PB9J-261512
EPA/600/3-90/061
July, 1990
EVALUATING RESIGN AND VERIFYING COMPLIANCE
OF WETLANDS CREATED UNDER
SECTION 404 OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT
IN OREGON
by
Stephani&.E. Gwin
Mary E. Kentula
NSI Technology Services Corporation
USEPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis,OR 97333
Contract Number 68-C8-0006
Project Officer
Eric M. Preston
Wetlands Research Program
USEPA Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Corvallis,OR 97333
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
US. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CORVALLIS, OREGON 97333
-------
DISCLAIMER
The research described in this report has been funded wholly or in part by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Contract #68-C8-0006
to NSI Technology Services Corporation. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer
and administrative review, and it has been approved for publication as an EPA
document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
11
-------
ABSTRACT
Permit specifications, construction plans, and field measurements were used to
examine the correlation between design and conditions "as-built" in a population of 11
palustrine emergent marshes created in the metropolitan area of Portland, Oregon,
between 1980-1986. The projects ranged from six months to almost seven years in age.
Data on planned and existing hydrology, wetland area, wetland shape, slopes of banks,
and vegetation were collected for each site. Information on the plans for each site was
gathered from the Section 404 permit files of the Portland District Office of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and the permit files of the Oregon Division of State Lands.
Results indicate that none of the wetlands studied were designed or constructed as
permitted. Hydrology could not be evaluated since the information in the permit files
was inadequate. There was a cumulative loss of 1.48 ha (3.6 acres), or 29% from the
5.10 ha (12.6 acres) that was to be created. Seven of the created wetlands had very
regular shorelines; four had irregular shapes. The predominant slope as-built was
gentler then what was to be built as determined from the construction plans and
permit specifications for nine of the eleven projects (82%). For 45% of the sites
(5/11) the predominant slopes to be built and as-built were steeper than the 5:1
maximum recommended in the literature. Vegetation to be planted did not occur on
the sites. The proportion of species found on the created wetlands that were to be
planted ranged from 0% to 7%.
The differences between the plans and specifications in the project file and the as-
built conditions point to the need for verification of projects in both the planning and
construction phases of the permitting process. The planning phase should focus on the
development of a realistic approach using information from the scientific literature and
past projects. The construction phase should culminate in the production of an as-
built plan. This would allow immediate checks to ensure that critical features have
been included as intended, e.g., wetland area, vegetation type. It would also document
any corrective measures that were taken due to unanticipated events during
construction. As-built plans of the project would ensure that the details of the actual
wetland created were available for future reference in addition to the conceptual
design.
m
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DISCLAIMER
TI
ABSTRACT i ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i*
INTRODUCTION 1
METHODS 3
SITE SELECTION 3
DATA COLLECTION 3
Evaluating the Hydrology to be Created and Actually Created 5
Evaluating the Area to be Created and Actually Created 5
Evaluating the Shape to be Created and Actually Created 6
Evaluating Slopes to be Created and Actually Created 6
Evaluating the Vegetation to be Established and Actually Found on
Site 7
RESULTS 9
•
EVALUATING THE HYDROLOGY TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY
CREATED 9
EVALUATING THE AREA TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY
CREATED 9
Permit Specifications Compared to Construction Plans 9
Permit Specifications Compared to Field Conditions 12
EVALUATING THE SHAPE TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY
CREATED 12
-------
EVALUATING SLOPES TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY
CREATED 12
As-Built Conditions Compared to Construction Plans & Permit
Specifications 12
Comparisons with Recommendations in the Literature 14
EVALUATING THE VEGETATION TO BE ESTABLISHED AND
ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED 15
Evaluation of Planting Lists 15
Evaluation of the Vegetation Found On-Site 16
DISCUSSION 23
DESIGN OF CREATED WETLANDS 23
Hydrology 23
Area of Wetland to be Created 23
Shape of the Wetland to be Created 23
Slopes 24
Vegetation to be Established and Actually Found on the Sites 26
RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE WETLAND CREATION UNDER
SECTION 404 31
LITERATURE CITED 33
APPENDIX I: DATA COLLECTED FOR EACH SITE 36
APPENDIX II: LISTS OF PLANT SPECIES 117
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. Dates when construction and field sampling was completed for the
created wetlands 4
TABLE 2. Wetland indicator codes were assigned to all species found on the created
wetlands and on planting lists. Codes were adapted from categories in
the regional list of plant species that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) . 8
TABLE 3. The hydrology planned for each created wetland studied. Information
was taken from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and Oregon
Division of State Lands (ODSL) permit files 10
TABLE 4. Comparison of wetland area required in the permit specifications
(PERMIT SPECS) with the area of wetland on the map (PERMIT
MAP) drafted from construction plans or conceptual drawings 11
TABLE 5. Comparison of the wetland area in the permit specifications (PERMIT
SPECS) with the area of wetland on each field map of "as-built"
conditions (FIELD MAP) 13
TABLE 6. Numbers of species and percentages of the total number of species found
on each planting list which were native, exotic, and unknown species. 17
TABLE 7. Proportions of the different types of vegetation composing the planting
lists which fell into the categories in the regional list of plant species that
occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) 18
TABLE 8. Numbers and percentages of species to be planted that were found on
the created wetlands vs the numbers and percentages of volunteer species
found 19
TABLE 9. Native and exotic species found at the created wetlands expressed as
numbers per site and as a proportion of the total 20
TABLE 10. Proportions of the different types of vegetation found on site which fell
into the categories in the regional list of plant species that occur in
wetlands (Reed 1988) 21
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. Photographs of the steep slopes at two of the created wetlands. Note
signs of erosion on photo 1A. 25
FIGURE 2. A. Photograph of the broad expanse of vegetation found on a created
wetland with gradual slopes. B. Photograph of the narrow fringe of
vegetation found on a created wetland with steep-sided slopes 27
viii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The research described in this report has been funded by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and conducted at EPA's Research Laboratory
in Corvallis, Oregon, through Contract 68-C8-0006 to NSI Technology Services
Corporation. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer review procedures and
approved for publication.
The authors want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the people from the
Wetlands Research Team and other units of the Environmental Research Laboratoiy-
Corvallis who assisted in this project Eric Preston, the EPA Project Officer, was
supportive of the effort and provided valuable advice. Sheri Confer, Bob Meinke, Ed
Alverson, Arthur Sherman, Thorn Whittier, and Jeannie Sifneos assisted in data
collection by serving as members of the field crew. Tracy Smith and Lori Jensen used
their geographic skills to create functional maps from field sketches and the sometimes
cryptic construction plans. Barb Hagler found the many manuscripts requested from
the library and showed amazing skill at locating "buried" information. Robert Gibson
used his creativity in computer programming to simplify and expedite data entry and
analysis. Donna Frostholm's care and diligence in data entry and verification was
greatly appreciated and contributed to the quality of the information used in this study.
Kristina Heike assisted in format editing the final version of the document Special
thanks to Arthur Sherman who helped with the innumerable tasks that needed to be
completed to finalize this document.
Gene Herb, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and LaRea Johnston,
Assistant Curator of the Oregon State University Herbarium deserve special
recognition for freely giving their time and advise as it was needed throughout the
course of this study. Mr. Herb assisted in obtaining access to the created wetlands
studied and provided invaluable information on the planning for and development of
the sites. Ms. Johnston assisted in plant identification and provided advise on the
indicator status of species not included in the regional lists of plants that occur in
wetlands (Reed 1988).
We extend special thanks to those who improved this report through their review
of the draft document. Ann Hairston and Lisa Ellingson of NSI Technology Services
Corporation provided editorial and Quality Assurance (QA) reviews, respectively.
Marc Boule of Shapiro & Associates, Ken Franklin of the Oregon Division of State
Lands, Michelle Stevens of the Washington Department of Ecology, and Jim Good of
Oregon State University reviewed the draft and offered valuable comments which
clarified and strengthened this report.
IX
-------
Finally, we thank the property owners of the created wetlands. Without their
permission for access to the sites, this research could not have been conducted.
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The growing body of information on both the ecological values of wetlands and the
documentation of the historic losses of these systems has generated concern about the
status of the resource. Reflecting this concern the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) initiated a Wetlands Research Program (Zedler and Kentula 1986) to
assist the Agency in implementing its responsibilities to protect the Nation's wetlands.
In particular, the research program was designed to support the Agency in the
administration of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
The CWA was passed in 1972 to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and
biological integrity of the Nation's waters by regulating the discharge of dredge and Oil
materials. In 1977, the legislation was strengthened to give additional protection to
wetlands. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) and EPA jointly administer the
Section 404 permit program. In brief, the COE is the Federal permitting authority,
while EPA is responsible for issuing the environmental criteria for permit review,
taking the lead in enforcement against unauthorized discharges, and overseeing state
assumption of the program. EPA also has the authority to prohibit or restrict
discharges that would have unacceptable adverse effects on certain resource values.
Applicants for 404 permits can be required to mitigate any adverse impacts to the
aquatic environment caused by the proposed project. The EPA and COE use a three
step process to evaluate Section 404 permit applications. The steps are to (1) avoid
impacts by exploring alternatives; (2) minimize potential impacts through project
modifications; and (3) compensate for any . unavoidable impacts which remain.
Compensatory mitigation includes either the restoration of existing degraded wetlands
or the creation of man-made wetlands (Memorandum of Agreement 1990).
Interest in compensatory mitigation has generated a number of reports on wetland
creation and restoration. In summarizing the results of a recent review of wetland
creation and restoration in the United States, Kusler and Kentula (1990) state that the
overall status of the literature on wetland creation and restoration is uneven by region
and topic. Moreover, the most quantitative and best documented information is
available for Spartina altemiflora (Lois) marshes along the Atlantic Coast, while
information on the creation and restoration of inland freshwater wetlands is spotty, at
best. Most of the studies of mitigation projects have been qualitative case studies
(e.g., Baker 1984, Reimold and Cobler 1986, Fishman et al. 1987, Good 1987, Mason
and Slocum 1987, and Reiner 1989). Furthermore, most are site-specific and do not
use reference sites (Quammen 1986).
1
-------
The research reported in this document was one component of EPA's ongoing
research to determine how well compensatory mitigation is working and how the
process could be improved. The research was designed to broaden the information
base on wetland creation and restoration by examining mitigation projects in the
context of the wetlands in a region. Ultimately, the work will lead to a statement on
the status of compensatory mitigation as well as an evaluation of individual projects.
The store of information associated with the thousands of mitigation projects that
have been constructed nationwide has been used to study completed projects to
identify critical design features, develop methods for evaluating projects, determine the
functions they perform, and describe how they change with time. To date, studies
have been conducted in Oregon. Connecticut, and Florida.
This study focuses on freshwater, compensatory mitigation projects in Oregon.
Quantitative measurements were taken to 1) determine if the wetland creation projects
were in compliance with their permit specifications, 2) verify that the wetlands were
created according to their construction plans, and 3) evaluate the design of those
projects.
-------
SECTION II
METHODS
The design and construction of a population of 11 freshwater wetlands created in
the Portland metropolitan area as a requirement of a Section 404 permit was
examined. Briefly, this involved the comparison of the as-built characteristics of the
created wetlands measured in the field with the permit conditions and construction
plans. In addition, design and as-built features were compared to the specifications
found in the literature. Site selection, data collection in the field and from project
records, and the process used to compare the information on specific design features
follow.
SITE SELECTION
The created wetlands to be studied were located by searching a database of all
wetlands created in Oregon as a condition of a Section 404 permit between January
1977 and January 1987 (Kentula et al. submitted). A population of 11 palustrine
emergent wetlands, <. 1 ha in size, ranging from six months to almost seven years in
age was identified in the Portland Metropolitan Area (Table 1 ). Because of its small
size, the entire population was sampled.
DATA COLLECTION
Data on planned and existing hydrology, wetland area, wetland shape, slopes of
banks, and vegetation were collected for each site. The general approach is presented
below; details are given when each item is discussed in the subsections that follow.
Information on the plans for each site was gathered from the Section 404 permit
files of the Portland District Office of the COE. In Oregon, in addition to, and in
concurrence with the federal regulations, the Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL)
regulates the removal and discharge of materials into waters of the state and will
participate in the review of Section 404 permits. Therefore, the ODSL permit files
were also searched to augment the data gathered from the COE. Specifically, the
permit conditions, and, when available, project descriptions, blueprints, conceptual
drawings, and lists of species to be planted were used.
Information on the existing conditions on the sites was gathered in the field.
Sampling of hydrology, wetland area, wetland shape, soils, and vegetation occurred
-------
TABLE 1. Dates when construction and field sampling was completed for the created
wetlands.
SITE
Cl-CC
C2-TI
O3-NS
04-MHP
C5-MG
C6-3I
C7-SML
C8-BSP
C9-GP
C10-PP
Cll-SM
CONSTRUCTION
COMPLETED
8/80
8/86
9/86
2/86
7/86
9/84
10/85
10/86
9/85
7/85
10/86
SAMPLED IN
THE FIELD
6/87
7/87
6/87
6/87
7/87
7/87
7/87
6/87
6/87
7/87
7/87
-------
during the summer of 1987. Slopes of banks were measured during the summer of
1988.
Evaluating the Hydrology to be Created and Actually Created
Permit files were examined for information on the intended hydrologic regime,
water levels, and area of the site to be inundated, and for descriptions of water
sources, inlets, outlets, and water control structures.
Sites were evaluated in the field for indicators of wetland hydrology. Evidence that
saturation occurred for a time sufficient to support hydrophytic vegetation and create
hydric soils were documented (Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation
1989). Evidence of a hydrophytic plant community was presence and degree of
dominance of obligate, facultative wetland, and facultative vegetation as defined by
Reed (1988). Evidence of wetland hydrology used were presence of water above the
surface of the substrate, presence of water in soil pits, evidence of soil saturation
(glistening), and presence of mottles in the soil. In addition, presence of hydric soil
was determined on the basis of soil chroma, and percent organic carbon content. Soil
chroma was determined using a Munsell Color Book. Percent organic matter was
expressed as ash free dry weight. In addition, water sources, inlets, and outlets were
located and described and their location documented. Water levels on site were
measured in each vegetation plot relative to the soil surface and recorded. Percent of
the site inundated was estimated and recorded.
Evaluating the Area to be Created and Actually Created
Three types of information were used to determine how the wetland area in the
plans and as-built compared with that listed in the permit conditions--the written
permit conditions, permit maps, and field maps. Paired permit and field maps for
each site were drawn at the same scale so that each map fit on an 8 1/2 x 11 inch
piece of paper. Permit maps were drawn* from blueprints and conceptual drawings
contained in the permit files. Field maps were drawn from a compass traverse of each
wetland (Lounsbury and AJdrich 1986). The field maps represent the perimeter of the
wetland as determined from changes in vegetation and slope.
Back sights were taken from each point on the compass traverse as a check of the
data points. The accuracy of the maps was checked by a member of the field crew.
Closure error was negligible.
A planiraeter (Numonics model #1250-1) was used to measure the area of each
map in acres. Each map was traced three times and the resulting areas were
averaged. A grid was used to check the accuracy of the planimetry on three pairs
(27%) of maps drawn at different scales. The relative percent difference between the
-------
areas derived from planimetry and those calculated by the grid was less than 5%. The
data were converted from acres to hectares by multiplying by 0.4047.
Evaluating the Shape to be Created and Actually Created
The shape of each wetland as-built was checked against the shape indicated by the
construction plans by visually comparing the permit and field maps. Notes on the
observations were made. In addition, the literature was searched for information
relating shape to ecological function.
Evaluating Slopes to be Created and Actually Created
The permits were searched for slope specifications for the banks of the wetlands.
Statements within the permit text and contour lines on the blueprints and conceptual
drawings were used.
The slopes of banks leading into the wetland from upland areas were determined
in the field by measuring elevation changes with a transit and stadia rod along
transects placed on banks characteristic of the site (Lounsbury and Aldrich 1986).
Elevation measurements were first made at the top of the bank and then at four
meter intervals across the wetland. Readings were taken at one meter intervals where
the microtopography of the wetland was irregular or where gradients appeared steep.
Another member of the field team checked the accuracy of measurements by repeating
the procedure at 5% of the data points. Relative percent difference between the
original and duplicate readings was less than 2%.
Elevations measured in the field were calculated relative to the lowest point in the
wetland. Calculations were checked and entered into a computer database. Double
entry was used to ensure that errors did not occur in transferring the data from the
field sheets into the computer. After entry, the two data sets were electronically
compared and discrepancies between them corrected by comparison with the field
sheets until both data sets were in exact correspondence.
The relative elevations in feet were converted to meters by multiplying by 0.3048.
The data were then entered into Statgraphics (Statistical Graphics Corporation 1988)
cross-sections of the topography of each wetland generated. The top and bottom of
each bank were located on each cross-section. The top of the bank was defined as
the uppermost point on each slope. The bottom of the bank was defined as either the
first point of inflection or the point where the profile obviously started to flatten out
across the bottom of the basin. The slope of each bank was then calculated.
Slopes specified in the permit plans and construction plans were compared to the
as-built conditions. The available literature on wetland creation was searched for
-------
recommendations on slopes appropriate for different types of wetlands, soil
stabilization, and the establishment of vegetation and wildlife communities. The
recommendations were compared to the slopes contained in the permit plans,
construction plans, and the as-built conditions.
The evaluations described above were made first with reference to the predominant
slopes on the site. In addition, since the information in the permit files was often
limited, each slope listed and each measured in the field was compared to the
recommended slopes from the literature.
Evaluating the Vegetation to be Established and Actually Found on Site
Permit files were searched for revegetation strategies specified as conditions of the
permit and lists of vegetation to be planted on the site. When the planting lists
contained common names, scientific names were assigned from the regional flora
(Hitchcock and Cronquist 1981) and the regional lists of plant species that occur in
wetlands (Reed 1988).
Transects were placed to obtain a representative sample of the plant communities
within each wetland studied. All species present in forty 1-m2 quadrats placed at equal
intervals along each transect were identified, and species lists were generated. The
accuracy of species identification was checked by a second botanist who resampled
25% of the quadrats. Overall, the same species were identified in a quadrat an
average of 80% of the time (AJD. Sherman, NSI Technology Services, pers. comm.).
Each species was assigned to one of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS)
wetland indicator categories (Reed 1988). This resource and the regional flora
(Hitchcock and Cronquist 1981) were also used to determine if species were native to
the Pacific Northwest or exotic. Table 2 lists the wetland indicator codes used. All
codes assigned were verified by a second person. Any species whose code could not
be determined from the above resources was assigned a wetland indicator after
consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant curator, Oregon State University (OSU)
Herbarium. Ms. Johnston co-authored the regional flora on aquatic plants (Steward
et al. 1963).
A combined list of all species contained in the planting lists was generated by
merging the lists from all sites. In addition, a combined list of all species actually
found on the eleven created wetlands was produced. The composition of each list of
species to be planted and of the plant community found on the site were compared
as to the proportion of 1) native and exotic species, 2) wetland and upland species,
and 3) species found on the site that were listed for planting. In addition, the same
comparisons were made between the combined list of species contained on the
planting lists and the combined list of species found on the sites.
-------
TABLE 2. Wetland indicator codes were assigned to all species found on the created wetlands and on planting lists.
in the regional list of plant species that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988).
Codes were adapted from categories
INDICATOR CATEGORY
POSITION IN CATEGORY
NATIVE/EXOTIC
00
ABS = Absent frail the list.
FAC « Facultative. Sometimes found on
wetlands (34X--66X estimated
frequency), also occurs In
nonwet lands.
NO = No Agreement, Not Considered, or No
Review. No agreement was applied
when a regional panel was not able to
reach a unanimous decision, not
considered was applied to plants that
have recently been added to the list,
and no review was applied to species
that have not received any regional
review.
* = Frequency is toward high end of the
category (more frequently found in
wetlands).
• = Frequency Is toward lower end of the
category (less frequently found in
wetlands).
\ " Intermedlacy within the category.
NAT = Native Species
EXO = Exotic Species, i.e., species intro-
duced Into the region.
*** = No information available.
OBL = Obligate Wetland Species. Always
found in wetlands under natural
conditions (frequency greater then
99X) but may persist in nonwet I ends.
UPL = Upland. Occurs in wetlands in
another region, but not found (<1X
frequency) in wetlands in the region
specified.
FACU= Facultative Upland. Seldom found in
wetlands (1X--33X frequency) and
usually occurs in nonwet lands.
FACU = Facultative Wetland. Usually found
in wetlands (67X--99X frequency), but
occasionally found In nonwet lands.
No information available.
-------
SECTION m
RESULTS
Data on planned and existing hydrology, wetland area, wetland shape, slopes of
banks, and vegetation were evaluated for each site. The results are presented in the
subsections that follow. Appendix I contains a narrative description and a catalog of all
the information gathered on each created wetland from both the field sampling and the
permit files.
EVALUATING THE HYDROLOGY TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY CREATED
The hydrologic information contained in the permit files was inadequate to use in
the comparison of the created wetlands with their permit specifications and construction
plans. A summary of the information found is presented in Table 3.
EVALUATING THE AREA TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY CREATED
Permit specifications, construction plans, and as-built conditions were compared
to evaluate the area of wetland created. Ten of the eleven wetlands studied were
compared. Site #C7-SML was a large mosaic of created and natural areas of different
wetland types, therefore, it was decided that only the portion that was created palustrine
emergent marsh would be studied. Since the entire area of this wetland was not
measured, the site was not included in the evaluation of area.
