HomeMy WebLinkAbout014 - Appendix L - Wetland ReportSouth Range Crossing Gallatin County, Montana
Wetland Delineation
Prepared for:
Providence Development, LLC
PO Box 4082
Bozeman, MT 59772
Prepared by:
Morrison-Maierle
2880 Technology Boulevard
Bozeman, MT 59715
Date of Issue: December 16, 2022
Project Number 5659.011
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
i | Page
CONTENTS
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 3
2 Methods .................................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Vegetation ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Soil ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.3 Hydrology ........................................................................................................................................................ 4
3 Results ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4
3.1 Vegetation ....................................................................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Soil ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4
4 Hydrology ................................................................................................................................................................. 5
4.1.1 Topography ........................................................................................................................................... 5
4.1.2 National Wetland Inventory ............................................................................................................ 5
4.1.3 Floodplains ............................................................................................................................................. 6
4.1.4 On-Site Hydrology .............................................................................................................................. 6
5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................ 6
6 References ................................................................................................................................................................ 7
TABLES
Table 1. Wetland and Waterways in the Project Area .......................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Figures ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
APPENDIX B: USACE Wetland Determination Forms ..................................................................................... 10
APPENDIX C: Site Photographs............................................................................................................................... 11
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
2 | Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A wetland delineation was performed by Morrison-Maierle, Inc. (Morrison-Maierle) for Providence Development, LLC (Client) for a property located southwest of the intersection of South 19th Avenue and Graf Street in Gallatin County, Montana. The property is referred to as “South Range Crossing.” The investigation area is 38.4 acres of land (Appendix A, Figure 1).
The subject property was evaluated for the presence and extent of wetlands and waterways, based on criteria set forth in the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast (Version 2.0) (Environmental Laboratory 2010).
Prior to the site visit, Morrison-Maierle reviewed existing project area literature including historical aerial photography, topographic maps, and hydrology data. A subsequent field evaluation was performed to identify hydric soils, hydrology, and hydrophytic vegetation. Vegetation communities were evaluated and documented to delineate wetland and upland boundaries.
Based on the findings presented in this report and the data collected, it is Morrison-Maierle’s professional judgement that waters of the U.S. are present within the project area in the form of approximately 1360.7 linear feet of stream/ditch that is identified as Middle Creek Ditch. No wetlands were observed in the project area during this investigation.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are the final authority over the jurisdictional status of both wetlands and waters of the U.S. per Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The findings discussed in this report are solely the opinion of Morrison-Maierle and have not been verified by the aforementioned regulatory government agencies.
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
3 | Page
1 INTRODUCTION
At the request of Providence Development, LLC, Morrison-Maierle completed a wetland delineation for 38.4 acres of property located in Gallatin County, Montana (Appendix A, Figure 1). The investigation area is referred to as “South Range Crossing,” and previously discussed as the “South 40” development. The investigation area is an undeveloped property located southwest of the intersection of South 19th Avenue and Graf Street in Gallatin County, Montana.
2 METHODS
This wetland delineation utilized the methodology presented in the 1987 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory 1987) and subsequent modifications outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast (Version 2.0) (Environmental Laboratory 2010). The methodology includes sampling procedures for vegetation, hydrology, and soil parameters.
Upland data points (UDP) and wetland data points (WDP) were established as needed during the field visit. Data for vegetation, hydrology, and soils were recorded in the field and entered on Wetland Determination Data Forms. Corresponding photographs were taken at each data point. Sample points and wetland boundaries (if present) were collected by a licensed surveyor; data was imported into ArcMap to create maps and perform calculations.
2.1 Vegetation
Vegetation at upland and wetland data points was classified based on wetland indicator status. The indicator status of vegetation was derived from the USACE 2020 National Wetlands Plant List (NWPL). Using the current plant list, vegetation cover qualified as hydrophytic where over 50% of the dominant plant species had an indicator status of obligate (OBL), facultative wet (FACW), and/or facultative (FAC). FAC plants, such as Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), are equally likely to occur in wetlands and non-wetlands. Vegetation cover was considered as upland where over 50% of the dominant plant species were classified as upland (UPL), and/or facultative upland (FACU). Plants observed within each data plot were identified using Montana Manual of Vascular Plants (Lesica 2012). Vegetation nomenclature follows USACE NWPL (2020) and Lesica (2012).
