1086535 - BMER LRMP Riparian PFC - Form - Lentic.pdf

Appendix A—Assessment Forms and Instructions

RIPARIAN AREA MANAGEMENT – Proper Functioning Condition Assessment for Lentic Areas

Lentic Riparian-Wetland Assessment Area Information Form

I. Background information: Date:

Riparian-wetland area name: Area ID:

Management unit (allotment/pasture, other):

Administrative unit/state:

ID team members:

Areal extent of riparian-wetland assessment area: (acres/hectares – circle one)

Assessment method:

Complete ground reconnaissance

Ground inspection of selected representative areas

Remote imagery with selective ground inspection of representative or other areas requiring closer inspection

II. Location of riparian-wetland assessment area:

Location: Attach aerial image, USGS 7.5-minute topographic map, or GIS map with the riparian-wetland assessment area delineated. Use GIS in the office or GPS in the field to obtain a representative location to affix a point to the riparian-wetland assessment area.

GIS/GPS point location of riparian-wetland assessment area

Latitude: N Longitude: W or

UTM E m UTM N m

Datum: NAD27 NAD83 WGS84 Other (specify):

UTM Zone (required for UTM coordinates):

III. Description of potential and rationale: Should include description of hydrologic regime, geomorphic setting, important soil properties, and riparian-wetland plant communities at potential (if altered potential is present, use the “Altered Potential Attachment” below):

IV. Other assessment or monitoring data or information about the riparian-wetland assessment area:

Lentic Riparian-Wetland Assessment Area Information Form – Altered Potential Attachment

See appendix D for instructions and examples for addressing these questions.

1. Have the alterations created artificial conditions for a substantial part of the site (and riparian-wetland functions are not present or expected)?

2. Are alterations present, but the potential of the site remains unchanged?

3. Has a new lentic riparian-wetland area been created in a former upland area?

4. Are alterations present that have changed the potential of an existing lentic site (but have not created artificial site conditions described in question #1 for a substantial part of the site)?

PFC Assessment Form (Lentic)

Riparian-wetland area name: Date:

Assessment ID team members:

Riparian-wetland area ID:

Yes No NA HYDROLOGY

1. Riparian-wetland area is saturated at or near the surface or inundated in “relatively frequent” events.

Rationale:

2. Fluctuation of water levels is within a range that maintains hydrologic functions and riparian-wetland vegetation.

Rationale:

3. Riparian-wetland area is enlarging or has achieved potential extent.

Rationale:

4. Riparian-wetland impairment from the contributing area is absent.

Rationale:

5. Water quality is sufficient to support riparian-wetland plants.

Rationale:

6. Disturbances or features that negatively affect surface- and subsurface- flow patterns are absent. These disturbances/features include but are not limited to hoof action, dams, dikes, levees, spring boxes, diversions, trails, roads, rills, gullies, drilling activities.

Rationale:

7. Impoundment structure accommodates safe passage of flows (e.g., no headcut affecting dam or spillway).

Rationale:

Yes No NA VEGETATION

8. There is adequate diversity of stabilizing riparian-wetland vegetation for recovery/ maintenance.

Rationale:

9. There are adequate age classes of stabilizing riparian-wetland vegetation for recovery/maintenance.

Rationale:

10. Species present indicate maintenance of riparian-wetland soil-moisture characteristics.

11. Stabilizing plant communities are present that are capable of withstanding overland flows (e.g., storm events, snowmelt), and wind and wave actions, and can resist physical alteration.

Rationale:

12. Riparian-wetland plants exhibit high vigor.

Rationale:

13. An adequate amount of stabilizing riparian-wetland vegetation is present to protect soil surfaces and shorelines, to dissipate energy from overland flows and wind and wave actions, and to resist physical alteration.

Rationale:

14. Abnormal frost or hydrologic heaving is absent.

Rationale:

15. Favorable microsite condition (e.g., woody material, water temperature) is maintained by adjacent site characteristics.

Yes No NA SOILS/GEOMORPHOLOGY

16. Accumulation of chemicals affecting plant productivity/composition is absent.

Rationale:

17. Saturation of soils (i.e., ponding, flooding frequency, and duration) is sufficient to compose and maintain hydric soils.

Rationale:

18. Underlying geologic material/soil material/permafrost is capable of restricting water percolation.

Rationale:

19. Riparian-wetland area is in balance with the water and sediment being supplied by the watershed (i.e., no excessive erosion or deposition).

Rationale:

20. Islands and shoreline characteristics (i.e., rocks, coarse and/or large woody material) are adequate to dissipate wind- and wave-event energies.

Summary Determination

Functional rating (check one)

Proper functioning condition

Functional–at risk

Nonfunctional

Trend for FAR rating (check one) Monitored trend Apparent trend

Upward Upward

Downward Downward

Static Not apparent

Rationale for rating:

Rationale for trend (for FAR rating):

PFC

FAR

NF

Are there factors present preventing the achievement of PFC or affecting progress towards desired condition that are outside the control of the manager?

Yes No

If yes, what are those factors? Check all that apply.

Flow regulation Land ownership Road encroachment

Mining activity Dewatering Oil field water discharge

Watershed condition Dredging activity Augmented flows

Other (specify): __________________________________________________________________

Explain factors preventing achievement of PFC: