FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF WETLANDS
IN NEW JERSEY'S
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
s'«v
ENVIRONMENTAL
\ PROTECTION
9 AGENCY
REGION n
-------
FINAL REPORT
FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF WETLANDS IN
NEW JERSEY'S HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
PREPARED FOR:
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, REGION II
PREPARED BY:
MAGUIRE GROUP INC.
DECEMBER 1989
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. NATURAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY 7
Introduction 7
Geologic Origins 7
Natural History 8
Settlement and Development 11
Existing Vegetation 14
Existing Wildlife 16
III. OVERVIEW OF METHODS 18
IV. RESULTS 22
Introduction 22
WET Input 22
WET Output 24
Level 1 (Significance) Output 25
Level 2,3 and 4 (Effectiveness &
Opportunity) Output 28
Groundwater Recharge 30
Groundwater Discharge 31
Floodflow Alteration 32
Sediment Stabilization 32
Sediment/Toxicant Retention 34
Nutrient Retention/Transformation 35
Production Export 36
Aquatic Diversity and Abundance 38
Fish Habitat 40
Wildlife Habitat 43
Waterfowl Habitat 50
Supporting Data 55
Special Habitats 56
Hazardous Waste and Landfill Sites 59
Wastewater Discharge 60
Hydrologic Associations 63
Dedicated Open Space and Recreation 64
V. CONCLUSIONS 66
VI. REFERENCES 69
i
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF METHODS
Draft Wetland Delineation
Summary of the Wetland Evaluation Technique
Application of WET in the Meadowlands
APPENDIX B: SPECIES LISTS OF ORGANISMS FOUND IN THE
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
APPENDIX C: WETLAND EVALUATION TECHNIQUE (WET)
APPENDIX D: FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT KEYS FOR FISH, WILDLIFE,
AND WATERFOWL DEVELOPED FOR HMDC DISTRICT
APPENDIX E: LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
MAP ATLAS (Bound Separately)
Index Map
General Wildlife Habitat "
General Waterfowl Habitat "
General Fish Habitat "
Aquatic Diversity and Abundance "
Production Export "
Sediment/Toxicant Retention "
Nutrient Retention/Transformation "
Floodflow Alteration "
Sediment Stabilization
Aerial Photograph of District "
Special Habitats "
Hazardous Waste and Landfill Sites "
Wastewater Discharge "
Hydrologic Associations "
Dedicated Open Space and Recreation "
Assessment Area Base Map
USGS Topographic Base Map "
Photogrametric Base Maps (34 maps) "
Functional Assessment Output Table
Functional Assessment Input Tables
ii
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Number
Title
Follows
Page
1.
Location of Study Area
3
2.
Place Names in the HMDC District
3
3.
Process Diagram for Functional Assessment
21
A-l.
Example of Page From Answer Sheet
A-15
A-2.
Example of Field Evaluation Form
A-17
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table On or
Following
Number Title Page
1. Listing of Assessment Areas in HMDC District 22
2. Distribution of Wetland Systems, Classes &
Subclasses 23
3. Distribution of Level 1 - Significance Ratings 27
4. Distribution of Effectiveness and Opportunity 29
Ratings
5. Results of Level 2, 3, 4 Functional Assessment 30
of Wetlands in the Hackensack Meadowlands
6. Hazardous Waste Sites in the HMDC District 59
7. Wastewater Discharge Sites in the HMDC District 61
Al. Decisions Made with Respect to the Application A-16
of WET in the Hackensack Meadowlands
A2. Consistent Answers to WET Questions A-16
iv
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
-------
FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT OF WETLANDS IN
NEW JERSEY'S HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
I. INTRODUCTION
This study, which is presented in two volumes (this report and a
separate map atlas), evaluates the probability that wetland
functions are performed within New Jersey's Hackensack Meadow-
lands. Twenty-three wetland functions have been evaluated for
147 wetland areas. These 147 wetland areas represent 92% of the
wetland area within the Hackensack Meadowlands District. These
functions include: groundwater recharge and discharge, floodflow
alteration, sediment stabilization, sediment/ toxicant retention,
nutrient removal/transformation, production export, aquatic
diversity/abundance, general fish habitat, general wildlife
habitat, general waterfowl habitat, wildlife diversity/abundance,
and a number of waterfowl functions. These functions are de-
scribed in detail in Chapter IV.
Evaluation of the likely performance of wetland functions within
these 147 wetland areas affords the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and the Corps of Engineers (Corps) an information
base useful in the identification of potential impacts from
potential wetland modifications and the comparative analysis of
probable wetland function throughout the Meadowlands District.
This information base is useful in federal and state regulatory
processes reviewing potential Clean Water Act Section 404 permit
applications within the Hackensack Meadowlands.
The EPA and Corps of Engineers have undertaken an Advanced
Identification study of the Hackensack Meadowlands wetlands in
order to identify possible future disposal sites and sites
generally unsuitable for disposal specification. Advanced
-1-
-------
identification is authorized by the Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines
For Specification of Disposal Sites For Dredged or Fill Material,
Subpart I - Planning to Shorten Permit Processing Time (4C CFR
§230.80).
"To provide the basis for advanced identification of dis-
posal areas, and areas unsuitable for disposal, EPA and the
permitting authority shall consider the likelihood that use
of the area in question for dredged or fill material dis-
posal will comply with these Guidelines. To facilitate this
analysis , EPA and the permitting agency should review
available water resources management data including data
available from the public, other Federal and State agencies,
and information from approved Coastal Zone Management
programs and River Basin Plans. (§230.80 (d))"
Also, EPA and the Corps have joined with the National Oceano-
qranhic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Hackensack
Meadowlands Development Commission (HMDC), and the New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) in a Special Area
Management Study (SAMP) within the Hackensack Meadowlands. The
implementation of Special Area Management Plans is addressed in
the Corps of Engineers Regulatory Guidance Letter Number 86-10.
These agencies have embarked upon the SAMP in order to establish
a cooperative interagency process for addressing applicable
requirements under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and related
federal laws and regulations in the context of the HMDC's revi-
sion of its Master Plan.
The interagency participants in these above mentioned efforts
envision the incorporation of the evaluation of wetland functions
within the Hackensack Meadowlands, reported herein, into the
Advanced Identification study. Further, these participants
envision the incorporation of the Advanced Identification study
in the Special Area Management Plan study. Thus, the evaluation
of wetland functions in the Hackensack Meadowlands will have far
reaching application in state and federal regulatory processes.
It is important to recognize the three independent efforts and
their inter-relationship. Results of the wetland functional
-2-
-------
assessment will be used in, but are not the same as, results of
the Advanced Identification study. Similarly, the results of the
Advanced Identification study will be used in, but are not
equivalent to, results of the SAMP.
The Hackensack Meadowlands is the largest complex of brackish
marshes in northern New Jersey. The Meadowlands comprise over
B.OOO acres of marshland surrounded by intensively developed
urban land. As shown in Figure I, the Meadowlands lies less than
five miles from New York City, New York and Passaics Newark, and
Jersey City, New Jersey. Figure 2 shows the boundaries of the
study area and some commonly used place names in the District.
Development of wetlands for landfills, roadways, warehouses,
offices and other commercial/industrial uses has led to a sig-
nificant loss of wetlands since the 1950s. Competing interests
for development and conservation of this regional resource led to
the creation of the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission
(HMDC) District by the State Legislature in 1968 which was signed
into law by the Governor in 1969. The HMDC regulates development
in and around wetlands through several mechanisms including
zoning certification, subdivision review and building permits.
Land use planning and development controls within the HMDC
district are developed and implemented by the HMDC rather than
the fourteen individual cities and towns whose land lies within
the District. While the HMDC has the most immediate control over
wetland alterations, other agencies also have jurisdiction and
permit authority over such alterations.
The placement of fill in wetlands is regulated at the federal
level by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. EPA under
the authority of § 404 of the Clean Water Act. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) also provide technical assistance and review in connection
with § 404 permits issued by the Corps. Within the HMDC Dis-
trict, the NJDEP has jurisdiction over wetland alterations under
-3-
-------
iv
m
:erso[T\f|
' \ w
-ii '«*
V^OrtOB |i "1
\°uJp
o
lerinfieM
r-
I[
Vilfl
w
Otrjjmcl^-.
\ Jf ^
Atul'
j jh up •
P. 1
jf u
,;,i. •
1* ypTT
7
•a. i^Syv
/« c» a.-VII I- fH~-I
I 4&&W
'- -~j ¦ tf/\ */OV [
ji
¦ r>
WaM^tn
1^""/ •~~Ti~*T^,_l1/f '/ t
hmdc district boundary^
I _ .\VC^ . ,.
~ * «i:j—n-u I
' J%TVr,
JL'JiL
r/JteC.!
on
m>N
IrSs^
»J§Mb W
5t"*/r
\C«OU/»«OnF
237^^'/^ 4
(**a(^ A v>& ^ V>~SS#e l'
I7"« J
FIGURE 1 LOCATION OF STUDY AREA
-------
teterboro
AIRPORT
GIANTS
STADIUM
;
I SECAUCUS ^
. !
jersey turnpike
KEARNY MAR8I
Figure 2.
Place Names in the HMDC District
-------
four programs: The Waterfront Development permit program covers
activities conducted below the mean high tide line; Tidelands
claims are made on all those riparian areas (upland or wetland)
now or formerly flowed by the Mean High Tide; the Flood Hazard
Area regulatory program (Stream Encroachment permits) applies to
the area within the 100 year floodplain, the flood fringe or the
flood hazard area delineated by the State for any given stream;
Open Water Fill permits are required for the discharge of fill
material into waters of the State; and Water Quality certificates
are required in conjunction with Department of the Army Section
404 applications.
These agencies each have different statutory mandates. In
practice, these mandates often overlap. The agencies' regulatory
perspective on particular wetland alterations is often different
because of their differing roles in wetland regulation. To
improve communication and coordination, the agencies noted above
have formed an interagency working group which reviews proposals
for the filling or other alteration of wetlands in the HMDC
district. This forum facilitates technical interaction between
the agencies with respect to wetland values, development impacts
and alternative mitigation strategies. While each agency still
retains its own permit/review responsibilities, the interagency
committee provides a forum in which developers may make presenta-
tions and receive comments from all the key agencies at one time.
While the interagency review of wetland development proposals has
given many developers valuable guidance, there is presently no
easy way for a developer to determine the likelihood of receiving
permits to fill a given wetland prior to the preparation and
interagency review of a proposal. Each proposal or permit
application is analyzed on a case by case basis. Often the
critical wetland values which lead the agencies to approve or
deny a permit are not apparent to the permit applicant prior to
-4-
-------
agency review. In fact, the quantification or determination of
these critical values for a particular wetland area is not made
by the reviewing agencies until a particular proposal comes under
review.
EPA's Marine and Wetlands Protection Branch initiated this study
as the first step towards identifying those wetland areas which
may be possible future disposal sites (if § 404 (b)(1) Guidelines
are met), and those areas which are unsuitable for disposal
specification. This information will be useful to developers
making decisions on the location and layout of their projects.
The information will be useful to regulating agencies because it
provides a consistent technical basis for the comparison of
functions and values provided by different wetland areas through-
out the HMDC district. This information is intended to facili-
tate timely permit processing. It should be noted that the
functional assessment and the future identification of any area
as a possible disposal site or site generally unsuitable for
disposal specification should not be deemed to constitute a
permit or the denial of a permit or deemed as prohibiting appli-
cation for a permit for specification of a disposal site or for
the discharge dredged or fill material within such area.
The information provided in this functional assessment report is
a synthesis of information from other State and Federal agencies,
data compiled in other studies, and data collected in the field
by the interagency participants of this study. The functional
assessment has provided a database on the Meadowlands wetlands.
This database may be edited at such time as site specific data is
available. In the event that empirical studies quantify the
degree to which a wetland performs 4 function, such results will
be used in the appropriate editing, if necessary, of the func-
tional assessment.
-5-
-------
The likelihood measures reported in this functional assessment
are not to be construed as the advanced identification. The
functional assessment reports the probability that a wetland
performs a function to an unspecified degree. The advanced
identification will address the identification of possible future
disposal sites and sites generally unsuitable for disposal. The
criteria, or rationale, for those determinations will incorporate
the results of the functional assessment and other pertinent
information. EPA and the Corps of Engineers will develop and
apply criteria for the advanced identification with review and
comment by the involved interagency team. The public will have
the opportunity to review and comment on the advanced identifi-
cation.
The remainder of this report is divided into four chapters.
Chapter II provides an overview of the study area's natural and
cultural history. Chapter III briefly describes the methods used
to conduct the functional assessment. A detailed discussion of
methods is presented in Appendix A. Chapter IV presents the
results of the application of the WET method to the assessment
areas. This text presents portions of the input/output tables
included in the map atlas and a table summarizing the results for
select functions. Accompanying this text is a separately bound
map atlas presenting graphic reproduction of the results.
Finally, Chapter V summarizes the findings and conclusions of the
study.
-6-
-------
II. NATURAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY
-------
II. NATURAL AND CULTURAL HISTORY
Introduction
The Hackensack Meadowlands occupy the valley between the Pali-
sades and the Watchung Mountains in the northeastern section of
New Jersey. They extend from Ridgefield in Bergen County to the
Kearny area of Hudson County and lie less than five miles to the
west of New York City. The Meadowlands has more than 8,000 acres
of wetlands and 12,000 acres of non-wetland. The non-wetland
areas are almost entirely developed and consist of commercial,
industrial and institutional land uses. The Hackensack Meadow-
lands District, which is divided among fourteen municipalities of
the State, is larger than Manhattan Island.
The Meadowlands wetlands are a dynamic system. The natural and
cultural history of this area has influenced the characteristics
and functional value of present day wetlands in this area. This
complex of fresh and estuarine waters and wetlands has been
severely altered by human action (DeLotto 1973, Galluzzi 1976).
This chapter presents a brief history of the Meadowlands' physi-
cal formation, natural resources, human history and land use.
Geologic Origins
Most of the Meadowlands is a broad marsh covered plain bounded by
ridges to the east and west. Beneath the marsh is clay, silt,
sand, gravel, sandstone, shale, diabase, and limestone. The
bedrock is a series of sandstones and shales. These rocks were
deposited more than 100 million years ago during the Triassic
age. In the eastern part of the Meadowlands District these rocks
outcrop along the Hackensack River and in the west they occur at
depths of up to 220 feet.
-7-
-------
The Hackensack Meadowlands were formed during the final olacia-
tions of the Pleistocene, particularly since the peak of the
Wisconsin Glaciation about 20,000 years ago. Marine, freshwater
and glacial deposits were laid down during the rise and fall of
sea level during that period. The basin was formed by scouring
action of the glacial ice. As the ice retreated in a world-wide
warming trend, glacial drift, gravel, boulders, sand and silt
fell out of the ice into the basin. The terminal moraine, which
extended south to Long Island and Perth Amboy, trapped and dammed
the meltwater forming Glacial Lake Hackensack. Fresh water clays
and organic silts were deposited in layers on the lake's bottom
during its 2500 to 3000 year existence.
Ocean and lake levels were rising then due to the ice melt. The
new levels breached the terminal moraine and the lake drained.
Vegetation took hold on the exposed ground. A freshwater river
and wetland system formed in the former lake bed. The continu-
ally rising ocean entered the lower boundaries of the former
lake. Fresh and salt water met, forming the Hackensack Meadow-
lands estuary.
Natural History
The draining of Lake Hackensack left a flat lake bed of sand and
clay. The rising sea level and water table encouraged the
development of larch and black spruce forests. Pollen diagrams
evidence the domination by Black Ash (Fraxina nigra), as well as
Tamarack (Larix laricina, and Black Spruce (Picea mariana)
(Heusser 1949, 1963). These forests perished as the water
continued to rise, and were replaced by Atlantic White Cedar
(Chaemecyparis thvoides) (Vermeule 1896, Harshberger and Burns
1919, Heusser 1949, 1963, Sipple 1972). This was the prevailing
vegetation during habitation by native Americans, early Dutch
settlers and later the English colonists, although this species
is no longer present in the Hackensack Meadowlands (Sipple 1972).
-8-
-------
The decline of White Cedar was brought about by aggressive land
reclamation projects, fire (Heusser 1963), lumbering, wetland
drainage, and mosquito control. Settlers used trees for boat and
road construction; white cedar was a prized wood for these
purposes since it is naturally resistant to decay. Some areas
were cleared for home sites, while others were burned either
accidentally or intentionally. Everyday needs of the settlers
for fuel also contributed to the forests' demise.
The destruction of the cedar forests were encouraged also by
ditches and dikes built by Dutch settlers. In some areas the
change in drainage pattern affected the salt and freshwater
balance thereby making the conditions too saline for the cedar
forests to survive. Diking resulted in drier conditions in some
areas, eventually leading to destruction of cedars by forest
fires. Diking and ditching also converted hundreds of acres of
regularly flooded salt marsh to relatively drier pasture land and
crop land. Elimination of tidal inundation changed wetlands in
these areas from estuarine to freshwater systems and greatly
reduced the amount of open water within these areas.
After the turn of the century, the Bergen and Hudson Mosquito
Commissions diked vast areas of the Hackensack River in an effort
to control mosquito populations. Tide gates were installed and
drainage ditches were constructed and maintained. Gradually,
more natural salt marsh was changed to fresh marsh and to upland
as the land was drained to control mosquito breeding or diked to
stop tidal inundation. Construction of the Oradell dam across
the Hackensack River in 1922 impeded fresh water flow, and
promoted salt water intrusion. Areas which had supported White
Cedar at the end of the 19th century (Vermeule 1896) were domi-
nated by the common reed (Phragmites austral is) by the 1920's
(Harshberger and Burns 1919).
-9-
-------
In the early to mid-1900s there were virtually no low salt
marshes beyond the diked bank of the river course. Dikes, pumps,
tide gates and other drainage facilities were not well maintained
during this period. Eventually, natural processes of erosion led
to failure of many drainage structures, and drained fields became
flooded. This was most dramatically seen when a major storm in
the 1950s breached many of the remaining structures; this flood-
ing created what is now the Sawmill Creek Wildlife Management
Area from what had previously been common reed fields. Another
dramatic change was the conversion of the Kearny Meadows (which
was open field twenty years ago) to a freshwater marsh. This
change was caused by altered stormwater drainage patterns within
an area of manmade dikes - primarily rail and highway embank-
ments. Today there are more than 1,300 acres of tidal bays,
mudflats and brackish marshes along the southern reaches of the
river (that area south of Route 3).
While the deterioration of drainage facilities has opened up
several large areas to tidal inundation in the southern part of
the District, similar drainage controls remain intact in the
northern part of the District. In many instances, these facili-
ties have been maintained to prevent flooding of commercial/in-
dustrial establishments built after the dikes were in place. The
result 1s that tidal waters are more often confined to channels
in the northern District than to the south. This limits oxygen-
ation and other water quality renovation that occurs when the
tide is allowed to overtop the banks and flood the marsh surface.
Restriction of fresh water inflow from the north (due to the
Oradell Dam), diminished tidal flushing (due to dikes and tide
gates), and major wastewater discharges (1n excess of 200 million
gallons per day) in ttie portion of the District north of Route 3
all contribute to the relatively poor water quality in those
areas when compared to areas south of Route 3.
-10-
-------
Settlement and Development
Pre-Colonial Period
The Unami were members of a cultural division of the Lenni Lenape
branch of the Delaware nation of native Americans. They lived in
the region that is now part of Bergen and Hudson Counties.
Oratam, or Ora-tamani was a peach-chief of the Hackensack tribe
that occupied the Hackensack Meadowlands and adjacent areas. He
was an ambassador representing several groups of Indians from
central and northern New Jersey in contact with the early Dutch
colonists.
The Lenni Lenapes sold their land in the mid-1600's to Peter
Sanmans and Peter Fauconnier, who represented themselves as
purchasers for two proprietors in England. The land known as the
Ramapo Tract was 42,500 acres. The deed sealing took place in
November 1709 at Tappan, New York. The Lenni Lenapes peacefully
surrendered their land and moved to southern New York, Pennsyl-
vania, and southern New Jersey where they were absorbed into the
local tribes.
Colonial Period
The Hackensack River was a primary trading route for Dutch
colonists. Settlements and trading posts developed rapidly in
the area from the 1600s to the 1700s. Beginning in the mid-
1600s, struggles for control of the land were waged between the
Dutch and the English. England at one point granted land titles
to English subjects, hoping to encourage development in the
region. In the late 1660s, a mixed group of immigrants from the
Netherlands, Finland, Germany and Scotland began infiltrating the
region. Power over the land switched several times between
self-governing settlers, private proprietors and the English
royal crown. The Revolutionary War brought an end to proprietor
and English crown claims to the land.
-11-
-------
During their heyday in the Meadow!ands, the Dutch set out to
"reclaim" the marshland. They farmed the upland and diked the
lowland to make it arable. Some areas were farmed for salt hay
which was used for bedding down horses, packing ice, and brick
manufacture. The Dutch built dikes on a small scale in an
attempt to charge wetland into farmland. But, this operation
failed due to poor crop yield on the converted lands and because
of muskrat damage to the dikes. The Dutch and other settlers
used water as their primary mode of transportation. They also
constructed and used plank roads - a series of former Indian
trails and streams bridged by cedar causeways. The plank roads
were used well into the late 1700s accommodating individual
commuters and extensive stagecoach travel.
Industrial Period
The extensive wetlands of the Hackensack Meadowlands posed
numerous obstacles to transportation and development until the
18C0s. The dramatic technological changes that accompanied the
industrial age made further development of the Meadowlands
possible. Embankments for railroads were installed from 1830-
1840 providing major accessibility to the area. WoodPn plank
roads which had existed since the 1700s were replaced and new
routes were established with more durable and extensive roadway
systems.
An effort to construct dikes in 1868 was less successful. The
dikes were designed with sheet iron cores to discourage muskrats
and the tide. This project was terminated when the iron cores
sunk into the underlying peat.
During the early 1900s, ditch and dike operations were initiated
by the Bergen and Hudson County Mosquito Commissions in an
attempt to control mosquito breeding. The mosquito was creating
-12-
-------
a serious health hazard by the transmission of the encephalitis
virus which infected well over a hundred residents and caused 29
reported associated deaths.
Modern Period
During this period, public attitudes did not yet recognize the
value of wetland preservation. Rather, wetland filling for land
development was seen as art improvement, by making "useless" land
useful, and by eliminating sites where mosquitos breed.
Development of large motorized earth moving equipment and hydrau-
lic dredges facilitated the creation of immense landfills for
industrial and commercial sites. This activity accelerated
following World War II due to increased accessibility and de-
creased cost of the machines. Technological advances had greatly
increased the area's development potential at a time when re-
gional demand for developable land was increasing.
Although technology advanced greatly, difficulties remained in
developing the Hackensack Meadowlands, Despite the development
challenges, industry continued to expand due to the desirable
location. From 1900 to 1940, diverse businesses located along
the fringe areas of the Meadowlands because of the ease of
developing this land. However, most of the land remained un-
touched until after World War II. As the surrounding metro-
politan area became affected by twentieth century growth, the
Meadowlands gradually lost its image as a vast wasteland, and
gained attention as an area with significant development poten-
tial.
Advanced earth shaping technology brought about more utilization
of the Hackensack Meadowlands. Landfills were introduced and
flourished when there were few or no regulations to oversee their
operation. As a result, there is no history of their origin,
ownership, types of materials accepted, or other Important
-13-
-------
details. The majority of them ceased operations before, or
shortly after, the creation of the Hackensack Meadowlands Devel-
opment Commission. The operations that continue are strictly
regulated by the Commission, the Department of Environmental
Protection, and the Public Utilities Commission.
The basin has also been subject to industrialization. The
Hackensack River and its tributaries became the disposal site for
raw and minimally treated sewage, as well as for a variety of
heavy metals, organic solvents, and petroleum hydrocarbons. The
District has received solid waste from most of northern New
Jersey. The Hackensack River has been further stressed by
thermal pollution from the generation of electricity.
Beginning in the 1960s, public awareness of environmental pollu-
tion began to increase. Public policy and law began to address
pollution issues and the long-term management and preservation of
valuable environmental resources. In 1968 the New Jersey State
Legislature enacted a law creating the Hackensack Meadowlands
Development Commission in order to oversee environmental cleanup
and industrial, recreational and residential development. The
EPA has committed itself extensively to regional water pollution
control programs in the Hackensack River basin with implementa-
tion of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
(Clean Water Act). Section 402 of the Act established the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and Section 201
established a grants program to fund the construction of waste-
water treatment facilities.
Existing Vegetation
Today, approximately 300 species of vascular plants can be found
in the Meadowlands (HMDC 1987b). The majority of these species
are listed in Appendix B. The common reed 1s the most widespread
-14-
-------
vascular plant species in the Meadowlands. Common reed is
especially competitive in disturbed or stressed areas such as
areas subjected to elevated sediment levels, or repeated burning.
Despite its reputation, common reed serves several roles in the
Meadowlands including the provision of cover and food for wild-
life and the retention and transformation of nutrients.
Other wetland vegetation in addition to common reed occurs in the
Meadowlands. Saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) occurs
in intertidal areas, particularly in the well flushed wetlands in
the southern portion of the District and along the Hackensack
River. Plant species inhabiting the middle and high marsh zones
of a typical saltmarsh are less common. These include salt hay
(Spartina patens, Distichilis spicata) which occur primarily as
remnant habitats in the southern part of the District. Saltmarsh
fleabane (Pluchea purpurascens) is common in shallow, brackish
marshes. In protected brackish and freshwater areas duckweed
(Lemna sp.) is widespread and locally abundant. Duckweed is a
preferred food for many waterfowl, and a food source for muskrat.
Cattail, although formerly widespread in the District, is declin-
ing; few stands remain.
There are a number of areas in the District where wetlands are
seldom flooded, but where the ground remains moist because of the
close proximity of the water table to the surface. Most of these
areas are now dominated by common reed. Historically, these wet
meadows contained a mix of grasses such as those of the Panicum
and Andropogon genera. Several areas of non-reed wet meadows
persist as remnant habitats in the vicinity of Losen Slote Creek
and Moonachie Creek, the westerly portion of Sawmill, and areas
in Kearny.
-15-
-------
Natural wooded areas in the Meadowlands are few compared to other
vegetation types. The largest tracts of wooded wetlands occur in
the vicinity of Teterboro Airport. These are dominated by red
maple. Other wooded areas in the Meadowlands include those near
Losen Slote Creek in Little Ferry and the Snake Hill area in
Secaucus.
Existing Wildlife
The Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission compiled a
list, from review of 33 references, of plant and animal species
occurring in the District, "his is reproduced in Appendix B. As
reported by HMDC, this list should not be considered a complete
listing of species occurrence since many areas in the District
have not been studied, and those that have been studied were not
systematically surveyed. The HMDC also conducted a two year
survey of the fishery resources of the Hackensack River and its
major tributaries (north of Overpeck Creek south beyond Penhorn
Creek) employing 23 sampling sites (HMDC 1987a). We have in-
cluded the species list in Appendix B to provide the reader with
an overview of the diversity of wildlife occurring in the
District.
As reported in Appendix B, a variety of reptiles, amphibians, and
fish occur in the Hackensack Meadowlands. Results from the
fisheries survey reported 31 species of fish and 23 species of
invertebrates taken. The ten most abundant and commonly occurr-
ing fish were the mummichoa, Atlantic silverside, inland silver-
side, white perch, blueback herring, Atlantic tomcod (New Jersey
State threatened) brown bullhead, pumpkinseed, American eel, and
bay anchovy. The invertebrate sampling evidenced large popula-
tions of prey species such as white-fingered mud crabs; mysid,
sand, and grass shrimp and several species of amphipods.
-16-
-------
A variety of small mammals occur in the District. The muskrat is
widespread in the shallow marsh areas of the District. It
thrives in Kearny Marsh where trappers have been reported to take
up to several thousand in one year. More than 250 species of
birds have been seen in the Meadowlands and over 60 are reported
to nest there. Marshes throughout the District are used by
various waterfowl, including over 20 species of ducks. The large
intertidal and mudflats near Sawmill Creek provide prime feeding
grounds for over 40 species of shorebirds. Wet meadows, fields
and waste places provide good hunting grounds for more than 10
species of raptors. The large expanses of wetland, the diversity
of habitat types and the scarcity of undeveloped land in the
District provide important habitat to migratory birds.
-------
III. OVERVIEW OF METHODS
-------
OVERVIEW OF METHODS
The following aspects of the functional assessment of wetlands in
the HMDC district was carried out between May of 1986 and June of
1987. The process began with a wetland delineation effort led by
the Corps with the assistance of EPA, FWS, NMFS, NODEP, and the
HMDC. Corrmitments to participate in the EPA led Advanced Identi-
fication study were made by the Corps, FWS, NMFS, NJDEP and the
HMDC. This was followed by a training session for study parti-
cipants in the use of the operational draft (March 1987) of the
Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) prior to release of the WET
2.0 version (October 1987). The session was conducted by Dr.
Paul Adamus, a principal author of the method. Dr. Adamus also
delineated assessment area boundaries using l"s200' scale photo-
grammetry (showing cultural/physical features and topography) and
aerial photographs. Background information was then collected
and reviewed for subsequent use in WET.
Field work and the answering of WET questions was conducted by
agency participants between September and December 1986. During
this time a computer program was developed to facilitate the
processing of input data (answers to WET questions) through the
"interpretation keys" to yield ratings (high, moderate and low)
for each wetland function. Since WET was in a pre-publication,
working draft stage during this assessment, EPA consulted with
Dr. Adamus and the WET project leaders at the Corps Waterways
Experiment Station (WES) to ensure changes being made to the
method were properly incorporated in this study. Data process-
ing, final quality assurance checks, the interpretation of
results and draft report preparation were completed between
January and June of 1987.
The final WET results were reviewed by the interagency group
between August 1987 and July 1988. Their review found general
concurrence with the WET results. Group members were asked to
-------
comment on any specific results which appeared counterintuitive
based on their professional experience in the ^eadowlands. The
WET version 2.0 (October 1987) states in its introduction that
when WET is used in conjunction with expert opinl-on) results
should be compared and discrepancies identified and resolved. As
such, the counterintuitive review comments on WET results made by
the interagency members are noted in the tabulation of results
(see Table 5) presented in the following section of this report
Where professional expertise recommends that the WET result
should be higher or lower, we will adopt that recommendation
Where there is conflicting professional comment, i.e., recom-
mendation that the WET result should be both higher and lower
the WET result will represent the assessment of that function.
While such comment represents an uncertainty about the perform-
ance of that wetland function, the WET results serve as the best
representation short of any further study or information.
Agency comments and discussion among the interagency group
members led to the conclusion that WET interpretation kevs for
wildlife, waterfowl and fisheries lacked an appropriate level of
sensitivity when applied in the Meadowlands. For example, the
WET interpretation key for wildlife diversity and abundance
(breeding on site) automatically considers all estuarine wetlands
to have a low probability of providing this function. This does
not reflect the documented value of estuarine wetlands in the
Meadowlands for a wide variety of wildlife.
The interagency group prepared new interpretation keys for
general wildlife, general waterfowl, and general fisheries.
These keys, presented in Appendix D, are similar to WET keys in
format and were designed to use the WET data base for the Meadow-
lands as input. These keys were developed through critical
scrutiny of the habitat features which correlate well with
wildlife/waterfowl/fish use in the Meadowlands. Further details
regarding the keys is presented in the appropriate results
sections and in Appendix A.
-19-
-------
Results produced by the new interpretation keys were reviewed
during the winter and spring of 1988. The interagency group
found that these results satisfactorily reflect conditions in the
Meadowlands. As with the WET functions, the interagency group
provided comments on counterintuitive results (appearing in Table
5). The group also used data from the HMDC 1987 fisheries study
to revise the general fisheries results. With the HHDC's permis-
sion, the Maguire Group summarized the fisheries data and depict-
ed the station locations, the sampling method, and the species
diversity and abundance sampled by station and sampling method on
an assessment area base map. The interagency group compared
these data to the output from the revised general fisheries key.
High, moderate, or low results from this revised key were changed
in those assessment areas in which the fisheries data in the
nearest sampling point showed conflicting results. The result
from the revised fisheries key was modified to a higher ranking
when the fisheries data reflected a greater diversity and abund-
ance or a lower ranking when the data reflected a lower diversity
and abundance. Specific revisions are reported in the General
Fisheries results section.
On March 1, 1988 EPA and the Corps of Engineers held a public
meeting at the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission's
auditorium to present Information on the purpose and status of
the Advanced Identification process and the wetland functional
assessment in the Meadowlands. Draft results of the wetland
assessment in the Meadowlands were on display. Results for
wildlife, waterfowl, and fisheries were represented by the new
interpretation keys mentioned above. HMDC fisheries sampling
data were summarized and incorporated into the wetland assessment
subsequent to the public meeting. A number of attendees of the
public meeting presented oral and/or written responses. Res-
ponses which were specific to wetland functions and/or assessment
areas are addressed in the appropriate results section. A
general summary of public meeting comments is presented in
Chapter V, Conclusions.
-20-
-------
The functional assessment process used for the Meadow!ands is
outlined in Figure 3. Note that quality assurance methods were
employed throughout the study. Appendix A presents a detailed
explanation of the methods used in this study. Methods described
in Appendix A are grouped under the following headings: Wetland
Delineation, Summary of Wetland Evaluation Technique, and Appli-
cation of WET in the Meadowlands. Appendix C presents the WET
(March 1987) questions and interpretation keys used for this
study.
-21-
-------
Proe«M Uaa1 MM NWIK (MNI
• ASMS9CN1 UU (VAUMIION IMOtl-
¦ mi comma rnrinrrnir wo«t -
CM/COf iKlllw U da an
tdmtiflcatian baglnatag nil* ftmcliaMl
UMIMMl M<*t Ml
CM. CM. m. KJ MP, WVC/INC parfara
¦ draft Mtland dallaaatian Ming COC
au)tt»araWUr WHHll
Intaraaancy CMiiiatnl af tuff tiaa far
canducttng MI ftanc«, Kagutr* Cra«9 hirvt Or
- (or WET training, M dahnaatlan
and gualtty muratci
M acraag# csUv>st*4 "
Or *" and anaciata* gi»* 1 aaak
training tatttan in IM uv* a' MCT for
ttwdy Mi
Sclwdvlt af attattaanU da»alapad irttng
ag»*cy priarltia* far aaalaatlng earUin
araat aarly In tM pracatt
On a datl» fcatlt: « '
larpat >raup af Mi ta a*al«*at*
Stwrpandar Aitactatat davalepi Ml
pragran and M datdftaca farMt •tti
technical lAptdt frw IPA, Npfulra 6rwp,
Or. and COf MS
iriai at Mcmary <
EM pravldai ilady participant* with •
hallcaptar Uwr «r HOC diltrlct
Nagwira firai* Mfcat carta' vidaatapa •*
diitrlct Aerial racannat«MAC« and
*tdta ravaal aav Mt «Mc* art Man
Inc Ivdad an M Mpt.
J Ataxia flald aaulpaatit
(>liiH||>—itry, atrial |MUi,
(Mart. talinUy MUr, pH papar,
valaclty Maturing aautpMnt, UH
aaatura. blnacuUrt, ftald
avalaatian fam)
4 Canfirw pra»anc» af tfcraa dlffarvnt
aganctat raprawntad in flald crmi
5 lr»»«l u ftita (valaata accuracy af
I laka aMta^rapttt *nd mimaMlt aft
wprapritta, fill Mt field avtlMllan
far*
17 datum ta affica and entaar MT
guattipni wing ftald t
data
•. Identify addltienel daU re«uired and
any gueHlant retarding appHcatien
af MCI
• » • aariadlc daft it:
Cantwlt Or AdMut, CM MS. and/ar
• after lea* aeapen la main any .
auttlanding «MttiaM an application
at MCt
fatalt ir»ut data (anawrt ta Ml
gwaitlam) far entry lata
teavaluate tchadula «f M evaluattant
ItiM an taaa aaafeer prJarMtat and
pragrtu aada Callact addlttotwi data at
r*«utrt« Cantinua daily aitattaantt
until all priarity AAi caaplatad
Inlti ca^utar frtpaat Mtad an WET
»r*vl»iant racalvad frw Or AdMwt, C0(
MS and/ar auaHty atiurMct cAackt ky
at«dy taaa
). tun Ml ca^Htar trifra and cwt
muttt «iu« Uwta aauiaad frw
•anual ma af Ml laurrrvutlan fccyt.
4. Nrfar* taal cfcacki ta vartfjr accuracy
af data aatry m capntar.
COE MS a?*Jact itaff far Ml canftct*
ana «aak r*vla« af Ml application in
Naa«a*lMdft. iwladiag raviaw af flald.
affica a
final avalwatian af aaaaad AA l
canMUl flald cftactft
autfttanding guaitlant.
Study taaa can*KU flald in»t"tar> af
- Mi Mt avalMtad 1aM trtu .tn»«
Una rtMiaing AAt laaad an fiald vHlt.
M acraaya r«cal«ulaUd aliara i
Study tta «
friarity Mt.
•lata* avaliiattan af
kdu »matting af all avalMtad Mt
ca^fatad. #r«f<*i««ad ta avalaata
¦ ta»act an daU aau and MT
QMltty at' a
cfcacki aarfai
. la r-aapMti u lat««t Ml chanvat-
. Quality iiMriKf (MM parfaraad an
Plaai «Mlity atturanca chacti garfarwd
-an Ml ti*tft and a*t«wt prlar ta draft *
_ . . I aai clrcaldtM ta
* atady Mmciaantt vlt* a^laMtian af -
lataat < " '
rf«tA. »lIdllfa and mtarfwl Pwvtlant
«ald Nklic Nwtiag
J
Camft matvdd irm twd* aartmaami
and Hal ic HaatlM. i tiMndtntt art
Incarwratad tn final ***art.
-------
IV. RESULTS
-------
RESULTS
Introduction
Table 1 provides a listing of assessment areas (AAs) identified
in the Meadowlands. Table 1 also indicates general location,
nonth and day of 1986'when the field evaluations were carried out
and the field crew for each AA. The approach utilized by the
field team to carry out the WET field evaluations is discussed in
Appendix A beginning on page A-14. Of the 228 assessment areas
identified, field visits were conducted on 212, and functional
assessments completed for 147. The 147 completed AAs comprise
7,576 acres (92$) of the Meadowland's wetlands and deepwater
habitats.
The functional assessment information for the Meadowlands is con-
tained in three types of data sets:
1. WET input (answers to WET questions),
2. WET output and output of new interpretive keys (functional
values) and,
3. Supporting data on special habitats, sources of pollution,
hydrology, dedicated open space, and recreation.
These three types of data are summarized below.
WET Input
The input dataset comprises approximately 45,000 yes/no/skip
answers (about 300 answers for each of 147 AAs). The tables
contained in the Map Atlas present the answers to 237 WET ques-
tions for all 147 AAs. The 60 or so questions not shown on this
-22-
-------
TABLE 1. LISTING OF ASSESSMENT AREAS IN HMDC DISTRICT
; field visit—
ASSESSMENT GENERAL LOCATION ACREAGE MONTH DAY TEAM MEMBERS
ASSESSMENT AREAS EVALUATED WITH WET:
2 B
2 C
o
2 F
o
2 J
2 K
2 L
2 M
2 N
2 P
o
2 R
2 T
2 U
2 V
2 W
2 X
2 YA
2 YB
2 Z
2 1
2 2
2 3
2 4
2 4A
2 5
2 6
2 7
id
3
4
5
6
7
HACKENSACK RIVER
HACKENSACK RIVER
D TRANSCO MARSH
E EMPIRE TRACT
f EMPIRE TRACT
q EMPIRE TRACT
, H TRANSCO MARSH
2 j VINCE LOMBARDI
EMPIRE TRACT
TRANSCO MARSH
BELLMANS CREEK
BELLMANS CREEK
LOSEN SLOTE
TRANSCO MARSH
O MILL CREEK
CHROMAKIIiL CREEK
CARLSTADT
HACKENSACK RIVER
HACKENSACK RIVER
HACKENSACK RIVER
BERRYS CREEK
BERRYS creek
BERRYS CREEK
HACKENSACK RIVER
BERRYS CREEK
BERRYS CR*EK
BERRYS CREM
BERRYS CREEK
BERRYS CREEK
BERRYS CREEK o
HACKENSACK R^R
HACKENSACK RIVER
2 8 SAWMILL CREEK
2 5 SS
1 i? hackzhsack nm
2 12 HACKENSACK RIVER
2 13
lJ PENHORN CREEK
BELLEVILLE TURNPIKE
tURNP1Ke
llltvnhb* turnpike
laLEVILliS turnpike
SSSJiLl^ TURNPIKE
51.32
10
22
DS,MP,CW
63.6
10
00
DS,MP,CW
49.37
10
20
MF,CM,CV,MK
454.49
10
14
DS,MF,KB,CW
16.52
10
14
DS,MF,KB,CW
43.67
10
14
DS,MF,KB,CW
100.39
10
20
MF,CM,CW,MK
3.5
10
15
DL,DS,CW,MF
8.01
10
14
DS,MF,KB,CV
459.39
10
15
DL,DS,CW,MF
38.22
10
31
DS,SS,CM,WB,BW, |)t
74.26
10
31
DS,SS,CM,WB,BW, jjy
24.37
10
6
DS, CM.BD
234.59
10
15
DL,DS,CW,MF
184.53
9
22
SS,BD,MK,DS,DL,
48.66
11
12
MF,JB,SS, CW
90.S2
10
17
CW,GN,JB
145.53
10
22
DS,MP,CW
25.34
12
19
DS, SS,CM
12.55
12
19
DS,SS,CM
104.37
9
24
SS,MF,DS,CM
7.53
9
24
SS,MF,DS,CM
12.61
9
24
SS,MF,DS,CM
17.53
10
22
DS,MP,CW
209.94
9
24
SS,MF,DS,CM
92.47
9
24
SS,MF,DS,CM
173.49
9
24
SS.MF.DS.CM
31.54
11
14
CW,MP,KD
26.52
9
24
SS,Mr,DS,CM
10.96
11
14
CW,MP,KD
189.82
10
20
CM,MK,BD
44.2
10
20
CM,MK,BD
859.54
10
20
CM,MK,BD
10.3
10
20
CM,MK,BD
56.39
10
29
DS,MK,MF,KD,CM
266.06
10
29
DS,MK,MF,KD,CM
36.4
10
29
DS,MK,MF,KD,CM
26.4
10
29
DS,MK,MF,KDrCM
171.91
10
31
JB,CW,BD,MF
341.71
10
1
DS,SS,BD,CM
55.57
9
15
DS,BD,CM
41.28
9
17
SS,MF,DS,CM
68.6
9
15
DS,BD,CM
73.84
9
15
DS,BD,CM
24.1
9
15
DS,BD,CM
-------
LEA
3
4 A
4 B
4 C
4 D
4 e:
4 E
4 F
4 C
6
7
13 A
13 B
13 C
18
19
23
24
27
28
31
32
33 A
33 B
34
35
37
38 A
39
41
46
48
50
54
61
62
63
64
69
70
71
72
80 A
81
82
84
85
87 B1
87 B2
90
91
92
96
GENERAL LOCATION
FIELD VISIT
ACREAGE MONTH DAY TEAM MEMBERS
BELLEVILLE TURNPIKE
21.85
9
15
DS,BD,CM
UPPER BERRYS CREEK
1.23
10
3
CM,SS,DL,BW,JB
UPPER BERRYS CREEK
37.69
10
3
CM,SS,DL,BV,JB
UPPER BERRYS CREEK
60.69
10
3
CM,SS,DL,BW,JB
BERRYS CREEK
220.17
10
20
MK,BD,CM
BERRYS CREEK
11.6
10
20
MK,BD,CM
PEACH ISLAND CREEK
2.1
10
7
CM,SS,GN,KB
PEACH ISLAND, CREEK
5.71
10
7
CM,SS,GN,KB
PEACH ISLAND CREEK
19.44
10
7
CM,SS,GN,KB
LOSEN SLOTE
57.95
10
6
DS ,CM,BD
CLAY PIT
37.92
10
6
DS,CM,BD
BELLMANS CREEK
15.79
10
30
CM, MK, KB
BELLMANS CREEK
20.47
10
30
CM,MK,KB
BELLMANS CREEK
33.24
10
30
CM, MK, KB
BERRYS CREEK
3.31
11
14
CW, MP, KD
BERRYS CREEK
5.58
10
20
MK,BD,CM
BERRYS CREEK
13.75
11
24
MK,MP,KD
BERRYS CREEK
20
11
24
MK,MP,KD
BELLMANS CREEK
25.01
10
31
DS, S S,CM,WB,BV,DL
BELLMANS CREEK
27.72
10
31
DS,S S,CM,WB,BW,DL
BELLMANS CREEK
4.57
10
31
DS,S S,CM,WB,BW,DL
BELLMANS CREEK
11.65
10
30
MP,SS,CV
BELLMANS CREEK
12.7
10
30
MP,SS,CW
BELLMANS CREEK
10.13
10
30
MP,SS, CW
BELLMANS CREEK
25.1
10
30
MP,SS,CW
WEST SIDE AVENUE
4.25
11
18
CM,DL,BD
WEST SIDE AVENUE
1.56
11
18
CM,DL,BD
BELLMANS CREEK
12.03
11
5
BW,DL,CM
WEST SIDE AVENUE
14.15
11
18
CM,DL,BD
CHROMAKILL CREEK
7.5
11
12
JB,SS,MF,CW
ROUTE 3 AND NJ TURNPIKE
0.9
11
20
MK,MF,KD
ROUTE 3 AND NJ TURNPIKE
12.19
11
24
MK,MP,KD
ROUTE 3 AND NJ TURNPIKE
1.69
11
20
MK,MF,KD
VALLEY BROOK
49.3
11
13
BB, MK, BW, KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
186.36
10
23
DL,GN,KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
28.7
10
23
DL,GN,KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
30.85
10
23
DL,GN,KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
1.3
10
23
DL, GN, KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
298.54
10
23
DL,GN,KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
75.6
10
23
DL,GN,KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
5.07
10
23
DL,GN,KB,CW
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
3.95
10
23
DL,GN,KB,CW
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
10.04
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KB,CW
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
6.8
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KB,CW
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
7.27
9
18
DL,GN,CM
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
1.15
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KB,CW
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
1.19
11
25
BW,DL,CW
PENHORN CREEK
3.1
10
24
JB,BW,CM
PENHORN CREEK
19.1
10
24
JB,BW,CM
LITTLE SNAKE HILL
3.6
10
28
DL,BD,CW
LITTLE SNAKE HILL
2.03
10
28
DL,BD,CW
LITTLE SNAKE HILL
1.14
10
28
DL,BD,CW
LITTLE SNAKE HILL
1.91
10
28
DL,BD,CW
-------
ASSESSMENT
AREA
GENERAL LOCATION
97
98
99
100
107
108
110
112
1 .3
114
115
129
130 A
130 B
132
133 A
133 B
134
135
138
142
145
150 A
151
152
153
200
202
204
206
208
209
210
211
213
220
««««
223
225
300
301
303
304
306
307
308
311
312
505
PENHORN CREEK
11.48
10
28
JB,BW,CM
LITTLE SNAKE HILL
3.91
10
28
DL,BD,CW
LITTLE SNAKE HILL
23.69
10
28
DL,BD,CV
PENHORN CREEK
23.52
10
24
JB,BW,CM
PENHORN CREEK
19.67
11
7
MF,DL,CM,RHW
PENHORN CREEK
107.75
10
31
JB,CW,BD,MF
PENHORN CREEK
2.29
11
7
MF,DL,CM,RHW
PENHORN CREEK
8.13
11
7
MF,DL,CM,RHW
PENHORN CREEK
14.29
11
7
MF,DL,CM,RHW
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
4.59
9
29
CM,MP,BD,DS
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
5.14
9
29
CM,MP,BD,DS
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
3.3
11
25
BW,DL,CW
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
5
11
25
BW,DL,CV
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
3.55
11
25
BW,DL,CW
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
0.39
11
25
BW,DL,CV
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
11.26
9
18
DL,GN,CM
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
4.53
11
25
BW,DL,CW
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
5.15
9
30
CM,BD,DS
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
5.55
9
30
CM,BD,DS
1A LANDFILL
27.36
9
17
dl,gn,cm,ss,mf,bs
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
3.92
9
16
MK,BW,GM,CM,SS
COPPERS NORTH
5.78
9
10
BW,CM,CW,JB
PENHORN CREEK
1.39
10
24
JB,BW,CM
PENHORN CREEK
2.88
10
24
JB,BW,CM
PENHORN CREEK
2.69
10
24
JB,BW,CM
PENHORN CREEK
0.43
10
24
JB,BV,CH
CARLSTADT
6.36
10
17
CW,GN,JB
CARLSTADT
3.89
10
17
CW,GN,JB
WEST SIDE AVENUE
1.88
11
18
CM,DL,BD
BELLEVILLE TURNPIKE
21.86
9
17
DL,GN,CM.SS,MF,fcs
VALLEY BROOK
2.5
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KBfCV
KINGSLAND CREEK AREA
0.95
11
14
CW,MP,KD,DS
TETERBORO
54.88
10
9
KB,KD,CW,CM,SS,fcv
TETERBORO
164.43
10
9
KBfKD,CW,CMfSS. toj.
TETERBORO
16.38
10
9
KB,KD,CW,CM,SS,
WEST SIDE AVENUE
3.8
11
18
CM,DL,BD W
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
18.88
9
30
CM,BD,DS
NJ TPK t PASSAIC RIVER
39.21
9
11
JB, CM, GM, SE, CW, w«.
DL,BD,CW ^
LITTLE SNAKE HILL
1.62
10
28
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
6.98
9
16
MK,BW,GM,CM,S S
MILL CREEK MITIGATION
59.3
9
22
SS,BD,MK,DS,DL,
SS,MF,DS,CM ®
BERRYS CREEK
82.61
9
24
BERRYS CREEK
109.5
9
24
SS,MF,DS,CM
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
6.98
9
29
CM,MP,BD,DS
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
3.8
9
29
CM,MP,BD,DS
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
3.98
9
29
CM,MP,BD,DS
PENHORN CREEK
2.57
11
7
MF,DL,CM,RHW
LRFC
70.24
9
23
SS,MK,BD,CM
SPORTS COMPLEX
6.37
11
24
MK,MP,KD
TOTAL ACREAGE EVALUATED = 7575.56
-------
SSESSMENT AREAS FIELD CHECKED BUT NOT EVALUATED WITH WET
¦SSESSMENT
—FIELD
i VISIT— -
HEA
GENERAL LOCATION
ACREAGE.
