Alberta Lentic Survey Users Manual
Contents
1. Some common invasive species are listed on the form and space is allowed for recording others Leave no listed species field blank however enter 0 to indicate absence of a value 2a Total Canopy Cover of Invasive Plant Species The observer must evaluate the total percentage of the polygon area that is covered by the combined canopy of all plants of all species of invasive plants Determine which rating applies in the scoring scale below Scoring 3 No invasive plant species weeds on the site 2 Invasive plants present with total canopy cover less than percent of the polygon area 1 Invasive plants present with total canopy cover between 1 and 15 percent of the polygon area 0 Invasive plants present with total canopy cover more than 15 percent of the polygon area 2b Density Distribution Pattern of Invasive Plant Species The observer must pick a category of pattern and extent of invasive plant distribution from the chart below that best fits what is observed on the polygon while realizing that the real situation may be only roughly approximated at best by any of these diagrams Choose the category that most closely matches the view of the polygon Form current as of 6 13 03 9 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals Scoring 3 No invasive plant species weeds on the site 2 Invasive plants present with density distribution in categories 1 2 or 3 1 Invasive plants present with density2. 2 Slightly susceptible to erosion moderately armoured 1 Moderately susceptible to erosion 0 Extremely susceptible to erosion 15 Percent of Shoreline Accessible to Livestock Record the percent of shoreline length accessible to livestock In general only consider topography steep banks deep water etc and dense vegetation as restricting access Fences unless part of an exclosure do not necessarily restrict livestock access even though they may appear to be doing so at the time 16 Quantify the percent of tree and shrub cover in the polygon that is dead and or decadent A decadent plant is one having at least 30 of its upper canopy dead Dead lower branches are not a problem if the upper canopy is vigorous 17 Polygon Trend Select the one category Improving Degrading Static or Status Unknown which best indicates the current trend of the vegetative community on the polygon to the extent possible Trend refers in the sense used here not specifically to successional pathway change but in a more general sense of apparent community health By definition trend implies change over time Accordingly a trend analysis would require comparison of repeated observations over time However some insights into trend can be observed in a single visit For example the observer may notice healing revegetating of a degraded shoreline and recent establishment of woody seedlings and saplings This would indicate changing conditions that s
3. such as bedrock are not a result of land uses 26 to 50 Vegetation use is moderate At least half the potential plant biomass remains Average stubble height is more than half its potential at the present stage of development 51 to 75 Vegetation use is high Less than half the potential plant biomass remains Plant stubble height is usually more than 2 inches on many ranges 76 to 100 Vegetation use is very high Only short stubble remains usually less than 2 inches on many ranges Almost all plant biomass has been removed Only the root systems and parts of the stems remain 14 Susceptibility of Parent Material to Erosion The soils derived from shale or having a large clay content are highly susceptible to compaction and trampling when wet There is evidence that trampling by hooves and subsequent loss of herbaceous vegetation when soils are wet are major contributions to site degradation In contrast those sites having soils derived from sandstone or any of the hard metamorphosed rock found in the northern Rocky Mountains commonly have a fine sandy loam to loam texture and are more resistant to damage when wet Intermediate of these soils are those having textures of clay loam to loam Texturing the soil by the ribboning technique or by feel will be required for this determination Rate the polygon soil according to one of these categories based on indicators as described above Scoring 3 Not susceptible to erosion well armoured
4. than 5 of the polygon are allowed Note For any area designated as an unclassified wetland type it is important to list any species present that can indicate the wetness or dryness of the site Optional Physical Site Characteristics Dla b Make a call on whether the polygon has potential for tall woody type s and if the answer is Yes then tell whether such types are present on the polygon Tall woody types are any tree HTs or CTs and such taller shrubs as willows Saskatoon Alder birch etc Not included are shorter shrub species such as buckbrush snowberry rose etc D2 Give the waterbody number FMIS Hydro code D3 If water quality data is available on this waterbody list the reference where the data can be found Photograph Data Form current as of 6 13 03 7 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals Note At a minimum take two photos from identifiable points along the upland edge of the polygon viewing toward the water body and along the long axis of the polygon Identify all photo point locations sufficiently so that they could be relocated by another individual E1 Identify the film roll number photo frame number and description of each photograph taken at the most northerly westerly end or side of the polygon List them in the order of northerly westerly views first then southerly easterly views and then each other shot taken to show other features of interest Also identify the photogra
5. For example a 0 5 mile 0 8 km polygon may be used to represent 2 miles 3 2 km of total shoreline length In this case 0 5 0 8 km is the shoreline length in the polygon item C5 and 2 miles 3 2 km is the overall shoreline miles kilometres entered in item C6 C7 Record average width of the polygon which in smaller wetlands corresponds to the width of the entire wetland area C8 List the riparian habitat type s and or community type s found in the polygon Thompson and Hansen 2001 If the habitat type cannot be determined for a portion of the polygon then list the appropriate community type s of that portion If neither the habitat type nor community type can be determined for any portion of the polygon or in areas outside of Montana where the habitat and community types have not been named and described list the area in question as unclassified wetland type and give the dominant species present Indicate with the appropriate abbreviation if these are habitat types HT community types CT or dominance types DT for example POPUTRE CORNSTO HT For each type listed estimate the percent of the polygon represented If known record the successional stage i e early seral mid seral late seral and climax or give other comments about the type As a minimum list all types that cover 5 or more of the polygon The total must approximate 100 Slight deviations due to use of class codes or to omission of types covering less
6. Wetland Conservation Corporation Regina Saskatchewan Canada 43 p Huel Denis 2000 Managing Saskatchewan Wetlands a landowner s guide ISBN No 1 896793 26 6 Saskatchewan Wetland Conservation Corporation Regina Saskatchewan Canada 68 p Mitsch William J and James G Gosselink 1993 Wetlands Second Edition Van Nostrand Reinhold Publishers New York New York USA 722 p Platts W S C Armour G D Booth M Bryant J L Bufford P Cuplin S Jensen G W Lienkaemper G W Minshall S B Monsen R L Nelson J R Sedell and J S Tuhy 1987 Methods for evaluating riparian habitats with applications to management USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT 221 Intermountain Research Station Ogden Utah USA 187 p Reed Porter B Jr 1988 National list of plant species that occur in wetlands Northwest Region 9 US Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88 26 9 USDI Fish and Wildlife Service Research and Development Washington DC USA 89 pp Form current as of 6 13 03 16 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals Shaw S P and C G Fredine 1956 Wetlands of the United States Their extent and their value for waterfowl and other wildlife USDI Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39 Washington DC USA 67 p Stewart R E and H A Kantrud 1972 Classification of natural ponds and lakes in the glaciated prairie region USDI Fish and Wildlife Service Research Pu
