Baldwin County Wetland Conservation Plan - Alabama Department ...
Baldwin County Wetland Conservation Plan - Alabama Department ...
Baldwin County Wetland Conservation Plan - Alabama Department ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />
Final Summary Document<br />
A cooperative project between the United<br />
States Environmental Protection Agency<br />
and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission<br />
Chairman David E. Bishop – District 2<br />
Commissioner Frank Burt, Jr. – District 1<br />
Commissioner Wayne A. Gruenloh – District 3<br />
Commissioner Albert Lipscomb – District 4<br />
May 2005<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Zoning <strong>Department</strong><br />
Http://www.wetlands.co.baldwin.al.us<br />
Cara Stallman Kenneth McIlwain Derek Lemoine<br />
Senior Natural Resource <strong>Plan</strong>ner Natural Resource <strong>Plan</strong>ner Natural Resource Analyst
Table of Contents<br />
a. Acknowledgments......................................................................................................................................iv<br />
b. List of Acronyms.........................................................................................................................................v<br />
c. List of Figures.............................................................................................................................................vi<br />
d. Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................vii<br />
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................1<br />
2. Background .................................................................................................................................................4<br />
2.1. General Information about <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, <strong>Alabama</strong> ................................................................4<br />
2.1.1. Geography and Demography ...............................................................................................4<br />
2.1.2. Soils...........................................................................................................................................4<br />
2.1.3. Waterways and Watersheds...................................................................................................5<br />
2.1.4. Climate .....................................................................................................................................5<br />
2.2. Summary of wetland resources in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>.......................................................................6<br />
2.2.1. <strong>Wetland</strong> Classification ...........................................................................................................6<br />
2.2.2. General Summary of wetland hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classes ...................................6<br />
2.2.2.1. Flat ....................................................................................................................................6<br />
2.2.2.2. Depressional .....................................................................................................................7<br />
2.2.2.3. Riverine ............................................................................................................................8<br />
2.2.2.4. Fringe.................................................................................................................................8<br />
2.2.2.5. Slope .................................................................................................................................9<br />
2.3. Summary of wetland protection efforts in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>.........................................................9<br />
2.4. Existing wetland regulatory framework.........................................................................................10<br />
2.4.1. Federal....................................................................................................................................10<br />
2.4.2. State .......................................................................................................................................10<br />
2.4.3. Local .......................................................................................................................................10<br />
2.5. Regulatory limitations.......................................................................................................................11<br />
3. Summary of Project Objectives/Goals..................................................................................................12<br />
3.1. Further develop a <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District (WPOD) and incorporate it into the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Zoning Regulations.............................................................................................12<br />
3.1.1. Recommendations and Future Direction..........................................................................13<br />
3.1.1.1. Interagency Relationship between BCC and USACE..............................................13<br />
3.1.1.2. Suggested changes to Zoning and Subdivision Regulations....................................14<br />
3.2. Develop a countywide GIS wetland data layer containing information on the location, type<br />
and functional capacity of wetlands ...............................................................................................15<br />
3.2.1. Creation of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer (BCDWL) .............................15<br />
3.2.2. <strong>Wetland</strong> Validation Project .................................................................................................15<br />
3.2.2.1. Fieldwork ........................................................................................................................16<br />
3.2.2.2. Statistical Analysis/Results...........................................................................................17<br />
3.2.3. Remote Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model (RFWAM)........................................19<br />
3.2.3.1. Conceptual Framework.................................................................................................19<br />
ii
3.2.3.2. Acquisition of GIS data layer for use in the BCWCP database..............................19<br />
3.2.3.3. <strong>Wetland</strong> classification: NWI to HGM Conversion ..................................................20<br />
3.2.3.4. <strong>Wetland</strong> model development .......................................................................................20<br />
3.2.3.5. Calibration of functional assessment ..........................................................................26<br />
3.2.3.6. Results of the RFWAM ................................................................................................26<br />
3.2.3.7. Future direction and recommendations .....................................................................27<br />
3.3. Develop a wetland education/outreach program for area stakeholders...................................28<br />
3.3.1. Public meetings.....................................................................................................................28<br />
3.3.2. Presentation to government and civic organizations ......................................................28<br />
3.3.3. Presentations at Professional Meetings .............................................................................28<br />
3.3.4. Other BCWCP activities......................................................................................................29<br />
3.3.5. Future direction and recommendations ............................................................................30<br />
3.4. Research, design and implement wetland restoration/construction projects at selected sites<br />
throughout the <strong>County</strong>.....................................................................................................................31<br />
3.4.1. Perdido Beach Shoreline Restoration Project ..................................................................31<br />
3.4.2. Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong>s Park.................................................................................................35<br />
3.4.3. <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> High School <strong>Wetland</strong> Restoration Project ..........................................36<br />
3.4.4. Keeney Driver East <strong>Wetland</strong> Reserve Program...............................................................37<br />
3.4.5. Coastal Land Trust/Tensaw Lake acquisition..................................................................38<br />
3.4.6. Future direction and recommendations ...........................................................................39<br />
4. Summary and Conclusions .....................................................................................................................40<br />
5. References ..................................................................................................................................................41<br />
6. Glossary......................................................................................................................................................42<br />
7. Figures ........................................................................................................................................................47<br />
8. Appendices.................................................................................................................................................81<br />
8.1. Summary of All Project Related Activities....................................................................................82<br />
8.2. Validation Project Results................................................................................................................89<br />
8.3. RFWAM Technical Protocol ..........................................................................................................93<br />
8.4. Final Summary Table......................................................................................................................111<br />
8.5. <strong>Wetland</strong> Validation Newspaper Article .......................................................................................113<br />
8.6. Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong>s Park Conceptual <strong>Plan</strong> .............................................................................115<br />
iii
a. Acknowledgments<br />
There have been many people and agencies associated with the development of the <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>. First, this document could not have been completed without<br />
the continual support of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission. All phases of this endeavor have been<br />
approved by the Commission and they have provided unanimous agreement for the continuation of<br />
this project, making <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> the leader in the protection of wetland resources in <strong>Alabama</strong>.<br />
Also, funding and technical support came from the United States Environmental Protection Agency.<br />
Hudson Slay, the EPA grant manager assigned to this project, provided endless technical support<br />
and patience throughout the development of this project. The United States Army Corps of<br />
Engineers – Mobile District Regulatory Branch donated many hours of staff time for the execution<br />
of the wetland validation project, with special thanks to Eric Buckelew and Larry “Chip” Dixon for<br />
their field expertise and to Linda Peterson for the statistical support. Also, the International Paper<br />
(IP) Corporation deserves thanks for donating its staff support in navigating to 36 validation sites on<br />
its property. There were also many private land owners in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> who allowed us to<br />
conduct wetland delineations for the wetland validation project. The Technical Advisory Committee<br />
endured many long meetings and lent their expertise to all phases of this project, most notably to the<br />
fine tuning of the remote functional assessment model. The Technical Advisory Committee was<br />
made up of representatives from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Daphne Field Office (Randy<br />
Roach, Darren LeBlanc); the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of Environmental Management (Carl Ferraro,<br />
Roy Collins); the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of <strong>Conservation</strong> and Natural Resources, State Lands<br />
Division (Garth Crow, Jeff Jordan); the University of South <strong>Alabama</strong> (Dr. Judy Stout); and many<br />
others.<br />
The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission has been stalwart in the protection of wetland<br />
resources during its monthly review of subdivision and rezoning applications. Also, support from<br />
the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Environmental Advisory Board was extremely helpful in the development of<br />
this program, with special thanks to Fred Nation who assisted with the plant species lists. We are<br />
also very thankful to our colleagues in the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Zoning <strong>Department</strong>, who<br />
utilize the wetland information generated by this project in their review of new subdivisions,<br />
rezoning requests, and variance applications and in turn have proved the usefulness of this project.<br />
We sincerely thank William H. Brantley Jr. of the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of <strong>Conservation</strong> and<br />
Natural Resources, State Lands Division who had the foresight and vision to develop this project<br />
and has a sincere interest and desire to continue <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s effort to protect its natural<br />
resources. We also thank Hank Burch of the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of <strong>Conservation</strong> and Natural<br />
Resources, State Lands Division, Coastal Section who provided meticulous and insightful review<br />
during all phases of this endeavor.<br />
iv
. List of Acronyms<br />
1. ADCNR...................................... <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of <strong>Conservation</strong> and Natural Resources<br />
2. ADEM ...................................................... <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of Environmental Management<br />
3. ADID........................................................................................ Advance Identification of <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
4. AFC .................................................................................................. <strong>Alabama</strong> Forestry Commission<br />
5. ANHP........................................................................................<strong>Alabama</strong> Natural Heritage Program<br />
6. BCC...................................................................................................... <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission<br />
7. BCDWL ..............................................................................<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer<br />
8. BCEAB...............................................................<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Environmental Advisory Board<br />
9. BCHS ................................................................................................... <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> High School<br />
10. BCWCP ..................................................................... <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />
11. CACWP ......................................................................... Coastal <strong>Alabama</strong> Clean Water Partnership<br />
12. CIAP .........................................................................<strong>Alabama</strong> Coastal Impact Assistance Program<br />
13. CIR ................................................................................................................................. Color Infrared<br />
14. DLG........................................................................................................................Digital Line Graph<br />
15. EPA..............................................................................................Environmental Protection Agency<br />
16. FEMA ..............................................................................Federal Emergency Management Agency<br />
17. GIS .................................................................................................. Geographic Information System<br />
18. GPS ........................................................................................................... Global Positioning System<br />
19. GSA.....................................................................................................Geological Survey of <strong>Alabama</strong><br />
20. HGM ...................................................................................................................... Hydrogeomorphic<br />
21. HUC..................................................................................................................Hydrologic Unit Code<br />
22. MBNEP................................................................................Mobile Bay National Estuary Program<br />
23. MBRT ........................................................................................... Mitigation Banking Review Team<br />
24. MOA ..................................................................................................... Memorandum of Agreement<br />
25. MOU...............................................................................................Memorandum of Understanding<br />
26. NLCD ....................................................................................................... National Land Cover Data<br />
27. NRCS ................................................................................ Natural Resources <strong>Conservation</strong> Service<br />
28. NWI ....................................................................................................... National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory<br />
29. RFWAM ............................................................. Remote Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model<br />
30. USACE ..............................................................................United States Army Corps of Engineers<br />
31. USCB......................................................................................................Unites States Census Bureau<br />
32. WPOD..................................................................................... <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District<br />
33. WRP ...........................................................................................................<strong>Wetland</strong> Reserve Program<br />
v
c. List of Figures<br />
1. <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> locator map (USA and <strong>Alabama</strong>) .......................................................................48<br />
2. <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> waterways (bays, rivers, streams)........................................................................49<br />
3. Continuous 10 foot contour in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> ..........................................................................50<br />
4. Land use map of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> ...................................................................................................51<br />
5. Color infrared map of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> (2001)..............................................................................52<br />
6. Population distribution .....................................................................................................................53<br />
7. Existing Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) boundaries......................................................................54<br />
8. Proposed Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) boundaries ...................................................................55<br />
9. <strong>County</strong>wide map of wetlands ...........................................................................................................56<br />
10. <strong>County</strong>wide map of hydrogeomorphic classes ..............................................................................57<br />
11. Graph of hydrogeomorphic classes by watershed .......................................................................58<br />
12. Map of a flat wetland ........................................................................................................................59<br />
13. Map of a depressional interdunal swale ..........................................................................................60<br />
14. Map of a depressional Grady Pond wetland .................................................................................61<br />
15. Map of a riverine wetland ................................................................................................................62<br />
16. Map of a fringe wetland ...................................................................................................................63<br />
17. <strong>Wetland</strong> validation sites ....................................................................................................................64<br />
18. Functional assessment model interface (1).....................................................................................65<br />
19. Functional assessment model interface (2).....................................................................................66<br />
20. Functional assessment model interface (3).....................................................................................67<br />
21. Functional assessment model interface (4).....................................................................................68<br />
22. Distribution of depressional wetlands among percentages of possible points earned ............69<br />
23. Distribution of flat wetlands among percentages of possible points earned.............................70<br />
24. Distribution of riverine wetlands among percentages of possible points earned.....................71<br />
25. Map of countywide functional assessment results ........................................................................72<br />
26. <strong>County</strong>wide functional assessment results by wetland acreage ...................................................73<br />
27. Functional assessment results by percent of acreage in hydrogeomorphic class......................74<br />
28. Functional assessment results by percent of wetland acreage in watershed .............................75<br />
29. BCWCP results Orange Beach Vicinity..........................................................................................76<br />
30. BCWCP results Eastern Shore ........................................................................................................77<br />
31. BCWCP results Lillian Swamp/Perdido River ..............................................................................78<br />
32. BCWCP results Dyas Creek Watershed (North <strong>Baldwin</strong>) ..........................................................79<br />
33. Example of wetland map made for the public .............................................................................80<br />
vi
d. Executive Summary<br />
The objective of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> (BCWCP) was to provide<br />
local decision-makers the best tools possible to make wise land use decisions regarding<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s wetland resources. There were four major tasks of this project. First, the<br />
development of a <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District (WPOD) was incorporated into the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Zoning and Subdivision Regulations. Another task was the development of<br />
a GIS wetland data layer containing information on the location, type and functional capacity<br />
of wetlands throughout <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Third, this project implemented a wetland<br />
education/outreach program for area stakeholders. Finally, wetland restoration/construction<br />
projects were designed and implemented at selected sites throughout the <strong>County</strong>.<br />
There are approximately 300,000 acres of wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. <strong>Wetland</strong>s perform<br />
many natural functions such as: floodwater storage; sediment, toxicant, and nutrient<br />
removal; groundwater recharge; and habitat for fish and wildlife.<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> protection is accomplished successfully at the local level. The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Subdivision Regulations prevent the platting of entire lots in areas that are considered<br />
wetland. Also the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Zoning Regulations require an upland buffer between a<br />
jurisdictional wetland and any land disturbance activity within a zoned area.<br />
National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory (NWI) data was acquired, merged, edge-matched and verified<br />
using color infrared photography. <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> staff and United States Army Corps of<br />
Engineers (USACE) staff ground-truthed the wetland data through a rigorous wetland<br />
validation project. It was determined that the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer<br />
(BCDWL) is 85.6% accurate in representing jurisdictional wetlands.<br />
In order to assess the functions of each wetland area throughout the <strong>County</strong>, a remote<br />
functional assessment model was developed using GIS software through the integration of<br />
other remotely sensed data layers such as flood zones, National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory data, and<br />
endangered species. The model was written, executed and calibrated with the support of an<br />
interagency Technical Advisory Committee. The results categorized <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s<br />
wetlands as suitable for conservation, enhancement, or restoration. The resulting data is<br />
available to local stakeholders in digital and hard copy format. The results provide<br />
watershed-based wetland restoration strategies for <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s wetlands. The majority<br />
of wetlands were categorized as wetlands suitable for conservation.<br />
Education and outreach programs were implemented throughout the project period through<br />