2.2 Soil
Wetlands must meet the qualifications of at least one hydric soil indicator or meet the definition of a hydric soil (a soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part (NRCS 2019a)). Soils at each data point were evaluated and described notating the depth, matrix color, mottle abundance and contrast (if present), texture, etc. (Environmental Laboratory, 1987 and 2010). Moist matrix color and moist mottle color of the soils were determined utilizing the Munsell Soil Color Chart (Kollmorgan Instruments Corporation, 2009). Hydric soil indicators, if present,
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
4 | Page
were identified and described according to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Field Indicators of Hydric Soils Version 8.2 (USDA 2018).
2.3 Hydrology
Primary and secondary hydrologic indicators were assessed at each data point; one primary indicator or two secondary indicators are required to qualify the area as containing wetland hydrology. Examples of primary hydrology indicators are saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface, surface water, and water table within 12 inches of the ground surface. Examples of secondary hydrology indicators are FAC-neutral test and geomorphic position on the landscape.
3 RESULTS
A wetland delineation of the project area was performed by Morrison-Maierle environmental scientists on October 3, 2022. The vegetation, hydrology, and soil characteristics at each of seven data points were documented in the field and recorded on Wetland Determination Data Forms for the Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast (USACE 2020). The investigation determined that no wetlands were present on the subject property.
3.1 Vegetation
Vegetation communities were evaluated and documented to delineate wetland and upland boundaries, where existing. The location of all data points is identified on Figure 5 of Appendix A.
The investigation area plant community consisted of grass, forb, and weedy species with remnant amounts of cereal crops from past farming throughout. Dominant vegetation included smooth brome (Bromus inermis, UPL), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea, FACW), meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis, FAC), Western wheatgrass (Elymus smithii, FACU), Maximillian sunflower (Helianthus maximiliani, UPL), and green bristle grass (Setaria viridis, UPL).
The central area of the investigation area had higher prevalence of Western wheatgrass, green bristle grass, and Maximillian sunflower, as well as common barley (Hordeum vulgare, UPL) and cultivated oat (Avena sativa, UPL). Data points were not collected in the central area of the investigation area due to the absence of mapped NWI features and visible lack of wetland vegetation.
3.2 Soil
A custom NRCS soil report for the investigation area was created from the NRCS Web Soil Survey (NRCS 2022). Two mapped soil types were identified in the project area: Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes (350B) and Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes (510B). Over 98% of the subject property is composed of the Meadowcreek loam soil unit, which is a somewhat poorly drained loam to silt loam with increasing gravel and sand content with depth. Very gravelly sand is expected to start at a depth of 25 inches (NRCS 2022). Neither soil type in the investigation area
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
5 | Page
is classified as a hydric soil. A map of the soil units in the investigation area is provided in Appendix B (Figure 8).
Soils were analyzed in the field for texture and color using the Munsell Soil Color Charts (Munsell 2009). Soils generally exhibited 10YR 3/1 (very dark gray) and 10YR 3/2 (very dark grayish brown) colors with loamy textures and granular structures. Two data points collected in the abandoned irrigation ditches area on the south and east edges of the investigation area had soil colors of ranging from 10YR 2/1 (black) to 10YR 4/3 (brown) with darker soils at the top of the profile, and gradually changing with depth with a distinct mixing zone between (4 and 12 inches, at one data point). Lighter-colored soil particles appeared to be transported there by the water feature that previously flowed through the sampled area, and then buried by darker soil eroded by the adjacent agricultural field.
4 HYDROLOGY
4.1.1 Topography, Streams, and Ditches
According to the Bozeman, Montana (2020) U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographic map, the property ranges in elevation between approximately 4,980 and 5,000 feet. The USGS map indicates that Middle Creek Ditch runs south and then north through the western edge of the subject property. (Figure 2). Historical aerial imagery of the area suggests that Middle Creek Ditch had a branch that flowed through the south-central area of the subject property until at least 2014. Imagery past this point indicates that this channel was removed or routed around the subject property, reflecting the current-day features and conditions observed in the field. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)’s 2020 CWAIC source data for Montana, which relies upon the National Hydrology Dataset, suggests that this branch/water feature is Mandeville Creek. This identification was dismissed by the Gallatin Conservation District (see below).
The Water Resources Survey for Gallatin County, Montana depicts segments, and/or private diversion laterals of Middle Creek Ditch on the subject property at the time of publication in 1953. One segment followed the west edge of the property, between the property boundary and 19th Avenue, and the other followed the south and eastern boundary.
Morrison-Maierle Scientists and Engineers met with the Gallatin Conservation District on December 7, 2022 and determined that the active channel on the western edge of the subject property is Middle Creek Ditch and is classified as a stream/ditch. The remnant private diversion laterals are not jurisdictional. The approved Jurisdictional Determination from the Conservation District is expected in late December 2022. See Figure 5 in Appendix A for a map of delineated features on the subject property.
