «
 follows:

      » column  responses   »re   those  addressing
      either  (a)  the  average  annual  condition,  or
      (b)  the  condition  Intermediate  between  the
      wettest  and  driest  annual  conditions (e.g.,
      late  June In most Prairie  pothole wetlands),
      or  (c)  the  condition  of  maximum  annual
      standing crop  of wetland  plants, or (d)  If
      tidal,  the  average daily mid-tide condition.

      K column responses are those addressing what
      the  area  would   look  like  (a)   during  the
      wettest  time of  an average year, or (b)  if
      tne  area is  tidal,  what it  would look  like
      during  an  average daily high tide (flooded)
      condition.

      0 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  tne area  is  tidal, "0" refers
      to  Us  daily  low  tide  (exposed) condition.

 For  examole.  question 2.1.1 should first  be a'slted
 and  answered  in  the context of  the UIA'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 condf-
'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  WIA or  basin, but not both.
  Q. •
VIA
 W
   BASIN
1    W    0
  Offlce-tyoe Data
  1.1
  1.2
  1.3
                                               100

-------
Ocean Breezes South
0. • 1
WIA
W 0
2.Z.Z Y(S) Y®
|3
*".2 Sfa
S.I **
C.I
6.2
hi
7.2


YVO

8.1
9li
9.1
9.2
10.1 Y 1
10.2 T 9
10.3 Y K
10.« Y *
11.1 Jjjb
11.2 fiTT
12.1
12.2
13.1
13.2
1*. Y ««
15.1 Yfl
15.2 Ytf
15.3 d>H
15.4 Y*T
is.s Y|N|
15.6 Yh
15.7 . Yfal

Ah

:^ VA


I
16. d>N
17.1 YCD
17.2 Y«
18. Y»
19. Yfl
20.
21.1 YrT
21.2 YlJ
21.2 Y/T
21.4 tX
21.5 (y\
21.6 Y(g



1
F1«1d-tyoe Data
22.1 Y/ff|
22.1.1 Y N
22.1.2 Y N
22.1.3 Y N
22.1.4 Y N
22.1.5 Vty
22.2 Y IT
22.2.1 V N
YjKN
YlN
YJN
YlN
YJIT
IAS1N
i v o
CJf N Q)N
d^

}|
I

Y H
Y N

-------
Ocean  Breezes  South
 22.2.2
 22.2.3
 22.2.4
 22.?.5
 22.3
 22.3.1
 22.3.2
 22.3.3
 22.3.4
                                       102

-------
Ocean Breezes "outh
                               103

-------
Ocean Breezes fouth
MIA
Q. 1 I V 0
49.1
49.2 __ _ ,-
50. *~YJN HLW UJH
51. Q)N
Detailed Oat*

52.1.1 Y K NA
52.1.2 1 M Nf\
52.2.1 SH '
52.2.? fr>
53.1 << JA
53.2 Y H "ft
54.1 Y N JA
54.2 T N ~"
55. t * MA
56.
57.1 T N
57.2 Y N J-
57.3 YU Nn
57.4 Y N
59.1 Y N
58.2 Y N JA
58.3 Y N Fn
58.4 V N
59.1 .1.
ftf to
M.I 1
SB *
ii.i V fc J*
81.* T N »*"
«?. Y N MA
63.1
63.2
M- J-*L
«5. CY>! ,
66.1 Y * I/A
66.2 t 1 rH
67.1 Y M JA
87.? Y N W\
68.1 Y N ./A
68.2 Y N Nn
Derived Responses
69.1 Y N
64.9 Y K
70.1 . Y N
70.2 Y N
71.1 Y N
71.? Y *
72.1 Y N
72.2 Y H
73.1 t N
73.2 Y H
74.1 V N
74.2 Y M
75.1 Y N
75.2 Y K
IASt!t
two
Hfc






T t A/fl


I H
f «
T II
r N
T *
Y R


A/A T
•VO T

1
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y



have be«
3H1 Yoi
(1n Sect








&t c*





















rVMrW'C'VvT





















-f-t>*-*~»









1








sponses to all possible questions (Form A)
n recorded above, turn to Porn 8 (page
j «111( as an option) return to this sheet
1on 2.1.2) to Interpret the above re-









                               104

-------
 Ocean  Breezes  South
 Response Sheet B1
 THRE5
                                 F1sh Food Chain/
                                 53.
Flood
Storane
IS. O
17.  Y
Shoreline
Ancnor i nci
                        Pt><
                                 Wildlife
                                 Habitat
                                 Active
                                 Reefeation
                                 Passive
36.
                                              105

-------
Form "A"  Comments  (Ocean Breeze South Study Site)

7,8           Basin = WIA  + area  1.5  times  as  large  toward
              Assateague Channel
              Sub-watershed = 1/2 area of trailer park to north
              Watershed = sub-watershed + pine  stand to north

22            Answered to describe  emergent, estuarine wetland.
              Scrub/shrub pine land  within WIA  not considered