Permit Specifications Compared to Construction Plans
Section 404 permits specified areas ranging from 0.04 ha (0.1 acre) to 1.46 ha
(3.6 acres) for the ten wetlands studied (Table 4). The total area to be created was
5.10 ha (12.6 acres). Areas derived from permit maps drafted from construction
blueprints and conceptual drawings ranged from 0.04 ha (0.1 acres) to 1.13 ha (2.8
acres) (Table 4). The total area of wetland in the ten permit maps is 4.66 ha (11.5
acres). This was a cumulative loss of 0.44 ha (1.1 acres), or 9% of the area specified
by the 404 permits. The net difference between the wetland area on each permit map
and the area specified by permit conditions ranged from a loss of 0.40 ha (1.0 acre), to
a gain of 0.29 ha (0.7 acres). Five permit maps indicated more area than the permit
specified', four indicated less. One permit map indicated the same area as that specified
in the permit conditions. Table 3. Information on the hydrology planned for each
created wetland studied. Information was taken from the COE and ODSL permit files.
-------
TABLE 3. The hydrology planned for each created wetland studied. Information was taken from the US. Army Corps of Engineers
(COE) and Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL) permit files. EPA = US. Environmental Protection Agency.
SITE HYDROLOGY LNTENDED AT CREATED WETLAND
Cl-CC Letter from EPA to COE states that a hydraulic connection must be maintained between the project site and the adjacent
creek to maintain adequate stream flow for fisheries.
C2-TI Design plan shorn a pipe leading into the created wetland from boat basin in the Columbia River
03-NS Special Condition 8 of Attachment A to the Permit states: "... connect newly dug wetland into the existing stream."
O4-MHP Lake to receive water from two streams entering at its NW and SW comers. The streams drain a 572.1 acre watershed.
Well water is to be supplied to the lake during seasonal low stream flow to maintain the water depth at agreed upon levels.
C5-MG Drawings show a culvert leading into the wetland from under nearby street.
Excavation to the level of an adjacent stream to subject area to stream overflows and possible periods of standing water.
C6-3I Existing creek channel to be rerouted through created wetlands. Stream Oow estimated as about 4 cubic feet per second.
C7-S.ML, New stream channels to be excavated to increase stream length and supply water to project. Existing stream channels to be
maintained as overflow channels.
•
C8-BSP Drawing shows overflow slough connecting pond with nearby creel!.
The overflow channel is to be created between the existing overflow slough and the SE corner of the project site.
"Roof water" will be discharged from two buildings into the pond.
Surface waters from the surrounding developments to be discharged into the basin through diffuser pipes.
Text stales that "there may always be a slight freshwater flow from subsurface seepage".
C9-GP Existing creek channels enlarged.
Wetland depression designed to back Gil from creek overflows.
Storm dram system to discharge into wetland depression.
Numerous springs and sub-surface seeps to supply water to wetland depression.
An extensive hydraulic analysis was done of the carrying capacity of the stream channels for flood storage and to determine
adequate culvert soe for road crossing.
C10-PP A ditch js to be excavated from nearby slough to the pond at elevations lower than the anticipated slough water level
Cll-SM Drawings show 'open ditch - water source" north of the created wetland running along the development's fenceline and a
connection between the project and the nearby creek.
Drawing states 'grade ditch to maintain positive drainage*.
10
-------
TABLE 4. Comparison of wetland area required in the permit specifications (PERMIT SPECS) with
the area of wetland on the map (PERMIT MAP) drafted from construction plans or conceptual
drawings. Area is expressed in hectares. The values in parentheses are the corresponding data
expressed in acres. The original information was expressed in acres, which was converted to hectares by
multiplying by 0.4047.
SITE PERMIT PERMIT MAP NET CHANGE
SPECS
Cl-CC
C2-TI
03-NS
04-MHP
C5-MG
C6-31
C8-BSP
C9-GP
C10-PP
Cll-SM
0.89
(2.2)
0.45
(1.1)
0.61
(1.5)
1.46
(3.6)
0.40
(1.0)
0.81
(2-0)
0.04
(0.1)
0.20
(0.5)
0.12
(0.3)
0.12
(0.3)
0.49
(1.2)
0.49
(1.2)
0.65
(1.6)
1.13
(2.8)
0.20
(0.5)
1.10
(2.7)
0.16
(0.4)
0.28
(0.7)
0.12
(0.3)
0.04
(0.1)
-0.40
(-1.0)
+ 0.05
(+0.1)
+ 0.04
(+0.1)
-0.33
(-0.8)
-0.20
(-0.5)
+ 0.29
(+0.7)
+ 0.12
(+0.3)
+ 0.08
(+0.2)
0.00
(0.0)
-0.08
(-0.2)
TOTALS 5.10 4.66 -0.44
(12.6) (11.5) (-1.1)
11
-------
Permit Specifications Compared to Field Conditions
The net change between the area'of each wetland as-built and the area specified
by the permit conditions ranged from a loss of 0.69 ha (1.7 acres), to a gain of 0.20 ha
(0.5 acres). Five of the wetlands were built smaller than intended and five were built
larger. None were built exactly as the permit mandated. One wetland (C9-GP), was built
as the construction plans indicated, however, the area contained in the construction plans
differed from the permit specifications by +0.08 ha (+0.2 acres).
The cumulative effect of all the differences between the permit specifications and
the as-built areas was also examined. The area of wetland on the ten field maps totalled
3.62 ha (9.0 acres); the area of wetland specified in the ten permits totalled 5.10 ha (12.6
acres). This represented a loss of 1.48 ha (3.6 acres), or 29% from the total area
specified by the permits (Table 5).
EVALUATING THE SHAPE TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY CREATED
Seven of the created wetlands studied had very regular, nearly round, oblong, or
rectangular shorelines. The other four wetlands were constructed with irregular shorelines.
EVALUATING SLOPES TO BE CREATED AND ACTUALLY CREATED
Slopes to be constructed were evaluated in several ways. The field measurements
of slopes as-built and the slopes determined from the permit specifications or construction
plans were compared to ascertain if the banks were graded as specified. Then, the slopes
in the permit specifications and in the construction plans and the as-built slopes
determined from field measurements were compared with slopes recommended in the
current literature on wetland creation.
Since any one site could contain banks with different slopes, the evaluations
described above were made with reference to the predominant slopes on the site. In
addition, each slope listed and each measured in the field was compared to the
recommended slopes from the literature.
As-Built Conditions Compared to Construction Plans & Permit Specifications
The predominant slope as-built was gentler than what was to be built as determined
from the construction plans and permit specifications for nine of the eleven projects
(82%). Slopes at two sites were built as planned.
12
-------
TABLE 5. Comparison of the wetland area in the permit specifications (PERMIT
SPECS) with the area of wetland on each field map of "as-built" conditions (FIELD
MAP). Area is expressed in hectares. The values in parentheses are the
corresponding data expressed in acres. The original information was expressed in
acres, which was converted to hectares by multiplying by 0.4047.
SITE
Cl-CC
C2-TI
O3-NS
O4-MHP
C5-MG
C6-3I
C8-BSP
C9-GP
C10-PP
Cll-SM
TOTALS
PERMIT
SPECS
0.89
(2.2)
0.45
(1.1)
0.61
(1.5)
1.46
(3.6)
0.40
(1.0)
0.81
(2.0)
0.04
(0.1)
0.20
(0.5)
0.12
(0.3)
0.12
(0.3)
5.10
(12.6)
FIELD
MAP
0.20
(0.5)
0.24
(0.6)
0.69
(1.7)
0.97
(2.4)
0.28
(0.7)
0.40
(1.0)
0.24
(0.6)
0.28
(0.7)
0.16
(0.4)
0.16
(0.4)
3.62
(9.0)
NET
CHANGE
-0.69
(-1.7)
-0.21
(-0.5)
+ 0.08
(+0.2)
-0.49
(-1.2)
-0.12
(-0.3)
- 0.41
(-1.0)
+ 0.20
(+0.5)
+ 0.08
(+0.2)
+ 0.04
(+0.1)
+ 0.04
(+0.1)
- 1.48
(-3.6)
13
-------
Eighty-one percent (29/36) of the slopes measured in the field were more gentle
(flatter) than their respective permit specifications or construction plans; 6% (2/36) were
steeper. Only 14% (5/36) of the as-built slopes agreed with the permit specifications or
construction plans.
Comparisons with Recommendations in the Literature
The current literature on wetland creation was reviewed to determine if slopes
intended for construction and actually constructed were appropriate for palustrine
emergent marshes. A minimum 1% gradient was recommended for bottom contours to
facilitate drainage. Bottom contours measured at the sites and stated in the construction
plans were all comparable to the recommended 1%.
The recommendation in the literature was that the banks of created wetlands
should be graded between 5:1 and 15:1 (horizontakvertical) to facilitate vegetation
establishment and soil stability (Reimold and Cobler 1986, Kruczynski 1990; D.S. Golden,
State of Montana Department of Highways, pers. comm.). For the purposes of this study,
slopes steeper than 5:1 were considered "steep", and slopes more gentle than 5:1 were
considered "gentle".
The recommended range for slopes was compared with the predominant slope to
be built for each site as determined from the from the construction plans and permit
specifications. The results were that: 1) 45% (5/11) of the sites had predominant slopes
specified or drawn that were steeper than 5:1; 2) 18% (2/11) were within the range of 5:1
to 15:1; and 3) 36% (4/11) could not be evaluated because the predominant slope
intended could not be determined.
The recommended range for slopes was compared with the predominant slope as
determined from the as-built conditions measured at each site. The results were that: 1)
45% (5/11) of the sites had predominant slopes that were steeper than 5:1; 2) 36% (4/11)
were within the range of 5:1 to 15:1; and 3) 18% (2/11) could not be evaluated because
approximately half of the site had slopes that were within the range, while half of the site
had slopes that were steeper than 5:1.
The recommended range for slopes was then compared with a cumulative list of
all the slopes specified in the permits and construction drawings. The results were that:
1) 87% (13/15) of the slopes specified or drawn were steeper than 5:1; 2) 13% (2/15)
were within the range of 5:1 to 15:1.
The recommended slopes were also compared with a cumulative list of as-built
conditions measured in the field. Results of these comparisons were: 1) 43% (15/35) of
the slopes were constructed steeper than 5:1; 2) 3% (1/35) were gentler; and 3) 54%
(19/35) were within the range of 5:1 to 15:1.
14
-------
EVALUATING THE VEGETATION TO BE ESTABLISHED AND ACTUALLY
ESTABLISHED
Seven (64%) of the eleven permits contained a list of species to be planted at the
site. Of these seven planting lists, only five used scientific names. The four permits that
did not contain planting lists did not state if the site was to revegetate naturally or if it
was to be planted. Therefore, it could not be determined if the absence of a planting list
was appropriate or was an oversight. It was learned from the Oregon Department of Fish
and Wildlife (ODFW) (G. Herb, Oregon Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, pers. comm.),
however, that one (O3-NS) of the four wetland creation projects that lacked a planting list
was to revegetate naturally.
Evaluation of Planting Lists
The maximum number of species on a planting list was eleven, with an average of
eight species per list. Most lists also contained species intended for the upland or
transitional areas surrounding the wetland.- The species designated for planting in uplands
or transitional areas were not included in this analysis because field inventories of
vegetation considered only species actually within the wetland. One permit (Cll-SM)
contained a list of 24 species "to choose from", however, there was no documentation
within the permit of which species were actually planted.
The planting lists were checked for native and exotic species, and wetland and
upland species. Exotic species, those not native to the Pacific Northwest which have been
introduced from other regions of the United States or the world, were identified from the
regional lists of plant species that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and the regional flora
(Hitchcock'and Cronquist 1981).
The regional lists of plant species that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) were also
used to assign each species a "wetland indicator code". Reed's categories, from which the
wetland indicator codes were derived, are:
o obligate wetland species-(estimated 99% probability of occurring in wetlands),
o facultative wetland species (estimated 67%-99% probability of occurring in
wetlands),
o facultative (34%-66% estimated probability of occurring in wetlands),
o facultative upland (67%—99% estimated probability of occurring in nonwetlands),
and
o obligate upland (may occur in wetlands in another region, but 99% estimated
probability of occurring within nonwetlands in this region).
15
-------
Species not included in the regional plant list of species that occur in wetlands were
assigned wetland indicator codes after consultation with Ms. LaRea Johnston, Assistant
Curator of the Oregon State University Herbarium.
Five of the planting lists contained between 57% and 78% native species, one
contained all native species, and one contained only 18% native species (Table 6). Fifty-
two percent of the species on the combined planting list (made up of the unique species
on the seven planting lists) were native to the Pacific Northwest. However, there were
species on the planting lists for which a designation of'native or exotic could not be
determined because common names were used, or only the genus or family name was
given. The proportion of unknowns on the planting lists ranged from 0% to 73% (Table
6).
Native, obligate wetland species were included on all planting lists, and made up
the largest category (36%) of species to be planted (Table 7). The proportion of unknown
species (30%) was the second largest category. Seventy-three percent of one planting list
was made up of species for which wetland indicators could not be determined. Native,
facultative wetland species constituted the next most frequently planted group (14%), and
were included on approximately half the planting lists.
Combining the planting lists gives a total of 44 unique species (Table 8). Of these,
seven (16%) were found on the sites at which they were to be planted. Two species,
creeping spikerush (Eleocharis palustris (L.) R. & S.) and meadow foxtail (Alopecurus
pratensis L.), were found on two of the wetlands on which they were to be planted.
Seventeen of the 44 species on the planting lists were found on sites on which they were
not listed to be planted, i.e., as volunteers. The proportion of species found on a site that
were also on the corresponding planting list ranged from 0% to 60%.
Evaluation of the Vegetation Found On-Site
The number of species found on each site was much greater than the number of
species on the planting lists. The average number of species found was 44 (S.E. = ±
3). The vegetation at six of the created wetlands was composed entirely of volunteer
species. For the remaining five wetlands, between 93% and 98% of the plant communities
were made up of volunteer species (Table 8). The combined list of all species that were
found on the created wetlands contains a total of 189 unique species. Of these, 4% were
species to be planted and 96% are volunteers.
Plant communities found at the created wetlands were composed of both native
and exotic species (Table 9). Eight of the sites contained a higher proportion of native
species than exotics. Of the 189 different species found on the created wetlands, 55%
were native to the Pacific Northwest and 42% were exotic. Native, obligate (20%) and
native, facultative wetland (23%) species were the types of species most often found on
the created wetlands (Table 10). In contrast, eight of the eleven wetlands sampled had
no exotic, obligate wetland species, and the remaining three wetlands had only one,
16
-------
IABLE 6. Numbers of species and percentages of the total number of species found on each planting list which were native, exotic, and unknown species.
Dashes indicate no information. Where planting lists were composed of common names, an effort was made to identify the scientific names. When this was
not possible, or if only the genus or family names were given, the species were counted in the UNKNOWN category. A combined list (COMB LIST) was created
by merging all the individual planting lists and eliminating duplicate species names.
SITE
C1-CC
C2-TI
03 -NS
04-MHP
C5-MG
C6-3I
C7-SML
CB-BSP
C9-GP
C10-PP
cfl-SM
TOTAL # LISTED
9
0
7
5
••
4
11
7
--
11
0 NATIVE
..
7
0
3
5
••
3
8
4
--
2
* EXOTIC
..
2
0
•-
0
--
1
2
3
--
1
* UNKNOWN
..
0
0
4
0
--
0
1
0
--
8
X NATIVE
..
78X
OX
43X
100X
--
75X
73X
57X
--
18X'
X EXOTIC
..
22X
OX
--
OX
--
25X
1BX
43X
--
9X
X UNKNOWN
..
OX
ox
57X
OX
--
OX
9X
OX
--
73X
COMB LIST
44
23
13
52X
1BX
30X
-------
00
TABLE 7. Proportions of the different types of vegetation composing the planting lists which fell into the categories in the regional list of plant
species that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988). Plants were assigned to categories using Reed (1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant
Curator. Oregon State University Herbarium. The categories are: DHL—obligate wetland species; FACU--facultative wetland species; FAC--facultative
species; FACU--facultative upland species; UPL--upland species; UNK--species that could not be identified because the planting list used common names
or only genus and family names. The combined list (COMB LIST) is composed of all unique species on the planting lists. No species was counted more than
once, though species may have been on more than one planting list. Results are expressed as percentages of total numbers of species on the planting list.
Numbers of species are in parentheses.
SITE tf SPP
C1-CC
C2-TI 9
03-NS 0
04-HHP 7
C5-HG 5
C6-3I
C7-SML 4
CB-BSP 11
C9-GP 7
C10-PP
C11-SH 11
COMB 44
LIST
XOBL
NATIVE
--
44X
( 4)
0
UX
( 1)
SOX
( 4)
•-
75X
( 3)
45X
( 5>
43X
( 3)
--
9X
( 1)
36X
(16)
X FACU
NATIVE
-•
33X
( 3)
0
29X
( 2)
0
-•
0
27X
( 3)
0
--
9X
( 1)
UX
( 6)
X FAC
NATIVE
••
0
0
-•
20X
( 1)
--
0
0
UX
( 1)
--
--
2X
( 1)
X FACU X UPL X OBL
NATIVE NATIVE EXOTIC
..
0 0 22X
( 2)
000
..
000
..
000
000
0 0 .0
..
9X
( 1)
0 0 7X
( 3>
X FACU X FAC
EXOTIC EXOTIC
--
0 0
0 0
--
0 0
•-
2SX 0
( 1)
18X 0
( 2)
UX 0
( 1)
..
..
7X 0
( 3)
X FACU X UPL X UNK
EXOTIC EXOTIC
..
000
000
57X
( 4)
000
..
000
0 0 9X
( 1)
29X 0 0
( 2)
..
73X
( 8)
5X 0 JOX
( 2) (13)
-------
TABLE 8. Numbers and percentages of species to be planted that were found on the created wetlands vs the numbers and percentages of volunteer species
found. Dashes Indicate no Information available, therefore, all species found on the site were assumed to be volunteers. The combined list (COMB
LIST) was created by merging all the individual planting lists.- Species were only counted once, though they nay have been found at more than one
site. 0 SPECIES PLANTED is the number of species to be planted on that site. 0 SPECIES PLANTED FOUND is the number of species found on the site that
was included on the planting list. * VOLUNTEER SPECIES is the number of species found on the site that was not on the planting list for that site. X
OF SPECIES PLANTED FOUND is the proportion of species on the planting list that was found on the site. X PLANTED SPECIES OF TOTAL FOUND is the
proportion of all species found on the site that was to be planted. X VOLUNTEERS OF TOTAL FOUND is the proportion of the total species found on the
site that was volunteers (not on the planting list).
vo
SITE «
C1-CC
C2-TI
03 -NS
04-MHP
C5-HG
C6-3I
C7-SHL
C8-BSP
C9-GP
C10-PP
C11-SM
# SPECIES
PLANTED
--
9
0
7
5
--
A
11
7
-•
11
* SPECIES
PLANTED FOUND
--
1
0
0
3
--
1
2
2
--
0
# VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
48
39
37
48
39
69
54
27
56
38
43
X OF SPECIES
PLANTED FOUND
--
11X
ox
ox
60X
--
25X
18X
29X
--
OX
X PLANTED SPECIES
OF TOTAL FOUND
--
3X
OX
OX
7X
--
2X
7X
5X
--
OX
X VOLUNTEERS OF
TOTAL FOUND
100X
98X
100X
100X
93X
100X
98X
93X
95X
100X
100X
COMB LIST
189
16X
4X
96X
-------
TABLE 9. Native end exotic species found at the created wetlands expressed as numbers per site and as a proportion of the total. Species in the
UNKNOWN categories were those found that could not be identified. The combined list (COMB LIST) is composed of all unique species found at the
created sites. No species was counted more than once, though it may have been identified at more than one site.
SITE
C1-CC
C2-TI
03-NS
04-MHP
C5-MC
C6-3I
10
O C7-SHL
C8-BSP
C9-CP
C10-PP
C11-SM
TOTAL H
SPECIES
46 •
40
37
48
42
69
55
29
38
38
43
* NATIVE
SPECIES
32
24
24
24
16
33
33
11
24
22
27
# EXOTIC
SPECIES
16
15
11
22
25
34
21
17
14
15
14
« UNKNOWN
SPECIES
0
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
0
1
2
X NATIVE
SPECIES
67X
60X
65X
SOX
3BX
48X
60X
38X
63X
sax
63X
X EXOTIC
SPECIES
33X
38X
30X
46X
60X
49X
38X
59X
37X
40X
33X
X UNKNOWN
SPECIES
OX
3X
5X
4X
2X
3X
2X
3X
OX
3X
5X
COMB LIST:
189
104
80
55X
42X
3X
-------
TABLE 10. Proportions of the different types of vegetation found on site which fell into the categories in the regional list of plant species that occur
in wetlands (Reed 1988). Plants were assigned to categories using Reed (1988) and in consultation with LaRca Johnston, Assistant Curator. Oregon State
University Herbarium. Categories are: OBL--obligate wetland species; FACU--facultative wetland species; FAC--facultative species; FACU--facultative
upland species; UPL--upland species; and UNK--species that could not be identified or for which the wetland indicator could not be determined. The
contained list (COMB LIST) Is composed of all unique species found at the created sites. No species was counted more than once, though it may have been
identified at more than one site. Results are expressed as percentages of total number of species found on site. Actual numbers of species are in
parentheses.