4.1.2 National Wetland Inventory
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) maintains the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), which serves as a publicly available resource that provides detailed information on the abundance, characteristics, and distribution of US Wetlands. According to the NWI database, two freshwater emergent wetland features (PEC1Cx) are located on the west and east boundaries of the subject
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
6 | Page
property (Figure 5). The mapped NWI features follow what is assumed to be active and former irrigation channels on the west and east edges of the subject property. These wetland features were not observed in the field. The NWI database is based on a model that predicts the presence of wetlands from various parameters and does not necessarily reflect ground conditions. A NWI map is provided in Appendix B (Figure 5).
4.1.3 Floodplains
The project area is located within Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FIRM Panel 30031C0818E for Gallatin County with an effective date of April 20, 2021 (Figure 6). The subject property is located outside of the 100-year floodplain. A custom FEMA map of the investigation area is provided in Appendix B (Figure 8).
4.1.4 On-Site Hydrology
There was no evidence of hydrology indicators within the investigation area. A ditch or stream/ditch that is presumed to be Middle Creek Ditch was flowing south to north on the western edge of the subject property at the time of inspection. Abandoned irrigation ditches were observed on the south and eastern edges of the investigation area. The channel on the eastern edge of the investigation area was wide, with gently sloping banks, and was fully vegetated. At the southeast corner of the property, the channel took a sharp turn to follow the southern edge of the property. Stormwater drains were observed at this intersection, the gradient and location thereof indicated that they drained stormwater from the adjacent neighborhood into the channel at times of high precipitation. The channel on the southern edge of the property was narrow, fully vegetated, and tapered off as it approached the southwest corner of the subject property. At the southwest corner of the property, the actively flowing presumed to be Middle Creek Ditch was observed. The ditch diverged at this southwest corner, flowing both west, underneath 19th Avenue as well as north, along the western edge of the subject property.
5 CONCLUSION
Based on the wetland delineation presented in this report and the data collected, it is Morrison-Maierle’s professional judgement that waters of the U.S. are present within the project area. The investigation area contains approximately 1360.7 linear feet of stream/ditch that is identified as Middle Creek Ditch on the western edge of the property. See Figure 5 for a map of the investigation area and data point locations.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are the final authority over the jurisdictional status of both wetlands and waters of the U.S. per Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The findings discussed in this report are solely the opinion of Morrison-Maierle and have not been verified by the aforementioned regulatory government agencies.
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
7 | Page
REFERENCES
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. FWS/OBS-79/31. US Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. Ditches & Canals GIS Data: This shapefile contains irrigation ditch and canal reaches that were compiled from multiple different data sources. Data sources include the National Hydrography Dataset layer at a scale of 1:100,000, the State Engineers Water Resource Surveys, and heads up digitizing based on the 1:24,000 scale USGS quad maps Digital Raster Graphs (DRG). Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS. Environmental Laboratory. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corp of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast. (Version 2.0) U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Environmental Laboratory. Vicksburg, MS. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2022. FEMA Map Service Center. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search Kollmorgan Instruments Corporation. 2009. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Macbeth Division, New Windsor, NY. Lesica, P. 2012. Manual of Montana Vascular Plants. Brit Press. Fort Worth, Texas. Montana State Engineer Office (1953, reprinted in 1961). Water Resources Survey, Gallatin County, Montana. Accessed November 20, 2022. https://archive.org/details/waterresourcessu1953mont_0/page/n85/mode/2up. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2019. Hydric Soils Definition. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/use/hydric/?cid=nrcs142p2_053961 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2022. Web Soil Survey. Custom Soil Resource Report for the investigation area. Accessed October 2022. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2020. National Wetland Plant List 2020. http://wetland-plants.usace.army.mil/ United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2018. Wetland Determination Data Sheet – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region, Version 1.16. OBM Control # 0710-0024, Expires 11/30/2024. Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT: (Authority: AR335-15, paragraph 5-2a). ENG Forms 6116-6, July 2018.
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation 5659.011
8 | Page
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2018. Field Indicators of Hydric Soils in the United States, Version 8.2. L.M. Vasilas, G.W. Hurt, and J.F. Berkowitz (eds.). USDA, NRCS, in cooperation with the National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2022. National Wetland Inventory Wetlands Mapper. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html United States Geological Survey. 2020. Bozeman, Montana, 7.5-minute Series Topographic Quadrangle Map. Accessed October 2022. https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/topoview/viewer/#15/45.6468/-111.0589.