28            Flap  gates  restrict  exchange  with Assateague
              Channel

39.5          Flap  gates (see above)

42            See comment 22 above

52.2          See comment 22 above

41            Basin for  Ocean Breezes  South  includes a large
              area  of salt marsh adjacent to Assateague Channel
Form "B" Comments  (Ocean Breezes South  and Chincoteague Channel
Marsh Study Sites)

21             Flooded daily, not as valuable for flood storage
               and  desynchronization

39,33          Chincoteague Channel Marsh Study Site is  too small
               for  turbid water, high nutrient water disposal

                              106

-------
3.8   CHINCOTEAGUE CHANNEL  MARSH STUDY SITE

3.8.1   Qualitative Description

    Physical description.  This  small  site  (Figure 12)  is
approximately  5 ha  and  is  located  immediately  next  to
Chincoteague Channel  on the southwest corner of Chincoteague
Island adjacent to the  Ocean Breezes South Study Site.

    Several  large spoil banks  and dredged channels  dissect the
site and have destroyed perhaps 10% to 15% of  the estuarine marsh
which  existed formerly.  However, much of the  original hydrologic
circulation and expanses of estuarine vegetation remain.

    Definitions. The WIA includes the site as outlined by the
EPA.  The basin consists  of the tidal  creek which flows  into
Chincoteague Bay.  The sub-watershed includes the filled areas
which run down the middle of the site and around the edges of the
site.

    Qualitative vegetation description.  The wetland areas of
the site are dominated by Spartlna alterniflora. JL. patens, and
Distichlis spicata.   The higher areas  of the  wetlands and the
filled dikes are covered with Iva and Baccharis  and other shrubs.

    Wetland classification.  The  wetlands on  this site  are
largely  estuarine emergent  with small patches  and strips  of
estuarine scrub/shrub.

    Substrate,  water  salinity.    Most  of  the  substrates
underneath this site are basically  sand,  but are  overlain by a
layer  of  estuarine  organic  soils  which may be up to  20-50  cm
thick.  Water enters  and exits the site through a fairly  open
inlet  so that salinities within the  site range  from 15 to 30 ppt
depending on local rainfall and tidal conditions.

    Wildlife use.  As with  most small estuarine marshes  this
area is heavily utilized by estuarine  fishes.  In addition,  a
variety of shorebirds and waterfowl also are present at times.

    Hydrologic functions.  While  drainage is  restricted  to
certain areas of the  site by construction of  dikes  and  filled
areas,  most  of  the site is  still  flushed through an inlet/outlet
which  flows  into Chincoteague Bay.   Drainage within  the  site
would be  improved easily by breaching  the artificial  dikes  at
several  points.   Like most estuarine  sites the ground-water
recharge potential is low.  Flood storage and  nutrient retention,
however, are  probably  high.
                             107

-------
 3.8.2  Adamus and Stockwell Evaluations:   Chincoteague Channel Harsh


 Summary Sheet 0

 This  form  Is  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.«oderate, or low; or A.  B.  or  C) In 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-
 sociated analyses.    For  the evaluation of  each  function's Effectiveness, enter whichever  rating  1s_
 hlgher—That for  the basin or that for the MIA. The evaluation of the  impact vector 1$ optional.
/BAS1M
EVALUATION TIME FRAME p. 60; 8'p.  62; 9'p.  64;  10-p. 67;
 p.  67;  12'p. 69; 13'p.  71;

-p.  93.
                               'p. 73; 15'p.  75;  16'p. 79; I7'p.  80;  18'p. 84.
*  Blue  Fish, Hard  Clam,  Winter  Flounder   **Too  small to score  high
                                              108

-------
 Chincoteague  Channel  JTarsh

 Response Sheet A1
 THRESHOLD  ANALYSIS:
 EFFECTIVENESS
        FUNCTIONAL  OPPORTUNITY  ANO
This sheet  1«  the appropriate place 'or recording
the  responses  to corresponding  questions  In  form
A.   A "yes"  (Y). or  'no'  (N)  response wst  be
circled for  «11  parts  of each question. «ve«  «*««
the  response seems  obvious.   This response  sheet
has  two  major  columns—'VIA'  and 'BASIH*.  and
within each  of  these,   three  subcoluws  entitled
•£", "•". and "0", which address,  when relevtnt, th«
seasonal  changes In  some  of  the  predictors,  as
follows:

     I  column  responses   are   those   addressing
     either (a)  the  average annual  condition,  or
     (b)  the  condition  Intermediate between  the
     wettest  and  driest  annual  conditions  (e.g.,
     late  June 1n most Prairie pothole wetlands).
     or  (c)  the  condition  of  maxiflwn  annual
     Standing crop of  wetland plants.  Of  (d)  If
     tidal,  the  average daily mid-title  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
     tne  area  is tidal,  what  it  would  look  like
     during  an  average daily high tide (flooded)
     condition.

     0  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  tlda!,   T5" refers
     to Us daily low tide  (exposed) condition.