SITE #
C1-CC
C2-TI
03 -NS
04-HHP
C5-HG
C6-3I
C7-SML
CS-BSP
C9-GP
C10-PP
C11-SM
COMB
LIST:
# SPP.
48
40
37
48
42
69
55
29
38
38
43
189
X OBL
NATIVE
17X
( 8)
23X
< 9)
35X
(13)
6X
( 3)
21X
< 9)
19X
(13)
31X
(17)
7X
( 2)
29X
(11)
29X
(11)
33X
(14)
20X
(38)
X FACU
NATIVE
35X
(17)
20X
( 8)
22X
( 8)
27X
(13)
10X
( 4)
22X
(15)
24X
(13)
24X
( 7)
24X
( 9)
1BX
( 7)
21X
( 9)
23X
(44)
X FAC
NATIVE
4X
( 2)
18X
( 7)
8X
( 3)
8X
( 4)
2X
( 1)
6X
( 4>
5X
( 3)
7X
( 2)
11X
( 4)
11X
( 4)
9X
( 4)
6X
(11)
X FACU
NATIVE
10X
( 5)
0
0
6X
( 3)
2X
( 1)
0
0
0
0
0
0
4X
( 8)
XUPL
NATIVE
0
0
0
2X
( D
2X
( 1)
0
0
0
0
0
0
IX
( 2)
XOBl
EXOTIC
0
3X
( 1)
0
0
2X
( 1)
0
2X
( D
0
0
0
0
2X
( 3)
X FACU
EXOTIC
8X
( 4)
8X
( 3)
m
( 4)
4X
( 2)
7X
( 3)
6X
( 4)
11X
( 6)
14X
( 4)
11X
( 4)
13X
( 5)
14X
( 6)
7X
(14)
X FAC
EXOTIC
6X
( 3)
13X
( 5)
sx
( 2)
15X
( 7)
10X
( 4)
14X
(10)
4X
( 2)
10X
( 3)
SX
( 2)
13X
( 5)
9X
( 4)
8X
(16)
X FACU
EXOTIC
8X
( 4)
13X
( 5)
8X
( 3)
13X
( 6)
21X
( 9)
12X
( 8)
13X
( 7)
7X
( 2)
13X
( 5)
11X
( 4)
9X
( 4)
10X
(19)
X UPL
EXOTIC
10X
( 5)
3X
( 1)
SX
( 2)
1SX
( 7)
19X
( B)
19X
(13)
9X
( 5)
28X
( 8)
BX
( 3)
3X
( 1)
0
13X
(24)
X UNK
0
3X
( 1)
SX
( 2)
4X
( 2)
2X
( 1)
3X
( 2)
2X
( 1)
3X
( D
0
3X
( D
SX
( 2)
SX
(10)
-------
exotic, obligate wetland species each. In addition, the proportion of exotic, facultative
wetland species on the created sites was very low (<^ 7%). The most notable characteristic
of the plant communities found on-site was the absence of native, upland species. Native,
facultative upland and native, upland species were found on only three of the sites while
exotic upland, and exotic facultative upland species were found at all the created wetlands
(Table 10).
22
-------
SECTION' IV
DISCUSSION
Wetlands are, and undoubtedly will continue to be, created as compensation for
those destroyed by development permitted under Section 404. It is important to ensure
that the wetlands created compensate fully for those destroyed. This includes ensuring
that wetland design is appropriate for the type of wetland desired and its location, and
that all losses are accounted for. The following discussion examines wetland design and
planning, and presents suggestions for improving the process.
DESIGN OF CREATED WETLANDS
Hydrology
Hydrology was not included in the comparisons of as-built conditions with permit
specifications and construction plans because information in the permit files was
inadequate. Hydrology is one of the most important aspects of wetland establishment.
Therefore, the design of a created wetland should include specific statements of the
hydrology intended. Statements that a source of water must (or will) be provided are not
sufficient. The plans must explicitly state at minimum 1) how and from where the -water
will be supplied to the site, 2) the depth of water intended to inundate the site, and 3)
the timing and duration of inundation.
Area of Wetland to be Created
Losses of area occurred due to differences between the permit conditions and the
construction plans, often found in the same file. When the area of the wetland as-built
was determined, it often was less than the area indicated in the construction drawings.
Cumulatively, both discrepancies amounted to a loss of 29% of the wetland area that was
to be created. One cause of such an error is not differentiating the project boundary (the
actual area being turned into wetland) from the property boundary and accounting for the
space required for banks and a transitional zone. Thus, the actual wetland area created
may be smaller than intended.
Shane of the Wetland to be Created
The shape of a wetland can influence its function as wildlife habitat. An irregular
shoreline with small vegetated fingers and open water bays will provide more edge than
will an even-sided shoreline. Greater edge tends to increase waterfowl usage by providing
isolated areas for feeding and loafing (Crawford and Rossiter 1982). It is easier and less
23
-------
expensive, however, to create regularly shaped wetlands 'with even sides. Seven of the
created wetlands studied had very regular, nearly round, oblong, or rectangular shorelines.
The other four wetlands were constructed with irregular shorelines.
Garbisch (1977) states that slopes are one of the most important factors in
preparing a site for marsh establishment. He suggests designing slopes to be as gentle as
possible without impounding water. One method of calculating slopes that will be proper
for the vegetation type desired, is to determine the slopes of non-eroding, vegetated
sections of banks contiguous to the site. For example, Shisler and Cnarette (1984)
recommend the grading of slopes and topography to the relative elevations of adjacent
natural marshes.
Kruczynski (1990) recommends slopes between 5:1 and 15:1 (horizontalrvertical) to
provide maximum flooding of wetland area, to minimize erosion, and for the successful
establishment of wetland vegetation. He states that many mitigation sites have been
unsuccessful because of the steepness of their slopes. In this study, 45% (5/11) of the sites
both as planned and constructed had slopes steeper than 5:1 predominant on the site.
Moreover, 87% (13/15) of all the slopes listed within the permits or drawn in the
construction plans were steeper than 5:1. In specifications for the creation of wetlands to
mitigate impacts from highway construction in Montana, Golden (State of Montana
Department of Highways, pers. comm.) included several requirements to ensure slopes
constructed were appropriate. The criteria were that at least 50% of the non-flooded area
must have a 10:1 or flatter slope, and no more than 10% of the non-flooded area may
have a 4:1 or steeper slope.
Field sampling showed that 43% (15.35) of the all slope measurements taken within
the created wetlands studied were steeper than 5:1. D'Avanzo (1990) stated that the
failure of plantings in created wetlands is often caused by incorrect slope, and the resulting
erosion and increased rate of sedimentation. Erosion, accompanied by sedimentation and
siltation, was noted at some of the sites with steep slopes (Figure 1A). The banks of site
ClO-PP were so steep that field workers had to pull themselves along with their hands to
keep from sliding into the pond (Figure IB).
Water fluctuations and the corresponding changes in the duration and frequency
of inundation of the site are likely to be greater when slopes are steep than when gradual.
Any influx of water into a small area with steep slopes will cause a rapid deepening of the
water as it rises up the banks, while the same influx of water will cause a much smaller
increase in depth where the topography is gentle and slopes are gradual. The effect is
analogous to the way water rises in a narrow glass versus in a shallow bowl. These
differences in water fluctuations, and hence, the differences in the duration and frequency
of inundation, influence the amount, zonation, and form of the vegetation community.
24
-------
from
best available co=v
D
••"**"' - **lx' "u,;^**j^ '
\. J
..44t,
B.
FIGURE 1. Photographs of the steep slopes at two of the created wetlands. Note signs
of erosion on photo 1A.
25
-------
Another consequence of steep banks is less area with the appropriate hydrology for
wetland vegetation to become established. A narrow fringe of wetland vegetation is likely
to occur around a steep-sided pond, whereas, on a gradual slope, wetland vegetation will
occupy a broad expanse (Figure 2). A narrow fringe of vegetation was observed at several
of the wetlands studied (e.g., O4-MHP, C6-3I, C8-BSP, C10-PP).
Wetlands abruptly confined by developed land lack the potential for vegetation
communities to adjust to changing hydroperiod by shifting up and down the banks, and,
therefore, force the loss of plant species, animals, and habitat. Transition areas between
the wetland and surrounding land uses are needed. Transition areas should have gentle,
gradual slopes to allow the plant communities a large area over which to expand and
contract, and, thus, increase the probability of their persistence (Willard and Hfller 1990).
Vegetation to be Established and Actually Found on the Sites
Planting Lists-
Vegetation of the site is imperative to the creation of a palustrine emergent marsh.
If planting is to be done, a list of species to be planted should be included in the project
plans. Planting lists were found for seven of the eleven projects studied. However, these
planting lists were problematic: 1) two used only common names, 2) several used family
and genus names instead of names of species, 3) nearly all planting lists included exotic
species, 4) several included upland and transitional species, without direction on where
they should be planted, 5) several included commercial cultivars, and 6) none specified
planting methods. In addition, a list of species recommended for planting in wetlands by
ODFW used only common names. Scientific names, both genus and species, should be
used to identify species for planting, and, whenever possible, the native variety should be
specified. Common names may be included with the scientific names, but should not be
the sole means of species identification because a common name often can apply to more
than one species.
All but one of the projects studied contained exotic species on its planting list.
Exotic species should not be planted for two reasons. First, some are not adapted to the
regional climatic conditions and may not survive. Bald cypress (Taxodium distichnm (L.)
Rich), a native of the Southeastern United States, was a found on both a list of species
recommended by ODFW for planting in Pacific Northwest wetlands, and on the planting
list for project (Cll-SM). Second, if an exotic species does have the ability to adapt to
the regional environmental conditions, it may have the potential to become a pest by
outcompeting native species. Examples of invasive pest species are purple loosestrife
(Lythrum salicaria L.), a species introduced from Eurasia, and crabgrass (Digitaria
ischaemum [Schreb.] Schreb.), a ubiquitous weedy species. Purple loosestrife was not
included on any of the planting lists, however, crabgrass was.
26
-------
B.
V
FIGURE 2. A. Photograph of the broad expanse of vegetation found on a created
wetland with gradual slopes. B. Photograph of the narrow fringe of
vegetation found on a created wetland with steep-sided slopes. Arrows
indicate boundaries of wetland vegetation.
27
-------
Commercial cultivars should not be substituted for native species (Josselyn et al.
1990). For example, the plans for project O4-MHP stipulated the planting of "multi-
flora rose". This is not a species of rose (L. Johnston, OSU Herbarium, pers. comm.), but
a generic name for cultivated roses with a tall, cascading form and many blooms. The
temptation to use cultivated varieties will be great if it is difficult to find sources of native
species while cultivated varieties are easy to locate and purchase. To prevent this, the
contractor must be made aware of the differences between native species and their
cultivated varieties, and the importance of planting native wetland species.
The season for planting, type of planting materials, planting density, and required
survival rates, should be stated within the permit conditions (Kruczynski 1990). None of
the permits examined contained such specifications. When considering type of plant
material to use, several factors should be considered. Seeding is the least expensive
method, but its success is the least predictable. Seeds may be washed away by fluctuating
water levels or consumed by wildlife. Their germination and development in shallow water
depend upon uncontrollable parameters such as the temperature and turbidity of the
water. If used, seeding should be done in early spring to take full advantage of the
growing season (Garbisch 1986).
Transplanting of peat-potted plants, plugs, sprigs, and dormant underground plant
parts (tubers, bulbs, and rhizomes) is both the most successful and most expensive method
of revegetating. Generally, peat-potted plants in either a growing or dormant condition
can be transplanted at any time of the year. Therefore, the timing of the completion of
construction of the site should not affect the success of establishment. Plugs, sprigs,
tubers, bulbs, and rhizomes must be planted while dormant, which limits optimal planting
times to winter and spring months (Garbisch 1986).
The transplants or seeds used should be of local origin. Native wetland plants
grown from non-local genetic stock may not be adapted to local climatic conditions.
Garbisch (1977) recommends that plant stock used should originate from within a 100-
mile radius of its intended destination. However, ensuring that plant stock originates in
a climate similar to its intended destination is probably more important than strictly
following the 100-mile radius recommendation. Recently, some Pacific Northwest nurseries
have begun providing locally grown, native species for wetland revegetation. However,
when large volumes of plants are needed, contractors must order plant stock from
nurseries outside the region, usually the midwest (R. Van Wormer, Independent Ecological
Services, pers. comm.).
Survival of Species Planted-
Overall, approximately 96% of the species on the created wetlands were volunteers,
while less than 4% were species found on the planting lists. This poses the question:
Why weren't species on the planting lists found in greater abundance on the sites?
28
-------
It is possible that planting did not take place. In this study it was assumed that
species included on planting lists were planted on the created wetlands. However, there
was no documentation within the files as to which species were actually planted, where
they were planted, or when they were planted. Also, no evidence of planting (e.g., rows
of sprigs) was observed within the wetlands during field sampling.
Assuming planting took place, environmental conditions at the created wetlands may
have been incorrect. It may be necessary to change the conditions of the site (hydrology,
slopes, location, etc.) to allow the types of species planted to persist on the created
wetlands. Future research might* include exploring the type of environmental conditions
necessary for the successful establishment of desired species.
Another possibility is that the species listed for planting were not appropriate.
Species appropriate for planting in palustrine emergent marshes of the Pacific Northwest
might be determined from inventories of the species that occur on natural marshes of the
region, or from inventories of the species that volunteered on the created sites.
Planting vs Natural Revegetation of the Site-
Natural revegetation may be a viable option, since approximately 96% of the
species found on the created sites were volunteers. During visits to site O3-NS, which was
allowed to naturally revegetate, we observed that vegetation cover increased over the three
summers after construction (1987, 1988, and . 1989). Shisler and Charette (1984)
recommended that small disturbed areas less than 0.20 ha (0.50 acres) in size occurring
within a natural marsh be allowed to revegetate naturally. This might also apply to
created wetlands less than 0.20 ha (0.5 acres), especially if a potential seed source is
nearby. However, the amount of time required for the site to become fully revegetated
naturally is generally longer than if the wetland is planted. Therefore, the time period
required for the site to fully revegetate through natural means constitutes a wetland loss.
Planting lessens this temporal loss because it hastens the establishment of a functional
wetland (Kruczynski 1990).
Mulching the created wetland by applying a layer of topsoil removed from the
destroyed wetland may enhance and accelerate the revegetation process by providing a
supply of propagules. In addition, Kruczynski (1990) recommends mulching to provide an
organic surface horizon and sofl microflora. Mulching also helps to reduce evaporation
of soil pore water, runoff and sofl loss, and surface compaction and crusting (Thornburg
1977). Created wetlands in Florida and other areas of the southeastern United States are
routinely mulched. This has accelerated the successful establishment of wetland vegetation
on the sites (M. Brown, University of Florida, pers. comm.).
29
-------
If the created wetland is mulched with topsoil taken from the wetland destroyed,
the created wetland will revegetate from the seed bank of the wetland destroyed.
However, the species present in the wetland when it was destroyed may not be the ones
that germinate from the topsoil placed in the new wetland. The species composition
• within a seedbank results from the accumulation of seeds over many years, during which
time, the vegetation in the wetland may have changed. In a study comparing the
seedbanks of different vegetation zones within prairie marshes, van der Valk and Davis
(1976) found that the seedbanks of wetlands with open water regimes (an early stage of
marsh succession) contained the seeds of species characteristic of wet meadows (a later
stage of marsh succession). Moreover, the seedbank of the wet meadow contained seeds
of plants typical of the earlier, open water wetland. Therefore, the type of vegetation
present at any time is primarily a function of water level, although the potential floristic
composition of the vegetation community is a function of the makeup of the seedbank
(van der Valk and Davis 1976).
Instances Where Planting May be Advisable-
It may be necessary to plant the required species to ensure their establishment if
a specific wetland community or wildlife habitat is desired. The value of a wetland for
wildlife habitat and food depends upon water depth, the density of the vegetation, seed
production, accessibility of edible plant parts, and the associated production of
invertebrates. Vegetation stands that are too dense may be impenetrable to waterfowl,
while those that are too sparse will be unattractive. The plant parts consumed must be
abundant and available at the right times and in the right places (Kadlec and Wentz 1974).
If erosion is a concern, especially where the banks slope steeply into the wetland,
species should be chosen on the basis of their capacity for soil stabilization. Those with
extensive root systems, rhizomes and erect stems that form dense bunches or turf, are best
(Allen and Klimas 1986). Perennial species are probably more effective at erosion control
than annuals (G. Herb, Oregon Dept of Fish and Wildlife, pers. comm.)
It may be easier to control the spread of invasive species by planting early in the
wetland construction process. Some marsh species have difficulty colonizing if more
aggressive species become established first. Planting of desired species may give them a
competitive edge over invasive species (Josselyn et al. 1990).
If the created wetland is isolated from appropriate seed sources, planting may be
advisable. The majority of the created wetlands in this study were located within
residential developments, or commercial and light industrial complexes, and were at least
partially isolated from appropriate seed sources. Although these wetlands appear to have
revegetated naturally, others placed in similar surroundings might not receive sufficient
propagules to revegetate naturally and, therefore, will require planting (Josselyn et al.
1990).
30
-------
Planting also may be advisable because, in contrast to the seedbank studies cited
above, other studies suggest that the vegetation of an area cannot be used to predict the
composition of the seedbank and vice versa. In a project undertaken to study the
correlation of freshwater tidal wetland seedbanks with vegetation change, Leek and
Simpson (1987) found that marsh species have different dependence on seedbanks. Some
species have transient seedbanks (Impatiens capensis Meerb.) and others have persistent
seedbanks (Typha sp.). In addition, they concluded that freshwater marshes affected by
drought (such as inland marshes in the Pacific Northwest) have vegetation that is not
closely related to the seedbank. Thus, the vegetation of these wetlands cannot be used
to predict the composition of their seedbanks and vice versa.
Another study of the correlation of seedbanks with vegetation indicated that weedy
and early-successional species tend to be long-lived in the seedbank (Glass 1989). This
suggests that weedy and early successional species are likely to appear on a disturbed
site (such as a newly created wetland), and that the seedbank cannot be counted on to
produce the desired vegetation community.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE WETLAND CREATION UNDER SECTION 404
Permit conditions, construction plans and conceptual drawings often did not reflect
as-built conditions of the created wetlands. However, judgments of non-compliance cannot
be made without proper documentation of the construction process. In some instances,
it is likely that necessary changes were made during construction that made it appear the
site was out .of compliance. As-built drawings of the wetland, drawn after the completion
of the construction process, would be an accurate method of portraying the newly
constructed site for a determination of compliance. To be most useful, as-built drawings
should contain a location map for the created wetland, a map of its size and shape, the
plan scale, vertical elevations, and the datum used. All sketches, lettering, scales, etc,
should be clear and legible. The as-built drawings should also include the actual slopes
built within the wetland, where vegetation species were planted, and documentation of any
mid-course changes. In addition, the plans should contain the specific objectives of the
creation. These should be related to specific vegetation or habitat types, wildlife values
or other functional values (Fishman, et al. 1987).
Flexibility to make changes along the way is a crucial component of the wetland
creation process. However, if mid-course changes are not documented by either the
contractor or agency personnel, there are no means by which to determine if the project
is out of compliance or if differences merely reflect a necessary change in the plans due
to unanticipated conditions encountered during construction.
31
-------
Many developers have short-term goals and create wetlands only to fulfill regulatory
obligations; to ensure the created wetland persists in the landscape, the long-term goals
(including monitoring) should be specified in the permit (Shisler and Charette 1984). No
specific long-term goals or plans for monitoring were stated within any of the permit files
examined. Moreover, monitoring would have been difficult to implement due to the lack
of baseline data. As-built drawings and documentation of changes made during the
construction process would provide the baseline information from which monitoring could
be conducted.
Complete documentation that is organized in a consistent manner and composed
of specific data would allow resource agencies to more easily investigate and assess
projects as they proceed. If inspections were recorded on a standard "data sheet" which
contained the same parameters for all projects, future projects could then use the
information to evaluate the methods and techniques used (Shisler and Charette 1984,
Erwin 1990). None of the permit files examined included documentation of the sequence
of construction events, dates of inspections, or mid-course changes.
Mason and Slocum (1987) conducted an evaluation of 32 wetlands created in
Virginia's coastal zone. Criteria used were establishment of vegetation, compliance with
permit conditions, and evidence of wildlife use. They concluded that when permits
contained specific conditions for creating the wetland, 86% were successful, whereas only
44% of projects without specific permit conditions were successful. Where time limits for
completion of the wetland creation were specified in the permit, 100% of the projects
were successful compared to only a 50% success rate when no time limits or deadlines
were set. It appears that specific permit conditions help to ensure compliance with the
permit and the establishment of the created wetland.
In summary, the differences between the plans and specifications in the project file
and the as-built conditions point to the need for verification of projects in both the
planning and construction phases of the permitting process. The planning phase should
focus on the development of a realistic approach using information from the scientific
literature and past projects. The construction phase should culminate in the production
of an as-built plan. This would allow immediate checks to ensure that critical features
have been included as intended, e.g., wetland area, vegetation type. It would also
document any corrective measures that were taken due to unanticipated events during'
construction. As-built plans of the project would ensure that the details of the actual
wetland created were available for future reference in addition to the conceptual design.
32
-------
SECTION VI
LITERATURE CITED
Allen, H.H. and CV. Klimas. 1986. Reservoir Shoreline Revegetation Guidelines. Tech: Rep. E-86-13.
U.S. Army Eng. Waterways Bcp. Sta., Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Baker, G.F. 1984. An Analysis of Wetland Losses and Compensation Under the Clean Water Act Section
404 Program: Managing Natural Resources Through Mitigation. M.S. Thesis, University of San
Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Crawford, R.D. and J_A. Rossiter. 1982. General design considerations in creating artificial wetlands for
wildlife, p. 44-47. In W.D. Svedarsky and R.D. Crawford (Eds.), Wildlife Values of Gravel Pits,
Symposium Proceedings. Misc. Pub. 17-1982. Ag. Exp. Sta., Univ. of Minn., Duluth, Minnesota.