7. and Regeneration Score If site lacks potential for woody species replace both Actual and Possible Scores with NA 6 More than 15 of the total canopy cover of preferred trees shrubs are seedlings and saplings 4 5 to 15 of the total canopy cover of preferred trees shrubs is seedlings and saplings 2 Less than 5 of the total canopy cover of preferred tree shrubs are seedlings and saplings 0 Preferred tree shrub seedlings or saplings absent 5 Utilization of Preferred Trees and Shrubs Score If site lacks potential for woody species replace both Actual and Possible Scores with NA 3 None 0 to 5 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 2 Light 5 to 25 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 1 Moderate 25 to 50 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 0 Heavy More than 50 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 6 Human Alteration of Polygon Vegetation Score 6 Less than 5 of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 4 5 to 15 of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 2 15 to 35 of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 0 35 or more of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 7 Human Alteration of Polygon Physical Site Score 12 Less than 5 of the polygon is physically altered by human activity 8 5 to 15 of the
8. certain potential exists for preferred trees or shrubs then enter NC and explain in the comment field below 6 More than 15 of the total canopy cover of preferred trees shrubs is seedlings and saplings 4 5 to 15 of the total canopy cover of preferred trees shrubs is seedlings and saplings 2 Less than 5 of the total canopy cover of preferred tree shrubs is seedlings and saplings 0 Preferred tree shrub seedlings or saplings absent 5 Utilisation of Preferred Trees and Shrubs Skip this item if the site lacks trees or shrubs for example the site is a herbaceous wet meadow or cattail marsh Many riparian woody species are browsed by livestock and or wildlife Heavy browsing can prevent establishment or regeneration of these important species Excessive browsing can eliminate them from the community and result in their replacement by undesirable invaders One tree species Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive and three other shrub genera Symphoricarpos spp buckbrush snowberry Rosa spp rose and Crataegus spp hawthorn are excluded from the evaluation of utilisation of woody species These are plants that may reflect long term disturbance on a site that are generally less palatable to browsers and that tend to increase under long term moderate to heavy grazing pressure AND for which there is rarely any problem in maintaining presence on site Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive is considered an especially aggressive und
9. made of other material and appears unstable 12 Shoreline Rock Volume and Size 12a Shoreline Rock Volume Rate the shoreline rock volume as the highest appropriate category Score 3 More than 40 of shoreline volume is rocks at least 2 5 inches 2 20 to 40 of shoreline volume is rock at least 2 5 inches 1 10 to 20 of shoreline volume is rock at least 2 5 inches 0 Less than 10 of shoreline volume is rocks at least 2 5 inches 12b Shoreline Bank Rock Size Rate the shoreline rock size for the polygon as the highest category Score 3 At least 50 of rocks present are boulders and large cobbles gt 5 inch 2 50 of rocks present are small cobbles and larger gt 2 5 inches 1 At least 50 of rocks present are coarse gravels and larger gt 0 6 inches 0 Less than 50 of rocks present are coarse gravels and larger gt 0 6 inches 13 Vegetative Use by Animals Use the categories below to score the amount of utilization Score 3 0 to 25 available forage taken 2 26 to 50 available forage taken 1 51 to 75 available forage taken 0 76 to 100 available forage taken 14 Susceptibility of Parent Material to Erosion Score 3 Not susceptible to erosion well armoured 2 Slightly susceptible to erosion moderately armoured 1 Moderately susceptible to erosion 0 Extremely susceptible to erosion Form current as of 6 13 03 19 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals 15 Percen
10. of the vegetation These include but are not limited to vegetation clearing mowing yards or hay changing plant community composition e g replacing willows with rose and buckbrush woody species with herbaceous species etc replacing native plants with tame plants replacing deep rooted plants with shallow rooted plants and or replacing tall species with short species On polygons adjacent to deep water remember that the polygon extends out to where the water is two meters deep NOTE Do not count the same area twice by including it as both a vegetative and a physical alteration unless there clearly are both kinds of alteration Decide into which category a particular effect should go For example A timber harvest may clear vegetation but not necessarily cause physical damage on one area while on another area cause both clearing of vegetation and disruption of the soil by skidding of logs Scoring 6 Less than 5 of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 4 5 to 15 of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 2 15 to 35 of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 0 35 or more of polygon vegetation is altered by human activity 7 Human Alteration of Polygon Physical Site This evaluation of human alteration of the physical site is meant to include all changes to the physical attributes of the site caused by human actions e g logging mining housing development or by agents of human management
11. several parts of this item identify various ways in which a data record may represent a resampling of a polygon that may have been inventoried again at some other time The data in this record may have been collected on an area that coincides precisely with an area inventoried at another time and recorded as another record in the database It may also represent the resampling of only a part of an area previously sampled This would include the case where this polygon Form current as of 6 13 03 4 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals overlaps but does not precisely and entirely coincide with one inventoried at another time One other case is where more than one polygon inventoried one year coincides with a single polygon inventoried another year All of these cases are represented in the database and all have some value for monitoring purposes in that they give some information on how the status on a site changes over time A7a Does this record represent the latest data recorded for this polygon A7b Has any part of the area within this polygon been inventoried previously or subsequently as represented by another data record in the Lentic Wetland database Such other records would logically carry different dates A7c Does the areal extent of this polygon exactly coincide with that of any other inventory represented in the Lentic Wetland database In many cases subsequent inventories only partially overlap spatially The
12. to manage such communities separately Community composition can be described as percentages of component types comprising the polygon vegetation Management actions can then be keyed to the higher priority types present DATA FORM ITEMS Record ID No This is the unique identifier allocated to each polygon This number will be assigned in the office when the form is entered into the database Administrative Data A1 Identify what organisation is doing the evaluation field work A2 Identify what organisation is paying for the work A3a Identify any Indian or M tis Reserve on which work is being done A3b Identify any National or Provincial Park Preserve or Sanctuary on which work is being done A3c Identify any local Ecological or Municipal Reserve Exclude national or provincial reserves on which work is being done A3d Was the work done on Private or Deeded Land Simply answer Yes or No A4 Observers Name the evaluators recording the data in the field A5a Date that the field data was collected Use the format month day year A5b Record the year that the field data was collected A6a Identify any grazing lease or grazing reserve on which work is being done A6b Give any grazing disposition identifying number A6c Give any other grazing name e g Community Pasture to identify where the work is being done Note Items A7a h are completed in the office field evaluators need not complete these items A7 The
13. type is a categorical description of predominant polygon character Select from the following list of categories that may occur within a lentic system the one that best characterizes the majority of the polygon Evaluators will select only one category as representative of the entire polygon If significant amounts of other categories are present indicate this in the General Comments or consider dividing the original polygon into two or more polygons Category Description Wet Meadow This type of wetland may occur in either riparian lotic or in still water lentic systems A lotic wet meadow has a defined channel or flowing surface water nearby but is typically much wider than the riparian zone associated with the classes described above This is often the result of the influence of lateral groundwater not associated with the stream flow Lotic and lentic wet meadows may occur in proximity e g when enough groundwater emerges to begin to flow from a mountain meadow the system goes from lentic to lotic Such communities are typically dominated by herbaceous hydrophytic vegetation that requires saturated soils near the surface but tolerates no standing water for most of the year This type of wetland typically occurs as the filled in basin of old beaver ponds lakes and potholes Spring Seep Groundwater discharge areas In general springs have more flow than seeps This wetland type may occur in a riparian lotic or still water len
