EPA/600/R-93/221
October. 1993
Research and Development
32 EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Environmental Research
Laboratory
Corvallis, Oregon 97333
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
FOR THE
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY
-------
DISCLAIMER
The research described in this report has been funded wholly or in part by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency under Contract #68-C8-0006 to 3ManTech
Environmental Technology, Inc., and Purchase Requisition #2B1149NATA to Teresa
Magee. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document should be cited as:
Magee, T.K., K.A. Dwire, C.C. Holland, S.E. Gwin, R.G. Gibson, J.E. Honea, P.W.
Shaffer, J.C. Sifneos, and M.E. Kentula. 1993. Quality Assurance Project Plan for the
Oregon Wetlands Study. Document production by K. Miller. EPA/600/R-93/221. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
ii
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to express our gratitude to the landowners of the properties on
which the study wetlands are located. Without their willingness to allow sampling
activities to occur on their land, this research could not be conducted. We also thank
the Oregon Division of State Lands for providing access to the wetland projects over
which they have jurisdiction, and for providing access to the permit files which contain
the information on the design and construction of these projects.
Preparing for this study required gathering a great deal of information on
wetland locations and surrounding land uses. The Portland Metropolitan Service
District (METRO) assisted in this task by creating maps of land use and wetland
locations for our use in selecting the study sites. The Port of Portland and the Oregon
Department of Transportation also assisted in our site selection efforts. Both agencies
provided information and access to sites located on properties within their control, and
often went one step further by providing historical data and information on future plans
for the sites.
The document benefitted greatly from the suggestions of several reviewers.
Specifically, we thank the following individuals for their thoughtful reviews: Louisa
Squires (Santa Clara Valley Water District), Robert Mickler (ManTech Environmental
Technology, Research Triangle Park), Brian Schumacher (EPA, Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas), Chris Swarth, (Jug Bay Wetlands
Sanctuary). In addition, we would like to thank Deborah Coffey and Ken West
(ManTech Environmental Technology) for quality assurance review. Finally, we thank
Carol Roberts, Kristina Miller, and Teresa Olsen for document assembly.
iii
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 SIGNATURE PAGE i
2.0 LIST OF TABLES vii
3.0 LIST OF FIGURES viii
4.0 INTRODUCTION 1
OBJECTIVES 1
PROJECT RELEVANCE TO EPA BRANCH AND PROGRAM 2
PROJECT DELIVERABLES TO EPA 3
5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4
STUDY DESIGN 4
Sampling Strategy 4
Study Area 5
Site Selection 5
Wetland Characterization 6
PROJECT SCHEDULE 6
6.0 PROJECT QA ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY 17
CREW MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES 17
7.0 OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT 22
EXISTING DATA 25
8.0 SAMPLING PROCEDURES 30
OVERVIEW OF SAMPLING TASKS FOR EACH SITE 30
SITE SELECTION 32
DEFINING THE POPULATION OF PROJECTS 32
DEFINING AND SAMPLING THE POPULATION OF NATURAL
WETLANDS 33
Locating Natural Wetlands 33
Field Reconnaissance of Natural Wetlands 34
TRANSECT ESTABLISHMENT : . 35
Held Methodology 36
Site Characterization Transects 36
Wetland Morphology Transect 37
Vegetation Transects 37
General Transect Establishment Procedures 39
Transect Establishment Procedures in Atypical Situations 41
GENERAL SITE DATA 42
Site Mapping Methodology 42
iv
-------
Equipment 42
The Brunton Cadet compass 43
Setting up the transit 43
Using the transit to map the study site 44
Land Use and Buffers 46
Photography 47
VEGETATION FIELD METHODOLOGY 48
Vegetation Team Responsibilities and Sampling Protocol 48
Field Equipment and Supplies 49
Pre-Sampling Activities 49
Vegetation Sampling 51
Placing the meter tape 52
Sampling Order for Vegetation Data 53
Line-intercept data collection 53
Canopy cover estimation within quadrats 54
Basal area data collection within belt-transects 55
Establishing the Transect Endpoint 56
Post-Sampling Activities 56
Final Plant Collection and Plant Specimen Preservation 57
WETLAND MORPHOLOGY FIELD METHODOLOGY 57
Equipment 59
Getting Started 60
Collecting Wetland Morphology Data 60
Turning with the Original Benchmark 62
Turning with a New Benchmark 63
Adjusting the Eye Level Plane 63
SOILS AND HYDROLOGY FIELD METHODOLOGY 64
General Considerations in Soil Descriptions and Sampling 64
Equipment and Supplies 65
Field Sampling Procedure 65
9.0 sample Custody 97
10.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY 98
EQUIPMENT 98
TRAINING 98
Crew Member Morale 106
11.b ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES 109
DRAWING THE FINAL MAP 109
LABORATORY ACTIVITIES FOR VEGETATION 110
Equipment 110
WETLAND MORPHOLOGY - ELEVATION CALCULATIONS 111
SOIL ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT -- LOSS ON IGNITION 111
v
-------
Equipment and Supplies 112
General Considerations for Laboratory Analysis 112
Laboratory Analysis Procedure 112
Calculations 114
12.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING 116
DATA ENTRY, RECONCILIATION, AND VALIDATION 118
DATABASE FORMATS 120
DOCUMENTING DATA PROBLEMS AND MAINTAINING A DATA
DICTIONARY 120
DATA STORAGE AND FILE BACK-UP 120
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA 121
Data Analysis Procedures 123
Characterization and comparison of the wetlands 124
Summary 126
COMPUTER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION 128
13.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS 141
QUALITY ASSURANCE FIELD PROCEDURES 141
Vegetation - Quality Assurance Procedures 141
Soils and Hydrology -- Quality Assurance Procedures 143
Between-Crew Quality Assurance Procedures 144
Standard procedure checks 144
Calibration activities 144
QUALITY ASSURANCE LABORATORY ANALYSIS PROCEDURES ... 146
QUALITY ASSURANCE CREW LEADER CHECKS 147
14.0 PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS 155
15.0 PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE 156
16.0 SPECIFIC ROUTINE PROCEDURES USED TO ASSESS DATA
QUALITY 157
17.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS 162
18.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT 163
19.0 REFERENCES 165
APPENDIX A 169
APPENDIX B 194
APPENDIX C 198
vi
-------
2.0 LIST OF TABLES
Table 5-1. Summary list of objectives, study questions, and research
approaches for the Oregon Wetlands Study 7
Table 5-2. Variables to be studied in the Oregon Wetlands Study 9
Table 5-3. Statistical analyses proposed for the Oregon Wetlands Study 13
Table 5-4. Project activities grouped by project phase 14
Table 6-1. Project QA organization and responsibility 19
Table 7-1. Data quality objectives for the Oregon Wetlands Study 27
Table 7-2. Existing data used in the Oregon Wetlands Study 29
Table 8-1. Methods used for data collection in the Oregon Wetlands Study .... 66
Table 8-2. Wetlands to be sampled by the OWS, stratified by wetland origin
(natural or project) and land use 73
Table 8-3. Numbers of the freshwater mitigation projects in Portland, Oregon,
by wetland type and size required in permits issued by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and the Oregon Division of State Lands from
January 1987 through January 1991 74
Table 10-1. Calibration procedures and frequency for field and laboratory
equipment 108
Table 11-1. List of regional floras and references used to facilitate plant
identification 115
Table 13-1. Summary of research and QA/QC activities for assuring and
estimating data quality 149
Table 13-2. Internal quality control checks for assessment of individual and
team proficiency in executing sampling methods 152
Table 13-3. Internal quality control checks for assessment of accuracy and
within and between-crew precision 154
vii
-------
3.0 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 5-1. Estimated time frame for major project activities 15
Figure 8-1. Flowchart of field crew member responsibilities and tasks 75
Figure 8-2. The letter given to landowners during site selection explaining the
Oregon Wetlands Study 76
Figure 8-3. Basic transect layout used to sample sites 77
Figure 8-4. Vegetation Transect (VT) placement when the vegetation band is
more than two sampling intervals wide 78
Figure 8-5. Vegetation Transect (VT) placement when the vegetation is less
than two sampling intervals wide 79
Figure 8-6. Transect establishment protocol flowchart 80
Figure 8-7. Procedure for transect establishment in cases where deep open
water interrupts one or more transects 81
Figure 8-8. A view through the transit telescope 82
Figure 8-9. Setting the magnetic declination on a compass 83
Figure 8-10. Example of the scale markings on a stadia rod 84
Figure 8-11. Illustration of procedure for triangulation 85
Figure 8-12. Placement of transects for determination of presence, type and
width of buffers 86
Figure 8-13. Vegetation sampling protocol illustrating order of task completion
and crew responsibility 87
Figure 8-14. The position of the first and last quadrats on vegetation sampling
transects 88
Figure 8-15. Transects used for sampling herbaceous vegetation, shrubs, and
trees 89
Figure 8-16. Illustration of transect segments in which vegetation data are
collected and the order of data collection 90
Figure 8-17. Determining the intercept intervals for shrubs using the line-
intercept method 91
Figure 8-18. Placement of the 1-m2 quadrat along transect line 92
Figure 8-19. Illustration of species cover estimation within a 1-m2 quadrat 93
Figure 8-20. Where to measure Diameter Breast Height (DBH) in a variety of
situations 94
Figure 8-21. Adjusting the eye level plane 95
Figure 8-22. Flowchart showing sampling options and the sequence of field
sampling activities for characterization of soil and hydrologic attributes ... 96
Figure 12-1 129
Figure 12-3. Example computer screen showing a lookup table 131
Figure 12-4. Flowchart of the three step comparison and reconciliation process 132
Figure 12-5. Example computer screen showing the reconciliation of a
GENUS/SPECIES name in a vegetation database 133'
Figure 12-6. Example notebook entry for identifying problems encountered
during the data reconciliation process and their solutions 134
viii
-------
Figure 12-7. Example of approaches for characterizing and comparing
wetlands 135
Figure 12-8. Hypothetical ordination and classification of wetland data 136
Figure 12-9. Plant diversity data from the 1987 Oregon Pilot Study (Kentula et
al. 1992a) 137
Figure 12-10. Weighted average scores for the type of vegetation found in
individual project (P) and natural (N) wetlands from the 1987 Oregon
Pilot Study 138
Figure 12-11. Hypothetical characterization curves comparing the level of
function in groups of wetlands in different land use settings 139
Figure 12-12. Hypothetical performance curves comparing the anticipated
development of the projects constructed prior to 1987 to the development
of projects constructed since 1987 and to similar natural wetlands 140
Figure 16-1. Hypothetical frequency distribution of difference in percent plant
cover as estimated by vegetation crews against a "standard" in "QA
vegetation quadrats." 159
Figure 16-1. Hypothetical frequency distribution of differences in percent plant
cover as estimated by vegetation crews against a "standard" in "QA
vegetation quadrats." 160
Figure 16-2. Hypothetical plot of paired (initial and remeasurement) plant cover
estimates from the "QA vegetation quadrats" sampled at each wetland . . 161
ix
-------
4.0 INTRODUCTION
Wetlands are recognized as valuable components of the landscape contributing
in many ways to overall environmental quality. Comprising only about 5% of the land
area in the conterminous United States (Dahl 1990), wetlands have a significant
influence on the landscape because of their roles in regulating watershed hydrology
and water quality. Moreover, wetlands provide habitat for a diverse flora and fauna
that includes over one-third of the Nation's endangered species (U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service 1990). Wetlands encompass a wide array of habitat types (Cowardin et al.
1979) and exhibit a level of productivity second only to tropical rainforests (Tiner
1984). During the last 200 years, more than half of all wetlands in the United States
have been lost due to human activities, primarily conversion for agricultural uses and
urban development. Losses in some states (e.g., California, Ohio) have been on the
order of 90% (Tiner 1984, Dahl 1990).
Although federal regulations such as Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and
the Food Securities Act govern wetland protection, they have proven to be only
partially successful. Consequently, the National Wetlands Policy Forum has
recommended the adoption of a clear policy designed to achieve no overall net loss of
wetlands in terms of area or function (Conservation Foundation 1988). Aiming toward
fulfilling its responsibilities for wetland conservation, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency has identified two points of national concern: 1) the need to advocate a
national goal for no net loss of wetlands, and 2) the development of a risk-based
approach to wetland protection and management (Leibowitz et al. 1992).
Economic pressures to develop wetlands have resulted in wetland restoration
and creation projects (hereafter "projects") being constructed with increasing
frequency. However, the efficacy of restoration and creation methods remains
uncertain. The technology is unproven for many types of wetlands and the quality of
completed projects is inconsistent. The success of projects is not well documented,
because performance criteria are lacking and monitoring is insufficient (Kusler and
Kentula 1991, Leibowitz et al. 1992). Where specifications for final project condition or
quality exist, they are often vague and qualitative (e.g., replacement of ecological
function), and thus not amenable to rigorous evaluation. Post-construction monitoring
to insure that mitigation projects meet the minimum physical criteria (e.g., size, slope,
or wetland type) of permit requirements is seldom conducted. When monitoring does
take place, it is often noted that completed projects vary substantially from the permit
specifications and design plans (Erwin 1991, Gwin and Kentula 1990, Owen 1990).
OBJECTIVES
1 The Oregon Wetland Study (OWS) is designed to provide technical information
about natural wetlands and projects, which can be used by wetland regulators and
managers to improve wetland management strategies and facilitate implementation of
a policy for no net wetland loss. The OWS builds on work from the Oregon Pilot
Study conducted in the metropolitan area of Portland, Oregon, in 1987. During the
1993 growing season, approximately 130 freshwater wetlands ranging from sites
1
-------
1.0 SIGNATURE PAGE
Quality Assurance Project Plan
Oregon Wetlands Study
Signature Approval Page
Name: Mary Kentula
Title: Principal Investigator
EPA - ERL-C
Signature^^t^ f —-
Phone: (503) 754-4478
Date: £/V/£3
Name: Mary Kentula Phone: (503) 754-4478
Title: Project Manager and Wetlands Program Leader
EPA - ERL-C
SianatureTT^?/^ —- Date: —
Name: Roger Blair
Title: Watershed J3fanch Cjjiel
EPA
"r^
Phone: (503) 754-4662
Signature:
Date
: /O
v t> y
Name: Robert T,
Title: Quality
EPA
Signature:
key
ce Officer
Date:
Phone: (503) 754-4601
/v jv>h. \°fi}
i
-------
dominated by open water to those dominated by emergent vegetation will be sampled,
including the sites sampled in 1987. The general approach will be to collect data that
can be used to characterize and compare the structural and functional attributes of:
1) populations of natural wetlands in different land use settings, and 2) populations of
natural wetlands and wetland projects. Characterizations can then be used to:
1) document direct losses of wetland area or function through conversion, 2) evaluate
indirect losses of wetland function due to the impacts from surrounding land uses, and
3} evaluate the potential for restoration and replacement of lost functions. This
information will aid in the development of performance criteria and design guidelines
for wetland projects, and ultimately, be used to evaluate the results of management
strategies and to suggest alternative approaches. Specifically, documenting the
causes of direct and indirect wetland losses and developing mechanisms for
preventing continued attrition are key steps in sound regulatory practices.
Documentation is particularly important in rapidly developing urban areas. Direct
losses arise from conversion of wetlands to other land uses such as residential or
commercial construction and industrialization. Indirect losses arise primarily from two
sources. Surrounding land use can cause degradation of wetland structure and
function via inputs of urban run-off, influx of exotic taxa, alteration of hydrology or
sedimentation rates, destruction of buffers, habitat fragmentation, and other
disturbances. Inadequately designed or constructed projects contribute to indirect loss
by failing to completely replace the functions of destroyed wetlands or to achieve the
attainable quality possible for the associated land use setting.
Four research objectives have been identified to fill the information needs of a
cohesive management and regulatory program:
Objective 1: Determine the number of freshwater wetlands that have been converted
to other land types and identify causes of this direct loss.
Objective 2: Evaluate the relationship between surrounding land uses and the
attainable quality of freshwater wetlands.
Objective 3: Evaluate the replacement potential of freshwater wetlands to aid in the
development of performance criteria.
Objective 4: Evaluate how project design and implementation affect the replacement
potential of freshwater wetlands to aid in the development of design guidelines.
PROJECT RELEVANCE TO EPA BRANCH AND PROGRAM
The OWS has been developed as a major component of the Wetland
Characterization and Restoration (C&R) project within EPA's Wetlands Research
Program {WRP) {Leibowitz et al. 1992). Four major tasks are intended for completion
as part of the C&R five year plan:
2
-------
1. Describe (characterize) wetland populations, including natural, restored, and
created wetlands, to quantify wetland functions and among-wetland variability
within specific geographic and land use settings.
2. Evaluate the attainable levels of wetland functions in various landscape settings
and the performance of wetland restoration and creation projects.
3. Provide technical support for the development of specific performance criteria
and technical design guidelines that can enhance performance and accelerate
project development.
4. Develop and test an approach for prioritizing sites for wetland restoration and
creation.
The Oregon Wetlands Study (OWS) addresses the first three of these tasks and
contributes information necessary to address to the fourth.
PROJECT DELIVERABLES TO EPA
Deliverables will be presented in the form of reports and scientific journal
papers. Anticipated titles, referenced to the Portland, Oregon Metro Region, for
papers and reports include:
1. Trends in Direct Loss of Freshwater Palustrine Wetlands.
2. Compliance of Project Construction with Permit and Design Specifications.
3. Evaluation of Attainable Quality by Land Use for Freshwater Palustrine
Wetlands and the Relationship of Attainable Quality to Replacement Potential
for Similar Wetlands.
4. Effects of Project Design and Implementation on Replacement Potential of
Freshwater Palustrine Wetlands and Recommendations for Improvements in
Management Strategies.
5. Research Plan and Methods Manual for the Oregon Wetlands Study (hereafter,
Research Plan). This document has cleared as an EPA external report (Magee
et al. 1993) and will likely be used as an approach methods manual for other
wetland studies.
6. Quality Assurance Project Plan: Oregon Wetlands Study (hereafter, QA Plan).
The QA Plan will also be cleared as an external EPA document so that it may
be distributed externally with the Research Plan.
All project deliverables will receive QA review as part of the ERL-C document
clearance process.
3
-------
5.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
To meet the OWS objectives, several questions and associated research
approaches were developed (Table 5-1). The data obtained from the proposed
research will add to basic knowledge about wetlands, and provide wetland regulators
with information that can improve management strategies and facilitate implementation
of a no net loss policy. The data collected during this study will be used in several
ways:
1. To provide baseline characterizations of projects and natural wetlands, by
describing the condition and attributes of existing wetland resources.
2. To provide assessments of attainable wetland quality in specific land use
settings.
3. To aid in development of performance criteria and monitoring schedules for
projects.
4. To aid in improving project design and implementation.
5. To improve decision making in permit evaluations.
6. To document trends in direct loss of wetlands.
7. To document compliance of as-built projects with permit specifications. As-built
projects are projects as they actually appear on-site, which may or may not be
consistent with permit specifications.
STUDY DESIGN
An overview of the study design used to meet research objectives is presented
here. Sampling strategy, study area description, site selection procedures, and the
variables sampled for wetland characterization are briefly discussed. For more detail
see the Research Plan and Methods Manual for the Oregon Wetlands Study
(Magee et al. 1993).
Sampling Strategy
An extensive sampling approach focusing on populations of wetlands has been
adopted so that results will be regionally applicable to wetland protection and
management. Populations have been chosen for study over single or paired sites,
because the general representativeness of single sites often cannot be determined,
and extrapolation of results from one site to other systems is, in many cases, not
valid. Also, data for a single site can not provide insight into variability among
wetlands of a given type or in a particular landscape setting. Extensive sampling will
permit quantitative and statistical evaluation of the effects of factors such as land use
or project age on wetland attributes. The OWS will also have an intensive research
4
-------
component. The results of the 1987 Oregon Pilot Study suggested that hydrological
modifications and increased sedimentation influence the structure and function of
freshwater wetlands in the Portland metropolitan area. Hydrology and sedimentation
rates in a subset of the wetlands examined in the OWS will be monitored for one year
beginning in the 1993 growing season. Details of this intensive portion of the study
are presented in a separate plan entitled, "Quality Assurance Project Plan for Held
Research on the Hydrology of Palustrine Wetlands in the Portland, Oregon
Area" (Shaffer, 1993).
Study Area
The study area is located in the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan region and is
restricted to portions of Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties that occur
within the Willamette Valley Plains subregion cf the Willamette Valley ecoregion
(Clarke et al. 1991). Limitation of sample sites to this subregion provides a restricted
geographic and physiographic area that includes both project and natural wetlands in
a variety of land use settings, allowing comparisons of wetlands while minimizing
confounding influences such as lithology, soils, and climate differences (Omemik
1987). This area was chosen for study, in part, because rapid urban development has
placed wetlands at high risk for modification or destruction. For example, 31% of the
Section 404 permits requiring compensatory mitigation issued in Oregon from January
1977 through January 1987 involved wetlands in the Portland Metropolitan area
(Kentula et al. 1992a). In addition, extensive ancillary data exist for the Portland-
metro vicinity including GIS-accessible land use maps and data from intensive
hydrologic monitoring. Such information will aid in research design and data
interpretation. Other preliminary data for the area come from the 1987 Oregon Pilot
Study which addressed similar issues and was conducted in the same location. This
affords an opportunity to revisit and evaluate the continued development of previously
sampled projects and the status of the previously sampled natural wetlands. Finally,
the location of the study area is sufficiently close to 1) the Environmental Research
Laboratory-Corvallis (ERL-C) to permit project staff at the laboratory to be integral
participants in field studies, 2) a large population of teacher volunteers who will be
involved in field sampling, and 3) the facilities at Portland State University that will be
used for training of field crews and processing of samples.
Site Selection
Specific criteria (See Section 8, Sampling Procedures-Site Selection) were
used to define populations of natural wetlands and projects in the Portland
metropolitan area. The population represented a gradient from sites dominated by
open water to those dominated by emergent vegetation. Most sites were < 2 ha in
area. All natural wetlands and projects in the Portland area meeting these criteria
were considered for study, including 10 natural wetlands and 11 projects sampled in
the 1987 Oregon Pilot Study and all mitigation projects required in Section 404 permits
and/or Oregon State removal-fill permits since 1977. The most current National
Wetland Inventory (NWI) maps (aerial photo dates 1981 and 1982) were used to
5
-------
identify all natural wetlands of the appropriate size and type that potentially occurred in
the study area. This population was then stratified by land use categories defined on
METRO (Portland Metropolitan Service District) maps.
All natural wetlands and projects from the NWI maps and permit records were
visited during field reconnaissance to verify that they existed, were of the appropriate
size and type, and were safe to sample. This resulted in a list comprising the entire
populations of both natural wetlands (111 sites) and projects (51 sites) occurring in the
study area and meeting site selection criteria. The last step will be to secure access
to all sites meeting the selection criteria. Because access to some wetlands may be
denied, the final number of sites to be sampled may b9 less than the total number
identified.'
Wetland Characterization
Variables used to characterize wetlands sampled in the OWS were selected to
provide data that describe the structural and functional features of wetlands, and that
facilitate assessments of ecological condition, trends in wetland loss, and permit
compliance. Wetland characterizations will be based on data describing the overall
site, wetland morphology, vegetation, soils, hydrology, and land use. Table 5-2
provides a summary of the variables, the information the variables are expected to
generate, and indicates the research questions addressed. Detailed rationales for
selection of variables and field methodologies are presented in the Research Plan.
Data will be summarized and analyzed using statistical methods to characterize and
compare natural and project wetlands (Table 5-3). For a discussion of data analysis
see Section 12 of this QA Plan and the Data Analysis Section of the Research Plan
and Field Manual for the Oregon Wetlands Study (Magee et al. 1993).
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The OWS requires three kinds of activities: pre-site, on-site, and post-site. The
tasks associated with each activity phase are illustrated in Table 5-4.
Initial planning, data collection and site reconnaissance for the OWS began in
1991. Site reconnaissance and selection are close to completion. Recruitment and
training of field" crews, field measurements, laboratory analyses, data entry, data
analysis and interpretation, and reporting of results will be completed during 1993
through 1995. The schedule for completion of major components of the OWS are
presented in Figure 5-1.
6
-------
Table 5-1. Summary list of objectives, study questions, and research approaches for the Oregon Wetlands
Study.
OBJECTIVE 1: Determine the amount and cause of direct loss of freshwater wetlands.
Question 1: What are the short term trends in wetland loss due to conversion?
Approach: Compare the most recent inventory based on NWI maps with current field
study inventory.
Question 2: What are the principal reasons for the wetland losses due to conversion?
Approach: Document reasons for wetland conversion identified in the course of current
inventory.
OBJECTIVE 2: Evaluate the relationship between surrounding land uses and the attainable quality
of freshwater wetlands.
Question 3: What is the relative attainable quality of wetlands in different land uses, and how are
differences in quality reflected in wetland structure and function?
Approach: ' Step 1 • Quantify and compare wetland structure and function by land use
category.
Step 2 • Rank the land uses according to the relative quality of the
wetlands.
Step 3 - Explore whether vegetated buffers ameliorate effects of land use.
OBJECTIVE 3: Evaluate the replacement potential of freshwater wetlands to aid in the
development of performance criteria.
Question 4: Do wetland projects replace the structure and function of similar natural wetlands, i.e.,
what is the replacement potential for the type of wetland?
Approach: Step 1 - Compare structure and function in projects representing a range of
ages and in similar natural wetlands as a measure of performance.
Step 2 • Investigate possible differences in level of performance due to age
of the project and land use setting.
Question 5: Has replacement potential improved with time and experience?
Approach: Compare the performance of pre-1987 projects with that of post-1987
projects at the same stage of development.
7
-------
Table 5-1. cont.
OBJECTIVE 4: Evaluate how project design and implementation affect the replacement potential
of freshwater wetlands to aid in the development of design guidelines.
Question 6: How can information on project design and implementation be used to improve
performance?
Question 6a: How do project design and as-built conditions compare with the structural
characteristics of similar natural wetlands?
Approach: Step 1 - Compare project plans, permit conditions, and as-built
conditions with the structural characteristics of similar natural
wetlands.
Step 2 - Investigate possible design improvements suggested by
the structure of natural wetlands of the highest attainable quality.
Question 6b: How do project design specifications compare with the as-built conditions?
Approach: Compare project plans and permit conditions with the as-built
conditions
Question 6c: How has project design and implementation changed with time and
experience?
Approach: Compare project plans, permit conditions, and as-built conditions of
pre-1987 projects with those of post-1987 projects.
8
-------
Table 5-2. Variables to be studied in the Oregon Wetlands Study. Numbers in parentheses associated vrith
variable uses refer to the study questions and research approaches summarized in Table 1-1. Primary use of
variable in answering a question is indicated by bolded numbers; secondary use, by Italicized numbers.
VARIABLES - ALL
SITES
RATIONALE FOR
INCLUSION
USES IN WETLAND
CHARACTERIZATION
AND COMPARISON
General
Location
Identifies site on local
map
Confirm site as part of
population of interest,
provide route information
for sampling
Wetland Type
Documents general
overall structure
Compare with project
goals and NWI
classification (1, 6b)
Structure
- % bare ground
- % vegetation (trees,
shrubs, herbs)
- % open water
(unvegetated and with
submerged aquatic
vegetation)
Describes distribution of
unvegetated land, reflects
site age and condition
Describes distribution of
vegetation, determines
wetland type
Reflects hydrology,
determines wetland type
Characterize site and
provide general
descriptive information
related to temporal
development, and
surrounding land use. (3,
4, 6a, 6b)
Surrounding Land Use
Influences inputs to
wetlands (e.g., nonpoint
source pollution, industrial
outfalls, recreational use,
source of propagules,
wildlife corridors, etc.)
Relate wetland
performance to
surrounding land use {2,
3, 4, 5)
Buffer Type/Extent
Provides a barrier to and
amelioration of off-site
inputs (e.g., industrial or
agricultural run-off) and
mediates the effects of
noise, foot traffic,
disturbance, etc., provides
habitat pathways for
animal movement
Explore the effect of
vegetated buffers of
different types (e.g.,
herbaceous, shrub, trees)
and widths on
ameliorating the effects of
land use and in
determining project
success (3, 4, 6)
9
-------
Table 5-2. Cont.
VARIABLES - ALL
SITES
RATIONALE FOR
INCLUSION
USES IN WETLAND
CHARACTERIZATION
AND COMPARISON
Presence of Obvious
Stressors or Disturbance
Documents potential
causes of the erosion of
wetland quality
Document presence of
degraded landscape or
damaging influences to
aid in explaining effects
of land use and in
understanding outlier
sites (3, 4)
Morphometry
Area
Influences habitat value,
plant community diversity,
and flood storage
Compare projects to
project construction
specification (6)
Slope/Elevation
Influences hydrologic
gradient, vegetation
establishment and
distribution, animal
access, etc.
Determine minimum,
maximum, and mean
depth and slopes from
topographic profiles of
each site. Compare basin
morphologies of project
and natural wetlands (4,
5, 6}
PerimeteriArea Ratio
Influences edge effect
(e.g., introductions of
exotic species and
extirpation of native taxa),
habitat size and quality
Compare amount of edge
in projects to natural
wetlands, and document
variation in project
shape/edge over time
through analysis of map
data on project and
natural wetland sampled
in both 1987 & 1993 (4,
5,6,
10
-------
Table 5-2. Cont.
VARIABLES • ALL
SITES
RATIONALE FOR
INCLUSION
USES IN WETLAND
CHARACTERIZATION
AND COMPARISON
Vegetation
Species Lists -
Identification
Defines wetland type,
habitat, and plant
diversity.
Compare species
composition between
natural project wetlands.
Compare species found
on completed project with
project planting or
seeding lists (4, 6)
Species Abundance
Provides information on
vegetation structure and
composition via species
richness, diversity,
dominance, community
type, ratios of native:
exotic taxa, ratios of
wetland:upland taxa
Describe and compare
project and natural
wetlands, relate
vegetation to
environmental or
disturbance gradients,
relate distribution and
abundance of individual
species with hydrology
elevation, and soils (3, 4,
5,6)
Soils
Soil Color
Indicates hydric soil
characteristics such as
gleying, mottling, root
oxidation channels, etc.
Used for delineating
wetland boundary, tracing
project development over
time, identifying
relationships of soil
conditions to elevation
and plant distribution (3,
4, 5, 6)
Presence of Hydrogen
Sulfide
Indication of hydric soil,
i.e., strongly reducing
conditions
See color (3, 4, 5, 6)
11
-------
Table 5-2. Cont.
VARIABLES - ALL
SITES
RATIONALE FOR
INCLUSION
USES IN WETLAND
CHARACTERIZATION
AND COMPARISON
Rough Description of Soil
Horizons
Characterized soil profiles
and development.
Characterize wetland
soils in different land use
settings. Evaluate
differences between
project and natural
wetland soils (3, 4, 5, 6)
Soil Amendments (e.g.,
substrates salvaged from
destroyed wetlands)
Provides baseline
information about projects,
influences soil
development and
chemistry, and vegetation
establishment
Evaluate relationship of
project performance and
rate of development to
use of amendments (4, 5,
6)
Soil Organic Matter
Indicated suitability as
planted medium,
conditions of soil
processes and chemistry
Compare projects to
natural wetlands.
Document temporal
change in organic matter
levels (3, 4, 5, 6) by
comparing data from
wetland samples in both
1987 & 1993
Hydrology
Water Depth "Throughout
Site:
- to saturated soil
- of standing water
during the growing
season
Influences which portions
of the site are wetland,
vegetation patterns,
wildlife and fisheries
habitat
Compare project and
natural wetlands. Look
for relationships between
water levels and plant
species composition and
abundance, soil
conditions (3, 4, 5, 6)
Flow Pattern
Influences plant
establishment, plant
productivity, substrate
stability and chemistry
Compare flow patterns in
project vs. natural
wetlands (3, 4, 5, 6)
12
-------
Table 5-3. Statistical anajyses proposed for the Oregon Wetlands Study.
Objective
Suggested Analyses
Characterization
Graphical Methods~to display variables and identify outliers (e.g., scatter plots, box plots,
Chernoff faces, etc.)
Descriptive Statistics~to summarize variables (e.g., mean, mode, range)
Multivariate Methods:
Multiple regression-measure relationships between variables
Correlations-measure the relationship between two variables
Cluster analysis-group wetlands based on species abundance or environmental variables
(e.g., CLUSB: non-hierachial, divisive; TWINSPAN: hierachial, divisive)
Ordinations:
Detrended correspondence analysis-summarize vegetation data and relate to
environmental variables
Principal components analysis-investigate which variables contribute the major
sources of variability
Binary logit regression/Discriminant function analysis-investigate which variables
most characterize the differences between projects and natural wetlands
Weighted averages-summarize vegetation data based on wetland indicator status
Canonical correspondence analysis-investigate relationship between two groups of
variables (e.g., vegetation and environmental variables)
Shannon and Simpson's diversity and dominance measures-to summarize plant
diversity and community structure.
Comparison
A) Natural wetlands within
each land use. Post-1967 projects
within each land use.
B) Post-1987 projects vs. natural
wetlands within each land use.
C) Pre-1907 projects vs. Post-1987
projects.
Univariate Methods:
Graphical methods-see above
T-tests/Non parametric two sample tests-compare two groups
ANOVA-compare more than two groups
Multivariate Methods:
Hotellings "^--compare more than one variable for two groups
-------
Table 5-4. Project Activities Grouped by Project Phase.
Pre>Site Phase
On-Site Phase
Post-Site Phase
Site selection
Travel to site
Copy data forms and
send to ERL-C
Securing permission to
sample from land owners
Transect establishment
Laboratory analyses
Preparation of the
Research Plan and
Methods Manual for the
Oregon Wetlands Study
Collection of field data
Plant specimen
identification
Preparation of the Quality
Assurance Plan: Oregon
Wetlands Study
Collection of plant
specimens and soil
samples
Site map completion
Preparation of the
Oregon Wetlands
Intensive Study Project
and QA plans
Sample and specimen
storage
Data entry and
verification
Development of EPA
portion of teacher training
program
Data sheet checks
Data analysis
Recruitment and
selection of Crew
Members
Site clean-up
Preliminary QA data
reports
Training of crews
QA Internal Audits
Reporting of results in
EPA documents and
scientific papers
Site-packet and field
sampling preparation
QA External Field Audits
Final QA reports
14
-------
Figure 5-1. Estimated Time Frame for Major Project Activities.
Activity
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
JFMAMJJASOND
JFMAMJJASOND
JFMAMJJASOND
J FMAMJJASOND
J F M
Site Selection
-Review ODSL permits
-Obtain land use maps
-Selection criteria
-Contact landowners
-Project site visits
-Natural site visits
-Final site list
I
.I
I
| ,
| 1
i 1
-I
I--
I—I
| 1
-|
I
I--I
Research/OA Plans
-Identify vanables
•Develop methods
-Draft research plan
-Draft QA plan
-Review/revise/clear
I -
I I
I---I
|
"I
| 1
I —I
PSU COOP
-Preliminary meetings
-Proposal/funding
-Plan teacher training
|
| 1
| 1
1
1
PSU/EPA
Recruitment/Training
-Recruit teacher crews
-Training course
-dasssroom
-laboratory
-field
•testing
I
|
1
| 1
| 1
| ,
H
-------
Figure 5-1 Continued.
Activity
1991
1992
1993
1994
199S
JFMAMJJASOND
JFMAMJJASOND
JFMAMJJASOND
JFMAMJJASOND
J FM
Field Sampling
•Order supplies
-Data collection
•general site
-vegetatron
-morphology
-hydrology
-soils
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
l—l
Lab Actlvltes
-organic content
-Draw wetland maps
-Elevaton calculations
-Plant identification
1 1
1—1
1—1
1—1
1 1
Quality Assurance
-Internal audits
-Field audit
1—1
1—1
l-l
Data Entry/Analysis
-Data to ERL-C
•Data entry
•Data verification
-Data analysis
1
1 1
1
-I
1—I ^
OA Reports
| 1
EPA Reports/
Scientific Papers
-Trends
-Compliance
•Attainable quality
-Project design
1"
1"
1
1
1
|
-------
6.0 PROJECT QA ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY
All personnel working on the OWS, their affiliations and responsibilities, are
listed in Table 6-1. Primary implementation of the study will be carried oat by staff
from ERL-Corvallis, in particular from the on-site contractor (currently ManTech
Environmental Technology, Inc.). In addition, ERL-C has established a cooperative
agreement with Portland State University (PSU) (CT-902668-01) to support 1993 field
sampling activities. As part of an environmental education program for teachers, PSU
staff have developed a program in which teachers will be trained in field sampling and
laboratory analysis techniques. Following training, two Laboratory Technicians and
three Field Crews composed of Crew Leaders from ERL-C and Teacher Volunteers
will be assembled to conduct the field work. Accountability for data quality is shown in
Figure 6-1. Project oversight and overall data quality is the responsibility of the
Principal Investigator and Project Officer, Mary Kentula. Stephanie Gwin, Crew
Supervisor, and Paul Shaffer, Soil Scientist, will have ultimate responsibility for field
data quality and soils laboratory data quality, respectively. Interim field data quality
maintenance rests with the Crew Leaders who will be on-site during data collection.
Quality of laboratory data is the combined responsibility of Crew Leaders and the
Plant Taxonomist, all of whom will make frequent visits to the laboratory at PSU.
Training of crews will be conducted by WRP scientists (Kate Dwire, Stephanie Gwin,
Cindy Holland, JoEllen Honea, Mary Kentula, Teresa Magee and Paul Shaffer) and
PSU scientists (Bill Becker, Neal Maine, and Sherry Spencer).
CREW MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES
Three separate field crews will work simultaneously at different field locations.
Each Crew will consist of eight people: the Crew Leader, two Botanists, two
Recorders, and three Surveyors. Each field crew is divided into three teams; two
Vegetation Teams, each made up of one Botanist and one Recorder, and the Survey
team, made up of three Surveyors.