9 | Page
APPENDIX A: FIGURES
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\5659\011 -YTI Development\GIS\Environmental
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
1
2880 Technology BlvdBozeman, MT 59718
Phone: (406) 587-0721
Legend
Subject Property
±
VICINITY MAPGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 10/12/2022
MONTANA
PROJECT LOCATION
0 0.8 1.60.4 Miles
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\5659\011 -YTI Development\GIS\Environmental
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
2
2880 Technology BoulevardBozeman, MT 59715
Phone: (406) 587-0721
Legend
Subject Property
±0 0.2 0.40.1 Miles
TOPOGRAPHIC MAPGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 10/12/2022
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\3959\028 - Boz E Ph1 ESA\GIS
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
3
2880 Technology BoulevardBozeman, MT 59715
Phone: (406) 587-0721
Legend
Subject Property
±0 250 500125Feet
AERIAL MAPGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 10/12/2022
Remnant private lateralMiddle Creek Ditch (stream/ditch)Remnant private lateral
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\5659\011 -YTI Development\GIS\Environmental
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
4
2880 Technology BoulevardBozeman, MT 59715
Phone: (406) 587-0721
±0 400 800200Feet
WATER FEATURES MAPGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 12/08/2022
Legend
Subject Property
Ditches and Canals
Paired Data Points: Channel/Field
Paired Data Points: Channel/Field
UDP 6UDP 5UDP 7 UDP 4
UDP 3
UDP 1UDP 2
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\5659\011 -YTI Development\GIS\Environmental
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
5
2880 Technology BoulevardBozeman, MT 59715
Phone: (406) 587-0721
±0 300 600150Feet
WETLAND DELINATIONGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 12/16/2022
Legend
Subject Property
Middle Creek Ditch
Upland Data Points
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\5659\011 -YTI Development\GIS\Environmental
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
6
2880 Technology BoulevardBozeman, MT 59715
Phone: (406) 587-0721
Legend
SubjectProperty
FreshwaterEmergentWetland
FreshwaterForested/ShrubWetland
±0 300 600150Feet
NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 10/12/2022
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022
\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\3959\028 - Boz E Ph1 ESA\GIS
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
7
2880 Technology BoulevardBozeman, MT 59715
Phone: (406) 587-0721
±0 500 1,000250Feet
FEMA FLOODZONE MAPGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 10/12/2022
Legend
Subject Property
Flood Hazard Zones
Zone Type
1% Annual ChanceFlood Hazard
RegulatoryFloodway
Special Floodway
Area ofUndeterminedFlood Hazard
0.2% AnnualChance FloodHazard
Future Conditions1% Annual ChanceFlood Hazard
Area with ReducedRisk Due to Levee
Area with Risk Dueto Levee
Flood Hazard Boundaries
Line Type
Limit Lines
SFHA / Flood ZoneBoundary
Cross-Sections
510B
350B
457A
COPYRIGHT MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2022\\mmi\Share\Bozeman\Projects\3959\028 - Boz E Ph1 ESA\GIS
FIGURE NO.
PROJECT NO.
5659.011
8
2880 Technology BoulevardBozeman, MT 59715
Phone: (406) 587-0721
Legend
NRCS Soil MapUnits
Subject Property
±0 300 600150Feet
NRCS SOIL MAP UNITS MAPGALLATIN COUNTY MT
South Range Crossing Wetland Delineation
DRAWN BY: FD CHK'D BY: CP APPR. BY: CP DATE: 11/02/2022
10 | Page
APPENDIX B: USACE WETLAND DETERMINATION FORMS
State:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):2-5
Subregion (LRR):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No X
Yes No X Yes X
Yes No X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (A/B)
1.
2.
3.
4.x 1 =
5.x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
1.x 5 =
2.Column Totals:(A)(B)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
5
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
450
485
90
100
=Total Cover
Cynoglossum officinale
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
(Plot size:
=Total Cover
No
FAC
Yes90
LRR D, MLRA 39
NWI classification:
Dominant
Species?
45.64934 NAD83
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Datum:-111.05756
Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes PEM1Ax
Long:
30ft
NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
S24 T2S R5E
MT UDP1
Shallow channel
Section, Township, Range:
0.0%
)
30ft )
Prevalence Index worksheet:
15
0
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10/03/2022Project/Site: South Range Crossing
Applicant/Owner: Providence Development, LLC
Investigator(s): Christine Pearcy, Faith Doty
Abandoned irrigation ditch
GallatinCity/County:
0
Total % Cover of:
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
20
Multiply by:
0
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
UPL species
FACW species
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
4 - Morphological Adaptations1(Provide supporting
=Total Cover
)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(Plot size:
Remarks:
FACU species
FAC species
OBL species
4.85
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
30ft
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
(Plot size:
Yes
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
significantly disturbed?
