HomeMy WebLinkAboutAquatic Delineation ReportGallatin County Regional Park
Aquatic Delineation Report
Prepared For:
Allied Engineering Services, Inc
32 Discovery Drive
Bozeman, MT 59718
Prepared By:
PO Box 1424
Bozeman, MT 59771
406.539.7244
briana@sundogeco.com
August 24, 2022
Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1
Site Description ......................................................................................................................................... 1
Methods .................................................................................................................................................... 2
Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 2
Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................. 3
Delineated Wetlands ................................................................................................................................ 3
Soils ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
Hydrology .................................................................................................................................................. 4
Water Bodies ............................................................................................................................................. 4
Uplands ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
Threatened and Endangered Species ........................................................................................................... 4
Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
References .................................................................................................................................................... 6
List of Figures and Tables
Figure 1: Location of the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site relative to Oak Street, Baxter
Lane, Ferguson Lane and Davis Lane in Bozeman, Montana. ....................................................................... 1
Table 1: List of plant species observed at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site. .................. 3
Table 2: Wetland characteristics identified at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site. ........... 3
Appendices
Appendix A – Project Area Maps
Appendix B – Wetland Delineation Map
Appendix C – Wetland Determination Data Forms
Appendix D – Site Photographs
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 1
Introduction
A routine wetland delineation and investigation of waters of the U.S. was conducted by Sundog
Ecological Inc on July 21st, 2022, for Allied Engineering Services, Inc. on behalf of Gallatin County. This
delineation was conducted as part of due diligence for construction of a maintenance building on site.
The purpose of this wetland delineation was to investigate the project area, identify areas meeting the
technical guidelines for wetlands, delineate the extent of wetlands within the project area and classify
these wetland habitats. This report describes the methodologies used, summarizes results of the
wetland investigations, and provides technical documentation for all delineated wetlands and
watercourses within the project area. Figures referred to in text are included in Appendices at the end
of the report.
Site Description
The Gallatin County Regional Park wetland delineation site is located in the northeast quarter of Section
3, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, in Bozeman, Montana. Upland communities are dominated by
smooth brome and balsam poplar bordering an irrigation ditch. Wetlands communities are dominated
by watercress, mint and Baltic rush. One wetland and one upland were identified within project
boundaries.
Figure 1: Location of the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site relative to Oak Street, Baxter Lane, Ferguson Lane
and Davis Lane in Bozeman, Montana.
Directions to site: From Main Street, head west following US-191 towards Four Corners. Turn right on to
North 19th Avenue, following for 1.9 miles. Turn left onto Oak Street. Continue on Oak Street for 1 mile
turning Right onto Davis Lane. Follow Davis Lane for 0.2 mile, turning left onto Vaquero Parkway. The
Dinosaur Park and Gallatin County Maintenance Building site are on the left.
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 2
Methods
This wetland delineation was conducted using a routine on-site-approach in accordance with standard
practices outlined in the 1987 Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) Wetland Delineation Manual
(Environmental Laboratory 1987) and by Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0 (ACOE 2010). The study
evaluated the presence or absence of indicators of three wetlands parameters described in the ACOE
Wetland Delineation Manual. Under the delineation procedures outlined in these manuals, an area
must exhibit characteristic wetland hydrology, hydric soils, and hydrophytic vegetation to be considered
a wetland. If field investigation determines that any of the three parameters are not satisfied, the area
does not usually qualify as a wetland. Wetlands were classified according to the Cowardin classification
system (Cowardin et al., 1979). Non-wetland water bodies such as streams were classified according to
flow regime (perennial, seasonal, etc.) and substrate (rock bottom, unconsolidated bottom, etc.)
according to the Cowardin system (Cowardin et al., 1979).
Prior to conducting field studies, available background and supplementary reference materials were
reviewed, including aerial photographs and maps from: Google Earth Pro, National Wetlands Inventory,
Montana Natural Heritage Program, the Gallatin County Soil Survey, Web Soil Survey, the National
Wetlands Plant List and plat and topographic maps. Site maps used for assessment of the Gallatin
County Regional Park wetland delineation site are included in Appendix A.