D'Avanzo, C 1990. Long-term evaluation of wetland creation projects, p. 487-496. In J.A Kusler and
M.E Kentula (Eds.), Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science, Part 2:
Perspectives. Island Press, Washington, District of Columbia.
Erwin, K.L. 1990. Freshwater marsh creation and restoration in the Southeast, p. 233-266. In J.A. Kusler
and M.E. Kentula (Eds.), Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science, Part 1:
Regional Reviews. Island Press, Washington, District of Columbia.
Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation. 1989. Federal Manual for Identifying and
Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. US. Army Corps of Eng, U.S. Env. Protection Agency, U.S.
Fish and Wildl Serv., and U.SJXA, Soil Conserv. Serv., Washington, District of Columbia. Coop.
Tech. PubL
Fishman, P.A, N.S. Geiger, L. Sharp, J.W. Buell, and L Wilson. 1987. Estuarine Mitigation Evaluation
Project-Mitigation Site Evaluation Notebook. Submitted to the Department of Land Conservation
and Development and The Division of State Lands. Fishman Environmental Services, Portland,
Oregon.
Garbisch, E.W., Jr. 1977. Recent and Planned Marsh Establishment Work Throughout the Contiguous
United States-A Survey and Basic Guidelines. Contr. Rep. D-77-3. U.S. Army Eng. Waterways
Exp. Sta., Vicksbnrg, Mississippi
Garbisch, EW., Jr. 1986. Highways and Wetlands: Compensating Wetland Losses. Contr. Rep. DOT-
• FH-11-9442. Fed. Highway Admin., Office of Implementation, McLean, Virginia.
Glass, S. 1989. The role of soil seed banks in restoration and management Restor. & Manag. Notes
7(l):24-29.
Good, J.W. 1987. Mitigating estuarine development in the Pacific Northwest: from concept to practice.
Northwest Env. Jour. 3(1)53-111.
Hitchcock, CL. and A CronquisL 1981. Flora of the Pacific Northwest-An Illustrated Manual. 5th
Edition. Univ. of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington.
33
-------
Josselyn, M, J. Zedier, and T. Griswold. 1990. Wetland mitigation along the Pacific Coast of the United
States, p. 3-36. In J-A. Kusler and M.E Kentula (Eds.), Wetland Creation and Restoration: The
Status of the Science, Part 1: Regional Reviews. Island Press, Washington, District of Columbia.
Kadlec, JA. and WA. Wentz. 1974. State-of-the-An Survey and Evaluation of Marsh Plant Establishment
Techniques: Induced and Natural. Volume I: Report of Research. U.S. Army Eng. Waterways
Exp. Sta., Contr. Rep. D-74-9. Vicksburg, Mississippi. Grant No. DACW72-74-C-0010.
Kentula, M.E., J.C Sifheos, J.W., M Rylko, and K, Kunz. Trends and patterns in Section 404 permitting
in Oregon and Washington. Submitted to Euv. Manag.
Kruczynski, W.L. 1990. Options to be considered in preparation and evaluation of mitigation plans, p. 555-
570. In JA Kusler and ME Kentula (Eds.), Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of
the Science, Pan 2: Perspectives. Island Press, Washington, District of Columbia.
Kusler, JA and ME Kentula. 1990. Executive Summary, p. xvii-xxv. In JA. Kusler and ME Kentula
(Eds.), Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science. Island Press, Washington,
District of Columbia.
Leek, MA. and RJL Simpson. 1987. Seed bank of a freshwater tidal wetland: turnover and relationship
to vegetation change. Amer. J. Hot 74(3):360-370.
Lounsbury, J.F. and F.T. Aldrich. 1986. Introduction to Geographic Field Methods and Techniques. 2nd
Edition. Charles E Merrill Publishing Co., Columbus, Ohio.
Mason, CO. and DA. Slocum. 1987. Wetland replication-does it work? p. 1183-1197. In Proceedings
of the 5th Symposium on Coastal and Ocean Management, May 1987, Volume 1. Amer. Soc. of
Civil Eng., New York, New York.
Memorandum of Agreement Between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the
Army Concerning the Determination of Mitigation Under the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(l)
Guidelines, (Feb. 7, 1990).
Quammen, ML. 1986. Measuring the success of wetlands mitigation. Nat Wetlands NewsL 8(5):6-8.
Reimold, RJ. and SA Cobler. 1986. Wetlands Mitigation Effectiveness. USEPA Contract No. 68-04-
0015. Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. Wakefield, Massachusetts.
Reiner, EL. 1989. The Biological and Regulatory Aspects of Salt Marsh Protection, Restoration and
Creation in Massachusetts. MS. Thesis, Dept. of Biology, Northeastern Univ., Boston,
Massachusetts.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). U.S.
Fish WildL Serv. BioL Rep. 88(26.9). Washington, District of Columbia.
Shisler, J.K. and DJ. Charene. 1984. Evaluation of Artificial Salt Marshes in New Jersey. NJ. Agric. Exp.
Sta. PubL No. P-40502-01-84.
Statistical Graphics Corporation. 1988. Statgraphics Statistical Graphics System, ISBN 0-926683-24-1.
RockvOle, Maryland.
34
-------
Steward, A.N., LJ. Dennis, and H.M. Gilkey. 1963. Aquatic Plants of the Pacific Nonhwest-With
Vegetative Keys. 2nd Edition. Oregon State Univ. Press, Corvallis, Oregon.
Thornburg, A. 1977. Use of vegetation for stabilization of shorelines of the Great Lakes, p. 39-53. In
Proceedings of the Workshop on the Role of Vegetation in Stabilization of the Great Lakes
Shoreline. Great Lakes Basin Commission, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
van der Valk, A.G. and CB. Davis. 1976. The seed banks of prairie glacial marshes. Can. J. BOL
54:1832-1838.
Wentworth, T.R., G.P. Johnson, and ILL. KologiskL 1988. Designation of wetlands by weighted averages
of vegetation data: a preliminary evaluation. Water Res. BoIL 24(2)383-396.
Willard, D.E. and A.K. Hfller. 1990. Wetland dynamics: considerations for restored and created wetlands,
p. 459-466. In J.A. Kusler and ME. Kentula (Eds.), Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status
of the Science, Pan 2: Perspectives. Island Press, Washington, District of Columbia.
Zedler, J.B. and M.E. Kentula. 1986. Wetland Research Plan. EPA/600/3-86/009, Environmental Research
Lab., U.S. Env. Protection Agency, Corvallis, Oregon. Nat. Tech. Infer. Serv. Accession No.
PB86158656/AS.
35
-------
APPENDIX I
DATA COLLECTED FOR EACH SITE: DESCRIPTIONS, PERMIT AND FIELD MAPS,
BASIN MORPHOLOGY PROFILES, AND SPECIES LISTS
DESCRIPTION: SITE Cl-CC
This project was mitigation for wetlands lost during the development of approximately 24.28
ha (60 acres) of industrially zoned land. The development entailed the (1) relocation of
approximately 650 linear feet of Phillips Creek, requiring the backfilling of the existing creek with
approximately 4,000 cubic yards of fill material; (2) placement of about 1,400 cubic yards of fill
material in a pond/wetland area adjacent to Phillips Creek; (3) placement of approximately 3400
cubic yards of fill material for the construction of a road adjacent to the pond/wetland area; (4)
placement of approximately 500 cubic yards of fill material in a wetland for the construction of a
road and site development; (5) placement of approximately 250 cubic yards of riprap and the
construction of a 60-foot long, 6 by 30 foot concrete box culvert for the construction of a road
across ML Scon Creek; and (6) placement of about 200 yards of rock for the construction of a weir
at the east end of an overflow channel The loss of approximately 1.38 ha (3.4 acres) of
pond/wetland habitat was to be compensated by the creation of approximately 0.77 ha (1.9 acres)
of pond/wetland habitat within the ML Scon Creek containment benn.
The goal of the wetland's creation was functional replacement of the wetland area IOSL
Functional replacement at this site consisted of flood storage and desynchronization, wildlife habitat,
food chain support, non-consumptive and consumptive recreation, and fisheries habitaL
In August of 1981, about one year after the mitigation work was completed, the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) inspected the site and found several problems. These
included the lack of a water supply to the wetland, the lack of aquatic vegetation at the site, the
lack of a buffer snip of vegetation around the perimeters of the ponds, and that an excessive
amount of riparian vegetation had been removed during construction (G. Herb, ODFW, pers.
comm.).
The water supply for the wetland originates from a spring approximately 100 yards up a nearby
hilL Originally, the pipes that had been designed to carry water from the spring to the wetland had
been installed upside-down. Therefore, water was being diverted from the wetland. This problem
has been corrected and water is now being supplied to the wetland (G. Herb, ODFW, pers. comm.).
Aquatic and emergent plant species have become established within the wetland since water has
been supplied. However, local children have discovered the area and are using the excavated areas
between the trees as motorcycle paths. This is destroying much of the wetland.
This wetland was created in August of 1980; the water supply was corrected in 1982. It was
nearly 7 years old when sampled in June of 1987.
General Description
The created wetland is a mosaic of ponds, emergent marsh, trees on hummocks, motorcycle
paths and upland grasses. It was created within the Mt. Scott Creek containment benn and is
36
-------
separated by it from a grassy meadow to the north and parking lots to the south. When this site
was created, the ground between the trees was excavated and covered with a thin layer of soil from
the destroyed wetland. Many of the large existing trees were allowed to remain, and now sit on
hummocks interspersed throughout the wetland. The excavated areas exhibit three conditions: 1)
water ponded with emergent vegetation; 2) no standing water, but moist soils supporting vegetation;
and 3) bare ground, primarily trails created by the motorcycle traffic
Water is supplied to the wetland via pipes from a spring on the slope above. It enters the site
on the north bank of a small pond that occupies the eastern quarter of the wetland. There is a
small pipe leading from this pond through a hummock to the remaining area, but when sampled,
water level in the pond was lower than the pipe and only a small stream of water was flowing.
At the western end of the wetland, the marsh narrows into a stream flowing west However,
there was no visible flow of water from the wetland into the stream during sampling.
Elevation changes both between the wetland and the neighboring meadow, and within the
wetland were quite large. The slopes of the berm were rather steep and the general topography
within the site was uneven and hilly due to the mosaic of hummocks and depressions.
Hydrology and Substrate
Water was clear, odorless, and stagnant. There was a thick layer of duckweed (Lemna sp.)
covering the surface of the main pond, however if this layer was disturbed, the pond's bottom could
be easily seen.
A very small stream of water was flowing from the pond into the adjacent depressions. This
flow was too small to allow ponding to develop during the dry summer months, as the water was
obviously being absorbed into the soil
There was evidence that when high water conditions exist, channels form around the
trees/hummocks.
The Munsell Color Book indicated soil chromas were borderline hydric (Le., 2). Although a
layer of wetland soil had been spread over the excavated areas (G. Herb, ODFW, pen. comm.), no
definite break in soil color, texture, or appearance was observed within the top 30 on. A few of
the soil pits were not dug to 30 cm because a day hardpan, or cobbles and gravel was encountered.
Mottles were observed in the top 5 cm of the soil indicating periodic inundation (Sofl Conservation
Service 1975).
Dominant Vegetation
Pond water surfaces were choked with aquatic and emergent vegetation, primarily (Lemna minor
L.) and species of Polygonmn.
Many Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia Benth.) and cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa T. & G.)
on-the hummocks were beginning to die. Possible causes include root damage from the excavating
process (or from motorcycle traffic), and the periodic inundation of the bases of the trees. The
hummocks were also covered with upland grasses, sedges, and blackberry vines (Rnbus sp.). Of
interest was the presence of blue wild-rye (Efymus glaucns Buck!.), a native perennial grass normally
found in prairie areas of western Oregon.
37
-------
The slopes of the containment berm were vegetated with introduced grasses (mostly species of
Poa and Bromus) tansy ragwort (Senecio jacobeae L), blackberry vines (Rnbus sp.), and other
upland plants.
Hydrophytic vegetation inhabiting the excavated areas that hadn't been disturbed by motorcycle
traffic consisted mainly of species of Eteochoris.
See the list of "Species Found On Site Cl-CC" for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined. Many birds were observed and heard at this
site. They included robins, red-tailed hawks, starlings, and song sparrows. Deer tracks were seen
in the mod. However, the noise from the nearby highway was often loud enough to drown out the
bird calls, and this disturbance may influence wildlife use.
of rt»c Site One Yfar T
Overall, the site appeared very similar to conditions observed the previous year. A few
differences were noted, however. The easternmost pond in the mosaic was more choked with
Polygonum than the previous year. Duckweed (Lemna minor L>) was still present, but was being
crowded out by the Polygonum. The vegetated areas between the hummocks were drier and more
sparsely vegetated, and the bare areas were more extensive-possibly due to heavier motorcycle
traffic
38
-------
PERMIT MAP
C1-CC
[>:-- J Proposed Replacement Wetland
ML Scott Creek (existing chameO
Proposed Berm
0
I-
0
1:800
8 16 24 m
33 67 ft
N
-------
FIELD MAP
C1-CC
BMT1
Bl
VT4
Basin Morphology Transect
Vegetation Transect
Start of Transect
End of Transect
•j=f§y Marsh Area Suveyed
0
t-
SOUKK Dab cdtecwl by Stttarie Own & Sheri Carter July. 1987
Map dratted by T. Smrti
1:800
8 16 24 m
N
33 67
40
-------
SITE C1-CC
Transect 1
Elevation (m)
0.4
0.2
18
14 ie IB eo
Distance (m)
SITE C1-CC
Transect 2
34
Elevation (m)
a
2.B
2
1.8
I
O.B
9 10 11 u ia
Distance (n)
IB 18
17
IS
18 20
21 22
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL-obligate wetland species; FACW--
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-cxotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the 'Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland" and the list of "Species Found On Site".
Species listed for Planting in Created Wetland Cl-CC
There was no planting list included in the permit file for this site.
Species Pound On Site Cl-OC During Summer 1987
Species Wetland Indicator Code
Juncus effusus FACW+NAT
Holcus lanatus ' FAQEXO
Rubus discolor FACU-EXO
Geum macrophyllum FACW+NAT
Stachys cooleyae FACWVNAT
Carer stipata OBIANAT
Galium aparine FACUVNAT
Agrostis alba FACWVEXO
Lotus corniculatus FAC\EXO
Polygonum hydropiperoides OBLVNAT
Eleocharis palustris OBUNAT
Veronica americana OBLVNAT
Carex laeviculmis FACWNNAT
Vicia tetraspenna UPLVEXO
Carex unilateralis FACWNNAT
Geranium dissectum UPLVEXO
Fragaria vesca FACUVNAT
Dactylis glomerata FACUVEXO
Senecio jacobaea UPLVEXO
Tellima grandiflora FACUVNAT
Juncus ensifolius FACW\NAT
Scirpus microcarpus OBLVNAT
Alopecurus pratensis FACWVEXO
Poa palustris FAQEXO
Epilobium watsonii FACW-NAT
Cornus stolonifera FACW\NAT
Phalaris arundinacea FACWVNAT
Alnus rubra FAONAT
Fraxinus latifolia FACW\NAT
42
-------
Rubus uisinus
Anthoxanthum odoratum
Vicia saliva
Hedera helix
Circaea alpina
Ranunculus repens
Camassia leichtlinii
Symphoricarpos albus
Carex feta
Eleocharis ovata
Juncus bnfonius
Lemna minor
Leersia oiyzoides
Populus trichocaipa
Juncus tenuis
Plantago lanceolata
Alopecunis geniculatus
Oemleria cerasiformis
Rumex crispus
FACWNAT
FAOflEXO
UPUEXO
UPL\EXO
FACW\NAT
FACW\EXO
FACW-NAT
FACUWAT
FACW\NAT
OBUNAT
FACW+NAT
OBL\NAT
OBUNAT
FACW\NAT
FAQNAT
FACU+EXO
FACW+NAT
FACU\NAT
FACW\EXO
43
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE C2-TI
Function/Purpose
This project was mitigation for the construction of a marina facility providing moorage space
for approximately 800 boats. The construction of the moorage involved dredging approximately
500,000 cubic yards of sand. In addition, approximately 90,000 cubic yards of fill material were used
as bank protection material and approximately 20,000 cubic yards of rock riprap were used to
stabilize and protect 6,000 linear feet of bankline. Approximately 50,000 cubic yards of fill material
was placed in an existing 1.21 ha (3 acre) wetland to establish sufficient area for a dredge disposal
area, access, and parking for the project Approximately 250 pilings were driven to secure an
estimated 11,000 linear feet of floating access walkways, fingerfloats, a fueling float, and a sewage
pumpout facility.
Proposed functions and purposes of the wetland created as mitigation for impacts caused by
construction of the marina facility are food chain support, wildlife habitat, fisheries habitat, sediment
trapping, and flood storage and desynchronization.
General Description
The created wetland is a pond in the bottom of a bowl-shaped depression with very steep banks.
The sandy berm separating it from Oregon Slough on the south stands several meters above the
water level The street and parking lots to the north of the site sit over 20 feet above the level of
the pond-this bank is also very steep. The EPA permit log states that the project is in violation
of the permit, but does not state why. The steepness and height of the banks might be the reason.
There is very little vegetation within the wetland. The plants are mostly small seedlings except
for some shrubs on the western slope and on top of the berm separating the pond from Oregon
Slough. Ornamentals have been planted along the top of the north bank next to the parking lot
These plants are being watered by sprinklers. This is creating a strange vegetation regime. The
plants being watered are growing lushry, and the volunteers just below them on the bank are also
growing well because of runoff from the watering. There are more "wetland" type plants growing
in this area, high above the natural water line, than are growing adjacent to the pond. The area
just below these plants is quite bare and dry. Further down the slope, just above the pond, wetland
vegetation occurs again, but the area is mostly mudflats with young seedlings.
Water marks on the steep banks indicate that water level fluctuates greatly. A large culvert
enters the pond midway on the north side. This culvert appears to be both the inlet and outlet to
the pond, depending upon water levels in the adjacent water bodies. When the field crew sampled
this wetland, water in the pond was two to three feet deep. It appears that the pond also accepts
runoff from the surrounding areas because all are at higher elevations, and erosion from water
flowing down the banks was evident.
This project was 11 months old when sampled in Jury of 1987.
Hydrology and Substrate
Water'in the pond was stagnant but clear and odorless. Small amounts of suspended materials
were visible, but the bottom of the pond could be seen easily. The water appeared to be several
feet deep near the culvert and approximately six inches to a foot deep around the margins of the
pond.
44
-------
The substrate appeared to be about 95% sand. The Munsell Color Book indicated soil sample
chromas ranging from /3 (non-hydric) to /I (hydric). Mottling was seen in most soil pits, but
usually not within 5 cm of the soil surface. Water was observed in only a few soil pits, indicating
the level of the water table was lower at that point in time than the depth of most soil pits dug.
Mudflats surrounding the pond are vegetated with small, young seedlings. Many of these
seedlings are the same species as plants observed in a nearby remnant of a natural marsh (E.
Alverson, Botanist, pers. comm.). Salix sp., among other shrubs and trees, were growing on the
term separating the pond from Oregon Slough and on the bank west of the pond leading up to
a boat yard.
See the list of "Species Found On Site C2-TT for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined. Very little wildlife was observed at this site.
We saw a frog, some redwing blackbirds, barn swallows, and a killdeer.
The area was covered with dog tracks and a man walking his dog was observed in the filled area
adjacent to the pond.
Impressions of the Site One Year Later
Overall, this site appeared unchanged from the previous summer. The water level in the pond
may have been slightly lower. Vegetation cover of the site had increased, especially Salix seedlings
growing in the mudflat/sandy areas. Also, the vegetation along the Derm and banks was thicker and
taller. However, the wetland was still mostly unvegetated mudflats.
45
-------
PERMIT MAP
C2-TI
- A \ ^•T*r»"*"JlTjPTJ*'; •>•'"> • ~ tiff if 'X.
Low Shrub Wetland Planting Area
Marsh Aroa
Pond Area
1:500
5 10 m
21 42ft
Map DrnMcMl by Tcncy Smltli
-------
FIELD MAP
C2-TI
BMT2
0
h
1:600
6 10
m
21
42 t
Pond and omeroem vegetation boundaries are ttie
approximate locations observed In July. 1987
Data collected by Stephanie Qwtoi & Sherl Confer
Map dratted by Tracy Smith
VT Vegetation Transect
BMT _- Basin Morphology Transect
A Start of Transect
• End of Transect
-H- Dam
O Culvert
^—Jr Wetland Outlet or Inlet
l-SSi- Pond
*"-* Emergent Vegetation
""^o Survey
^5- Ppe (underground)
47
-------
SFTE C2-TI
Transect 1
Elevation (n)
a
1.8
1.8
0.8
18
Distance (•)
SITE C2-TI
Transect 2
78
Elevation (n)
8.B
to
14
IB 18 ~ 89
Distance (•)
84
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL-obligate wetland species; FACW-
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO—exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the "Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland* and the list of 'Species Found On Site'.