14. wetlands exists primarily due to the nearly unlimited variation in hydrology soil and vegetative types Wetlands are lands transitional between aquatic water and terrestrial upland ecosystems Windell and others 1986 state that wetlands are part of a continuous landscape that grades from wet to dry In many cases it is not easy to determine precisely where they begin and where they end In the semi arid and arid portions of western North America a useful distinction has been made between wetland types based on association with different aquatic ecosystems Several authors have used lotic and lentic to separate wetlands associated with running water from those associated with still water The following definitions represent a synthesis and refinement of terminology from Shaw and Fredine 1956 Stewart and Kantrud 1972 Boldt and others 1978 Cowardin and others 1979 American Fisheries Society 1980 Johnson and Carothers 1980 Cooperrider and others 1986 Windell and others 1986 Environmental Laboratory 1987 Kovalchik 1987 Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation 1989 Mitsch and Gosselink 1993 and Kent 1994 Lentic wetlands are associated with still water systems These wetlands occur in basins and lack a defined channel and floodplain Included are permanent i e perennial or intermittent bodies of water such as lakes reservoirs potholes marshes ponds and stockponds Other examples include fen
15. 1 3 2b Density Distribution Pattern of Invasive Plant Species 1 3 3 Disturbance Caused Undesirable Herbaceous Species 2 3 4 Preferred Tree and Shrub Establishment and Regeneration 2 6 5 Utilization of Preferred Trees and Shrubs 2 3 6 Human Alteration of Polygon Vegetation 4 6 Vegetative Score 18 30 Soil Hydrology Factors 7 Human Alteration of Polygon Physical Site 8 12 8 Human Caused Bare Ground 2 6 9 Degree of Artificial Withdrawal of Water 9 9 Soil Hydrology Score 19 2 TOTAL SCORE 37 57 Rating Total Actual Total Possible X 100 Rating 37 57 X 100 65 Rating Category 80 100 Proper Functioning Condition Healthy 60 79 Functional At Risk Healthy but with Problems Less than 60 Nonfunctional Unhealthy The manager should realize that a less than perfect score is not necessarily cause for concern An area rated at 80 is still considered to be functioning properly At the same time ratings of individual factors can be useful in detecting strengths or weaknesses of a site A low score on any factor warrants management focus For example the sample score sheet shown above has low scores for invasive plant species tree and shrub regeneration and bare ground items 2 4 and 8 These are factors in which a management change might result in improvement on a subsequent assessment ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT CONCERNS OPTIONAL The following items do not contribute to a site s health assessment rating Rath
16. ALBERTA LENTIC WETLAND HEALTH ASSESSMENT Survey USER MANUAL This document is intended to accompany the Alberta Lentic Wetland Health Assessment Survey Form for the rapid evaluation of the functional health status of lentic still water wetlands Other forms are available for lotic flowing water wetlands ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Development of these assessment tools has been a collaborative and reiterative process Many people from many agencies and organizations have contributed greatly their time effort funding and moral support for the creation of these documents as well as to the general idea of devising a way for people to look critically at wetlands and riparian areas in a systematic and consistent way Some individuals and the agencies organizations they represent who have been instrumental in enabling this work are Dan Hinckley Tim Bozorth and Jim Roscoe of the USDI Bureau of Land Management in Montana Karen Rice and Karl Gebhardt of the USDI Bureau of Land Management in Idaho Bill Haglan of the USDI Fish and Wildlife Service in Montana Barry Adams and Gerry Ehlert of Alberta Public Lands Division Lorne Fitch of Alberta Environmental Protection and Greg Hale and Norine Ambrose of the Alberta Cows and Fish Program BACKGROUND INFORMATION Introduction Public and private land managers are being asked to improve or maintain wetland lentic habitat and water quality on lands throughout the western North America Three questions that ar
17. as it relates to the scale of water removal Pumping a small dugout full of water for livestock might severely impact a two acre slough but be negligible to a lake covering a section of land Be sure to document the grounds for your estimate here If there is no way to know with any reasonable degree of certainty how much water is being removed it may be better to document the situation and to zero out this item not answer it During periods of drought lakebeds become exposed and often exhibit wide zones of almost barren shore The evaluator must be careful not to attribute this natural phenomenon unfairly to a human cause Categories of Severity of Lentic Wetland Artificial Water Level Change Not Subjected The water body or wetland is not subjected to artificial water level change Minor The water body or wetland is subject to no more than minor artificial water level change The shore area remains vegetated Withdrawal of water occurs slowly enough or is small enough to allow vegetation to maintain coverage of exposed ground A relatively narrow band affected by fluctuation of water level may be occupied only by annual plant species Moderate The water body or wetland is subject to a moderate level speed and or frequency of drawdown but the rate and timing of withdrawal will have allowed pioneer plants to vegetate at least half the exposed area of the drawdown zone by the time of evaluation Extreme The water body o
18. blication 92 57 p Thompson William H and Paul L Hansen 2001 Classification and management of riparian and wetland sites of the Saskatchewan Prairie Ecozone and parts of adjacent subregions Riparian and Wetland Research Program the University of Montana Prepared for the Saskatchewan Wetland Conservation Corporation Regina Saskatchewan Canada 298 pp Thompson William H and Paul L Hansen 2002 Classification and management of riparian and wetland sites of Alberta s Grasslands Natural Region and adjacent subregions Bitterroot Restoration Inc Prepared for the Alberta Riparian Habitat Management Program Cows and Fish Lethbridge Alberta 416 pp Thompson William H and Paul L Hansen 2003 Classification and management of riparian and wetland sites of Alberta s Parkland Natural Region and Dry Mixedwood Natural Subregion Bitterroot Restoration Inc Prepared for the Alberta Riparian Habitat Management Program Cows and Fish Lethbridge Alberta 340 pp USDA Forest Service 1989 Ecosystem classification handbook ECODATA USDA Forest Service Northern Region Missoula Montana USA Valastin Pat and others 1999 Caring for Shoreline Properties Alberta Conservation Association Edmonton Alberta Canada T5L2W4 29 p Form current as of 6 13 03 17 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals ALBERTA LENTIC WETLAND SURVEY FIELD SCORE SHEET 1 Vegetative Cover of the Polygon Score 6 More than 95 of th
19. composed primarily of silts and clays characteristic of many lentic systems in the Great Plains require more vegetative protection to compensate for the smaller particle sizes Form current as of 6 13 03 14 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals 12a Shoreline Rock Volume Rate the shoreline rock volume as the highest appropriate of the following categories Scoring 3 More than 40 of shoreline volume is rocks at least 2 5 inches 2 20 to 40 of shoreline volume is rock at least 2 5 inches 1 10 to 20 of shoreline volume is rock at least 2 5 inches 0 Less than 10 of shoreline volume is rocks at least 2 5 inches 12b Shoreline Rock Size Rate the shoreline rock size for the polygon as the highest appropriate of the following categories Scoring 3 At least 50 of rocks present are boulders and large cobbles gt 5 inch 2 50 of rocks present are small cobbles and larger gt 2 5 inches 1 At least 50 of rocks present are coarse gravels and larger gt 0 6 inches 0 Less than 50 of rocks present are coarse gravels and larger gt 0 6 inches 13 Vegetation Use by Animals Record the rating category which best describes the vegetation use by animals Platts and others 1987 Code Category Description 0to25 Vegetation use is light or none Almost all plant biomass at the current development stage remains Vegetative cover is close to that which would occur without use Unvegetated areas
