ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2003
New Light Creek Mitigation Site
Wake County
Project No. 8.U401721
TIP No. R-2000 WM
Prepared By:
Office of Natural Environment & Roadside Environmental Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
December 2003TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY..................................................................................................................1
1.0 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................2
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................2
1.2 PURPOSE............................................................................................2
1.3 PROJECT HISTORY............................................................................4
1.4 DEBIT LEDGER...................................................................................4
2.0 HYDROLOGY..................................................................................................5
2.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA..........................................................................5
2.2 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION............................................................5
2.3 RESULTS OF HYDROLOGIC MONITORING......................................7
2.3.1 Site Data...................................................................................7
2.3.2 Climatic Data..........................................................................11
2.4 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................11
3.0 VEGETATION: NEW LIGHT CREEK MITIGATION SITE............................13
3.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA........................................................................13
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES............................................................13
3.3 RESULTS OF VEGETATION MONITORING.....................................14
3.4 CONCLUSIONS.................................................................................14
4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS...........................................................................15
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Location Map......................................................................................3
Figure 2. Monitoring Gauge Location Map................................................................6
Figure 3. Monitoring Gauge Hydrologic Results......................................................10
Figure 4. New Light Creek 30-70 Percentile Graph, Raleigh, NC...........................12
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. New Light Creek Hydrologic Monitoring Results........................................8
Table 2. Hydrologic Monitoring Results (1999- 2002)..............................................9
Table 3. Vegetation Monitoring Statistics...............................................................14
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A GAUGE DATA GRAPHS
APPENDIX B SITE PHOTOS & VEGETATION PLOT LOCATIONS
APPENDIX C EXCERPT FROM 1998 MITIGATION PLAN
APPENDIX D WETLAND DELINEATION
SUMMARY
The following report summarizes the monitoring activities that have occurred in the past year at the New Light Creek Mitigation Site. This site was originally constructed in 1998. Monitoring activities in 2003 represent the fifth year of monitoring for the site. The site must demonstrate both hydrologic and vegetation success for a minimum of five years or until the site is deemed successful.
In 2002, four additional monitoring gauges were installed, based on agency comments and review. Currently, the site hydrology is monitored with ten groundwater gauges and an onsite rain gauge.
This report utilizes rainfall data from both a local weather station and from an onsite rain gauge. The NC State Climate Office provided the historical data for the Raleigh/Durham weather station.
For the 2003-year, hydrologic monitoring indicated that four of the ten monitoring gauges (GW-1, GW-2, GW-3, and GW-5) met the optimum saturation (within 12” of the surface for more than 12.5% of the growing season).
There were four vegetation plots established to monitor the 13.2 acres planted in trees on the site. The fifth year of monitoring revealed an average density of 548 trees per acre, which is well above the minimum required by the success criteria.
A wetland delineation was performed in December 2003 to determine the extent of restored wetlands on the New Light Creek Mitigation Site. The delineation was conducted by the continual sampling of hydric and non-hydric soils until the edges of the wetland units were identified. Previous years hydrology data was used to refine the delineation. Mictrotopography, landscape position, soil textural changes, redoximorphic features, and the presence of a depleted matrix were also considered to determine the extent of hydric soils in transitioning areas. Wetland data sheets and soil profile descriptions (Appendix D) were prepared to support the differentiation between wetland and non-wetland areas.
Representatives from NCDOT-ONE met onsite with a representative from the USACOE to get jurisdictional concurrence of the delineated boundary in December 2003. Global Positioning Satellite (GPS) technology was used to survey the flagged boundaries. A boundary map was prepared and is included herein (Appendix D).
The 2003-year represents the fifth year that the site has been monitored for hydrology and vegetation. A wetland delineation was conducted in December 2003 to determine the extent of restored wetlands. Following concurrence of the delineated boundary, a total of 6.83 acres of wetlands were mapped on the New Light Creek Mitigation Site.
NCDOT has approached the EEP (Ecosystem Enhancement Program) about accepting the 5.44-acre deficit from the New Light Creek Mitigation Site. The resource agencies will be contacted as soon as more information is available. With this determination, NCDOT proposes to discontinue monitoring activities on this site.
1
2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The New Light Creek Mitigation Site is located east of Mangum Dairy Road (SR 1911) adjacent to New Light Creek in Wake County, near the Granville County Line (Figure 1). This site was constructed to provide mitigation for wetland impacts associated with the Raleigh Outer Loop (R-2000).