The Crew Leader is responsible for ensuring that all aspects of the sampling
and QA activities are conducted properly and completely. The Crew Leader, with
input from other crew members, determines the wetland boundaries, the location and
orientation of the transect baseline, and the sampling transect starting points. The
Crew Leader photographs the site, ensures there is an adequate supply of the data
forms and that all are filled out completely and accurately, ensures all samples are
collected and stored properly, and keeps a diary of field activities. Finally, the Crew
Leader is responsible for resolving questions or problems that arise in the field, filling
in to assist other crew members wherever necessary, and ensuring the safety of all
crew members.
The Vegetation Teams are responsible for sampling vegetation and collecting
and preserving voucher specimens. The Survey Teams are responsible for mapping
the site, measuring relative elevations and collecting soil samples.
17
-------
Project personnel must meet minimum education and experience qualifications
to perform the required tasks and make sound decisions. The positions and their
requirements are:
1. Crew Leaders: These individuals are responsible for managing the crews in
the field and for making on-site decisions regarding the execution of
procedures. Therefore, the Crew Leaders must have a thorough understanding
of the goals of the study, all sampling procedures, and some knowledge of
plant taxonomy and experience in identification of wetland plants. In addition,
the Crew Leader must possess good leadership and interpersonal skills and be
able to maintain a productive, cooperative crew.
2. Botanists: Accurate plant species identification is of primary importance to the
quality of data collected. Therefore, Botanists must, at minimum, demonstrate
ability in sight recognition of common wetland taxa. Sight recognition means
that the Botanist must be capable of recognizing dominant species to the level
of genus and species, provided that plants are at the proper phenoiogica! stage.
The individual must also be familiar with local floristic references, show
proficiency in the use of diagnostic keys, and have experience with proper
techniques for collection and preservation of plant specimens. A competency
evaluation will be included as part of training.
3. Recorders: These crew members provide support for the Botanists, and when
needed, for the Surveyors. Attention to detail, and a willingness to follow strict
procedures and to work industriously are required. Recorders should be self-
motivated and willing to "pitch-in" when needed. Some botanical expertise is
desirable but training in Botanical and Survey skills will be provided. A
competency evaluation will follow training.
4. Surveyors: Knowledge of the use of a transit and compass, and skills in
elementary surveying, mapping, and soil sampling techniques are needed for
these team members. Training will be provided, and a competency evaluation
will be given at the end of training.
5. Laboratory Technicians: Knowledge and skill in processing laboratory soils to
determine organic matter content via ash free dry-weights are necessary.
18
-------
Table 6-1. Project QA Organization and Responsibility. 1 = EPA, 2= ManTech Environmental, 3 = PSU, 4 = Volunteer.
~—»
V0
Title
Name
Project/QA Responsibility
Project Officer -
Principal Investigator
Mary Kentula1
Oversight of Project, Research Plan, Training,
Data Analysis and Interpretation.
QA Auditor
Deborah Coffey2
Review of QA and Research Plans, External
Audits of Field and Lab Work.
Wetlands QA
Kate Dwire2
Review Research Plan, Training, QA Plan,
Crew Leader, Data Analysis and Interpretation,
Preparation of QA Final Report.
Plant Ecologist
Teresa Magee2
QA and Research Plans, Technical Guidance,
Training, Crew Leader, Data Analysis and
Interpretation.
Environmental Scientist
Stephanie Gwin2
Site Selection, QA and Research Plans,
Training, Crew Leader, Data Analysis and
Interpretation.
Soil Scientist
Paul Shaffer2
QA and Research Plans, Training, Data
Analysis and Interpretation.
Environmental Scientist
Cindy Holland2
Site Selection, QA and Research Plans,
Training, Crew Leader, Data Analysis and
Interpretation.
Environmental Scientist
JoEllen Honea2
Site Selection, QA and Research Plans,
Training, Crew Leader, Data Analysis and
Interpretation.
Programmer
Robert Gibson2
Data Management and Verification.
Biostatistician
Jeannie Sifneos2
Research Plan
Statistician
Barbara Peniston2
Consultation and Data Analysis.
-------
Table 6-1. Cont.
O
Principal Investigator - PSU Coop
Bill Becker3
Recruitment, Management, Training of Held
Crew Members and Lab Technicians.
Principle Investigator - PSU Coop
Neil Maine3
Recruitment, Management, Training of Field
Crew Members and Lab Technicians.
Plant Taxonomist
Sherry Spencer3
Plant taxonomy training of field crews, field and
lab assistance in plant identification, sample
custody.
6 Teacher Volunteer Botanists
Recruited4
Field sampling of vegetation, identification of
unknown plant taxa.
6 Teacher Volunteer Recorders
Recruited4
Transect establishment, recording data for the
Botanists, assisting the Survey team as
needed.
9 Teacher Volunteer Surveyors
Recruited4
Site mapping, surveying wetland morphology,
soil sampling and collection of water depth
data.
5 Crew Leaders
Stephanie Gwin, Cindy
Holland, JoEtlen Honea,
Kate Dwire, and Teresa
Magee
Management of one Crew including
oversight of field, lab, and QA activities,
assisting crew members as needed, data
handling and sample custody.
2 Lab Technicians
Recruited4
Processing laboratory soil samples to
determine organic matter content via ash free
dry-weights.
-------
EPA Project Officer -
Mary Kentula - EPA ERL-
C
Responsible for overall
project data quality
Crew Supervisor
Stephanie Gwin MET] ERL-C
Responsible for field collected site data
Soil Scientist
Paul Shaffer MET] ERL-C
Responsible for field collected soils data
and laboratory analysis (LOI) of soils
Plant Ecoloqist
Teresa Magee METI ERL-C
Responsible for vegetation data
QA Specialist
Kate Dwire METI ERL-C
Responsible for QC data
Crew Leaders - METI ERL-C
Stephanie Gwin
-i Responsible for:
Cindy Holland
| -training
JoEllen Honea
| -day-to-day
Teresa Magee
1 decision making in the field
Kate Dwire
~ -use of correct protocols in field
Back-up:
| -complete & legible data forms
Mary Kentula (EPA)
[ -correct handling & transporting of
Paul Shaffer
j soil samples
j
Sherry Spencer (PSU) -
Plant Taxonomist
Responsible for training,
correct plant species
identifications
Crew Representatives
• Responsible for crew
member attendance
- Safety issues
Crew 1
2 Botanists
2 Recorders
3 Surveyors
Crew 2
2 Botanists
2 Recorders
3 Surveyors
Crew 3
2 Botanists
2 Recorders
3 Surveyors
-i responsible
• for field data & sample
J collection
2 Laboratory
Technicians
Responsible for
laboratory
processing &
analysis of soils
21
-------
7.0 OBJECTIVES FOR MEASUREMENT
Data quality objectives (DQOs) are statements of the level of uncertainty that is
acceptable to a researcher or decision maker in results derived from environmental
data. Data quality objectives for the variables being measured in the OWS are shown
in Table 7.1. Procedures to be used in attaining and estimating these objectives are
summarized in Table 13.1, and described in Section 13. Calculation of accuracy,
precision, and completeness is described in Section 16. Achievement of data quality
objectives will be discussed in the project QA report (Section 18). When possible,
data quality will be expressed quantitatively for individual measurements. The
estimation of five data quality attributes • accuracy, precision, comparability,
completeness, and representativeness - is described below.
ACCURACY
Accuracy is the degree to which a measured value agrees with an accepted
known or "true" value (Taylor 1988). Accuracy of plant species identifications will be
assessed during the practical evaluation following training, and by identification checks
made by a PSU Plant Taxonomist during the field season. The Plant Taxonomist will
visit each crew within the first week of field activities, assist in identifying unknown
plant species, and review distinctive species characteristics of difficult plants with the
Vegetation Teams. The Plant Taxonomist will continue to visit each Field Crew
regularly throughout the field season. Identification and subsequent verification of
unknown plant species is described in Section 8. Whenever there is any doubt about
the identity of a plant species, a sample will be collected for verification in the
laboratory.
No "true" values exist for the subjective estimates of plant species cover, soil
color, soil horizon depth, and soil mottle size and abundance; hence, "true" accuracy
for these estimates cannot be determined. However, estimates obtained by the Field
Crew members for these variables will be "standardized" during training. We refer to
this standardization as calibration. As noted in Section 10, calibration entails
comparison and correspondence of values obtained by Team Members with the
"standard values" for the same estimates obtained by the Trainers. "Standard values"
for plant species cover will be determined by Teresa Magee and Sherry Spencer;
"standard values" for soil variables will be determined by Paul Shaffer. At the end of
training and once during the field season, Botanists and Recorders will remeasure
vegetation plots sampled by Teresa Magee, and Sherry Spencer. Estimates of plant
cover by each Vegetation Team will be compared with the Trainers' estimates.
Similarly, Soil Scientists and Surveyors will evaluate soil pedons, and their values for
soil description variables will be compared with those previously recorded by Paul
Shaffer. The degree of difference between the values obtained by the Team Members
and the Trainers will be used to evaluate "accuracy" (Table 7-1) of the subjective
estimates.
22
-------
Accuracy for the analytical process of loss on ignition will be addressed by
inclusion of soil audit materials in each analytical batch. The two audit soils were
collected and characterized for a previous EPA research project, and are described in
Appendix B. A control chart for each audit soil will be constructed using data (mean +
2 standard deviations) resulting from analyses conducted at Oregon State University
on 10 samples of each audit soil. As part of the analytical process of the research soil
samples at PSU, the loss on ignition value for the audit soil sample contained in each
batch will be charted following analysis. Accuracy will be evaluated by visual
inspection of the control charts.
Logistical constraints (field time and money) will not allow estimation of "true
values" for field measurements of basin elevation, depth of standing water, depth in
the soil pit to standing water, free water surface, and saturated soil. Accuracy values
in Table 7.1 for these measurements reflect the accuracy of the measurement
instruments, which will be calibrated.
PRECISION
Precision is a measure of variation among repeated independent observations
of the same property under controlled similar conditions (Taylor 1988). During training
and the first week of data collection, Field Crew members will be "calibrated" (as
described above) for data collection of vegetation and soil variables to increase within
and between crew precision. During field sampling, within crew precision for plant
species cover estimates will be evaluated by repeat measurements made at five plots
within each wetland i.e. both Vegetation Teams on the same Field Crew will measure
the same five plots. Procedures for repeat sampling are described in detail in Section
B - Quality Assurance Field Procedures. "TTie transect (SCT) for repeat measurements
of vegetation plots (Vegetation QA transect) will be selected by the throw of a die; the
five plots that will be sampled by both Vegetation Teams along the Vegetation QA
Transect will be taken from Form 12, which contains a list of randomly generated
numbers for each wetland. Within crew precision for soil profile description variables
will be estimated by repeat sampling of one soil pedon per wetland, i.e. two
Surveyors/Soil Scientists will independently describe the same soil pedon. TTie
transect (SCT) containing the "QA soil plot" (Soil QA transect) will also be selected by
the throw of a die (a separate throw from selection of the Vegetation QA Transect);
the location of the repeat-sampled soil pedon will be taken from Form 12 (the first
number on the list of random numbers corresponding to a plot number).
Between crew precision for plant cover will be estimated by independent data
collection by each Vegetation Team on the same plots at 2 different times - at the end
of training, and mid field season. Between crew precision for soil variables will be
estimated by independent data collection by each Surveyor/Soil Scientist on the same
soil pedons at the end of training. The goal of training and initial "calibration"
(described above) is to train crew members so their estimates of subjective variables
meet the DQOs stated in Table 7-1. The purpose of the mid-season remeasurement
23
-------
is to check for an increase in within and between crew variance that may exceed the
DQOs.
For determination of soil organic matter (loss on ignition), precision will be
estimated by analysis of field and laboratory duplicate samples.
COMPARABILITY
Comparability is the degree of confidence with which data sets may be
compared. Comparability of data collected by different Field Crews within the OWS
will be increased by training, cross-comparisons and testing of Field Crews prior to
field sampling, and adherence to protocols. Comparability will be assessed in terms of
accuracy and precision for the subjective field variables. Comparability of the loss on
ignition data will be evaluated based on analytical results of audit soils, blanks, and
field and laboratory duplicate samples. There is concern that temporal variability over
the course of the field season may affect data comparability, i.e. data collected at the
beginning of the field season may not be comparable to data collected near the end
due to changes in plant phenology and dry down of wetlands. Methods for assessing
temporal variability during the sampling period are being discussed.
COMPLETENESS
Completeness is the ratio or percentage of the amount of valid data obtained
compared to the planned amount (Stanley and Verner 1985, Smith et. al. 1988). Our
completeness goal is to visit all wetlands selected during the site selection phase, and
to collect data and samples as described in Section 8 at each wetland. Access may
limit sampling of some wetlands.
Collection of data on soil attributes may be limited by occurrence of bedrock,
cemented soil horizons, unconsolidated materials for which vertical soil horizons
cannot by described, or impediments to digging, such as plastic liners or erosion
control layers on project wetlands. Natural features (e.g. bedrock) will be described as
part of the soil profile; artificial features will be noted. In an effort to maximize
completeness in soil sampling, we have identified and prioritized the use of several
procedures which allow sampling of soils under different environmental conditions.
Procedures for numbering and tracking soil samples and plant specimens (including
unknowns) will be implemented to ensure correct labeling (see Section 9).
Completeness will be assessed throughout the OWS. Before leaving each site,
the Crew Leader is responsible for checking all data sheets and soil sample labels,
and logging soil samples on Form G-2, the soil sample tracking form. Form G-2 will
also be checked and initialed by Sherry Spencer when she picks up the soil samples
from the Crew Leaders, and upon receipt of the soil samples in the laboratory at PSU.
Annotation and completion of the vegetation data forms (Form 7, Form 8, and Form 9)
are described in Section 11. Data forms will again be checked for completeness
before copying and data entry (Section 12).
24
-------
At the end of the field season, the amount of data and samples collected will be
compared to the planned amount, and be presented as a percentage for soil samples
and each data variable. In addition, reasons for not meeting the 100% completeness
objective will be recorded. Following data entry, the amount of validated data will be
compared to the amount of data collected, and be presented as a percentage for each
variable. Reasons for unvalidated data witl be recorded.
REPRESENTATIVENESS
Representativeness is the degree to which data truly characterize a population
or environmental condition (Stanley and Verner 1985, Smith et.al 1988).
Representativeness of the sample wetlands was addressed during the site selection
process (see Section 5: Project Description). Representativeness of the
characteristics of each site will be assessed by the field sampling design described in
Section 8, Sampling Procedures.
EXISTING DATA
Several kinds of existing data (Table 7-2) were used to facilitate site selection
and are intended to contribute information for evaluating trends in wetland loss and in
determining the level of compliance of projects with permit specifications. National
Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps (1:24,000 scale) of the study area were acquired from
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1991. Wetland type and location data were
identified from the NWI maps; thus, quality of these data is dependent on the accuracy
of the maps. We were aware of several data quality problems associated with using
NWI maps, which were based on aerial photographs from 1981-1982, and actions
were taken to minimize effects of these problems. For example, wetland boundaries
identified on NWI maps are less accurate than boundaries identified by field
measurements, therefore, wetland boundaries will be obtained from field
measurements taken during the OWS. Also, many small wetlands (less than 2 ha)
are not identified on NWI maps, since they are often not visible on aerial photographs.
Although we were aware of this limitation, the NWI inventory was the most recent
wetlands inventory available for the study area, and one goal of the OWS is to
compare wetland designation from the most recent wetlands inventory with the field
condition encountered during site selection reconnaissance. Land use data were
obtained in 1992 from METRO (Portland Metropolitan Service District), a planning
agency for the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area, and are assumed to be accurate
up to 1990, the year the land use information was obtained by METRO. METRO
generated a map containing the NWI data on wetland location and type combined with
land use data for the study area. It is recognized that land uses may have changed
since 1990. Therefore, the land use data were only used to pre-stratify wetlands by
land use. Land use information obtained from field observations at each wetland will
be used in the analyses.
Existing permit data and construction files were acquired in 1991 by transferring
information from permit files at the Oregon Division of State Lands to a permit tracking
form. The information obtained accurately described the permit conditions and
25
-------
requirements; however, the specifications were often vague and incomplete. Follow-
up information regarding whether the wetland was actually constructed and the "as-
built" specifications of the mitigation project were often lacking from the permit files.
26
-------
Table 7-1. Data Quality Objectives for the Oregon Wetlands Study.
Variable
Units
Precision
Accuracy
Completeness
Comparability
SITE
Distance
meters
±1 m
±1 m
100%
*1 m
Elevations
meters
±1 cm
±1 cm
100%
±1 cm
Buffer size
meters
not assessed
not assessed
100%
not assessed
VEGETATION
Plant species
identification
Plant species
abundance
Percent canopy
cover of herbaceous
species
binomials (genus &
species names)
percent
95-100%
5% for interval 0-25%
15% far interval 26-100%
95-100%
5% for interval 0-25%
15% for interval 26-100%
100%
100%
95%-100% correct
identification for all
botanists
5% for Interval 0-25%
15% for interval 26-
100%
Percent relative
cover of shrubs1
cm
±10 cm
«
100%
±10 cm
Percent relative
cover of trees8
cm
±2 cm
•
100%
±2 cm
Percent bare ground
Percent standing
water
percent
percent
5% for interval 0-25%
15% for interval 26-100%
5% for interval 0-25%
15% for interval 26-100%
100%
5% for Interval 0-25%
15% for interval 26-
100%
1 Percent relative cover tot eacn snruo species is calculated from line-intercept distances (cm).
2 Percent relative cover for each tree species is calculated from basal area mesaurements (cm).
-------
Table 7-1. Cont.
Variable
Units
Precision
Accuracy
Completeness
Comparability j
SOILS
Total organic matter
% dry weight
larger of ±0.5%
(absolute) or ±15%
of reported value
DQO will be
stated alter audit
soils analyzed
100%
DQO will be stated after audit
soils are analyzed
Soil color
Munsell Units
±1 interval for hue,
value, &/or chroma
±1 interval for
hue, value, &/or
chroma
100%
±1 interval for hue, value, &/or
chroma
Presence of:
mottles
gleying
concretions
oxidized root
channels
HZS
presence/absence
90% agreement for
all repeat
descriptions
90% agreement
for all repeat
descriptions
100%
90% agreement for all repeat
descriptions
Horizon thickness
cm
±2 cm
±2 cm
100%
±5 cm
HYDROLOGY
Depth of standing
water
cm
±0.5 cm
±0.5 cm
100%
±0.5cm
Depth in soil pit to:
standing water
free water surface
saturated soil
cm
cm
cm
±1 cm
±1.0 cm
±1.0 cm
±1 cm
±1 cm
±1 cm
100%
100%
100%
±1.0cm
±1,0cm
± 1.0cm
-------
Table 7-2. Existing data used in the Oregon Wetlands Study.
Data Type
Source of Data
Data Transfer
Use of Data
Wetland type,
USFWS NWI1 maps
Maps - sent through
Site Selection and
location
mail
trends study
\
ODSL2 permit files,
Section 404 permit
COE3 permit files,
Data collected at
Site Selection and
information
and construction
ODSL, COE and
compliance study
includes:
contractors' files
construction
wetland type
contractors' offices
wetland size
slopes
location
vegetation species
to be planted
buffer type
buffer width
Land use
METRO4
Maps obtained at
Site Selection
METRO office
^.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory
JOregon Division of State Lands
3U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Metropolitan Service District
29
-------
8.0 SAMPLING PROCEDURES
The field methods and detailed procedures for executing sampling tasks are
presented here. First an overview of sampling activities to be completed at each site
is provided. Second, procedures for site selection and major sampling tasks are
grouped under the following subheadings: Site Selection, Transect Establishment,
General Site Data, Wetland Morphology, Vegetation, Soils and Hydrology. The format
of each of these sections may vary slightly but each contains a detailed discussion of
field methods and implementation. This includes: 1) Protocols (flowcharts) describing
the order in which field activities are completed and crew member responsibilities are
assigned, and 2) Step-by-step instructions for field activities. The methods used to
collect data for each variable evaluated in the OWS are summarized in Table 8-1. All
forms used in the OWS are contained in Appendix A
OVERVIEW OF SAMPLING TASKS FOR EACH SITE
Each numbered paragraph, below, represents a group of tasks to be completed
simultaneously. Figure 8-1 presents an overview of the sampling tasks, indicates the
order in which they must be completed, and the personnel responsible for each.
1. The Crew Leader will select one wetland or two in close proximity for sampling
each day. A site packet will have been prepared for each site that contains the
street address (if applicable) and directions to each site, as well as identifying
photographs. All crew members will congregate at a predetermined meeting
point. From there, the Crew Leader will transport all crew members to the
site(s).
2. Upon arriving at the study site, Recorders and Surveyors organize and
distribute data forms and equipment. Use the equipment list (Form G-1) to
ensure that all equipment is present. Routinely locate items in the same places
within the vehicle. Keeping the equipment organized by storing and
transporting items in the same locations allows items to be easily found,
facilitates packing and unpacking the vehicle, minimizes mess and confusion,
and helps prevent loss.
The large number of data sheets used in this study and the nature of
field work requires that data sheets be carefully organized and protected from
the elements. Therefore, data sheets will be organized and stored in a portable
file box. Each crew member's clipboard will be supplied with all the data sheets
needed for each site. The Recorders will organize the data sheets on the
clipboards while the Botanists conduct initial reconnaissance, and the Surveyors
organize equipment.
All writing on data sheets will be done In pencil or waterproof Ink to
prevent loss of data through water damage. Each data sheet will have a
30
-------
standard heading that identifies the date, study site, personnel, and
sampling activity. The heading will be completed for every data sheet
used.
3. The Crew Leader and Botanists will confer to determine wetland boundaries,
any predominating environmental gradients, and locate the transect baseline.
4. The Crew Leader and Recorders will lay out the transect baseline. The Crew
Leader determines transect starting points along baseline and Recorders mark
with stakes and appropriate flagging. Botanists conduct initial reconnaissance
of wetland vegetation, and agree upon pseudonyms for unKnown species.
Surveyors begin mapping procedures.
5. Vegetation Teams begin the following work along the transects: plant species
identification; estimation of plant species cover, bare ground and open water
within 1 -m2 quadrats; line-intercept determinations and belt transect
measurements. Surveyors complete mapping procedures. Crew Leader
photographs the site.
6. Surveyors begin the following work along transects completed by the Vegetation
Teams: measure elevations and water depths; record data on whether transects
intercept vegetation, open water or bare ground; and collect soil samples.
Vegetation Teams continue vegetation sampling.
7. Crew Leader and Botanists determine if additional transects are required to
sufficiently characterize the vegetation. A minimum of 40 vegetation quadrats
are required. If additional transects are necessary to get 40 vegetation
quadrats, determine and mark locations of Vegetation Transects.
8. Vegetation Teams conduct vegetation sampling along Vegetation Transects.
Surveyors follow, and measure elevations and water depths.
S. Botanists collect voucher samples, and key out and preserve plants for future
identification and archiving. Recorders assist Botanists and/or Surveyors.
10. Crew Leader reviews all data forms for completeness, errors and legibility,
organizes forms into the site packet, and makes entries into the field diary.
Surveyors and Recorders collect and organize equipment, and replace it in the
vehicle. The Recorders ensure there is an ample supply of data forms to be
used at the next site. If the supply of data forms is running low, Recorders
inform the Crew Leader who ensures that more are obtained.
11. Crew Leader ensures the site is left in the best possible condition and checks
to ensure no equipment or samples are left behind.
31
-------
Although the Crew Leader has ultimate responsibility for ensuring completeness
and legibility of data sheets, each crew member should check the data sheets
completed during sampling activities to be sure they are complete and legible.
There should be no need for data entry personnel to interpret handwriting or
numbers. All calculations and the legibility of results should be checked. The
draft site map and data sheets should be checked to ensure all required
information (transect locations, soil sample locations, and landmarks) are
included and correct.
All sample containers should be checked for seal tightness and code accuracy
and legibility. Soil pits must be filled in, and flagging, stakes, meter tapes, other
supplies and equipment retrieved and replaced in the vehicle. Aside from
unavoidable trampling and soil sampling disturbance, the study site should look
much as it did when the crew arrived.
12. Leave the site.
SITE SELECTION
Site selection for the OWS involves a two-step process. First, the kinds of
wetland projects that have been constructed in the study area were identified and the
population of projects to be sampled was defined. Second, the population of natural
wetlands to be sampled was defined based on correspondence with the most common
wetlands types for projects. Once the populations of wetlands were identified, field
reconnaissance of potential sites for sampling was conducted to ensure sites met
selection criteria. Table 8-2 lists numbers of projects and natural wetlands by land
use.
DEFINING THE POPULATION OF PROJECTS
Criteria for inclusion of wetland projects in the study population were: 1)
location of the project in the study area (the Portland Metropolitan area within the
Willamette Valley Plains subregion of the Willamette Valley ecoregion (Omernik 1987,
Clarke et al. 1991); 2) wetland type (freshwater wetlands that range from sites
dominated by open water to those dominated by emergent vegetation); and 3) wetland
size (< 2ha). Refer to Section 5, Project Description and to the Research Plan and
Field Manual for the Oregon Wetlands Study (Magee et al. 1993) for details on
study area selection and description. Wetland type and size criteria are discussed
below. A list of Section 404 permits requiring compensatory mitigation was obtained
from the Oregon Division of State Lands (ODSL), the state agency responsible for
wetlands permitting, to identify potential projects for sampling. Data were compiled
from permits issued between January 1987 and January 1991 by transferring the
information from the files at ODSL to the Permit Tracking Form (See Appendix A).
The numbers of freshwater mitigation projects identified from the permits are listed by
size and type in Table 8-2. The wetland types considered are freshwater wetlands
that range from sites dominated by open water to those dominated by emergent
32
-------
vegetation. These types were selected because they represent the most common
freshwater mitigation projects and natural wetlands found across a mosaic of land use
settings in the study area. This provides an opportunity for: 1) comparing natural
wetlands and wetland projects and 2) assessing land use influences on the level of
wetland function.
The selection of wetland type for this study does not imply an endorsement of
ponds as wetland projects. In fact, few natural ponds exist in the study area (Kentula
et al. 1992b). Adoption of the wetland type criterion for study was driven by the kind
of project wetland available and the best natural analogs in the study area (i.e., we
designed our study to evaluate what exists). The primary considerations for making
management decisions about the type of a proposed project are the relative rarity of
wetland types and the need for wetland functions to be replaced. Project design and
type should not be based solely on what is most convenient because of land
availability or project cost (Kentula et al. 1992a). Further, the ecological ramifications
of replacing impacted wetlands with wetlands of different types are unknown (Kentula
et al. 1992a), so reason suggests that we exercise caution and do our best to
establish types that occur naturally in the area.
All of the projects meeting the wetland type criterion were visited during
Summer 1991 and Spring 1992. Access to the projects was granted by the ODSL
and, as a courtesy, most of the land owners or property managers were contacted to
set up a convenient time to visit the site. During each site visit, directions to the site
and general site information were recorded on Form I and the site was photographed.
Evaluation of reconnaissance information revealed that the most common project size
was < 2ha (approximately 5 acres). Thus, the second criterion for site selection was
defined as wetlands < 2ha in size. Projects were rejected if: 1) they were not
constructed; 2) they did not meet the wetland type or size criteria; 3) conditions at the
site were hazardous; or 4) project construction confounded the ability to sample the
site (e.g., soils were underlain by plastic sheeting).
DEFINING AND SAMPLING THE POPULATION OF NATURAL WETLANDS
The population of natural wetlands was defined in terms of the population of
project wetlands. Selection criteria for natural wetlands were: 1) freshwater palustrine
wetlands that range from sites dominated by open water to those dominated by
emergent vegetation; 2) size < 2ha; and 3) location in the study area. National
Wetlands Inventory (NVvl) palustrine wetland types meeting the sampling criteria
included aquatic bed, emergent, moss/lichen, open water, rock bottom, unconsolidated
bottom, and unconsolidate shore.
Locating Natural Wetlands
Land use is a major consideration in the OWS because data from the Oregon
Pilot Study suggested wetlands in different land uses within an urban setting exhibit
varying levels of function. It is important to document these differences to gain
information about attainable quality for wetlands within specific land uses. The pool of
natural wetlands potentially meeting the selection criteria was identified using a
33
-------
procedure adapted from Abbruzzese et al. (1988). A color-coded map depicting the
five land use categories-undeveloped, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and
residential-was created for the OWS by METRO.
The land use map was overlain with NWI digital data for wetland types and
sizes appropriate to the OWS. The study area was delineated by placing overlays of
the boundaries of the Willamette Valley Plains' subregion on the land use map. The
615 wetlands occurring within the study area were labeled, and surrounding land use
was identified from the map and recorded. Sites with NWI special modifiers (e.g.,
partially drained/ditched, diked/impounded, artificial, spoil, excavated) were dropped
from consideration because they were not natural wetlands. In addition,
reconnaissance visits to the sites revealed the entire population of natural wetlands
could be censused, because a large proportion of the sites were destroyed or altered
by human activity.
Field Reconnaissance of Natural Wetlands
Preparation for field reconnaissance of natural wetlands and securing
permission to sample consisted of:
1. The locations of sites identified on the land use map were transferred to an
NWI composite map and a current Portland street atlas, for convenience in
locating the sites.
2. A route to each site was determined and approximate geographic coordinates
(latitudes and longitudes) were determined for each site. A hand-held, battery-
powered navigation system (Trimble Global Positioning System [GPS],
Transpak II unit) that receives data from U.S. Department of Defense satellites
and calculates and displays position, velocity, time, and navigational information
(Trimble Navigational Limited 1991) was used to locate each site. The
geographic coordinates were entered into the unit which then displayed the
distance and bearing to the site. After physically locating the site, the exact
geographic position was entered into the GPS for future field reference. The
GPS unit was extremely useful in site location, enabling us to find sites initially
believed to be destroyed because of the difficulty in translating mapped
information to exact locations on the ground.
3. We met with Portland area professionals who were able to provide information
about ownership of public and private properties, and to identify individuals to
contact for access and sampling permission. Permission was obtained to
sample the sites located on land owned or controlled by the agencies
represented by these professionals. For sites on private land, an attempt was
made to determine ownership by checking information on mail boxes and real
estate signs, and interviewing local residents. After ownership was determined,
the owner was contacted and given a copy of a letter (Figure 8-2) explaining
34
-------
the study. Using this procedure, permission to sample was secured from 40%
of property owners.
Reconnaissance data were collected and site selection criteria were assessed
for each wetland:
1. General site information was collected for each wetland on Form t.
Observations were made at each site which were used to determine the
approximate proportion of land cover types within the wetland and land uses
directly surrounding the wetland. Also, a rough map of each site was sketched.
2. Each site was evaluated to see if it fit the criteria outlined for natural sites. A
site was eliminated during the selection process if: 1) type or size were
incorrect; 2) the wetland was destroyed; 3) conditions on or near the site would
make sampling hazardous (e.g., garbage being dumped); 4} the site was
altered substantially by human activities (e.g., grazing) or natural phenomena
(e.g., drought); or 5) access was denied by the land owner.
TRANSECT ESTABLISHMENT
Three kinds of transects, Site Characterization, Wetland Morphology, and
Vegetation Transects, are used for data collection in the OWS. Site Characterization
Transects cross the wetland from edge to edge, perpendicular to a baseline (Figure 8-
3). To reduce researcher bias and subjectivity as much as possible, the Site
Characterization Transects will be placed systematically at evenly spaced intervals
along the Baseline. The Wetland Morphology Transect is placed parallel to the
Baseline and perpendicular to each Site Characterization Transect (Figure 8-3).
Vegetation transects will be necessary only when fewer than 40 of the quadrats along
the Site Characterization Transects contain vegetation. When used, Vegetation
Transects will either be located between the Site Characterization Transects (Figure 8-
4), or follow a narrow fringe of vegetation encircling a pond (Figure 8-5).
The Baseline will be oriented to permit characterization of the relationships
between vegetation and environmental variables. The Baseline is placed so that it lies
perpendicular to any obvious uni-directional gradient, allowing the Site
Characterization Transects to span the gradient. However, if no uni-directional
gradient can be identified, the Baseline is placed parallel to the longest edge of the
wetland.
Sampling points will be systematically spaced along all transects based on
wetland area. The sampling intervals used in this study have been adapted from
Homer and Raedeke (1989) and are listed below. Additionally, the appropriate
placement of the vegetation quadrat frame in relation to the transect line is (described
below).
35
-------
Wetland Size
Sampling Interval
Quadrat Frame Placement
< 0.1 ha (0.25a)
1m
Short side parallel to
transect line
>0.1 ha (0.25a) but
< 0.3 ha (0.75a)
3m
Long side parallel to
transect line
> 0.3ha (0.75a) but
< 1.0ha'(2.5a)
6m
Long side parallel to
transect line
> 1.0ha (2.5a) but
< 2.0ha (5.0a)
9m
Long side parallel to
transect line
Field Methodology
The Crew Leader, Botanists, and Recorders all have roles in transect
establishment. Specific responsibilities, tasks, and the order in which the tasks are
completed are outlined in Figure 8-6 and discussed in greater detail in the following
sections.
Site Characterization Transects
Site Characterization Transects will be used to sample several wetland
variables at predetermined sampling intervals. The proportions and distribution of
vegetation, open water, and bare soil will be described. Measurements of elevation
will be made to determine wetland morphology. Vegetation will be characterized in
terms of composition and structure. General seasonal hydrology will be assessed by
obtaining values for standing water depth and depth to soil saturation. Soils will be
evaluated by profile characteristics and organic matter content at a subsample of the
sample points; Details of sampling procedures for each variable are described in the
Supporting Data, Vegetation, and Soils and Hydrology sections.
The field procedures for placement of site characterization transects are
adapted from Horner & Raedeke 1989.
1. Crew Leader and Botanists determine the approximate boundaries of the
wetland to be used to guide sampling.
2. The Crew Leader selects one side of the wetland as a Baseline. The Baseline
is located just upland of the wetland/upland edge, perpendicular to any
topographic gradient, otherwise parallel to the long axis of the wetland. If
possible, the baseline should run the entire length of the wetland. Lay out a
meter tape along the baseline, and record the baseline length on Form F-1.
36
-------
3. Multiply the length of the baseline, measured to the nearest 0,1m, by 0.1, 0.3,
0.5, 0.7 and 0.9 to determine the starting points of each of the Site
Characterization Transects and record on Form F-1. This procedure allows
each Site Characterization Transect to bisect a 20% segment of the wetland.
The Site Characterization Transects (SCT) are perpendicular to the baseline
and run across the wetland from the Baseline, through the near edge of the
wetland, then across the wetland to the opposite wetland/upland boundary.
The start and endpoints are placed one sampling interval beyond the wetland
boundary.
EXAMPLE: Using d
Baseline length: 12(
Starting point SCT 1:
Starting point SCT2:
Starting point SCT3:
Starting point SCT4:
Starting point SCT5:
ta presented in Figure 8-3.
n
120m x 0.1 = 12m
120m x 0.3 = 36m
120m x 0.5 = 60m
120m x 0.7 = 84m
120m x 0.9 = 108m
Wetland Morphology Transect
A single Wetland Morphology Transect will be placed parallel to the Baseline so
that it bisects the wetland as close to the center as possible, and perpendicularly
intersects the Site Characterization Transects (Figure 8-3). The start and endpoints
for this transect are placed one sampling interval beyond the wetland boundary so that
the ends of the transect are placed in the upland. Elevations and water depths will be
measured along the Wetland Morphology Transect, and the type of land cover
(vegetation, open water, bare ground) at each sampling point will be recorded.
Vegetation sampling will not be conducted along this transect. Wetland Morphology
Transect elevations will be used in conjunction with the elevation data collected along
the Site Characterization Transects to define the cross-sectional shape (morphology)
of the wetland.
Vegetation Transects
Some wetland physiognomies encountered during this study will necessitate an
increase in the number of transects to adequately characterize the vegetation of a
given site. This is expected to occur most frequently at sites with a narrow fringe of
vegetation surrounding a large expanse of open water, a condition common in newly
constructed projects. In such situations, often fewer than 40 of the quadrats placed
along the Site Characterization Transects are likely to contain vegetation. Since it is
oiir experience that a minimum of 40 quadrats per site is required to accurately
represent the herbaceous vegetation on wetlands 2 ha or less in size (unpublished
data from the Oregon Pilot Study, Brown 1991, Confer and Niering 1992), it will be
necessary to add additional transects until a minimum of 40 vegetation quadrats are
obtained. The additional transects will be referred to as Vegetation Transects to
distinguish them from the Site Characterization and Wetland Morphology Transects.
37
-------
Methods of data collection on the Vegetation Transects are the same as those used
for the Site Characterization Transects.
Two standard procedures for Vegetation Transect placement accommodate two
different, but commonly encountered, wetland scenarios and reduce the effects of
observer subjectivity. These procedures address logistical problems related to the
width of the vegetation band surrounding a pond.
Case 1 - If the vegetation ring is greater than two sampling intervals in width,
Vegetation Transects are added until the needed number of vegetation quadrats is
obtained (Figure 8-4):
1. Vegetation Transects extend across the width of the vegetation band on both
sides of the open water. Non-vegetated areas are not sampled.
2. Vegetation Transects 2 through 5 run parallel to and are located at the mid-
points between the Site Characterization Transects. To determine their exact
positions in relation to the Baseline, multiply the length of the Baseline by 0.2,
0.4, 0.6, and 0.8 for Vegetation Transects (VT) 2, 3, 4, and 5 respectively.
Example: Using data presented in Figure 8-4.
Baseline length = 120m
Starting point VT2: 120 X 0.2 = 24m
Starting point VT3: 120X0.4 = 48m
Starting point VT4: 120 X 0.6 = 72m
Starting point VT5: 120X0.8 = 96m
3. Vegetation Transects 1 and 6 are placed parallel to and outside Site
Characterization Transects 1 and 5 and within the wetland boundary. Their
locations relative to the base-line are equidistant between the outer Site
Characterization Transects (1 and 5) and the edge of the wetland. To
determine their exact positions, multiply the length of the baseline by 0.05 and
0.95 for Vegetation Transects (VT) 1 and 6 respectively.