Sample point is in an agricultural field, upland from a poorly defined channel that appears to be an old irrigation ditch that is presently used for
stormwater drainage.
Indicator
Status
0
1
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
(Plot size:
Machaeranthera canescens
FACU
UPL
Herb Stratum
5 No
Bromus inermis
5
0
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
See ERDC/EL TR-10-3; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 11/30/2024
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Tree Stratum
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?No
100
30ft
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR A, E)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D, G)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Field Observations:
(includes capillary fringe)
No hydrologic indicators observed.
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Surface Water (A1)
Loamy/Clayey
Matrix
Texture
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
Color (moist)
0-15
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Salt Crust (B11)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Saturation (A3)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
There were many fine and medium roots in the upper eight inches. No hydric soil indicators were observed.
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
UDP1SOIL
Remarks
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
State:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):0-2
Subregion (LRR):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No X
Yes No X Yes X
Yes No X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (A/B)
1.
2.
3.
4.x 1 =
5.x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
1.x 5 =
2.Column Totals:(A)(B)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
See ERDC/EL TR-10-3; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 11/30/2024
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Tree Stratum
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?No
100
30ft
Remarks:
Indicator
Status
0
1
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
(Plot size:
Machaeranthera canescens
FACU
UPL
Herb Stratum
5 No
Bromus inermis
5
0
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
30ft
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
(Plot size:
Yes
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
significantly disturbed?
Sample point is in an agricultural field, upland from a poorly defined channel that appears to be an old irrigation ditch that is presently used for
stormwater drainage.
Remarks:
FACU species
FAC species
OBL species
4.85
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
4 - Morphological Adaptations1(Provide supporting
=Total Cover
)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(Plot size:
0
Total % Cover of:
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
20
Multiply by:
0
Prevalence Index = B/A =
5
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
UPL species
FACW species
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10/03/2022
Agricultural field
GallatinCity/County:
PEM1Ax
Long:
30ft
NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
S24 T2S R5E
MT UDP2
Flat
Section, Township, Range:
0.0%
)
30ft )
Prevalence Index worksheet:
15
0
Project/Site: South Range Crossing
Applicant/Owner: Providence Development, LLC
Investigator(s): Christine Pearcy, Faith Doty
LRR D, MLRA 39
NWI classification:
Dominant
Species?
45.64934 NAD83
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Datum:-111.0576
Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
(Plot size:
=Total Cover
No
FAC
Yes90
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
5
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
450
485
90
100
=Total Cover
Cynoglossum officinale
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
UDP2SOIL
Remarks
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
There were many fine and medium roots in the upper eight inches. No hydric soil indicators were observed.
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Salt Crust (B11)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Saturation (A3)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
Color (moist)
0-15
Surface Water (A1)
Loamy/Clayey
Matrix
Texture
Redox FeaturesDepth
Remarks:
Field Observations:
(includes capillary fringe)
No hydrologic indicators observed.
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR A, E)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D, G)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
State:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):2-5
Subregion (LRR):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes X No
Yes No X Yes X
Yes No X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (A/B)
1.
2.
3.
4.x 1 =
5.x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
1.x 5 =
2.Column Totals:(A)(B)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.X
8.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
1
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
0
201
0
100
=Total Cover
Cirsium arvense
Typha latifolia
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
(Plot size:
=Total Cover
9
No
FACU
Yes80
LRR D, MLRA 39
NWI classification:
Dominant
Species?
45.64865 NAD83
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Datum:-111.05758
Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes PEM1Ax
Long:
30ft
NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
S24 T2S R5E
MT UDP3
Shallow channel
Section, Township, Range:
100.0%
)
30ft )
Prevalence Index worksheet:
27
10
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10/03/2022Project/Site: South Range Crossing
Applicant/Owner: Providence Development, LLC
Investigator(s): Christine Pearcy, Faith Doty
Abandoned irrigation ditch
GallatinCity/County:
80
Total % Cover of:
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
4
Multiply by:
160
Prevalence Index = B/A =
9
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
UPL species
FACW species
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
4 - Morphological Adaptations1(Provide supporting
=Total Cover
)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(Plot size:
Remarks:
FACU species
FAC species
OBL species
FAC
2.01
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
30ft
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
(Plot size:
Yes
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
significantly disturbed?
Sample location was up gradient from UDP 1, in a poorly defined channel that appears to be an old irrigation ditch that is presently used for
stormwater drainage.
