WETLAND IDENTIFICATION
AND DELINEATION MANUAL
VOLUME II
FIELD METHODOLOGY
by
William S. Sipple
Office of Wetlands Protection
Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
April,
Interim
1987
Final
-------
-2-
PREFACE
According to Corps of Engineers and Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) regulations (33 CFR Section 328.3 and 40 CFR Section 230.3,
respectively), wetlands are ". . . areas that are Inundated or saturated
with surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence
of vegetation typically adapted for life 1n saturated soil conditions.
Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs and similar areas."
Although this definition has been in effect since 1977, the development
of formal guidance for implementing it has been slow, despite the fact
that such guidance could help assure regional and national consistency
in making wetland jurisdictional determinations. Moreover, a consistent,
repeatable operational methodology for determining the presence and
boundaries of wetlands as defined under the federal regulations cited
above would alleviate some concerns of the regulated public and various
private interest groups; it would also substantially reduce interagency
disputes over wetland jurisdictional determinations. Therefore, this
Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual was developed to address
the need for operational jurisdictional guidance.
The basic rationale behind EPA's wetland jurisdictional approach was
initially conceived in 1980 with the issuance of interim guidance for
identifying wetlands under the 404 program (Environmental Protection
Agency, 1980). In 1983 the rationale was expanded and a draft juris-
dictional approach was developed consistent with the revised rationale.
EPA distributed the 1983 draft rationale and approach to about forty
potential peer reviewers. Because the responses were, for the most part,
favorable, further revisions were made and a second draft was circulated
to about sixty potential peer reviewers in 1984. Individuals receiving
the drafts for review were associated with federal, state, and regional
governmental agencies, academic institutions, consulting firms, and
private environmental organizations; they represented a wide range
of wetland technical expertise. The 1984 draft also went through EPA
regional review, as well as formal interagency review by the U.S. Fish
-------
-3-
and Wildlife Service, Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries
Service, and Soil Conservation Service. Based upon the 1984 peer review
comments, the comments from the federal agencies, and EPA field testing
over the last few years in bottomland hardwoods, pocosins, and East
Coast marshes and swamps, the document was further developed into this
2-volume Wetland Identification and Delineation Manual. Volume I presents
EPA's rationale on wetland jurisdiction, elaborates on the three wetland
parameters generally considered when making wetland jurisdictional
determinations, and presents an overview of the jurisdictional approaches
developed by EPA in Volume II, the Field Methodology. Thus, it lays the
foundation for the "simple" and "detailed" jurisdictional approaches
presented in Volume II.
This Wetland Identification and Del 1 neation Manual has been approved
by EPA as an interim final document to be field tested by EPA regional and
headquarters' personnel for a one year period. During this same review
period, the Corps of Engineers has agreed to conduct field review of its
wetland delineation manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987). After the
respective reviews, both agencies have agreed to meet, consider the
comments received, and attempt to merge the two documents into one 404
wetland jurisdictional methodology for use by both agencies.
The author truly appreciates the efforts of the many peer reviewers
who commented on one or both of the drafts that preceded this interim
final document, including Greg Auble, Barbara Bedford, Virginia Carter,
Harold Cassell, Lew Cowardin, Bill Davis, Dave Davis, Doug Davis, Frank
Dawson, M1ke Gantt, Mike Gilbert, Frank Golet, Dave Hardin, Robin Hart,
John Hefner, Wayne Klockner, Bill Kruczynski, Lyndon Lee, Dick Macomber,
Ken Metsler, John Organ, Greg Peck, Don Reed, Charlie Rhodes, Charlie
Roman, Dana Sanders, Bill Sanville, Hank Sather, Jim Schmid, Joe Shisler,
Pat Stuber, Carl Thomas, Doug Thompson, Ralph Tiner, Fred Weinmann, and
Bill Wilen. Their many constructive comments and recommendations have
been very helpful in refining this document. The author also appreciates
the help of EPA's Regional Bottomland Hardwood Wetland Delineation Review
Team (Tom Glatzel, Lyndon Lee, Randy Pomponio, Susan Ray, Charlie Rhodes,
-------
-4-
B111 Sipple, Norm Thomas, and Tom Welborn) in field testing the basic
rationale underlying the Field Methodology at a number of bottomland
hardwood sites in 1986. The vegetation sampling protocol in the Field
Methodology is to a large extent an outgrowth of that effort. Helpful
review and administrative guidance was provided by Suzanne Schwartz,
John Meagher, and Dave Davis of EPA's Office of Wetlands Protection.
Comments and suggestions received during the federal interagency review
were also instrumental in further refining the manual. In fact, in
addressing the soil and hydrology parameters in this manual, the author
relied heavily upon materials already developed by the Corps of Engineers
in their wetland delineation manual cited above. Stan Franczak ably
handled the huge typing load associated with the interim final, as well
as the earlier drafts.
-------
-5-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section I. Introduction 5
Section II. Scoping and Preliminary Data Gathering 7
A. General 7
B. Steps for Preliminary Data Gathering and Scoping..,. 7
Section III. Simple Jurisdictional Approach......... 3
A. General............ 8
B. Steps for Implementing Simple Jurisdictional Approach 9
Section IV. Detailed Jurisdictional Approach 16
A. General 16
8. Steps for Implementing Petailed Jurisdictional Approach 16
Appendix A. Jurisdictional Decision Flow Chart A-l
Appendix B« Jurisdiction Decision Diagnostic Key B-l
Appendix C. Data Forms for Simple Jurisdictional Determination C-l
Appendix D. Data Forms for Detailed Jurisdictional Determination.... D-l
Appendix E. Equipment Necessary for Making Wetland Jurisdictional
Determinations E-l
-------
-6-
SECTION I: INTRODUCTION
This Field Methodology is intended for use by Environmental Protection
Agency field personnel in making wetland jurisdictional determinations. It
was developed as a separate volume to facilitate its use in the field. The
Field Methodology includes four sections and five appendices. Section I is
an introduction which indicates the purpose of the document, outlines its
contents, and explains its relationship to Volume I (Rationale, Wetland
Parameters, and Overview of Jurisdictional Approaches). Section II addresses
scoping and preliminary data gathering, two steps that are generally necessary
prior to making jurisdictional determinations. A simple approach for making
more or less routine jurisdictional determinations is outlined in Section
III. A detailed approach for making jurisdictional determinations for large
and/or controversial sites or projects is presented in Section IV. Appendix A
is a Jurisdictional Decision Flow Chart; Appendix B.is a Jurisdictional
Decision Diagnostic Key. Both of these appendices are tools that will expedite
and conceptually guide decisions about jurisdiction for vegetation units and
sample plots once the field data have been collected. They closely track
each other and will lead to the same conclusions; one's preference for use
will be solely a matter of choice. Some field investigators may find the
flow chart easier to use than the key, especially if they have had limited
experience using diagnostic keys. Appendices C and D include field data forms
for the simple and detailed approaches, respectively. Lists of necessary and
optional equipment for both approaches are included in Appendix E.
Volume II should not be utilized in isolation from Volume I. Users
should first become very familiar with the rationale, wetland parameters,
and overview of the jurisdictional approaches presented in Volume I. It is
also very important to thoroughly review the glossary in Volume I, since a
good understanding of the terms used in the methodology is imperative.
Thus, Volume I should be thought of, in part, as a prerequisite training
document on the use of Volume II, in that an understanding of the former
will help assure the proper use of the jurisdictional approaches presented
in the latter.
-------
-7-
SECTION II: SCOPING AND PRELIMINARY DATA GATHERING
A. General
Prior to making a wetland jurisdictional determination, it is generally
necessary to gather preliminary data on the site or project and scope out the
task. This will allow the field investigator to determine whether the simple
or detailed jurisdictional approach is appropriate.
B. Steps for Preliminary Data Gathering and Scoping
1. Obtain and review any aerial photographs, vegetation maps,
wetland maps, topographic maps, soil surveys, technical
reports, or other pertinent information depicting and/or
describing the site.
2. Estimate the size of the site.
3. Determine the site's geomorphological setting (e.g., floodplain,
isolated depression, ridge and swale complex) and its habitat or
vegetative complexity (i.e., the range of habitat or vegetation
types).
4. Determine whether a permit situation or an enforcement situation
is involved.
5. If necessary, do a field reconnaissance to complete Steps 2-4.
6. Based upon Steps 1-5, determine whether the simple jurisdictional
approach (Section III) or the detailed jurisdictional approach
(Section IV) is appropriate. This step assumes that a field
investigator is already familiar with the simple and detailed
jurisdictional approaches and the types of projects or sites that
would generally be applicable to them as described in Sections
III A and IV A of this Field Methodology.
-------
-8-
SECTION III: SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL APPROACH
A. General
The simple jurisdictional approach is generally applicable to sites or
projects that are small in extent (e.g., a narrow fringe marsh along a shore-
line or a small depressional wetland) and/or non-controversial in terms of
public or private Interests, ecological significance, potential jurisdictional
challenges, enforcement status, etc. Discretion must be exercised in deciding
whether a project is simple, however, since even small sites may be so vege-
tatively complex to require detailed examination; larger sites may be so
uniform to allow for a simple examination. Significantly altered sites and
controversial sites, particularly enforcement situations, will generally
entail conducting a detailed field examination regardless of size.
The simple jurisdictional approach involves Inspecting the majority of
the site and making ocular vegetation estimates for the vegetation units as
a whole (as opposed to detailed sampling along transects), and when appro-
priate, examining soil and hydrologic conditions as well. Because fourteen
steps are potentially involved in the simple jurisdictional approach, on the
surface it appears more complex than it really is. Actually, many juris-
dictional determinations can be made without going through all fourteen steps.
The simple jurisdictional approach will generally be applied only to smaller
sites, which probably will have only one or at most, a few vegetation units.
Furthermore, a field investigator will only have to proceed through Step 6
for any vegetation units dominated by one or more obligate plant species,
assuming there is no evidence of significant hydrologic modifications.
And if a vegetation unit is comprised of only herbaceous plants, which is
the situation with most marshes, dominants will have to be determined just
for those species. Thus, jurisdictional determinations for small herbaceous
wetlands, especially those with dominant obligate wetland species, should be
rather easy to conduct.