As part of a delineation report, data forms and technical information are required by the ACOE to
document three parameters for any area determined to be wetland. A total of two data points were
observed. Wetland boundaries were drawn utilizing field data, aerial photographs and topographic
boundaries. Data forms for sample locations are provided in Appendix B. Representative photographs
of sample locations and delineated wetlands are provided in Appendix C.
Results
The following discussion provides an overview of each of three wetland components inventoried at the
Gallatin County Regional Park wetland delineation site. In July 2022, one wetland area was identified
and delineated within the project boundaries. All potential areas of impact were assessed for dominant
hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and evidence of wetland hydrology. Wetland areas outside of the
project limits were not assessed. Overall, two data points (1 wetland, 1 upland) were investigated to
determine the wetland/upland boundary within the project area. Data points were placed in and along
the wetland/upland boundary.
One wetland type was identified within the project boundaries in immediate proximity to Spring Ditch.
The location of identified wetlands and upland/wetland sample points are shown on Exhibit 1, Appendix
B. Data forms for sample locations can be found in Appendix C and photographs of sample locations in
Appendix D.
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 3
Vegetation
Approximately eleven (11) plant species were identified at data point locations at the Gallatin County
Regional Park delineation site (Table 1). Plants observed at these locations are listed on their respective
wetland data forms located in Appendix C. One Montana state listed noxious weeds was observed on
site. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) is considered a priority 2B noxious weed and a management plan
should be developed and implemented to curtail its spread.
Table 1: List of plant species observed at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site.
Delineated Wetlands
Wetland Type 1 represents a palustrine emergent wetland community dominated by mint, watercress,
balsam poplar and Baltic rush. All observed wetlands were associated with the fringes of a seasonal
irrigation ditch (Spring Ditch) which originates from the Farmers Canal. The total amount of palustrine
emergent wetland identified on site was 0.031 acres.
Table 2: Wetland characteristics identified at the Gallatin County Regional Park Delineation Site.
Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status
Bromus inermis smooth brome UPL
Carex vulpoides common fix sedge OBL
Cirsium arvense Canada thistle FAC
Juncus balticus Baltic rush FACW
Mentha arvensis wild mint FACW
Nasturium officinale Watercress OBL
Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass FAC
Populus balsamifera balsam poplar FAC
Rumex crispus curly dock FAC
Sonchus arvensis Field sow-thislte FACU
Veronica anagallis-aquatica blue water spedwell OBL
Site General Location Cowardin Class Primary Hydrology Dominant Vegetation
Upland throughout project area none none smooth brome, balsam poplar
Wetland Type
1 irrigation ditch fringes palustrine
emergent surface water mint, watercress, balsam
poplar, Baltic rush
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 4
Soils
One soil map unit was observed within the project limits of the Gallatin County Regional Park Sierra Vista
wetland delineation site. Based on soil descriptions, the Meadowcreek loam 0-4% slopes, is typically
found along stream terraces and alluvial fans and are common throughout the Gallatin Valley. Observed
wetland soils were silt loams in texture with matrix hues of 10YR, matrix values of 3 to 4 and matrix chroma
of 2 or less. Redox concentrations were observed throughout wetland soils within the project boundaries.
Hydric soil indicators were depleted matrix (F3). Detailed soil descriptions for wetland and upland sample
locations are provided on wetland delineation data forms and can be found in Appendix C.
Hydrology
Primary indicators of wetland hydrology observed were soil saturation (A3), (see completed data forms in
Appendix B). The secondary indicators of geomorphic position (D2) and Positive FAC-neutral test (D5)
were also observed on site.
Water Bodies
The Spring Ditch is the primary driver of hydrology on site. The irrigation ditch varies in width from
three to seven (3 to 7) feet wide and one to two feet (1 to23) feet deep. This ditch originates from the
Farmers Canal (originating at the Gallatin River) and is controlled via headgate. The ditch is used
seasonally, generally open during the irrigation season and flows from south to north across the
property.
Uplands
One upland sample point (paired with one wetland sample point) was documented within the project
area and is shown on accompanying project/site maps (Appendix B). Sample points were used to assist
in establishing wetland boundaries and to determine/verify upland-wetland boundaries. Vegetation
within the uplands was dominated by smooth brome and balsam poplar. Soils were a very dark greyish
brown (10YR 3/2) and lacking redox concentrations. Textures were silt loam to large cobbles, with some
mixing (likely from ditch cleaning) and similar to descriptions found in NRCS Soil Survey information
provided in Appendix A.