The site, which totals 19.8 acres in size, consists of bottomland hardwood forest restoration and creation. The site was constructed in 1998 and planted in 1999.
1.2 PURPOSE
In order to demonstrate successful mitigation, hydrologic and vegetative monitoring must be conducted for a minimum of five consecutive years or until the site is deemed successful. Success criteria are based on federal guidelines for wetland mitigation. These guidelines stipulate criteria for both hydrologic conditions and vegetation survival. The following report details the results of hydrologic and vegetative monitoring during the 2003 growing season at the New Light Creek Mitigation Site.
Activities in 2003 reflect the fifth year of monitoring following the restoration efforts. Included in this report are analyses of both hydrologic and vegetative monitoring results, as well as local climate conditions throughout the growing season and site photographs.
Figure 1. Site Location Map
3
1.3 PROJECT HISTORY
October 1998 Site Grading Commenced
February 1999 Site Planted
March 1999 Monitoring Gauges Installed
March- November 1999 Hydrologic Monitoring (1 yr.)
September 1999 Vegetation Monitoring (1 yr.)
March- November 2000 Hydrologic Monitoring (2 yr.)
November 2000 Vegetation Monitoring (2 yr.)
March- November 2001 Hydrologic Monitoring (3 yr.)
July 2001 Vegetation Monitoring (3 yr.)
March 2002 Supplemental Planting of
Streambank Levee
March- November 2002Hydrologic Monitoring (4 yr.)
June 2002 Vegetation Monitoring (4 yr.)
March- November 2003 Hydrologic Monitoring (5 yr.)
June 2003 Vegetation Monitoring (5 yr.)
December 2003 Wetland Delineation
1.4 DEBIT LEDGER
The entire New Light Creek Mitigation Site was used for projects R-2000EA and R-2000EB to compensate for unavoidable wetland impacts.
4
2.0 HYDROLOGY
2.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA
In accordance with federal guidelines for wetland mitigation, the success criteria for hydrology state that the area must be inundated or saturated (within 12” of the surface) by surface or groundwater for at least a consecutive 12.5% of the growing season. Areas inundated for less than 5% of the growing season are always classified as non-wetlands. Areas inundated between 5% - 12.5% of the growing season can be classified as wetlands depending upon factors such as the presence of wetland vegetation and hydric soils.
The growing season in Wake County begins March 26 and ends November 10. These dates correspond to a 50% probability that temperatures will drop to 28°F or lower after March 26 and before November 10.1 The growing season is 229 days; therefore, optimum hydrology requires 12.5% of this season, or at least 29 consecutive days. Local climate must also represent average conditions for the area.
2.2 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION
In March of 1999, six groundwater-monitoring gauges were installed across the site (Figure 2). Four additional groundwater-monitoring gauges were installed in February 2002. The automatic monitoring gauges record daily readings of groundwater depth.
The New Light Creek Site was designed to receive hydrologic input from rainfall. The hydrologic monitoring should show the reaction of the groundwater level to specific rainfall events.
1 Natural Resources Conservation Service, Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina.
5
GW-1GW-2GW-3GW-4GW-7GW-8GW-5GW-9GW-10GW-6Figure 2. Monitoring Gauge Location Map
6
7
2.3 RESULTS OF HYDROLOGIC MONITORING
2.3.1 Site Data
The maximum number of consecutive days that the groundwater was within twelve inches of the surface was determined for each gauge. This number was converted into a percentage of the 229-day growing season (March 26 – November 10). The results are presented in Table 1.
Appendix A contains a plot of the groundwater depth for each monitoring gauge during 2003. The maximum number of consecutive days is noted on each graph. The individual precipitation events, shown on the monitoring well graphs as bars, represent data collected from the onsite Infinity rain gauge
In February 2002, four new ground water gauges (GW-7, GW-8, GW-9, GW-10) were installed. These gauges were installed between existing gauges that were either not meeting success or were marginal, with respect to the success criteria, based on previous years monitoring (Table2).
Figure 3 provides a graphical representation of the hydrologic results. Gauges highlighted in blue indicate wetland hydrology for more than 12.5% of the growing season. Gauges highlighted in red indicate saturation between 8 and 12.5% of the growing season, while those in green indicate saturation between 5 and 8%. Gauges highlighted in black indicate no wetland hydrology (less than 5% of the growing season).
8
Table 1. 2003 New Light Creek Hydrologic Monitoring Results
Monitoring Gauge
< 5%
5-8%
8-12.5%
>12.5%
Actual %
Success Dates
GW-1+
r
30.9
July 12-Aug 29
Sept 1-Nov 10
GW-2+
r
79.6
March 26-Sept 24
GW-3+
r
100
March 26-Nov 10
GW-4
r
4.3
GW-5+
r
100
March 26-Nov 10
GW-6
r
4.8
GW-7
r
5.2
April 8-April 19
GW-8
r
12.2
March 26-April 22
GW-9
r
8.7
Aug 2-Aug 21
GW-10
r
2.6
+ Gauge met success criterion during an average rainfall month (March, July, and October).
9
Table 2. Hydrologic Monitoring Results (1999- 2002)
Monitoring Gauge
1999 Results
Pre Hurricane
1999 Results Post Hurricane
2000 Results
2001 Results
2002 Results
GW-1
2.2
27.8
10.9
7.0
13.1
GW-2
11.3
33.4
100
50.2
30.6
GW-3
12.6
29.1
18.3
17.9
13.5
GW-4
1.3
4.3
7.0
4.4
4.4
GW-5
3.9
29.1
100
43.2
23.1
GW-6
2.2
3.9
3.0
3.1
3.1
GW-7
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
1.8
GW-8
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
5.7
GW-9
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
3.1
GW-10
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
Not Installed
1.3
Climate Conditions
Below Average Rainfall
Above Average Rainfall
Average Rainfall
Below Average Rainfall
Below Average Rainfall
Table 2 represents hydrologic data in percentages from previous years (1999-2002). 􀀀
􀀀
􀀀
􀀀
􀀀
􀀀 􀀀 􀀀 􀀀 􀀀
􀀀          	

    
                                
􀀀          	  􀀀  􀀀

       	 
􀀀 
      
          􀀀 􀀀
      
􀀀     
       	  
       􀀀
       􀀀    
2.3.2 Climatic Data
Figure 4 represents an evaluation of the local climate in comparison with historical data in order to determine whether 2003 was “average” in terms of climate conditions. The two lines represent the 30th and 70th percentiles of monthly precipitation for Raleigh. The bars are the monthly rainfall totals for November 2002 through November 2003. The NC State Climate Office provided the historical data.
Months with below average rainfall include January and November. November (02’), February, March, July, and October experienced average rainfall. The months of December (02’), April, May, June, August, and September all experienced above average rainfall for the year. Overall, the site experienced average to above average rainfall in 2003.
2.4 CONCLUSIONS
The 2003-year represents the fifth full growing season that hydrologic data has been examined. For the 2003-year, hydrologic monitoring indicated that four of the ten monitoring gauges (GW-1, GW-2, GW-3, and GW-5) met the optimum saturation (within 12” of the surface for more than 12.5% of the growing season).
NCDOT has approached the EEP (Ecosystem Enhancement Program) about accepting the 5.44-acre deficit from the New Light Creek Mitigation Site. The resource agencies will be contacted as soon as more information is available. With this determination, NCDOT proposes to discontinue monitoring activities on this site.
11
Figure 3. 30-70 Percentile Graph
New Light Creek 30-70 Graph012345678910Nov 02'Dec 02'Jan 03'Feb 03'Mar 03'Apr 03'MayJun 03'Jul 03'Aug 03'Sep 03'Oct 03'Nov 03'Dec 03'MonthPrecipitation (in.)2002 Rainfall2003 Rainfall30 Percentile70 PercentileRaleigh, NC30th Percentile70th Percentile
12
3.0 VEGETATION: NEW LIGHT CREEK MITIGATION SITE (YEAR 5 MONITORING)
3.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA
NCDOT will monitor the site for five years or until success criteria are met. A 320 stems per acre survival criterion for planted seedlings will be used to determine success for the first three years. The required survival criterion will decrease by 10% per year after the third year of vegetation monitoring (i.e., for an expected 290 stems per acre for year 4 and 260 stems per acre for year 5). The number of plants of one species will not exceed 20% of the total number of planted trees.