For example, question 2.1.1 should first he 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
neod   not    be   evaluated   for   this   question.
Similarly,   some  questions  will  require responses
only for the- WIA or basin,  but not both.
 Q. •
VJIA
 w
                                     BASIN
                                  I    U     0
 Office-type Oata
                                              109

-------
Chincoteague Channel Marsh
            UIX
    BASIN
  i   v
 2.1.1

 Z.z'.l
 2.2.2
 LI
 fit
 *i.
 5.1
  .1
 7.2
 V «
 Y N
See
 a.i
 If
 L2
                 S£L
TT
 Y N
                           r n
                           Y N
                           Y N
 20.
 21.1
 21
 21
 21
 21
 21.6
 Flcld-tyoe Data
 22.1
 22.1.1
 22.1.2
 22.1.3
 22.1.4
 22.1.5
                                              Jce
 22.2
 22.2.1
                                                                             •V
                                      110

-------
Hhincoteague  Channel Marsh
 22.2.2 T
 22.2.3 T
 22.2.4 T
 22.?.5 T
 22.
 22.3.1
 22.3.2
 22.3.3
 22.3.4
                                     111

-------
Chincoteaaue  Channel  Marsh
 0. I
                               IASI«
      SOL
 37.1
 It 9
                            T N  T H  T H
        TJL
 41.1.1
 41.1.2
 41.1.3
 41.2
 41.2.1
 41.2.2
 41.2.3
 41.3
 41.3.1
 41.3.2
 41.3.3
 41.4
                                       112

-------
Chincoteaque Channel "larsh
MIA
P. * 1 ^ 9
49.1
«9.2
50. ti»N t^O* OJH
si. qpN
Detailed Data

52.1.1 T * fa
52.1.2 111 «/A
52.2.1 OTL
52.?. 2 TOO
53.1 T < /A
S3.? T N NA
54.1 T N .1
54.2 T N frA
55. T * MA
56. NA
57.1 T N
57.2 T N .fA
57.3 T N Nn
57.4 Y N
58.1 Y N
58.2 T N .J*
58.3 y N Nn
56.4 V H
5f.l /
"•* Hf\
M.S /"'"
M.1 /
21 W
iH !! VA
l ». T « */«
3.1
M.2
J 4- -L.
1 *. fV*
«6.l ~ T 1 JA
««.? T H Pn
•7.1 T « A/A
87.? T M A»A
68.1 y « JA
68.2 T H Wn
Derived ftesoonses
69.1 T N
69.? Y * 	
70.1 . y N
70.2 T «
?l.l T N
71.2 y «
72.1 y H
72.2 T N
73.1 t N
73.2 T N
74.1 y N
74.2 T II
75.1 y n
75.2 T N
IASM
t tf 0
^






y i


i "
T n
T II
T n
T II
T N


tlA ?
A/A y

y
T
T
Y
Y
Y




After res
hive beer
38). Tou
(1n Sectl
sponses.



























































•


<
,





ponies to all possible questions (Form A)
i recorded above, turn to form 8 (page
w11!( as an option) return to this sheet
on 2.1.2) to Interpret the above re-






                                113

-------
 Chincoteague Channel  Marsh
Response Sheet B1

THRESHOLD ANALYSIS:  SIGNIFICANCE

This sheet  1s the appropriate place for  recording
the responses  to the  corresponding  questions in
Form 8.   Circle  Y  (yes) or N (no), being  careful
to note  that the order of Y and N below frequently
reverses.
General
Nutr ient
Recharge
                                Wildlife
                                Habitat
Flood
Storaoe
Shorel ine
Anchorina
                                Passive
                                78.  N(Y
                                            114

-------
Form "A" Comments  (Chincoteague Channel Marsh Study Site)

WIA            = area  inside dashed line  (Figure 12)

Basin          = WIA  + equivalent  area  (extending  width  of
               wetland into Chincoteague  Bay)

7,8            Sub-watershed = cleared parking area around WIA

22             Basin  (as well as WIA) considered emergent

23             < 50 cm porous organic

39.5           Two vegetated dams across  creek.   Origin  unknown

41             Basin  includes WIA
                              115

-------
        4.   SUMMARY OF THE EIGHT CHINCOTEAGUE STUDY SITES

4.1   OVERALL IMPRESSIONS FROM  FIELD VISITS

     Most of the interior palustrine  and  estuarine  wetlands  (in
contrast to fringing estuarine marshes)  are the result of the
basic ridge and swale topography.  On a regional scale (nearby
mainland and barrier islands),  these wetlands  are relatively
unusual features  and  worthy of  both scientific study and
preservation  efforts.    Chincoteague  palustrine wetlands,
including emergent  scrub/shrub  and forested, are particularly
unusual in this region.   For example, on Assateague, most ridge
and swale topography is either  saline or has been altered for
waterfowl management.