speaking engagements and public meetings. <strong>Wetland</strong> maps were a successful method of<br />
conveying information about wetland resources to developers, realtors, and the general<br />
public. <strong>Wetland</strong> restoration projects such as shoreline stabilization, riverine wetland creation,<br />
and isolated wetland protection were implemented.<br />
This document summarizes the 4 years of effort and creates a framework for future wetland<br />
protection efforts in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, <strong>Alabama</strong>.<br />
vii
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
1. Introduction<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, <strong>Alabama</strong> is located is the southwestern corner of the State of <strong>Alabama</strong><br />
(Figure 1). It is one of two coastal counties in the State of <strong>Alabama</strong> and is one of the largest counties<br />
east of the Mississippi River, encompassing an area of approximately 1,655 square miles. Except for<br />
a seventeen-mile stretch along its northeastern border, <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is entirely surrounded by<br />
water. It is bordered by Mobile Bay, the Tensaw River and the Mobile River to the west; Little River<br />
to the north; Perdido River and Perdido Bay to the east; and the Gulf of Mexico to the south. It also<br />
contains many miles of major inland waterways including Bay Minette Creek, Styx River, Blackwater<br />
River, Fish River, Magnolia River, Weeks Bay, Bon Secour River, the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,<br />
Oyster Bay, Wolf Bay, Soldier Creek, and Palmetto Creek, among many others (Figure 2).<br />
Numerous wetlands are associated with these creeks, rivers, streams and bays, as approximately onethird<br />
of the land area in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is considered wetland.<br />
As a coastal county with many miles of coastal and inland waters coupled with a mild<br />
climate, <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> offers an attractive lifestyle to its residents and is experiencing explosive<br />
population growth. There was a 42.9% increase in population from 1990 to 2000. This rate of<br />
increase is expected to rise significantly by 2010. It is estimated that greater than one million tourists<br />
visit <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> every year, generating several million dollars of revenue annually. According to<br />
a study published by the <strong>Alabama</strong> Gulf Coast Visitors Bureau, travel-related expenditures in 2002 in<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> were $1.7 billion (Economic Impact of the <strong>Alabama</strong> Travel Industry, 2003). As a<br />
result of population growth, there is an increased demand for commercial, residential, and<br />
infrastructure development, thus bringing growth management issues to the forefront for local<br />
elected officials. One of the more visible changes in the landscape of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is the rapid<br />
transformation of agricultural and forested lands to residential development. These development<br />
pressures are threatening the natural resources which make <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> a popular place to live<br />
and visit. As a result, land use planning has become necessary to direct growth to appropriate areas<br />
and to strike a balance between development and the protection of natural resources.<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong>s in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> are regulated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers –<br />
Mobile District Regulatory Branch as per the guidelines set forward in §404(b) of the Clean Water<br />
Act. Also, the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of Environmental Management regulates wetlands below the 10<br />
foot contour elevation (Figure 3). Land use changes and subdivision regulations are regulated via an<br />
ordinance in each municipality within their respective corporate limits. In unincorporated areas,<br />
subdivisions are regulated through the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Subdivision Regulations and land use is<br />
regulated in areas that elect to come under the <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Zoning Authority of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commission. Subsequently, there are many areas of unincorporated <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> that are not<br />
subject to land use review. With the lack of local regulations directly protecting wetland resources,<br />
direct and indirect impacts to wetlands can occur. For example, wetlands adjacent to developments<br />
can receive abnormal amounts of stormwater runoff, thus altering their beneficial functions. Also,<br />
wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> have been altered due to intensive agricultural and forestry practices for<br />
the past 200 years, creating wetland areas suitable for restoration and enhancement. There is a need<br />
for increased information about the location, types and functional capacity of wetland resources in<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>.<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong>s perform many important functions in the landscape of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, and these<br />
functions protect the high quality of life enjoyed by its residents and visitors. First, a lucrative<br />
commercial and recreational fishing industry thrives in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Fringe wetland habitats (e.g.<br />
1
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
salt marshes) provide food and habitat for spawning fish, thus supporting the multi-million dollar<br />
commercial fishery in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. The principal species are shrimp, oysters, and crab. A 1996<br />
study reported that $835,615,325.00 was spent on sport fishing in <strong>Alabama</strong> (Economic Impact of<br />
Sport Fishing in <strong>Alabama</strong>, 1996). Second, wetlands store floodwater during large rainfall events.<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is extremely vulnerable to large tropical events originating in the Gulf of Mexico.<br />
The increase of impervious surfaces from development throughout a watershed increases the<br />
quantity and velocity of stormwater runoff during large rainfall events. <strong>Wetland</strong>s absorb the<br />
floodwaters and can decrease catastrophic flood damage. Third, the quality of water in the bays,<br />
rivers, streams, and Gulf of Mexico is directly related to the success of the tourist industry. Tourists<br />
and residents enjoy many water-dependent recreational activities such as boating, skiing, swimming,<br />
canoeing, and surfing. <strong>Wetland</strong>s can remove toxicants, excess sediment and nutrients from runoff<br />
and can maintain and improve water quality. Finally, some wetlands recharge groundwater via<br />
percolation. A majority of the water systems in the county obtain water from groundwater. In sum,<br />
wetland functions can be directly tied to the economy and high quality of life in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. It<br />
is in the best interests of the public to protect, conserve, enhance and restore wetland resources to<br />
maintain <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s appeal as a place to live and visit.<br />
In 1999, the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission, the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of Environmental<br />
Management, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency completed the <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> Advance Identification Project (ADID), which located, identified, and assessed wetland<br />
resources in an 89,000 acre area of southern <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. The resulting information provided<br />
federal, state and local regulators an opportunity to identify wetland areas as either suitable or<br />
unsuitable for disposal of fill or dredged material. This non-regulatory effort established a<br />
framework for future wetland protection efforts and provided more information to the public about<br />
wetland functions within the project boundary.<br />
Continuing in the efforts of the ADID project, in 1999 the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission<br />
and the United States Environmental Protection Agency launched an effort to identify, assess, and<br />
restore wetland resources countywide. This effort has been named the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
<strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> (BCWCP) and elaborates on objectives and findings of the ADID project. This<br />
project started in October 1999 and was completed in September of 2003. The objective of the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> is to identify, assess and restore wetland resources<br />
throughout <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> and to provide local decision makers with the best tools to make wise<br />
land use decisions regarding wetland resources. Although this effort is non-regulatory in nature, it<br />
has been successful in increasing the awareness of the importance of wetland functions throughout<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. There are four major project objectives for this study: protect wetland resources<br />
throughout <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, raise awareness of wetlands through education and outreach, restore<br />
degraded wetlands, and promote interagency coordination.<br />
This document describes the tasks and results of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong><br />
<strong>Plan</strong> (BCWCP). This study accomplished the major objectives by developing the four major project<br />
tasks. Each of these project tasks will be discussed in detail throughout this document. The first<br />
major task was to develop a <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District (WPOD) and incorporate it into<br />
the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Zoning Regulations. The second task involved the development of a GIS<br />
wetland data layer containing information on the location, type and functional capacity of wetlands<br />
throughout <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. The third task enhanced a wetlands education/outreach program for<br />
area stakeholders. Last, wetland restoration/construction projects were researched, designed and<br />
implemented at selected sites throughout the <strong>County</strong>.<br />
2
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
The development of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> (BCWCP) has been a<br />
collaborative effort among many agencies and partners. First, the United States Environmental<br />
Protection Agency provided the funding through the Region IV <strong>Wetland</strong>s Protection State<br />
Development grant. In addition, the United States Army Corps of Engineers - Mobile District,<br />
Regulatory Branch provided staff support for the wetland validation component of this project.<br />
Also, an interagency Technical Advisory Committee met numerous times through the grant period<br />
to provide technical expertise on all aspects of the project. The agencies represented were the United<br />
States Environmental Protection Agency, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the <strong>Alabama</strong><br />
<strong>Department</strong> of <strong>Conservation</strong> and Natural Resources State Lands Division, the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong><br />
of Environmental Management, the University of South <strong>Alabama</strong>, and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commission. Also, insight was obtained from members of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s real estate and<br />
development community and the general public throughout the project period.<br />
3
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
2. Background<br />
2.1 General information about <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
2.1.1 Geography and Demography<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is located in the southwest corner of the State of <strong>Alabama</strong>. It is one of two<br />
coastal counties in <strong>Alabama</strong> which border in the Gulf of Mexico. As a coastal county, it contains<br />
diverse upland and wetland habitats, such as bottomland hardwood swamps, longleaf pine forests,<br />
coastal scrub forest, maritime forest, sand dunes, salt marshes and many others. According to the<br />
1992 EPA National Land Cover Data (NLCD), approximately 22% is wetlands, 51% is forested, 1%<br />
is urban/residential, and 26% is agriculture (Figure 4). The terrain in the northern two-thirds of<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> consists of long, rolling hills, entrenched streams, and rivers with steep banks. A<br />
majority of the land area has been converted to pine plantations. Approximately 21% of the land<br />
area is owned by timber companies. There is very little change in elevation in the southern portion<br />
of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> where most of the streams and rivers have broad channels and low gently<br />
sloping banks. Agriculture and residential development dominate land use in the southern portion of<br />
the county. Figure 5 is a color infrared (CIR) map of the entire <strong>County</strong>.<br />
The cities along the Eastern Shore (Spanish Fort, Daphne and Fairhope) and the coastal<br />
communities (Gulf Shores, Orange Beach and Foley) are the most rapidly developing areas in<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Figure 6 is a map of recent census data depicting the population distribution.<br />
Currently, there are large-scale developments on the drawing board for the Stockton/Bay Minette<br />
area in the north and the Seminole and Lillian area in the southeast. The largest employers in<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> are, in order, local government, retail, and hospitals (<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Economic<br />
Development website).<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> lies within the East Gulf Coastal Plain physiographic setting. The majority<br />
of the land area of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> lies within the Southern Pine Hills District. The land area<br />
bordering the Mobile and Tensaw Rivers falls within the Alluvial-Deltaic Plain District and the<br />
coastal area of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> falls within the Coastal Lowlands District. The typical landform in<br />
the Coastal Lowlands District is flat to gently rolling plains, tidal streams, marshes and wetlands.<br />
The Holocene and Pleistocene Series makes up the upper 150 feet. Alluvium and coastal deposits<br />
are the geologic units. The Pliocene layer is dominated by the Citronelle Formation in the northern<br />
portion of the <strong>County</strong>. The Miocene Series is approximately 300 to 1000 feet thick. The major<br />
aquifer system for drinking water in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is found in the Miocene and Pliocene series.<br />
2.1.2 Soils<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is located within the Lower Coastal Plain of <strong>Alabama</strong>. The area has five<br />
major regions that influence soil genesis. These five regions are the river flood plains and terraces of<br />
the Tombigbee and <strong>Alabama</strong> Rivers, marine terraces, the Citronelle Geologic Formation,<br />
Hattiesburg Clays, and areas of recent marine deposits (beaches).<br />
Soils in the river floodplains and terraces mainly consist of silts and clays that have been<br />
transported and deposited by the river systems from areas to the north. The origin of these<br />
sediments can vary greatly from weathered materials of the Piedmont Region to materials<br />
transported from the Black Belt region of <strong>Alabama</strong> and Mississippi. Soils in this area are typically<br />
poorly drained to moderately well drained. The marine terraces of south <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> are<br />
4
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
derived from marine deposits overlaying the Citronelle formation. These soils typically have sandy<br />
surfaces underlain by sandy loam to clayey subsurfaces. These soils range from moderately well<br />
drained to somewhat excessively drained. Soils of the Citronelle Formation are mostly sandy in<br />
nature but do contain areas of heavy clays. These soils are generally found along the ridges and the<br />
plateaus of central and north <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. The Hattiesburg Clays underlie the Citronelle<br />
Formation and are usually exposed in areas of steep topography and along stream and riverbanks<br />
where erosion has removed the material overlying these clays. These soils range from moderately<br />
well drained to excessively drained. Recent marine deposits along the <strong>Alabama</strong> coastal corridor are<br />
mainly coarse to fine grain sands. These soils have very little, if any, subsurface development and<br />
range from poorly drained to excessively drained. In general, the soils of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> are sandy<br />
in nature, and most of the soils in the area are acidic to varying degrees. These two generalizations<br />
are evidenced by the rich history and current use of land resources for agriculture, horticulture, and<br />
silviculture.<br />
2.1.3 Waterways and Watersheds<br />
There are approximately 1800 miles of streams and rivers in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> identified in<br />
the United States Census Bureau (USCB) TIGER files. There are six 8-digit hydrological unit codes<br />
(HUC) and twenty-seven 11-digit hydrological unit codes. Since the completion of the BCWCP, the<br />
Natural Resources <strong>Conservation</strong> Service (NRCS) has finished updating the HUC boundaries to 10-<br />
and 12 -digit codes. A cursory review of the draft version of the new HUCs showed eighteen 10digit<br />
watersheds and sixty-three 12-digit subwatersheds. Figures 7 and 8 illustrate the existing and<br />
the proposed HUC maps. The watershed boundary used in the BCWCP analysis is based on the<br />
older HUC boundary as the updated HUCs had not been formally released by the NRCS. There is a<br />
surface water divide running approximately down the center of the county. West of the divide, the<br />
drainage flows into the Tensaw River and Mobile Bay. East of the divide, the drainage flows into the<br />
Perdido River and Perdido Bay. There are a few man-made lakes, the largest being Steelwood Lake,<br />
which is located almost in the geographic center of the county.<br />
2.1.4 Climate<br />
The average rainfall in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is approximately 66 inches per year, with July and<br />
August as the wettest months and October and November as the driest months. There is a good<br />
deal of variability in the average rainfall. For example, rainfall in Bay Minette (north <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong>) totaled 34.1 inches in 2000, but reached 93.7 inches in 2003. The coldest month is January<br />
and the warmest moth is July. Average monthly temperatures range from about 49 to 81 degrees and<br />
the average annual temperature is 66. The growing season usually begins in March and ends in<br />
October or November.<br />
5
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
2.2 Summary of <strong>Wetland</strong> Resources in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
2.2.1 <strong>Wetland</strong> Classification<br />
There is a diversity of wetland types in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. According to the data generated in<br />
this study, approximately 300,000 acres (or 30% of the land area) is defined as wetland (Figure 9).<br />
The wetland definition defers to the 1987 United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)<br />
definition, which states: “<strong>Wetland</strong>s are defined by the USACE as areas that are inundated or saturated by<br />
surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do<br />
support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. <strong>Wetland</strong>s generally include<br />
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.” The BCWCP utilized two types of wetland classification. First,<br />
the National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory (NWI) data was used to create a continuous wetland coverage. The<br />
base NWI data was developed through interpretation of National Aerial Photography Program<br />
(NAPP) imagery (approx. 1:50,000 scale, typically color-infrared) in conjunction with limited field<br />
verification studies. Ancillary data sources, particularly USGS Quadrangle Maps and soil surveys,<br />
were also used in the interpretation process. The NWI data for most quads was developed in 1979,<br />
but the data for some quads was developed in 1985 using USGS data. <strong>Wetland</strong> polygons were<br />
classified according to the Cowardin (1979) classification. Second, the Hydrogeomorphic (HGM)<br />
classification was used in the functional assessment component of this project. The HGM<br />
classification defines wetlands through their hydrologic sources, as hydrology is the driving force of<br />
wetland function within a landscape. For the purpose of this study, <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s wetlands were<br />
classified into five HGM types: flat, depressional, riverine, fringe, and slope.<br />
Figure 10 illustrates a map of the HGM types in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Figure 11 illustrates the<br />
percentage of HGM type per 8-digit HUC watershed. It is evident from these graphs that the most<br />
dominant HGM type in each watershed is riverine. In the Perdido Bay watershed, almost 25% of the<br />
wetlands are depressional wetlands while 25% are fringe wetlands. These numbers are relatively<br />
higher than the other watersheds as the Perdido Bay Watershed includes interdunal swales and<br />
fringe wetlands along the coastal corridor of the <strong>County</strong>. There is a relatively high amount of flat<br />
wetlands in the Mobile Bay watershed due to a large extent of low-lying areas in the vicinity of<br />
Weeks Bay. The Mobile-Tensaw watershed included a relatively high amount of fringe wetlands as<br />
this area includes the southern extent of the Mobile-Tensaw Delta (at the northern extent of Mobile<br />
Bay). Finally, the Perdido and Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> watersheds are dominated by riverine wetlands.<br />
2.2.2 General Summary of wetland hydrogeomorphic (HGM) classes<br />
Each of the main wetland HGM classes that are commonly found in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is<br />
particularly associated with important functions. Flat wetlands are particularly good for floodwater<br />
storage and for capturing sediment on its way downstream. Depressional wetlands recharge<br />
groundwater supplies and provide isolated pockets of valuable habitat. Riverine wetlands store<br />
much water during times of normalcy and of flooding. Finally, fringe wetlands provide exceptional<br />
habitat for fisheries and wildlife while also removing sediment, toxicants, and nutrients from<br />
outflows into large bodies of water.<br />
2.2.2.1 Flat<br />
6
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Flat wetlands are categorized as seasonally saturated or inundated areas that contain a high or<br />
perched water table and that contain soils that are mineral to slightly organic. They are commonly<br />
referred to as wet pine flats, pine savannas, and pitcher plant bogs. These systems are non-riverine<br />
wetlands and the primary source of hydrology is precipitation. These areas typically have a sparse<br />
overstory dominated by several pine species including longleaf pine (Pinus palustris), slash pine (Pinus<br />
elliotti), and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). The understory is dominated by southern wax myrtle (Myrica<br />
cerifera,) gallberry (Ilex glabra), sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua), sparkleberry (Vaccinium arboreum),<br />
and red maple (Acer rubrum). There also can be a high diversity of herbaceous species, such as<br />
(Dicanthelium spp., Andropogon spp., Cyperus spp., Panicum spp., Sarracenia leucophylla, Drosera capillaris,<br />
Polygala nana, and Eriocaulon decangulare. It is also important to note that Gulf Coast pitcher plant bogs<br />
are the most diverse terrestrial habitats in North America in terms of vascular flora. Fire is an<br />
important component to these wetlands. As natural fires have been suppressed in recent history, it is<br />
estimated that many of these systems have become more dominated by woody species and overall<br />
plant species diversity has decreased. There are several large flat wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, such<br />
as the Weeks Bay Mitigation Bank, Splinter Hill Bog. There are approximately 14,000 acres of flat<br />
wetlands. Figure 12 is a color infrared (CIR) map of a large flat wetland in southwest <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong>.<br />
2.2.2.2 Depressional<br />
A Pitcher <strong>Plan</strong>t Bog in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Depressional wetlands are wetlands located in a depression in the landscape, and they have a<br />
very small catchment area for surface runoff. Depressional wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> can include<br />
interdunal swales along Fort Morgan and Grady Ponds located throughout the agricultural areas in<br />
the southern half of the <strong>County</strong>.<br />
Interdunal swales are generally not very diverse and are dominated by the following<br />
herbaceous species: Juncus roemerianus, Myriophyllum laxum, Sagittaria graminea, Spartina spp.,<br />
Dicanthelium spp., Carex spp. and Hydrocotyle bonariensis. However, as localized expressions of the nearsurface<br />
groundwater table, interdunal swales are important for both habitat and water quality<br />
protection. Figure 13 shows interdunal swales along Fort Morgan Peninsula.<br />
7
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Grady Ponds are characterized by being composed of grady soils and the dominant woody<br />
species in Grady Pond are pond cypress (Taxodium ascendens), tupelo (Nyssa biflora), black willow<br />
(Salix nigra), sweetbay magnolia (Magnolia virginiana), popcorn tree (Sapium sebiferum), titi (Cyrilla<br />
racemiflora), black titi (Cliftonia monophylla), and slash pine (Pinus elliotti). There are approximately 9,600<br />
acres of depressional wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Figure 14 is a color infrared map of a Grady<br />
Pond north of Bay Minette.<br />
2.2.2.3 Riverine<br />
A <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Grady Pond, Belforest Community<br />