Example: See Figure 8-4.
Baseline length = 120m
Starting point VT6 = 120m X 0.95 = 114m
Starting point VT1 = 120 m X 0.05 = 6 m
4. The Vegetation Transects are not sampled in chronological order. The order is
determined by randomly selecting Vegetation Transect numbers (1-6) by rolling
a die. The number obtained on the first roll will be the first transect sampled,
the second roll will be the second transect sampled, and so on. If the number
of a transect already selected comes up on a roll of the die, disregard it and roll
38
-------
again. Record the sampling order of the transects on Form F-1 and record the
numbers of the transects actually sampled.
5. Establish only the number of transects required to obtain a minimum of 40
vegetation quadrats. If 40 vegetation quadrats are obtained prior to reaching
the end of a transect, continue sampling until that transect is completed.
6. The first quadrat on a Vegetation Transect is placed at the first sampling
interval from the transect starting point that falls within the wetland boundary
(See Vegetation Section for details on identifying the first quadrat position).
Sampling proceeds at the normal sampling intervals until open water is
reached. The open water area(s) is skipped and sampling begins again on the
other side of the water and continues to the wetland boundary (See Vegetation
Section for details on identifying the last quadrat position).
Case 2 - If the vegetation band is narrower than two sampling intervals, up to
six Vegetation Transects are placed so that they parallel the vegetation band (Figure
8-5). The start point for each transect is systematically determined and each transect
is sampled at the standard interval for the site. Only the number of vegetation
transects required to obtain 40 quadrats are randomly selected for sampling.
1. The order of placement for transects to be sampled is randomly selected by
rolling a die to obtain a number from 1 to 6. These numbers correspond to pre-
assigned potential start points defined as the locations where the Site
Characterization Transects 2 and 4, and the Wetland Morphology Transect
intersect the vegetation ring (Figure 8-5). After determining the sampling order
for the six transects, list the order on Form F-1 and circle, on the diagram, the
start points for each transect actually sampled.
2. To establish each transect during sampling, the meter tape is pinned at the
starting point and extended left, when facing the center of the wetland, until the
end of the transect is reached (e.g., the start point of the next transect) (Figure
8-5).
3. Quadrat placement differs from the normal procedure. Usually quadrats are
places with their long side parallel to the transect meter tape (See Vegetation
Section). Here, quadrats are placed with their short side adjacent to the meter
tape. This placement allows the long dimension of the quadrat to span the
maximum area possible, thus encompassing the greatest level of vegetation
zonation and heterogeneity possible (Figure 8-5, inset).
General Transect Establishment Procedures
Once the locations of the transects have been determined, the process for
laying out and marking all transect types is essentially the same. Wetlands are
39
-------
sensitive to trampling so a sampling method that requires as few trips as possible
along each transect is used, and crew members always walk on the left side (when
walking from the beginning towards the end) of the transects to avoid trampling
vegetation to be sampled.
1. Transect starting points are located on the transect Baseline. For wetland
morphology measurements, the first sampling point along each transect will be
at the Baseline/transect intersection (Om). For vegetation sampling, the first
sampling point will be the first point within the wetland boundary as determined
by quadrat placement according to the sampling interval for the site. The Crew
Leader must clearly document how the location of each transect was
determined on Form F-1 and ensure that the Recorders marking the transect
starting points understand where the transects should be located.
2. "Hie Recorders mark transect starting points with stakes and flags. The
transect numbers are indicated with flags, i.e., transect one has one flag,
transect two has two flags, etc. Meter tapes are firmly attached to the stakes
marking the transect starting points.
3. The Recorders use a compass to determine the direction each transect should
take to cross the wetland perpendicular (90°) to the transect baseline. Record
the transect bearing on Form F-1.
4. The first sampling team (Botanists and Recorders along Site Characterization
and Vegetation Transects, or the Surveyors along the Wetland Morphology
Transect) lays out the meter tape as they proceed along a transect from its
starting point, sampling the plots at the predetermined intervals. On Site
Characterization and Vegetation Transects, the meter tape is left in place and
sampling point locations flagged with wire pins for the second sampling team
(the Surveyors). After sampling the Wetland Morphology Transect, the
Surveyors remove the meter tape.
5. Sampling order along each transect is designed to minimize vegetation
trampling by requiring each person to make only one pass along each transect.
The Wetland Morphology Transect is traversed only by the Survey Team. As
they proceed along the transect they collect land cover type, elevation and
water depth measurements. Site Characterization and Vegetation Transects
are traversed first by one of the Vegetation Teams and then by the Survey
Team. Vegetation sampling will be conducted on two transects simultaneously
by separate Vegetation Teams. A Botanist and a Recorder will sample
vegetation as they proceed along a Site Characterization or a Vegetation
Transect. After vegetation sampling has been completed along a given
transect, the Survey Team follows and collects the appropriate data and
samples. For Site Characterization Transects this includes land cover types,
40
-------
elevations, water depths, soil data, and soil samples. For Vegetation
Transects, only land cover type, elevation and water depth measurements are
obtained.
6. After all sampling has been completed and data forms checked for
completeness, the meter tapes will be removed by reeling them in from the end
of each transect. The stakes and flagging are retrieved by walking around the
wetland perimeter.
Transect Establishment Procedures in Atypical Situations
In cases where deep open water that cannot be crossed on foot interrupts one
or more transects, special procedures are required to locate the portions of the
transects lying on the far side of the wetland (Figure 8-7). This problem may affect all
three types of transects.
1. Commence transect establishment and sampling using the general procedures
described above. Sample the portions of all transects that can be reached on
one side of the open water. Once sampling has been completed on one side of
the water, walk around the perimeter of the wetland to the wetland/upland edge
opposite the transect start points.
2. Standing at the opposite wetland/upland edge look directly across the water
back toward the segment of a transect that has already been sampled.
Establish the direction along which the unsampled portion of the transect should
run by aiming a compass back toward the transect starting point stake along a
bearing 180° from the bearing defining the original transect segment (Figure 8-
7). Move to the left or right as needed until the correct bearing is obtained.
3. Place a stake at this point so that it is located just upland from the wetland
boundary. This will be the transect endpoint. The first vegetation quadrat will
be placed at the water's edge and subsequent quadrats will be placed at the
appropriate sampling interval until the last sampling point within the wetland
boundary is reached (Figure 8-7). The Surveyors follow the Vegetation Team.
Record, on the appropriate data sheet the sampling point distances along the
meter tape in chronological order beginning with zero at the water's edge and
continuing with increasing numbers to the transect end-point (Figure 8-7).
4. After sampling has been completed the Survey Team uses the transit to obtain
triangulation measurements (See General Site Information, Site Map Section for
details) that will permit calculation of the distance from each transect's start
point to its endpoint on the opposite side of the wetland.
5. All triangulation distances and calculations are recorded on a transect
establishment data sheet. Form F-1, for each transect. The total length of a
41
-------
given transect can then be used to convert the recorded distances for the
sampling points to the actual distances of the sampling points along the
transect. A completed Form F-1 is filed together with all other data forms for
that transect so that data entry personnel can enter data into a computer in the
correct order.
GENERAL SITE DATA
Several kinds of activities provide general background information about each
site. These activities include: creating a sketch map, evaluating land use and buffers,
and photographing important features of the wetland or project.
Site Mapping Methodology
The skills and methods required to make a good field map are discussed below.
These skills are easy to learn and personnel can be trained quickly.
The site map will be made by determining the distance and bearing of points
located along the wetland perimeter with the Surveyor's Transit (hereafter, the transit).
The wetland perimeter will be identified through changes in slope and vegetation.
Locations of objects, landmarks, patches of vegetation, and transect endpoints can be
determined with the transit and included on the map. The distance and direction to all
mapped points is recorded from a single point (the transit location) and later
transferred to graph paper to make the final site map. A rough sketch map is drawn
at the same time the data are collected to check the relative locations of mappable
features during final map construction. Transit-stadia surveying was chosen for this
study because it is sufficiently precise for reconnaissance surveys, rough surveys for
the location of boundaries, and detailed surveys for maps. In addition, it is more rapid
and economical than other survey methods (Davis and Kelley 1969). When calibrated
with a compass, magnetic bearings can be determined with the transit to within 5 feet.
The stadia hairs within the telescope of the transit allow horizontal and vertical
distances to be measured accurately (Kissam 1966). Horizontal distances are
accurate to +/-1 cm and vertical distances are accurate to +/-1 m.
Measuring distances with the transit and stadia rod is based on the principle
that the intercept, or difference in reading between the two fixed stadia hairs in the
telescope of the transit, is directly proportional to the distance between the target (the
stadia rod) and the telescope. Stadia hairs are two supplementary horizontal cross
hairs equally spaced above and below the center cross hair. The stadia hairs are
fixed so that there is a constant multiplier for converting the stadia interval to distance
(Figure 8-8). The multiplier is usually 100 (Buckner 1983).
Equipment
Brunton Cadet Compass
Surveyor's Transit and Tripod
Stadia Rod
Forms
Pencils
42
-------
35-mm Camera
Copy of Form I from visit to the site during site selection
"Walkie Talkie" Headphones
The Brunton Cadet compass
The Brunton Cadet compass (hereafter, the compass) is used to determine
direction and to measure vertical angles and percent of slopes. The principal use of
the compass will be to determine direction via compass bearings and to calibrate the
graduated circle of the Surveyor's Transit (discussed below) for use in mapping. The
compass circle is divided into 90° quadrants or 360° counterclockwise azimuth. The
azimuth or bearing is read directly off the compass circle with the compass needle as
the pointer. With this method, the compass circle is numbered in reverse. Therefore,
East and West are interchanged and the numbers run 0° to 360° counterclockwise.
This allows the needle's north tip to point directly to the angle on the compass circle
toward the line of sight (Brunton Company 1980). For mapping, the 360° azimuth is
more useful than the 90° quadrants because there is less chance errors will be made
in calculating directions (Lounsbury and Aldrich 1979).
The compass circle must be set for true north. The compass needle points
toward magnetic north, which changes slightly with time. True north is located
geographically, and maps are based on it because it does not change. The angle
between magnetic north and true north is called magnetic declination. This angle is
the number of degrees the compass needle bears away from true north at that locality.
Declination information for every location in the United States can be obtained from
U.S. Geologic Survey Maps (USGS) (Greenhood 1964). The compass circle can be
adjusted for magnetic declination by manually rotating the compass dial and offsetting
"N" on the compass circle by the appropriate number of degrees for the local
declination. Before using the instrument, always be sure to set the circle at the
declination of the locality. Declination in the Portland, Oregon, area is presently about
20 degrees E of N, so the compass dial must be rotated clockwise so that "N" reads
20° to the right (Figure 8-9).
To take a bearing, i.e., to determine the direction from one object to another,
hold the compass about waist high, open the lid and slant the mirror backward at
about 45°. Hold the instrument flat in the left hand with the mirror to the rear. Press
the left forearm against the waist. Steady the instrument with the right hand. Any
tipping of the compass will prevent the needle from swinging freely. Place your eye
so that the line on the mirror (the rear sight) bisects the reflection of the front sight.
Turn your whole body until the reflection of the object to be sighted is aligned with the
sights (i.e., the black center sighting line of the mirror bisects both the reflected front
sight and the objected sighted). The NORTH end (painted) of the needle indicates the
bearing of the object sighted (Brunton Company 1980).
Setting up the transit
First, position the transit to enable the operator to see as much of the wetiand's
perimeter and as many sampling points as possible. Generally, a centrally located
43
-------
position on a slight rise and on firm ground is best. This saves time and effort
because it should allow the operator to collect all mapping and sampling information
without moving the transit (a process called "turning", Wetland Morphology Section).
Sink the tripod feet into the ground to stabilize the instrument, adjusting the legs to
make a nominally level platform. The legs should have about a 3 1/2-foot spread. If
the tripod has adjustable legs, be sure the wing nuts on the leg damps are securely
hand tightened.
Place the transit onto the platform, hand tightening the threaded stud of the
tripod to the instrument base securely. While watching the level bubble on the transit,
push individual tripod legs further into the ground until the bubble is somewhat
centered.
Begin to level the transit using the levelling knobs; while leveling the instrument,
do not touch the tripod. The three leveling screws of the transit are turned one at a
time until the bubble is centered within the black indicator circle. When properly
leveled, the bubble should remain in centered position during a 360° rotation of the
telescope. The automatic level's pendulum compensator will maintain this level
alignment even if the tripod or transit is jarred or tilted slightly.
To ensure that the transit remains level during operation, it is important to
periodically check that the bubble is centered. Select a solid object (e.g., a targe
stone, stump, edge of a sidewalk) to use as a benchmark (the elevation control point).
Sightings will be periodically made to the benchmark to ensure that the transit is level
and has not shifted.
Calibrate the graduated circle of the transit with the Brunton compass. Rotate
the transit's graduated circle so that 0° on the transit corresponds witn 0° on the
compass. (Some transits will be equipped with a compass, making this step
unnecessary.)
Using the transit to map the study site
The Crew Leader will confer with the Botanists to establish the wetland
perimeter based on changes in vegetation, moisture, and elevation. The Crew Leader
will convey this information to the Surveyors and verbally establish the points that will
be used to identify the wetland perimeter. The surveyors record the distance and
direction from the transit to all "corners" on the wetland perimeter. Comers represent
changes in direction in the wetland boundary. The finished map will depict the
wetland as a polygon.
The distance and direction to all mapped points is recorded from a single point
(the transit location) and later transferred to a map. The transit operator draws a
rough sketch map on Form F-2 while in the field, to check the relative locations of
mapped features during final map construction. The map should include all points
recorded with the transit. Use the following procedure:
1. Assemble a clipboard, compass, transit and stadia rod, several copies of Form
F-2 and map data sheets, Form F-3.
44
-------
2. Set up the transit at a point where the entire wetland perimeter can be seen. If
the transit must be moved during the mapping procedure, follow the procedures
for "turning" (See Wetland Morphology section) and record the benchmark data
on the back of Form F-3. Ensure that the transit is level and calibrated with the
compass. On Form F-2 (blank sketch map) indicate approximately where the
transit is located and label this point as "Transit Location 1". Draw an arrow on
the map to indicate North.
3. While the Transit Operator sets up the transit, the Surveyor with the stadia rod
moves along the perimeter of the wetland to the first "corner". This will be
comer "A" on the sketch map. To standardize the mapping procedure, the
Surveyor with the stadia rod should move clockwise around the perimeter of the
wetland.
4. The stadia rod is held vertically while the transit operator uses the telescope to
sight the stadia rod. The Transit Operator sketches the approximate location of
the wetland "corner11 on the sketch map, labels it, and then records the stadia
readings (upper, middle, and lower cross-hairs) and the compass bearing for
that point on Form F-3. The upper and lower stadia readings indicate the
distance to the corner from the transit location, and the middle stadia reading
indicates the relative elevation of that point. Stadia readings, in meters, are
recorded from the meter scale on the stadia rod (Figure 8-10). The compass
bearing provides the direction to that corner of the wetland from the transit
location and is read directly off the compass rosette on the transit.
5. The Surveyor with the stadia rod continues moving the stadia rod from "comer"
to "corner" around the perimeter of the wetland while the Transit Operator
records the data and makes the rough sketch. The Transit Operator should
also record any anecdotal information which might help construct the final map
in the comments box on Form F-3.
6. In addition to the wetland perimeter, the Transit Operator should map the
locations of all sampling transects by positioning the stadia rod to take
bearings, distance and elevation readings at their beginning and end-points. It
will be necessary to collect this data later during the day, i.e., after sampling
transects have been placed and during collection of wetland morphology data.
Record the information on Form F-3 (the map data sheet) and mark the
positions of the transects on the sketch map.
7. The Transit Operator records the locations of major site features such as open
water, trees, water courses, patches of monotypic vegetation, and man-made
structures.
45
-------
8. If a corner of the wetland perimeter cannot be reached by the Surveyor carrying
the stadia rod due to deep water, unstable substrate or other obstructions, use
triangulation to determine its location (Lounsbury and Aldrich 1986). First,
using a meter tape, establish two points (endpoints of a baseline) which are a
known distance apart (at least 30m), and record the length and the direction of
the baseline on Form F-3 (Map Data Sheet). Using the transit, take compass
and upper and lower stadia hair readings from both baseline endpoints to a
previously measured point on the wetland perimeter (e.g., a mapped wetland
"corner" or transect endpoint). These readings will be used to locate the
baseline's position on the sketch map.
Then, from both baseline endpoints, take compass readings through the
transit to the corner not reached by the Surveyor and record the data on Form
F-3. When constructing the final site map, the location of the comer not
reached by the Surveyor will be indicated by the intersection of two rays drawn
along these bearings from the baseline endpoints (illustrated in Figure 8-11).
9. After all wetland corners and site features are measured and recorded, examine
the sketch map and document anything that will help complete the final map.
Check that data are recorded for all wetland "corners" and that entries on the
data forms are legible.
Land Use and Buffers
Buffer zones between a wetland and a developed upland area can protect the
integrity of the wetland water supply, water quality, and associated wetland-dependent
wildlife (Brown et. al. 1990). A buffer can act to lesson the impacts of development on
adjacent wetlands (Jordan and Shisler 1988). In addition, vegetated buffers provide
structural diversity and transition zones between land uses. They create visual and
noise barriers, corridors and linkages to other habitats, and help ensure species
diversity.
For this study, the presence of vegetated buffers will be quantitatively
determined along four transects extending out from the perimeter of each wetland.
After positions of the Wetland Morphology Transect and Site Characterization
Transects have been determined, Survey Team members visually determine the
presence or absence of vegetated buffers by viewing the area extending beyond the
wetland edge from both ends of the Wetland Morphology Transect and the center Site
Characterization Transect (SCT3) (Figure 8-12). If a vegetated buffer exists, the
Surveyors extend a meter tape from the transect and stake and record on Form F-4,
the vegetation strata present (herbs, shrubs, or trees) and the extent or distances
along the meter tape which each stratum occupies. When the outside edge of the
vegetated buffer is encountered, the Surveyors record the type of land use that occurs
(Agricultural, Industrial, Commercial, Residential, or Transportation Corridor). If the
buffer width is greater than 100m, >100m is recorded on Form F-4.
Form T, used during site selection to collect data on surrounding land uses
and determine wetland types, will be checked, and if necessary, annotated during field
46
-------
sampling to determine if changes have occurred in the year since site selection, and
to verify the site selection data. The Crew Leader uses a colored pencil to annotate a
copy of Form I for the site by: 1) looking for evidence of changes (e.g., new
construction, felled trees, new culverts); 2) estimating the portions of the surrounding
area that fall into residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, or undeveloped land
use categories; and 3) comparing the estimates with those on Form I. Estimates of
land use may differ with personnel collecting the data, but if wetland surroundings
h^ve not changed since site selection, completion of Form I will be adequate for the
needs of this study.
Photography
A photographic record is used to visually document site characteristics. It can
also be used later to verify data and provides a method for tracking changes in the
wetland over time.
1. To standardize photographs, use a good quality, 35-mm camera equipped with
ASA 100, 35-mm Ektachrome slide film and a 50-mm lens.
2. Label each roll of film by photographing a completed Form F-5 in the first
frame. Photograph a new Form F-5 as the first photo taken with each new
study site. Complete Form F-5 as follows: Using a dark magic marker, fill in
the Date, Site Code, Photographer's last name and the Film Roll Code. The
Film code contains two parts. The first three characters pertain to the film roll
number. Rolls are numbered consecutively for each camera from the start of
the field season. The fourth and fifth characters are the photographer's initials.
For example, if Maria Melon is taking photographs on the 14th roll of film
used in that camera, the code would be 014MM.
3. Document each photograph by number and topic on the photo log form (Form
F-6). Make certain to record all photos taken (even accidental exposures) so
that the order of the developed slides matches the order of exposures recorded
in the photo log.
4. Check the camera battery frequently, carry a spare.
5. Never let the camera or film sit in the sun. Extra film should always be carried
and should be stored in a sealed plastic bag in a cooler if the weather is hot.
The primary types of photographs taken at each site are general site photos,
site record photos, and rare or unusual items (i.e., plants, animals, structures). Either
the Crew Leader or the member of the Survey Team not handling either the transit or
the stadia rod for mapping takes the general site and site record photos.
47
-------
General site photos document the features of the site and the approach to
sampling. Take a panoramic landscape sequence from a central location at the edge
of the wetland. Photograph major wetland features such as open water areas, water
channels, inlets and outlets. Be sure to photograph transect locations along the
direction of the transect line. Photos of transect locations may be used to verify
sampling locations, or possibly, to resample the wetlands at a later date. Interesting
action photos of field crew members sampling will come in handy for future
presentations discussing the research.
Site record photos provide a permanent record of the wetland from a specific
vantage point. Carefully choose a vantage point to see as much of the wetland as
possible. .Carefully record the location on the map and on Form F-6 so that the
wetland can be re-photographed from the same location in the future and changes in
the wetland can be documented. Also be sure to record the compass bearings of the
photos taken from the vantage point. Be sure to include likely permanent landmarks
like stumps, rock outcrops, fencelines, or roadways.
VEGETATION FIELD METHODOLOGY
This section describes several aspects of the field methodology: 1) the field
activities and required expertise of each crew member on the Vegetation Teams; 2)
the vegetation sampling protocol outlining the order in which sampling tasks are to be
completed, 3) a list of sampling equipment and supplies; and finally, 4) detailed
sampling procedures for the various cover measurement techniques and other field
activities. The vegetation sampling protocol (Figure 8-13) has been designed to
ensure that quality data are collected and minimal trampling of the vegetation and
substrate occurs. Field procedures consist of standardized methods to facilitate
accuracy, precision, and comparability of the data collected. Thus, it is imperative that
sampling activities be carried out in the order and manner specified.
Vegetation Team Responsibilities and Sampling Protocol
Each Vegetation Team consists of two individuals, one Botanist and one
Recorder. Each field crew will have two Vegetation Teams; both work simultaneously
on the same site. The Botanists must have demonstrated skill at wetland plant
identification (See Section 6). The Recorders should have at least minimal botanical
training, and at least one Recorder per crew should be capable of substituting for a
Botanist. The sampling activities are divided into several basic task groups:
equipment organization, pre-sampling reconnaissance and plant collection, vegetation
sampling, data form proofing, defining transect end points, plant specimen
preservation, and identification of unknowns. The order in which each task and its
component parts are conducted, as well as the team member responsible for task
completion is illustrated in the vegetation sampling protocol (Figure 8-13). At the site,
the two Botanists will conduct a pre-sampling reconnaissance, make canopy cover
estimates, gather line-intercept and belt transect data, collect plant specimens, proof
vegetation data forms, and identify the transect end-points. The two Recorders are
responsible for organizing data sheets, flagging and staking the transect start-points
48
-------
as indicated by the Crew Leader, accurately recording cover values provided by the
Botanists during cover estimation, flagging the end-points of the transect as indicated
by the Botanists, and assisting the Survey Team as required.
Field Equipment and Supplies
Two 1-m2 rectangular quadrats (073m x 1.40m)
Two diameter tapes <.°'^
80 flagged wire pins and two carrying pouches
Vegetation data forms
Pencils or waterproof pens
Plant presses with blotters, ventilators, and cinch straps
Newsprint for plant pressing
Collection labels
Regional floras (e.g. Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the
Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA)
Wetland plant species lists
Rare plant lists
Trowel for obtaining plant specimens with intact roots
Hand lenses
6-cm ruler for measuring plant parts during field keying
Gallon size zip-loc plastic bags
Large plastic bags (e.g. kitchen trash bag)
Letter-sized envelopes
Tags for marking unknowns specimens that are carried as references during
sampling
Permanent marking pens
Ice chest
Pre-Sampling Activities
Prior to conducting vegetation sampling activities, the Botanists and Recorders
have specific tasks related to Transect Establishment. These include:
1. Botanists confer with the Crew Leader to aid in identifying wetland boundaries,
the presence and direction of any environmental gradients, and the location of
the Baseline (See Transect Establishment). The Botanists then begin the pre-
sampling reconnaissance.
2. Recorders organize data sheets for all crew members and then, at the
instruction of the Crew Leader, flag the endpoints of the Baseline and the start
points of the transects (See Transect Establishment).
Both Botanists conduct a pre-sampling reconnaissance to identify the common
and dominant species and determine the general nature of the vegetation. This is
accomplished by:
49
-------
1. Botanists jointly conduct a floristic survey of the area to identify plant species.
Care should be taken to enter and traverse the wetland as little as possible to
avoid trampling damage to the site. Agreement between the Botanists
regarding species names helps to ensure accurate plant identification.
2. Botanists standardize pseudonyms for plants they cannot readily identify in the
field. If the genus name is known, then "sp." should be substituted for the
species epithet (e.g., Carex sp.). If there is more than one unknown species of
a genus present, then pseudonyms should include the genus name followed by
numbers, letters, or an identifying characteristic (e.g., Carex 1, Carex 2, Carex -
with 3 stigmas, or Carex - with bidentate perigynia and striped scale). Where
neither the genus nor species names are known, the Botanists devise a
pseudonym that reflects growth habit, microhabitat, or some distinctive
morphological feature (e.g., bunchgrass # 1, thin-leaved aquatic herb). In
cases where there are numerous unknown taxa, it may be necessary to carry
tagged examples of the plants, in individual bouquets, during sampling to keep
the pseudonyms straight. This is especially relevant if a single genus has
several unknown representatives on the site.
3. Botanists and Recorders enter, on the Canopy Coverage Form (F-7), the
names of species likely to be encountered within the sampling plots. Species
names recorded during field activities are entered in the third column of the
form (the first column will be used during post-field work to record the validated
species name). Use the binary genus/species name if known or enter the
predetermined species code discussed in item 2. If additional taxa are
encountered during sampling, record their names or pseudonyms and continue
data collection. Once the transects are completed, both Botanists will reconcile
the names and pseudonyms of these species on their respective data forms.
4. Botanists collect voucher specimens of unknown or interesting plants. DO NOT
COLLECT THREATENED OR ENDANGERED PLANT SPECIES. A list and
description of rare species in the study area will be available to each crew. The
Crew Leader will carefully photograph such taxa and record their precise
locations in the field diary. Plant specimens are placed in plastic bags and then
into an ice chest to reduce wilt prior to pressing. For especially wet specimens,
the plants might be placed in a paper bag or between folds of newspaper
before being deposited into a plastic bag to prevent mold development and
wilting. Plastic bags should be marked, using a permanent marker, with
pseudonym information, the site number, date, and the wetland area or transect
number, and the plot number and plot distance from which the specimen was
collected. Examples: Carex 1, Site 61, 7-21-93, Plot 4 (18m), or Carex 1. Site
61, near the north end of the Baseline east of the Wetland Morphology
Transect.
50
-------
5. Specimen collection continues throughout the site visit as new species are.
found. When a plant sample is collected place a check in the "collected" box of
the appropriate vegetation data form (Forms F-7 and F-8). If a specimen is
needed, but has not yet been collected, place a check in the "to be collected"
box as a reminder. Collect the required specimens before leaving the site.
Vegetation Sampling
Vegetation sampling is conducted by both Vegetation Teams working
simultaneously on separate transects. One Vegetation Team begins with Site
Characterization Transect 1 and the other begins with Site Characterization Transect
2. The Teams continue sampling alternate transects until all the Site Characterization
and Vegetation Transects have been sampled. Vegetation sampling involves several
activities: 1) determination of the position of the first vegetation quadrat on each
transect; 2) preparation of the data sheets; 3) placement of the meter tape along the
transect line; 4) collection of line-intercept data for shrubs; 5) collection of canopy
coverage estimates for herbaceous species; and 6) collection of basal area data for
trees. The procedures for each sampling activity are described below, detailing the
steps required to complete a single transect.
The Botanist determines the locations of the first and last vegetation quadrats
on each transect and the Recorder enters the distance information on the Canopy
Coverage Form F-7. The sampling interval (1, 3, 6, or 9m) selected during transect
establishment is used to identify the meter tape distances, at which the quadrats or
sampling points will be placed. Quadrats are placed only at these pre-defined points.
1. First quadrat location. Transects begin at the baseline at Om. However, this
position will lie in upland, and vegetation sampling is conducted only in the
wetland. The position of the first quadrat on the meter tape is determined by 1)
identifying the location of the wetland/upland boundary, and 2) proceeding along
the meter tape from the boundary to the first sampling point inside the wetland.
The first quadrat will be located at this point. For example, if a 6-m sampling
interval is used for the wetland and the wetland boundary occurs at 10m from
the Baseline, the nearest sampling point would be at 12m (See Figure 8-14,
Site Characterization Transect 3). Thus, in this case, 12m is the location of the
first quadrat on this transect. Subsequent quadrats would be placed at 6-m
intervals (e.g., 18m, 24m, 30m, etc.) until the wetland boundary at the opposite
end of the transect is reached. See Figure 8-14 for more examples of
determining the distance from 0m to the first quadrat position. Enter the
position of the first and subsequent quadrats in the section on data form F-7
marked "dist. from 0".
2. Last quadrat location. The final vegetation quadrat on a transect is placed at
the last sampling point where an entire quadrat can be placed inside the far
wetland boundary (i.e., the boundary across the wetland from the Baseline).
The position of the last quadrat on a transect is determined during sampling.
51
-------
Do not walk the length of the transect prior to sampling because this would
cause unneeded trampling of the vegetation. Examples of last quadrat position
determination are illustrated in Figure 8-14. On Site Characterization Transect
1 the last quadrat occurs at 48m along the meter tape even though the wetland
boundary extends to approximately 60m. A quadrat placed at 54m would cross
the wetland boundary and extend into upland vegetation so it would not be
sampled.
Prior to beginning data collection Recorders complete the headings on all
vegetation data sheets (Forms F-7 through F-9). It is important to take the time to do
this before beginning to record data. Wetland width, the length of th© transect that
falls within the wetland boundary, should be recorded for each transect after the
transect has been sampled. The start and end of the wetland boundary, i.e., the
portion of the transect where vegetation is sampled, is also recorded on Forms F-7
through F-9. Vegetation sampling does not occur on the upland ends of the transects,
so it is important to record the start and end of the wetland boundaries. This is
particularly critical for the fine-intercept and tree diameter data because wetland width
is used in calculating cover percentages for trees and shrubs.
1. Canopy coverage data sheet (Form F-7). Record the distances from zero and
the plot numbers for each quadrat along a transect as sampling proceeds. Use
separate data sheets for each transect. If more than one data sheet is required
to complete a transect, repeat the species names in the same order on each
sheet. If the number of species occurring on a transect exceeds the number of
spaces provided for species names, record the additional species on another
data sheet. Make certain to enter the correct quadrat location (distance from
zero and plot number) on the additional data sheets.
2. Line-intercept data sheet (Form F-8). List all shrub and tree species that occur
on the site in the space provided. Use separate data sheets for each transect.
If more than one data sheet is required to complete a transect because all the
tape position/interval length spaces are filled, repeat the species names in the
same order on each sheet. If more than one data sheet is required because
more than five species occur on the transect, record the additional species on
another data sheet. After sampling the transect be certain to record the precise
wetland width in the heading of the form.
3. Diameter at Breast Height (dbh) (Form F-9). List all tree species that occur on
the site in the first column of the data form.
Placing the meter tape
The Recorder pins or otherwise attaches the meter tape at the flag marking the
transect beginning. The meter tape is NOT stretched the full length of transect prior to
sampling; instead, during sampling, it is stretched along a compass bearing as the
52
-------
Vegetation Team proceeds toward the end of the transect. The tape is left in place
after the Botanist has finished cover readings so it can be used later by the Survey
Team. These procedures minimize trampling of fragile wetland soils and vegetation.
To avoid trampling of the vegetation that will be sampled in quadrats the Vegetation
Team always travels along the transect on the left side when facing the transect from
the baseline.
Sampling Order for Vegetation Data
Three kinds of data, line-intercept for shrubs, canopy coverage for herbaceous
species, and basal area for trees, will be collected in a single pass along the transect.
Line-intercept intervals for shrub species will be obtained along the meter
tape, percentage cover values for herbaceous species will be estimated within 1-m2
quadrats placed adjacent to the meter tape, and basal areas for tree species will be
gathered in a 2-m wide belt transect centered on the meter tape (Figure 8-15). The
Botanist collects all the types of vegetation data for a given segment of a transect,
then proceeds to the next segment. Sampling is continued in each subsequent
segment until the transect is completed. The length of a transect segment equals the
sampling interval defined during transect establishment (1m, 3m, 6m, or 9m depending
on wetland size). For purposes of vegetation sampling, the intervals begin at the
bottom edge of the quadrat, that is the edge nearest and parallel to the baseline, and
continues along the meter tape to the bottom edge of the next quadrat (Figure 8-16).
Data are collected in the following order within each transect interval:
1. Line intercept data are gathered first because vegetation will be matted down
due to kneeling on the transect line while reading the quadrats during
estimation of canopy coverage. Kneeling on and disturbing shrubs would
negatively affect the quality of the line-intercept data.
2. Canopy cover estimates are then obtained for all species occurring in the
quadrat.
3. Since both the line transect and the quadrat are contained within the belt
transect, basal area data is gathered last to prevent trampling of the
herbaceous vegetation in the vicinity of trees prior to sampling.
Une-lntercept data collection
1. Line-intercept data are not gathered from the upland ends of the transect but
only within the wetland boundaries. Shrubs and small trees are sampled along
the transect length which is bounded by the outside edges of the wetland (See
Figure 8-17).
2. Definition. Intercept length equals the portion of the transect, i.e., the distance
along the meter tape, that a plant's foliage touches, overlies, or underlies.
53
-------
3. Botanists determine the intercept length for each shrub species and each small
tree (< 2m tall) by calling out the species name and the intercept length
beginning and endpoints (e.g., Figure 8-17, Salix piperi, 3.60 to 6.10m).
4. Recorders enter data on the line-intercept data form (Form F-8) by recording
beginning and ending points in the spaces provided under the correct species
name. Meters are recorded as whole numbers and centimeters as decimals
(e.g., continuing the previous example, in the Salix piperi column 3.60 to 6.10m)
5. Intercept lengths will be calculated by subtracting the beginning point from the
ending point (e.g., 6.10m - 3.60m = 2.50m). Calculations will be done by
computer after the data are entered.
Canopy cover estimation within quadrats
1. Sample plot placement.
a. Sampling begins with the plot nearest the baseline on the transect that
will be sampled (See procedures for the location of the first plot above).
The Botanist places the 1-m2 quadrat so that its nearest right-hand
corner is adjacent to the appropriate sampling point on the meter tape
and its long side is parallel to the transect (Figure 8-16).
b. The recorder places a flagged wire pin in the nearest right-hand corner
of the quadrat to mark the sampling point location for the Survey Team.
The Survey Team will remove the pins as they sample the transect.
2. Definition. Plant species cover estimates are the percentage of each sampling
plot that is overlain by the undisturbed canopies of each species occurring in
3. Percentages for cover estimation. Use the percentage increments defined for
precision in cover estimates.
4. Guidelines for cover estimation (Adapted from Daubenmire 1959):
a. Botanists make cover determinations for each species by estimating the
amount of ground space in the plot overlain by the canopies of
individuals or ramets of that species (See Figure 8-19). Cover
determinations for microsite characteristics are made by estimating the
ground space occupied by water or bare ground.
the plot.
For Cover Of:
1% to 5%
>5% to 100%
Use Increments Of:
1%
5%
54
-------
b. Do not try to subtract openings created by separated leaves in canopies
of species with open habit (Figure 8-19). The space over which a plant
exerts influence is approximated by the area of its undisturbed canopy
even where such openings exist, since the plant's root system typically
spreads at least as extensively in the horizontal direction as does the
canopy.
c. The ground space is frequently covered by superimposed layers of
plants due to the vertical stratification of plants within communities.
Thus, the sum of all canopy-coverage estimates often substantially
exceeds 100%.
5. The Recorder reports percentage cover for each of the species names or
microsite characteristics on the Canopy Cover Form F-7 as they are called out
by the Botanist. If a species called out by the Botanist is not already on the list,
the Recorder adds it. The Recorder verbally confirms names and percent cover
with the Botanist for any such information he/she has difficulty hearing or
understanding.
6. Standing water. The Botanist estimates the percentage of area occupied by
standing water, If any is present, within the 1-m2 quadrat. Do not Include
saturated soil as standing water.
7. Bare ground. Estimate the percentage of the 1-m2 quadrat without herbaceous
vegetative cover as bare ground. Bare ground includes any area covered by
water and lacking vegetation or litter. This means the bare ground and
standing water could occupy the same space, thus, percentage cover for either
or both variable could be recorded for the same area.
8. Plant species. Using the guidelines in item five, the Botanist estimates the
cover of each plant species occurring in the sample quadrat. If a plant needs
to be collected for taxonomic validation, the recorder makes a check in the to
collect box" in the second column on the Canopy Cover Form F-7. When a
specimen has been collected, check the "collected box" on the form (see
Collection and Preservation, later in this section).
Basal area data collection within belt-transects
1. Definition. Basal area is measured by obtaining the diameters at breast height
(dbh = 1.4m) for all trees > than 2m tall and occurring within a 2-m wide belt
transect that is centered on the transect line.
2. Determine the outside boundary of the belt transect by placing a meter stick on
the ground perpendicular to the transect line, first on one side of the transect
line, then the other (Figure 8-15). This is done whenever trees are encountered
55
-------
near the transect line to determine whether or not they occur within the belt
transect. Diameters for all trees occurring within the belt or with at least half of
their stem routed inside the belt will be measured.
3. The Botanist measures dbh for each tree encountered, by stretching a diameter
tape around the bole (trunk) of the tree at a position 1.4 m from ground level.