Species
for Planting in Created Wetland C2-TI
1 Stirpus validus
2 Potamogeton crispus
3 Cyperus esculentus*
4 Potentilla anserina
5 Polygonum hydropiper
6 Eleocharis palustris
7 Sagittaria latifolia
8 Spiraea douglasii
9 Salix sitchensis
Secies Found On Site C7-TI During
Wetland Indicator Code
OBUNAT
OBL\EXO
FACWWAT
OBL\NAT
OBUEXO
OBL\NAT
OBUNAT
FACWWAT
FACW\NAT
1987
Species
1 Juncus effusus
2 Juncus tenuis
3 Plantago major
4 Veronica americana
5 Salix fluviatilis
6 Veronica serpyllifolia
7 Gratiola neglecta
8 Chenopodium ambrosioides
9 Gnaphaiium uliginosum
10 Tfflaea aquatica
11 Heleochloa alopecuroides
12 Agrostis exarata
13 Epilobium watsonii
14 Eragrostis pectinacea
IS Gnaphaiium palustre
16 Polygonum persicaria
17 Spergularia rubra
18 Polygonum aviculare
19 Cyperus esculentus*
Wetland Indicator Code
FACW+NAT
FAQNAT
FAC+EXO
OBL\NAT
OBUNAT
FAQEXO
OBLVNAT
FAQEXO
FAQNAT
OBUNAT
OBUEXO
FACW\NAT
FACW-NAT
FAQNAT
FAC+NAT
FACW\EXO
FAC-EXO
FACW-EXO
FACW\NAT
49
-------
20 Mollugo verticillata FAONAT
21 Equisetum arvense FAONAT
22 Limosella aquatica OBL\NAT
23 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
24 Undernia dubia OBL\NAT
25 Cyperus erythrorhizos OBL\NAT
26 Panicum capillare FAONAT
27 Arctium minus FACIAEXO
28 Lindemia anagallidea OBL\NAT
29 Peplis portula FACW\EXO
30 Potygonum hydropiperoides OBL\NAT
31 Cyperaceae 1 (seedling) ???
32 Rorippa curvisiliqua FACW+NAT
33 Chenopodium botrys FACIAEXO
34 Trifolium repens FACU+EXO
35 Solidago ooddentalis FACW\NAT
36 Festuca arundinacea FACU-EXO
37 Echinochloa crusgalli FACWVNAT
38 Euphorbia supina UPLNEXO
39 Digitaria ischaemnm FACIAEXO
40 Chenopodium album FAOEXO
50
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE O3-NS
Function/Purpose
This project was mitigation for the placement of up to 7,960 cubic yards of fill material and
rock riprap in the 100 year flood plain of Fanno Creek to elevate Nimbus Avenue (south of Scholl's
Ferry Road) above the floodplain. The pre-existing field between Nimbus Avenue and Fanno Creek
was excavated. The excavation work was intended to maintain flood storage volumes and result in
wetter soil conditions to allow natural revegetation by wetland species. Other functions and
purposes of this mitigation are flood desynchronization, wildlife habitat, nutrient cycling, and
sediment trapping.
General Description
As called for in the project permit, there is a grassy berm separating the detention area from
Fanno Creek. It has steep sides that stand approximately 4 to 6 feet above the creek edge except
at a narrow opening that serves as the connection between the wetland and the creek.
The northern half of the wetland was covered by shallow water. Pond edges were gradually
sloped and the water appeared to be a few feet deep in some places. At the northeast corner, rock
riprap created a steep bank up to Nimbus Avenue. There was very little emergent vegetation in
this half of the wetland, so it was not sampled.
The southern half of the wetland consisted of mudflats and emergent vegetation interspersed
with ponds of stagnant water and slowly flowing rivulets. The edges gradually sloped up to Nimbus
Avenue on the east side, to a grassy field on the south side, and to the berm separating the wetland
from Fanno Creek on the west side.
A small underground spring flowed into the wetland near its southwest corner. Water from
this spring was slowly flowing over the wetland in no established channel toward the connection
with Fanno Creek. This spring was considered the inlet to the wetland; the point where the water
entered Fanno Creek, the outlet At the outlet, the water formed a small channel When high
water conditions exist, water from Fanno Creek will flood the wetland, entering the site through
what usually is the outlet
When sampled in June 1987, this project was approximately 6 months old.
Hydrology and Substrate
Water in the wetland was odorless, slightly murky, and very shallow in the sampled area. As
mentioned above, the water was much deeper and formed a pond in the northern half of the
wetland. It flowed very slowly across the wetland toward the connection with Fanno Creek and
formed stagnant pools in many places.
Most soil samples taken exhibited Munsell Color chromas of /I, indicating hydric soil. A few
samples exhibited a H chroma, indicating a "borderline* hydric soil. All sample pits had mottling
in the upper 5 cm of the soil, which indicates periodic inundation (Soil Conservation Service 197S).
Most of the sofl pits immediately filled with water when dug. A few rilled rapidly to the surface.
The soil was a very heavy, fine, mixture of silt and clay.
51
-------
rv>minant Vegetation
The area surrounding the wetland was covered primarily with upland grasses, including species
of Bromos, Poa, and Dactylis. There was one large ash tree (Fratinns latifolia Benth.) and a thicket
of wild roses (Rosa sp.) on the east edge of the wetland. Emergent vegetation was sparse across
the mudflats, possibly due to the young age of the wetland. However, most species appeared
reproductive. A very notable aspect was the unusually high number of native herbs present These
include Gratkria neglecta Torr, Lindemia dnbia (L.) Pennell, and several Ranunculns species.
Seeds of these taxa presumably arrived via Fanno Creek, although transport by waterfowl is also
possible. Another interesting note was the presence of thalloid liverworts (possibly Rictia sp.) along
the mudflat's east shore. About 75% of the water's edge had a brownish or greenish algal bloom.
See the list of "Species Found On Site 03-NS" for an explicit account of the species identified.
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Birds observed included mourning doves, killdeer, robins, mallard ducks, ringneck pheasants,
and red winged blackbirds. Dragonflies and frogs were also observed.
impressions of the She One Year Later
This wetland seemed to be maturing well. Shallow water covered almost the entire site. The
vegetation was mostly wetland species. Whereas last summer most plants were seedlings, this
summer many were mature and more seedlings were present.
52
-------
PERMIT MAP
03-NS
Proposed pond
Existing elevati
tours OnteeO
Famo Creek
0 8 16
0 33 67
1 :800
m
H
53
-------
FIELD MAP
03-NS
Vegetation Transect
Basin Morphology Transect
Start of Transect
End of Transect
Riprap
Emergent Vegetation
Shatow Pond
Wetbnd Wet or Ouflet
Underground Spring
/ ^
N
1 : 800
0 8 16 24
m
33 67 ft
Map dratted by Tracy Smith
Data coSected by Stephanie Gwin & Sheri Confer
Pond and emergent vegetation boundaries are the
approximate locations observed in Juty. 1987
54
-------
Elevation (m)
SITE 03-NS
Transect 1
I—I—I—I—I—I I I I I I I I I I I I
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60
Distance (m)
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL-obligate wetland species; FACW--
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the "Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland* and the list of •Species Found On Site'.
Species TJCTMI far Planting in Created Wetland O3-NS
There was no planting list included in the permit files for this site. This site was to be allowed
to revegetate naturally (G. Herb, ODFW, pers. comm.).
Species R>nf*d On Site O3-NS During Summer 1987
Wetland Indicator Codes
1 meocharis ovata OBUNAT
2 Ranunculus repens FACW\EXO
3 Epilobium watsonii FACW-NAT
4 Rorippa curvisiliqua FACW+NAT
5 Gnaphalinm uliginosum FAQNAT
6 Callitriche stagnalis OBL\NAT
7 Lindemia dubia OBUNAT
8 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
9 Scirpus validus OBL\NAT
10 Alopecurus pratensis FACW\EXO
11 Carex stipata OBUNAT
12 Salix sp. ???
13 Echinochloa crusgalli FACW\NAT
14 Alopecurus geniculatus FACW+NAT
15 Poa trivialis FACW-EXO
16 Myosotis laxa OBUNAT
17 Phalaris arandinacea FACW\NAT
18 Rorippa islandica OBUNAT
19 Loliura perenne FACIAEXO
20 Trifolium repens FACU+EXO
21 Cirsium arvense FACU+EXO
22 Trifolium dubium UPUEXO
23 Unknown Herb 2 ???
24 Ludwigia palustris OBUNAT
25 Typha latifolia OBUNAT
26 Juncus tenuis FAONAT
27 Juncus effusus FACW+NAT
28 Pynis malus UPL\EXO
56
-------
29 Veronica americana OBL\NAT
30 Plantago major FAC+EXO
31 Glyceria leptostachya OBL\NAT
32 Gnaphalium palustre FAC+NAT
33 Ranunculus sceleratus OBUNAT
34 Solanum dulcamara FAQEXO
35 Polygonum persicaria FACW\EXO
36 Rumex salitifolius FACW\NAT
37 Leersia oryzoides OBLANAT
57
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE O4-MHP
Function/Purpose
This project was mitigation for a residential development and shopping center requiring the
placement of up to 13,600 cubic yards of fill material in an un-named tributary of Ash Creek. A
lake has been created, of which 03 acres of its southwest shore have been planted with wetland
vegetation. Emergent vegetation was to be planted along the lake edges and in the shallows.
Proposed functions of the created lake and wetlands include: provide wildlife habitat (especially
wildfowl), create an aesthetically pleasing 'open space" within the development, detention and
storage of surface water runoff, and reduction of erosion below the site by the desynchronization
of storm waters coming from above the lake. Surface runoff was expected to increase upon
completion of the development due to the greatly enlarged area of impervious surfaces. According
to the "Development and Management Plan for Stream and Lake System" designed for this site, the
area was a forested woodland prior to development.
General Description
The wetland area comprised a very small section of this site. The bulk of the site was occupied
by a small lake and the clover covered lawns surrounding it. Ponland General Electric's buildings
sit on the hill to the south of the site, and the new shopping center is on the hill to the north.
Murray Boulevard borders the lake at its eastern edge. A culvert runs under Murray and connects
the lake with a system of ponds in the housing development across the road.
The lake receives water from two streams. One enters the lake at its northwest corner and the
other enters the lake at its southwest comer. A road separates the streams from the lake,
therefore, water from the streams enter the lake via weirs and culverts running under the road.
Both of these creeks are to be converted to emergent marshes directly upstream of the road. The
area where the SW stream abuts the road looked like a marshy area with woody shrubs at sampling
time. Although the design plans called for it to be graded to lower elevations, it had not yet been
dredged. The area where the NW stream abuts the road had already been excavated and flooded
to create a very small pond.
The lake empties through the culvert under Murray Boulevard into the ponds on the other side
of the road.
The lake bottom and sides have been covered with a clay liner to prevent seepage and water loss.
The area of lake edge indicated by the construction plans as "emergent marsh" has been covered
with a thin layer ("20 buckets') of soil dredged from the marsh just upstream and northwest of the
lake. This is the only portion of the lake edge that supported emergent vegetation. The bulk of
the lakeshore was a very steep drop-off (almost vertical) from the level of the lawns. This is
contrary to the mitigation plans which state that "side slopes will not exceed 3:1 around the
perimeter of the lake". Clover grew up to the lake's edge.
A fountain was located in the center of the eastern half of the lake. It provided artificial
circulation to the lake to prevent it from stagnating during low water summer conditions.
This project was completed in December of 1986. When sampled in June of 1987, the site was
approximately six months old.
58
-------
The water in the lake was odorless.. Visibility into the water was limited to the upper few
inches due to its dark green color. This coloring was probably caused by a bloom of unicellular
blue-green algae visible on the water's surface and floating just under the surface.
The lake was to be 6 feet deep on the average. This was impossible to verify because of the
limited visibility. The construction crew field boss informed me that the water level has been
lowered and raised depending upon existing construction plans. These plans have changed several
times. During sampling (June 23,1987), the water level was at the very top of the banks. During
a revisit to the site a few weeks later, the water level was approximately half as high.
Digging soil pits was very difficult because of the clay liner applied to the bottom and sides of
the lake. The construction plans stated that the purpose of the liner was to prevent water loss due
to seepage and to discourage the rooting of •nuisance* aquatic plants. The liner seemed to be
effectively preventing seepage along the lake edge because all soil pits but two were completely dry,
both at the time of digging and after the 30 minute stabilization period.
The Munsell Color Book indicated non-hydric soil chromas (/3 and /4) for eight of the ten plots
sampled. The remaining two plots had chromas of 12 which indicates a borderline hydric soil
Mottling was present in the upper 5 cm of the soil, indicating periodic inundation (Soil
Conservation Service 1975).
Substrate particle size was approximately 90% fine (clays) with a trace of cobble and gravel
Dominant Vegetation
As stated above, the lake was surrounded by wide lawns of clover that extend from the
development down to the water's edge. The slope from the east bank of the lake up to Murray
Boulevard was mulched with bark dust and planted with ornamental shrubs and herbaceous plants.
There are a few large conifers at the southeast corner. Judging from their large size, they probably
were left standing when the forested woodland was cleared from this site. The area west of the lake
between the two streams was thickly forested when we sampled.
A narrow strip of wetland vegetation was confined to the western edge of the lake shore. Here
the slope was slightly less steep.
See the list of "Species Found On Site 04-MHP" for an explicit account of the species
identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Several species of swallow were observed skimming over the surface of the lake, including:
violet-green swallows, barn swallows, cliff swallows and tree swallows. Starlings and other birds
were heard in the nearby forest but not seen. Several different types of dragonflies were observed.
59
-------
Addendum
On August 8, 1987, Ed ANeison and Sheri Confer (two members of the field team) revisited
the site to collect vegetation samples. They reponed that the-lake had been completely drained
and heavy equipment was working in and around it. The soil had been scraped away from all the
banks, so that they appeared less steep than when we sampled. The stream entering the lake from
its southwest corner had been widened into a bowl shaped impoundment at the point where it abuts
the road separating it from the lake.
Impressions of the She One Year Later
As noted in the Addendum above, the lake had been completely regraded, particularly the
western half. It had been enlarged, and the nonh and south banks steepened. The lawn on the
north bank had been removed. The lake bottom had been made very regular and the water level
lowered so that it was approximately 03m deep in the west end extending out several meters toward
the center, where it again deepened. Three fountains were present The effects of erosion were
visible. The clover has been replaced by upland grasses at the west end.
The intended wetland strip along the western edge of the lake had slightly more vegetation than
during sampling the previous summer. The bank was more irregular than it was previously. This
area was being watered with a sprinkler system.
The stream coming into the southwest corner of the lake has been widened and islands
constructed within it. A cyclone fence was installed around the perimeter of this area.
60
-------
PERMIT MAP
04-MHP
Pond
Emergent Vegetation
0 12 24 36 m
0 60 100 ft
1:1200
MHI dfglled by Lori Jensen
-------
o\
N)
FIELD MAP
04-MHP
Proposed
Emergent
Vegetation
VT
1M1
Start of Transect
End of Transect
Vegetation Transect
Basin Morphology Transact
i
Emergent Vegetation
Pond
Bridge Qrate
Fountain
60 100
ft
1:1200
Dltch
Manhole
Fire Hydrant
Fir T'ree
Maple Tree
N
Sdurcu: Daia collected by Stephanie Qwln A Sherl Cooler July. 1987
Mnp drullud by Lori Jensen
-------
dmtion H
SITE 04-MHP
i
SITE 04-MHP
ta
amttti M
SITE 04-MHP
Hornets
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL~obligate wetland species; FACW-
facultative wetland species; FAC-fecultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL~
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the "Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland* and the list of 'Species Found On Site*.
Species I j«t«i for Planting in Created Wetland O4-MHP
Wetland Indicator Code
1 Spiraea douglasii FACW\NAT
2 Cornus stolonifera var occidentalis FACW\NAT
3 Scirpus microcarpus OBUNAT
4 Ranunculus sp. ???
5 Typha sp. OBL\???
6 Safe sp. ???
7 "Great bulrush* ???
Common names only were used for all plants listed for this site. Where possible, genus and
species were determined for the common names given.-
Species Found On Site 04-MHP Daring S"""""" 1987
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Trifolium dubium UPUEXO
2 Lolium perenne FACU\EXO
3 Leontodon nudicanlis UPL\EXO
4 Trifolium pratense FACU\EXO
5 Vicia sativa UPL\EXO
6 Trifolium repens FACU+EXO
7 Glyceria leptostachya OBL\NAT
8 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
9 Spergularia rubra FAC-EXO
10 Deschampsia elongata FACW-NAT
11 Potygonum aviculare FACW-EXO
12 Gnaphalium palustre FAC+NAT
13 Agrostis exarata FACWVNAT
14 Holcus lanatus FAQEXO
IS Cardamine oligospenna FACW\NAT
16 Navarretia squanosa UPL\NAT
17 Epilobium watsonii FACW-NAT
L8 Antirrhinum orontium FAQNAT
64
-------
19 Equisetum telmateia FACW\NAT
20 Caret sp. ???
21 Cirsium vulgare FACU\EXO
22 Festuca bromoides FAC\EXO
23 Daucus carota FAOEXO
24 Capsella bursa-pastoris FAC-EXO
25 Taraxacum officinale FACIAEXO
26 Jnncus ensifolius FACW\NAT
27 Myosotis laxa OBLNNAT
28 Crepis setosa UPL\EXO
29 Poa oompressa FACLANAT
30 Geum macrophyllum FACW+NAT
31 Vicia americana FAQNAT
32 Alopecurus geniculatus FACW+NAT
33 Alnus rubra FAONAT
34 Cirsium arvense FACU+EXO
35 Lactuca serriola FAC-EXO
36 Juncus effusus FACW+NAT
37 Centaurea cyanus UPUEXO
38 Veronica americana OBUNAT
39 Lupinus polyphyUus FACU-NAT
40 Pbalaris arundinacea FACW\NAT
41 Boisduvalia densiflora FACW-NAT
42 Echinochloa crusgalli FACW\NAT
43 Cerastium viscosum NOVEXO
44 Geranium dissectum UPLAEXO
45 Rumex crispus FACWVEXO
46 Luzula campestris FACLANAT
47 Chrysanthemum leucanthemum FAOEXO
48 Hypericum perforatum UPUEXO
65
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE C5-MG
Function/Purpose
This permit allowed the filling of approximately 0.12 ha (0.3 acres) of wetland within the 100
year flood plain of Fanno Creek to provide a parking area and landscaping improvements for an
upland development Approximately 0.17 ha (0.4 acres) were excavated to create a wetland to
replace the functions of flood storage and desynchronization, wildlife habitat, food chain support,
fisheries habitat, nutrient retention and removal, and sediment trapping.
General Description
The created wetland was a narrow strip of marsh running north/south between the
development's east parking lot and a stream running into the extensive natural marsh. It was
considered "Mitigation Area 2" in the development proposal.
The bank sloping down from the parking lot east of the created marsh was rather steep. It was
covered with bark dust and planted with shrubs (mostly ornamental dogwood) in an effort to
control erosion.
The north edge of the created marsh was bordered by large buildings housing offices and light
industry. The building directly north of the sampled area was built on pillars above the marsh.
An extensive natural wetland consisting of ponds, stream channels, and emergent marsh was
located west of the created marsh. It was heavily vegetated and supported many birds and other
wildlife (G. Herb pers. comm.). A small stream (about two meters across and between one and two
meters deep), separated the created area from the natural marsh, and was designated the western
boundary.
Directly south of the created marsh was a small filled area that extends from the parking lot
and separates the marsh from several acres of forest.
A large culvert was located at the northeast corner of the sampled area. The
development/mitigation plans show it running from Nimbus Avenue under the east parking lot The
field team regarded this culvert as the inlet to the wetland. The plans showed another culvert
running into the wetland at its southeast corner and mentioned the existence of a "seep", but
neither were observed by the field crew.
The stream running alongside the created wetland toward the natural marsh was considered to
be the created wetland's outlet by the field crew.
The site was sampled in July of 1987, and was almost three years old.
Hydrology and Substrate
Water was channelized, but flowing very slowly. The water in the stream was cloudy and
odorless, and relatively deep. The stream bottom could not be seen. Probing with the stadia rod
indicated depths ranging from 0.8-2.2 m at midstream.
Munsell chromas indicated all but one soil sample were hydric (/I). The one non-hydric sample
was from a pit dug on Transect 1 in the neighboring fill area. This sample had a chroma indicating
"borderline" hydric (/2). All sample pits were mottled in the upper 5-cm, indicating periodic
66
-------
inundation (Soil Conservation Service 1975). Near the fill area, soil pits were not dug to 30 cm
because we hit gravel/cobbles at shallower depths.
Most soil sample pits had water in them within 30 minutes of digging. Exceptions were those
pits on Transect 1 (See Field Map) nearest the fill area, and one pit on Transect 2 (See Field
Map), also near the fill area. There was a detrital layer present and soil panicle size was 100%
fines.
Dominant Vegetation
A heavy, dense mixture of Typha latifolia L, Lcersia oryzoidcs (L.) Swartz, Juncus effusus L,
and Phalaris arundinacea L. covered most of this site. Some of the T. latifolia was over two meters
tall. Emergent vegetation was observed along the edges of the streambed, and algal growth coated
many of the stems of the emergent plants. The most diversity occurred along the periphery of the
site, where the T. latifolia and J. effusus were less robust. Numerous introduced weeds prevailed
along the periphery, as well as a few natives like Epilobium watsonii Barbey and Geum
maaophyUum Willd. Some interesting aquatics and semi-aquatics occurred in the stream, including
Hydrocotyle ranunculoides L.
See the list of "Species Found On Site C5-MG" for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Birds observed included red tailed hawks, redwing blackbirds, song sparrows, robins, mallard
ducks, great blue heron, sora, and yellow throat. The birds were very abundant Frogs and
minnows were observed in the creek.
impressions of the Site One Year Later
Water levels within the wetland and neighboring natural marsh appeared higher than last
summer. The stream separating the natural and created portions of the marsh appeared wider and
deeper than the previous year. Also, there appeared to be large patches of open water in the
natural marsh which had been heavily vegetated last summer. Much of the T. latifolia was standing
dead.
The bank sloping up to the parking lot was now vegetated and the ornamental dogwoods
planted along its crest were doing well. The area surrounding the marsh was being developed
rapidly. There were buildings under construction and many newly completed.