Threatened and Endangered Species
A review of USFWS Information, Planning and Consultation database for the site listed the Canada Lynx
North American wolverine and grizzly bear as threatened and endangered species in the area. Monarch
Butterfly is also listed but considered a Candidate species. Construction of a maintenance building at
the Gallatin County Regional Park is not expected to impact either of these species as there are no
critical habitats for them within the project area.
Summary
This Wetland Delineation Report for the Gallatin County Regional Park provides baseline information
that will assist in developing practices to minimize wetland impacts during the site infrastructure and
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 5
development process. One wetland and one upland type were identified within the project boundary.
Wetland components total 1,354 square feet, or 0.031 acres. 3,707 square feet, or 0.085 acres, an
additional 537 square feet, or 0.012 acres would be impacted outside of the project area (totaling 0.09
acres). Wetland areas were limited to a narrow fringe bordering Spring Ditch. Identified wetlands were
classified as palustrine emergent wetlands.
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 6
References
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water
habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. U.S.D.I Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington D.C.
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. Washington, DC.
Lichvar, R.W., M. Butterwick, N.C. Melvin, and W.N. Kirchner. 2014. The National Wetland Plant List.
2014 Update of Wetland Ratings. Phytoneuron 2014-41:1-42.
Reed, P.B. 1988. National list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). Biological
Report 88(26.9), May 1988. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S.
Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-10-3. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer
Research and Development Center
Websites
Montana Natural Heritage Program website. Accessed in August 2022 at http://mtnhp.org/mapviewer
USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. Gallatin County, Montana. Accessed
August 2022 at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory website. Accessed August 2022 at:
https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html.
US Fish & Wildlife Service. Information for Planning and Conservation. Accessed August 2022 at:
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
Appendix A
Aerial Overview of Gallatin County Regional Park
Topographic Overview of Gallatin County Regional Park
National Wetland Inventory – Mapped Wetlands at Gallatin County Regional Park
Soils of Gallatin County at Gallatin County Regional Park
Gallatin County Regional Park
3000 ft
N➤➤N
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetlands
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,wetlands_team@fws.gov
Wetlands
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
Freshwater Pond
Lake
Other
Riverine
August 23, 2022
0 0.1 0.20.05 mi
0 0.2 0.40.1 km
1:7,523
This page was produced by the NWI mapperNational Wetlands Inventory (NWI)
This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site.
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Gallatin County
Area, MontanaNatural
Resources
Conservation
Service
August 4, 2022
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2
alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3
Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2
How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5
Soil Map..................................................................................................................8
Soil Map................................................................................................................9
Legend................................................................................................................10
Map Unit Legend................................................................................................11
Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11
Gallatin County Area, Montana.......................................................................13
53B—Amsterdam silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................................13
510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................................14
References............................................................................................................16
4
How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
Custom Soil Resource Report
6
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
Custom Soil Resource Report
7
Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8
9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
50601905060200506021050602205060230506024050602505060260506027050602805060290506030050603105060190506020050602105060220506023050602405060250506026050602705060280506029050603005060310493290 493300 493310 493320 493330 493340 493350 493360 493370 493380
493290 493300 493310 493320 493330 493340 493350 493360 493370 493380
45° 41' 46'' N 111° 5' 10'' W45° 41' 46'' N111° 5' 6'' W45° 41' 42'' N
111° 5' 10'' W45° 41' 42'' N
111° 5' 6'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84
0 30 60 120 180
Feet
0 5 10 20 30
Meters
Map Scale: 1:638 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana
Survey Area Data: Version 25, Sep 2, 2021
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 3, 2009—Sep 1,
2016
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI
53B Amsterdam silt loam, 0 to 4
percent slopes
0.3 21.1%
510B Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4
percent slopes
1.1 78.9%
Totals for Area of Interest 1.4 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
Custom Soil Resource Report
12
Gallatin County Area, Montana
53B—Amsterdam silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 56ws
Elevation: 4,400 to 5,550 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Amsterdam and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Amsterdam
Setting
Landform:Stream terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Loess
Typical profile
A - 0 to 8 inches: silt loam
Bw - 8 to 15 inches: silt loam
Bk - 15 to 42 inches: silt loam
2C - 42 to 60 inches: very fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Calcium carbonate, maximum content:35 percent