20. distribution in categories 4 5 6 or 7 0 Invasive plants present with density distribution in categories 8 or higher DISTRIBUTION DESCRIPTION OF ABUNDANCE PATTERN No invasive plants on the polygon Rare occurrence A few sporadically occurring individual plants A single patch A single patch plus a few sporadically occurring plants Several sporadically occurring plants A single patch plus several sporadically occurring plants A few patches A few patches plus several sporadically occurring plants Several well spaced patches Continuous uniform occurrence of well spaced plants Continuous occurrence of plants with a few gaps in the distribution Continuous dense occurrence of plants Continuous occurrence of plants associated with a wetter or drier zone within the polygon 3 Disturbance Caused Undesirable Herbaceous Species A large cover of disturbance increaser undesirable herbaceous species native or exotic indicates displacement from the potential natural community PNC and a reduction in riparian health These species generally are less productive have shallow roots and poorly perform most riparian functions They usually result from some disturbance which removes more desirable species Invasive species considered in the previous item are not reconsidered here As in the previous item the evaluator should state the list of species considered A partial list of
21. e g livestock The kinds of physical change that diminish or disrupt the natural wetland functions on the site include but are not limited to hammocking pugging and trails by livestock human roads trails buildings landscaping boat launches docks beach clearing and building or rip rapping shores and banks NOTE Do not count the same area twice by including it as both a vegetative and a physical alteration unless there clearly are both kinds of alteration Decide into which category a particular effect should go For example A cottage owner may clear vegetation to gain a view of the lake without causing physical damage to one area whereas if he she hauls in sand to enhance the beach there is also physical alteration Scoring 12 Less than 5 of the polygon is physically altered by human activity 8 5 to 15 of the polygon is physically altered by human activity 4 15 to 35 of the polygon is physically altered by human activity 0 35 or more of the polygon is physically altered by human activity 8 Human Caused Bare Ground Bare ground is exposed soil surface not covered by plants litter or duff down wood or rocks larger than 2 5 inches 6 cm Bare ground may result naturally from several processes i e sedimentation flood erosion fire tree fall and exposure of lakebed by low water level but that caused by human activity always indicates an impairment of wetland health Exposed soil is vulnerable to erosion a
22. e generally asked about a wetland site are 1 What is the potential of the site e g climax or potential natural community 2 What plant communities currently occupy the site and 3 What is the overall health condition of the site For a lentic still water site the first two questions can be answered by using the Alberta Lentic Wetland Inventory Form along with Classification and management of riparian and wetland sites of Alberta s Grassland Natural Region Thompson and Hansen 2002 or a similar publication This Alberta Lentic Wetland Health Assessment Survey is a method for rapidly addressing the third question above what is the site s overall health condition It provides a site rating useful for setting management priorities and stratifying wetland sites for remedial action or closer analytical attention It is intended to serve as a first approximation or coarse filter by which to identify lentic wetlands in need of closer attention so that the manager can more efficiently concentrate effort We use the term lentic still water wetland health to mean the ability of a lentic wetland to perform certain functions These functions include sediment trapping shoreline maintenance water storage aquifer recharge wave energy dissipation maintenance of biotic diversity and primary production Flowing Water Lotic vs Still Water Lentic Wetlands Cowardin and others 1979 point out that no single correct definition for
23. e polygon area is covered by live plant growth 4 85 to 95 of the polygon area is covered by live plant growth 2 75 to 85 of the polygon area is covered by live plant growth 0 Less than 75 of the polygon area is covered by live plant growth 2a Total Canopy Cover of Invasive Plant Species Weeds Score 3 No invasive plant species on the site 2 Invasive plants present with total canopy cover less than percent of the polygon area 1 Invasive plants present with total canopy cover between 1 and 15 percent of the polygon area 0 Invasive plants present with total canopy cover more than 15 percent of the polygon area 2b Density Distribution Pattern of Invasive Plant Species Score 3 No invasive plant species weeds on the site 2 Invasive plants present with density distribution in categories 1 2 or 3 1 Invasive plants present with density distribution in categories 4 5 6 or 7 0 Invasive plants present with density distribution in categories 8 or higher 3 Disturbance Caused Undesirable Herbaceous Species Score 3 Less than 5 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 2 5 to 25 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 1 25 to 45 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 0 More than 45 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 4 Preferred Tree and Shrub Establishment
24. er they may help to quantify inherent physical site characteristics that reveal structural weaknesses or sensitivities or to assess the direction of change on a site These data can be useful for planning future site management 11 Overflow Structure Stability Often the most dynamically unstable point in a lentic system is at the overflow or outlet Natural systems usually evolve behind a relatively stable outlet structure but the overflow structures or spillways of human made water bodies often become unstable and erode wash out or downcut causing severe disruption to the lentic system dependent on that body of water Scoring If the water body is not human constructed nor structurally altered and lacks an overflow structure replace both Actual and Possible Scores with NA 6 The overflow structure is made of concrete pipe or armoured rock and appears stable 4 The overflow structure is unprotected or is made of other material but still appears stable 2 The overflow structure is made of concrete pipe or armoured rock but appears unstable 0 The overflow structure is unprotected or is made of other material and appears unstable 12 Shoreline Rock Volume and Size The composition of shoreline materials influences the susceptibility of the shoreline to erosion caused by trampling wave action or other disturbance In general larger rocks provide better protection against disturbance than smaller materials Thus shoreline
25. esirable exotic plant The main reason for excluding these plants is they are far more abundant on many sites than are species of greater concern i e Salix spp willows Cornus stolonifera red osier dogwood Amelanchier alnifolia Saskatoon and many other taller native riparian species and they may mask the ecological significance of a small amount of a heavily utilised species of greater concern FOR EXAMPLE A polygon may have Symphoricarpos occidentalis buckbrush snowberry with 30 canopy cover showing only light utilisation while also having a trace of Salix exigua sandbar willow present showing heavy utilisation We feel that although there is only a small amount of willow present the fact that it is being heavily utilized is very important to the health evaluation By including the snowberry and willow together on this polygon the condition of the willow would be hidden overwhelmed by the larger amount of buckbrush snowberry When estimating degree of utilisation count browsed second year and older leaders on representative plants of woody species normally browsed by ungulates Do not count current year s use since this may not accurately reflect actual use because significant browsing can occur late in the season Determine percentage by comparing the number of leaders browsed with the total number of leaders available those within animal reach on a representative sample at least three plants of each tree and shrub species pre
26. est forms and user manuals those with managerial breaks across them 2 a typical relationship between aquatic habitat open water and surrounding lentic wetland which includes areas of persistent emergent vegetation in standing water The outer boundaries of polygons are usually at the wetland ecosystem outer edges These boundaries are sometimes easily determined by abrupt changes in the landform and or vegetation but proper determination often depends on experienced interpretation of more subtle features The inner polygon boundary is the landward edge of the deep water habitat or where persistent vegetation gives way to open water Deep water habitat is the area covered by surface water deeper than 6 6 ft 2 m or where sunlight cannot penetrate to support erect rooted plant life Persistent emergent vegetation consists of emergent species that normally remain standing at least until the beginning of the next growing season e g Typha spp cattails or Scirpus spp bulrushes Cowardin and others 1979 Identification of plant communities by vegetation type Thompson and Hansen 2001 Hansen and others 1995 will be useful both in delineating lentic areas and later in determining appropriate management These may be in a mosaic difficult to map An area may have a mix of herbaceous communities shrubs and forest These communities have diverse resource values and may respond differently to a management action but it is seldom practical
