1

Wetland Tracker

Andree Greenberg, Ph.D. Senior Environmental Scientist

Shin-Roei Lee, P.E.Supervising Engineer

Watershed Management Division

December 10, 2008

www.wetlandtracker.org

2

www.iep.water.ca.gov

US EPA

Cristina Grosso Michael MayJosh Collins of SFEI

Paula White of Water Board

Acknowledgement

Overview

• Need to better assess mitigation success• Need web-based GIS to manage project information• Give public access to information• Link to other databases

• Make it a program and project management tool for water board manager and staff

• Make it a planning tool to provide better watershed context for local entities to plan for priority development and conservation areas

• Make it a permit application tool to guide project proponents on mitigation and restoration

Goals

5

Project Map

6

Project Map

7

8

9

10

Wetland Tracker Data Analysis

August 2006 –- December 2007

11

Wetland Tracker as a 401 Condition in Region 2

Aug 06 –Dec 07 Jan--Oct 08 Total

Required 68 46 114

Completed 45 27 72

45 Projects Resulting in habitat loss to: 11.5 acres and 6,125 linear feet.

Acres Linear Feet

Restored: 12 17,082

Created + 10 + 1,089

TOTAL: 22 18,171

Enhanced 145 8,663

Preserved +10 + 1,203

TOTAL: 155 9,866

GAINS

Improvements

12

WETLAND TYPES in Wetland Tracker:

9

14

15

•Riparian•14 ac created & preserved

Tidal Brackish Salt Pond

Depressional Seep

Riparian Vernal PoolRiparian

Estuarine:

13

Figure 1. Distribution of impacts that required compensatory mitigation. (Total=36)

28%

19%19%

11%

8%

6%6% 3%

New ConstructionResidential (10)

Transportation (7)

Maintenance (7)

Restoration (4)

New ConstructionCommercial (3)

Stream BankStabilization (2)

Expansion of ExistingFacilities (2)

Other (1)

Project Types That Required Compensatory Mitigation. (Total = 36)

14

15

Riparian Linear Feet and Acres Lost and Gained

16

Losses and Gains by Habitat Type

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Depression Vernal Pool Seep andSpring

Acr

es

Lost

Restored

Created

Enhanced

Preserved

17

ACRES:Estuarine (acres)

18

Project Review Findings

• Estuarine and depressional habitats had highest replacement ratios;

• Vernal pools had highest impacts to existing habitats and the lowest replacement ratios;

• Riparian habitats were impacted 3 times more than other habitats; replacement ratios were mid-range using linear feet and very low for acres.

19

Next Steps

To insure the accuracy of Wetland Tracker as a tool:

• Review and correct wetland tracker forms

• Follow up on late or inaccurate forms

• Conduct field verifications

• Analyze 2008 data to determine if 2006-07 trends continue or differ

20

Management Decisions

• Develop general permit for maintenance activities

• Avoid and minimize impacts to vernal pools and riparian systems

• Inform policy development

21

Thank youQuestions?

Shin-Roei Lee srlee@waterboards.ca.gov

Andree Greenbergagreenberg@waterboards.ca.gov