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES
The following species were planted in the Wetland Enhancement/Preservation Area:
Bottomland Hardwood Area (12.2 Acres)
Quercus phellos, Willow Oak Quercus falcata var. pagodaefolia, Cherrybark Oak Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Green Ash Nyssa sylvatica var. sylvatica, Blackgum Quercus lyrata, Overcup Oak Quercus michauxii, Swamp Chestnut Oak
Levee Area (1.0 Acre)
Betula nigra, River Birch Quercus lyrata, Overcup Oak Quercus phellos, Willow Oak Platanus occidentalis, Sycamore Juglans nigra, Black Walnut
13
3.3 RESULTS OF VEGETATION MONITORING
Table 3. Vegetation Monitoring Statistics 1(BLH/Levee)113106930375512(BLH)53155533385913(BLH)2811223344604(BLH)22561523237588AVERAGE DENSITY548
Site Notes: Volunteer green ash and sycamore were found throughout the site. Heavy grasses and ground cover exist throughout the site including fescue, smartweed, horse-nettle, Juncus sp., poison ivy, pokeweed, stinkweed, and small pines.
The swale in the middle of the site with a slightly lower elevation contains various wetland species including Juncus sp., Scirpus sp., Cyperus sp., black willow, and cattail. Standing water is present throughout this middle swale. This swale was established during construction of the site and is described and shown in the attached map taken from the June 1998 mitigation plan.
3.4 CONCLUSIONS
Of the 19.8 total acres on this site, approximately 13.2 acres involved tree planting. There were 4 vegetation-monitoring plots established throughout the site. The 2003 vegetation monitoring of the site revealed an average density of 548 trees per acre, which is well above the minimum required by the success criteria.
NCDOT and USACE personnel inspected the washout along the streambank in June 2000. It was agreed that NCDOT would repair the washout. This work was not done. A site inspection in September 2000 revealed this washout to be stabilizing on its own. NCDOT has continued to monitor this area to determine if this slope will stabilize given time. The streambank was inspected and photographed during the 2003-monitoring visit and no other signs of erosion were observed (see photos 5 and 6).
In 2002, NCDOT performed supplemental planting of the streambank levee due to the beaver damage to existing trees. The following species were planted: sycamore, cherrybark oak, and water oak.
NCDOT proposes to discontinue vegetation monitoring on the New Light Creek Mitigation Site.
14
4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS
In 2003, hydrologic monitoring indicated that four of the ten monitoring gauges (GW-1, GW-2, GW-3, and GW-5) met the optimum saturation (within 12” of the surface for more than 12.5% of the growing season). The four vegetation-monitoring plots indicate an average density of 548 trees per acre.
The 2003-year, represents the fifth year that the site has been monitored for hydrology and vegetation. A wetland delineation was conducted in December 2003 to determine the extent of restored wetlands. Following concurrence of the delineated boundary, a total of 6.83 acres of wetlands were mapped on the New Light Creek Mitigation Site.
NCDOT has approached the EEP (Ecosystem Enhancement Program) about accepting the 5.44-acre deficit from the New Light Creek Mitigation Site. The resource agencies will be contacted as soon as more information is available. With this determination, NCDOT proposes to discontinue monitoring activities on this site.
15
APPENDIX A
GAUGE DATA GRAPHS
APPENDIX B
SITE PHOTOS & VEGETATION PLOT LOCATIONS
New Light Creek
Photo 1 Photo 2
Photo 3 Photo 4
Photo 5 Photo 6
2003
New Light Creek
Photo 7 Photo 8
2003 APPENDIX C
EXCERPT FROM 1998 MITIGATION PLAN
APPENDIX D
WETLAND DELINEATION
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/03/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 1 (wetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
FACW
9.
2.
Acer negundo
2
FACW
10.
3.
Quercus phellos
2
FACW-
11.
4.
Acer rubrum
2
FAC
12.
5.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
3
FACW
13.
6.
Juncus effusus
3
FACW+
14.
7.
Boehmeria cylindrica
3
FACW+
15.
8.
Polygonum spp.
3
-
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
100 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
___ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
___ Other
_____ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
X No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 11.5 (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 11 (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Wehadkee variant
Drainage Class:
Poorly Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-4
A
10YR 5/3
l, 1fgr
4-8
Bw
10YR 5/3
10YR 5/2
f1f
scl, 1msbk
4/5b
c2p
8-11
Bg1
10YR 5/2
10YR 4/4
f1f
scl, 1msbk
5YR 4/6
f1f
11-16
Bg2
10YR 5/2
5YR 4/6
c2p
scl, 1fsbk
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors X Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Gley mottles in 4-8” horizon indicate that the soils are episaturated and transitioning to a wetter soil;
redox concentrations are present in the 8-11” horizon;
oxidized root channels are present in the 11-16” horizon.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/03/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 2 (nonwetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Quercus falcata
2
FAC+
9.