Riverine wetlands are wetlands whose primary source of water is a river or stream. These<br />
are typically thought of as swamps, bottomland hardwoods, or floodplains. These wetlands store a<br />
good deal of flood waters during large rain events. Riverine wetlands are the most extensive wetland<br />
type in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, encompassing eighty percent of the county’s wetlands. The dominant<br />
overstory species include: bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), sweetbay magnolia (Magnolia virginiana),<br />
tupelo (Nyssa biflora), water oak (Quercus nigra), green ash<br />
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), swamp redbay (Persea palustris), and water<br />
hickory (Carya aquatica). A picture and a color infrared map of a<br />
riverine wetland are presented in Figure 15. The most extensive<br />
riverine wetland system in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> is the Mobile-<br />
Tensaw Delta, which contains many acres of bottomland<br />
hardwood swamp. The Perdido River Floodplain also contains<br />
many acres of riverine wetlands, with the prominent species<br />
being Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides).<br />
A Riverine <strong>Wetland</strong> in the Mobile-Tensaw Delta<br />
2.2.2.4 Fringe<br />
Fringe wetlands are located adjacent to a large body of<br />
8
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
water, most typically the Gulf of Mexico or a large bay system, and they receive frequent and regular<br />
two-way flow from astronomic tides or from wind-driven water level fluctuation. The dominant<br />
fringe wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> are salt marshes. The largest fringe wetland is found in the lower<br />
Mobile-Tensaw Delta (Figure 16). The dominant species are Juncus roemerianus and Spartina altiflora.<br />
Fringe wetlands can improve water quality and protect the natural shoreline. There are<br />
approximately 35,500 acres of fringe wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Figure 16 displays a color infrared<br />
map of fringe wetlands.<br />
2.2.2.5 Slope<br />
Slope wetlands are defined as wetlands located along a slope and the primary source of water<br />
is groundwater seepage springs. Slope wetlands have been identified in the northern portion of the<br />
county in areas of steep stream embankments. However, due to limited extent, slope wetlands were<br />
not classified or mapped in this study. It is estimated that only a small amount of wetlands can be<br />
classified as slope in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Slope wetlands are dominated by Sphagnum spp.<br />
2.3 Summary of wetland protection efforts in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
There are several concurrent programs throughout <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> that are raising the<br />
awareness of wetland resources for area stakeholders. In the last decade, <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of<br />
<strong>Conservation</strong> and Natural Resources (ADCNR), State Lands Division, along with other partners,<br />
has acquired 38,264 acres of wetlands in the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> portion of the Mobile-Tensaw Delta.<br />
These tracts protect wetlands and are accessible to the public for recreational activities. Several<br />
thousand acres have also been acquired in the Weeks Bay watershed and in Lillian Swamp through<br />
the Forever Wild Program. The State of <strong>Alabama</strong> and the Nature Conservancy have recently<br />
partnered to acquire approximately 1000 acres of a pitcher plant bog in North <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
(Splinter Hill Bog). This flat wetland system contains a high diversity of plant species and also<br />
contains the panhandle lily (Lilium iridollae), a federally listed candidate species. The largest known<br />
population of this species is found in the Splinter Hill bog, which also harbors the American<br />
chaffseed (Schwalbea americana), a federally listed endangered plant. The ADCNR, State Lands<br />
Division and the <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of Environmental Management (ADEM) have partnered to<br />
target restoration on state-owned lands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. This project is funded by the EPA.<br />
Federally, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has worked with Partners in<br />
Wildlife to restore and protect wetlands throughout the <strong>County</strong>. In addition, USFWS Bon Secour<br />
National Wildlife Refuge has protected many acres of precious interdunal swales on Fort Morgan<br />
through acquisition of sensitive property.<br />
Locally, the City of Orange Beach has drafted a wetland ordinance, whereby all wetland<br />
mitigation must occur within the corporate limits of the city. This ordinance is expected to pass in<br />
early 2004. Grassroots watershed protection plans have been written or are in the process of being<br />
written for the Weeks Bay, Wolf Bay and Bon Secour River watersheds. All of these documents<br />
propose and encourage wetland protection efforts. The City of Fairhope recently completed a<br />
greenspace plan for its planning jurisdiction. Also other watershed protection groups such as the<br />
Mobile Bay National Estuary Program (MBNEP) and the Coastal <strong>Alabama</strong> Clean Water Partnership<br />
(CACWP) have outlined wetland efforts in their management plans.<br />
In 2001, <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> received 3.1 million dollars through the Coastal Impact Assistance<br />
Program to implement environmental restoration projects which mitigate for outer continental shelf<br />
9
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
impacts. One of the initiatives of this program dedicated almost 500,000 dollars to implement the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>. To date, the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission has<br />
protected and restored a Grady Pond and acquired 400 acres of sensitive property in the Mobile-<br />
Tensaw Delta using these funds. Furthermore, other partnerships with the NRCS for a <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
Reserve Program (WRP) have helped implement the efforts of this initiative. The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commission hopes that the information acquired through this project will assist in the continuation<br />
of the above efforts and will provide more information on the location, function and type of<br />
wetlands throughout <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>.<br />
2.4 Existing wetland regulatory framework<br />
2.4.1 Federal<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> lies within the Mobile District of the US Army Corps of Engineers<br />
(USACE). The USACE has been tasked by Congress with protecting the integrity of navigable<br />
waters of the United States (Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899-§§ 9-11), and the USACE jointly<br />
administers the Clean Water Act §404 with the EPA to protect the nation’s wetlands through the<br />
regulation of discharge of dredged and fill material. In addition, the Food Security Act of 1985 (as<br />
amended) grants the United States <strong>Department</strong> of Agriculture the authority to withhold benefits<br />
from a person who converts a wetland to make the production of an agricultural commodity<br />
possible.<br />
The USACE issues individual or general permits for wetland-related impacts and it<br />
delineates wetlands according to the presence of hydric soils, hydrophytic vegetation and evidence<br />
of hydrological indicators. The following activities require a permit when they affect waters and<br />
wetlands of the United States: placement of fill material; slab-on-grade foundations; levee and dike<br />
construction; most other construction; mechanized land clearing; grading and landscaping; ditching<br />
activities when the excavated material is sidecast; and certain pile-supported structures. The final<br />
determination of whether an area is a jurisdictional wetland and whether the activity requires a<br />
permit must be made by the USACE.<br />
2.4.2 State<br />
The Coastal Area of <strong>Alabama</strong> includes waters, water bottoms, and adjacent shorelines lying<br />
seaward of the continuous 10-foot contour (Figure 3). Within this area, wetlands are regulated by the<br />
<strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Department</strong> of Environmental Management (ADEM) Administrative Code Rule 335-8.<br />
ADEM utilizes regulations that apply to wetland-related activities, such as dredge, fill and mitigation,<br />
and it uses strategies relating to buffers and setbacks to protect wetland and riparian areas. To avoid<br />
duplication and overlap, ADEM and USACE executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)<br />
whereby permitting in the coastal area is conducted through a Joint Public Notice.<br />
2.4.3 Local<br />
At the county and municipal levels, there are some additional regulatory controls for wetland<br />
protection, but all of these regulations defer to the USACE for regulation and permitting. <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> lacks “home rule,” meaning that the creation of a local ordinance requires an Act of the<br />
<strong>Alabama</strong> Legislature. Nonetheless, <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> does have the authority to regulate subdivisions<br />
via subdivision regulations. §5.2.2 of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> subdivision regulations state, “Lots may be<br />
10
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
platted where sufficient upland area exists to provide a building site for the principal structure and necessary ancillary<br />
facility. Fill is used where necessary to provide access to lots where approval for such fill has been received from the<br />
USACE and other appropriate governmental agencies.” In addition, on July 15, 2003 the City of Orange<br />
Beach passed Resolution No. 1955, which declares a moratorium on filling wetlands where<br />
mitigation is proposed to occur outside the corporate limits of the city of Orange Beach.<br />
2.5 Regulatory Limitations<br />
There are thirteen municipalities in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, all of which are rapidly expanding their<br />
corporate limits via annexation. Each municipality has adopted its own zoning and subdivision<br />
ordinance. Further, municipal governments can regulate subdivisions up to 5 miles outside of their<br />
corporate limits. This leads to overlapping jurisdiction and inconsistent land use controls throughout<br />
the <strong>County</strong>, which can be confusing to both the development and regulatory communities.<br />
Prior to approval of any zoning or subdivision application for non-municipal county land,<br />
the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission (BCC) requires certification of all federal and state permits to<br />
ensure proper compliance. However, general loopholes do exist, and the BCC does not have the<br />
explicit authority to regulate wetlands via the subdivision regulations. It has become customary for<br />
the BCC to comment on USACE public notices when the proposed activity contradicts the<br />
<strong>County</strong>’s Zoning and Subdivision requirements.<br />
11
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3. Summary of Project Objectives/Goals<br />
3.1 Further Develop a <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District (WPOD) and incorporate it<br />
into the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Zoning Regulations.<br />
A revision of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>, <strong>Alabama</strong> Zoning Regulations (Regulations) has taken place<br />
during this grant period. The revision process lasted approximately eighteen (18) months and was<br />
spearheaded by the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission, the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Zoning<br />
Commission, and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Zoning <strong>Department</strong>. Input from a variety of<br />
stakeholders, including real estate professionals, developers, environmental organizations, and<br />
individuals was obtained through public hearings, interest group meetings and written comments.<br />
The revision process ended with the adoption of the Regulations by the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commission at their regularly scheduled meeting.<br />
Part of the revision process of the Regulations included the development of various overlay<br />
districts. These overlay districts were designed to provide special accommodations for cultural<br />
features, unique infrastructure features, public safety considerations and natural resource features.<br />
Information concerning the various overlay districts can be found in Section 24 of the Regulations.<br />
A <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District (§24.4) was developed and included in the<br />
Regulations. The purpose of the wetland protection overlay district is to provide “wetland protection,<br />
while taking into account varying ecological, economic development, recreational and aesthetic values and to protect<br />
wetlands from alterations that will significantly affect or reduce their primary functions for water quality, flood plain<br />
and erosion control, groundwater recharge and wildlife habitat.” Specific permit requirements are set forth in<br />
§24.4(e). During the review of a proposed development, if the <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District<br />
indicates that a site is wet, then a jurisdictional determination is now required.<br />
Additionally, the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Subdivision Regulations contain provisions for wetland<br />
protection. § 5.2.2, Character of the Land, states the following: “Where a parcel of land proposed to be<br />
subdivided contains an area of wetlands delineated as jurisdictional by the USACE, said wetlands shall be subject to<br />
§404(b)(1) guidelines concerning fill material disposal into wetlands. Lots may be platted where sufficient upland<br />
areas exist to provide a building site for the principal structure and necessary ancillary facilities. Fill may be used where<br />
necessary to provide access to lots where approval for such fill has been received from the USACE and other<br />
appropriate governmental agencies.” These regulations provide that lots will be platted only where there is<br />
sufficient upland area to accommodate the built structures. This addresses a need since there are<br />
numerous lots in the county platted years ago that are comprised entirely of jurisdictional wetlands<br />
and the property owners of these platted wetland lots may run into permitting difficulties when they<br />
start to develop them. The <strong>County</strong> now does not allow lots that are entirely wetland to be platted.<br />
Both sets of county regulations, along with preliminary information from the BCWCP, are<br />
regularly used as the basis for comments on Joint Public Notices from the USACE and ADEM<br />
concerning local wetland fill activities.<br />
In addition, the <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission met in March 2002 to discuss updates to the<br />
Subdivision and Zoning Regulations. Several members of the <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission suggested<br />
increasing wetland protection measures in the subdivision regulations. <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission<br />
members discussed changing the definition of wetlands in the subdivision regulations in order to<br />
include isolated wetlands. Isolated wetlands that do not contain a hydrologic connection to an<br />
12
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
adjacent water body have been recently considered non-jurisdictional by federal courts and thus do<br />
not fall within the <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection Overlay District. In addition, the <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission<br />
considered increasing the wetland buffer distance (currently 5 feet) in the zoning regulations.<br />
The <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission reassembled for another meeting on October 14, 2002 in order to<br />
update the subdivision regulations. BCWCP staff suggested altering the definition of a wetland in<br />
the subdivision regulations from:<br />
to:<br />
“Where a parcel of land proposed to be subdivided contains an area of wetlands delineated<br />
as jurisdictional by the USACE...”<br />
“Where a parcel of land proposed to be subdivided contains an area of wetlands defined as a<br />
wetland according the to the 1987 Corps of Engineers <strong>Wetland</strong> Delineation Manual....”<br />
By the new definition, wetlands which contain the three characteristics of a wetland (soils,<br />
hydrology and wetland plants) as per the US Army Corps of Engineers definition (1987) would be<br />
protected under the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Subdivision regulations. The current definition of wetlands<br />
refers to the jurisdictional status by the USACE. Unfortunately, there are wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> that meet the 1987 <strong>Wetland</strong> Delineation manual criteria but are not considered jurisdictional<br />
by the USACE. This is due to a January 2001 Supreme Court ruling which determined that isolated<br />
wetlands (i.e., wetlands that are not adjacent to or connected via surface water to a navigable water)<br />
were no longer protected under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> contains<br />
numerous Grady Ponds, which can be considered isolated or non-jurisdictional wetlands.<br />
Nonetheless, these ponds can perform many important functions such as wildlife habitat, floodwater<br />
storage, groundwater recharge and nutrient/toxicant/sediment removal. USACE staff have<br />
indicated that there have been losses of these wetlands in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> since the 2001 Supreme<br />
Court ruling.<br />
Due to the important functions performed by Grady Ponds in the landscape, BCWCP staff<br />
proposed altering the subdivision regulations to include isolated wetlands in the <strong>Wetland</strong> Protection<br />
Overlay District. The <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission supported the idea and the final revision to the<br />
subdivision regulations should occur in the future.<br />
3.1.1 Recommendations and Future Direction<br />
3.1.1.1 Interagency relationship between BCC and USACE<br />
A future course of action has become evident throughout this process in order to expand<br />
and enhance existing county-supported wetland protection efforts. First, we suggest the BCC<br />
coordinate efforts with the USACE to minimize fill permitting for lots in a subdivision. We are<br />
aware of the large jurisdiction of the Mobile District, and it would be logistically very difficult to<br />
recognize individual local restrictions. Therefore, it is suggested the USACE issue only one permit<br />
per subdivision so that piecemeal wetland losses do not occur.<br />
Additionally, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the BCC and the USACE<br />
regarding permitting of fill of isolated wetlands is suggested. This MOU would result in an<br />
acknowledgement by the USACE in the permit that an isolated wetland meets the criteria of the<br />
13
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
USACE 1987 definition but is not considered jurisdictional. Because the definition of wetland in the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Subdivision Regulations will refer to the USACE 1987 definition, this<br />
acknowledgement would result in the protection and regulation of isolated wetlands.<br />
3.1.1.2 Suggested Changes to Zoning and Subdivision Regulations<br />
A recent study by Wenger (1999) reviewed the benefits of buffers for various riparian<br />
systems. This study concluded that while minimum buffer width depends upon the value to be<br />
maximized, the absolute minimum buffer width is 30 feet. Wenger (1999) summarizes the literature<br />
by offering three options for wetland protection, all of which include buffers wider than 30 feet.<br />
Using this scientific basis, it is recommended that the upland buffer around wetlands be increased in<br />
both the zoning and subdivision regulations from its current 5 feet. Additionally, it is recommended<br />
that <strong>Conservation</strong> District be created as a new zoning designation in the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Zoning<br />
Regulations. This zoning designation would restrict construction and would reflect areas set aside<br />
for mitigation and/or protection of wetland resources.<br />
14
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3.2 Develop a countywide GIS wetland data layer containing information on the location,<br />
type and functional capacity of wetlands.<br />
3.2.1 Creation of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer (BCDWL)<br />
The first step in creating a digital wetland data set for <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> was the acquisition<br />
of National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory data. The data was acquired from the USFWS National <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
Inventory website. The data quads were re-projected into the projection used by the <strong>County</strong>’s GIS<br />
<strong>Department</strong> (State <strong>Plan</strong>e, NAD 1983 (feet), <strong>Alabama</strong> West FIPS 0102 (feet)) to ensure that other<br />
local entities would be able to use the data. The data quads were then merged and edge-matched to<br />
create a continuous digital wetland coverage based on the 1979 digital NWI data.<br />
The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission awarded a contract to collect digital orthophotography<br />
in early 2001. In addition to a true color data set, the Commission purchased color infrared<br />
photography (CIR) for all of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> at a resolution of 3 feet. This data set proved to be a<br />
vital resource in the development of the BCDWL.<br />
The NWI data quads in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> were generated by different entities not utilizing<br />
uniform standards. Therefore, there were some discrepancies found during the edge-matching<br />
process. Project staff compared the continuous wetland coverage to color infrared photography to<br />
visually assess data quality. CIR was used to make decisions on where polygon lines should be placed<br />
in areas where discrepancies were found. Upon completion of this dataset, metadata was created<br />
using the FGDC standards.<br />
3.2.2 <strong>Wetland</strong> Validation Project<br />
In an effort to provide accurate and updated information regarding BCWCP project outputs,<br />
BCWCP staff initiated a wetland validation study for the project. The purpose of the validation<br />
study was to compare the remotely sensed wetland maps to on-the-ground wetland jurisdictional<br />
determinations. When discrepancies between the computer generated maps and the field results<br />
were found, the field-based information could be used to update the GIS wetland database.<br />
Performing the validation study would ensure that the final map products accurately represented<br />
actual wetland conditions and would provide statistical confidence estimates for the data.<br />
The precedence for such a validation study was established during the development and<br />
implementation of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> Advance Identification (ADID) project. In that<br />
project, the wetland areas in the southern part of the county were mapped using remotely sensed<br />
technologies and then compared to on-the-ground wetland jurisdictional determinations. The results<br />
of that validation study indicated that the GIS-based wetland maps were 95% accurate when<br />
compared to jurisdictional wetland determinations.<br />
In January of 2001, BCWCP staff met with a US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)<br />
statistician to establish a statistical framework for the current validation study. When the ADID<br />
project validation study was initiated, the accuracy (p-value) of the NWI maps was estimated to be<br />
0.90. The results of that study, however, indicated that wetlands identified and mapped during the<br />
ADID project were actually 95% accurate when compared to on-the-ground jurisdictional<br />
15
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
determinations. Accordingly, BCWCP and USACE staff chose the p-value of the BCWCP wetland<br />
validation study to be 0.90 with an error of ±5%. Using the table provided by the USACE, it was<br />
determined that 138 sampling locations would be necessary in order to establish a strong statistical<br />
foundation in comparing the NWI maps to on-the-ground jurisdictional wetlands.<br />
BCWCP staff found several random sampling scripts on the ESRI web page and reviewed<br />
them with the USACE statistician. After review, it was determined that the Simple Random Sampler,<br />
written in Avenue, be used since it offered supporting documentation. A total of 160 sampling<br />
locations were chosen to account for those locations where site access would be limited or<br />
permission to access the property would not be granted. The sampling script was run with the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> boundary as the base coverage to generate a point theme with 160 records. The<br />
point coverage was converted to a polygon coverage using each point as the centroid of a square<br />
acre. A site identification field was added to the data table using a numbering script.<br />
The polygon coverage was then overlaid on <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s parcel data. A spatial join was<br />
executed, linking the parcel identification number to the sample table. The data were linked to the<br />
Revenue Commission’s database, in which the property owner’s name and address were linked to<br />
the sampling location. The database was then modified to house all of the data that would be<br />
collected in the validation study. BCWCP staff collected additional field data while making the<br />
jurisdictional determination at each sampling location. These data included the date visited and a<br />
determination of HGM class, functional capacity and soil survey type.<br />
Letters were sent to all property owners requesting permission to access the respective<br />
property. A form was created in the relational database for fieldwork purposes to increase the<br />
efficiency of data collection.<br />
3.2.2.1 Fieldwork<br />
Prior to validation study site visits in the field, BCWCP staff prepared maps of the site in<br />
order to aid in the access of the sites. The recently acquired color infrared (CIR) aerial photography<br />
was used extensively in this process. Site visits were coordinated with USACE staff and property<br />
owners. Each property owner was contacted via telephone prior to a site visit. This also gave staff<br />