Indicator
Status
1
1
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
(Plot size:
Solidago canadensis
No
OBL
FACW
Herb Stratum
1 No
Phalaris arundinacea
10
10
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
See ERDC/EL TR-10-3; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 11/30/2024
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Tree Stratum
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?No
100
30ft
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
60
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
X
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Cobbles/gravels
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR A, E)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D, G)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Field Observations:
(includes capillary fringe)
No hydrologic indicators observed.
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Surface Water (A1)
Loamy/Clayey
10YR 4/3
18
Matrix
Texture
12-18 Loamy/Clayey
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 2/1
10YR 2/1
Color (moist)
0-4
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Salt Crust (B11)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Saturation (A3)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Soils were moist but not saturated. Between 4 and 12 inches appeared to be a mixing/transitionary profile between the upper and lower horizons. The
lower, lighter-colored soil had a higher clay content than above.
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
4-12
UDP3SOIL
40% 10YR 4/3
Remarks
Loamy/Clayey
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
State:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):2-5
Subregion (LRR):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No X
Yes No X Yes X
Yes No X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (A/B)
1.
2.
3.
4.x 1 =
5.x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
1.x 5 =
2.Column Totals:(A)(B)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
40
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
150
400
30
100
=Total Cover
Lactuca serriola
Bromus inermis
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
(Plot size:
=Total Cover
5
Yes
5
FACU
Yes30
LRR D, MLRA 39
NWI classification:
Dominant
Species?
NAD83
FACU
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Datum:
Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Long:
30ft
NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
S24 T2S R5E
MT UDP4
Shallow channel
Section, Township, Range:
25.0%
)
30ft )
Symphoricarpos albus
Prevalence Index worksheet:
90
0
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10/03/2022Project/Site: South Range Crossing
Applicant/Owner: Providence Development, LLC
Investigator(s): Christine Pearcy, Faith Doty
Abandoned irrigation ditch
GallatinCity/County:
0
Total % Cover of:
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
160
Multiply by:
0
Prevalence Index = B/A =
30
Yes
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
UPL species
FACW species
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
0
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
4 - Morphological Adaptations1(Provide supporting
=Total Cover
)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(Plot size:
Remarks:
FACU species
FAC species
OBL species
FACU
4.00
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
30ft
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
(Plot size:
Yes
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
significantly disturbed?
Sampled location was on the southeast corner of the investigation area, along where the channel is wider and stormwater drains lead to the channel
Indicator
Status
1
4
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
(Plot size:
Elymus smithii
5
No
UPL
FAC
Herb Stratum
30 Yes
Alopecurus pratensis
30
0
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
See ERDC/EL TR-10-3; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 11/30/2024
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Tree Stratum
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?No
95
30ft
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
90
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Cobbles
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR A, E)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D, G)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Field Observations:
(includes capillary fringe)
No hydrologic indicators observed.
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Surface Water (A1)
Loamy/Clayey
6
Matrix
Texture
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 2/1
Color (moist)
0-6
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Salt Crust (B11)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Saturation (A3)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
10% inclusions of 10YR 4/3 appear to be weathered from parent material and not redox. Soils at this sampling point appear to be transported with
water over time, during periods of flow.
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
UDP4SOIL
Over 50% large cobbles
Remarks
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
State:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):0-2
Subregion (LRR):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No X
Yes No X Yes X
Yes No X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (A/B)
1.
2.
3.
4.x 1 =
5.x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
1.x 5 =
2.Column Totals:(A)(B)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
See ERDC/EL TR-10-3; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 11/30/2024
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Tree Stratum
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?No
100
3 No
30ft
Remarks:
Indicator
Status
0
4
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Setaria viridis
(Plot size:
Helianthus maximiliani
6
No
FACU
UPL
Herb Stratum
25 Yes
Bromus inermis
6
0
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
30ft
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
(Plot size:
Yes
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
significantly disturbed?
Sampled location is in an upland posistion with drainage just to the south, in a former agricultural field
Remarks:
FACU species
FAC species
OBL species
FAC
4.77
2
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
0
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
4 - Morphological Adaptations1(Provide supporting
=Total Cover
)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(Plot size:
NoSilene latifolia UPL
0
Total % Cover of:
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
48
Multiply by:
0
Prevalence Index = B/A =
6
Yes
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
FAC Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
UPL species
FACW species
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10/03/2022
Agricultural field
GallatinCity/County:
None
Long:
30ft
NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
S24 T2S R5E
MT UDP5
Flat
Section, Township, Range:
0.0%
)
30ft )
Symphoricarpos albus
Prevalence Index worksheet:
18
0
Project/Site: South Range Crossing
Applicant/Owner: Providence Development, LLC
Investigator(s): Christine Pearcy, Faith Doty
LRR D, MLRA 39
NWI classification:
Dominant
Species?