Figure 8-20 depicts several tree stem conditions that might be encountered
during sampling and illustrates correct placement of the diameter tape.
Diameters are obtained for each branch and/or stem of multi-stemmed trees
with a dbh > 4.0 cm. Botanists call out the tree species name, diameter and
the tree location on the transect (e.g., Populus trichocarpa, 37.0 cm, 16m).
4. The Recorder enters one dbh value to the nearest millimeter, and tree location
to the nearest meter on the transect per box in the appropriate species row on
Form F-9.
Establishing the Transect Endpoint
After the Vegetation Team has finished data collection for a transect, the
transect end-point must be established so that the Survey Team will know how far to
sample and so that total transect length can be determined.
1. The Botanist determines the location of the transect end-point. This is done by
stretching the meter tape one complete sampling interval beyond the wetland
boundary and into upland vegetation.
2. The Recorder stakes the end-point according to the Botanists instructions. The
stake is marked to identify the transect by attaching pieces of flagging to
correspond with the transect number, e.g., transect 3 would have 3 pieces of
flagging. The Recorder notes the end of the wetland boundary.
Post-Sampling Activities
The Survey Team will need to know the number of vegetation quadrats that
were sampled along the transect so they can randomly select the locations for soil
sampling.
1. Following completion of a transect, the Recorder calls a Survey Team Member
on a walkie-talkie and gives them the transect type and number and the
number of vegetation plots sampled on the transect.
2. The Survey Team Member confirms the information by repeating the numbers
to the Recorder.
After all the data have been collected for a transect, the Botanists check the
data sheets for completeness and legibility. Botanists check to see whether
56
-------
specimens have been obtained for all species which need to be collected and that the
appropriate collection box is checked off on the data forms.
Once the vegetation sampling has been completed, the Recorders assemble
and file data forms, and gather and stow all vegetation equipment. Recorders then
assist the Survey Team as needed or help the Botanists with plant collection,
preservation or identification.
Final Plant Collection and Plant Specimen Preservation
Botanists collect unknown plant taxa that they have not previously gathered
from the site. All plant specimens are labeled and pressed for subsequent species
validation. Labelling is a three step process: 1) a tie tag is attached to the plant when
it is collected and labelled with pseudonym, transect, plot or other location information
and the date; 2) this information is transferred to the outside of the newsprint in which
the specimen is placed during pressing; and 3) a collection label is completed and
included in the newsprint with the plant specimen during pressing. The label is
illustrated below.
| Collection Label for OWS Plant Specimens -
* Collector. County Dates
^ Site #: Transect#: Plot#;
< *•
. Specks Name or flsfcuaonyni;
\ -
5/ Habitat {c-g, Aqwtic, submerged conditions* emerged conditions, Saturated amotions, opfcnd, etc,);';
$
- Plant Commamiy/Associaied Species:
£
( Features of tbeplak that might fade during drying or may «ot be obvious from
-------
Standard procedures for plant collection and preservation are used. The steps
in each procedure are briefly outlined below. More complete discussions are available
in most plant taxonomy texts or laboratory manuals.
The steps in plant collection are:
1. Plants should, whenever possible, be collected when in flower and/or fruit.
Mature fruit are especially important for Carex (sedge) species.
2. If the plant is dioecious (male plants and female plants) collect specimens from
both sexes whenever possible. Wetland species likely to be dioecious are Salix
sp. (willows) and some Carexsp. (sedges).
3. If the specimen is small, collect the entire plant including the roots. Collect at
least enough material to fill a herbarium sheet.
4. If the specimen is large, collect some of the root, part of the stem with leaves,
and part of the inflorescence (flowering stem). If the specimen is a Carex or a
grass (Poaceae), also place a piece of the inflorescence in a small envelope to
protect it from damage.
5. If the plant is woody, collect twigs with leaves and fruit.
6. Collect enough plant material to ensure adequate material for identification.
7. While in the field, temporarily store specimens in plastic bags labelled with the
species name or pseudonym and the site information described in the pre-
sampling reconnaissance section. If specimens are extremely wet, place them
in paper bags or wrap in newspaper before storing in plastic bags.
The steps in pressing specimens are:
1. Standard 30 X 45 cm (12 X 18 inch) plant presses will be used.
2. Clean the dirt off the plants before placing them in a press.
3. Place the plants in a sheet of folded newsprint.
4. Lay the plants flat, avoid overlapping plant parts, and spread leaves, flowers,
and fruits so they will be easily seen.
5. Bend long plants sharply so they fit within the frame. Do not curve or twist the
stems.
58
-------
6. Pad areas around thick stems with layers of newspaper so no air pockets
remain.
7. Write the date, the site number, the area of the wetland or transect number,
and the plot number (if applicable) from which the specimen was collected on
the margin of the newsprint and attach an identifying tag with the same
information to the stem of each plant.
8. Stack the plants in folded newsprint in the press by inserting the newsprint
between blotters and separating the "blotter-newsprint sandwiches" with
corrugated cardboard. The corrugations of the cardboard should run parallel to
the shorter dimension (12 in.) for better air circulation in the press. Use two
adjustable straps to firmly hold the plant press and its contents. It should not
be possible to move the blotters or cardboards from the side in a properly
tightened press.
Botanists and Recorders, if time permits, may wish to key non-graminoid
unknowns while still in the field because it is frequently easier to key fresh specimens
than dried material. Such plants should still be collected and pressed for later
validation. Local floras and hand lenses should be used for field identifications.
WETLAND MORPHOLOGY FIELD METHODOLOGY
Data on wetland morphology are collected by measuring the relative elevations
of points along transects to provide cross-sectional profiles of each wetland. A transit
and stadia rod will be used to measure relative elevations. The transit establishes a
plane over the ground at eye level, and the stadia rod measures how far the earth is
below that plane. Therefore, as the stadia rod is moved downhill, the numbers read
from it will increase. Because we are concerned with relative elevations, we will use
the lowest reading per site (not per transect) as zero and calculate elevations relative
to that point.
The Survey Team will use procedures to help assure precise data, e.g., hold a
pencil on the rod to double-check a reading, and use consistent hand signals and the
walkie-talkie radios to indicate if the rod is not vertical or should be moved.
Equipment
Transit & Tripod
Stadia Rod
Data Forms
Pencil
"Walkie-Talkie" Headphones
Pouch for carrying retrieved plot markers
59
-------
Getting Started
1. If possible, set up the transit in a location that will allow all transects to be
surveyed from one location. If the transit must be moved during surveying,
carefully follow the instructions for "turning" (below).
2. Set up the tripod and mount the transit. Follow the instructions for setting up
the transit in the section on General Site Data.
3. Establish a "benchmark" to use as the reference elevation. A solidly anchored
natural feature, such as a stump, can be used, or one can create a reference
point by driving a stake firmly into the ground. The benchmark must be visible
from all transit locations. Keep this in mind if turns are required. Take a
reading on the benchmark at the beginning and end of each transect, and
before and after each turn. If the difference in benchmark readings at the
beginning and end of a transect is greater than 0.01m (1cm), re-shoot the
elevations for that transect.
4. The Surveyor with the stadia rod must hold the rod vertically, and, if the rod is
extended, ensure that the extension set screw is tight and that the extension is
seated properly against the stop. If the stadia rod is vertical, the telescope
cross-hairs will appear exactly parallel to the stadia rod markings. Therefore, it
is the Transit Operator's responsibility to indicate whether or not the stadia rod
is vertical and correct the positioning through hand signals and the use of the
walkie-talkies.
Collecting Wetland Morphology Data
Relative elevations, water depths, and data on bare ground, open water, or
vegetation at the sampling points will be collected along all sampling transects by the
Survey Team.
1. The Crew Leader, with input from the Botanists and Surveyors, establishes the
transect locations and directs the Recorders in marking the transect beginning
points with flagged stakes (see Transect Establishment).
2. The Surveyors carrying the stadia rod attach a meter tape to the stake that
marks the starting point of the Wetland Morphology Transect and extend the
meter tape as they advance the stadia rod across the wetland to sample. For
the Site Characterization Transects, the Vegetation Teams will have left the
meter tapes in place after they have sampled the vegetation and inserted
flagged wire pins as plot markers along these transects. The Surveyors with
the stadia rod advance along the meter tape in the same direction as did the
Vegetation Teams along the Site Characterization Transects.
60
-------
3. Record the first elevation measurement at "0mM on each transect (at the starting
point). Place the stadia rod directly to the right of the meter tape at the starting
point and hold it vertically until the transit operator signals that the stadia rod
can be moved to the next sampling point. To reduce bias, sampling intervals
along the transects will be determined systematically by the size of the wetland
(see Transect Establishment). The same sampling interval will be used on all
transects at a site. This interval MUST be recorded on all data sheets, and, it
is IMPERATIVE that the same sampling interval be used by all teams so that
data can be correlated during analysis.
4. The Transit Operator measures the elevation at each sample point by sighting
the stadia rod through the transit telescope and recording the stadia reading of
the center cross-hairs on Form F-10.
5. The Surveyor holding the stadia rod relays information via the "walkie-talkie"
headphones to the Transit Operator. This information includes water depth
measurements, the type of land ccver occupying the sampling point (vegetation,
barren ground, or open water), as well as general information such as where
the edges of inundated areas occur, where obvious changes in vegetation
composition occur, locations of landmarks, etc. This additional information is
recorded by the Transit Operator in the appropriate sections of Form F-10.
6. If the stadia rod is moved out of the sight of the Transit Operator, a "turn" must
be made. Before "turning", the Transit Operator must check to see that the
transit is level and record the benchmark elevation. The procedure for "turning"
is described in the following section. Document "turn" information on the back
of Form F-10.
7. After completing all measurements along the Wetland Morphology Transect,
measure elevations along the Site Characterization Transects and along the
Vegetation Transects, if they are used for the site. All data gathered on the
Site Characterization and Vegetation Transects MUST be made within the
vegetation plots that were sampled. Therefore, it is extremely important that
the meter tapes are left exactly in place, and that the stadia rod be placed
within the vegetation sampling points. To facilitate this, the Recorders will have
placed flagged wire pins along the transect at the lower right hand corner of
each vegetation sampling plot. Place the stadia rod directly to the right of the
meter tape and wire pin as you are facing toward the end of the transect, so
that it touches the wire pin. After recording elevation data at each sampling
point, retrieve each wire pin and carry them along the transect. You should be
carrying a pouch or pack for this purpose. To avoid trampling vegetation before
the Botanists have sampled, the Surveyors must follow the Vegetation Teams
during sampling.
61
-------
8. After all measurements have been made on each transect, take a reading of
the benchmark. This reading must not differ from the first benchmark reading
by more than + 0.01m. Do this BEFORE dismantling the tripod. Show on the
back of Form F-10 all benchmark readings and calculations. If the error is
greater than + 0.01m, reshoot all points measured since the last accurate
benchmark check. To correct data on Form F-10, put a single line through the
incorrect entry and write the correct entry above it.
9. If transects are interrupted by deep water, distance to the transect start and
endpoints or the far side of the water must be determined. Therefore, upper
and lower stadia readings must be made for these points and recorded on the
back of Form F-10.
10. After all elevation measurements have been made for the entire site, calculate
the relative elevations for all sampling points on the site - NOT PER
TRANSECT.
a. Determine the lowest point on the site. This point corresponds to the
largest stadia rod reading for the site. The stadia rod reading at this
point becomes the "vertical offset" for all calculations.
b. For each measurement, subtract the stadia rod reading from the vertical
offset to determine the relative elevation for each sampling point.
c. Leave all original stadia rod readings on Form F-10 as a data check, as
well as any notes.
Turning with the Original Benchmark
If the transit operator cannot see all sampling points from the transit location,
the transit must be moved. This procedure is referred to as "making a turn" or
"turning".
1. BEFORE moving the tripod, take a reading of the original benchmark and
record it on the back of Form F-10.
2. Determine if the original benchmark will be visible from the tripod's new
position. If so, continue to use the same benchmark. If not, follow the steps in
the next section for "Turning with a new Benchmark".
3. Move the tripod to its new position, set it up and level it.
4. Take a reading of the benchmark from the new position and record it on Form
F-10. Then continue to measure the elevations of the sampling points.
62
-------
Turning with a New Benchmark
If the original benchmark is not visible from the new tripod position, a new
benchmark must be established. It is important to take and record a final reading of
the first benchmark and a reading of the new benchmark BEFORE MOVING THE
TRIPOD. This enables the new "eye level plane" to be correlated with the previous
one, so that elevations read after the tripod is moved will correspond to those read
earlier. The procedure is:
1. Record the elevation of the original benchmark.
2. Determine the new benchmark and record its elevation.
3. Move the tripod to its new position, set it up and level it.
4. Take another reading of the new benchmark and record it. This reading gives
you the new eye level plane.
5. Continue to record the elevations of the remaining sampling points.
Adjusting the Eye Level Plane
If only one benchmark was required, the elevations calculated from
measurements made after moving the tripod must be correlated with those
measurements made before moving the tripod.
1. Determine the difference between the benchmark readings by subtracting the
smaller reading from the larger. For example, the last reading of the
benchmark before the tripod was moved was 5.15 m. The elevation
measurement of the benchmark after the tripod was moved was 3.74m. This
means the tripod was moved 1.41m downhill (5.15 - 3.74 = 1.41.). The new
eye level plane is 1.41m lower than the first (Figure 8-21a).
2. Adjust the relative elevations of the sampling points measured after the tripod
was moved by adding 1.41m to each.
If more than one benchmark is required, the procedure for adjusting your eye
level plane is:
1. Calculate the difference between the last reading of the original benchmark and
the reading of the new benchmark taken before moving the triood. For
example, the last reading of the original benchmark was 5.15m. The reading
for the new benchmark is 4.04m. Therefore, the elevation of the new
benchmark is 1.11m higher than the original benchmark (5.15 - 4.04 =1.11).
63
-------
2. Calculate the difference between the readings taken of the new benchmark
before and after moving the tripod. For example, the reading of the second
benchmark after moving the tripod is 6.32m. This means that the new eye level
plane is 2.28m higher than the previous plane (6.32 - 4.04 = 2.28) (Rgure 8-
21b).
3. When calculating relative elevations for the site, the change in eye level plane
must be considered. Using the example above, 2.28m must be subtracted from
each calculated relative elevation measured after the turn.
SOILS AND HYDROLOGY FIELD METHODOLOGY
Soils will be sampled and characterized on a randomly selected set of plots in
each wetland; plot selection protocols are designed to provide characterization of a
representative sample of soils in each wetland. A total of 15 plots will be described
and sampled in each wetland, three on each of the five Site Characterization
Transects.
Figure 8-22 provides a flow chart showing the sequence of field sampling
activities to be used. Based on the presence/absence of standing water and an
evaluation of soil conditions, one of several alternative soil sampling procedures will be
selected. Sampling at each plot will include three types of data collection:
1. Visible soil physical characteristics, such as horizon depths, color, and presence
of anthropogenically-introduced materials will be described. If possible, soil pits
will be excavated to a depth of 0.5m. Alternatively soils will be sampled using a
core sampler, bucket auger, or by inserting a core by hand and rapping the
bottom in situ.
2. Soils from two depth intervals (0-5 and 15-20cm) will be sampled and returned
to the laboratory for analysis of organic matter content;
3. A limited amount of hydrologic information will be collected. At soil plots with
standing water, the depth will be measured; at plots without standing water,
depth to saturated soils and to the free water surface (if they occur at a depth
of < 50cm) will be measured.
General Considerations in Soil Descriptions and Sampling
1. Sampling and Characterization will be conducted by the Survey Team. Teams
include three members with interchangeable duties. Soil sampling and
characterization will be done concurrently with measurement of basin elevations
and water depths along Site Characterization Transects.
64
-------
2. Soil sampling - digging of pits, sampling of soils, and characterization - must
not be done until after the Vegetation Teams have completed all activities on a
plot, to avoid trampling and other disturbance of vegetation.
3. All measurements will be reported in metric units - centimeters and meters. All
depth measurements are made from the ground surface, below living vegetation
or litter.
Equipment and Supplies
Field data sheets - Form F-11 (5 copies per wetland)
Soil sample bags (2 per plot, with labels)
Pencil and waterproof marking pen
Sharpshooter shovel
Bucket auger (7.5 or 10 cm diameter)
Core samplers (2.5 cm diameter)
Core sampler liners and caps
Knife, with long blade
Munsell color chart with gleyed color page
Two 0.5m rulers (or cut down meter sticks)
Ice chest with ice and rack to hold sample tubes
Squirt bottle with water for cleaning (filled with clean tap water)
Paper towels
Handi-wipes (or equivalent) for cleaning hands and equipment
Held Sampling Procedure
Soil sampling will be the final activity conducted by the Survey Teams at each
sample point. Notify the Crew Leader if there are questions or problems associated
with any of the soil sampling activities. Soils will be described and sampled at three
locations on each of the five Site Characterization Transects.
1. At the start of each transect, determine the number of plots on the transect.
The Crew Leader will identify three of the plots for soil sampling using a list of
random numbers. Record the three plot numbers on Form F-11, and
characterize soils and hydrology on only those plots.
2. Rll out the heading information at the top of Form F-11.
3. Upon completion of sampling by the Vegetation Team on the transect, locate
plots for soil sampling during the pass along the transect to measure elevations.
4. Depending on soil and water conditions at the plot, soils may be sampled by
excavating a pit, using a bucket auger, or by using one of two types of coring
devices. The choice of sampling procedures is discussed below. One ol four
alternate procedures will be used to sample soils on each plot. For samples
65
-------
collected from a soil pit (Procedure A) or using a bucket auger (Procedure C),
collect 75-100 grams of soil to insure that there is adequate material for
laboratory duplicates or reanalysis (if necessary).
5. Label sample containers - two bags for each plot if soils will be collected from
a pit or using a bucket auger; a single label for core tubes. Be certain that
labels are written using pencil or waterproof ink, and double check to be certain
that all information on the labels is correct. Sample bags should be labelled as
described below; cores labels will be the same, except that "99" should be
entered on the form for sample depth, and the entire depth interval represented
by * e core should be recorded separately. Each sample should be labelled
with the sampling date and a 13 digit code that includes:
• characters 1 -4 -- wetland number
• characters 5-8 -- transect number
characters 9-10-- plot number for each transect
characters 11-12- depth (lower limit of sampling interval, i.e., 5 or 20 cm)
• character 13 - sample type (1 for routine, 2 for a field duplicate (QA
sample), 9 for other (note in comment field))
As an example, 2253-SCT2-02-05-1 would be the code for a sample taken from
wetland 2253, transect SCT2, plot 02, depth 0-5 cm, for a routine sample (code
1). Note that transect numbers and depth should be right justified, with a zero
in any extra space.
SOIL SAMPLE LABEL
; 1993 OREGON WETLANDS STUDY
< 2 2 53-SCT2-02 - 05-1
J? SBe Transoct Plot Depft Type
> s
;; DATE 7/19/93 Bv B. Ball. M. Delono
P
6. After completing soil sampling on each plot, check to be certain that data forms
have been completely filled out and are legible, and that samples are properly
labelled (see code in step 5). Information on water depths in soil pits will only
be filled in for plots where pits are dug; color and presence/absence of
hydrogen sulfide will not be determined for samples collected in cores. Be sure
to note deviations from routine procedures, problems with equipment or
supplies, etc. Notify the Crew Leader if you have questions or if there are
problems with sampling or equipment.
66
-------
7. After completing soil sampling on each plot, clean all equipment to prevent
contamination of soils on subsequent plots.
8. After completing each transect, replenish supplies as needed, and place
samples in a cooler for return to the laboratory. Core tubes should be handled
as carefully as possible to avoid mixing or other disturbance, and should be
placed in a rack in the cooler. Core samples should be frozen as soon as is
practical, and should remain frozen until laboratory analysis.
Upon arrival at each plot, determine whether standing water is present. If water
is not present, follow the instructions for Procedure A. If standing water is present,
enter "surface" in the space for depth to standing water on Form F-11, and select one
of the alternate sampling procedures. For plots with standing water, there are three
alternatives for soil sampling (in order of preference, corer, bucket auger, manually
collected core). The choice among these ultimately is subjective, and depends on the
nature of the substrate, presence and density of roots.
Evaluate soils on the site - how dense is the material, how well consolidated,
how much coarse material (stones, woody material, heavy roots or rhizomes) is
present. The preferred alternative is to use the core sampler (Procedure B). In soils
that are compacted, contain coarse materials (e.g., rock fragments, woody material),
or are heavily ingrown with roots, it may be necessary to sample using a bucket auger
(Procedure C). Finally, in wet, unconsolidated soils, it may be necessary to manually
insert a core tube in the soil and cap both ends before removing it from the soil
(Procedure D). Note the type of sampling device used on Form F-11. For all
sampling procedures, if a rock, log or other impenetrable material, move 10-20 inches
to the left along the transect and make a second attempt to collect a sample.
Procedure A. Excavation of soil pit
1. Excavate a pit approximately 25-cm wide and 50-cm deep. Using the knife,
carefully clean the soil on one face of the pit to remove plant tissue, soil
transferred from other depths, etc. Note that in some cases, a rock, log, a
cemented horizon, or similar impenetrable material may be encountered at a
depth of <50cm. In such instances, excavate the pit as deep as possible,
describe and sample soils as the depth of the pit allows, and note the
occurrence and depth to bedrock or the cemented horizon.
2. Using the sharpshooter shovel, excavate and remove an intact slab of soil from
the clean pit face. Lay the shovel and slab carefully on a clean sheet of plastic.
If the presence of water in a pit precludes sampling of a slab of soil to the 50cm
depth, excavate a slab as deep as is practical; if necessary, sample subsoils
using a corer or bucket auger as described in Procedures B and C.
67
-------
3.
If the pit contains standing water, measure the depth to the water surface; note
the depth and time in the space for initial depth to standing water on Form F-
11. If no standing water is present, enter "NP" (not present).
4. If soil at the margin (edge) of the pit are saturated with water, record the depth
to the saturated layer. Saturation will be indicated by a sheen or glistening of
the soil. At or below the depth of soil saturation, water may also be oozing
from the soil into the pit. On Form F-11, record the depth to saturation and to
the free water surface (where there is a visible flow of water).
5. Carefully examine soils in the pit and in the excavated slab; identify and
describe pertinent features in each horizon on Form F-11, including:
• presence of, and upper and lower depth for, each soil horizon. Horizons
will be identified by changes in soil color and texture, or by changes in the
presence/absence or abundance of mottles or concretions.
• the size, nature, and abundance of stones, gravel, woody material in each
horizon;
• presence and abundance, in each horizon, of mottles, gleyed soils, iron
and/or manganese concretions/stains;
color of the soil matrix and of mottles in each horizon (using the Munsell
color chart);
presence and abundance of living roots and oxidized root channels;
• presence of hydrogen sulfide. At several depths in each horizon where
there is evidence of reducing conditions (e.g. gleying, mottles), remove a
small piece of soil from the pit (or excavated slab); crush it between thumb
and forefingers and smell it to determine whether hydrogen sulfide (rotten
egg odor) is present. Note depths at which hydrogen sulfide is present;
• presence and nature of any additional natural or anthropogenic features in
any horizon (or at any discrete depth). Examples might include a buried
horizon or buried organic material, presence of straw or other introduced
organic material.
6. Using a clean knife, remove any foreign material (bits of vegetation) and
carefully sample soils from the slab at two depths - 0-5 and 15-20cm. Each
sample should be representative of material for its respective depth interval.
Place each sample in a clean, pre-labelled bag. Check labels to verify that the
code for each sample is complete and correct. Wipe the knife clean between
1 samples.
7. 30 minutes after completing sample collection and description, remeasure the
depth to standing water in the pit; record the depth and time in the space for
final depthAime on Form F-11.
68
-------
8. Check to be certain that all information has been recorded on data forms; return
the excavated slab to the pit; refill the pit and replace vegetation.
Alternate Procedure B. Core sampler
1. Detach the corer handle, and place a clean tube in the corer and reattach the
handle. Fill out and verify information on a data label (i.e., the sample
identification including wetland, transect, and plot numbers) prior to sample
collection.
2. Remove litter and live vegetation from the soil surface (cut at ground level so
vegetation will not contaminate sample soils; do not remove roots).
3. Insert the corer into soil as deeply as possible (but not more than 50 cm).
Minimize disturbance to material in the core due to lifting, tipping, or twisting of
the corer during sampling.
4. Withdraw the sampler, remove the handle and attach a cap on the upper end of
the tube, then withdraw the core tube and carefully place an end cap on the
lower end of the tube. Wipe the sides of the tube clean, and examine the tube
contents. If the tube shows evidence of significant disturbance during sampling,
discard the sample and repeat sample collection.
5. If the integrity of the sample in the tube is satisfactory, describe, as completely
as possible, horizon depths, presence of gleying, mottles, etc. in step 5 of
Procedure A. Colors determined for materials through the core tube may not
be reliable, so do not spend time trying to determine color for these samples.
Attach the sample label, and record the depth interval for the core on the
sample label and in the space for comments on Form F-11.
Alternate Procedure C. Bucket Auger
1. Remove litter and live vegetation from the soil surface (cut at ground level so
vegetation will not contaminate the sample; do not remove roots).
2. Use the auger to collect a sample from the 0-5 cm depth, and place it in a pre-
labelled bag.
3. Auger a second hole to a depth of 20 cm, remove the auger and soil from the
hole, and carefully extrude the soil onto a clean piece of plastic. Separate
material from the 15-20 cm depth interval, and replace material from other
depths in the hole. Recognize that sampling may distort the depth of the
extruded material (by compaction during sampling or crumbling of material
69
-------
when it is removed from the auger); if this occurs, estimate the depth as well as
possible and make a note in the comment field on Form F-11.
4. Remove stones, roots and other foreign matter, then place a sample in a pre-
labelled bag.
5. Using the auger, dig a third hole in the soil to a depth of >50cm; remove the
soil and auger and carefully lay soil on a sheet of clean plastic. Clean the
surface of the sample to remove vegetation and soil from other depths, and
describe the occurrence, depth, and characteristics of soil horizons as
described in step 5 under Procedure A. Replace soil in the hole after
completing the description.
Alternate Procedure D Core collection by hand insertion of a core liner
1. Sample material by manually inserting a core liner into the soil to a depth of 25
cm (or as deep as possible if less than 25 cm).
2. Cap the top of the core, then reach into the soil/sediment and place a second
cap on the lower end of the tube. Insertion and capping should be done in
such a way as to minimize disturbance of the soil column that might cause
disruption and mixing of the soil.
3. Carefully remove the core from the soil, with a minimum amount of tipping or
twisting of the tube
4. Prepare a label for the core; record the depth interval for the core on the
sample label and in the space for comments on Form F-11.
70
-------
Table 8-1. Methods used for data collection in the Oregon Wetlands Study.
Variable
Units
Method
SITE
Mapping
meters
Transit stadia rod-
distance and bearing
from transit to stadia
rod placed at wetland
boundary points
Elevations
cm
Transit and stadia
rod-elevation
markings on stadia
rod indicate ground
level in relation to
'eye-level plane' of
transit
Buffers
presence
N/A
Visual determination
of presence and type
of buffer
size
meters
Width of buffer
measured via transit
and stadia rod or
VEGETATION
meter tape
Plant species
taxonomic binomials
^Identification by an
identification
(genus & species
experienced botanist
names)
2) Keying plant with
local floras
Plant species
percent
Visual estimation of
abundance
percent canopy cover
% cover of
of all herbaceous
herbaceous
species and of shrubs
species
and tree seedlings
<2m tall within 1m8
quadrats
% relative cover of
percent
Line-intercept method
shrubs
for measuring cover
of all shrubs and of
trees <2m tall
occurring along
sampling transects
71
-------
Table 8-1. Cont.
Variable
Units
Method
VEGETATION (con'fi
% relative cover of
trees
percent
Basal area of all trees
>2m tall encountered
within 2m wide belt
transects
% bare ground
percent
Visual estimation of
percent
% standing water
percent
Visual estimation of
percent
SOIL
Soil organic content
(loss on ignition)
percent dry weight
Dry ashing
Soil color
Munsell units
Visual matching using
Munsell charts
Presence of:
mottles
gleying
concretions
oxidized root
channels
H2S
presence/absence and
percent relative
abundance
¦
presence/absence
Visual inspection
a
•
n
smell
Horizon thickness
cm
Direct measurement
(ruler)
HYDROLOGY
Depth of standing
water
cm
Direct measurement
(ruler)
Depth in soil pit to:
standing water
free water surface
saturated soil
cm
cm
cm
Direct measurement
(ruler)
Direct measurement
(ruler)
Direct measurement
(ruler)
72
-------
Table 8-2. Wetlands to be sampled by the OWS, stratified by wetland origin (natural or
project) and land use.
Land Use Natural Project
Undeveloped 58 28
Agriculture 22 5
Residential 18 11
Commercial 7 5
Industrial 8 3
Totals 111 51
73
-------
Table 8-3. Numbers of the freshwater mitigation projects in Portland, Oregon, by wetland type
and size required in permits issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the
Oregon Division of State Lands from January 1987 through January 1991. "?"
indicates area unknown.
TYPE
0-2
2-4
SIZE (Acres)
4-6 6-8 8-10 >10
?
TOTALS
Marsh
9
5
0
0
0
0
2
16
Pond
24
0
1
0
1
1
12
39
Marsh and Pond
4
1
0
0
0
0
3
8
Marsh and Shrub-scrub
2
2
1
0
0
0
1
6
Marsh and Forested
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
Marsh, Shrub-scrub, and Forested
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Marsh, Pond, Shrub-scrub, and Forested
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
3
Marsh, Pond, Aquatic Bed, and Forested
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Marsh, Pond, and Flooded Grassland
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
Pond, and Riparian
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
Pond, Forested, and Stream Channel
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Riverine Wetland
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Stream Channel
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
Creek Bank
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
100-year Floodplain
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Mud Flat
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Unknown
3
0
0
0
0
0
10
13
TOTALS
58
11
3
0
2
2
31
107
74
-------
Photograph's study site
Survey Team
• Maps the site
Assist crew members
when necessary.
Resolve problems
Crew Leader
• Determines Transect
starting points
• Botanists collect and
preserve voucher
specimens. Key out
unknown species and
agree on pseudonyms.
Assist in placement
of additional
transects for
sampling vegetation
if needed
Crew Leader & Botanists:
Determine wetland perimeter
Determine baseline location
• Determine if
additional transects
are necessary for
vegetation sampling
• Determine locations
of additional
transects
•Sample vegetation
Surveyors & Recorders:
> Organize and distribute
equipment and data forms
• Recorders and
Surveyors gather
samples.
• Organize and
replace in vehicle.
• Assist Botanists with
plant preservation.
• Check supply of data
forms for next site.
Measure elevations
and water depths,
record open water,
bare ground or
vegtated and collect
soil samples along
appropriate transects.
• Check all data forms
for completeness
and legibility; organize
forms into Site Packet.
• Make entries into field
diary.
• Ensure study site is
left in good condition
and that all equipment
is returned to vehicle.
Vegetation Teams
• Recorders establish
transect starting points
• Botanists conduct
vegetation reconnaissance
• Vegetation Teams conduct
vegetation sampling
Figure 8-1. Flowchart of field crew member responsibilities and tasks. A Field Crew
consists of a Crew Leader, two Vegetation Teams (each composed of a
Botanist and Recorder) and one Survey Team (composed of 3 Surveyors).
75
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
f ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
% 200 S W 3STH STREET
1 CORVALLIS, OREGON 97333
May 27, 1992
Dear Landowner
U S Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Wetlands Research Program is requesting your assistance in a
research project being initiated in the Portland Metropolitan Area. In recent years, humans have attempted to
create wetlands to replace those destroyed in the process of development. It is still unclear how effectively
these created wetlands are replacing the ecological functions of naturally-occurring wetlands. To find out how
these created wetlands compare to natural sites, the EPA is looking at a number of created and naturally-
occurring wetlands in the area. Your property may contain a naturally-occurring wetland that we would (ike to
include in our study This would require allowing us on your property today to photograph and record some basic
features of the wetland (e g., wetland type and size, percent open water and vegetation, and surrounding land
uses)
If the wetland on your property is the type and size selected for our study, a field crew would return to the site
next summer (1993) for sampling They should not be on your property for more than half a day. We will notify
you of the exact day of the sampling as soon as we determine the final schedule. The field crew (consisting
of 7 people) will set up temporary markers (wooden stakes), record the elevation-of the site with a transit, and
take notes on the vegetation. The field crew will dig no more than ten holes, ot> deeper than 18 inches, to take
a soil sample. These samples will be scattered over the site. The field crew will remove the stakes and fill
in the holes after they are finished.
It is, of course, totally up to you whether you will permit us to visit the wetland on your property. We hope
you will choose to assist us in this important project. Since we are only interested in the summary statistics
for the wetlands, information from your wetland will be combined with that of other similar wetlands. All
wetlands will be given a code name. Your name and property will not be specifically mentioned in the published
results. If you wish, we can add your name to a list of people who receive information on the Wetlands
Research Program The results of the study can also be sent to you when they are available; this should be
approximately two years after the sampling is complete. Simply inform the bearer of this letter, a member of
the field crew, or me of your desire for this information.
Thank you in advance for your consideration and cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions or
concerns, please feel free to call me at (503) 754-4478
Sincerely, ,
Mar££r Kentula, Program Leader
Wetlands Research Program
Figure 8-2. The letter given to landowners during site selection explaining the Oregon
Wetlands Study.
76
-------
Wetland
Boundary
120m 108m 84m 60m 36m 12m 0m
—— a Baseline
——— = Wetland Morphology Transect (WMT)
| a Site Characterization Transects (SCT)
Figure 8-3. Basic transect layout used to sample sites. A Baseline is placed along one side of the wetland and is used to systematically
place the Site Characterization Transects. A Wetland Morphology Transect is placed parallel to the Baseline, as near as possible to
the center of the wetland. Five Site Characterization Transects originate from and are placed perpendicular to the Baseline.
They span the wetland from edge-to-edge and are placed at even intervals along the Baseline. The start and endpoints of the
transects are placed one sampling interval beyond the wetland boundary.
-------
Seals
Upland
Vegetation
Open Water
¦MMHW
Wetland
Boundary
TVT3
120m 108m 84m 60m 36m 12m 0m
— = Baseline
— = Wetland Morphology Transect (WMT)
| = Site Characterization Transects (SCT)
i = Vegetation Transects (VT)
: = Vegetation Transects (VT) Area not sampled.
— = Sampling Interval Endpoints
Figure 8-4. Vegetation Transect (VT) placement when the vegetation band is more than two sampling intervals wide. VTs span the wetland from
edge-to-edge and are placed at even intervals along the Baseline but sampled randomly in the order determined by rolling a die until the
number of transects needed to provide 40 quadrats with vegetation are sampled.
-------
-J
vo
mergerrt
Vegetatli
Upland
Open Water
Wetland
Boundary
120m
Vegetation Tra
Scale
1 cm = 6m
Open Water
= Baseline
—— s Wetland Morphology Transect (WMT)
| a Site Characterization Transects (SCT)
• - - - = Vegetation Transects (VT)
(#) a Start point for Vegetation Transect
— s Sampling Interval Endpoints
Inset:
Figure 8-5. Vegetation Transect (VT) placement when the vegetation is less than two sampling intervals wide.
-------
Wetland Morphology
Transect
(Crew Leader)
Site Characterization
Transects
(Crew Leader)
Vegetation Transects
(if needed)
(Crew Leader
or Botanists)
Inspect Site
(Crew Leader/Botanists)
Flag Starting Points
(Recorders)
Determine Baseline Length and Location
(Crew Leader)
Determine Locations of Transects
Document Rationale for
Baseline Placement and
Vegetation Transect
Placement
(Crew Leader)
Determine Sampling Interval
Interval Based on Wetland Size
as Determined from Map
Information
(Crew Leader)
Determine Appropriate Wetland Boundary and Identify Gradients
(Crew Leader/Botanists)
Figure 8-6. Transect Establishment Protocol Flowchart: Crew responsibilities and the order
in which sampling tasks must be completed.
80
-------
Transect end-point
Upland
1 cm = 6m
m
. i
*20711
<—Jit m
jjttVegetatiortjj
Deep Water
MMSim
mmmmm
M; m
Om 6n
1112m
smmM
Mawa
msg&i
fciiiill
WMT
llll
Mll»g»l
I §g §1 \ >x 4^.
r
. £7<*,V-. • t &r*
V--
' j- -^6m „
Qm
• 18m
i - i 111 "¦¦ i 11P
•*2m ^|| '
Wetland
Boundary
120m
108m
^ ¦ Compass Bearing
—— a Baseline
s Wetland Morphology Transect (WMT)
| s Site Characterization Transects (SCT)
60m /*
Transect start point
• = transect start or end-point = first sampling point for Survey Team
~ = first sampling point/quadrat for Vegetation Team
xm = distance from zero
= Portion of transects under water
Figure 8-7. Procedure for transect establishment in cases where deep open water interrupts one or more transects.
-------
1.44m
Stadia
Hairs
Stadia
Interval
0.47m
Horizontal
Cross Hair
0.97m
Figure 8-8. a view through the transit telescope showing the Horizontal cross-hair at
1.20m on the Stadia Rod and a Stadia Interval of 0.47m
(1.44m - 0.97m = 0.47m). Distance from the transit to the Stadia Rod is 47m
(0.47m x 100 = 47m).
82
-------
¦Line of Sight
m*,
:&J§£
wmm
i j i«» -'-yrr
Figure 8-9. Setting the magnetic declination on a compass.
-------
v«i -» &••.•.<•. \!'-
£." 5* *tr"v tjOUS*
¦ wf *•' - >1*' ,"V \ *:&?
'-i '?k.:*-lc- - y.. 'V^ '
fc V.' •. a i-.V^Sk'.
'..S#^ A'.
£$' 'L' ^
Vvfif-T ¦¦!-
«J - V -. w*"vrJL&. <
f * . >• ¦ tr-r* ¦¦.
