Loading...
2002-12-20 Replacement Wetland ReportSVOBODA ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES Providing the Sharper Edge in Natural Resources & Environmental Consulting , ~- December 20, 2002 , Lisa Goeb City Administrators - , -, ' P.O: Box 9 Albertville, MN 55301 RE: Project Name: Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II (formerly known as , Minneapolis Factory Shoppes, Albertville Factory Shoppes, and Albertville Outlet Mall in SER files) Project Location: E 1/2 of Section 35, T. 121 N, R. 24 W, Albertville, Wright County, Minnesota . SER Project No.: 2002-023-26 , Project Description: Replacement Wetland Monitoring Report= Year IV (LGU ' Version) Dear Ms: Goeb: Pursuant to Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) §8420.0620 and to.the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) permit issued for this project, Svoboda Ecological Resources (SER) staff ' visited the above-referenced site on May 15, July 18, and October 8, 2002, for the purpose of monitoring the progress "of the proposed replacement wetlands and wetland buffer seeding areas. This is the fourth year of monitoring out'of the five years required by the WCA and by the Corps permit to determine if replacement wetlands satisfy replacement.of functions and values lost by permitted wetland fill. The purpose of this year's field visits was to: 1) Obtain seasonal water level measurements between April and October; 2) Develop a list of dominant vegetation in the ,wetland; and 3) Take' color photographs from. the photo reference points to document progress. In addition, SER staff inspected the sites-for existing or potential problems with the progress of the replacement wetland areas. Approximately 113,691 ftZ (2.61 acres) of wetland fill is associated with this project. As a result, 170,320 ft2 (3.91 acres) of New Wetland Creation and 202,990 ft2 (4.66 acres) of Public Value Credit was proposed under the Wetland Replacement Plan Application Revised Plan submitted by the client. The Revised Flan proposed five new wetland creation areas located in the southern and western portions of the site, and three areas of wetland buffer seeding area located on the - ' western and southern portions of the development. To maintain consistency with the Revised 2477 Shadywood Road Excelsior, MN 55331 (952) 471-1100 (Office) (952) 471-0007 (Fax) Plan, these new wetland creation areas are labeled NWC-l; -2, -3; -4, and -5. During our site visits, these five proposed mitigated wetland areas were observed. As was suggested in our 2000 and 2001 Local Government Unit (LGU) and Corps reports, our first site visit was made early in the season to assist in determining if hydrology in these basins is adequate for wetland formation. Results are discussed in the Conclusions section at the :end of the report. The acreage of the mitigation areas were measured this year during the October site visit using a sub-meter accurate Global Positioning System (GPS) unit. However, Wright County had an unusually high amount of precipitation this year, even late in the growing season. The wetlands onsite were extremely flooded in October, so complete boundaries were not obtainable: some portions of every wetland's boundary was deemed inaccessible by the field staff visiting the site. Due to these circumstances, SER estimated the remaining portion of tie boundaries using aerial photographs taken in 2000. Thus, we could only estimate total wetland acreage this year; it was calculated to be approximately 166,674 ft2 (3.83 acres). This is a predicted deficit of approximately 3,646 ft2 (0.08 acre) from what was intended, although it is still over the 1:1 minimum area required to mitigate for wetland impacts. A graphic with the GPS points on it in red and the estimated boundaries on it in yellow is included as Appendix A. SER suggests that the boundaries of these basins be re-measured using GPS next year in order to get a more accurate determination of the amount of created wetland onsite. OBSERVATIONS NWC-1 This area was designed to provide 1.62 acres (approximately 70,567 ft2) of'New Wetland Creation (NWC) credit. SER approximates that this basin was 1.92 acre (83,604 ft2) this year. This is potentially a surplus of 0.30 acre (13,037 ft?). The desired wetland type noted in the Replacement Plan Application (RPA) was Type 3 palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and \ excavated (PEMCx). 'The basin was classified as a Type 3 PEMCx wetland. In May, there was open water with some: filamentous blue-green algae in it ponded over 1 foot deep that covered 50% of the basin. In July, ponded water containing water plantain (Alisma subcordatum) decreased to about 10% of the basin. In October, open water over 1 foot deep covered 10% of the basin, and water. plantain covesred an additional 5% of the basin. The basin was noted as appearing very flooded at the time of the October site visit.. Thus, the primary reason for the decrease in open water between May and October seems to be an increase in vegetative growth. Please see Photos 1 and 2 of the Photo Log at the end of this report.. Adjacent slopes ranged between 3:1 to greater than 3:1 (a gentle slope). Frogs were noted using the site in May. A snake and frogs were noted, in July. Vegetation in this basin was dominated by approximately 40% ,narrow-leaf cattail (Typha angustifolia) in May. Approximately half of the cattails were dead at-this time. In July, the basin was~covered by 50% narrow-leaf cattail. Narrow-leaf cattail made up 25% of the basin in October. Reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea) coverage increased from only 10% in May to 40% in July. Only 25% reed canary grass was noted in October.. Other plants noted in the area included Kentucky bluegrass (Poo pratensis) and needle rush (Eleocharis acicularis). Plants noted in the adjacent upland area included wood sorrel- (Oxalis stricta), dandelion (Taraxacum o~cinale), reed canary grass, Kentucky bluegrass, goldenrod (Solidago sp.), yellow sweet clover (Melilotus o~cinale), white clover (Trifolium repens), pineapple weed (Matricaria matricarioides), cow vetch (Vicia cracca), Canada thistle (Cirsium aryense), daisy fleabane ' (Erigeron annuus), and common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia). NWC-2 This area was designed to provide 1.14 acres (approximately 49,658 ft2) of NWC credit. SER approximates. that this basin was 0.63 acre (27,366 ft2) this year. This is potentially, a deficit of 0.51 acre (22,292 ft?). -The desired wetland type noted in the RPA was Type 3 palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PENICx). The basin appeared to be a Type 3 PEMCx wetland at the time of the two site visits. In May, there was open water ponded over 12 inches. deep covering 45% of the site. In both July and October, there was approximately 20% open water ponded over 12 inches deep, although the basin was noted to be very wet. This basin has less open water than last year, when open water covered 80% of the site in May and 70% of the site in June. However, the reason for this decrease in open water seems to be an increase in vegetative growth, especially an increase in narrow-leaf cattail. Please see Photos 3 and 4 of the Photo Log at the end of this report. Adjacent slopes ranged between 3:1 to greater than 3:1 (gentle slope). Frogs were found using the basin in both May and July. Geese were found using the basin in May. A great blue heron and a green heron were found using the site in October. Narrow-leaf