67
-------
Existing Wetlands Boundary
Sewer Ltoe or Drainage
Portion of Wetland to be Created
PERMIT MAP
C5-MG
N
1 : 1000
0
h
10 20
i
42
m
83 ft
Map dratted by Tracy Smith
68
-------
N
1 : 1000
0 10 20 m
I 'i ' !
0 42 83 ft
FIELD MAP
C5-MG
VT2
BMT1
VT1
VT
BM1
Vegetation Transect
Basin Morphology Transect
Start of Transect
End of Transect
Stream
Wetland Intet or Outlet
Ditch
Emergent Vegetation
Source: Data coMecud by Stephanie Gwin & Sheri Confer 1987
Map dratted by Tracy Smith
69
-------
SITE C5-MG
Transact 1
Elevation (m)
1.8
1.4
1.8
I
0.8
0.8
0.4
0.8
878
Distance (n)
10
is
14
Elevation (m)
1.4
1.8
SfTE C5-MG
Transact 2
o.a -
Distance (a)
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL~obligate wetland species; FACW-
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-ecotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the "Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland* and the list of 'Species Found On Site".
Species T fritA fr>r Planting in Created We»fond CS-MG
aes Wetland Indicator Code
1 Eleocharis palustris* OBLNNAT
2 Glyceria borealis OBL\NAT
3 Stirpus acurus* OBLNNAT
4 Typha latifolia* OBLNNAT
5 Agrostis palustris FAC+NAT
Species Found On Site CS-MG During SUP""CT 1987
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Typha latifolia* OBLNNAT
2 Agrostis tenuis UPLNEXO
3 Veronica americana OBLVNAT
4 Eleocharis palustris* OBLNNAT
5 Phalaris arundinacea FACWNNAT
6 Stirpus acutus* OBLNNAT
7 Juncus effusus FACW+NAT
8 Poa annua FAC-NAT
9 Carex stipata OBLNNAT
10 Epilobium watsonii FACW-NAT
11 Poa palustris FAOEXO
12 Phleum pretense FACUNEXO
13 Lolium perenne FACUNEXO
14 Cirsium vulgare FACUNEXO
15 Plantago major FAC+EXO
16 Geranium dissectum UPLNEXO
17 Cichorium intybus UPLNEXO
18 Agropyron repens NONEXO
19 Epilobium paniculatum UPLNNAT
20 Plantago lanceolata FACU+EXO
21 Alopecurus pratensis FACWNEXO
22 Holcus lanatus FACNEXO
23 Dipsacus sylvestris FACUNEXO
71
-------
24 Rubus discolor FACU-EXO
25 Ranunculus repens FACW\EXO
26 Senecio jacobaea UPIAEXO
27 Geum macrophyllum FACW+NAT
28 Lapsana conununis UPL\EXO
29 Rumex conglomeratus FACW\EXO
30 Taraxacum offirinale , FACIAEXO
31 Daucus carota FAOEXO
32 Festuca arundinacea FACU-EXO
33 Trifolium dubium UPLAEXO
34 Symphoricarpos albus FACLANAT
35 Trifolium repens FACU+EXO
36 Vicia tetrasperma UPIAEXO
37 Vicia saliva UPLAEXO
38 Sparganium eurycarpum OBLANAT
39 Lemna minor OBIANAT
40 Leersia oryzoides OBLNNAT
41 Glyceria grandis OBL\EXO
42 Eleocharis ovata OBLVNAT
72
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE C6-31
Function/Purpose
This project was mitigation for a fill between Cornell Road and the south and west right-of-
way of Sunset Highway. The property will be developed according to approved zoning. The pre-
existing creek channel was realigned along the easterly portion of the property, along the toe of the
fill. The flood storage displaced by the placement of fill on the northwesterly portion of the
property was compensated through the creation of a wetland by removing material within the
eastern portion, located south of the Sunset Highway at the intersection of Cornell Road and 158th
street. When the excavation work was completed, the native topsoil was replaced and the entire
disturbed area was reseeded with native grasses. The project was implemented in a way that
retained as much of the natural character of the property as possible. In addition to flood storage,
proposed purposes of this created wetland were flood water desynchronization, wildlife habitat,
nutrient cycling, non-consumptive recreation, and sediment trapping.
General Description
Three shallow ponds connected by narrow channels were created as an enhancement of existing
emergent marshland. Each pond contained an irregularly shaped island vegetated with grasses and
herbs. The banks of the ponds were uneven and gradually sloped. Emergent vegetation and algae
were growing along the pond edges, both on the banks and in the water. South of the ponds was
a steep sided benn covered with grasses. A wooded hedge situated along its summit screened and
separated the wetland from adjacent cultivated hayfields.
A stream approximately 2 meters wide entered the pond system midway down the north edge
of the easternmost pond. Water in the stream was flowing slowly into the wetland. Another,
smaller stream was separated from the easternmost pond by a narrow isthmus and was flowing into
the channel leading from the east pond to the center pond.
Water flowed from the westernmost pond into a channel leading to a culvert under 158th street.
This channel appeared to be the outlet from the wetland.
This project was completed in September of 1984. The benn was reconstructed one year later.
The created wetland was sampled in July of 1987.
Hydrology and Substrate
Water in the ponds was odorless and turbid with visibility to a depth of about 03 meters. The
water was flowing slowly from pond to pond via the connecting channels.
The soil was very hard and dry along all the transects except Transect 3 (See Field Map). Field
crew members weren't able to reach 30 cm on all pits because of the difficulty of digging.
The Munsell Color Book indicated non-hydric soils with chromas ranging from /4 to 12 on all
sampled plots except one. Plot 9 of Transect 1 had hydric soil with a chroma of /I. Periodic
inundation was indicated in all soil pits by mottles observed in the upper 5 cm of the soil (Soil
Conservation Service 1975).
Soil pits dug along Transects 2 and 4 were dry. These two transects were on each of the banks
opposite the center pond. A few of the pits dug along Transect 1, located along the south bank
of the westernmost pond, filled slowly during the 30 minutes allowed for stabilization. Pits along
73
-------
Transect 3 flooded almost immediately after being dug. This transect was placed along the narrow
isthmus separating the easternmost pond from the stream bordering it.
TVuninant Vegetation
A filamentous greenish alga (probably Spirogyra spp.) was observed floating on the water's
surface and along the edges of the ponds. A blue-green, filamentous alga was attached to the
channel bottoms between the ponds. Also present was the green alga Hydrodictyon retkularam
Roth (B. Meinke pers. comm.). Extensive stands of Typha latifolia L, species of Sab* and Spiraea
douglasii Hook, were observed to the north and northeast of the ponds, and along the southern
borders of the eastern and westernmost ponds.
The westernmost pond was almost completely surrounded by .wetland vegetation, but the center
pond had only a narrow band of wetland vegetation along its edges. The eastern pond had a thick
band of wetland vegetation along its south and east borders, but a very narrow band along the
northern border.
The diversity of vegetation at this site was high, likely due to the close proximity of the pre-
existing natural marsh (B. Meinke, Botanist, pers. comm.). The diversity will probably diminish in
time, as the more aggressive perennial such as T. latifolia and Juncus effusus L, occupy more of
the site.
See the list of "Species Found On Site C6-3I" for an
explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Birds observed included starlings, a great blue heron, robins, chickadees, yellow throat, and
mallard ducks. There were tadpoles in the ponds and several types of dragonflies and damselflies
were observed skimming over the water's surface.
IniDTessions of tlie Site One Year T
-------
PERMIT MAP
C6-3I
piripjjjiinniinii^
^---'
^Ua.;sinjp{jj{jj
Exbthg Wetland Area
Portion of Excavated Area
SS>4 Ponds to be Created
Islands to be created
Ground Contoura (h feet)
to be Created
10 20 30 m
A
N
0 42 83
1 : 1000
Map Oralled by T.
-------
FIELD MAP
C6-3I
BMT3
\
VT
Basin Morphology Transect
Vegetation Transect
Start of Transect
End of Transect
Emergent Vegetation
Island
Pond
Pond Inlet or Outlet
Pond and vegetation bouviAries ore the approximate
locations observed In July, 1887
1 : 1000
10 20 30 m
42 83 ft
/\
N
Souce: Date collected by Stephanie Gwln & Shorl Cooler
Umftrxl by T. Smlti
-------
SITE C6-3I
11
act
S1TEC6-3I
it
• M m m
SITE C6-3I
•S S i ft ft ft
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed. 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL-obligate wetland species; FACW-
facultative wetland species; FAC-facuItative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by ' were common to both the 'Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland" and the list of "Species Found On Site".
Species Listed for Planting in Created Wetland C6-3I
There was no planting list included in the permit file for this site. However, the permit stated
that the area should be seeded with legumes, grasses, shrubs, and trees; and that the project "will
be landscaped ... will include revegetation of natural grasses and planting of bushes and trees".
Species Found On Site C6-3T Poring Summer 1987
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Lotus corniculatus FAQEXO
2 Juncus tenuis FAQNAT
3 Carex stipata OBUNAT
4 Epilobium watsonii FACW-NAT
5 Agrostis tenuis UPL\EXO
6 Lemna minor OBL\NAT
7 Glyceria leptostachya OBUNAT
8 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
9 Potamogeton ffliformis OBUNAT
10 Poa palustris FAQEXO
11 Vitia tetraspenna UPL\EXO
12 Carex unilateralis FACW\NAT
13 Oenantbe sannentosa OBUNAT
14 Eleocharis palustris OBUNAT
IS Juncus ensifolius FACW\NAT
16 Juncus effusus FACW+NAT
17 Stellaria media FAQEXO
18 Galium trifidum FACW+NAT
19 Lactuca serriola FAC-EXO
20 Holcus lanatus FAQEXO
21 Grsium arvense FACU+EXO
22 Agropyron repens NO\EXO
23 Alopecurus pratensis FACW\EXO
24 Myosotis discolor FACW\EXO
25 Phalaris arundinacea FACW\NAT
26 Rumex crispus FACW\EXO
27 Beckmannia syzigachne OBL\NAT
78
-------
28 Potamogeton amplifolius OBL\NAT
29 Callitriche stagnalis OBL\NAT
30 Equisetum aivense FAQNAT
31 Senecio jacobaea FAQEXO
32 Eteocharis ovata OBL\NAT
33 Trifolium repens FACU+EXO
34 Hordeum brachyanthenim FACW\NAT
35 Stachys palustris FACW+NAT
36 Hyperioun perforatum UPUEXO
37 Chrysanthemum leucanthemum FAQEXO
38 Carex athrostachya FACW\NAT
39 Festuca arundinacea FACU-EXO
40 Veronica americana OBUNAT
41 Centaurium umbellatum FAC-EXO
42 Trifolium dubium UPUEXO
43 Typha latifolia OBUNAT
44 Rubus discolor FACU-EXO
45 Gnaphalium uliginosum FAQNAT
46 Rorippa curvisiliqua FACW+NAT
47 Salix lasiandra FACW+NAT
48 Alopecunis geniculatus FACW+NAT
49 Crepis setosa UPUEXO
50 Sonchus asper FAC-EXO
51 Geranium molle UPL\EXO
52 Leontodon nudicaulis UPL\EXO
53 Verbascum blattaria UPLXEXO
54 Epilobium paniculatum UPL\NAT
55 Trifolium subterraneum UPUEXO
56 Deschampsia elongata FACW-NAT
57 Plantago major FAC+EXO
58 Polygonum lapathifolium FACW+EXO-
59 Lolium mulliflorum FACIAEXO
60 Lolium perenne FACIAEXO
61 Cirsium vulgare FACIAEXO
62 Anthoxanthum odoratum FACIAEXO
63 Agrostis exarata FACW\NAT
64 Gnaphalium palustre FAC+WAT
65 Solanum dulcamara FAQEXO
66 Daucus carota FAQEXO
67 Geranium dissectnm FAQEXO
68 Polygonum spergulariaeforme ABSNNAT
69 Veronica peregrina OBL\NAT
79
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE C7-SML
Function/Purpose
This wetland was created to mitigate for the removal of up to 28,289 cubic yards of material
and the placement of up to 25,977 cubic yards of material in the 100 year floodplain of Beaverton
Creek and Johnson Creek. This was done to accommodate parking and landscaping improvements
for a proposed high-tech development Specific functions and purposes for this created wetland
included flood storage and desvnchronization, groundwater modification, habitat for fisheries, food
chain support, non-consumptive recreation, habitat for wildlife, and increased plant diversity.
General Description
The entire mitigation area included several acres of pre-existing natural marsh and newly created
wetland. The mitigation project includes an area of mudflats, several ponds, and created and
natural creek channels. Because of the diversity of wetland types and the large size of the project,
we sampled only a depression/water detention area to the north of an elbow of a channel jutting
off of, and running parallel to, Beavenon Creek.
There was a steep bank leading down to the wetland from 153rd street, but elevation changed
very little inside the bowl-shaped depression. A filled area just west of this detention area was
planted with ornamental trees and shrubs. This was done in an effort to provide a buffer zone
between the wetland and the industrial developments (G. Herb, ODFW, pers. conun.). However,
most of these shrubs and trees were dying.
Water entered the sampled area from two sources. There was a culvert at the northwest corner,
coming from under 153rd Street and the neighboring fill Water entering the detention area from
this culvert flowed across the wetland and emptied into a created channel that connected to
Beaverton Creek. When high water conditions exist, water will flood the detention area through
the created channel At time of sampling, water conditions were low enough that the channel
simply by-passed the detention area. The only water entering it was from the culvert mentioned
above.
This mitigation project was approximately 10 months old when sampled in Jury of 1987.
Hydrology an<| Substrate
As mentioned above, water in this wetland was channelized and flowed across the wetland from
the culvert to the created channel It was odorless and murky and had a greenish algal bloom.
Soil chromas ranged from /3 to A). These values indicated both hydric (/I and 10) and non-
hydric soils (/3). 12 chroma indicated a "borderline" hydric soil
Dominant Vegetation
There was moderate floristic diversity along the transect located nearest the filled areas (See
Field Map). The transect nearest the stream channel had less diversity, with mostly Juncas efiosus
L. growing along it The size of the J. effusus plants was such that an herbaceous understory was
80
-------
largely shaded out A species observed in the floor of the detention area was Lythrum byssopifolia
L. A terrestrial algal bloom grew profusely from the culvert to about midway across the site.
See the list of 'Species Found On Site C7-SML" for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Many birds were observed. These included swallows, starlings, great blue heion, ducks, red tail
hawk, kingfisher, and yellowthroat. There were minnows and bullfrogs in the creek channel
of the Site One "Yrer i-ater
Water levels appeared much the same as the previous year. However, the edge of the main
channel where the rivulet from the culvert enters was not as heavily vegetated as previously. It
appeared to be grazed by ducks and geese. Although no birds were actually seen, sign of them was
evident
Vegetation throughout the site was thicker and taller than the previous year.
81
-------
PERMIT MAP
C7-SML
N
New Stream or Pond Bank
Island Nesting Area
Pond Area Planting
H~| Cut Area New-Wetlands
Slope Buffer Area
*'^j Beaverton Creek
New Stream Channel
1 :800
o
K-
16 24 m
ft
33 67
82
-------
FIELD MAP
C7-SML
BMTI
S
VT
Start o» Transect
End of Transect
Basin Motphotogy Transect
Vegetation Transect
Stream
Wetland Area
Cutort
N
0 8 16 24 m
.1 'l ' • '
0 33 67 ft
1 : 800
Sauce CtaB Cctected by Stephanie Gwin & Shen Cooler July. 1S87
lAap Oratied by Tracy 9nti
83
-------
SITE C7-SML
Transect 1
Elevation (m)
1.6
0.2 -
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54
Distance (m)
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: DHL-obligate wetland species; FACW-
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the "Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland* and the list of "Species Found On Site".
Species T jct«-d for Planting in Created Wetland C7-SML
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Carex lyngbeii OBUNAT
2 Scirpus microcarpus OBL\NAT
3 Sparganium emersum OBL\NAT
4 Alopecurus pratensis* FACW\EXO
Species Found On Site C7-SML Paring Summer 1987
Wetland Indicator Code
1 Salix lasiandra FACW+NAT
2 Typha latifolia OBUNAT
3 Bidens cernua FACW+EXO
4 Callitriche verna OBL\NAT
5 Juncus effusus FACW+NAT
6 Leersia oryzoides OBUNAT
7 Eleocharis ovata OBUNAT
8 Alisma plantago-aquatica OBUNAT
9 Salix piperi FACW\NAT
10 Trifolium pretense FACIAEXO
11 Porygonum lapathifolium FACW+EXO
12 Ranunculus repens FACW\EXO
13 Phalaris arundinacea FACW\NAT
14 Scirpus acutus OBL\NAT
15 Plantago major FAC+EXO
16 Porygonum punctatum OBL\NAT
17 Trifolium dubium FAOEXO
18 Veronica peregrina OBL\NAT
19 Rorippa islandica OBL\NAT
20 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
21 Lythrum hyssopifolia OBUEXO
22 Anthemis cotula FACIAEXO
23 Agrostis tenuis UPUEXO
24 Echinochloa crusgalli FACW\NAT
85
-------
25 Polygonnm aviculare
26 Lindernia dubia
27 Lolium multiQorum
28 Tanacetum vulgare
29 Agrostis exarata
30 Rumex crispus
31 Alopecurus pratensis*
32 Trifolium repens
33 Oenanthe saraientosa
34 Ludwigia palustris
35 Epilobium watsonii
36 Leontodon nudicaulis
37 Cam stipata
38 Populus trichocarpa
39 Lotus corniculatus
40 Gratiola neglecta
41 Bidens frondosa
42 Gnaphaliun uliginosum
43 Lolium perenne
44 Juncus tenuis
45 Salix sitchensis
46 Ranunculus lobbii
47 Ranunculus sceleratus
48 Veronica americana
49 Rorippa curvisiliqua
50 Carex unilateralis
51 Lathyrus hirsutus
52 Equisetum arvense
53 Vida tetnsperma
54 Qrsiuni arvense
55 Dipsacus sylvestris
FACW-EXO
OBL\NAT
FACUNEXO
ABS\EXO
FACW\NAT
FACW\EXO
FACW\EXO
FACU+EXO
OBUNAT
OBL\NAT
FACW-NAT
UPUEXO
OBUNAT
FACW\NAT
FAQEXO
OBL\NAT
FACW+NAT
FAQNAT
FACUNEXO
FAQNAT
FACW\NAT
OBL\NAT
OBUNAT
OBUNAT
FACW+NAT
FACW\NAT
UPL\EXO
FAONAT
UPL\EXO
FACU+EXO
FACU\EXO
86
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE C8-BSP
Function/Purpose
This wetland was created as mitigation for an illegal fill. The area was excavated to form a
detention pond to replace storm water/surface runoff detention area that was filled. The plans
called for the creation of 0.06 ha (0.14 acres) of *nish-sedge-canarygrass" wetland with the
construction of the surface detention pond.
General Description
A very steep-sided pond has been created. The pond itself appeared several feet deep along
the south, east and west edges, but very shallow along the north edge. Mudflats extended from the
north edge out toward the center of the pond. There was some emergent vegetation growing on
the mudflats, but none in the deeper water along the other edges.
There were several inlets to the pond-4 visible culverts, a small stream, and, according to G.
Herb (ODFW), an underground seep. There was a large culvert (Inlet 1 on the Field Map) midway
along the west bank. When the pond was sampled, this inlet was dry and above the water level of
the pond. The other 3 culverts (Inlets 2, 3, & 4 on the Field Map) were smaller in diameter than
Inlet 1. All were flowing at sampling time. These inlets appeared to carry water from the
neighboring City Operations plant.
The pond outlet was a drainage ditch dug from the southwest comer of the pond, leading to
Fanno Creek.
The project was completed in September of 1986. At the time it was sampled (June, 1987),
it was about 9 months old.
Hydrology and Substrate
The pond's surface was covered with patches of a filamentous blue-green algae and petroleum
slicks which gave the water a bluish cast The water in the main pond area was almost stagnant,
but flowing slowly toward the outlet The water was odorless. Water from Inlet 2 had a very
strong petroleum odor. This water was probably runoff from the City Operations parking lot.
Water flowing in from Inlet 3 was odorless. The pond surface near this inlet supported a thick
algal growth.
The culvert midway down the east bank, Inlet 4, had a strong sewage odor, was brownish in
color, and had a plume of brownish water extending from it out into the pond.
Inlet 5 was a small stream flowing over the surface of the bank at the southeast corner of the
pond. This water was both clear and odorless. Water flow at the outlet was very slow.
Eight of the ten soil pits were dug on Transects 1 & 2 which were placed along the edges of
the pond (See Field Map). Only one pit each was dug on Transects 3 & 4 (across the mudflats)
because our crew leader was worried about possible sewage contamination. Soil sample chromas
(according to the MunseO Color Book) were all in the hydric range, either /I or A). There was
mottling in the upper 5 cm of most soil samples, indicating periodic inundation (Soil Conservation
Service 1975). Soil structure was heavy and clayey on all transects, but on Transects 1 & 2 large
particles and pebbles were also present The two soil pits dug on the mudflats (Transects 3 & 4)
87
-------
contained a layer of straw at depths of approximately 25 to 30 cm. The straw was intact and
showed little sign of decomposition.
Dominant VegC*a>X>n
Vegetation along the periphery of the pond on the disturbed sides was mostly annual herbs,
primarily Joncus bnfbnins L. A variety of weedy taxa existed on the upper banks. The area to the
south of the created pond was a lush forest, including a thick herbaceous layer, a deciduous
understory, and an overstory of both conifers and deciduous trees. This forested marsh was the
natural vegetation regime that existed before the area was disturbed (Gene Herb, ODFW, pers.
comm.). Species here included Pseodotsuga menziesii (Mirbel) Franco., Oemleria cerasifbnnis H.