/HV\ \;^Y%Vs>.
fe«.2 .:-'/¦ 5N
- '«*-• I***
*54
i,**
>£
j WMQ&&-
e- 'tj-iH; ,?>•>;
v- :» "S-.O- ->
-
1.545m
*-° --1:520m
* :> t :-.-¦
%
Figure 8~10. Example of the scale markings on a stadia rod.
84
-------
' X
/ V
/ X
~ X
/
~ X
~
(ac) ''
N(bc)
/ N
/
/ X
~ X
/ V
/
/ X
Baseline of known length B
•Transit locations
Figure B-11. Illustration of procedure for triangulation. Triangulation is the process for
determining the intersection of two rays originating from the endpoints of a
baseline, and therefore, the position of the intersection in relation to the
endpoints. A line of sight is made from point A to C (ray ac). A similar
sighting is taken from point 6 to C (ray be). The location of C is defined as
the intersection of rays ac and be (Lounsbury and Aldrich 1986).
85
-------
GO
ON
I -
\—\ =
Upland
120m 10dm
-V-<
Baseline
Wetland Morphology Transect (WMT)
Site Characterization Transects (SCT)
Transects placed for determination of presence,
type, and widths of buffers.
Figure 8-12.
Placement of transects for determination of presence, type and width of buffers. Transects will extend 100m outward from the
start and end points of the Wetland Morphology Transect (WMT) and the middle Site Characterization Transect (SCT3).
-------
Recorders organize data sheets
for each clipboard
Recorders complete data
sheet headings
After sampling ALL transects and
Before leaving the site
Recorders flag end-points
of transects
Botanists determine position
of the first vegetation
quadrat along the meter tape
they are about to sample.
Botanists conduct presampling
reconnaissance and plant
collection. Recorders assist
as time permits.
Botanists confer with
Crew Leader re:
wetland boundaries and
environmental gradients
Recorders organize and store
vegetation sampling equipment,
make line-intercept calculations,
and assist Survey Crew, if necessary.
Botanists complete collection of
unknown plant species, press all
plant specimens, and if time remains
work on keying non-graminoid taxa.
Each Vegetation Team (one botanist, one recorder) works simultaneously on
separate transects until all transects have been sampled.
Recorder: (1) Enters data on the
appropriate data sheets. (2) Flags sampling
points for the Survey Crew. (3) Stakes and
flags the transect end-point. (4) Conveys
number of vegetation plots on transect
to Survey Team. (5) Aids Botanist in
data proofing.
Botanists-During a single pass along
the transect:
(1) Collect vegetation data
in the following order:
-line-intercepts for shrubs
-canopy coverage for herbs
-basal area for trees
(2) Identify the transect end-point
(3) Proof data for the transect for
completeness, legibility, errors
(4) If necessary (rarely) resample
parts of transect to obtain/replace
missing or erroneous data.
Figure 8-13. Vegetation sampling protocol illustrating order of task completion and crew
responsibility.
87
-------
Upland
¦ 66m
¦ • 60m
¦ • 54m
A 54m
5*m Emergent
Vegetation
48m
- 48m
- 42m
¦ 42m
¦36m
¦ 36m
-36m
¦¦30m
¦ 30m
30m
- 24m
¦24m
24m
24m
¦18m
- 18m
- 12m
12m
- 6m
• 6m
= Baseline
| = Site Characterization Transects (SCT)
~ = Position of the first quadrat
0 = Position of the last quadrat
1cm = 6m
8-14. The position of the first and last quadrats on vegetation sampling transects.
-------
2-m belt transect
for trees
Determine belt width
by placing a meter
stick perpendicular to
the transect line.
1-m (.073 x 1.40m) quadrats
for herbaceous vegetation
(graminoids and forbs)
Transect Line
Line-intercept
transect for shrubs
Figure 8-15. Transects used for sampling herbaceous vegetation, shrubs, and trees.
(Adapted from Horner and Roedeke 1989). Scale: 1cm=1m
89
-------
Belt Transect
rJ-n
15m
12m
r
Order for sampling
within each segment
1. L ine-intercept data (shrubs)
2. Canopy coverage data
3. Basal area of trees
Transect Line
quadrat
6m
Om
Transect Segment 3
Transect Segment 2
Transect Segment 1
first quadrat positioned at
the first sampling interval
point within the wetland
boundary.
wetland/upland
boundary
Baseline
Figure 8-16. Illustration of transect segments in which vegetation data are collected and the
order of data collection. All data are collected for each segment before
proceeding to the next segment. Scale: 1 cm=1 m
90
-------
'Transect Line
Upland
Wetland Boundary
Sampling Interval
Emergent
Vegetation
8.65m
Salfx plperf
7.50m
6.9m
Rosa plsocarpa
5.20m
4.65m
Sallx p |perl
Spina douglasll
3.60m
3.60i
2.70m
2.00m
SCT1
SCT2
SCT5
SCT4
SCT3
Intercept Lengths:
Transect 1- Sallx plperl: 6.10m-3.60m=2.50m, 8.65m-6.90m=1,75m
Transect 4- Spires douglasll; 3.60m-2.00m=1.60m
Transect 5- Spina douglasll 4.65m-2.70m=1.95m. Rosa plsocarpa: 7.50m-5.20m=2.30m
Figure 8-17. Determining the intercept intervals for shrubs using the line-intercept method.
-------
1 -m Quadrat.
Location of
flagged wire pin
6m
Transect Une
3m
Increasing Distance from Zero
Enlarged to show derail. Figure is not to scale.
1
Figure 8-18. Placement of the 1-m2 quadrat along transect line.
92
-------
1.40m
Leaves Open Area
Estimate cover based on solid line
Figure 8-19. Illustration of species cover estimation within a 1 -m2 quadrat.
93
-------
Figure 8-20. Where to measure Diameter Breast Height (DBH) in a variety of
situations.
DBH
DBH
DBH
1. Tree on slope
2. Tree on level ground
3. Leaning tree
Dia. Point
Dia. Pt.
1.0m
¦DBH
1 .Am
6. Tree with branch
4. Tree forks above 1.4m
5. Tree forks below 1.4m
Dia. Pt
Dia. Pt.
0.5m
DBH
.1 .Am
7. Tree with swell 8. Bottleneck tree 9. Tree with multiple stems
at 1.4m
94
-------
Stadia Rod
Line of sight
5.15m
¦1.41m
3.74m
Tripod
Station A
Benchmark
(stump)
Tripod
Station B
Stadia Rod
I
Stadia Rod
6.32m
2.28m
Tripod
Station B
4.04m
5.15m
Benchmark 2
(stump)
Tripod
Station A
Benchmark 1
(stump)
Figure 8-21. A. Adjusting the eye level plane when only one benchmark is required for making
a turn. B. Adjusting the eye level plane when more than one benchmark is
required to make a turn.
95
-------
Flow Chart -- Soil/Hydrology Field Sampling
No
Yes
Yes
No
Proceed to next plot
Is standing water present?
Complete other tasks,
wait if necessary
If manual corer,
seal and label tube
Dig pit > 50cm deep,
-25cm diameter
Record presence and depth
of standing water
Measure depth to standing
water, saturated soil, and
free water surface; record time
Collect soil samples from
0-5,15-20cm depths
Excavate clean slab
of soil
Describe soil horizons (depth,
color, mottles, gleying, etc)
If corer or bucket auger, describe
soils as completely as possible
After completing soil sampling,
remeasure depth to standing water
Are vegetation analyses complete?
Evaluate soil conditions attempt
to collect sample using corer,
bucket auger, or manual core tube
Store sample for return to lab, verify that
forms are completely filled out
Figure 8-22. Flowchart showing sampling options and the sequence of field sampling
activities for characterization of soil and hydrologic attributes.
96
-------
9.0 SAMPLE CUSTODY
Soil samples will be handled and analyzed by the field teams and not shipped
to multiple locations. For details of sampling handling by OWS crews see Section 8.
Plant specimen handling and archiving of vouchers is described in Section 11 under
Laboratory Activities for Vegetation.
97
-------
10.0 CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND FREQUENCY
EQUIPMENT
Several pieces of equipment will require calibration: the transit level, the
Brunton compass, the Mettler top loading balances, drying oven, and muffle furnaces.
Procedures and frequencies for calibration are listed in Table 10-1 and are conducted
as part of the standard sampling or laboratory activities.
TRAINING
OWS Crew Members will be trained in field and laboratory techniques during an
intensive classroom and field course, scheduled for Spring 1993 and provided by staff
from ManTech, EPA, and Portland State University. Goals of the training are to
develop high proficiency in conducting standardized field and laboratory activities and
to achieve high levels of precision, accuracy, and comparability in data collected by
different Crew Members.
An agenda defining the dates and nature of classroom activities, laboratory
exercises, field training, and performance evaluation is provided below. Lectures and
laboratory sessions will be held at Portland State University and field training will take
place primarily at Bryant Woods in Lake Oswego, OR. Crew Members will read the
Research Plan and appropriate sections of the Quality Assurance Project Plan during
training.
Oregon Wetlands Study Training Agenda
Note: Crew Members need to read through "Research Plan and Methods Manual
for the Oregon Wetlands Study" before the first training session
General Format
Reading Assignment - to be done prior to each class session
Lecture # 1
BREAK
Lecture # 2
LUNCH - Brown bag and conversation
Field Work
Laboratory Work
98
-------
April 10 - Week 1
WRP staff present: Dwire, Gwin, Holland, Honea, Kentula, Magee, Shaffer
Reading assignment: Read: Chapters 1-3 in Decision Making
Review: Study Overview & Site Selection Sections in Research
Plan
9:30-9:45 a.m. Introduction: Teacher Internships for the Oregon Wetlands
Study, (Becker, Maine,)
9:45-10:30 a.m. Overview: Educational goals and course strategy for reaching
them (Becker, Maine)
10:30-10:45 a.m. BREAK
10:45-11:30 a.m. Oregon Wetlands Study: Overview of the Science (Kentula)
Overview of wetland science, wetland regulation (EPA's interest), and its
relation to the study.
Overview of Oregon Wetland Study-objectives, overall design including site
selection and team organization, variables to be measured and why, and
expected results.
Use of texts-how they were produced; differences in perspective presented.
What EPA can provide and what it wants from you-Provide a real life research
experience; emphasis will be on getting the highest quality data. A lot of
practice in the field techniques will be necessary.
11:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. LUNCH
12:00-5:15 p.m. LABORATORY OR FIELD
Group 1. Soil/survey activities
12:00-1:00 p.m. Overview presentations (Shaffer and Gwin) in laboratory
1:00-1:30 p.m. Travel to Bryant Woods, split into two groups
1:30-3:00 p.m
3:00-3:15 p.m
3:15-4:45 p.m
4:45-5:15 p.m
Group A - mapping; Group B - soils/hydrology
Break
Group A - soils/hydrology; Group B - mapping
Pack up and return to laboratory
99
-------
The goal for the first week is to provide an overview and hands-on introduction
to field activities; what kinds of activities will be performed and why, and initial
familiarization with sampling equipment. Activities will include: (1) set-up and
use of transit, stadia rods, concepts of determining compass bearing, elevations
and distances, etc.; (2) experience with digging and describing soils (e.g.,
presence of gleying and mottles color determination); and (3) introduction to
project data forms.
In case of heavy rain - alternate activities will be conducted in the laboratory:
look at and describe soils brought from the field, determine Munsell color, fill
out forms; use compasses and transit in laboratory, start the example mapping
exercise using existing data.
Group 2. Botanical activities
12:00-5:15 p.m. Laboratory session (Magee and Spencer)
Introduction: importance of accurate plant identification,
review terminology, definitions, and use of taxonomic keys
(we will be using Hitchcock and Cronquist, (1973) "Flora of
the Pacific Northwest")
Practice keying a forb, grass, and sedge
Overview of differences between major groups of wetland
plants
April 24 - Week 2
WRP staff present: Dwire, Gwin, Holland, Honea, Kentula, Magee, Shaffer
Reading assignment: Review: Soils and Hydrology Section in Research Plan
Read: ECOLOGY-Chapter 2, Chapter 1, optional
9:30-10:25 a.m. Learning What Ecologists "DO"/Using an Ecological Framework
for Study and Educational Planning (Maine)
10:25-10:40 a.m. BREAK
10:40 -11:30 am Sampling Soils/Hydrology: Why and How (Shaffer)
11:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. LUNCH
100
-------
12:00-5:15 p.m. LABORATORY OR FIELD
Group 1. Botanical activities
Importance of accurate plant identification, terminology, use of a taxonomic key,
overview of differences among major groups of wetland plants, practice
identification of major plant groups
Group 2. Soil/survey activities
Soil/survey activities, using the same schedule as Group 1 from week 1
May 1 - Week 3
WRP staff present: Dwire, Gwin, Holland, Honea, Magee, Shaffer
Reading assignment: Review: Overview of Field Activities, Transect
Establishment, and Vegetation in Research Plan
Read: ECOLOGY-Chapter 3-The Ecosystem
9:30-10:25 a.m. Science as Problem-Solving: Allowing Students to "DO"
Science (Becker-Maine)
10:25-10:40 a.m. BREAK
10:40-11:30 a.m. Sampling Vegetation: Why and How (Magee)
11:30 a.m.-12.00 p.m. LUNCH
12:00-3:00 p.m. FIELD
12:00-12:30 p.m. Travel to Bryant Woods; split to three groups
12:30-1:45 p.m. Group A - mapping and elevations
Group B - soils/hydrology, describe soils and fill out data
forms
Group C - botany - sampling methods, cover estimates
1:45-3:00 p.m. Rotate groups (A to soils/hydrology, etc.)
3:00-3:15 p.m. Break
3:15-4:30 p.m. Rotate groups
4:30-5:15 p.m. Pack up and return to PSU
Held activities this week will include set-up and use of equipment, sampling
procedures and familiarization with data forms. Mapping activities will focus on
101
-------
using equipment to map a wetland perimeter and run elevation transects, and
on filling out data forms. Soils/hydrology work will focus on selecting and using
the proper equipment, and on examining soils and learning terminology to fill
out data forms. Botanists will learn and practice field sampling procedures
(plots for herbaceous vegetation, transects for shrubs and trees).
Mav 8 - Week 4
WRP staff present: Dwire, Gwin, Holland, Honea, Magee, Shaffer
Reading assignment:
Review: Site Selection Section in Research Plan
Read: ECOLOGY-Chapter 4, Energetics, Chapter 4 in Decision
Making, Quality Assurance handout
9:30-10:25 a.m. Classroom Project Selection: Wetland Study Project-Some
Options (Maine)
10:25-10:40 a.m. BREAK
10:40-11:30 a.m. Sample Design and Quality Assurance: Or How Do You Know
That You Measured the Right Thing in The Right Way? (Dwire)
11:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m. EXTENDED LUNCH -time for chatting and questions
12:00-5:15 p.m. Laboratory
Soil/survev activities (in laboratory)
12:30-2:45 p.m. Mapping • process field mapping and basin morphology
data; make maps and determine datum to define elevations
for transects
2:45-3:00 p.m. Break
3:00-5:15 p.m. Soil analysis - laboratory preparation of soils (e.g.,
process cores, sieve to remove coarse material);
weigh and process soils to determine loss on ignition
(LOI); process data to compute LOI
Botany activities (in laboratory)
12:30-5:15 p.m. Plant identification - work on keying skills, learning family
characteristics, and sight identification of dominant species
102
-------
Mav 15-Week 5
WRP staff present: Dwire, Gwin, Holland, Honea, Magee
Reading assignment: Review: General Site Data, Wetland Morphology, and
Existing Data Sections in Research Plan
Read: Chapters 5 and 6 in Decision Making
9:30-10:25 a m. Working with Community Resources and Resource Specialist
(Maine-Becker)
10:25-10:40 a.m. BREAK
10:40-11:30 a.m. Evaluating Wetland Project Design (Gwin)
11:30-12:30 a.m. LUNCH
12:30-5:15 p.m. FIELD
Work as field teams for the first time; Survey Teams work on calibration of
elevation measurements, Vegetation Teams work on calibration of plant species
cover estimates: begin to develop cohesion in organizing at sites and setting up
and implementing field activities as teams. Practice field activities appropriate
individual crew members sampling responsibilities.
Mav 22 - Week 6
WRP staff present: Dwire, Gwin, Holland, Honea, Magee, Kentula, Shaffer
9:30-10:00 a.m. Overview of field activities, Field Crew assignments
10:00 a.m.-5:15 p.m. Survey Teams: Sampling buffers, calibration of crew members
for soil descriptions
Vegetation Teams: Measuring diameter at breast height (DBH) of trees,
using a compass for transect establishment,
calibration of crew plant species cover estimates.
Work as 3 field crews and sample a portion of a wetland as it will be done in
the study. Include end-of-sampling-day activities. Mary Kentula and ERL-C QA
staff perform an informal QA review of crews and crew leaders and provide
1 feedback.
June 5 - Week 7
WRP staff present: Dwire, Gwin, Holland, Honea, Kentula, Magee, Shaffer
103
-------
Reading assignment: Review: Overview of Field Activates in Research Plan
ECOLOGY-Chapter 5-Materials Cycles and Physical
Conditions of Existence
9:30-10:25 a.m. Evaluate to Determine Needs of Group (Classroom Project
Design)
10:25-10:40 am BREAK
10:40 a.m.-12:00 p.m. FIELD - Review of data and activities from Week 6,
final practice of all field activities
12:00-12:30 p.m. LUNCH
12:30-5:15 p.m. Visit several sites to identify wetland boundaries, baseline
locations, and discuss transect establishment procedures.
During Week 5 of training (May 15, 1993) the field crew members will be
assigned to Survey and Vegetation Teams. Botanists and Recorder positions will be
assigned within each Vegetation Team. Initial calibration of team members for
measurements of elevations and for estimation of plant species cover will be
conducted. Calibration entails comparison and correspondence of values obtained by
Team Members with values for the same measurements or estimates obtained by the
ERL-C staff who are acting as Trainers. The values determined by the Trainers are
considered "standards" and Team Members are considered to be calibrated when they
consistently obtain values that correspond to the standards within the ranges specified
by OWS data quality objectives (see Table 7-1).
Survey Team members will be calibrated for reading the stadia rod through the
transit. The Trainer (Stephanie Gwin) reads the stadia rod (upper and lower stadia
hairs, and cross-hair) at each sample point. These readings serve as the "standard"
against which the Surveyors readings will be evaluated. The Surveyors read the
stadia rod at each sample point. Surveyors readings must be within + 1 cm of the
Trainer's readings.
Vegetation Teams will work toward consistency in making cover estimations
through an initial calibration process. This procedure will consist of reviewing
techniques for plant species cover estimation and making cover estimates in quadrats
for which cover "standards" have been identified by the Trainers (Teresa Magee, Kate
Dwire, Sherry Spencer). Cover estimates will be discussed and reconciied with the
"standards."
104
-------
Following calibration the individual Survey and Vegetation Teams will sample a
Site Characterization Transect. Sampling a transect from start to finish will allow the
Teams to begin to develop within team routines for implementing field activities.
During the sixth week of training (May 22,1993), the field crews will work
together for the first time. "Riey will integrate all the sampling skills they have learned,
and sample a wetland using standard field procedures. Also, at this time, success of
the training process and the field readiness of the Crews will be evaluated to
determine rf the material presented by the instructors was conveyed and understood
as intended. This evaluation will include calibration and field sampling activities.
Basic understanding of soil description techniques, and recognition of wetland plant
species and cover estimation will be assessed during calibration.
Crew Members will practice soil and vegetation sampling in order to become
calibrated to "standards" for soil descriptions, plant species identification, and for cover
values. Standards for these variables will be provided by consensus among the OWS
scientists in the case of soils, by Teresa Magee and Sherry Spencer for plant
identification and plant species cover estimates. Vegetation Teams will estimate plant
species cover in a series of quadrats for which standard values have been
predetermined. The goal will be to correctly identify all plant species found in a given
quadrat and to obtain cover values for each species that are consistent with the
standards defined for that quadrat. Soil descriptions will be made for a series of
pedons by the Survey Teams. The goal will be to identify color, mottles, concretions,
and oxidized root channels, and to note horizon depths, the presence of an organic
layer, gleying, or hydrogen sulfide in a manner consistent with the predefined
standards. This calibration process will be used to bring all Crew Members into
agreement for vegetation and soil measurements, estimates, or descriptions so that
DQO's for accuracy, precision, and comparability can be met During the middle of
the field season similar procedures will be used as a mid-season check on between-
crew precision and to re-calibrate the Crews. The calibration process is described in
detail in Section 13, Internal Quality Control Checks. Field activities will be used to
evaluate the proficiency of both Crew Members and Crew Leaders in properly
executing sampling procedures. Crews will sample two transects using standard
procedures to collect data and fill out the appropriate data forms (See Appendix A).
Mary Kentula and other ERL-C QA staff will observe the Crews, then provide feedback
regarding sampling technique. Copies of the proficiency check-lists used for field
evaluations are included in Appendix C. This will be the first opportunity for Crew
Leaders and Crew Members to work together as Crews and to integrate all sampling
techniques. Consequently, the evaluation should be viewed as an opportunity to
provide constructive feedback to aid in developing routine and proficiency in sampling,
not as an expectation for flawless implementation of sampling procedures.
Data collected during the Week 6 field evaluations and calibrations will be
examined, in terms of the DQO's, before the final training session on June 5.
Determining whether data meet the DQO's will allow 1) quantification of the
effectiveness of training, 2) assessment of crew member sampling proficiency and
comparability, and 3) identification of areas where improvement is needed. If data do
105
-------
not meet the DQOs, an attempt will be made to determine causes of divergence -
related to sampling technique and appropriate procedural changes will be
recommended at the final training session (June 5-Week 7) .
During Week 7 of training, the Crew Members will practice sampling techniques
that need improvement and incorporate any required any changes in field procedures.
Following this final practice, Crew Members will visit several sites with OWS scientists
to work on uniformity between crews in identifying wetland boundaries and evaluating
criteria for baseline locations. As a closure to training the Crew Members will be
asked to fill out an evaluation of the training process and encouraged to discuss
perceived strengths and weaknesses, and concerns or questions about the upcoming
field work.
During training and subsequent evaluation of the applicability of OWS methods,
it is probable that difficulties in the procedures will be recognized, and ideas for
improvements will evolve. Consequently, during and following training, necessary
revisions will be made to enhance the field schedule and on-site logistics, data sheet
utility, and workability of field and laboratory procedures. Any changes will be
communicated in detail to all Crew Members and described in the Field Operations
Report (described in Section 18).
Crew Member Morale
Another facet of training that is critical to maintaining collection of high quality
data and for transfer of science back to the classroom is the morale of the teacher
Crew Members. The field and laboratory work will be strenuous, require long hours,
at times be quite tedious, and occasionally be conducted in adverse weather
conditions (e.g., heat or rain). Under such conditions, career relevance of the field
work may become somewhat muddied. Also, fatigue, boredom, and feeling
inadequately appreciated can decrease motivation and undermine a person's
determination to consistently execute sampling and laboratory procedures. Thus, it is
extremely important to acknowledge the teachers as integral and valued members of
the overall project, without whom the science could not proceed.
Expressing recognition of the role of the crew members can be accomplished in
several ways. During training and throughout the field season, crew members will be
encouraged to participate as colleagues, to ask questions, and express concerns.
Team work and cooperation should be stressed as an integral part of the training and
research. Brown-bag lunches will be used to facilitate camaraderie between Crew
Members and Scientists. During the field season, the Crew Leaders will concern
themselves with the tenor of Crew Member attitude toward the project. Care should
be taken to encourage Crew Members when the working conditions become difficult,
to stress the importance of the project in terms of scientific gain and management
applications, and to always maintain the connection of the research experience to
anticipated educational applications. During the course of field or laboratory work,
Crew Leaders will frequently solicit feedback from the Crew Members about any
aspect of the work, any concerns, or positive experiences that they wish to share.
106
-------
This might be done informally in passing conversations, during transportation to and
from sites, during lunch periods, or in lulls during laboratory activities.
Crew Leaders will meet weekly (See Section 13, Internal Quality Control
Checks) to discuss problems related to field and laboratory work or personnel
considerations, and to develop solutions that may alleviate difficulties. Particular
attention should be given to the overall morale of the crews and any specific
personality conflicts that may develop between individual Crew Members or between a
Ccew Member and a Crew Leader. In the case of personality conflicts that do not
appear resolvable, it may be appropriate to rotate one of the parties to another crew.
This is not desirable because of QA considerations, but may be preferable to causing
dissent or long-term negative feelings that could undermine data quality.
At the conclusion of the field season, there will be an informal follow-up
session, lasting 4-8 hours, to permit Crew Members and ERL-C staff to discuss the
success of the field season. This session will include opportunities to:
1) Acknowledge the Crew Members and to recognize their contribution to the overall
project.
2) Allow the Crew Members to say good-bye to project scientists and other Crew
Members.
3) Allow Crew Members time for verbal feedback to ERL-C staff about their
experience.
4) Allow Crew Members to complete a written questionnaire/evaluation of the
program -- identifying what they felt worked well, what did not, and how useful the
research experience was in terms of personal development and its utility for education.
The questionnaire will also address Crew Member evaluation of how well the training
prepared them for field work and the utility of the Research Plan and Methods
Manual for the Oregon Wetlands Study (Magee et al. 1993).
5) Describe the intended use of the data, discuss preliminary results, and indicate that
the Crew Members will receive copies of final reports or journal articles.
6) Allow ERL-C to express appreciation to the Crew Members.
7) Allow time for interaction, discussion, and reminiscing among the Crew Members
and OWS scientists.
107
-------
Table 10-1. Calibration Procedures and Frequency for Field and Laboratory Equipment
Equipment
Calibration Procedures
Calibration Frequency
Transit
Follow standard field
procedures for set-up and
leveling (See Section 8 -
Sampling Procedures.
During field sampling each
day.
'Srunton Compass
Follow standard field
procedures for adjusting
declination (See Section 6 •
Sampling Procedures.
Before beginning field
sampling each day.
Top Loading Balance
(Mettler College 300)
Zero balance according to
manufacturer's instructions
(see balance manual). Check
calibration using standard
weights.
Daily before each weighing
session. The balances are
calibrated annually by a
manufacturer representative as
part of normal maintenance.
Drying Oven
Thelco Model 26
PS Scientific
Verify temperature with a
thermometer placed in the
center of the oven.
Prior to drying samples and
monthly during sample
processing
Muffle Furnace
Blue M Electric Co.
Model #M154-1A
Verify temperature by melting
compounds with known melting
point temperatures.
Prior to sample processing
and monthly during sample
analysis
108
-------
11.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
All analytical procedures and laboratory activities for the OWS will be conducted
by the Crew Members using facilities at Portland State University. Laboratory tasks
include drawing final maps, drying and processing plant specimens, identifying
unknown plant taxa, making elevation calculations, processing and analyzing soil
samples for loss on ignition.
DRAWING THE FINAL MAP
Finished maps are drawn from the surveying data and rough sketch maps in
the office or laboratory as time permits.
1. Assemble graph paper, pencils, erasers, a ruler with markings in centimeters,
and a 360° protractor.
2. Examine the sketch map and map data (Forms F-2 and F-3) to estimate the
appropriate scale so that the map will fit on an 8.5 x 11 inch sheet of paper.
This takes some practice, if the scale is too large, the map will not fit on the
paper. If too small, the map will not contain the necessary details. A wetland
covering 1 to 2 ha will typically fit on an 8.5 by 11 inch sheet of paper at a
scale of 1:1000 (1 m in the field equals 1 mm on the map).
3. Establish "true north" and indicate on the map with an arrow.
4. Using the sketch map as a guide, mark on the graph paper the approximate
location of the transit in the wetland.
5. Calculate the distance from the transit to a map point using the data on Form
F-3. To do this, subtract the lower stadia reading from the upper one and
express the result in centimeters. The number of centimeters between the two
stadia lines is equal to the number of meters between the transit and the
mapped point.
6. Align the protractor so that the center mark is positioned on the transit location
and 0° points toward north on the map sheet.
7 Using the bearing information from Form F-3, draw a light line from the transit
location and through the bearing angle for the map point.
8. Using the ruler, measure the distance along the line from the transit position to
the represented mapped point. This distance will depend on the map scale you
have chosen. For instance, when drawing the map at a scale of 1:1000, each
meter on the ground will equal 1 mm on the map. Label the point on the map.
109
-------
9. Repeat this procedure for each point to be mapped. To complete the map,
connect the points with a dark line representing the perimeter of the wetland.
10. Erase unwanted lines and marks, and darken the lines if necessary; to make a
good copy that can be xeroxed. Draw in the site features and label the map
with the site number, location, date sampled, date drawn, and the mapper's
name. Also indicate the map scale, e.g., Scale: 1 cm = 8 m. See Figure 5-7
for an example of a finished map.
LABORATORY ACTIVITIES FOR VEGETATION
The principle laboratory activities related to vegetation are drying of plant
specimens, identification of unknown plant taxa, checking of plant species names.
Specific procedures for these tasks are outlined below.
Equipment
Dissecting microscopes
Hand lenses
Dissecting tools (e.g., single edge razor blades, forceps, dissecting needles)
Regional floras (See Table 11-1 for a list)
Plant specimens to be identified
Vegetation data sheets from sites where specimens were collected
Pens, pencils
Plant dryer
Place plant presses in a warm, dry, well-ventilated room or on a plant dryer to
allow specimens to dry. Once plant specimens are dry, they should be removed from
the presses and stored in labelled folders in designated herbarium cabinets at PSU.
Following identification, specimens will be deposited at the PSU herbarium as
vouchers, and duplicate material will be stored at ERL-C for a minimum of 5 years as
a reference for future wetland studies in the vicinity.
Plant identification is critical to data quality so it is imperative that correct
species names are provided. Precisely following the procedures outlined below will
facilitate accurate identification and verification of species names.
1. Botanists and Recorders work together to key unknown plant species.
2. Two individuals simultaneously and independently key one unknown. After
each has determined a species name, they confer to confirm that both agree on
1 the name.
3. A Plant Taxonomist assists the Botanists and Recorders as need9d and
confirms their identifications. She may also wish to personally key particularly
difficult species.
110
-------
4. The validated species names are written on the appropriate data forms in the
space provided, and on the newsprint containing the specimen. Also, a label
with the correct species name and standard herbarium information is filled out
and stored with the specimen inside the newsprint.
5. The specimen is filed and stored for future reference, as described above.
6. Plant specimens that cannot be identified with certainty because of missing or
immature parts, difficult key characteristics, or because of poorly defined
taxonomy will be sent to a wetland species expert.
To avoid confusion during data entry, it is important to check the data forms to
verify that plant species names are spelled correctly and that nonexistent
genus/species combinations are not listed.
1. Review the data sheets for correct spellings by comparing the names with the
OWS plant species list, or with the Flora of the Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock
and Cronquist 1973).
2. If an incorrect spelling is found, record the correct spelling in the space for
validated species name on the data sheet.
3. If a genus/species combination occurs that cannot be found in the Flora of the
Pacific Northwest (Hitchcock and Cronquist 1973) or on the Threatened and
Endangered Species List in Appendix 6, refer the problem to the Plant
Taxonomist.
4. The Plant Taxonomist will decide how to handle the problem.
WETLAND MORPHOLOGY - ELEVATION CALCULATIONS
Calculations of relative elevations for each wetland will generally be made in the
field before leaving the sites. However, when logistics makes this difficult, calculations
will be made in the laboratory by the Surveyors.
SOIL ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT - LOSS ON IGNITION
Soil organic matter content analysis will be conducted by two Teacher Crew
Members who have been selected as Laboratory Technicians. Their responsibility will
be to process all soil samples collected by the field crews. The laboratory procedure
used for determination of soil organic matter content is based on combustion of a soil
sample in a muffle furnace at 450° C, with organic matter content determined by
weight loss of the sample. The procedure is adapted from USDA (1984) and Blume et
al. (1990).
111
-------
Equipment and Supplies
Balance, weighing to 0.01 g
Drying oven (in operating exhaust hood)
Muffle furnace (in operating exhaust hood)
Desiccator (needed only if samples will not be weighed as soon as removed
from the muffle furnace and allowed to cool to room temperature)
Sieve (U.S. Standard #10 mesh, 2.00 mm opening)
Furnace gloves
Tongs
Forceps
Disposable aluminum weigh dishes (ca 2" diameter by 0.5" high)
Data Forms L-1 and L-2, log book
Rubber gloves (disposable)
Munsell color chart with gleyed color page
General Considerations for Laboratory Analysis
1. Calibrate the balance according to routine good laboratory practices. The
balance should be leveled and calibrated using standard weights at the start of
analyses, weekly thereafter, and any time the balance has been moved or
disturbed. Balances will be recalibrated if measured weights are not within +
0.01 g of the calibration standard. Record calibration results in the laboratory
log book.
2. Place the drying oven and muffle furnace in an operating exhaust hood if
possible, to insure that moisture and objectionable odors (from H2S, organo-
sulfur compounds) are not vented into the laboratory. Check temperatures for
drying oven (105°C) and muffle furnace (450°C) regularly; ovens should be
calibrated and temperature settings adjusted to insure that samples are dried at
the proper temperature. Record information on calibration of the oven
temperatures in the laboratory log book.
3. If possible, process cores and soils in an exhaust hood or other well-ventilated
area tc insure that objectionable odors are not vented into the laboratory.
4. If part of a sample is spilled, or if material spills into any of the weighing dishes
or crucibles, discard the sample(s), and repeat the entire procedure using a
second aliquot of the sample.
Laboratory Analysis Procedure
Soil samples will be processed in the laboratory in batches; each batch will
include both routine and QC samples (1 blank, 1 audit sample, and 3 field/laboratory
duplicates). The number of samples in each batch will depend on the size of the
muffle furnace. Number samples with the batch number, and a sample number for
tracking during laboratory and data analysis. Label soil sample bags with the batch
112
-------
and sample number, and record the batch, sample number, and soil identification
(wetland and transect number, etc.) for each sample in the laboratory log book.
Processing dates for each soil sample will also be recorded in the log book.
1. For material frozen in core tubes, thaw the outer layer of the sample (in the
tube) by briefly holding the tube (with end caps still attached) under warm
running water, then slide the core from the tube onto a clean sheet of plastic or
' a clean tray. Quickly and carefully slice the 0-5 and 15-20 cm depth segments
from the core, place them in separate, sample bags labelled with the
appropriate soil sample code (site #, transect #, plot #, and depth code), and
allow them to thaw completely. Discard unused portions of the core. For
samples collected using a corer, record sample identification, presence or
absence of hydrogen sulfide, and color on Form L-2.
2. Carefully remove stones, twigs, live roots, invertebrates (insect larvae or snails),
and obvious foreign materials (e.g., plastic or metal fragments) from each
sample. Wear clear rubber gloves and use forceps to avoid contamination of
the samples.
3. Sieve soil, using a 10 mesh (2.0mm) sieve, to remove rock fragments, wood
chips, and other materials >2 mm in size. For wet soils, materials will probably
need to be gently pushed through the sieve; this can be done using a spatula
or your fingers (wear rubber gloves). Clean and dry the sieve between
samples.
4. Material passing through the sieve should be mixed thoroughly to homogenize
the sample, and placed in a clean, labelled plastic bag.
5. Number and pre-weigh disposable aluminum weigh boats. Numbers will be
applied by pressing hard with a pencil to emboss the sample codes into the
aluminum boats so that the codes will not be obliterated by heating. Record
the container number and tare weight (weight of the empty container) for each
container on Form L-1.
6. Fill containers approximately two-thirds full of fresh soil (10-20 g). Record the
sample identification and the weight of container plus soil (FRESH_WT) on
Form L-1. Excess sample material will be saved for possible reanalysis. If all
of the soil for a particular sample has been used, make a note in the log book
and discard the container.
7. Place containers in a drying oven and dry overnight (>12 hours) at 105°C. Cool
containers to room temperature and weigh immediately upon cooling. Samples
should be stored in a desiccator if they cannot be immediately weighed.
Record the time samples are placed in, and removed from, the oven on Form
113
-------
L-1, and record the weight of containers with dried soil under "DRY_WT" on
Form L-1.
8. Carefully place containers in a muffle furnace (at <100°C). DO NOT attempt to
place samples in a hot furnace; materials with high organic content are likely to
ignite. Set the temperature at 450°C and turn on the oven; samples should be
held at 450°C for at least 2 hours, but can be left longer (e.g., overnight) if
convenient. Record the time samples are placed in the muffle furnace.
9. Turn off the furnace and remove weigh containers and remaining soil. Record
the time samples are removed from the muffle furnace. Place containers in a
desiccator until they have cooled to room temperature. Weigh samples
immediately upon removal from the desiccator, and record weight under
"ASHED_wr on Form L-1. Allow the furnace to cool to <100°C prior to
refilling with a new set of containers.
Calculations
If disposable dishes are used, blanks should be used to check weight changes
in the aluminum dishes. During heating to 450°C, weights sometimes may increase
by 0.01-0.02 g as a small amount of aluminum is oxidized. If such changes are
observed, sample weights should be adjusted accordingly, by subtracting the average
change in the weight of blanks from the "ASHED_WT" of each sample.
Moisture content is reported as a percentage of fresh sample weight; loss on ignition
is reported as percentage of oven-dry (105°C) weight. Compute moisture content and
loss on ignition as follows, and record on Form L-1.
Moisture content = ((FRESH_WT - DRY_WT) * 100%) / (FRESH_WT - TARE_WT)
Loss on ignition = ((DRY_WT - ASHED_WT) * 100%) / (DRY_WT - TARE_WT)
114
-------
Table 11 -1. List of Regional floras and references used to facilitate plant identification.
Gilkey, H.M. and L.J. Dennis. 1980. Handbook of Northwestern Plants. Oregon State
University. Corvallis, OR*
Harrington, H.D. and L.W. Durrell. 1957. How to Identify Plants. Swallow Press. Athens.