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: High (about 10.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R044BB032MT - Loamy (Lo) LRU 01 Subset B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Blackdog
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Stream terraces
Custom Soil Resource Report
13
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS355MT - Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Quagle
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Stream terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS357MT - Limy (Ly) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Bowery
Percent of map unit:3 percent
Landform:Stream terraces, alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS355MT - Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Meagher
Percent of map unit:2 percent
Landform:Stream terraces, alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS355MT - Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 56vt
Elevation: 4,200 to 5,950 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F
Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Meadowcreek and similar soils:85 percent
Minor components:15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Meadowcreek
Setting
Landform:Stream terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Alluvium
Custom Soil Resource Report
14
Typical profile
A - 0 to 11 inches: loam
Bg - 11 to 25 inches: silt loam
2C - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table:About 24 to 42 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm)
Available water supply, 0 to 60 inches: Low (about 5.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Ecological site: R044BP815MT - Subirrigated Grassland
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Blossberg
Percent of map unit:10 percent
Landform:Terraces
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS365MT - Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Beaverton
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Landform:Stream terraces, alluvial fans
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Ecological site:R044BS354MT - Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z.
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/
detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084
16
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf
Custom Soil Resource Report
17
Appendix B
Exhibit 1 – Mapped Wetland Boundary of Gallatin County Regional Park
Appendix C
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Determination Data Forms
2 -
3 -
4 -
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is > 50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1
1
1
Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1
1
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation
DP 1w
0.0 0.0
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
15
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
30
10
10
5
5
5
5
3
0
0
0
0
20
Yes No
Healthy plant communiy along shallow, slow moving ditch water.
4######FAC
0.0%
50.0%
0.0%
80.0%15
######FAC
0.0%
0.0%15 15
0.0%40 80
0.0%28 84
10 405
0 0
41.1%FACW 93 21913.7%FACU
2.35513.7%FACW
6.8%OBL
6.8%OBL
6.8%FAC
6.8%OBL
4.1%FAC
0.0%
0.0%
73
0.0%
0.0%
0
, or Hydrology
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1.
2.
3.
4.
(A/B)
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sampling Date:
Lat.:Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1.
2.
Remarks:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Are Vegetation
(B)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
Tree Stratum
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
R
Absolute% Cover
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
naturally problematic?
Slope:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Hydric Soil Present?
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Subregion (LRR):
Indicator
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
HydrophyticVegetationPresent?
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
City/County:
Percent of dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
State:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
, or Hydrology
DominantSpecies?
Rel.Strat.Cover
Wetland data point along ditch fringe.
0 0.0%
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
21-Jul-22Gallatin County Maintenance Building Bozeman / Gallatin
Gallatin County MT
5 E2 S3B Schultz
Ditch concave
NAV88-111.085358445.6957304LRR E
Meadowcreek loam , 0 to 4% slopes none
Populus balsamifera
Populus balsamifera
Mentha arvensis
Sonchus arvensis
Juncus balticus
Nasturtium officinale
Carex vulpinoidea
Poa pratensis
Veronica anagallis-aquatica
Rumex crispus
(Plot size:30 ft.
(Plot size:15 ft.
(Plot size:5 ft.
(Plot size:
)
)
)
)
VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants.
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Good mottles at 5 inches within very organic and rooty soil profile.
DP 1w
3
0
Soil saturated to surface with ground water observed at 3 inches.
Soil Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except in MLRA 1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox depressions (F8)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydrology
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Salt Crust (B11)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Frost Heave Hummocks (D7)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
3
3
1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
organic and very rooty
very rooty and organic with sand
grey with brigth redox
1
0-2
2-5
5-12
10YR
10YR
10YR
2/1
3/1
4/1
100
100
90 10YR 5/4 10 C M Silt Loam
Silt Loam
Silt Loam
2 -
3 -
4 -
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants
Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology mustbe present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is > 50%
Prevalence Index is ≤3.0 1
1
1
Morphological Adaptations (Provide supporting data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation (Explain)
1
1
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrologic Vegetation
DP-1u
0.0 0.0
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
35
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
55
30
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
Yes No
Mixed grasses with tree overstroy.