2.
Liquidambar styraciflua
2
FAC+
10.
3.
Pinus taeda
2
FAC
11.
4.
Acer rubrum
2
FAC
12.
5.
Juncus effusus
3
FACW+
13.
6.
Festuca spp.
3
FAC-
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
83 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
X Other
_____ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
___ No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
_____ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 16 (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 16 (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Adjacent to monitoring well #1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Chewacla
Drainage Class:
Somewhat Poorly
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-9.5
A
10YR 4/3
sl, 1mgr
9.5-12.5
Bw1
10YR 4/3
5YR 4/6
c2p
scl, 1fsbk
12.5-14
Bw2
10YR 4/3
5YR 4/6
c2p
scl, 1msbk
10YR 5/2
c2f
14-32
Bw3
10YR 5/2
5YR 4/6
c2p
sl, 1fsbk
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_____ Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_____ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Water table is at 16”;
listed on local hydric soils list as having inclusions of hydric soils;
listed on National hydric soils list as frequently flooded.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/15/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 3 (wetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Acer negundo
2
FACW
9.
2.
Quercus michauxii
2
FACW-
10.
3.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
FACW
11.
4.
Festuca spp.
3
FAC-
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
75 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
X Other
_____ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
___ No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 10 (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Water was draining into pit to a depth of 5.5” as a result of rain within 48 hours;
<2% oxidized root channels;
adjacent to monitoring well #3.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Chewacla variant
Drainage Class:
Poorly Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-8
10YR 4/3
l, 1fgr
8-11
10YR 4/3
6/5BG
f1d
l, 1msbk
10YR 4/2
f1f
11-14
10YR 4/2
10YR 3/6
f1f
l, 1msbk
10YR 4/3
c2f
10YR 4/6
c2d
10YR 3/4
f1f
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
10YR 4/2 dries to 10YR 4/3 in 8-11” horizon which shows hydric soils formation;
high concentrations of mica in B horizon;
many fine and medium root throughout sample.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Soil is becoming hydric as shown by the gleyed and low chroma colors in the 8-11” horizon.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/15/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 4 (nonwetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Quercus phellos
2
FACW-
9.
2.
Quercus michauxii
2
FACW-
10.
3.
Quercus lyrata
2
OBL
11.
4.
Phytolacca americana
2
FACU+
12.
5.
Festuca spp.
3
FAC-
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
60 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
___ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
___ Other
_____ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
X No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
_____ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 14 (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Rained within 48 hours.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Chewacla variant
Drainage Class:
Somewhat Poorly
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-6
A
10YR 4/3
l, 1fgr
6-14.5
Bw1
10YR 4/4
l, 1msbk
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_____ Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_____ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Many fine roots in the A horizon;
few fine roots in the B horizon.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/15/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 5 (nonwetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Quercus lyrata
2
OBL
9.
2.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
FACW
10.
3.
Festuca spp.
3
FAC-
11.
4.
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
67 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
X Other
_____ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
___ No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
_____ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 14 (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
X Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Water table in the pit rose to a depth of 4” as a result of rain within 48 hours;
adjacent to monitoring well #8.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Chewacla variant
Drainage Class:
Somewhat Poorly
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-3
A1
10YR 4/3
10YR 4/2
f2f
l, 1fgr
3-6
A2
10YR 4/3
l, 1fgr
6-10
Bw1
10YR 4/4
l, 1fsbk
10-12
Bw2
10YR 4/4
10 YR 4/3
c2f
sil, 1msbk
12-13.5
Bw3
10YR 4/4
l, 1fsbk
10YR 4/2
10YR 2/2
13.5-14
Bw4
10YR 5/4
cl, 1fsbk
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Odor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_____ Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_____ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Black manganese stains in 10-12” horizon and many common 10-15mm concretions at 13” indicate transition to a wetter soil;
high concentrations of mica in 12-13.5” horizon.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/15/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 6 (wetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Quercus lyrata
2
OBL
9.
2.
Festuca spp.
3
FAC-
10.
3.
11.
4.