cattail covered about 30% of the site in May, although 20% of the basin was dead cattails.. By July, the basin was covered by 70% narrow-leaf cattail. Narrow-leaf cattail covered 50% of the basin by October. Reed canary grass decreased from 25% in May to 10% in July and 5% in. October. Water plantain was noted in July and October. Kentucky bluegrass was noted in October. ,Plants in the adjacent upland area that were noted included reed canary grass, dandelion, sumac (Rhus sp.), Canada thistle, goldenrod, alfalfa (Medicago sativa), white clover, strawberry (Fragaria sp.), and Kentucky bluegrass. NWC-3 This area was designed to provide 0.50 acre (approximately 21,780 ft2) of NWC credit. SER approximates that this basin was-0.40 acre (17,371 ft2) this year. This is potentially. a deficit of 0.10 acre (4,409 ft2). The desired wetland type noted in the RPA was Type 3 palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). Frogs were found using both parts of the basin during May and July: A rusty, 1 inch diameter cable was found in the 3A portion of the basin in May, but was not noted in July. It was. noted in 2000 that NWC-3 had been divided into two areas by a berm leading to a billboard on the site. Vegetation on the western side (3A) of this berm was examined separately from vegetation on the eastern side (3B) of this berm.. This basin appeared to be a Type 3 PEMCx wetland on both-sides of the berm. On both sides of the berm, there was over 12 inches of ponded open water. Open water covered 80% of 3A in May and 20% of 3A in July. Open water covered 90% of 3B in May and SSa/o of 3B in July. As was the case last year, the decreases in open water coverage were due primarily to increases in vegetative growth, especially narrow-leaf cattail. See Photos 5 and 6 of Basin 3A, and Photos 7 and 8 of Basin 3B in the Photo Log at the end of this report. Although the amount. of open water in 3A decreased between May and July, this part of the basin was noted to be wetter overall in July than in May.. In May, some filamentous blue-green algae was noted in the open water of 3A. In July, some floating-leaf pondweed (Potgmogeton natans) was noted in the open water portions of both 3A and 3B. On the 3A portion of this basin, vegetation was dominated by 10% dead narrow-leaf cattail and 10% reed canary grass in May. In July, narrow-leaf cattail increased to 60% of the basin, while , reed canary grass stayed at 10% of the basin. On the 3B portion of the basin, 10% of the basin consisted of reed canary grass in Maya Reed canary grass increased to 20% and narrow-leaf cattail made up 20% of 3B in July. By October, the area was so flooded that the berm had been covered. Thus, data were taken for the two portions of the basin as a whole. Open water over 12 inches deep covered 60% of the area.- Narrow-leaf cattail covered about 20% of the area. Water plantain and Kentucky bluegrass each covered about 5% of the area. The adjacent uplands consisted of reed canary gras$, common plantain (Plantago major}, redtop (Ag-rostis alba), goldenrod, dandelion, Kentucky bluegrass, smartweed (Polygonum sp.), staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina), and common ragweed. NWC-4 This area was designed to prgvide D.26 acre (approximately 11,326 ftZ) of NWC credit. SER apprgximates that this-basin was 0.22 acre (9,456 ftZ) this year. This is potentially, a deficit of 0.04 acre (1,870 ftZ). The desired wetland type noted' in the RPA was Type 3 palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). This basin appeared to be a Type 3 PEMCx wetland.. In May, there was open water. ponded over 10 inches deep covering 40% of this site. Open water decreased to 20% in July. The open water contained lesser duckweed (Lemna minor) and water plantain