45.64571 NAD83
FACU
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Datum:-111.05845
Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes
(Plot size:
=Total Cover
3
25
No
6
UPL
Yes36
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
12
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
440
506
88
106
=Total Cover
Yes UPL
Kochia scoparia
Machaeranthera canescens
Lactuca serriola
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
UDP5SOIL
Loose granular structure
Remarks
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
Many fine and medium roots throughout
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Salt Crust (B11)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Saturation (A3)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
Color (moist)
0-15
Surface Water (A1)
Loamy/Clayey
Matrix
Texture
Redox FeaturesDepth
Remarks:
Field Observations:
(includes capillary fringe)
No hydrologic indicators observed.
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR A, E)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D, G)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
State:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):5-10
Subregion (LRR):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No X
Yes No X Yes X
Yes No X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (A/B)
1.
2.
3.
4.x 1 =
5.x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
1.x 5 =
2.Column Totals:(A)(B)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
0
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
100
260
20
100
=Total Cover
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
(Plot size:
=Total Cover
UPL
Yes80
LRR D, MLRA 39
NWI classification:
Dominant
Species?
45.64569 NAD83
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Datum:-111.05843
Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes None
Long:
30ft
NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
S24 T2S R5E
MT UDP6
Narrow channel
Section, Township, Range:
50.0%
)
30ft )
Prevalence Index worksheet:
0
0
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10/03/2022Project/Site: South Range Crossing
Applicant/Owner: Providence Development, LLC
Investigator(s): Christine Pearcy, Faith Doty
Abandoned irrigation ditch
GallatinCity/County:
80
Total % Cover of:
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
0
Multiply by:
160
Prevalence Index = B/A =
0
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
UPL species
FACW species
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
0
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
4 - Morphological Adaptations1(Provide supporting
=Total Cover
)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(Plot size:
Remarks:
FACU species
FAC species
OBL species
2.60
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
30ft
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
(Plot size:
Yes
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
significantly disturbed?
Sampled location is in a fully vegetated channel directly south of UDP5
Indicator
Status
1
2
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
(Plot size:
Bromus inermis
FACW
Herb Stratum
20 Yes
Phalaris arundinacea
0
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
See ERDC/EL TR-10-3; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 11/30/2024
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Tree Stratum
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?No
100
30ft
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR A, E)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D, G)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Field Observations:
(includes capillary fringe)
No hydrologic indicators observed.
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Surface Water (A1)
Loamy/Clayey
Matrix
Texture
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/1
Color (moist)
0-15
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Salt Crust (B11)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Saturation (A3)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
No hydric soil indicators observed.
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
UDP6SOIL
Granular structure
Remarks
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
State:
Landform (hillside, terrace, etc.):2-5
Subregion (LRR):Lat:
Soil Map Unit Name:
X
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology Are “Normal Circumstances” present?Yes X No
Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Yes No X
Yes No X Yes X
Yes No X
)
1.
2.(A)
3.
4.(B)
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (A/B)
1.
2.
3.
4.x 1 =
5.x 2 =
x 3 =
x 4 =
1.x 5 =
2.Column Totals:(A)(B)
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Woody Vine Stratum
1.
2.
Yes X
Percent of Dominant Species That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
10
Total Number of Dominant Species
Across All Strata:
Dominance Test worksheet:
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum
Absolute
% Cover
0
230
0
100
=Total Cover
1Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
(Plot size:
=Total Cover
10
FAC
Yes80
LRR D, MLRA 39
NWI classification:
Dominant
Species?
45.64577 NAD83
FACU
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Datum:-111.06252
Blackmore silt loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes PEM1Ax
Long:
30ft
NoAre climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year?
S24 T2S R5E
MT UDP7
Gentle slope
Section, Township, Range:
50.0%
)
30ft )
Rosa woodsii
Prevalence Index worksheet:
30
0
Sampling Date:
Sampling Point:
Slope (%):Local relief (concave, convex, none):
10/03/2022Project/Site: South Range Crossing
Applicant/Owner: Providence Development, LLC
Investigator(s): Christine Pearcy, Faith Doty
Bank of irrigation ditch
GallatinCity/County:
80
Total % Cover of:
=Total Cover
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
40
Multiply by:
160
Prevalence Index = B/A =
10
Yes
3 - Prevalence Index is ≤3.01
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
UPL species
FACW species
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation1 (Explain)
0
5 - Wetland Non-Vascular Plants1
4 - Morphological Adaptations1(Provide supporting
=Total Cover
)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present?No
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
(Plot size:
Remarks:
FACU species
FAC species
OBL species
2.30
2 - Dominance Test is >50%
(If no, explain in Remarks.)