     Clearly, these  ridge and  swale wetlands generally function
for ground-water  recharge  and  discharge with  the  surface  (water
table) aquifer.  Since this aquifer is largely brackish, except
for a thin  surface layer  of freshwater input from the palustrine
wetlands,  the palustrine wetlands  are  probably  instrumental in
preventing  the  aquifer from becoming more  saline.  Since most of
Chincoteague's ridge  and  swale  wetlands are probably connected by
this surface aquifer,  this means that  filling or  destruction of
one wetland may adversely affect other wetlands,  particularly the
palustrine  wetlands, on  Assateague.   This  suggests  that the
destruction  of more  than one palustrine  wetland may  have a
cumulative  effect on other untouched,  undeveloped wetlands by
increasing  the  salinity of the surface aquifer.  Furthermore,
these cumulative effects  may include reduced freshwater  inflow to
adjacent estuarine marshes which  may alter their estuarine  nature
(i.e.,  intermediate salinity  regime,  nursery  value,  and
protection  for  juvenile  fishes).

     At this point,  these suggestions of hydrologic  connectivity
through the  surface  aquifer and cumulative impacts of palustrine
wetland alteration   remain hypothetical.   The  next  step is a
detailed topographic and ground-water hydrologic  study (see
Section 6.).


4.2  SUMMARY OF ADAMUS/STOCKWELL RATINGS

     Summaries  of the functional  significance ratings for the
eight sites  (and  two sub-sites) are given  in Table 1.  In section

                              116

-------



•
^«
f^>
•u
3 •
4-1 5
en o
r— i
cu
rC >>
+-> M
CU
5 >
T-l ||
tf
-O E>
CU
4J -0
CO C
3 cfl
t— I
CO ••
> 3
cu o
i— i
C II
0 rJ
•H
CO .
•H CU
>. i
*•
•H CO
T3 (-1
.0 CU
3 T3
CO O
E
< n
ss


~ rC
C 60
CTJ *H
rC
< II
HH T4
s *
rC rC
O 60
ftj TH"

,
O rJ
u-i cu
£>
CO II
00 ps
c >
•H
•to 01
CO r-l
Vj CO
01 C
CJ 0
C T-l
CO 4J
CJ 0
•H C
14-1 3
•H U-i
C
60 rC
•H O
en co
cu
r— )
CO rJ
C 0
O u-i
"f^

4-1 CO
u cu
C r-l
3 0
ft, o
en

• n)
v UJ
r*-l 1—
r£3
cu T-I
rH CO
rQ CO
co o
EH PM






























(0
en
c
•H
4J
10
K

Ol
O
C
(0
o
U-l
c
en
-rH
CO

r-H
10
c
o
•rH
4J
U
C
s
U4

















3BB3TJ3H PUB
uoT^saaoaa 3AfssBd


BUTTTBS


6UT3OUBO


BuT^sog jawod


BUTHOUnBT }BOS
BuTinmtMS

UOT^BaiOSH 3AT^OV



-
^^SdTDouS


Z dnoio iMOjja^BM

t dnoao T«03^a^BM

^TS33Afa IB33U9D

^B^iqBH ajTTPITM



*S3IO3dS

7AH9M 11I7CU
^o^ en ui.1 v p\
^B^iqBH Ajsqsij

UTSBfl UI


UIE93^SUrtOa

^joddns UTBUO pootj
IBUOSB3S
UIJ9X BUOT


uoi^ua^aa ^uaTj^nn

ouTddBJi ^uaiuipsg



Butjoqouv auTiajoqs
a&ejotis poou


»«« Tr\
9DJBi{D5TQ ja^eMpunoay

aBJBqoaa aa^BMpunoao











41
10
Z

41
4->
•rH
CO

£ £


J rJ


.J J


rJ J


J £
J J





•a •a
£ E


E E

£ £

X X




42
E


J >J


£ £


£ £


X X
> >
X X
> >



X X



E £
X X


£ X


E E




4J
Ul
en ia
at u
41 rH
3 10 -H
O> * o
10 CO O
4)\ JS
4J 41 U
O en co
O T)
c -H x;
•H 05 en
rC -rH
CJ X

E


rJ


J


ij


a
J





41
X


J

J

E

o
J3

10
E


rJ


E


E


X
X
>


X
>



£
X


J


J

c
o
•H
4J
U
O
1 CL,

4J 41
3 C
0-H
U
en (0
C 3
•H 4J
rH en
|U
Cu

X £

rJ
J >

tj
.J >

J
J >

J
J >
>4
J >

V*H
,J

tjl

uj 'a
rJ £


rJ £

rJ J

£ J







J
J >


£ E


E E


X >
X
X >


X
> X



X £
X X
> >


X J


X X
c
o
•rH
4-1
u
O Ul
a. T3
1 O
4) O
•PC 2
3 -H -O
U u u
4J 10
en ra x o<
C 3 E
•rH -H "O (0
rH (0 41 *
S CM x co
0 -H
h £

E


.J


£


J


rJ
J


U-l
J

01
X


J

,J

E

CJ
J3

10
£


-)


£


E


X
>
X
>


X
>



£
X


J


rJ






rH
rH
•H
Cu

•O
O
(V 41
•p
41 -H
u CO
•H
£

£


rJ


E


vJ


J
ij


U-l
J

41
X


r4

J

E

O
J3
^
<0
E


.J


E


E


X
>
X
>


X
>



E
X


J


J



01
1 C
43 -H
3 U
Ul 10
U 3
CO 4J
Ul
•O U C
C 1 O
O 43 -H
cu a 4J
u u
4) ,C 0
u co a<
•H
£