in July. Only 10% open water with lesser duckweed was noted in'October; water was ponded to 12 inches and the area was noted as being very flooded. As with the other basins, the decrease in open water between months is due to an increase in vegetation. See Photos 9 and 10 in the Photo Log at the back of this. report. Adjacent slopes were primarily greater than 3:1 (gentle) but were closer to 2:1 (steep) on the western side of the basin (where PVC-1 was built). Despite this steep slope, no problems associated with erosion were noted at this time. Mallards were found using this site in May, and red-wing blackbirds were found using this site in May ahd July. In May, narrow-leaf cattail covered 50% of this basin. This increased slightly to 60% of the basin in July and October. Reed canary grass increased slightly from 10%. in May to 20% of the basin in July,-but then decreased to 10% again in October. There is less reed canary grass and more narrow-leaf cattail in this basin this yeaz than there was last year. Other plants noted in the basin included water plantain and Kentucky bluegrass. Plants in the. buffer area (PVC-1) included reed canary grass, common mullein (Yerbascum thapsus), dandelion, Kentucky bluegrass, fescue (Festuca sp.), red clover (Trifolium pratense), Canada thistle, bull thistle (Cirsiurrt vulgare), white clover, and alfalfa. Buffer plants seemed to be well-established. NWC-5 This area was designed to provide 0.39 acre (approximately 16,988 ft2) ofNWC credit. SER approximates that this basin was 0.66 acre (28,877 ft2) this yeaz. This is potentially a surplus of 0.27 acre (11,889 ft2). The desired wetland type noted in the RPA was Type 3 palustrine, emergent, seasonally flooded and excavated (PEMCx). This basin appeazed to be a Type 3 ~PEMCx wetland. In May, there was over 12 inches of water ponded over about 50% of this basin. In July, ponded water was still noted to be over 12 inches deep, although its coverage decreased to less than 20%. Open water ponded at about 12 inches covered 25% of the basin in October. There was lesser duckweed found in the open water in July ,_ and October. The overall decrease in open water since May is mostly due to an increase in vegetative coverage, primarily narrow-leaf cattail -the. basin was noted to be very wet in July and October. See Photos 11 and 12 in the Fhoto Log at the end of this report.. Adjacent slopes ranged between 3:1 to greater than 3:1 (gentle slope). Geese and'redwing' blackbirds were noted using this azea in May. Frogs were found in this azea in July. Narrow-leaf cattail cover increased from about 40% in May (half of which were dead) to about - 80% in July. Only 30% of the basin was covered by narrow-leaf cattail in_ October. Other plants found in this area included goldenrod, willows (Salix sp.), Kentucky bluegrass, water plantain, white clover, daisy fleabane, sedges (Carex sp.), and reed canary grass (10% of the basin in May, not noted in July, 5% of the basin in October). The upland `plants included dandelion, reed canary grass, Kentucky bluegrass, thistle (Cirsium ` sp.), aster (Aster sp.), mint (Mentha sp.), common mullein, hawk's-beazd (Crepis tectorum), tall ,goldenrod (Solidago altissima), daisy fleabane, curly dock. (Rumex crispus), alfalfa, raspberry (Rubus sp.), white clover, sweet clover (Melilotus sp.), common plantain, and a nettle species (Urtica sp.).