All sites or projects for which the simple jurisdictional approach
1s not appropriate, should be examined using the detailed jurisdictional
approach (Section IV). Field data forms are included in Appendix C. A
11st of necessary and optional equipment is given in Appendix E.
-------
-9-
B. Steps for Implementing Simple Jurisdictional Approach
1. Decide how the jurisdictional determination will be presented (e.g.,
ground delineation, delineation on aerial photographs or topographic
maps, or written description in a technical report). Proceed to
Step 2.
2. Inspect the entire site and horizontally stratify it into
different vegetation units either mentally, or on an aerial
photograph or a topographic map. Proceed to Step 3.
3. Determine the dominant plant species for each vegetation unit.
a. Visually estimate the percent areal cover (by species) of the
graminoids, forbs, ferns, fern allies, bryophytes, woody
seedlings, and non-woody vines in the herbaceous understory
and record it on Data Form C-l. This should be done by
estimating the area of the vegetation unit covered by the
foliage of a given plant species projected onto the ground.
b. Indicate the cover class into which each herbaceous species
falls and its corresponding midpoint. The cover classes
(and midpoints) are: T=<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15%
(10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5); 4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0);
6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
c. Rank the herbaceous species according to midpoints. If two or
more species have the same midpoints, use the actual recorded
percent areal cover as a tie-breaker. If two or more species
have the same midpoints and actual recorded percent areal cover,
equally rank them.
d. Sum the midpoint values of all herbaceous species.
e. Multiply the total midpoint values by 50%.
f. Compile the cumulative total of the ranked species in the
herbaceous understory until 50% of the sum of the midpoints for
all herbaceous species is reached or initially exceeded. All
species contributing cover to the cumulative 50% threshold
should be considered dominants. If two or more of these
species have the same midpoints and actual recorded areal
cover, consider them all dominants.
-------
-10-
g. Visually estimate the percent area! cover of the shrub species
and record it on Data Form C-2. Follow the same procedure used
for herbaceous species in Step 3a-f (page 9).
h. Visually estimate the percent areal cover of the woody vines
(other than seedlings) independent of the strata in which they,
occur and record it on Data Form C-2. Follow the same procedure
used for herbaceous species in Step 3a-f (page 9). ?
i. Visually estimate the percent areal cover of the saplings and
record it on Data Form C-3. Follow the same procedure used
for herbacecous species 1n Step 3a-f (page 9).
j. Visually estimate the relative basal area of the tree species
(exclusive of saplings) and record it on Data Form C-3. This
should be done by considering both the size and number of
Individuals of a tree species and comparing that species to
other tree species in the vegetation unit. Note: The total
relative basal area for all the species in a vegetation unit
will always equal 100%.
k. Rank the trees species by relative basal area.
1. Compile the cumulative sum of the ranked tree species until
50% of the total relative basal area for all tree species
is reached or Initially exceeded. All species contributing
relative basal area to the cumulative 50% threshold should be
considered dominants. If the threshold is reached by two or
more species with equal relative basal area values, consider
them all dominants, along with any higher ranking species. If
all the species have equal relative basal area values, consider
them all dominants. Proceed to Step 4.
4. Determine the indicator status of the dominant plant species
in each vegetation unit using the appropriate regional list
of plants that occur in wetlands. Proceed to Step 5.
5. Determine whether the vegetation units have been hydrologically
modified (e.g., whether a vegetation unit with dominant obligate
wetland species has been ditched or a vegetation unit with dominant
obligate upland species has been impounded).
a. In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species
or one or more dominant obligate upland species in a vegetation
unit, and in the absence of hydrological modifications, a juris-
dictional determination can be made without further consideration
of hydrology. If hydrological modifications are evident, however,
the significance of these modifications must be determined before
making the jurisdictional determination. Proceed to Step 6.
-------
-11-
b. In the presence of only dominant facultative species (i.e.,
facultative wetland, straight facultative, and/or facultative
upland) in a vegetation unit, proceed to step 7.
c. If both situations exist at a site, steps 6 and 7 must be
completed.
6. Using the data summary sheets (Data Form C-5) and either the Juris-
dictional Decision Flow Chart (Appendix A) or the Jurisdictional
Decision Diagnostic Key (Appendix B), decide whether the vegetation
units supporting one or more dominant obligate wetland species or
one or more dominant obligate upland species, are wetland units.
Note: In a situation involving multiple vertical strata in which
the only dominants in a given stratum occur sparsely because the
total percent area! cover for that stratum is low, more weight
should be given to the dominants in any strata that have substan-
tially greater overall percent areai cover. For example, if a
vegetation unit in a herbaceous wetland (e.g., a marsh) has one
shrub species represented by a few scattered individuals, the shrub
species would be considered the dominant shrub species present
and thus a dominant under this methodology. However, that shrub
species should be given relatively little weight in comparison
with the dominant herbaceous species, which are obviously more
abundant overall. This can be particularly significant if the
shrub species 1s either an obligate wetland species or an obligate
upland species and its indicator status is inconsistent with the
indicator status of the herbaceous species that are more abundant
overall (i.e., both obligate wetland species and obligate upland
species occur as dominants in the same vegetation unit). This
situation would usually result from anomalous conditions (e.g.,
man-induced disturbance), natural disturbance, or the presence
of microsites. Proceed to Step 14.
7. If the dominant plant species in any vegetation units are all
facultative (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative,
and/or facultative upland), examine the soils and hydrology
as indicated in Steps 8-13.
-------
-12-
8. Check the appropriate county soil survey to determine the soil
series or phases for the vegetation units containing only
facultative species. Proceed to Step 9.
9. Check the national list of hydric soils or the pertinent state
hydric soils 11st to determine whether the soil series or phases
for the vegetation units are considered hydric. Proceed to Step 10.
10. Dig soil pits in the vegetation units and examine the soil profiles
to confirm whether they fit the soil series or phase descriptions
in the soil survey. This is necessary due to the possibility of
inclusions of other soil series or phases and to check for possible
mapping errors. Also some mapping units may be hydric (e.g., tidal
marsh) but will not be on the list of hydric soils because they do
not yet have series names for the area 1n question. Proceed to
Step 11.
11. Determine whether field indicators of hydric soil conditions exist
in the vegetation units and record them on Data Form C-4. The
presence of one or more of the following indicators is indicative
of the presence of hydric soils. Note; The soil examination can
be terminated when a hydric soil indicator is encountered.
a. Organic soils (Histosols) or mineral soils with a histlc epipedon.
b. Gleying or mottling with a soil matrix chroma of < 2 in mineral
soils. Using Munsel Soil Color Charts, record the soil matrix
color and mottle color (i.e., the hue, value, and chroma) of a
soil sample by matching the sample with the appropriate color
chips. Note: The soil should be moistened If it is dry when
examined. For example, a soil sample with a hue of 10YR, a
value of 6, and a chroma of 2 would be recorded as 10YR6/2.
Also determine whether the soil is gleyed by matching the soil
sample with the color chips on the gley page of Munsel Soil
Color Charts. These samples should be taken at approximately
a 25 centimeter (10 inch) depth, or irranediately below the A
horizon, whichever is higher in the soil profile. Apply the
following diagnostic soil key to confirm whether the colors in
the soil matrix are indicative of hydric soil conditions:
-------
-13-
la. Soil is mottled:
2a. Matrix is gleyed
2b. Matrix is not gleyed:
hydric.
3a. Chroma of matrix is < 2
.. ..hydric.
not hydric.
3b. Chroma of matrix is > 2
lb. Soil is not mottled:
4a. Matrix is gleyed
4b. Matrix is not gleyed and chroma is < 1
hydric.
hydric.
4c. Matrix is not gleyed and chroma is > l...not hydric.
Because of their high organic content, some mineral soils
(e.g., MolHsols) may not meet these hydric criteria. However,
in such dark (black) soils, the presence of gray mottles within
25 centimeters (10 inches) of soil surface is considered
indicative of hydric conditions. For the most part 1n the
United States, MolHsols are mainly the dark colored, base-rich
soils of the Prairie Region. Because of the color of the
parent material (e.g. the red soils of the Red River Valley)
some soils will not meet any of these color characteristics.
Soil color 1s also generally not a good indicator in sandy
soils (e.g., barrier islands). When problematic parent materials
or sandy soils are encountered, hydric soil indicators other
than color may have to be relied on in the field.
c. Sulfidic materials. The smell of hydrogen sulfide (rotten egg
odor) is indicative of the presence of sulfidic materials.
Hydrogen sulfide forms under extreme reducing conditions
associated with prolonged soil saturation or inundation.
d. Iron or manganese concretions. These are usually black or dark
brown and occur as small aggregates near the soil surface.
e. Ferrous iron. This is chemically reduced iron, the presence of
which can be determined using a colorimetric field test kit.
f. Other organic materials. In sandy soils (e.g., on barrier
islands) look for any of the indicators listed below.
(1) A layer of organic matter above the mineral surface or high
organic matter content in the surface horizon. The mineral
surface layer generally appears darker than the mineral
-------
-14-
material immediately below it due to organic matter
interspersed among or adhering to sand particles. Note:
Because organic matter also accumulates in upland soils,
in some instances it may be difficult to distinguish a
surface organic layer associated with a wetland site from
TTtter and duff associated with an up!end site unless the
plant species composition of the organic material is
determine"?!
(2) A thin organic layer of hardened soil (i.e., an organic pan
or spodic horizon) at 30-75 centimeter (12-30 inch) depths.
(3) Dark vertical streaking in subsurface horizons due to the
downward movement of organic materials from the surface.
When the soil from a vertical streak is rubbed between the
fingers, a dark stain will result.
Proceed to Step 12.