£ £ £


.J J J


rJ J J


rJ J J


J J iJ
J J iJ





u-i oi oi
rJ XX


J J J

rJ J rJ

J £ £

CJ CJ
43 43

 > X
X X
> > X


X X
> > X


X
E > X
X
> XX


J J X


X J .J


a*
c
i •-<
43 U £
3 4J en
u to en u
CJ 3 41 41 (0
CO iH N 3 £
(0 41 Ol
TD O. C Ol (0 rH
CIO u 41 Ol
O 43 -rH CO -C 4J C
Cvi 3 4J 4-1 O C
u u C 3 U 10
41 £ O 10 O C .C
u W Cu 4) CO -H CJ
•H O43
£ O U
C
O
t-i
01
rC
1
4J
rC
cn
•rH
C
•c
01

c
i
o
u
CJ
1
o
10
jQ
II
en

*•
j*:
CJ
m
y
A:
u
10
^
43
II
U-l
4J
Ol
U
t7>
01

c
o
E
E
o
o
II
01
«.
.*£
o
D
T3
•o
0
O
J
II
TJ
•tt
*

a
<3
O
•D
u
to
£
II
O
u
01
*o
c
3
o
T-t
VM
Ul
(U
4J
c
-H
3
II
.Q

^
x:
CO
•iH
M-l
0)
3
i— (
Xi
II
(0
*
117

-------
5.  we discuss the Adamus/Stockwell technique  and compare the
ratings  from our own subjective  impressions  formed while  field-
surveying  the  sites.
                              118

-------
    5.   COMMENTS ON THE ADAMUS/STOCKWELL TECHNIQUE AS RELATED

                    TO CHINCOTEAGUE WETLANDS

5.1  GENERAL COMMENTS

     The Adamus and Stockwell method  is  designed to objectively
assess  potential  wetland  functional values  based  on  simple
physical,  chemical, and  biological  indicators along  with
socioeconomic  trends.  Simple  yes-no  responses to  153  questions
are categorized and evaluated to derive  final summary ratings
(very low, low, moderate,  high,  very high) for  each of eleven
functional  values.   Though widely  regarded as an improvement over
earlier attempts to develop wetland rating systems, the method
remains relatively new and untested.

     Upon  receiving  the Adamus/Stockwell document,  we  were
impressed  with the  interdisciplinary  breadth of  the  literature
review.  Almost any wetland scientist will find new references
and ideas contained in this portion  of the document.

     After using the  method on  eight  different  sites  c:.
Chincoteague  Island, Virginia, we have concluded  that for this
area the Adamus/Stockwell technique  works  relatively well in its
current form  and has  even more promise if revised, regionalized,
and "fine-tuned" in the future.  We have  identified six problem
areas  with the technique  in  its present  form.   Though these
problems interfere  somewhat with  assessments,  we  feel that the
outcomes of the Chincoteague  study  were  not seriously affected.
(See the next section for examples of possible  minor problems
with specific  ratings.)

     We  have  identified   six  problem  areas with  the
Adamus/Stockwell  technique  in its present  form.   These  are
presented below in no particular order of importance.

     (1)  The method is best suited for the  assessment of smalj.
homogenous^  areas.   Heterogenous sites  create problems for users
of the Adamus technique.  When answering  the numerous  questions
that require the observer to take an  average over a widespread
and diverse wetland,  in effect one loses  the ability to describe
any part of the wetland accurately.  In  two cases (Fowling Gut
and Mire Pond  Scrub/Shrub sites) we found  such basic differences
in wetland vegetation,  hydroperiod,  and flow characteristics

                              119

-------
within the same WIA that it became necessary to divide the WTA
into two sections.   Of  course,  this criticism applies to almost
all wetland assessment techniques.

     (2)   The method cajj be  applied  much more  reliably where
detailed,  site-specific data  are available.   Detailed data,
rather than gross physical  features lend the strongest support to
hypotheses  concerning  wetland functions  in  this  assessment
system.   In addition, without  detailed data the final  rating of a
wetland for a particular  function  may be  artificially  moderate.
A moderate  rating may mean that a wetland has a truly moderate
yalue,  or  it may only mean  that  the  assessment has  been
inconclusive due to a lack  of detailed data.  The system guards
against assigning high or low  values without  sufficient data.
This may have affected,  for  example, fishery and  wildlife  ratings
at many of the Chincoteague  sites.

     (3)  Answers to Form B depend entirely upon  the  perspective
of the user.  A  reliable,  functional rating method should have a
high degree of accuracy and reproducibility.  The questions in
Form B give essentially  free-reign to the user to  interpret local
socioeconomic  trends.   There  also  exists a  high degree  of
latitude in assigning the final ratings.  The Form B evaluation
has undergone  significant  modification  in a revision  of the
Adamus and Stockwell method due out in late 1986.   Since these
modifications  were  not  available  when  this  evaluation  was
conducted,  the results for this  section may be inaccurate.

     (4)  The method may contain a. high degree of subjectivity.
In the complex  structure of the Form  A  interpretation key there
may be junctures in which the outcome becomes extremely sensitive
to certain questions.  In fact, we found  in several instances
that the differences between a high  and  a moderate (or even a
high and a low)  rating  could  hinge upon the  answer to a single
question.   Identification  of  these pivotal questions  is
essential.  Pivotal questions could be  identified  through some
sort of computer generated sensitivity analyses as is often done
in systems analysis and operations research.  The results of the
analyses  could  then  be  checked for consistency and potential
uneven outcomes.

     (5)  The method requires that experienced wetland scientists
perform the assessment if  results  are to be  accurate  and
reproducible.  We believe  that in the long run the accuracy of
the ratings  derived from this method will be inseparable from the
skills and  training of the observer (knowledge  of  hydrology,
field botany, etc.)  in all but the  simplest wetlands.  The method
is  an  excellent aid  that  can broaden  the  perspective  of  a
research scientist, but given  the inherent  problems described
above, there remains no substitute for extensive  training and
experience  in wetland science.
                              120

-------
     (6)  The method has potential problems dealing with wetlands
in different  regions.   While this  problem did not  appear to
seriously affect the Chincoteague study, it is clear tha~t the
technique needs ,to be modified for  certain  regions  (e.g.,
tropics, Pacific coast, far north).   The only real  problems in
this area for  the Chincoteague study  involved  the estuarine fish
species  supposedly important to  this  region  (see the  next
section).

5.2  SPECIFIC  COMMENTS CONCERNING  THE CHINCOTEAGUE ANALYSES

     In  general,  the Adamus/Stockwell  Technique  appears to  have
functioned well for this  set  of eight wetlands.   This  opinion is
based  on a  comparison  of  calculated values versus  estimated
values (the  latter  are expert  opinions based on our own field and
academic experience with similar wetlands).

     One of the most confusing aspects of wetlands  assessments
involves "effectiveness" and  "opportunity."  For example,  at the
present time a specific wetland may be potentially very effective
at  sediment trapping,   but there may be  no  sediment to trap.
Twenty years  later after a construction  activity, there may be
plenty of  opportunity  to trap sediment.  One  of  our  biggest
problems,  particularly in  our personal assessments  of  a
particular  site,  is  reconciling  "effectiveness"  and
"opportunity."  The Adamus/Stockwell  technique handles  this
problem  relatively well.   Therefore, in  most  cases,  we agree
closely with the values  reported in Table  1.

     Several values  in Table 1,  however,  appear to be too low or
too high.   For example, the  ground-water discharge values for
Chincoteague Channel Marsh,  which  has a small drainage area, seem
too high (probably  should be a 3  instead of a 2).  On the other
hand, the value for Ocean Breezes south, which has a relatively
large  area  for infiltration and two  outlets,  seems too  low
(probably should be at  least  a 3 instead of a 4).

     In  certain cases  (e.g.,  food  chain support,  wildlife
habitat), the  ratings are almost uniformly  the same at all  sites.
This can be traced to  the  problem  of  insufficient field data
(seasonal counts of waterfowl,  fish surveys,  etc.) which we
discussed in 5.1.

     The moderate values (3)  for  "fishery  habitat by  species" are
probably too  low  (should  be 2).   These underestimates  were
generated  by  the  non-inclusion  of  species  such as  spot  and
croaker  in the Adamus listing of  important estuarine dependent
fishes  for  this region (see  Table  8, page 78 in Adamus/Stockwell,
1983).

     In  summary,  the majority  of the rankings  in  Table  1 seem
fair  and  consistent   with  our  opinions  based  on   field
observations.
                             121

-------
                      6.   RESEARCH NEEDS

     The functional role  of  the  interior wetlands of barrier
islands  of the coastal United States has not been as intensively
studied  as that  of  riverine or tidal wetlands.   In the  extensive
review  of wetland functional  values by Adamus and Stockwell
(1983),  few citations  apply directly  to  hydrologic  and  nutrient
retention  values of coastal  wetlands other than salt  marshes.
Less attention in research  has been given to swales, dune  slacks
and  other  varieties  of  interior,  coastal  wetlands.   On
Chincoteague Island,  basic research  would sharpen understanding
and strengthen conclusions  concerning the functional role  of  the
swale wetlands in the  hydrology and ecology  of  the island.   Basic
research  is  time  consuming and  expensive.    Yet if planned
correctly,  such work could provide an invaluable environmental
management tool.

     Research that  could improve  understanding of the  hydrology
and nutrient  retention  capacity  of Chincoteague's wetlands is
described briefly below.

     1.  Microtopographic survey.   Stereo-photogrammetric  aerial
photography could be  used to map I1  elevation  contours,  to
identify and categorize  wetlands,  channels, borrow pits,  drainage
ditches, culverts and  other drainage modifications.   Large scale
photography ( 1" =  500') would be essential.   This mapping would
represent a substantial improvement  over  existing photography  and
contour mapping of  the  island.   It  would  be  invaluable in
conducting a baseline inventory and classification of  wetlands
and surface water  bodies  (e.g., probable degree of  isolation) on
the  island.   Field ground  truthing  would  be an essential
component of this work.