& A., and lyaghimm americanum Hulten & St. John.
See the list of "Species Found On Site C8-BSP* for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Mallard ducks were seen in the pond and various birds were heard in the forest nearby. Upon
returning to this site a few days later to gather water samples, one of the mallards was found dead.
impressions of the Site One Year later
The mudflats along the northeast edges of the pond extending toward its center were becoming
vegetated. The plants seemed stunted. The banks of the pond were much more heavily vegetated
than the previous year. In some cases, the rocky banks were completely covered with vegetation.
The water level appeared higher than the previous year, and the pollution seemed less (at least
it was less visible). The south bank, between the natural forested wetland and the water, had
become vegetated. The pond still was occupied by ducks. This year they were tame and wanted
fed.
88
-------
PERMIT MAP
C8-BSP
•- -*--V'.-*-:.*v>X ^'-T^-A-i «i-^^SH:
7:500
0 5 10 m
I 'i 'i' ,i \
0 21 « ft
A/
Existing WettancJ
Wedand to be Created
Wetland Wet (ppe)
Water Flow Direction
Mao Craned by Tracy Snifr
89
-------
FIELD MAP
C8-BSP
/ v
N
BMT3
VT — Vegetation Transect
BMT ~»- Basin Morphology Transect
A Start of Transect
• End of Transect
O Culvert
""~* Wetland Outlet or Inlet
Pond
~-~,-* Emergent Vegetation
"*"->. Survey Boundary
1:500
0 5 10
I ".'I',' \ m
0 20.S 41.6 1t
Pond and emergent vegetation boundari«s are in.
approximate locations observ«O in July. |
-------
ant
SO M •
t— I g t 1 1
i - 1 - 1 - 1 - 1
V- .
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL-obligate wetland species; FACW--
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL--
upland species; NAT—native species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol 4- indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the "Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland" and the list of "Species Found On Site".
Species F jcted for Planting in Created Wetland C8-BSF
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Carexobnupta OBUNAT
2 Porygonum persicaria* FACW\EXO
3 Porygonum lapathifolium FACW+NAT
4 Potentilla anserina OBLVNAT
5 Echinochloa cnisgalli FACW\EXO
6 Cyperus esculentus FACW\NAT
7 Stirpus americanus OBLNNAT
8 Sparganium eurycarpum OBLVNAT
9 Phalaris arundinacea* FACW\NAT
10 Lysichiton americanum OBLVNAT
11 "Nutsedge" ???
•
The planting list for this site included common names. Efforts were made to determine the
correct genus and species. Where this was not possible, the common name was listed above in
"quotes'.
Species Rwmd On Site C8-BSP During S"*"«"gr 1987
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
2 Trifolium pretense FACIAEXO
3 Viria tetraspenna UPLVEXO
4 Eleocharis ovata OBLNNAT
5 Trifolium hybridum UPLVEXO
6 Alnus nibra FAQNAT
7 Lolium perenne FACIAEXO
8 Vicia sativa UPLVEXO
9 Juncus ensifolius FACWVNAT
10 Epilobium watsonii FACW-NAT
11 Holcus lanatus FACVEXO
12 Equiseium telmateia FACW\NAT
13 Caucus carota FAOEXO
92
-------
14 Phalaris anindinacea*
IS Hypochaeris radicata
16 Agrostis alba
17 Trifolium dubium
18 Trifolium arvense
19 Lamium amplexicaule
20 Geum macrophyllum
21 Rumex conglomeratus
22 Poa palustris
23 Agropyron repens
24 Impatiens capensis
25 Rumex crispus
26 Oenanthe sannentosa
27 Panicum capillare
28 Potygonum persicaria*
29 Lapsana oommunis
FACW\NAT
UPL\EXO
FACW\EXO
UPL\EXO
FAQEXO
UPL\EXO
FACW+NAT
FACW\EXO
FAQEXO
NO\EXO
FACW\NAT
FACW\EXO
OBLNNAT
FAONAT
FACW\EXO
UPL\EXO
93
-------
DESCRIPTION: STIE C9-GP
Function/Purpose
This wetland was created to mitigate the placement of approximately 5,000 cubic yards of clay,
gravel and rock to construct 400 feet of roadway embankment across Rock Creek and the adjacent
wetland. The project plans called for the existing creek channels to be enlarged to improve their
hydraulic capacity and the stability of the channel banks. The plans also stated that the existing
man-made channel was to be improved by widening and sloping the channel banks to create flatter
slopes and more stable banks. The banks of this channel were to be planted with riparian
vegetation to prevent erosion and provide cover for wildlife. The pond on the northwest side of
the roadway was to be enlarged and revegetated with native and introduced wetland-type vegetation.
In addition to the original plans, an area south of the roadway was excavated to form a pond within
the marshy meadow. This was the portion of the project most recently completed. It was the area
sampled by the field team because it was the area Gene Herb (ODFW) indicated was important
This pond had several proposed functions. It was designed to allow storage and detention of
surface water runoff, contain backfill from creek overflow, maintain wildlife habitat, and provide a
quiet and aesthetically pleasing setting.
General Description
Rock Creek was split into two channels that flow under the new roadway via two large culverts.
The pond sampled lies south of the road just west of where the two channels rejoin. A small dam
separated the pond from the creek channel at the pond's southwestern-most point When high
water conditions occur, the channel will overflow its banks and water will collect in the pond.
During low water/drought conditions, water will be maintained in the pond by the dam. The dam
is the pond's outlet when water level in the pond is above the height of the dam.
There was a large culvert leading into the pond from under the hillside at its nonheastern-
most point This culvert may divert upland runoff from abandoned sewage ponds north of the
project Other than creek overflow and some underground seeps that G. Herb (ODFW) indicated
might be present, this culvert was the only direct inlet to the pond.
The pond's banks sloped steeply from a hayfield on the west side. The north and east banks
have very gradual, almost level slopes that form mudflats from the edge of the grass to the water
level. There was very little established vegetation on the mudflats. The southeast bank of the pond
was formed by a grassy berrn that separated the pond from the creek channel. The sides of the
berra were steeply sloped.
The bulk of the pond appeared shallow and had patches of emergent vegetation growing in it
The deepest area was directly behind the dam.
The area directly north of the pond, between it and the roadway, was a grassy meadow. The
meadow included both dry, upland areas and wet, marshy areas with standing water.
The project was approximately one year and nine months old when sampled (June of 1987).
Hydrology and SuLabate
The pond water was odorless. It had a tan, cloudy color. It contained patches of emergent
vegetation and a filamentous, green alga.
94
-------
The water was stagnant and below the level of the dam at the outlet. Very little water flowed
in via the culvert
The chroma of soil samples along Transects 1 & 2 (See Field Map) indicate hydric soils (/I and
A)). The chroma of soil samples taken along Transect 3 were 'borderline' hydric (/2). Mottling
occurred in the upper 5 cm of all soil samples, indicating periodic inundation (Soil Conservation
Service 1975). Soils were very fine and clayey.
Dominant Vegetation
The pond supported patches of emergent vegetation. An algal bloom was especially lush along
the pond's banks, extending from one to five feet across the water's surface. The dominant
vegetation types in the meadow and along the berm were upland grasses, Douglas fir (Psendotsnga
menziesii (Mirbel) Franco.), and ash (Frannus latifotia Benth.). Wetland vegetation was starting
to propagate along the mudflats of the north and east sides of the pond, and was well established
in the area closest to the culvert. Species that were to be planted by the contractor, including
Scirpas americanus Pen. and Heochoiis palnstris (L.) R. & S., seemed to be taking hold, and will
probably dominate the area within the next decade (B. Meinke, Botanist, pers. comm.)- The steep
banks of the west and south edges supported mostly upland grasses.
See the list of "Species Found On Site C9-GP* for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
A population of tiny, biting, black flies was in residence. They were most abundant near the
culvert and along the northwest banks of the pond.
Birds observed included Mallard ducks, killdeer, redwing blackbirds, starlings, goldfinches, tree
swallows, barn swallows, and violet-green swallows. A bullfrog was heard and many dragonflies were
observed.
After studying the permit file for this project, I have concluded that the area sampled was not
included in the original plans. It seems to have been an afterthought. The area sampled was
denoted as a •meadow* on Exhibit F-l, and the pond was referred to only once in the
mitigation/permit paperwork: '—especially the new pond created south of Evergreen". This
statement was included in a letter from Gene Herb (ODFW) to the applicant concerning changes
made in the project
Impressions of the Site One Year I ater
The reduced amount of upland area along the shoreline indicated that water levels were higher
during 1988 than during sampling the previous summer. However, there were more patches of
emergent vegetation growing throughout the pond, indicating that the pond may be silting in.
While sampling during the summer of 1987, the pond was shallow but almost entirely open water,
there were no large patches of emergent vegetation.
95
-------
Aesthetics was one of the major objectives of this mitigation project. In this respect, the
wetland seemed to be fulfilling its purpose.
96
-------
PERMIT MAP
C9-GP
1 : 500
S 10
21
42 ft
m
•\ Boundary- Portion of Wetland
to be Created
V
Mao Drafted by Tracy Smith
Wetland Intot (pipe)
Water Flow Direction
Rip Rap
100 Year Flood Plata
Existing Wetland Boundary
97
-------
FIELD MAP
C9-GP
VT1
BMT
N
1:500
0 5 10
I • ' • ' t ",
I I I I t
0 20.8 41.6 fl
Pood and emergent vegetation boundaries are the
approximate locations observed in July. 1987
Data collected by Stephanie Gwin & Sheri Confer
Map drafted by Tracy Smith
Vegetation Transect
Basin Morphology Transect
Start of Transect
End of Transect
Oam
Culvert
Wetland Outlet or Inlet
Pond
Emergent Vegetation
Survey Boundary
98
-------
SITE C9-GP
Transect 1
Elevation (m)
1.6
3 6
9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48 51 54 57 60 63 66
Distance (m)
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL-obligate wetland species; FACW-
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the "Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland' and the list of 'Species Found On Site".
Species listed for Planting in Created Wetland C9-GP
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Agrostis palustris FAC+NAT
2 Alopecurus pratensis* FACW\EXO
3 Bromus inennis FACU\EXO
4 Dactylis glomerata FACLAEXO
5 Scirpus americanus OBUNAT
6 Cyperus erythrorhizos OBL\NAT
7 Eleocharis palustris* OBL\NAT
Species Found On Site C9-GP Poring Summer 1967
Wetland Indicator Codes
1 Alopecurus geniculatus FACW+NAT
2 Heocharis acicularis OBL\NAT
3 Epilobium watsonii FACW-NAT
4 Callitriche stagnalis OBL\NAT
5 Scirpus fluviatilis OBUNAT
6 Veronica americana OBUNAT
7 Gnaphalium uliginosum FAQNAT
8 Plantago major FAC+EXO
9 Ju'ncus patens FACW\NAT
10 Agrostis alba FACWNEXO
11 Juncus tenuis FAONAT
12 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
13 Holcus lanatus FAOEXO
14 Ranunculus sceleratus OBL\NAT
IS Plagiobothrys scouleri FACW\NAT
16 Poa trivialis FACW-EXO
17 Cirsium arvense FACU+EXO
18 Agrostis tenuis UPUEXO
19 Trifolium repens FACU+EXO
20 Trifolium dubium UPUEXO
21 Bidens vulgata FACW+NAT
100
-------
22 Alopecunis pratensis* FACW\£XO
23 Polygonum lapathifolium FACW+EXO
24 Lemna minor OBLANAT
25 Leontodon nudicaulis UPL\EXO
26 Caret arcta FACW+NAT
27 Leersia oiyzoides OBL\NAT
28 Centunculus minimus FACW\NAT
29 Scirpus microcarpus OBLANAT
30 Heocharis palustris* OBUNAT
31 TVpha latifolia OBL\NAT
32 Rorippa curvisiliqua FACW+NAT
33 Lolium perenne ' FACIAEXO
34 Gnaphalium palustre FAC+NAT
35 Eleocharis ovata OBL\NAT
36 Poa annua FAC-NAT
37 Anthemis ootula FACLAEXO
38 Senetio vulgaris FACLAEXO
101
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE C10-PP
Function/Purpose
This project was mitigation for the removal of up to 1,500 cubic yards of silt and the placement
of up to 6,100 cubic yards of material in the Columbia Slough to provide railroad access for a new
automobile shipping facility. To replace the emergent marsh lost within the Columbia Slough, a
pond was excavated, and the slopes seeded with clover. Proposed functions of the new pond
included food chain support, habitat for wildlife, habitat for fisheries, nutrient retention and
removal, and non-consumptive recreation.
General Description
The pond was deep, and was at the bottom of a very steeply sloped excavation within several
feet of the Columbia Slough. A high, grassy, and shrub-covered berm separated the pond from the
slough. A deep ditch has been cut in the berm to connect the pond with the slough. The pond
had very steep banks, so steep that field crew members had difficulty walking along the pond edge.
The mitigation design plans show that the pond was 150 by 75 feet across, and an average of twelve
feet deep from the top of the bank to the pond floor. The water's surface was several feet lower
than the top of the bank, but the bank appeared- to continue at the same steep angle under the
water. The bottom could not be seen.
The channel connecting the pond and Columbia Slough appears to be both the inlet and outlet
for the pond. Water level in the pond was lower than the floor of the channel The sides of the
ditch appeared to drop almost vertically from the meadow to the floor.
The banks of the pond edge have been seeded with mostly Trifoliom pratense L. in an effort
to control erosion. However, ravines from erosion were beginning to form on the sides of the
banks in several places.
The project was completed in August of 1985. When sampled in Jury of 1985, it was almost
two years old.
Hydrology and Substrate
Water in the pond was odorless and very murky. The pond contained stagnant water, and the
channel connecting it to Columbia slough was dry. When high water conditions exist, water will
flow into the pond from Columbia Slough via this channel.
Soils consisted of very heavy and fine clays with some sand. The Munsell Color Book indicated
non-hydric soil chromas, ranging from /4 to fZ. However, there were mottles in the upper 5 cm of
all soil samples indicating periodic inundation (Soil Conservation Service 1975). Most of the soil
pits remained dry during the sampling protocol's required 30 minute period to allow for
stabilization of water levels, but a few nearest the pond edge did fill with a few centimeters of
water.
Dominant Vegetation
Wetland vegetation was found only in a narrow band (about two feet wide) in and around the
water's edge. Clover extended from this band up the slopes to the meadow above. Our crew leader
and head botanist believed the clover had been seeded into the bank to try to prevent erosion, but
102
-------
because of its tenacity, he feared that it might also prevent wetland species from establishing (B.
Meinke, Botanist, pers. comm.).
Green algae grew around the edge of the pond. Phalaris arandinacea L. and Salix speaes grew
on top of the berm separating the pond from the slough. There was a variety of native wetland
species present, but all had a low frequency of occurrence. This diversity probably reflects input
of propagules from the nearby slough. Colonization by wetland species may be retarded, however,
by the depth of the pond (and its steep banks) and the pervasive weedy species already well
established (ie., the clover). Sagittaria latifolia Willd., the dominant herbaceous species in the
slough was present as scattered individuals in the mitigated area, along with several species of Carex
and Juncus.
See the list of "Species Found On Site C10-PP" for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes made during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Many small fish fry and a bullfrog were observed in the pond. Gold finches, swallows, and a
red tailed hawk were the only birds sighted.
Southern Pacific Railroad's tracks were several hundred feet across the meadow from the pond
and ran parallel to its south side.
impressions of the Site One Year Later
This wetland appeared much the same as the previous summer. The banks were becoming
more vegetated, mostly with clover, which appears to be minimizing erosion of the steep banks.
Wetland vegetation was located in a narrow band along the water's edge about one meter below
the top of the bank.
103
-------
PERMIT MAP
C10-PP
Pond
N
5 10
m
. . .
I . * i i
0 21 42 ft
1:500
Map g r a (led by Lori J e n sen
104
-------
FIELD MAP
C10-PP
BMT2
VT
BMT
Start of Transect
End of Transect
Vegetation Transect
Basin Morphology Transect
Upland Vegetation
Emergent Vegetation
Pond
Ditch
BMT 1
0 5 10 m
I .-I-.—.1—.
I I i
0 21 42 ft
1:500
N
Map dratted by Lori Jensen
Source: Data collected by Stephanie Gwin & Sheri Center
105
-------
STTE C10-PP
11
\ * 1 * fr
SITE C10-PP
11
SITE C10-PP
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL~obligate wetland species; FACW--
facultative wetland species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO~exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); • indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the 'Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland* and the list of "Species Found On Site*.
Suedes Listed for Planting in Created Wetland C1O-PP
There was no planting list included in the permit file for this site. However, the banks were
to be seeded with grasses and legumes.
Species Found On Site C10-PP During Summer 1987
Species
1 Phalaris anmdinacea
2 Lolium perenne
3 Salix piperi
4 Lotus corniculatus
5 Epilobium watsonii
6 Eleocharis palustris
7 Gnaphalium uliginosum
8 Trifoh'um repens
9 Cirsium arvense
10 Porygonum spergulariaeforme
11 Juncus oxymeris
12 Eleocharis ovata
13 Trifblium pratense
14 Bidens tripartita
15 Juncus tenuis
16 • Spnchus asper
17 Festuca bromoides
18 Leersia oryzoides
19 Trifolium dubium
20 Plantago major
21 Carex lenticularis
22 Sagittaria latifolia
23 Bidens cernua
24 Cyperus erythrorhizos
25 Salix fluviatilis
26 Fraxinus latifolia
27 Lindernia dubia
28 Rumex crispus
Wetland Indicator Code
FACW\NAT
FACU\EXO
FACW\NAT
FAOEXO
FACW-NAT
OBUNAT
FAONAT
FACU+EXO
FACU+EXO
ABSNNAT
FACW+NAT
OBUNAT
FACU\EXO
FACWVEXO
FAQNAT
FAC-EXO
FAQEXO
OBUNAT
UPUEXO
FAC+EXO
FACW+NAT
OBUNAT •
FACW+EXO
OBL\NAT
OBUNAT
FACWVNAT
OBL\NAT '
FACW\EXO
107
-------
29 Equisetura arvense FAC\NAT
30 Poa palustris FAQEXO
31 Graiiola neglecta OBL\NAT
32 Veronica peregrina OBUNAT
33 Rorippa islandica OBL\NAT
34 Sparganium emersum OBL\NAT
35 Mazus japonicus FACW\EXO
36 Poa annua FAC-NAT
37 Agrostis exarata FACW\NAT
38 Agrostis alba FACW\EXO
108
-------
DESCRIPTION: SITE Cll-SM
Function/Purpose
The function of this wetland creation was to mitigate for the placement of 2,600 cubic yards
of earth fill in a 0.13 ha (0.3 acre) wetland area adjacent to Fanno Creek. The fill was required
to provide an elevation above the 100 year flood plain for construction of additional parking and
storage area. The primary objective of the mitigation was functional replacement of the wetland
area destroyed, including wildlife habitat, flood storage and desynchronization, and habitat for
fisheries.
Geueial Description
The project's design called for the creation of two small sumps, at least 30 feet by 60 feet, with
an island in the center and an irregular shoreline. The field team found a shallow pond with an
isthmus connecting an island to the southeast shoreline. As required in the design plans, the island
stood a couple of feet above water level at its' highest point, and the wetland had an irregular
shoreline. There was emergent vegetation growing in the very shallow water (5 cm) covering the
isthmus, and along the shorelines of the bank and the island.
The inlet was a narrow, shallow ditch running along the nonh edge of the parking lot. There
was water flowing into the wetland through this inlet at the time of sampling. A dry streambed
leading from the wetland to Fanno Creek was assumed to be the wetland's outlet When high water
conditions exist, Fanno Creek will overflow its banks and flood this wetland.
A wire mesh fence approximately 9 feet tall separated the wetland from the parking lot. Young
pine trees were planted between the fence and the pond. Directly south and southeast of the
created wetland was a large marshy area almost completely covered with reed canary grass (Phalaris
anmdinacea L.). The fill and the created wetland were extensions of this area prior to development
(G. Herb, ODFW, pers. comm.).
•
A pile of broken asphalt was found on the slope leading up from the wetland to the parking
lot. Old tires and other debris were also observed. The landowner informed us that they would
be cleaned up as per the design plans.
This project was approximately ten months old when sampled in July of 1987.
Hydrology and Substrate
Although there was flow into the wetland via the inlet, water in the sump was stagnant and
turbid, and had a brown-colored algal growth. The water had no odor.
All but one of the chromas of the soil samples were in the hydric range, either /I or /O (as
determined using a Munsell Color Book). The one non-hydric chroma was /2 (borderline hydric).
Periodic inundation was indicated by mottling in the upper 5 to 10 cm of the soil samples (Soil
Conservation Service 1975). Water was observed in all soil pits dug along transect 2, and most pits
along transect 1 (See Field Map). No water was observed in soil pits dug along transect 3.
Dominant Vegetation
The created wetland was bordered by an upland grassy meadow to the North, and a marshy
stand of reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) to the south. Within the wetland, emergent
109
-------
vegetation was prevalent At sampling time, there was a large mudflat area where vegetation was
not growing. Some of the plants on the site were weeds known to be established only along the
Columbia River near Portland, where they were apparently established from seed that was carried
in the ballast of ships (E. Alverson, OSU, pers. comm.). A few were native, such as jointed rush
(Juncus articnlatus L.).
See the list of" Species Found On Site Cll-SM" for an explicit account of the species identified.
Wildlife
Common names were used for wildlife sighted or heard because information was taken from
notes nude during field sampling by an amateur birdwatcher. No definitive wildlife survey was done
and therefore, scientific names were not determined.
