Maryland Department of the Environment Water Management Administration Wetlands and Waterways Program

Goals for Wetland Monitoring Strategy C Meet Requirements of Clean Water Act Use classes, water quality standards, 305(b) 303(d) TMDLs Integrate Results into Regulatory Program for Permit Review and Mitigation Improve Voluntary Wetland Restoration and Protection Integrate Results with other Planning and Water Monitoring, and Water/Natural Resources Management C

Existing Monitoring Efforts Best Professional Judgment for Small Wetland Impacts Formal Functional Assessment for State Highway Projects Monitoring of Mitigation Sites Test Studies of Wetland Condition – Completed, In progress or Near Future Nanticoke watershed, Piedmont slope, Test case, Patuxent watersheds

Steps in Development of Strategy Obtain Grant for Strategy Development (2004-2008) Form Workgroup of Interested Parties MDE, DNR, SHA, MDA, Corps, EPA, Local Governments, Volunteer Groups, Universities, other research institutions Set Goals and timeline Identify Monitoring Needs, Uses, Tools incl. Databases, information exchange, GIS data, wetland classification, sampling design, landowner contact

Steps in Development of Strategy – cont. Consider wetland function and condition Evaluate data for Level 1,2,3 Assessments, including digital and paper reference information To be evaluated: wetland maps permit data other land features soil information mitigation sites land use water quality data MBSS elevations wetland assessments Green Infrastructure

Steps in Development of Strategy – cont. Refine Identification of Gaps and Needs for Level 1,2,3 Reach Consensus on Protocols Test case Develop Use Class, Water Quality Criteria Description of Steps to Integrate Monitoring Results in Regulatory and Non-regulatory Wetland Management Efforts Final Report with background information, analysis of data sources considered and decisions on use, literature citations, deliberations, detailed work plan, and task assignments

Status of Current Discussions Mid-Atlantic Wetland Work Group (MAWWG) –EPA, MD, VA, DE, OH, WV, NC, PA, NY, NJ, VIMS, PSU, U-DE What Should Be Assessed? What Assessments Should Be Conducted? What Classification System Should be Used? How Should Use Designations Be Structured?

What Should Be Assessed What Should Be Assessed? Condition as Deviation from Reference Condition Function with Effectiveness and Opportunity Conceptual Results: Present Results indicating wetland condition as meeting/not meeting natural integrity use; and Results indicating wetlands that meet functional use designations

What Assessments Should be Conducted? 3 Tiers of Assessment – Landscape, Rapid, Intensive Landscape (Level 1) – GIS Analysis, using existing data layers Rapid – (Level 2) Evaluation of Stressors during Brief Field Visit Intensive - (Level 3) Additional Data Collection Level 3 Used to Calibrate Level 1 and Level 2 Data collection varies – ½ day in Nanticoke, 2 years in Va. pilot EPA offers assistance in sample study design. Recommends 50 samples/wetland type

Discussion Lags Behind Development of Assessment Methods Designated Uses Discussion Lags Behind Development of Assessment Methods Tiered Aquatic Life Use Support (TALUS)– Encouraged for water quality standards 6 Levels of Biological Condition Gradient Includes Function Different Levels Consider Presence of Natural and Sensitive Species, Tolerant Species, Diversity Originally Designed for Permanent Streams Functional Decline Lags Behind Condition Change Have Been Developed in Several States

Designated Uses cont. Try to “Lump” Classes Consider Distinguishing Between Physiographic Regions Separate Class for Man-made Wetlands

Classification System Hydrogeomorphic Assessment (HGM) – currently favored by EPA Region III. Uses hydrology source, landscape position, physiographic region to classify wetlands – e.g. tidal fringe, depression, riverine, flat, slope National Wetland Inventory Existing classification on base maps, uses hydrology, salinity, vegetation, duration of inundation Other - Ohio uses HGM w/ vegetation modifier MD tidal wetland system, DNR Community Classification –Key Wildlife Habitats

Hydrogeomorphic (HGM) Assessment Developed by Brinson (USACOE. 1993) to evaluate impacts on wetland functions in response to CWA 404 permitting. Based on three factors that create and maintain function Landscape position (geomorphic setting) Water source (hydrology) Flow and fluctuation of water in wetland (hydrodynamics)

Riverine Depressional Slope Flats (mineral) Flats (organic) Fringe (Estuarine) Fringe (Lacustrine)

Key Wildlife Habitats Concept developed as a required element of State Wildlife Action Plan for all states Method to focus conservation for about 500 GCN species, as well as the full array of wildlife that also occurs within those habitats Conserve entire assemblages of species by working to protect and conserve key wildlife habitats

Key Wildlife Habitats cont. Based on GCN species with input from DNR, scientific experts, stakeholders Use of existing, data-driven and standardized ecoregion and vegetative classification systems NWI, USNVC, MD Ecological Community groups, Ecological Systems

List of Key Wildlife Habitats (wetlands) Floodplain Forests Nontidal Shrub Wetlands Forested Seepage Wetlands Tidal Shrub Wetlands Carolina Bays Nontidal Emergent Wetlands Vernal Pools Tidal Marshes Upland Depressional Swamps Bog and Fen Wetland Complexes

Modified Wetland Classification Renames, Consolidates, Revises HGM classes, Allows for Cross Walk with HGM and Key Wildlife Habitats Tidal Wetlands (may separate into estuarine and freshwater) Riparian Headwater Wetland – may have multiple hydrology sources, include slope and depressional complexes in or connected to floodplain Riparian Mainstem Wetland – may have multiple hydrology sources, including overbank flooding, include slope and depressional complexes in or connected to floodplain

Modified Wetland Classification cont. Isolated Wetland – not hydrologically connected to surface water body, may include slopes or depressions Seasonal Flat Wetland – slow infiltration of surface water, high groundwater, level topography, may or may not be connected Peatland Wetlands – sphagnous mat, organic soils, accumulated peat, year-round soil saturation

Modified Wetland Classification cont. Altered, Constructed, or Incidental Wetland – Actively managed or established due to human activity (wetlands in stormwater facility). May have increased or decreased functional performance. May not initially be comparable to reference wetland, but may resemble natural reference over time (e.g. mitigation or created/restored wetlands) Does not include wetlands under management to replace natural process (e.g. fire)

Resolve Differences Between HGM/Modified State System Modifiers System may use special modifiers to provide higher score to certain wetlands – presence of RTE species, Delmarva Bays, vernal pools Next Steps Resolve Differences Between HGM/Modified State System Differences: riverine/riparian areas, slopes, depressions Sampling under HGM/Modified State System Should Yield Data to be Used for Key Wildlife Habitat Assessment.