Harrington, H. D. 1977. How to Identify Grasses and Grass-like Plants. Swallow Press.
Chicago.
Hitchcock, C.L. and A. Cronquist. 1973. Flora of the Pacific Northwest: An Illustrated
Manual. University of Washington Press. Seattle.
Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Owenbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1969. Vascular Plants of
the Pacific Northwest. Part 1: Vascular Cryptograms, Gymnosperms, and Monocotyledons.
University of Washington Press. Seattle.
Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Owenbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1964. Vascular Plants of
the Pacific Northwest. Part 2: Salicaceae to Saxifragaceae. University of Washington Press.
Seattle.
Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Owenbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1961. Vascular Plants of
the Pacific Northwest. Part 3: Saxifragaceae to Ericaceae. University of Washington Press.
Seattle.
Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist, M. Owenbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1959. Vascular Plants of
the Pacific Northwest. Part 4: Ericaceae through Campanulaceae. University of Washington
Press. Seattle.
Hitchcock, C.L, A. Cronquist, M. Owenbey, and J.W. Thompson. 1955. Vascular Plants of
the Pacific Northwest. Part 5: Compositae. University of Washington Press. Seattle.
Soil Conservation Service. Western Wetland Flora: Field Office Guide to Plant Species.
SCS West National Technical Center, Portland, OR*
Weinmann, F., M. Boule, K. Brunner, J. Malek, and V. Yoshino. 1984. Wetland Plants of
the Pacific Northwest. U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Seattle, District. *
l
Zika, P. (in preparation). Keys the Carex, Juncus, and Salix species occurring in the Portland
Metropolitan Area.
*Starred references are incomplete for the flora of our study area, but are useful in terms of
ease of use.
115
-------
12.0 DATA REDUCTION, VALIDATION, AND REPORTING
Data for the OWS originates from existing sources, field sampling, and
laboratory analyses. To avoid data loss, it is important to track data from their points
of origin through data entry and statistical and qualitative analysis. Data custody
procedures through data entry are outlined in Figure 12-1. The process of tracking
and archival of field data sheets is presented below under Data Tracking and
Archiving. Subsequent management of the data is described below in the Data
Storage and File Back-up and under Statistical Analysis subsections.
Data entry accuracy will be safeguarded by using a computerized dual data
entry system, in which two people enter, compare, and reconcile two identical data
sets. Data entry errors are minimized by finding and correcting differences between
the data sets. Programming for the data entry system is currently underway and a
general description is provided below under Data Entry, Reconciliation, and Validation.
Validation refers to several tests used to detect potential problems with the reconciled
or corrected data Formats for entering the data are discussed in the Database
subsection.
Data entry and validation problems will be recorded, and a data dictionary will
be maintained in a data notebook. Details are provided under Documenting Data
Problems and Maintaining a Data Dictionary, in this section.
The intended uses of data are discussed briefly in the Statistical Analysis
subsection. More detail is provided in the Data Analysis Section of the Research
Plan. The computer system used for data entry, storage, and analysis is also
described.
DATA TRACKING AND ARCHIVING
Protection of the original data forms is critical to any scientific study. The
procedures adopted for the OWS described in the points listed below and in Figure
12-1.
1. At the end of each sampling day, all data collected for the study site are
placed ihto an accordion folder called a site packet. There is a separate folder
for each site.
2. At the end of each sampling week, all site packets for the week are transported
back to ERL-C where they are copied.
3. Prior to copying, DATA TRACKING FORMS (Appendix A) must be filled out to
1 indicate the level of completeness and the storage locations of original data and
copies for data entry and archival. Completed data tracking forms are taped on
the outside of each site packet. These forms are colored coded by the name of
the crew collecting the data.
116
-------
4. All data from each site packet is photocopied. It is important to copy data from
only one site packet at a time, making certain to copy both sides of double-
sided forms. Several copies of each data sheet are required, so to avoid
confusion the copies are colored coded:
a. Completed data forms are copied onto blue paper for archiving.
b. Incomplete data (e.g. needs annotation of plant species names, requires
completion of elevation calculations) are copied onto yellow paper for
archiving. Later, after the data forms are completed they are xeroxed
again onto blue paper and replaced in the archive.
c. Completed data forms are xeroxed onto white paper for data entry.
5. Once the initial copying process is complete, the originals and copied data
forms are placed into appropriate file folders and each folder is stored in a
designated location (Figure 12-2). There are 6 folders for each site packet
labelled as follows: General Forms, Soils Forms, Mapping and Morphology
Forms, Vegetation Forms, Archive Data, and Data Entry.
a. All COMPLETED ORIGINAL DATA FORMS are filed in their respective
folders (General or Soils) in the site packets. The site packets with data
tracking forms attached are filed in file cabinets at ERL-C.
b. Incomplete ORIGINAL Vegetation Data Forms are filed in the Vegetation
Form folder and placed in the project botanist's (Teresa Magee) file box.
These forms can then be transported to Portland State University (PSU)
for annotation by the PSU taxonomist (Sherry Spencer) and the field crews
during lab days, or kept at ERL-C for the project botanist to annotate with
correct plant species names.
c. Incomplete ORIGINAL Mapping and Morphology data forms are filed in
the Mapping and Morphology folder and placed in the Crew Supervisor's
(Stephanie Gwin) file box. During the field season this data will be
transported to PSU on lab days for field crew members to work on
elevation calculations and drawing maps.
d. A complete set of ARCHIVE DATA (both blue and yellow copies) for each
site will be placed in the Archive folder and filed at an off-site location. As
data forms for each site are completed, new archive copies (blue) will be
made. The archive file will be routinely updated by replacing the
incomplete copies (yellow) with the copies of the completed forms (blue).
117
-------
e. White copies of completed data forms should be placed in the Data Entry
file folders for each site and the folders should be placed in the data entry
office at ERL-C on a shelf marked OWS DATA IN. Data from these
folders is entered into the OWS computer database. As other forms for a
given site are completed they must be copied on white for data entry.
Empty Data Entry folders for these sites can be retrieved from the
adjacent shelf labelled EMPTY FOLDERS. Data entry copies of completed
data can be placed in the appropriate empty Data Entry folders and
returned to the shelf marked DATA IN.
f. As vegetation, morphology, and mapping data forms are completed and
copied, the ORIGINALS must be filed in the appropriate folder and site
packet. The data tracking form must be updated to indicate the status and
location of all ORIGINALS AND COPIES.
DATA ENTRY, RECONCILIATION, AND VALIDATION
Duplicate data sets will be generated by separate users and the number of
initial data entry errors will be reduced by using three techniques: lookup tables,
range value checking, and a duplicate key field check. Key fields are data fields used
to uniquely identify each record in a database.
Lookup tables allow the user to select an item from a list. For example, the
user enters the first two characters of a plant genus name to get a list of possible
genus/species names. The user then selects the appropriate genus/species name
from this list, eliminating the need to type in the name and code. If the user types the
letters "TR", the list of genus/species names (Figure 12-3) would appear. If the user
selects one of the names, the program will enter the selected name and code in the
current file. If a genus/species name is not found in the master species list file, the
user will be prompted to enter the species name from the form. The program will then
add the name to the master species list and assign a temporary code. At the
conclusion of the data entry process, the master species lists from both data sets will
be copied 10 a floppy disk. Both lists will be reviewed, compared, and reconciled by
separate individuals. After the master species list has been validated, the dual data
entry program will be used to update all the vegetation files in both data sets with the
correct genus/species name and code.
Range value checking is used to set acceptable limits for an entry in a field.
For example, the range of acceptable values for WATER DEPTH is 0 to 6 m. If a
value outside this range is entered, a warning message is displayed and the user is
prompted to check the entry for a probable error in data entry and to make any
needed corrections.
Another data entry problem is that of duplicate key fields. Key fields must be
unique because they identify each record in a database. This error can occur by the
user trying to enter the same record twice or key fields having been entered on a data
form more than once. To eliminate this problem, the dual data entry program will be
designed to check the key fields as they are being entered to make sure that they are
118
-------
unique to the file. If the user is trying to enter an existing key field the program will
display a warning message so that the cause of the problem can be identified.
Following dual data entry, the data sets are compared and corrected. Three
steps are used for reconciling the two data sets (Figure 12-4): matching the
filenames, comparing the key fields, and comparing the non key fields. During
completion of each step, all the files in one data set are compared, record by record,
with all files in the other data set. The program reports any errors found and the user
cbrrects the problems.
Three kinds of differences can occur between data sets: non-matching
filenames, invalid or missing key fields, or different field values. Non-matching
filenames can be the result of a misspelled filename, entry of an inappropriate
filename, or omission of a file in one of the data sets. Invalid or missing key fields are
identified when the program cannot find a matching key field value in the other data
set because 1) the key field was not entered, 2) the wrong key field was entered, or 3)
a key field was entered that does not belong to the file. Disparate values for the same
field in the two data sets can occur as a result of omission of a field value, entry of
value in an incorrect field, or entry of the wrong value in a field.
When correcting differences, the program automatically highlights the proper
record and field. A message describing the problem and possible causes will be
displayed. To fix the problem, the user will review the appropriate data sheet and
correct the error (Figure 12-5). After dealing with the problem, the user presses the
appropriate key to move to the next discrepancy. After each user has reconciled their
copy of the dual data set, they will trade copies via floppy disks and run a new
comparison. The process is repeated until no errors can be identified and the data
sets are identical.
After the data sets are reconciled, several tests are used to detect potential
problems. These tests are data validation, percent completeness, relational database
check, and code check.
Data validation is used to identify any unusual spellings or values. This is
accomplished by producing a separate file that contains a sorted list of all unique
entries for each field in a data set. If any incorrect entries (e.g. misspelled genus or
species names) are found they can be changed by using the program's global search
and replace option.
The completeness of the data are evaluated by calculating a percentage that
describes how often a field was used to store data. This allows the analyst to
consider whether or not the data quality objectives for completeness have been met
and to assess the appropriateness of proceeding with analysis using the affected data.
The relational database check determines if all the records that are related by
key fields in a group of files are properly aligned. If the information in such a
relational database is not properly associated, then any analyses dependent upon the
relationships will be erroneous or impossible to perform.
The code check identifies naming conflicts. Codes represent information in an
abbreviated format. For example, in the vegetation database, codes represent the
genus/species names of plants. If the same code identifies more than one
119
-------
genus/species, then a naming conflict has occurred that would produce erroneous
results when the data are analyzed.
DATABASE FORMATS
Database formats for entering and manipulating the OWS data must offer
maximum flexibility and compatibility with the planned statistical and multivariate
analyses. The format structures and the number of databases required are being
finalized for the OWS. Data for like variables are grouped together by site and
transect in one database composed of files for each site. For example, herbaceous
plant species cover forms a data base, and hydric soil indicator data forms another.
The data manager, Robert Gibson, and the project statistician, Barbara Peniston are
participating in file format design.
DOCUMENTING DATA PROBLEMS AND MAINTAINING A DATA DICTIONARY
A data notebook will be maintained to track all deficiencies, manipulations,
format structures, data codes, and any other data definitions used in the study.
Copies will be made weekly and stored separately from the original to guard against
loss or damage to this vital information. One copy will always accompany the entire
data set and be available to personnel working on data management, analysis, or
interpretation.
Data deficiencies identified during the data entry, reconciliation, and validation
processes will be recorded into the notebook so they can be tracked and referred to
during data analysis and interpretation. This section of the notebook will be organized
by site and transect numbers, and used to record problems encountered during the
data entry and analysis processes and to describe the solutions (Figure 12-6).
In addition, the notebook will have a dictionary that documents all file format
structures, data codes, filenames, and file contents. This is intended to act as a
tracking system that will indicate the condition and location of all files that are created
for or during data analysis in the OWS. It is particularly important to have a copy of
the raw dataset archived and to describe in detail all analysis manipulations and
outputs. This record is especially important in cases of personnel changes or multiple
users, and is essential to prevent misinterpretation of the results, time loss related to
poor documentation of files, and inadvertently repeating work. The format for this
tracking system, preferably a hierarchical method based on analysis type and the
order in which the analyses are conducted, will be devised before beginning any data
analysis.
DATA STORAGE AND FILE BACK-UP
Data from the field sheets will be stored on three types of computer media:
hard drives, floppy disks, and magnetic tape. In addition, data from each dual entry
data set will be backed up on floppy disks each time a comparison is made. Upon
completion of the data entry and verification process, a final copy of each data set will
be archived on two sets of floppy disks. The two sets will be stored on different
colored floppy disks so that they can be easily identified. The floppy disks will be
120
-------
stored in separate locations along with a copy of the notebook. If any subsequent
changes are made to the data, the following steps will be followed: 1) the changes
will be entered into the data notebook, 2) the data sets on the hard drives and both
sets of floppy disks will be updated, and 3) the data analyst(s) will be notified.
All data sets and output files created during analysis will be named, and the
appropriate content information will be recorded in the data notebook. Analysis files
will be maintained on a hard drive, with two back-up copies on floppy disks. Back-up
copies will be updated at the end of each day when any of the files are edited or new
files are created. The two back-up sets of floppy disks will be stored in separate
locations.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF DATA
The data analysis section is divided into two parts. The first section lists the
four study objectives and offers a brief discussion of the analyses proposed to address
them. The second section describes, in more detail, the manner in which the
statistical analyses will be used to facilitate characterization and comparison of the
OWS wetlands.
This is an observational study, therefore, with the exception of Objective 1,
causation cannot be determined. For example, the percent of organic matter in the
soil could be significantly higher in the natural wetlands, however, it is not correct to
say that the higher value was caused by the fact that the wetland was natural. There
could be other confounding variables that are related both to the percent organic
matter in the soil and to the natural status of the wetland.
Objective 1-Determine the number of freshwater wetlands that have been
converted to other land types and identify causes of this direct loss.
To address this objective, the most recent wetland inventory based on NWI
maps will be compared to a current inventory performed during site selection to
determine the short term trends in wetland loss. Comparisons will be made between
wetland types listed on NWI maps and types of existing wetlands. The wetland type
most frequently destroyed and the locales where the majority of the wetland
destruction has occurred will be documented and summarized. In addition, the land
use in the location of the destroyed wetlands will be documented to determine the
cause (if identifiable) of wetland loss. For example, if a natural wetland identified on a
NWI map has been destroyed, and a shopping mall has been constructed in the
location of that destroyed wetland, the cause of the wetland loss is commercial
development. The information on cause of wetland loss will be summarized to detect
trends.
121
-------
Objective 2-Evaluate the relationship between surrounding land uses and the
attainable quality of freshwater wetlands.
Comparisons will be made between wetlands in different land uses for specific
variables of interest (i.e., those variables that are believed to be affected by different
land uses). For example, we might expect the ratio of native to exotic plant species to
be influenced by land uses with intensive human use. Summary statistics (e.g., mean,
mode) will be calculated for the variables of interest, and graphical methods will be
used to display the variables (e.g., box and whisker plots). Analysis of variance will be
used to compare data from wetlands within the different land uses and multiple
comparison tests (e.g., least significant difference) will be used to determine which
group(s) of wetlands are significantly different from the others.
Another mechanism for looking at attainable quality will be to explore the
structure and function of wetlands with and without vegetated buffers. Summary
statistics will be calculated for variables of interest within wetlands grouped by the
presence or absence of vegetated buffers. The two groups will be compared
graphically and with a two sample test (e.g., Student's t test, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney
rank-sum test).
Objective 3-Evaluate the replacement potential of freshwater wetlands to aid in
the development of performance criteria.
This objective can be divided into a number of questions of interest. How does
the performance of the pre-1987 projects compare with that of the post-1987 projects?
How do the post-1987 projects compare with similar natural wetlands; if they are
different, are there likely explanations (e.g., age of project, land use setting)?
The performance of the pre- and post-1987 projects will be investigated by
comparing the two groups for certain relevant variables (e.g., the ratio of wetland to
upland taxa). Data for the groups will be compared graphically and statistically. A two
sample test will be used to compare the two groups for a single variable and
Hotelling's T2 for a group of related variables. In addition, multivariate analyses will be
used to explore the data and determine whether there are distinct differences between
pre- and post-1987 projects. Comparisons of natural wetlands and projects will be
similar to those outlined for the pre- and post-1987 projects. In addition, outliers will
be identified and investigated for both comparisons (i.e., comparisons of pre- and
post-1987 projects and comparisons of project and natural wetlands). Cook's distance
and other diagnostic tools will be used to determine if there are outliers which have
influence in the statistical sense.
122
-------
Objective 4-Evaluate how project design and implementation affect the
replacement potential of freshwater wetlands to aid in the development of
design guidelines.
Existing data compiled from Section 404 and Oregon Removal-Fill Permit files
will be compared with field data to examine the compliance of projects with their
permits and construction plans. In addition, both the design specifications and the as-
built structural features of the projects will be compared to the structural characteristics
of the natural wetlands. Differences and similarities in the structural characteristics of
the two groups of wetlands will be documented and summarized to aid in the
development of design guidelines for future projects.
Permit files and construction plans will be examined for information on the
intended hydrologic regime of each project. Intended water levels, area to be
inundated, and descriptions and locations of water sources, inlets, outlets, and control
structures will be compared to as-built conditions of projects and structural conditions
of natural wetlands identified from field maps and measurements of hydrologic
indicators.
The intended area and shape of each project determined from blueprints and
written permit conditions will be compared to as-built data for each project identified
from field maps. In addition, project shapes (e.g., shoreline sinuosity), will be
compared to the shapes of natural wetlands. Morphology and bank slopes intended
for the projects (e.g., written bank slope specifications and contour lines on blueprints)
will be compared to as-built project morphology and the structural characteristics of
natural wetlands measured during field activities.
Revegetation strategies specified as conditions of permits and lists of species to
be planted will be compared to the plant species identified on the projects during field
sampling. The revegetation information will also be compared to the plant species
identified at the natural wetlands to determine if the species listed for planting occur
naturally on wetlands in the region.
Data Analysis Procedures
Checking to see that the assumptions of a statistical procedure are met is the
first step in data analysis. The data used for statistical tests must fulfill various
assumptions (e.g., normal distribution, independent observations, equal variances) for
the use of the tests and the results to be valid. However, data can be transformed so
that assumptions are met. Also, when necessary, alternative analyses including non-
parametic techniques can be used.
In addition, to gain the most complete understanding of data, interim results of
the analyses will be discussed with a plant community ecologist. The ecologist can
provide interpretation or insight that a statistician may lack (e.g., interpretation of an
axis produced by detrended correspondence analysis).
To observe trends, identify outliers, and summarize the data, descriptive
statistics will be calculated (e.g., mean, mode, range) and the data will be graphically
displayed. Displaying data graphically is an effective way to understand relationships
123
-------
between variables. Such graphics can also be used to compare groups and develop a
preliminary interpretation of results. There are many informative ways to display
univariate data graphically (e.g., histograms, stem and leaf plots, and boxplots).
Multivariate data can be presented as a matrix of scatter plots that is analogous to a
correlation matrix.
Answering the research questions (Table 5-1) for the OWS requires two basic
analysis approaches, characterization and comparison. Comparing natural wetlands to
project wetlands is necessary to evaluate the degree to which projects replicate
natural wetlands and to identify features that suggest improvements to project design.
However, meaningful comparisons cannot be made without detailed descriptions of
wetland attributes and an understanding of existing wetland resources. The first step
of analysis is to characterize the wetlands by employing data that describe wetlands in
terms of their vegetation, soils, hydrology, morphology, and land use (See Table 5-2
for list of variables) to identify groups of wetlands and to document the condition of
wetland resources. The data analysis methods proposed for the characterization and
comparison processes are outlined in Table 5-3. Both a priori groups of wetlands
(e.g., those defined by land use categories, natural vs. project, pre-1987 and post-
1987 projects) and groups of wetlands defined by ecological characteristics will be
evaluated in data analyses.
Characterization and comparison of the wetlands
Several data analysis procedures are involved in characterizing the OWS
wetlands. An example illustrating how the data and analysis approaches might be
used for wetland characterization is provided in Figure 12-7. It is necessary to
describe each wetland (e.g., using site averages), define groups of wetlands that can
be compared (e.g., using Cluster Analysis), and identify the gradients along which the
wetland groups vary or are distributed (e.g., using Ordination Analysis). The next step
is to evaluate the wetlands in greater detail to 1) develop more precise understanding
of wetland characteristics for comparisons, and 2) identify relationships between
variables that can aid in answering some of the study questions or that suggest
hypotheses to be tested in further studies. Techniques useful in this regard are
Diversity Indices and Dominance Measures, Weighted Averaging Ordination,
Correlations, and Multiple Regressions.
Site averages for each variable will be calculated so that each site can be
described in terms of vegetation and environmental measures. The site averages will
be input into several kinds of multivariate analysis programs. First, vegetation data
and environmental data will both be evaluated using Classification techniques
(clustering programs) to 1) describe groups of related wetlands such as projects,
natural wetlands, wetlands in different land uses, and wetlands with similar plant
communities or environmental attributes, and 2) identify outlier sites.
Ordinations are useful in summarizing community data, and will aid in relating
community variation to environmental gradients and understanding community
structure (Gauch 1982). Vegetation and environmental data will be analyzed using
Ordination techniques (e.g. Detrended Correspondence Analysis) to look for
124
-------
environmental gradients, such as hydrology, wetland morphology, land use,
disturbance, project age, buffer presence or absence, along which the wetland groups
are distributed. The position, along the Ordination axes, of the wetland groups
identified during Cluster analysis will be evaluated to see if the groups are aligning
along a gradient. The environmental variables will then be back correlated with the
vegetation ordination axes to see if any of the variables are significantly related to the
gradient(s) described by the axes. Figure 12-8 depicts a hypothetical ordination of
wetland species data. Hypothetical groups resulting from clustering analysis are
circled on the diagram to illustrate how wetland groups are related to the gradients
represented by the ordination axes. In this case, ordination axis 1 represents a
hydrologic gradient, and axis 2 represents a disturbance gradient. Along the first axis,
the hypothetical wetlands do not separate according to whether they are project or
natural (except that more projects are ponds), but are aligned according to inundation
duration or water depth. Along the second axis, wetlands appear to be aligned based
on the proportion of native to exotic species.
Several other approaches for identifying which variables are most explanatory in
defining gradients are also available. Canonical Correspondence Analysis will be used
to investigate the relationships between vegetation and environmental variables.
Principal Components Analysis will be used to explain which variables or combinations
of variables account for major sources of variation. Binary logit regression (for non-
normally distributed data) or discriminant function analysis (for normally distributed
data) will be used to identify the variables which best characterize differences between
groups of wetlands.
More information regarding differences between individual or groups of wetlands
will be obtained in several ways. Diversity and Dominance Measures will be used to
summarize vegetation structure in individual wetlands and to aid in describing
differences between groups of wetlands. For example, such analyses could show
species diversity is greater on young projects than on natural wetlands (Figure 12-9).
This might be due to the influx of weedy colonizers in early succession.
The Weighted Averages Ordination Technique will be used to rank plant
species by their wetland indicator status and produce axes that distribute the wetlands
along a continuum of NWI habitat categories (Wentworth et al. 1988). For example,
Figure 12-10 illustrates the Weighted Averages Score for natural and project wetlands
sampled in the 1987 Oregon Pilot Study. Results could illustrate differences in
wetland type or "quality" that might be related to project vs. natural wetlands, land use,
or presence of buffers, etc. Weighted averages may be similarly employed using
hydric soil indicator and organic matter data.
Multiple regression will be used to determine the relationship between a
response variable and one or more explanatory variables. For example, regression
could determine if the percent of organic matter found in the soil is related to the
project age and land use.
Correlations are also used to determine the degree of linear relationship
between two variables. Correlation Analyses will be conducted in two ways, using
either site averages or plot values for the variables. Relationships between any of the
125
-------
variables sampled in the OWS (Table 5-2) can further characterize the study wetlands,
and also permit inferences useful in identifying differences that relate to attainable
quality or replacement potential, and suggest improvements in project design. For
example, if high cover of exotic plant taxa is positively correlated to urban land use,
narrow buffer width, and low soil organic matter, several ideas emerge. The condition
or the attainable quality of a site that occurs in such a situation is likely to be low and
influenced by these particular variables. The potential of replacing a high quality
wotland would likely be low if the compensatory mitigation project was placed in an
urban site that lacked buffers and had limited soil organic matter. Project design
might be enhanced by relocating the project, installing buffers, or adding organic
matter to the site.
Correlations involving plot values for variables could provide detailed
information about relationships between plant species and environmental variables
such as hydric soil indicators, soil organic matter, hydrology, and relative elevation.
Such information could be used to improve project designs by providing guidelines for
construction that would generate wetland morphology, hydrology, and soil conditions
conducive to the establishment of desired plant species. Also, planting lists of native
species that are adapted to conditions of marginally successful projects might be
developed.
Following the characterization analyses, data for groups of wetlands will be
statistically (e.g., T-tests, Mann-Whitney rank sum test, Hotelling's T2, ANOVA) and
graphically (e.g., histograms, boxplots, characterization and performance curves)
compared to facilitate answering the research questions. For quantitative comparisons
used to determine if statistical differences in wetland attributes exist between different
wetland groups, the choice of statistical test will depend on the number of groups
being compared and whether data are normally distributed. For comparisons of two
samples, Student's T test will be used for normally distributed data, and a non-
parametric test such as the Mann-Whitney rank sum test will be used for non-normally
distributed data. Similarly, for comparisons of more than three groups (e.g., organic
content of soils for wetlands in the five land use classes), analysis of variance or a
non-parametric equivalent such as Kruskal and Wallis test will be used. Hotelling's T*
is a multivariate extension of a t-test which could be used to summarize a group of
related variables (e.g., vegetation). Graphical depiction of data in characterization or
performance curves will be used to compare projects and natural wetlands, wetlands
in different land use groups, and groups of wetlands defined during the
characterization process. The results of these graphical comparisons will be used to
aid in development of criteria for project evaluation and design (Kentula et al. 1992a).
The utility of characterization and performance curves is discussed in more detail in
the summary section that follows.
Summary
The OWS has been designed to collect, analyze, and report information that will
contribute to sound wetland management using wetland restoration and creation. As
stated in the study overview, information needs related to direct and indirect wetland
126
-------
loss will be addressed by the study. The unique contribution of this study to wetland
science and management is the definition of indirect losses of wetland function due to
land use practices and the design and implementation of wetland projects. This
contribution is best illustrated by the use of characterization curves and performance
curves to represent the results of the study.
Characterization curves are frequency distribution curves in which the vertical
axis represents the number of wetlands (i.e., frequency) and the horizontal axis
represents some measure of function (i.e.. the variable of interest). These curves will
be used to summarize data and graphically compare major characteristics of the
wetland groups studied. For example, Figure 12-11 illustrates the results we would
anticipate for the relative function of wetlands in different land use settings based on
results from the 1987 Pilot Study. The shape of the curve indicates whether the group
is homogenous or heterogenous, i.e., includes sites having a similar level of the
function measured (A on Figure 12-11) or includes sites with a wide range of values
for the function (B on Figure 12-11). The position of the curves along the x-axis
represents the relationship between the wetlands in each land use setting and level of
function measured. Consequently, displaying data in characterization curves allows
the presentation of a large amount of information in a way that portrays the
relationship between land use and specific wetland functions.
Performance curves display the changes in a function in wetland projects over
time as compared to the level of that function in similar natural wetlands. In the 1987
Pilot Study we produced the first portion of these curves for the variables measured at
all wetland projects in existence at that time (Figure 12-11). One goal of the OWS is
to generate the next segment of those curves to determine how pre-1987 projects
have continued to develop and if they are becoming more similar to natural wetlands.
Another goal is to determine if projects constructed since 1987 are developing as we
would expect based on the 1987 study, or if they are developing differently due to
changes in design or management. We hope that due to increased knowledge and
experience in wetland restoration and creation that the newer projects are developing
the functions of natural wetlands more rapidly than the projects constructed prior to
1987 (Figure 12-12). Again, the graphic display enables us to summarize and
compare key information simply and rapidly.
In designing the OWS we have responded to the challenge stated in An
Approach to Improving Decision Making in Wetland Restoration and Creation
(Kentula et al. 1992a) that we continue to build the knowledge base on wetland
restoration and creation through the application, testing, and evaluation of the
concepts presented in Decision Making. The OWS employs one of those concepts
by considering ecological setting in the evaluation of the function of natural wetlands
and projects, and by beginning to address the relationship between land use and
wetland function. It also treats existing projects as experiments in progress, making
monitoring of natural wetlands and projects central to the use of restoration and
creation in wetland management, and endorsing the idea that we all must
"...learn by going where we need to go...* (Roethke 1961).
127
-------
COMPUTER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Data will be entered and analyzed on IBM compatible PC computers (AT for
data entry, 386 and above for analysis). The dual entry data management system will
be written using Clipper programming software which is compatible with D-Base,
Paradox, and FoxPro formats.
128
-------
Field Data Lab Data
Existing Data
Data Entry and Verification
Store in lab files at PSU
Transport data
forms to ERL-C -
Crew Leader
Place forms in site packet and
Verify data - Statistician, Data Analysts
Compare and reconcile data - Data Entry Personnel
Evaluation of outliers, unusual values
Collect, record, and check field
data - Field Crew Members
Collect, record, and check laboratory
soils data - Lab Technicians
Dual data entry into appropriate data base - Data Entry Personnel
Xerox completed forms each week -
store one set in lab files at PSU
and one in ERL-C files - Crew Leader
NSI Maps - Wetland Types
information (hand copy)
404/State permit
Metro Land Use Map
Xerox and return
original and duplicate
site packets. Store
separately in different
building - Crew Leader
Validata data - data Entry Personnel Range checks, code checks,
completeness
Complete or review
forms during lab data:
finish maps, calculations
plant identification
Field Crew Members
Figure 12-1. Row chart outlining data tracking from data sources (field, laboratory existing) through data entry.
-------
Step 1: Copy all forms and store in off-site archive
Incomplete forms on
yellow paper: F-7,
F-8, F-9, F-10,
QA-1, QA-2, QA-3
Completed forms
on blue paper:
Form-I, G-3, F-1,
F-2, F-3, F-4, F-5,
F-6, F-11, F-12, QA-4
Step 2: Copy completed data for data entry
I
Step 3: Organize, complete and store original data forms
Originals
Copy
White for
data entry
Data
Entry
Blue to update
archive
Complete and anno
at PSU or ERL-C
tate
Vegetation: F-7
F-8, F-9, QA-1,
QA-2, QA-3
General forms:
Form 1, G-3, F-4,
F-5, F-6, F-12
Project Botanist's
file box
Crew Supervisor's
file box
Mapping/morphology
F-10, completed map
F-1, F-2, F-3,
File folders in site packet
site packets stored in
file cabinet at ERL-C
Copy completed data forms on white
paper: F-4 (buffers), F-11 (soils), QA-4 (Soils-QA)
Figure 12-2. OWS data tracking, copying, and archiving procedures.
130
-------
[F1] = Help [F2] = Notes
I FILENAME: VO50T5C
NAME
Vicia sativa
Holcus lanatus
Rubus discolor
Geum macrophyllum
Stachys coolyeyae
Please enter the first two-
letters of the Qenlis name [TrJ
CODE
p\i210605
f\n602101
u-i201001
w+n200301
o\n590118
(FIJaHelp (Esc)=Bdt
PLOT1
PLOT2
PLOT3
Trifolium arvense
Trifolium dubium
trifolium hybridum
Trifolium pratense
Trifolium repens
Trifolium sooterraneum
Trifolium hyacinlhina
[Enter-*—^Select
3.5
7.4
4.2
3.0
18.3
.5
.4
.5
10.3
1.4
4.6
3.8
Figure 12-3.
Example computer screen showing a lookup table. The user can enter the GENUS/SPECIES name by entering
the first two letters of the GENUS name, then selecting the appropriate name from the lookup table.
-------
No
Yes
Are all key fields the same?
No
Yes
Does all the data match?
No
Yes
Are all the filenames matched?
2) For each file compare every key
field in set ONE to set TWO.
1) Compare each filename in set
ONE to the filenames in set TWO.
3) For each file use the key fields
to compare the matching fields in
set ONE to set TWO.
Have the users reconcile the data
Perform post reconcilation tests:
Date Validation, Percent Completed
Check, Relational Database Check,
and Code check.
Figure 12-4. Flowchart of the three step comparison and reconciliation process.
132
-------
* ' " ' - " ' ' s? w m§&m yyy^y %% v** '<¦
(F1J = Help IF21 = Notes (F3J = Top/Bottom (FlOj = Next I FILENAME: VO50T5C
—[Thelr's-Record: 23]
NAME
CODE
PLOT1
PLOT2
*
PLOT3
mrnzmwWPWZMZi
Vicia sativa
p\i210605
3.5
7.4
Holcus lanatus
f\n602101
4.2
3.0
Rubus discolor
u-i201001
18.3
.5
.4
Geum macrophyllum
w+n200301
.5
10.3
Stachys coolyeyae
o\n590118
1.4
4.6
3.8
-^-[Your's-Record: 23)
NAME
CbDE
PLOT!
PLOT2
PLOT3
Juncus effusus
w+n580105
40.0
• -1
Holcus lanatus
f\n602101
4.2
3.0
liiifi mil •'
Rubus discolor
U-J201001
18,3
; ,5
A
Geum macrophyllum
w+n200301
.5
10.3
Stachys coolyeyae
o\r»590118
14
••
4.6
3.8
[PROBLEM: GENUS/SPECIEb names are not the same]
POSSIBLE CAUSES: 1) You entered the wrong name. 2) They didn't enter the record. 3) You entered this record twice.
4) This record doesnl belong.
Figure 12-5.
Example computer screen showing the reconciliation of a GENUS/SPECIES name in a vegetation
database.
-------
VEGETATION
ISITE: 3352 pAN: 2
FILE: V3352T1 RECORD ID: Vicia Sativa FIELD: PLOT32
PROBLEM: Could not determine the number recorded on the
field sheet.
RESOLUTION: No value entered.
Figure 12-6. Example notebook entry for identifying problems encountered during the data
reconciliation process and their solutions.
134
-------
Dh/ftraity Analyses
• Shannon's and
Simpson's diversity
and dominance
measures
Evaluata
relationship
ot diversity
or
dominance
to wetland
groups or
to
environmental
gradients
Ul
Ln
Define
Group
wetlands,
Identify
outliers
Cluster Analysis
TW1NSPAN
CLUSB
wetland
Multiple
Regressions
Correlations
I
Look for relationships between variables|
VftBfttBtinit MfHtttm
~ species abundance
~ species composition
• richness
• exbtic:nafive
• wetlandrupland
~ % cover bare ground
~ % cover water
Look
for
gradients
Identify
position
of
wetland
groups
along
_ gradient
Ordination Analysis
Weighted Averages
DECORRANA (DCA)
Back correlate environmental
measures with axes
Cannonical Correspondence
Analysis
Principal Components
Analysis
Discriminant Function
Analysis
Binary Logit Regression
Identify environ-
mental measures
which are most
"explanatory" In
describing gradients
along which wetlands
are distributed
Define groups of wetlands based
on similar vegetation and/or
environmental characteristics
Envfonrnantal Measure
• soils
• soil organic matter
» hydrology . ¦
• elevation
• land use
• buffers
Look
for
gradients
Ordination Analysis
DCA
Group
wetlands,
Identify
outliers
Identify
position
of wetland
groups
along
gradient
Cluster Analysis
TW1NSPAN
CLUSB
Statistical comparisons of
wetland groups to answer
research questions.
(See Table 11-1).
Figure 12-7.
Example of approaches for characterizing and comparing wetlands. Italics = purpose of analyses.
Shading = data sources.
-------
HYPOTHETICAL CLASSIFICATION AND
ORDINATION OF WETLAND SITES
~ = projects
high diversity,
native species
O - natural
wetlands
eep-water emergent
and ponds
long growing
season inundation
O o a
c§
season inundation
sparse
vegetation, many
exotic species
Emergent Marsh
Ponds
DCA Axis One (Hydrologic Gradient)
Figure 12-8. Hypothetical ordination and classification of wetland data. Natural and project
wetlands are distributed along a hydrologic gradient on the first axis and along
a disturbance gradient on the second axis. Circled groups of wetlands (A-E)
represent hypothetical results of cluster analysis. Notes refer to
characteristics of wetland groups.
136
-------
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
* *
I
Legend
• = mean for 12 natural wetlands
I = + J standard error
5|e = value for 1 created wetland
1
I
1
I
1
2 3 4 5
Age of wetland (years)
Figure 12-9. Plant diversity data from the 1987 Oregon Pilot Study (Kentula et al. 1992a).
-------
OJ
00
N5
N6
N2
N9
N10|
N7
N3
N11
N8
N12
N4
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
3.5
2.5
4.5
C2
C11
C6
C8
C10
C9
Extreme wetland
(100% obligate
hydrophytes)
Extreme upland
(100% obligate
upland species)
C3
Wetland ~ Upland
Figure ' 2-10. Weighted average scores for the type of vegetation found in individual project (P) and natural (N) wetlands
from the 1987 Oregon Pilot Study (Kentula et al. 1992a).
-------
HYPOTHETICAL CHARACTERIZATION CURVES OF WETLANDS
IN DIFFERENT LAND USE SETTINGS
UNDEVELOPED
— - • INDUSTRIAL
•••• RESIDENTIAL
— COMMERCIAL
— AGRICULTURE
Low
Level of Function
High
Figure 12-11. Hypothetical characterization curves comparing the level of function in groups of wetlands in different land use settings.
The pattern displays the results anticipated for the OWS based on the 1987 Pilot Study. A is the characterization curve
of a relatively homogeneous group of wetlands; B, of a relatively heterogeneous group of wetlands.
