Laserfiche WebLink
Water Quality <br /> _ Any Wetland within 200 ft of a protected lake or river was rated 3. Wetlands between 200 feet and <br /> 1320 feet were rated 2 and all others were rated 1. <br /> Rare and Endangered Species <br /> The list of major wetland groups was rated from 1 to 3 based on a potential to support rare plant <br /> communities or where several species of rare plants have been found. <br /> Disclaimer: These ratings are based on the experiences of an MCBS plant ecologist in Cass <br /> County. In general, less common plant communities and those wetland communities where <br /> several species of rare plants have been found were rated 3 (most protection). <br /> It is important to keep in mind the value of site-specific survey when it comes to wetland <br /> manipulation of any sort. Although these ratings might be used to plan for the amount of effort put <br /> into evaluating a site, they should not be used to decide the fate of a wetland without an on-the- <br /> ground evaluation by a trained observer. <br /> Cultural Resources <br /> A point coverage was digitized for lake inlets/outlets occurrences along with any stream <br /> confluence. <br /> Any wetlands within a distance of 200 feet of a confluence were rated 3. Any wetlands within 500 <br /> feet of an inlet/outlet were rated 3. Any wetlands within 200 feet of a protected lake or river were <br /> rated 3 also. All other wetlands were rated as 1. <br /> Flood Attenuation <br /> All isolated basins, basins within areas zoned industrial/commercial/residential, and basins <br /> within flood prone watersheds will always receive the highest rating (3) regardless of water regime. <br /> Isolated basins (surrounded by uplands) are assumed to have the highest capacity to store <br /> surface water runoff since no runoff is allowed to escape. Basins located in areas zoned <br /> industrial/commercial/residential are assumed to have high value for storage because the <br /> presence or potential presence of significant amounts of impervious surfaces (no runoff detention <br /> capability) within these areas increases the value of existing wetlands. Basins in flood prone <br /> watersheds are assumed to have high value for storage because these watersheds are already at <br /> risk due to low overall capacity to store surface runoff. <br /> For wetlands remaining unscored based on the above spatial criteria, the water regime modifier is <br /> used to rate flood attenuation as follows: <br /> Score 3) Types A,C,E and J <br /> Score 2) Types F,G,Z and H <br /> Score 1) Types B,K and U <br /> Groundwater Sensitivity <br /> All wetlands were rated according to their geologic landform position. Basins in outwash <br /> plains and other generally sandy landforms were rated 3. Basins in transitional landforms <br /> containing loams/loamy sands were rated 2. Basins in glacial till complexes containing clay loams <br /> and clays were rated 3. If a wetland was located in more than one geomorphic type, then the <br /> higher of the ratings was used. (See appendix 2 ) <br /> Scores were calculated for all wetlands and stored as a field in the attribute table. <br /> Wetland Protection Scoresheet <br /> 17 <br />