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
50 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
___ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
___ Other
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
X No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
_____ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 10 (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Water was draining into pit to a depth of 4” as a result of rain within 48 hours.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Chewacla variant
Drainage Class:
Poorly Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-6
A
10YR 4/3
l, 1mgr
6-11
Bw1
10YR 4/3
5/N
f1p
l, 1msbk
11-13.5
Bw2
10YR 4/4
5/N
c2d
cl, 2csbk
10YR 2/2
13.5-14.5
Bwg3
10YR 4/2
10YR 4/4
f1f
cl, 2msbk
14.5-18
Bwg4
10YR 5/2
10YR 4/6
c2d
cl-c, 1msbk-mass
5/N
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
10YR 2/2 manganese masses in 11-13.5” horizon;
many fine roots throughout sample;
3-5mm concretions in 14.5-18” horizon.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
Soil is becoming hydric as shown by the gleyed colors in the 6-11” and 11-13.5” horizons;
redox features are also present in the 11-13.5” horizon as shown by the 10YR 2/2 masses.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/15/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 7 (wetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Typha spp.
3
OBL
9.
2.
Polygonum spp.
3
-
10.
3.
11.
4.
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
100 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
X Inundated
X Other
X Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
___ No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water 1-2 (in.)
X Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Adjacent to monitoring well #5.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Wehadkee
Drainage Class:
Poorly Drained
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-3
A
10YR 4/1
sil, mass
3-6
Bg1
2.5YR 5/2
10YR 3/6
c2d
l, mass
6-12
Bg2
10YR 4/1
5/N
f1d
c, 1msbk-mass
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
X Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
X Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
10YR 3/6 redox concentrations in pore spaces and oxidized root channels in 3-6” horizon;
sampling point was inundated and soil structure was indistinct.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/15/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 8 (nonwetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Quercus lyrata
2
OBL
9.
2.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2
FACW
10.
3.
Festuca spp.
3
FAC-
11.
4.
Mentha spp.
3
-
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
67 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
___ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
___ Other
_____ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
X No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
_____ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
X FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Water table >18”.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Chewacla variant
Drainage Class:
Moderately well
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-6
A
10YR 4/3
sl, 1mgr
6-9
Bw1
10YR 4/4
sl-l, 1msbk
9-13
Bw2
10YR 5/4
10YR 4/4
f1f
cl, 2msbk
10YR 3/4
c2f
13-18
Bw3
10YR 5/6
5YR 4/6
f1p
cl, 2msbk
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_____ Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_____ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
10YR 3/4 manganese masses in 9-13” horizon.
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
Project Site:
New Light Creek Wetland Mitigation Site
Date:
12/15/03
Applicant/Owner:
NCDOT
County:
Wake
Investigator:
S. Stokes, M. Schlegel
State:
NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site?
Yes
No
Community ID:
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)?
Yes
No
Transect ID:
Is there area a potential Problem Area?
Yes
No
Plot ID:
Data Point 9 (nonwetland)
(if needed, explain on reverse.)
At monitoring well #4
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
Dominant Plant Species
Stratum
Indicator
1.
Festuca spp.
3
FAC-
9.
2.
10.
3.
11.
4.
12.
5.
13.
6.
14.
7.
15.
8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-).
0 %
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
X Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
___ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Primary Indicators:
___ Aerial Photographs
_____ Inundated
X Other
_____ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
___ No Recorded Data Available
_____ Water Marks
_____ Drift Lines
_____ Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: _____ (in.)
_____ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water _____ (in.)
_____ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper Inches
_____ Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
_____ Local Soil Survey Data
_____ FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
_____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
No indications of wetland hydrology;
adjacent to monitoring well #4.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE WETLANDS DELINEATION MANUAL)
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase):
Chewacla variant
Drainage Class:
Somewhat Poorly
Taxonomy (Subgroup):
Fluvaquentic Dystrudepts
Field Observations
Confirm Mapped Type? Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth
(Inches) Horizon
Matrix Color
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors
(Munsell Moist)
Mottle
Abundance/Contrast
Texture, Concretions, Structure, etc.
0-6
A
10YR 4/3
l, 1fgr
6-13
Bt1
10YR 4/4
scl, 1fsbk
Hydric Soil Indicators:
_____ Histosol _____ Concretions
_____ Histic Epipedon _____ High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
_____ Sulfidic Ordor _____ Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
_____ Aquic Moisture Regime X Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
_____ Reducing Conditions X Listed on National Hydric Soils List
_____ Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors _____ Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present Yes No (circle)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
(circle)
Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? Yes No
Remarks: