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