27. imental to the riparian vegetation site productivity and wildlife values In a few cases water level may be artificially raised by influx of runoff from such activities as drainage of one wetland into another or irrigation return flows The evaluator must evaluate the degree to which this change of water level affects the vegetation community and overall riparian wetland functional health Not all lentic wetlands evaluated with this form will have surface water potential but any wetland may have its water table degraded by draining pumping or diverting its surface or subsurface supply On such lentic wetlands as marshes and wet meadows look for evidence of drainage ditching pumping and the interruption of normal surface drainage inputs by livestock watering dugouts cross slope ditches or dams upslope In this item the evaluator is asked to categorize the degree to which the system is subjected to artificially rapid or unnaturally timed fluctuations in water level Reservoirs intended for storage of water for power generation irrigation and or livestock watering typically exhibit the most severe effects but water may be diverted or pumped from natural systems for many other reasons domestic use industrial use livestock watering etc This item requires the evaluator to make a subjective call by choosing as a best fit one of the categories of drawdown severity described below NOTE Be careful to consider the scale of the water body
28. important to remember that a health rating is not an absolute value The factor breakout groupings and point weighting in the evaluation are somewhat subjective and are not grounded in quantitative science so much as in the collective experience of an array of riparian scientists range professionals and land managers Each factor below will be rated according to conditions observed on the site The evaluator will estimate the scoring category and enter that value on the score sheet 1 Vegetative Cover of the Polygon Around lentic water bodies vegetation cover helps to stabilize shorelines control nutrient cycling reduce water velocity provide fish cover and food trap sediments reduce erosion reduce the rate of evaporation Platts and others 1987 and contributes primary production to the ecosystem This question focuses on how much of the entire polygon area is covered by live plant growth Item 10 below assesses the amount of human caused bare ground Although there is some overlap between these two items the bare ground to be counted in item 10 is strictly limited in definition whereas all unvegetated area not inundated by water is counted in this item The only area within the polygon exempt from consideration here is area covered by water Areas such as boat docks hardened pathways and artificial structures are counted as unvegetated along with any bare ground human caused or natural The rationale is that all such unvegetated areas cont
29. ing Although the intent of legislation is to protect wetland functions the current delineation of jurisdictional wetland still relies upon structural features or attributes The hydrogeomorphic HGM approach being developed by the US Corps of Engineers is intended to focus more specifically on wetland functions The prevailing view among many wetland scientists is that functional wetlands need to meet only one of the three criteria as outlined by Cowardin and others 1979 e g hydric soils hydrophytic plants and wetland hydrology On the other hand jurisdictional wetlands need to meet all three criteria except in limited situations Even though functional wetlands may not meet jurisdictional wetland requirements they certainly perform wetland functions resulting from the greater amount of water that accumulates on or near the soil surface relative to the adjacent uplands Examples include some woody draws occupied by the Acer negundo Prunus virginiana Manitoba maple choke cherry habitat type Thompson and Hansen 2002 and some floodplain sites occupied by the Artemisia cana Agropyron smithii silver sagebrush western wheatgrass habitat type or the Populus tremuloides Cornus stolonifera aspen red osier dogwood habitat type Currently many of these sites fail to meet jurisdictional wetland criteria Nevertheless these functional wetlands provide important wetland functions vital to wetland dependent species and may warrant special managerial co
30. l from a Typha latifolia cattail habitat type to a Calamagrostis canadensis bluejoint habitat type or even to an upland type Sites experiencing significant hydrologic edaphic soil or climatic changes will likely also have a change in plant community potential This method is not designed for an in depth comprehensive analysis of ecologic processes Such analysis may be warranted on a site and can be done after this evaluation has identified areas of concern Nor does this approach yield an absolute rating Form current as of 6 13 03 2 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals to be used in comparison with wetlands in other areas or of other types Appropriate comparisons using this rating can be made between neighbouring wetlands of similar size and type and between subsequent assessments of the same site A single evaluation provides a rating at only one point in time Due to the range of variation possible on a wetland site a single evaluation cannot define absolute status of site health or reliably indicate trend whether the site is improving degrading or stable To monitor trend health assessments should be repeated in subsequent years during the same time of year Evaluation should be conducted when most plants can be identified in the field and when hydrologic conditions are most nearly normal e g not during peak spring runoff or immediately after a major storm Management regime should influence assessment timi
31. ler native riparian species and they may mask the ecological significance of a small amount of a species of greater concern FOR EXAMPLE A polygon may have Symphoricarpos occidentalis buckbrush snowberry with 30 canopy cover showing young plants for replacement of older ones while also having a trace of Salix exigua sandbar willow present but represented only by older mature individuals We feel that the failure of the willow to regenerate even though there is only a small amount is very important in the health evaluation but by including the snowberry and willow together on this polygon the condition of the willow would be hidden overwhelmed by the larger amount of buckbrush snowberry For shrubs in general seedlings and saplings can be distinguished from mature plants as follows For those species having a mature height generally over 6 0 ft 1 8 m seedlings and saplings are those individuals less than 6 0 ft 1 8 m tall For species normally not exceeding 6 0 ft 1 8 m seedlings and saplings are those individuals less than 1 5 ft 0 45 m tall or which lack reproductive structures and the relative stature to suggest maturity Note Evaluators should take care not to confuse short stature resulting from heavy browsing with that due to youth Scoring If the site has no potential for trees or shrubs except for the species listed above to be excluded replace both Actual Score and Possible Score with NA If the observer is not fairly
32. nd is where weeds become established Bare soil is not producing nor providing habitat Sediment deposits and other natural bare ground are excluded as normal and probably beyond management control Human land uses often causing bare ground include livestock grazing recreation off road vehicle use and resource extraction activities After considering the causes of all bare ground on the site the evaluator must estimate what percent of the site polygon area is human caused bare ground Scoring 6 Less than 1 of the polygon is human caused bare ground 4 1 to 5 of the polygon is human caused bare ground 2 5 to 15 of the polygon is human caused bare ground 0 15 or more of the polygon is human caused bare ground 9 Degree of Artificial Withdrawal or Raising of Water Level Although water levels naturally fluctuate on a seasonal basis in most systems many wetland systems are affected by water removal for human uses This artificial drawdown of Form current as of 6 13 03 12 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals water level often does not follow a temporal regime conducive to maintaining healthy native wetland plant communities The result is often a barren band of shore exposed for much of the growing season This withdraws soil water from the rooting zone of established shore vegetation communities causes shore material to destabilize and provides sites for weeds to invade Such conditions are extremely detr
