Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout21_Huffine Lane Delineation 77-Acre Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Report Prepared For: Hyalite Engineers, PLLC 2403 N 7th Avenue, Ste. L Bozeman, MT 59715 Prepared By: PO Box 1424 Bozeman, MT 59771 406.539.7244 briana@sundogeco.com Updated: December 2022 Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Site Description ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Methods .................................................................................................................................................... 2 Results ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................................. 3 Delineated Wetlands ................................................................................................................................ 3 Soils ........................................................................................................................................................... 3 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 Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site relative to Huffine Lane (US 191) and Cottonwood Lane in Bozeman, Montana. .................................................................................................... 1 Table 1: List of plant species observed at the 77-acre Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site. ................... 3 Table 2: Wetland characteristics identified at the 77-acre Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site. ............ 3 Appendices Appendix A – Project Area Maps Appendix B – Aquatic Delineation Map Appendix C – Wetland Determination Data Forms Appendix D – Site Photographs 77-Acre Huffine Lane Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc. Page | 1 Introduction A routine aquatic delineation and investigation of waters of the U.S. was conducted by Sundog Ecological Inc on April 24, 2021, for Hyalite Engineering, PLLC. This delineation was conducted as part of due diligence for future land and infrastructure development in Gallatin County, MT. The project site encompasses 77-acres located at 8553 Huffine Lane Bozeman, Montana at Section 35, Township 1 South, Range 5 East. The purpose of this wetland delineation was to investigate the project area, identify areas meeting the technical guidelines for aquatic resources (wetlands and watercourses), delineate the extent of these resources within the project area and classify these aquatic resource habitats. This report describes methodologies used, summarizes results of 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 77-acre Huffine Lane property is located north of Huffine Lane, south of Fallon Street, west of Cottonwood Road and east of Gooch Hill Road (Figure 1). An unnamed irrigation ditch flows along the east side of the property for approximately 1,230 feet. Depressional wetland are found along the fringes of this irrigation canal and extend westward. This property has historically been used for agricultural purposes. Figure 1: Location of the Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site relative to Huffine Lane (US 191) and Cottonwood Lane in Bozeman, Montana. 77-Acre Huffine Lane Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc. Page | 2 Methods This wetland delineation was conducted using the 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 three wetland indicators described in the ACOE Wetland Delineation Manual. Under the delineation procedures outlined in this manual, 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 may not qualify as a wetland, as under certain site conditions a site may qualify as a wetland in the absence of some indicators. 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, Gallatin County Soil Survey, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil Survey, National Wetlands Plant List and plat and topographic maps. Site maps used for assessment of the 77-acre Huffine Lane aquatic 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 the three parameters for any area determined to be wetland. A total of eight 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 the three wetland components inventoried at the Huffine Lane project location. In 2021, 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, eight data points (4 wetland and 4 upland) were investigated to determine the wetland/upland boundary within the project area. Data points were placed in and along the wetland/upland boundary. In addition, 10 to 20 unofficial soil pits were excavated to examine wetland indicators to ensure the wetland boundary was followed as precisely as possible (i.e., data were not collected/recorded at these sites). One wetland area was identified within the project boundaries in immediate proximity to an unnamed irrigation ditch. These wetlands continue east and connect to wetlands surrounding the Baxter Creek, this connection to Baxter Creek makes these wetlands jurisdictional (a Jurisdictional Determination was submitted to ACOE for verification). The location of identified wetlands and upland/wetland sample 77-Acre Huffine Lane Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc. Page | 3 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. Vegetation Approximately six (6) plant species were identified at data point locations at the Huffine Lane aquatic delineation site (Table 1). Plants observed at these locations are listed on their respective wetland data forms located in Appendix C. Of the plant species observed, one is listed as a Montana State noxious weed; Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense). Canada thistle is classified as priority 2B weed and was observed minimally across the site. Table 1: List of plant species observed at the 77-acre Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site. Delineated Wetlands Wetland Type 1 represents 1.93 acres of palustrine emergent wetlands dominated by reed canary grass. Type 1 Wetlands are mainly depressional wetlands associated with low lying areas along an irrigation ditch and areas of ponded water. Table 2: Wetland characteristics identified at the 77-acre Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site. Soils Three soil types were identified by NRCS within the 77-acre Huffine Lane site. Of these three, one soil map unit was observed within the delineation limits. Based on soil NRCS descriptions of the Meadowcreek loam is a deep soil found along stream terraces with slopes ranging from 0 to 4 percent and are 10% hydric. In general, observed wetland soils were silt loam to silty clay loam in texture with matrix hues of Scientific Name Common Name Indicator Status Alopecurus pratensis Garrison's creeping foxtail FAC Bromus inermis smooth brome UPL Cirsium arvense Canada thistle FAC Juncus balticus Baltic rush FACW Phalaris arundinacea reed canary grass FACW Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass FAC Site General Location Cowardin Class Primary Hydrology Dominant Vegetation Upland throughout project area none none smooth brome, Kentucky bluegrass Wetland Type 1 adjacent to irrigation ditch palustrine emergent surface and ground water reed canary grass, Kentucky bluegrass, creeping foxtail 77-Acre Huffine Lane Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc. Page | 4 10YR, matrix values of 2 to 4 and matrix chroma of 2 or less. Redox concentrations were observed throughout wetland soils within the project boundaries. Hydric soil indicators were redox dark surface (F6). 