Swallows, kflldeer, goldfinches, and the tracks of a great blue heron were observed. The design
plans specified that the ponds were to be stocked with a species of Gambusia, a mosquito-eating
fish, but none were observed.
Impressions of the Site One Year later
Most of the debris Uttering the site during the summer of 1987 was removed. The broken
asphalt near the gate in the fence along the east side of the wetland was becoming vegetated.
Water levels appeared much higher. The isthmus reaching from the south bank to the island
was flooded. The water appeared very clear. Although the water level was higher than during the
previous summer, the pond had become dotted with patches of emergent vegetation. The island
and banks of the pond had become heavily vegetated, and the wetland seemed to be maturing well
110
-------
PERMIT MAP
C11-SM
Islands approximately 15 x 30 ft
N
1 : 4001
048m
I—s—•-.
0 17 33 ft
(Because no scale was given on source mac
t>is scale is approximated trom dimensions
«r»en on source mzr)
Q island
Sump (pond)
Wetland Met or Outlet
Ditch
Riprap
Map dratted by Tracy Smith
111
-------
FIELD MAP
C11-SM
BMT1
VT1
•48 m
1 : 400
17 33 tt
Map drafted by Tracy Smith .
Pond and vegetation boundaries are
the approximate locations observed in July. 1987
Source: Data collected by Stephanie Gwin & Sheri Confer
BUT
Basin Morphology Transect
Vegetation Transect
Upland Vegetion
Emergent Vegetation
Pond
Wetland Inlet or Outlet
Ditch
Start of Transect
End of Transect
112
-------
Devotion (m)
u
SITE C11-SM
Transect 1
0 • e • tt
Distance (m)
Elevation (m)
srrE C11-SM
Transect 2
•4
•i M sr
Dhlance (m)
•i
-------
VEGETATION ANALYSIS
Following are the species listed for planting in the created wetland and the species found on
the site. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of
the Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL-obligate wetland species; FACW--
facultative wetland species; FAC-facuItative species; FACU-faculiative upland species; UPL--
upland species; NAT-native species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two
elements of each code indicate the position of that species within the wetland indicator category.
The symbol + indicates the species is toward the high end of the category (more frequently found
in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low end of the category (less frequently found in
wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within the category. ??? indicates no
information. Species names followed by * were common to both the 'Species Listed for Planting
in Created Wetland' and the list of 'Species Found On Site*.
Species T jcted for Planting in Created Wetland Cll-SM
Wetland Indicator Code
1 Salix sp. ???
2 Populus sp. ???
3 Taxodium distichum OBUEXO
4 Potamogeton pectinatus OBL\NAT
5 Polygonum sp. ???
6 Cyperaceae ???
7 Srirpus sp. ???
8 Sparganiaceae ???
9 Sagittaria sp. ???
10 Fraxinus latifblia var oregana FACW\NAT
11 Crataegus sp. ???
Only common names were used to designate species for planting on this site. Efforts were
made to determine the correct genus and species. Where this was not possible, the family or genus
name was determined.
Species Found On Site Cll-SM During Summer 1987
Species Wetland Indicator Code
1 Juncus bufonius FACW+NAT
2 Holcus lanatus FAQEXO
3 Alopecunis geniculatus FACW+NAT
4 Phalaris anindinacea FACW\NAT
5 Lindernia dubia ' OBL\NAT
6 Gnaphalium uliginosum FAC\NAT
7 Eleocharis ovata . OBUNAT
8 Lemna minor OBL\NAT
9 Typha latifolia OBUNAT
10 Leersia oryzoides OBL\NAT
11 Callitriche stagnalis OBL\NAT
12 Ludwigia palustris OBL\NAT
13 Alisma plantago-aquatica OBL\NAT
114
-------
14 Agrostis alba
15 Echinochloa crusgalli
16 Eleocharis palustris
17 Juncus tenuis
18 Polygonum persicaria
19 Polygonum punctatum
20 Salix sitchensis
21 Mimulus moschatus
22 Trifolium repens
23 Equisetum arvense
24 Rorippa islandica
25 Gratiola neglecta
26 EpOobium watsonii
27 Gnaphalium palustre
28 Veronica americana
29 Rorippa cuivisiliqua
30 Ranunculus repens
31 Sparganium emersum
32 Polygonum aviculare
33 Unknown Seedling 1
34 Plantago major
35 Juncus oxymeris
36 Lotus oorniculatus
37 Anthemis cotula
38 Trifolium pratense
39 Poa trivialis
40 Cirsium vulgare
41 Vicia dispenna
42 Sonchus asper
43 Rumex crispus
FACW\EXO
FACW\NAT
OBL\NAT
FAONAT
FACW\EXO
OBUNAT
FACW\NAT
FACW+NAT
FACU-fEXO
FAQNAT
OBUNAT
OBUNAT
FACW-NAT
FAC+NAT
OBUNAT
FACW+NAT
FACW\EXO
OBUNAT
FACW-EXO
???
FAC+EXO
FACW+NAT
FAQEXO
FACU\EXO
FAOAEXO
FACW-EXO
FACUNEXO
ABS\EXO
FAC-EXO
FACW\EXO
115
-------
LITERATURE CITED
Alverson, E 1987. Botanist. Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
Herb, G. 1987. Wildlife Biologist. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Johnston, L. 1989. Assistant Curator, Oregon State University Herbarium. Oregon State University,
Corvallis, Oregon.
Meinke, B. 1987. Botanist. Oregon State University Herbarium. Oregon State University, Corvallis,
Oregon.
Reed, P.B., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9).
U.S. Fish WildL Serv. BioL Rep. 88(26.9). Washington, DC
Soil Conservation Service. 1975. Soil Taxonomy-A Basic System of Soil Classification for Making and
Interpreting Soil Surveys. Soil Survey Staff, Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Agriculture Handbook No. 436.
116
-------
APPENDIX n
LISTS OF PLANT SPECIES TO BE ESTABLISHED AND
ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED ON EACH SITE
Following are the list of all species intended for planting and the list of all species found on the created
wetlands studied. Wetland indicator codes were adapted from categories in the regional list of plant species
that occur in wetlands (Reed 1988) and in consultation with LaRea Johnston, Assistant Curator of the
Oregon State University Herbarium. Codes are: OBL—obligate wetland species; FACW-facultative wetland
species; FAC-facultative species; FACU-facultative upland species; UPL-upland species; NAT-native
species; and EXO-exotic species. The symbols separating the two elements of each code indicate the
position of that species within the wetland indicator category. The symbol + indicates the species is toward
the high end of the category (more frequently found in wetlands); - indicates the species is toward the low
end of the category (less frequently found in wetlands); and \ indicates the species is intermediate within
the category. ??? indicates no information. Species names followed by • were common to both the "List
of All Species Intended for Planting* and the "List of All Species Found on Created Wetlands'.
LIST OF ALL SPECIES INTENDED FOR PLANTING
The following list includes all species intended for planting within wetland areas of the created wetlands
studied. Species listed for planting in buffer areas, banks, and adjacent upland areas are not included.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Scientific Name
Agrostis palustrisNA. stolonifera
Alopecurus pratensis*
Bromus inennis
Carex lyngbeii
Carex obnupta
Crataegus sp.
Cyperaceae (family)
Cyperus erythrorhizos*
Cyperus esculentus*
Dactylis glomerate*
Echinochloa crusgalli*
Eleocharis palustris*
Fraxinus latifolia var oregana*
Glyceria borealis
Lysichiton americanum
Phalaris arundinacea*
Polygonum hydropiper
Polygonum lapathifolium*
Polygonum persicaria*
Polygonum sp.
Populus sp..
Potamogeton crispus
Potamogeton pectinatus
Potentilla anserina
Common Name
Spreading bentgrass
Meadow foxtail
Smooth brome-grass
Lyngbye's sedge
Slough sedge
Hawthorne
Sedges
Red-root flatsedge
Chufa
California oatgrass
Barnyard grass
Creeping spikerush
Oregon ash
Small floating mannagrass
Yellow skunk cabbage
Reed canary grass
Marshpepper smartweed
Willow-weed
Lady's thumb
Smartweeds
Cottonwoods
Curly pondweed
Sago pondweed
Silverweed
Code
FAC+NAT
FACW\£XO
FACUXEXO
OBL\NAT
OBL\NAT
???
777
OBUNAT
FACWVNAT
FACU\EXO
FACWVEXO
OBUNAT
FACWVNAT
OBL\NAT '
OBUNAT
FACW\NAT
OBLVEXO
FACW+NAT
FACWVEXO
77?
777
OBUEXO
OBUNAT
OBLXNAT
117
-------
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
Ranunculus spp.
Sagittaria latifolia*
Sagittaria sp.
Salix sitchensis*
Salixsp.
Scirpus acutus*
Scirpus americanus
Scirpus microcarpus*
Scirpus sp.
Scirpus validus*
Sparganiaceae (family)
Sparganium emersum*
Sparganium eurycarpum*
Spiraea douglasii
Symphoricarpos spp.
Taxodium disticbum
Typha latifolia
Typha spp.
Buttercups
Broad-leaf arrowhead
Arrowhead
Sitka willow
Willow
Hard-stem bulrush
Olney's bulrush
Small-fruit bulrush
Bulrush
Soft-stem bulrush
Burreed family
Narrow-leaf burreed
Giant burreed
Douglas' spiraea
Snowbeny
Bald cypress
Broad-leaf cattail
Cattails
Nutsedge
Great bulrush
OBIANAT
???
FACW\NAT
???
OBUNAT
OBUNAT
OBLVNAT
OBLNNAT
???
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
FACWVNAT
???
OBLAEXO
OBLNNAT
OBUNAT
???
77?
LIST OF ALL SPECIES FOUND ON CREATED WETLANDS
The following list includes all species found along transects that were placed to represent the
vegetation communities of each created wetland studied. Transects were located within the wetland areas
of the sites only. They were not placed in buffer areas, banks, and adjacent upland areas.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Scientific Name
Agropyron repens
Agrostis alba
Agrostis exarata
Agrostis tenuis
Alisma plantago-aquatica
Alnus rubra
Alopecurus geniculatus
Alopecurus pratensis*
Anthemis cotula
Anthoxanthum odoratum
Antirrhinum orontium
Arctium minus
Bcckmann'a syzigachne
Bidens cernua
Bidens frondosa
Bidens tripartita
Bidens vulgata
Boisduvalia densiflora
Callitriche stagnalis
Callitriche verna
Camassia leichtlinii
Capsella bursa-pastoris
Common Name
Quackgrass
Red top
Spike bentgrass
Colonial bentgrass
Broadleaf water-plantain
Red alder
Meadow foxtail
Meadow foxtail
Mayweed
Sweet vernal grass
Snapdragon
Common burdock
American sloughgrass
Nodding beggar-ticks
Devil's beggar-ticks
Tree-lobe beggar-ticks
Tall beggar-ticks
Dense-flower spike-primrose
Pond water-siarwort
Spiny water-starwort
Leichtlin's Camassia
Common shepard's purse
Code
NONEXO
FACWNEXO
FACW\NAT
UPUEXO
OBUNAT
FAQNAT
FACW+NAT
FACW\EXO
FACUNEXO
FACUVEXO
FACVNAT
FACUVEXO
OBUNAT
FACW+EXO
FACW+NAT
FACWNEXO
FACW+NAT
FACW-NAT
OBLVNAT
OBLNNAT
FACW-NAT
FAC-EXO
118
-------
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
Cardamine oligosperma
Carex arcta
Carex athrostachya
Carex feta
Carex laeviculmis
Carex lenticularis
Carex sp.
Carex stipata
Carex unilateralis
Centaurea cyanus
Centaurium umbellatum
Centunculus minimus
Cerastium visoosum
Cbenopodium album
Chenopodium ambrosioides
Chenopodium botrys
Chrysanthemum leucanthemum
Cichorium intybus
Circaea alpina
Cirsium arvense
Cirsium vulgare
Cornus stolonifera
Crepis setosa
Cyperaceae (seedling)
Cyperus erytbrorhizos*
Cyperus esculentus*
Dacrylis glomerata*
Daucus carota
Deschampsia elongata
Digitaria ischaemum
Dipsacus sylvestris
Echinochloa crusgalli*
Eleocharis acicularis
Eleocharis ovata .
Eleocharis palustris*
Epilobium paniculatum
Epilobium watsonii
Equisetum arvense
telmateia
Euphorbia supina
Festuca arundinacea
Festuca bromoides
Fragaria vesca
Fraxinus latifolia*
Galium aparine
Galium trifidum
Geranium dissectum
Geranium molle
Geum macrophyllum
Glyoeria grandis
Glyceria leptostachya
Few-seed bitter-cress
Northern clustered sedge
Slender-beak sedge
Green-sheath sedge
Smooth-stem sedge
Shore sedge
Sedges
Stalk-grain sedge
One-side sedge
Bachelor's button
Centaury
Chaffweed
Sticky chickweed
White goosefoot
American wormseed
Jerusalem-oak
Oxeye daisy
Chicory
Small enchanter's nightshade
Creeping thistle
Bull thistle
Red-osier dogwood
Rough hawksbeard
Sedge
Red-root flatsedge
Chufa
Orchard grass
Queen Anne's lace
Slender hairgrass
Smooth crabgrass
Teasel
Barnyard grass
Least spikerush
Ovate spikerush
Creeping spikerush
Autumn willow-weed
Watson's willow-weed
Field horsetail
Giant horsetail
Purple lovegrass
Milk spurge
Kentucky fescue
Barren fescue
Woods strawberry
Oregon ash
Catchweed bedstraw
Small bedstraw
Cut-leaf geranium
Dovefoot geranium
Large-leaf avens
Reed mannagrass
Slender-spike mannagrass
FACW\NAT
FACW-f-NAT
FACWNNAT
FACWNNAT
FACWNNAT
FACW+NAT
???
OBLVNAT
FACWVNAT
UPL\EXO
FAC-EXO
FACWVNAT
NONEXO
FAOEXO
FAOEXO
FACUNEXO
FAOEXO
UPLNEXO
FACWNNAT
FACU+EXO
FACUNEXO
FACWNNAT
UPLNEXO
???
OBLNNAT
FACWNNAT
FACUNEXO
FAOEXO
FACW-NAT
FACUNEXO
FACUNEXO
FACWNNAT
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
UPLNNAT
FACW-NAT
FACNNAT
FACWNNAT
FAONAT
UPLNEXO
FACU-EXO
FACNEXO
FACUNNAT
FACWNNAT
FACUNNAT
FACW+NAT
UPLNEXO
UPLNEXO
FACW+NAT
OBLNEXO
OBLNNAT
119
-------
75
76
77
78
79
. 80
81
82
83
84
85
.86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
Gnaphalium palustre
Gnaphalium uligmosum
Gratiola neglecta
Hedera helix
Heleochloa alopecuroides
Holcus lanatus
Hordeum brachyaotherum
Hypericum perforatum
Hypocbaeris radicata
Impatiens capensis
Juncus bufonius
Juncus effusus
Juncus ensifolius
Juncus oxymeris
Juncus patens
Juncus tenuis
Lacnica serriola
Lamium atnptericaule
Lapsana conununis
Lathyrus hirsutus
Leersia oiyzoides
Lemna minor
Leontodon nudicaulis
LamoseUa aquatica
Lindemia a
Lindemia dubia
Lolium multiflonun
Lolium perenne
Lotus comiculatus
Ludwigia palustris
Lupinus porypbyllus
Luzula campestris
Lythrum hyssopifolia
Mazus japonicus
Mimulus moschatus
Mollugo verticOlata
Myosotis discolor
Myosotis laxa
Navarretia squanosa
Oemleria cerasiformis
Oenanthe sarmentosa
Panicum capfllare
Peplis portula
Phalaris arundinacea*
Phleum pratense
Plagiobothiys scouleri
Plantago lanceolata
Plantago major
Poa annua
Poa compressa
Poa palustris
Poa trivialis
Western marsh cudweed FAC+NAT
Marsh cudweed FAONAT
Clammy hedgehyssop OBLNNAT
Ivy UPL\EXO
Heleochloa OBL-EXO
Common velvet-grass FAOEXO
Meadow barley FACWVNAT
Common St. John's-wort UPUEXO
Spotted cats-ear UPL\EXO
Spotted touch-me-not FACW\NAT
Toad rush FACW+NAT
Soft rush FACW-f NAT
Three-stamen rush FACW\NAT
Pointed rush FACW-I-NAT
Spreading rush FACWVNAT
Slender rush FAONAT
Prickly lettuce FAC-EXO
Common dead-nettle UPIAEXO
Nipplewort UPL\EXO
Hairy peavine UPL\EXO
Rice cutgrass OBLNNAT
Lessor duckweed OBLNNAT
Hairy hawkbit UPL\EXO
Northern mudwort OBLNNAT
False pimpernel OBLNNAT
Yellow-seed false pimpernel OBLNNAT
Australian ryegrass FACUNEXO
Perennial ryegrass FACUNEXO
Birds-foot trefoil FAOEXO
Marsh seedbox OBLNNAT
Large-leaved lupine FACU-NAT
Sweep's brush FACIANAT
Hyssop loosestrife OBLNEXO
Japanese mazus FACW\EXO
Muskflower FACW+NAT
Green carpet-weed . FAONAT
Yellow and blue forget-me-not FACW\EXO
Bay forget-me-not OBL\NAT
Skunkweed UPUNAT
Indian plum FACIANAT
Water-parsley OBIANAT
Witchgrass FAONAT
??? FACWNEXO
Reed canary grass FACWNNAT
Timothy FACUVEXO
Scouler popcorn-flower FACWNNAT
English plantain FACU-i-EXO
Common plantain FAC+EXO
Annual bluegrass FAC-NAT
Canada bluegrass FACUNNAT
Fowl bluegrass FAOEXO
Rough bluegrass FACW-EXO
120
-------
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
Polygonum aviculare
Polygonum hydropiperoides
Polygonum lapathifolium*
Polygonum persicaria*
Polygonum punctatum
Polygonum spergulariaeforme
Populus trichocarpa
Potamogeton amplifolius
Potamogeton filifonnis
Pynis malus
Ranunculus lobbii
Ranunculus repens
Ranunculus soeleratus
Rorippa curvisiliqua
Rorippa islandica
Rubus discolor
Rubus ursinus
Rumex conglomeratus
Rumex crispus
Rumex salicifolius
Sagittaria latifolia*
Salix fluviatilis
Salix lasiandra
Salix piperi
Salix sitchensis*
Salix sp.
Scirpus acutus*
Scirpus fluviatilis
Scirpus microcarpus*
Scirpus validus*
Senecio jacobaea
Senecio vulgaris
Solanum dulcamara
Solidago occidentalis
Sonchus asper
Sparganium emersion"
Sparganium eurycarpum*
Spergularia rabra
Stachys cooleyae
Stachys palustris
Stellaria media
Symphoricarpos albus
Tanacetum vulgare
Taraxacum ofBcinale
Tellima grandiflora
Tillaea aquatica
Trifolium arvense
Trifolium dubium
Trifolium bybridum
Trifolium pratense
Trifolium repens
Trifolium subterraneum
Prostrate knotweed
Swamp smartweed
Willow-weed
Lady's thumb
Dotted smartweed
Spurry knotweed
Black cottonwood
Large-leaf pondweed
Fine-leaf pondweed
Apple (cultivated)
Lobb's water buttercup
Creeping buttercup
Celery-leaf buttercup
Curve-pod yellowcress
Marsh yellowcress
Himalayan blackberry
Pacific blackberry
Clustered dock
Curly dock
Willow dock
Broad-leaf arrowhead
River willow
Pacific willow
Dune willow
Sitka willow
Willow
Hardstem bulrush
River bulrush
Small-fruit bulrush
Soft-stem bulrush
Tansy ragwort
Common groundsel
Climbing nightshade
Western goldenrod
Prickly sowthistle
Narrow-leaf burreed
Giant burreed
Purple sandspurry
Cooley's hedgenettle
Marsh hedgenettle
duckweed
Snowbeny
Common tansy
Common dandelion
Fnngecup
Pigmy-weed
Hare's foot
Suckling clover
Alsike clover
Red clover
White clover
Subterranean clover
FACW-EXO
OBLNNAT
FACW+EXO
FACWNEXO
OBLNNAT
ABSNNAT
FACWNNAT
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
UPLNEXO
OBLNNAT
FACWNEXO
OBLNNAT
FACW+NAT
OBLNNAT
FACU-EXO
FACWNNAT
FACWVEXO
FACWNEXO
FACWNNAT
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
FACW+NAT
FACWNNAT
FACWNNAT
???
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
UPLNEXO
FACUNEXO
FAQEXO
FACWNNAT
FAC-EXO
OBLNNAT
OBLNNAT
FAC-EXO
FACW\NAT
FACW+NAT
UPLNEXO
FACUNNAT
ABSNEXO
FACUNEXO
FACUNNAT
OBLNNAT
UPLNEXO
UPLNEXO
UPLNEXO
FACUNEXO
FACU+EXO
UPLNEXO
121
-------
179
180
181
182
183
184
18S
186
187
188
189
Typha latifolia*
Unknown Herb 2
Unknown Seedling 1
Verbascum blattaria
Veronica americana
Veronica peregrina
Veronica serpyllifolia
Vicia americana
Vicia dispenna
Vicia sativa
Vicia tetrasperma
Broadleaf cattail
Moth mullein
American speedwell
Purslane speedwell
Thyme-leaf speedwell
American purple vetch
Vetch
Common vetch
Slender vetch
OBUNAT
UPUEXO
OBUNAT
OBUNAT
FAOEXO
FAONAT
ABS\EXO
UPUEXO
UPL\EXO
122
------- |