the time to educate and inform each of the property owners on the significance of wetland<br />
functions.<br />
Field work at each sampling site consisted of the following steps:<br />
1. GPS: Way points of the sampling location were entered into the Trimble GeoExplorer 3.<br />
This instrument was used to navigate to the sampling locations. In areas of dense canopy<br />
cover, aerial photography and pacing methods were used to reach the square acre sampling<br />
location. GPS data points, site ID number and wetland/upland status were collected at the<br />
southeast corner of each square acre. Upon return from the field, these data were<br />
differentially corrected and exported in a shapefile format.<br />
2. <strong>Wetland</strong> determination: USACE staff conducted routine wetland determinations at each site per<br />
the guidance provided in the 1987 USACE <strong>Wetland</strong> Delineation Manual. Dominant<br />
vegetation, hydrological indicators and soil color (type) were noted on the field data sheet.<br />
Other notable features such as disturbances or atypical conditions were also noted.<br />
16
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3. Photos: Digital photographs of each site were taken and documented.<br />
4. BCWCP data collection: A separate field data form was developed for collecting additional<br />
sampling site information while in the field. Approximate wetland boundaries within the<br />
square acre sampling location were noted when applicable. HGM determinations (riverine,<br />
depressional, slope, flat or fringe) were also noted when the sampling location was a<br />
jurisdictional wetland. In addition, the capacity (i.e. high, medium or low) for each wetland<br />
function was determined by best professional judgment of the field team members and<br />
noted on the field data form. Upon return from the field, these data forms were organized<br />
according to site order and updated in the validation site database.<br />
Validation Project Site Visit<br />
On April 17, 2002, the field component of the wetland validation study was completed.<br />
BCWCP staff and USACE staff visited 138 randomly selected sites. Figure 17 shows the wetland<br />
validation sites visited by BCWCP and USACE staff over the course of the project.<br />
3.2.2.2 Statistical Analysis/Results<br />
Upon completion of the field component of the wetland validation project, the staff<br />
prepared the field data for analysis. First, the GPS data was differentially corrected and the field<br />
points were exported as an ArcView shape file. Second, the GPS data for each site (total 138) was<br />
then systematically replaced with the randomly selected point generated in the initial phase of this<br />
17
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
effort. In addition, the information in the database (i.e., field data, property ownership, latitude and<br />
longitude) was merged from the original data to the spatial GPS data. Third, a 40-foot buffer was<br />
created from the GPS point data to create a polygon coverage. This buffer was created as per<br />
suggestion from US Fish and Wildlife Service National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory experts to allow for the<br />
40 foot line error accounted for in the original National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory Maps (Charlie Storrs,<br />
personal communication). Lastly, the buffered polygon data was then spatially joined to the <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer. There were a few instances where the 40-foot buffered polygon<br />
overlapped on both upland and wetland on the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer. For each of<br />
these polygons, staff made a determination based on the predominant coverage within the polygon.<br />
A final spreadsheet was generated that contained the Site ID and the field data and the Digital<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> data. The spreadsheet was subsequently forwarded to the Corps statistician for analysis.<br />
The wetland status of each of the 138 sites was determined by the Corps regulatory experts, and<br />
compared to the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer to calculate the proportion of sites correctly<br />
identified as either wetland or upland by the remote sensing method. A total of 20 (14.5%) of the<br />
138 sites were incorrectly classified by the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer. There were a<br />
total of 43 actual wetland sites based on the expert field assessments. The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Layer misclassified 9 (20.9%) of the 43 wetland sites as upland. Of the 95 actual upland<br />
sites, 11 were misclassified as wetland. Hence, the overall estimated accuracy of the Remote Sensing<br />
Method was approximately 86 percent. However, the proportion of correctly identified wetlands<br />
was 79.1 percent. The table below compares the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer with the<br />
expert assessment of the 138 sites. The complete data is in Appendix 9.2.<br />
Table 1: Accuracy of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong>s Uplands Total<br />
BCWCP # % # % # %<br />
Correct 34 79.1 84 88.4 118 85.5<br />
Incorrect 9 20.9 11 11.6 20 14.5<br />
Actual/Field 43 100.0 95 100.0 138 100.0<br />
18
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3.2.3 Remote Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model (RFWAM)<br />
3.2.3.1 Conceptual Framework<br />
The ADID project developed a series of remotely sensed wetland functional assessment<br />
models to be applied using computer-based GIS analysis. The Technical Advisory Committee met<br />
several times over the course of this project, principally to provide guidance for the development of<br />
the Remote Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model (RFWAM). As a considerable amount of time<br />
was spent on the RFWAM during the ADID project, the Technical Advisory Committee continued<br />
to build on the existing model framework. Each model was broken down by function and then run<br />
for each 8-digit HUC watershed. The most notable difference in comparing the BCWCP to the<br />
ADID project was the lack of countywide digital soil information. To address this, the <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> Commission has contracted with NRCS in Auburn to digitize the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> soil<br />
survey. As of the completion of this document, this soil data is scheduled to be released to the<br />
<strong>County</strong> in 2004. The BCWCP Technical Protocol document was developed by the Technical<br />
Advisory Committee and modified as needed at advisory committee meetings (Appendix 9.3).<br />
3.2.3.2 Acquisition of GIS data layers for use in the BCWCP database<br />
As stated earlier, the NWI data was obtained from the USFWS. This data was broken down by<br />
watershed in the county. There are six 8-digit HUCs in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Only a very small portion<br />
of the Lower Tombigbee HUC is in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> and all wetlands in this HUC are riverine.<br />
Therefore, this HUC’s polygons were combined with those of the Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> HUC to help<br />
streamline the modeling process. A shapefile containing point data of known endangered species<br />
was provided by the USFWS and <strong>Alabama</strong> Natural Heritage Program. In an effort to account for<br />
wildlife movement, a 1/8 mile buffer was placed around the points to represent areas with sensitive<br />
populations. Fire locations and approximate acreages were obtained from the <strong>Alabama</strong> Forestry<br />
Commission and converted to a shapefile format. This shapefile is only an approximation of burned<br />
acreage and is not intended to reflect actual fire conditions. FEMA flood data was obtained by the<br />
<strong>County</strong>’s GIS department. This data is in shapefile format and represents areas prone to flooding<br />
during large rain events. A wellhead protection area coverage was obtained from the EPA and<br />
represents sensitive areas surrounding public drinking water wells. Land use data was broken down<br />
into four categories (urban, agriculture, forest, water) to complete the model, and four coverages<br />
were developed to represent each category. A hydrology coverage was obtained from the US<br />
Census Bureau (USCB) to represent the locations of streams, creeks, rivers, and large open water<br />
areas such as Wolf and Weeks Bay. The road centerlines file was generated by the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commisssion via a contract with a consultant. Due to the nature of NWI polygons, a 100 ft buffer<br />
was applied to the centerlines to more accurately identify areas where natural wetlands systems have<br />
been disrupted by roadway corridors.<br />
19
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Table 2. Summary of GIS Layers Utilized in BCWCP RFWAM.<br />
Data Layer Source<br />
NWI USFWS<br />
Endangered Species USFWS and ANHP<br />
Fire Locations AFC<br />
Flood Zones FEMA<br />
Wellhead Protection Areas EPA and GSA<br />
Land Use GSA<br />
8 Digit HUC NRCS<br />
11 Digit HUC NRCS<br />
Hydrology USCB TIGER<br />
CIR BCC<br />
True Color Photos BCC<br />
Centerlines BCC<br />
3.2.3.3 <strong>Wetland</strong> Classification: HGM Classification Development<br />
Conversion of the National <strong>Wetland</strong>s Inventory (NWI) or <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Layer classification to the HGM classification system was an essential task of the BCWCP,<br />
as the functional assessment models were based on the HGM system. BCWCP staff were contacted<br />
by the EPA grant manager to suggest collaboration between EPA GIS and BCWCP staff in order to<br />
accomplish this task most efficiently. BCWCP staff provided the data necessary to EPA staff in<br />
order to initiate the conversion process. After an initial review of HGM conversions provided to<br />
BCWCP staff, discrepancies were found and time became limited to correct these errors. Therefore,<br />
staff developed a protocol for the HGM classification of polygons.<br />
Riverine wetlands were identified by a geospatial relationship within the hydrology coverage. In<br />
other words, if a wetland polygon intersected the hydrology coverage, it was classified as riverine.<br />
Since many wetland polygons can exist within a riverine system, all polygons touching these riverine<br />
wetland polygons were also classified as riverine. This process was repeated until all polygons within<br />
riverine systems were identified and classified as riverine. Fringe wetlands were identified in a<br />
similar fashion using a coverage of saltwater hydrology. Polygons intersecting or touching saltwater<br />
areas were identified as fringe wetlands. Further, any polygon with the NWI classification of<br />
estuarine (E) was classified as fringe. This initial identification was then refined through spot checks<br />
conducted by local experts familiar with the coastal landscape of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Flat and<br />
depressional wetlands were identified using a visual interpretation of CIR photography that was<br />
taken during a very dry year in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Because polygons with visible standing water in<br />
such a year must have access to groundwater, they were classified as depressional, and polygons<br />
identified as wetlands but with no water present were classified as flat wetlands. Upon completion<br />
of this process, BCWCP staff evaluated the final product and found that the classifications were<br />
largely accurate. As with any remote analysis, there were some errors in classifications. After several<br />
reviews by other professionals affiliated with other government agencies involved, a final<br />
classification was reached (Figure 10).<br />
3.2.3.4 <strong>Wetland</strong> model development<br />
20
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
In order to facilitate development of the RFWAM, staff attended a training class in Atlanta,<br />
Georgia in December of 2002. This class was taught by members of Environmental Systems<br />
Research Institute’s (ESRI) technical staff. The models were implemented using ESRI’s marquee<br />
software package, ArcGIS 8.3. ArcGIS 8.3 allows one to write macros using Visual Basic for<br />
Applications (VBA). Staff attended a week-long class that covered the basic principles and structure<br />
of the Visual Basic programming language, development and implementation of graphic user<br />
interfaces (GUI), the programming infrastructure components of ArcGIS (also known as<br />
ArcObjects), and how to manipulate ArcObjects to perform custom designed tasks. The knowledge<br />
acquired during this course was crucial to the process of developing the model.<br />
ArcObjects is used to programmatically enhance and extend ArcGIS. It allows the model<br />
developer to create custom processes to be performed at the request of the user. Customizations<br />
made to the model pertain to the ability to use ArcObjects to add layer files programmatically, to<br />
identify spatial relationships, to search databases, and to allow data to be programmatically added to<br />
databases based on the results of queries and functions.<br />
Most aspects of the model have been addressed and programming language has been written<br />
to perform the functions outlined in the BCWCP Technical Protocol. Currently, the program allows<br />
staff to select wetland polygons based on spatial relationships with other GIS layers. The following<br />
code illustrates how the spatial relationship between wetland polygons and recorded forest fires is<br />
identified. The spatial relationship of concern in this particular case is simply the intersection of the<br />
two layers. The ArcObjects component used is esriSpatialRelIntersects, which selects polygons from a<br />
layer that intersect with another layer as prescribed by the programmer and stores the selection in a<br />
selection set.<br />
‘********************************************************************************************<br />
****<br />
Public Sub SelectIfIntersectSpecies() Sets variables, identify<br />
Dim pMxDoc As IMxDocument layers of interest, select<br />
Dim pFeatureLayer1 As IFeatureLayer intersection of polygons.<br />
Dim pFeatureLayer2 As IFeatureLayer<br />
Dim pFeatureSelection1 As IFeatureSelection<br />
Dim pFeatureSelection2 As IFeatureSelection<br />
Dim pFeatureCursor1 As IFeatureCursor<br />
Dim pFeatureCursor2 As IFeatureCursor<br />
Dim pFeature As IFeature<br />
Set pMxDoc = ThisDocument<br />
Set pFeatureLayer1 = pMxDoc.FocusMap.Layer(0)<br />
Set pFeatureLayer2 = pMxDoc.FocusMap.Layer(1)<br />
Set pFeatureCursor1 = pFeatureLayer1.FeatureClass.Search(Nothing, True)<br />
Set pFeature = pFeatureCursor1.NextFeature<br />
If pFeature Is Nothing Then Exit Sub<br />
Dim pGeometry As IGeometry<br />
Dim pSpatialFilter As ISpatialFilter<br />
Set pFeatureSelection1 = pFeatureLayer2<br />
pFeatureSelection1.Clear<br />
Do While Not pFeature Is Nothing<br />
Set pGeometry = pFeature.ShapeCopy<br />
Set pSpatialFilter = New SpatialFilter<br />
pSpatialFilter.SpatialRel = esriSpatialRelIntersects<br />
21
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Set pSpatialFilter.Geometry = pGeometry<br />
pFeatureSelection1.SelectFeatures pSpatialFilter, esriSelectionResultAdd, False<br />
Set pFeature = pFeatureCursor1.NextFeature<br />
Loop<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
***<br />
Dim pCursor As IFeatureCursor Searches for data storage<br />
Dim pFeature2 As Ifeature space.<br />
Dim pSelectionSet As ISelectionSet<br />
Dim pField As IField<br />
Dim pFeatureClass As IFeatureClass<br />
Dim pLayerFields As IFields<br />
Dim pModelField As IField<br />
Dim pTable As ITable<br />
Dim pRow As IRow<br />
Dim pModelField2 As Long<br />
Dim Fld As Long<br />
Dim i As Long<br />
Dim b As Long<br />
Set pSelectionSet = pFeatureSelection1.SelectionSet<br />
pSelectionSet.Search Nothing, False, pCursor<br />
Set pFeatureClass = pFeatureLayer2.FeatureClass<br />
i = 0<br />
b = 0<br />
Set pLayerFields = pFeatureClass.Fields<br />
Fld = pFeatureClass.Fields.FieldCount - 1<br />
For i = 0 To Fld<br />
Set pModelField = pFeatureClass.Fields.Field(i)<br />
If pModelField.Name = "fire" Then<br />
Set pModelField = pLayerFields.Field(i)<br />
i = Fld<br />
b = i<br />
Else<br />
b = 0<br />
End If<br />
Next<br />
If b = 0 Then<br />
MsgBox "There is no fire Field in the table!", vbOKOnly, "No model Field"<br />
Exit Sub<br />
End If<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
***<br />
Set pFeature2 = pCursor.NextFeature Assigns values<br />
Set pTable = pFeature2.Table accordingly.<br />
pModelField2 = pTable.FindField(pModelField.Name)<br />
Do While Not (pFeature2 Is Nothing)<br />
Set pRow = pTable.GetRow(pFeature2.OID)<br />
pRow.Value(pModelField2) = 1<br />
pRow.Store<br />
Set pFeature2 = pCursor.NextFeature<br />
Loop<br />
pMxDoc.ActiveView.Refresh<br />
End Sub<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
***<br />
22
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
This piece of code identifies the wetland polygons which were subjected to fire, prepares a place in<br />
the database for data that conveys this information, adds the data to the database, and refreshes the<br />
on-screen view.<br />
Programmed macros will also allow wetland polygon attributes to be searched for key<br />
information, such as HGM classification. The following code contains a structured query language<br />
(SQL) statement which searches the database for the requested information:<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
***Public Sub SelectFeaturesSQL() Declare variables, set<br />
active<br />
Dim pMxDoc As IMxDocument map layer, search table<br />
Dim pMap As Imap using SQL statement.<br />
Dim pActiveView As IActiveView<br />
Dim pFeatureLayer As IFeatureLayer<br />
Dim pFeatureSelection As IFeatureSelection<br />
Dim pQueryFilter As IQueryFilter<br />
Dim pLayer As ILayer<br />
Set pMxDoc = Application.Document<br />
Set pMap = pMxDoc.FocusMap<br />
Set pActiveView = pMap<br />
Set pLayer = pMxDoc.FocusMap.Layer(2)<br />
If Not TypeOf pLayer Is IFeatureLayer Then Exit Sub<br />
Set pFeatureLayer = pLayer<br />
Set pFeatureSelection = pFeatureLayer<br />
Set pQueryFilter = New QueryFilter<br />
Dim s1 As String<br />
Dim sQs As String<br />
s1 = "d"<br />
sQs = "HGM LIKE '%" & s1 & "%'"<br />
pQueryFilter.whereClause = sQs<br />
pFeatureSelection.SelectFeatures pQueryFilter, esriSelectionResultNew, False<br />
pActiveView.Refresh<br />
End Sub<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
***<br />
This code selects all polygons that contain a lower case “d” in the HGM classification, which is an<br />
indicator of ditched wetlands. This programming can be coupled with other code to attach data to<br />
the selected polygons attributes.<br />
The last example of critical code for the model is essentially an “if then” scenario. A<br />
procedure was written to examine the acreage of wetland polygons and to then assign values to the<br />
attribute table accordingly (e.g., if a polygon is < 1 acre, then it scores 2; >1 acre scores 4; >10 acres<br />
scores 6; >100 acres scores 8). This is a primary component of each model. The following code<br />
accomplishes this task:<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
***Public Sub PopulateAcres_Rate() Declaration of variables.<br />
Dim pDoc As IMxDocument<br />
Dim pMap As IMap<br />
Dim unknFeatLayer As IFeatureLayer<br />
Dim unknFeatClass As IFeatureClass<br />
23
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Dim plyFeatLayer As IFeatureLayer<br />
Dim plyFeatClass As IFeatureClass<br />
Dim plyFeatureCursor As IFeatureCursor<br />
Dim plyFeat As IFeature<br />
Dim plyLayerFields As IFields<br />
Dim plyRateField As IField<br />
Dim plyAcreField As IField<br />
Dim plyTable As ITable<br />
Dim plyRow As IRow<br />
Dim plyAcField As Long<br />
Dim plyRtField As Long<br />
Dim dlbAcre As Double<br />
Dim Fld As Long<br />
Dim i As Long<br />
Dim b As Long<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
*** Set pDoc = ThisDocument Set active map layer.<br />
Set pMap = pDoc.Maps.Item(0)<br />
Set unknFeatLayer = pMap.Layer(1)<br />
Set unknFeatClass = unknFeatLayer.FeatureClass<br />
If unknFeatClass.ShapeType = esriGeometryPolygon Then<br />
Set plyFeatLayer = unknFeatLayer<br />
Else<br />
MsgBox "No Polygon Feature Class Loaded in the Map Document", vbExclamation, "No Polygon Feature<br />
Class"<br />
Exit Sub<br />
End If<br />
Set plyFeatClass = plyFeatLayer.FeatureClass<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
*** Set plyLayerFields = plyFeatClass.Fields Search active<br />
layer’s<br />
Fld = plyFeatClass.Fields.FieldCount - 1 attribute table for<br />
For i = 0 To Fld desired data.<br />
Set plyAcreField = plyFeatClass.Fields.Field(i)<br />
If plyAcreField.Name = "ACRES" Then<br />
Set plyAcreField = plyLayerFields.Field(i)<br />
i = Fld<br />
b = i<br />
Else<br />
b = 0<br />
End If<br />
Next<br />
If b = 0 Then<br />
MsgBox "There is no ACRES Field in the table!", vbOKOnly, "No ACRES Field"<br />
End If<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
*** i = 0 Search active<br />
layer’s<br />
b = 0 attribute table for<br />
For i = 0 To Fld space to record data.<br />
Set plyRateField = plyFeatClass.Fields.Field(i)<br />
If plyRateField.Name = "Acres_Rate" Then<br />
Set plyRateField = plyLayerFields.Field(i)<br />
i = Fld<br />
b = i<br />
Else<br />
24
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
b = 0<br />
End If<br />
Next<br />
If b = 0 Then<br />
MsgBox "There is no Acre_Rate Field in the table!", vbOKOnly, "No Acres_Rate Field"<br />
Exit Sub<br />
End If<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
*** Set plyFeatureCursor = plyFeatClass.Search(Nothing, True) Execution of data<br />
Set plyFeat = plyFeatureCursor.NextFeature scan & writing results<br />
Set plyTable = plyFeat.Table to data table.<br />
plyAcField = plyTable.FindField(plyAcreField.Name)<br />
plyRtField = plyTable.FindField(plyRateField.Name)<br />
Do Until (plyFeat Is Nothing)<br />
Set plyRow = plyTable.GetRow(plyFeat.OID)<br />
dblAcre = plyRow.Value(plyAcField)<br />
If dblAcre < 1 Then<br />
plyRow.Value(plyRtField) = 2<br />
plyRow.Store<br />
End If<br />
If dblAcre > 1 Then<br />
plyRow.Value(plyRtField) = 4<br />
plyRow.Store<br />
End If<br />
If dblAcre > 10 Then<br />
plyRow.Value(plyRtField) = 6<br />
plyRow.Store<br />
End If<br />
If dblAcre > 100 Then<br />
plyRow.Value(plyRtField) = 8<br />
plyRow.Store<br />
End If<br />
Set plyFeat = plyFeatureCursor.NextFeature<br />
Loop<br />
End Sub<br />
'*********************************************************************************************<br />
***<br />
These three samples of code encompass most of what is required to accomplish the model’s<br />
objective. As outlined in the BCWCP Technical Protocol document, there are actually three<br />
individual wetland models (depressional, flat, and riverine) that make up the entire BCWCP Remote<br />
Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model. It is important to note that the code samples shown are<br />
used for each model with only slight variances as prescribed by the BCWCP Technical Protocol.<br />
For example, the Riverine <strong>Wetland</strong> Functional Assessment model asks to identify all wetlands the<br />
NWI classifies as FO (forested). The Structured Query Language (SQL) statement will simply be<br />
changed to search for “FO” rather than “d” in the attribute table. The scoring system for wetland<br />
classification is found in the BCWCP Technical Protocol (Appendix 9.3).<br />
As mentioned earlier, code was written for each HGM type. Due to the large file sizes and<br />
the functional capacity of staff’s desktop computers, the model was further simplified by applying<br />
the final model product to individual watersheds within the county, rather than countywide. The<br />
model interfaces that guide the user through running the RFWAM can be seen in Figures 18-21.<br />
25
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
The development of this model challenged the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Staff. Programming with<br />
Visual Basic for Applications and ArcObjects is a very labor intensive process and is closely akin to<br />
learning to speak an unfamiliar language. Because there is no room for error in programming, the<br />
code must be perfect. Much time and effort was spent troubleshooting and proofreading code to<br />
ensure quality results and a properly functioning model. Actual VBA code for the RFWAM as<br />
outlined by Technical Protocol document is 161 pages in length and can be obtained from the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Zoning <strong>Department</strong> upon request.<br />
3.2.3.5 Calibration of functional assessment<br />
The final step in this process was the calibration with the help of the Technical Advisory<br />
Committee. For each HGM classification, a scoring system was developed as outlined in the<br />
technical protocol document (Appendix 9.3). The number of points earned by a wetland polygon<br />
was then expressed as the percentage of possible points (not counting bonus points), and this<br />
percentage determined whether the wetland polygon was classified as suitable for conservation,<br />
enhancement, or restoration. The Technical Advisory Committee chose the classification ranges of<br />
these percentages to achieve a reasonable distribution of functional assessment types for the<br />
wetlands in an HGM class (Table 3). Figures 22, 23, and 24 show the distributions of wetland<br />
polygons by the percentage of possible points earned, and they also show how the functional<br />
assessment categories classify these distributions using the ranges in Table 3. Lower percentages<br />
were classified as in need of restoration, middling percentages indicated the possibility for<br />
enhancement, and high percentages demonstrated conservation value. Because of their<br />
environmentally sensitive nature, all fringe wetlands were classified as suitable for conservation.<br />
Table 3. Data Ranges for <strong>Wetland</strong> Classifications<br />
<strong>Conservation</strong> Enhancement Restoration<br />
Riverine >80% 60-80% 61% 41-60% 50% 25-50%
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
acres), Perdido (20,000 acres) and Perdido Bay (3,000 acres). The overwhelming majority of<br />
wetlands are highly functioning and suitable for conservation. Appendix 9.4 lists the results of the<br />
RFWAM.<br />
3.2.3.7 Future Direction and Recommendations<br />
Although complete and useful, there is great potential for future updates of the RFWAM as<br />
more digital data becomes available. Such data could be more detailed land use coverages or digital<br />
soils data. This information would increase the accuracy of remotely assessing wetland functions.<br />
Further, the hydric soils in the digital wetland coverage could be used in combination with the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer to increase the accuracy of the coverage. Also, field studies<br />
could be developed to identify relationships between the digital hydric soils data to the BCDWL, as<br />
the wetland layer was developed remotely and the soils data is field-based.<br />