MONTH
DAY
TEAM MEMBERS
2 .S
MILL CREEK
16.9
9
SOUTH OF OVERPECK CREEK
17.4
11
SOUTH OF OVERPECK CREEK
1.34
14 A
OVERPECK CREEK
34.29
11
25
BW,CV,DL
14 B
OVERPECK CREEK
4.41
11
25
BW,CV,DL
16
ROUTES 3 £ 17
6.79
12
19
DS,SS,CM
11
ROUTES 3 4 17
13.11
12
19
DS,SS,CM
20
COCA COLA
3.43
11
13
BB,KKrBV,KB,CW
21
SPORTS COMPLEX
7.8
11
24
MP,KD,MK
22
SPORTS COMPLEX
8.2
11
24
MP,KD,MK
25
SPORTS COMPLEX
0.22
11
24
HP,KD,MK
40
CHROMAKILL CREEK
1.02
11
18
DL,CM,BD
42
VEST SIDE AVENUE
0.47
11
IS
DL,CM,BD
49
SPORTS COMPLEX
3.81
11
20
MK,MF,KD
52
SPORTS COMPLEX
0.5
11
20
MK,MF,KD
53
SPORTS COMPLEX
1.34
11
20
KK,MT,KD
55
VALLEY BROOK
0.5
11
13
BB,MK,BV,KB,CW
58
LEACHATE POND
1.82
11
14
CV,MP,KD,DS
59
LEACHATE POMD
0.94
11
14
CV,MP,KD,DS
65
LEACHATE POND
0.73
66
LEACEATE POND
0.71
67
LEACHATE POND
o.e
11
26
AC,DS,MF,CW
68
LEACHATE POND
1.32
73
ROUTE 3 &NJ TPK EAST
0.98
11
26
Aflf DS ,MF< CM
75
NORTH OF KEARNY KARSH
2.69
76
NORTH OF KEARNY KARSH
2.68
77
NORTH OF KEARNY MARSH
10.52
78
NORTH OF KEARNY KARSH
3.7
86
NJ TURNPIKE SOUTH
0.95
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KB,CV
87 A
SNAKE BILL
4.09
104
SNAKE HILL
4.37
12
10
CM,MK,RY
106
SEACAUCUS SOUTH
5.47
12
19
DS,SS, CM
109
PENHORN CREEK
1.12
12
10
CM,MK,RY
116
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
0.79
9
29
CM,MP
117
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
0.78
9
29
CM, MP
118
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
0.8
9
29
CM, MP
119
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
2.24
9
29
CM, MP
J 22
SOUTH OF KEARNY HARSH
3.8
123
SOUTH OF KEARNY MARSH
1.16
11
13
BB,MKPBV,KB,CV
125
SOUTH OF KEARNY MARSH
1.54
11
26
AG,DS,MF,CV
126
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
0.11
9
29
CM, HP
127
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
0.12
9
29
CM, MP
128
SOUTH OF KEARNY MARSH
1.46
137 1A
LANDFILL
0.54
143
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
0.38
9
29
CM, MP
144
COPPERS NORTH
9.98
147
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
1.56
12
10
CH,NX,RY
143
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
1.07
12
9
DS,MP,CK,RY
149
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
3.99
12
9
DS,MP,CM,RY
-------
ASSESSMENT ————————p jEL]} VISIT—"—"""""-
AREA general location acreage month day teak members
150 B
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
20.32
12
9
DS,MP,CM,RY
154
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
3.44
12
9
DS,MP,CM,RY
155
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
2.9
12
9
DS,MP,CM,RY
156
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
7.22
12
9
DS,MK,CM
201
WEST OF EMPIRE TRACT
1.7
11
25
BW,CW
207
WEST OF SAWMILL KREEK
17.76
12
19
DS,SS,CM
212
UPPER BERRYS CREEK
2.59
10
3
CM,SS,DL,BW,JB
214
ROUTE 17 NORTH
4.48
12
19
DS,SS,CM
215
COCA COLA
3.76
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KB,CV
216
COCA COLA
10.24
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KB,CW
217
QUALITY INN '
1.29
218
QUALITY INN
0.49
12
19
DS, SS,CM
219
ROUTE 3 & NJTPK EAST
2.81
221
SOUTH OF KEARNY MARSH
2.14
11
13
BB,MK,BW,KB,CV
224
SOUTHEAST DISTRICT
1.84
12
9
DS,MP,RY,CM
226
SOTH OF KEARNY MARSH
2.68
11
13
bb,mk,bw,kb,cv
305
RR YARD AND PASSAIC RIVER
1.35
9
29
CM, MP
401
UPPER BERRYS CREEK
3.6
12
19
DS,SS,CM
402
SOUTH OF TETERBORO
3.92
12
19
DS,SS,CM
403
NEAR LOSEN SLOTE
7.8
12
19
DS,SS,CM
404
VALLEY BROOK
3.55
12
19
DS,SS,CM
405
SPORTS COMPLEX
0.43
12
19
DS,SS,CM
410
ROUTE 17 NORTH
0.37
12
19
DS,SS,CM
420
WEST SIDE AVENUE
0.98
11
18
CM,DL,BD
421
WEST SIDE AVENUE
1.01
11
18
CM,DL,BD
SNAKE HILL
3.06
12
10
CM,MK,RY
500
TETERBORO AIRPORT
383.1
12
19
DS,SS,CM
501
WEST OF EMPIRE TRACT
3.7
10
16
MP,CW,GM
502
W. OF BERGEN CO. LANDFILL
4.68
12
19
DS,SS,CM
503
RADIO ANT. - TRANSCO MARS
2.2
504
SPORTS COMPLEX
0.18
11
24
MK,MP,KD
506
SPORTS COMPLEX
0.61
11
24
MK,MP,KD
TOTAL ACREAGE NOT EVALUATED =
€84.04
TOTAL AA ACREAGE =
8259.6
KEY TO
FIELD PARTICIPANTS
BB
- BRETT BRAGIN, HMDC
CM
JB
- JOHN BOLAN, HMDC
GM
KB
- KEVIN BRODERICK, NJDEP
GN
WB
- WARREN BLACK, EPA
MP
bd
- BOB DIETERICH, CORPS
DS
KD
- KATHLEEN DRAKE, EPA
SS
MF
- MICHELE FARMER, CORPS
BW
AG
- ANNE GALLI, HMDC
CW
MK
- MARK KRAUS, HMDC
RW
DL
- DEBBIE LAWLOR, HMDC
RY
CHRISTOPHER MASON, MAGUIRE GROUP r
GENE McCOLLIGAN, NJDEP
GEORGE NIEVES, CORPS
MARIO PAULA, CORPS
DON SMITH, HMDC
SHARI STEVENS, FWS
BOB WILL, CORPS
CLINT WEBB, MAGUIRE GROUP INC.
ROBERT WARDWELL, MAGUIRE GROUP INc
RICHARD YOUNG, CORPS - WES
-------
table have consistent answers for all AAs in the Meadowlands.
These questions and the answers to them are discussed in Appendix
A. Answers to WET questions are often referred to as "predic-
tors" because they are used in the interpretation keys to predict
the probability that a given function is performed by the wet-
land.
The input data set has two major uses. First, a reader who
wishes to check the logic leading to a specific functional value
for a particular AA may do so by using this input data with the
interpretation keys presented in Appendices C and D. Second, the
input dataset contains valuable information not specifically
included in the output dataset. For example, the following
distribution of dominant wetland systems and classes was tabulat-
ed by examining the answers to questions 10 and 12.
Table 2.
Distribution of Wetland Systems, Classes and Subclasses
in the Meadowlands According to FWS Classification System.
System Class Subclass Total Number
Riverine Tidal Emergent Persistent 1
Palustrine Forested Broad-leaved deciduous 2
" Scrub-shrub Broad-leaved deciduous 1
" Aquatic bed Floating vascular 1
" Emergent Persistent 44
Estuarine Unconsolidated
Bottom Mud 1
" Aquatic bed Floating vascular 1
" " Rooted vascular 9
" Emergent Persistent 87
There are hundreds of potentially useful ways to combine and sort
the WET input data. Potentially unique or rare habitats can be
readily identified with this data (for example, 0.12A-forest
areas, Q.ll-islands, Q.32-hydroperiod, Q.39-special habitat
features).
-23-
-------
The Input data are also useful in the qualification of the output
data. For example, many AAs are classified under the estuarine
system because their salinity is greater than 0.5 ppt. These
estuarine AAs automatically receive a low value rating for
floodflow alteration effectiveness, even though many have low
salinities (less than 2,0 ppt), are only marginally tidal and
appear more like freshwater wetlands than tidal wetlands.
Examination of answers to the salinity questions (4B.A-F) will
indicate which AAs have low salinities. These AAs may be ex-
pected to retain a certain amount of rainwater/runoff/freshwater
stream flow, and therefore may be providing some level of flood-
flow alteration.
WET Output
The complete WET output dataset is presented in the first table
of the Map Atlas. The WET method contains five levels of analy-
sis. Level 1 addresses a wetlands social significance with
respect to certain functions. Levels 2, 3, and 4 address a
wetland's effectiveness in performing the various functions, and
in some cases, it's opportunity to perform certain functions.
Level 5 is an advanced method of assessing a wetlands signifi-
cance with respect to the Uniqueness/Heritage function. The
Interagency Group decided to complete Levels 1, 2, and 3 for all
assessment areas. Complete information was available for Levels
1, 2 and 3; partial data were available for Level 4. While
complete data were not available to answer all Level 4 questions,
the Interagency Group decided to use the available information to
address as many Level 4 questions as possible, and thereby
increase the reliability of results beyond that obtainable under
Levels 2 and 3 only. These considerations are more fully des-
cribed in Appendix A (Detailed Description of Methods). Select
functional values are also reproduced later in this section.
Select functional values (effectiveness and opportunity) are also
depicted on the interpretive maps (F^OOD1 scale) at the begin-
ning of the Map Atlas.
-24-
-------
It is important to remember that WET reports functional "values"
which are indicators of the probability that a wetland performs
that function to an unspecified degree. It is therefore incor-
rect to assume that a High rating reported by WET infers a high
number of animals occur in an assessment area or a high degree of
sediment/toxicants are removed, etc. Or, conversely a low rating
does not infer few animals occur in the assessment area or a low
degree of sediment or toxicants are removed, etc. Currently,
there is no wetland assessment method which quantifies the degree
to which a wetland performs a particular function. Such informa-
tion must be gathered through empirical studies.
The interagency group elected to implement the WET method in the
Hackensack Meadowlands at the conclusion of considerations dis-
cussed in Appendix A. It is the strongest method useful in the
consistent consideration of all major wetland functions. The
agencies are aware of the limitation that WET reports a proba-
bility that a function or functions may be performed by wetlands.
EPA and the Corps consider the WET a useful tool in the decision
making process and the most feasible method for wetland assess-
ment given the scope of the wetlands area to be assessed and the
constraints of manpower, time and costs.
Level 1 (Significance) Output
WET Level 1 reports the probability that a given function is
socially significant for a given wetland. The thirty individual
values shown for each AA under Level 1 (Significance) Results
(Map Atlas table) are the result from a single interpretation key
(Appendix C page 86) using the answers to the 31 Level 1 ques-
tions. Note that several values may appear for a given function.
This is because several different factors may contribute to a
function's significance. For example, the presence of endangered
species, environmental monitoring stations, and the proximity to
-25-
-------
a nature center are all separate predicators of the AA's signifi-
cance for the uniqueness/heritage function. WET synthesizes the
Level 1 output into a single value. The Map Atlas reports all of
the Level 1 results, not combined. As such, the reader can
determine the parameters contributing to the Significance rating.
For example, a high Uniqueness/Heritage rating based on the
occurrence of endangered species can be distinguished from a high
Uniqueness/Heritage value resulting from the AA's proximity to a
nature center.
Table 3 summarizes the distribution of Level 1 - Significance
ratings for the 147 AAs evaluated. Examination of the Level 1
output reveals very little variation for most functions. Most
assessment areas have a Moderate or High significance for most
functions. Exceptions are: Groundwater Recharge - Moderate;
Floodflow Alteration - Low/Moderate; Aquatic Diversity and
Abundance - Moderate; Fisheries Habitat - Moderate; and Active
Recreation - Low. There are, of course, exceptions to these
general observations; exceptions which are perhaps more signifi-
cant than the trends because of their relative rarity.
In the Meadowlands data set, a specific Level 1 result is usually
controlled by the answer to a single question. Examination of
the Level 1 interpretation key (page 86 of Appendix C) shows that
many individual answers lead directly to a High, Moderate, or Low
result. For example, if the answer to question three (historic/
archaeologic site) is yes, then the Uniqueness/Heritage value
(for UH1) will be high.
Lists A and B in the Level 1 interpretation key provide a measure
of conditional logic for many functions. However, an implicit
assumption of the key is that it is probable that any wetland in
an urban area will be of at least moderate significance regard-
less of its other characteristics. In the Meadowlands the answer
to Q 28 (wetland located in an urban area?) is always yes.
Therefore the typical logic sequence employing Lists A and B is:
-26-
-------
Table 3.
Distribution of Level 1 - Significance Ratings for
Wetland Assessment Areas in the Meadow!ands
Not Applicable
Function
Key*
Uncertain
Low
Moderate
Hist
Groundwater
GWP.l
0
0
147
0
Recharge
GWR2
0
0
147
0
Groundwater
GWD1
147
0
0
0
Di scharge
GWD2
0
0
0
147
GVID3
0
0
147
0
GWD4
0
0
147
0
GWD5
147
0
Q
0
Floodflow
FA1
27
120
0
0
Alteration
FA2
0
0
117
30
Sediment
SSI
0
0
112
35
Stabilization
Sediment /
STR1
0
0
14
133
Toxicant
STR2
0
0
17
130
Retention
STR3
0
0
147
0
Nutrient
NTR1
0
0
17
130
Transformation
NTR2
0
0
147
0
P.etention
NTR3
0
0
12
135
NTR4
0
0
147
0
Aquatic
ADAl
0
0
128
19
Diversity
ADA 2
0
0
140
7
Abundance
Fish Habitat
F1
0
0
140
7
Wildlife
ML1
0
0
15
132
Diversity
VIL2
0
0
35
112
Abundance
WL3
0
0
140
7
Recreation
RI
0
143
0
4
Uniqueness
UH1
0
0
19
128
Heritage
U HZ
0
0
140
7
UH3
0
0
144
3
(JH4
0
0
125
22
UH5
0
0
147
0
* Key » output identifier as it appears in map atlas. Note that the
numeric portion of Key relates to the occurrence of that functional
output in the interpretation key; for example, UH4 corresponds to the
fourth opportunity to generate a uniqueness/heritage significance value
from the Level I interpretation key.
-27-
-------
0 If the predictor (answer to the question) is Yes, then the
associated Level 1 output is High,
0 If the predictor is No or false, then List A or List. B will
cause the output to be Moderate.
Level 2, 3 and 4 (Effectiveness & Opportunity) Output
The Functional Assessment output table in the Map Atlas reports
the results of the effectiveness and opportunity interpretation
keys with input from the 270 or so questions contained in Levels
2, 3 and 4. Most of the effectiveness and opportunity values are
also depicted on the 1"=2000' scale interpretive maps included
near the beginning of the Map Atlas. Few Level 4 questions could
be answered, and therefore the results for effectiveness and
opportunity have only slightly greater certainty than results
produced by a Level 2 and Level 3 analyses.
Table 4 summarizes the distribution of effectiveness and opportu-
nity values produced by WET. Note that certain keys produce
values other than High, Moderate or Low. The Groundwater Re-
charge key can yield an uncertain result, for instance. Many
species or species group keys were not appropriate for certain
assessment areas and were therefore not run. For example, the
Warmwater Fish key was not run for AAs with no standing water at
any time of the year. There is also one special case, Waterfowl
General Migration, where the output is either Low (1) or Not Low
(0). According to WET, if a Low value is obtained for Waterfowl
General Migration individual species or group keys should not be
used - the assumption being that the AA is Low for all waterfowl.
A "Not Low" value means that individpal species/group keys should
be used.
-28-
-------
Table A.
Distribution of Effectiveness and Opportunity Ratings for
Wetland Assessment Areas in the-Meadowlands
Function
Not Applicable/
Uncertai n
Low Moderate High
Ground Water Recharge
Ground Water Discharge
Floodflow Alteration
Effectiveness
Opportunity
Sediment Stabilization
Sediment/Toxicant Retention
Effectiveness
Opportunity
Nutrient Removal/Transformation
Effectiveness
Opportunity
Production Export
Aquatic Diversity/Abundance
21
126
0
0
0
42
101
4
0
125
8
14
0
104
18
25
0
31
34
82
0
34
44
69
0
0
0
147
0
44
0
103
0
5
1
141
2
21
124
0
0
94
25
28
General
Fish Habitat *
0
23
79
45
General
Wildlife Habitat *
0
52
73
22
General
Waterfowl Habitat *
0
67
21
59
0
19
126
2
100
0
43
4
0
120
19
8
0
64
5
78
0
11
29
107
Fishery Habitat:**
General
Warmwater
Wildlife Diversity/Abundanee:**
Breeding
Migration
Wintering
Waterfowl Not Applicable/
Function** Uncertain Low Moderate/High
Group 1 Breeding
General Migration
Black Duck Migration
Common Merganser Migration
Group 1 Migration
Group 4 Migration
Group 7 Migration
All Waterfowl Wintering
*New interpretation keys developed specifically for the Meadowlands.
**Nc data for these functions is presented in Table 5, it appears
in the output table in the Map Atlas.
NA = Not Applicable
0
104
43
99
48
NA
54
23
70
120
27
0
55
33
59
IIP
24
B
93
8
46
0
57
90
-29-
-------
Table 5 presents the High, Moderate and Low ratings produced for
select functions in the Meadowlands. Note that General Fish
(FG3), General Wildlife (GWL) and Waterfowl (GWF) Habitat ratings
were obtained using interpretive keys developed specifically for
the Meadowlands by the interagency study group. Also note the +
and - signs which follow certain values in the Table. These
signs indicate that one or more of the interagency group members
felt the model output did not accurately reflect the functional
value of that wetland. For example, an "M +" indicates the
functional value was thought to be higher than "M" by one or more
group members. Likewise, an "M suggests the rating should be
lower than predicted by the model. (Refer to Page 19 of the
Overview of Methods Section for interpretation of these nota-
tions.)
The following pages summarize the distribution of ratings for the
effectiveness and opportunity of select functions. The defini-
tions of these functions and the rationale for their High,
Moderate and Low ratings are presented in the WET (March 1987
version) manual, reproduced in part in Appendix C. The following
discussion of assessment area ratings refers to the area's
effectiveness at performing that function, unless otherwise
stated. Only three functions, floodflow alteration, nutrient
removal/transformation, and sediment/toxicant retention, have
opportunity ratings in addition to effectiveness ratings.
Opportunity ratings are identified in the discussion of those
functions.
Groundwater Recharge (GWR)
This function relates to the ability of precipitation and/or
surface waters to infiltrate through wetland soils and recharge
underlying ground water. The vast majority of AAs have a Low
rating for ground water recharge. According to WET, any estua-
rine AA automatically receives a Low rating. This reflects the
fact that most tidal wetlands lie at the lowest elevations with
-30-
-------
TABLE 5.
RESULTS OF LEVEL 2, 3, 4 FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT
OF WETLANDS IN THE HACKENSACK MEADOVLANDS
LEVEL 2,3,4 (EFFECTIVENESS & OPPORTUNITY) RESULTS
GWR
GVD
FA
FAO
SS
STR
STRO
NR
NRO
PE
ADA
FG3
GWL
GWF
AA
* 1
L
M
L
L
H
L
+ H
L
H
M
H
H
H
L +
2 1
^ 2
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
H
H
M
H
H
M
H
0 0
tu 4d
£ 3
L
M
L
L
H
L
H
H
R
M
H
H
M
H
*
4i -J
^ 4
L
L
L
L
H
H
R
L
+ H
M
L
M
M
H
2 4
^ 4A
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
H
H
M
H
M
M
H
2 4A
^ 5
L
L
L
L
H
M
H
L
H
M
L
M
M
H
2 5
^ 6
L
M
L
L
H
H
H
L
H
M
H
H
M
+
H
2 6
7
L
M
L
L
H
L
H
L
R
M
H
H
M
+
R
2 7
^ 8
L
M
L
L
H
H
H
L
+ H
M
H
H
H
H
2 8
^ 9
L
M
L
L
H
L
H
L
H
M
L
M
M
M
2 9
10
L
M
L
L
H
L
+ H
L
H
M
R
R
M
+
H
2 10
£ 11
L
M
L
L
H
L
+ H
L
+ H
M
M
H
H
H
2 11
^ 12
L
M
L
L
L
L
H
L
H
H
L
H
L
L +
2 12
3 13
L
M
L
L
L
L
H
L
R
M
L
H.
L
L +
2 13
B
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
L
R
M
M
H
M
L +
2 B
^ c
L
L
L
L
L
L
R
L
R
K
M
R
H
R
o r
u w
2 D
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
L
R
M
M
H
M
H
2 D
3 E
L
M
L
H
H
H
R
R
H
H
- L
M
M
-
M
2 E
5 F
U
M
H
- H
M
M
+ H
H
H
M
H
M
M
H
2 F
2 G
L
M
L
H
H
R
R
R
R
M
L
L
N
L
2 G
3 H
L
L
L
L
H
H
R
L
H
M
M
B
M
H
2 H
2 I
L
L
L
L
H
L
H
H
H
M
L
M
L
L
2 I
J
L
M
L
H
H
H
R
R
H
M
L
L
M
L
2 J
2 K
L
L
L
L
R
H
R
L
H
M
M
H
M
H
2 K
:2 L
L
M
L
L
M
M
H
R
H
M
L
H
M
H -
2 L
2 N
L
M
L
L
M
N
R
H
H
M
M
H
H
H -
2 M
2 N
L
M
L
H
H
H
R
H
H
M
L
M
M
M
2 N
2 P
L
L
L
L
B
H
R
L
H
M
M
H
M
H
2 P
2 Q
L
L
L
L
H
H
R
L
H
M
M
H
M
+/-
- H -
2 Q
2 R
L
L
L
L
H
H
R
H
H
M
M
M
M
H -
2 R
2 T
L
M
L
M
L
R
R
L
H
M
L
L
M
L
2 T
2 U
L
L
L
L
L
L
+ H
L
H
M
M
H
M
H
2 U
2 V
L
L
L
L
H
L
+ H
H
R
M
L
L
M
L
2 V
2 W
L
L
L
L
M
L
H
L
H
M
L
M
M
H
2 V
2 X
U
M
H
M
L
+ H
H
H
R
L
L
L
L
L
2 X
2 YA
U
M
H
M
L
+ H
H
H
H
L
L
L
L
L
2 YA
2 YB
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
L
B
M
H
B
M
+
H
2 YB
2 Z
L
L
L
L
L
L
H
L
R
M
L
+ H
M
L +
2 Z
,3 1
U
M
M
H
M
H
R
R
H
H
M
M
H
B
3 1
3 2
L
M
L
L
M
M
R
H
H
H
H
B
R
B
3 2
See last page for key.
-------
AA
GVR
GWD
FA
FAO
SS
STR
STRO
NR
NRO
PE
ADA
FG3
GWL
GVF
AA
3 3
L
L
L
L
H
H
R
H
H
M
H
H
H
R
3 3
3 4
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
L
H
M'
H
H
M
H
3 4
3 5
L
L
L
L
H
R
H
H
H
M
R
H
H
R
3 5
3 6
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
H
H
M
R
H
H
H
3 6
3 7
L
L
L
L
H
R
R
H
R
M
L +
H
H
H
3 7
3 8
L
L
L
L
H
R
H
H
H
M
L
R
H
H
3 8
4 A
L
M
L
L
H
H
H
L
R
M
L
M
L
L
4 A
4 B
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
H
R
M
L
M
L
H -
4 B
4 C
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
R
R
H
H
M
M
H -
4 C
4 D
L
L
L
L
M
R
R
H
H
M
M
M
H
H -
4 D
4 E
L
L
L
L
M
M
H
R
H
M
L
M
L
L
4 E
a ro
4J 4d
L
L
L
L
H
L
H
L
H
M
L
M
M
M
4 E2
4 F
L
L
L
L
H
M
R
R
H
M
L
M
M
M
4 F
4 G
L
M
M
H
M
H
R
R
H
M
L
L
M
L
4 G
6
L
M
L
H
H
R
R
H
R
M
L
M
H
M
6
7
L
M
L
L
L
H
H
H
L
L
K
M
L
M +
7
13 A
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
H
R
M
L
M
L
+
H
13 A
13 B
L
M
L
L
M
M
R
H
H
M
L
M
L
+
R
13 B
13 C
L
M
L
L
M
M
R
R
R
M
L
M
M
+
H
13 C
18
L
L
L
L
H
M
H
R
H
M
L
M
L
L
18
19
L
L
L
L
B
M
H
H
H
M
L
M
M
M
19
23
L
L
L
L
M
M
H
H
H
M
L
M
M
M
23
24
L
L
L
L
M
M
R
R
R
M
L
M
M
M
24
27
L
M
L
L
H
M
R
L
H
M
L
M
M
M
27
28
L
M
L
L
H
R
R
R
H
M
L
M
M
M
28
31
L
M
L
L
L
R
R
R
H
L
L
M
L
L
31
32
L
M
L
L
H
L
R
L
R
M
L
M
L
H -
32
33 A
L
M
L
L
K
L
R
R
H
M
L
M
L
H -
33 A
33 B
L
M
L
L
H
L
R
R
R
M
L
M
L
H -
33 B
34
L
M
L
L
M
M
H
R
R
M
L
M
M
M
34
35
L
H
L
L
M
H
R
H
H
L
L
L
L
L
35
37
L
M
L
L
M
R
R
R
H
L
L
M
L
L
37
38 A
L
M
L
L
M
M
R
L
H
U
L
M
M
H -
38 A
39
L
M
L
L
M
M
H
H
H
M
L
H
M
+
H -
39
41
L
L
L
L
L
R
R
H
H
M
L
M
L
L
41
46
u
M
H
H
L
H
R
H '
H
L
L
L
L
L
46
48
L
L
L
L
H
H
R
H
R
H
L
L
L
L
48
50
L
M
L
L
M
M
H
R
R
M
L
M
L
L
50
54
L
M
L
L
M
H
H
R
R
M
M
R
M
H
54
61
L
M
L
L
M
H
H
R
R
M
R
H
H
L +
61
r. o
V
L
L
L
M
M +
R
L +
R
M
L
H
R
L +
62
V 4J
63
L
L
L
M
u
tl
H
H
H
M
K
H
R
L +
63
T
T
L
H
u
u
41
H
M
L
H
L
L
64
- -a
U
T
V
L
T
M
44
L +
U
u
44
V
tt
M
44
H
u
44
u
u
44
€9
70
L
L
L
L
M
V
u
*4
a
4*
V
• 4
V
44
H
H
u
44
u
in
> V
71
L
L
L
L
M
L
R
L
H
M
L
u
*4
t
U
u
72
L
L
L
L
M
L
R
L
H
M
L
H
L
T
•7 -v
80 A
L
M
L
M
H
H
H
H
H
M
L
H
X
L
80 A
81
L
M
L
L
H
R
H
R
H
L
L
N
L
L
81
U X
82
L
H
L
L
H
R
H
L
R
M
L
H
M
H
82
84
L
M
L
L
R
H
H
H
H
L
L
M
L
L
84
* See last page'for key.
-------
AA
GWR
GVD
FA
FAO
SS
STR
STRO
NR
NRO
PE
ADA
FG3
GWL
GWF
AA
85
L
M
L
H
H
H
R
R
H
L
L
L
L
L
85
87 B1
U
M
H
M
L
R
R
H
H
L
L
H
L
L
87 B1
87 B2
U
M
H
M
H
L +
H
H
H
M
L
M
M
R
87 B2
SO
U
M
H
H
L
R
H
R
R
L
L
H
L
L
90
51
U
M
H
H
L
H
R
H
H
L
L
L
L
L
91
92
u
M
H
M
L
R
H
H
H
L
L
L
L
L
92
96
u
M
H
H
M
R
R
R
H
L
L
M
L
L
96
97
L
M
L
L
K
R
R
R
H
H
H
M
M
M
97
98
U
M
H
H
L
R
R
H
H
L
L
L
L
L
98
99
U
M
M
H
M
R
R
H
H
M
L
M
M
M -
99
*00
L
H
L
L
R
H
R
R
H
U
L
M
M
M
100
fl©7
U
M
M
H
H
H
H
R
H
M
L
M
K
L
107
1*08
U
M
M
M
R
R
R
R
H
M
L
M
M
M
108
Sio
U
M
H
H
L
H
R
R
H
L
L
L
L
L
110
1*12
U
M
M
H
H
H
R
H
H
K
L
M
M
H -
112
J*13
U
M
M
H
H
R
H
H
H
M
L
M
M
H -
113
1*14
L
H
L
L
R
M
R
R
L
M
M
M
L
L
114
i>i5
L
H
L
L
L
M
H
H
L
M
M
M
L
L
115
1*29
L
M
L
M
R
R
R
H
R
M
L
L
L
L
129
1*30 A
L
M
L
H
R
R
H
H
H
M
L
M
M
L
130 A
PL 30 B
L
M
L
M
H
R
H
R
H
M
L
L
L
L
130 B
[*32
L
M
L
M
H
R
R
H
R
L
L
M
L
L
132
1*33 A
L
M
L
L
R
R
H
H
H
M
L
M
M
L +
133 A
1*33 B
L
M
L
R
R
R
R
R
H
L
L
M
L
L
133 B
*34
L
M
L
L
R
M
R
H
R
M
H
M
M
M
134
*35
L
M
L
L
L
M
R
H
L
M
M
M
M
M
135
1.38
L
M
L
L
R
N
H
L
H
M
L
H
M
L
138
*42
L
M
L
M
R
N
R
R
H
M
L
M
L
L
142
*45
L
M
L
L
R
M
H
H
R
M
L
M
K
H
145
*50 A
L
M
L
L
M
L
H
R
R
M
R
M
M
L
150 A
*51
L
M
L
L
L
L
R
R
H
M
H
M
M
L
151
<52
L
M
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
M
R
M
M
L
152
^53
L
M
L
L
L
L
R
R
H
M
R
M
M
L
153
^00
L
M
L
H
L
L
H
L
H
M
L
L
L
L
200
^02
L
H
L
H
L
L
H
L
R
M
L
L
L
L
202
^04
L
M
L
L
L
M
H
H
R
M
L
M
L
L
204
^06
L
M
L
L
R
H
R
L
R
M
L
M
H
+ H
206
-------
AA GVR GVD FA FAO SS STR STRO KR NRO PE ADA FG3 GVL
GVF AA
307
L
M
L
L
H
M
H
H
M
M
M
M
L
L
307
308
L
H
L
L
L
M
H
H
L
M"
M
L
L
L
308
311
U
M
M
M
H
H
H
H
H
M
L
L
L
L
311
312
L
L
L
L
H
H
H
L
H
M
H
L
H
L
312
505
L
L
L
L
H
L
H
H
H
M
L
M
M
M
505
KEY: AA = Assessment Area
H = High Probability that Wetland Performs Function
M = Moderate Probability that Wetland Performs Function
L = Low Probability that Wetland Perforins Function
U = Uncertain Probability that Wetland Performs Function
+ = Agency Comments Suggest AA May Have Higher Probability
of Performing Function than Indicated by Model
= Agency Comments Suggest AA May Have Lower Probability
of Performing Function than Indicated by Model
GWR = Groundwater Recharge Effectiveness
GVD = Groundwater Discharge Effectiveness
FA = Floodflow Alteration Effectiveness
FAO = Floodflow Alteration Opportunity
SS = Sediment Stabilization Effectiveness
STR = Sediment / Toxicant Retention Effectiveness
STRO = Sediment / Toxicant Retention Opportunity
NR = Nutrient Removal / Transformation Effectiveness
NRO = Nutrient Removal / Transformation Opportunity
PE = Production Export Effectiveness
ADA = Aquatic Diversity and Abundance Effectiveness
FG3 = General Fish Habitat Effectiveness
GVL - General Wildlife Habitat Effectiveness
GVF = General Vaterfowl Habitat Effectiveness
-------
respect to the regional water table and are therefore more likely
to be points of ground water discharge than recharge. Ninety-
seven AAs received a Low rating because they are estuarine.
Two palustrine AAs received a Low rating because they have no
permanent inlet, but do have a permanent outlet. A wetland with
an outlet, but no inlet, is likely to facilitate surface water
drainage out of the wetland, thereby limiting surface water
detention and associated ground water recharge. The remaining 27
AAs with Low ratings all have ditches or channels which restrict
water to a relatively narrow area of the AA. The implicit
assumption is that such drainage channels limit the extent to
which precipitation, runoff, or flood waters car spread over the
marsh surface and infiltrate into the ground and underlying
aquifer. The remaining AAs have an Uncertain rating. This
indicates that some AA attributes suggest a potential for re-
charge but others do not. This type of distribution is typical
of WET output [see Appendix C, p. 88) and is intuitively accept-
able based on the Meadowlands1 Tow topographic position in a
major watershed.
Examination of the GWR interpretation key and the Hackensack data
set shows that any AA which does not receive a Low rating must
receive an Uncertain rating. This is because Q. 54 (water table
slopes away} was never answered due to lack of data, Q. 1,1 (dry
region) is always No, and Q. 62 is always No due to the preval-
ence of marine and lacustrine clays in the subsoil.
Groundwater Discharge (GWD)
Ratings for this function Indicate the probability that ground
water emerges in the wetland, typically along the upland/wetland
edge or within stream channels. One hundred and one AAs have a
Moderate rating for this function, indicating some of their
-31-
-------
attributes are conducive to groundwater discharge. Most of these
Moderate rated AAs are so rated because of their topographically
low position in the watershed. The few which are rated High
typically have no permanent inlet but do have an outlet. A
wet.la J with an outlet, but no inlet, is likely to facilitate
surface water drainage out of the wetland which in turn limits
detention of surface water, thereby facilitating discharge of
ground water.
Floodflow Alteration Effectiveness/Opportunity (FA, FAQ)
Floodflow alteration refers to a wetland's ability to detain
floodwaters, lessen peak flood velocity and elevation, and
thereby protect downstream properties. Almost all AAs (125) have
a Low effectiveness and opportunity rating for this function.
This is largely due to the dominance of estuarine system AAs in
the Meadowlands. Small si/e, permanent water hydroperiods, lack
of stormwater ponding and non-sinuous channels also contribute to
the predominance of Low ratings. The Penhorn Creek area has the
most AAs rated Moderate and High for floodflow alteration effec-
tiveness. This is understandable since this creek is hydrologi-
cally isolated from the Hackensack River by a functioning, but
leaking, tide gate resulting in palustrine AAs and significant
ponding of stormwater flows.
Information and materials were submitted by a number of Little
Ferry residents at the March 1, 1988 Public Meeting attesting to
the retention of storm waters by Assessment Area number 6. WET
results for AA6 showed a high opportunity and a low effectiveness
for flood flow alteration. The information EPA received indi-
cates that the area's flood flow effectiveness is greater than
low.
Sediment Stabilization (SS)
Wetlands which perform the sediment stabilization function
protect shorelines and river banks by dissipating the erosional
-32-
-------
forces of waves and swift currents. In the Meadowlands this
wetland function is important because adjacent wetlands protect
dikes and road and railroad embankments from the erosive forces
of waterways. The integrity of dikes is particularly important
in some northern parts of the District where they afford essen-
tial flood protection.
More than 50 percent of all AAs showed a high rating for this
function. This is due to a combination of potentially erosive
conditions (high water velocities in AA channels or tributaries,
unsheltered open water, water artificially confined) and features
which stabilize the sediment (bands of erect vegetation greater
than 20 feet wide). Hackensack River AAs 2B, 2C, 21, 21, 2-12
and 2-13 are all rated Low because the average width of erect
vegetation is less than 20 feet and they otherwise lack features
which tend to diminish shoreline erosion. Note that a number of
AAs rated high such as 2E or 54, occur in areas hydrologically
isolated from major erosional forces except perhaps in severe
storms and hurricanes. These areas may have the physical charac-
teristics to stabilize sediment, but they rarely have the oppor-
tunity to perform this function.
AAs that do not show indicators of erosion potential received
Moderate or Low ratings. Indicators of erosion potential include
the occurrence of channels which1 confine water, high water
velocities, unsheltered waters, or direct evidence of erosion.
The 34 AAs which lack erosion indicators, but show one or more
features which would tend to stabilize sediment (bands of erect
vegetation 20 feet wide along the water's edge) received a
Moderate rating. The 31 AAs rated Low for this function lack
both erosion indicators and features which stabilize sediment.
Interagency comment on these results suggested that AAs 2X and
2YA should have a higher rating than Low for this function; both
of these areas have extensive stands of common reed which could
be expected to dissipate erosional forces during severe storms.
-33-
-------
Sediment/Toxicant Retention Effectiveness and Opportunity-
(STR, STRO)
Sixty-nine AAs have a High rating for sediment/toxicant retention
effectiveness. High and Moderate ratings are primarily a result
of features which promote the detention and/or filtration of
waters entering the AA. In the Meadowlands such features include
constricted outlets, wide expanses of erect persistent vegeta-
tion, and low surface water velocity. Detention and filtration
facilitate the sedimentation of suspended particles and adsorp-
tion/chelation of toxic chemicals.
Most AAs that rated high for effectiveness met the third cri-
terion in the first box of the interpretation key (Appendix C p.
102). Since aerial photos of the District do not show long term
erosion in any AAs, any AA will receive a High rating if it has
an average width of erect vegetation greater than 500 feet, or
its outlet is constricted and erect vegetation occurs throughout.
Estuarine AAs with low water velocities and aquatic bed or rooted
vascular vegetation are also rated High (brackish impoundments
east of Kearny Marsh).
Attributes opposite to those which favor a High rating tend to
produce a Low effectiveness rating (unconstricted outlets; no
expanses of erect, persistent vegetation; high flow velocities).
As with the sediment stabilization function, AAs along the river
which are rated Low in effectiveness for sediment./ toxicant
retention lack an adequate width of erect vegetation. Interagency
comment on these results noted that AAs 62, 69, 87B2 and 2-11 are
adjacent to landfills and should probably receive at least a
Moderate effectiveness rating. Interagency comment also sug-
gested that AAs 2U, 2Z, 2-1, and 2-10 should also receive at
least a Moderate rating.
-34-
-------
Note that all AAs evaluated have a High opportunity rating for
this function. There are a number of industrial and municipal
sources of wastewater discharge, hazardous waste sites, and
landfills in the District (see Map Atlas) to which WET attributes
the high opportunity.
Studies of the Berrys Creek mercury contamination problem demon-
strate that wetlands there perform this sediment/toxicant reten-
tion function. Marsh sediments in the upper reaches of Berrys
Creek have trapped significant amounts of mercury. Performance
of this function can protect downstream water quality and associ-
ated water dependent species. At the same time, retention of
large amounts or high concentrations of sediments and toxicants
may have an adverse effect on species within that same wetland.
Nutrient Removal/Transformation Effectiveness and Qpportunity-
(NR, NRO)
This function reflects a wetland's ability to retain or transform
plant nutrients such as compounds of nitrogen and phosphorous.
While wetland waters are often naturally high in nutrients,
excessive nutrient levels can stimulate nuisance growths of
algae. Subsequent decay of algae can deplete dissolved oxygen to
the point that aquatic organisms cannot survive. In the Meadow-
lands, this function is particularly significant because of high
nutrient loadings from sewage treatment plants (see Map Atlas map
of wastewater discharge sites).
One hundred and seven AAs have a High effectiveness rating and
141 have a High opportunity rating for this function. The High
effectiveness ratings are the result of many of the same attri-
butes that lead to a High effectiveness rating for sediment/toxi-
cant retention: constricted outlets, wide expanses of erect
persistent vegetation, and low surface water velocity. There
appears to be a general correspondence between the results for
these two different functions.
-35-
-------
Some AAs rated High for sediment/toxicant retention effectiveness
are Moderate or Low for nutrient retention/transformation effec-
tiveness. For some AAs such as Sawmill Creek (2-8) or area 2-6,
this is because of their high peak flow velocities and because
this function does not automatically produce a High effectiveness
rating if the average width of erect vegetation exceeds 500 feet
(unlike the STR function). In other cases, AAs received a lower
effectiveness ratirg for nutrient removal/ transformation than
for sediment/ toxicant retention because they are not permanently
flooded to any significant extent; this flooding enhances the
potential for denitrification.
One hundred and forty-one assessment areas are rated High for
nutrient removal/transformation opportunity. The opportunity key
for this function will only rate an AA as High if there is a
potential source of nutrient runoff present (Question 26.1 » Y).
The potential presence of nutrient runoff in the 1*1 AAs is not
surprising given the volumes of urban runoff and wastewater
discharges in the district. The six AAs which rated Low or
Moderate are all hydrologically isolated from nutrient runoff.
Interagency comments suggested that AAs 2-4, 2-8, and 2-11 should
receive at least a Moderate effectiveness rating because they are
adjacent to landfills (2-4, 2-11) or they receive a major portion
of the Hackensack River flow on an incoming tide (2-8).
Production Export (PE)
Production export refers to the biomass produced in a wetland and
then transported elsewhere. Dead vegetation in various stages of
decay can be swept downstream by floodwaters. This organic
matter can then become a nutrient source for plants and animals
far away from the wetland where that organic matter was produced.
Live plant material, seeds, plankton, invertebrates and fish can
-36-
-------
also be produced in a wetland and exported downstream. The
production export function provides an indication of the contri-
bution an assessment area makes to the productivity of the
wetland system as a whole.
The WET production export interpretation key focuses on primary
productivity (plant growth) within the wetland. Production and
export of living resources such as nursery fish is not assessed,
although such productivity often correlates with primary produc-
tivity. Commercial production and export in wetlands, such as
crop production, haying, lumbering, trapping or shellfishing, is
not considered under WET's production export function.
One hundred and twenty-four AAs are rated Moderate for this
function. Almost all of these would be rated High except that the
plant productivity data for the Meadow!ands shows the plant
communities have a net above ground productivity less than that
considered "high" by WET (1500 gm/yr). Large expanses of erect
vegetation and standing water would otherwise tend to give these
AAs a High rating. Twenty-one AAs received a Low rating because
they have no permanent or intermittent outlet.
Even though net above ground productivity in the Meadow!ands
2
falls below WET's 1500 gm/m /year threshold, the total mass of
organic matter produced is significant. Take for example a
conservative estimate that 6,000 acres of vegetated wetland has a
2
net above ground productivity of 1000 gm/m /year. This rate
yields an annual production of almost 27,000 tons of organic
matter. Compare this to an annual load of 2,700 tons of sus-
pended solids allowed under the discharge permit of the Bergen
County Utilities Authority's sewage treatment plant 1n Little
Ferry (75 million gallons per day at 24 mg/1 of suspended so-
lids.) Of course, the export of wetland produced biomass is
affected by the hydrologic charateristics of the wetland.
-37-
-------
Interagency comments on the production export results noted that
area 2-E (Empire Tract) has ... "virtually no pathway for ex-
port." Area 2-E has functioning tide gates at its outlet; this
eliminates tidal flushing and maintains water levels in the AA
below the prevailing wetland surface. However, storm induced
surcharging of Moonachie Creek is known to flood this wetland and
it is possible that receding flood waters carry some organic
matter from this area to downstream locations. Still, the
opportunity for transport of organic matter from such poorly
flushed areas is less than for areas such as Sawmill Creek where
tidal flows are unrestricted. Poorly flushed areas include the
diked and tide-gated areas of Moonachie and Losen Slote Creeks in
the north, and the Kearny Marsh and Penhorn Creek systems in the
south.
Aquatic Diversity and Abundance (ADA)
The aquatic diversity and abundance ratings produced by WET
indicate the probability that the wetland's populations of fish
and/or aquatic invertebrates are large and diverse. Aquatic
diversity and abundance is an important indicator of a wetland's
biological value because it is fundamentally related to overall
productivity, and value for fish, wildlife, and waterfowl.
Ninety-four AAs evaluated have a Low rating for this function.
In the Meadowlands, a Low rating is most often the result of the
following combination of characteristics: toxic sources present
in water, size less than 40 acres, and dissolved oxygen (DO)
levels thought to be limiting to fish. As previously discussed,
toxic sources are present throughout most of the Meadowlands.
Further, long term water quality monitoring shows that DO levels
are routinely less than 4 ma/1 throughout much of the HMDC
District. Low ratings were also produced for a large number of
palustrine AAs with channelized streams, or no open water at all.
-38-
-------
Note however, that in terms of total acreage, most of the Meadow-
lands' wetlands are rated High or Moderate. In the WET method,
an AA which does not have features leading to a Low rating will
obtain a High rating if it has a majority of the characteristics
itemized under AD/A List B (for palustrine wetlands) or AD/A List
C (for estuarine wetlands) in the AD/A interpretation key (Ap-
pendix C p. 116). Otherwise a Moderate rating results. Only
five palustrine AAs received High ratings; they are all shallow
marshes near the southern end of Penhorn Creek. For these areas
the characteristics in List B which lead to a High rating are:
permanent inlet and outlet, substrate is not sand, permanently
flooded hydroperiod, warmest bottom water temperature is greater
than 50° F, and DO is not known to be limiting.
For the 23 estuarine AAs receiving a High rating, the character-
istics in AD/A List C which lead to a High rating are: 30-60% of
the area with standing water has emergent vegetation, upslope
wetlands are present, and there is good vegetation-water or
vegetation class interspersion.
Interagency comment suggested that palustrine AAs 210 and 211
near Teterboro Airport should be rated higher than Low because
they have freshwater streams running through them. These AAs
received a Low rating because they are palustrine and ditches
confine water within the AA. Still, substantial areas of shallow
pools occur in both of these AAs. The rarity of freshwater
streams and pools in combination with forest cover in the Dis-
trict suggests that these AAs contain aquatic life which is
relatively rare 1n the District.
Additional interagency comment questioned the Low ratings for AAs
2-Z (Hackensack River), 3-7 and 3-8 (brackish impoundments near
Kearny Marsh) given the higher ratings for adjacent and similar
AAs. AAs 2-Z, 3-7 and 3-8 received the low rating because they
-39-
-------
are all less than 40 acres in size, while adjacent AAs are larger
than 40 acres. Areas less than 40 acres in size with toxic
sources in the water and limiting DO receive a Low rating.
Fish Habitat
Evaluation of wetland suitability for fish included three steps.
First, the WET General Fish interpretation key was used. This
produced Moderate ratings throughout the District and was there-
fore insensitive to obvious differences between the fisheries
values of wetlands in the Meadowlands. This insensitivity led to
the second step, the creation of a new interpretation key addres-
sing fish habitat value within the Meadowlands. This new key
produced markedly improved results based on a comparison with
empirical data from the ongoing HMDC fisheries study. Still, a
number of areas appeared to have counterintuitive results when
compared with the empirical data. This led o the third step
which entailed the adjustment of certain AA ratings where the
empirical data clearly showed the rating should be higher or
lower. As mentioned in the Overview of Methods Section, the HMDC
fisheries data were plotted on an assessment area base map to
facilitate comparison of fisheries sampling with results from the
revised fisheries key. Where data from the fisheries study
showed a higher diversity or abundance of fish the result from
the revised interpretation key was changed to a higher value;
where data from the study showed a lower diversity or abundance
the result from the revised interpretation key was changed to a
lower value. Both interpretation keys, WET and the revised, are
described below along with a listing of AA ratings changed in
response to the fisheries study data.
° WET General Fish (FG)
Almost all areas assessed had a Moderate rating using the WET
general fish interpretive key. To receive this rating an AA must
-40-
-------
have some area within the AA (or hydrologically connected, nearby
area) which is permanently/regularly flooded and is at least five
inches deep over one acre or 10£ of the AA. These conditions are
easily met in the Meadowlands, except for small, isolated AAs.
To receive a High rating there must also be no potential source
of toxins; this occurs in very few AAs.
° General Fish Habitat (FG3) - New Key for HMDC District
A new interpretation key for general fish habitat was developed
for the project area to overcome a lack af sensitivity in the WET
General Fish key to conditions in the Meadowlands. This new key
was developed in consultation and by agreement with the inter-
agency team assigned to this project. The new key developed for
this project is shown in Appendix D of this report. Results of
the new general fish habitat interpretation key are also shown in
Table 5.
The new interpretation key for fish habitat identifies several
mnimum criteria for a wetland to receive a Moderate or High
rating. First, the AA must have some minimum area of open water:
greater than 10% of AA is flooded and partially open, or, open
channel is present, or deep water occurs somewhere in the AA.
AAs which fail to meet these primary conditions are rated Low.
Second, AAs less than five acres in area with dominant water
depths less than ore inch, or otherwise infrequently flooded
receive a Low rating.
Having met the criteria for a Moderate or High rating, ar AA then
is evaluated for a number of different characteristics which
favor fish diversity and/or abundance. An AA must have at least
three out of the seven listed characteristics to receive a High
rating; otherwise a Moderate rating results. The seven charac-
teristics are:
-41-
-------
° Fish and Wildlife Service fish species of special emphasis
present (list is presented on Pages. 40 and 41 in Appendix
C),
° greater than 40 acres in area and permanently/frequently
flooded,
° permanent inlet or outlet present,
0 at least 1 acre or 10% of AA is aquatic bed class,
° vegetation-water interspersion moderate or high,
° dominant water depth is greater than 8", and
° physical habitat interspersion is high.
Comparison of the results of this interpretation key with the
empirical data of the HMDC fisheries study found general confir-
mation that the Hackensack River wetlands, and the large inter-
tidal and brackish marshes in the southern part of the District
have a high value for fish habitat. The new interpretation key
did, however, tend to overestimate the fish habitat rating in the
northern part of the District. This is probably because that
area of the District has a lower water quality than the southern
areas, and this is not adequately reflected in the key. Compari-
son of the fisheries results from the revised interpretation key
with the empirical data led to agreement among the interagency
team members on the following revisions:
AAs which should be High based on fisheries study data:
2D, 2-12, and 2-13
AAs rated High by interpretation key but which should receive a
lower rating (Moderate) based on fisheries study data:
2Q, 2R, 2-4, 4C, 4D, 13A, 13B, 13C, 32, 33A, 33B, 39, 90,
99, 112, 133A, 138, 145, 150A, 151, 153, 210, 211, 213, 301
-42-
-------
With these revisions in place, a total of 45 AAs received a High
rating, The most cowman characteristics leading to High ratings
for fish habitat are: more than 40 acres and permanently flood-
ed, inlets and outlets present, ar>6 dminznt water depth is
greater than eight inches. The 79 AAs rated Moderate have enough
mater to support fish but otherwise lack features which promote
fish diversity or abundance. The 23 wetlands which received a
Low rating are all small (less than 5 acres) or lack sufficient
water to support fish populations.
Wildlife Habitat
A,pp\ication of VIET interpretation keys related to wildlife
produced results which wsre insensitive to observable, and
sometimes dramatic, differences in wildlife use of wetlands in
the Meadowlands. This stems from the model's logic which causes
all estuarine wetlands to receive a Low rating for wildlife. The
WET version 2.0 (October 1987) corrected this problem to some
extent - the new version defaults estuarine areas to a moderate
rating if they have minimum features suitable to wildlife (cover,
undisturbed, water and/or vegetation interspersion* and others).
WET version 2.0 still provides no opportunity for an estuarine AA
to receive a High rating for wildlife breeding. For the Meadow-
lands this assumption is inappropriate given the abundance of
waterfowl, musfcrat and other rodents in wany estuarine AAs in the
District. There was also general agreement among the interagency
team members that the WET wildlife keys did not adequately
address the habitat requirements of certain types of wildlife
such as amphibians and reptiles.
A new interpretation key for general wildlife habitat was there-
fore developed for the project area to overcome a Tack of sensi-
tivity in the WET wildlife keys to conditions in the Meadowlands.
This new key was developed in consultation and by agreement with
-43-
-------
the interagency team assigned to this project. The new wildlife
key developed for this project is shown in Appendix D of this
report.
Results of WET wildlife keys and the wildlife habitat key devel-
oped for the HMDC District are discussed below and presented in
the Map Atlas output table. Results of the new wildlife inter-
pretation key are alsc shown in Table 5.
0 WET Wildlife Diversity/Abundance Breeding On-Site (WEB)
Almost all AAs are rated Low for this function. Estuarine AAs
are automatically rated Low by the March 1987 version of WET used
in this study. Small AAs with impervious (paved) watersheds, and
those with solid stands of emergent vegetation (or no water at
all) also receive a Low rating. The predominance of Low ratings
is not intuitive based on known wildlife use in the Meadowlands;
this led to the development and use of a new interpretation key
described later in this section.
WET produced High ratings for seven large palustrine AAs in the
District. These include the forested wetlands near Teterboro
Airport and Losen Slote Creek. These forested areas are rare in
the District and are thought to have a high wildlife value.
Other areas rated High are the Empire Tract (2E) and Transco
Marsh (2T). Both of these areas lie above the level of regular
inundation and are dominated by nearly solid stands of common
reed. However, portions of 2E are known to support a diversity
of vegetation types (although they are generally grouped as
persistent emergent vegetation in the WET method) which may in
turn support a greater diversity of wildlife than expected in the
solid stands of common reed. Finally, two areas in Penhorn Creek
(3-1 and 108) received High ratings. AA 3-1 appears intuitively
correct due to the diversity of physical habitats (open water,
emergent and floating leaved plants, sheltered pools, unflooded
-44-
-------
areas and some woody cover) and because of known use by muskrat.
Area 108 lacks many of these features, and should probably have
been rated lower because of the high level of sewage and toxicant
contamination in the Creek.
0 WET Wildlife Diversity/Abundance Migration (WEM)
Assessment areas are split almost evenly between High and Low
ratings for this function. The factors leading to a Low rating
are similar to those leading to a Low rating for breeding: less
than 5 acres, impervious subwatershed, no outlet, human disturb-
ance, and low vegetation-water, vegetation class interspersion.
