Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout013 - Appendix K - 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.