12. Make hydrologic observations in the vegetation units and record them
on Data Form C-4.
a. Record any evidence of surface inundation, such as drift lines,
water marks, sediment deposition, standing water, surface
scouring, drainage patterns, etc.
b. After sufficient time has passed to allow water to drain into
the soil pit dug in Step 10, examine the pit for evidence of
standing water. Note: Because of the capillary zone, the soil
will be saturated higher"1n the soil profile than the depth of
standing water in the soil pit.
c. Record any plant species that have morphological adaptations
(e.g., buttressed tree bases and adventitious roots) to saturated
soil conditions or surface inundation.
d. When necessary, additional information on hydrology should be
obtained from recorded sources, such as stream gauge data, tide
gauge data, flood predictions, soil surveys, and the national
or state lists of hydric soils.
Note: It is not necessary to directly demonstrate that wetland
hydrology is present. It is only necessary to show that the soil
or its surface are at least periodically saturated or inundated,
respectively. Specifically, with a vegetation unit dominated by
one or more dominant obligate wetland plant species, it is necessary
to show either (1) that there have been no significant hydrologic
modifications or (2) that there is one or more hydrologic indicators
-------
-15-
at least periodically present during the growing season. With a
vegetation unit dominated by only facultative species (i.e., facul-
tative wetland, straight facultative, and/or facultative upland)
occurring on a hydric soil, it is necessary to demonstrate that
there is one or more hydrologic indicators at least periodically
present" during the growing season. Indicators of surface inundation
and the presence of saturated soils in the major portion of the
root zone are considered hydrology indicators. Plant morphological
adaptations are also considered hydrology indicators, unless the
vegetation unit has been significantly altered hydrologically.
Other hydrology indicators include the various recorded sources
listed in Step 12d (page 14). Proceed to Step 13.
13. Using the data summary sheets (Data Form C-5) and either the Juris-
dictional Decision Flow Chart (Appendix A) or. the Jurisdictional
Decision Diagnostic Key (Appendix B), decide whether the vegetation
units dominated by facultative species (i.e., facultative wetland,
straight facultative and/or facultative upland) are wetland units.
See the note 1n Step 6 (page 11) and proceed to Step 14.
14. Indicate the extent of wetlands at the site either on a topographic
map or aerial photograph, 1n a written description, or by a ground
delineation (or any combination of the above). The geographic
extent of wetlands at the site will coincide with the distribution
of the various wetland vegetation units determined in Steps 6
and/or 13, as applicable. Therefore, any upland-wetland boundaries
at the site will coincide with the boundaries between the upland
vegetation units and the wetland vegetation units that are present.
-------
-16-
SECTION IV: DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL APPROACH
A. General
The detailed jurisdictional approach is generally applicable to
sites or projects that are large (e.g., an extensive riverine bottomland
hardwood tract or a large depressional wetland) and/or controversial in
terms of public or private interests, ecological significance, potential
jurisdictional challenges, enforcement status, etc. In some instances,
the detailed jurisdictional approach might also be appropriate for smaller
sites or projects, especially those with complex vegetation. Likewise,
significantly altered sites, as well as enforcement situations, will
generally entail conducting a detailed field examination regardless of
size. Under some circumstances, such as enforcement cases involving filled
wetlands, it may be necessary to rely on alternative approaches. One
option is photointerpretation of vegetation units on pre-project aerial
photographs; another is peat analysis (Sipple, 1985; see Section V of
Volume I for full citation).
The detailed jurisdictional approach involves standard quantitative
vegetation sampling along transects and frequently an examination of the
soils and hydrology as well. Field data forms are included in Appendix D.
A list of necessary and optional equipment is given in Appendix E.
B. Steps for Implementing Detailed Jurisdictional Approach
1. Decide how the jurisdictional determination will be presented
(e.g., ground delineation, delineation on aerial photographs or
topographic maps, written description in a technical report).
Proceed to Step 2.
2. If a reconnaissance survey was not done in the preliminary data
gathering and scoping effort, it generally should be done here.
Proceed to Step 3.
-------
-17-
3. Horizontally stratify the site Into different vegetation units. The
approach used to stratify the site will be contingent upon how the
jurisdictional determination will be presented. If the determination
is to be presented using aerial photographs, then vegetation units
should be tentatively delineated directly on the photographs or
on photographic overlays prior to going into the field. These
vegetation units should then be refined as appropriate in the
field. If a ground delineation 1s planned, vegetation units can
also be shown on aerial photographs or topographic maps, but the
upland-wetland boundary will also have to be delineated on the
ground using stakes or flagging tape. Proceed to Step 4.
4. Establish a baseline or baselines from which transects will extend
into the site. A baseline might be the boundary of the site, a
highway or unimproved road, or some other evident lineal feature.
It should extend more or less parallel to any major watercourse at
the site and/or perpendicular to the topographic gradient. Delineate
the baseline on an aerial photograph or a topographic map and record
its length and compass heading. Proceed to Step 5.
5. Establish transect locations. The number of transects necessary
to adequately characterize a site will vary with the size of the
site and the complexity of the vegetation. It is generally best
to divide the baseline into segments (e.g., 100 foot, 500 foot, or
1000 foot Intervals depending on the size of the site) and randomly
select a point within each segment to begin a transect. Be sure,
however, that each vegetation unit 1s Included within at least one
transect. Proceed to Step 6.
6. Establish each transect along a compass heading perpendicular to
the baseline. Transects should extend far enough into the site
to adequately characterize all of the vegetation units along the
heading.
-------
-18-
7. Following the compass heading, walk each transect to a point at
which all of the vegetation units along the transect have been
encountered. Frequently, this will be to the river or stream if
the site is a floodplain. In the process, make any necessary
adjustments to the tentatively delineated vegetation units or
establish such units if they were not delineated in Step 3. Also
record the length of the transects by either pacing or measuring.
If aerial photographs or topographic maps are used, delineate the
transects on them. Proceed to Step 8.
8. After a transect has been established and walked to its terminus,
it should be traversed again in the opposite direction to do the
quantitative sampling. The number of sample plots necessary will
depend upon the length of the transect and the complexity of the
vegetation. At least one 0.1 acre (0.04 hectare) circular sample
plot should be established in each vegetation unit along a transect.
Additional sample plots should be established within the unit at
91.5 meters (300 foot) intervals or sooner if a different vegetation
unit is encountered. With exceptionally large vegetation units,
however, a sampling interval larger than 91.5 meters may be more
appropriate. Thus, a field investigator should exercise discretion
in establishing sampling intervals. Sample plots should be shown
on either the aerial photographs or topographic maps, or their
distances from the baseline should be recorded in the absence of
photographs or maps. Proceed to Step 9.
9. Select a point along the transect in the ultimate vegetation unit
to center the first 0.1 acre sample plot. Flag the center of the
plot and the four cardinal compass points of the perimeter of the
circular plot. This will divide the plot into four quadrants, and
the plot will have a 10.9 meter (35.8 foot) radius. Proceed to
Step 10.
-------
-19-
10. Determine the dominant plant species for the sample plot. There are
a number of ways to effectively sample vegetation. Many procedures
will produce essentially the same results and some procedures may
be appropriate for certain vegetation types but not for others.
The following procedure has proven effective in the field, but may
have to be adjusted as appropriate depending upon site conditions
and the nature of the vegetation.
a. Randomly toss two 0.1m2 quadrat frames into the herbaceous
understory of each quadrant of the 0.1 acre plot. On Data
Form D-l, record the percent areal cover of each plant species
(graminoids, forbs, ferns, fern allies, bryophytes, woody
seedlings, and herbaceous vines) occurring soley within or
extending into each quadrat frame when viewed from directly
above it.
b. Construct a species area curve to determine whether the eight
0.1m2 quadrats are sufficient to adequately survey the
herbaceous understory. The number of quadrats necessary will
correspond to the point on the curve where it first levels off
(and remains essentially level), indicating that the quadrats
after that point added few if any additional species. If eight
0.1m2 quadrats are not sufficient, do additional quadrats in
increments of four (one in each quadrant) until the necessary
number of quadrats is reached.
c. For each species, sum the percent areal cover for all 0.1m2
quadrats and divide the total by the total number of quadrats
sampled, which will give an average percent areal cover by
species.
d. Rank the species in the herbaceous understory by average
percent areal cover. If two or more species have the same
average percent areal cover, equally rank them.
e. Sum the average percent areal cover for all the species
1n the herbaceous understory.
f. Multiply the total average percent areal cover by 50%.
g. Compile the cumulative sum of the ranked species in the
herbaceous understory until 50% of the total average percent
areal cover for all species is reached or initially exceeded.
All species contributing cover to the cumulative 50% threshold
should be considered dominants. If the threshold is reached
by two or more species with equal average percent areal cover
values, consider them all dominants, along with any higher
ranking species. If all species have equal average percent
areal cover values, consider them all dominants.
-------
-20-
h. Determine the percent areal cover of the shrubs within the
entire 0.1 acre sample plot and record the data on Data Form
D-2. This should be done by traversing the plot a number of
times, listing the shrub species present, and estimating the
percent areal cover by shrub species for the entire plot.
i. Indicate the cover class into which each shrub species falls
and its corresponding midpoint.
j. Rank the shrub species according to midpoints. If two or more
species have the same midpoints, use the actual recorded percent
areal cover as the tie-breaker. If two or more species have the
same midpoints and actual recorded percent areal cover, equally
rank them.
k. SSjfm the midpoint values of all shrub species.
1. Multiply the total midpoint values by 50%.
m. Compile the cumulative total of the ranked shrub species until
50% of the sum of the midpoints for all shrub species is reached
of Initially exceeded. All species contributing cover to the
cumulative 50% threshold should be considered dominants. If
two or more of these species have the same midpoints and actual
recorded areal cover, consider them all dominants.
n. Determine the percent areal cover of the woody vine species
(other than seedlings) within the entire 0.1 acre sample plot
and record the data on Data Form D-2. This should be done by
traversing the plot a number of times, listing the woody vine
species present, and estimating the percent areal cover by
species for the entire plot independent of the strata in which
they occur. Follow the same procedure used for shrubs in Step
lOi-m (page 19).
o. Determine the percent areal cover of the saplings with the
entire 0.1 acre sample plot and record the data on Data Form
D-3. This should be done by traversing the plot a number of
times, listing the sapling species present, and estimating the
percent areal cover by species for the entire plot. Follow
thfl same procedure used for shrubs in Step lOi-m (page 19).
p. Determine the basal area of the trees (exclusive of saplings)
using the point sampling (Bitterlich) system (Avery, 1967;
Dillworth & Bell, 1978) and record the data on Data Form D-3.