     2.  Surface water drainage.   Channel  cross section data,
water level gauging and current velocity measurements could be
made to establish  stage-discharge relationships in the Jeep Trail
Ditch,  Fowling Gut, and Andrews Landing Gut.  These  data  are
necessary to  calculate  surface discharge from the island under
various conditions  of  water stage.

     3.   Groundwater.    On selected transects  wells   could be
installed, soil borings examined and described qualitatively,
grain  size analyzed vs. depth,  and  possible confining  layers
identified for the  water table aquifer.   Within  the wells, pump

                              122

-------
tests would  allow determination of  transmissivity within the
water table aquifer.  Daily or weekly monitoring  of  water  levels
within wells for  a minimum of  one year  in addition to rainfall
measurements, evaporation  estimates,  and surface  water  drainage
estimates  would  provide  the basic data needed  to  construct
wetland water budgets.

     4. Simulation of water table aquifer dynamics.  Ground-water
models have  been  used  successfully for aquifer  simulation in
other coastal environments.  An existing  model  could be  modified
and validated against field data from Chincoteague and then used
to quantitatively assess the effects of simplified  model
scenarios  such as culvert  removal,  complete blockage of major
surface drainways, and other wetland  manipulations.

     5.   Water quality.  Salinity, coliforms,  total  dissolved
solids,  dissolved  N and P,  metals (Pb),  pH,  and suspended  solids
(of surface water) could be monitored in  major  surface drainways
and within wells  on selected transects.   This would indicate both
the amount of lateral  movement  of  pollutants from  highways,
septic fields, and the  like and the effect of selected wetlands
on interception and retention  of these pollutants.

     In addition  to the hydrologic studies, seasonal studies of
waterfowl  and fishes at specific wetland sites are desirable.
The results might alter the Adamus/Stockwell values for fishery
and wildlife  habitat functions.
                             123

-------
                         7.   REFERENCES

                        References Cited

Adamus,  P. and  L.  Stockwell.  1983.  A  method  for  wetland
     functional  assessment:  Volume  1.    Federal  Highway
     Administration, Report No. FHWA-IP-82-23.   176  pp.

Adamus, P.  1983. A method for wetland functional assessment:
     Volume 2.  Federal Highway Administration,  Report No.  FHWA-
     IP-82-24.  134 pp.

Bartberger, C. E.  1976.  Sediment  sources and sedimentation
     rates, Chincoteague Bay, Maryland  and Virginia.   J. Sed.
     Pet.  46: 326-36.

Bear, J.   1979.   Hydraulics  of groundwater.  McGraw-Hill,  New
     York.   569 pp.

Biggs,  R.  D.  1970.   Assateague ecological studies:  final report,
     part   1.   Environmental  information.  Natural  Resources
     Institute, University of Maryland. Contribution No. 446.   6y
     pp.

Bolyard, T. H.  1978.  Empirical relationships  between barrier
     island hydrology and physiography.  M.S.  Thesis.  Department
     of Environmental   Sciences,  University of  Virginia,
     Charlottesville.

Bolyard,  T. H., G. M. Hornberger,  R.  Dolan,  and B.  P. Hayden.
     1979.   Freshwater  reserves of mid-Atlantic coast barrier
     islands.  Environmental  Geology 3: 1-11.

Bozeman, E. L., and  J. M.  Dean.  1980. The  abundance  of estuarine
     larval and juvenile  fish in  a South Carolina intertidal
     creek.  Estuaries 3: 89-97.

Cain, R. L., and J. M. Dean. 1976.  Annual occurrence, abundance
     and diversity  of fish in a South Carolina intertidal creek.
     Mar.  Biol. 36: 369-379.

Cowardin,  L. M.,  V. Carter,  F. C. Golet,  and E.  T. LaRoe.  1979.
     Classification of  wetlands and deepwater  habitats of  the
     U.S.   Fish Wildl. Serv.  FWS/OBS-79/31.   103  pp.

                             125

-------
Department  of Agriculture.   1975.   Eastern shore of Virginia:
     resource  conservation and development project.   Soil
     Conservation Service,  Richmond, Va.

Environmental  Protection Agency.  1982.   Aquifer  identification
     for  the State of Virginia and District  of  Columbia.  Region
     III  Office, Philadelphia,  Pa.

Freeze, R. A.,  and Cherry, J.  A.  1979.  Groundwater.  Prentice
     Hall,  Englewood Cliffs,  N. J.   604 pp.

Halsey,  S.  D.   1979.   Nexus: new  models  of barrier  island
     development.   Pages  185-210   in  S.  P.  Leatherman,  ed.
     Barrier islands.   Academic Press,  New York.

Kimmel, G. E. and J. Vecchioli.  1979.  Groundwater.  Pages 639-
     643   iri  J. R. Clark,  ed. Coastal   ecosystem   management.
     Wiley and Sons, New York.
Kraft, J. C., E. A.  Allen,  D.  F.  Belknap,  C. J.  John,  and E. M.
     Maurmeyer.   1979. Processes  and  morphologic evolution of an
     estuarine  and  coastal barrier system.   Pages  149-184  in S.
     P.  Leatherman, ed.  Barrier  islands.   Academic Press,  New
     York.
McHugh, J. L.  1966.  Management of estuarine fisheries.  Pages
     133-154 in  A symposium on  estuarine  fisheries. American
     Fisheries Society, Special Publications No. 3.