-------
HYPOTHETICAL PERFORMANCE CURVES FOR
ACCUMULATION OF SOIL ORGANIC MATTER
•5
*
*
— 0
0
0
0,
0A
Legend
0 = mean for natural wetlands in 1993
• - mean for natural wetlands in 1987
1 = ± 1 standard error
^ = value for 1 created wetland
— = Pre-1987 Projects in 1987
— = Pre-1987 Projects in 1993
• - = Post-1987 Projects
012345678
Age (years)
12. Hypothetical performance curves comparing the anticipated development of the projects contructed prior to 1987 to the development
of projects constructed since 1987 and to similar natural wetlands. The curves present results of the 1987 Pilot Study and suggest
the results that might be expected in the OWS.
-------
13.0 INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS
Quality control (QC) checks will be conducted to ensure that field and
laboratory procedures are correctly followed. QA/QC activities and frequency are
summarized in Table 13-1. QC data will be gathered following standard procedures,
with crew members exchanging jobs and duplicating part of the sampling and data
collection. OA procedures, summarized in Tables 13-2 and 13-3, fall into three types:
within-crew checks to be conducted at each site, between-crew checks to be
performed twice over the field season, and Crew Leader checks. QC data will be
collected for 5 vegetation quadrats, 1 transect for shrub cover and tree diameter data,
and 1 soil sampling point at each wetland. Within-crew and between-crew checks will
use standard procedures and involve resampling or taking replicate readings for a
subset of the site, vegetation, and soil data The within-crew checks conducted at
every site are designed to ensure proper execution of standard field procedures, and
assess comparability and precision between observers on the same crew. Between-
crew checks are used to assess comparability between crews, to ensure that data
collection procedures are executed in a consistent manner by all field crews, and to
"recalibrate" the observers on different field crews against each other and an
"accuracy standard". Crew Leader checks involve weekly conferences among Crew
Leaders to compare problems and progress, and discuss any modifications in data
collection procedures. External checks include a technical systems audit conducted
by ERL-C QA staff, and visits by the EPA Program Leader.
QUALITY ASSURANCE FIELD PROCEDURES
QA/QC checks apply to data and sample collection for site, vegetation, and soil
variables. Detailed QA procedures are provided for tasks in the order that they are
performed in the field and are listed under the appropriate subheadings below. Refer
to Section 8 in this QA plan or the Research Plan and Field Manual for the Oregon
Wetlands Study (Magee et al. 1993) for details on standard procedures.
Vegetation - Quality Assurance Procedures
Within-crew QA procedures for vegetation sampling will be conducted by the
two Botanists and two Recorders from each crew. During these procedures, one
Botanist will be referred to as the "primary botanist" and the other as the "second
botanist". Botanists will alternate the primary and second roles between sites, but
roles must remain consistent at a site. Assuming all three vegetation strata
(herbaceous, shrubs, trees) are present at a site, duplicate sampling will be done for
herbaceous cover (5 quadrats on one transect), shrub line-intercept intervals (1
transect), and tree diameter measurements (1 transect). These data will allow
assessment of the precision and comparability, among the two Botanists, for the line-
intercept and tree diameter measurements, and cover estimation. Also, the data will
provide information on the completeness and comparability with which herbaceous
species are identified within the quadrats by two different Botanists.
141
-------
1. The Crew Leader randomly selects the Site Characterization Transect on which
to collect QC data. Roll a die to select a number from one to five to select a
transect number. If a six is thrown, roll again. This is the transect used for
collecting all QC data for vegetation. Shrubs and trees are resampled along
the entire length of the transect. Cover of herbaceous vegetation will be re-
read in five randomly selected quadrats, taken from a list of random numbers.
2. When the primary Botanist and Recorder reach the QA transect during the
course of normal field activities, they sample it using standard sampling
procedures to obtain shrub line-intercept data, vegetation quadrat data, and tree
measurements. Data is recorded on the appropriate forms (F-7 through F-9)
and the "N" for non-QA sheet is circled in the heading of each form. Once
sampling is completed, they leave the tape, the flagged wire markers, and
quadrat frames for QA plots in place for the second Botanist and Recorder.
3. When the second Botanist and Recorder reach the QA transect, they sample
the entire transect for shrub intercept-lengths and tree diameters, and the five
designated quadrats for herb cover. Data are recorded on the appropriate
forms (F-7 through F-9) and the "Y" for QA sheet is circled in the heading of
each form. The Recorder carefully fills out the heading for the QA data sheets
so that correct transect number and plots are provided.
4. Botanists should not exchange comments on the vegetation of the re-sampled
transects and plots while conducting QA sampling. When the site has been
completed, the Botanists compare their results. If there appear to be
discrepancies in cover estimates that exceed the DQOs, the Botanists should
practice, as soon as possible, reading the same plots until they consistently
obtain cover values that approach the DQOs. When QC cover data are
analyzed during the field season and large differences are noted, recalibration
should be conducted.
Accurate plant species identification is critical to data quality and is facilitated by
training (Section 10) and the botanical expertise (Section 6) of the Botanist Crew
Members, by use of standard procedures for presampling species reconnaissance,
handling unknown taxa, and plant identification (Section 8 and 11), and by additional
QA field checks. The QA field checks for plant species identification are as follows:
1. A Plant Taxonomist (Sherry Spencer) will visit each crew in the field at least
once per week to assist Botanists with any taxonomic difficulties they may be
having. She will assist with recognition of field characters that will aid in
identification of difficult taxa or that separate closely related species.
2. The Taxonomist will observe the Botanists during vegetation sampling
procedures and confirm or correct species determinations.
142
-------
3. The Taxonomist will also retrieve any full plant presses and return them to PSU
to be placed on plant driers so that specimens will dry quickly and retain their
integrity for future identification.
Soils and Hydrology - Quality Assurance Procedures
1. In each wetland, the Crew Leader will randomly select one soil plot for repeat
description and collection of duplicate samples.
2. If the selected plot has soil conditions that preclude description of the soil
profile (e.g., unconsolidated soils or standing water), the crew leader will identify
an alternate plot for description.
3. Upon arrival at the plot, the Survey Team members fill out information on the
top of the QA copy of Form F-11; cross check to insure that wetland, transect,
and plot numbers are the same as those on the routine copy of the data form
(Form F-11).
4. The soil pit should be dug or auger samples collected as described for routine
samples in Procedures A and C as in Soils and Hydrology in Section 8.
5. Each member of the Survey Team should independently fill out information
describing the QA plot on both the routine and QA copies of Form F-11. Do not
discuss the soil or compare information until all members of the team have
finished filling out the form. When all members have completed the forms, turn
them over to the Crew Leader who will check them for consistency and discuss
discrepancies among Crew Members. Do not refill the pit on the QA plot after
sampling; if time permits, discuss information on the data forms with the Crew
Leader before refilling the pit.
6. After completing soil descriptions, Survey Team members will collect duplicate
soil samples at 0-5 and at 15-20 cm depths in the pit. The intent is to collect
two identical aliquots of soil, which will be analyzed to quantify uncertainty in
the field. To collect the duplicate samples :
• In lieu of the standard sample collection procedure described in step 5 of
Procedure A, place soil material from the 0-5 cm depth on a dean sheet of
plastic.
• Carefully remove large roots and stones.
Mix the soil thoroughly, using a spatula.
Label Zip-loc™ plastic bag with the sample code as described in Step 5 of
the field sampling procedures. Be sure to use sample type codes of "I"
on one of the bags; "2" on the other (it does not matter which is which,
because the containers should be filled with identical material).
143
-------
• After mixing the soil, place alternate scoops of soil into the two sample
bags. Place all the material in the two bags, filling the two sample
containers approximately equally.
• Repeat this procedure for soil from the 15-20 cm depth interval.
7. Complete routine field sampling activities as described in Section 8.
Botween-Crew Quality Assurance Procedures
Between-crew QA activities will center on maintaining high comparability in data
collected by different crews. Two approaches will be used to meet this goal. First,
each crew will be visited weekly by the Plant Taxonomist to determine if standard field
procedures are being routinely followed. Second, twice during the field season
between crew recalibration and training review will be conducted.
Standard procedure checks
1. During the course of her regular duties, a Plant Taxonomist will visit each crew
at least once a week to aid with plant identification and pick up plant and soil
samples. These visits will also allow her to observe any differences in the
manner in which data are being collected.
2. If differences are noted, the Plant Taxonomist will document the nature of the
discrepancies and report this information to the Crew Leaders.
3. At their weekly meetings (See Crew Leader checks below) the Crew Leaders
will discuss any problems related to deviation from standard procedures or
differences in Crew Leader style.
4. Proficiency checklists (Appendix 3), listing the sequence of sampling and data
collection tasks, and notes on proper execution of methods, have been
prepared for evaluating implementation of methods by individuals and teams.
These checklists will be used by crew leaders during training and field data
collection, by the Program Manager during field visits, and by ERL-C QA staff
during training observation and the technical systems audit (see Section 14).
Calibration activities
All three crews will be assembled together twice during the field season, once
at the end of training (Week 6) and once near the middle (mid-July, 5th week of
sampling) for "calibration" in the collection of site, vegetation, and soil measurements.
The wetlands to be used as calibration sites will not be wetlands sampled as part of
the OWS. The following "calibration" activities will be performed during Week 6 of the
training:
144
-------
1. The morning session will address calibration of Crew Members to one another
based on the "standards" determined by OWS scientists for transit use, soil
descriptions, and plant species cover estimation procedures.
2. The Survey Teams will rotate through transit and soil stations, repeating
procedures for transit measurements, soil sampling, and describing soils at the
same sampling points.
3. The Botanist Teams will rotate through a series of quadrats making appropriate
cover estimations. Results for each team will be compared to the "standard"
cover values determined by the OWS Plant Ecologist and PSU Plant
Taxonomist and to values estimated by the other teams. Attention will also be
given to attaining uniformity and completeness in detecting all plant species in a
quadrat and to accurately identifying species.
4. Throughout the course of these between-crew QC checks, the Crew Leaders
and other OWS scientists will provide encouragement and show appreciation for
the efforts of the Crew Members.
5. Members of the Survey Teams will describe a series of soil pedons. Results
for each individual will be compared to the "standard" values determined by the
OWS Soil Scientist and to the values estimated by other Survey Team
members.
6. An extended break for lunch will be provided, if possible, so that Crew
Members can relax, discuss experiences with their counterparts from different
crews, and interact with the Crew Leaders.
7. During the lunch period, the Crew Leaders will informally assess the variation in
data collected on the same transects, plots, or soil sampling points by different
individuals. Any discrepancies observed will be discussed as immediate
feedback to Crew Members and as part of the calibration procedures during the
afternoon session.
8. tn the afternoon, each crew will carry out the basic field procedures for
sampling a wetland, i.e. conduct a "mock" sampling. This will be the first time
that the Survey Team and Botany Teams will be working together as a Crew.
t The following activities will be conducted: baseline and transect establishment,
complete sampling of at least one transect by each of the teams, completion of
data forms.
9. Each Crew Leader, using proficiency checklists (see Appendix C), will observe
and watch for deviations or discrepancies in the methods being implemented by
145
-------
their crew. Immediate feedback corrections or recommendations will be given
to the Crew Members.
10. Each Crew Leader will be participating in "mock" sampling, carrying out the
Crew Leader activities. Consistency of Crew Leaders' implementation of
methods, decision-making, and response to questions will be evaluated by the
Program Manager and ERL-C QA staff, who will also be using proficiency
checklists.
Similar "calibration" activities will be performed during the middle of the field
data collection season (tentatively scheduled for 13 July 1993). Mid-season
"calibration" will be conducted at a wetland that is not part of the study population, and
will consist of the following:
1. A set of vegetation quadrats will be established and sampled by Teresa Magee,
OWS Plant Ecologist and Sherry Spencer, PSU Plant Taxonomist. Their
measurements will serve as "standard" values.
2. A series of soil pedons will be dug and described by Paul Shaffer, OWS Soil
Scientist. His measurements will serve as "standard" values.
3. The Botanist Teams will rotate through a series of vegetation quadrats making
appropriate cover estimations. Results for each team will be compared to the
"standard" cover values determined by the OWS Plant Ecologist and PSU Plant
Taxonomist and to values estimated by the other teams. Attention will also be
given to attaining uniformity and completeness in detecting all plant species in a
quadrat and to accurately identifying species.
4. Members of the Survey Teams will describe the series of soil pedons. Results
for each individual will be compared to the "standard" values determined by the
OWS Soil Scientist and to the values estimated by other Survey Team
members.
5. Crew Leaders will informally assess the variation in the data collected on the
same vegetation quadrats and soil pedons. Any discrepancies or obvious "drift"
will be discussed as immediate feedback to Crew Members. If necessary,
methods for estimating cover will be reviewed.
QUALITY ASSURANCE LABORATORY ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
QA laboratory procedures will be conducted by the two Laboratory Technicians
who process the soils and conduct loss on ignition analyses. Each batch of soils
analyzed for loss on ignition will include three types of QC samples: one audit sample
(described in Appendix B), a blank (an empty weigh dish), and at least one set of
duplicate samples. A set of duplicates includes four samples: the routine field sample,
146
-------
a field duplicate, and laboratory splits of both the routine sample and field duplicate.
More than one set of duplicates may be analyzed in a batch, but field duplicates and
laboratory splits are always processed in the same batch as the associated routine
sample.
1. One sample of soil audit material will be included with each batch of soils that
are processed. Homogenize the audit soil sample by rolling the bottle end-
over-end approximately 10 times. Label (with batch number and "AUDIT) and
tare a weigh dish, and place 10-15 g of the audit material in the dish. Record
the fresh weight of the sample, and process it along with other soils in the
batch. Data should be recorded on Forms L-1 (standard) and L-3 (OA).
«
2. Label an empty weigh boat with the sample identification code, and process it
along with the routine samples. Record the tare weight, dry weight, and ashed
weight on Forms L-1 and L-3.
3. Identify field duplicate sample and the associated routine field sample.
Following preparation of the samples as described in Steps 1 -4 of the
Laboratory Procedures under Soil Organic Matter Content in Section 11, set the
two samples aside.
4. Label four weighing dishes with the sample identification, and sample type
codes 1 through 4, and tare the containers. Aliquots of the routine sample
should be put in dishes with a sample type code of "1" (the routine sample) and
"3" (laboratory split of the routine sample). Similarly, aliquots of the field
duplicate should be put in dishes labelled "2" (field duplicate) and "4"
(laboratory split, of the field duplicate). The four samples should then be
processed the same as normal samples. Record data for the four samples on
Forms L-2 and L-3.
QUALITY ASSURANCE CREW LEADER CHECKS
Crew Leaders will meet weekly to compare progress, to discuss and resolve
problems that they may have encountered, and to address any issues brought to their
attention by the external audits or internal QA checks. These meetings will be
extremely important in terms of preventing data quality problems, variation in
execution of sampling procedures, and tensions between noncompatible personalities
among Crew Members. These meetings may take place in the evenings following
field days, during return travel to Corvallis on Fridays, or at another time convenient to
the Crew Leaders. Topics for discussion will include:
1. Progress in field sampling and laboratory analyses or activities. Are the crews
performing the tasks at similar speeds and completing sites on schedule? If
not, assess the reasons (i.e. not possible to sample more quickly, one crew is
147
-------
less efficient than others, some crews are routinely receiving more difficult sites)
and discuss remedies.
2. Identify problems with sampling procedures or logistics in the field. Discuss
difficulties encountered in specific situations and adopt corrective actions.
Discuss differences noted by the Plant Taxonomist in her weekly between crew
checks and decide if they are matters of style or are important to data quality.
Develop and adopt appropriate modifications for standardizing use of methods
among crews.
3. Discus? personnel performance problems or personality conflicts and make
recommendations for solutions (e.g. mediation between parties involved or
rotation of Crew Members between crews).
4. Crew Leaders who will be working in the field on alternate weeks will need to
brief their counterparts at each Crew Leader switch. These briefings may be
conducted by phone on Friday evenings after returning from a week in the field
or at sometime during the weekend. The returning Crew Leader should advise
the Crew Leader who will go into the field on the following Monday of the status
of the field work, problems encountered, or any other pertinent information.
148
-------
Table 13-1. Summary of research and QA/QC activities for assuring and estimating data quality. The frequency and purpose of each
activity are indicated (R=representativeness, A=accuracy, P=precision, C=comparability).
Activity
Variable
Frequency
Purpose
Field replicates (data) at each
wetland
Site:
• Elevation
• Buffer size
• 6 transects (5 SCT and 1 WMT)
through wetland
R
Vegetation:
• % cover for plant species
(herbaceous, shrubs, trees)
bare ground, open water
• 5 transects (SCT) through
wetland; minimum of 40 vegetated
plots
R
Soils:
• Soil color
• Horizon thickness
• Presence of mottles,
gleying, concretions,
oxidized root channels, H2S
• 5 transects (SCT) through wetland
(independent of vegetation
transects) 2 plots per transect
R
Field replicates (samples) at
each wetland
Soils:
¦ Loss on ignition
• 5 transects per wetland; 2 plots
per transect; samples collected
from 0-5cm, and 15-20 cm at
each plot
• Duplicate soil samples from
homogenized sample; 2 depths per
plot; 1 plot per wetland
R
P
Measurement process
check on field sample
collection
Collection of plant specimens
Plant species identification
¦ Unknowns at each wetland
A
-------
Table 13-1 (con't.). Summary of research and QA/QC activities for assuring and estimating data quality. The frequency and purpose
of each activity are indicated (R=representativeness, A=accuracy, P=precision, C=comparability).
Activity
Variable
Frequency
Purpose
Re-measurements
Vegetation:
• % cover for plant species
(herbacious, shrubs, trees)
bare ground, open water
- 5 quadrats (randomly selected)
within each wetland for herbaceous
cover; 1 transect for shrub & tree
cover
¦ "calibration" quadrats, 2 times
during field season (training and
mid-season)
A,P (within crew)
C (within crew)
A,P (between crew)
C (between crew)
Soils:
• Soil color
¦ Horizon thickness
• Presence of mottles,
gleying, concretions,
oxidized root channels, H2S
¦ at 1 quadrat (randomly selected)
within each wetland
• "calibration" pedons, 2 times
during field season (training and
mid-season)
P (within crew)
C (within crew)
A,P (between crew)
C (between crew)
Laboratory QC checks
Soils:
¦ Loss on ignition
¦ Duplicate soil samples; 2 sets of
duplicates per batch
- Blank; 1 blank (minimum) per
batch
* Audit; 1 audit sample (minimum)
per batch
Measurement process
check on laboratory
processing
Measurement process
check on weighing
Measurement process
check on muffle
furnace performance
-------
Table 13-1 (con't.). Summary of research and QA/QC activities for assuring and estimating data quality. The frequency and purpose
of each activity are indicated (R=representativeness, A=accuracy, P=precision, C=comparability).
Activity
Variable
Frequency
Purpose
Instrument Calibration:
Balances
Soil sample weights
Daily-before each use
A
Surveying tools
Elevation
Daily-before each use
A
Meter sticks, rulers
Depths:
* standing water
¦ in soil pit to standing water
¦ soil horizon depths
Beginning of field season, against
standard
A
-------
Table 13-2. Internal quality control checks for assessment of individual and team proficiency in executing sampling methods.
Method
Individual
Proficiency
Team
Proficiency
Overall Comparability and Calibration
of Individuals and Teams
Site:
Surveying
End-of-training surveying
Vegetation:
Plant Species
Identification
Plant: Species
Abundance
% cover of
herbaceous species,
shrubs, and trees;
% bare ground
% standing water
End-of-training plant
identification practical
End-of-training practical for overall
surveying methods
Accuracy & precision of stadia rod
reading estimated against 'standard' at
end-of-training.
End-of-training practical for over-all
vegetation sampling methods
Accuracy of species identifications and
cover measurements estimated against
'standard' at end-of-training and mid-
season in 'QA quadrats'
Precision of cover measurements
estimated against 'standard' at end-of-
training and mid-season in 'QA
quadrats'
Individual and team proficiency
checklists
End-of-training and weekly crew
leader discussions
Individual and team proficiency
checklists
End-of-training and weekly crew
leader discussions
Discussions among botanists and
crew leaders to 'calibrate' cover
estimates. End-of-training and mid-
season 'calibration' (precision and
accuracy checks) in 'QA quadrats'.
Soil:
Soil color
Horizon thickness
Presence of:
mottles
gleying
concretions
Oxidized root
channels
HjS
End-of-training soil description
practical
End-of-training practical for over-all soil
data and sample collection methods
Accuracy and precision of subjective
measurements estimated at end-of-
training and mid-season against
'standard' measures on 'QA soil plots'
Individual and team proficiency
checklist
End-of-training and weekly crew
leader discussions
Discussions among soil scientist and
crew leaders 'calibrate' subjective
measurements. End-of-training and
mid-season 'calibration' (precision
and accuracy checks)
-------
Table 13-2. Cont.
Method
Individual
Proficiency
Team
Proficiency
Overall Comparability and Calibration
of Individuals and Teams
Soil:
Soil Sample
Processing
Soil Organic Matter
Hydrology:
Depth of standing
water
Depth in soil pit to:
standing water free
water surface
saturated soil
Lab Technicians: End-of-training
practical evaluation
Audit samples, blanks, laboratory
duplicates
Accuracy and precision estimated at
end-of-training and mid-season against
'standard' on 'QA soil plots'
-------
Table 13-3. Internal quality control checks for assessment of accuracy and within and between crew precision.
Variable
Withln-Crew
Precision
Between-Crew
Precision
Accuracy
Vegetation: •
Plant Species
Identification
Plant Species
Abundance
% cover of
herbaceous sp.,
shrubs and trees,
% bare ground
% standing HzO
Soils;
Soil Color
Horizon Thickness
Presence of:
mottles
gleying
concretions
Oxidized root
channels
HsS
Soil Organic Matter
Hydrology:
Depth of standing
water
Depth in soil pit to:
standing water
free water surface
saturated soil
Remeasurement (plant species
and cover) of 5 vegetation plots
per wetland
Precision of cover
measurements estimated at end-
of-training and mid-season in
aQA quadrats'
Remeasurement of 1 soil plot
per wetland
Precision estimated at end-of-
training and mid-season against
'standard' measures on 'QA soil
plots'
Precision of cover measurements
estimated at end-of-training and mid-
season in 'QA quadrats'
Precision estimated at end-of-training
and mid-season against 'standard'
measures on 'QA soil plots'
Precision estimated at end-of-training
and mid-season on 'QA soil plots'
Accuracy of species identifications
and cover measurements estimated
at end-of-training and mid-season
against 'standard' in 'QA quadrats'
Weekly visits to each crew by Plant
Taxonomist to assist in plant species
identification.
Accuracy estimated at end-of-training
and mid-season against 'standard'
measures on 'QA soil plots'
Accuracy estimated based on LOI
results for QC audit samples
Accuracy estimated at end-of-training
and mid-season against 'standard'
measures on 'QA soil plots'
-------
14.0 PERFORMANCE AND SYSTEM AUDITS
The QA coordinator of the EPA Environmental Research Laboratory-Corvallis
(ERL-C) will observe field staff training on Saturday, May 22, 1993 at the Bryant
Woods training site in Lake Oswego, OR. The objectives of this field visit by ERL-C
QA staff are: (1) to observe implementation of field methods by the three field crews;
(2) to observe OWS training methods; (3) to qualitatively assess consistency of Crew
Leaders in implementation of field methods, assessment of individual and team
proficiency, and answering questions. If deficiencies or problems are identified, QA
staff will make recommendations to the Program Leader and crew leaders.
The ERL-C QA staff will conduct a technical systems audit of the OWS field
and laboratory research and QA activities, probably during the week of 28 June, 1993,
the second week of field sampling. This external evaluation will include: (1) an
assessment of personnel performance, equipment, and procedures; (2) review
implementation of the QA project plan; (3) determine whether DQOs are being met
(review QC data collected to date); (4) assess consistency of field methods
implementation by the three field crews. Any deficiencies or problems will be
discussed with the Program Leader, and summarized in an audit report.
155
-------
15.0 PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE
Maintenance information is provided in Table 10-1 in Section 10: Calibration
Procedures and Frequency.
156
-------
16.0 SPECIFIC ROUTINE PROCEDURES USED TO ASSESS DATA QUALITY
The following formulas will be used to calculate data quality attributes. The
values obtained should be within the data quality objectives set for this study (Table 7-
1)-
Accuracy
As described in Section 13, accuracy will be estimated for site, vegetation, and
soil measurements. Measurement values of OWS staff will serve as accuracy
'standards' (see Table 13-3) for subjective variables. Accuracy, the degree of
agreement between an observed value and an accepted reference value, will be
expressed as percent agreement or percent difference, and calculated by the following
formulas:
% agreement
= # of measurements - # of incorrect measurements x 100
# of measurements
% difference
= # of measurements' - # of correct measurements x 100
# of measurements
Frequency distributions of differences will be plotted (Figure 16-1) to show the range
of accuracy for different crews and/or individuals.
Accuracy will not be assessed directly for organic matter content (loss on
ignition) values, because the soil audit material is not being treated as a standard
reference material. The loss on ignition (LOI) values for the audit material samples
included in each batch will be plotted on a control chart, with warning limits of + 2
standard deviations of the mean and control limits of + 3 standard deviations of the
mean (Appendix B).
Precision
As described in Section 13, between and within crew precision will be estimated
for vegetation and soil measurements. Precision, the degree of variation among
individual measurements of the same variable, will be expressed as relative percent
difference, relative standard deviation, standard deviation, variance, or range. Relative
percent difference will be calculated for repeat measurements as follows:
RPD = _JC, - C,) x 100
(C, + CJ/2
where: RPD = relative percent difference
C, = larger of the two observed values
157
-------
C2 = smaller of the two observed values
For three or more repeat measures (between-crew precision), relative standard
deviation will be calculated as follows:
RSD = (s/y) x 100%
where: RSD = relative standard deviation
s = standard deviation
y = mean of the repeat measurements
Frequency distributions of differences will be plotted (Figure 16-1) to show between
crew precision. The slope and R2 values resulting from regression analysis of repeat
measurements (Rgure 16-2) collected for soil and vegetation measures at each
wetland for the duration of the field season will provide estimates of within-crew
precision.
Comparability
Comparability, a measure of the degree to which different methods and data
sets can be represented as similar, will be assessed in terms of accuracy and
precision for most site, soil, vegetation, and hydrology measurements (Table 7.1).
Comparability of the soil organic matter content (LOI) data will be evaluated based on
results from analyses of soil audit samples and laboratory and field duplicates.
Overall comparability of methods implementation and calibration of individuals and
teams will be evaluated qualitatively throughout the data collection period (see Table
13-2).
Completeness
Completeness will be assessed twice during the OWS. At the end of the field
season, completeness will be assessed as the amount of data (and samples) actually
collected compared to the planned amount and will be calculated by the following
formulas:
% completeness (data)
= data collected x 100
planned data collected
% completeness (samples)
= samples collected x 100
planned samples collected
Following data entry, the amount of validated data will be compared to the
amount of data collected, using formulas similar to those above.
158
-------
Representativeness
Representativeness of the characteristics of each site will be assessed by
estimating variation (scatterplots, box plots, standard deviations, coefficients of
variation) for variables collected at each site. The sample wetlands will also be sorted
by wetland types, and variation within wetland type will be evaluated and compared.
Figure 16-1. Hypothetical frequency distribution of difference in percent plant cover as
estimated by vegetation crews against a 'standard" in "QA vegetation quadrats."
159
-------
60
»
o
c
<1)
3 30
cr
-------
100 T
90 --
80 --
\AAAZ
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Initial plant cover estimate
80 90 100
Figure 16-2. Hypothetical plot of paired (initial and remeasurement) plant cover estimates
from the "QA vegetation quadrats" sampled at each wetland. The slope and
and Revalue provide an estimate of within-crew precision.
161
-------
17.0 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS
We anticipate taking corrective actions when there is difficulty implementing a
field or laboratory method, or when QC data reflects a violation of data quality goals.
We intend to "dry run" all field methods prior to training to identify difficulties, confusing
instructions or activities, and to refine sampling methods.
During training, we will note any methods that the Crew Members find
confusing, and discuss modification of the method and/or the training schedule. We
plan to re-evaluate all field protocols following the training. All field Crew Members will
be required to pass proficiency criteria at the end of training. If crew members do not
pass the proficiency criteria, they will receive additional training. Between-crew
precision and accuracy for vegetation and soil measurements will be assessed at the
end of training, and again in mid-season. If QC data show that crews are not
sampling vegetation and soils comparably, they will receive additional training.
For laboratory analysis of soil organic matter content, methods and protocols
will be evaluated during training and will be modified if required. During routine
analysis, corrective actions will be taken when a need is identified based on evaluation
of analytical data for blanks, audit samples, or duplicate samples. Problematic data
will be promptly evaluated to determine the cause; equipment will be repaired/adjusted
or methods modified as necessary, and the samples will be reanalyzed. If there is an
insufficient amount of any soil(s) for reanalysis, data for affected samples will be
flagged in the database and excluded from statistical analysis.
Corrective actions will be taken following any recommendations made during
the field training visit and the QA audit conducted by ERL-C QA staff. Sherry
Spencer, the Plant Taxonomist (PSU), will visit all field crews to check on identification
of plant species. Any plant mis-identifications will be corrected, and Botanists will
receive additional instruction in plant species identification.
Quality control (remeasurement) data will be collected for vegetation and soils
measurements at each wetland. We plan to calculate within-crew precision at the end
of each week, to assure that we are meeting our precision goals. If the goals are not
being met, Crew Leaders are responsible for exploring the reasons, and
recommending corrective actions to the Project Manager.
162
-------
18.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT
Two QA reports will be prepared for the project: (1) The Field Operations
Report, with a tentative deliverable data of March, 1994; (2) The Final QA Report, with
a tentative deliverable date of July, 1994.
The Field Operations Report will contain the following:
1. Introduction
a. Project Description, Objectives, Schedule
b. Site Selection
2. Training summary
a. Description of training, including agenda, instructors, material covered,
location(s), and training materials;
b. List of proficiency criteria for testing trainees; actions taken when trainees
did not pass proficiency criteria;
c. Summary of training results, including quantitative assessment of trainees'
performance, improvements and changes made in field methods, and
recommendations for future training;
d. Description of corrective actions following field training visit by ERL-C QA
staff and EPA Project Leader;
e. Summary of results from end-of-training questionnaire.
3. Field Data Collection Activities
a. List of sites sampled;
b. Summary of plant specimens and soil samples collected; description of
any samples lost and why; estimate of completeness for samples;
c. Time estimates, including average number of sites sampled per day,
amount of time spent at each site (sorted by wetland type), displayed as
distribution (range) of time required to sample a site;
d. Description of corrective actions following field audit by ERL-C QA staff;
e. Summary of remeasurement data, in terms of accuracy, precision, and
comparability for site, vegetation , and soil characteristics. QC data will be
summarized statistically, displayed graphically, and evaluated in terms of
DQO achievement.
f. Summary of logistics and safety issues, including sampling difficult sites,
access, lodging/accommodations, sampling equipment and supplies.
4. Laboratory Operations
a. Balance calibration records;
b. Summary of LOI QC data for blanks, duplicates, and audit samples;
c. Control chart for muffle furnace performance;
163
-------
d. Estimate of completeness • summary of samples analyzed vs. the number
collected;
e. Plant identification; plant specimen collection.
5. Summary and Recommendations
a. Summary of teachers' evaluations, exit meeting;
b. Results (comments, reflections, criticisms) of final exit meeting (all project
staff) will be summarized;
c. Conclusion and recommendations for future studies.
The Final QA Report will contain the following:
1. Introduction
a. Project Description, Objectives, Schedule;
b. Site Selection.
2. Data and Information Management
a. Summary of data entry errors, any difficulties with data;
b. Evaluation of data entry - completeness;
c. Documentation of project activities, including content and location of
project notebooks (field, laboratory, data management), preparation of
additional reports.
3. Summary of QC data
4. Discussion
a. Summary of greatest sources of error;
b. Summary evaluation of protocols, DQOS.and training;
c. Use of science teachers as field assistants - how well did it work?
d. Recommendations for future studies;
e. How will data quality affect study results?
164
-------
19.0 REFERENCES
Abbruzzese, B., A.B. Allen, S. Henderson, and M.E. Kentula. 1988. Selecting sites
for comparison with created wetlands, p. 291-297. In C.D.A. Rubec and R.P. Overend
(Comp.), Proceedings of Symposium '87-Wetlands/Peatlands. Environment Canada,
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Blume, L.J., B.A. Schumacher, P.W. Shaffer, K.A. Cappo, M.L Papp, R.D. van
Remortel, D.S. Coffey, M.G. Johnson, and D.J. Chaloud. 1990. Handbook of
Methods for Acid Deposition Studies: Laboratory Analyses for Soil Chemistry.
EPA/600/4-90/023. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Washington, D.C.
Brown, M.T. 1991. Evaluating Created Wetlands Through Comparisons with Natural
Wetlands. EPA/600/3-91/058. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
Brown, M.T., J. Schaefer, and K.H. Brandt. 1990. Buffer Zones for Water, Wetlands,
and Wildlife in East Central Florida. Publication Number 89-07 and Florida Agricultural
Experiment^ Station Journal Series Number T-00061. The Center for Wetlands,
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Brunton Company. 1980. The Compass Book. Riverview, NY.
Buckner, R.B. 1983. Surveying Measurements and Their Analysis. 1st Edition. The
Dept. of Geodetic Science and Surveying, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Clarke, S.E., D. White, and A.L. Schaedel. 1991. Oregon ecological regions and
subregions for water quality management. Environmental Management 15:847-856.
Confer, S.R. and W.A. Niering. 1992. Comparison of created and natural freshwater
emergent wetlands in Connecticut (USA). Wetlands Ecology and Management
2:143-156.
Conservation Foundation. 1988. Protecting America's Wetlands: An Action Agenda.
The Final Report of the National Wetlands Policy Forum. Washington D.C.
Cooper, J.R., J.W. Gilliam, and T.C. Jacobs. 1986. Riparian areas as a control of
nonpoint pollutants, p. 166-192. In D.L Correl (Ed.), Watershed Research
Perspectives. Smithsonian Institution Press.
165
-------
Cowardin, LM., V. Carter, F.C. Goulet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
Cox, G. 1980. Laboratory Manual of General Ecology. William C. Brook Publishers,
Dubuque, IA.
Dahl, T.E. 1990. Wetland losses in the United States 1780's to 1980's. U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
Daubenmire, R. 1959. A canopy-coverage method of vegetation analysis.
Northwest Science 33:43-64.
Davis, R.E. and J.W. Kelly. 1969. Elementary Plane Surveying. 4th Edition.
McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY.
Erwin, K.L. 1991. An Evaluation of Wetland Mitigation Within the South Florida Water
Management District, Volume 1. South Florida Water Management District, West
Palm Beach, FL.
Gauch, H.G., Jr. 1977. ORDIFLEX - A Flexible Computer Program for Four
Ordination Techniques: Weighted Averages, Polar Ordination, Principal Components
Analysis, and Reciprocal Averaging, Release B. Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Gauch, H.G., Jr. 1982. Multivariate Analysis in Community Ecology. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, England.
Greenhood, D. 1964. Mapping. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Gwin, S.E. and M.E. Kentula. 1990. Evaluating Design and Verifying Compliance of
Wetlands Created Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act in Oregon. EPA/600/3-
90/061 . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory,
Corvallis, OR.
Homer, R.R. and K.J. Raedeke. 1989. Guide for Wetland Mitigation Projects
Monitoring. Report Number WA-RD 195.1. Washington State Department of
Transportation, Seattle, WA.
Jordan, R.A. and J.K. Shisler. 1988. Research needs for the use of buffer zones for
wetland protection, p. 433-435. In J.A. Kusler, M.L Quammen, and G. Brooks (Eds.),
Proceedings of the National Wetland Symposium: Mitigation of Impacts and Losses.
Association of State Wetland Managers, Berne, NY.
166
-------
Kentula, M.E., J.C. Sifneos, J.W. Good, M. Rylko, and K. Kunz. 1992a. Trends and
patterns in Section 404 permitting requiring compensatory mitigation in Oregon and
Washington. Environmental Management 16:109-119.
Kentula, M.E., R.P. Brooks, S.E. Gwin, C.C. Holland, A.D. Sherman, and J.C. Sifneos.
1992b. An Approach to Improving Decision Making in Wetland Restoration and
Creation. Edited by A.J. Hairston. EPA/600/R-92/150. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
Kissam, P. 1966. Surveying Practice: The Fundamentals of Surveying. McGraw-Hill
Inc., New York, NY.
Kusler, J.A and M.E. Kentula. 1991. Executive summary, p. xi-xix. In J.A. Kusler and
M.E. Kentula (Eds.), Wetland Creation and Restoration: The Status of the Science.
Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Leibowitz, S.G., E.M. Preston, L.Y. Arnaut, N.E. Detenbeck, C.A. Hagley, M.E.
Kentula, R.K. Olson, W.D. Sanville, and R.R. Sumner. 1992. Wetlands Research
Plan FY92-96: An Integrated Risk-Based Approach. EPA/600/R-92/060. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
Lounsbury, J.F. and F.T. Aldrich. 1979. Introduction to Geographic Field Methods
and Techniques. Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, OH.
Magee, T.K., S.E. Gwin, R.G. Gibson, C.C. Holland, J.E. Honea, P.W. Shaffer, J.C.
Sifneos, and M.E. Kentula. 1993. Research Plan and Methods Manual for the
Oregon Wetlands Study. EPA/600/R-93/072. Document Production by Kristina Miller.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis,
OR.
Omernik, J.M. 1987. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers 77(1):118-125. (map scale 1:7,500,000)
Owen, C.R. 1990. Effectiveness of Compensatory Wetland Mitigation in Wisconsin.
Technical Report to the Wisconsin Wetlands Association, The Lake Michigan
Federation, The American Clean Water Project. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wl.
Shaffer, P. 1993. Quality Assurance Project Plan for Field Research on the Hydrology
of Palustrine Wetlands in the Portland, Oregon Area. 39 p. Submitted to the U.S.
EPA, Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, OR.