Hydric Soil Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
30ft
naturally problematic?(If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.)
(Plot size:
Yes
Number of Dominant Species That
Are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
significantly disturbed?
Sampled location is next to a flowing irrigation channel on the west edge of the investigation area. Topography of this area is man-made (agricultural
field, irrigation channel)
Indicator
Status
1
2
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
(Plot size:
Cirsium arvense
10
FACW
Herb Stratum
10 No
Phalaris arundinacea
0
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA SHEET – Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region
See ERDC/EL TR-10-3; the proponent agency is CECW-CO-R
OMB Control #: 0710-0024, Exp: 11/30/2024
Requirement Control Symbol EXEMPT:
(Authority: AR 335-15, paragraph 5-2a)
Tree Stratum
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland?No
90
30ft
Remarks:
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
Sampling Point:
%%Type1 Loc2
100
Type:
Depth (inches):Hydric Soil Present?Yes No X
Primary Indicators (minimum of one is required; check all that apply)
Surface Water Present?Yes X
Water Table Present?Yes X
Saturation Present?Yes X Wetland Hydrology Present?Yes No X
2.5 cm Mucky Peat or Peat (S2) (LRR G)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2)
Iron-Manganese Masses (F12) (LRR D)
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
Redox Depressions (F8)unless disturbed or problematic.
3Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
High Water Table (A2) MLRA 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) 4A, and 4B)
2Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR A, E)
Red Parent Material (F21)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (F22)
Histosol (A1)
Histic Epipedon (A2)
Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D, G)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11)
Thick Dark Surface (A12)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1)
Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) (except MLRA 1)
1Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains.
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Field Observations:
(includes capillary fringe)
No hydrologic indicators observed.
No
No
No
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Depth (inches):
Surface Water (A1)
Loamy/Clayey
Matrix
Texture
Redox FeaturesDepth
(inches)Color (moist)
10YR 3/2
Color (moist)
0-15
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Geomorphic Position (D2)
Raised Ant Mounds (D6) (LRR A)Surface Soil Cracks (B6)
Sediment Deposits (B2)
Drift Deposits (B3)
Water Marks (B1)
Algal Mat or Crust (B4)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Salt Crust (B11)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (MLRA 1, 2
Frost-Heave Hummocks (D7)Other (Explain in Remarks)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1) (LRR A)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (B7)
Iron Deposits (B5)
Saturation (A3)
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required)
Shallow Aquitard (D3)
Drainage Patterns (B10)
Dry-Season Water Table (C2)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Aquatic Invertebrates (B13)
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1)
Oxidized Rhizospheres on Living Roots (C3)
Water-Stained Leaves (B9) (except
Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.)Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils3:
No hydric soil indicators. Dry at time of sampling. Many fine and medium roots.
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
UDP7SOIL
Crumbly, granular
Remarks
ENG FORM 6116-9, JUL 2018 Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast – Version 2.0
11 | Page
APPENDIX C: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 1: Representative view of the subject property; taken from the central area, facing south.
Photo 2: Representative view of the subject property; taken from the central area, facing north.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 3: Representative view UDP1, facing south.
Photo 4: Representative view of soil color mid-excavation at UDP1.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 5: Representative view UDP2, facing south.
Photo 6: Representative view of soil pit at UDP2.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 7: Representative view of vegetation at UDP3, facing south.
Photo 8: View of soil colors at UDP3.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 9: Representative view of UDP4 and stormwater infrastructure, facing southwest.
Photo 10: Alternative view of UDP4, facing north.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 11: Representative view of UDP5, facing west.
Photo 12: View of soil pit at UDP5.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 13: Representative view of UDP6, facing west.
Photo 14: Representative view of UDP7, facing east.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 15: Representative view the remnant channel on the eastern edge of the investigation area.
Photo 16: Representative view of the remnant channel on the southern edge of the investigation area.
N:\5659\011 -YTI Development\04 Design\Reports\Wetland Delineation -SRX\Field investigation 100322\Photos
South Range CrossingWetland DelineationBozeman, Montana
Photo Date: October 3, 2022
Photo 17: Representative view of Middle Creek Ditch along the western edge of the investigation area,taken from the northwest corner facing south.
Photo 18: Close up view of flow of water in Middle Creek Ditch to culvert underneath Graf Street, taken from the northwest corner facing south.