33. ng For example in assessing trend on rotational grazing systems one should avoid comparing a rating after a season of use one year to a rating another year after a season of rest Pre Assessment Preparation The lentic health assessment process incorporates data on a wide range of biological and physical categories The basic unit of delineation upon which an assessment is made is referred to as a polygon A lentic polygon is a wetland or portion of a wetland not associated with a waterway stream or river and which has no defined channel Polygons are delineated on topographic topo maps before evaluators go to the field It is important to clearly mark and number the polygons on the maps If aerial photos are available polygon delineations can be based on vegetation differences geologic features or other observable characteristics On larger systems with wide wetland areas aerial photos may allow delineation of multiple vegetation based polygons away from the water source In these cases where polygons can be drawn as enclosed units a minimum mapping unit of possibly 5 to 10 acres 2 to 4 ha should be followed The size of the minimum mapping unit should be based on factors such as management capabilities available funds and capabilities of data collection If pre delineated polygons are drawn on the maps and pre assigned numbers are given be sure the inventoried polygons correspond exactly to those drawn Evaluators are allowed to move
34. niversal Transverse Mercator UTM coordinates are recorded for the upper or most northerly and westerly and lower or most southerly and easterly ends of the polygon using GPS units in the field Other locations of special interest may be recorded using the GPS unit These coordinates are considered accurate to within approximately 50 m Field observers are to use GPS units to obtain these coordinates following standard protocol Record UTM coordinates at each end of the long axis of the polygon Enter the UTM coordinate data including the UTM zone and the identifying waypoint number on the form for each point collected Save the data in the GPS unit for downloading to the computer later When starting work in a new location always check the GPS receiving unit against a known point by using the UTM grid and map B11d e Identify the GPS unit used and the name or number designator of the waypoints saved for the upper and lower ends of the polygon and for other locations Describe any comments worth noting about the waypoints i e monument referenced or general location descriptions B12a c Record the name s scale and publication year of the quadrangle map s or any other map s locating the polygon Use precisely the name listed on the map sheet Provision is made for listing two maps in case the polygon crosses between two maps B13 Record identifying data for any aerial photos used on this polygon Selected Summary Data C1 Wetland
35. nsideration The current interpretation is that not all functional wetlands are jurisdictional wetlands but that all jurisdictional wetlands are functional wetlands Lentic Wetland Health As noted above the health of a lentic site a wetland located adjacent to a still water body may be defined as the ability of that system including the saturated and inundated near shore emergent wetland and all the shoreline area that is influenced by the lentic waters to perform certain wetland functions These functions include sediment trapping shoreline maintenance water storage aquifer recharge wave energy dissipation and primary biotic production A site s health rating may also reflect management considerations For example although Cirsium arvense Canada thistle or Euphorbia esula leafy spurge may help to trap sediment and provide soil binding properties other functions i e productivity and wildlife habitat will be impaired and their presence should be a management concern Excellent sources of practical ideas and tips on good management of these wetland sites in Alberta are found in Caring for Shoreline Properties Valastin and others 1999 and Caring for the Green Zone Adams and Fitch 1995 and Riparian Areas A User s Guide to Health Fitch and Ambrose 2003 In Saskatchewan some excellent resources are Streambank Stewardship Your Guide to Caring For Riparian Areas in Saskatchewan Huel 1998 and Managing Saskatchewan Wetlands A Lando
36. pher and camera used E2 Tell if there is another polygon adjacent to this one to the north west E3 Same as E1 above for shots taken at the most southerly easterly end or side of the polygon E2 Tell if there is another polygon adjacent to this one to the south east E5 Identify all additional photos taken outside of polygon i e non polygon photos by giving roll number frame number and description of view E6 Record the brand of film film speed camera lens size and lens focal length or magnification Form current as of 6 13 03 8 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals THE LENTIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT SCORE SHEET SURVEY Some factors on the evaluation will not apply on all sites For example sites without potential for woody species are not rated on factors concerning trees and shrubs Vegetative site potential can be determined by using a key to site type e g Hansen and others 1995 Kovalchik 1987 or another appropriate publication On severely disturbed sites vegetation potential can be difficult to determine On such sites clues to potential may be sought on nearby sites with similar landscape position Most of the factors rated in this evaluation are based on ocular estimations Such estimation may be difficult on large brushy sites where visibility is limited but extreme precision is not necessary While the rating categories are broad evaluators do need to calibrate their eye with practice It is
37. polygon boundaries create new polygons or consolidate polygons if the vegetation geography location of fences or width of the wetland zone warrant If polygon boundaries are changed the changes must be clearly marked on the field copies of the maps Evaluators should draw the complete polygon boundary onto their field maps if possible at the 1 20 000 or 1 50 000 scale In most cases involving small bodies of water or small lentic wetlands the inventoried polygon will be a single unit of area Around larger lakes extensive marshes or other large lentic wetlands it may be necessary to divide the wetland into separate polygons Figure 1 Polygons should be divided at distinct locations such as fences stream entrances or exits or other features easily recognized in the field Polygons should not cross fences between areas with different management Allotment fence polygon break Arbitrary or managerial Wetland Upland boundary point delineating polygon break k Arbitrary central point drawn on map Lentic Still Water Wetland mm Pelygon 2 E ma m Lentic Still Water Wetland Aquatic Habitat Figure 1 Schematic drawing of a lentic still water wetland showing 1 delineation of polygons on larger systems i e those too big to inventory as a single polygon more than about one half mile in length or Form current as of 6 13 03 3 Check www cowsandfish org for lat
38. polygon is physically altered by human activity 4 15 to 35 of the polygon is physically altered by human activity 0 35 or more of the polygon is physically altered by human activity 8 Human Caused Bare Ground Score 6 Less than 1 of the polygon is human caused bare ground 4 1 to 5 of the polygon is human caused bare ground 2 5 to 15 of the polygon is human caused bare ground 0 15 or more of the polygon is human caused bare ground Form current as of 6 13 03 18 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals 9 Degree of Artificial Withdrawal or Raising of Water Level Score 9 The waterbody is Not Subjected to artificial water level change 6 The degree of artificial water level change is Minor 3 The degree of artificial water level change is Moderate 0 The degree of artificial water level change is Extreme 10 Comments and Observations ADDITIONAL MANAGEMENT CONCERNS OPTIONAL 11 Overflow Structure Stability Score If the water body is not human constructed nor structurally altered and lacks an overflow structure replace both Actual and Possible Scores with NA 6 The overflow structure is made of concrete pipe or armoured rock and appears stable 4 The overflow structure is unprotected or is made of other material but still appears stable 2 The overflow structure is made of concrete pipe or armoured rock but appears unstable 0 The overflow structure is unprotected or is
39. purpose of this question is to identify those records that can be compared as representing exactly the same ground area A7d If A7c is answered Yes then enter the years of any inventories of this exact polygon A7e If A7c is answered Yes also enter the record ID number s of any other previous or subsequent reinventories resamplings of this exact polygon for purposes of cross reference in the database A7f Even though this polygon is not a re inventory of the exact same area as any other polygon does it share at least some common area with one or more polygons inventoried at another time A7g If A7f is answered Yes enter the years of any other inventories of polygons sharing common area with this one A7h If A7f is answered Yes also enter the record ID number s of any other polygon s sharing common area with this one A8a Has a management change been implemented on this polygon A8b If A8a is answered Yes in what year was the management change implemented A8c If A8a is answered Yes describe the management change implemented Location Data B1 Province in which the field work is being done B2a b Identify the Natural Region and Sub Region in which the field work is being done Use the Natural Regions and Subregions of Alberta Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre 1999 B3 County or municipal district in which the field work is being done B4a The city town or village in