BCWCP staff plans to distribute the BCDWL and the model results to all federal, state and<br />
local wetland stakeholders. The results could aid the USACE in determining suitable sites for<br />
successful wetland mitigation. Locally, the data will be utilized daily by the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning<br />
and Zoning <strong>Department</strong> and will be provided to the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Highway <strong>Department</strong> for<br />
future transportation corridor development.<br />
27
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3.3 Develop wetlands education/outreach program for area stakeholders<br />
The education/outreach component of the BCWCP was achieved through public meetings<br />
designed to present information and obtain stakeholder input. Activities included presentations to<br />
governmental and civic organizations and presentations to professional organizations. During the<br />
course of this project, BCWCP staff were very successful in conveying information to the public<br />
regarding <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> wetland project activities.<br />
3.3.1 Public Meetings<br />
BCWCP staff conducted two sets of public meetings during the course of the project period.<br />
These meetings were held in Bay Minette, Foley and Fairhope, three locations distributed around<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. These meetings were well-attended. The first meetings were held in March 2001 to<br />
inform the public of the project goals and activities and to solicit input from the public on wetlandrelated<br />
issues. The second set of meetings was held in July 2003 to present the results of the Remote<br />
Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model. BCWCP staff also utilized this platform to emphasize to the<br />
public the importance of wetland functions in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>.<br />
Throughout the grant period, staff updated and informed the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission<br />
of project-related activities at regularly scheduled meetings. In July 2003, a presentation to the<br />
Commission led to a local newspaper article announcing the results of the remote functional<br />
assessment model (Appendix 9.4). This article informed the public of the availability of wetland<br />
maps, which led to many map requests. These meetings were attended by the local media and were<br />
televised throughout <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> on the public access cable channel. Additionally, BCWCP staff<br />
solicited input from the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Environmental Advisory Board throughout the project period.<br />
3.3.2 Presentation to Government and Civic Organizations<br />
BCWCP staff made presentations to numerous civic organizations throughout the grant<br />
period. A partial listing of these speaking engagements includes presentations at the Sonora<br />
Homemakers Club, Faulkner State Community College, Bay Minette Rotary Club, Gulf Shores<br />
Rotary Club, Point Clear Rotary Club, Daphne Spanish Fort Rotary Club, Fairhope Kiwanis Club,<br />
and the Gulf Shores Kiwanis Club.<br />
3.3.3 Presentations at Professional Meetings<br />
Throughout the grant period, BCWCP staff presented the technical aspects of the BCWCP<br />
to other professionals. The presentations included:<br />
• <strong>Alabama</strong> Chapter of the American <strong>Plan</strong>ning Association Annual Meeting<br />
• Nonpoint Source & Watershed Workshop (sponsored by the Weeks Bay Watershed Project)<br />
• Southeast Regional Users Group (SERUG) Annual Meeting at Orange Beach, AL. BCWCP staff<br />
presented a talk entitled “Applications of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>.”<br />
This talk focused on the technical aspects of the GIS component of the BCWCP.<br />
28
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
• Society of <strong>Wetland</strong> Scientists Annual Meeting. BCWCP presented a talk entitled: “The <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>: Development and Implementation” at the annual<br />
meeting in New Orleans in early June 2003. The presentation was well-received and<br />
generated a worthwhile discussion.<br />
• <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Surveyors Association Monthly Meeting. BCWCP staff was the guest speaker at this<br />
organization’s monthly meeting. BCWCP presented the methodology of the wetland<br />
validation project and its potential applications with respect to surveying and engineering<br />
practices in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>.<br />
3.3.4 Other BCWCP education activities include:<br />
1. <strong>Wetland</strong> Maps. By far the most successful method of conveying information to the public<br />
was through the creation and distribution of wetland maps. <strong>Wetland</strong> maps were provided to<br />
the public free of charge and approximately 400 wetland maps were created and distributed<br />
throughout the project period. These maps consisted of color infrared photography, tax<br />
parcel data and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer (BCDWL) and were extensively<br />
used by local realtors and developers for obtaining preliminary wetland locations. Also, these<br />
maps were provided to potential property owners so that they would gain the most<br />
information about a parcel prior to purchase. Figure 33 is a sample wetland map produced<br />
by BCWCP staff. Upon requesting these maps, BCWCP staff took advantage of the<br />
opportunity to educate and inform the public about the importance of wetland resources.<br />
Also, the BCDWL is used in maps for review by the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission<br />
and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission during review of site plan applications for zoning and<br />
subdivision requirements. <strong>Plan</strong>ners and other staff in the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning and<br />
Zoning <strong>Department</strong> use the BCDWL daily for site plan review. The BCDWL has been<br />
provided to municipal governments upon request. Finally, the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Highway<br />
<strong>Department</strong> utilizes the data for future road projects in order to minimize wetland impacts.<br />
2. <strong>Wetland</strong> Information Booth by the Sonora Homemakers Club at the annual <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Fair. In<br />
April 2001, BCWCP project staff made a presentation to the Sonora Homemakers Club<br />
(Club) on countywide wetland activities. Each year the Club picks a specific issue to focus on<br />
when preparing a booth for the annual <strong>County</strong> Fair held in September of each year. This<br />
year the Club chose the issue of wetlands for its focus area. BCWCP staff provided literature<br />
and map products to the Club for use at its fair booth. The Club’s booth won a blue ribbon<br />
during the judging portion of the fair.<br />
3. Fire Suppression <strong>Plan</strong>ning by the <strong>Alabama</strong> Forestry Commission Utilizing BCWCP Products and<br />
Analyses. BCWCP staff met with staff from the <strong>Alabama</strong> Forestry Commission (AFC) in<br />
October 2001 to discuss the possibility of utilizing <strong>County</strong> wetland information to help aid<br />
the acquisition of additional fire suppression equipment. Fires in wetlands present unusual<br />
and sometimes difficult circumstances which hinder containment and control. First, wetland<br />
fires tend to smolder and burn longer than fires in non-wetland areas, which presents a<br />
greater hazard to nearby structures. Second, accessing burning wetlands proves difficult since<br />
traditional fire fighting equipment is not able to get into these areas. AFC was pursuing grant<br />
programs which would allow the purchase of appropriate wetland firefighting equipment. To<br />
demonstrate the need for this equipment, AFC staff requested that BCWCP staff perform<br />
analysis on identified wetland areas and their proximity to vulnerable structures in particular<br />
29
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
geographic locations around the county. To date, BCWCP has performed some of these<br />
analyses and has provided that information to the AFC.<br />
4. Local Newspaper Coverage. The Gulf Coast newspapers and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> Register published<br />
many articles on the BCWCP (a sample is in Appendix 9.5). Most notably, articles on the<br />
Christmas Tree Recycling Project and the results of the wetland validation project generated<br />
public enthusiasm and support.<br />
3.3.5 Future direction and recommendations<br />
Educating local stakeholders about wetland issues is an integral component of wetland<br />
resource protection. There is a continuing benefit to developing relationships with the public. For<br />
example, BCWCP staff attend pre-application conferences with consultants for projects that could<br />
impact wetland resources. Methods to minimize wetland protection are suggested prior to any<br />
wetland or subdivision permit application. Although the BCDWL may not reflect the precise<br />
jurisdictional lines, it provides an effective tool for proper land use planning. BCWCP staff have<br />
identified future educational actions to continue these efforts. These future activities include:<br />
1. <strong>Wetland</strong> Maps: BCWCP staff plan to continue to produce wetland maps for the public using<br />
the BCDWL and the <strong>County</strong>’s GIS information.<br />
2. Workshops: Using <strong>Alabama</strong> Coastal Impact Assistance <strong>Plan</strong> (CIAP) funds, BCWCP staff<br />
will plan for a half day workshop open to all city planners, engineers, wetland consultants,<br />
and local, state, and federal employees regarding the use of the BCDWL. At this workshop,<br />
staff will provide a data CD of the BCDWL and instruct how to implement the data in their<br />
day-to-day activities. Also, this will allow staff to explain the potential applications of the<br />
RFWAM.<br />
3. Website: The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission is currently enhancing the <strong>County</strong> webpage<br />
(http://www.co.baldwin.al.us). BCWCP staff plan to develop an informative website for the<br />
public that summarizes information on local, state, and federal wetland regulations.<br />
Additionally, this web page will provide information on how to obtain the BCWCP Final<br />
Summary Document and GIS data. Further, BCWCP staff hopes to include the wetland<br />
layer in a web-based mapping application in the near future.<br />
4. BCDWL distribution: The final digital data will be distributed to all local municipalities and<br />
regulatory agencies so that all stakeholders can use the data and results generated from this<br />
study.<br />
30
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3.4 Research, design and implement wetland restoration/construction projects at<br />
selected sites throughout the <strong>County</strong><br />
The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> was involved with several wetland<br />
restoration projects. Each of these projects explored innovative means of restoring wetlands and<br />
provided BCWCP staff with insight for future projects. The successes and lessons learned during the<br />
wetland restoration projects undertaken during the BCWCP project period are explained below.<br />
3.4.1 Perdido Beach Shoreline Restoration Project<br />
A shoreline wetland restoration project was initiated in the southeastern portion of <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong>. This project involved the construction of offshore brush fence breakwater structures<br />
designed to reduce the impact of high energy waves reaching the shoreline. Once built, the offshore<br />
structures are filled with recycled Christmas trees. Waves are allowed to pass through the structures,<br />
but their energy is greatly diminished. This mitigates the erosive forces attributed to high energy<br />
wave action. Additionally, these structures promote accretion by allowing sediment to drop out of<br />
the water column and be deposited on the shoreline. Once sediment accretion has occurred, native<br />
shoreline wetland vegetation (i.e Juncus roemerianus and Spartina alterniflora) can be established through<br />
plantings. Such establishment of vegetation should help prevent future erosion. This restoration<br />
project is modeled after a Mobile Bay National Estuary Program Action <strong>Plan</strong> Demonstration Project<br />
where a similar offshore brush fence breakwater structure was built on an eroding Weeks Bay<br />
shoreline. That project resulted in the establishment of a beach/marsh area on the subject shoreline.<br />
Construction of the offshore breakwater structures commenced on June 7, 2000 and was<br />
completed by the end of the month. On July 17 and 18, 2000, recycled Christmas trees were placed<br />
into the structures by <strong>County</strong> staff, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service employees, and Youth <strong>Conservation</strong><br />
Corps (YCC) members. The first post construction quarterly survey was completed on November 2,<br />
2000. Generally, results showed significant accretion along the majority of the affected shoreline.<br />
Small portions of the southwest shoreline, however, exhibited erosion once the structures were put<br />
into place. This was probably due to the placement of the structures, the length of the structures,<br />
and the presence of bulkheads adjacent to the affected shorelines.<br />
31
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Construction of the offshore Perdido Beach brush fences<br />
While results of the quarterly beach profile monitoring indicate significant sand accretion<br />
along the beach directly in front of the offshore breakwater structures, there is some visible evidence<br />
that the areas of the beach corresponding to the ends of the offshore breakwater structures may be<br />
experiencing erosion. When the restoration effort was initiated, staff did not overlap the structures<br />
with the corresponding bulkheads located on the shore. As a result, the “gap” between the<br />
32
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
structures and the bulkheads appears to have scoured the shoreline on the extreme ends of the<br />
structures. As a result of this erosion, BCWCP project staff planned and initiated development of<br />
additional offshore breakwater structures to fill the gap between the structures and the bulkheads.<br />
<strong>County</strong> staff built two new offshore structures in March and completed a pre-Christmas tree<br />
installation survey to provide baseline beach profile information. Data collected from this survey is<br />
illustrated in the graph below. The data show that there was an initial accumulation of sand after the<br />
construction of the brush fences. However, the initial increase leveled off to a net gain of sand.<br />
Seasonal wind patterns could affect the level of accretion and the success of the brush fence.<br />
Rod Level (feet)<br />
4.5<br />
5<br />
5.5<br />
6<br />
6.5<br />
7<br />
7.5<br />
2<br />
Brush Fence Beach Accretion Data<br />
4<br />
6<br />
8<br />
10 14<br />
12<br />
Distance (m)<br />
16<br />
18<br />
Brush Fence<br />
Survey data from the brush fence project<br />
July (preconstruction)<br />
Nov ember<br />
February<br />
June (2001)<br />
During a minor tropical storm in October 2001, the newly built brush fence bins sustained<br />
fairly serious damage due to excessive wave action. The damage was repaired and in June of 2002,<br />
BCWCP staff purchased 500 needle rush plants (Juncus roemerianus) and planted them on the newly<br />
accreted beach in order to stabilize the beach and create a wetland habitat. Also, needle rush was<br />
planted adjacent to an eroding shoreline along a large tidal creek (Soldier’s Creek). In all likelihood,<br />
the shoreline was eroding due to excessive boat wake activity. The survival rate was much higher in<br />
the more protected fringe system. Therefore, it is hypothesized that the success rate for planting<br />
marsh vegetation in areas of high wave energy (Perdido Beach) is not as high as in more protected<br />
waters (Soldier Creek).<br />
33
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
<strong>Plan</strong>ted needle rush (Juncus roemerianus) at Perdido Beach brush fence<br />
The brush fences at Perdido Beach were surveyed for the final time in June 2002. The 2002<br />
hurricane season was quite active in Southwest <strong>Alabama</strong>, as the area was hit by 3 tropical storms:<br />
Hannah, Isidore and Lily. Although a relatively mild tropical storm, the brunt of the wind energy of<br />
Hannah destroyed the brush fences and caused considerable damage to the adjacent bulkheads.<br />
Isidore was a much stronger storm and it is speculated that it would have also destroyed the brush<br />
fences. Although quite successful in aiding beach accretion and in educating the public of costeffective<br />
alternatives to bulk heading, the brush fences were not able to withstand the wind and<br />
wave energy of a tropical storm. Future brush fence construction should be constructed to<br />
withstand high wave energy or should be located in semi-protected waters.<br />
34
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3.4.2 Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong>s Park<br />
Destroyed brush fences following Tropical Storm Hannah<br />
The <strong>County</strong> was approached by the City of Gulf Shores about the possibility of partnering,<br />
utilizing the BCWCP grant, to restore a degraded wetland area adjacent to the City’s new sportsplex.<br />
The site was inspected on several occasions and a preliminary determination was made that it would<br />
be suitable for restoration efforts. The site is adjacent to a small creek called Bright’s creek, and it is<br />
comprised of riverine wetlands that, over time, were used as borrow areas for highway construction<br />
projects. These borrow areas have evolved into small ponds which currently support a variety of<br />
aquatic life. Connecting these ponds with transitional wetland areas and removing soil berms could<br />
restore the hydrology on certain portions of the property.<br />
BCWCP staff received a formal request from the City of Gulf shores to conduct wetland<br />
restoration activities at the Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong>s Park. The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission allocated<br />
60% of the cost of the wetland restoration activities at this site based on the preliminary cost<br />
estimate. Through this negotiation, the BCC encouraged the City of Gulf Shores to place the<br />
existing jurisdictional wetlands into a conservation easement. The conservation easement is between<br />
the City of Gulf Shores and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission, and it legally requires the City of Gulf<br />
Shores to protect the existing wetlands in perpetuity. <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> staff will monitor this site<br />
periodically to ensure that no impacts occur. In addition, a comprehensive restoration plan was<br />
requested from the City of Gulf Shores prior to commencement of restoration activities at the site.<br />
The conceptual site plan of the project is included in Appendix 9.6 of this report.<br />
35
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Restoration activities began in the summer of 2003 at the Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong>s Park.<br />
BCWCP and EPA staff visited the site during construction. Hydrologic connections were created<br />
between the ponds, instead of a slight grading of the surface soil. Also, picnic tables and gazebos<br />
were installed in the areas to be restored. The changes were discussed in great detail, and BCWCP<br />
staff negotiated with City for more extensive planting in the open water areas in order to create<br />
more wetland habitat. The plants were installed in August 2003. The plants that were installed were:<br />
bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), black gum (Nyssa sylvatica), Juncus effusus, Scirpus californicus, Sagittaria<br />
latifolia, Peltandra virginica, Thalia geniculaba, Sarracenia leucophyllla, and Nymphea odorata.<br />
BCWCP continues to monitor the success of this project. Although the wetland restoration<br />
efforts were not maximized, the site was improved and will provide education and outreach to<br />
residents and guests of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Future wetland restoration activities will include binding<br />
documentation to ensure the success of the wetland restoration activities upon construction.<br />
Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong>s Park<br />
3.4.3 <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> High School <strong>Wetland</strong> Restoration Project<br />
Staff worked with representatives from the USFWS Daphne Field Office and a teacher and<br />
principal at the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> High School (Bay Minette) to develop a Grady Pond wetland<br />
restoration project on the school’s campus. First, a conservation easement for the property was<br />
agreed to between the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission and the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Board of Education.<br />
This project involved the installation of a water control structure at a ditched outlet of the pond to<br />
help maintain a constant water level. Also a boardwalk and teaching classroom were designed to<br />
minimally impact the integrity of the Grady Pond. The boardwalk and classroom were constructed<br />
in fall of 2003. The boardwalk will be used by the students for educational purposes such as water<br />
36
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
sampling, plant identification and learning about wetland functions. The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Coastal<br />
Impact Assistance <strong>Plan</strong> (CIAP) was used as the primary funding source of this project.<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> High School <strong>Wetland</strong> Restoration Project<br />
3.4.4 Keeney Drive East <strong>Wetland</strong> Reserve Program<br />
The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission and the Natural Resources <strong>Conservation</strong> Service entered<br />
into an agreement to restore wetlands at a 1.7 acre site on Keeney Drive East in Marlow. BCWCP<br />
staff coordinated all activities related to the restoration of wetlands at this site. This project created<br />
riverine wetlands adjacent to Fish River. This restoration project has been very successful and the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission hopes to accomplish similar wetland restoration projects in the future.<br />
37
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Keeney Drive East <strong>Wetland</strong> Reserve Program<br />
3.4.5 Coastal Land Trust/Tensaw Lake acquisition<br />
In November 2003, the BCC acquired 400 acres of sensitive property along Tensaw Lake in<br />
the northwest area of the county. This parcel contains approximately 90 acres of slope and riverine<br />
wetland habitat. Although there are no plans to date, the BCC hopes to restore the wetland on the<br />
property and to develop an outdoor recreation facility.<br />
In June of 2003, the<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commission purchased<br />
400 acres adjacent to<br />
Tensaw Lake<br />
38
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
3.4.6 Future direction and recommendations<br />
This project has set forth the framework necessary for future wetland restoration activities.<br />
The results of the Remote Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model (RFWAM) will aid staff in future<br />
wetland restoration projects by helping them target watershed areas that may be suitable for wetland<br />
restoration. This project could be further developed in the following ways:<br />
• Develop a <strong>Wetland</strong> Mitigation Bank for <strong>County</strong> road projects. BCC staff will work with the<br />
Mitigation Banking Review Team (MBRT) for approval of this endeavor.<br />
• Using CIAP funds, the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission hopes to acquire fee simple property<br />
for the protection of wetlands. Also, the BCC recently drafted the “<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Parks<br />
and Public Land Management Initiative” in order to target watersheds in need of water<br />
access and park development.<br />
• Continue to work with other agencies to protect isolated wetland from development as they<br />
are not considered jurisdictional by the USACE.<br />
• Further develop interagency cooperation, such as the partnership with NRCS for the Keeney<br />
Drive East <strong>Wetland</strong> Reserve Program.<br />
• Explore opportunities for shoreline stabilization and fringe wetland protection, as many<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> shorelines are eroding and causing property owners to construct bulkheads.<br />
Opportunities exist such as the Project Greenshores in nearby Pensacola, Florida.<br />
39
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
4. Summary and Conclusions<br />
The development of the BCWCP has raised the awareness of wetland issues in <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong>. <strong>County</strong> officials continue to be more aware of the sensitivity of wetland areas and are taking<br />
steps to protect these areas through Subdivision Regulations, acquisition of sensitive properties, and<br />
implementation of wetland restoration projects. The possibility of developing a local mitigation bank<br />
has been discussed. This mitigation bank would be owned and operated by the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commission and would primarily be used to mitigate highway construction projects.<br />
Although non-regulatory in scope, this project utilizes education and information as a basis<br />
for wetland protection. Local leader support has been an integral component of this project. Future<br />
efforts include modifying the Subdivision and Zoning regulations to enhance existing wetland<br />
restrictions. The <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer (BCDWL) will aid staff in making informed<br />
decisions. BCWCP staff will continue to educate the public about the importance of wetland<br />
functions in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>’s landscape. Finally, the BCDWL will assist non-profit, local, state, and<br />
federal entities in identifying priority areas where successful wetland conservation and protection<br />
projects can be implemented.<br />
40
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
5. References<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Economic Development Alliance. Http://www.badwineda.com.<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Subdivision and Zoning Regulations, <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission. 1999 and 2003.<br />
Brinson, M. 1993. A Hydrogeomorphic Classification for <strong>Wetland</strong>s. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Research Program Technical Report WRP-DE-4.<br />
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of <strong>Wetland</strong>s and<br />
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biological Services<br />
Program. FWS/OBS-79-31. 131 pp.<br />
Economic Impact of the <strong>Alabama</strong> Travel Industry, 2003. <strong>Alabama</strong> Bureau of Tourism and Travel.<br />
84 pp.<br />
Economic Impact of Sport Fishing in <strong>Alabama</strong>, A cooperative effort between the U.S. Fish and<br />
Wildlife Service, Division of Federal Aid, and the American Sport Fishing Association. 1996.<br />
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Technical<br />
Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. NTIS<br />
No. AD A176 912.<br />
Mitsch, W.J and J.G. Gosselink, 1993. <strong>Wetland</strong>s. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, New York.<br />
Southeast Regional Climate Center. Http://cirrus.dnr.state.sc.us/cgi- bin/sercc/cliMAIN.pl?al0583.<br />
Wenger, S. 1990. A Review of the Scientific Literature on Riparian Buffer Width, Extent and<br />
Vegetation. Office of Public Service and Outreach, Institute of Ecology, University of<br />
Georgia, Athens, Georgia.<br />
41
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
6. Glossary<br />
Advance Identification – federal planning process, authorized by the Clean Water Act, designed to<br />
locate, identify, and map wetland resources in a specific geographic area. Also, designed to provide<br />
detailed information on wetland functions in the designated area.<br />
Anaerobic – refers to an environment in which oxygen is absent. These environments are typical of<br />
wetland ecosystems.<br />
Aquifer – a saturated, permeable geologic unit that can transmit significant quantities of water under<br />
ordinary hydraulic gradients.<br />
<strong>Conservation</strong> – one of the three wetland functional assessment categories reached by applying the<br />
RFWAM. Indicates that a wetland has a high general functional capacity and that it is suitable for<br />
preservation, protection, and, perhaps, maintenance.<br />
Critical Habitat – refers to geographic locations which are vital to the survival of a Threatened and<br />
Endangered species as defined in the Endangered Species Act. The specific areas on which are<br />
found those physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and which<br />
may require special management considerations or protection.<br />
Depressional – one of five wetland classes described in the HGM wetland classification. These<br />
wetlands occur in topographic depressions and dominant water sources include precipitation,<br />
groundwater discharge, and both interflow and overland flow from adjacent uplands. Elevation<br />
contours are closed thus allowing surface water accumulation.<br />
Enhancement - one of the three wetland functional assessment categories reached by applying the<br />
RFWAM. Indicates that a wetland has a general functional capacity that is neither high nor low.<br />
Such a wetland may be suitable for manipulation of physical, chemical, or biological characteristics<br />
to improve certain wetland functions while possibly allowing a decline in some other functions.<br />
Estuarine – one of the five wetland systems described in the USFWS wetland classification scheme.<br />
This system consists of deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands that are usually semienclosed<br />
by land but have open, partly obstructed, or sporadic access to marine water, and in which<br />
marine water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater run-off from the land.<br />
Estuary – a coastal body of water which has a free connection with the open sea and where fresh<br />
water, derived from land drainage, is mixed with sea water. Often subject to tidal action and, where<br />
tidal activity is large, ebb and flood tidal currents tend to avoid each other, forming separate<br />
channels.<br />
Flat – one of five wetland classes described in the HGM wetland classification. These wetlands<br />
occur in areas where the main source of water is precipitation. They occur on areas with little or no<br />
topographic gradient and they do depend partially on groundwater discharge.<br />
42
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Floodplain – the part of a river valley that is made of unconsolidated, river-borne sediment and is<br />
periodically flooded. It is built up of relatively coarse debris left behind as a stream channel migrates<br />
laterally and of relatively fine sediment deposited when bankful discharge is exceeded.<br />
Fringe – one of five wetland classes described in the HGM wetland classification. These wetlands<br />
occur near a large body of water, most typically the ocean, and receive frequent and regular<br />
bidirectional flow from astronomic tides or wind-driven water level fluctuations. Other water<br />
sources may be riverine flow, groundwater discharge and precipitation.<br />
Function – any ecological, hydrological or other phenomenon that contributes to the selfmaintenance<br />
of the wetland ecosystem; also, the normal or characteristic activities that take place in<br />
wetland ecosystems; or simply the things that wetlands do.<br />
Functional Assessment – a methodology or protocol used to assess the level at which a particular<br />
function, or suite of functions, is present in a wetland ecosystem.<br />
Functional Capacity – the level at which a wetland is performing a specific function or suite of<br />
functions; is usually determined through an objective, scientifically based assessment methodology<br />
such as the RFWAM.<br />
Generally Unsuitable for Fill – refers to one of the three designations for area wetlands found on the<br />
ADID maps. <strong>Wetland</strong>s with this designation tend to have a high functional capacity where the<br />
discharge of dredged or fill material could potentially result in significant degradation to waters of<br />
the United States or coastal resources of the State of <strong>Alabama</strong>.<br />
Groundwater – water that occurs below the Earth’s surface. It is either passing through or standing<br />
in the soil and underlying strata, and is free to move under the influence of gravity. Most<br />
groundwater is derived from surface sources.<br />
Groundwater Maintenance – one of four wetland functions assessed in the RFWAM. This describes<br />
the capacity of a wetland to recharge aquifer water supplies, provide for aquifer discharge, and filter<br />
surface water which ultimately drains to the aquifer.<br />
Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) – refers to a federal wetland classification scheme which identifies<br />
wetlands based on the following criteria: 1) geomorphology (i.e., a wetland’s topographic position on<br />
the landscape), 2) hydrology (i.e., water source), and 3) hydrodynamics (i.e., the manner in which<br />
water moves through the wetland).<br />
Interdunal Swale – a wetland type located in a depressional area between two dune ridges. These<br />
wetlands commonly occur in the coastal portions of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>.<br />
Intermittently Exposed – one of the nontidal water regime modifiers used in the USFWS wetland<br />
classification scheme. This describes wetland areas where surface water is present throughout the<br />
year except in years of extreme drought.<br />
Jurisdictional <strong>Wetland</strong> – wetlands identified for regulation by the Clean Water Act. The 1987<br />
USACE <strong>Wetland</strong>s Delineation Manual is the tool used to determine jurisdictional status of a<br />
wetland. For a wetland to be jurisdictional, there must be at least one positive wetland indicator<br />
43
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
from each of the following criteria: 1) hydric soils, 2) hydrophytic vegetation, and 3) wetland<br />
hydrology. Since the 2001 decision of the US Supreme Court in SWANCC, isolated wetlands are<br />
not considered jurisdictional, whether or not they meet the criteria in the 1987 USACE manual.<br />
Lacustrine – one of the five wetland systems described in the USFWS wetland classification scheme.<br />
This system includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats with all of the following characteristics: 1)<br />
situated on a topographic depression or a dammed river channel; 2) lacking trees, shrubs, persistent<br />
emergents, emergent mosses or lichens with greater than 30% areal coverage; and 3) total area<br />
exceeding 20 acres. Lacustrine waters may be tidal or nontidal, but ocean derived salinity is always<br />
less than 0.5 parts per hundred.<br />
Marine – one of the five wetland systems described in the USFWS wetland classification scheme. It<br />
consists of the open ocean overlaying the continental shelf and its associated high-energy coastline.<br />
These habitats are exposed to the waves and currents of the open ocean and the water regimes are<br />
determined primarily by the ebb and flow of oceanic tides.<br />
Mitigation Bank – the creation, restoration, or enhancement of an area of functioning wetland in<br />
advance of anticipated impacts within the same region.<br />
Mitigation – the compensation for reduction or loss of wetland functions due to filling activities<br />
through wetland restoration, enhancement, and/or creation activities.<br />
Obstruction – describes man-made barriers which prohibit or greatly reduce natural river flows and<br />
prevent overbank discharge of water into adjacent floodplains. Examples include dams, dikes, and<br />
roads.<br />
Palustrine - one of the five wetland systems described in the USFWS wetland classification scheme.<br />
This system includes all nontidal wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents,<br />
emergent mosses or lichens, and all such wetlands that occur in tidal areas where salinity due to<br />
ocean-derived salts is below 0.5 parts per hundred.<br />
Potentially Suitable for Fill with Compensatory Mitigation – refers to one of three designations for<br />
area wetlands found on the ADID maps. <strong>Wetland</strong>s with this designation have a limited or<br />
significantly impacted functional capacity that may be replaced by mitigation.<br />
Restoration - one of the three wetland functional assessment categories reached by applying the<br />
RFWAM. Indicates that a wetland has a low general functional capacity. Such a wetland may be<br />
suitable for the manipulation of physical, chemical, or biological characteristics to return<br />
natural/historic functions. Such manipulation may involve re-establishment or rehabilitation.<br />
Riparian – of, on, or relating to the banks of a natural course of water.<br />
Riverine 1 – one of five wetland classifications described in the HGM classification. These wetlands<br />
occur in floodplains and riparian corridors in association with stream channels. Dominant water<br />
sources are overbank flow from the channel or subsurface hydrologic connections between the<br />
stream channel and adjacent wetlands.<br />
44
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Riverine 2 – one of the five wetland systems described in the USFWS wetland classification scheme.<br />
This system includes all wetlands and deepwater habitats contained within a channel, with two<br />
exceptions: 1) wetlands dominated by trees, shrubs, persistent emergents, emergent mosses, or<br />
lichens; and 2) habitats with water containing ocean-derived salts in excess of 0.5 parts per hundred.<br />
Saltwater Intrusion – the occurrence of unsuitable levels of salt within local aquifer supplies which<br />
are usually used for domestic purposes such as drinking, bathing, or irrigating. Causes include overpumping<br />
of coastal aquifers and the lowering or destruction of coastal dunes and wetlands (which<br />
serve as aquifer recharge areas) through development activities.<br />
Seasonally Flooded – one of the nontidal water regime modifiers used in the USFWS wetland<br />
classification scheme. Surface water is present for extended periods especially early in the growing<br />
season, but is absent by the end of the season in most years. When surface water is absent, the water<br />
table is often near the land surface.<br />
Sediment/Toxicant/Nutrient Removal – one of four wetland functions assessed in the RFWAM.<br />
This describes the capacity of a wetland to capture, retain, remove and/or transform sediment,<br />
toxicants, or nutrients which enter a wetland system. These processes are facilitated by physical,<br />
chemical and biological processes associated with the wetland system.<br />
Semi-permanently Flooded – one of the nontidal water regime modifiers used in the USFWS<br />
wetland classification scheme. This describes wetland areas where surface water persists throughout<br />
the growing season in most years. When surface water is absent, the water table is usually at or very<br />
near the land surface.<br />
Site-by-Site Evaluation Required – refers to one of three designation for area wetlands found on the<br />
ADID maps. <strong>Wetland</strong>s with this designation have a mixed functional capacity or one that is difficult<br />
to estimate remotely. Further investigation of the site is required to determine its suitability for fill.<br />
Stakeholder – a party with a specific interest in a particular activity. For BCWCP purposes, it refers<br />
to those individuals or entities with an interest in wetland activities as they pertain to <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong>. BCWCP project stakeholders include, but are not limited to, the following: wetlands<br />
regulatory/commenting agencies, private landowners, public land managers, land developers and<br />
real estate professionals, consulting engineers, biologists, landscapers, conservation groups, the<br />
forest industry, the seafood industry, the agricultural industry, and the <strong>Department</strong> of<br />
Transportation.<br />
Water/Floodwater Storage – one of four wetland functions assessed in the RFWAM. This describes<br />
the capacity of a wetland to retain surface water for long or short durations. The source of water<br />
may be overbank flow, overland flow, or precipitation.<br />
Watershed – a geographic area from which a surface watercourse or groundwater system derives its<br />
water; the area of land where all precipitation drains to a common sink.<br />
Water Table – the surface on which the fluid pressure in the pores of a porous medium is exactly<br />
atmospheric; the level below which the ground is completely saturated with water.<br />
45
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> – those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency or<br />
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of<br />
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. <strong>Wetland</strong>s generally include swamps,<br />
marshes, bogs and similar areas.<br />
Wildlife/Fisheries Habitat – one of four wetland functions assessed in the RFWAM. This describes<br />
the capacity of a wetland to provide the requisite needs, including foraging areas, water, cover,<br />
nesting areas and resting areas, to support expected species.<br />
46
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
7. Figures<br />
47
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 1: <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Locator Map<br />
48
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 2: <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Waterways<br />
49
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 3: Continuous 10 Foot Contour in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
(Data Source: <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Communications & Information Systems)<br />
50
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 4: Land Use Map of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
(Data Source: National Land Cover Data, EPA 1992)<br />
51
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 5: Color Infrared Map of <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> (2001)<br />
52
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 6: Population Distribution<br />
53
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 7: Existing Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Boundaries<br />
54
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 8: Proposed Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) Boundaries<br />
55
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 9: <strong>County</strong>wide Map of <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
56
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 10: <strong>County</strong>wide Map of <strong>Wetland</strong> Hydrogeomorphic Classes<br />
57
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Percentage<br />
100.0%<br />
Figure 11: Graph of <strong>Wetland</strong> Hydrogeomorphic Class By Watershed<br />
90.0%<br />
80.0%<br />
70.0%<br />
60.0%<br />
50.0%<br />
40.0%<br />
30.0%<br />
20.0%<br />
10.0%<br />
0.0%<br />
95%<br />
42%<br />
HGM Percentage Per Watershed<br />
77%<br />
98%<br />
48%<br />
24%<br />
1%<br />
22%<br />
14%<br />
0%<br />
11%<br />
3%<br />
0%<br />
28%<br />
24%<br />
1% 0%<br />
Riverine Fringe Flat Depressional<br />
HGM Type<br />
Perdido Bay <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Perdido <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Mobile-Tensaw <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Mobile Bay <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
1%<br />
9%<br />
2%<br />
58
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 12: Map of a Flat <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
59
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 13: Map of a Depressional Interdunal Swale<br />
60
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 14: Map of a Depressional Grady Pond <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
61
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 15: Map of a Riverine <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
62
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 16: Map of Fringe <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
63
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 17: <strong>Wetland</strong> Validation Sites<br />
64
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 18: Functional Assessment Model Interface (1)<br />
65
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 19: Functional Assessment Model Interface (2)<br />
66
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 20: Functional Assessment Model Interface (3)<br />
67
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 21: Functional Assessment Model Interface (4)<br />
68
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Frequency<br />
Figure 22: Distribution of Depressional <strong>Wetland</strong>s Among Percentages of Possible Points Earned<br />
1000<br />
900<br />
800<br />
700<br />
600<br />
500<br />
400<br />
300<br />
200<br />
100<br />
0<br />
Depressional <strong>Wetland</strong>s Categorized by Percentage of Possible Points Earned<br />
Restoration<br />
Enhancement<br />
<strong>Conservation</strong><br />
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100<br />
Bins<br />
N.B. Bonus points can bring percentage above 100.<br />
n=2372<br />
69
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Frequency<br />
400<br />
350<br />
300<br />
250<br />
200<br />
150<br />
100<br />
50<br />
0<br />
Figure 23: Distribution of Flat <strong>Wetland</strong>s Among Percentages of Possible Points Earned<br />
Flat <strong>Wetland</strong>s Categorized by Percentage of Possible Points Earned<br />
Restoration<br />
Enhancement<br />
<strong>Conservation</strong><br />
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100<br />
Bins<br />
N.B. Bonus points can bring percentage above 100.<br />
n=1186<br />
70
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Frequency<br />
1800<br />
1600<br />
1400<br />
1200<br />
1000<br />
800<br />
600<br />
400<br />
200<br />
0<br />
Figure 24: Distribution of Riverine <strong>Wetland</strong>s Among Percentages of Possible Points Earned<br />
n=6394<br />
Riverine <strong>Wetland</strong>s Categorized by Percentage of Possible Points Earned<br />
Restoration<br />
Enhancement<br />
<strong>Conservation</strong><br />
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 >100<br />
Bins<br />
N.B. Bonus points can bring percentage above 100.<br />
71
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 25: Map of <strong>County</strong>wide Functional Assessment Results<br />
72
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 26: <strong>County</strong>wide Functional Assessment Results by <strong>Wetland</strong> Acreage<br />
Percentage<br />
100.0%<br />
90.0%<br />
80.0%<br />
70.0%<br />
60.0%<br />
50.0%<br />
40.0%<br />
30.0%<br />
20.0%<br />
10.0%<br />
0.0%<br />
Functional Assessment <strong>County</strong>wide<br />
88%<br />
10%<br />
1%<br />
conservation enhancement restoration<br />
Functional Assessment<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
73
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 27: Functional Assessment Results by Percent of Acreage in Hydrogeomorphic Class<br />
Percentage<br />
100.0%<br />
90.0%<br />
80.0%<br />
70.0%<br />
60.0%<br />
50.0%<br />
40.0%<br />
30.0%<br />
20.0%<br />
10.0%<br />
0.0%<br />
Functional Assessment Per HGM Type<br />
88%<br />
100%<br />
79%<br />
60%<br />
10%<br />
0%<br />
19%<br />
31%<br />
conservation enhancement restoration<br />
Functional Assessment<br />
Riverine <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Fringe <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Flat <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Depressional <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
1%<br />
0%<br />
3%<br />
8%<br />
74
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 28: Functional Assessment Results by Percent of <strong>Wetland</strong> Acreage in Watershed<br />
Percentage<br />
100.0%<br />
90.0%<br />
80.0%<br />
70.0%<br />
60.0%<br />
50.0%<br />
40.0%<br />
30.0%<br />
20.0%<br />
10.0%<br />
0.0%<br />
Functional Assessment Per Watershed<br />
85%<br />
80%<br />
94%<br />
85%<br />
98%<br />
12%<br />
18%<br />
5%<br />
12%<br />
3% 2% 3%<br />
0% 0%<br />
conservation enhancement restoration<br />
Functional Assessment<br />
(Percentages are based on total HGM type found in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>)<br />
2%<br />
Perdido Bay <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Perdido <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Mobile-Tensaw <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Mobile Bay <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
75
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 29: BCWCP Results Orange Beach Vicinity<br />
76
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 30: BCWCP Results Eastern Shore<br />
77
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 31: BCWCP Results Lillian Swamp/Perdido River<br />
78
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 32: BCWCP Results Dyas Creek Watershed (North <strong>Baldwin</strong>)<br />
79
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Figure 33: Example of <strong>Wetland</strong> Map Made For the Public<br />
80
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
8. Appendices<br />
81
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
8.1 Appendix 1: Summary of Project-related Activities for the entire project period<br />
(October 1999-December 2003)<br />
December 27 1999- January 9, 2000 Collected recycled Christmas trees for use in<br />
shoreline wetland restoration demonstration<br />
projects.<br />
January 2000 <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission developed job<br />
description and advertised for Resource Analyst<br />
position in local and state newspapers,<br />
professional journals, and appropriate websites.<br />
February 2000 Interview process for Resource Analyst position<br />
was started<br />
February 2000 Found suitable location for a shoreline wetland<br />
restoration demonstration project. Filed an<br />
application with the U.S. Army USACE to<br />
receive a permit for project construction. The<br />
application is attached to this report<br />
March 2000 Hired individual to fill the Resource Analyst<br />
position. This position will be responsible for,<br />
among other things, GIS related activities.<br />
Individual will start in June 2000<br />
March 2000 Received permit from the USACE to construct<br />
Christmas tree brush fence/breakwater<br />
structures as part of the shoreline wetland<br />
restoration projects<br />
March 2, 2000 First meeting of the BCWCP Technical Advisory<br />
Committee<br />
March 10, 2000 Meeting with NRCS to discuss possibility of<br />
updating and digitizing <strong>County</strong> soil survey.<br />
Hydric soil information obtained from this data<br />
layer may be useful in development of the<br />
Bcwcp.<br />
March 16, 2000 Presentation on the BCWCP at the annual<br />
meeting of the <strong>Alabama</strong> chapter of the American<br />
<strong>Plan</strong>ning Association<br />
April 2000 Purchased GIS related computer hardware and<br />
software<br />
June 5, 2000 Resource Analyst begins work for the <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>ning and Zoning <strong>Department</strong>.<br />
June 7, 2000 Shoreline wetland restoration project begins in<br />
the Perdido Beach community located in<br />
southeastern <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong>. Construction of<br />
offshore brush-fence breakwaters begins.<br />
June 12, 2000 Meeting with NRCS and other stakeholders to<br />
discuss funding opportunities for the updating<br />
June 29, 2000<br />
and digitizing of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> soil survey<br />
BCWCP staff made a presentation on the project<br />
to participants at the Nonpoint & Watershed<br />
Workshop sponsored by the Weeks Bay<br />
82
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Watershed Project<br />
July 17 through July 18, 2000 Utilizing <strong>County</strong> crews, U.S. Fish & Wildlife<br />
Service personnel and Youth <strong>Conservation</strong><br />
Corps (YCC) members, recycled Christmas trees<br />
were placed into offshore bins for the purpose of<br />
restoring eroding shoreline and creating fringe<br />
wetland habitat<br />
August 30, 2000 Performed visual survey of offshore breakwater<br />
bins with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service personnel.<br />
September 8, 2000 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee meeting<br />
October 4, 2000 BCWCP staff visited wetland sites in the field<br />
looking for reference wetland locations<br />
November 2, 2000 First quarterly elevation survey of brush fence<br />
shoreline wetland restoration project<br />
November 17, 2000 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee meeting<br />
to discuss the wetland functional assessment<br />
protocol<br />
November 27, 2000 BCWCP staff met with U.S. Environmental<br />
Protection Agency staff to discuss project<br />
activities and tour wetland sites in <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong><br />
December 25, 2000 through January 5, 2001 Collected recycled Christmas Trees for use in<br />
shoreline wetland restoration projects<br />
Jan. 4, 2001 Meeting between <strong>County</strong> staff and U.S. Army<br />
Corps of Engineer statistician to set up<br />
experimental design for the BCWCP wetland<br />
validation study<br />
Jan. 29, 2001 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee meeting<br />
Feb. 1, 2001 Quarterly survey of shoreline wetland restoration<br />
project in the Perdido Beach community<br />
Feb. 5, 2001 Meeting between <strong>County</strong> staff and U.S. Army<br />
Corps of Engineer statistician to discuss Corps<br />
participation (i.e. Field work) in the BCWCP<br />
wetland validation study<br />
Feb. 14, 2001 BCWCP project update to the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
Commission at a scheduled worksession.<br />
Feb. 23, 2001 <strong>Plan</strong>ning meeting to discuss construction of new<br />
offshore breakwater structures at the Perdido<br />
Beach community to encourage shoreline<br />
wetland restoration.<br />
Mar. 7, 2001 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee meeting<br />
Mar. 12 - 16, 2001 BCWCP staff commence Construction of new<br />
offshore breakwater structures in the Perdido<br />
Beach community<br />
Mar. 26, 2001 BCWCP public meeting in Bay Minette, <strong>Alabama</strong><br />
Mar. 27, 2001 BCWCP public meeting in Foley, <strong>Alabama</strong>.<br />
Mar. 29, 2001 BCWCP public meeting in Fairhope, <strong>Alabama</strong>.<br />
83
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Apr. 19, 2001 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee<br />
meeting.<br />
April 23, 2001 BCWCP presentation to the Sonora<br />
Homemakers Club in Summerdale, <strong>Alabama</strong><br />
May 23 - 25, 2001 BCWCP staff met with EPA and USFWS staff in<br />
Atlanta, Georgia to discuss the NWI to HGM<br />
conversion protocol<br />
June 7, 2001 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee meeting<br />
June 8, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
June 14, 2001<br />
Quarterly brush fence beach profile survey at<br />
Perdido Beach<br />
June 21, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field days in the<br />
Mobile-Tensaw Delta<br />
June 22, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> restoration project field reconnaissance<br />
in Bon Secour<br />
July 6, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
July 13, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
July 27, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
August 1, 2001 Placement of recycled Christmas trees into new<br />
brush fence structures at Perdido Beach<br />
August 3, 2001 On-site restoration meeting at potential wetland<br />
restoration site in Gulf Shores, <strong>Alabama</strong><br />
August 23, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
September 14, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
September 21, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
September 27, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day.<br />
October 3, 2001 Meeting with the <strong>Alabama</strong> Forestry Commission<br />
to discuss use of BCWCP project wetland<br />
information for use in county-wide fire<br />
suppression activities.<br />
October 5, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
October 10, 2001<br />
Meeting with the City of Gulf Shores to discuss<br />
potential wetland restoration opportunities.<br />
October 18 - 19, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field days in the<br />
Mobile-Tensaw Delta<br />
October 26, 2001 Meeting with the <strong>Alabama</strong> Forestry Commission<br />
to discuss use of BCWCP project wetland<br />
information for use in county-wide fire<br />
November 1-2, 2001<br />
suppression activities<br />
SERUG Annual Meeting in Orange Beach, Al.<br />
BCWCP staff presents a talk entitled “GIS<br />
Applications of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
<strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>. ”<br />
November 15, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
November 30, 2001 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
January 11, 2002 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
December 13, 2002 On-site meeting with Gulf Shores to discuss<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Restoration Project<br />
January 25, 2002 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
February 14, 2002 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
84
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Restoration at Perdido Beach Brush<br />
Fences<br />
February 22, 2002 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
March 8, 2002 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day<br />
March 16, 2002 <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Staff gives presentation at<br />
the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Environmental<br />
Advisory Board Annual Meeting<br />
March 27, 2002 Presentation to BC Surveyors Association<br />
March 26-27, 2002 Brush Fence Repair and Maintenance and<br />
Christmas Tree Delivery<br />
April 10, 2002 Meeting with EPA, ADCNR and ADEM<br />
staff to discuss <strong>Baldwin</strong> ADID applications<br />
of the functional assessment model<br />
April 11, 2002 <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />
Technical Advisory Meeting<br />
April 12, 2002 Mobile and <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong><br />
Mapping Project Meeting<br />
April 17, 2002 <strong>Wetland</strong> validation study field day (Final Site)<br />
April 24, 2002 Meeting with USFWS at Gulf Shores to<br />
demonstrate restoration project at Gulf<br />
Shores <strong>Wetland</strong>s Park<br />
May/June 2002 GPS correction and analysis of field data for<br />
submittal to US USACE statistician.<br />
June 7, 2002 BCWCP staff met with GIS Consulting<br />
Company regarding technical applications of the<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong>s Functional Assessment Model.<br />
June 20, 2002 Perdido Beach brush fence survey (final)<br />
June 26, 2002 BCWOC staff met with consultant to discuss<br />
applications of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Layer for wetland delineation purposes.<br />
June 27, 2002<br />
BCWCP staff met with representative from<br />
ADCNR Fish and Game to discuss applications<br />
of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer for<br />
wetland delineation purposes.<br />
July 11, 2002 Presentation of Perdido Beach Brush Fence<br />
survey data to a Multi-agency workshop on SW<br />
<strong>Alabama</strong> coastline management practices<br />
July 23, 2002 <strong>Plan</strong>ted Needle rush at Perdido Beach wetland<br />
shoreline<br />
July 24, 2002 BCWCP presentation to Bay Minette Rotary<br />
Club<br />
August 2, 2002 BCWCP staff met with a consultant for a large<br />
development corporation to discuss applications<br />
of the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital <strong>Wetland</strong> Layer<br />
for wetland delineation purposes<br />
August 7, 2002 BCWCP staff met with <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> survey<br />
crew at Perdido Beach to correct survey data<br />
August 15, 2002 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee Meeting<br />
August 20, 2002 Presented <strong>Wetland</strong> Validation Project results to<br />
85
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Commission and sent thank you<br />
letter to USACE.<br />
August 23, 2003 BCWCP staff met with local property owners in<br />
Point Clear regarding local wetland issues<br />
August 30, 2002 BCWCP presentation to journalism class at<br />
Faulkner State Community College<br />
September 12, 2002 <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />
Technical Advisory Meeting<br />
October 9, 2002 Field demonstration with press representative<br />
(Mobile Register) of <strong>Wetland</strong> Validation Study<br />
methodology<br />
October 14, 2002 BCWCP staff met with the <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
<strong>Plan</strong>ning Commission regarding updates to the<br />
subdivision regulations to incorporate protection<br />
for isolated wetlands<br />
October 17, 2002 BCWCP update to Gulf Shores Rotary Club<br />
November 5, 2002 Ken McIlwain, Resource Analyst, commences<br />
work at <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
December 9-13, 2002 Ken McIlwain attends ESRI training class in<br />
Atlanta, GA. Class pertains to Visual Basic<br />
programming for Functional Assessment Model<br />
development<br />
December 12, 2002 Meeting with USFWS to discuss Functional<br />
Assessment Model<br />
January 9, 2003 Work commences on Keeney Drive East<br />
wetland restoration project (joint project with<br />
USDA-NRCS)<br />
January 23, 2003 Staff met with assistant county engineer to<br />
discuss flooding issues associated with Keeney<br />
Drive East WRP site<br />
January 29, 2003 Staff met at Keeny Drive East WRP Site with<br />
local citizens to informally discuss public<br />
concerns<br />
February 6, 2003 Staff, District 6 <strong>County</strong> Commissioner, <strong>County</strong><br />
Administrator, <strong>County</strong> Engineer, and USDA-<br />
NRCS representative meet formally with<br />
concerned citizens of the Keeney Drive East area<br />
to discuss flooding, aesthetics, and completion<br />
date of the wetland restoration project<br />
February 13, 2003 Staff met with local conservation oriented<br />
citizens to identify and discuss the conservation<br />
of Pitcher <strong>Plan</strong>t Bogs in Northern <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong><br />
February 25, 2003 Keeney Drive East WRP Project completed with<br />
the planting of various types of wetland<br />
vegetation<br />
February 27, 2003 Staff met at <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> High School<br />
(BCHS) with USFWS to consider a wetland<br />
restoration project on the school campus<br />
March 6, 2003 Staff conducts field evaluation of large wetland<br />
areas to be impacted by the construction of<br />
86
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
5000+ acre subdivision in North <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong><br />
March 7, 2003 Staff, Volkert Engineering, and City of Foley<br />
staff meet to discuss the preservation of large<br />
depressional wetland in the City of Foley<br />
March 24, 2003 Staff met with Dr. Greg Jennings of North<br />
Carolina State University and Mr. Randy Roach<br />
of the USFWS to evaluate and develop a<br />
contingency plan for a possible streambank<br />
restoration project at Bohemian Park in south<br />
central <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
March 28, 2003 Staff conducts a field review of wetland projects<br />
in <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> (Keeney Drive & Gulf Shores<br />
Municipal Park)<br />
April 8, 2003 Basic programming language for Functional<br />
Assessment Model developed. Work<br />
commences on the development of the graphic<br />
user interfaces<br />
April 23-24, 2003 Staff meets with EPA Grant manager to discuss<br />
progress made on the Functional Assessment<br />
Model. Field tours of environmentally sensitive<br />
areas and wetland restoration project sites in<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
May 7, 2003 Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong> Park Site Visit<br />
May 9, 2003 Coastal Local Government <strong>Plan</strong>ning Meeting<br />
May 19, 2003 BCWCP update to Spanish Fort/Daphne Rotary<br />
Club<br />
May 23, 2003 Meeting with teacher at Fairhope High School to<br />
conduct a Grady Pond restoration project on the<br />
school’s campus<br />
June 6, 2003 Meeting with consultant and City of Gulf Shores<br />
at Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong> Park Site Visit<br />
June 17-24 BCWCP staff convert NWI data to HGM<br />
classification in the Remote Functional<br />
Assessment Model<br />
June 20, 2003 BCWCP update to Fairhope Kiwanis Club<br />
June 26, 2003 Staff meets representatives from State Lands<br />
Division to assist with pitcher plant bog<br />
identification<br />
July 16, 2003 <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> High School restoration project<br />
site meeting<br />
July 21, 2003 BCWCP Public Meeting – Bay Minette<br />
July 23, 2003 BCWCP Public Meeting – Fairhope<br />
July 24, 2003 BCWCP Public Meeting – Foley<br />
July 30, 2003 BCWCP staff meet with EPA grant manager to<br />
go over components of the Remote Functional<br />
Assessment Model<br />
August 11-12, 2003 BCWCP staff attends a workshop on<br />
conservation easements<br />
August 14, 2003 BCWCP staff updates workshop on on-site<br />
sewage disposal<br />
87
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
August 19, 2003 BCWCP staff meets with principal of <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong> High School<br />
August 27, 2003 BCWCP staff conduct site visit at Gulf Shores<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Park<br />
August 28, 2003 BCWCP Technical Advisory Committee Meeting<br />
September 10, 2003 BCWCP staff and EPA representatives assist<br />
ADCNR staff with wetland restoration activities<br />
on State Land<br />
September 11, 2003 BCWCP Advisory Committee Meeting<br />
September 11, 2003 BCWCP staff and EPA visit the Gulf Shores<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Park<br />
September 23, 2003 BCWCP staff meets with USFWS representatives<br />
to QA/QC wetland data<br />
October/November 2003 Staff calibrates the Remote Functional<br />
Assessment Model and modifies the code as per<br />
Technical Advisory Committee<br />
recommendations.<br />
October 21, 2003 BCWCP staff attends inter-agency scoping<br />
meeting to discuss EIS development of a<br />
proposed large-scale community in northern<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong><br />
November 13, 2003 BCWCP update to Point Clear Rotary Club<br />
December 2003 Staff completes a draft version of the BCWCP<br />
summary document<br />
December 31, 2003 BCWCP staff submits Draft BCWCP summary<br />
document<br />
88
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
8.2 Appendix 2: Validation Project<br />
Site ID Number Field Data Results <strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> Digital<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Layer<br />
1 UPLAND UP<br />
2 UPLAND UP<br />
3 UPLAND UP<br />
4 UPLAND UP<br />
6 UPLAND UP<br />
7 UPLAND UP<br />
8 WETLAND UP<br />
10 WETLAND WET<br />
11 UPLAND UP<br />
12 UPLAND UP<br />
13 WETLAND UP<br />
14 UPLAND UP<br />
15 UPLAND UP<br />
16 UPLAND UP<br />
17 WETLAND WET<br />
18 WETLAND UP<br />
19 UPLAND WET<br />
20 UPLAND UPLAND<br />
21 UPLAND UP<br />
22 WETLAND WET<br />
23 UPLAND UP<br />
25 UPLAND UP<br />
26 WETLAND WET<br />
27 WETLAND WET<br />
28 UPLAND UP<br />
29 WETLAND WET<br />
30 UPLAND UP<br />
31 UPLAND UP<br />
32 UPLAND UP<br />
34 WETLAND WET<br />
35 UPLAND UP<br />
36 UPLAND UP<br />
37 WETLAND WET<br />
38 UPLAND UP<br />
39 UPLAND UP<br />
40 WETLAND WET<br />
41 UPLAND UP<br />
42 WETLAND WET<br />
43 WETLAND WET<br />
89
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
45 UPLAND WET<br />
46 UPLAND UP<br />
47 WETLAND WET<br />
48 WETLAND WET<br />
50 WETLAND WET<br />
52 WETLAND WET<br />
53 UPLAND WET<br />
54 WETLAND UP<br />
55 UPLAND UP<br />
56 WETLAND WET<br />
57 UPLAND UP<br />
58 UPLAND UP<br />
59 UPLAND UP<br />
60 WETLAND WET<br />
62 UPLAND UP<br />
63 UPLAND UP<br />
64 UPLAND UP<br />
66 UPLAND UP<br />
68 WETLAND WET<br />
69 UPLAND WET<br />
70 WETLAND WET<br />
71 WETLAND WET<br />
72 UPLAND UP<br />
73 UPLAND UP<br />
74 UPLAND UP<br />
76 WETLAND WET<br />
77 WETLAND WET<br />
78 UPLAND UP<br />
79 UPLAND UP<br />
82 UPLAND UP<br />
83 UPLAND UP<br />
84 UPLAND UP<br />
85 UPLAND UP<br />
86 UPLAND UP<br />
87 UPLAND UP<br />
89 WETLAND WET<br />
90 UPLAND UP<br />
91 UPLAND UP<br />
92 UPLAND UP<br />
93 UPLAND UP<br />
94 UPLAND UP<br />
95 WETLAND WET<br />
96 WETLAND WET<br />
97 UPLAND UP<br />
90
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
98 UPLAND UP<br />
99 WETLAND UP<br />
100 UPLAND WET<br />
101 UPLAND WET<br />
102 UPLAND WET<br />
103 UPLAND UP<br />
104 UPLAND UP<br />
106 UPLAND UP<br />
107 UPLAND UP<br />
108 UPLAND WET<br />
109 UPLAND UP<br />
110 UPLAND UP<br />
111 WETLAND UP<br />
112 UPLAND UP<br />
113 UPLAND UP<br />
114 UPLAND UP<br />
115 UPLAND UP<br />
116 UPLAND UP<br />
117 UPLAND UP<br />
118 UPLAND UP<br />
119 WETLAND WET<br />
120 WETLAND UP<br />
121 UPLAND UP<br />
122 WETLAND WET<br />
123 UPLAND UP<br />
124 UPLAND UP<br />
125 UPLAND UP<br />
126 UPLAND UP<br />
127 UPLAND WET<br />
128 WETLAND UP<br />
130 UPLAND UP<br />
131 UPLAND UP<br />
132 UPLAND WET<br />
133 UPLAND WET<br />
135 WETLAND WET<br />
138 WETLAND WET<br />
139 WETLAND WET<br />
140 WETLAND UP<br />
141 UPLAND UP<br />
142 UPLAND UP<br />
143 UPLAND UP<br />
144 WETLAND WET<br />
145 UPLAND UP<br />
146 UPLAND UP<br />
91
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
148 UPLAND UP<br />
149 WETLAND WET<br />
150 WETLAND WET<br />
151 UPLAND UP<br />
152 UPLAND UP<br />
153 UPLAND UP<br />
154 UPLAND UP<br />
156 WETLAND WET<br />
157 UPLAND UP<br />
158 UPLAND UP<br />
160 UPLAND UP<br />
92
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
8.3 Appendix 9.3: Remote Functional <strong>Wetland</strong> Assessment Model Technical Protocol<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong><br />
Technical Protocol<br />
November 2003<br />
93
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
NOTE: For reading purposes, this version of the draft model contains only questions<br />
currently addressed in the models.<br />
Data column names and values are in blue type.<br />
94
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Functional Assessment Decision Tree:<br />
95
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Functions Assessed<br />
The Advisory Committee agreed that the model should address the same functions as the ADID<br />
Project.<br />
Determining the capacity of a wetland to perform a particular function, or suite of functions, is<br />
an objective of a functional assessment procedure. This capacity is expressed in functional<br />
capacity designations for all project area wetlands. There are a number of wetland functions to<br />
consider for possible inclusion into a functional assessment model. Ultimately, the wetland<br />
functions to be assessed are chosen based on their relative economic value to the local area.<br />
This value, or perceived societal importance, is measured largely in terms of economic benefits<br />
derived from the wetland resource. A wetland value is described as “something worthy,<br />
desirable or useful to humans” (Mitsch and Gosselink 1986). These values are somewhat<br />
subjective and vary from individual to individual and can range from aesthetic importance to<br />
recreational importance. This project assesses wetland functions, but these are closely linked to<br />
wetland values. The following table (Table 1.1) displays the wetland functions assessed for the<br />
project and their associated value to society.<br />
Table 1.1. <strong>Wetland</strong> Functions Assessed and Their Associated Value to Society.<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong> Function Associated Value To Society<br />
Water/Floodwater Storage Flood Damage Reduction/Water Quality<br />
Maintenance<br />
Sediment/Toxicant/Nutrient Removal Water Quality Maintenance<br />
Wildlife/Fisheries Habitat Aesthetic/Recreational/Hunting<br />
Groundwater Maintenance Water Supply/Water Quality Maintenance<br />
Each of the above functions will be assessed for each wetland type in the various functional<br />
assessment models. A number of variables (expressed as questions in the project format) will<br />
be used to address each function in the functional assessment models. Simply put, a variable is<br />
96
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
an indicator of function, which is used collectively with other indicators to address wetland<br />
functional capacity. Examples of variables to be used in this project include plant structural<br />
composition, wetland size, and water regime. The definitions for each wetland function to be<br />
used in the project are seen below. These definitions were adapted from existing literature, but<br />
were regionalized to better describe processes associated with local wetlands.<br />
Water/Floodwater Storage - the capacity of a wetland to retain surface water for long or short<br />
durations. The source of water may be overbank flow, overland flow or precipitation.<br />
Sediment/Toxicant/Nutrient Removal - the capacity of a wetland to capture, retain, remove<br />
and/or transform sediment, toxicants or nutrients which enter a wetland system. These<br />
processes are facilitated by physical, chemical and biological processes associated with the<br />
wetland system.<br />
Wildlife/Fisheries Habitat - the capacity of a wetland to provide the requisite needs, including<br />
foraging areas, water, cover, nesting areas and resting areas, to support expected species.<br />
Groundwater Maintenance - the capacity of a wetland to recharge aquifer water supplies,<br />
provide for aquifer discharge, and filter surface water which ultimately drains to the aquifer.<br />
97
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Flat Functional Assessment Model<br />
12 total points; 7 actual; 5 bonus; 2 possible subtractions<br />
Functional Assessment Ranges:<br />
61% <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
This functional assessment model will be applied to pine savanna and wet pine flat wetland<br />
types.<br />
Questions of Function:<br />
Water Storage<br />
Question 1: Is the observed wetland one (1) acre or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: <strong>Wetland</strong> size to be the most important factor in terms of water storage. As<br />
such, this variable has been weighted to consider wetlands of one (1), ten (10) and one<br />
hundred (100) acres in size. <strong>Wetland</strong>s of this size will have a significant water storage<br />
capacity and would be of higher functionality than smaller wetlands. Due to scale of<br />
mapping, an acre is approximately the smallest mapping unit which would consistently<br />
show up on the final map products and thus is the smallest area which was considered<br />
for this variable. This variable was identified remotely through digital NWI (NWI) data.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point<br />
Question 2: Is the observed wetland ten (10) acres or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: See question # 2.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point (for a total of 2 in the column)<br />
Question 3: Is the observed wetland one hundred (100) acres or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: See question # 2<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point (for a total of 3 in the column).<br />
Question 4: Is the observed wetland free of ditches?<br />
Rationale: The presence of a ditch may significantly alter the hydrologic regime of a<br />
wetland and reduce its ability to hold and slowly release water to the water table or<br />
aquifer. Consequently, the functional capacity to store water is diminished. This variable<br />
was identified remotely through NWI modifiers.<br />
Data Column: ditch; subtract 1 point<br />
Question 5: Does the adjacent land surrounding the observed wetland fall into one of the<br />
following land use categories: residential, commercial, industrial, transportation or<br />
mixed urban use?<br />
98
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Rationale: These land use categories are marked by the presence of impervious<br />
surfaces which will increase the volume of surface water sheet flow entering the wetland.<br />
Thus, a wetland surrounded by these land uses will be more likely to receive and store<br />
larger volumes of water. This variable was identified remotely through digital land use<br />
data provide by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).<br />
Data Column: WS_LULC; 1 point<br />
Sediment/Toxicant/Nutrient Removal<br />
Question1: Is the water regime of the observed wetland semipermanently flooded (F),<br />
seasonally flooded (C), saturated (B), seasonally flooded/saturated (E), or<br />
saturated/semipermanent/seasonally flooded (Y)?<br />
Rationale: If the wetland exhibits one of the above water regimes, it is likely to provide<br />
the alternating wet and dry conditions necessary to promote the microbial activity which<br />
aid in nutrient processing. This variable was identified remotely through digital NWI data.<br />
Data Column: wat_reg; 1 point<br />
Question 2: Does the adjacent land surrounding the observed wetland fall into one of the<br />
following land use categories: residential, commercial, industrial, transportation, mixed urban<br />
use or agriculture?<br />
Rationale: The assumption is that developed or agricultural lands which surround a<br />
wetland increase the nutrient, sediment or toxicant load (fertilizer, animal waste, polluted<br />
runoff) entering the system. Thus, a wetland in this position would have an increased<br />
opportunity to cycle nutrients and filter water exiting the system. Since this variable deals<br />
with the issue of opportunity rather than functional ability, a “no” response will not count<br />
against a particular wetland. Rather, this will serve as a “bonus” question allowing a<br />
wetland extra consideration if this variable applies. This variable was identified<br />
remotely through digital land use data supplied by FEMA.<br />
Data Column: STN_LULC; 1 point bonus<br />
Wildlife Habitat<br />
Question 1: Is the observed wetland free of government maintained roads?<br />
Rationale: Highly traveled road corridors (defined here as government maintained since<br />
a government entity would not normally maintain a road that was not highly traveled)<br />
which bisect wildlife habitat create obvious disturbances which negatively impact wildlife.<br />
In addition to the obvious traffic disturbances, secondary development (i.e. Commercial<br />
enterprise) is often a result and is ultimately located adjacent to these highly traveled<br />
road corridors. Also, roads which bisect a wetland reduce habitat capability by<br />
fragmenting the landscape. This variable was identified remotely through <strong>Baldwin</strong><br />
<strong>County</strong>’s digital centerline file. The NWI often have gaps in wetland polygons where<br />
roads exist. Therefore, a 100’ road buffer was used to identify all wetlands that are<br />
actually affected by the presence of a road. <strong>Wetland</strong>s polygons that were contained<br />
within a wetland system of greater than 100 acres were not affected.<br />
99
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Data Column: roads; subtract 1 point<br />
Question 2: Is the observed wetland located in area where an endangered species has been<br />
observed?<br />
Rationale: The USFWS and ADCNR provided point data of known areas where<br />
endangered species have been observed. A 1/8 mile buffer was applied to these points.<br />
The intersection of a wetland and 1/8 mile buffer zones constitutes a bonus point for the<br />
observed wetland.<br />
Data Column: endan; 1 point bonus<br />
Question 3: Does the observed wetland provide a corridor of movement for expected wildlife as<br />
indicated by its presence in one of the following land use categories: forest or<br />
wetland?<br />
Rationale: A wetland which may not necessarily serve as habitat, but does provide a<br />
corridor of movement for wildlife between two habitats is important to the habitat<br />
function. This variable was identified remotely through FEMA land use data.<br />
Data Column: WILDLULC; 1 point<br />
Question 4: Is the observed wetland located in an area that has burned within the last ten<br />
years?<br />
Rationale: Fire is a variable closely associated with maintaining the characteristic plant<br />
community of a wet pine flatwood or a pine savannah. It helps maintain the proper<br />
vegetative cover required for expected species. Thus, a flat which is burned periodically<br />
is of higher functionality than one that is not. This variable was identified remotely<br />
through <strong>Alabama</strong> Forestry Commission (AFC) digital data.<br />
Data Column: burn; 1 point bonus<br />
Question 5: Is the adjacent land use compatible with supporting the expected wildlife as<br />
indicated by being located in one of the following land use categories: agriculture,<br />
rangeland, forest or wetland?<br />
Rationale: Land use adjacent to wetland habitat has a significant impact upon the<br />
species which utilize that habitat. <strong>Wetland</strong>s are more valuable for habitat when<br />
surrounding land use meets specific wildlife needs such as temporary escape, resting<br />
cover and seasonal food sources. The listed land use categories provide for these<br />
specific needs. This variable can be identified remotely through digital land use data<br />
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).<br />
Data Column: WILLULC2; 1 point<br />
Groundwater Maintenance<br />
100
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
1. Is the observed wetland within the zone of influence (designated wellhead protection<br />
area for the 10 year time of travel capture zone) of a major groundwater pumping center (i.e.<br />
withdrawal rates of three to four million gallons a day)?<br />
Rationale: Historically, wetlands in the Project area served as aquifer discharge areas.<br />
Recent development, however, has increased the need for large groundwater pumping<br />
stations in the Project area. These pumping stations draw down water in the aquifer thus<br />
forcing the wetland to engage in an aquifer recharge function. So the wetlands within the<br />
zone of influence become important in replenishing aquifer supplies and filtering<br />
contaminants before they reach the water supply. Since this variable deals with a<br />
human- induced condition, a “no” response will not count against a particular wetland.<br />
Rather, it will serve as a “bonus” question allowing a wetland extra consideration if this<br />
variable applies. This variable was identified remotely through digital maps provided by<br />
the EPA.<br />
Data Column: wellhead; 2 point bonus<br />
101
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Riverine Functional Assessment Model<br />
16 total points; 11 actual; 5 bonus; 1 possible subtraction<br />
Functional Assessment Ranges:<br />
80% <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
This functional assessment model will be applied to swamps and hardwood bottoms and<br />
fresh marshes associated with riparian systems.<br />
General Items:<br />
Questions of Function:<br />
Floodwater Storage<br />
Question 1: Is the observed wetland within the 100 year floodplain?<br />
Rationale: If the wetland is in a topographic position which receives frequent flood<br />
events (as indicated by occurring within the 100 year floodplain), then the wetland is<br />
likely to perform the floodwater storage function at a higher level than a wetland which is<br />
outside an area of frequent flooding. This variable was identified remotely through digital<br />
floodplain maps from FEMA.<br />
Data Column: Flood; 1 point<br />
Question 2: Is the observed wetland one (1) acre or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: <strong>Wetland</strong> size was considered to be one of the most important factors in terms<br />
of water storage. As such, this variable has been weighted to consider wetlands of one<br />
(1), ten (10) and one hundred (100) acres in size. <strong>Wetland</strong>s of this size will have a<br />
significant water storage capacity and would be of higher functionality than smaller<br />
wetlands. Due to scale of mapping, an acre is approximately the smallest mapping unit<br />
which would consistently show up on the final map products and thus is the smallest<br />
area which was considered for this variable. This variable was identified remotely<br />
through digital NWI (NWI) maps.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point<br />
Question 3: Is the observed wetland ten (10) acres or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: See question # 2.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point (for a total of 2 in the column)<br />
Question 4: Is the observed wetland one hundred (100) acres or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: See question #2.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point (for a total of 3 in the column)<br />
Question 5: Is the water regime of the observed wetland either intermittently exposed (G),<br />
semipermanently flooded (F), seasonally flooded (C), or temporarily flooded (A)?<br />
102
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Rationale: Floodwater storage capacity is greatest with alternating wet and dry<br />
conditions as found in the regimes listed above. <strong>Wetland</strong>s that are permanently flooded<br />
have little additional capacity to store water during flood events; while those that flood<br />
less often than seasonally play a lesser role than others in storing floodwaters. Thus,<br />
those that exhibit the above NWI water regimes are considered to function at a higher<br />
level than those that have different regimes. This variable was identified remotely<br />
through digital NWI maps.<br />
Data Column: wat_reg; 1 point<br />
Question 6: Does the adjacent land use surrounding the observed wetland fall into one of the<br />
following land use categories; residential, commercial, industrial, transportation or<br />
mixed urban use?<br />
Rationale: These land use categories are marked by the presence of impervious<br />
surfaces which will increase the volume of surface water sheetflow entering the wetland.<br />
Thus, a wetland surrounded by these land uses will be more likely to receive and store<br />
larger volumes of water. This variable was identified remotely through digital land use<br />
data provide by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).<br />
Data Column: WS_LULC; 1 point<br />
Sediment/Toxicant/Nutrient Removal and Soil Stabilization<br />
Question 1: Does the observed wetland contain rooted vegetation or coarse woody debris as<br />
indicated by one of the following NWI class designations: FO, SS or EM?<br />
Rationale: Rooted vegetation and coarse woody debris provide frictional resistance for<br />
water flow thus slowing water as it moves through the wetland. This water velocity<br />
reduction allows sediments to settle out of the water column thus resulting in improved<br />
water quality. For nutrient cycling to occur, both living and dead biomass must be<br />
present. The presence of coarse woody debris indicates a level of decomposition which<br />
will ultimately release nutrients into the soil which can then be assimilated into living<br />
material through plant uptake. Although the presence of coarse woody debris cannot be<br />
measured directly through remote techniques, it was determined indirectly. In a natural<br />
riverine ecosystem there is both living and dead material. Thus, if a site contains rooted<br />
live vegetation (which was measured remotely through NWI) it follows that the site would<br />
also contain dead material (in some form). Thus the presence of rooted vegetation is<br />
indicative of nutrient cycling occurring on the site which indicates a high level of function<br />
for this variable.<br />
Data Column: root_veg; 1 point<br />
Question 2: Is the water regime of the observed wetland either intermittently exposed (G),<br />
semi- permanently flooded (F), seasonally flooded (C), or temporarily flooded (A)?<br />
Rationale: If the wetland exhibits one of the above water regimes, it is likely to provide<br />
the alternating wet and dry conditions necessary to promote the microbial activity, found<br />
in anaerobic conditions, which aid in nutrient processing. This variable was identified<br />
remotely through digital NWI data.<br />
103
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Data Column: wat_reg2; 1 point<br />
Question 3. Does the adjacent land surrounding the observed wetland fall into one of the<br />
following land use categories: residential, commercial, industrial, transportation,<br />
mixed urban use or agriculture?<br />
Rationale: The assumption is that developed or agricultural lands which surround a<br />
wetland would increase the nutrient, sediment or toxicant load (fertilizer, animal waste,<br />
polluted runoff) entering the system. Thus, a wetland in this position would have an<br />
increased opportunity to cycle nutrients and filter water exiting the system. Since this<br />
variable deals with the issue of opportunity rather than functional ability, a “no” response<br />
will not count against a particular wetland. Rather, this will serve as a “bonus” question<br />
allowing a wetland extra consideration if this variable applies. This variable was<br />
identified remotely through digital land use data supplied by the FEMA.<br />
Data Column: STN_LULC; 1 point bonus<br />
Wildlife/Fisheries Habitat<br />
1. Is the observed wetland free from government maintained roads?<br />
Rationale: Highly traveled road corridors (defined here as government maintained since<br />
a government would not normally maintain a road that was not highly traveled) which<br />
bisect wildlife habitat create disturbances which negatively impact wildlife. In addition to<br />
the obvious traffic disturbances, secondary development (i.e. commercial enterprise) is<br />
often located adjacent to these road corridors which can further impact habitat. Also,<br />
roads which bisect a wetland reduce habitat capability by fragmenting the landscape.<br />
This variable was identified remotely through county digital centerline data. The NWI<br />
often have gaps in wetland polygons where roads exist. Therefore, a 100’ road buffer<br />
was used to identify all wetlands that are actually affected by the presence of a road.<br />
<strong>Wetland</strong>s polygons that were contained within a wetland system of greater than 100<br />
acres were not affected.<br />
Data Column: roads; subtract 1 point<br />
Question 2: Is the observed wetland forested as indicated by the FO class designation from<br />
NWI?<br />
Rationale: Forested areas contain a mast supply (hard or soft - depending upon the<br />
cover type) and provide adequate cover for wildlife. Forested wetlands provide vertical<br />
and horizontal layers of habitats that are important to a diverse wildlife community.<br />
Forests also provide other important wildlife niches that are unavailable in non-forested<br />
habitats, such as cavities, snags and woody debris. Silvicultural activities on forested<br />
wetlands also provide important habitat components by providing different stages of tree<br />
growth which attract and support a variety of wildlife. This variable was identified<br />
remotely through NWI digital data.<br />
Data Column: forest; 1 point bonus<br />
104
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Question 3: Is the observed wetland located in area where an endangered species has been<br />
observed?<br />
Rationale: The USFWS and ADCNR provided point data of known areas where<br />
endangered species have been observed. A 1/8 mile buffer was applied to these points.<br />
The intersection of a wetland and 1/8 mile buffer zones constitutes a bonus point for the<br />
observed wetland.<br />
Data Column: endan; 1 point bonus<br />
Question 4: Does the observed wetland provide a corridor of movement for expected wildlife as<br />
indicated by its presence in one of the following land use categories: forest or<br />
wetland?<br />
Rationale: A wetland which may not necessarily serve as habitat, but does provide a<br />
corridor of movement for wildlife between two habitats is important to the habitat<br />
function. This variable was identified remotely through FEMA land use data.<br />
Data Column: WILDLULC; 1 point<br />
Question 5: Is the adjacent land use compatible with supporting the expected wildlife as<br />
indicated by being located in one of the following land use categories:<br />
agriculture, rangeland, forest or wetland?<br />
Rationale: Land use adjacent to wetland habitat has a significant impact upon the<br />
species which utilize that habitat. <strong>Wetland</strong>s are more valuable for habitat when<br />
surrounding land use meets specific wildlife needs such as temporary escape, resting<br />
cover and seasonal food sources. Agricultural or forest lands adjacent to wetlands<br />
provide better wildlife habitat than a subdivision or shopping center. This variable was<br />
identified remotely through digital land use data provided by FEMA.<br />
Data Column: WILLULC2; 1 point<br />
Groundwater Maintenance<br />
Question 1. Is the observed wetland within the 100 year floodplain?<br />
Rationale: Typically, riverine wetlands discharge groundwater into adjacent open waters.<br />
These wetlands filter the discharged water of contaminants and sediments before<br />
entering into adjacent open waters. Thus, wetlands located within the 100 year<br />
floodplain play a critical role in filtering contaminants before they enter a body of water.<br />
This variable was identified remotely through digital floodplain maps.<br />
Data Column: flood2; 1 point<br />
Question 2. Is the observed wetland within the zone of influence (i.e. designated<br />
wellhead protection area for the 10 year time of travel capture zone) of a<br />
105
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
major groundwater pumping center (withdrawal rates of three to four million<br />
gallons a day)?<br />
Rationale: Historically, wetlands in the Project area served as aquifer discharge areas.<br />
Recent development, however, has increased the need for large groundwater pumping<br />
stations in the Project area. These pumping stations draw down water in the aquifer thus<br />
forcing the wetland to engage in an aquifer recharge function. So the wetlands within the<br />
zone of influence become important in replenishing aquifer water supplies and filtering<br />
contaminants before they reach the water supply. Since this variable deals with a<br />
human-induced condition, a “no” response will not count against a particular wetland.<br />
Rather, it will serve as a bonus question allowing a wetland extra consideration if this<br />
variable applies. This variable was identified remotely through digital maps provided by<br />
the EPA.<br />
Data Column: wellhead; 2 point bonus<br />
106
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Depressional Functional Assessment Model<br />
10 Total points; 4 Actual; 6 Bonus; 2 possible subtractions<br />
Functional Assessment Ranges:<br />
50% <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong>s<br />
This functional assessment model will be applied to isolated wetlands.<br />
Questions of Function:<br />
Water Storage<br />
Question 1. Is the observed wetland one (1) acre or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: <strong>Wetland</strong> size was considered to be one of the most important factors in terms<br />
of water storage. As such, this variable has been weighted to consider wetlands of one<br />
(1), ten (10) or one hundred (100) acres in size. <strong>Wetland</strong>s of this size will have a<br />
significant water storage capacity and would be of higher functionality than smaller<br />
wetlands. Due to scale of mapping, an acre is approximately the smallest mapping unit<br />
which would consistently show up on the final map products and thus is the smallest<br />
area which was considered for this variable. This variable was identified remotely<br />
through digital National <strong>Wetland</strong> Inventory (NWI) data.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point<br />
Question 2. Is observed wetland ten (10) acres or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: See question # 1. This question served as a bonus.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate; 1 point bonus (for a total of 2 in the column)<br />
Question 3. Is observed wetland one hundred (100) acres or larger in size?<br />
Rationale: See question # 1. This question served as a bonus.<br />
Data Column: Acres_Rate ; 1 point bonus (for a total of 3 in the column)<br />
Question 4. Does the adjacent land use (i.e. residential, commercial, industrial, transportation or<br />
mixed urban use) surrounding the observed wetland provide for overland flow of<br />
surface water into the wetland?<br />
Rationale: Impervious surfaces, found mainly in urban setting (including residential,<br />
commercial or industrial land uses), will increase the volume of surface water entering<br />
the wetland. Thus, a wetland surrounded by these land uses will be more likely to<br />
receive and store larger volumes of water. This variable was identified remotely through<br />
digital land use data from FEMA.<br />
Data Column: WS_LULC; 1 point<br />
107
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Question 5. Is the observed wetland free of ditches as indicated by the absence of the NWI “d”<br />
special modifier?<br />
Rationale: The presence of ditches significantly alters the hydrologic regime of a wetland<br />
and reduces its ability to hold and slowly release water to the water table or aquifer.<br />
Consequently, the functional capacity to store water is diminished. This variable was<br />
identified remotely through digital NWI data.<br />
Data Column: ditch; subtract 1 point<br />
Question 6: Is observed wetland inside the zone of influence (designated wellhead protection<br />
area for the 10 year time of travel capture zone) of a major groundwater pumping<br />
center (withdrawal rates of three to four million gallons a day)?<br />
Rationale: Depressional wetlands within the Project area depend partly on groundwater<br />
discharge for their hydrologic requirements. Proximity of a wetland to a groundwater<br />
withdrawal well, which lowers the groundwater level within the zone of influence, could<br />
affect the hydrology of a wetland by lowering the water table. A wetland within the zone<br />
of influence of a groundwater withdrawal well would be more likely to exhibit a reduction<br />
in the groundwater table and would thus store more water than a wetland outside the<br />
zone of influence of a large groundwater withdrawal well. Since this variable deals with a<br />
human-induced condition, a “no” response will not count against a particular wetland.<br />
Rather, it will serve as a bonus question allowing a wetland extra consideration if this<br />
variable applies. This variable was identified remotely through digital maps provided by<br />
the EPA.<br />
Data Column: wellhead; 1 point bonus<br />
Sediment/Toxicant/Nutrient Removal<br />
Question 1: Does the adjacent land use surrounding the observed wetland fall into one<br />
of the following land use categories: residential, commercial, industrial,<br />
transportation, mixed urban use or agriculture?<br />
Rationale: The assumption is that developed or agricultural lands which surround a<br />
wetland would increase the nutrient, sediment, and toxicant load (fertilizer, animal waste,<br />
polluted runoff) entering the system. Thus, a wetland in this position would have an<br />
increased opportunity to cycle nutrients and filter water exiting the system. Since this<br />
variable deals with the issue of opportunity rather than functional performance, a “no”<br />
response will not count against a particular wetland. Rather, this will serve as a “bonus”<br />
question allowing a wetland extra consideration if this variable applies. This variable was<br />
identified remotely through digital land use data from FEMA.<br />
Data Column: STN_LULC; 1 point bonus<br />
Wildlife Habitat<br />
Question 1: Is the observed wetland free from government maintained roads?<br />
108
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Rationale: Highly traveled road corridors (defined here as government maintained since<br />
a government entity would not normally maintain a road that was not highly traveled)<br />
which bisect wildlife habitat create disturbances which negatively impact wildlife. In<br />
addition to the obvious traffic disturbances, secondary development (i.e. Commercial<br />
enterprise) is often located adjacent to these road corridors which can lead to further<br />
wildlife impacts. Also, roads which bisect a wetland reduce habitat capability by<br />
fragmenting the landscape. This variable was identified remotely through county digital<br />
centerline data. The NWI often have gaps in wetland polygons where roads exist.<br />
Therefore, a 100’ road buffer was used to identify all wetlands that are actually affected<br />
by the presence of a road.<br />
Data Column: roads; subtract 1 point<br />
Question 2: Is the adjacent land use compatible with supporting the expected wildlife as<br />
indicated by being located in one of the following land use categories: agriculture,<br />
rangeland, forest or wetland?<br />
Rationale: Land use adjacent to a wetland habitat has a significant impact upon the<br />
species which utilize that habitat. <strong>Wetland</strong>s are more valuable for habitat when<br />
surrounding land use meets specific wildlife needs such as temporary escape, resting<br />
cover and seasonal food sources. Agricultural or forest lands adjacent to wetlands<br />
provide better wildlife habitat than a subdivision or shopping center. This variable was<br />
identified remotely through digital land use data from FEMA.<br />
Data Column: WILDLULC; 1 point<br />
Question 3: Is the water regime of the observed wetland either semi-permanently flooded (F) or<br />
permanently flooded (H)? (According to NWI).<br />
Rationale: A water source is a critical requirement for all species, both for habitat<br />
purposes and for drinking. The above water regimes provide both of these components.<br />
These regimes provide habitat for many wading birds, and also provide species with a<br />
good source of water to satisfy their daily water requirements. This variable was<br />
identified remotely through digital NWI data.<br />
Data Column: wat_reg; 1 point<br />
Groundwater Maintenance<br />
Question1: Is the observed wetland inside the zone of influence (designated wellhead protection<br />
area for the 10 year time of travel capture zone) of a major groundwater pumping<br />
center (withdrawal rates of three to four million gallons a day)?<br />
Rationale: Historically, wetlands in the Project area served as aquifer discharge areas.<br />
Recent development, however, has increased the need for large groundwater pumping<br />
stations in the Project area. These pumping stations draw down water in the aquifer thus<br />
forcing the wetland to engage in an aquifer recharge function. So the wetlands within the<br />
zone of influence become important in replenishing aquifer supplies and filtering<br />
109
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
contaminants before they reach the water supply. Since this variable deals with humaninduced<br />
condition, a “no” response will not count against a particular wetland. Rather, it<br />
will serve as a bonus question allowing a wetland extra consideration if this variable<br />
applies. This variable was identified remotely through digital maps provided by the EPA.<br />
Data Column: welhead2; 2 point bonus<br />
110
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
8.4 Appendix 4: Final Summary Table<br />
Watershed HGM Type Acres Total Acres % HGM Type<br />
Perdido Bay Riverine 8056 19278 41.8%<br />
Perdido Bay Fringe 4542 19278 23.6%<br />
Perdido Bay Flat 2120 19278 11.0%<br />
Perdido Bay Depressional 4560 19278 23.7%<br />
Perdido Riverine 94831 99851 95.0%<br />
Perdido Fringe 1389 99851 1.4%<br />
Perdido Flat 2586 99851 2.6%<br />
Perdido Depressional 1045 99851 1.0%<br />
Mobile-Tensaw Riverine 87168 112936 77.2%<br />
Mobile-Tensaw Fringe 25085 112936 22.2%<br />
Mobile-Tensaw Flat 276 112936 0.2%<br />
Mobile-Tensaw Depressional 407 112936 0.4%<br />
Mobile Bay Riverine 15305 31711 48.3%<br />
Mobile Bay Fringe 4557 31711 14.4%<br />
Mobile Bay Flat 8881 31711 28.0%<br />
Mobile Bay Depressional 2968 31711 9.4%<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> Riverine 35491 36384 97.5%<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> Fringe 0 36384 0.0%<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> Flat 249 36384 0.7%<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> Depressional 644 36384 1.8%<br />
Watershed Classification Acres Total Acres % Class<br />
Perdido Bay conservation 16133 18982 85.0%<br />
Perdido Bay enhancement 2354 18982 12.4%<br />
Perdido Bay restoration 495 18982 2.6%<br />
Perdido conservation 78280 98446 79.5%<br />
Perdido enhancement 17794 98446 18.1%<br />
Perdido restoration 2372 98446 2.4%<br />
Mobile-Tensaw conservation 100821 106938 94.3%<br />
Mobile-Tensaw enhancement 5640 106938 5.3%<br />
Mobile-Tensaw restoration 477 106938 0.4%<br />
Mobile Bay conservation 26582 31197 85.2%<br />
Mobile Bay enhancement 3705 31197 11.9%<br />
Mobile Bay restoration 910 31197 2.9%<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> conservation 35221 35978 97.9%<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> enhancement 705 35978 2.0%<br />
Lower <strong>Alabama</strong> restoration 52 35978 0.1%<br />
<strong>County</strong> Classification Acres Total Acres % Class<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> conservation 257037 291541 88.2%<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> enhancement 30198 291541 10.4%<br />
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> restoration 4306 291541 1.5%<br />
HGM Type Classification Acres Total Acres % Class<br />
Riverine conservation 213092 240854 88.5%<br />
Riverine enhancement 24606 240854 10.2%<br />
Riverine restoration 3155 240854 1.3%<br />
Fringe conservation 35574 35574 100.0%<br />
Fringe enhancement 0 35574 0.0%<br />
Fringe restoration 0 35574 0.0%<br />
111
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
Flat conservation 11104 14114 78.7%<br />
Flat enhancement 2637 14114 18.7%<br />
Flat restoration 373 14114 2.6%<br />
Depressional conservation 5803 9626 60.3%<br />
Depressional enhancement 3031 9626 31.5%<br />
Depressional restoration 791 9626 8.2%<br />
112
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
8.5 Appendix 5: <strong>Wetland</strong> Validation Newspaper Article<br />
113
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
114
<strong>Baldwin</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>Wetland</strong> <strong>Conservation</strong> <strong>Plan</strong> Final Summary Document<br />
8.6 Appendix 6: Gulf Shores <strong>Wetland</strong> Park Conceptual Site <strong>Plan</strong><br />
115