- A small amount of haze ground was noted in October. Buffer plants seemed to be well-established. CONCLUSIONS There aze a couple-of management concerns that SER deemed necessary to address this yeaz: s • In 2000, it appeazed that most of the azeas aze drier than what was proposed in the RPA. The 2001, and 2002 site .visits revealed an increase in hydrology in. these basins. The major factor that caused this change was probably precipitation. In 2000, precipitation was lower than normal during the preceding winter, causing a deficit in snowmelt runoff - available for basin recharge: In 2001 and 2002, precipitation in May and June was normal to above-normal. The. preceding winter also provided plenty of runoff water for the spring recharge of these basins. Hydrology seems to be adequate for creation and maintenance of wetland conditions in all basins. These basins should be examined early in the season the last yeaz of monitoring (April or May 2003), as they were this year, to monitor early post-snowmelt conditions and ensure that hydrological conditions will be adequate in future years. a • Reed canary grass is present in most of the created basins. As can be seen in the table ,below, the amount of reed canary grass in the mitigation basins has tended to fluctuate over time, occasionally peaking but then decreasing again. Table 1. Reed cana rass covera e, as noted. in the miti ation monitorin re orts, over the last 3 years. Monitoring Year II Monitoring Year III Monitoring Year 1V. Area Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 Visit t Visit 2 Visit 3 Visit 1 Visit 2 Visit 3 NWC-1 IS% 20% 60% 15% 15% IS% 10% 40% 25% NWG-2 <10% 15% 15% 15% <10% <10% 25% 10% 5% NWC-3A <10% <10% <]0% <10% <10% <10% 10% 10% 0% NWC-3B 15% 30% 30% <10% <10% <10% 10% 20% 0% NWC-4 10% 10% 10% 15% 35% 25% 10% 20% 10% NWC-5 <10% <10% <10% <10% <10% ~ <10% 0% 0% 5% Note: <10% generally means that the species was noted, but that no percentage of coverage was noted. The pattern of change can be'seen on the graphic included in Appendi_Y B. The amount of reed canary grass inNWC-3A and NWC-5 have remained relatively stable or_decreased over the last three years. In NWC-l,"NWC-2, NWC-3B, and NWC-4, there was a relative .peak in reed canary grass coverage during some part of the season. Reed canary grass cover was 20% or higher in each of these basins during some time in summer; the highest was in NWC-1 in July, when it reached 40%. Thus, reed canary grass coverage is high enough to warrant control in NWC-1: It would be beneficial to control reed canary grass in NWC-2, NWC-3B, and NWC-4. SER recommends spot-treating patches of reed canary grass in the aforementioned basins with Rodeo next spring. There is a small amount of filamentous blue-green algae in the open water areas of some of the basins. However, the amount noted was always relatively small. No remedial measures are deemed necessary at this time. _ SER examined the data from this and previous-years to determine if the mitigation basins have become increasingly dominated ~by cattail. Although cattail is a preferred wetland plant to many other wetland species commonly found in mitigation basins (e.g., reed canary grass, purple loosestrife, etc.), it tends to dominate wetlands over time by creating dense monotypic stands. Cattail dominance may decrease plant diversity in wetlands,. which seems to be a trend in the aforementioned basins: fewer plant species were documented in these basins this year than there were last year. When cattail growth decreases open water coverage in a wetland, it decreases the wetland's value to wildlife. such as migrating waterfowl. However, a dense stand of cattail might help retard surface water flow, provide flood or storm water attenuation, decrease water energy to allow settling of suspended materials, and increase uptake of dissolved nutrients. Cattails tend to outcompete other species in environments high in nutrients like phosphorous, so cattail dominance seems to be linked with high nutrient levels. Thus, although the increase in cattail is not a problem in and of itself, it essentially results in a decrease of wildlife .habitat