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 hydrology observed were soil saturation (A3), (see completed data forms in Appendix B). Secondary indicators observed were geomorphic position (D2), a positive FAC-neutral (D5) test. Wetlands are sourced by seasonal irrigation flows and pulses from high runoff events. Water Bodies The primary driver of hydrology on site is an unnamed irrigation ditch that flows along the eastern property boundary. Secondary hydrology is influenced by possible surface water flows, seasonally high groundwater and possible drain tile from historic agricultural activities. Water accumulates (in some areas, six to eight inches of water was observed) across the wetland areas in dense stands of reed canary grass. Baxter Creek is located directly east of the property. The wetlands identified on this site connect to wetlands identified by Cindy Hoschouer (Woodard & Curran) in September 2020. Uplands A total of four upland sample points (paired with four wetland sample points) were documented within the project area and are 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. Taken throughout the project site, sample points varied across the upland areas. Uplands generally occurred in areas of slightly higher topography located further away from irrigation water. Vegetation within the uplands included a mix of facultative and upland species. Common species noted were reed canary grass, smooth brome, Canada thistle and Garrison creeping foxtail. Soils were a very dark greyish brown (10YR 3/2) and lacking redox concentrations. Textures were silt loam and silty clay loam, similar to descriptions found in NRCS Soil Survey information provided in Appendix A. Threatened and Endangered Species A review of USFWS Information, Planning and Conservation System database for the site listed the Canada Lynx and grizzly bear as threatened species in the area. Development of the Huffine Lane site is not expected to impact either of these species as there are no critical habitats for them within the project area. Summary This Aquatic Delineation Report for 77-acres along Huffine Lane provides baseline information that will assist in developing practices to minimize wetland impacts during the site infrastructure and development process. One wetland and one upland type were identified within the project boundary. Wetland components total 84,070 square feet, or 1.93 acres. Wetland areas were identified along an 77-Acre Huffine Lane Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc. Page | 5 irrigation ditch and connected to wetlands along Baxter Creek, making these palustrine emergent wetlands jurisdictional. 77-Acre Huffine Lane 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 May 2019 at http://mtnhp.org/mapviewer USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey. Gallatin County, Montana. Accessed May 2021 at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetlands Inventory website. Accessed May 2021 at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html. US Fish & Wildlife Service. Information for Planning and Conservation. Accessed May 2021 at: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/ Appendix A Aerial Overview of Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site Topographic Overview of Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site National Wetland Inventory – Mapped Wetlands at Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site Soils of Gallatin County at Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site Huffine Lane 77 Acre Wetland Delineation Legend Property Boundary 2000 ft N➤➤N Image © 2021 Maxar Technologies Image © 2021 Maxar Technologies Image © 2021 Maxar Technologies Huffine Lane Wetlands Source: Esri, Maxar, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS,USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community Wetlands Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Lake Other Riverine April 15, 2021 0 0.1 0.20.05 mi 0 0.15 0.30.075 km 1:7,218 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 April 15, 2021 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 448A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................................................................................................13 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes...................................................15 510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................................16 537A—Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes........................................17 References............................................................................................................19 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 505750050576005057700505780050579005058000505750050576005057700505780050579005058000490600 490700 490800 490900 491000 491100 491200 491300 491400 491500 490600 490700 490800 490900 491000 491100 491200 491300 491400 491500 45° 40' 33'' N 111° 7' 15'' W45° 40' 33'' N111° 6' 29'' W45° 40' 12'' N 111° 7' 15'' W45° 40' 12'' N 111° 6' 29'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,540 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 12/30/2022 Page 1 of 550575005057600505770050578005057900505800050581005057500505760050577005057800505790050580005058100490600490700490800490900491000491100491200491300491400491500 490600 490700 490800 490900 491000 491100 491200 491300 491400 491500 45° 40' 35'' N 111° 7' 15'' W45° 40' 35'' N111° 6' 28'' W45° 40' 13'' N 111° 7' 15'' W45° 40' 13'' N 111° 6' 28'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,630 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points Hydric (100%) Hydric (66 to 99%) Hydric (33 to 65%) Hydric (1 to 32%) Not Hydric (0%) Not rated or not available 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 26, Aug 30, 2022 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 10, 2012—Nov 12, 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. Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 12/30/2022 Page 2 of 5 Hydric Rating by Map Unit Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 448A Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0 49.7 54.1% 509B Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 10 18.7 20.4% 510B Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 10 22.0 24.0% 537A Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 95 1.5 1.6% Totals for Area of Interest 91.9 100.0% Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 12/30/2022 Page 3 of 5 Description This rating indicates the percentage of map units that meets the criteria for hydric soils. Map units are composed of one or more map unit components or soil types, each of which is rated as hydric soil or not hydric. Map units that are made up dominantly of hydric soils may have small areas of minor nonhydric components in the higher positions on the landform, and map units that are made up dominantly of nonhydric soils may have small areas of minor hydric components in the lower positions on the landform. Each map unit is rated based on its respective components and the percentage of each component within the map unit. The thematic map is color coded based on the composition of hydric components. The five color classes are separated as 100 percent hydric components, 66 to 99 percent hydric components, 33 to 65 percent hydric components, 1 to 32 percent hydric components, and less than one percent hydric components. In Web Soil Survey, the Summary by Map Unit table that is displayed below the map pane contains a column named 'Rating'. In this column the percentage of each map unit that is classified as hydric is displayed. Hydric soils are defined by the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils (NTCHS) as soils that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (Federal Register, 1994). Under natural conditions, these soils are either saturated or inundated long enough during the growing season to support the growth and reproduction of hydrophytic vegetation. The NTCHS definition identifies general soil properties that are associated with wetness. In order to determine whether a specific soil is a hydric soil or nonhydric soil, however, more specific information, such as information about the depth and duration of the water table, is needed. Thus, criteria that identify those estimated soil properties unique to hydric soils have been established (Federal Register, 2002). These criteria are used to identify map unit components that normally are associated with wetlands. The criteria used are selected estimated soil properties that are described in "Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 1999) and "Keys to Soil Taxonomy" (Soil Survey Staff, 2006) and in the "Soil Survey Manual" (Soil Survey Division Staff, 1993). If soils are wet enough for a long enough period of time to be considered hydric, they should exhibit certain properties that can be easily observed in the field. These visible properties are indicators of hydric soils. The indicators used to make onsite determinations of hydric soils are specified in "Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States" (Hurt and Vasilas, 2006). References: Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 12/30/2022 Page 4 of 5 Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. 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. Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to soil taxonomy. 10th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Percent Present Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified Tie-break Rule: Lower Hydric Rating by Map Unit—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 12/30/2022 Page 5 of 5 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 24, Jun 4, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 10, 2012—Nov 12, 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 448A Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes 48.0 59.3% 509B Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 10.1 12.4% 510B Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 22.7 28.0% 537A Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0.2 0.2% Totals for Area of Interest 80.9 100.0% 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 11 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, 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 448A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56sq Elevation: 4,450 to 5,300 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Hyalite and similar soils:70 percent Beaverton and similar soils:20 percent Minor components:10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hyalite Setting Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Loamy alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bt1 - 5 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt2 - 9 to 17 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt3 - 17 to 26 inches: very cobbly sandy clay loam 3C - 26 to 60 inches: very cobbly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 2 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:About 48 to 96 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:5 percent Available water capacity:Low (about 4.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R043BP818MT - Upland Grassland Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 13 Description of Beaverton Setting Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: cobbly loam Bt - 5 to 21 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bk - 21 to 25 inches: very cobbly coarse sandy loam 2Bk - 25 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loamy coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 2 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 to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table:About 48 to 96 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:15 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity:Low (about 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: R043BP818MT - Upland Grassland Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Meadowcreek Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044XS359MT - Subirrigated (Sb) 15-19" p.z. Hydric soil rating: No Beaverton Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044XS354MT - Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56vp Elevation: 4,400 to 6,000 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 Enbar and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Enbar Setting Landform:Flood plains Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Loamy alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 22 inches: loam Cg - 22 to 49 inches: sandy loam 2C - 49 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy 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:RareNone Frequency of ponding:None Calcium carbonate, maximum content:10 percent Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity:Moderate (about 8.