However, an estuarine system does not automatically produce a Low
rating for migratory habitat.
Also note that item number three in the first box of the inter-
pretation key (Appendix C p. 130) is similar to item number six
in the wildlife diversity/abundance breeding key, and item number
four in the wildlife diversity/abundance wintering key. The
difference between these logical statements is the use of "OR" in
the migration key versus the use of "AND" in the breeding and
wintering key. With the breeding and wintering keys a Low rating
results if an AA has both of the following conditions:
° low water-vegetation Interspersion, vegetation class inter-
spersion, and plant form richness
° standing water areas are either totally devoid of emergent
vegetation or totally covered with emergent vegetation
With the migration key, either of the above conditions will yield
a Low rating. This logical condition leads to Low ratings for
wildlife diversity/abundance migration in Penhorn Creek and in
the northern reaches of the Hackensack River wetlands. Inter-
spersion and plant form richness are typically low in both areas.
-45-
-------
Any AAs that are not rated Low will be rated High if they are
greater than 5 acres (see interpretation.key List 6, Appendix C
p. 130). Areas less than five acres in size may also be rated
high if they have a majority of the characteristics in List H,
including high interspersion, plant form richness and no signi-
ficant disturbance or alteration.
° MET Wildlife Diversity/Abundance Wintering (WEW)
Almost all AAs are rated High for this function. Essentially,
the interpretation key is very similar to the migration key and
there is a high degree of similarity between the two functions.
The major differences between the results for wintering and
migration are in the northern reaches of the Hackensack River and
in Penhorn Creek. These areas are rated High for wintering but
Low for migration. This difference is explained above in the
discussion of the migration key.
° General Wildlife Habitat (GWL) - New Key for HMDC District
The new interpretation key for wildlife habitat identifies
several minimum criteria for a wetland to receive a Moderate or
High rating. The AA must be greater than five acres, contain
inlets or outlets, have water deeper than one Inch in at least a
portion of the assessment area, and have an unpaved subwatershed
or more than 10% of the AA is not usually flooded.
When the criteria for a Moderate or High rating are met, the new
key checks for the dominance of locally rare vegetation types
(forest, scrub/shrub, or aquatic bed-rooted vascular). AAs with
these rare vegetation types receive a High rating. AAs which
meet the minimum criteria for High/Moderate ratings but which do
not have the rare vegetation types are then evaluated for a
number of different characteristics which favor the diversity
and/or abundance of various types of wildlife. This part of the
-46-
-------
new key assumes a certain trade-off between diversity and abund-
ance vith respect to overall value. Compared to smaller AAs,
larger AAs require fewer features which favor wildlife habitat to
receive a High rating. Ar AA greater than 200 acres in size must
Nave at least three out of the twenty listed characteristics to
receive a High rating; otherwise a Moderate rating results. An
AA between 40 and 200 acres must meet five of the listed criteria
to receive a High rating. An AA between 5 and 40 acres must, meet
seven of the criteria to receive a High rating. If these ccndi-
tlons are rot met then a Moderate ratirg results.
The twenty listed characteristics are:
" locally rare plants or animals present,
° 1 acre or IChS of AA is forest class
° 1 acre or 10% of AA is scrub/shrub class
0 1 acre or 10% of AA is aquatic bed class,
° AA contains one or more islands greater than 25 square feet
in area
0 vegetation-water interspersion moderate or high,
0 vegetation class interspersion is moderate or high
0 upland - wetland edge is irregular
0 wind shelter of 1+ acres open water or fetch of less than
100 feet
0 woody vegetation shelters ad-jacent upland
0 cover along wetland - upland edge
0 within 1 mile: permanently flooded/seasonally flooded forest
or shrub*
0 within 1/2 mile: nontidal emergent or rooted floating leaved
vegetation / 1+ acre hardwoods*
0 adjacent mudflat and tidal scrub/shrub*
0 adjacent mudflat (greater than 5 ac.) and emergent
vegetation (greater than 5 ac.)*
° within 1/2 mile: agricultural or early successional
vegetation / evergreen forest (greater than 10 ac,)*
-47-
-------
° within 1 mile: semipermanently flooded / seasonally flooded
/ permanently flooded or intermittently exposed or artifi-
cially flooded and managed for wildlife*
0 special habitat features listed in Q. 39
° physical habitat interspersion is high.
° plants of waterfowl food value
* Type combinations (Q. 38): to meet these criteria the
AA must have one type of the characteristics listed,
and another nearby wetland must have the other type of
characteristic.
The results produced by this new interpretation key correspond
well with known wildlife use, where such data is available. The
45 AAs rated High for this function include the forested wetlands
near Teterboro Airport and Losen Slote Creek, the Sawmill and
Kingsland Creek tidal marshes, Kearny Marsh and the adjacent
brackish marshes. The features in List A which most often contri-
buted to a High rating are: aquatic bed vegetation, high vegeta-
tion-water interspersion, cover, high physical habitat intersper-
sion, and plants of waterfowl food value.
Seventy-three AAs were rated Moderate for this function. These
Moderate rated AAs meet the minimum criteria for wildlife habitat
(greater than 5 ac., inlets/outlets, some water, some unflooded
areas), but failed to meet the required number of features in
List A. Fifty-two N- s received a Low rating, usually because
they are less than 5 acres in size.
Interagency team members commented on several AAs which appear to
have counterintuitive results. AAs 2-6, 2-7 and 2-10 on the
Hackensack River appear to be underrated based on the High
ratings in adjacent AAs. The main reason these AAs were rated
Moderate instead of High, compared to neighboring AAs, is their
size. Adjacent AAs are typically larger than 200 acres, while
2-6, 2-7 and 2-10 are all less than 200 acres. Note that area
2-6 would be rated High if it were only 11 acres bigger. This
shows the disadvantage of using threshold values in such a model
- shades of grey are often reduced to black or white.
-------
Some interagency team members thought that Assessment Area 2E
should be rated low for wildlife habitat because of the dominance
of common reed and the lack of unchannelized open water. Al-
though common reed dominates the tract, there is some physical
and vegetational diversity. There are areas supporting rela-
tively uncommon vegetation for the District, for example, vege-
tation characteristics of wet meadows. Such diversity is not
reflected in the WET method because the diverse vegetation types
are all represented in WET's persistent emergent vegetation
classification. Actual plant species diversity may support
greater diversity of wildlife than expected in solid stands of
common reed.
Area 2Q on Mill Creek received a Moderate rating. Interagency
comment was conflicting. Some commented that the area should
receive a lower rating, while some commented that the area should
receive a higher rating. This professional disagreement suggests
a degree of uncertainty associated with the model rating. Yet,
it remains the best representation of this function short of any
further empirical study.
Interagency comment also noted several AAs which probably have a
greater value to wildlife than indicated by the new wildlife key.
These areas are: 2YB (near Berrys Creek), 13A, 13B, and 13C
(upper Bellmans Creek), 39 (near Cromakill Creek), 206, and 223
(southern part of District). Each of these is known to be used by
mammals and/or waterfowl to a significant degree.
Public response to the information presented at the March 1, 1988
Public Meeting included comments describing a number of assess-
ment areas in and/or near the Berrys Creek and Kearny marsh areas
which should be considered to have wildlife and waterfowl results
greater than low. While a small number of the AA's were rated
low, the majority of those AA's within the areas referred to in
-49-
-------
the public meeting comments were rated moderate or high. An
additional comment disagreed with the high results for general
wildlife and general waterfowl for assessment area 211.
Waterfowl Habitat
Twenty-nine species of the Anatidae (waterfowl) family have been
observed in the Meadowlands (HMDC 1987b). Mute swan, Canada
goose, mallard, black duck, green-winged teal, blue-winged teal,
gadwall, wood duck and ruddy duck are all known to nest in the
District. WET provides three general waterfowl keys (general
migration, duck wintering, geese wintering) and eight keys for
specific groups of waterfowl.
The general keys work in conjunction with group specific keys to
produce ratings for migration and for wintering. WET first
evaluates if the wetland assessment area has a low probability
for general waterfowl use during migration. If the result is
low, no further group specific waterfowl keys are employed. A
WET result other than low directs the model to proceed to the
appropriate waterfowl group migration key. These keys evaluate
if the assessment area has a low probability of use by the
specific waterfowl group, e.g. dabblers, divers, etc. A high or
moderate result is determined by the occurrence of waterfowl in
the assessment area. If waterfowl of that group have been
observed in the assessment area the WET result is high. If
waterfowl have not been observed, the WET result is moderate. In
sumnary, the logic of these keys, the general waterfowl and
specific waterfowl groups, is driven by first determining if the
assessment areas have a low probability to function as migratory
waterfowl habitat.
Similarly, the evaluation of an assessment area as wintering
habitat is based on whether the assessment area is first deter-
mined to have a low probability for this function. If an AA is
-50-
-------
not rated low for wintering, the AA's rating for wintering is
identical to its rating for migration. Factors most often
contributing to a low wintering WET result are: low rating for
migration; the entire AA freezes for more than one month per
year; less than one acre of the AA is sheltered.
Use of these keys for waterfowl groups found in the Meadowlands
produced results which appeared insensitive to waterfowl use of
estuarine AAs. Low salinities found in many parts of the District
classify the AAs as estuarine using the FWS classification system
(salinity greater than 0.5 ppt = estuarine system). In the WET
method an estuarine hydrologic regime results in a low rating for
waterfowl. Yet, many of the brackish marshes have such low
salinities that they appear to function more similarly to fresh-
water marshes than tidal marshes and are frequently utilized by
waterfowl. As a result, WET appears to underrate estuarine AAs
for waterfowl habitat functions. The keys also produced results
which lacked sensitivity to significant, observable differences
in actual waterfowl use of wetlands in the District.
As with fish and wildlife functions, the interagency group
overcame these deficiencies by creating a new interpretive key
for general waterfowl habitat in the Meadowlands shown in Appen-
dix D. This new key is discussed below after a presentation of
results obtained using the WET waterfowl keys. Results of the
new general waterfowl habitat interpretation key are also shown
in Table 5.
° WET Waterfowl Group 1 Breeding (W61B)
Waterfowl group 1 consists of prairie dabblers; in the Meadow-
lands the mallard, gadwall, and teals are the only prairie
dabblers known to breed there. Waterfowl group 1 breeding is
-51-
-------
rated High for 38 AAs, mostly the palustrine AAs with predomi-
nantly saturated (non-flooded) soils. Elsewhere Group 1 breeding
is rated Low. Again, these results underrate Group 1 waterfowl
use of brackish wetlands. The waterfowl group 1 breeding key
automatically rates an AA as Low if the salinity of water in the
AA is greater than 5 parts per thousand. There are many brackish
wetlands with salinities greater than 5 ppt which are known to
support group 1 breeding populations (e.g., impoundment outside
HMDC headquarters).
° WET Waterfowl Migration Keys (WMG, BDM, CMM, WG1M, WG4M, WG7M)
Migration is generally rated Moderate/High where the species or
group is thought to occur. Forty-eight areas received a Low
rating in the general migration key. Seventy-seven of the 99 AAs
rated "not Low" for general migration had at least one waterfowl
group receive a Moderate/High rating for migration.
Seventy AAs received a Moderate/High rating for black duck migra-
tion. To receive this rating an AA must have a majority of the
characteristics itemized in the key (Appendix C p. 145). Plants
of waterfowl food value, aquatic bed/emergent vegetation, moder-
ate/high water-vegetation interspersion and size greater than 5
acres were the most common characteristics leading to a Moder-
ate/High rating.
Comtion and red-breasted merganser migration ratings produced by
WET are all Low. Item number 2 in the merganser migration key
(Appendix C p. 146) states that if an AA has one or more acres of
water that is less than 20 inches deep, it will receive a Low
rating. Most areas in the Meadowlands that otherwise meet the
criteria for merganser migration also have some areas where
shallow water occurs. While mergansers favor deep water, their
occurrence in the Meadowlands indicates that they also use areas
with shallower water.
-52-
-------
Fifty-nine AAs received a Moderate/High rating for waterfowl
group 1 (prafrfe dabblers) migration. In all but a few cases the
results for group 1 migration are identical to the results for
black duck migration. The two keys are very similar; the chief
difference is the influence of aquatic bed vegetation and mud-
flats in the results for black duck and the influence of a
pelustrine system type and unpaved subwatersheds in the results
for Group 1 waterfowl.
Group 4 waterfowl {bufflehead, goldeneye) migration was rated
High for seven AAs, Low for 21 AAs and not applicable for the
remainder. The AAs rated Moderate/High typically met the follow-
ing criteria leading to that rating: size greater than 5 acres,
no human disturbance, 1+ acre of water 21-59 inches deep.
Functional assessment results for group 7 waterfowl inland
geese) migration are similar to results for black duck and group
1 migration. The criteria for goose migration are similar to the
other keys except that larger sired AAs are favored. Forty-six
areas we^e rated Moderate/High, and eight were rated Low.
0 WET All Waterfowl Wintering (AWW)
Wintering is rated Moderate/High throughout most of the Meadow-
lands. While 40% of the AAs are rated Low, these are all rela-
tively small AAs which together total less than 10J of the
wetland area in the District. No wetlands in the District freeze
for more than one month per year. Therefore, the only applicable
criteria for a Moderate/High rating are the presence of at least
one acre of sheltered wetland and a Moderate/High migration
rating for at least one of the waterfowl groups/ species analyz-
ed.
'53-
-------
0 General Waterfowl Habitat - New Key for HMDC District (GWF)
For reasons described above, the WET waterfowl keys lacked
sensitivity to conditions in the Meadowlands. A new general
waterfowl habitat key (presented in Appendix D) was therefore
developed by the interagency group. In conjunction with develop-
ing a new waterfowl key, we used six additional questions to
those presented in WET to more accurately address waterfowl
habitat suitability in the District (see Page 21, Appendix A).
Results of the new interpretation key are shown in Table 5.
Waterfowl must be thought to use the AA for it to receive a
Moderate or High rating. Additionally, an AA must be greater
than five acres, have some unflooded area or cover along an
upland edge, and must have some minimum amount of open water.
AAs which fail to meet these criteria are rated Low.
Assessment areas which meet these criteria will be rated Moderate
or High. A High rating is given when the AA has any of the
following features:
0 25+ square foot island
0 vegetation-water interspersion is moderate or high
0 plants of waterfowl food value are present
0 size greater than 40 acres and permanently/frequently
flooded
AAs which meet the primary criteria but which contain none of the
features listed above are rated Moderate.
-54-
-------
Fifty-nine AAs are rated High with the new revised key. In terms
of total area these AAs comprise over half of the wetland area in
the District. Host of these AAs are greater than 40 acres and
are permanently/frequently flooded. Many of these AAs also meet
the interspersion and waterfowl food criteria. Most of the 21
Moderate rated AAs are homogeneous stands of common reed with
open water confined within ditches. The 67 wetlands rated Low
are typically either less than five acres in size or without
adequate cover/ unflooded areas.
When compared with known waterfowl use, the results of this new
key appear intuitively correct. Most AAs rated High are in the
tidal waters of the Hackensack River and its major tributaries.
The Kearny Marsh, the nearby brackish impoundments and the upper
part of Penhorn Creek also received High ratings. Several
members of the interagency group commented that the following
portions of the Hackensack River should be rated High: 2-1, 2-12,
2-13, 2B, and 21. These areas are suitable for bay ducks but
otherwise lack significant habitat features (cover, plant food)
suitable for other waterfowl. Interagency comments also sug-
gested that AAs 7, 133A, and 223 should receive higher ratings.
AA 7 has a large open water area and is known to be used by a
variety of ducks including mergansers. AAs 133A and 223 have
good water/ vegetation interspersion and have vast blankets of
duckweed, a preferred food for ducks.
Supporting Data on Special Habitats, Pollution Sources, Hydrolo-
gic Associations, Open Space and Recreation
Strict interpretation of questions in WET led to the same res-
ponses to several questions for all, or almost all, AAs. The use
of virtually all undeveloped portions of the Meadowlands as
hunting grounds by the harrier led to a Yes answer to Level 1
question 1: does a threatened or endangered species regularly use
-55-
-------
the wetland. Also, the prevalence of solid waste disposal sites
and wastewater discharges led to a nearly uniform Yes answer to
Level 2 question 27.1: is there a potential source of waterborne
toxic substances. While these uniform responses are accurate,
they do not reflect known concentrations of threatened/endangered
species or concentrations of toxic wastes. Also, the Wetland
Evaluation Technique does not address open space or recreation
functions a wetland may provide. Information on threatened/en-
dangered species, solid waste disposal, wastewater discharges,
recreation and open space was collected and mapped to overcome
these shortcomings. Additionally, the relationship of wetland
assessment areas within the District is hydrologically complex as
a result of many man-made influences. The Hydrologic Associa-
tions map was prepared to further understand the surface hydro-
logy systems within the District. These maps appear in the Map
Atlas following the functional assessment maps. They are de-
scribed below.
° Special Habitats
The Special Habitats map shows the general location of the recent
occurrence of State listed threatened and endangered species, and
remnant/unique habitats in the District. Threatened and endan-
gered species data were obtained from NJDEP, the New Jersey
Natural Heritage Program, HMDC records, and response to the
Public Meeting.
These data show the following threatened/endangered species as
having occurred in recent years at these general locations:
American Shad: Entire length of the Hackensack River in the
District.
Atlantic Tomcod: Hackensack River from Mill Creek south to
nearly the mouth of the River, and Sawmill
Creek Wildlife Management Area.
Least Tern: Sawmill Creek Wildlife Management Area and
west, Kingsland impoundment, Mill Creek area,
and the Vince Lombardi mitigated wetlands.
-56-
-------
~Northern Harrier:
Peregrine Falcon:
~Pied-Billed Grebe:
~American Bittern:
Osprey:
Black Skimmer:
Yellow-Crowned
Night Heron:
~Savannah Sparrow:
~Bobolink:
Dog Fennel:
Area bounded by Berrys Creek, Berrys Creek
Canal, and the Hackensack River.
Kearny Marsh, Sawmill Creek Wildlife
Management Area, Kingsland impoundment,
and landfills in the vicinity of HMDC
offices.
Kearny Marsh and the brackish impoundments to
the east, Kingsland impoundment.
Kearny Marsh, Sawmill Creek Wildlife Manage-
ment Area, Mill Creek area, Berrys Creek
area, South Secaucus area.
Kearny Marsh, Kingsland impoundment.
Kingsland impoundment, Sawmill Creek
Wildlife Management Area, and the Kearny
brackish impoundments.
Kearny Marsh, Sawmill Creek Wildlife
Management Area.
Western area of Sawmill and landfills in the
vicinity of HMDC offices.
Landfills in the vicinity of HMDC offices.
Kearny brackish impoundments.
~The NJDEP considers only the breeding population of these
species to be threatened or endangered within New Jersey.
These species are either known to breed in the District or
experts (NJ Natural Heritage/HMDC/NJ Audubon) consider the
District to be suitable breeding habitat. Therefore, the
locations listed above refer to: (1) nest sites and/or, (2)
occurrence of adults with young and/or, (3) species occur-
rence during the breeding season (considered to be May
through July).
The seasonal distinction of threatened or endangered status
raises the question as to whether breeding populations could
persist without suitable fall and wintering habitat. Therefore,
we note that the birding records (HMDC, NJ Audubon) report
nunerous sitings of those species listed above (whose breeding
population are threatened or endangered) within the District
-57-
-------
outside of the breeding season. Many species appear to be winter
residents and at least one, the American -Bittern, is considered
(by NJ Natural Heritage) to be a year-round resident in the
District. The depictions of species in the Special Habitats map
report only actual or probable nesting sitings. Non-breeding
season occurrence can be found in HMDC's and NJ Audubon birding
records.
Similarly, we note that the Great Blue Heron, a species whose
breeding population NJDEP lists as threatened in New Jersey, have
been recently sited within the District during the breeding
season months, as well as fall and winter. Experts do not
consider this species to breed within the District, therefore,
the Great Blue Heron is not depicted in the Special Habitats map.
It's occurrence in the District can be found also in HMDC and NJ
Audubon bird records.
Remnant habitats are those which were more common in the past but
which have since dwindled to remnants of their former range.
Unique habitats are those which have developed under unusual
circumstances and now provide valuable habitat. Remnant and/or
unique habitats include:
forested wetlands found near Teterboro Airport and
Losen Slote Creek,
middle to high salt marsh (dominated by Spartina
patens, and/or Distichlis spicata) found near the
Hackensack River in the southern part (areas south
of Route 3) of the District,
wet meadow near Losen Slote and Moonachie Creeks,
the western portions of Sawmill and 1n the Kearny
area,
-58-
-------
rock outcropping, hardwood forest at Snake Hill
and Little Snake Hill,
estuarine impoundment - grebe breeding habitat in
the vicinity of Kearny Marsh.
Remnant habitats provide researchers with an opportunity to study
and understand the mechanisms which led to the reduction of these
habitats. Remnant and unique habitats provide a local diversity
of plants and animals which may supply the stock to recolonize
other areas of the Meadowlands at some future time.
0 Hazardous Maste and Landfill Sites
The Map Atlas map entitled "Hazardous Waste and Landfill Sites"
shows the distribution of such sites in the HMDC District. The
landfill sites are likely to range from the relatively benign to
the potentially toxic. Closure of County landfills west of
Sawmill Creek has implemented hydro!ogic isolation of groundwater
beneath the site and leachate collection.
Hazardous waste sites currently listed by the NJDEP are shown on
the map and listed in Table 6. Their locations are only approxi-
mate since studies are still underway to determine the exact
extent of contamination. The chemicals of concern include
volatile organic compounds, heavy metals, oils and PCBs. The
Ventron/Velsicol site alone is one of the world's largest mercury
contamination sites. Mercury compounds have been found at
significant concentrations in marsh sediments in the upper
reaches of Berrys Creek. In fact, the entire Berrys Creek system
is under investigation as part of the EPA Superfund enforcement
action. All of these sites are likely to impact wetlands and
water quality. Some level of toxic accumulation is likely in the
wetlands which receive drainage from these sites, and bioaccumu-
lation of some compounds in wetland plants and animals is also
-59-
-------
Table 6. HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES IN THE HMDC DISTRICT
SITE « COMPANY, SITE HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION
CHEMICALS OF CONCEr#
Bergen County
BURROUGHS CORP. - CARLSTADT FACILITY ""
Situated on 2 acres of land, facility operations
consisted of solvent based inks production used in
coating carbon paper and data process ribbons.
Petroleum hydrocarbon
SCIENTIFIC CHEMICAL
PROCESSING *
An inactive waste processing facility about 6 acres.
Previously the company recovered and recycled
chemical and waste solvents. About 375,000 gallons
of hazardous substances were stored on the property
during this time.
UNIVERSAL OIL PRODUCTS *
The site is approximately 85 acres. The site was used
from 1955 to 1960 by Trubeck Labs as a recovery
facility for solvents and waste chemicals.
UOP produced organic chemicals and discharged 4.5
million gallons of the wastes into unlined lagoons.
Facility closed in 1980.
VENTRON/VELSICOL +
The site is approximately 40 acres. A mercury
processing plant was operated here from 1929 to 1974.
Most of the land was used to landfill waste from
the operation.
Hudson County
Crude oils
Fuel oils
PCB waste
Paint sludge
Phenolic resins
VOCs
PCBs
Chlorobenzene:
Mercury
DIAMOND SHAMROCK *
A chromate manufacturing plant from 1916 to 1971.
This site is approximately 20 acres.
KEARNY DRUM DUMP #3 +
A drum dump containing about 30 drums which are
deteriorating. This site is approximately 3 acres.
KOPPERS COKE *
The site is about 155 acres previously used for
manufacturing coke, coal tar, coal gas, sulfuric acid
cyanide compounds and light oils. The company ceased
operations in the early 1970s.
STANDARD CHLORINE *
This site is approximately 25 acres. During the 1950s
crude naj; thalene was refined on the site. Currently the
site is ujed for formulating a drain cleaner.
Chromate waste
Dioxin
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Napthalene
Beryllium
Tar materials
Cyanide compound'
Dioxin
Chromium
:lag
-------
REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES: Facility Type / Lead / Funding
i- Superfund / DHSM (Div. Hazardous Site Mitigation) / Public
* Enforcement / DHWM (Div. Hazardous Waste Management) / Private
ECRA (Environmental Cleanup Responsibility Act 1984) / Private
Source: Site Status Reports On the Hazardous Waste Management Program in New Jersey,
October 1987. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection/Division of
Hazardous Waste Management
-------
likely. The effect of such toxic accumulations in the Meadow-
lands is being studied, but at this time the effects are not well
understood.
° Wastewater Discharge
The "Wastewater Discharge" map in the Map Atlas shows the loca-
tion of industrial plants and municipal/private sewage treatment
plants (STPs) that discharge water into rivers, streams or ponds
within the Hackensack Meadowlands District. This information was
taken from HMDC's January 1989 Inventory Report of NJPDES permits
for the Hackensack Meadowlands District. Also presented on this
map are the locations of combined sewer overflows (CSOs) which
contribute flows to the study area. This information was derived
from data provided to the HMDC in the 201 Wastewater Facilities
Plan, Volume III, Combined Sewer Overflow Study.
Over fifty sites are depicted on the map. Circles represent
industrial sites, squares represent municipal and private STPs,
and stars represent combined sewer overflows. The size of the
circles and squares show the relative order of magnitude of the
discharge in millions of gallons per day (M6D). Table 7 presents
each NJPDES site by the map number and the NOPDES Permit number,
the facility name, the flow type and the permitted volume of the
discharge in MGD.
Wastewater discharges are scattered throughout the District.
Numerous discharges occur in the upper reaches of Berrys Creek,
an area already under the influence of several hazardous waste
sites. The 67.5 mgd discharge from the Bergen County sewage
treatment plant and the nearby thermal discharge from the PSE&G
power plant contribute to water quality problems in this poorly
flushed section of the Hackensack River. Discharges into tribu-
taries of Penhorn Creek are also significant because of tidal
restriction at the Creek's outlet to the Hackensack River.
-60-
-------
MAP
#
1
3
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
44
45
46
47
Table 7.
Wastewater Discharge Sites in the HMDC District.
NJPDES # FACILITY NAME FLOW VOLUME
TYPE* (MGD)
NJ0050300 Alfa Ink & Chemical Corp. I 0.0015
NJ0001368 Amerada Hess Corp. - Secaucus I 0.000016
NJ0054682 Andrill Oil Corp. I NA
NJ0030970 Arsynco, Inc. I 0.021
NJ0001074 Becton Dickinson Company I 0.0415
NJ0033448 HMDC-Baler STP M 0.002
NJ0002097 Allied Signal Aerospace Co. I 0+
NJ0001031 Benedict-Miller I 0.09
NJ0020028 Bergen County Utilities Authority I 67.5
NJ0027251 Clipper Express Company M 0.0015
NJ0000132 Colorite Plastics Company I 0.0033
NJ0032522 Cosan Chemical Corp. I 0.3
NJ0031747 Eastern of New Jersey, Inc. I 0.144
NJ0055719 Exxon Storage Terminal I 0.247
NJ0033553 General Painting Inc. I 100.0
NJ0028584 Gilbert Systems WWTP I 0.005
NJ0029378 Grobet File Co. of America, Inc. I NA
NJ0023868 Haward Corp. I 0.012
NJ0002798 Carlstadt Facility of Henkel Corp. I 1.0
NJ0003468 Howmedica, Inc. I 0.178
NJ0055778 Kingsland Sanitary Landfill I NA
NJ0002721 Matheson Gas Products, Inc. I 0.032
NJ0023566 Meadowview Hospital M 0.15
NJ0003719 Metal Improvement Company, Inc. I 0.058
NJ0023345 NJ Sports & Exposition Authority I NA
NJ0025291 North Arlington-Lyndhurst STP M 0
NJ0034339 North Bergen MUA Central M 4.92
NJ0002402 Occidental Chemical I 0
NJ0000621 Bergen Generating Station I 639.0
NJ0000655 Kearny Generating Station I 292
NJ0000647 Hudson Generating Station I 893
NJ0028991 Randolph Products Company I 0
NJ0020508 Sears, Roebuck & Company (STP) M 0.003
NJ0028410 Secaucus Motor Lodge (STP) M 0.015
NJ0032921 Hartz Mountain Interim STP M 0.5
NJ0025038 Secaucus MUA STP M 2.5
NJ0002011 SIKA Corp. I 0.12
NJ0032590 Spear Packing Corp. I 0.003
NJ0001856 Standard Chlorine Chemical Co.,Inc.I 0.0065
NJ0035181 Standard Tool & Mfg. Company I 0.035
NJ0033405 TecCast, Inc. 10
NJ0005754 Technical Oil Products I 0.122
-61-
-------
TABLE 7
(Continued)
MAP
NJPDES #
FACILITY NAME
FLOW
VOLUME
#
TYPE*
(MGD)
48
NJC031194
Texaco
I
0.0012
49
NJ0002101
Transcontinental Gas Pipeline
I
0.002
50
NJ0022756
Tri-boro Joint Meeting STP
M
0
52
NJ0003646
United States Printing Ink Corp.
I
0.05
55
NJ0025186
Wood-Ridge STP
M
0.6
56
NJ0003344
Yoo-Hoo Beverage Corp.
I
0.04
* Flow Type: I = Industrial M = Municipal
+ Will stop discharge on January 1, 1989
NOTE: Numbers missing from the above sequence have been deleted
because they were located outside of the study area.
-62-
-------
Combined sewer overflows within the District are located pri-
marily 1n the Jersey City and North Bergen regions. Discharges
from these CSOs also influence the water quality of the Hacken-
sack River.
° Hydrologic Associations
The placement of dikes, ditches, tidegates, pump stations,
embankments, and culverts related to mosquito control efforts and
various developments within the Hackensack Meadowlands District
have affected a very complex surface hydrology system within the
District. The Hydrologic Associations map, fourth in the series
of supporting data maps, den-ir^s *he general configurations of
wetland areas having the same tidal exchange or having associated
surface water drainages. The map also shows the type and loca-
tion of the man-made features (tidegates, dikes, etc.) restrict-
ing these water flows. This map is based upon field data and
consultation with HMDC personnel. No depictions are made for
those wetland assessment areas for which we were uncertain.
Some of the District's wetlands are tidally influenced (depicted
on the map with two-headed arrows) by estuarine waters of the
Hackensack River. The volume and extent of tidal inundation in
many locations in the District is limited by the features men-
tioned. Tidal connection of some wetlands are maintained by
constricted flow through various culverts.
Other wetlands in the District which are restricted from tidal
influence by dikes, embankments, tide gates, or high elevations
are Influenced by storm and/or groundwater (depicted on the maps
with single-headed arrows). The drainage of many freshwater
wetlands to major tributaries and to the Hackensack River is
facilitated by ditches and culverts.
-63-
-------
The Hydrologic Associations Map identifies wetland areas which
are jointly inundated or drained. Given the extent of man-made
influences on the surface hydrology within the District, this
information provides a more comprehensive overview of the
District's surface water system.
° Dedicated Open Space and Recreation
The fifth map in the Map Atlas series of supporting data maps
shows dedicated open space and recreation areas in wetlands.
Dedicated open space includes parks, refuges and sites with
permanent conservation easements, deed restrictions, or dedicated
zoning restrictions. A number of areas not shown on this map
also serve as open space and passive recreation areas, but there
are no legally binding agreements to preserve these areas.
Key recreation sites include several boat launching sites on the
Hackensack River. The entire River and most of its tributaries
are used by recreational boaters. Canoeing is also very popular
in the Sawmill Creek Wildlife Management Area and Kearny Marsh.
These two areas are particularly popular with birders because of
the variety of waterfowl and shore birds which may be seen there.
Birding is popular throughout much of the rest of the Meadow-
lands, particularly in the vicinity of Losen Slote Creek, the
Hackensack River, tidal flats, wet meadows and fill areas.
Response to the March 1, 1988 Public Meeting also reflected the
public concern for recognizing the recreational value of the
Meadowlands.
Hunting, trapping and fishing are also popular in the Meadow-
lands. Duck hunting is permitted only in designated areas of the
Sawmill Creek Wildlife Management Area. Duck hunting 1n Kearny
Marsh and other prime duck habitat is also known to occur.
Trapping of muskrat is widespread in the Meadowlands. Muskrat
are abundant in the District and over 3,000 were trapped in one
year in the Kearny Marsh without affecting the long term success
-64-
-------
of the breeding population. Muskrat pelts can bring a very good
price in the New York City market, and for. many trappers this is
an important source of supplemental income. Recreational fishing
and crabbing occurs in the Hackensack River, its tributaries, and
numerous isolated ponds in the District. Taking of fish, crabs
or shellfish from the Hackensack River and its tributaries for
sale or consumption is prohibited because of water pollution.
-65-
-------
V. CONCLUSIONS
-------
V. CONCLUSIONS
One hundred and forty-seven wetland assessment areas in the
Hackensack Meadowlands were evaluated using the Wetland Evalua-
tion Technique, These assessment areas cover approximately 7,576
acres (9?.%) of wetlands in the Hackensack Meadowlands District.
The method was used by an interagency group led by EPA with
representatives from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, and the Hackensack
Meadowlands Development Commission.
The interagency group concluded that the WET interpretation keys
for wildlife, waterfowl, and fisheries lacked an appropriate
level of sensitivity when applied in the Meadowlands and, there-
fore, prepared new interpretation keys for general wildlife,
general waterfowl and general fisheries. Detailed review of the
functional assessment results by the interagency team members
showed the model results using the modified keys for wildlife,
waterfowl, and fish, correspond well with empirical data on these
wetland functions, where such data is available.
The wetlands which received the most High ratings for multiple
functions correspond to those areas already considered to be of
high value and significance in the Meadowlands. These areas
include the Sawmill Creek Wildlife Management Area, the inter-
tidal mud flats to the west of Sawmill Creek, Kearny Marsh, the
brackish impoundments to the east of Kearny Marsh, the forested
wetlands and wet meadows in the vicinity of Teterboro Airport and
Losen Slote Creeks, the lower reaches of Berrys Creek, and the
Hackensack River. The few areas where model results appeared
counterintuitive based on existing information and experience
were noted in Table 5 for consideration during the advanced
identification phase of this project.
-66-
-------
The results of this functional assessment show that all areas are
likely to perform at least one or two wetland functions, while
none are likely to perform all of the functions evaluated. The
results show that in terms of area, most of the Meadowland's
wetlands have a high probability in their effectiveness for
performing sediment stabilization, sediment/toxicant retention,
nutrient removal/transformation, fish habitat, and waterfowl
habitat functions. Most of the Meadowlandr ire highly likely to
have the opportunity to perform the sediment/toxicant retention
and nutrient removal/transformation functions. Large areas also
have a high probability of performing aquatic diversity/abundance
and general wildlife habitat functions. The depiction of waste-
water discharge sites, hazardous waste sites and the occurrences
of rare wildlife in the District attest to the significance of
the performance of these wetland functions. As a whole, the
Meadowlands have a low probability in their effectiveness for
performing groundwater or floodflow alteration functions. Most
of the Meadowlands are unlikely to have the opportunity to affect
floodflow alteration.
The wetland assessment effort was conducted to provide an ecolog-
ical data base on the Hackensack Meadowlands wetlands. In the
regulatory process, this data base will provide information on
the anticipated environmental impacts from proposed Section 404
activities. The wetland assessment results will be incorporated
into the advanced identification of potential disposal sites and
sites generally unsuitable for disposal specification.
It should be noted that the functional assessment and the future
identification of any area as a possible disposal site or site
generally unsuitable for disposal specification should not be
deemed to constitute a permit or the denial of a permit or deemed
as prohibiting application for a permit for specification of a
disposal site or for the discharge dredged or fill material
within such area. These sets of information constitute informa-
tion to facilitate individual permit application and processing.
-67-
-------
Comments received in response to the March 1, 1988 Public Meeting
recommended that the Advanced Identification study consider the
recreational and educational value of the Meadowlands wetlands
and consider the potential value of the District's wetlands.
That is, wetlands which at this point in time showed low probabi-
lities to perform wetland functions may in the future show a
greater probability under changed or different future conditions.
A few respondents reported the wildlife and/or plant species
which they have observed in the Meadowlands. We received copies
of printed articles on wildlife occurrence in the Meadowlands and
copies of materials submitted to HMDC public meetings. One
respondent requested information on specific properties. A few
respondents expressed disappointment with any potential loss of
development in the Meadowlands wetlands while other respondents
expressed support for no further loss of wetlands in the Dis-
trict. The next phase of the advanced identification process
will focus on the criteria for identifying these different areas.
The development and application of such criteria will be accom-
plished by the EPA and the Corps of Engineers with the subsequent
review by the interagency team and the general public.
-68-
-------
VI. REFERENCES
-------
REFERENCES
COE 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.
Prepared by Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, Ms.
COE 1986. Wetland delineation field sheets for HMDC district.
New York District COE. New York, NY.
Cowardin, L.M., et a!. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deep
Water Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Washington, D.C.
DeLotto, D. 1973. An Overview of the Hackensack Meadowlands from
its geological beginnings to the present. MS thesis. Saint
Louis Univ., Saint Louis, MO.
Environmental Resources Management 1986. Results of the 1985
Hackensack Meadowlands Marsh Plant Net ProBuctivity Studies TDraft).
Prepared for the HMEC. West Chester, PA.
FEMA. Flood insurance rate maps.
FWS. National Wetland Inventory Map
Galluzzi, P.F. 1976. Mercury concentrations in muskrats,
Ondatra zibethicus from the Hackensack Meadowlands, NO MS thesis.
Farleigh Dickinson Univ., Rutherford, NJ.
Harshberger, J.W., and Burns, V.G. 1919. The vegetation of the
Hackensack Marsh: A typical American Fen. Wagner Free Inst.
Sci. 9(1):1-35.
Heusser, C.J. 1963. Pollen diagrams from three former cedar bogs
in the Hackensack tidal marsh, northeastern New Jersey. Bull.
Torrey Bot. club 90 (1):16-28.
Heusser, C.J. 1949. History of an estuarine bog at Secaucus, NJ
Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 76:385-406.
HMDC 1985. 1"=200' scale photogrammetry, 2' contour interval.
HMDC 1985. ln=200' scale aerial orthophotos.
HMDC 1985. Aerial steroscopic photographs.
HMDC 1985. Zoning map.
HMDC 1987a. Inventory of Fisheries Resources of the Hackensack
River within the Jurisdictional Boundary of the Hackensack
Meadowlands Development Conmrission from Kearny, Hudson County,
to Ridgefield, Berden County, New Jersey.
-69-
-------
HMDC 1987b. Species Lists of Organisms Found in the Hackensack
Meadowlands: Vascular Plants - Mammals.
HMEC 1986. Hackensack Meadowlands Summer Water Quality Project Four
Year Summary 1983-1986.
SCS 1979. Bergen County Soil Survey (Draft).
Sipple, W.S. 1972. The past and present flora and vegetation of
the Hackensack Meadows. Bartonia 41:4-56.
Tiner, R.W. 1985. Wetlands of New Jersey. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory. Newton Corner, MA.
Tippets-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton 1981. Reconnaissance Report for
Flood Control Measures, Hackensack River~Basin, Hudson and Beropn
Counties, New Jersey! Prepared for New York District Corps of—
Engineers. New York, New York.
USGS 1981. 1"=2000' topographic maps, 7\ minute series (1967
photorevised 1981).
Vermeule, C.C. 1896. Drainage of the Hackensack and Nowark
tide-marshes Ann. Rept. N.J. State Geologist, 1896: 287-317.
WET-MARCH 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) for Func-
tional Volume II (March Working uraft). Prepared Dy the Army
Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS
WET-OCTOBER 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET) for Funr-
tional Volume II, Version 2.0, COctober Operational Draft)"—
Prepared by the Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment
Station. Vicksburg, MS.
-70-
-------
APPENDICES
-------
APPENDIX A:
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF METHODS
-------
APPENDIX A
METHODS
The following pages present a more detailed explanation of the methods
used in this study. Methods are grouped under the following subheadings:
Wetland Delineation, Summary of Wetland Evaluation Technique, and Ap-
plication of WET in the Meadowlands.
Draft Wetland Delineation
Wetlands were first delineated by biologists from the Corps, EPA, FWS,
NJDEP and HMDC. The delineation was done solely for the purpose of the
advanced identification effort; wetland boundaries from this delineation
effort are not intended to be used by Section 404 applicants as final
delineation lines, for reasons explained below. Corps' staff made all
final judgements on wetland boundaries.
The approach to the draft wetland delineation followed that presented in
a working draft of the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual
(COE 19B7). This approach uses the presence of three wetland parameters,
vegetation, soil and hydrology, to confirm the presence of a wetland
falling under Corps jurisdiction. The vast wetland areas in the Meadow-
lands and the limited staff time available for delineation necessitated
the use of several techniques to simplify the delineation effort. For
example, tidally flooded lands with a surface elevation less than 3.9
feet above mean sea level (MSL) were assumed to be wetlands. This
assumption is based on the average spring (moon) high tide elevation of
3.9' MSL throughout the Oistrict. The source of elevation data was the
1"=200' scale photogrammetry developed from aerial photographs taken in
March 1985. These maps show topographic contour lines at two foot
intervals and have numerous spot elevations to the nearest tenth of a
foot. These maps have been reduced to a 1"=400' scale and reproduced in
the Map Atlas associated with this report.
A-l
-------
In most cases the use of transects as described in the delineation manual
was not warranted. For example there are numerous wetlands in the HMDC
district which are continuously flooded over their entire extent; the
presence of emergent vegetation, saturated soils and a permanently
flooded hydroperiod obviously qualified such areas as wetlands. Also,
many wetland boundaries are sharp and very distinct because they are
formed by steep banked cultural features such as highways, railroads and
landfills Soil sampling and transects were employed for those areas
where boundaries were indistinct or where the presence of a wetland was
uncertain.
At the time the delineation maps were in production, EPA contracted with
the consulting firm of Maguire Group Inc. to assist in the functional
assessment and advanced identification efforts. The Maguire Group in
turn retained Dr. Paul Adamus to assist in training, assessment area
delineation and quality assurance. Dr. Adamus used the the l"-200' scale
photogranmetry and orthoscopically corrected aerial photographs to
delineate assessment areas (AAs) in accordance with the Wetland Evalua-
tion Technique.
"Assessment area" is defined in all versions of the WET manual as "A term
which includes whatever area is being assessed ... [and] ... may corre-
spond to the wetland, the impact area, or the wet depression." For this
study the AAs correspond to wet depressions. Wet depression is defined
by *he WET manual as: "The wetland plus adjoining deep open water (conti-
guous and usually within 0.5 mile), if any, which generally occupies a
depression 1n the landscape. ..." The manual sets forth guidelines for
delineating wet depressions. In the Meadowlands most wet depressions
were delineated on the basis of a distinct wetland edge with respect to
adjoining non-wetland areas. Wetlands Interconnected by natural or
artificial drainageways are generally separated into separate wet depres-
sions by delineating part of the wet depre- ion boundary at the point of
greatest constriction, such as an outlet St.earn.
A-2
-------
The WET manual also presents criteria for the delineation of wet depres-
sions along a river. Confluences with tributaries and rapid changes in
the river or floodplain width are criteria for segmenting river reaches
into separate wet depressions. Otherwise, "... the narrowest point of
the river (including its annual floodplain) in any 0.5 mile reach should
be used as the basis for segregating different WDs" (WET March 1987).
In providing guidance on wet depression delineation the WET manual
states:
"Even with these guidelines the delineation of wet
depressions remains a subjective process. What is
most important is that, where several areas are
being compared or several users are doing the
analysis, a consistent rule be applied, and that
it be based on considerations of hydrologic and
biologic interactions" (WET March 1987).
Dr. Adamus followed the WET manual criteria for wet depression delinea-
tion with one exception. Segments along the Hackensack River were
separated such that wetlands along both sides of the river were included
in one wet depression even when the width of these wetlands occupied less
than 1/3 the width of the river. The WET manual classifies such wetlands
as fringe wetlands and prescribes the delineation of the wet depression
boundary along the open water side at a distance of 300 feet outward from
the 6.6 foot depth contour. Dr. Adamus deviated from this guideline
because, in the HMDC District, it would result in a biased comparison
between those river segments which met and those segments which did not
meet the fringe criterion.
The AA maps prepared by Dr. Adamus were compared with the delineation
maps prepared by the Corps. Differences were noted and field checked.
These field checks resulted in some minor boundary changes on both sets
of maps. During the field assessment of AAs using WET the interagency
A-3
-------
field tews corrected AA boundaries, when necessary, based on previously
unidentified hydrologic or biologic conditions. The field teams also
found a number of relatively small wetlands which had not been identified
before During the field and office level assessment of AAs, Maguire
staff videotaped the entire HMOC district from an EPA helicopter. Review
of the videotape identified additional wetlands not previously identi-
fied The extent of these new areas was subsequently verified In the
field All newly Identified wetlands were delineated as wet depressions
in accordance with the WET manual guidelines. In all, boundary changes
and the identification of new wetland areas altered the total number and
acreage of assessment areas by less than 5*.
The final assessment area maps prepared for this study are reproduced in
the Map Atlas which accompanies this report. These are reductions of the
j.- 200' scale maps wh ch were used in the field and office level assess-
es Note that the delineation of wet depressions on the AA maps does
not always correspond to the draft delineation maps prepared by the
Cons For example, the Corps' maps do not include deepwater (depth
areater than 2 meters) habitats. The AA maps also separated some wet-
lands into different AAs based on hydrologic/blologlc conditions even
though they appear as a single wetland area on the Corps' maps.
Finally 1t 1s important to note that not all wetlands have been Identi-
fied on these maps and that some boundaries remain imprecise. Numerous
Short and narrow drainage channels within the urban portions of the
district were not Included on either set of maps, even though they fall
within Corps jurisdiction and perform Important drainage functions. Some
wetlands were not delineated because site access was extremely difficult
or unsafe. For example, several wetlands occur on hazardous waste sites
which were unsafe for unprotected field crews.
in summary, the delineation of AAs Included 1n the Map Atlas suggests the
ikely occurrence of • wetland or deepwater habitat and alterations
within these areas are likely to require 5 404 permits from the Corps of
A-4
-------
Engineers. However, the AA boundaries do not demarcate Department of the
Army jurisdiction of waters of the United States pursuant to Section 404
of the Clean Water Act. The absence of delineated wetland areas on the
AA maps does not imply that a wetland or deepwater habitat does not occur
or that a § 404 permit is not required for alterations to wetlands not
shown on these maps.
Summary of the Wetland Evaluation Technique
The method used to assess the functions and values of wetlands in the
Meadowlands is called the Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET). WET is a
revised version of the Federal Highway Administration's "Method for
Wetland Functional Assessment" (Adamus and Stockwell, 1983). The method
has been updated by the Corps with the assistance of Dr. Adamus and with
the benefit of scientific review by EPA, FWS, other federal agencies and
the scientific community at large.
The method is favored by the Corps and EPA because it addresses a number
of different wetland functions and Section 404 wetland concerns. Typi-
cally, a given wetland may perform some functions very well, some func-
tions marginally and some functions may not be performed at all. Depend-
ing on the context and societal values/policies, the performance of a
given function may or may not be significant. The method evaluates the
significance of a function (S), the effectiveness for performing that
function (E), and the opportunity to perform that function (0) (for
select functions). The primary functions which are evaluated by WET are:
Ground Water Recharge (S,E)*
Ground Water Discharge (S,E)
Floodflow Alteration (S,E,0)
Sediment Stabilization (S,E)
Sediment/Toxicant Retention (S,E,0)
Nutrient Removals/Transformation (S,E,0)
Production Export (S,E)
Aquatic Diversity/Abundance (S,E)
-------
Fishery Habitat:
General (S,E)
Warmwater (E)
Coldwater (E)
Coldwater Riverine (E)
Northern Lake (E)
Wildlife Diversity/Abundance (S):
Breeding (E)
Migration (E)
Wintering (E)
Waterfowl (separate keys for 14 groups/species):
Breeding (E)
Migration (E)
Wintering (E)
Active Recreation .'3)
Uniqueness/Heritage (S)
* S = Significance E = Effectiveness 0 = Opportunity
It is very unlikely that a given wetland will perform all functions; for
example a wetland typically does not perform groundwater recharge and
groundwater discharge functions simultaneously. Also, it is very unlike-
ly that a wetland would not perform any of the functions evaluated.
WET has several levels of analysis. Each successive level requires more
detailed information and provides more reliable results. The WET users
first decide what level(s) and season of analysis will be used, and then
collect the data required for that level of analysis. The users then
answer a number of yes/no questions contained in each level. The ques-
tions and answers are called "predictors" because they are combined in
various ways to predict the probability that a given function may be
performed by the wetland. For example, if an assessment area is tidal
estuarine, or marine, or there is no permanent inlet and no permanent
outlet, then there is a LOW probability that the groundwater recharge
function is performed by the wetland.
A-6
-------
Each function evaluated by WET has one or more "interpretation keys" in
which the predictors are combined using "and/or" logic to yield a func-
tional value result of either High, Moderate, or Low. The interpretation
keys used in this study are reproduced in Appendix C and D of this
report.
WET provides a qualitative assessment of wetland areas and it is not
based on a system which applies weights or scores to each wetland area.
The evaluation technique may analyze wetlands on the basis of a func-
tion's "significance", "effectiveness", and/or "opportunity".
Significance considers the degree to which a function or value is valued
by society. Opportunity considers whether a wetland has the opportunity
to carry out a particular function. Effectiveness considers the probabi-
lity of a wetland being able to maximize the opportunity to carry out a
particular function.
In other words, WET estimates the probability that a given function
occurs, to an unspecified degree, in the wetland. WET does not provide
quantitative measures of the degree to which a function is performed.
Level 1 of WET employs 31 questions and an interpretation key to assign
significance ratings of HIGH, MODERATE or LOW to each of 10 wetland
functions. Example predictors of significance are the presence of an
endangered species, designation of a wetland as a wildlife refuge, nature
preserve or scenic waterway. Economic and social benefits a wetland may
provide are also a consideration in the determination of the significance
of a wetland function. A Level 1 assessment requires approximately one
hour to complete and can be done in the office.
Levels 2, 3 and 4 of WET assess a wetland's effectiveness and opportunity'
to carry out the functions being evaluated. The interpretation keys
assign opportunity ratings of HIGH, MODERATE and LOW to three wetland
functions, and effectiveness ratings of HIGH, MODERATE or LOW to ten
A-7
-------
wetland functions. An opportunity or effectiveness interpretation key
may be used with information produced in Levels 2 and 3, or Levels 2, 3,
and 4. The addition of Level 4 information increases the reliability of
the WET results.
Level 2 contains 27 predictors including climate, topography, acreage of
the wetland, gradient around the assessment area, vegetation forms of the
wetland area, soils and sediment sources. A Level 2 assessment can be
conducted in the office using topographic maps, aerial photos, regional
surveys and other geographic information.
Level 3 is based on 24 predictors including wetland alteration, (tilled,
filled or excavated), hydroperiod (permanently flooded nontidal, tempo-
rarily flooded nontidal, etc.), vegetative width, bottom water tempera-
ture and physical habitat interspersion. Level 3 assessment requires a
field visit to the wetland site for data collection and site observation.
Level 4 analysis is based upon 14 predictors including plant productivi-
ty, tidal flat invertebrate density/biomass, suspended solids concentra-
tions and water quality anomalies. Completion of Level 4 requires
detailed data often requiring the use of special equipment and a lengthy
period of analysis. F°r this project, Level 4 questions were answered to
the maximum extent feasible based on existing information.
The following limitations of the method are offered with this basic
overview of WET as a caution to those who use the method or interpret its
results. These general limitations have been excerpted or paraphrased
from the WET manual (March 1987).
The predictors which are assumed to control or correlate with wetland
processes, and ultimately with wetland functions, are used to estimate
functional value. These predictors may vary over a large range in their
applicability and the accuracy with which they really measure the func-
tion. The predictors and interpretation keys were developed from a
compilation and comparison of hundreds of wetland studies conducted
A-8
-------
across tte united States, and some from abroad. This literature database
imparts CJ&rtilr biases u-pon tfET. For enanpfe, most of the studies relate
to wildlife functions wtiiTe reTe7y few relats t& wetlard ^Brolojy.