and vegetative diversity/integrity values but may increase water quality,. as,well as flood and stormwater storage and attenuation. Our examination of these data revealed no distinct, steady pattern of cattail increase and open water decrease. If you look at the graphs in"Appendix C, the only obvious pattern is that as cattail increases; open water decreases and vice versa. As mentioned before, the basins should be re-measured using GPS next year. Next year will be the fifth year of monitoring and should be the final year of monitoring. An accurate measurement of wetland coverage would be needed by the LGU prior to determining whether the wetland monitoring can be terminated for this site. Based on our observations, it was quite apparent that all replacement wetlands and all wetland buffer seeding areas did exist at the time of the visit. The. mitigated wetlands will conXinue to be monitored according to the monitoring plan outlined in the Wetland Replacement Plan Application and the Corps permit issued for this site. , If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this. site, please feel free to contact us at (952) 471-1100: -Thank you. Sincerely, Svoboda Ecological Resources Franklin ~. S.voboda, CWB, PWS Laura E. Eklov ' Vice-President Ecologist/Project Manager cc: Robert Morse, JMJ Properties Danielle D. Cerza, Chelsea Property Group, Inc. Joe Yanta, Army Corps of Engineers ' Attachments: Photo Log Appendix A -Aerial Photo with GPS and Estimated Boundaries Appendix B -Changes in Reed Canary Grass Coverage During Monitoring Appendix C -Cattail vs: Open Water Coverage PHOTO 1: NWC-1, facing east. Photo taken in May. This photo is similar to Photo 1 of the 2000 and 2001 reports. PHOTO 2: NWC-1, facing east. Photo taken in July. This photo is similar to Photo 1 of the 2000 and 2001 reports and to Photo 1 above. Note that there is significantly more vegetation and less open water in this basin in July than there was in May. PHOTO LOG OF SITE ~~~ ~: ~1 A Y~ V ~ ~ a ~t'1 Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II '~~ '~> Ecological Resources Page 1 of 5 r~~' PHOTO 4: NWC-2, facing east. Photo taken in October. This photo is similar to Photo 2 in the 2001 report and to Photo 3 above. Note the increase in cattail coverage since May. PHOTO 3: NWC-2, facing east. Photo taken in May. This photo is similar to Photo 2 in the 2001 report. Note the new building erected since last year (on the right hand side). PHOTO 5: NWC-3A, facing west. Photo taken in May. This photo is similar to Photo 3 of the 2000 and 2001 reports. PHOTO LOG OF SITE ~~t ~~, ~~ ~ V ~ D ~ ~A Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II u``~~ Ecobgical Resources Page 2 of 5 PHOTO 6: NWC-3A, facing west. Photo taken in July. This photo is similar to Photo 3 of the 2000 and 2001 reports and Photo 4 of this report. Note that the amount of cattails has greatly increased and the amount of open water has greatly decreased in this basin since May. PHOTO 7: NWC-3B, facing west. Photo taken in May. This photo is similar to Photo 4 of the 2000 and 2001 reports. PHOTO LOG OF SITE ~ ~, ~/ pp ~~- ~~,5 V ~ p ~ ~~ Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II ,''~~ Ecological Resources Page 3 of 5 PHOTO 8: NWC-3B, facing east. Photo taken in July. This photo was taken in the opposite direction of Photo 6. Note the increase in cattail coverage in this basin since May. PHOTO 9: NWC-4, facing north. Photo taken in May. PHOTO LOG OF SITE ~ ~, SV O B ~ DA Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II ;> '.