Since the Bitterlich system is a plotless method, both trees
within and beyond the 0.1 acre plot should be tallied. This
should be done using either a prism or an angle gauge. Note:
An alternative plotless method for sampling trees is the point
quarter method.
-------
-21-
(1) Hold the prism or angle gauge directly over the center of
the 0.1 acre plot and record all individual trees by species
"sighted in" according to the prism or angle gauge while
rotating 360 degrees in one direction. In the process,
also measure the basal area of each individual tree using
a basal area tape. If a basal area tape is not available,
determine the diameter of each individual tree with a
diameter tape and compute its basal area by the formula
A =
4
(2) Sum the individual tree basal areas by species.
(3) Rank the tree species by their basal areas.
(4) Sum the basal areas of all tree species.
(5) Multiply the summed (total) basal area by 50%.
(6) Compile the cumulative sum of the ranked tree species until
50% of the total basal area for all tree species is reached
or initially exceeded. All species contributing cover to
the cumulative 50% threshold should be considered dominants.
If the threshold is reached by two or more species with
equal basal area values, consider them all dominants, along
with any higher ranking species. If all species have equal
basal area values, consider them all dominants. If it is
felt that a representative sample of the trees has not been
obtained by the one Bitterlich tally, additional tallies
should be obtained by offsetting perpendicularly from the
center point of the plot in alternate directions and taking
additional tallies. Otherwise, proceed to step 11.
Determine the indicator status of the dominant plant species in
the vegetation unit using the appropriate regional list of plants
that occur in wetlands. Proceed to Step 12.
-------
-22-
12. Determine whether the vegetation unit has been hydrologically
modified (e.g., whether a vegetation unit with dominant obligate
wetland plants has been ditched or a vegetation unit with dominant
obligate upland plants has been impounded).
a. In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species
or one or more dominant obligate upland species in a vegetation
unit and in the absence of hydrological modifications, a juris-
dictional determination can be made without further consideration
of hydrology. If hydrological modifications are evident, the
significance of these modifications must be determined before
making the jurisdictional determination. Proceed to Step 13.
b. In the presence of only dominant facultative species (i.e.,
facultative wetland, straight facultative, and/or facultative
upland) in a vegetation unit, proceed to step 14.
c. If both situations exist at the site, steps 13 and 14 must be
completed.
13. Using the sample plot data summary sheet (Data Form D-5) and either
the Jurisdictional Decision Flow Chart (Appendix A) or the Jurisdic-
tional Decision Diagnostic Key (Appendix B), decide whether the
vegetation unit supporting one or more dominant obligate wetland or
one or more dominant obligate upland species, is a wetland unit.
Note: In a multiple-strata setting in which the only dominants
in a given stratum occur sparsely in the sample plot because the total
percent area cover for that stratum in that plot is low, more weight
should be given to the dominants in any strata that have substantially
greater overall percent area! cover in the sample plot. For example,
if a sample plot in a herbaceous wetland (e.g., a marsh) has one
shrub species represented by a few scattered individuals, the shrub
species would be considered the dominant shrub species present and
thus a dominant under this methodology. However, it should be given
relatively little weight in comparison with the dominant herbaceous
species, which are obviously more abundant overall. This can be
particularly significant if the shrub species is either an obligate
wetland species or an obligate upland species and its indicator
status 1s inconsistent with the indicator status of the herbaceous
species that are more abundant overall (i.e., both obligate wetland
-------
-23-
species and obligate upland species occur as dominants in the same
plot). This situation would usually result from anomalous conditions
(e.g., man-induced disturbance) or the presence of microsites. A
second potential sampling problem may also occur. If a single large
tree is recorded in a sample plot, it may be determined to be dominant
for that plot under this methodology. Similarly to the example
above, this species may have an indicator status that is inconsistent
with the dominants in the other strata. Thus, when this situation
is encountered, it is important to determine whether the individual
tree is occurring under either anomalous conditions or on a microsite;
in either case, it should be given relatively little weight in com-
parison with any overall more abundant species in the vegetation
unit. Proceed to Step 21.
14. If the dominant plant species in the vegetation unit are all
facultative (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative,
and/or facultative upland), examine the soils and hydrology
as indicated in Steps 15-19.
15. Check the appropriate county soil survey to determine the soil series
or phases for the vegetation unit containing only facultative species.
Proceed to Step 16.
16. Check the national list of hydric soils or the pertinent state
hydric soils list to determine whether the soil series or phases
for the vegetation unit are considered hydric. Proceed to Step 17.
17. Dig a soil pit near the center of the 0.1 acre sample plot and
examine the soil profile in the vegetation unit to confirm whether
it fits the soil series or phase descriptions in the soil survey.
This is necessary due to the possibility of inclusions of other
soil series or phases and to check for possible mapping errors.
Also, some mapping units may be hydric (e.g., tidal marsh) but
will not be on the list of hydric soils because they do not yet
have series names for the area in question. If it is felt that
-------
-24-
supplemental soil sampling should be done to adequately characterize
the soils at the plot, additional samples can be readily obtained
by randomly sampling in each quadrant with an Oakfield soil probe
or similar device. Proceed to Step 18.
18. Determine whether field indicators of hydric soil conditions exist
in the soil pits and record the data on Data Form D-4. The presence
of one or more of the following indicators is indicative of the
presence of hydric soils. Note: The soil examination can be
terminated when a hydric soil indicator is encountered.
a. Organic soils (Histosols) or mineral soils with a histic
epipedon.
b. Gleying or mottling with a soil matrix chroma of < 2 in mineral
soils. Using Munsel Soil Color Charts, record the soil matrix
color and mottle color (i.e., the hue, value, and chroma) of a
soil sample by matching the sample with the appropriate color
chips. Note: The soil should be moistened if it is dry when
examined. For example, a soil sample with a hue of 10YR, a
value of 6, and a chroma of 2 would be recorded as 10YR6/2.
Also determine whether the soil is gleyed by matching the soil
sample with the color chips on the gley page of Munsel Soi1
Color Charts. These samples should be taken at approximately
a 25 centimeter (10 inch) depth or immediately below the A
horizon, whichever is higher in the soil profile. Apply the
following diagnostic soil key to confirm whether the colors in
the soil matrix are indicative of hydric soil conditions:
la. Soil is mottled:
2a. Matrix is gleyed hydric.
2b. Matrix is not gleyed
3a. Chroma of matrix is < 2
... .hydric.
not hydric.
3b. Chroma of matrix is > 2
lb. Soil is not mottled:
4a. Matrix is gleyed
hydric
4b. Matrix is not gleyed and chroma is £ 1 hydric.
4c. Matrix is not gleyed and chroma is "> 1...not hydric.
-------
-25-
Because of their high organic content, some mineral soils
(e.g., Mollisols) may not meet these hydric criteria. However,
in such dark (black) soils, the presence of gray mottles within
25 centimeters (10 inches) of the soil surface is considered
indicative of hydric conditions. For the most part, in the
United States, Mollisols are mainly the dark colored, base-rich
soils of the Prairie Region. Because of the color of the
parent material (e.g., the red soil of tha Red River Valley)
some soils will not meet any of these color characteristics.
Soil color is also generally not a good indicator in sandy soils
(e.g., harrier islands). When problematic parent materials or
sandy soils are encountered, hydric soil indicators other than
color may have to be relied on in the field.
c. Sulfidic materials. The smell of hydrogen sulfide (rotten
egg odor) is indicative of the presence of sulfidic materials.
Hydrogen sulfide forms under extreme reducing conditions
associated with prolonged soil saturation or inundation.
d. Iron or manganese concretions. These are usually black or dark
brown and occur as small aggregates near the soil surface.
e. Ferrous iron. This is a chemically reduced iron, the presence
of which can be determined by using a calorimetric field test
kit.
f. Other organic materials. In sandy soils, look for any of the
indicators listed below.
(1) A layer of organic matter above the mineral surface or high
organic matter in the surface horizon. The mineral surface
layer generally appears darker than the mineral material
immediately below it due to organic matter interspersed
among or adhering to sand particles. Note: Because organic
matter also accumulates in upland soils, in some instances
it may be difficult to distinguish a surface organic layer
associated with a wetland site from litter and duff associ-
ated with an upland site unless the plant species composition
of the organic material is determined.
(2) A thin organic layer of hardened soil (i.e., an oryanic pan
or spodic horizon) at 30-75 centimeter (12-30 inch) depths.
(3) Dark vertical streaking in subsurface horizons due to the
downward movement of organic materials from the surface.
When the soil from a vertical streak is rubbed between the
fingers, a dark stain will result.
Proceed to Step 19.
-------
-2fi-
19. Make hydrologic observations in the vegetation unit and record the
data on Data Form D-4.
a. Traverse the 0.1 acre sample plot a number of times and record
any evidence of surface inundation, such as drift lines, water
marks, sediment deposition, standing water, surface scouring,
drainage patterns, etc.
b. After sufficient time has passed to allow water to drain into
the soil pit dug in Step 17, examine the pit for evidence of
soil saturation. Note: Because of the capillary zone, the
soil will be saturated' higher in the profile than the standing
water in the soil pit.
c. Record any plant species found that have morphological adapta-
tions to saturated soil conditions or surface inundation.
d. When necessary, additional information on hydrology should be
obtained from recorded sources, such as stream gauge data, tide
gauge data, flood predictions, soil surveys, the national or
state lists of hydric soils.
Note: It is not necessary to directly demonstrate that wetland
hydrology is present. It is only necessary to show that the soil
or its surface are at least periodically saturated or inundated,
respectively. Specifically, with a vegetation unit dominated
by one or more dominant obligate wetland plant species, it is
necessary to show either (1) that there have been no significant
hydrologic modifications or (2) that there is one or more hydrologic
indicators at least periodically present during the growing season.
With a vegetation unit dominated by only facultative species (i.e.,
facultative wetland, straight facultative, and/or facultative
upland) occurring on a hydric soil, it is necessary to demonstrate
that there is one or more hydrologic indicators at least periodically
present during the growing season. Indicators of surface inundation
and the presence of saturated soils in the major portion of the
root zone are considered hydrology indicators. Plant morphological
adaptations are also considered hydrology indicators, unless the
vegetation unit has been significantly altered hydrologically.
Other hydrology indicators include the various recorded sources
listed in Step 19d (page 26). Proceed to Step 20.
-------
-27-
20. Using the sample plot data sumnary sheet (Data Form D-5) and either
the Jurisdictional Decision Flow Chart or the Jurisdictional Decision
Diagnostic Key, decide whether the vegetation unit dominated by
facultative species (i.e., facultative wetland, straight facultative
and/or facultative upland) is a wetland unit. See the note in
Step 13 (page 22) and proceed to step 21.
21. Proceed along the transect towards the baseline until another
vegetation unit is encountered or 91.5 meters (300 feet), whichever
comes first. Establish a second 0.1 acre sampling plot (plot two)
at least 15.2 meters (50 feet) beyond the boundary of the new
vegetation unit or at a distance 91.5 meters from the first plot
if the same vegetation unit is encountered. Repeat the same pro-
cedures given in Steps 10-20. If the vegetation unit (including
soils and topography) at the second plot is the same as the first,
or if the second is different but they are either both wetlands or
both uplands, proceed to Step 23. If the vegetation unit at the
second plot is different and one of the units is upland and the
other is wetland, then an upland-wetland boundary has been traversed.
Proceed to Step 22.
22. Determine the upland-wetland boundary between the two plots.
a. Move back along the transect at least 15.2 meters (50 feet)
into what is obviously the vegetation unit encountered in the
first sample plot. Repeat the same procedures given in Steps
10-20 for this sample plot (plot three).
b. Look for a change in vegetation or topography between sample
plots two and three. Information from the data forms for
plots two and three will provide cues as to which parameters
have changed. In a forested area, this will frequently involve
changes in the shrubs or herbaceous plants. If there is a
vegetation or topographic change or break, sample the soil at
that point along the transect to see if it is hydric. If it
is hydric, proceed towards the upland plot until a more evident
change or break in the vegetation or topography is noted, and
examine the soil again to see if it is hydric. If no evident
change or break in vegetation or topography is initially noted,
-------
-28-
the soil should be examined half way between plots two and
three. If the soil is hydric at this point on the transect,
sample the soil again half way between this point and plot
two. By repeating either of these procedures, make as many
additional soil samples as necessary to determine the location
of the upland-wetland boundary (actually a point) along the
transect. A soil probe (e.g., an Oakfield soil probe) is very
helpful to do this intensified soil sampling. Note: At this
point in the overall procedure, soils generally become more
useful than vegetation in establishing the upland-wetland
boundary, particularly if there is no evident vegetation
change or break or when facultative species dominate two
adjacent vegetation units. Therefore, a Data Form D-4
should be filled out for each additional soil sample taken
between sample plots two and three. On the Data Form D-4's,
also include any hydrology observations made in the ininediate
vicinity of the soil samples. Because quantitative vegetation
data have already been obtained for 0.1 acre plots (sample
plots two and three) centered approximately 15.2 meters
(50 feet) to each side of the upland-wetland boundary, further
detailed quantitative analysis of the vegetation is generally
not necessary. Any vegetation breaks or changes in species
composition in the immediate vicinity of the soil samples
should be recorded, however, on a Data Form D-5. Data Form
D-5's (including vegetation, soils and hydrology observations)
must be completed at least for the areas immediately to each
side of the upland-wetland boundary point (i.e., one form
should be completed for an upland unit and one form should
be completed for a wetland unit).
c. Once the upland-wetland boundary point is determined, indicate
its location on the aerial photograph or topographic map with
the letters "BP" and record its distance from one of the two 0.1
acre sample plots or the baseline. Proceed to step 23.
23. Make additional wetland determinations along the transect in
accordance with Step 21. The procedure described in Step 22
should be applied at every place along the transect where a
wetland boundary occurs between successive 0.1 acre sampling
plots. Proceed to Step 24.
24. Establish all other necessary transects and repeat the procedures
1n Steps 7-23. Proceed to Step ?5.
-------
-29-
25. Synthesize the sample data for all of the transects to determine
the portion of the site that is wetlands.
a. Examine the sample plot data summary sheets (Data Form D-5)
and indicate on the aerial photograph or topographic map all
plots that are wetlands and all plots that are uplands.
b. If the sampling plots are all wetlands or all uplands, the
entire site is either entirely wetlands or entirely uplands,
respectively.
c. If some sampling plots are uplands and some are wetlands, then an
upland-wetland boundary is present. Connect the upland-wetland
boundary points ("BP's") on the aerial photograph or topographic
map by following either the vegetation break or the topographic
contour that corresponds with the upland-wetland boundary points.
This interpolated line passing through the "BP's" is the upland-
wetland boundary.
d. If the distances between transects are large or the vegetation
breaks or the topographic contours do not consistently correspond
with the upland-wetland boundary, it may be necessary to do
additional soil sampling across the boundary in the areas
between transects. The latter should done by walking the
approximate upland-wetland boundary and periodically sampling
across it. For each soil sample across the boundary, record soil
data (and hydrology observations from the immediate vicinity)
on a Hata Form 0-4. Data Form D-5's (including vegetation, soils
and hydrology observations) must be completed at least for the
areas immediately to each side of the upland-wetland boundary
point (i.e., one form should be completed for an upland unit
and one form should be completed for a wetland unit).
e. If the upland-wetland boundary is to be delineated on the ground,
place stakes or flagging tape at all transect boundary points,
as well as at any boundary points established by inter-transect
sampling.
-------
APPENDIX A
JURISDICTIONAL DECISION
FLOW CHART
-------
APPENDIX A: JURISDICTIONAL DECISION FLOW CHART
PART A: DETERMINATIONS IN WHICH ONE OR MORE DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES OCCUR I/2/
One Or More Dominant OBL Wetland
Yes V Speci es Present _3/
-No
One Or More Dominant
OBL Upland Species
Yes Present No
Dominant OBL Upland Species
Occur On Relatively Dry
Microsites And/Or
Yes<—Larger Similar Inclusions—> No
One Or More Dominant OBL
Yes < Upland Species Present > Mo 6/
Wetlands (1) |
One Or More Dominant
Facultative
Species (FACW, FAC
Yes <—And/Or FACU) Present--> No 8/
Yes
Hydric Soils
<—Present--> No
Microsites And
Inclusions Are
Uplands; Matrix
Is Wetlands (2)
Dominant OBL Wetland
Species Comprise 50% Or
More Of The Total Dominant
OBL (Both OBL
Wetland And OBL
Yes <--'Jpland) Species > No
Dominant OBL Upland
Species Occur On
Relatively Ory
Microsites And/Or
Larger Similar
Yes < —Inclusions--> No 8/
|Uplands (5)
Hydrology |Uplands( 10)"
Indicative
Of Wetlands 7/
Yes
No
| irletl anHs' (3") |
Uplands'!4) |
Yes
I
I
Vegetation
Unit Matrix Has
<—Hydric Soils—>
| Upfands (6) |
1 Wetlands (12)1 [U^an~ds"TnTl
No
Hydrology Indicative
Yes <—Of Wetlands 7/—> No
Microsites, Inclusions
And Matrix Are Uplands (7)
Micros! tes "And
Larger Similar
Inclusions Are
Uplands; Matrix
Is Wetlands (9)
~MicTos~i tes, Inclusions
And Matrix Are
Uplands (B)
-------
A-2
Footnotes For Part A
V The methodology presented in this flow diagram relies hierarchically on vegetation, soils and hydrology. As pointed out
by the Corps of Engineers (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), there are certain wetland types and/or conditions that may
make application of indicators of one or more of the parameters difficult, at least at certain times of the year.
This should not be considered atypical. Rather, it is due to normal seasonal or annual variations in environmental
conditions that result from causes other than human activities or catastrophic natural events. The Corps gives four
examples of this situation (wetlands in drumlins, seasonal wetlands, prairie potholes, and vegetated flats). For
example, vegetated flats dominated by annual plants may appear only as unvegetated mudflats during the nongrowing season.
Under such circumstances, an indicator of hydrophytic vegetation would not be evident. Likewise, a prairie pothole
may not have inundated or saturated soils during most of the growing season in years of below normal precipitation.
Thus, a hydrology indicator would be absent. Under these circumstances, a field investigator making a jurisdictional
determination must decide whether or not wetland indicators are normally present during a portion of the growing season.
The Corps further points out that atypical situations may also exist in which one or more indicators of hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils and/or wetland hydrology cannot be found due to the effects of recent human activities or nat-
ural events. For example, unauthorized activities such as (1) the alteration or removal of vegetation, (2) the placement
of dredged or fill material over a wetland, and (3) the construction of levees, drainage systems, or dams that signifi-
cantly alter hydrology. Under such circumstances, an investigation of the pre-existing conditions is necessary to
determine whether or not a wetland existed prior to the disturbance. Recent natural events (e.g., impoundment of water
by beaver) and man-induced conditions (e.g., inadvertent impoundment due to highway construction) may also result in
atypical situations that effect wetland vegetation and hydrology in an area which was uplands prior to flooding.
However, the area may not yet have developed hydric soil indicators. It is important in the latter two circumstances
(i.e., natural events and man-induced conditions) to determine Whether or not the alterations to the area have resulted
in changes that are now the "normal circumstances." The relative permanence of the change and whether or not the area
is now functioning as a wetland must be considered. A site with wetland vegetation and hydrology (other than from
irrigation) that has not yet developed hydric soil characteristics due to recent flooding should be considered to have
soils that are functioning as hydric soils.
£/ Non-dominant plants may be present as well.
2/ Dominant facultative species (FACW, FAC and/or FACII) may be present as well.
V In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species, assume wetland hydrology is present (except for upland
— microsites and/or larger similar inclusions) unless evidence of disturbance suggests otherwise.
-------
A-3
Footnotes for Part A (continued)
5/ This situation (both dominant obligate wetland species and dominant obligate upland species in the same vegetation unit
under non-microsite/inclusion circumstances) should only occur in disturbed units, either naturally (e.g., a saltmarsh
invading a pine forest due to sea level rise) or unnaturally (e.g., a ditched wetland with wetland obligates dying out
and upland obligates invading). When it does occur, a 50% rule should be applied. An alternative to the 50% rule
for forested sites would be to examine tree vigor and reproduction (e.g., seedlings and saplings), which may give a
good indication of the direction of vegetation change at the unit or site. This alternative may apply to herbaceous
sites as wel 1.
6/ Under these circumstances, dominant FACW, FAC, and/or FACU species must be present.
Jj At this point, a field investigator must :1ecide whether or not wetland hydrologic indicators are naturally present.
If one or more are present, the vegetation unit is wetlands; if not, the unit is uplands. If the site has been hyrtro-
logically disturbed, the significance of the disturbance must be considered in deciding whether or not the unit is
still wetlands hydrologically.
In the presence of one or more dominant obligate upland species, assume upland hydrology is present (except for wetland
rnicrosites and/or similar larger inclusions) unless evidence of disturbance suggest otherwise.
Note: (1) - (12) are wetland determination points.
ORL = obiigate
FACW = facultative wetland
FAC = straight facultative
FACU = facultative upland
-------
A-4
APPENDIX A: JURISDICTIONAL DECISION FLOW CHART
PART B: DETERMINATION IN WHICH ONLY NON-DOMINANT PLANT SPECIES OCCUR 1/2/
Yes <-
Yes V
I
OBL Wetland
Species Well
Distributed In
<—Unit > No
One Or More OBL Wetland
Species Present 3/__.
No
I
One Or More OBL
Upland Species
No V < Present > Yes
> Hydric Soils <-
Yes <—Present—>
No
Yes <•
One Or (lore
OBL Upland
Species
--Present—>
No
Hydrology | TTpland (7)
Indicative Of
Yes <—Wetlands if > No
Facultative Species
(FACW, FAC And/Or FACU)
Yes < Present > No 8/
OBL Upland
Species Occur
On Relatively
Dry Microsites
And/Or Larger
Similar Inclusions
| Wetlands fl) 1
| MetlandsXS) I
| UplandrTfiT I
OBL Upland
Species Occur
On Relatively
Dry Microsites
And/Or Larger
Yes <— Sinilar Inclusions —
| UpTands (~11)
No 8/
Yes
"Mfcros
tes
And
Inclusions Are
Uplands; Unit
Matrix Is
Wetlands (?)
No 6/
OBL Wetland Species
Comprise 50% Or More
Of The Total OBL
(Both OBL Wetland And
OBL Upland) Species
Yes <-
Vegetation
Unit Matrix
Has Hydric
-Soils
, I rnr
| Uplands fB)
Yes No
l~WetTan"ds (3) | | TTplalds~~f4"T~
Microsites Ant?
Inclusions Are
Uplands; Matrix
Is Wetlands (9)
-> No
Microsites
Inclusions, And
Matrix Are Uplands
(10)
-------
A-5
Footnotes For Part B
\f A situation in which no species is dominant will seldom occur. Consequently, this flow chart will not be utilized often.
2/ The methodology presented in this flow diagram relies hierarchically on vegetation, soils and hydrology. As pointed out
by the Corps of Engineers (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), there are certain wetland types and/or conditions that may
make application of indicators of one or more of the parameters difficult, at least at certain times of the year. This
should not be considered atypical. Rather it is due to normal seasonal or annual variations in environmental conditions
that result from causes other than human activities or catastrophic natural events. The Corps gives four examples of
this situation (wetlands in drumlins, seasonal wetlands, prairie potholes, and vegetated fats). For example, vegetated
flats dominated by annual plants may appear only as unvegetated mudflats during the nongrowing season. Under such
circumstances, an indicator of hydrophytic vegetation would not be evident. Likewise, a prairie pothole may not have
inundated or saturated soils during most of the growing season in years of below normal precipitation. Thus, a
hydrology indicator would be absent. Under these circumstances, a field investigator making a jurisdiction determina-
ation must decide whether or not wetland indicators are normally present during a portion of the growing season.
The Corps further points out that atypical situations may also exist in which one or more indicators of hydrophytic
vegetation, hydric soils and/or wetland hydrology cannot be found due to the effects of recent human activities or natur-
al events. For example, unauthorized activities such as (1) the alteration or removal of vegetation, (2) the placement
of dredged or fill material over a wetland, and (3) the construction of levees, drainage systems, or dams that signifi-
cantly alter hydrology. Under such circumstances, an investigation of the pre-existing conditions is necessary to
determine whether or not a wetland existed prior to the disturbance. Recent natural events (e.g., impoundment of
water by beaver) and man-induced conditions (e.g., inadvertent impoundment due to highway construction) may also result
in atypical situations that effect wetland vegetation and hydrology in an area which was uplands prior to flooding.
However, the area may not yet have developed hydric soil indicators. It is important in the latter t*o circumstances
(i.e., natural events and man-induced conditions) to determine whether or not the alterations to the area have resulted
in changes that are now the "normal circumstances." The relative permanence of the change and whether or not the area
is now functioning as a wetland must be considered. A site with wetland vegetation and hydrology (other than from
irrigation) that has not yet developed hydric soil characteristics due to recent flooding should be considered to have
soils that are functioning as hydric soils.
2/ Non-dominant OBL upland species and/or non-doininant facultative species (FACW, FAC and/or FACU) may be present as well.
£/ In the presence of one or more non-dominant obligate wetland species that are wel1-distributed in the unit, assume
wetland hydrology is present (except for upland microsites and/or larger similar inclusions) unless evidence of
disturbance suggests otherwise.
jS/ Under these circumstances, non-dominant FACW, FAC, and/or FACU species must be present.
-------
A-6
Footnotes for Part B (continued)
6/ This situation (both obligate wetland species and obligate upland species in the same vegetation unit under non-micro-
~ site/inclusion circumstances) should occur rather infrequently and only in disturbed units, either naturally (e.g., a
saltmarsh invading a pine forest due to sea level rise) or unnaturally (e.g., a ditched wetland with wetland obligates
dying out and upland obligates invading). When it does occur, a 50% rule should be applied. An alternative to the
50% rule for forested sites would be to examine tree vigor or reproduction (e.g., seedlings and saplings), which may
give a good indication of the direction of vegetation change at the unit or site. This alternative may apply to
herbaceous sites as well.
7/ At this point, a field investigator must decide whether or not wetland hydrologic indicators are naturally present.
— If one or more are present, the vegetation unit is wetlands; if not, the unit is uplands. If the site has been
hydrologically disturbed, the significance of the disturbance must be considered in deciding whether or not the unit
is still wetlands hydrologically.
8/ In the presence of one or more non-dominant obligate upland species that are well-distributed in the unit, assume upland
hydrology is present (except for wetland microsites and/or similar larger inclusions) unless evidence of disturbance
suggests otherwise.
Note: (1) - (11) are wetland determination points.
OBL = obligate
FACtJ = facultative wetland
FAC = straight facultative
FACtJ = facultative upland
-------
APPENDIX B
JURISDICTIONAL DECISION
DIAGNOSTIC KEY
-------
APPENDIX B: JURISDICTIONAL
DECISION DIAGNOSTIC KEY }j
Vegetation units are dominated by one or more plant species. Non-dominant
species may also be present.
2a. One or more dominant obligate wetland plant species are present in the
vegetation unit (or site if it is a monotypic site). Facultative species
(facultative wetland, straight facultative and/or facultative upland) may
occur as dominants as well.Jy
3a. Obligate upland dominants (one or more) are present.
4a. Dominant obligate upland species occur on relatively dry
microsites (e.g., live tree bases, decaying tree stumps,
mosquito ditch spoil piles, small earth hummocks) and/or
on larger similar inclusions occurring In an otherwise
topographically uniform unit containing dominant obligate
wetland species. Under such circumstances, you should check
to see if you correctly horizontally stratified the site and
adjust accordingly by either: (a) showing these microsites
and inclusions as local UPLANDS in a WETLANDS matrix or by
(b) considering the unit to be all WETLANDS, but acknowledging
the presence of the local UPLANDS in a written description
of the site.( l)^/
4b. Dominant obligate upland species do not occur on relatively
dry microsites and/or larger similar inclusions; they occur
rather uniformly intermixed with the dominant obligate wetland
species. Under such circumstances, the unit and/or site is
probably significantly hydrologically disturbed (naturally or
by man) and successional vegetation changes are occurring.^/
5a. 50% or more of the total dominant obligate species (both
obligate wetland species and obligate upland species) are
obligate wetland species WETLANDS (2)
5b. Less than 50% of the total dominant obligate species are
obligate wetland species UPLANDS (3)
3b. Obligate upland dominants are not present WETLANDS (4)
2b. One or more dominant obligate wetland plant species are not present in
the vegetation unit (or site if it is a monotypic site). Facultative
species (facultative wetland, straight facultative and/or facultative
upland) may occur as dominants as well.
6a. Obligate upland dominants (one or more) are present.
7a. One or more dominant facultative species (facultative wetland,
straight facultative and/or facultative upland) are present.
-------
8-2
8a. Dominant obligate upland species occur on relatively dry
inicrosites and/or larger similar inclusions. Under such
circumstances, you should check to see if you correctly
horizontally stratified the site and determine whether
the vegetation unit natrix (the area dominated by the
facultative species in this instance) is wetlands by
examining soils.^/
9a. Vegetation unit matrix has hydric soils.
10a. Hydrology of vegetation unit matrix is indicative
of wetlands Microsites and inclusions are
UPLANDS; matrix is WETLANDS (5).5/
10b. Hydrology of vegetation unit matrix is not indica-
tive of wetlands....Microsites, inclusions and
matrix are UPLANDS (6).
9b. Vegetation unit matrix does not have hydric soils./.Micro-
sites, inclusions, and matrix are UPLANDS (7).
8b. Dominant obligate upland species do not occur on relatively dry
microsites and/or larger similar inclusions UPLANDS (8).£/
7b. One or more facultative species are not present UPLANDS (9) .£/
6b. Obligate upland dominants are not present; one or more dominant
facultative species (facultative wetland, straight facultative
and/or facultative upland) are presently
11a. Hydric soils are present
8a. Hydrology is indicative of wetlands WETLANDS (10).V
8b. Hydrology is not_ indicative of wetlands...UPLANDS (11).
lib. Hydric soils are not present UPLANDS (12).
lb. Vegetation units are not dominated by one or more plant species.^/
12a. One or more obligate wetland species are present.
13a. Obligate wetland species are well-distributed in unitjty
14a. One or more obligate upland species are present.
15a. Obligate upland species occur on relatively dry
microsites and/or larger similar inclusions. Under
these circumstances, the microsites and inclusions
are UPLANDS and the vegetation unit matrix is
WETLANDS (13).
-------
ft-3
15b. Obligate upland species do not occur on relatively dry
microsites and/or larger similar inclusions; they occur
rather uniformly intermixed with the obligate wetland
species. Under such circumstances, the unit and/or
entire site is probably significantly hydrologically
disturbed (naturally or by man) and successional changes
are occurring.^/
16a. 50% or more of the total obligate species (both
obligate upland and obligate wetland) are obligate
wetland species WETLANDS (14).
16b. Less than 50% of the total obligate species are
obligate wetland species...UPLANDS (15).
14b. One or more obligate upland species are not present...WETLANDS (16).
13b. Obligate wetland species are not well-distributed in unit.
17a. Hydric soils are present.
18a. Hydrology 1s indicative of wetlands WETLANDS (17)Jv
18b. Hydrology is ^>1 indicative of wetlands...UPLANDS (18).
17b. Hydric soils are not present.. .UPLANDS (19).
12b. One or more obligate wetland species are not present.
19a. One or more obligate upland species are present.
20a. Facultative species (facultative wetland, straight facultative
and/or facultative upland) are present.
21a. Obligate upland species occur on relatively dry microsites
and/or larger similar inclusions.
22a. Vegetation unit matrix has hydric soils...Microsites
and inclusions are UPLANDS; matrix is WETLANDS (20).
22b. Vegetation unit matrix does not have hydric soils...
...Microsites, inclusions and matrix are UPLANDS (21).
21b. Obligate upland species do not occur on relatively dry micro-
sites and/or larger similar inclusions UPLANDS (22).*0/
20b. Facultative species are not present UPLANDS (23).1°/
19b. One or more obligate upland species are not present; one or more
facultative species (facultative wetland, straight facultative
and/or facultative upland) are present.V
23a. Hydric soils are present.
-------
B-4
24a. Hydrology is indicative of wetlands WETLANDS (24),5/
24b. Hydrology is not indicative of wetlands...UPLANDS (25).
23b. Hydric soils are not present UPLANDS (26).
Footnotes for Key
1/ The methodology presented in this diagnostic key relies hierarchically on
vegetation, soils and hydrology. As pointed out by the Corps of Engineers
(Environmental Laboratory, 1987), there are certain wetland types and/or
conditions that may make application of indicators of one or more of the
parameters difficult, at least at certain times of the year. This should
not be considered atypical. Rather, it is due to normal seasonal or annual
variations in environmental conditions that result from causes other than
human activities or catastrophic natural events. The Corps gives four
examples of this situation (wetlands in drumlins, seasonal wetlands, prairie
potholes, and vegetated flats). For example, vegetated flats dominated by
annual plants may appear only as unvegetated mudflats during the nongrowing
season. Under such circumstances, an indicator of hydrophytic vegetation
would not be evident. Likewise, a prairie pothole may not have inundated or
saturated soils during most of the growing season in years of below normal
precipitation. Thus, a hydrology indicator would be absent. Under these
circumstances, a field investigator making a jurisdictional determination must
decide whether or not wetland indicators are normally present during a portion
of the growing season.
The Corps further points out that atypical situations may also exist in
which one or more indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils and/or
wetland hydrology cannot be found due to the effects of recent human activities
or natural events. For example, unauthorized activities such as (1) the altera-
tion or removal of vegetation, (2) the placement of dredged or fill material
over a wetland, and (3) the construction of levees, drainage systems, or dams
that significantly alter hydrology. Under such circumstances, an investigation
of the preexisting conditions is necessary to determine whether or not a wetland
existed prior to the disturbance. Recent natural events (e.g., impoundment of
water by beaver) and man-induced conditions (e.g., inadvertent impoundment due
to highway construction) may also result in atypical situations that effect
wetland vegetation and hydrology in an area which was uplands prior to flooding.
However, the area may not yet have developed hydric soil indicators. It is
important in the latter two circumstances (i.e., natural events and man-induced
conditions) to determine whether or not the alterations to the area have resulted
in changes that are now the "normal circumstances." The relative permanence of
the change and whether or not the area is now functioning as a wetland must be
considered. A site with wetland vegetation and hydrology (other than from
irrigation) that has not yet developed hydric soil characteristics due to
recent flooding should be considered to have soils that are functioning as
hydric soils.
-------
8-5
Footnotes for Key (continued)
2/ In the presence of one or more dominant obligate wetland species, assume wetland
hydrology is present (except for upland mlcrosites and/or larger similar inclusions)
unless evidence of disturbance suggests otherwise.
3/ Numbers in parentheses represent jurisdictional decision points in the key.
£/ Where significant drainage has occurred, soils usually will not be diagnostic
either since soil wetness characteristics (e.g., gleying and mottling) generally
take many years to respond to hydrologic changes. Therefore, a 5C% rule should
be applied to the vegetation. An alternative to this 50% rule for forested sites
would be to examine tree vigor and reproduction (e.g., seedlings and saplings),
which may give a good indication of the direction of vegetation change at the
unit or site. This alternative may apply to herbaceous sites as well.
5/ At this point, a field investigator must decide whether or not wetland hydrologic
indicators are naturally present. If one or more are present, the vegetation unit
is wetlands; if not, the unit is uplands. If the site has been hydrologlcally
disturbed, the significance of the disturbance must be considered in deciding
whether or not the unit 1s still wetlands hydrologlcally.
£/ In the prespnce of one or more dominant obligate tip!and species, assume upland
hydrology is present (except for wetland microsites and/or larger, similar
inclusions) unless evidence of disturbance suggests otherwise.
Jj Because facultative species are not diagnostic of wetlands or uplands, an examina-
tion of soil and hydrologic parameters is necessary to help determine whether the
vegetation unit is a wetland.
£/ A situation without one or more dominants will seldom occur. Consequently, this
part of the key should seldom be used.
2j In the presence of one or more non-dominant obligate wetland species that are
well-distributed in the vegetation unit, assume wetland hydrology is present
(except for upland microsites and/or larger similar inclusions) unless evidence
of disturbance suggests otherwise.
10/ In the presence of one or more non-dominant obligate upland species that are
wel1-distributed in the vegetation unit, assume upland hydrology is present
(except for wetland microsites and/or larger similar inclusions) unless evidence
of disturbance suggests otherwise.
-------
APPENDIX C
DATA FORMS FOR
SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS
-------
DATA FORM C-l: HERBACEOUS SPECIES DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: _
-Toject/Site:
Recorder:
Date:
State:
County:
Applicant/Owner: Vegetation Unit fl/Name:
**************************************************************************************
Species
Indicator
Status
Percent
Area!
Cover
Cover
Class
Midpoint
of Cover
Class
Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
J.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
2fi.
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
**************************************************************************************
1. Note: Herbaceous species include all graminoids, forbs, ferns, fern allies,
bryophytes, woody seedings, and herbaceous vines.
2. Cover classes (midpoints): T<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5);
4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
3. To determine the dominants, first rank the species by their midpoints. Then cumula-
tively sum the midpoints of the ranked species until 50% of the total for all species
midpoints is reached or initially exceeded. All species contributing to that cumula-
tive total should be considered dominants and indicated with an asterisk above.
4. Do the dominant herbaceous species indicate that the vegetation unit supports
hydrophytic vegetation? Yes No Inconlusive .
". Note: Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (i .e., facultative
wetland, straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
6. Comments:
-------
DATA FORM C-2: SHRUB AND WOODY VINE DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: Recorder: Date:
Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Vegetation Unit #/Name:
**************************************************************************************
SHRUBS
Percent Midpoint
Indicator Area! Cover of Cover
Species Status Cover Class Class Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
v/ w /i7 n >,j ui 11 w i i i i uuv i ii w ^
***************************************************************************************
WOODY VINES
, Percent Midpoint
Indicator Area! Cover of Cover
Species Status Cover Class Class Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
******************************************************************************************
1. Note: A shrub is usually less than 6.1 meters (20 feet) tall and generally exhibits
several erect, spreading or prostrate stems and has a bushy appearance. Percent cover
of woody vines should be estimated independent of strata and exclusive of seedlings.
2. Cover classes (midpoints): T<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5)
4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
3. To determine the dominants, first rank the shrub species by their midpoints. Then
cumulatively sum the midpoints of the ranked shrub species until 50% of the total
for all shrub species midpoints is reached or initially exceeded. Do the same for
woody vines. All species contributing to these cumulative totals should be con-
sidered dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
4. Do the dominant shrub species indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic
vegetation? Yes No Inconlusive .
5. Do the dominant woody vine species indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydro-
phytic vegetation? Yes No Inconclusive .
6. Note: Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (i.e., facultative wet-
land, straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
7. Comments:
-------
DATA FORM C-3: TREE AND SAPLING DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: Recorder: Date:
Project/Site: State: County: ;
Applicant/Owner: Vegetation Unit #/Name:
*****************************************************************************44£££:lr444r
TREES
Relative
Indicator Basal
Species Status Area (%) Rank
1 •
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Total Relative Basal Area Equals 100%
***************************************************************************************
SAPLINGS
Percent Midpoint
Indicator Areal Cover of Cover
Species Status Cover Class Class Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8. "
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
****************************************************************************************
1. Note: A tree is greater than 10 centimeters (4 inches) diameter breast height (dbh).
A sapling is from 1-10 centimeters (0.4-4 inches) dbh.
2. Cover classes (midpoints): T<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5);
4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
3. To determine the dominants, first rank the tree species by relative basal area.
Then cumulatively sum the relative basal area of the ranked tree species until 50%
of the total relative basal area for all tree species is reached or initially exceeded.
Do the same for saplings using the sum of midpoints. All species contributing to these
cumulative totals should be considered dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
4. Do the dominant trees indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic vegetation
Yes No Inconlusive .
5. Do the dominant saplings indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic
vegetation? Yes No Inconclusive .
6. Note: Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (i.e., facultative wetland,
straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
7. Comments:
-------
DATA FORM C-4: SOIL/HYDROLOGY DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: Recorder: Date:
Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Vegetation Unit #/Name:
SOILS
Is the soil on the national or state hydric soils list? Yes No
Series/phase: Subgroup:
Is the soil a Histosol or is a histic epipedon present? Yes No
Is the soil:
Mottled? Yes No Matrix Color: Mottle Color:
Gleyed? Yes No
Other Indicators
1. Note: Soils should be sample at about 25 centimeters (10 inches) or immediately
below the A horizon, whichever comes first. If desired, use the back of the form
to diagram or describe the soil profile.
2. Does the sampling indicate that the vegetation unit has hydric soils?
Yes No Inconclusive .
Rationale:
Comments:
HYDROLOGY
1. Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Depth of water:
2. Is the soil saturated? Yes No Depth to free-standing water:
3. List other field evidence of surface inundation or soil saturation
4. Are hydrology indicators present in the vegetation unit?
Yes No Inconclusive .
Note: It may be necessary to rely on supplemental historical data (e.g., soil
surveys) during a dry season or drought year as long as a site has not been
significantly modified hydrologically since data collection.
Rationale:
5. Comments:
-------
DATA FORM C-5: SUMMARY OF DATA
FOR SIMPLE JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: Recorder: Date:
Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Vegetation Unit £/Name:
**************************************************************************************
Dominant Species Indicator Status
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10. :
11. :
12.
13.
14.
15.
1.6.
17.
18.
19.
20.
****************************************************************************************
1. Is hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No Inconclusive
2. Are hydric soils present? Yes No Inconclusive
3. Are hydrology indicators present? Yes No Inconclusive
4. Overall, is the vegetation unit wetland? Yes No Inconclusive
5. Comments:
-------
appendix p
DATA FORMS FOR
DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS
-------
DATA FORM D-l: HERBACEOUS SPECIES DATA
FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
£PA Region: Recorder: Hate:
Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Transect #: Plot *:
~a***************************************************+*******~***+**~******~*¦**~******
PERCENT AREAL COVER
Species
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12. ~T—
13.
*4.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Status Q1 02 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 07 08 X Rank
Total of Averages (X's) of Percent Areal Cover
50% X Total of Averages (X's) of Percent Areal Cover
1. Note: Herbaceous species include all graminoids, forbs, ferns, fern allies,
bryophytes, woody seedlings, and herbaceous vines.
2. To determine the dominants, first rank the species by their average percent areal
cover. Then cumulatively sum the percent areal cover averages (X's) of the
ranked species until 50% of the total of all the species averages is reached or
initially exceeded. All species contributing to that cumulative total should be
considered dominants and indicated with an asterisk above.
3. Do the dominant herbaceous species indicate that the vegetation unit supports
hydrophytic vegetation? Yes No Inconclusive .
4. Note: Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (facultative wetland,
straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
5. Comments:
-------
DATA FORM D-2: SHRUB AND WOODY VINE
DATA FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: Recorder: Date:
Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Transects #: Plot #:
**************************************************************************************
SHRUBS
Indicator Percent Areal Cover Midpoint of
Species Status Cover Class Cover Class Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
****************************************************************************************
WOODY VINES
Indicator Percent Area! Cover Midpoint of
Species Status Cover Class Cover Class Rank
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. '
6.
7.
8.
9.
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
****************************************************************************************
1. Note: A shrub usually is less than 6.1 meters (20 feet) tall and generally exhibits
several erect, spreading or prostrate stems and has a bushy appearance. Percent cover
of woody vines should be estimated independent of strata and exclusive of seedlings.
2. Cover classes (midpoints): T=<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5);
4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95% (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
3. To determine dominants, first rank the shrub species by their midpoints. Then
cumulatively sum the midpoints of the ranked shrub species until 50% of the total
for all shrub species midpoints is reached or initially exceeded. Do the same for
woody vines. All species contributing to these cumulative totals should be considered
dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
4. Do the dominant shrubs indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic
vegetation? Yes No Inconclusive .
5. Do the dominant woody vine species indicate that the vegetation unit supports
hydrophytic vegetation? Yes No Inconclusive .
6. Note: Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (i .e., facultative
wetland, straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
7. Comments: -
-------
DATA FORM D-3: TREE AND SAPLING DATA
FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
""•A Region: Recorder: Date:
oject/Site: State: r_r__ County:
Applicant/Owner: Transect #: Plot #:
**************************************************************************************
TREES (Bitter!ich Method)
Basal
Area Basal Area
Individual Tree Indicator DBH Per Tree Per Species
(Species Name) Status Tern/ft) (sq ft) (sq ft) Rank
1. /
2. 7
3. J
4. ZZZZZHZZZZHZZH zz
5. /
6. IZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZI ZZZZI 7
7. HZ
8. /
9. T
10. ——————— j
Total Basal Area of All Species Combined
5056 X Total Basal Area of All Species Combined
***************************************************************************************
SAPLINGS
Midpoint
Indicator Percent Cover of Cover
Species Status Area! Cover Class Class Rank
1.
?.
3.
4.
5.
Sum of Midpoints
50% X Sum of Midpoints
****************************************************************************************
1. Note: A tree is greater than 10 centimeters (4 inches) diameter breast height (dbh).
A sapling is from 1-10 centimeters (0.4-4 inches) dbh.
2. Cover classes (midpoints): T<1% (none); 1=1-5% (3.0); 2=6-15% (10.5); 3=16-25% (20.5);
4=26-50% (38.0); 5=51-75% (63.0); 6=76-95 (85.5); 7=96-100% (98.0).
3. To determine the dominants, first rank the tree species by their basal areas. Then
cumulatively sum the basal areas of the ranked tree species until 50% of the total
basal area for all tree species is reached or initially exceeded. Do the same for
saplings using the sum of midpoints. All species contributing to these cumulative
totals should be considered dominants and marked with an asterisk above.
4. Do the dominant trees Indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic vegetation?
Yes No Inconlusive .
5. Do the dominant samplings Indicate that the vegetation unit supports hydrophytic
vegetation? Yes No Inconclusive .
. Note: Inconclusive should be checked when only facultative (I.e., facultative wetland,
straight facultative, and/or facultative upland) species dominate.
7. Comments:
-------
DATA FORM D-4: SOIL/HYDROLOGY DATA FOR
DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: Recorder: Date:
Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Transect #: Plot #:
SOILS
Is the soil on the national or state hydric soils list? Yes No
Series/phase: Subgroup:
Is the soil a Histosol or is a histic epipedon present? Yes No
Is the soil:
Mottled? Yes No Matrix Color: Mottle Color:
G1 eyed? Yes No
Other Indicators
1. Note: Soils should be sampled at about 25 centimeters (10 inches) or immediately
below the A horizon, whichever comes first. If desired, use the back of the
form to diagram or describe the soil profi16.
2. Does the sampling indicate that the vegetation unit has hydric soils?
Yes No Inconclusive
3. Rationale:
4. Comments:
**************************************************************************************
HYDROLOGY
1. Is the ground surface inundated? Yes No Depth of water:
2. Is the soil saturated? Yes No Depth of free-standing water:
3. List other field evidence of surface inundation of soil saturation
4. Are hydrology indicators present in the vegetation unit?
Yes No Inconclusive
Note: It may be necessary to rely on supplemental historical data (e.g., soil
surveys) during a dry season or drought year as long as a site has not been
significantly modified hydrologically since data collection.
Rationale:
5. Comments:
-------
DATA FORM 0-5: SUMMARY OF DATA
FOR DETAILED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
EPA Region: Recorder: Date:
Project/Site: State: County:
Applicant/Owner: Transect #: Plot #:
**************************************************************************************
Dominant Species
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Indicator
Status
***************************************************************************************
1. Is hydrophytic vegetation present? Yes No Inconclusive
2. Are hydric soils present? Yes No Inconclusive
3. Are hydrology indicators present? Yes No Inconclusive
4. Overall, is the vegetation unit wetland"? Tes No Inconclusive
5. Comments:
-------
APPENDIX E
EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR
MAKING WETLAND JURISDICTIONAL
DETERMINATIONS
-------
APPENDIX E
EQUIPMENT NECESSARY FOR MAKING WETLAND
JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATIONS
Jurisdictional
Item Approach V
National or regional list of plants 1,2
that occur in wetlands
National or state hydric soils list 1,2
Key to Soi 1 Taxonomy (optional )£/ 2
National List of Scientific Plant Names (optional) 1,2
State or regional plant identification manuals 1,2
Plant field guides 1,2
Spencer tape 2
Diameter tape or basal area tape 2
Two 0.1m2 quadrat frames 2
Prism or angle gauge 2
Vasculum or plastic bags 1,2
Sighting compass 2
Pens or pencils 1,2
Clip board and data sheets 1,2
Notebook 1,2
Flagging tape 1,2
Wooden stakes or wire flagging stakes (optional) 1,2
Increment borer (optional) 2
10X hand lens 1,2
Dissecting kit 1,2
Calculator 2
Aerial photographs or topographic map 1,2
Shovel 1,2
Bucket auger and/or soil probe 1,2
Munsel Color Soil Charts 1,2
Colorimetric field test kit (optional) 1,2
V 1 refers to equipment needed for simple jurisdictional approach.
2 refers to equipment needed for detailed jurisdictional approach.
£/ Optional items are not necessary, but may be useful in certain situations.
------- |