05/08/17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City of Ramsey February 12, 2007 Functional Assessment of Wetlands Each wetland was similarly attributed with information from the Anoka County soil survey to assess the dominant soils and hydrologic soil groups. This information was used to answer many MnRAM questions relating to the wetland’s soils and land-use capabilities and characteristics. Data from the additional layers listed above was added to the GIS database and attributed to the appropriate wetland(s) and used to answer questions in the MnRAM database. Many of the MnRAM questions required information on characteristics of soils or land- use within a certain upland area surrounding each wetland. Therefore, 200- and 500-foot 4 wetland buffers were created around each wetland. Data was analyzed using these buffered areas to assess surrounding land-use, soil/hydrological characteristics, and presence of rare, listed plant and animal species. Once all the data was incorporated into the GIS database, each wetland was visually evaluated using high resolution 2003 FSA aerial photographs to confirm and support the existing GIS data and to provide estimates of wildlife habitat, hydrologic group and land- use functions. Based on the information entered for each question, the MnRAM database then assigned a functional assessment ranking of “exceptional’, “high”, “moderate”, “low” or “not applicable” to each of its prescribed wetland functions (see Appendix B for preliminary MnRAM 3.0 Wetland Functional Assessment Summary). These rankings 5 were compared to the Wetland Management Classifications listed and each wetland was assigned an overall preliminary classification of “Preserve”, “Manage 1”, “Manage 2”, or “Manage 3”. Exhibit 2 shows the non field-verified preliminary Wetland Management Classifications assigned to all 349 wetlands.A summary of the preliminary classification results are shown in Table 1. Wetlands initially placed into Preserve and Manage 1 classifications were then field verified and underwent a complete MnRAM 3.0 analysis using the existing GIS information, augmented with field observations of applicable functional characteristics. Special Concerns: The MnRAM database calculations rely heavily on data relating to vegetative diversity and integrity. This parameter is impossible to assess in the office without field verification, even with the available GIS data. Since only one characteristic must be met to assign a wetland to a given Wetland Management Classification, wetlands are placed in the most appropriate preliminary Wetland Management Classification based on the available data in the office. Not having field-verified vegetative diversity and integrity data available at this stage resulted in some wetlands potentially being under-classified. Another issue that arose during the GIS analysis was how DNR Heritage Program data on state listed threatened, endangered and special-concern wildlife species affects the 4 Based on MnRAM 3.0 Full Text, updated 1-19-06. 5 Draft Recommended Wetland Management Classification System, 7/15/04, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. 8