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R044BY150MT - Subirrigated (Sb) LRU 44B-Y Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 15 Minor Components Nythar Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Flood plains Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044XS365MT - Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. Hydric soil rating: Yes Straw Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044XS355MT - 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 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 16 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 capacity:Low (about 5.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: R044BY150MT - Subirrigated (Sb) LRU 44B-Y 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:R044XS365MT - Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. Hydric soil rating: Yes Beaverton Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044XS354MT - Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. Hydric soil rating: No 537A—Lamoose silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56wp Elevation: 4,000 to 5,000 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: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Lamoose and similar soils:85 percent Minor components:15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Custom Soil Resource Report 17 Description of Lamoose Setting Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Parent material:Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 9 inches: silt loam Bg - 9 to 27 inches: silt loam 2C - 27 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope:0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches Drainage class: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 12 to 24 inches Frequency of flooding:None Frequency of ponding:None Maximum salinity:Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 3.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity:Low (about 5.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: R044BY181MT - Wet Meadow (WM) LRU 44B-Y Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Bonebasin Percent of map unit:10 percent Landform:Terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044XS365MT - Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. Hydric soil rating: Yes Meadowcreek Percent of map unit:5 percent Landform:Stream terraces Down-slope shape:Linear Across-slope shape:Linear Ecological site:R044XS343MT - Subirrigated (Sb) 9-14" p.z. Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 18 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 19 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 20 Appendix B Exhibit 1 – Mapped Wetland Boundary of Huffine Lane Aquatic Delineation Site SPSPSPSPSPSPSPSP0'60'120'180'1OF 1AS NOTEDWETLANDDELINEATIONMALBAXTER CREEKCOMMERCIALINFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTSGALLATIN COUNTY, MTOUTLAW PARTNERSBIG SKY, MONTANA04/29/2021203430HEC Apr 29, 2021 - 2:38pmCAD FILE: M:\203430\Drawings\77 ACRE\X-WETLANDS.dwg REVISIONSDATEPROJECT NUMBERHYALITE Engineers, PLLC2304 N 7th Ave. Ste. LBozeman, MT 59715Tel: (406) 587.2781w w w . hyaliteeng. comFax: (406) 522.92252016PRELIMINARY DRAWING SET - 22x34 originalsSCALESHEET TITLEDESIGN BYWETLAND DELINEATIONBAXTER CREEK COMMERCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTSLEGAL DESCRIPTIONA TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THE S 12 OF SECTION 9, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 5EAST, PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN MONTANA, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA.LEGENDWETLAND BOUNDARYSAMPLE POINTAPPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOUNDARYSPSPU 6SPW 5SPU 8SPW 7SPW 1SPU 2SPW 4SPU 3WETLANDS1.93 ACRESHUFFINE LANE FALLON STREET WATER LILY DRSTONEFLY DR Appendix C 77 Acres at Huffine Lane 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 1 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 10 35 25 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Dense grasses were observed. 20.0% 0.0% 30.0% 0.0% 66.7%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%25 50 0.0%45 135 0 00 25 125 25.0%FACW 95 31010.0%FAC 3.26335.0%FAC 25.0%UPL 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 parallell to ditch. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'33.73"N45°40'23.60'LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Phalaris arundinacea Alopecurus pratensis Poa pratensis Bromus inermis Litter (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers Mottles noted at six inches. EnterID 6 Soil saturation occurred at 6 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% wet cobbles at 16 1 0-6 6-10 10-16 10YR 10YR 10YR 2/1 3/1 4/2 100 95 85 10YR 10YR 10YR 5/2 4/6 4/6 5 10 5 C M Silty Clay Loam Silty Clay 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 2 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 20 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Upland pasture grasses were observed at this sample location. 10.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 50.0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%0 0 0.0%20 60 0 00 60 300 63.2%UPL 80 36021.1%FAC 4.50015.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 95 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 Upland sample point paired with DP 1. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'33.58"N45°40'23.93'LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Bromus inermis Poa pratensis Litter (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers Small redox features observed at 8 inches. DP 2 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% dry damp 1 0-8 8-16 10YR 10YR 3/2 3/2 100 95 10YR 4/6 5 Silty Clay 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 3 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 35 15 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Mixed grasses were observed at this sample location. 10.