Most of the studies wer^ conducted ors wetlands within the coastal zcr.e,
vtitn few studies on wetlands tit the interior ti.S.. This skewed database
tier*f validity ef
the predictions. Second, tfee use of inultip'ie predictor"* can ma fee the
technique mere flexible ir terns of data availability [WET ttarcfi 1987 J„
T?m syster cT" -&tl,rg s. furetloa's valae HIGH, MODERATE or LDK in terms of
its sig/iifrcarce, opportunity anil effectiveness, fs not a system mrfvfctt
estimates tne magnitude of wetlard functions. Rather, it esttoaies t/ta
probability that the$ aay exist cr occur, to an unspecified degree, in a
given situation. For example, MET may indicate th«.t in 4 particular
wetland the groundwater recharge function has a Mgfe probability of
existing. However, the overall infTuence of tte wetland on the total
amount of water that Teaches cr. a^irffer say be negligible when compared
niy- the tctii i«ate^s,ietf impact.
The probability ratings af KlGH, MODERATE sr LfV do not Have statistical
co^re^atas. A low rating dees- not. mean that fewer than VQ percent of all
wetlands «i" 'i satisfy a certain condition* ffor* does a HIGH rating nisnr
tinet mr^ t*»an SG percent of all wetlands will satisfy a certain condi-
tion.
A-S
-------
Few wetland functions can be quantified. Therefore, it is inappropriate
to attempt to multiply a rating by the acreage of a wetland to give it an
overall value, which would be higher than it actually is in reality
Decisions on the functional performance of wetlands are not always
obvious and objective. Some functions may be defined objectively. For
example, a HIGH rating for sediment trapping means that the wetland
likely traps more sediment than it exports. For other functions and
values, the selection of criteria for HIGH and LOW probability ratings
was a more subjective process. For example, wildlife habitat is a
wetland value provided to some degree by virtually all wetlands. What
constitutes a HIGH and LOW probability rating, in terms of effectiveness
for wildlife diversity and abundance depends on many factors (e.g
geographic location, management strategy, etc.) and a subjective weight-
ing of these factors (WET October 1987).
The following suggestions are made in order to curb potential misuse or
misunderstanding of the WET method. They are primarily suggestions for
the application of the method in administrative and technical contexts
WET is intended primarily for use by persons who do not have ready access
to an interdisciplinary team of experts on wetlands. Although the method
lacks a regional and site specificity, and relies on a literature base
versus first hand expert experience, it is often more replicable, expli-
cit and capable of tracking a wider range of variables and functions than
can be considered by a single expert at one time. The technique can be
used in conjunction with experts who are available for consultation. The
judgement of these experts can be used to check the results of WET since
(as with many procedures founded on limited technical databases) the
results it generates are occasionally counterintuitive. With respect to
the use of WET in the Hackensack Meadowlands, this is specifically
discussed in the Overview of Methods (Page 18).
A-10
-------
MET might be applied ir individual permit applications, advanced identi-
fication of most important wetlands, selection of least damaging alterna-
tives, and for prioritization of wetlands for intensive delineation
efforts, acquisition, or research. Because WET is a rapid assessment
method, it offers a realistic tool for demonstrating consistent con-
sideration of all major wetland values. It provides the user with a
consistent basis for comparisons and contrasts of different wetlands in
situations vjhere interdisciplinary expertise is not routinely available.
In summary, there are many appropriate uses of the Wetland Evaluation
Technicue} provided that the above provisions and limitations are well
understood or at least recognized.
Application of WET in the Weadowlands
The process of functional assessment of wetlands in the Meadowlands began
with the delineation of wetland areas (described previously) and the
commitment of the individual agencies to provide staff time to the
effort. At this time EPA hired the Maguire Group to provide technical
and clerical assistance on the study. The Maguire Group in turn hired
Dr. Paul Adamus to provide training in the use of WET, delineation of
assessment areas, and quality assurance throughout the study, Maguire
Group also hired Simon-Bender Associates to develop computer programs arri
data base formats to assist in the WET analysis.
The WET training session was held during one week in June of 1986. Dr.
Adamus led the session with assistance by Dr. Terry Huffman (co-author of
the Corps wetland delineation manual), and Dr. Gary Tucker. Attorney Jon
Kusler of the Association of State Wetland Managers also provided a
presentation on legal issues related to wetland regulation and evalua-
tion. The training session was held at the Hackensack Meadowlands
Development Commission's offices. This allowed session participants to
practice WET application in the area where the study would take place.
The training session was particularly valuable because it allowed study
A-ll
-------
participants to ask Dr. Adamus specific questions regarding the applica-
tion of WET to various situations peculiar to the Meadowlands. It also
provided a common training basis for the study team members who would be
applying WET as a group over the coming months.
After the training session Dr. Adamus delineated assessment areas on the
1"= 200' photogrammetry. These maps were compared with the draft Corps
delineation maps and any boundary discrepancies were resolved (see
earlier discussion in this Appendix). The areas of AAs shown on the
corrected maps were measured with a polar planimeter and acreage was
calculated to the nearest 1/100 of an acre. Due to inevitable map and
measuring equipment error the accuracy of acreage calculations is actual-
ly +/- 0.1 acre. This acreage information was one of the many types of
data collected or synthesized for later use in WET.
A large volume of background data was reviewed during the summer of 1986
to ascertain its potential value for the WET effort. Much of this data
is potentially useful to the advanced identification effort but could not
be used in the application of WET. For example, invertebrate density
data exist for some areas, but this data set did not include both biomass
and density values and therefore could not be used to answer WET question
53. The volume and detail of data available for the Meadowlands was
however, more than adequate to document most of the information required
as input to WET. This documentation combined with the field evaluations
conducted by the interagency team provided a high degree of confidence in
the data input to WET. The interagency group decided that the available
(or obtainable) information was sufficient to complete WET Levels 1, 2
and 3. It was also decided that Level 4 would be completed to the extent
possible with existing or readily obtainable information.
We applied the WET method using average conditions. It was not feasible
given the constraints of time and manpower, to apply WET in all
conditions, wet, dry and average.
A-12
-------
The key documentation gathered or synthesized in this background research
phase included:
1"=2001 scale photogrammetry, 2" contour interval (1965)
l"-200' scale aerial orthophotos (1985)
r«20a0' USGS topographic maps (1967 photorevised 1981)
1"=2000' watershed map based on 1967/1981 USGS base maps
assessment area acreage +/- 1/10 acre (1986)
aerial steroscopic photographs (1985)
FEMA flood insurance rate maps
Corps preliminary wetland delineation field sheets (1986)
HMEC long term water quality monitoring data (1983-1986)
HHEC plant productivity study (1985}
Bergen County SCS draft soil survey (1979)
FUS National Wetland Inventory Hap
Corps flood control study (1981}
HMDC zoning map
District map identifying sewage outfalls* landfills and
hazardous waste sites
District map showing general project locations where
environmental impact statements/reports have been
prepared
FWS "Classification of Wetlands and Deep Hater Habitats
of the United States" (1979)
FVIS "Wetlands of New Jersey" (1985)
During the period of background data collection, Maguire Group hired
Simon-Bender Associates to computerize WET interpretation keys and
database formats, The need for a computer model of WET was threefold.
First, manual use of the interpretation keys requires hours while a
computer version can be run in minutes or even seconds. Second, computer
programs are not susceptible to human error once their accuracy has beer
tested and verified. Third, ongoing revisions to the March 1987 draft
version of WET could be incorporated easily and the entire dataset could
be run with the latest interpretation keys.
A-13
-------
WET was programmed in dBase III Plus (TN Ashton-Tate) on the advice of
Or Adamus. The chief advantages of this software are its popularity
(thus allowing many potential users easy access to the WET programs), and
the ease of editing the database and the WET programs. The chief dis-
advantage of using dBase III Plus is that the full set of WET program
modules runs in about two to four minutes per assessment area. This is
relatively slow compared to other possibilities. For example, the pro-
grams recently developed by WES for WET have been compiled to run in
machine language, completing a typical run in less than two seconds.
Once the background data was compiled and the computer programming effort
underway, the scheduling of field and office work began. The basic rule
set forth by EPA was that each team conducting a functional assessment
must have representatives from at least three of the different agencies
comprising the interagency study team. One of these would be an EPA
representative. Magulre Group staff or EPA staff represented EPA on all
assessments. The COE and HMOC almost always had a ".aff representative
on the team. The FWS and NODEP had representatives on the assessment
team approximately one or two days per week over the duration of the
field and office assessment. The NMFS lent support to the field effort
but had few opportunities to participate because of limited manpower. The
Corps had five staff representatives who rotated field/office duty each
week. The HMDC had four staff representatives who rotated duty each
week. NJDEP had two staff representatives and the FWS had one repre-
sentative.
The grouping of several assessment areas in a day's work was key to the
completion of the 147 AAs. By visiting several AAs in the same vicinity
the team was able to answer the WET questions for these AAs at one time.
In other words, question 1 would be answered for five different AAs, then
question 2 was answered for these AAs, then question 3 ... and so forth.
This turned out to be a much faster and more consistent means of complet-
ing the WET questions than completing each AA separately in sequence,
especially since most of the sites in the same area were similar, ie.,
most questions were answered the same way.
A-14
-------
The process of data entry was also facilitated by the manner in which
answer forms were completed. First, the form developed for this project
included the question number, a mnemonic summary of the question, and a
number of columns each corresponding to the answer set for a particular
AA (Figure A-l). The answer set for the first AA (column 1} was filled
out completely. For the other AAs, where the answer to a particular
question was the same as for the first AA no entry was made; only answers
differing from that shown in the first column were recorded. In this way
the first AA data set could be entered on the computer, copied, and
renamed. Only the changes or differences in the answers then had to be
corrected on the copied data set.
The field and office assessment of AAs was conducted between mid-Septem-
ber and mid-December 1986. During the first few weeks, the team identi-
fied many questions which required clarification. Typically, these
questions did not arise until a particular (and often atypical) set of
circumstances was found to occur in the AA. Dr. Adamus was consulted
periodically during this early phase to ensure the team was interpreting
WET correctly. The interagency team discussed his consultations and
determined a consistent approach to these situations based on his clari-
fication. These decisions are shown in Table A-l. The Hackensack
Meadowlands Contractor's review commented on the influence to the WET
results of some of these decisions. In particular, he noted that the
decisions regarding the "presence" of threatened and endangered species
and the classification of an AA as estuarine when salinity is greater
than 0.5 ppm {resulting in the application of a tidal hydroperiod}
influenced the variation in results between his application of WET and
that of the interagency group. These influential decisions by the
interagency group were based, as discussed above, on the discussions with
Dr. Adamus.
Many WET questions had consistent answers throughout the HMDC district.
These consistent answers are listed in Table A-2 with the question number
and mnemonic summary of the question which appears on the answer sheet.
A-15
-------
Figure
¥ paae from Answer
A-1. Example of
Sheet
Page No•
09/0*4 '86
USEPA WETLAND EVALUATION
ANSWER 3HEET
QuS5 i \o~
NuWD©1
5U(nma<"y
Quest ion
Answer
H »V
*°r
~fJ
-------
TABLE A-l
DECISIONS MADE WITH RESPECT TO THE APPLICATION
OF WET IN THE HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
"locality" was defined as the HMDC district
"region" was defined as th.e State of New Jersey
average conditions would be assessed during the study, exclusive of wet
and dry conditions which also may be assessed during the use of WET
the "presence of an endangered or threatened species" (Level 1 question
1) did not require documented presence within the AA, but rather a good
possibility that the AA habitat was suitable for one or more of the
threatened/endangered species in the district.
features of "great social concern or economic value" include actively
used structures, railroads, roadways and parking lots (Level 1 questions
8 and 9)
Phraqmites australfs (P. communis) is a "robust" species (Level 2 ques-
tion 15.2)
stands of emergent Phragmites do not shade 80? or more of the surface at
midday (Level 2 question Z0.1)
railroad and roadway embankments» landfills and fill areas are best
classified as "urban or suburban lawns, recently revegetated landfills or
mine tailings" under the classification of subwatershed land cover (Level
2 question 21)
heavily traveled roadways and landfills are both sources of nutrients and
toxic chemicals (Level 2 questions 26 and 27)
if an AA is classified as estuarine (salinity greater than 0.5 ppt) a
tidal hydroperiod must be used even if tidal fluctuation is not visually
apparent (Level 3 questions 32 and 33)
the substrate beneath Phraqmites stands is classified as peat while the
substrate beneath aquatic bed zones is muck, unless otherwise noted in
the field (such as where rubble substrate is apparent) (Level 3 question
45)
the pH of the water 1n an AA is circumneutral unless features noted in
the field (such as ash landfilling) suggest otherwise (Level 3 question
47)
Phraqmites and Spartina a 1ternif1org marshes have an above ground pro-
ductivity between 500 and 1500 g/m /yr unless otherwise noted in the
plant productivity data (Level 4 question 51)
A-16
-------
Table A-2.
Consistent Answers to WET Questions
Question Summary of
Number Question Answer
I 5 Only wetland in locality? N
I 7 Unnaturally high salinities? N
112 Drinking water supplies? N
114 Bathing areas? N
116 Actively used wells? N
117 Wildlife critically flow limited? N
121 USFWS Waterfowl Use Region? Y
125 Pristine? N
126 Recreation in deficient area? N
128 Urban area? Y
130 Region losing this type? Y
1.1 Evaporation > precipitation? N
1.2 Rainfall-erosivity > 300? N
1.3 Freeze-over > one month? N
3.1 Complex - < 1 mile? Y
6.1 < 5 miles to major water? Y
7.1 v < 10 ca/s? I
10.F Marine? N
12.Ab needle-leaved evergreen N
12.Ac broad-leaved evergreen N
12.Ad needle-leaved deciduous N
12.Bb needle-leaved evergreen N
12.Be broad-leaved evergreen N
12.Bd needle-leaved deciduous N
13.Ab needle-leaved evergreen N
13.Ac broad-leaved evergreen N
13.Ad needle-leaved deciduous N
24.1 Aluminum in soil? U
24.5 Karst? N
38.6 Couplet .6 N
38.8 Couplet .8 I
45.E cobble-gravel? N
45.G bedrock? N
48.4 18.0 < Salinity < 30.0 N
48.5 30.0 < Salinity < 40.0 N
48.6 Salinity >40 N
54 Ground water surface slopes away? U
-------
The base of operations for both field and office level wetland assessment
was the Hackensack Meadowlands Development Commission's offices. The
HMDC provided a conference room for the four months of field/office work.
The HMDC also provided occasional secretarial services, copying, compu-
ters, field equipment, off-road vehicles, motorboats and canoes.
The typical day of wetland assessment would begin with the team leader
(EPA and/or Maguire Group staff) reviewing the schedule of AAs to be done
that day. On occasion these plans would be changed because of weather,
equipment availability, or the absence of key team members. The team
leader would then gather the appropriate 1"=200' assessment area maps and
aerial photographs. This information would be used to plan access
routes, type of transportation (foot, car, off-road vehicle, motorboat or
canoe) and the sequence of AAs to visit that day. Potential access
problems such as hazardous waste, fences, dog packs, and commuter rail-
road tracks were considered. HMDC staff were invaluable both in provid-
ing access information and in the provision of vehicles and boats for the
field work.
At the beginning of the study there was a basic question on whether to do
the field visit before or after Level 1, 2 and 4 questions were answered.
Theoretically, only Level 3 questions require data collected in the
field. The team quickly found that starting with the field visits was
most productive. The field visits cleared up many uncertainties in the
Level 1 and 2 analysis, and avoided problems such as answering many
questions based on mapped data only to find that data did not accurately
reflect present conditions as seen in the field. Therefore, when weather
and staff schedules permitted, the team opted for conducting the field
work during the morning, and answering WET questions in the afternoon.
Once the day's field work had been planned, the team gathered the field
equipment and traveled to the site. Each team member was given a field
evaluation form, shown in Figure A-2. At each site the field team
evaluated the accuracy of the mapped AA boundaries and took appropriate
measurements. Estimation of depth categories was perhaps the most
A-17
-------
Figure A-2
HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS WETLANDS ASSESSMENT
FIELD EVALUATION
AA No.: Z""3 Locati°n: Cr^tL-^U^
Date: Time: /O Field Crew; , AAj^ X^S
Vegetation Classes and Subclasses (1+ ac. or 10Z+):
Velocity Measurements:
Station Velocity (ft/s)
f&i B .Cc«el*— > ** f (0 S sw — 16
Plants of Waterfowl Food Value (1 ac. or 10Z): Y N
MAP CHECKLIST:
Inlets & Outlets
Zones A, eB, sB, C
Depth Categories
Limit of Seasonal Flooding
Photostations %
Velocity Measurement Stations
Other Questions to Resolve in Field:
Observations/Comments (mammal sign, rare species, unique
features, etc.):
^-TroMuO
*14-, K^ rntsrHtj
^ -sVjUwrcv-
3*1^ kU f^OAci.
6>r* J
4oV>*W-«K'
-------
difficult task at each site because access to interior portions was often
restricted. Indicators such as vegetation types and partially submerged
debris (tires, shopping carts) were often useful where direct measurement
was impossible.
The team then returned to the office to answer the WET questions. The
team's policy was to arrive at a consensus on the answer to each ques-
tion. Since many WET questions are somewhat open to interpretation,
extended discussions were often necessary to arrive at a consensus.
While this type of discussion increased the time necessary to answer all
of the WET questions, it increased the reliability and consistency of the
answer sets. The number of AAs completed in a day ranged from one to 10,
but typically averaged from three to six.
Data entry and computer model tests occurred throughout the period of
field and office work. The early computer results were compared against
manual use of the WET interpretation keys. This process identified
several errors in the coding of the programs. These errors were subse-
quently corrected. Manual use of the keys also gave team members a
chance to review the logic of those keys, and to thereby note any logic
which was inherently counterintuitive in the context of the Meadowlands
wetlands. Periodic reviews of the computer output (functional values)
also gave the team members a chance to see how the work was progressing
and what type of results could be expected in the Meadowlands.
Spot checks of data set files were made as data sets were being entered
on the computer. These and subsequent checks of the data sets resulted
in approximately 20% of the datasets being checked, individually, for
data entry accuracy.
Towards the end of the field/office work Rick Young from the Corps WES
spent a week with the team to see how WET was being applied. Mr. Young
was one of the staff at WES primarily responsible for the production of
the WET manual. He was also one of the few people familiar with the use
of this updated version of the functional assessment method. Mr. Young
found the team was using WET consistent with WES application and gave the
A-18
-------
team an indication of the remaining minor revisions to WET which could be
expected from WES in the upcoming months. Some of the team's observa-
tions and concerns presented to Mr. Young (and Dr. Adamus) were used in
the subsequent revisions to WET.
After the first three months of field/office work were completed, the
team conducted a field inventory of remaining assessment areas. At that
time about 92% of the wetland acreage in the Meadowlands had been
evaluated, but these evaluated areas comprised only about half of the AAs
identified. Basically, many small AAs remained to be evaluated. The
team conducted field visits to all remaining AAs which were accessible.
Field evalue ion forms were completed for these AAs, measurements were
taken, and a priority rank for future application of the WET Method was
assigned. Ranking was based on apparent value, size, and the degree to
which an area appeared representative of other wetlands in the District.
All high priority ranked AAs, and some lower priority ranked areas were
subsequently evaluated using WET. The omission of WET analyses or field
visits for remaining wetlands in this study confers no significance to
their functions or values. It was decided, based on the effort expended
to complete the WET on 147 AAs, not to complete the WET evaluation on all
228 AAs. The conclusion was that the completion of the WET analysis on
92% of the District's wetland acreage was a representative study of the
Meadowland's wetlands.
A five month period of data processing and quality assurance followed the
completion of the field and office use of WET. One hundred and forty-
seven areas had been completed. This resulted in an input data set
of about 45,000 pieces of information. Further revisions by WES to the
draft version of WET were received during this period. These revisions
were evaluated carefully to determine the need to revise any parts of the
input data or the programmed interpretation keys. These changes and
errors found during the quality assurance process resulted in no more
than 5% of the input data set being revised. Nonetheless it was an
exacting and time consuming process. HMDC's Contractor reviewed results
of the WET as applied in the Hackensack Meadowlands by the interagency
group compared with results from application of those data in WET-
A-19
-------
version 2.0 (October 1987). Although he noted slight differences in the
two sets of results, he reported that the WET results from application by
the interagency group provide a sufficiently accurate assessment of the
wetland functions and values cf the Hackensack Meadow!ands.
Quality assurance checks of data entry were made on an area by area basis
and by comparing all assessment areas against each other. This later
method was very useful because, once printed together (as shown in the
Map Atlas)* deviations from prevailing patterns became readily apparent.
Usually these deviations were accurate representations of unusual or
atypical circumstances occurring in an AA. However, they sometimes
indicated errors in data entry. Such potential errors were identified by
checking the handwritten answer sheets.
Quality assurance checks of the computer program were made by comparing
manual use of the keys with computer output, line by line verification of
program logic and syntax, and use of the program on all 147 data sets.
WET output was evaluated for values which appeared unusual based on
knowledge of the AAs or trends which appear in the output. Unusual
values were scrutinized to determine if an input error or program error
might be responsible. Tha modular programming used by Simon-Bender
Associates facilitated program debugging and correction.
The final WET results were reviewed by the interagency group between
August 1987 and July 1988. Their review found general concurrence with
the WET results. Group members were asked to comment on any specific
results which appeared counterintuitive based on their professional
experience in the Meadowlands. These comments were noted in the tabu-
lation of results presented in the results section of this report (see
Table 5).
Agency comments and discussion among the interagency group members "led to
tlie conclusion that WET -inter pre tat ion keys for wildlife, waterfowl and
fisheries lacked an appropriate level of sensitivity when applied in the
Meadowlands* For example, the MET ¦interpretation key for wMdlife
A-20
-------
diversity and abundance - breeding on site automatically considers all
estuarine wetlands to have a low probability of providing this function.
This does not reflect the documented value of estuarine wetlands in the
Meadowlands for a wide variety of wildlife.
The interagency group prepared three new interpretation keys for wild-
life, waterfowl and fish (presented in Appendix D). These keys are
similar to WET keys in format and use the WET data base for the Meadow-
lands as input. These keys were developed through critical scrutiny of
the habitat features which correlate well with wildlife/waterfowl/fish
use in the Meadowlands. They utilize WET information to specifically
address habitat suitability for wildlife, waterfowl and/or fish. We used
six additional questions to those presented in WET to more accurately
evaluate the habitat suitability for waterfowl breeding, migration and
wintering. The following questions were used in the waterfowl key
presented in Appendix D.
66.1.1 Is Group 1 waterfowl breeding present or likely to occur
in the AA?
66.2.1 Is Group 1 waterfowl migration/wintering present or likely
to occur in the AA?
66.2.3 Is Black Duck migration/wintering present or likely to
occur in this AA?
66.2.5 Is Merganser migration/wintering present or likely to
occur in this AA?
66.2.7 Is Buffiehead/Goldeneye migration/wintering present or
likely to occur in this AA?
66.2.10 Is Geese migration/wintering present or likely to occur in
this AA?
Results produced by the new interpretation keys were reviewed during the
winter and spring of 1988. The interagency group found these results
satisfactorily reflect conditions in the Meadowlands. As with the WET
functions, the interagency group provided comments on counterintuitive
results. The group also used raw data from the HMDC fisheries study to
fine tune the new fish habitat results. Discussion of these new keys,
their rationale, and their results is presented in the results section of
this report.
A-?l
-------
APPENDIX B:
SPECIES LISTS OF ORGANISMS FOUND
IN THE HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS:
VASCULAR PLANTS - MAMMALS
THE HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MAY 1987
-------
Species Lists of Organisms Found
in the Hackensack Meadovlands:
Vascular Plants - Mammals
The Hackensack Meadovlands Development Commission
One DeKorte Park Plaza
Lyndhurst, NJ 07071
(201) A60-1700
May 1987
-------
(The Hackensack Meadovlands are) a breeding place for mosquitoes and other
insects. Owing to its trifling value this marshy area is gradually becoming,
and is likely to, in the future, become more and more a site for offensive
manufacturing industries, manure piles, and other nuisances . . . these
marshes have consequently had a retarding influence upon its (the State of Nev
Jersey) progress, and their improvement . . . could not fail to have a decided
beneficial effect upon . . . this whole district . . . Aside from the direct
benefit resulting from a removal of a blot upon an otherwise fair landscape,
it is a well-known fact that the nuisances attributable to these marshes are
experienced by all . . . and the application of this waste marsh land to such
purposes (draining) will add very largely to the wealth of the state.
New Jersey State Geologist Annual Report - 1897
The Hackensack Meadows are not at the present time of significance to fish or
wildlife. Although waterfowl and rails do use certain localized areas,
productivity of the meadows has all but been destroyed. Pollution of the
waters has eliminated fish life. Encroachment by highways, and industrial,
residential, and recreational developments has destroyed large areas, and
mosquito control activities have been instrumental in changing the plant
composition to species of little value to wildlife. . . . There are no
possibilities for extensive fish and wildlife developments . . .
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service - 1962
-------
i;rrPnwCTI0W
The species lists contained in this document are a compilation of a
collected from 33 references on the Hackensack Meadovlands. These refer *
come from a variety of sources including the scientific literat^**
consultants' reports, and Hackensack Meadovlands Development Commission
documents. These lists should not be considered complete. Many areas
the Hackensack Meadovlands have not been studied, and many of the areas
have been studied vere not systematically surveyed. wkich
Scientific nomenclature vas standardized using the following references-
Vegetation - Femald, M.L., ed. 1950. Gray's Manual of Botany. New v
American Book Company. ' Xo*'k:
Invertebrates - Gosner, K.L. 1979. A field Guide to the Atlantic
Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.
McCafferty, W.P. 1981. Aquatic Entomology - The Fisherm
and Ecologists' Illustrated Guide to Insects and
Relatives. Jones and Bartlett Publ. Co., Boston.
Pennak, R.W. 1978. Freshvater Invertebrates of the it
States. Wiley, Nev York.
Fish- Robins, C.R., Ray, C.G., and Douglas, J. 1986. A Field r
to Atlantic Coast Fishes of North America. Houghton
Co., Boston.
Reptiles and - Connant, R. 1975. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians
Amphibians Eastern and Central North America. Houghton Mifflin
Boston. c°.»
-------
2
Birds - Robbins, C.S., Bruun, B., and Zim, H.S. 1966. Birds of North
America, Golden Press, NY.
Birds of the Hackensack Meadowlands New Jersey. A list
prepared by the Hackensack Meadowlands Environment Center.
Mammals - Burt, W.H., and Grossenheider, R.P. 1976. A Field Guide to the
Mammals. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston.
The bird list included in this document does not identify regions of the
District where the birds were found. A variety of reasons necessitated this.
Most of the references copied existing lists. Those reports which actually
did bird studies, did not perform comprehensive surveys. Therefore actual
site by site lists are either lacking or incomplete.
References used to prepare this document are numbered 1-33, and are
numbered according to their geographic location in the Hackensack Meadowlands
District. Those documents which reference sites in the Northern portion of
the District will have the lowest numbers. The document numbers rise as the
referenced sites are found further south in the district. A site map (Figure
1) is provided to help you quickly visualize where the data was collected.
This map is keyed to the references as well.
The lists are organized in the following manner:
Species Name Common Name Document Number
(Scientific) (if applicable) in ascending order
Most of the references used in the compilation of the species lists are
single copy only documents. Therefore they cannot be borrowed. In addition,
we do not have the capability of photocopying and mailing to you large
documents.
If you wish to review the documents, you may come into our offices and use
them here. Please make an appointment before coming in so that a staff member
will be available to help you.
-------
3
- COMPILED BY -
Mark L. Kraua, Ph.D.
Wetlands Management Specialist
Audrey Benda
Wetlands Intern
Paul Lupini
Laboratory Technician
Allison Smith
Secretary
May 1987
-------
4
KEY TO LOCATIONS IN FTGTTBE 1
1. *Wetland Biozone Report (HMDC)
2. Bergen County Resource Recovery
3. Bergen Generating Station
4. Office/Industrial Park
5. Clause/Oakpoint Tract
6. River Mile 10.5 in Office/Industrial
7. Giants Stadium/Sports Complex
8. Meadovlands Arena
9. Brackish Wetland Mitigation
10. Villages at Mill Creek (IR-2)
11. Multipurpose Development/Harmon Meadow
12. Tidelands Application - Hartz/Mori
13. Berry's Creek Center
14. Island Residential (IR-1)
15. Anderson Marsh
16. Sawmill Creek Wildlife Management
17. Sawmill Creek (Dentzau)
18. Sawmill Creek Sewage and Leachate
19. Sawmill Creek Water Quality Management
20. Sawmill Creek (Kraus & Kraus)
21. LRFC (Hansen)
22. Kearny Meadows: Land Use Study
23. Kearny Meadows (SU-3)
24. Hudson County Resource Recovery
25. Hudson Generating Station
26.*Hackensack River Studies for PSE&G
27. Power Plant Studies for PSE&G
28.*N.J. Marine Sciences Consortium
29.*Present Study for NJ Turnpike Widening
30. Kearny Generating Station
31.*Collection of Aquatic Organisms(WAPORA)
32.*Striped Bass Recruitment
33.*Tra.wl Sampling
section of the District.
District
Ridgefield
Ridgefield
Ridgefield
Carlstadt
Ridgefield
East Rutherford
East Rutherford
Secaucus
Secaucus
Secaucus
Secaucus
Rutherford
Secaucus
Rutherford,
Lyndhurst, Secai
Lyndhurst, Kearny
Lyndhurst, Kearny
Lyndhurst, Kearny
Lyndhurst, Kearny
Lyndhurst, Kearny
Lyndhurst, Kearny
Kearny
Kearny
Kearny
Jersey City
District
District
District
District
Kearny
District
District
District
1984
1986
1974
1981
1986
1981
1972
1972
1985
1985
1978
1978
1986
1974
1985
s
1976
1981
1982
1983
1986
1986
1976
1982
1985
1978
1972-
74
1974-
79
1976-
80
1985
1974
1977
1983
1986
limited
to
one
-------
-------
VEGETATION
Eaulsetaceae - Horsetail
Equisetum arvense
Equisetum sp.
Osimmdaceae - Royal Fern
Osmunda cinnamomea
0. Clayton!ana
Polvpodiaceae - Fern
Dryopteris Thelypteris
Onoclea sensibilis
Dennstaedtia punctlloba
Pteridium aquilinum
Pinaceae - Pine
Juniperus virgin!ana
Pinus sp.
P. sylvestris
Tvphaeeae - Cattail
Typha sp.
T. angustifolia
T. latifolia
Zosteraceae - Pondweed
Zannichellia palustris
Allsmataceae - Water Plantain
Alisma sp.
Gramineae - Grass
Andropogon scoparius
A. virginicus
Digitaria sanguinale
D. filiforme
Echinochloa Crus-galli
Panicum virgatum
P. dichotomiflorum
Horsetail, common
Horsetail
Cinnamon Fern
Interrupted Fern
Marsh Fern
Sensitive Fern
Hayscented Fern
Bracken Fern
Red Cedar
Spruce
Scotch Pine
Cattail
Narrow-leaved Cattail
Broad-leaved Cattail
Horned Pondweed
Water Plantain
Bluestem
Broomsedge
Crabgrass
Crabgrass
Barnyard Grass
Switchgrass
Spreading Witchgrass
7,23,29
13
7
29
7,29
7,29
23
23
16,18
23
23
11,12,29,31
5.7,8,9,11
7,23
18,19
29
21,23,24
13,18,23,29
13,23
23
13,23
7,13,14,23,24,
8
-------
7
Gramlneae - Grass (cont'd)
P. capillare
Setaria verticillata
S. viridis
Aristida purpurascens
Agrostis alba
A. hyemails
Nothoholcus lanatus
Spartina cynosuroides
S. patens
S. alterniflora
Eleuslne lndlca
Phragmites communis
Eragrostls pectlnaceae
E. poaeoldes
Distichlis splcata
Dactylis glomerata
Poa annua
Festuca sp.
F. rubra
F. elatlor
Bromus sp.
Loliuo multiflorum
Agropyron sp.
A. repens
Hordeum jubatum
Anthoxanthum odoratum
Arrhenatherum elatlus
Cynodon dactylon
Gramineae
Cvneraceae - Sedge
Eleocharis sp.
E. olivaceae
E. tenuis
E. parvula
Carex sp.
Scirpus sp.
S. americanus
S. Olneyi
S. validus
Cyperus sp.
C. strigosus
Witch-grass
23
Foxtail Grass
23
Green Foxtail Grass
5,8,13,14,18,23
Broom Sedge
18
Red-top
11,13,29
Silk Grass
23
Velvet-grass
21
Salt Reed-grass
7,10
Salt-meadow Grass
9,11,14,16,29
Salt Harsh-grass
8,9,10,11,12,14,15,
16,18,23,29,31
Goosegrass
23
Common Reed-grass
throughout
Purple Lovegrass
23
Low Lovegrass
23
Marsh Spike-grass
11,12,21
Orchard Grass
29
Annual Meadowgrass
21,23
Fescue Grass
8,29
Red Fescue
21
Tall Fescue
8,23
Brome-grass
29
Rye-grass
23
Wheat-grass
29
Quick-grass
23
Squirrel-tail Grass
11,21
Sweet Vernal-grass
11
Oatgrass
23
Bermuda-grass
23
Grasses
7
Spikerush 5,29
Bright green Spikerush 7
Spikerush 23
Dwarf Club-rush 2,9,13,18,23
Sedge 13
Sedge 10
Common Threesquare 8,23
Oiney's Bulrush 11
American Great Bulrush 2,23
Sedge 7,14,21,29
Straw-colored Cyperus 23
-------
8
Araceae - Arum
Peltandra virginica
Lemnaceaa - Duckweed
Lemna sp.
L. gibba
L. minor
Wolffia columbiana
Commellnaeeaa - Spiderwort
Commelina communis
Juncaceae - Rush
Juncus sp.
J. effusus
J. tenuis
J. Gerardi
Lillaeaae - Lily
Maianthemum canadense
Irldaceac - iris
Iris sp.
Salicaceaa - Willow
Populus deltoides
P. alba
P. tremuloides
Salix sp.
S. babylonica
S. discolor
Arrow Arum
Duckweed
Duckweed
Duckweed
Watermeal
Asiatic Dayflower
Rushes
Soft-stem Bulrush
Slender Rush
Black-grass
Cottonwood
White Poplar
American Aspen
Willow
Weeping Willow
Pussywillow
29
7,29
23
23
23
13,14,23
7,10,13,29
5
11,21
21
False Lily-of-the-valley 29
jlueflag
2,8,11,13,14,23,24
11
2,7,11
24
23
21
MvriCftCm - Bayberry
Myrica pennsylvanica
Corvlaceae - Hazel
Betula populifolia
Faaacgae - Beech
Quercus prinus
Q. alba
Q. rubra
Q. palustris
Q. bicolor
Bayberry 13
American White Birch 7,18
Chestnut Oak 7
White Oak 7
Red Oak 7
Pin Oak 29
Swamp White Oak 29
-------
Ulmaccae - Elm
Ulmus americana
Moraceae - Mulberry
Morus sp.
Morus alba
Cannablnaceae - Hemp
Humulus Lupulus
H. japonicus
Arlatolochlaceae - Birthwort
Aristolochia serpentaria
Polvgonaceae - Buckwheat
Rumex sp.
R. Acetosella
R. crispus
Polygonum sp.
Persicaria persicaria
P. orientale
P. cuspidatum
P. pensylvanicum
P. punctatum
Chenopodtaceae - Goosefoot
Chenopodlum sp.
C. ambrosoides
C. album
Atriplex sp.
A. hastata
Kochia scoparia
Bassia hirauta
Salsola Kali
Amaranthaceae - Amaranth
Acnida cannabina
Amaranthus graecizans
Phvtolaeaeeae - Pokeveed
Phytolacca americana
American Elm 13
Mulberry 7,8
White Mulberry 11,14,23
Hops 1A
Japanese Hops 23
Virginia snakeroot 29
Dock 14
Red Sorrel 13
Curled Dock 9,11,23
Knotweed 7,11,23,29
Lady's Thumb 14,21
Prince's Feather 24
Japanese Knotveed 11,13,21,23
Pennsylvania Smartweed 8,23
Water Smartweed 5,11,14
Goosefoot 13
Mexican Tea 8,23
Lamb's Quarters 5,7,8,14,23
Orache 8
Halberd-leaved Orache 13,21,23,29
Kochia 14
Bassia 23
Russian Thistle 23
Waterhemp 2,7,8,10,13,14,18
Tumble-weed 23
Pokeveed 2,7,8,14,23,29
-------
Carvophvllaceae - PinJc
Saponaria officinalis
Lychnis alba
Silene cucubolus
Alslnaceae sp.
Ceratoohvllaceae - Hornwort
Ceratophyllum demersum
Lauraceae - Laurel
Sassafras albidum
Cruciferae - Mustard
Barbarea vulgaris
Capsella bursa-pascoris
Lepidium sp.
L. campestra
L. virginicum
Platanaceae - Plane-tree
Platanus occidentalis
Rosaceae - Rose
Rubus sp.
Potentilla norvegica
Rosa multiflora
Spiraea tomentosa
Rubus hispidus
Potentilla canadensis
Duchesnea indica
Prunus serotina
P. cerasus
Leguminosae - Pulse
Albizzia julibrissin
Gledetsia triacanthos
Medicago lupulina
Melilotus sp.
M. alba
M. officinalis
Sobinla pseudoacacia
Trifolium repens
T. pratense
Bouncing Bet
White Campion
Bladder Campion
Chickweed
Hornwort
Sassafras
Winter Cress
Shepherd's purse
Pepper grass
Cow Cress
Peppergrass
Sycamore
Blackberry
Barren Strawberry
Multiflora Rose
Steeplebush
Swamp Blackberry
Five-finger Cinquefoil
Indian Strawberry
Black Cherry
Sour Cherry
Mimosa
Honey Locust
Hop Clover
Clover
White Sweet Clover
Yellow Sweet Clover
Locust Tree
White Clover
Red Clover
11.13,21,23
7,13,23
13
18
23
7,18
13,18,23
7,23
24
7
14,23
11,23
7,8,11,13,29
11
18
7,29
21,23,29
13,23
23
7,11,21,23,24
23
23
14
11
21
11,13,14,23
23
7,11,13,14,21
7,23
7,13,23
-------
11
Leeuminosae - Pulse (cont'd)
Coronilla varia
Locus corniculatus
Lespedeza sp.
L. capitata
Wisteria sp.
Crown Vetch 29
Birds' Foot Trefoil 13,29
Bush Clover 23
Roundheaded Bushclover 21
Wisteria 23
Oxalidaceae - Wood Sorrel
Oxalis stricta
Yellow Wood Sorrel
13,23
Simaroubaceae - Ailanthus
Ailanthus altissima
Polvealaceae - Milkwort
Polygala sp.
Tree-of-Heaven
Milkwort
2,5,7,8,10,11,13,14,
18,23,24
24
Euphorbiaceae - Spurge
Euphorbia maculata
£. marginata
Spotted Spurge 13
White Margined Spurge 23
Anaeardiaceae - Sumac
Rhus sp.
R. glabra
R. radicans
R. copallma
R. typhina
Sumac
Smooth Sumac
Poison Ivy
Winged Sumac
Staghorn Sumac
18
11,13,14,23,24,29
18,23
2,23
2,24,29
Celastraceae - Staff-Tree
Celastrus sp.
Bittersweet
Aceraceae - Maple
Acer rubrum
A. saccharinum
Red Maple
Silver Maple
7,18,29
13,23
Balsaminaceae - Jewel-weed
Impatiens sp.
- Buckthorn
Rhamnus frangula
Jewelweed
European Buckthorn
7,29
7
Vltaceae - .Grape
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Vitis sp.
Virginia Creeper
Grape
18
14
-------
Malvaceae - Mallow
Hibiscus palustris
Kosteletzkya sp.
Swamp Rose Mallow
Mallow
2.5,7,11,14,21,23,
Guttlferae - St. John's-wort
Hypericum sp. St. John's wort
H. boreale St. John's wort
Lvthraceae - Loosestrife
Lythrum Salicaria Purple Loosestrife
Onoeraceae - Evening Primrose
Oenothera biennis
Epilobium hirsutum
Evening Primrose
Willow Herb
Umbelliferae - Parsley
Pastinaca sativa
Aethusa cynapium
Daucus carota
Cornaeeae - Dogwood
Cornus sp.
C. racemosa
Clethraceaa - White Alder
Clethra alnifolia
Ericaceae - Heath
Lyonia ligustrina
Vaccinium corymbosum
Lysimachia sp.
L. quadrifolia
Oleaceae - Olive
Fraxinus sp.
F. nigra
F. pennsylvanica
Wild Parsnip
Fool's Parsley
Wild Carrot
Dogwood
Grey Dogwood
Sweet pepperbush
Maleberry
Highbush blueberry
Loosestrife
Whorled Loosestrife
Ash
Black Ash
Green Ash
Aoocvnaeeae - Dogbane
Apocymun sp.
A. cannabinum
Dogbane
Dogbane
24,29
13
11,21,23
8,11,13,14,23,24
11
11,23
13
7,8,11,18,23,29
18,29
18
7
7
7
29
13
2
7
23,29
7,8,13,14
11,21,23,23
-------
13
Ascleoladaceae - Milkweed
Asclepias sp. Milkweed 14,29
A. purpurascens Purple Milkweed 11
A. incarnata Swamp Milkweed 23
A. syriaca Common Milkweed 23
Convolvulaceae - Morning Glory
Convolvulus sp. Bindweed 7,29
C. sepium Great Bindweed 11,21
C. arvensis Small Bindweed 23
Ipomoea purpurea Morning-glory 23
Cuscuta sp. Dodder 23
C. Gronovii Love-vine 21
Boraginaceae - Borage
Echium vulgare Viper's Bugloss 11
Verbenaceae - Vervain
Verbena hastata Blue Vervain 2,13,29
V. urticifolia White Vervain 11,13,23
Labiatae - Mint
Nepeta cataria
Lycopus americanus
L. virginicus
Catmint 11,13
Cut-leaved Hoarhound 23,29
Bugleweed 13
Solanaceae - Potato
Solanum sp. Nightshade 8
S. dulcamara Bittersweet Nightshade 2,5,14,23
S. carolinense Horse Nettle 5,23
S. nigrum Black Nightshade 23
Datura Stramonium Jimson-weed 23
Physalis heterophylla Ground Cherry 23
Scrophulariaceae - Figwort
Verbascum thapsus
Paulownia tomentosa
Veronica sp.
Mimulus ringens
Linaria vulgaris
Great Mullein
Princess Tree
Speedwell
Monkey Flower
Butter & Eggs
2,8,11,13,14,18,23
2,7,8,13
7
29
13,21,23,29
-------
14
Plantaeinaceae - Plantain
Plantago sp.
P. lanceolata
P. major
P. Rugelii
Caprifoliaceae - Honeysuckle
Sambucus canadensis
Viburnum dentatum
Lonicera japonica
Compositae - Composite
Sonchus asper
S. arvensis
Hieracium sp.
Cichorium sp.
C. intybus
Lactuca canadensis
L. scariola
Lapsana communis
Taraxacum sp.
Xanthium pensylvanicum
Iva frutescens
Ambrosia trifida
A. artemisifolia
Compositae
Eupatorium sp.
E. urticaefolium
E. maculaturn
E. capillifolium
Solidago sp.
S. juncea
S. sempervirens
S. canadensis
S. rugosa
S. altissima
S. graminifolia
Aster sp.
Erigeron sp.
E. 'strigosus
E. canadensis
Baccharis halimifolia
Pluchea camphorata
Plantain 29
English Plantain 11,23
Common Plantain 11,14,23
Pale Plantain 23
Elderberry
Northern Arrowwood
Japanese Honeysuckle
2,7,8,11,13,14f23 f 29
23
Spiny Snow-thistle 2,11
Sow-thistle 23
Hawkweed 18
Chicory 29
Chicory 13,23
Wild Lettuce 13
Prickly Lettuce 23
Nipplewort 23
Dandelion 23
Common cockleburr 8,23
Marsh Elder 11,29
Great Ragweed 14,23
Ragweed 5,7,8,11,13,18,21,23
Composites 8
Snakeroot 24
White Snakeroot 23,29
Spotted Joe-Pye Weed 13
Dog-fennel 23
Goldenrod 7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14
18,24,29
Early Goldenrod 11,13
Sea-side Goldenrod 13,21,24
Canada Goldenrod 23
Pyramid Goldenrod 23
Tall Goldenrod 21
Flat—topped Goldenrod 23
Aster 8,9,11,23,29
Fleabane 29
Daisy Fleabane 11,29
Horseweed 8,13,23
Groundsel Bush 2,21,24,29
Salt Marsh Fleabane 5,8,10,13,14,23,29
-------
15
Comnosltae - Composite (cont'd)
Gnaphalium sp.
Everlasting
24
6. obtusifolium
Sweet Everlasting
13,23
Rudbeckia sp.
Cone Flower
13
R. hirta
Black-eyed Susan
23
Helianthus annuus
Sunflower
7,8,11,13,14,23,29
Bidens sp.
Sticktights
13
Achillea millefolium
Yarrow
11,13,14,23,29
Anthemis Cotula
Dogfennel
23
Chrysanthemum leucanthemum
Ox-eye Daisy
11,23
Tanacetum vulgare
Tansy
13,21
Artemisia sp.
Mugwort
29
A. vulgaris
Common Mugwort
5,11,21,23,24
A. annua
Annual Wormwood
5
Tussilago farfara
Coltsfoot
23
Arctium minus
Common Burdock
11,13,23
Cirsium sp.
Thistle
2,7,8,13,14,23,24
C. arvense
Canada Thistle
11,13,23,29
Carduus nutans
Musk Thistle
11
Centaurea sp.
Bachelor Button
24,29
C. cyanus
Bachelor Button
23
C. americana
American Star Thistle
23
C. maculosa
Spotted Knapweed
13
-------
INVERTEBRATES
Hvdrozoa
Gonionemus marbachi Hydromedusa 18,19
Tentaculata
Beroe cucumins Comb jellies 26,28
R
-------
Bivalvia - Bivalves (cont'd)
Donsinea discus 26
Corbicula fluminea 26
Gyraulus sp. 20
Armiger sp. 20
Mytilopsis leucophaeaca 20
Oligochaeta - Aquatic worms 10,13,29
Lumbriceulus variegatus 26
Limnodrilus sp. 26
Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri 12,26
Limnodrilus udekemienus 26
Limnodrilus cervix 26
Limnodrilus maumeensis 26
Aulodrilus americanus 12
Tubifex sp. 26
Polvchaeta - Bristle worms 16
Hypaniola grayi 17,18,19,20,29
Hypaniola sp. 13
Nereis arenaceodonta 26,28,29
Streblospio benedicti Sandy-mud worms 28,29
Polydora ligni Hud-clay worms 18
Polydora sp. Mud worms 12
Pectinaria gouldii Trumpet worm 26
Traviaia carnea 26
Sabellanaria vulgaris Sand-builder worm 26
Hlrundinea - Leeches
Helobdella stagnalis 26
Meroatomata - Horseshoe crabs
Limulus polyphemus 26
Arachnids - Arachnids 13
Hydracarina Water mites 13
Acari Mites 10
InSCCtt - Insects
Chironomidae Midges 12,17,18,19,20
Tendipedidae 13,14,15
Chironomus riparius Midge 20,26
Glyptotendipes sp. Midges 26
Pentaneura sp. Midges 26
-------
18
Inaecta - Insects (cont'd)
Chaoborus sp.
Procladius culiciformis
Culex pipiens
Tipulidae
Psychodidae
Mymaridae
Collembola sp.
Ephydra subopaca
Libellula sp.
Coleoptera
Dytiscidae
Hemiptera
Carabidae
Staphylinidae
Pselaphidae
Stratiomyidae
Psephenidae
Nuscidae
Mesoveliidae
Annura maritima
Crustacea - Crustaceans
Balanus amphitrite
Balanus balanoides
Balanus improvisus
Balanus sp.
Cyathura pollta
Crangon septemsplnosa
Rhithropanopeus harrisil
Panopeus herbstell
Paleomonetes sp.
Paleomonetes pugio
Palaemonetes vulgaris
Callinectes sapidus
Chirodotea almyra
Neopanopeus texana
Uca sp.
Uca mlnax
Uca pugnax
Gammarus sp.
Gammarus tigrinus
Midges 26
Midge 26
Mosquito 19
Crane flies 20
Moth flies 20
Fairy flies 20
Springtails 10,12
Shore fly 12
Dragonflies 12
Water beetles 10
Diving beetles 13
Water bugs 13
Ground beetles 10
Rove beetles 10
Water pennies 10
Aquatic soldier flies 10
Riffle beetles 10
Muscid flies 10
Water treaders 10
15
Striped barnacle 1
Northern rock barnacle 20,26,28
Bay barnacle 26,29,31,33
Barnacle 10,13,14,17,18,29
Slender isopod 16,20,26,29,31
Sand shrimp 9,26,28,29,31
White-fingered mud crab 2,3,1115,16,18
Black-fingered mud crab 1
Shore shrimp 17
1,14,16,18,26,28,31
33
1,18,19,29
Blue crab 1,14,16,18,19,28,31
33
26,29
17,18,19
Fiddler crabs 15
Brackish-water fiddler 1,18,28
Mud fiddler 1,14,15,19,28,31
Scuds 10,17,18,19,20,29
29
-------
Crustacea - Crustaceans (cont'd)
Ganunarus mucronatus
Gammarus annulatus
Corophium sp. Slender tube makers
Tozeuma carolinense Arrow shrimp
Chiridotae arenicola
Neomysis americana
Lironeca ovalis
Eurtamara hirundoides
Cyclops sp.
Harpaticoide
Unciola irrorata
Cantho camtos
Sesarma reticulatum
Oatracod
Chthamalus frag11is
Hexapanopeus angustifrons
Arcaria tonsa
Xanthidae
Crab zoea
Tunlcata - Tunicates
29
26
29
1
26
26
29
19
19,22
20
20
17
10
10
14
14
18,19
19
19
28
-------
USE
Aneuillidae - Freshwater Eels
Anguilla rostrata
Clupeldae - Herrings
Alosa aestivalis
A. pseudoharengus
A. sapidissima
Brevortia tyrannus
Clupea harengus
Dorosoma cepedianium
Enaraulidae - Anchovies
Anchoa mitchilli
Osmeridae - Smelts
Osmerus morda::
Cvcrinidae - Minnows
Cyprinus carpio
Carassius auratus
Notemigonus crysoleucas
Notropis analostanus
Ictaluridae - Catfish
Ictalurus cattus
I. natalis
I. nebulosus
American eel 1,3,6,9,13,15,16,18
AmCri 19,23,25,27,28,29
31,32,33
Bluebaclc herring 1,3,6,9,18,19,25,27
28,29
Alewife 1.3,9,18,19,25,27,28
29
American shad 1,3,9,18,19,25,27,28
23,33
Atlantic menhaden 18,19,25,27,28,29,30
Atlantic herring 27,28,29
Gizzard shad 25,27,28,29
Bay anchovy 1,9,18,19,25,27,28 ,29
Rainbow smelt 18,25,27
Carp
Goldfish 3,6,9,15,18,19,23,25
29,31
Golden Shiner 25,29
Satinfin Shiner 3,18,19
White catfish 9,25
Yellow bullhead 3,18,19
Brown bullhead 1,3,10,18,19,25 27 •>.
29,32 '~8
-------
21
Gadiftae - Cods
Microgadus tomcod
Merluccius bilinearis
Urophycis chuss
Cvprinodontidae - Killiflshea
Fundulua sp.