Missimer,  T.  M.   1973.  The  depositional history  of  Sanibel
     Island, Florida.  M.S. Thesis, Florida  State University,
     Tallahassee.

Missimer,  T. M.   1976. Hydrology.  Pages  165-194'in J. Clark,
     ed.   The Sanibel   report.    Conservation  Foundation,
     Washington, D. C.

Odum, W.  E., Smith, T. J., Hoover,  J. K., and C. C. Mclvor. 1984.
     The  ecology  of tidal  freshwater marshes  of the United States
     east coast: a community  profile.   U.S.  Fish  Wildl. Serv.
     FWS/OBS-83/17.  177 pp.

Rozas,  L.  P.,  and C.  T. Hackney.  1983.  The  importance  of
     oligohaline estuarine  wetland  habitats to fisheries
     resources.   Wetlands  3: 77-89.

Shenker, J. M.,   and J. M.  Dean.   1979.  The utilization  of  an
     intertidal salt  marsh  creek by larval and juvenile fishes:
     abundance,  diversity, and  temporal  variation.  Estuaries  2:
     154-163.
                             126

-------
State Water  Control Board.  1975.   Groundwater conditions in the
     eastern shore  of  Virginia.   Commonwealth  of  Virginia,
     Planning Bulletin 45.

Waterways  Surveys  and  Engineering,  Ltd.    1985.   Report  on
     investigations and findings:   Fowling Gut tidal hydraulics,
     Chincoteague, Va. unpublished report.   8  pp.

Weinstein,  M.  P.  1979.  Shallow marsh habitats  as primary
     nurseries  for fishes and shellfish, Cape Fear River, North
     Carolina.  U.S. National  Marine Fisheries Service Fishery
     Bulletin 77:  339-357.

Wiegle,  J.  M.    1974.   Availability of  fresh  groundwater  in
     northeastern Worcester  County,  Maryland.   Department  of
     Natural Resources,  Maryland  Geological  Survey,  Report  of
     Investigations No. 24.

Winner, M. D.  1978. Groundwater Resources  of the Cape Lookout
     National Seashore,  North Carolina.  U.S. Geological Survey
     Report  78-52.  49 pp.
                             127

-------

-------
 50273 -lot
REPORT DOCUMENTATION »• «ero"T "°- *•
PAGE NWRC Open File Report 86-7
4. Tttl« and Subtitle
The Functional Assessment of Selected Wetlands of
Chincoteague Island, Virginia
7. Authors)
W. E. Odum, J. Harvey, L. Rozas, R. Chambers*
9. Performing Organization Nam* and Address
12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Environmental
National Wetlands Research Center Protection Agency
1010 Cause Blvd. Wetlands and Marine
Slidell, LA 70458 Policy Section
Region 3
Philadelphia, PA 19107
3. Recipient's Accaatlon No.
S. Report Oat*
May 1986
6.
S. Performing Organization R*pt. No.
10. Project/T»sk/Wor* Unrt No.
I
11. Contract(C) or Grant(G) No.
(O
(G) I
13. Typ* of Report & Period Covered
14.
is. suppiamantary Nota.^Affi-|iation. Department of Environmental Sciences, Clark Hall, Univer-
sity of Virginia, Charlottesvil le, VA 22903
 18. Abstract (Limit: 200 words)
      At  the request  of the  U.S.  Environmental  Protection  Agency,  a study was  conducted  to
 assess   the  potential  hydrologic   and   ecologic   functions  of  eight  wetlands  sites   on
 Chincoteague Island,  Virginia.   These sites ranged from 4  to 21  ha and included estuarine
 emergent  and scrub/shrub  wetlands as well  as palustrine emergent,  scrub/shrub,  and forested
 wetlands.

      The  author  was  asked  to  use  the  1983 Adamus/Stockwel1  technique as  the  assessment
 method  and to  provide  general  descriptions  of  the  sites  and  the  suitability  of the
 technique  for  assessing the  wetlands.

      This  report  discusses  the  results  of the assessment and the  problems with some of the
 ratings.
 17. Document Analysis  a. Descriptors
    Fresh and estuarine wetlands, hydrologic functions,  ecological  functions,  recreational
    values
   b. Identifiers/Open-Ended Terms
     Adamus/Stockwel1 technique
     Chincoteague Island,  VA
   c. COSATI Field/Group
 18. Availability Statement

      Unlimited  release
19. Security Class (This Report)
   Unclassified
                                                        20. Security Class (This Page)
                                                           Unclassified
21. No. of Pages
    127
                                                                                  22. Price
(See ANSI-Z39.18)
                                                                                 OPTIONAL FORM 272 (4-77)
                                                                                 (Formerly NTIS-3S)
                                                                                 Department of Commerce

-------