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 50.0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%40 80 0.0%5 15 0 00 35 175 42.1%FACW 80 27036.8%UPL 3.37515.8% 5.3%FAC 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 95 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 Upland sample point paired with DP 4. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'33.79"N45°40'25.11"LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Phalaris arundinacea Bromus inermis Litter Poa pratensis (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers Very small redox features at 10 inches. DP 3 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% dry damp 1 0-10 10-16 10YR 10YR 3/2 3/2 100 98 10YR 4/6 20 silt clay 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 4 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Data point dominated by reed canary grass, both living and dead. 10.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 50.0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%65 130 0.0%0 0 0 00 0 0 65.0%FACW 65 13035.0% 2.0000.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 paired with upland site DP 3. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'33.98"N45°40'25.01"LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Phalaris arundinacea Litter (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers Redox concentrations were observed starting at six inches. DP 4 6 Saturation was observed at 6 inches. Two secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were also observed at this 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% damp saturated cobbles at 14 1 0-6 6-10 10-14 10YR 10YR 10YR 3/1 4/1 4/1 100 97 90 10YR 10YR 10YR 5/2 4/6 4/6 3 5 5 C C M M Silty Clay Loam Silty Clay 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 5 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 15 10 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Reed canary grass dominated the sample location. 10.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 100.0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%75 150 0.0%5 15 0 00 10 50 60.0%FACW 90 21515.0%FACW 2.38910.0%UPL 10.0% 5.0%FAC 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 paired with upland site DP 6. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'35.27"N45°40'23.26"LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Phalaris arundinacea Juncus balticus Bromus inermis Litter Poa pratensis (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers Strong redoox observed at six inches increasing with depth. DP 5 Saturation was observed at 6 inches. Two secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were also observed at this 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% damp/saturated at 6 inches redox increases to 10 percent with depth 1 0-6 6-11 10YR 10YR 2/1 3/1 100 95 10YR 4/6 5 C M Silty Clay 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 6 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 25 20 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Reed canary grass dominated the sample location with other mixed pasture grasses. 10.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 50.0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%45 90 0.0%15 45 0 00 25 125 42.9%FACW 85 26023.8%UPL 3.05919.0% 14.3%FAC 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 105 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 Upland data point located along fringe and paired with DP 5. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'34.91"N45°40'23.30"LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Phalaris arundinacea Bromus inermis Litter Poa pratensis (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers Minimal redox concentrations observed starting at 12 inches. DP 6 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% damp cool, damp 1 0-6 6-12 12-16 10YR 10YR 10YR 3/2 4/1 4/1 100 100 97 10YR 4/6 3 C M Silty Clay 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 7 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 20 15 10 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Mixed grasses were observed at this sample location. 20.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%50 100 0.0%30 90 0 00 15 75 50.0%FACW 95 26520.0%FAC 2.78915.0%UPL 10.0%FAC 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 near Huffine Lane. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'34.45"N45°40'18.99"LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Phalaris arundinacea Alopecurus pratensis Bromus inermis Poa pratensis Litter (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers Increased saturation with depth. Cobbles at 14 inches. DP 7 0 Saturation was observed at at surface. Two secondary indicators of wetland hydrology were also observed at this 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% saturated 1 0-6 6-14 10YR 10YR 2/1 3/2 100 97 10YR 4/6 3 C M Silty Clay 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 8 0.0 0.0 Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 25 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes No Pasture grasses dominated the sample location. 10.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 50.0%0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0 0 0.0%0 0 0.0%25 75 0 00 65 325 61.9%UPL 90 40023.8%FAC 4.44414.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 105 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 SpeciesThat 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 HydrophyticVegetation Present? (If no, explain in Remarks.) Dominance Test worksheet: City/County: Percent of dominant Species That 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 Upland data point located along Huffine Lane and paired with DP 7. 0 0.0% WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM - Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region 06-Aug-1977 Acres Huffine Lane Bozeman/Gallatin Hyalite Engineering, PLLC MT 5E2S9Briana Schultz Valley bottom none NAD 83W111°06'34.26"N45°40'18.99"LRR E Meadowcreek loam none Bromus inermis Poa pratensis Litter (Plot size: (Plot size: (Plot size:5 ft. (Plot size: ) ) ) ) VEGETATION -Use scientific names of plants. Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast - Version 2.0US Army Corps of Engineers No hydric soil indicators were observed at this sample location. DP 8 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% dry dry, cobbles at 14 inches 1 0-6 6-14 10YR 10YR 3/2 4/1 100 100 Silty Clay Loam Silt Loam Appendix D 77 Acres at Huffine Lane Wetland Site Photographs 77-Acres Huffine Lane Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc. Page | 1 Data Point 1 Data Point 2 Data Point 3 77-Acres Huffine Lane Wetland Delineation Sundog Ecological Inc. Page | 2 Data Point 4 Data Point 7 Data Point 8