~: Ecological Resources Page 4 of 5 PHOTO 10: NWC-4, facing north. Photo taken in July. This photo was taken in the same place as Photo 8 of this report. Note the significant growth of vegetation since May. PHOTO 11: NWC-5, facing west. Photo taken in May. This photo is similar to Photo 6 of the 2000 and 2001 reports. PHOTO 12: NWC-5, facing southwest. Photo taken in July. Note the significant increase in vegetative growth since May (above photo). PHOTO LOG OF SITE ~''~~ SVD BQ DA Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II ~~/ rEcological Resources Pa e 5 of 5 g Appendix A ,~ z ~ C 8~ g. N O O N ~_ O O O a .~ a 0 0 N O +• O t a ~L C~ C 0 C~ C y N .~ -~ V^/ rLL V .~ L .~ 0 .~ -~ Q °~ V '~ d ~~ t 1 ~- ,.~~_ - - NW C-1 - Reed Canary Grass % Cover Over Tim e 70 60 ~-% RCG 50 ~ 40 V C' 30 20 10 0 .` ~ \~ti `'3 g e y `t^ `wry ,`9 .` ~. e 5 5 e ~R. y`^~ 0 e Ji Ja Ja ~~ J~ J~ Ja J~ Ja 00. 00, 0^ 00• . 0^. 0^. 0~, 0~ . Ory. X0 X0 X0 rL0 X0 X0 ~0 ry0 ~O Visit Num ber NW C-3A -Reed Canary Grass % Cover Over Tim e 70 60 ~_ °~ RCG 50 ~ 40 U K ;e 30 20 10 0 ~ ~ti ~ ~ ~~ ~ ti M \ ~ ~ ~ ~^ ~ti ~ ~ ` ~ J`y J`y J~e J~y J~e J`y J~y J`y J`y 00, 00, 00 0^, 0ry , 0^. 0~• , 00ry, 00ry. ry0 ry0 ry0 ry0 ry0 X0 rL0 ry ry Visit Num b®r NW C-4 -Reed Canary Grass % Cover Over Time 70 60 50 ~ 40 v 30 20 10 0 ~ ry 3 .` ae S ~5 .~ ~5 J J J O~ O ~ O ~ (LOO rL00 ,LOO (LO NW C-2 -Reed Canary Grass % Cover Over Tim e 70 60 ~-°,G RCG 50 ~ 40 U 1' ~ 30 20 10 0 ~. ~R. t~ ,~~. ~ti ti~ ~. ry t~ J~e~ J~5` Jay` J~y~ J~5` Jay` J~g~ J~y~ Jam'` 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. O^. O^. O~. O ry. O ry. O ry. rL0 rL0 (LO (LO (LO (LO ,LO 'LO tL0 Visit Num ber NW C-36 -Reed Canary Grass % Cover Over Tim e 70 60 -~-°,6 RCG 50 ~ 40 v K ;q 30 20 10 0 ~5 ~5 ~5 ~5 `5 ~5 ~e ~e `e J ~ J J J , ~ , J O~ 00 O~ O 00 OO ~ '~~ ~~ '~~ 'L~ OO OO ' 00 ( 00 `L~ `L~ 00 00 ry L L L L L L ry ry Visit Num ber NW C-5 -Reed Canary Grass % Cover Over Tim e 70 60 ~_ °,6 RCG 50 ~ 40 v o: ;~ 30 20 10 0 J~5 J~5 J~5 J~5 Jae ~~y Jae ,~e J~5 (L00 LOO ry00 X00 ry00 ry00 ry00 ry00 X00 Visit Num ber Appendix B. Reed canary grass coverage for all basins. ~~ S Y ~.J 6 Q QA Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II ~q ~, Ecological Resources ~, J`y~~. J`y``L J~y`~0 Jay ^ J`y`~l. J~y`^' O^, O^, O^ 00" Off", 00' (LO (LO 'LO (LO ,LO Visit Num ber 90 80 70 60 50 O c i ~ 40 30 20 10 0 ,~ ~` .dry ,~9 ,~~ ~ry ,~'h ,~'` 9 ry . , .5 5 ~9 5 5 9 9 ~ b 9 5 , J. J ,~ J~ j~ J~ ,~ J~ oo , oo , oo , o^ , o^ , o^ , ory , ory , ory. ryo ryo ryo ryo ryo ryo ryo ryo ryo Visit Num ber NW C-3A -Cattail vs. Open W ater Coverage 90 80 --~'-% Cattail 70 % Open Water 60 -~_ c7 50 v ~ 40 30 20 10 - 0 , J.y Jay J.y Jay Jae ;~°, J~5 Jas Jae ryooo , ryooo , ryooo , ryoo , ryoo , ryoo^ , ryoory, ryoory, ryoory. Visit Num ber NW C-4 - Cattail vs. Open Water Coverage 90 80 -~-% Cattail _ 70 % Open Water _ 60 ~ 50 v ~ 40 ° 30 20 10 ,~~ .dry .~A .~,'` .dry .~3 ,~'` .dry ,~^~ J.5 Jay ,.e J.5 J.g J~5 Jae Jae Jae ryooo , ryooo , ryoo , ryoo , ryoo^ , ryoo^ , ryoory, ryoory, ryoory, Visit Num ber NW C-2 -Cattail vs. Open Water Coverage 90 80 -~-% Cattail 70 % Open Water 60 t7 50 V ~ 40 30 20 10 0 , J`'b J`y~ J`y~ J`'~ J`y~ J`~o~ J~y~ J`~~ J`y~ ryooo , ryooo , ryooo , ryoo^ , ryoo^ , ryoo , ryoory, ryoo• ryoory. Visit Num ber NW C-3B -Cattail vs. Open Water Coverage 90 80 -'~-% Cattail 70 % Open Water 60 ~ 50 ~- U ~ 40 30 20 10 0 ! - ,~~ ~ry ~~ ,~~ bry ~M ,~~ ~ry ~~ ,~5 ,~0 ,~' ,~9 ,~5 ,~9 ,~0 ,~0 ~~9 ryooo , ryooo , ryoo , ryoo^ , ryoo^ , ryoo^ , ryoory, ryoory, ryoory. Visit Num ber NW C-5 -Cattail vs. Open Water Coverage 90 80 _ -~-% Cattail 70 % Open Water 60 ~- ~ 50 ~ 40 ~ 30 20 10 0 ry ~ ^ ry ~ ^ ry ~ .1~'~ J`°j~ J~y~ J~y~ J~y~ J~g~ J~~~ J~y~ ~`yb ryoo , ryooo , ryoo , ryoo^ , ryoo^ , ryoo^ , ryoo, ryoo, ryoory. Visit Num ber Appendix C. Cattail and open water coverage for all basins. \ { ~. Outlets at Albertville - Phases I and II ,~ ~~,~SVO60DA Ecological Resources NW C-1 -Cattail vs. Open Water Coverage