40. r wetland is subject to an extreme extent speed and or frequency of water withdrawal A wide drawdown zone of exposed bottom material remains unvegetated Scoring 9 The waterbody or wetland is Not Subjected to artificial water level change 6 The degree of artificial water level change is Minor 3 The degree of artificial water level change is Moderate 0 The degree of artificial water level change is Extreme 10 Comments and Observations Add any necessary commentary to explain or amplify the data recorded Do not leave this space blank Describe any unique characteristics of the site and other observations relating to the vegetation or to the physical conditions of the site Each item in the health rating has a small space provided for specific information to enlighten the score given This larger space is the place for more general commentary to help the reader understand the larger context of the data Such things as landscape setting and local land use history are appropriate here Form current as of 6 13 03 13 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals Calculating the Lentic Health Score To arrive at the overall site health rating the scores are totalled for all the factors and that total is divided by the possible perfect score total A sample score sheet is shown below Vegetation Factors Actual Pts Possible Pts 1 Vegetative Cover of Polygon 6 6 2a Total Canopy Cover of Invasive Plant Species
41. ribute nothing to several of the important lentic wetland functions The evaluator is to estimate the fraction of the polygon covered by plant growth Vegetation cover is ocularly estimated using the canopy cover method Daubenmire 1959 Scoring 6 More than 95 of the polygon area is covered by live plant growth 4 85 to 95 of the polygon area is covered by live plant growth 2 75 to 85 of the polygon area is covered by live plant growth 0 Less than 75 of the polygon area is covered by live plant growth 2 Invasive Plant Species Weeds Invasive plants weeds are alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm Whether the disturbance that allowed their establishment is natural or human caused weed presence indicates a degrading ecosystem While some of these species may contribute to some riparian functions their negative impacts reduce overall site health This item assesses the degree and extent to which the site is infested by invasive plants The severity of the problem is a function of the density distribution pattern of occurrence as well as canopy cover abundance of the weeds In determining the health score all invasive species are considered collectively not individually A weed list should be used that is standard for the locality and that indicates which species are being considered 1 e Invasive Weed and Disturbance caused Undesirable Plant List Cows and Fish 2002
42. s bogs wet meadows and seeps not associated with a defined channel Lotic wetlands are associated with rivers streams and drainageways They contain a defined channel and floodplain The channel is an open conduit which periodically or continuously carries flowing water Beaver ponds seeps springs and wet meadows on the floodplain of or associated with a river or stream are part of the lotic wetland Form current as of 6 13 03 1 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals Functional vs Jurisdictional Wetland Criteria Defining wetlands has become more difficult as greater economic stakes have increased the potential for conflict between politics and science A universally accepted wetland definition satisfactory to all users has not yet been developed because the definition depends on the objectives and the field of interest However scientists generally agree that wetlands are characterized by one or more of the following features 1 wetland hydrology the driving force creating all wetlands 2 hydric soils an indicator of the absence of oxygen and 3 hydrophytic vegetation an indicator of wetland site conditions The problem is how to define and obtain consensus on thresholds for these three criteria and various combinations of them Wetlands are not easily identified and delineated for jurisdictional purposes Functional definitions have generally been difficult to apply to the regulation of wetland dredging or fill
43. s for the purpose of making such a determination Other polygons include areas supporting non wetland vegetation types A Yes answer here indicates that no part of the polygon keys to a riparian habitat type or community type HT CT Areas classified in item C8 as any vegetation type described in a riparian and or wetland classification document for the region in which you are working are counted as functional wetlands Areas listed as UNCLASSIFIED WETLAND TYPE are also counted as functional wetlands Other areas are counted as non wetlands or uplands The functional wetland fraction of the polygon area is listed in item C3c in acres and as a percentage of the entire polygon area in item C3d C4 Some lentic polygons may not contain a defined shoreline between wetland and open water In some cases these polygons are in ephemeral depressions which may be inundated infrequently but do support wetland plant communities In other cases these polygons may be part of large marsh systems that may or may not be associated with lakes but where polygons may be delineated in areas not adjacent to open water C5 Polygon length usually equivalent to the length of shore along the polygon is measured in the field or by scaling from the map This data is considered accurate to the nearest 0 1 mile 0 16 km C6 In some cases the polygon data is used to characterize or represent a much larger shoreline The length represented by the polygon is given here
44. sent Do not include use of dead plants unless it is clear this condition was the result of over grazing Form current as of 6 13 03 11 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals Scoring If the site has no potential for trees or shrubs except for the species listed above to be excluded replace both Actual Score and Possible Score with NA If the observer is not fairly certain potential exists for preferred trees or shrubs then enter NC and explain in the comment field below 3 None 0 to 5 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 2 Light 5 to 25 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 1 Moderate 25 to 50 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 0 Heavy More than 50 of available second year and older leaders of preferred species are browsed 6 Human Alteration of Polygon Vegetation Human alteration of the vegetation is meant to include all changes to the plant community composition or structure on the polygon caused by human actions e g logging mining roads construction or development or by agents of human management e g livestock It is not meant to include transitory or short term removal of plant material that does not impact plant community composition i e grazing at carefully managed levels Of concern are the kinds of change that diminish or disrupt the natural wetland function
45. t of Shoreline Accessible to Livestock Percent 16 Percent of Tree and Shrub Cover in the Polygon that is Dead and or Decadent Percent 17 Polygon Trend Select one Improving Degrading Static or Status Unknown Trend 18 Break Down the Polygon Area into the Land Uses Listed must total to approx 100 No land use apparent Turf grass lawn Tame pasture grazing Native pasture grazing Recreation ATV paths campsites etc Development buildings corrals paved lots etc Tilled cropping Perennial forage e g alfalfa hayland Roads Logging Mining Railroads Other Description of Other Usage Noted 19 Break Down the Area Adjacent to the Polygon Into the Land Uses Listed must total to approx 100 No land use apparent Turf grass lawn Tame pasture grazing Native pasture grazing Recreation ATV paths campsites etc Development buildings corrals paved lots etc Tilled cropping Perennial forage e g alfalfa hayland Roads Logging Mining Railroads Other Description of Other Usage Noted Form current as of 6 13 03 20 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals
46. ta Canada Daubenmire R D 1959 A canopy coverage method of vegetation analysis Northwest Science 33 43 66 Federal Interagency Committee for Wetland Delineation 1989 Federal manual for identifying and delineating jurisdictional wetlands US Army Corps of Engineers US Environmental Protection Agency USDI Fish and Wildlife Service and USDA Soil Conservation Service Cooperative Technical Publication Washington DC USA 76 p Fitch L B W Adams and G Hale Eds 2001 Riparian Health Assessment for Streams and Small Rivers Field Workbook Lethbridge Alberta Cows and Fish Program adapted from Riparian and Wetland Research Program School of Forestry 2001 Lotic health assessments Riparian Health Assessment for Streams and Small Rivers Survey User Guide University of Montana Missoula Montana USA January 2001 75 p Fitch L and N Ambrose 2003 Riparian areas A user s guide to health Lethbridge Alberta Cows and Fish Program ISBN No 0 7785 2305 S 46 p Hansen Paul L Robert D Pfister Keith Boggs Bradley J Cook John Joy and Dan K Hinckley 1995 Classification and management of Montana s riparian and wetland sites Miscellaneous Publication No 54 Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment Station School of Forestry University of Montana Missoula Montana USA 646 p Huel Denis 1998 Streambank stewardship your guide to caring for riparian areas in Saskatchewan ISBN No 1 896793 20 7 Saskatchewan
47. tic system Reservoir An artificial dammed water body with at least 20 acres 8 ha covered by surface water Stock pond An artificial dammed body of water of less than 20 acres 8 ha covered by surface water Lake A natural topographic depression collecting a body of water covering at least 20 acres 8 ha with surface water Form current as of 6 13 03 6 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals Pothole Slough or Small Mountain Lake A natural topographic depression collecting a body of water covering less than 20 acres 8 ha with surface water Other Describe any other wetland type encountered that is not associated with a surface water channel Non wetland Upland This designation is for those areas which are included in the inventoried polygon but which do not support functional wetland vegetation communities Such areas may be undisturbed inclusions of naturally occurring high ground or such disturbed high ground as roadways and other elevated sites of human activity C2 The size acres hectares of polygons large enough to be drawn as enclosed units on available maps may be determined in the office using a planimeter dot grid or GIS For polygons too narrow or small to be accurately drawn as enclosed units on available maps size is calculated using polygon length item C5 and average polygon width item C7 C3a d Evaluators may be asked to survey some areas that have not been determined to be wetland
48. tock Young age classes of woody species are important indicators of the continued presence of woody communities not only at a given point Form current as of 6 13 03 10 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals in time but into the future Woody species potential can be determined by using a key to site type Thompson and Hansen 2001 Hansen and others 1995 On severely disturbed sites the evaluator should seek clues to potential by observing nearby sites with similar landscape position Note Vegetation potential is commonly underestimated on sites with a long history of disturbance One species Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive and three other shrub genera Symphoricarpos spp buckbrush snowberry Rosa spp rose and Crataegus spp hawthorn are excluded from the evaluation of establishment and regeneration These are species that may reflect long term disturbance on a site that are generally less palatable to browsers and that tend to increase under long term moderate to heavy grazing pressure AND for which there is rarely any problem in maintaining presence on site Elaeagnus angustifolia Russian olive is considered an especially aggressive undesirable exotic plant The main reason for excluding these plants is that they are far more abundant on many sites than are species of greater concern 1 e Salix spp willows Cornus stolonifera red osier dogwood Amelanchier alnifolia Saskatoon and many other tal
49. uggest an improving trend If such indicators are not apparent enter the category status unknown Form current as of 6 13 03 15 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals 18 Break Down the Polygon Area into the Land Uses Listed Name any Others Observed 19 Break Down the Area Adjacent to the Polygon into the Land Uses Listed Name any Others Observed LITERATURE CITED Adams Barry and Lorne Fitch 1995 Caring for the green zone riparian areas and grazing management Alberta Riparian Habitat Management Project Lethbridge Alberta Canada 37 p Alberta Natural Heritage Information Centre 1999 Natural regions and subregions of Alberta Internet website http www gov ab ca env parks anhic abnatreg html Edmonton Alberta Canada TSK 2J6 Cooperrider Allen Y Raymond J Boyd and Hanson R Stuart 1986 Inventory and monitoring of wildlife habitat USDI Bureau of Land Management Denver Service Center Denver Colorado USA 858 p Cowardin L M V Carter F C Golet and E T LaRoe 1979 Classification of wetlands and deep water habitats of the United States USDI Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Biological Services Washington DC USA Publication Number FWS OBS 79 31 107 p Cows and Fish 2001 Invasive Weed and Disturbance caused Herbaceous Species List For Use in Riparian Health Assessment and Inventory in Alberta draft Alberta Riparian Habitat Management Program Lethbridge Alber
50. undesirable herbaceous species appropriate for use in Alberta follows A list should be used that is standard for the locality and that indicates which species are being considered i e Invasive Weed and Disturbance caused Undesirable Plant List Cows and Fish 2002 The evaluator should list any additional species included Antennaria spp pussy toes Hordeum jubatum foxtail barley Potentilla anserina silverweed Brassicaceae mustards Plantago spp plantains Taraxacum spp dandelion Bromus inermis smooth brome Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass Trifolium spp clovers Fragaria spp strawberries Scoring 3 Less than 5 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 2 5 to 25 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 1 25 to 45 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 0 More than 45 of the site covered by disturbance caused undesirable herbaceous species 4 Preferred Tree and Shrub Establishment and or Regeneration Skip this item if the site lacks potential for trees or shrubs for example the site is a herbaceous wet meadow or marsh Not all riparian areas can support trees and or shrubs However on those sites where such species do belong they play important roles The root systems of woody species are excellent bank stabilizers while their spreading canopies provide protection to soil water wildlife and lives
51. which the field work is being done B4b The subdivision in which the field work is being done B4c The subdivision lot on which the field work is being done B5 Identify the allotment range unit or landowner where the field work is being done B6 Name the waterbody or area on which the field work is being done B7 Polygon number is a sequential identifier of the actual piece of land being surveyed This is referenced to the map delineations Sequences normally progress clockwise on lentic systems B8 The location of the polygon is presented as a legal land description 1 4 1 4 section 1 4 section Township Range and Meridian are read from smallest to largest unit Form current as of 6 13 03 5 Check www cowsandfish org for latest forms and user manuals B9 Elevation feet or meters of the polygon centroid Elevation is usually interpolated from a topographic map B10a Name the major watershed e g North Saskatchewan River of which the site being surveyed is a part B10b Name the minor watershed e g Battle River of which the site being surveyed is a part This is normally subordinate to the major watershed named above in B10a B10c d The minor watershed area km and perimeter km are obtained from the map in the office B10e Name the sub basin e g Iron Creek This is the local watershed of which the site being surveyed is a part This is normally subordinate to the minor watershed named above in B10b B1la c U
52. wner s Guide Huel 2000 No single factor or characteristic of a wetland site can provide a complete picture of either site health or the direction of trend The lentic wetland health assessment is based on consideration of physical hydrologic and vegetation factors It relies heavily on vegetative characteristics as integrators of factors operating on the landscape Because they are more visible than soil or hydrological characteristics plants may provide early indications of riparian health as well as successional trend These are reflected not only in the types of plants present but also by the effectiveness with which the vegetation carries out its wetland functions of stabilizing the soil trapping sediments and providing wildlife habitat Furthermore the utilization of certain types of vegetation by animals may indicate the current condition of the wetland and may indicate trend toward or away from potential natural community PNC In addition to vegetation factors an analysis of site health and its susceptibility to degradation must consider physical factors soils and hydrology for both ecologic and management reasons Changes in soil or hydrologic conditions obviously affect functioning of a wetland ecosystem Moreover changes in physical characteristics are often but not always more difficult to remedy than vegetative changes For example downcutting of an unstable overflow point may lower the water table and thus change site potentia
Download Pdf Manuals
Related Search