Smith, F.,S. Kulkami, L.E. Myers and J.J. Messer. 1988. Evaluating and presenting
quality assurance sampling data, pp. 157-168. In: L.H. Keith, ed. Principles of
Environmental Sampling. American Chemical Society, Washington D.C.
167
-------
Stanley, T.W. and S.S. Verner. 1985. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
quality assurance program, pp. 12-19. In J.K. Taylor and T.W. Stanley, eds. Quality
Assurance for Environmental Measurements. American Society for Testing and
Materials, STP 867, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Taylor, J. K. 1988. Quality assurance of chemical measurements. Lewis
Publishers:Chelsea, Ml 328 pp.
Tiner, R.W. Jr. 1984. Wetlands of the United States: Current Status and Recent
Trends. U.S. Rsh and Wildlife Service, National Wetland Inventory, Washington, D.C.
Trimble Navigation Limited. 1991. Operation and Maintenance Guide for the
TransPak II GPS Personal Navigator with I/O. Sunnyvale, CA.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1990. Wetlands: Meeting the President's challenge.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
168
-------
APPENDIX A
FORMS USED IN THE OREGON WETLANDS STUDY
169
-------
COE permit number_
State permit number_
Date permit issued I I
Mitigation type-Setecfff/ '
O Created O Enhanced O Preserved O.Restored
Permit Tracking System
COMPENSATORY WETLAND DATA FORM
Form designed by C C Holland and R.G. Gibson
ManTech Environmental Technology, Inc
" U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Research Laboratory
200 SW 35th Street
Coivallis. OR 97333
State Countv
Acres
State Countv
Acres
l
TOTAL
Townshto & Rarwe
Sectionfs)
Latltude/Lonaltude
USGS/NWI man name
Scale 1:"
Select [1]
Water/river body name
0 Water Body
0 River Body
Specific location
Was the mitigation project Off-site or On-site?
Land uso-Solect [1]
Agricultural
Commercial
Industrial
Natural
Residential
Documents available-
Selea[o-4]
O Maps
O Blueprints
O Ground photos
O Aerial photos
Date construction began
Date construction completed / /
Were mid-course corrections made? Yes / No
(Make notes In comments section)
. - v.. ACRES
ES7UAR1NE
O subtldal open water
O subtldal roek bottom
O Intertidal aquatic bed
O tnterfdal emergent
dliueft dalflai j.:Sd
O Intertdal forested
C^rit^ftdatlre^d
O hterfidal rocky shore
"
O Intorfdal stream bod
<5'^tert'dal unansbSdaled ihore
ACRES
ACRES
RIVERINE
RIVERINE (cont)
I-iJS^Sn&^perefl^^
. O unknown perennial beach/bar
^Z!^05^)ih:
O Mai rock bottom . O unknown perennial rocky shore
Mai beach/bar
O Mai flat
LACUSTRINE
0 '-Imnetic aqUaUc'bed
O tmneoc open water
0.5(wwUctoA tottom1 VI:
O fannetic unconsolidated bottom
O JlttoraJ aqUaiicbed Z~;X.L '"J.
O itloral beach/bar
O SttbraTemefgent
O ittoralflat
0 ' Ittoral open water'
O littoral rock bottom
O 'lttora) rocky shore ,
O littoral unconsolidated bottom
O itloral unconsolidated shore
O Mai stream bed
_, <„Q,;Mal' /l\1
O Mai unconsolidated chore
-,o
O lower peremlal'toadi'bar
O lower perennial flat
O lower perennial rode bottom
dMbwer'pdfenriJi^a5^ScSv •
O lowor perennial streambed
!• -—•— ~ ¦' O tower Mreai^lift^EStidail^tiotlom '
O lower perennial unoonsoBdated shore
— O upper f»nir^^a{}i^cti>ed' ' " - .
— O upper perennial beach/bar
—, , 0"Upper'perennlal^5xi£^S.'^i1^Wij^eftnlaluncooso5date .Irrtositichon . .
O open water
'O'rt^bottom
O scrub/shrub
-O unconsolidated bottom
O unconsolidated shore
¦— MARINE
; . , 0, SUbfidal aquatic bed
O subtldal open water
' 0 subtidalreef
O subtldal rock bottom
O 'SUbtidaJ unconsolidated bottom
O intertidal aquatic bed
O intertdal beach/bar
O intertidal (tat
O Intertidal reel
O Intertidal rocky shore
O intertidal unconsolidated shore
TOTAL AREA
170
-------
REPORT INFORMATION
Trtle_
Authors First Initial Middle Initial Last Name
Year
• Content.
!A
/// ^ ^ v# •** i <^jiS^k4]9
V-<: wS&Wtf
^Iist Initial • Mlddk^tttal ' Last Name.1
Organization
Address
City State Zip Phone ( )
$3 NT ACT | M FQfi !MTIOKj!
, , »•
Rrst Initial Middle Initial Last Name
. Organization ;
Address
City - State Zip Phone ( )
Rrst Initial Middle Initial" " Last Name [
Organization ;
Address
City State Zip Phone ( )
iy£Is
¦ -. X ' v+&yi '
v S- -y-> •¦.' -• , *¦' s-t»s * '¦¦&.' s..V <¦.••• /•"•¦'
sv £ CONTACT' INRJRMAtlON
' s' < -y-' ¦•//> 4.S /.V V ..^ /v,vfe y. "V ' "¦-V> ' • / a'//v's]S?/Vh ^ •¦
? 5 \ *A < > 'v- w^v-!
- ^Vwrvs/*,?".'
Rrst Initial Middle Initial Last Name
Organization
Address
City State Zip Phone ( )
Objective:
Method- ;
As-buill.
171
-------
FORM I: GENERAL SfTE INFORMATION
Date
SITE NAME/CODE 50
-------
irr>o«i« i rrncom Citc |f\JFQPMAT!°*'
I. Indicate % open water, % vegetated and % non-vegetated areas within the wetland (A-C
should add up to 100%)
A. 80 _% open water
1. % unvegetated
2. 5 % with submerged aquatic vegetation
B. f5 % vegetated
1. O % trees
2. O % shrubs (15 feet or less)
3. /5 % herbs
C. 5 % unvegetated
TOTAL: 100%
II. Indicate % relative cover of surrounding areas within 100 meters of the wetland
boundaries (A-E should add up to 100%):
A. IP % trees
B. 2. % shrubs
C. 8 % natural herbaceous vegetation
D. O % water body-specify type:
E. QO % human landuse
1 O % crops
2 . 0_% fallow
3. o % grazing
4. Q% industrial-specify type:
5. 0% commercial
6. 5 % transportation corridor
7. 1-5 % housing-single family dwellings
8. O % housing-multiple family dwellings
TOTAL: 100% **NOTE: 1-8 should total the percentage value in E.
III. Indicate % of wetland which is disturbed and describe the disturbance (for example,
ditches, water control structures, dumping, fill, and anything that might be hazardous):
5°/o di's+urbed - plas-h'c and hay bale5
3 pi pe5
some s+ahe5 left on sife
IV. Comments:
Kt'ngfeher^ usinj site.
173
-------
OREGON WETLAND STUDY - SUMMER 1993
Form G-1 Equipment Checklist
Site Name/Code
Crew
GENERAL EQUIPMENT
6 Clipboards
Large rubber bands to go around clip boards
Form Folders or File Folders
Data Forms
First Aid Kit including Bee/lnsed
bite and sting medication
Large plastic bags
Baskets to contain equipment & supplies
TRANSECT ESTABLISHMENT
A1 least seven 100-m all weather measunng
tapes (Ben Meadows #122608 or equivalent)
VEGETATION SAMPUNG
Two 1-m* Rectangular Quadrats (Dimensions
0.73m x 1.40m)
Plant Presses with blotters,
ventilators & cinch straps
80 flagged wire pins
2 Pouches or packs for wire pins
(one per Recorder)
Two diameter tapes
Tags for marking specimens of unknown plants
SOIL SAMPLING
35 Soil Sample bags - prelabelled
Bucket Auger
Core Samplers
Core sampler liners & caps
Knife w/th long blade
WETLAND MORPHOLOGY
Transit & Tripod
GENERAL SITE DATA
Transit & Tripod
Stadia Rod
Florescent Flagging Tape
100-m Measuring Tape
Walkie Talkies
Page of
Date:
County
Personnel
Colored pencils
Pencils and Waterproof Pens
Permanent Markers
Cups
Cooler for lunches
Water Jug - for drinking
Water Jug - for washing
Paper Towels
Handi-wipes (or equivalent)
Tec-nu (or equivalent) for Poison Oak
Two 5-lb. Hammers
Twelve 24"-Wooden Stakes
4 Meter Sticks
Regional Flora (Hitchcock & Cronquist)
15-cm ruler
Trowel
Hand Lenses
Wetland species list
Rare species list
Gallon size Ziploc bags
Ice chest w/ice
Set of Dice
Munsell color chart with gleyed color page
Jce chest w/ice & rack to hold sample tubes
2 Shovels
Squirt bottle w/clean water
Paper towels
Random # table
Stadia Rod
Spare camera batteries
35-mm Camera with 50-mm lens
35-mm color slide film, ASA 100
2 pouches or packs for wire pins
360'-Azimuth Compass
174
-------
OREGON WETLAND STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM G-2 Sample Custody Log
Date:
Site Name/Code County
Crew Personnel
A copy of this form must accompany the soil samples and plant specimens to the Portland State
University (PSU) lab. The originals will be included in the packets for each site. Field personnel
complete items followed by (Field); lab personnel complete items followed by (Lab).
Soil Sample #'s (Field):
Number of Soil Samples Collected
(Field):
Delivered to lab personnel: (Initials of
field personnel responsible)
Plant specimens received at PSU (Lab):
Date received:
Personnel receiving:
Soil samples received at PSU (Lab):
Date received:
Personnel receiving:
Sample condition:
Good I Poor (circle one)
Broken sample containers:
Open sample containers:
Leaking sample containers:
Other:
List damaged sample numbers:
Comments:
175
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM G-3 Field Personnel Form
Site Name & Code
Page.
Date
of
County_
Fill out for each site.
Crew:
Crew Leader:
Crew Members
usual/alternate
Surveys
(Transit)
Survey:_
(Stadia)
Survey:_
_(Soils)
Botanist:
(Transects
Botanist:
(Transects
Recorder:
(Transects
Recorder
(Transects
Comments:
176
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM F-1 Transect Establishment
Site Name & Code
Crew
Page.
Date
County
of
Personnel
Baseline Length.
Bearing_
Calculations of Site Characterization Transect Length:
Baseline Length Starting Point
m x 0.1 = m
Bearing
SCT2:
m x 0.3=
m
SCT3:
m x 0.5=
m
SCT4:
m x 0.7=
m
SCT5:
m x 0.9=
m
Sampling interval (Wetland Size): 1m (<0.1 ha [0.25a])
(Circle one) 3m feo.fha [0.25a] but <0.3ha [0.75a])
6m fe0.3ha [0.75a] but <1.0ha [2.5a])
9m (>1 Oha [2.5a] but <2.0ha [5.0a])
Case 1- Calculations for Vegetation Transect Starting Points:
Baseline Length Starting Point Bearing
Rationale for Baseline Placement (e.g., presence/absence of
uni-directional gradient) and other notes (e.g., triangulation
distance calculations, compass bearing for transect segments
across open water):
VT1
VT2
VT3
VT4
VT5
VT6
_m x 0.05=
_m x 0.2=
_m x 0.4=_
_m x 0.6=
m x 0.8=
m x 0.95=
_m
_m
_m
_m
_m
m
Case 2- List Random Sampling Order of Transects
(obtained by rolling a die):
Circle, on the diagram below the start points of transects
actually selected.
-------
1
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993 Page of_
FORM F-2 Sketch Map Date
Site Name & Code County
Crew Personnel
178
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM F-3 Map Data Sheet
Site Name & Code
Crew Personnel_
OA Sheet: Y/N
Station
From
Station
To
Bearing
Stadia
Readings
Calculated
Distance
Comments
U
m
I
u
m
1
u
m
1
U
m
1
u
m
1
u
m
1
u
m
1
u
m
1
u
m
1
u
m
1
-
ii
m
1
u
m
1
ii
T1
•
Comments:
Page of.
Date
County
179
-------
I
Form F-3. (cont.)
NO TURN: Benchmark (B.M.) Readings
Initial Readings u
m
I
Beanng
Final Readings u
m
I
Beanng £_
Error (m-m)
TURN: New Benchmark?
NO:
1 2nd Reading
InrtiaJ B M u Station to
m
I
Bearing °
2 Relocate Tripod
3 3rd Reading
Initial B M u Station to
m
I
Deanng °
4 Final BM
Reading u Station to
m
I
Bearing 2.
5 Agistment
ptl of 3 & 4tn only)
TURN: New Benchmark?
YES:
1 2nd Reading
Initial B M u Station to:.
m
I
Bearing U.
2. Establish new Benchmark
3 1st Reading
New B M u Station to..
m
I
Bearing ^
4 Difference between new and initial
Benchmarks u
m
I
5 Relocate tripod
6. 2nd Reading
NewBM u Station to'.
m
Bearing "
7 Difference between 1st and 2nd Readings
New Benchmarks u
m
I
6 Agistment
(Diff of 6 4 Bm only)
B Final Reading
Initial BM u Station to
m
I
Bearing 1
180
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993 Paga of_
FORM F-4 Buffers and Surrounding Land Use Dale
Site Name & Code County
Crew Personnel
Transect# (circle one) WMT_B WMT_E SCT3B SCT3E Buffer Width Bearing,
Record types of vegetation strata at changes within buffer surrounding wetland
(TR=trees, SH=shrubs, HB=herbaceous). Record O.W. for Open Water and B.G. for
Bare Ground. Record vegetation strata, O.W. or B.G. up to the maximum width of
the buffer < 100m. Record 101m if Buffer width is greater than 100m. Record Land
Use outside the vegetated buffer by circling the appropriate choice.
Distance
(Meters)
Buffer
(TR, SH, HB, OW, BG)
Land Use outside buffer: (circle one)
If Transportation Corridor, circle two.
AG CROPS = AGC
AG FALLOW = AGF
AG GRAZED = AGG
AG ORCHARD = AGO
AG PLOWED = AGP
INDUSTRIAL = IND
INDUSTRY FALLOW = INF
COMMERCIAL = COM
COMMERCIAL FALLOW = COF
TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR = TRN
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE = RSS
RESIDENTIAL MULT1 = RSM
NATURAL = NAT
181
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM F-5 Photographic Label
Site Name & Code
Crew Personnel
DATE:
SITE CODE:
PHOTOGRAPHER
FILM ROLL CODE:
182
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM F-6 Photo Record
Site Name & Code
Crew Personnel_
Include photographs of: surroundings, overview of wetland, representative
vegetation, evidence of animal activity, disturbance or obstructions, buffers,
evidence of stress, the view down the length of each transect (label by number),
and other features of interest and importance. Indicate vantage point and
bearing for.Site Record Photos.
Use a new record sheet for every new roll of film and every new site.
TYPE OF FILM: FILM ID#
DEVELOPED
PHOTOGRAPH DESCRIPTION PHQTQ FRAME# SLIDE#
Page of.
Dale
County
183
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993 Page of.
FORM F-7 Herbaceous Vegetation/% Canopy Coverage Date
Site Name & Code County
Crew Personnel
Wetland
a fcfrcte
Transect# Width Bearing Sampling Interval: 1m 3m 6m 9m one)
OA Sheet Y/N
Check top box
tf sample needs
to be collected,
check bottom box
when sample has
been collected
Plot#
Distance from Om
'Bare ground
Water
Standing Dead and Litter
Species Name 1 Species Name
Corrections ? r
—
-
boundary start
boundary end = wetland width
164
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM F-8 All Shrubs and Trees <2m Tall - Line-Intercept Data Form
Site Name & Code
Personnel
Page_
Date
County
of
Crew
Transect#
Check to collect
Check whan collected.
Wetland Width
Bearing
Sampling Interval: 1m 3m 6m 9m (circle one)
QA Sheet Y/N
Record tape position as metere (whole numbers) and centimeters as decimals: e.g., 1m 14cm=1.14,17m 7cm=17.07
Species:
Species:
Species:
Species:
Species:
Tape Post it ion:
Tape Postition:
Tape Postition:
Tape Postition:
rape Postition:
boundary start
boundary end
= wetland width
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993 Page of
FORM F-9 Tree Identification and Diameter at Breast Height Date
Site Name & Code County
Crew Personnel
Wetland 0 (circle
Transect# Width Bearing Sampling Interval: 1m 3m .6m 9m one)
OA Sheet: Y/N
Diameter at Breast Height (dbh) cm/distance to nearest m
Species
boundary start
boundary end = wetland width
186
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
FORM F-10 Wetland Morphology
Site Name & Code
Crew Personnel
Page_
Date
of
County_
Transect#
Length,
Bearing Sampling Interval: 1m 3m 6m 9m ^e)9
OA Sheet: Y/N
Sample
Point
Plot
Distance
(Meters)
Stadia
Reading
Vertical
Offset
Relative
Elevation
Water
Depth
Open
Water
Vegetated
Bare
Ground
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
WMT Start u_
l_
Bearing_
WMT End u_
l_
Bearing
187
JL
-------
Form F-10. (cont.)
NO TURN: Benchmark (B.M.) Reading* TURN: New Benchmark?
Inftal Reading
Final Reading,
Error
Bearing,
NO:
1 2nd Reading
Initial BM
Bearing 0
Plot#
2. Relocate Tripod
3. 3rd Reading
Initial BM
Plot#
Bearing,
4 FmalBM
Reading
Bearing
Plot#
5 Adjustment
(Difl ol3&4)~
YES:
1. 2nd Reading
Initial B M.
Bearing 0
Plot#
2. Establish new Benchmark
3. 1st Reading
New B.M
Plot#
(same as 1)
Bearing 0
4 Difference between new and Initial
Benchmarks
5. Relocate tripod
6 2nd Reading
New B M
Bearing 0
Plot#
7. Difference between 1st and 2nd Readings
New Benchmarks
8 Adjustment
(Din of 6 & B)
9 Final Reading
Initial B M Plot #
Bearing 0
If transects are interrupted by deep water, distance to the transect start and
endpoints on the far side of the water must be determined. Therefore, record
Upper and lower stadia hairs for those points: start point: u
End point: u
Comments:
188
-------
PI
ot
PI
Ot
Pic
It
Soil Sampling Method
0-9
cm
•
Sample Code #
15-20
crp
Dept
satur
hto
ated soil (cm)
Hydrology
Depth to free
water surface (cm)
Standing water
initial depth/time (cm)
Standing water
final depth/time (cm)
A
(O
to
-
-fe
u
to
-
A
U
ro
Horizon #
Soil Description
Org (0) or
Mineral (Ml
Horizon Depth U/L
(cm)
KfeS Present (Y/N)
Gleyed Matrix (Y/N)
•
Matrix Color
Present (Y/N)
Mottles
Abundance**
Size"*
Color
Fe Concretions (Y/N)
Mn Concretions (Y/N)
Oxidized root
channels (Y/N)
Comments
(a g., presence of rocks,
woody material, buried
vegetation, etc)
O w -n o
3 © O u
< II u m
£? 2 O
|nO
O Ik Z
Z 3, !
® ® (
o
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993
Form L-2 Soil Core Characterization
Analyst Name Date
Sample Identification
Soil Description
Comments
Wetland ft
Transect #
Plot#
Depth (cm)
HjS
Present (Y/N)
Gleyed (Y/N)
Matrix
Color
Mottle
Color
Fe (Y/N)
Concretions
Mn (Y/N)
Concretions
Oxidized root
channels (Y/N)
*
'
Comments:
-------
Form L-3 - Determination of Soil Moisture Content and Loss on Ignition
Quality Assurance Data
Batch
#
Sample 1
Code
Crucible
»
TARE_WT
(g)
FRESH_WT
0)
DRY_WT
(0)
ASHED_WT
(g)
Moisture
(%)
Loss on
Ignition (%)
Blank
Audit
1
9
*
A
Blank
Audit
1
9
n
a
Blank
Audit
1
9
a
A
Blank
Audit
1
2
A
Blank
Audit
1
9
*
Blank
Audit
1
2
3
_ 4
^ Sample type code 1 Is the routine sample, 2 Is the field duplicate, 3 Is tab split of the routine sample, and 4 Is lab split of the
field duplicate
Comments.
191
-------
OREGON WETLANDS STUDY - SUMMER 1993 Page of
FORM L-1 Determination of Soil Moisture Content and Loss on Ignition Date
Batch # Drying Oven Temperature Date/time in Analyst Initials
Date/time out Analyst Initials
Date Weighed Analyst Initials
Muffle Furnace Temperature Date/time in Analyst Initials
Date/time out Analyst Initials
Date Weighed Analyst Initials
Sample
#
Sample
Code
Crucible
#
TARE WT
(9)
FRESH WT
(9)
DRY WT
(g)
ASHED WT
(g)
Moisture
(%)
Loss on
Ignition (%)
Comments:
-------
DATA TRACKING FORM
Site#
FORMS
Copie
Blue
(complete)
d On
Yellow
(incomplete)
Copied On
White-
Data Entry
Or
SQ's
Office/
PSU
iginals
TM'S
Office/
PSU
File
Cabinet
General
Form 1
Phone contact form
AREM
G-3, Personnel
F-1, Transect Est.
F-4, Buffers
F-5, Photo label
F-6, Photo record
F-12, Random # table
Soils
F-11, Soils
QA-4, Soils QA
Veaetation
F-7, Herbaceous
F-8, Shrubs
F-9, Trees
QA-1, QA-herb
QA-2, QA-shrubs
QA-3, QA-trees
MaDDina/MorDholoav
F-2, Sketch map
F-3, Map data sheet
*
F-10, Morphology
Final map
193
-------
APPENDIX B
DESCRIPTION OF AUDIT SOILS USED IN
THE OREGON WETLANDS STUDY
194
-------
Introduction
Two soil audit materials, prepared from mineral and organic soil horizons, will
be used in the Oregon Wetland Study (OWS) as checks on the analytical process for
loss on ignition. The soil audit materials were prepared in 1987 for cooperators in the
Forest Response Program (FRP), the forest research component of the National Acid
Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) that was co-funded by the US Forest
Service and EPA. Although the audit materials were prepared from forest soils, they
are suitable for use in the OWS because their organic matter content (LOI) is within
the range expected in OWS soil samples.
Preparation of the Soil Audit Materials
The two soil audit materials were developed by Dr. Wayne Robarge and his
staff at North Carolina University in spring 1987. Large volumes of soil (approximately
68 kilograms for the mineral soil material and 45 kilograms for the organic soil
material) were collected from two soil horizons. The mineral soil material was
prepared from soil taken from the B horizon of an exposed soil profile located on the
east side of Commissary Ridge, Mount Mitchell, North Carolina (1886 m). The organic
soil sample was prepared from a composite of the Oa and A horizons excavated from
a pit located on Clingman's Peak, approximately 1.2 miles south of the Mt. Mitchell
summit (2168 m). Forest cover type at both collection locations is spruce-fir (Dull et
al., 1988). Soil was placed in large plastic bags and transported to North Carolina
University. The soil was air-dried, milled in a large ball mill (30 minutes), and passed
through a 2mm plastic sieve. Each soil was further homogenized using a cement
mixer (15 minutes) and the method of cone and quartering (Raab et al., 1990). The
homogenized soil was stored in 1 liter Nalgene™ containers.
The soil audit materials have been used by EPA QA staff to assess laboratory
comparability of soil analytical data across diverse research projects (Dwire et al., in
preparation) and continue to be used by researchers as internal quality control checks.
The soils have been stored at room temperature since preparation, and are distributed
on request.
Use of the Soil Audit Materials in the Oregon Wetland Study
Five liters of each soil audit material were requested from Dr. Robarge for use
in the OWS. Two 20-30 gram samples from each liter container will be analyzed for
LOI at Oregon State University, Crop and Soil Science Laboratory prior to sample
collection in the OWS. A control chart (Figure A-1) will be constructed for each audit
soil based on the OSU results, showing the mean soil organic matter content value,
upper and lower warning limits (+2 standard deviations), and upper and lower control
195
-------
limits (+ 3 standard deviations). The LOI value for the audit sample contained in each
batch will be charted. The control chart will serve as a visual check of the LOI
analytical process; values near or exceeding the warning limits will alert the laboratory
technicians of such problems as malfunction of the muffle furnace. In addition, LOI
values from the audit materials will assist in estimating batch-to-batch variation.
Dull, C.W., J.D. Ward, H.D. Brown, G.W. Ryan, W.H. Clerke, and R.J. Uhler. 1988.
Evaluation of spruce and fir in the southern Appalachian mountains. USDA Forest
Service Protection Report R8-PR 13 October 1988.
Dwire, K.A., W. Burkman, R. Mickler, and D. Cassell. Comparability of analytical data
in acid deposition research: results from soil, foliar, and aqueous sample exchanges in
the Forest Response Program. In preparation.
Raab, G.A., M.H. Bartling, M.A. Stapanian, W.H. Cole, R.L. Tidwell, and C.A. Cappo.
1990. The homogenization if environmental soil samples in bulk. In: Hazardous
Waste Measurements. M. Simmons (editor). Lewis Publishers.
196
-------
U— UCL
¦A— UWL
M -- MEAN
•B— LWL
•L— LCL
BATCH
Figure B-l. Hypothetical control chart for soil audit material used in the Oregon Wetlands Study.
-------
APPENDIX C
PROFICIENCY CHECKLISTS USED IN
THE OREGON WETLANDS STUDY
198
-------
Vegetation - Refer also to "Steps in Sampling Vegetation Along a Transect"
1. Recorders correctly fill out header and plot information on forms.
2. Always walking on left side of transect.
3. Tape being stretched along compass bearing.
4. Trampling minimized in each transect segment (sampling interval)- Botanists and Recorders move as indicated
in "Steps".
6. Transect tape is tightly stretched when line-intercept distances are obtained.
7. Botanists and Recorders avoid stepping into plot while reading cover.
8. Botanists work systematically through plot when estimating cover.
9. Botanists estimate cover to nearest 1% for cover values ranging from 1-5%, to nearest 5% for cover values
ranging from 5-100%, and for values less than 1% record .1 to indicate trace amount.
10. Botanists estimate cover of all herbaceous plants, any woody plants (or portions of shrubs or trees) that cccur
within or overlie the plot and are less than 2m tall. Values are obtained for bareground, litter, water, and total
cover of bryophytes or algae if they are present.
11. Recorders correctly record data and assist botanist as needed.
12. Botanists tag (label unknowns) for bouquets, tag and collect unknowns and place in bags as they work along
the transect. Once transect is completed store the collected plants in the ice chest until they can be pressed at
the end of the day.
13. Botanists uses open quadrats on plots with shrubs or trees.
14. DBH is measured properly for all trees > 4 cm diameter (dbh) -correct height; tape placed correctly around
stem. (See "Steps")
15. Recorder or Botanist do not step in the quadrat in their effort to reach trees - this disturbs the area to be used
by the survey team.
16. Botanists properly identify the wetland boundaries, and the positions of the first and last plot
17. Recorders remember to record boundary start and end for each transect and to calculate and record the
transect length on which shrubs and trees are sampled.
199
-------
Soil
1. Random number sheets correctly used to identify which soil plots will be sampled and
to identify the QA plot
2. Correct equipment used for sampling dependent on soil conditions and water depth
3. Sample is collected from the correct location in the plot (near right comer, adjacent
to the flag placed by botany team)
4. Soil pit/auger depth is adequate
5. Soil slab is clean and undisturbed (e.g., not contaminated with material from other depths
from the side of the pit)
6. If bucket auger is used, sampling depth is adequate, and sample Is removed from auger and
reassembled on plastic sheet properly
7. Both surveyors participate in defining horizon boundaries, color, etc.
8. Soil horizons we properly identified, and depths are measured properly
9. Color measured properly
Sample is moist
Surveyors check and compare several possible colors before making a choice
Sample not held in bright sunshine while making determination
Sample not held next to brightly colored clothes that might alter perceived color
Color of matrix determined correctly, i.e., as color of matrix only, ignoring mottles,
concretions, and root channels
Mottles and concretions correctly identified (mottles have same texture as matrix; concretions_
are hard)
10. Depth "0" is properly identified as the interface between litter and mineral soil
11. Samples to be used for LOI analysis are taken from proper depths, correctly labelled (team member
holding stadia rod, who has relatively clean hands, should hold color charts and should label and
hold sample bags)
12. Samples are stored property, bags are sealed
13. Data forms are correctly and completely filled out
14. When sampling at a plot is completed, team members have cleaned up completely; soil is placed
in the pit properly; equipment has been cleaned
15. If comments are added, they are brief, but detailed enough to be useful (e.g., include depth(s), etc.)_
200
-------
Survey
Person with stadia rod
GENERAL
Is a proper benchmark established-one for which a precise location can be located again that day (not permanent)?
Is stadia rod extended from bottom?
Is it extended completely so that each extension fits in notch?
*
Is the stadia rod extended the proper amount (not too much so that it is not vertical)?
Does person at stadia rod hold rod without blocking view of numbers?
Does person at stadia rod hold rod vertical?
MAPPING
Does person at stadia rod stop at correct locations (changes in direction) around wetland perimeter?
Does person at stadia rod correctly identify perimeter?
ELEVATIONS
Does person with stadia rod place stadia rod next to flags inside sample plots and at correct sample points as they
proceed down transects?
Do surveyors take elevation readings before digging soil pits along SCTs?
Do surveyors walk on left side of transects only and avoid traversing wetland?
Are land cover (vegetation, bare ground, open water, water depth) collected at each point along SCTs and WMT and
conveyed to person at transit?
Person at transit
GENERAL
Is transit set up in a location for best view of wetland?
Is transit levelled correctly?
Is transit calibrated correctly with Brunton compass?
Does person at transit give hand signals (or communicate via walkie-talkies) to insure stadia rod is vertical?
Are transit readings made correctly?
201
-------
MAPPING
Are all three stadia hairs read? Is bearing read correctly?
ELEVATIONS
Is middle stadia hair being read?
Is there either a number or a slash for every data point in Water Depth column?
Person recording tor transit operator
i
GENERAL
¦s header information on forms filled out first, is header complete and accurate?
Are stadia readings and bearings recorded accurately and in correct place?
Are comments noted on back of Form F-10 (such as starting and ending points of transects and baseline, vegetation,
etc)? and in comments column on Form F-3?
Is benchmark information recorded on back of Forms F-10 and F-3?
MAPPING
Is sketch map drawn with sufficient detail? labelled correctly (A-Z around perimeter)?
BUFFERS
Is buffer information collected from the start and end points of WMT and SCT3?
Is Form F-4 (buffers) filled out correctly?
If Transportation Corridor is circled, is another land use category also circled?
202
-------
OREGON WETLAND STUDY - SUMMER 1993 Page 1 of 4
CREW LEADER CHECKLIST Date:
Site Name/Code County
Crew Personnel
1. Crew Leader, Botanists, and Surveyor using Stadia Rod determine wetland
boundaries, any predominating environmental gradients, estimate approximate
wetland area and locate transect baseline.
2. Crew Leader ensures that all data Is being recorded in pencil or waterproof ink.
3. Recorders and remaining two Surveyors organize and distribute data forms and
equipment using Form G-1 (Equipment List).
4. Crew Leader and Recorders lay out transect baseline. Crew leader calculates
transect starting points along baseline and Recorders mark with stakes and
appropriate flagging.
5. Crew Leader determines sampling interval from estimate of wetland area.
6. Botanists conduct initial reconnaissance of wetland vegetation and agree upon
pseudonyms for unknown species.
7. Surveyors conduct mapping procedures.
8. Crew Leader performs QA/Proficiency Check of Transit Operator reading the
Stadia Rod (+ 0.5cm). Crew Leader records duplicate readings for 5 stations
on Form F-4 (divide QA check points up-some close and some far from
transit).
9. Crew Leader identifies QA transect and plots for vegetation QA activities
(identification and cover estimates of herbs, line intercept for shrubs and DBH
for trees). Botanists lay out entire tape and flag plots. Crew Leader places 5
sampling quadrats at the start of the QA transect for the Botanist's use.
10. Surveyors determine location of WMT with input from the Crew Leader.
11. Vegetation Teams conduct vegetation identification and estimation of cover of
plant species, bare ground and open water within quadrats, make line-intercept
determinations and belt transect measurements along Site Characterization
Transects.
A. Recorders correctly fill out header and plot
information on forms, correctly record data and
assist botanist as needed.
B. Always walk on left side of transect and stretch
tape along compass bearing. Trampling minimized
in each transect segment. _
C. Transect tape is tightly stretched when
line-intercept distances are obtained.
203
-------
OREGON WETLAND STUDY • SUMMER 1993
CREW LEADER CHECKLIST
Site Name/Code
Date
11. CONTINUED:
D. Botanists work systematically through plot when
estimating cover and Botanists and Recorders
avoid stepping into plot while reading cover.
E. Botanists estimate cover to nearest 1 % for cover
values ranging from 1-5%, to nearest 5% for cover
values ranging from 5-100%, and for values less
than 1% record .1 to indicate trace amount.
G. Botanists estimate cover of all herbaceous plants,
any woody plants (or portions of shrubs or trees)
that occur within or overlie the plot and are less
than 2m tall. Values are obtained for bare ground,
litter, water, and total cover of biyophytes or
algae if they are present.
H. Botanists use take apart quadrats on plots with
shrubs or trees.
I. Botanists tag (label unknowns) for bouquets, tag
and collect unknowns and place in bags as they work
along the transect. Once transect is completed store
the collected plants in the ice chest until they
can be pressed at the end of the day.
J. DBH is measured properly for all trees > 4 cm
diameter (dbh) at correct height; tape placed
correctly around stem.
K. Neither Recorder or Botanist step in the quadrat
in their effort to reach trees - this disturbs
the area to be used by the survey team.
L. Botanists properly identify the wetland boundaries,
and the positions of the first and last plot.
N. Recorders remember to record boundary start and
end for each transect and to calculate and record
the transect length on which shrubs and trees
are sampled.
12. Botanists conduct QA activities for vegetation (identification and estimation of
cover of herbs, bare ground and open water by remeasuring 5 plots, and
remeasuring line intercept for shrubs and DBH for trees within corresponding 5
transect intervals).
13. Crew Leader photographs the site.
14. Crew Leader annotates/updates Form I.
16. Surveyors measure elevations and water depths, and record land cover data at
sampling points along Wetland Morphology Transect.
17. Crew Leader identifies QA transect for soil sampling by rolling a die, identifies
routine and QA plots for soil sampling from random number table. Informs
Surveyors prior to morphology and soil sampling along Site Characterization
Transects.
204
-------
OREGON WETLAND STUDY - SUMMER 1993
CREW LEADER CHECKLIST
Site Name/Code
Date:
Page 3 of 4
18. Surveyors measure elevations and water depths, record land cover data, and
collect soil samples at sampling points along Site Characterization Transects.
A. Stadia rod held vertically?
B. Stadia rod placed property at sampling points
and within plots?
C. Transmitting land cover data to Transit
Operator?
D. Transmitting water depth to Transit Operator?
E. Water Depth MUST be a NUMBER or a SLASH in
all data form spaces-NO blanks.
F. Transit Operator checking bubble-level?
19. Crew Leader performs Proficiency Check of soil sampling activities.
A. Sample collected from proper location at
corner of plot.
B. Correct equipment used for soil conditions.
C. "Clean" soil slab extracted.
D. Soil horizons correctly identified.
E. Samples extracted from correct depths.
F. Munsell color chart properly used for
determining color (e.g., soil is moist,
charts not used in bright sunshine, charts
held away from bright clothing, etc.), and
colors of matrix and mottles correctly
identified.
G. Soil samples correctly labeled and stored.
H. Depth 0 properly identified (interface
between litter layer and top mineral layer).
I. Both Surveyors participating in defining
horizon depths, determining color, etc.
J. Every box on Form filled in?
20. Surveyors conduct QA activities for soil sampling by recharacterizing 1 soil pit
and collecting duplicate soil samples.
21. Botanists and Crew Leader determine if additional Vegetation Transects are
necessary to obtain required number of sample plots containing vegetation.
22. Botanists conduct vegetation identification and estimation of cover of plant
species, bare ground and open water within quadrats, make line-intercept
determinations and belt transect measurements along Vegetation Transects (if
necessary).
23. Surveyors measure elevations and water depths, and record land cover data at
sampling points along Vegetation Transects (if necessary).
205
-------
OREGON WETLAND STUDY - SUMMER 1993
CREW LEADER CHECKLIST
Site Name/Code
Date:
Page 4 of 4
24. Botanists collect voucher samples, and key out and preserve plants for future
identification and archiving.
25. Surveyors place soil samples in coolers for refrigeration and transport to the lab
at PSU.
26. Crew Leader collects and reviews all data forms for completeness, errors, etc.,
organizes them into the site packet, and makes entries in the field diary.
Form G-1, Equipment Checklist (1)
Form G-2, Sample Custody Log (1)
Form G-3, Field Personnel (1)
Form F-1, Transect Establishment (1)
Form F-2, Sketch Map (1)
Form F-3, Map Data Sheet (# of #) per site
Form F-4, Buffers (# of #) per transect
Form F-5, Photographic Label (1)
Form F-6, Photo Record (# of #) per site
Form F-7, Herbaceous Veg (# of #) per transect
Form F-8, Line Intercept (# of #) per transect
Form F-9, Tree DBH (# of #) per transect
Form F-10, Morphology (# of #) per transect
Form F-11, Soils/Hydrology (5) 1 per SCT
Form L-1, LAB - none in field
Form L-2, LAB - none in field
27. Surveyors and Recorders collect and organize equipment and replace it in the
vehicle.
28. Recorders check supply of data forms to ensure that enough copies are
available for sampling the next site. Inform Crew Leader if more copies are
necessary.
29. Crew Leader ensures site is left in the best possible condition, and checks to
ensure no equipment, samples, or personnel are left behind.
COMMENTS:
206
------- |