3######FAC
0.0%
40.0%
0.0%
75.0%35
######FAC
0.0%
0.0%0 0
0.0%0 0
0.0%73 219
1 45
55 275
61.8%UPL 129 49833.7%FAC
3.8603.4%FAC
1.1%FACU
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
89
0.0%
0.0%
0
, or Hydrology
Prevalence Index = B/A =
1.
2.
3.
4.
(A/B)
Project/Site:
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Applicant/Owner:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Sampling Date:
Lat.:Long.:
Sampling Point:
Investigator(s):
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.):
T
Number of Dominant Species
That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1.
2.
Remarks:
OBL species
FACW species
FAC species
FACU species
UPL species
Column Totals:
x 1 =
x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
x 5 =
(A)
(A)
Are Vegetation
(B)
Are "Normal Circumstances" present?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Soil Map Unit Name:
Datum:
Are climatic/hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
NWI classification:
Remarks:
Tree Stratum
Sapling/Shrub Stratum
*Indicator suffix = National status or professional decision assigned because Regional status not defined by FWS.
R
Absolute% Cover
Are Vegetation
Section, Township, Range: S
significantly disturbed?
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?
Local relief (concave, convex, none):
naturally problematic?
Slope:
(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
, Soil
Summary of Findings - Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
% /
, Soil
Hydric Soil Present?
Woody Vine Stratum
(B)
Herb Stratum
= Total Cover
Subregion (LRR):
Indicator
= Total Cover
= Total Cover
HydrophyticVegetationPresent?
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Dominance Test worksheet:
City/County:
Percent of dominant SpeciesThat Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
Total Number of DominantSpecies Across All Strata:
Prevalence Index worksheet:
State:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
, or Hydrology
DominantSpecies?
Rel.Strat.Cover
Data point approximately 5 feet above wetland data point.
0 0.0%
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
21-Jul-22Gallatin County Maintenance Building Bozeman / Gallatin
Gallatin County MT
5 E2 S3B Schultz
Terrace none
NW 83 -111.085414945.6957487LRR E
Meadowcreek loam , 0 to 4% slopes none
Populus balsamifera
Populus balsamifera
Bromus inermis
Poa pratensis
Cirsium arvense
Lactuca serriola
(Plot size:30 ft.
(Plot size:15 ft.
(Plot size:5 ft.
(Plot size:
)
)
)
)
VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants.
Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers
Large cobble, likely from ditch maintenance. No hydirc soil indicators were observed at this sample location.
DP-1u
No wetland hydrology indicators were observed at this sample location.
Soil Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Type: C=Concentration. D=Depletion. RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains ²Location: PL=Pore Lining. M=Matrix
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No Yes No
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils :
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Hydric Soil Present?
Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Muck Mineral (S1)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except in MLRA 1)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox depressions (F8)
2 cm Muck (A10)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydrology
Remarks:
Surface Water (A1)
High Water Table (A2)
Saturation (A3)
Water Marks (B1)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift deposits (B3)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Salt Crust (B11)
Dry Season Water Table (C2)Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Frost Heave Hummocks (D7)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
FAC-neutral Test (D5)
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present?
Water Table Present?
Saturation Present?
(includes capillary fringe)
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):Wetland Hydrology Present?
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitor well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Secondary Indicators (minimum of two required)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except MLRA
1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Red Parent Material (TF2)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)
3
3
1
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth(inches) Color (moist) Color (moist)
Matrix Redox Features
%Loc²Texture RemarksType%
very dry
very dry
large cobble
1
0-4
4-6
6+
10YR
10YR
3/2
4/1
100
100 Silt Loam
Silt Loam
Appendix D
Gallatin County Regional Park Wetland Site Photographs
Gallatin County Regional Park Maintenance Building Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 1
Data Point 1
Data Point 1 and 2
Existing Conditions 1
Gallatin County Regional Park Maintenance Building Sundog Ecological Inc.
Page | 2
Existing Conditions 2
Existing Conditions 3