F. heteroclitis
F. diaphanua
F. majalis
ATrtf"'jrlnldae - Silversides
Menidia beryllina
M. menidia
Atlantic tomcod
Silver hake
Red Hake
Killifish
Mummichog
Banded killifish
Striped killifish
Inland silverside
Atlantic silverside
18,19,25,27,28,29,30
18,19,25,27,28,29,30
18,19,25,27
31
throughout
1,18,19,27,29
1,13,14,27,28
13,14,24,25,27
1,13,18,19,25,27,28
29
Ggsterosteidae - Sticklebacks
Gasterosteus aculeatus
Threespine stickle back
!;ynPTiathldae - Pipefishes
Syngnathus fuscus
prrplchthvldae - Temperate Basses
Morone americana
Morone saxatilis
g-rranidae - Sea Basses
Ceatrbpristis striata
<;.fptrarchidae - Sunfish
Lepomis macrochirus
L. gibbosus
Pomoxis nirgomaculatus
p*»rcldae - Perch
Perca flavescens
Northern pipefish
White perch
Striped bass
Black sea bass
Bluegill
Pumpkinseed
Black crappie
Yellow perch
1,3,6,9,15,18,19,25
27,28
1,27,28,29
1,3,6,9,13,15,16,18
19,25,27,28,29
1,9,13,16,18,19,25,27
28,29
19,25,27,28
1,3,6,9,10,15,19,25
27,28,29
1,3,10,18,19,25,27,28
29,32
3,18,19,25
3,18,19,25,27,28,29
-------
22
Pomatomidae - Bluefishes
Pomatomus saltatrix
Carangidae - Jacks
Caranx hippos
Sparidae - Porgies
S t eno t omus chrys ops
Sciaenidae - Drums
Leiostomus xanthurus
Cynoscion regalis
Labridae - Wrasses
Tautoga onitis
Tautogolabrus adspersus
Mugilidae - Mullets
Mugil cephalus
Ammodvtidae - Sand Lance
Ammodytes hexapterus
Scombridae - Mackerels
Scomber scombrus
Stromateldae - Butterfishes
Peprilus triacanthus
Triglidae - Searobins
Prionotus carolinus
P. evolans
Cottidae - Sculpins
Myoxocephalus aenaeus
M. octodecimspinosus
Bothidae - Lefteye Flounders
Paralichthys dentatus
Etropus microstomus
Bluefish
Crevalle jack
Scup
Spot
Weakfish
Tautog
Cunner
Striped mullet
American sand lance
Atlantic mackerel
Butterfish
Northern searobin
Striped searobin
Grubby
Longhorn sculpin
Summer flounder
Smallmouth flounder
1,9,18,19,25,27,28,29
30
18,19,25,28,29
25,27
18,19,25,27,28,29
18,19,25,27,28,29
18,19,25
25,27
29
30
25,27
18,19,25
27
18,19,25,28
25,27,30
29
25,27
25
-------
23
Pleuronectidae - Righteye Flounders
Pseudopleuronectes
amaricanus Winter flounder 18,19,25,27,28,29
Soleidae - Soles
Trinectes maculatus Hogchoker 1,18,19,25,27,28
Tetraodontldae - Puffers
Sphaeroides maculatus Northern puffer 29
-------
24
REPTILES
Chelvdridae - Snapping Turtles
Chelydra serpentina Snapping Turtle 4»7,9,13,14,15
Klnosternidae - Musk and Mud Turtles
Sternotherus odoratus Stinkpot 23
Kinosternon s. subrubrum Mud Turtle 4,13,29
Emvdidae - Box and Water Turtles
Clemmys guttata
Malaclemys t. terrapin
Chrysemys p. picta
Scincidae - Skinks
Eumeces fasciatus
Colubrldae - Colubrids
Natrix s. sipedon
Storeria d. dekayi
Thamnophis s. sirtalis
T. s. sauritus
Heterodon platyrhinos
Coluber c. constrictor
Opheodrys vernalis
Lampropeltis t. triangulum
Spotted Turtle 4,13,29
No. Diamondback Terrapin 4,9,13,14,15,19,29
E. Painted Turtle 4,7,13,29
Five-lined skink 23
Northern Water Snake 4,9,13,14,29
N. Brown Snake 13,14,29
E. Garter Snake 4,7,13,14,21,24,29
E. Ribbon Snake 13,29
Eastern Hognose Snake 23
N. Black Racer 13
Smooth Green Snake 23
E. Milk Snake 13,21,29
-------
25
Bufonldae - Toads
Bufo americanus E. American Toad 13,14
B. woodhousei fowleri Fowler's Toad 13,14,29
Hvlldae - Treefrogs
Acris c. crepitans N. Cricket Frog 23
Hyla c. crucifer Northern Spring Peeper 23
H. chrysoscelis/versicolor Gray Treefrog 23
Pseudacris triseriata kalmi NJ Chorus Frog 23
Ranldae - True Frogs
Sana catesbeiana Bull Frog 23
R. clamitans melenota Green Frog 4,13,29
R. utricularia S. Leopard Frog 4,7,9,13,14,24,29
R. palustris Pickerel Frog 23
-------
BIRDS
Gavlidae - Loons
G&via inuner
G. stell&ta
Common Loon
Red-throated Loon
Podlcipedidae - Grebes
Podiceps aurltus
Podilymbus podiceps*b
Horned Grebe
Pied-billed Grebe
Phalacrocoracldae - Cormorants
Phalacrocorax auritus
Double-crested Cormorant
Anatidae - Waterfowl
Cygnus olor*
Olor columblanus
Branta canadensis*
B. bernicla
Chen hyperborea
Dendrocygna bicolor
Anas platyrynchos*
A. rubripes*
A. strepera*
A. ascuta
A. carolinensis*
A. discors*
Mareca americana
Spatula clypeata
Aix sponsa*
Aythya americana
A. collaris
A. valisineria
A. marila
A. affinls
Bucephala clangula
B. albeo'la
Clangula hyemalls
Melanitta deglandi
M. perspicillata
Mute Swan
Whittling Swan
Canada Goose
Brant
Snow Goose
Fulvous Tree Duck
Mallard
American Black Duck
Gadvall
Northern Pintail
Green-winged Teal
Blue-winged Teal
American Wigeon
Northern Shoveler
Wood Duck
Redhead
Ring-necked Duck
Canvasback
Greater Scaup
Lesser Scaup
Common Goldeneye
Bufflehead
Oldsquaw
White-winged Scoter
Surf Scoter
-------
Anatldae - Waterfowl (cont'd)
Oxyura jamaicensis*
Lophodytes cucullatus
Mergus merganser
M. serrator
Cathartes aura
Ruddy Duck
Hooded Merganser
Common Merganser
Red-breasted Merganser
Turkey Vulture
Acclpltridae - Kites, Hawks,
Accipiter gentilis
A. striatus
A. cooperiie
Buteo jamaicensis
B. lineatust
B. platypterus
B. lagopus
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Circus cyaneus*b
Eagles
Northern Goshawk
Sharp-shinned Hawk
Cooper's Hawk
Red-tailed Hawk
Red-shouldered. Hawk
Broad-winged Hawk
Rough-legged Hawk
Bald Eagle
Northern Harrier
Pandionidae - Ospreys
Pandion haliaetust
Falco peregrinus^e
F. columbariusc
F. sparverius*
Osprey
Peregrine Falcon
Merlin
American Kestrel
Phasianidae - Pheasants
Phasianus colchicus*
Ardeidae - Herons, Bitterns
Ardea herodiast
Butorides virescens*
Florida caerulea
Bubulcos iris
Casmerodius albus
Leucophoyx thula
Hydranassa tricolor
Nycticorax nycticorax*
N. violacea*t
Ixobrychus exilis*
Botaurus lentiginosus*
Ring-necked Pheasant
Great Blue Heron
Green-backed Heron
Little Blue Heron
Cattle Egret
Great Egret
Snowy Egret
Louisiana Heron
Black-crowned Night-Heron
Yellow-crowned Night-Heron
Least Bittern
American Bittern
-------
28
Threskiomithidae - Ibises
Plegadis falcinellus
Glossy Ibis
Rallidae - Rails, Coots
Rallus Elegans
King Rail
R. longirostris*
Clapper Rail
R. limicola
Virginia Rail
Porzana Carolina
Sora
Coturnicops noveboracensis
Yellow Rail
Gallinula chloropus*
Common Moorhen
Fulica americana*
American Coot
Charadriidae - Plovers. Surfbirds
Charadrius semipalmatus
Semipalmated Plover
C. vociferus*
Killdeer
Pluvius dominica
Lesser Golden-Plover
Squatarola squatarola
Black-bellied Plover
ScoloDacidae - Sandpipers
Arenaria interpres
Ruddy Turnstone
Philohela minor*
American Woodcock
Capella gallinago
Common snipe
Numenius phaeopus
Whimbrel
Bartramia longicaudae
Upland Sandpiper
Actitus macularia*
Spotted Sandpiper
Tringa solitaria
Solitary Sandpiper
Cacoptrophorus semipalmatus
Willet
Totanus melanoleucus
Greater Yellovlegs
T. flavipes
Lesser Yellovlegs
Calidris canutus
Red Knot
Erolia melanotos
Pectoral Sandpiper
E. fuscicollis
White-rumped Sandpiper
E. bairdii
Baird's Sandpiper
E. minutilla
Least Sandpiper
E. ferruginea
Curlew Sandpiper
E. alpina
Dunlin
Limnodromus griseus
Short-billed Dovitcher
L. scolopaceus
Long-billed Dowitcher
Micropalama himantopus
Stilt Sandpiper
Ereunetes pusillus
Semipalmated Sandpiper
E. mauri
Western Sandpiper
Tryngites subruficollis
Buff-breasted Sandpiper
Limosa fedoa
Marbled Godvit
-------
Scolooacldae - Sandpipers (cont'd)
L. haemastica
Phllomachus pugnax
Crocethia alba
Recurvirostra americana
Himantopus mexicanus
Hudsonian Godwit
Ruff
Sanderling
American Avocet
Black-necked Stilt
Phalaropodidae - Phalaropes
Phalaropus fulicarius
Steganopus tricolor
Lobipes lobatus
Red Phalarope
Wilson's Phalarope
Northern Phalarope
Laridae - Gulls, Terns
Larus hyperboreus
L. glaucoides
L. marinus
L. fuscus
L. argentatus
L. delawarensis
L. ridibundus
L. atricilla
L. Philadelphia
Gelochelidon nilotica
Sterna forsteri
S. hirundo
S. dougallii*
S. albifronse
Thalasseus maximus
Hydroprogne caspia
Chlidonias niger
Rynchops nigrae
Cnlumbidae - Pigeons, Doves
Columba livia*
Zenaidura macroura*
Cueulidae - Cuckoos
Coccyzus aaericanus
C. erythropthalmus
Glaucous Gull
Iceland Gull
Great Black-backed Gull
Lesser Black-backed Gull
Herring Gull
Ring-billed Gull
Common Black-headed Gull
Laughing Gull
Bonaparte's Gull
Gull-billed Tern
Forster's Tern
Common Tern
Roseate Tern
Least Tern
Royal Tern
Caspian Tern
Black Tern
Black Skimmer
Rock Dove
Mourning Dove
Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Black-billed Cuckoo
Tvtonidae - Barn Owls
Tyto alba*
Barn Owl
-------
Strialdae - Owls
Otus asid*
Bubo virginianus
Nyctea scandiaca
Aslo olus
A. flammeusb
Caprimulgidae - Goatsuckers
Chordeiles minor*
Apoaidae - Swifts
Chaetura pelagica
Trochllidae - Humming Birds
Archilochus colubris
Alcedinidae - Kingfishers
Megaceryle alcyon*
Picidae - Woodpeckers
Colaptes cafer*
Melanerpes erythrocephalusc
Sphyrapicus varius
Dendrocopos villosus*
D. pubescens*
Tyrannise - Flycatchers
Tyrannus tyrannus
T. verticalis
Myiarchus crinitus
Sayornis phoebe*
Empidonax flaviventris
E. traillii*
E. minimus
Contopus virens
Alaydiflae - Larks
Eremophila alpestris*
Hirvndlnldflg - Swallows
Iridoprocne bicolor
Riparia riparia
Stelgidopteryx ruficollis*
Hirundo rustics*
Petrochelidon pyrrhonotab
Progne subis
Eastern Screech-Owl
Great Horned Owl
Snowy Owl
Long-eared Owl
Short-eared Owl
Common Nighthawk
Chimney Swift
Ruby-throated Hummingbird
Belted Kingfisher
Northern Flicker
Red-headed Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Sapsucker
Hairy Woodpecker
Downy Woodpecker
Eastern Kingbird
Western Kingbird
Greated Crested Flycatcher
Eastern Phoebe
Yellow-bellied Flycatcher
Traill's Flycatcher
Least Flycatcher
Eastern Wood-Pewee
Horned Lark
Tree Swallow
Bank Swallow
Northern Rough-winged Swallow
Barn Swallow
Cliff Swallow
Purple Martin
-------
Corvidae - Jays, Crows
Cyanocitta cristata
Corvus ossifragus*
C. brachyrynchos*
Parldac - Chickadees
Parus atricapillus
P. bicolor
Stttidae - Nuthatches
Sitta carolinensis*
S. canadensis
Certhiidae - Creepers
Cer.tha familiaris
Troglodvtidae - Wrens
Troglodytes aedon*
I. troglodytes
Thryothorus ludovicianus
Telmatodytes palustris*
Cistothorus platensis*
Blue Jay
Fish Crow
Common Crov
Black-capped Chickadee
Tufted Titmouse
White-breasted Nuthatch
Red-breasted Nuthatch
Brown Creeper
House Wren
Winter Wren
Carolina Wren
Marsh Wren
Sedge Wren
Mimidae - Mockingbirds, Thr,
Mimus polyglottos*
Dumetella carolinensis*
Toxostoma rufum*
Northern Mockingbird
Gray Catbird
Brown Thrasher
Turdldae - Thrushers
Turdus migratorius*
Hylocichla mustelina
K. guttata
H. ustulata
H. minima
H. fuseescens
Svlvlldae - Gnatcatchers,
Polioptila caerulea
Regulus satrapa
R. calendula
American Robin
Wood Thrush
Hermit Thrush
Swainson's Thrush
Gray-cheeked Thrush
Veery
Kinglets
Blue-gray Gnatcatcher
Golden-crowned Kinglet
Ruby-crowned Kinglet
fflitacillidae - Pipits
Anthus spinoletta
Water Pipit
-------
Bombvcillldae - Waxvings
Bombycilla cedrodum
Cedar Waxving
Laniidae - Shrikes
Lanius ludovicianus
Loggerhead Shrike
Sturnidae - Starlings
Sturnus vulgaris*
Virg?nidftg - Vireos
Vireo griseus
V. flavifrons
V. solitarius*
V. olivaceus*
V. gilvua
Parulldae - Wood Warblers
Mniotilta varia
Vermivora pinus
V. peregrina
V. celaca
V. ruficapllla
Parula americana
Dendroica petechia*
D. magnolia
D. tigrina
0. caerulescens
D. coronata
D. virens
D. fusca
0. pensylvanica
D. castanea
D. striata
D. discolor
D. palmarum
Seiurus aurocapillus
S. noveboracensis
S. motacilla
Oporornis agills
Geothlypis trichas*
Wilsonia pusilla
W. canadensis
Setophaga ruticilla
Starling
White-eyed Vireo
7ellov-throated Vireo
Solitary Vireo
Red-eyed Vireo
Warbling Vireo
Black-and-White Warbler
Blue-winged Warbler
Tennessee Warbler
Orange-crovned Warbler
Nashville Warbler
Northern Parula
Yellow Warbler
Magnolia Warbler
Cape Hay Warbler
Black-throated Blue Warbler
Myrtle Warbler
Black-throated Green Warbler
Blackburnian Warbler
Chesnut-sided Warbler
Bay-breasted Warbler
Blackpoll Warbler
Pririe Warbler
Palm Warbler
Ovenbird
Northern Waterthrush
Louisiana Waterthrush
Connecticut Warbler
Common Yellowthroat
Wilaon's Warbler
Canada Warbler
American Redstart
-------
33
Ploceldae - Weaver Finches
Passer domesticus*
Icteridae - Blackbirds, Orioles
Dolichonyx oryzivorust
Sturnella magna
Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus
Agelaius phoeniceus*
Icterus galbula*
Euphagus carolinus
Quiscalus quiscalus*
Molothrus ater
Thrauoldae - Tanagers
Piranga olivacea
TVinglllidae - Grosbeaks, Finches
Richmondena cardinalis*
Pheucticus ludovicianus
Guiraca caerulea*
Passerina cyanea*
Spiza americana
Carpodacus purpureus
C. mexicanus*
Acanthis flammea
Spinus pinus
S. tristis
Pipilo erythrophthalmus
Passerculus sandwichensis*t
Ammospiza caudacuta*
A. maritima*
Podecetes gramineusb
Junco hyemalis
Spizella arborea
S. passerina
S. pusilla
Zonotrichia leucophrys
Z. albicollis
Passerella iliaca
Melospiza lincolnii
M. georgiana*
M. melodia*
Calcarius lapponicus
Plectrophenax nivalis
House Sparrow
Bobolink
Eastern Meadovlark
Yellow-headed Blackbird
Red-winged Blackbird
Baltimore Oriole
Rusty Blackbird
Common Grackle
Brown-headed Cowbird
Scarlet Tanager
, Sparrows, Buntings
Northern Cardinal
Rose-breasted Grosbeak
Blue Grosbeak
Indigo Bunting
Dickcisael
Purple Finch
House Finch
Common Redpoll
Pine Siskin
American Goldfinch
Rufous-sided Towhee
Savannah Sparrow
Sharp-tailed Sparrow
Seaside Sparrow
Vesper Sparrow
Slate-colored Junco
American Tree Sparrow
Chipping Sparrow
Field Sparrow
White-crowned Sparrow
White-throated Sparrow
Fox Sparrow
Lincoln's Sparrow
Swamp Sparrow
Song Sparrow
Lapland Longspur
Snow Bunting
-------
34
KEY: * = Nests in Meadowlands
e = Endangered status NJ
t s Threatened status NJ
// = Federal endangered status
b = Breeding population endangered
From Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in New Jersey. List revised
May 6, 1985. NJDEP - Div. of Fish, Game and Wildlife.
-------
35
MAMMALS
Didelohiidae - Opossums
Didelphis marsupialis Opposum 4,7,9,10,13,14,15,21,
23,29
Soricldae - Shrews
Sorex cinereus Masked Shrew 13,14
Blarina brevicauda Short-tail Shrew 4,13,14,23,29
T&loldae - Moles
Scalopus aquaticus Eastern Mole 13,14,29
y»snertlllonldae - Plainnose Bats
Myotis lucifugus Little Brown Bat 1,9,13,14,29
M. keeni Keen's Myotis 9
M. subulatus Small-footed Myotis 9
Eptesicus fuscus Big Brown Bat 9,13,14
Proevonldae - Raccoons
Procyon lotor Raccoon 4,7,9,10,13,14,15,21,
23,29
Mu9telidae - Weasels, Skunks, Etc.
Mustela frenata Long-tailed Weasel 7,9,13,14,15,29
Mephitis mephitis Striped Skunk 7,9,13,14,15,23,29
Canidae - Dogs, Wolves, Foxes
Vulpes fulva Red Fox 7,9,15
Urocyon cinereoargenteus Gray Fox 7
Canis familiaris Dog 4,10,13,14,23,24,29
Felidae - Cats
Felis domestica Cat 4,10,13,14,23,29
Scluridae - Squirrels
lamias striatus E. Chipmunk 29
Sciurus carolinensis E. Gray Squirrel 29
-------
36
Cricetidae - Mice, Rats, Voles
Peromyscus leucopus White-footed Mouse
Microtus pennsylvanicus Meadow Vole
Ondatra zibethica
Muridae - Old World Rats & Mice
Rattus norvegicus
Mus musculus
Muskrat
Norway Rat
House Mouse
4,10,13,14,23,29
1,4,8,9,13,14,15,22
23,29
throughout except 24
1,4,7,9,10,13,14,15
18,19,22,23,29
4,7,10,13,14,15,23,29
31
Zapodldae - Jumping Mice
Zapus hudsonius Meadow Jumping Mouse 13,14,18,19,23,29
Leporidae - Hares, Rabbits
Sylvilagus floridanus Eastern Cottontail 4,7,8,10,13,14,15,22
23,24,29 '
-------
37
REFERENCES
1. Wetland Bio-zones of the Hackensack Meadovlands: An Inventory. Hackensack
Meadowlands Development Commission, Lyndhurst, NJ. 198A.
2. Bergen County Resource Recovery Facility. Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. for The
Bergen County Utilities Authority, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Permit Application. 1985-86.
3. Bergen Generating Station (1974) cited in Environmental Impact Statement
for Proposed Office/Industrial Park, West Side Avenue at 83rd Street,
Ridgefield, NJ. Land Design Associates for Hartz Mountain Industries,
Inc. 1981.
4. E.I.S. for Proposed Office/Industrial Park, West Side Avenue at 83rd St.,
Ridgefield, NJ. Land Design Associates for Hartz Mountain Industries,
Inc. 1981.
5. Clause - Oakpoint Tract in Project Description and Documentation of
Compliance with Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines. Paulus, Sokolowski and
Sartor, Inc. for C&F Realty Mitigation/Development Plan, Carlstadt,
NJ. 1986.
6. River Mile 10.5 (1981) cited in E.I.S. for proposed Office/Industrial Park,
West Side Avenue at 83rd St., Ridgefield, NJ. Land Design Associates
for Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. 1981.
7. 1972 E.I.S. Giants Stadium, the Meadovlands, East Rutherford, NJ. Jack
McCormick & Associates, Inc. for the NJ Sports and Exposition
Authority. 1972.
8. Full E.I.S. for the Proposed Meadovlands Arena at the Nev Jersey Sports
Complex. Jack McCormick & Associates, Inc. for The Nev Jersey Sports
and Exposition Authority. 1978.
9. Hackensack Meadovlands Brackish Wetland Mitigation Plan. Tippetts-Abbett-
McCarthy-Stratton for Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. 1985.
10. IR-2 General Plan E.I.A. Report: The Villages at Mill Creek. Hartz
Mountain Industries, Inc. 1985.
-------
38
11. E.I.S. on a Multipurpose Development. Jack McCormick and Associates, Inc
for Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. 1978
12. Environmental Assessment in Support of Tidelands Application for Property
in Secaucus, North Bergen, NJ. Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. 1978
13. General Plan Application E.I.A.: Berry's Creek Center. Berry's Creek
Development Company. 1986.
14. E.I.A. on the Construction and Operation of an Island Residential
Development on Specially Planned Area 1, Town of Secaucus, Huds
County, N.J. Jack McCormick & Associates, Inc. for Hartz Mount.?*1
Industries, Inc. 1974.
15. Anderson Marsh Wetlands Management Plans for Sawmill Creek Wildlife
Management Study. Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-Stratton for Hart-
Mountain Industries, Inc. 1985 2
16. Wildlife and Fisheries Management Plans for Sawmill Creek Wildlife
Management Area. S.J. Toth, Jr. and P.J. Festa. 1976.
17. Analysis of the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Population of the Sawmill Creet
Tidal Mud Flat. M.W. Dentzau. 1981. ¦
e.«m4ii Creek Basin: An Innovative Approach to Sewage and Leachate
18. The SJ£^nent> Hackensack ffeadowlands Development Commission. 1982.
19. Sawmill Creek Basin: Water Quality Management. E.I.A. BSC Engineering.
1983.
_ ,Mrt1er crab (Uca minax) colony on a manmade
20 The establishment o marsh and its effect on invertebrate
gp»rtina £raus and M.L. Kraus. Proceeding of the Symposium
colonization. D.B. . Loss", Association of State Wetlands
2E£!°Se«&r e"l0?»86, Orleans. 19".
21. A study of Biozonaa on a Fill Tract In tha U Maadovlanda. J.M.
Hansen. 1986.
* t and Use study..Hackensack Meadowlands Development
22. The Kearny Meadows: A Land Conmission and Mayor and Council
Commission for tne
of Kearny, NJ. 1976•
-------
39
23. E.I.A. General Plan Application SU-3 - Kearny Meadows. Greiner Engineering
Sciences, Inc. for Harcz Mountain Industries, Inc. 1982.
24. Hudson County Resource Recovery Project. William F. Cosulich Associates,
P.C. for The County of Hudson. 1985.
25. Hudson Generating Station: NPDES Permit No. RJ0000647. Ichthyological
Associates, Inc. for Public Service Electric and Gas Company. 1979.
26. Environmental studies on the Hackensack River for PSE&G Co. cited in New
Jersey Turnpike 1985-90 Widening. Rev Jersey Turnpike Authority.
1986.
27. Ichthyological Associates and PSE&G Co. cited in Rev Jersey Turnpike
1985-90 Widening. Rev Jersey Turnpike Authority. 1986.
28. Rev Jersey Marine Sciences Consortium cited in Rev Jersey Turnpike 1985-90
Widening. Rev Jersey Turnpike Authority. 1986.
29. Levis Berger & Associates, Inc. cited in Rev Jersey Turnpike 1985-90
Widening. Rev Jersey Turnpike Authority. 1986.
30. Kearny Generating Station (1974) cited in E.I.S. for proposed Office/
Industrial Park, West Side Avenue, at 83rd Street, Ridgefield, NJ.
Land Design Associates for Hartz Mountain Industries, Inc. 1981.
31. Collections of Aquatic Organisms from the Hackensack Meadovlands. Bergen
and Hudson Counties, RJ. WAP0RA. 1977.
32. RJDEP, Marine Fisheries Bureau Trap Ret Results, 1986.
33. NJDEP, Marine Fisheries Bureau Reconnaissance Sampling. 1986.
-------
APPENDIX C:
EXCERPTS FROM THE
WETLAND EVALUATION TECHNIQUE (WET) FOR FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT
VOLUME II
MARCH 1, 1987
-------
ttURKINb DRAH
nam Di evaluation submrv sheet
Name of Uttlandl ______________________________________
Enter ratings In appropriate column*. Information tor coaklmd rating
procedure can be found on Pag* (Section 4.3).
Significance Effectiveness Opportunity Combined
Ground Water Recharge
Sround Hater Discharge
Floodflow Alteration
Sediment Stabilization
Sediment/Toxicant Retention
Nutrient Removal/Transport
Production Export -
Aquatic Olversity/Abwidance
riAery Habltati
General
Warmwater
Coldwater
Coldwater Riverine
Northern Lake
Sppi
Spp«
Uildlife 0/A (Breeding)
Wildlife 0/A (mgratlon)
Wildlife D/A (Wintering)
Waterfowl Broup (Breed.)
Waterfowl Sroup (Mgr.)
Waterfowl Sroup _ (Wtnt.)
Sppi
Spp>
Uniqueness/Heri tage
These ratings are for (circle one, unless synonymous)i MB IA
Highest level of analysis (circle one)i 1 111 IV V
Evidence/interpretations that sight suggest ratings contrary to the abovei
HHillltll
^UXlXUlCZi
mUUUIIXL
ttlltHMt
mumm
mZZIZIXXXXXSU
¦ ¦UTTTTintX.
» »» »e t T f TTT
i -TTITTTgTTgS-
¦ ¦HTlUXUIfc
* TTrT
¦slXXUXXSXSfa
*"T"^
***
nmmm
...........
NOTEt If the IA is not synonymous with the W), or if project impacts are to
be analyzed separately, attach additional copies of Forms A, B, C, and 0 for
these separately evaluated areas.
34
3.0 ASSESSMENT PHASE
Record your answers to the questions for Level 1 - Level 4 of the "assessment
on Form Bi Assessment Answer Sheet (page ). Be sure to review the answer
sheet instructions.
3.1 Level 1 - Significance Assessment
3.1.1 'Red Flags'
1. Are State or Federally designated threatened or endangered plant or animal
species known to use or occur regularly in the AA?
2. Is the AA part of a park, refuse, scenic route, water bank or conservation
easement, historic site, marine or estuarine sanctuary, wilderness or
primitive area, landmark area, public recreation area. Heritage Program
site (e.g.. Nature Conservancy) or similarly designated area under
public control, ft supervised by an organized conservation group for the
primary purpose of preservation,.ecological enhancement, or low Intensity
recreation?
3. Is the AA included in a statewide listing of historical or archaeological
sites?
4. Is the AA knot** to have ecological or geological features considered by
regional scientists to be \awsual or rare for wetlands In the region?
(Do not answer *Y* if the type is merely sensitive or threatened, only if
the AA is indeed rare among regional wetland types.) Examples include
the followingi
(a) peat bogs in southern New England.
(b) fens in the Hldwest.
(c) cypress swamps in northern states.
(d) spring communities in various regions.
5. Does the AA represent most or all of the only wetland in this locality of
this wetland system type?
£. Have substantial private or public expenditures been directed specifically
to this area for the creation, restoration, protection, or ecological
management of the AA? Examples include previous costs to resource
agencies for conservation purchase, seeding, fencing, fishvay
installation, improvement, improved access, impoundment, etc.
3.1.2 On Site Wetland Significance
7. Are biological communities in the AA stressed by hot springs or abnormally
high salinities (nontidal systems only) jl Is there a directly adjoining
wet depression (WD) where this is a problem? (ground water discharge)
¦ * The oarenthitical phrase following each indicates the wetland
f' o( value(s) being addressed by the question.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
8. (Answer *1" II AA li tidal.) Are there (taturti of great Mclil concern
or econoalc value (e.g., huaw habitations, hazardous wast* landfills,
factories, archaeological sites, etc.) within or adjacent to the WO
that would be inundated by a 100-year flood? (floodtlow alteration)
3.1.3 Off-Mt* Wetland Significance
Questions 9-18 deal with features of great social concern or economic value
that could potentially benefit froa the services provided by a wetland
regardless of whether the wetland actually delivers such services.
For questions 9-14, consider the "area specified* to be the area that was
delineated for the consideration of downslope service areas. Rsaeabsr that
service areas to be included were defined using the following criteria. If
the watershed of the M covered less than 20 square ailes, service areas
within 10 allss downslope of the M, or until a da* is reached were
considered. If the watershed of the AA covered wre than 20 square attes,
service areas within 20 alias downs lope of the AA outlet, or unti. • Artificial recharge pita.
(c) Known fish spawning areas highly sensitive to siltatlon.
(d) Coawerclal shellfish beds
Areas known to be ':i violation of Section 401 water quality
standards due to suspended solid levels.
(sedlaent/toxlcant retention)
11. Are there bodies of water, within the area specified, that have been
targeted by government agencies as "priority areas" for construction of
wastewater treatment facilities or other water quality iaproveaent
projects? (nutrient reaoval/transforaatlon, sediaent/toiicant retention)
12. Is there surface water within the wet depression or the area specified
whose aajor use is drinking water? (nutrient reaoval/transforaatlon,
sediaent/toiicant retention)
13. Are any of the following features present in the area specified?
(a) Uater bodies known to be especially nutrient-sensitive or subject
to regular blooas of algae, aquatic fungi, or oxygen-related fish
kills.
(b) Areas known to be in /iolation of Section 401 water quality
standards due to nutrient levels.
(nutrient reaoval/transforaatlon)
WORKING DRAFT
14. Are there frequently used swlaalng/bathlng areas located in the area
specified? (nutrient reaoval/transformation)
If you answered "Y" to any of Questions 9-14, you Mist now refine your
answers using the following procedurei
(a) Beginning with the first question that was answered *Y*, determine
if the land cover of the functional watershed associated with the
service area closest to the AA has at least 10X lapervlous surfaces
(urban) OL If other wetlands and lakes co^rlses less than Tt of the
functional watershed. If either of these conditions is true, do not
change the original answer to the question and go to (c) below.
(b) However, if lapervlous surfaces comprise at least 10*, or other
wetlands and lakes comprise aore than 7Z of the service areas
functional watershed, deteralne, whether or not iapervious surfaces
comprise *ore than 10X or wetlands and lakes coaprise aore than 71 ol
the functional watersheds for each successive downstream service area
reaaining in the area specled above (10 or 20+ ailes). If any of
these functional watersheds are coaprlsed of 10Z lapervlous surface or
aore than 7* other wetlands and lakes, change your answer for the
question under consideration to *N." If not, retain the original "Y"
response.
(c) Repeat steps (a) and (b) for all of Questions 9-14 which were
originally answered "Y".
For Questions 13-18, consider the "area specified" to Include the area within
two ailes of the perlaeter of the wet depression, jQjt within the subwaterihed.
13. A threatened or endangered species regularly inhabits the area
specified, (ground water discharge)
16. Are any of the following conditions found in the area specified?
(a) There are sites designated by EPA as Sole Source Aquifers or Class
II (Special) Ground Uaters.
(b) There are wells that serve at least 2,300 people (the people using
the well aay be living outsid* the area specified).
(c) There are actively used wells which n«e yields greater than shown
for this regi jr. ,n Figure 4, gr_ there are wells that are a
part of a major alluvial valley (watershed area at least 100 square
ailes) and have yields exceeding 2300 gal/min?
(ground water recharge, ground water discharge)
17. Do well yields, in the area specifuu, surpass the criteria described in
Question 16(c), fir does the UO empty into an area (within two-miles'
whose fishery or wildlife use has been critically Halted by excessively
low flows or low wat?" levels during dry years? (ground water recharge,
ground water discharge)
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Figure 4. Groundwater regions of the United Stat** with •xctptlotul wall
yields (gal/min) (Interpreted from Heath 19 )
IB. Are there features of great social concern or economic value iltuittd in
erosion prone or wave vulnerable areas directly behind or adjacent to the
AA? (sediaent stabilization)
19. Does this AA's fishery resource contain any species on FUB National
Species of Special EapHnis List shown In Table I, fit does it have any
other State or Federal special designations related to its increased
fishery value? (aquatic diversity/abundance)
20. Does this AA's wildlife resource contain any species on FUB National
Species of Special Eaphasis List shown in Table 1 fl£ does It have any
other special designations due to its recognized wildlife value?
(wildlife diversity/abundance)
21. (Answer only if at least I acre of open water is present.) Is this a
waterfowl us* region of major concern as defined by FM8 and shown in
Figure S at. has it received a priority rating in state waterfowl concept
plans (FUB 1979)? (wildlife diversity/abundance)
22. Does this AA support^lant or aniaal species with exceptionally narrow
habitat requirements or eitrewly limited occurence in this region?
(wildlife diversity/abundance, fishery habitat, uniqueness/heritage,
aquatic diversity/abundance)
* Species for which less than IX of the other wetlands in the MM class
are acceptable.
WORKING DRAFT
Figure 3. Waterfowl use regions of major concern (Interpreted from FWS 1} >
23. Is this the closest wetland (of at least 3 acres in size) to iny nature
center, school, caap, or college with a science curriculum, en£ is it
within 2,000 ft. of a public road Utere parking is allowed?
(uniqueness/heritage)
24. Is the AA part of, and essential to, an on going, long-tern environmental
research or monitoring program? (uniqueness/heritage)
23. Is this known to be a 'pristine* natural area, in the sense of having no
lasting human alteration (direct or indirect) of the AA, its WD, and tlie
immediate portions of its tributaries or watershed?
(uniqueness/her i tage)
26. Is the AA used regularly for recreational activities, for i*lch
opportunities are otherwise locally deficient? (active recreation)
27. Is this a major public access point to a recreational waterway? (active
recreation)
28. Is the wetland located in an urban area? (all functions)
29. (Answer only if any of Questions 9-17 were answered "Y".) Is the
following true for any of the Questions 9-17 that were answered "Y"?
The AA's wet depression is either the only UD in the functional
watershed qt_ it is the WD that is closest to the named feature
the closest one upstope of a drinking water supply in (fcjestion 1Z).
WORKING DRAFT
3?
-------
MING DRAFT
Table 1. National Species of Special
HAHMALSt
Grizzly Bear
Polar fear
Black-Foot Ml Ferret
Sea Ottar i
Southarn
Alaskan Population
Coyota
Oray Uolfi
Eastern
Rocky Mountain
•tenican
Pacific Ualrus
Mest Indian Manatee
BIROSl
Broun Palleant
Eastern
California
Tundra Swant
Eastern Papulation
Western Population
Truapeter Suani
Intarior Population
Pacific Coast Papulation
Rocky Mountain Population
6r eater White-Fronted GooseI
Eaat*rn Mid-Continent Population
Western Mid-Continent Population
tula
Pacific Tlyway Population
Snow Gooset
Greater,
Atlantic flyvay Population
Lesser,
Mid-Continent
Western Cantral Flyway Population
Uastarn Canadian Artie Population
Urangel Island Population
Brant i
Atlantic Population
Pacific Population
Canadian 6oosei
Atlantic Flyuay Population
Tennessee Vallay Population
Mississippi Vallay Population
Eastern Prairie Population
Great Plains Population
TjU Grass Prairie Population
Hi-Lin* Population
Short Grass Prairie Population
'Uastarn Prairia Population
Pociy Mountain Population
Pacific Population
Eaphasls (Sourest rUS 19 )
Canada Goose (cont.)
Lesser (Pacific Tlyway Population)
Vancouver
Dusky
Cackling
Aleutian
Northern Pintail
Hood Duck
Black Buck
Hal lard
Canvasbac kI
Eastarn Population
Uastarn Population
Ring-Neck Duck
Redhead
California Condor
Oaprey
Bald Eaglet
Southeastern Population
Cheasapeake Bay Population
Northern Papulation
Southwest Population
Pacific State Population
Alaskan Population
Golden Eaglet
Western Population
Peregrine Falconi
Eastern Papulation
Rocky Mountain Population
Southwestern Population
Pacific Coast Population
Alaska Population (ArtlctAaerica,
and Peal's)
Attawater's Greater Prairie Chicken
Masked Bobwhite
Clapper Rat It
Vuna
Light-Footed
Sandhill Cranet
Eastern Populatlon-6reater
Mld-Contlnent Population-Lesser
Canadian-Greater
Rocky Mountain Population-Greater
Lower Colorado Population-Greater
Central Valley Population-greater
Pacific Flyway Population-Qreater
Uhooping Crane
Aaerican Woodcock
Piping Plover
Least Term
Interior
Eastern
California
-10
Table 1. Cont.
BIRDS (cont.)
Roseate Tern
Uhlte-Winged Dove
Mourning Dove
Spotted Owli
Northern
Red-Cockaded Uoodoecker
Klrtland's Uarbler
REPTILES and AMPHIBIANS:
Aaerican Alligator
FISHt
Sea Laaprey
Sockeye Salaon (Alaskan)
Coho Salaont
Non-Alaskan U.S. Stock
Alaskan Stock
Chinook Salaont
Non-Alaskan U.S. Stock
Alaskan Stock
Cutthroat Trout (Uestern U.S.)
Steelhead Trouti
Non-Alaskan U.S. Stock
Alaskan Stock
Atlantic Sal»on
Lake Trout (Breat Lai es)
Striped Bass
Cui-ui
WORKING DRAFT
-------
30. la thim AA located in I lUtt known to be losing wetlands at a rat*
greater than the national annual average (O.OSZ/year)? (Unless local
data are available, refer to Table 2 for state percent annual loss rate.)
31. Is the IA (or AA if IA was not delineated) acreage, expressed as a
percent of the acreage of all wetlands in the functional watershed,
greater than the percent annual loss rat* (¦ 0.01) of wetlands In this
state as shown in Table 27 For exaapl*, if the functional watershed has
200 acres, of wetland and the AA coaprises 20 of these acres then
20/200 • 0.1 or 10X. The corresponding statewide loss rate fro* Table 2
is 0.07X per year (0.0007/year). Therefore, the answer for this exaaple
is "V* since the calculated loss rats is greater than th* loss rat* from
Table 2.
This coapl*t*« th* L*v*l 1 - Significance assessment. At this point, you
have two options!
(a) You aay iaprove the validity of the assessment by continuing on to
high*r assessment levels. If this is your desire, turn to the
Lev*l 2 Eff*ctiv*n*ss/Opportunity (Office) assessment on the
following page and begin to answer the questions.
(b) Alternatively, you may stop the assessment at this point and
interpret your answers using th* L*v*l 1 Functional Significance Key
If this is your desire, return to Step B on page .
WORKING DRAFT
7 43
4 26
1
1
22 134
1
1
8 48
13
78
29 171
1
1
Table 2. Oases (OA), Clusters (CL), and Loss Rates by State for Emergent
(EH), Scrub-Shrub (SS), and Forested (FO) vegetation classes.
(Interpreted from NUI data.)
PALUSTOINE (acres/so.at.) ESTUARIIC (acres/mi.) LOSS RATE
~EH SS/FO (X/vear)
oa a. Qft a.
77 463 NO 0.9£
0-05
0.96
0.05
1.96
1.09
1.97
1.19
1.36
0.96
0.B7
0.96
0.23
48 283 NO 0.71
ND 1.09
3 29 1 1 1.09
18 11 1.03
1.06
1 B 0.96
0.96
0.23
0.03
1 3 1.41
19 IIS 1.09
0.23
3 32 1.09
9 34 J.09
1.33
0.23
NO 0.03
|.09
7 43 1.09
28 168 1 1 0.83
1.33
0.96
22 130 0.23
0.03
1.09
3 31 1.09
16 98 0.03
1.09
0.78
0.23
ET1
SS/FO
Oft
Oft
QL
AL
0.4
2.4
11.2
67.2
AZ
0.2
1.2*
1.2
7.0*
AR
0.9
3.6
22.3
68.0.
CA
0.3
1.6*
0.2
1.0*
CO
0.6
3.6
0.4
2.6*
CT
0.3
3.2
8.7
32.4
HE
0.4
2.3
13.7
82.3
n.
11.7
70.3
22.3
134.3
OA
0.7
4.2
13.6
93.6.
ID
0.2
1.4
0.6
3.7*
IL
0.2
1.1
2.2
13.3
IN
0.4
2.6
0.8
3.0
IA
1.3
7.6
1.6
9.7*
KS
0.3
1.9
0.2
0.9*
KV
0.2
1.1
0.4
2.3
LA
3.4
32.6.
22.0
132.1
*
1.6
2.r
8.6
31.7
IS
0.3
3.3
21.0
MA
1.3
9.1
10.7
64.4
HI
0.3
1.6
16.1
96.6
m
9.1
34.4
10.2
61.1
IS
0.7
4.0*
7.4
44.6
no
0.2
1.3
1.3
7.7
NT
0.8
4.6
0.1
0.1*
NE
3.3
21.1.
1.0
3.9*
NV
0.2
1.0*
0.1
0.1*
IW
0.6
3.6
3.0
17.8
NJ
2.2
9.3
16.2
79.6.
Wt
0.6
3.7
0.1
0.1*
NV
1.2
7.2
2.9
17.4
NC
1.7
10.2
19.0
114.0
ND
7.1
42.7
0.3
3.1,
OH
0.8
4.8
1.2
7.4 *
OK
0.4
2.6,
2.3
13.1.
OR
2.3
13.0
0.3
1.8*
PA
0.3
1.9,
1.0
3.9
RI
0.1
0.8*
7.9
47.2
SC
1.3
7.8
23.2
131.4
SO
3.1
18.8
0.2
1.1
TN
0.4
2.3
2.9
17.4
TX
1.1
6.4
1.0
6.1
UT
. 0.9
3.6*
0.4
2.3
VT
0.7
4.2
4.1
24.3
VA
0.2
I.I,
4.1
24.6*
UA
0.7
4.4
1.3
7.7
UV
0.1
0.3
ffl)
HI
3.8
22.6
61.8
11.7
70.0
UY
to.:
2.3
13.6
ID
.43
-------
Table 2 cant.
Wetland acreage ntlNtM wr< not obtained for thi• state, so data Iroa
nearby state* war* used. If available, acre detailed or accurate data on
wetland denaitlea fro* atate or local agencies My be substituted and the
following foraula applied to iaprove the defintlon of clusters and oasest
Oasis ¦ 0.2i| Cluster " * ~ 0.2* (where ¦ • Bean statewide density of
wetlands in acres per square aile).
** Uhere state data were statistically insignificant, regional (flyway) data
were used. Miere theae were alao atatiatically insignificant, the national
loss rate (0.0SS) was applied. Users should substitute aore applicable data
if available.
WORKING ORAH
44
tiQktiihv tfRAp]
3.2 Level 2 ~ Effectiveness/Opportunity Assessment (Office)
1. CLIHATE
1.1 Is the AA located In any of the precipitation deficit regions shown In
Figure 6 fit. does annual on-site evaporation exceed precipitation?
Tigure 6. Precipitation deficit regions of the United States (Interpreted
froa USG3 National Atlas 19„>
'•2 Is the AA located In any of the intense stora regions shown in figure 7
OL Is the rainfall eroslvity factor
-------
Figure 7. Intense stora regions of the United States (Sources SCS 19_)
2.2 (fciswer "I" tf none of the AA Is forested.) Is the forested areai
2.2.1 less than 3 acres?
2.2.2 greater than 40 acres?
* Include all wetland and nonwetland forested areas within one alle of the AA
that are connected to the AA's forested area by an unbroken, forested corridor
of not less than 190 ft. In width (Figure ¦).
wre m(mmomiiiun»cwstcititii i
sswas sr jemWts&!
SS.'rtfKST S?Tn«T,ti.tt"£KT,l5-
Sm « «mnui ikstm «w x msmki m.
Figure 8. Exalte of a forest corridor connecting the assessaent
area to adjacent forested areas
46
iilttui
3. COTLEX, CLUSTER, OASIS
WORKING DRAFi
3.1 Is any part of the AA's wet depression less than 1 ail* troa
another wet depression?
3.2 Ulthln a 1,000 yard radius of the AA (and Including it), is the acreage
of eaergent or scrub-shrub wetlands (palumtrine or estuarine) greater
than shown for the corresponding type in the "cluster" coluvt of Table 2?
3.3 Uithin a 1,000 yard radius of the AA (and Including it), is the acreage
of eaergent or scrub-shrub wetlands (palustrlne or estuarine) less than
shown for the corresponding type In the "oasis" coluwi of Table 2?
4. LOCATION
4.1 Is the AA located within 3 alles of tidal waters, the Great Lakes, fiL '•
aajor river (at least 100 ailes long)?
4.2 The area of the AA's watershed (in square ailes) isi
4.2A less than 1?
4.2B 1-100?
4.2C 100-2,300?
4.20 greater than 2,300?
S. MET DEPRES8I0N/UATERBC0 AREA RATIO
Uhat percentage of the UD's watershed acreage does the UD comprise?
3.1.1 less than 3X (or less than 10* if region Is dry)?
3.1.2 »ore than 20X (or aore than 13Z if region is dry)?
3.2 Do upslope UD's coaprise aore than 3X of the total acreage of this AA's
wet depression's watershed (Figure 9)?
-WATEJLSHjyi JOVIOMY
»kne< rn mis BtWLF,
QmvJ 5-Z VMnOBff MSWtKI «« KUUK OTMI
umtrt «ti KmojoM ivcm ctaratci mm tun s ki
CUT 0 IK MltttHi MU wrM iwirt.
Figure 9. Upslope wetlands in relation to the watershed
-------
5.3 Is the AA outside the portion of a floodplain that It Inundated nearly
every y*ir?
6. LOCAL TOPO0RAPHY
6.1 Are «nv of tha following conditions present?
(a) The UD 1* a pliyi.
lb) Tha ftUvAtional drop b«twt*n the dounilcp* end of the AA and a point
2 illn down* lop* (or to the bottoa of a vail ay, whichavar comi
first) Is graatar than tha elevational rlaa batvaan tha upslopa end
of tha AA and a point 2 alias upslopa (or to tha top of a natural
ridge, whichavar coaes first) (Figura 10).
(c) Within 2 alias upslopa froa tha AA, thara Is a natural topographic
faatura (!.«., ridga lina) trftich dividas two watersheds (riguri 11).
MOGE-a aoa
VALLEY ROOR
EL 700
far iwiHFRvwLe;
t.i mrw »u umn ni kcmk
n 1 ""l *» worn
!* "T^f* ¦* mumu n T*
¦» «w •» wow m i«u uan <¦¦ «u
S MICK fHT.
Figura 10. Elevational change upslopa and downslopa of tha assessaant area
6.2 Is «lthar of tha following conditions prasant as indicated from soil
aaps, gaologic aaps, or fiald impaction?
(a) A gaologic fault is prasant within tha watland and is generally
oriented perpendicular to flow.
(b> Within this wetland*s watershed tha hydraulic conductivity of the
soils dacraasas in a downslopa direction toward tha watland. If
unknown, assuate that decreased hydraulic conductivity is represented
by increased prevalance of Marine clavs, fine partlcied soils,
shallower depth to badrocl** or dacreasvd prevalenca of talus or
coarsa alluvial sadlaants rue!, js it tha Mouths of canyons in
glacial aoraina areas, or at tha base of avalanche paths.
WORKING DRAFT
WORKING DRi
fjow Tif1It|S0wur
OaSlkM) fc.l t*6T OnJ, WU MSWEK* MCMBi
TMK B I MS UK «ITM I Mil -pMr ttVlDR
TWO wA**5ltet>S
Figure 11. Exaaple of a topographic feature dividing watersheds
7. GRADIENT
(Answer only if Ouastlon 41 cannot ba answered, tha site is nontidal,
or no other data axist on tha AA's velocity.) Is the channel gradient of the
AA lass than tha gradient shown in Table 3? Measure the AA's gradient using
the finast scale topographic aap available (Figure 12).
Table 3. Gradient necessary to creata dapositlonal velocity conditions.
(Interpreted froa SCS curves for channel flow.)
tl.an Death
If N > 0.1231
IF H' 0.080
IF N= 0.030?
ir n <;
< 0.3
< 0.0230
< 0.0100
< 0.0038
<
0.0010
0.3-1
< 0.0130
< 0.0060
< 0,0023
<
0.0012
1-2
< 0.0030
< 0.0012
<
0.0006
2-3,
< 0.0017
< 0.0006
<
0.0003
3"45
< 0.0013
< 0.0005
<
0.0002
6-0 _
< o.oooe
< 0.0003
<
0.0001
< 0.0006
< 0.0002
1
0.0001
0-10 _
< 0.0004
< 0.0002
10-12
< 0.0003
< 0.0001
Footnotes*
1. Host densely wooded floodplains <*N" is Manning's roughness coefficient)
2. Host densely vegetated emergent wetlands not totally submerged by flood
flows
3. Host noderately v*g*tat*d &r totally subaergtd (by flood water •
emergent wet'3<'.Js
4. Mostly unobstructed channels
3. Assuaes width, perpendicular to flow is < 0 ft. If channe is 18-20 ft.
wide, tha nuaber below It should be used. If channel is greater than "0
ft. answar "U*.
43
-------
WIHG DRAFi
tJbrr- n>B**nsM
vtr wmn k m m
tarn- mrr-mrr
.ipMNwm -»m- wft mwl
•Mi rb • Ml m i reran
Figure 12. Deterainlng gradient of the atseaent area using topographic aaps
B. IHETB, OUTLETV
Does surface water enter the W or connect it to othar water bodlas via a
constricted or uncomtrtctadi
8.1 paraanent iniat?
8.2 interalttent inlat?
8.3 paraanant outlat?
8.4 intaralttant outlat?
* If this is a fringe or tidal wetland, answer *V* to both inlat and outlat
(riguras 3b and 3c>. Considar Inlets or outlats ragularly floodad by tha
tida to be paraanant. 8oa» contiguous oxbow* will ba claaaifiad
intaralttant. Do not considar pracipitation or ovarland sheet flow to ba
surfaca watar.
1. CONSTRICTION
(Answer only if flow is prasant at laast lntaralttantly in tha AA)
9.1 . Is tha total width of th* AA's outlet(s>, at aanlaua flow, lass tlian one-
third tha avaraga width of tha AA aaasurad perpendicular to flow for one-
tanth if no gradiant or tidal flow is prasant), k is the cross-sectional
area of the outlet(s) clearly lass than that of the inletCs), thus
causing "ponding" (Figure 13)?
SO
MTt: M CAtt A, T* ««TI « CWtt ttCTIMUU. AM* $f
m WTUii iwr wn «g Bltemi iem ma i/j m
TUFHAarfrJJj. *)CASl L|M fUMN SATIH W«T« Wl tt UU
raui i/ic tk mouZe mri m ra umxt mt mmt-
tML ¦ Mil CMH Wt WT1CTS WBU II IBWtl t«l-
ITMCTtl HWIT KIKTMt ¦ KrWTI AA? It****
StTAtATI (TIUMTM MSI» HOMM HI* WtK fSBITtl
Figure 13. Exaaples of constricted outlets
8.2 Does floodwater from an adjoining body of water enter the AA as sheet flow
(e.g., as than a river or lake overtops a levee over a wide area) and
exit tha AA through constricted outlets or not at all (Figure 14)'
FU>OP COfODlTVA J
Mil; tlMFKt WATH UTIRS TIMU
MMU »I Ftm.
HWfbW~tJAH?lPO A>5
jT
MT(: SUVACE WATER 1X11J UK AA JIL A
CMSfttCTEl M CMMRfL-fLOtf WUH.
figure II. of a seasonally >:onstri«:t*d outlet
WORKING DRAFT
-------
9.3 doalnant tn th* AA?
I0.A Lacustrin*
10.B Paluatrine
IO.C Rlv*rln* nontldal
10.D Rlv*rln* tidal
10.E Eatuarine
10. F Harin*
* "Doainant" In this question r*(*ra to th* wetland aystea with th* greatest
coverag*.
11. FRIME OR ISLAND WETLAND
la th* AA included in, do*a it coaprls* all or wit of, a frlngt wetland or
(Figur* 3, pag* It
12. VEaCTATlON FORM
8*l*ct th* on* cl«M and ajbclHI of v*g*tation (Cowardin it |i< 1979) that is
doainant in th* AA'i wetland (Figur* IS)? Now, a*l*ct th* on* claaa and
Mbclama (if dlff*r*nt fro* abov*> that la doainant at th* *dg* of ep*n wat*r
in Zon*a I or Ian* C axcluding ar*as of submerged vegetation in Ion* • (*¦>.
Now, a*l*ct th* on* claaa andsubclaaa (if different froa above) that hav*
root and lower at*a contact with watar ov*r th* larg*at ar*a of th* AA'a
vet1 and.
12.A For*at*d?
Aa and dead?
Ab and n**dl*-l*av*d *v*rgr**n?
Ac and broad-l*av*d *v*rgr**n?
Ad and n**dl*-l*av*d deciduous?
A* and broad-l*av*d d*ciduoua?
12.B Scrub-shrub?
Ba and d*ad?
Bb and n**dl*-l*av*d evergreen?
Be and broad-leav*d *v*rgr**ii?
Bd and n**dl*'l*av*d deciduous?
B* and brial-'.ii.jil d*ciduoua?
22.C Aquatic b*d?
Ca and algal?
Cb and floating vascular?
Cc and rooted vascular?
Cd and aquatic bryophyt* (aoss or liverwort)?
WORKING DLL
12. D E»erg*ttt?
Da and persistant?
Db and nonpersistent?
12.E Hoss-lichen?
"Doainant" Is th* class and subclass with th* largest percentage of cov*r.
How*v*r, if 12.A-for*st*d and 12. iib/shrub together, or 12.C-aquatlc b*d
and 12.D-emergent together courts* a gr*at«r p*rc*ntag* of cover than any
oth*r class, answer "Y" to th* larger of th* two classes. You *ay also yse
this proc*dur* on * subclass level by grouping evergreens (all 4), deciduous
(all ~), dead (both)* For example, If th* four evergreen subclasses together
comprise a greater percentage of cover than any single subclass, answer "Y" to
th* largest of th* four subclass*s.
Wo
IjDOgh** UEfjr&^TpO^inf- MoSTLy MU43*T>uF~$f&JS.
tris f/^uo vor rirf+uevn* Ficoftjp
Iff*? $ li VSWTWD WlTJf-iMOSIW OBOMV SfgttWS to*.
bte*> uwet. SuKtHjr u/*ie*. is rers cwi- -ntir
CfeiiFtn> 5C\SoO. SotlTooe's 2o*«r B |Ocu*>tf^:
ofrt) u»*w*. (ytSi U9*vvep
Ut>) («¦&)
(«&) 5oO*«*frK>
^O/OffC. « opfw utwit, wleurvem is AruBfer (,.b ft peer
Figure 13. Wetland Zones
53
'J3'j3\'A8iib Ju<
-------
13. VE8ETATI0N TYPES
^OKWHGDRAVi
Which of the above cIhim and subclass*! llittd In Question 12 coaprise at
least 1 acre, fit. 10t of th* AA?
14. ISLANDS
0o*s th* AA contain or Is it part of an laland that 1st
14.1 at l*ast 23 sq ft in siz*, (Oft '* l*aat 30 ft fro* th* mainland?
14.2 at least 2 acres in siz*, s*parat*d (ro* th* mainland by water at Wast
30 in. d**p, ami at l*ast 2 ill** offshor* If th* wetland systta is
aariM, or 0.3 ail* offshor* If th* wetland system is not aarin*?
19. VESETATIOMMTER INTEMKMION
(Answer "I" to all-if w*tland systea is riverine. Answer "V* to 13.1A if Zone
8 is absent.) Is th* horizontal pattern of erect vegetation in Ion* B
(el), including largely or partially auteerged logs and stuaps,
distributed lni
13.1A relatively large, well d*fin*d ar*a(s) (301 of AA or 200+ acres) of
v*g*tation with littl* or no intarsparaion with channels, pools, or
flats (Figure 16a>?
13.IB an intermediate condition?
13.1C a aosalc pattern with relatively saall areas of vegetation (none
snailer in diaaeter than two tla*a the height of the prevailing
vegetation) highly interspersed with nuaerous pools, channels, or flats
(Figure 16b>?
Figur* 16. Exa*el*s of low (A) and high (B) v*g*tation/wat*r interspersion
13.2 (Answer "I" If flow never occurs in the AA.) Hlthin Host of th^ AA
having measurable flow Is either of the following conditions present?
(a) Vegetation In lone B consists nainly of robust emergents (rB)
distributed In the mosaic pattern described in 13.IC.
(b> Flow enters th* AA in a channel and then spreads out over a wide
area.
34
16. VE9ETATI0N CLASS INTER9PERSI0N
Uithin the AA's wetland is the horizontal pattern of vegetation claasea
distributed ini
18.A relatively large, well defined area(s) supporting a single vegetation
class with little or no interapersion of these areas (rigure I7a>?
16.B an intermediate condition?
16.C a mosaic with relatively small, highly interspersed areas (not less than
100 sq. ft.) supporting two or more vegetation classes (Figure 17b).
Figure 17. Examples of low (A) and high (B) vegetation class lnterspersion
17. VEGETATION FORM RIOWESS
Are any of the following statements true?
(a) The AA is 1-10 acres and has 3 or More vegetation classes' and/or 4 or
more subclass*!.
(b) The AA is 10-100 acres and has 3 or more vegetation classes* and/or 6
or more subclasses.
(c) The AA is 100 or more acres and has 4 or aore classes' and/or 0 or hd
subclasses.
* In Question 17, no class may coaprise aore than 70X of the AA, or less than
100 sq. ft.
IB. SHAPE OF UPLAND-WETLAND EDQE
(Circle "1" if the AA is longer than ten miles, or if there is no adjacent
upland.) Is the boundary between the upland and Zone A irregular-in shape
•Figure '.SC!"
WORKING DRAFT
-------
IH « MT KWM B «B1
BK T* FMMU . _f_T
Uf»
E TK MT INBM B PMM.T KF
-------
SIDE VIEW
MTL «M*T VEKTAIM «mM TK M B nmanTLT TML
I* MB.TEI HBWK MSaELnn MTUM KATMU M
STMM WMM. IM WE1TM IU » TO.
Figure 21. Exaaple of vagatation wtthln Mia wetland shattering adjacent
upland
20. STREAMAMC CANOPY
(Answer "I" to 20.1 and 20.2 If there is no channel within the AA.)
20.1 Is there sufficient vegetation or topographic relief along tha Zona A/B
interface, within Zone B, and wtthln the upstrea» buffer tana to shade at
least BOt of Zone • at aidday?
20.2 Is there a balanced lnterapersion of ahaded (forested) and unshaded
(open) cover along the Zone A/> Interface, within Zona B, and within the
upstreaa buffer lone (Figure 22)?
Figure 22. Entente of balanced intersperslon of shaded and unshaded cover
58 WORKING DRAFT
21. LAND COVER OF THE 8UMATERSHED
Is the dominant land cover of the subwatershedi
21.A Forest and scrub?
21.B lepervious surfaces?
21.C Row crops, orchard, or vineyard?
21.D Nonurban pasture, hayland, perennial forbs, or grassland?
21.E Urban or suburban lawns, recently revegetated landfills or alne
tailings?
* "Dominant" Mans the greatest percentage of total land cover. However, if
21B, 21C, and 21E together coaprise a greater percentage than any other jype,
answer affirmatively the largest of these three types.
** For aost of the subwaterslied to have Impervious surfaces, the averane lot
size should be less than about 1/4 acre (10,000 sq ft).
22. FUM, GRADIENT, DEPOSITION
22.1.1 Are any of the following true?
(a) The AA contains a channel.
(b) The AA's outlet Is lower than the inlet.
(c) The AA is tidal.
(d) The presence of flow within the AA is suggested by gage data.
22.1.2 Is the channel at least aildly sinuous with a aeander ratio exceeds
1.2?
22.2 Does the AA include, or is it part of, an actively accreting delta
(Figure 23)?
22.3 Do aerial photos Indicate long-tera erosion of the AA?
| | Of0n
Figure 23. E«aftpl*s of *:tiv*ly ao:r*ting deltas
59
It as
WORKING DRAFT
-------
23. DITCHES, CANALS, CHANNELIZATION, LEVEES
WORKING DRAFi
Do functioning ditch**, canals, levees, or similar artificial features
(excluding thoM built specifically for wildlife management) within the AA, or
at its inlet or outlet, confine surface water to a narrower part of th* AA
than It would without such features?
24. SOILS
24.1 (Answer "0" if unknown.) Are the soil types present in th* AA tnoun to
contain aore than 4,000 mg/kg (dry weight) of amorphous extractabl*
aluminum in the upper B Inches?
24.2 (Answer only if no data are available for question 24.1.) Is *ith*r of
the following conditions present?
(a) Soil maps Indicate presence of alluvial (e.g., fluvaquent), ferric,
clay, or other primarily fin* mineral soils In the AA.
(b The aap in figure 24 shows th* soils of this region to normally
have elevated concentrations of aluminum (>6X) or Iron, and
analysis indicates there is less than 201 organic matter by weight
in th* upper 3 Inches of sediment?
Figure 24. Geographic areas with elevated concentrations of ••
(Interpreted from USGS 13 )
60
24.3 Do coll surveys Indicate that soils in the AA have exceptionally slow
infiltration rates due to presence of impeding layers (fragipan,
(duripan, claypan) or very shallow depth to unfractured bedrock?
24.4 Do soil surveys Indicate that toils in the watershed (up to 1 mile away)
with mostly slow Infiltration rates, fir. are these soils iapermeable due
to fine texture, iapedlng layers, high water table, shallow depth to
unfractured bedrock, or frozen condition during the usual tiae of
greatest flooding?
24.3 Is the AA in a karst (limestone) region?
23. SEDIMENT SOURCES
23.1 Is there any feature that is a source, or a potential source, of
inorganic sediment to the AA? ^onsider storvwater outfalls, irrigation return
waters, surface mines, or areas containing any of the following: exposed
soils associated with agriculture, lands cleared within the last 2 years,
soli-slope conditions classified by SCS as eroding or erosion hazard (e.g.,
subclass "e" In the SCS Land Classification Codes), gullies, sand or gravel
pits, or severely eroding steam or road banks.
* To be considered, the area must ccwprise 1 acre or 2X of the buffer zone or
a subwatershed area equivalent to tli* AA's wetland acreage.
23.2A Is the primary sediment source entering the AA sheetflow?
23.28 Is the primary sediment source entering the AA channel flow?
23.3 Are any of the following true?
(a) Erosion Is caused by drastic fluctuation in water levels due to
artificial manipulation or extensive urban runoff.
(b) Slopes Immediately adjacent to the wet'.and aresteeper than 107. (or
steeper than 1Z if alluvial clays prevail) and are unstable.
(c) Boating causes freauent wakes that impinge on the deepuater fringe
of the AA.
(d) Tributaries ibmediately upstream of the AA have been channelized.
26. NUTRIENT SOURCES
26.1 Are any of the following a source, or a potential source, of
nutrients to the AA?
(a) Sewage outfalls, phosphate Mines, tile drains, canals and other
nutrient rich sources.
(b) Areas' containing any of the following: feedlots, active
pastureland, landfills, septic fields, fertilized soils, lolls
tilled, burned, or clrured within the last 2 years.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
(c) Actual observance of nulsane* algal blooms or measurement of
excessive nutrient concentration*.
(d) Areas where the acreage of the MO divided by the nuaber of houses
with septic systems within the buffer zone is less than 8.
Form Bi Assessment Answer Sheet
(d> Fora Ci Supplementary Observations
(e) Topographic naps, aerial photos, and soil survey
(f) Measuring stick/depth aeter, sallnoaeter, pH aeter, and sedlaenf grab.
(g) Binoculars
Uhen you arrive at the site, coaplete Part 3 of Fora At Site Docuaentatlon.
Also, review Fora Ci Supplemental Observations for the types of activities
and species to watch for in the field. .Fora C should be completed before you
leave the field.
28. DIRECT ALTERATION
Is either of the following conditions true?
(a) Host of the AA has been tilled, filled, or excavated at least once in
the past 3 years.
(b) An outlet has recently been added to the AA'? wet depression where none
previously existed, jl an inlet has recently been blocked off and »
outlet is still present.
23. BUFFER ZONE EDQE UITH NETLAND
29.1 Does the transition area at the boundary of the buffer zone and Zone A
support adequate understory vegetation (e.g., shrubs less than 3 ft
tall, dense grasses, vines and ferns) to serve as cover for vertebrates
using the wetland?
29.2 Are alofiM in most of the buffer tone less than SX?
30. DISTURBANCE
Are both of the following conditions true?
(a) The AA is visited by people on foot, boat, or off-road vehicle at least
three times daily.
(b) Host of Zone B is less than 2 feet deep and less than 1,000 ft from the
usual places of human activity jr most of Zone B is hore than 3 ft
deep and less than 600 ft from the usual places of huia«i activity.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
31. HATER and VESETATION PROPORTIONS
tfpiuvinu uRAFT
Considering th« entire Mi
31.1 Ar« Zones A and • together greater than Zone C?
31.2 Is Zone B at least 101 of the AA?
31.3 Is Zone B larger than Zone A?
31.4 Is the area of submerged vegetation In Zan* B (il) larger than the open
water areas of Zones B (oB) and C? (Answer *1" If sB Is absent)
31.5 Is the area of Zone A at least 10X of area of Zones B and C?
31.6 (Answer 31.6E • V If Zone B Is absent.) Uhat percent of Zone B and C
taken together contains emergent vegetation ?
31.6A 0
31.SB 1-30
31.6C 31-60
31.60 61-39
31.6E 100
32. HVDROPERIOD I SPATIALLY DOMINANT)
The dominant* flooding regime of the AA can best be characterized as
(figure 23) i
32.A peraanently flooded nontidal. „
32.B intermittently exposed nontidal.
32.C semipermanently flooded nontidal.
32.0 seasonally flooded nontidal.
32.E saturated (no standing water) nontidal.
32.F temporarily flooded nontidal.
32.8 intermittently flooded nontidal^
32.H artificially flooded nontidal.
32.1 regularly flooded tidal.
32.J irregularly exposed tidal.
32.K irregularly flooded tidal.
* 'Dominant* refers to the largest percentage of the AA. However, if 32.A and
32.B would together coaprise a greater percentage than any other type, answer
affirmatively for the larger of the two types. Similarly, if any of the
nonpermanent types (32.C-32.6) in combination would comprise a greater
percentage than any permanent type(s), answer affirmatively the largest of the
nonpermanent types.
** Distinctions between 32.B and 32.8 are usually not critical unless wildlife
is being analyzed at the group or species level.
If 32.H is "V", also answer "V" to the second »
'LOOOCO UU
(Kccrr o« ought ycam*
MTtftMTTfMTLV
'LOOOCD ft)
MOST TtAftS
fCMtCMtANCNTLT
FLOOOCOCI
IK LOOM OA
unmkoctaoiv
muctrriA zonc
OCMSIULLT OOMBMATCa
MOST OMOWWO Sf AtON:
SATUMATK) Ml
•HICFLV
TtMFOfUHIL* t LOOOCO |F|
MOMTtCtAftLC KaXMAUTY
MTfMMTTINTtV
FLOOOCDIOI
ammmit PiooowHimPMKM». to**. cmiiMf. ma, VMM MTtHTMMi. nmt
MHMUiAAiT IIPOMO M CUOMO Utt TNAMOMCt MHT.N &.«MU*4. MIMl tOMI
'LOOMO W 'IOOOIOUHWWOBtl . It A..IMM4. ft.#4UT«*v IWCI
Figure 23. Key for determination of hydroperiod
33. HOST PERMANENT HV0R0PERI00
Which of the hydroperiods listed in Question 32 best describes the portion of
this AA, or the contiguous, accessible deeper waters, that are Inundated or
saturated for the longest part of the year, and comprises at least 1 acre or
10Z of the AA?
* If 32.H is "Y", alto answer "Y" to the second most dominant hydroperiod.
34. UATER LEVEL CONTROL
34.1 Is the AA's water level or flooding regime influenced* by artificial
control structures upstream or downstream (other than those designed
specifically for fish and wildlife management)?
* As a guideline, consider increases less than 20 vertical inches 'xaxiiuuit,
any season) to be insignificant unless there is evidence of biological damage
(e.g., reduced vegetation vigor).
34.2 Is the AA located less than 2 miles downsi ope from a large impoundment
(deeper than 20 ft at outlet), or is the AA's water table demonstrably
influenced by any other type of upstream impoundment?
34.3.1 Is any part of the AA flooded (even seasonally) due to permanent or
temporary ponding created by a dam or diVe'
34.3.2 (Circle "I" if 34.3.1 is answered no.) In such flooding a' result of
beaver activity?
" WORKING DRAFT
-------
33. FUtODINa EXTENT MC DURATION
(Answer Questions 33.1 and 33.2 -I* if the UD is tidal.)
33.1 Do** flooding cause the AA to expand «or* than 3 tiaes (200Z) its noraal
six* for aore than 23 days (Figure 26), or is the.relatlonship between
extent and duration above tha curve in Figur* 27?
* Suidanc* for deteralning hydroperiod and flooding reglae can b» obtained
fro» tha following sourcasi
(a) Bast initial sources includes Gauging stations, direct observation,
air photos, HUD/FEHA flood aaps, local knowledge, flood aodel* of the
Hydrologic Engineering Center and BCS (e.g.,NEC and TR-20).
(b) Other clues of flooding extent aret Hater aarks, drift lines, scour
¦arks, absence of litter, beaver sign, sedlaent on leaves and stgeas,
presence of flood intolerant vegetation (U.S. Fish and midlife
Service (in preparation)! Teskey and Hinckley 1977a,b,c, 1978a,b,C|
and Halters, Teskey, and Hinckley 1900a,b>.
(c> If clues are still insufficient, answer Question 33.1 "V* if the
wetland is low in the watersheds and has a large Zone A which is
devoid of upland plants. Answer "N* If the wetland'a Zone B shows a
sharp transition to upland.
SVRfAtr H/ATR EXPANDS BY
500 PERCENT FOR 20 OAYS;
ACCORDING TO FI6URE
QUESTION 35.1 = YES
Si/KBUCE-yrATE* EXPANDS BY
200 PERCENT FOR 22 OAYS;
QUESTION 35.1 = NO
WTt mams v u»*iFt expmsim mimm him
ohm tuaft urns nncate ixtut m kumu
FLMHMl ma UKt MHCATE rtMUIKIIT WATU. MNKIR
1 naon M MUMMNtl
Figure ;e. E»at^>les of surface water expansion during I'.c-odir,g
66
WORKING DRAFT
Q
£80
-
•
260
\
CO
\ QUESTION 35.1 = YES
i[ 40
\
U-
\
0=20
UJ
CQ
s n
QUESTION 35.1 = NO —
* 0 100 ZOO 300 400 500
WET DEPRESSION AREA SEASONAL
EXPANSION (PERCENTAGE)
Figure 27. Seasonal expansion of surface water (Adapted fro* HES 19 )
33.2 (If flowing water is absent answer "I".) Are any of the following
conditions true?
(a) Base flow typically fills less than 60Z of the channel.
(b> Surface water is absent 3 days after a aean aonthly 24 hour stora,
and the watershed 1* larger than 10 square ailes (100 square ailes
In dry regions).
(c) The ratio of the high flow (aeasured in cubic feet per second)
which is reached or exceeded tOZ of the year, versus the typical
low flow which is exceeded 907. of the year, greater than 1.3 .
* This analysis requires at least two complete years of daily streaaflow
records, and a suaaarizatlon of these according to the "percent exceedance"
paraaeter. Such curves or data nay be available for sow streaas with daus.
-------
WORKING LRA
36. VEGETATED UIOTH
36.1 Ii the averag* width* of the trti In Zone A and B which supports erect
vegetation!
36.1.1 Less than 20 ft?
36.1.2 6reat*r than 300 ft, SL th* w«t depression Is constricted and «Kt
vegetation is present throughout.
36.2 Is the average width* of the area in Zone B which supports erect
vegetation, and where d*pth seldoa exceeds SOX plant height
36.2.1 Less than 20 ft?
36.2.2 Less than 20 ft, and aainly robust vegetation depth exceeding 2 ft,
(c) width greater than 6 ft, and
(d> length at least 1,000 ft or serving as a thoroughfare between two large
water bodies?
30. TYPE COMBINATIONS
For each of the couplets below, is the AA predominantly (a) or (b),
and, within the distance specified, is there a separate wetland having
predominantly the other characteristic?
38.1 Within 1 aile (in addition, both areas must be accessible to the sane
fish population for at least 20 days of the year)i
permanently flooded wet depression.
(b) seasonally flooded, forested and/or scrub-shrub wet depression.
38.2 Uithin 0.3 milei
(aP nontidal, with erect vegetation or rooted vascular floating-
leaved vegetation in Zone B.
(b) 1 acre of hardwoods (less than 6 in. diamet.-r at breast
height) with greater than 1ST canopy closure.
38.3 Uithin 3 mllesi
(a) estuarine or marine.
(b) freshwater palustrine or lacustrine, £L coastal islond.
38.4 Adjacent I
-------
38.7 Ulthln 1 ail* (for th* following combination, th* M aust represent on*
of th* hydrologlc rtglm and th* oth*r two reglaes aust b* represented
by at l*a seasonally flood*d.
(c) p*raan*ntly flooded,lnt*ralUf.tly *ipos*d, or artificially
flooded and aanaged for wildlife.
38.B (Answer "N" if this la not a Southwestern riparian wetland.) Ml thin the
AA m adjoining up 1 andi
(a) cottonwood-wlllow stand* (greater than 1 acre).
(b) honey aesquite (greater than 1 acre).
39. SPECIAL HABITAT FEATURES
la either of th* following conditions true?
(a) The AA is less than 100 acres, and two of the features listed below
are present in the AA or buffer tone at mm tlae during the year.
(b) The AA is aore than 100 acres, and three or aore of the features
listed below ar* pr*sent.
—standing snags with cavities larger than 2 in.
—trees with diaaeter exceeding 10 in.
—plants bearing fleshy fruit (e.g., cherry, persl—on)
—ust-bearing hardwoods (e.g., oak, be*ch, hickory)
—cone-bearing trees or shrubs
—cropland with waste grains
—evergreen tree stands with over 80Z canopy closur*
—native prairie
—exposed bar (*.g., unconsolidated gravel, audflat)
40. SOTTOH IMTER TEMPERATURE
Is the average daily alniaua suaaer water teaperature aeasured at the
deepest part of the wet depression usuallyi
40.1 Lest than 30° F?
40.2 Oreater than 69° F?
41. VELOCITY (SPATIALLY DOMINANT)
(Do not answer If question 7.1 was answered.) During annual peat flow is
velocity throughout aost of the AAl
41.1 Less than 0.3 ft/sec or If unknown, is aost of the AA flooded for
less than 3 days annually?
41.2 Greater than 1.3 ft/sec, fit greater than 3.3 ft/sec, and substrate is
. cobble-gravel?
- WORKING DRAF
42. 0TICR VELOCITY CATE80RIE8
42.1 Answer "Y" to the velocity categories that reflect seasonal (wet and
dry) flow velocities occurring in at least one acre or 10* of the AA.
42.1.1 0-1 ft/sec
42.1.2 1-3.3 ft/sec
42.1.3 3.3+ ft/sec
42.2 Answer "Y" to velocity categories that reflect seasonal (wet and dry)
flow velocities occurring In wet depressions that are within one aile,
and accessible to fish froa this AA during at least 20 days of tl)e year?
42.2.1 0-1 ft/sec
42.2.2 1-3.3 ft/sec
42.2.3 3.3* ft/sec
43. MATER DEPTH (SPATIALLY DOMINANT)
Which depth category is doainant* in the AA**i
43.A less than 1 Inch?
43.B 1-4 In.?
43.C 3-8 In.?
43.D 9-20 In.?
43.E 21-39 in.?
43.F 40-39 In.?
43.6 3-6.3 ft?
43.H 6.6-26 ft?
43.1 greater than 26 ft?
' "Doainant" aeans greatest percentage of the total area covered with water.
** Great precisiri is needed only If the fish habitat function is being
analyzed at the species level. Noraally an estlaate will suffice.
44. WATER DEPTH (SECONDARY)
Answer *Y" to *11 water depth categories covering least 1 acre or 10X of
the AA, as well as all depth categories In UD within 1 »il* that are
acc*s*lbl« to fish fro* this AA during at least 20 days of the year.
44. A
less than 1 In.?
44. B
1-4 in.*'
44.C
3-8 in.?*
44.D
9-20 in.?
44.E
21-39 in.?
44.F
40-39 in.?
44.G
5-6.5 ft?
44.H
6.6-26 It-
44.1
greater than 26 ft?
Great precision IS necessary only if the fir.h habitat function i"s being
analyzed at the species level. t4orteally an estimate- will aufti*:*.
- WORKING DRAFT
-------
43. 8U89TRATE TYPE (SPATIALLY DOMINANT)
It the dominant* surface sedlaent type (upper 3 In.) In most of the AA**i
43.A Hud (aineral)?***
43.B Ruck (ncnforoui organic)?
43.C Peat (porous organic)?
43. D Sand?
43. E Cobble-gravel?
43. F RubbU?
43.6 Bedrock?
* -Dominant" Mans th* largest fLr cent age of total. However, if 43A, B, and C
together coaprls* a greater percentage than any other type, answer "V" tha
largast of tha threa. (Slailarfy, for 430, E, F, and 6.)
** (a) If distinction between auck and paat is unsure, than consider peat to
be sediaents Mtlch contain largely undacoaposad roots, steas, etc.,
uhile in auck organic particles are barely If at all recognizable.
(b) If substrata type cannot be detarainad froa soils aaps, assuae that
channel gradients greater than 0.3Z will have cobble-gravel or
coarser aatarlals uhiU those less than this will have sand or finer
aaterials.
(c) Assuae that tolls that are not permanently flooded, unsaturated
soils, and unvegetated areas are 'and* (mineral).
Attune that areas with estuarlne eaergents or sphagnua boss are
"peat."
***" Mineral" is considered to be sediaents coaprised of at least 8ZZ mineral
Material If the soil : * !ay 2L BOX ainerjl aaterlal If the soli is not clay
(e.g., organic carbon).
46. PHYSICAL HABITAT INTBtSPStSION
Within Zones I and C of th* AA, are substrate types, velocity categories,
and/or depth categories distributed ast
46.A A nearly unlfora environaent (e.g., laainar flow, aicrotopography not
undulating)?
46.B Interaedlate condition?
46.C Mosaic of two or aore categories (e.g., good pool-riffle sequence If
aid-order riverine)?
47. pH
Is pH of the water in tha AAi
47.A 6.0-8.3 (neutral) (include all tidal waters)?
47.B B»Iow 6.0 (generally acidic)?
47.C Above 8.3 (generally alkaline)?
WORKING DRAFT
48. SALINITY AMD CONDUCTIVITY
Is th* AA'i lalinity/halinity or conductivity:
Approx.
Salinity (pot)/Hallnltv (pot) Conductivity
46.A Less than 0.3 less than BOO
48.B 0.3-3.0 000-9000
4B.C 3.O-1B.0 0000-30,000
48. D 18.0-30.0 30,000-43,000
48.E 30.0-40.0 43,000-60,000
48.F >40.0 >60,000
F"S Tug
fresh
oligohaline
mesohaline
polyhaline
euhaline
hyp*rhallne
If it is not possible to measure salinity, the presence (but not absence) of
the plant species shown in Table 4 may serve as an indicator of nonfreth
conditions.
Table 4. Uetland Plants Indicating Saline (Nonfresh) Conditions
(Sources: Millar 1976, Stewart and Kantrud 1372)
Suaeda deoressa
StlratH rtYititnili
Sclrous naludosus
Runnla occldentalls
Zennichellla palustrts
RumU IMTtMM
Potaaooeton vaoinatiit
Qienopodiua salt mat
Arttr trwhyMUT
Plltlthill MUrt?
Plantaoa erioooda
Potentllla anserlna
Atriolex patula
Polvoonua oaciflcua
Lactuca scarlola
TrUtohln wIM**
llwhltntttrQti watrlfBUi
Soartlna spp.
Ranunculus cvabalarla
Soeroularla marina
H*llotronlua curvastavlcun
Alisaa oraaineua
Pucclnellla nuttalliana
Salicornia viroinica
WORKING DRAFT
-------
WORKihb DRAFT
49. AQUATIC HABITAT FEATURES
(Answer only if a nontidal channel with a gradient of less than 0.01 ia
present.)
49.1.1 Does the AA include, or is It In;' - * in, • peraanently flooded „
streaa reach of which 201-BOX i« or ilallar slow-water areas?
49.1.2 Is the AA interspersed with rlffl«*t* spaced at intervals of five to
seven tiaes the average streaa width, and the substrate is cobble-
gravel? (Answer "N" If 49.1.1 - •**.)
* "Streaa reach" is the length of streaa between tributaries, or 1 alle In
length, whichever is greater.
** "Slow-water areas" are backwaters, side channels, and areas where flow
velocity at the surface ia generally less than 0.6 ft/sec.
m Riffles are naturally shallow areas with coarser substrate (generally
cobble-gravel) and faster current.
49.2 Does the AA have cover (e.g., aoderately dense aquatic vegetation,
submersed logs and stuaps, tree roots, boulders, overhanging vegetation,
crevices, undercut banks, etc.) available to fish for at least 20 days
in at least 201 of Zone I, or In other UO which are within 1 aile and at
least interaittently accessible to fish from this AA?
49.3 Are carp prevalent in the AA?
90. 'PLANTSl UATERTOUL VALUE
(Answer "I" if AA is unvegetated.) Does any plant or coabiriation of plants
listed in Table 9 coaprlse mk than 10Z, or 1 acre, of the AA?
This coapletes Level 3, Effectiveness/Opportunity (Held) phase of the
assessaent. At this point you have two options!
(a) You aay laprove the results of your assessaent by continuing on to
higher assessaent levels. If this is your desire, you aay either
continue with the Level 4 - Effectiveness/Opportunity Assessaent
(Detailed Data) on the following page, or skip to the Advanced
Unl queries*/Her I tag* Significance Assessaent on page _.
Alternatively, you aay stop the assessaent at this level and
interpret you responses for signicance using the Level 1
Significance Key, and for effectiveness/opportunity using the
function specific interpretation keys. The interpretation will be
based on your answers to Level 1 - Level 3 questions. If this is
your desire, turn to Step S on page .
74
laklt 1 fctlait flotl frtlwrrf kf viltrfool.'(Starcti l*fw 1177,
fclliKt UK, WIk f4 Inti 1174, Itrlla (t.. ll.- 1991.)
MWHC Kl gftIB
FMT li htltiHU FMI 2i frtfttmct *T hltrlMl Sr«p mi Shim
ty *« I I J 4 5 t 7 I
^ K 1 Iff ft »¦ im »w »m im nm n
twlltei t«l«it
Umli
Buw-
Iff.
jilM (tltlfl Ifltl)
hli—s W.
fHiwtilw
twin Iff.
Nwii MfUlH
fclretoU iff.
IHllHUii rn-
hi Kit «M.
tffUWUl HlnUll
"WtMIgltlH
MfHIti HtiU
C«m «#¦
HltKHH m»n
fclintUa «.
Budurli ne.
tMlMto iff.
Jwiim iff.
Ltwili tttnUti
L«etetMa« Iwlc.lirli
IWMUHfHI tilnliw
fclU
fariiM m.
FmmIm lenlaai
ftltHfi rinNd
iwlttifit ilrtn»fll«
Sallcseaia tlnl.itt
hiunW'
fceletMw IhIkkh
Sttnim WfUlaiMtf
Sttliil Iff.
Smiaia iff.
SmtiM iff.
Mritm
Hiieii MMtin
I t
t I «
t t
1 I
t I t
i
« t
t t
FMT It FiiIhhk
I) t«fi«
K X Ft WIHI
I t
FMI ll FiiIhhh If litHlwl CfMf
I J J 4 S I 7 I
«¦ II !¦ ¦¦ II ¦¦ II II
t
t
I t
I t
t I
I
. t
i <
t t
t t I t I
t I t i i t * t
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Table 3 coot.
All plants listed In Table 3 are of ilxwt-ivtrigt ittrictWtmu to at
least on* waterfowl group in at least ona region as indicated by the "*"
syabol. Plants not listed are seldoa preferred as food| nevertheless, they
soaetiaes may be valuable as cover, Mating aaterial, or as food when
preferred plants are locally scarce. This table reflects the attractiveness
of plants to waterfowl, and not necessarily their nutritive value. Nuts,
ant and fruits of woody species Bay be i sport ant locally, but are not
considered here. Also, the umar.should reaeaber that the presence of
adequate cover and dense concentrations of aquatic invertebrates aay be at
least as Important as presence of preferred plants to rat groups at mm
seasons. This is particularly true for groups 1 through 3, and B during the
breeding season. This fact is accounted for in the interpretation keys.
Part 1 of Table 3 indicates regions in which the plant is preferred
(coablntng all waterfowl species and seasons). The regions aret
Northeast (NE)t tC, NH, VT, M, CT, Rl, NJ, NY, PA, K, HD, UV, CM, IN, HI,
Ul, KY, west NC, east TN, south IL, east m, west VA.
Southeast t SC, 8A, FV, N., HS, N(, LA, east OK, east TX, south HO, west
TN, east NC, south VA.
Prairie (Plt)i 1A, 10, KS, (C, SD, ND, east NT, east UV, east CO, east NH,
west OK, west tW, north HO, central TX.
Mountains (HT)l A2, UT, NV, ID, west NH, west CO, west UV, west HT, east OR,
east UA, southeast CA.
Pacific (PC)i CA, west OR, west UA.
Part 2 of Table 3 indicates which waterfowl species prefer the plant and
during which periods of the year. The periods of the year are abbreviated!
N « nesting and brood rearing, and Ml ¦ sioration and winter. The waterfolw
groups are defined below.
6roup li Prairie Dabblers
Group 2i Wood Duck and Black Duck
Sroup 3i 6oldeneye and Bufflehead
Group 4i Canvasback, Redhead, Ruddy, Mid Ring-necked Duck
Sroup St Greater and Lesser Scaup
Group St Inland Geese and Swans
Group 7: Brant
Group Bt Uhistling Ducks
3-* Level 4 - Effectiveness/Opportunity Assessment (Detailed Data)
SI. PLANT PRODUCTIVITY
Is net annual aboveground productivity* (or less desirably, end-of~s*ason
standing crop) of any species or group of species (association) which
coaprises aore than 10X of the AAt
31.1 Less than 300 g/a'/year?
31.2 Greater than 1300 g/a /year?
* Measured as the spatial aean value within the I01 (or mr<) or the AA
where it occurs. Procedures are described In Kibby et al. 1990.
32. FREBHUATER INVERTEBRATE DENSITY
(If saltwater, answer *1.") In areas accessible to flih and wildlife, does
representative field saapling of the AA's benthlc and epiphytic
aacroinvertebrates indicate that during the growing season there arei
32.1 More than 300 individual a/ft' (excluding annelid woras)?
32.2 Less than 23 Individuals/ft ?
S3. TIDAL FLAT INVERTEBRATE DENBITY/B10HAB8
(Answer "I" • 'he wetland is not a tidal flat.) Does representative field
saapling ol . ... AA indicate that the relationship between density and bioaass
of aacroscopic annelids, aolluscs, or crustaceans ist
33.1 In the "H" portion of Figure 29?
33.2 In the "L" portion of Figure 29?
34. BROUND HATER MEASUREMENTS
If two wells are drilled (nearly siaultaneously) within {he wetland, one to
the depth of the water table and the other to the base of the organic layer
(ie., usually deeper), is the ground water deeper in the second well?
33. SUSPENDED S0L1D8
Does aost runoff or surface water entering the AA have a concentration of
suspended solids (preferably Inorganic):
53.1 Alaost alu-./s below 23 *g/l, and/or a secchi disc reading*
consistently greater than 9 » (26.4 ft)7
33.2 Regularly exceeding 80 ag/1 for prolonged periods, oc. 200 mg/l
at least once annually, and/or a secchi disc reading" consistently less
Vian 2 a (6.S ft).
53.3 Exceeding 1,200 xg/1 at least once annually7
53.4 Exceeding 4,000 ng/1 at least once annually?
Secchi disc is not a valid Measure of suspended solids if waters are
WORKING DRAFT
-------
PXYHfJur
FRESHWATER
TO
MESOHALINE TO
' ' 0°/oo UVKf-HALINE
to 18*/oo • >18'/oo
ANNELIDS
i «
- '• 1000 >111.000'•
a >
2 1,1
5
£
o
5
»
t
MOLLUSCS
.>
1M
MO >1000 •
CRUSTACEANS
IMMNMLMrf
Figure 29. Benthic Invertebrate populations of estuarlna tidal flats (Sourcei
Mat 1382)
36. DISSOLVED SOLIM OR ALKALINITY
(Mmwer to 96.1 and 36.2 If AA Is ttdal at. "o* oceesslble to fish.)
36.1 I* alkalinity (CaCOU) 1m* than 20 ag/1?
36.2 Is tha •orphedaphleinda* lass than 7 or greater than 33?
37. EUTWTHIC CONDITION
37.1 Ulthln tha wet dtpttnlon are any of the following conditions present in
the upper 2 a (6.6 ft> of tha water coluan during the growing season for
a period of at laast ona day?
(a) Tha watlwid systea is palustrine or lacustrine and total
phosphorus lass than 0.01 ag/1.
(b) Inorganic nitrogen less than 0.03 ag/1.
(c) A secchi disc is visible it greater than 8 ¦».*
- WORKING DRAF
(d) The wetland systea is palustrine or lacustrine and chlorophyll §
less than 0.001 kg/1.
(e) The wetland systea is not riverine and the relationship between
chlorophyll | and tight intensity at the sediaent Interface is
in region "L" of Figure 30.
Cf) The wetland systea is not aarine or estuarine and the
relationship between phosphorus loading rate ar* flushing
capacity lj jn region "L" of Figure 31.
37.2 111 thin the wet depression are any of the following conditions present In
the upper 2 a <6.6 ft) gf the water coluan during the growing season
for a period of at least one day?
(a> The wetland systea is palustrine or lacustrine and t^tal
phosphorus greater than 0.023 ag/1.
(b) Inorganic nitrogen greater, than 0.30 ag/1.
(c) A secchi disc is not visible at greater than 1 a.*
The wetland systea is not aarine or estuarine and the
r*l differ froa those collected in the rest of the wet
depression or other n»arby wet depression suggesting substantial ground
u4,,r input or output? Specifically, do elevated levels of »agn*siua,
chloride, bicarbonate (and their ratio with calciua), alkalinity,
hardness (both usually above 100 ag/1), specific conductance, halinity,
total dissolved solids (especially greater than 1,300 ag/1), and possible
silica exist at levels siailar to nearby deep wells? (Interpret with
caution.)
WORKING DRAFT
-------
>¦ £T
Q.
o
K
O
o
CM
E
0 200 400 600 800
LIGHT INTENSITY
(/iE/m2/8ec)
Figure 30. Chlorophyll ft »« • autrephlc Indicator in eituarles (Sourcei Diaz
,,82) 10.0,
1.0 5.0 10 50 100
FLUSHING CAPACITY (m/yr)
FiQur* 21. Phosphorou» as a ~utrophic indicator in freshwater 'Source:
Voll*nw*id#r 1974)
00 V
FORKING DRAH
WORKING DRAF
JT.C (Answer "I" If tidal.) Do water saaples froa the AA (preferably froa
drilled well*) differ fro* those collected in the rest of the wet
depression or other nearby wet depression suggesting substantial ground
water Input or output? Specifically, are there reduced, and soaetlaes
¦ore seasonally, variable levels of total dissolved solids (less than 300
ag/l), hallnity, and alkalinity or hardness (both usually below 50 ag/l)
with increased prevalence of sulfates or bicarbonate* of calciua or
aagneslua? (Interpret with caution.)
60. HATER TEMPERATURE ANOMALIES
Are sprlngj present within the AA, or are there localized, atypical thermal
conditions which Might suggest substantial ground water Input?
* Specifically, locally cooler and less variable temperatures In suaaer and
waraer, less variable temperatures In winter not attributable local snowaelt,
water depth, turbidity, differences in solar absorption of sediaents, water
velocity, shading, or wind buffering.
61. DIB8CLVED 0XY8EN
(Answer "I'^if AA is not accessible to fish.) Is dissolved oxygen known to
be Halting , at least seasonally, to fish that could otherwise use this AA?
* Assum that concentrations of less than 4 ag/l and 60X saturation are
liaiting unless direct observation indicates regular presence and/or
successful reproduction of fish.
62. UNDERLYING STRATA
Do geologic aaps Indicate that any part of the AA is underlain by at least
10 ft of predoainantly porous aaterials or well-fractured rock?
63. DIBCHAME DIFFERENTIAL
(Answer "I* to 63.1 and 63.2 if tidal.)
63.1 Do inlet hydrographs exhibit higher flood peaks than outlet hydrographs,
based on data froa More than one stora?
63.2 Do surface water Inflows exceed simultaneously neasured surface water
outflows after accounting for losses due to evapotranspiration?
Evapotranspiration loss can be eliminated by using night time
aeasureaents.)
64. TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS CTSS) DIFFERENTIAL
(If AA lacks a constricted outlet or inlet, answer *1".) Art- levels of total
suspended inorganic solids, Measured at the AA's inlet (especially during
intense storas), greater than those Measured simultaneously at the outlet, qt_
is detention tlae (as deterained by tracer dyes or aorphoaetr ic aeasuremerits)
at least 3 days in suauer and IS days in winter'1
81
-------
t^Oktvihb i
This completes the Level 4 Effectiveness/Opportunity (Detailed Data)
UMUMnt. At this point you have two options!
(*) You My continue on to Level S - Advanced Bigniflcance Assessment lor
(fe>iqueness/Herltag* on tha following paga If desired.
(b) A1 tarnativaly, you uy atop tha »•!«..' ¦' (Wi point and raturn to
Stap 8 on paga .
3.9 Laval S - Advanced Significance Assessment for Uhiqueness/Herltage
This level of the assessment refine* the significance rating for the
Uniqueness/Heritage value. Tha rating Is refined by looking beyond the
wetland being evaluated, and considering how other wetlands in the r*qt ->n
serve as a context for the characteristics and functions of the wetland being
evaluated. The ideal approach for accomplishing this goal would be to
calculate the functions of all wetlands in a region using Levels I through 4,
and then scale tha Uniqueness/Heritage rating of any single wetland. Ii the
•ore realistic approach (in terms of effort) that follows, single
characteristic assessments (rather than detailed functional assessments) are
tallied for all regional wetlands to taprove the Uniqueness/Heritage estimate.
3.3.1 Contest Region
Tor this assessment there are several options for choosing a context region. <
Select the one that best fits available manpower and project objectives, since
the counting of large nuatoers of wetlands is time-consuming.
The SMllest area you may wish to use as a contest region is the locality. An
advantage of using it Is its general recognition as the most legally and
politically important unit for judging environmental values. A disadvantage
is that difficulties arise In comparing wetland uniqueness in different
locations of greatly different size. A larger locality is likelier to have
¦ore wet 1 ends, and thus mora wetland types. Although this Increases the
probability of there being an especially rare or unique type, the relative
value of each wetland may seem smaller.
A solution to this dilemma is to use a "standard density circle" (SDC).
Within any 2 such circles the probabilities are more equal of encountering a
rare type. Thus, wetland comparisons based on scarcity and uniqueness have a
statistical basis.
A third option is to use a functional watershed or U.S.6.S. hydrounit as the
context region. Although such an option has little political relevance and
makes comparisons statistically less reliable, it better accounts for the
potential interactions among wetlands and socioeconomic values.
Other options include evaluating wetlands in terms of their uniqueness
within an ecoregion (see Bailey 1970) or within a local, state, or federal
agency jurisdictional district. These options would all require extensive
effort, examining and classifying (at least fro* the office) thousands of
wetlands in some cases. The result, however would be a more realistic
perspective on uniqueness of a particular wetland, and an ability to deal
with wetland issues in an anticipatory, rather than a reactive manner.
3.3.2 Assessment
1. .Select the context region that will be used from the options above.
2. Obtain National Wetland Inventory maps for the entire context region. If
these are not available, and no similar regional maps (indicating
wetland type) are available, you must classify and map all wetlands vitlun
the region yourself, using airphotos and field visits.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
3. froa the NUI aap (or your own) tally the nuaber and, If convenient, the
acreage of all wetland* according to their iyitt* and class, and
preferably also their subclass and hydroperlod.
4. Calculate percentages for the categories tallied in Step 4.
3. If the context region Is a standard density circle then answer the 4
questions below as they are written. If the context region is locality,
insert locality for SDC In the four questions below. If the context region Is
a hydrounit or functional watershed. Insert Hydrounit or functional watershed
for SDC in the four questions below.
(a) Is the wetland's class the scarcest or next-to-scarcest wetland
class in the SDC, by nuaber or acreage?
(b> Is the wetland's subclass the scarcest or next-to-scarcest wetland
sidiclass in the SDC, by nuaber or acreage?
Is the wetland's hydroperlod the scarcest or next-to-scarcest
wetland hydroperlod in the SDC, by nuaber or acreage?
(d> Of all the wetland hydroperlods or subclasses that are present in this
SDC, does this wetland possess tore than SOX?
3.3.3 Interpretation
If any of the questions above Is answered "yes", place a rating of MODERATE wi
the For. Oi Evaluation Suaeary In the U»iqu*neit/Herttage row of the
Significance coluan. If sore than one question (classification category) is
answered "yes", place a rating of HIGH where just indicated. Place a rating of
LOU If none of the above >.ire answered "yes'i however, do not substitute a loutr
rating for a higher one If the latter was already assigned to Uniqueness by
Level I analysis. Enter a code next to the Uniqueness category to indicate
which level of analysis was used. For exaaplei
Context Rulon All Wetlands Classified/
Used I Tallied toi SfiSlti
SDC hydroperlod SDC- HP
locality class, siAclast L- C,SC
hydrounit class, hydroperlod HU- C,HP
This coaeletes the Level S assessment. Return to Step S on page .
WORKING DRAFT
4.0 INTERPRETATION* PHASE
During this phase of th# evaluation answers to th* questions in Level 1
through 4 will be interpreted. Based on this interpretation, qualitative
value ratings of H16H, MEDIUM, or LOU will be assigned to significance,
effectiveness, and oppportunity (where applicable) for 10 wetland functions
and values. Value ratings are assingned by analyzing the answers in an
"interpretation key* (inference network) specific to each function. In
addition to assigning ratings for functions and values, the interpretation
provides keys for assigning probable use assessments for 214 wetland dependent
fish and bird species.
If you Intend to use the computer program developed at Waterways Experiment
Station for the interpretation phase of WET, please refer to the User's Manual
provided with the program at this time.
4.1 Interpretation of Significance
Place in front of you Form Bt Assessment Answer Sheet and the Significance
Interpretation Key which is on the foll<- >nc ,*ge. I' you look at the
Significance Interpretation Key you will notice that it contains a series of
boxes. Within each box is a coded reference to a single, or series of
Questions from the Level 1 - Significance Assessment, following the coded
reference is an "equal" sign and a "y" (yes) or V V.o). For ***ftvle, in the
first box of the Significance Interpretation Key is the word "ANY" followed by
"Q1-Q6 ¦ y". This translates to "Were any of Questions 1-6 answered yes"?
Two separate paths emerge from each box. The true (T) path assumes that the
conditions in the predictor group have been met, and the false (F) path
assumes that the conditions were not met. Proceed down the key from box to
box until you assigned a HIGH, MODERATE, LOU, or UNCERTAIN rating for the
each function. Record the resulting value rating in the Significance column
of Form Di Evaluation Summary Sheet. Please note, however, that it is
possible for some functions to be assigned more than one significance rating.
If multiple ratings result for a specific function record only the highest
¦lontfuaott rttlna an FOTP Pi Evaluation SmM»arv Sheet for that function.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Ming draft
¦ignlflcance Interpretation Key
I Ql- 06 » y 1 1 > HIGH (for Uniqueness/Heritage)
If '
[ 030 ¦ y | ' > MODERATE (lor Uilqu«iMi/H«rlti(t)
C~^ F
LOW (for IhlQUWHilltrittoi:
fo7 ¦ y )-
LOU (for Qround Water Discharge)
CEZD-
LOU (for rioodflow Alteration)
y j T ¦ LUt A - y I — ^
F _ Jf
HI8H (for Floodflow Alteration)
List A
- > MODERATE (for rioodflou Alteration)
F
-9 UM (for FA)
-List A"
Sy or
2By or
29y or
3!y
Repeat the above sequence substituting 010-17 for 09. Record HIGH, MODERATE,
UM for the functlon(s) addressed by each question (i.e., sediment/toxicant
retention, nutrient reaoval/transforaation, ground water discharge, ground
water recharge). '
| 018 - y~}-
->HIGH (for Sedlaent Stabilization)
HE
I List » ¦ yj T ¦
T7 ¦
-^MOOERATE (for Sedlaent Stabilization)
•List B- )
Sy or I
2By or /
_3__J
-5>LQU (far Sedlaent Stabilization)
Repeat the above sequence substituting 019-23 for 01B. Record HIGH, MODERATE,
LOU for the function(s) addressed by each question (i.e., static
diversity/abundance, wildlife diversity/abundance, fishery habitat,
uniqueness/heritage).
026
"" 1
lfF
027
* V
(
OS or 030 « y
HIGH (for Recreation)
-^MOOERATE (for Recreation)
—I> LOU (for Recreation)
B6
4.2 Interpretation of Opportunity and Effectiveness
It is 1aportant to understand that the opportunity and effectiveness
interpretation key* were written with the assumption that all questions in
Level 2 and Level 3 would be answered. The only provision aade for partially
completed data seta (I.e., unknown answers) is In the case of a Level 4
assessment (Questions 31-64). If all of the questions for a particular level
of assessment cannot be answered, the next lowest level of assesment should be
selected.
Each of the following sections address a particular wetland function or value.
Host sections begin with a brief Introductory discussion of the function or
value, followed by a working definition, the rationale for HIGH and LOU.
rankings, and a stateaent of the general sensitivity of the interpretation
keys. Interpretation key(s) are at the end of each section. Three of the
functions (floodflow alteration, sedlmenht/toxlcant retention, nutrient
reaovel/transforaation ) have two keys, one addressing effectiveness, the
other addressing opportunity. In addition, three probable-use assessment keys
for wetland dependent birds and fish are Included.
Begin by placing in front of you the completed Form Bi Assessment Answer
Sheet and the interpretation key for the function of Interest. Each key
contains groups of question numbers and associated "correct" answers. Two
separate paths emerge from each groups. One path assume* that all of the
conditions in the predictor grc'jp Iiave been met (T), and the other assumes
that all of the conditions were not met (F) or in the case of some Level 4
questions, the answer is tnknown (PO). Begin with the first group and proceed
down the key until you arrive at a HIGH, MODERATE, LOU, or UNCERTAIN rating
for the function. Record this rating In the appropriate column (Effectiveness
or Opportunity) of the Fora Di Evaluation Summary Sheet. Repeat this
procedure for each of the functions of interest.4.0 INTERPRETATION PHASE
Ouring this phase of the evaluation answers to the questions In Level 1
through 4 will be Interpreted. Based on this Interpretation, qualitative
value ratings of HIGH, MEDIUM, or LOU will be assigned to significance,
effectiveness, and oppportunity (where applicable) for 10 wetland functions
and values. Value ratings are assingned by analyzing the answers in an
"interpretation key" (inference network) specific to each function. In
addition to assigning ratings for functions and values, the Interpretation
phase provides keys for assigning probable use assessments for 214 wetland
dependent fish and bird species.
If you intend to use the computer program developed at Waterways Experiment
Station for the interpretation phase of UET, please refer to the User's Manual
provided with the program at this time.
4.2.1 Ground Water Recharge
Definition - For purposes of this method, recharge wet depressions or wetlands
are considered to be those wherei (a) recharge to underlying materials or
ground water (deep or shallow) exceeds ground water discharge to the wet
depression on a net annua) basis, and/or *b) the rate of recharge typically
exceeds the of recharge from terrestrial environments.
„ WORKING DRAFT
-------
Rational* (HIGH) - There art four general types of wetlands which, on a net
annual basis, My have a high probability of being ground water recharge
situations (1.*., rated HIGH), first are those areas Utere direct evidence of
recharge has been gained through use of piezometers at various seasons.
Specifically, evidence consists of Measurements showing that the water table
slopes away from the wet depression on Most of its sides, with no downslope
water table divide occurring In the immediate vicinity, and/or where the depth
to water is progressively deeper in a cluster of piezometers drilled at the
same location but to different depths. Second are those wetlands in
precipitation deficit regions that either are nonpermanently flooded or t*ilch
have an Inlet but no outlet (excluding fringe wetlands) aad. vrtilch are
topogr^rtilcally high, urban (I.e., reduced recharge from uplands and Increased
hydraulic head In wetlands), within an Impoundment, or "losing" streams.
Third are those wetlands not necessarily In precipitation deficit regions, but
which have an inlet but no outlet (excluding fringe wetlands) and Uilch have
any one of several other conditions noted in the next paragraph. Finally, the
wetlands In precipitation surplus or deficit regions that have underlying
limestone strata or mineral soil, are nonpermanently flooded, ar*
topographically high (I.e., outlets steeper than Inlets, or near a major
watershed divide), tcA. urban or within an impoundment. They must also exhibit
great fluctuations in water level or be a "losing" stream.
Rational* (LOU) - Several wetland types are considered to have low
probabilities of net annual recharge, regardless of any circumstantial
evidence of high recharge as described above. Such low-recharge wetlands
lncludet (a) all marine and estuarine wetlands (where recharge. If it occurs,
is economically detrimental), (b) all wetlands with iapervlous underlying
strata, (c) all nonfrlnge wet depressions that have outlets only, (d) other
wetlands 'hat do not have all of the following! coarse underlying strata, not
below a dam, wid no Indicators of ground water discharge.
8«n*ral Sensitivity - Relatively few eastern wetlands will be rated HIGH for
recharge. Most will receive a rating of UNCERTAIN, and probably more will be
rated LOU than HIGH. Relatively more western wetlands will receive HIGH
ratings. Collection of pleioaetrlc data or knowledge of the area's surflclal
geology can have a pivotal effect on the ratings, «4ilch otherwise are strongly
affected by the hydroperlod, precipitation balance, contiguity, and system
predictors.
WORKING DRAF
WORKING m
Ground Uater Recharge (SUR) Effectiveness Key
For the GUR interpretation, use the answers In the "X" coluwi of Form B. If
these are not available, use the answers in the "W" column, and as a last
resort the answers in the *D" coluwi.
> LOU
[(10D/E/F=y) or (8.l-n and 8.3»y>
A—c
tidal/estuarine/marine or no permanent inlet and permanent outlet *
I (24.3*n) ~ (34.2«n)~<60=n)~ (Z3=«i) ]
_L
LOW
soil Infiltration not slow and not located dounslope of a large
impoundment and no springs or water temperature anomalies that suggest
discharge and not ditched » J
(54-y)
water table slopes away from the AA
HIGH
(1.1-y) L
IIZESl
E>P or located in a "dry" region
Q.
ANV of the followingi
1. (33A*n)
not permanently flooded
2. (£3.2»y>
negative discharge differential
3. I<8.l*y)*(8.3-n)+Cll®n)1
permanent inlet and no permanent outlet and not fringe or island
situation
ANV of the followingi
1. (S.l»y)
local topography looks promising
2. (24.4»y)
> UNCERTAIN
F
watershed soils have slow infiltration rate
3. (21B*y)
subwatershed iapervious
4. (34.3.l"y)
located upsloa? of a dai> or dike
5. (39.2*y)
uater jjuality anc-af.! 1 es (dissolved solids reduction)
-» HIGH
BOTH of the following:
1. I(63.2=y)*C39.;=y)l OR [(8.l=y)+(8.3=n)*(ll»n)J
negative discharge differential and water quality anomalies
(dissolved solids reduction) OR permanent inlet and no permanent
outlet and fringe or island situation
2. ANY of GUR List A
tie:
ALL of GUR List A
>
(62«y>
porous underlying strataL T"
F/PD
-> UNCERTAIN
f
— Continued —
-^> HIGH
83
-------
GUR Key coot.
eu* Ll«t A
1. <32An)
not peraanently flooded
2. (6-y>
local topography favorable
3. C(2IB*y' or (24.4>y) or (34.3.1*y>)
ubwattrihtd laptrvlam or veter*h»d lotlt with alow Infiltration or
located upslop* of a daa or dike
4. (24.2-y or 24.3-y>
fin* Mineral coils beneath AA or karat region
3. (33.1-y or 33.2-y>
expansive flooding or unstable flow
— End —
30
4.2.2 Qround Hater Discharge
Definition - Tor purposes of this Method, HIGH-discharge areas are those where
discharge fro* underlying Materials or ground water (deep or shallow) into the
wet depression exceeds the recharge of underlying ground water froa the wet
depression on a net annual basis. The tera "recharge* is soaetiaes Misused
(i.e., in the sense of "the aquifer recharges the wetland") when in a strict
sense, what is Meant is that discharge froa the ground water is replenishing a
wetland.
Rationale (HI8H) - There are More than eight types of wetlands which, on a net
annual basis, May have a high probability of being ground water discharge
situations (I.e., rated HIGH). These include Most peraanently flooded or
saturated wetlands that arei (a) in the Uest (and other preci;i*)tion deficit
regions), (b) iaa*diat*ly below daM, (c) larger than 200 acres, with a
watershed less than 3 tiaes the wet depression's area, (d) larger than 200
acres and not surrounded by paved land, (e) steeper downstreaa of their outlet
than Just before their inlet, (f) lacking inlets but having outlets, and not
dominated by snoiwelt (nonfringe wetlands only), (g) stable with regard to
seasonal water-level fluctuations, 2L (h> characterized by springs, water
quality, or teaperature anoaalies that suggest discharge. They aust also not
have previously passed the criteria for HIGH recharge, although the
possibility of a wet depression having recharge and discharge siaultaneously
(at different points) is conceptually possible. If the wetland is not
peraanently flooded or saturated, a rating of HIGH aay be assigned nonetheless
if at leaat two of the above are Met.
Rational* (UM) - The only wetlands believed to have a LOU probability for
discharge are thoset (a) rated HIGH for recharge, or (b> nonperaanently
flooded wetlands that do not have even two of the characteristics described
above.
Oeneral Sensitivity - A aajority of wetlands nationwide will probably attain
ratings of HIGH for ground water discharge, particularly if they are
peraanently flooded. A slightly fewer nuaber will be rated UNCERTAIN, while
the few*st—but probably a significant percent—will be rated LOU. Tidal
wetlands will aost often be rated UNCERTAIN and can never attain a rating of
HIGH. This does not deny the occurrence of ground water discharge in tidal
wetlands, but rather highlights the difficulty in predicting its presence.
The criteria do not allow a peraanently flooded nontidal wetland to be rated
LOU for discharge, unless recharge has been Indicated by the recharge key.
The aost pivotal predictors in the key are those discussed in the
corresponding section on ground water recharge.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Sround Hater Discharge (QUO) Effectlv*n*ss K*y
Tor th* QUO Interpretation us* th« answers In th* "X" column of fori B. If
these art not available us* th* answer* in th* "U" coluan, and as a last
r*sort th* answer* in *0* coluan.
Uas BUR rated HIGH? 1 31 »» LOU
=—, \r tr
(34-y) «-*
wat*r tabl* do** not *Icp« away froa wttland)
1 P/Pt>
^ AMY of th* followlngi
1. t(l.l-y)*(3.l.l-n)*<21B»n)+(32A/B/E/H/I/J-y)+(39.2-n)+<63.2-n)*(23»n]
E>P or located in "dry* region and depression >3Z of watershed area
and subwatershed not lapervioua and longstanding water and no water
chemistry anoaalies suggesting recharge and not a "losing streaa" and
not ditched
2. t(l.l«n)e(3.1.2»y>*<21B»n>«-(32A/»/E/H/!/J»y)e(63.2-n)*(39.2-n)e(23-n>l
E201 of watershed
area and subwatershed not lapervioua and longstanding water and no
chealcal anomalies which suggest recharge and not a "losing streaa"
and not ditched
3. (33. 1«hi and 33.2»n)
no expansive flooding and stable flow
4. Two of the conditions in Part B below
AND ANY of the followlngi
1. (34.2-y)
AA water table influenced by upstreaa iapoundaent
2. (39.l«y)
water quality anoaalies (elevated dissolved solids)
3. (!2Cd»y>
aquatic bed and aquatic aoss
4. C<6.l=n)+(6.2-y>)
local topography not favorable for r*charg* but favors discharge
3. (60»y)
water teaperature anoaalies
G. C(B. l*n)*(8.2"n>-K8.3»y) + L0M
— End —
AJil'W
4.2.3 Floodflow Alteration
Tlie hydrologlcal literature provides auple foraulas and Mthods for
quantifying the flocdflow alteration capacity of wet depressions.
Qualitative, rapid ass*ssa*nt approaches have been presented In procedures by
Reppert et al. (1979) and Uolverton (1980). Quantitative or qualitative
approaches which exaaine just the contribution of the wetland to floodflou
alteration are few.
Definition - Tor purposes of this method, HIGH-floodflow alteration areas are
those where surface water is stored or its velocity is otherwise attenuated to
a greater degree than typically occurs in terrestrial envlronaents. No
judgment is aade as to th* value of such flow alteration. Indeed, there aay
be Instances irftere retarding of flow causes Increased flooding by
synchronizing flows.
1. Tloodflow Alteration Effectiveness
Rationale (HISH) - There are five types of wetlands which aost clearly are
effective for altering floodflows. These include wet depressions which! (a)
have regulated outflows (reservoirs, daas), (b) have outflows that are
aeasured as being less than Inflows, (c) have neither an outlet nor an inlet,
(d> expand their surface are* by at least 23 percent for 20 days of the year
and are larger than 3 acres, or (e) are larger than 200 acres and are either
In a precipitation deficit region or (if flowing water is present) are at
least 70Z covered with juxtaposed woody vegetation. Additionally, they aust
not be tidal. Thus, the simple presence of vegetation which adds to channel
roughness is considered insufficient to result in a rating of HIGH| the wet
depression aust reaove (through evapotransplratlon) or store water as well as
create a lag (desynchronized) effect.
Rationale (LOU) - Uetlands with LOU probabilities of altering flood flows are
assuaed to be those which have all the following characteristics! (a) the
spatially dominant hydroperlod is "peraanent," (b) th* wet depression Is less
than 200 acres, (c> no potential for ponding of stormflow? is apparent (e.g.,
fringe wetland or others with unconstrlcted outlets), (d) If precipitation '
~vapo.-atlm, and the wet depression is saaller than 3 acres, and (e) lf flow
Is present, channels are neither sinuous nor containing ample woody vegetation
that Intercepts surface flows. Also, all tidal wetlands are rated LOU, as
they are a buffer against floodflows only lf alld stora surges occur at low
tide.
fleneral Sensitivity - Host Uestern and Prairie wetlands will be rated HIGH, as
will large flowing wetlands elsewhere with extensive woody vegetation. LOU
ratings will be assigned to aost saall, unconstricted, permanently flooded
wetlands in the East, especially if they lack low-gradient channels and woody
vegetation. The MODERATE rating will be the aost common rating In many
regions.
These ratings do not reflect the Quantity (e.g., acre-feet) of flood storage—
only the probability that storage or loss will occur or lag time will be
measurably increased. The position of the wetland in the watershed and its
position relative to floodable properties have been ignored in this portion
the !.ey due to the difficulty of predicting Aether increased lag time will
synchronize or desynchroni:e flood flows at a particular point of inter'.-st.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
WORKING DRAFT
The aost pivotal predictors appear to ba system type, rtjlon, contiguity,
size, and vegetation for*. A vary few wetlands sight meet the criteria for
both HIGH and LOU, e.g., a taal1 unconstricted, unvegetated, permanently
flooded Eastern wetland (LOU) which has great natural fluctuation* In water
level (HIGH). In such cases, the logic flowchart and coaputer program produce
a message of UNCERTAIN.
2. Floodflou Alteration Opportunity
Uetlands low in a watershed say have gre*t»' oorortunlty for intercepting
floodflowsj however if they are lower lr t .« than aost floodable
properties, their social significance will «!gM and, in some cases, their
effectiveness My also be less (I.e., as cci-r.i to "headwater reservoir"
type wetland).
Uetlands considered to have the highest opportunity for floodflow alteration
are those which are not tidal but which have a large water-
F '—!—^ low
no p*rMn*nt outlet
'
(9.2"y or 63.l*y)
unconstricted inlet and constricted outlet or flat hydrograph
C(2.t.2«y)+(31.3-n>«<9.1-y)J
>40 acres and Zone B < Zone A and constricted outlet
t(2.1.3-y)+(31.3«y>]
>200 acres and Zone A >10X of Zones B and C .
1,
HIGH
MX of the following!
1. (2.1.l«n>
>3 acres
2. (33.1«y)
eipansivt flooding
3. (24.3-n)
soil does not have slow infiltration rate
4. (32A-n or 32E«y>
saturated or not peraanently flooded
OR AU. of the following!
1. (2.1.3=y>
>200 acres
2. (24.3-n)
r
soil does not have slow infiltration rate
(l.l-y) OR t<22.l.l=y)+(31.6D/E=y)*(12A/B=y>+(13.1A*y or 13.2=y>]
"dry" region or E>P OR flow suggested and BC : 60" eB it\d forested or
scrub-shrub and channel flow intercepted by large clumps or it
spreads out over a wide area
ALL of the following:
1. (32A»y)
peraanently flooded
(2.1.3-n>
<200 acres
[ or (9.l=n*9.2*n)3
l f- ,£(22. l.l'«y)
flow is suggested
F
>
fringe/i sland situation or outlet not constricted
1(1.l=n) or (2.1»y)l
not a "dry" region or ELDU
ALL of the following:
1. (12A*B=n>
not forested or scrub-shrub
2. (3l.6A=y or 31.6E=y)
<60* of BC is eB
3. (13.2-n)
-3> LCm)
roDERATE
instr*** v*g«tation-wat*r intrrcptrsion not great
^ I
>
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Floodflow Alteration (FA) Opportunity K*y
For th* FA Opportunity Interpretation, us* the anw*ri in the "U" coluan of
Fora A. If these are not available, use the answers in the "I" coluan, and at
a last resort the answer* In the "D" coluan.
<100+E*f-n>
not aarine, estuarine or tidal
I £
LOU
BOTH of the following!
1. (S.2*n or 3.1.fy)
upslope wet depressions are <51 of AA's watershed or AA <51 of
watershed acreage
2. t(21B-y) or (24.4-y)}
subwatershed i "pervious or watershed soils with slow infiltration
ALL of th* followlngi \
ir
1. (3.1.2-y) 1
F v
AA >20Z of watershed acreage 1
HIGH
2. (21A«y) V
/
3. <3.2«y>
upslope wetland! coapris* >3X of AA's watershed
4. (24.4-n)
watershed soils do not have slow infiltration
LOU
MODERATE
— End —
4.2.4 8*dla*nt Stabilization
Quantitative aodels for evaluating the wave dissipation ability of vegetation
are presented by Caafield (1977) and Uayne <1976). Several quantitative
aodels are available for evaluation of frictional resistance of terrestrial
vegetation to runoff in teaporarily flooded grassed waterways, but apparently
few if any exist for aquatic vegetation. Ouantitative aodels for evaluating
deposltlonal-erosional dynaaics and wave decay are available for all wetland
systeas, but do not always include a coaponent easily recognizable as "wetland
influence." No foraal qualitative procedures exist for evaluating this
function in all wetland types, although inforaal guidelines are given by
Silberhorn ft it- <1974), a foraal procedure by Pfaunkuch (1973) Is applicable
to riverine depressions, and a procedure by Knutson et al. (I9B1) is
applicable to tidal eaergent areas.
Definition - For purposes of this aethod, HIGH sedlaent stabilization areas
are those which are aore effective for binding soil and dissipating erosive
forces than are typical upland environments.
Rational* (HI9H) - Uetlands rated HIGH for this function aust have high
opportunity (e.g., boat wakes, downstreaa froa reservoir, fetch exceeding 2
ailes. or If less, deep waters prevail in the wet depression, channelization,
eroding currents, or shoreline erosion areas) as well as being comprised o<
rubblei or consisting of or including an island, bar, or peninsula that
Intercepts waves or currents (and is vegetated with persistent erect
vegetation)} or consisting of such vegetation in a zone at least 20 ft wide
along soae of the shoreline.
Rational* (LOU) - It was reasoned that if an area had little opportunity to
intercept waves or anchor the shoreline, it was irrelevant how effective it
aight be at such tasks.
The only type of wetland considered capable of being rated LOU is one in which
there is no flowing water, no boat wakes, no open water wider than 100 ft,'and
no eroding areas abutting the wetland, as well as having no vegetation (erect
or subaerged) or rubble.
Qeneral 8*nsltlvlty - Harine, estuarine, riverine, aftd contiguous palustrine
wetlands will never be rated LOU by these criteria. Most vegetated estuarine
and palustrlne wetlands with open water will be rated HIGH, as will aost
rocky seacoasts and isl.- J\ tie aost pivotal characteristics for this
function seea to be those dealing with contiguity, flow, fetch, and vegetation
zone width.
" WORKING DRAFT
-------
Sadiftant Stabilisation CSS) Eff«ctiv«n*tt Kay
For th# SS intarpratation, um only th* answ+rs in tha "M" column of Fori B.
If thm art not available, us* th* answers in th# "0" cot nan, and as a last
rasort th# answers in th* "X" coluwi.
All of the following:
1. (22.l.l-n)
flow is not evidenced
2. (23.3*n>
~7~
•rosion not a problMi
3. (19.lA»y>
" " ^
at least 1 acre is sheltered
3Z
AU. of th* (oilowing:
1. (31.6A-y)
BC is 0* eB
2. (12C«n>
not aquatic bed
3. (43f-n>
not rubble substrate
LOW
1
ANY of th* foilowingI
1. (23.3*y>
1.
n
I
potential erosive forces pr»«*nt
2. C<19.lB»y) or <31.1»n)]
unsheltered or toiw C > Zones A*B
3. (23-y)
ditches, canals, or levees conflr.* water
4. t(7.2«y) or (41.2-y)]
high velocity
3. (22.3-y)
long-t*r> erosion evident
6. (34.2-y)
water table influenced by upstream ittpountfsent
2.
3.
4.
3.
ANY of th* following:
1. <4ST*y?
rubbl* nbitratt
(19.2«y>
island or p*nlniula intercepts waves
(36.1.l*n)
erect vegetation in Zones A and B >20 ft
(12A/B«y>
forested or scrub-shrub
<13.2-y>
instreaa water-vegetation interspersion good
HIGH
— Continued —
* ,
98
VJOWWG DMA
SS Key cont.
WORKING DR
ALL of the following:
1. <43F=n)
substrate not rubble
2. (19.2=n>
no island or peninsula to intercept waves
3. (3£.l.l«y>
erect vegetation in Zones A and B <20 ft
4. (12A+B*n>
not forest or scrub-shrub
3. (13.2-n)
poor instreaa water-vegetation interspersion
-4>L0W
>MODERATE
End —
39
WORKING DRAFT
-------
4.2.3 S*diMnt and Toxicant R*t*ntlon
Quantitative models for evaluating the sediaent and toxicant retention
capabilities of wetlands are feu. to previously noted, quantitative models of
varying usefulness exist for predicting sediment routing and deposition rates
in all systems, but few Include an identifiable shallow-water coaponent. An
exception is the study by Hlckok at >1. (1977). Qualitative aodels for
sediment and toxicant retention are presented in procedures by Reppert et al.
(1979) and Uolverton (1980).
Definition - Tor purposes of this method, HIGH sediment/toxicant retention
areas are those which physically (or cheadcally In the case of toxicants)
trap and retain on a net annual basis the Inorganic sediments and/or
chealcal substances generally toxic to aquatic life.
Rational* (HIGH for Effectiveness) - Wetlands considered by the method to
have high effectiveness for sediaent trapping Include ones Kith no outlets;
ones that are iapounded (though It can be argued that the dam, not the
wetland. Is the factor causing sedimentation)) ones where water sampling
(especially during storas) directly Indicates that outlet wattrs have less
Inorganic particulate utter than nontida! inlet waters) ones that are
vegetatad with aract, persistant vegetation and coaprlse all of a clearly
defined delta, laland, bar, or paninsulai ones where there is direct
evidence of accretion froa historic photographic evidence or field sampling;
ones in basically depositions! environments with erect vegetation wider than
20 ft; persistent eaergent estuarlne wetlands wider than 20 ft in
deposltlonal environments) aollusc bed/reef wetlands) or estuarlne rooted
vascular aquatic bed wetlands. Wetlands fulfilling any of these
descriptions aust also be free of artificial channelization and soil
tillage.
Other wetlands qualifying for a rating of HIGH are those having aost of the
following condltlonsi constricted outlet) no flow or slow-velocity flow|
brackish salinity) riverine with good pool-riffle ratio (if cobble-gravel
sediment) or adequate pools and Intream debris) short fetch) great depth
(or shallower depths with shorter letches)) relatively great duration and
extent of seasonal flooding) and estuarlne emergent in a high-Intensity
stora region. In addition, such wetlands also aust be free of artificial
channelization and soil tillage, as well as having erect vegetation in a
zone at least 20 ft wide, or in the came of tidal wetlands, having aquatic
bed vegetation under brackish (flocculating) conditions.
Rationale (LOU for Effectiveness) - Uetlands that have not aet the criteria
for HIGH are next screened for LOU effectiveness. Uetlands considered to
have a LOU probability of being effective for sediaent trapping are one of
five basic typesi (a) wetlands with tilled (faraed) soils and having a
permanent outlet, > wetlands with cobble-gravel, rubble, or bedroct
substrates and no vegetation, lnstream debris, or pools; > wetlands
fringing the channel iamedlately cl.unitream froa an impoundment; (d)
wetlands where measured nontida I outputs of inorganic particulates are
greater than inputs (especially during storas); (e) wetlands where
prevailing current velocities are sometimes greater than the suspc-noion
thresholds of the prevailing sediment types; or (f) wetlands having host of
the following characteristics) exposed to boat wakes or channelized;
unconstricted outlet; tilled soil; not in a depositional gradient or not
WORKING DRAFT
being in a wet depression that expands greatly when flooded) shallow depths
with large fetch (and minimal aquatic bed vegetation); and minimal fringe
vegetation if sediaent enters as overland flow (or mlniaal in-depression
vegetation lnterspersion if sediment enters as channel flow).
Uetlands meeting any of the criteria in the above paragraph must also (if
such data are available) show no evidence of accretion, based on historic
photographic or field coring data.
General Sensitivity - A majority of prairie pothole wetlands will be rated
HIGH, and in some regions probably a majority of wetlands will be rated
MODERATE. Uetlands likeliest to be rated LOU will be marine and riverine
types. The aost pivotal characteristics seem to b* vegetation zone width,
contiguity, velocity, and s*dlment type. •
Rational* (HIBH.for Opportunity) - Uetlands with a HIGH opportunity for
sediment trapping are those with any of several potential nonpoint or point
sources of sediaent or toxicants named in the method (*.g., row crops, soil-
slope conditions enhancing erosion, dumps, fields where pesticides are
applied).
Rational* (LOW for Opportunity) - LOU opportunity for sediaent and toxicant
retention results from absence of potential sediaent sources, combined wit!i
a forested subwatershed cf a size not larger than five tikes the wet!and'j
area at least 31 of the upslope watershed being occupied by wetlands (or
a reservoir being present).
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Sedlsent/Toxicant Retention (B/TR) Effectiveness Kay
For the S/TR effectiveness interpretation use the answers in the "X" coluan of
For* B. If these are not available use the answers in the *U' coluan, and as
a last resort the answers in the "D* coluan.
ANY of the following!
1. <9.2»y>
unconstricted inlet and constricted outlet
2. <8.3-n and 8.4«n)
no outlet
3. (36.1.2»y and 22.3-n)
substantial erect vegetation in *»r« » and B and no evidence of |
erosion on aerial photos /
—=>HIGH
ANY of the following! I
IE
1.
2.
3.
4.
3.
C<19.1A»n>e<43A/B/C/D/E«y>*(31.4"n>»<31.6E»y> 1 ^
not sheltered and water depth <40 in. and sXoB and B+C is OX eB |
<19.1B>y>
unsheltered I
t64«n) I
Inlet inorganic solids < outlet inorganic solids |
(28-y)
direct alteration evident
C(7.2-y) or (41.2»y>l
high velocity
r
15
L
LOU
c
Ml&H
l*y) or (41.1^) or (42.1.l«y)l
low velocity
AND ANY of the following!
1. <34.3.l»y>
dike or da* downslope creates flooding
2. C(22.3-n>«<31.6A-n)»<12A/B/0a>y>+<22.2'y or !9.2-y>J
no long-tera erosion and DC is not OX eB and forested/scrub-shrub
or persistent eaergent and actively accreting delta or
island/peninsula part of AA
BOTH of the followingi
1. C(7.l»y> or (4l.l*y) or <31.1*n>]
low velocity or lone C > Zones Ml
2. (43E+F *6"n)
substrate not bedrock, rubble or cobble-gravel
J
T
— Continued —
t" ?«¦ V-
tJl / f foOf,
102
WORKING DRAFT
ST/R Effectiveness Key cont.
iUiiU b
BOTH of the followingi
1. (13A/B/Da=y)
partially forested, scrub-shrub or persistent emergent
2. CC36.1.1*n)*(23.2A*y>] OR t (36.2. l=n)+<23.2B*y>*<7. l=y)+<9.1/9.2=y> 1
erect vegetation in Zones A+B <20 ft wide and predoalnant sediaent source
is overland flow OR Zone eB usually <20 ft wide and predominant
lediaent,source is channel flow and low velocity and constricted
outlet
OR ALL of the following!
1. <9.1«y>
constricted outlet
2. U00/E-y>
tidal riverine or estuarine
3. <48B-y) or C(t.2'y)t(13A/B/Da>y>)
salinityO.S-S.O ppt or high rainfal 1-erosivity factor and forested,
scrub-shrub or persistent emergent
ALL of the followingi 1
1. (31.4»y) l~-
2.
«y>
Zone sB >
<100/E/F«y)
Zones oB and C
LOU
aarlne, estuarine or tidal riverine
3. <48B=y)
salinity « 0.3-3.0 ppt
OR ALL of the followingi
1. <10C/D*y)
riverine
2. (33.1-y or 33.2*y>
expanded flooding or flow
3. t(13.2=y) or <31.4-y>J
good lnstrea* interspersion or Zone sB > Zones oB and C
4. (9.1-y) or (9.2*y> or (31.1-n> or CC49.1.2=y>*<49.1.l»y)1
constricted outlet or Zones A+B>C or numerous pools/riffles
r
I
r
-> MODERATE
— End —
103
-------
S*dia*nt/Toxlcant Retention (B/TR) Opportunity K*y
For th* ST/R Opportunity Interpretation use the w»«rf in the *X" column of
For* B. If these ar* not available, us* th# answer* in the "U" column, o> as
a last resort th* answ*rs In th* "0* coluan.
ANY of th* following!
1. (33.l-n)
¦*asur*d suspended solids not low
2. <23.l-y)
potential sedlaent sourc* In buffer tone
3. (23.3»y)
erosive conditions present
4. <27.1-y)
toxin source in buffer zone
&
of S/TR List A
BOTH of th* following
1. (B.l-y)
permanent inlet present
2. ANY of S/TR List A
n
3
MODERATE
*
->¦ LOU
5/TR Urt ft'
1. C(21A»n) or <1.2»y>)
subwatershed not forest and scrub or high rainfall-erosivlty factor
2. <3.I.1-y)
wetland coaprises <3Z of watershed
3. t<3.2«n)*<34.2-n)l
upslope wetlands cdkprls*
-------
HUIxivuiui/UMfi
Nutrient Iteaoval/Trans formation (NT/R) Effectiveness Key
For the Mt/T E(fectiveness interpretation us* the answers in the "X" coluan of
For. B. If these are not available, use the aniutri in the "U* coluan, or as
a last resort the answers In the *D" coluan.
ANY of the follouingi
1. (9.2»y>
surface flow Inlet and constrl:
2. tfl.3»n and 0.4»n>
no out'.«t
f
ANY
of the following! 1
1.
(28-y)
direct alteration
2.
(12E-y)
aoss-lichen
3.
(7.2»y or 41.2*y)
high velocity ,
t-
T
——HOST of HR/T Ust A
lF »
( Hps. 2. «, or 3 fro* MR/T Ust A J"
JT
->¦ HIGH
UM
UM
C(36.i.l-n and 36.2.1-n) I— 1
width of erect vegetation in tones A»B > 20 ft |T"
.^MODERATE
MR/T List A.
1. I(7.1«y> or (41.1-y) or U2A/B/Cb/Da«y)l
low velocity throughout or forested/acrub-shrub, floating vascular
aquatic bed or persistent emergent
2. t(24.i«y or 24.2«y> and (X.H)]
fine mineral sails present and alkalinity not low
3. [<12Aa+Ba*n> and <23»n> and (17-y)]
no dead forest and scrub-shrub and no ditches, levees, or channels to
confine water and high plant diversity
4. t(36.1.2«y>*(26.2"yJ] OR
t<36.2.3"y>*<26.3»y>*<9.t«y or 9.2»y)K7. l»y or 4i.l«y)l
extensive erect vegetation in Zones A and B and sheet flow is aajor
nutrient source OR extensive eB width in shallow water and channel flow
Its major nutrient source and constricted outlet and low velocity
3. (33A/E/J/K-y>
Most permanent hydroperiod is permanently flooded, saturated, or
V irregularly exposed/flooded tidal
^ ¦
— End —
'.06
Nutrient Reaoval/Transformation (NT/R) Opportunity Key
Tor the Mt/T Opportunity interpretation use the answers in the "X" coluan of
For* B. If these are not available, use the answers in the "U" coluan, or as
a last resort the answers in the *D" coluan.
(26.l*y)
potential sourct of nutrient runoff present
ZSEZ
( ALL of NR/T List B
IP '
kBOTH of the follovingi
11. ANY of NR/T List B
12. (8.1-y)
p«run*nt inlet
0-
T
T
HIGH
-^•MODERATE
J
W/T List Bl
1. C(l.2-y> or (21A-n)l
high ralnfall-erosivity factor or forest and scrub subwatershed
2. t<3.1.i*y> or (4.2C/D-y)I
AA coaprises <3Z of watershed or riverine watershed >100 square
3. <3.2«n)
upslope wetlands coaprise <31 of watershed acreage
— End —
WORKING DRAFT
107
-------
4.2.8 Production Export
Pr*vlou« attempts to develop a research-based wtlimti •valuation procedure
for production export (e.g., Ovlatt et al - 1977) have been unsuccessful, at
least In terms of the usual statistical tests. A procedure for using field
aeasureaents of chlorophyll ft and benthlc populations to characterize
productivity of tidal audflats has been developed by Diaz (1902), but the
results of this procedure are not specifically and directly related to
productivity export potentfa for coaaarcial and sport fisheries beyond the
wetland. Production export was also one focus of the procedure by Reppert et
i)_. (1979), who required that some flushing exist.
Various quantitative Models have been developed site-specifically to address
production export, but none Is broadly applicable. On a very crude basis, one
can determine the nutrient and/or caloric contents of wetland plants
(published values are given in Tilton et al. 1978) or animals and estlaate
froa this the nuatiers or bioaass of higher organlsas that can be supported.
For exaaple, aenhaden consume 6 to 9 percent of the phytoplankton in estuaries
they inhabit, or the equivalent dally production of 0.8 g/sq a (Peters and
Schaaf 1981). Daily aacrolnvertebrate drift a. labia as food to fish in
freshwater stream aay represent the equivalent standing crop froa up to 100
sq a of benthie habitat. However, decoaposltion rates, depression flushing
rates, and feeding rates aust also be known before the support function can be
realistically estlaated.
Definition - Tor purposes of this Method, HIGH productivity export is the
flushing of relatively large aaounts of organic plant Material (specifically,
net annual prlaary production) froa the wet depression Into downslope waters.
No judgaent is aade as to the value of such export) indeed, there aay be
Instances where such export represents a nutrient loss to the exporting system
or where such exported Material causes water quality probleas downslope.
Rationale (HtQH) - To attain a rating of HIGH, the assessment area aust have
conditions favoring prlaary productivity (relative to siallar wetland types
within the saae region) of wetland plants, as well as having a peraanent
outlet.
If the wetland is aarine, estuarine, or tidal riverine, no other conditions
aside froa a peraanent outlet need to be paired with elevated prlaary
productivity to give a rating of HIGH. If the wetland is nontldal riverine,
it aust be a aid- or high-order streaa. if the wetland Is lacustrine or
palustrine. It aust be a peraanent fringe wetland with a large watershed.
Such conditions laply favorable export, and aust be complemented by elevated
productivity.
If the wetland is Marine, prlaary productivity or water quality aust be
Measured to attain a rating of HIGH when paired with the above-noted presence
of an outlet. If the wetland is tidal riverine or estuarine, then in
addLtIon, the zone of erect vegetation should be wider than 20 ft and flooded
vegetation (Zone B) must cover at least 10X of the wet depression area. If
the wetland is lacustrine, elevated productivity will be aore likely where, in
addition, significant seasonal flooding occurs. Finally, if the wetland is
palustrine, lt should be in a fringe situation or have flowing water in
addition to the foregoing characteristics, and not be doainantly forested or
aquatic bed vegetation. Nontldal riverine wetlands with small watersheds are
WORKING DRAFT
not considered to be Major producers of autochthonous (internal) detritus by
this method unless they contain substantial quantities of aquatic bed
vegetation. Their Most important role is usually considered to be as
transporters and transforaers of upland-generated aaterlals. Soae of the
conditions described in this paragraph are not considered by the aetliol to be
absolute requirements, particularly in the case of palustrine system.
Rational* (LOW) - To attain a rating of LOU, the assessaent area—regardless
of Its productivity—Must have no permanent or interaittent outlets. This is
not to deny the productivity or importance of noncontiguous (e.g., Prairie
pothole) wetlands) it Means only that their relative probability of exporting
organic nutrients Is low. Additionally, soae wetlands with outlets aay be
rated LOU if reduced aacrophyte productivity is suggested by hypersal in* or
very acidic conditions, sand bottoa doalnating in a flowing-water situation
with very little stable instreaa substrates, occurrence of recent soil
disturbance, headwater situation without emergent or aquatic bed vegetation,
scouring conditions of current or fetch with no offsetting influence of
aquatic vegetation, or excessive turbidity in an aquatic-bed dominated
wetland.
Senaral Sensitivity - Noncontiguous and nontidal riverine wetlands (excluding
soae fringe types, such as bottoaland hardwoods) will generally get lower
ratings for this function. Most marine and estuarine wetlands will probably
be ratad HIGH, as will many contiguous palustrine wetlands. The most pivotal
characteristics appear to be contiguity, system type, fringe situation, and
velocity.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Production E^ort (PC)
for lh» PC tBt*rpr»taticn iw th* mwri Xn Mi* *W* coluan et fVM S, jj
IVif art not itiUAIt, u» Mi* Mwn In tK+ 'i" coluan, or a* a lm
rttort th-4 imwi In th» "H" coluan.
c
lB.3«n m>4 8.4^3
no outl«l
r
¦*¦ uw
3£-
L
Mr of tin taltwlnfi
1.
tltal Hv«lnt vllb N«irM >1 v--)
MtuirtM/urlnt
3- ItmfrylHS.l.lvIl
Ucu>trlM(filtattli» «wd wtlwJ tamlw >3B of HtariM
IK
ol pg Ll rt 6 }
->«WMrE
F V
y UNCERTAIN
FE Uas h
!!«¦->» wild UST.I-y} or
urint Jnd pmnbif (atrophic condition or not lew flint pvctetlifly
OH «U_ o( th* following!
I.
rlwlnt
1. !«3l.*"y5 or <36.t.l«r)l
Ion* il > Zona* cB and C or oroct «| 20 It,
3. I4.2M-M
mIhM >1M fqwt nfl*a
4. <37.1-n>
potential wtrcpAlc condition
ft Utt
ALL of tKo followlngi
1. cioe/r-*>
Mtturint/aarliw
2. OK.l.i-n)
width ol mkI wgttitioi In lon« * and B > 20 It
3. 1(31.2-y> w
high Talnl*ll~*rosivlty factor M Ion* B HOI ol thi M
«. <5T.t-n>
jntantial #u.tfophic ccndLtion
5- ' ("V
Higti plant productL.tty
— Continued - . p-r
m WORKING DRAFT
PE K»y cont.
ft-Ult.fl
ALL ol t»* foltoulngi
1. (l£*-y>
laontrtn*
2. <3S.1.1««>
tract vagatatioit in Zones A anif * > 20 ft
3. t<3l.2«yJ or ll.2"y) or 135. L*y arid 2.1-HJ]
Ion* B >10* of th« M or higfi rainfall-erwivity factor or tupmslvt
flooding and not v*ry saall
4. C«57.i^i» or '-36.i"! ar
prtantlil mtroghlc condition or high dltiolrri tolldi
3. 151.2"»»
plmt productivity
5.
pH I 6.0
7. U2*tS»ft>
for-»it and Krub-tfirub
« Llrt Pi
ALL ol tfi* folkoulngi
1. ««T>
tiluilriiit
2. <36. t.Unf
*r*ct vagatatlon in Zones A arid B > 20 ft
3. [C31.2V7 or (1.2»y> or f35.1»y»
Ion* B >101 of til* M or high factor or agpantiv*
flooding
4. ICSM-nl or 1%.1-n)]
pot *nt)«1 rutrophic condition or not low diM-ilvMl solids
3.
high plant productivity
5. X or (23,UI«y)J
fring* or Island situation or llau I* suggested
FE Hft.B.
1. [U2E«y» Or (47B*iI at («D«r]
¦ail-lIchw or plfl ^E.-O err sutii-trat* ii «and
2. It7.J*y or 4I.I*rI or
high nlocity or ur ®r <13C+D*y)J
a&stly aquatic b*fl or partially aquatic b«<3 arid wtrgtnt
3. (M.i-'nJ
low susfi*nd*d set ids
6. (3-1.1 '»0
vAt+r Itvrls artificially Mniputittd
Cnd —
WORKING DRAFT
-------
4.2.9 Habitat Keys
General Commints - For the habitat function, it la difficult to only say that
certain types of wetlands are most productive for fisheries or wildlife in
general. Because each species has individual needs for food, cover, water
quality, and other factors, the analysis should also be species-specific, even
though this can mean tedious species-by-speclee analysis. To narrow this task
somewhat, this aanual describes habitat requirements of only those fish and
avian species In the 48 contiguous states which are inextricably dependent
upon wetlands throughout nearly all of their range. While it wold have been
desirable to Include many other critically laportant species that use wetlands
from region to region. Accordingly, habitat
information in this manual la in some cases indexed by region.
The keys do not provide a means of combining individual species habitat
ratings into an overall assessment of habitat productivity. This would
require weighting of species, which is both a social, and a biological,
judgment. For those users who wish to pursue this further, guidelines are
provided by Adamus and Clough (1978), Sparrowe and Uight (1973), and US Fish
and Wildlife Service (1980a).
Although they may be used alone, the habitat keys can also supplement the more
precise and detailed Habitat Evaluation Procedures (HP) of the U5FVS or in
the South Central U.S. the Habitat Evaluation System (HES) of the US Army
Corps of Engineers. These keys and their supporting data in Chapter 3 of
Volume I represent a broad source of detailed habitat preference information
for wetlands. Thus, Information in the tables accompanying these keys can be
incorporated if either of these other procedures (t£P or HES) is used. The
organiiatlon of the keys is as followsi
Aquatic Diversity/Abundance Key (Fish and Invertebrates, On-Slte)
General Freshwater Fish Key
Harawater Fish Key
Coldwater Fish Key
Coldwater Riverine Fish Key
Northern Lake Flih Key
General Wildlife Diversity/Abundance Key (Breeding, On-Slte)
Qeneral Wildlife Diversity/Abundance Key Migration, On-Slte)
General Wildlife Diversity/Abundance Key (Wintering, On-Slte)
Harvested Waterfowl Keys (Breeding)
Harvested Waterfowl Keys Migration)
Harvested Water fowl Keys (Wintering)
WORKING DRAFT
Keys are provided for "Wildlife Diversity! Breeding," "Wildlife Diversity!
Migration and Wintering," "Harvested Waterfowl," and "Wetland Dependent Birds
(Excluding Waterfowl)." Keys are not provided for wetland dependent
furbearers, other mammal*, or amphibians, for reasons discussed In Volume I,
Section 2.8. The keys attempt to measure whether the total number of wetland
dependent species recorded in the area is likely to be great. This accounts
only for diversity, and not for dependence, duration of stay, population
density, or social or ecological importance of the species which use the AA.
4.2.10 Aquatic Diversity/Abundance (Fish and Invertebrates On 81te>
Definition - For purposes of this method, a HIGH rating for an area means
that, at least seasonally, the AA supports a notably great on-site diversity
of fish or invertebrates (I.e., most trophic groups of secondary consumers
with complex food webs). Other aquatic animals (e.g., waterfowl) are covered
under other functions.
Rationale (LOU) - Before being eligible for a HIGH rating, the wetland must
not be rated LOU. Estuarlne and riverine wetlands cannot have a bedrock or
rubble substrate without substantial macroalgae, nor have potentially toxic
inputs into a wet depression that lacks an outlet and is less than 40 acres.
Lacustrine and palustrlne wetlands also aust lack these conditions, and in
addition must not be farmed (soil tilled), must have some surface water
present (i.e., not merely saturated), and must not have an excessively acidic
condition (e.g., many sphagnum bogs).
Rational* (HIGH) - After the wetland has passed the screen for LOU, a majority
(not all) of several conditions must be present.
If marine, the hydroperlod must be "regularly flocdei" or "intermittently
exposed" (intertldal or subtidal). Such areas must comprise at least 10Z of
the wet depression, must not be domlnantly sanr* and must have a diversity of
depths and current velocities.
If riverine. In addition to the conditions required of marine wetlands,
wetlands must not be channelized, leveed, or have the seasonal timing of their
flows altered. Natural flooding must expand the wet depression to a
significant extent and seasonal duration If they are In southern regions,
while in northern regions there should be minimal natural variation in flow
(suggesting ground water inputs). In both regions, streambanks should be
neither completely forested nor totally unshaded, and adequate instream cover,
dissolved oxygen, and (in headwater or intermittent streams) adequate pools
should be present.
If estuarine. "great storm intensity/frequency" is substituted for the
seasonal flood index used for riverine systems. It Implies increased access
to (and use of) supratidal areas. In addition to the other above-named
requirements, estuarine wetlands should have a freshwater Inlet or a watershed
which is at least 5Z freshwater wetlands (diversity of estuarine salinity
conditions) and moderate amounts of adequately interspersed erect vegetation.
If lacustrine, the wet depressieni (a) should have an inlet and outlet; (b)
should be larger than 200 acres or, if smaller and in an ice-ha:ar"d region,
should have a large watershed; (c) should not be dominated by sand bottom;
-------
WORKING DRAi-f
area with divers* cov»r and vegetation that covers at least 10Z of the area of
tha deepwater| (f) should hava a diversity of depth categories and adequate
dissolved oxygen| (g) should not be leveed or dltchedf (h> should expand
substantially with natural seasonal flooding} (i) should not be oligotrophic
or should have suitable values for th* aorphedaphic index.
If nalustrin*. in addition to characteristics in the above paragraph the
uetlandt (a) should have moderate atovnti cf *r» should not have Its water level* subject to artificial Manipulation
(except for intentional ecological aanag»**«it>.
Saneral Sensitivity - A probable sinority vet lands nationally will be
assigned a LOU for this function. Palustrinr «t!ends Bay be slightly less
likely than lacustrine ones to attain a rating of HlflH, depending In part on
the region. Th* aost pivotal characteristics appear to b* siri>strate,
hydroperiod, and presence of potential toxicants.
114
Aquatic Diversity/Abundance (AD/A) Key
ANY of the following)
1. t(2IB*y or 27.l«y)+(2.1.2»n)*<8.3«n or 6t-y)l OR <48E/F-y> OR <36.l-y> OR
(37.l«y)
subwatershed iapervious or toxic source present and <40 acres and no
permanent outlet or D.O. is Uniting OR salinity >30 ppt OR
alkalinity low OR oligotrophic condition
2. C(10E/F«y>»(12C=n)+(43F/6*y)l
estuarine/aarine and not aquatic bed and substrate is bedrock or
rubble
3. t(lOA/B/Oy>+(13C=n)+(31.6A/E»y)*(33A+B-n)]
lacustrine/palustrine/riverlne and no aquatic bed class and BC is.0
or 100Z eB and never permanently flooded or intermittently exposed
4. (lOA/B-y) AND C(23=y) or (2B«y) or (478>y» or (23.3»y> or (48C/D/E/F«y)1
lacustrine/palustrlne AND canals, ditches or levees confine water or
direct alteration or pH <6.0 or potential sediaent sources or salinity
>9 ppt
3. t(10E-yW31.6E»y) + (32K=y)l
estuarin* and BC is 100Z *B and irregularly flooded tidal
c
T I—— M(AD/A List A/B/C/D/E)
(33.2*n> < ^MODERATE
tidal flat invert density not low \ p/PD
Liat
"1
(10A"y) ( MODERATE HIGH
lacustrine A A
AND HOST of the followingi r | T |
1. KB. i-y and B.3»y) OR (U-Yl •
permanent inlet and outlet OR fringe or island situation
2. (2.1.2»y) AND (U.3>n> or (4.2C/D»y and 33.1"y)J
>40 acres AND does not freeze >1 aonth/year or watershed >100 square
•il*s and fluctuates naturally
3. C <13C-y) or <43D=n) or <49.2-y>]
partially aquatic bed or substrate not sand or fish cover present
4. <33A/B/H»y)
at least p*raan*ntly flooded, lnteraittently exposed or artificially
flooded
3. (31.2-y) AND t(l7=y) or (46C=y)l
Zone B > 107. of AA AM) high plant fora richness or Mosaic habitat
interspersion
6. C (40. l*n) AND t(56.2=>y) or (37.1«n>l
wareest teaperature >30° F AND dissolved solids <7 or >33
ag/l/a or oligotrophic condition
7. (34.1-n)+(61=n>
no artificial control structures and D.O. is not limiting
¦»- — —— ; -
— Continued —
li:
WORKING DRAFT
-------
AO/A K*y cont.
AD/A List MODERATE HIGH
i t
<10B»y)»*33E-ny
not merely saturated
AM) MOST of the following!
1. tCB.l-y Mid B.3»y) OR (tl-V]
permanent inlet and outl*t OR fringe or Island situation
2. (2.1.3-y) AND [<1.3-n> or <4.2C/D-y>]
>200 acres AND docs not freeze >1 month/year or riverine
watershed >100 square all*
3. C(lX-y) or <43D-n> or <49.2-y>]
partially aquatic bad or substrata not sand or fish covar present
4. (33A/B/H-y)
at laast permanently floodad, Intermittently exposed or artificially
flood ad
3. <31.2-y) AMD t(17-y) or <46C-y>]
Zona B > 101 of AA AND high plant fora richness or aosalc habitat
lntersperslon
6. C<40.1-n> and (36.2-y) and (37.1-n)]
warmest temperature >30° r end dissolved solids <7 or >39 ag/1
and not ollgotrophlc
7. (34.1-n»<6t-n>
no artificial control ctructurea and D.O. not Hatting
B. (31.6C-y>
30-601 of BC is eB
9. <23.l«n)
no potential source of Inorganic sediment present
MODERATE HI8H
fr
Kiwie man
t- f1
»p/a c.
(I0E»y)
estuarine
AND MOST of the foiloutngi
1. <31.6C-y)
30-60* of BC is eB
2. C(1.2-y> or <3.2-yJ
ralnfall-erosivity factor high or upslope wetlands present
3. C(13.1C or 13.2>y) or <16B/C-y>]
good vegetation lntersperslon or good vegetation-water lntersperslon
4. <34.1>n>»<33K-n>*<61-n>
no artificial control structures and not exclusively supratldal and
not D.O. Uniting
3. (37.1-n) |
not ollgotrophlc condition J
— Continued —
i:e
WORKING DRAfl
AD/A Key cont.
gjf.ORKING.DRi
AP/A Lilt Pi ALL of the folloulnoi
1.
2.
fF
(10F«y) MODERATE
aarine
(32K-n)
not irregularly flooded tidal
3. C(31.2-y) or <460y)l
Zona B >10Z of the AA or mosaic habitat lntersperslon
4. <45D*n)
not sand substrate
HIGH
*
MODERATE
f F
AD/A List E. ALL of the following!
1. (lOC-y)
riverine
2. (23~i>
ho ditches, canals or levees to confine water
3. t(7.2-n) or <41.2«n)l
low water velocity
4. {(34.1-n) or [<33.1«y>+(33A-y>+<32D-y)+<40.2«y>]} OR
C(33.2»n)+(40.2=n)*(31.2«y>]
HIGH
no water control structures or expansive flooding and at least
permanently flooded and predominantly seasonally flooded and iuwot
water temperatures >69 F OR stable water levels and summer
temperatures <69 F and Zone B >101 of the AA
AND HOST of the following!
1. (20.3-y)
BOX of Zone B shaded at midday
2. t(13.2-y) or <13C*y> or <43.2»y>J
good instream lntersperslon or partially aquatic bed or fish cover
present
3. C(4.2A+B-n) or <49.1.l-y>]
riverine watershed >100 square miles or 201-801 pools
4. t<32.l»y) or <49.1.2-y)}
high freshwater invert density or good riffles
3. C<23.1-n) or <33.2-n)I
no potential source of organic sediment or measured suspended solids
not high
-------
4.2.11 Freshwater Fiehery Groups
Rational (Qeneral Fish Kay) - At least 1 acre of peraanently flooded wetland
is Muatd Mctnary It the dtprHiion 1« never contiguous. There wist b» at
least 1 acra of uatar at laast 4 in. daep for Boat fish. If the daprasiion is
irr an ice-hazard region and is never contiguous, it should also ba larger than
3 acras and hava a water depth of at least 13 ft to sowwhat reduce island
biogeography effects and the threat of winter-lcill of fish. Evidence of fieh
kills aust be lacking. Secondarily, the site should a) not be extreaely
acidic (pH less than 6), b) be contiguous and »rc*««ible, at least
intermittently, to other aquatic areas, r) lack ocessive aquatic plant cover
which would restrict fish aoveaent, d) lack water level fluctuations
that do not aiaic natural fluctuations, «! I*cfc potential sources of toxins,
f> not be hypersaline. Bom sites aay lacV two of these secondary
characteristics yet have fish present.
Rational (Uarawater Fish Kay) - To support uarawater riverine fish, the area
aust have, in addition to S above, three of the following! (a) a sinuous win
channel} (b) large natural (seasonal) fluctuations) (c) a wooded floodplaini
(d) a gently sloping (perpendicular to thalweg) floodplaini and (a) an
interaediate or large streaa order. Soae sites aay lack two of these five,
yet have an appreciable warawater fishery.
Rational (Coldwater Fish Kay) - To support any coldwater fish, the area (in
addition to 8 above) aust have suitable cover, teaperature, and dissolved
oxygen. Secondarily, it should havei (a) acceptably low turbidityi (b)
ground water input, as laplied by springs or relatively stable water levels)
and (c) at least I acra of coarse sediaents. Boh sites aay lack one of these
three, yet have coldwater fish present.
Rational (Coldwater Riverine Kay) - To support any coldwater riverine fish,
the area auat hava (in addition to the Q and C criteria above) nost of the
followingi (a) Interaediate streaa order| (b) gravel-rubble sediaents (not
aerely coarse)| (c) a good pool-riffle ratio| (d) aoderate shade) and (e> lack
of aotentlal sediaent sources. Soae sites aay lack two of these five, yet
have coldwater riverine fish present.
Rational (Northern Lake Fish Kay) - To support a northern, lacustrine,
centrarehld-Esox (largeaouth bass - Northern pike) coaplex of species, the
lake should (in addition to Q above) be contiguous with other wet depressions
in a watershed of at least 208 square alias or hava a winter dissolved oxygen
(DO) content of at least 4.0 ag/1 (Rattel 1984).
Seneral Freshwater Fish Key
C(33A/I/J«y> AND (44C/D/E/F/G/H/I=y)J
permanently flooded, regularly flooded tidal or irregularly exposed tidal
AND at least 1 acre or IPX of wetland is 3 in. deep
t[ (1.3*
3»y) and (0.l+8.2+8.3+8.4=n)]
of AA freezes for >1 aonth and no Inlet or outlet
ALL I
1. (2.l"n)
>3 acres
(441«y>
3
ACTUALLY PRESENT
1 acre or 10X of water is 26 ft deep
(61"n)
D.O. not Halting
(49.3»n>
Carp not prevalent
ANY!
1.
(2.1«n)
>3 acres
2.
<44I-y)
i acre or
3.
(6l*n)
D.D. not Uniting
ALL I
1. (47B*n)
pH >6.0
2. (8.1/8.2/8.3/8.4By)
inlat or outlet present
3. (61-n)
D.O. not Halting
4. (34.l»n»
no water level control structures
3. (31.6E-n)
BC is not 1001 eB ^
6. (27.l"n)
no toxin source
7. <48F-n>
salinity <40 ppt
I HIGH j-
— End —
Skip this criterion if a future condition is being assessed. Assing a LOU
value since the future presence/absence of the fiTill In th« ar*a is not known.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
(40.1-y)
Uir«Mt«r Flth Qroup Key
T
10 onAfJ
MrMtt uiltr teaperature <30
MOSTI "1
1. (22.1.2»y)
LOU
channel alldly sinuous
2. (23>n and 34.l«n>
no ltvm, canals or channels to confine flou and no water level
control structures
3. t(33.1-y> and (32D-y> and <12Ae-yH
flooding expands wetland and seasonally flooded and forested broad-
leaved deciduous
4. (13.2-y or 49.2«y>
adequate water-vegetation intersperslan or adequate fish cover
3. (4.2A-n or 3.l.l"y>
riverine watershed >1 square aile or low depression/watershed ratio
6. t(QUO rated HIGH and 201.-n) OR (61-n and 40.2-y)1
shade not available OR D.O. not Halting and waraest suaawr
t taper ature >£9 F
7. (27.1«n)
. no toxin source present
TZ
r
^ Proceed to Species
s Hodel If
HDDBWTE\
Desired \
— End —
IM
Coldwatar Fish Group Key
ALL I
1. <40.2=n>
waraest su—ir teaperature <89° F
2. <49.2-y>
adequate cover
3. (61«n)
dissolved oxygen not Uniting
4. (48A-y>
freshwater
HE
ACTUALLY PRESENT
MOST I
fh
">L0U
1. (8UD rated HIGH and 20.l*n)
shade not available
2. (33.2*=n or 20. l»y or 23. l=n)
suspended solids not excessive or sufficient buffer present or no
sedlaent source in buffer Zone
3. C(43A+BtC=n> OR (31.6A=n>J
not Mud, auck, or peat substrate OR BC Is not 1007. «8
MODERATE
[Proceed to Species or Coldwater Riverine Hodel if desl TeTj
— End —
Skip this criterion if a future condition is being assessed. Assign a LOU
value sine* the future presence/absence of the fish in the area is not known.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
Coldwater ftlverlne Fish aroup Key
HOSTi
I. <13.2>y)
2.
3.
4.
3.
6.
7.
adequate ation/water interspersion
(23.1"i» or 33.1«y)
no sedlaent source in buffer Zona or low suspended solids levels
<43E/r>y)
cobble-gravel or rubble cubst"* •
<23»n and 49.l.l«y and 4t.t.2«y)
no ditches, canals, or 1 eve«* t» t r- " and adequate pools and
riffles present
(4.2Mn>
riverine watershed >1 square >tle
(20.1-y)
adequate shade provided by buffer lone
(QUO rated HIGH end 20.1-n)
shade not available
_if
(ACTWLLY PRESENT*
-> UM
MODERATE I
Proceed to Species Kodel If desired ]
— End —
Sltip this criterion if a futur# condition is btlng MMiMd. Assign a LOW
v«lu* sine* th* futur* pr***nc*/*bs*nc* of th* fish in th* «r«« is not known.
122
WORKING DRAFT
Northern Lafc* Fish Group K*y
— End —
Skip this criterion if a futur ¦> condition is being isimbmI. Assign a
HOOERATE valu* sine* th* futur* pr*s*nc*/abs*nc* of th* fish in th* ar*i is
not known.
WORKING DRAFT
-------
4.2.12 Wlldllf* Diversity Breeding
Definition - For purposes of this Mthod, a HIGH rating for a wetland Mans
that during the breeding season the wetland noraally supports a notably great
on-site diversity of wetland-dependent vertebrates. This definition does not
take into account the contribution of an area to off-site (regional) faunal
richness or the uniqueness/rarity of the species. Those factors are addressed
in the 'Red Flag" portion of Section 3.1.
Rational* (Level 3 - HIGH) - There are six types of wetlands which, in a
natural context, have a high probability of supporting an exceptional
diversity of breeding wildlife. Certain individual wetlands within the
following types My be rated HISHi
1.
Nonvooded prairie potholes
2.
Western riparian Zones
3.
Bottomland hardwoods
4.
Other floodplain wetlands
3.
Large and vegetationally diverse wetlands
6.
Moderate-size wetlands that ar* oases or coaplexea ar
mlnlMl lnterspersion.
Ml have at least
Accuracy in the use of this key s**as to depend the most on reliable
estiMtion of the following characteristics! surrounding land use, potential
sources of toxic Mterial, location in a precipitation deficit area,
lnterspersion, size, and vegetation class.
Rational* (Lev*l 3 - LOU) - There are seven types of wetlands which, in a
natural context, have a UM probability o< sporting exceptional diversity of
breeding wildlife. Certain individual wetlands within the following seven
typea My be rated LOU if they are in a precipitation surplus regions
1. Upper riverine, forested, shrub, or moss wetlands unconnected to
adjoining forests by vegetated corridors, and SMller than 40 acres.
Z. SmII wetlands with potential toxic inputs.
3. Estuarine/Mrine wetlands that eitheri
(a) are Mil 1 and exposed to large waves, or
(b> contain little vegetation.
4. Palustrlne/Iacustrlne wetlands that either:
(a) are predoainantly moss (peat bogs) in J have low vegetation class
diversity and no open water, or
(b) are smII, surrounded by urban development, and if forested have
no connecting corridors, or
(c) are smII and have low vegetation class diversity, low edge
irregularity, no open water, and are not part of an
oasis/cluster.
WORKING DRAFT
Other wetlands eligible for LOU ratings for this function are described in
Section 2.8.3 of VoIum I. Accuracy in the use of this key seems to depend
priMrlly on reliable estiMtion of the following characteristics! location
in a precipitation surplus area, size, potential sources of toxic Mterial,
and wetland classification.
Rational* (L*v*l 4 - HIGH and LOU) - This level laproves the estlMtes from
Level 2 by calling for deterainatlon (usually, in the field) of the wetland's
doeinant hydroperiod, the hydroperiods of nearby wetlands (if available),
general salinity, presence or absence of certain alterations of hydrology and
soils, and flow velocity. "Disturbance* is substituted for "urban watershed,"
as it More directly aeasures stress to wildlife. In addition to the
requirements of Level 2, to achieve a HIGH rating a nontidal wetland must
havei *
1. a hydroperiod that is not "saturated" or "intermittently flooded"
unless evapotransplratlon is more than twice precipitation.
2. salinity <30 ppt.
3. velocity, if riverine, <30 ca/sec.
4. hydric soils that have not been tilled, nor any types of detrimental
hydrologlc alterations Mde.
In addition, if the wetland is in a moderate precipitation-deficit region, a
requirement for regional hydroper'-1 diversity is added (i.e., at least one
other wetland . i , a different hydroperiod type should be present within 1
mile). In addition to the six basic types that (in Level 2) can attain a HIGH
rating in Level 3, a seventh Is added—wetlands artificially flooded for
wildlife uanagement.
To attain a "LOU" rating under Level 3, the converse of the above must be
true. Also, excessive salinity Is added as a limiting condition for
estuarine/Mrlne wetlands, pH is added as a "backup" predictor for moss
wetlands, and a requirement Is added that in wetlands SMller than S acres,
the "A" Zone must be larger than the "B Zone".
WORKING DRAFT
-------
iKwril Wildlife D1 vermlty/Mxmdanc• Breading (WO/AB) Kay
1. t(2.l.l-y or 2.2.1-y)«(30-y or 21B-y>]
<3 acrem and no cover adjacent to wetland and huaan disturbance or
subwatarshed lapervious
2. t(2.1.1*y or 2.2.1"y}e<8.3-n>»(27.1"yJ*3.3^pOJ
<3 acres and no paraanant out I ft . «tn source and not oaals
3. (20-y or 4flE/F-y)
direct alteration or salinity >30 fpt
4. (100/E/F-y) AND t(19.1B-y> or <23-y) or (3B.3-n)l
tidal, estuarine or aarlna MB unsheltered or artificial structures
confine flow or no othar wetland within 3 alia*
3. (43E/F/0"y>
substrate la bedrock, rubble, or cobble-gravel
6. t(13.1A-y>*(16A-y>+U7-n>»C3l.6A/E-y)l
low vegetation-water lntersperslon and low vegetation lntersperslon
and low plant fora richness and BC is 0Z or 100Z at
3E
(l.l-y)
E>F or located in a "dry" region
{
3l
Ki
(10A«y>\Xjm Do WD/AB List A\
lacustrine)
LOU
(10B-y>
palustrlne]
Do UD/AB List B
(10C«y>
riverin*
—E >L0U
Do MD/AB List C
HIGH
r
MODERATE
i
5
(10B-y>
paluatrlna
(lOA-y)
lacustrine
OL
(3l.2-y>*(W0/AB List E)
Zone B Is IOX of the AA
ia/A» List E. AMY of the following.
1. <2.1.1*n)*(H0ST of MO/A• List 0)
>3 acres
2. <2.l.l-y or 2.2.1-y)+(ALL of UD/AB List D)
<3 acres
3. (2.1.2-y or 2.2.2-y)+(ANV of UD/AB List D)
MO acres
3
'HIGH
->¦ MODERATE
LOU
[ tUOC-y)*(36.1.1-n>M20.1-y>J ~
i, riverine and vegetated width of Zones A»B <20 ft and adjacent wooded areas \
j-—
LJ—¦>. HOOERATE
— Continued —
WORKING HP'"
UD/A Breeding Key cont.
UD/AB List A. ALL of the following
1.
2.
"> HIGH
-> MODERATE
(2.1.1-n)
>3 acres
(3.2-y or 3.3-y)
"cluster" or "oasis* wetland
(31.2-y)
Zone B coaprises 10Z of the AA
(38.7-y)
other wetland types within 1 aile
C(l4.1-y) or (IS.lA-n) or (lGC-n) or (17-y)l
saall island present or aoderate vegetation-water lntersperslon or
aoderate vegetation lntersperslon or high plant fora richness
)
->H1GH
MODERATE
MD/AB LIST B. ALL of the following.
1. (2.1.1-n)
>3 acres
2. <31.6E-n)
. BC is not 1001 »B
3. C(33A/B-y> or (38.7-y)] V
partially peraanently flooded or lnteraittently exposed or other
wetland types within 1 aile
4. C(13.lC-y) or (lGC-y) or (17«y)l
great vegetation-water lntersperslon or great vegetation
lntersperslon or high plant fora richness
3. C(20.1-y) or (X.l.l-n) or (30.S-y)]
V. connected or adjacent wooded areas or vegetation width >20 ft
W/AB LIST C: ALL of the following.
HIGH
_5> MODERATE
1. (2.1.1-n)
>3 acres
2. <4.2A-n>
riverine watershed > 1 square aile
3. (31.1-y)
Zones A+B>C
4. [(14.1-y) or (13.lA-n) or (16C-n> or (17-y)l
saall island present or aoderate vegetation-water lntersperslon or
aoderate vegetation lntersperslon or high plant fora richness
3. (20.1-y or 38.8-y)
adjacent or connected wooded areas
t. (7.2-n or 41.2«n)
low water velocity
— Continued —
¦ WORKING
DRAFT
-------
UD/A Breeding Key cant.
UD/AB LIST P.
1. C(13.1C>y) or (tfiC-y)]
great vegetation-water interspersion or great vegetation
inter tpermion
2. (17-y) ,
good plant for* richness
3. (18-y)
irregular upland/Ion* A edge
4. (3.2»y or 3.3"y>
"cluster" or *oaala" wetland
3. (39«y>
apecial habitat features preaent
End —
WORKING DRAFT
128
4.2.13 Ulldllfe Diversity Migration and Wintering
Definition - Tor purposes of this Method, a HIGH rating for a wetland Beans
that during Migration or winter, it normally supports a notably great on-site
diversity of wetland-dependent vertebrates. Off-site (regional) diversity Is
not addressed here, but elsewhere In the Method.
Rationale (Hlgratlon/Ulnterlng - HI0H) - Tills key recognizes three general
types of wetlands which, in a national context, have a HIGH probability of
supporting an exceptional diversity of wildlife during atoratlon. Certain
individual wetlands within ttie following types aay be rated HIGHt
1. Uest coast freshwater wetlands located within 3 ailes of estuarlne
wetlands larger than 3 acres (or vice versa).
2. Moderate or large-sized Mudflats with good visibility and adjoined by
emergent Marsh.
3. Wetlands uith good vegetational diversity and intersperslon, generally
large and in agricultural areas or along river valleys or coastlines.
Uetlands potentially rated HIGH (or wintering wildlife Include not only the
first two of the above, but also the fotlowlng type if it is unfrozen and also
fits the general description of (3> abovel sheltered, forested wetlands with
evergreens (e.g., northern deer yards, Gulf Mangroves).
Use of Level 4 May add another high-probability category for both Migration
and winterIr ji Uetlands Managed for wildlife or rice cultivation. Level 3
also improves the accuracy of (3) above by Making the criteria slightly More
stringent. It does so by adding requireMents for lack of
channelization/alteration (Eastern wetlands) and presence of waterfowl food
plants.
Rationale (Migration/Wintering - LOU) - This key recognizes three general
types of wetlands which, in a national context, usually have a LOU probability
of supporting an exceptional diversity of wildlife during Migration. These,
plus a fourth type, are assigned a LOU rating for wintering wildlife as well.
Certain individual wetlands within the following May be assigned a LOU rating:
1. Uetlands with toxic Inputs, and having no outlet or being saaller than
3 acres.
2. Hoss-llchen wetlands (bogs) with no open water.
3. SMall, urban wetlands without woody vegetation.
4. Uetlands frozen over at least 1 Month of the year.
Accuracy In the use of both the above keys seeas to depend Mostly on reliable
estiMation of the following characteristics! size, presence of a toxin
Material source, vegetation type and diversity, and presence of ice cover.
-------
Seneral Midlife 01 varsity'Abundance Migration (WO/AH) Kay
1. C(2.1.1-y)*(B.3-nn(21B«y)l \
<3 acrM and no ptrunwt outlet and «vfcnUrih«l la iaparvlaua 1
2. t(21B-y>*(30»y>*(2.2.1-y>*(I2A*»-n>l
aubwatershed iapervious and huaan tl' ' tr « »rfi <3 acraa and no
adjacent wooded irtii and M net scrub-shrub
3. t(13.1A»y>*(16A«y>*(17-n>J OR C>31.i
low vegetation/water lnteraperfl wt *«¦ .vtjititlcn intersperslon
, and low plant for* richness OR BC la OX c IWl *9
3E
ANYl
1. UO/AH List
2. UO/AH List
3. UO/AH List
"lr
HISH
MODERATE
WD/AH LIST T. ALL of tha following.
1. (38.5-y)
emergent vegetation or audflat adjoin aach other
2. <2.1.I-n)
>3 acraa
3. t(3.2-y) or (3.3-y> or (4.1-y>)
Mtlind la part of a "duster" or "oaals* or within 3 alias of tha
Braat Lakes. a aalor rlvar. or tidal waters
Wm llST a» ftx cf tht frtlwlmi
1. (l.l«n>
not locatad in a "dry" region
(2.1. t»n and 2.2. lit)
>3 acraa
C(38.3*y) or (32H-y) or (4.1-y) or (12A/B-y)}
within 3 alias of a watland of diffarant systaa typa or artificially
flooded or within 3 alias of tha Great Lakes, a aajor rlvar, or tidal
watar or woodad
HP/AH LIST H«
t(2.1«n) or (3.2>y) or (3.3«y> or (4.l*y>]
>3 acraa or part of a "clustar" or "oaala" or within 3 alias of tha
Qreat Lafcaa, a aajor river, or tidal waters
— Continued —
WORKING DRAFT
WO/A Migration Key cont.
AND HOST of the following!
1. (31.6C*Y)
301-601 of BC la eB
2. C(21C«y> or (30*y> or (39*y>J
cultivated agricultural subwatershed or waterfowl food planta present
or apecial habitat features present
3. <17-y>
high plant fora richness
4. C16C»y) or (lB»y) or (13.lC/13.2*y)J
great vegetation interaversion or irregular upland/Zone A edge or
great vegetation/water intersperslon
3. t(28-n)+<23-n)+<34.1-n>J
no direct alteration and no atructures to confine or control water
6. (30-n)
no huaan disturbance
7. (2.3-y)
>200 acres
B. C47B*n)
pH >6.0
9. (43E*F*6-n)
substrate is not bedrock, rubble, or cobble-gravel
WD/AH LIST I. AWY of tha followlno.
1. (19.lA*y>
at least 1 acre is sheltered
2. (38.6-y)
agricultural, evergreen, or regenerating vegetation within 0.3 aile
3. (32H>y)
artificially flooded
4. <12Bc-y>
scrub-shrub and broad-leaved evergreen
— End
WUKKiMb
DRAFT
-------
deneral Midlife Dlversi ty/Abundanc» Wintering (UD/A) Key
ANY I ^
V___
t. U.3»y>
•11 of vet1 and (reeies for >1 aonth/year
2. t(2.1«y)*CB.3«n>+<21B-y>J
<3 tern and no ptrunMt outlet and subwatershed is iapervious
3. t (21B"y)*C30"yH(2.1. t«y)*(l2A*B"n)l
subwatershed iapervious and huaan disturbance and +U£A-y>»C17«n>«<31.£A/E-y>]
low vegetation/water lntersperslon and low vegetation lntersperslon
and low plant form richness and BC is not OZ or 100Z eB
If
' AWYt I *¦ — F (<38.6-n)M12Ab/Bb-n)
| 1. UO/AU List 8 js: \ not avargraan
I 2. HO/MI List H and UD List I J T-
It \% F
HIGH v ^MODERATE LOU
UP/AH LIST Fi ALL of the fallowlnni
1. (38.3-y>
emergent vegetation or audflat adjoin each other
2. (2.1.1-n>
53 acres
3. C(3.2*y> or (3.3>y) or <4.1>y>l
wetland is part of a "cluster" or "oasis" or within 3 ailes of the
< Great Lakes, a Major river, or tidal waters
HP/AH LIST a. ALL of the followino.
1. U.l«n>
not located in a "dry" region
C2.1.t-n and 2.2.l"nJ
>3 acres
I
C(38.3-y) or <32>*y> or (4.1«y> or (12A/B«y)]
within 3 niles of a wetland of different systeei type or artificially
flooded or within 3 Biles of the Great Lakes, a aajor river, or tidal
water or wooded
MD/AM LIST H. -
C(2.l«n) or <3.2»y> or (3.3>y) or (4.l>y>]
>3 acres or part of a "cluster* or "oasis" or within 3 ailes of the
Great Lakes, a major river, or tidal waters
— Continued —
WORKING DRAF/
WD/A Wintering Key cont.
AND MOST of the following!
1. (31.6C-Y)
30Z-60Z of BC is *B
2. C(2lOy) or (30-y> or (39«y)l
cultivated agricultural subwatershed or waterfowl food plants present
or special habitat features present
3. <17«y)
high plant torn richness
4. [16C-y> or or <13.lC/13.2=y)1
great vegetation lntersperslon or Irregular upland/Zone A edge gr
great vegetation/water lntersperslon
3. t(28«n)»<23-n) + (34.1-n)1
no direct alteration and no structures to confine or control water
fi. (30-n)
no huaan disturbance
7. (2.3-y)
>200 acres
B. <47B-n>
pH >6.0
9. <43E+F*G-n>
substrate is not bedrock, rubble, or cobble-gravel J
IB/AH LIST li ANY of the followinoi
1. (19.lA-y>
at least 1 acre Is sheltered
2. (38.6-y>
agricultural, evergreen, or regenerating vegetation within 0.3 alle
I 3. (32H-y>
I artificially flooded
14. <12Bc»y)
| scrub-shrub and broad-leaved evergreen
— End —
133
-------
4.2.14 Harvested Waterfowl
To facilitate analysis, water fowl have bean aggregated into group* baaed on
the usual requirements of adult males. These groupings are based more on
tiwiring than wintering habitat affinities. Mao, some species In these
groupings do not si—er in the 48 contiguous states. For the breeding season,
the following species may be expected to deviate the aost from the general
habitat criteria for their group specified In the breeding keysi
1. Badvall, nottied Duck, and Mexican Duck - all tolerate higher
salinities.
2. Red-breasted Mergansers - can nest in estuarine/aarlne systeas, and
•ay use emergent wetlands.
Nesting and 9u—iring - The key's validity Is probably greater for the early
¦ii— »r period (nesting) than late si—nr, and Is probably aore valid for
regions without extreae year-to-year fluctuations In precipitation conditions.
For the evaluation, use only information In the "H" coluan of the response
sheet (Fora A)| if this Is lacking, use Information in the *X* coluan or
(least priority) *0* coluan.
Wintering and Migration - The prediction of habitat value for wintering
waterfowl has seldom been attempted. A procedure baaed aostly on winter food
habits of coastal waterfowl was published by Allan (1936), and a
classification based aostly on vegetation, sedlaent type, water depth, and
shelter was developed for coastal Halne by Adaaus (1978).
For the evaluation, use only Information in the *X' coluan of the response
sheet (Fora A)| If this la lacking, use Inforaatlon in the *0* coluan or
(least priority) "W* coluan.
Table 8 provides descriptions used to group waterfowl species and also the
appropriate interpretation key(s) to evaluate breeding, migratory use, and/or
wintering use potential. Begin by selecting tor analysis one or aore of the
species whose geographic range encoapasses the wetland. The aaps Included in
Figure 32 will assist in the selection. Then proceed with the analysts of the
predictor responses from Fora A using the nuaeric keys referenced below for
the group (s) of your choice.
134
WORKING DRAFT
-------
N.ta«aa«»/a «*—»"
Nitpauri/M
Ceographic ranges of waterfowl species (grlirtft !***£€• MU-nlerscion winter
ad**,m) _ n
-------
Harvested lister fowl Interpretation Keys
Key ti Oeneral Migration Model
MM i
1. (40E-y)
salinity " 30-40 ppt
2. (32H-y)
artificially flooded
3. (4.1-y)
located within S tiles of the Sreat Lake*, ujor river, or tidal water*
4. (3.2-y)
wetland ic in a "cluster*
3. <3.3»yJ
y wetland is an *oa»i»*
*LU~ \ ],T a
1. (31.6E-n) v T p
BC is not 100* eB J \ 1
2. t(27.1-n and 2IB-n> OR <2.1-n and 8.3-y>] '
r 3
F
LOU
no potential toxins and subuaterihed is not lapervious OR
and permanent outlet present
3. (lOC-n or 4.2A"n)
not riverine or riverine watershed >1 square site
LJT—^(eo to specific sroup ycjsj 1
Key 2i Wintering for Keys 12-20, 22
>3 acres j
(Migration « MODERATE or HUHJ ^
, - ¦ - t It | >LDU
((l.3~N) V r1 L.——I 4
L entire M does not freeie over >1 sonth/year) 1
f (19.1B-n)\_ ^ p J
1 sere of M is sheltered} —
I T .JtCBERATE If Woration - MOOERATE I
^iHlflH If Migration - HI8H J
Key 3) Uintering for Keys 21 and 23
(Migration « MttHATC or H16H ) ^ Sf
[" I"1" \ ^
V entire AA does not freeze >1 sonth/year) p.
-^fnOOERATE if Migration - MOOERATEi
,HIGH if Migration "HIGH
136
WORKING DRAFT
HU Keys cont.
Key 4i Prairie Dabblers Breeding
ANYi
1. T(2.I«y and B.3«n and (27. l»n or 21B=y>3
<3 acres and no peraanent outlet and toxin source or subwatershed
Mostly lapervious
2. U2A»y>
forested
3. <36.I.l=y and 29.l=n)
width of eB in AB <20 ft and no cover for wetland anlMls
4. <31.6E«y>
100X of BC is eB
3. (41.2»y or 7.2«y>
high water velocity
6. (48A»B»rt>
salinity >3 ppt
7. (l9.1B»y>
, unsheltered
LOW <5-
MOSTi
1. tl4.1»y or 13.1C*y or 13.2»y>
wetland contains island or good lntersperslon
2. (31.6C-y>
30Z-60Z of BC is eB
3. (21A*n)
subwatershed not forested and scrub
4. (33A-n>
>ost permanent hydroperiod is permanently flooded nontidal
3. (38.7-y)
permanent water within i mile
6. ll2D*y)
emergent J
7. (iOB*y and I3.iA*y>
palustrine and at least 1 acre sheltered
B. (48A-Y)
freshwater /
9. (23*n and 34.1*n>
no ditches, canals, or levees and no great water level fluctuations
jr
wetland in a 'dry* region or
E>f)
£
MOSTI A
1. <38.7»y) >—
permanent water within 1 all
2. C<2.l-n> or (30-y) or (3.1-y)
>3 acres or waterfowl food plants present or wetland part of
"coaplex"
3. <8.l«n and B.3*n>
, neither peraanent Inlet nor outlet present
R.
3
^HIGH if actually observed\
i (- nof- okscrw' y
r
J 37
WORKING DRAFT
-------
HU Keys cont.
WORKING DRAFT
K*y 9i Hack Duck BrMdlno
ANYl
t. (44B*C"n)
<101 of wetland is 1-6 In. daep
2. <4BA*B-n)
salinity >3 ppt
3. (31.68/E-y)
•B In BC Is 100X or <301
4. (12Ba/Cay>
aquatic bed or dead scrub-shrub predoainat.s
5. C2*t*y and B.3*n and C27.l«y or 21B-y)l
> LQU
2.
forested or scrub-shrub, broad-laavad deciduousi M«rg«it or adequate I
buffer Zona cover for wildlife
<34.3.2ay>
flooding caused by baawar
3. (1S.JB/C or 14.1-y)
island present or Moderate to high interspersloo
C2iA-y>-
subwatershed la forest and scrub
3. <21B-n and 30«n)
subwatershed not lapervious and no huaan disturbance
<48A/B«y>
salinity <3 ppt
7. (2. l.i-n or 3.l»y)
>3 acres or part of a "coaplex"
B. (23«n and 34.l-n)
no ditches, canals, or levees and no artificial water level
fluctuations
9. (32.2-n)
l Invertebrate density not low -*
6.
ALU 1
1. (3B.3>y)
freshwater paluitrln* iyit«« within 3 *iUt
2. <21A*y)
subwatershed forest and scrub
3. (2.1.1*11 and 30«n>
>S acres and no huaan disturbance
4. <*1.2s*n or 7.2=n>
velocity not high
LOU
t/pd
f HtGH if actually observed ^
138
HU Keys cont.
Key 6i Wood Duck Breeding
ALLi ~\
!• <44B/Oy>
at least 10X of AA is 1-8 In. deep
2. (lOE+f-n)
not atari ne or estuarine
3. t(2.I.l*n) OR (2.2.1-n and 3.t-y)l
>3 acres or part of a *"eo«pl#x*
4. <31.6E-n)
BC is not 100X eB
3. (t2C/E-n)
not aquatic bed or lichen-Moss
6. (48A-y>
freshwater
7. <21A»y or i3A«y>
subwatershed is forest and scrub or 10% of AA is forested
B. (32.2-n)
Invertebrates not scarce
LOU
T/PD
HIGH if actually observed
MODERATE If not observed
133
WORKING DRAFT
-------
HU Key cant.
Kty 7i Co—on and NHrmtid Merganser Breeding
1. C(2*1.2*y) at <2.2.1-n and 3.1-y>)
>40 Krti or >3 acres and part of a "coaplex*
2. <44E/F/B"y)
at least 101 of water is 21 in.-6.3 ft deep
3. <21A-y)
MwttirdiMl I* forest and acrub
4. (33A/B«y)
at least partially paraanantly flooded or interaittently exposed
3. <31.6A/B-y>
0Z-30X of K is *1
6. <48A-y)
freshwater
7. <4.2A-n>
riverine watershed > 1 square aile
8. ClOA/B-y OR (10C«y and (41.l«n or 7.1-n))1
lacustrine/palustrine OR riverine with high velocity
HOSTi
\
->L0H
1. <4.1«y or 3.1.l*y)
within 3 ailes of the Great Lalces, aajor river, tidal water or low
depression/watershed ratio
2. (14.2-y)
contains part of a large Island
3. (30-n)
no huaan disturbance
4. (43E/F/8-y>
substrate Is cobble-gravel, bedrock or rubble
3. <47B-n>
pH >6.0
6. <10A-y>
lacustrine
7. (U-y>
fringe or island wetland
HIGH if actually observed
HOOERATE if not observed
WORKING DRAFT
HU Keys cont.
Key 8i Prairie Divers Breeding
WORKING DR
V
ALL l
1. (36.1.1-n or 29.1-y)
eB in AB is >20 ft wide or buffer Zone wide enough to provide
cover
2. <12A-n>
not forested
3. t(27.1-n and 218-n> OR <2.1.1-n and B.3-y)J
no toxic source and subwatershed not iapervious OR->3 acres with
peraanent outlet
4. (3i.6E-n>
BC Is not 1001 eB
3. tlOC-n OR <(41.2-n or 7.2>n) and 4.2A«y)l
not riverine OR if riverine, low velocity and saall watershed
6. (44E/F«y>
at least 10Z of M is 21-39 in deep
7. <13Cc/D-y)
10Z of AA is eaergent or rooted vascular
8. n or 38.7-y)
not in "dry" region or else peraanent we
9. (28-n) r
no direct alteration J
wildlife
HOSTi ^—
1. (23-n and 34.l-n> '
no ditches, channels, or levees and no artificial water
level fluctuation
2. £(2.1.1-n) or (2.2.1-n and 3.l*y)l
>3 acres or part of a "coaplex"
3. <8.1-n and B.2-n)
no inlet
4. (t3.1C-y or 14.1>y>
great lntersperslon or part of an island
3. <31.GOy>
BC is 30X-60X eB
(12C/D«y>
aquatic bed or eaergent
(50-y and 32.2«n>
waterfowl food plants present and invertebrate density not low
C48A/B/C-y> _
salinity <1B ppt
9.
subwatershed not forest and scrub
I T/PP ^
HIGH if actually obs*rv«d
ft\0Q&AW if r\ot objcrirsf )
141
-------
HU Keys coot.
Key Co—aw Boldeneye Breeding
AU-1
1.
2.
3.
4.
3.
6.
7.
"L
(21A»y or 13A»y>
mubwaterehed la forest aid acrub or at least I0X forest
<48A-y)
freshwater
(31.6A*E-n)
eB in BC is not OX or 1001
(33A/H-y>
permanently or artificially flooded
<44E/F»y)
at least 10Z or 1 acre of water is 21-39 in. deep
(41.2«n or 7.2"n)
low flow velocity
C(27.1«n and 21B-n> OR <2.1.l*n and 8.3»y)J
no toxin source end subwatershed not iapervlous OR >3 acres with a
permanent outlet
<10A/B/C*y)
lacustrine, palustrine, or riverine | | p
r
HOST l
1. 1(2.1.1-n) or <2.2.l*n and 3.t>y>)
>3 acres or part of a "coaplex"
2. <13.lC»y or 14.1»y)
great intersperslon or island present
3. <31.£C*y>
eB Is 301-fiOX of BC
4. <34.3.2»y)
flooding by beaver
3. <32.l»y>
high Invertebrate density
i'
LOU
J
T/PD
-*C*
k!
HIGH if actually observed
MODERATE If not observed
3
142
WORKING DRAFT
HU IC«y« cont.
K#y lOi Inland 6#»«a, Tundra Swan and Brant Br»«ding
ALLi
1. (21A+21B*n)
subwatershed not forest and scrub or i¦pervious
2. <36.1.t-n)
* width of erect vegetation In Zones A and B >20 ft
3. il2D-y>
eaergent
4. <27.l«n or 8.3>y)
no toxin source present or permanent outlet present
3. <31.GE-n>
BC is not 100X eB
6. (44D/E«y)
at least 10X or 1 acre of water is 9-39 in. deep
7. <33A/H-y)
partially, permanently, or artificially flooded
8. (28-n)
no direct alteration to wetland
9. <2.1.1-n)
>3 acres in size
10. C(10A/B-y> ANO (48A/B/C-y> 1
V lacustrine or palustrlne AND salinity <18 ppt
T" ' ;> LOW
y
HOST I
r
Tj
1. (32A/H-y) \
¦ostly permanently or artificially flooded '
2. <2.1.2-yl
> 40 acres in size
3. <13. lOy or 14.2«y>
great Intersperslon or saall island present
4. (31.6C"y)
30X-E0I of BC is eB
3. <30-y)
waterfowl food plants available
6. <23-n)
no ditches, canals, or levees to confine water
"T~ '
y HIGH if actually observed
I MODERATE if not observed
143
working dr
-------
HU Keys cant.
Key 111 Witatling Duck*
f(10A/B/C»y) V-
lacustrlne, palustrine, or r1verIne;
"r
(27. l«n and 21S>n> OR <2.1. l"n and (.>y)
no toxin source and subuaterdied not laperwlous OR >3 acr*m in size
and permanent outlet prMMt
<32H-y> OR t<32C/D/F-y) and (21C/D-y>l OR (30-y>
artificially Hooded OR MakptrMMntly, Mwaaily, or tesporarlly
flooded and subwatershed agricultural, grassland, or perennial forbs
OR water fowl food plants present
<43A/B/C>y>
predominant vater depth la 0-9 In.
r
ALLl
i. 1. (loe-y)
7 estuarlne
' 2. <38.3"y>
~1
In*
freshwater palustrine or lacustrine within S Biles
I 3. (43A/»/C-y>
I predominant water depth Is 0-0 In. f
1
1
r
LOM
I
t
MOM if acti
[ HOOEBATE if
actually observed
not observed .
Key 12i Puddle Ducks Migration
~ V
nosTi
1. <21A+B-n>
sufcwatershed not forest and scrub or lapervlous
2. <13.1A-n>
¦oderate to good Intersperslon
3. <10A/B-y>
lacustrine or palustrine
4. <13D«y>
at least I acre or 10X emergent
3. <30»y or 13Ccy>
water fowl food plants available or 1 acre or 10Z rooted vascular
6. <44B/C-y>
at least 1 acre or 101 of water Is 1-8 in. deep
7. (30-n and 2.1.l>n>
no husan disturbance and >3 acres in size
HIGH if actually observed
HQDERATE jf not observed
144
WORKING DRAFT
HU K*y* cont.
K#y 13a Black Duck Migration
WORKING D(
mjsti
l.
\
(30-y or 53.2»n)
food plants available or tidal flat invertebrate density >23
indlvidujls/sq ft
2. (12C/0"y)
aquatic bed or eaergent predominates
3. (44B/C-y >
at least 1 acre or 10Z of water is 1-8 In. deep
4. (13.1A«n)
¦Oderate to high intersperslon
5. (38.5-y)
3-acre audflat or eaergent vegetation directly adjacent
S. (2.1.1-n)
>3 acres in size
(30-n)
• no huaan disturbance
t/pp
LOU
HIGH If actually observed
MODERATE 1f not observed
Kay !4i Hood Duck Migration
nosTi
l. <30-y>
\
waterfowl food plants available
2. <13A*y or 21My)
forested or subwatershed forest and scrub
3. (44B/C«y)
1 acre or 10Z of water is 1-B in. deep
4. <12A/B/D»y)
forest, scrub-shrub, or eaergent
3. (33.I*y>
considerable naturally tined flooding
6. (31.6A+B-n)
301-1001 of BC Is eB
7. (13.lA*n)
moderate to high intersperslon
8. (2.l.l»n and 30«n>
>3 acres In size with nb human disturbance
9. <10A/B«y> OR tlOC/D-y and (7.2-n or 41.2*n>]
lacustrine or palustrine OR riverine with low velocity
t
-> uv
t(IOF-y) OR (48A»B»n)l
¦arine OR salinity >3ppt
HIGH if actually observed
MODERATE 1f not observed
-5>L0U
n
-------
HM Ktys cont.
Kay 13i Co—on and R«d-BrMittd Htrg«ni»r Hlgration
f BC is eB I
Ml *—
M-Ll
1. (31.6A/B»y)
0X-3W o
2. (44A+B-K>D*n)
•11 Mtir covering I acre or 10Z of area la >20 in. deep
3. (Il>y or 4.2C/D«y>
island/fringe situation or riverine watershed >100 square ailes
4. (4l.l«n or 7.l«n>
Moderate to high velocity f
T5
HIGH if actually observed
MODERATE if not observed
J
Kay 16i Hoodad Hargansar Migration
MOST l
(13A-y or 21A-Y)
foramtad or subwatershed forast and scrub
2. (44B/C«y)
1 acra or 10Z of water is 1-8 in. daap
3. (lOA/B-y) OR tl
lacustrina or palustrina OR rivarina with low valocity and watarahad
of 100-2300 squara atlas
4. (lOA-y) OR (42.1.1/42.1.2^)
lacustrina OR at laast 1 acra or 10X haa valocity of <3.3 ft/aec
3. <3i.6B/C-y>
11-601 of BC is eB
6. <2.1.l-n and 30«n>
>S acr»a in sixe and no huaai disturbance
7. (32.2-n)
invartabrata dansity not low
HIGH if actually obaerved 1
M00ERATE if not obsarvad
146
WORKING DRAFT
HU Kays cont.
Kay 17i Canvasback, Radhaad, Ruddy Higration
<30*y or 13Cc *y> ^
water fowl food plants availabia or rooted vascular aouatlc bad present )
L_
MOSTl
1
(lOA/B-y) OR t(10C/D/E'y) and <4.2C/D=y> and (7.2-n or 41.2«n)]
lacustrina or palustrina OR riverlne/estuarlne with low valocity and
watershed >100 square alles
<32.2*n or 33.2=n)
Invertebrate density not low
<12Cc-y>
rooted vascular bed predominant
(44E/F«y)
1 acra or 10Z of water is 2!-39 in. deep
(2.1.l"n and 30»n)
>3 acres in size and no htman disturbance
LOU
t/PD
HIQH if actually obsarvad
MODERATE if not obsarvad
Kay IBi Rlng-Nackad Duck Migration
<10e/r-y or 40A/B«n)\-
aarlna/astuarina or salinity > S pptj
I?
T
All I \
1.
30Z-99X of BC la aB
3. C<2.1.1-n and 30»n) OR <10A=y)]
>9 acraa and no huaan disturbanca OR lacustrina
HIGH if actually obsarvad^
[ HODERATE if not obsarvad
-------
HU Kays cant.
Kay 19» Scaup Itigratian
HOST I
1. (»3C-y)
aquatic bad
2. (44£/F»y)
1 acra or 10% of watar dapth 1* 21-99 in.
3. (2.l.l«n and 30-n)
>3 acra* and no huMn disturbanca
4. (Il-y or 10A»y)
(ring* or Island aituation or lacustrina
3. KlOE/F-y) and (33.2-n) and (44E/F-y)l OR
((10C/D—y) and (4.2C/D"y» and C(7.2-n or 41.2m) and 32.2-n)]
aatuarina/aarlna with 1 acra -or 10Z of uatar 21-39 In. daap, and
aodarata lnvartabrata papulations OR rlvarlna with low flow velocity,
MttriM >100 aquara alia* and aodarata lnvartabrata population*
T/PD
( HIGH If actually ob*arvad \
yHOOERATE If not cbsarvad J
Kay 20i Bufflahaad and Soldanaya Migration
C(10E/F»y> and (43E/T-y) and (32.2-n or 33.2-n)3
astuarlna/Mrina with abundant lnvartabrata* and pradoalnant dapth of
21-39 In. .
OR
\
HOSTi
I. (11-y)
fringa or island situation
Z. W4E/F«y>
1 acra or 10Z of watar is 21-3*3 In. daap
3. (32.2-n or 33.2-n)
abundant lnvartabrata*
4. (7.i*y or
slow uatar valocity
3. <2.1.1^1 and 30m)
, >3 acra* in *iza and no huMn disturbanca
T
T/TD
HIGH if actually obsarvad
MODERATE 1f not obsarvad
» WORKING DRAFi'
HU Kays cant.
Kay 21i Inland Boosa HI oratIon
(lOT-y)
¦arIn*
JK
T
v_
MOST I
1. (lOD/E-y or 13Cc/D-y)
LOU
[f
1_
J:
astuarina/tidal rlvarlna or cMargant/rootad vascular aquatic bad
2. C(30-y) or (12Cc/D-y) or (38.3-y>l
watarfowl food plants prtsant or pradoolnantly aaargant/rootad
vascular aquatic bad or aaargant vagatatlon/audflat dlractly adjacant
3. (446/F-y)
1 acra or 10Z of watar Is 21-39 In. daap
4. (2.1.2-y am) 11-y)
>40 acras and island or fringa situation
3. t(2.1.3-y) OR <2.1.2-y and 30-n>J .
>200 acras OR >40 acras and no huaan disturbanca
L
HIGH If actually obsarvad
HOOERATE i f not obsarvad
Kay 22i Tundra Swan Migration
(10F-y or 13Cc«n) \_
aarina or no rootad vascular aquatic bad prasant
L
%
LOU
nosrt
1. <12Cc*y or 30»y)
pradoalnantly rootad vascular aquatic bad or watarfowl food plants'
prasant
2. <10D«y>
rlvarlna tidal
3. (44E/F«y)
1 acra or 10Z of watar Is 21-39 in. daap
4. (2.1.2-y and 11-y)
>40 acras and island or frinra situation
3. 1(2.1.3»y OR (2.1.2«y and 30«n)i
>200 acras OR >40 acras and no huaan disturbanca
t:
HIGH if actually observed
MODERATE i( not ob<*rv*d
WORKING DRAFi
-------
HU Keys cont.
Key 23i Brant Migration
(lOD/E/F-y)
Mr In*, estuarine, or tidal riverine}—
*
LOU
*
nosTt
1. <13Cc-y or 38.3-y)
rooted vascular plants present or adjacant
2. «2.2-y or l9.1B-y>
>40 acres or generally exposed
3. (12Cc-y or 30-y)
rooted vascular bad predominates or waterfowl food plants praaant
4. <44E/F«y)
1 acra or 10X of water is 21-33 in. daap [
J
1
3. (lOE-y)
estuarine
4"'
HIGH if actually obsarvad
H00ERATC if not obsarvad
— End —
WORKING DRAFT
4.2.19 Active Recreation and Uhlqueneaa/Herltage
No interpretation keys are presented for assessing opportunity and
effectiveness of these valuas bacausa no scientific basis exists for an
objective assessment without considerable site-specific data collection.
Feu traditional wetland evaluation techniques Have addressed recreational
potential, probably bacausa of tha Banner in which "wetlands" ware defined,
and or bacausa active recreation was viewed as an incompatible use. An
exception is a key developed for Massachusetts localities by tha USDA Soil
Conservation Service (1978). Quantitative procedures for recreational
assessment ara provided by tha U.S. Uater Resources Council's Principles and
Guidelines. Also, several evaluation techniques exist for qualitative,
recreational assessments of lakes and rivers.
Procedures for evaluation of aesthetic aspects of wetlands, rivers, and
shorelines (Smardon and Fabos 1976), rely primarily on landscape diversity,
vividness, scaricity, unity, and freedom fro* eyesores. Although society
respects, to soma degree, tha judgments of "authorities* on questions of
artistic merit, this respect has not, to date been routinely vested in
professionals working with tha aesthetic analysis of landscapes. This is
partly bacausa perception of tha landscape, which may be encountered everyday
or once in a lifetime, tend to be mora strongly shaped by sociological
factors.
Systematic procedures exist for incorporation of scientific data Into policy
decisions regarding management, avoidance, or protection of natural areas or
species. For example, numerous procedures exist for ranking rare aniaals
(Adamus and Clough 1978, Sparrows and Wight 1973), rare plants (DuMond 1973,
Peterken 1974), and natural areas (Bpellerberg 1981, Uright 1977, and Tans
1974).
4.3 Oerlvatlon of 'Combined Rating"
The following procedure synthesizes Significance, Effectiveness, and
Opportunity, >4>en applicable, into a single combined rating for each wetland
function. Record these combined ratings in tha "Combined* column of Form Di
Evaluation Summary Sheet (page >.
Abbreviations used in the two step procedure below are as followsi
H - high
H ¦ moderate
L » low
U » uncertain
H-P • potentially high i( watershed changes
H-M * potentially high If "improved"
wjnfWMr, ni^tr
-------
Stap t
If Opportunity III
and Effactivanasa iai than O+E lai
H
H
H
K/U
H
L
h
n
H
H-P
H/U
H
L
L
L
H
H-P
n/u
H-P
L
L
¦tap 2
If IKE* i«i
and Significan
ca I.," than Coabinad
HerH-P
H
H
N
H
L
H-P
H or H-P
H
H
n
H
L
L
L
H
H-fl
N
L
L
L
NOME
H
H
ri
L
H-H
L
H-fl
~' ¦
ITT
* Just "E", if Opportunity not ratad.
H'r
**
Do not record a
Significanca rating if
no rating 1» aatignad to
Effactivanasa with
tha aacaption of Ifcilquanaaa/Haritaga.
152
WORKING DRAFT
»
-------
APPENDIX D:
FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT INTERPRETATION KEYS FOR:
GENERAL FISH HABITAT
GENERAL WILDLIFE HABITAT
GENERAL WATERFOWL HABITAT
DEVELOPED FOR USE IN THE HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS
-------
FISH DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE
(31.2-y + 31.6.E-n
) / 37-y / 43.H«y / 43.1-y
B
zone >¦ 10Z of AA but is not 100Z eB or open water at least 2* deep by 6'
vide by 1000' long
or dominant water depth > 6.6* (significant water
present)
TRUE
FALSE
T
LOW
1
2.
l.l"j + (43.A»y
/ (32.D/E/F/G/K«y))
<
5 acres and dominant water depth is < 1" or dominant hydroperiod shows
flooding is infrequent
J
r TRua
FALSE
LOW
7
THREE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
1.
I19«y FWS species of special emphasis
2.
2.1.2-Y + 32.A/B/C/H/I/J"y >40 acres & frequently flooded
3.
8.1-y / 8.3-y
permanent inlet or outlet
4.
13.C«y aquatic bed 1 acre or 10Z of AA
5.
15.1.B/C»y vegetation - water interspersion moderate or high
6.
43.D/F./F/G/H/I
¦y dominant water depth > 8"
7.
46.C-y physical habitat interspersion high
TRUE
FALSE
1
1 \
1
HIGH MODERATE
-------
WILDLIFE DIVERSITY AND ABUNDANCE
(Breeding, Migration & Wintering)
HIGH MODERATE
-------
WATERFOWL BREEDING, MIGRATION, WINTERING
66
.1.1-y / 66.2.1-
y / 66.2.3-y / 66.2.5-y / 66.2.7-y / 66.2.10-y
waterfowl thought
to use AA
TRUE
FALSE
1
i
\
LOW
1
2.1.1-n + (29.1-y / 31.5-y) + ((31.2-y + 31.6.E-n) / 37-y / 43.H-y / 43.1-yI
> 5 acres, cover along wetland - upland edge or A zone >¦ 10% of AA, B zone >
• 10% of AA but is not 100Z eB or open water at least 2' deep by 6' wide by
1000' long or dominant water depth > 6.6'
TRUE
FALSE
LOW
ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. 14.1-y 25 square foot+ island(s)
2. 15.1.B/C«y vegetation - water interspersion moderate or high
3* 50-y plants of waterfowl food value
2.1.2-Y + 32.A/B/C/H/I/J-Y
>40 acres and frequently flooded
TRUE FALSE
? V
HIGH MODERATE
-------
LIST A:
1.
I22-y
rare
local type
2.
13.A»y
1 acre or 10Z forested
3.
13.B-J
1 acre or 10Z scrub/shrub
4.
13.C«y
1 acre or 10Z aquatic bed
5.
14.1-y
25 square foot+ island(s)
6.
15.1.B/C-y
vegetation - water interspersion moderate or high
7.
16.B/C-y
vegetation class interspersion moderate or high
8.
18»y
upland - wetland edge irregular
9.
19.1.A-y
wind
shelter of 1+ acres open water or fetch < 100*
10.
19.3-y
woody vegetation shelters adjacent upland
11.
29.1-y
cover along wetland - upland edge
12.
38.1-y
type
combination
13.
38.2-y
type
combination
U.
38.4-y
type
combination
15.
38.5-y
type
combination
16.
38.6-y
type
combination
17.
38.7-y
type
combination
18.
39- y
special habitat features
19.
46.C«y
high
physical habitat interspersion
20.
50»y
plants of waterfowl food value
-------
APPENDIX E
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
-------
APPENDIX E
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region II
Marine and Wetlands Protection Branch:
Mario Del Vicario, Branch Chief, Project Director
Kathleen Drake, Project Manager
Environmental Impacts Branch:
Robert Hargrove, Chief
Maguire Group Inc.
Robert Wardwell, Project Administrator
Clinton Webb, Project Manager
Christopher Mason, Technical Manager
David Westcott, Principal Planner
Dale Toomer, Senior Planner
Nicole Demakis, Planner
Andrew Kuchta, Planner
Richard Galantowicz, Planner
-------
Karen Cruanes, Graphic Artist
Leslie Halstein, Graphic Artist
Karen Isibel, Graphic Artist
Pat Whitaker, Word Processing
Phil Plante, Reproduction
Simon-Bender Associates
Barbara Simon, Computer Programming
Bruce Bender, Computer Programming
Adamus Resource Assessment, Inc.
Paul Adamus, Training and Quality Assurance
Terry Huffman, Training
Gary Tucker, Training
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station
Ellis Clairain, Consultation on WET
Richard Young, Consultation on WET
Daniel Smith, Consultation on WET
-------
Participants in Field and Office Use of WET
John Bolan, HMDC
Kevin Broderick, NJDEP
Bob Dieterich, Corps
Kathleen Drake, EPA
Michele Farmer, Corps
Mark Kraus, HMDC
Debbie Lawlor, HMDC
Chris Mason, Maguire Group Inc.
Gene McColligan, NJDEP
George Nieves, Corps
Mario Paula, Corps
Don Smith, HMDC
Shari.Stevens, FWS
Clint Webb, Maguire Group Inc.
Bob Wil1, Corps
Other HMDC Staff who assisted in the Preparation of this
Report ~~
Anne Gal 1i, Director of Environmental Operations
Ed Konsevick, Laboratory
Chris Cheng, Laboratory
Brett Bragin
Mark Slauter
May D'Arminio, Secretary
Chris Ferrante, Secretary
P. R. Sanders and Associates
Dana R. Sanders, Sr., Consultant to HMDC
------- |