Laserfiche WebLink
Brian Bear, City of Hugo <br />November 16, 2022 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />K:\020552-000\Admin\Docs\Memo - 2022 Data Summary and Recommendation - 111622.docx <br />Monitoring Month 3 Month Prior Antecedent <br />Precipitation <br />Onsite Precipitation Recorded <br />September Normal 0.61 in <br />October Normal NA (data only collected through <br />10/4/22) <br /> <br />Based on the data, the wetland at locations 2 and 5 are showing wetland hydrology at some point <br />during the growing season between July and October, typical of a fresh wet meadow wetland. It is <br />likely that the wetland in well locations 1, 3, 4, and 7 would show wetland hydrology after spring <br />runoff, typical of a seasonally flooded wetland but further hydrology monitoring would be needed <br />in early spring to evaluate whether these areas meet wetland hydrology. The climatic conditions <br />throughout the growing season were generally normal, however according to the U.S. Drought <br />Monitor, Minnesota overall has experienced a drought during the 2022 season and was in a <br />severe drought (D2) by August and an extreme drought (D3) by November 2022. The U.S. <br />Drought Monitor is jointly produced by the National Drought Mitigation Center at the University of <br />Nebraska-Lincoln, the United States Department of Agriculture, and the National Oceanic and <br />Atmospheric Administration. <br /> <br />4. DATA SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS <br />The existing vegetative composition of the site is low quality based on the FQI results and <br />species richness. Diversifying the vegetation composition and reducing the number of invasive <br />species on site would provide a functional lift to the vegetation in the wetland areas. Similarly, the <br />hydrology data has indicated wetland hydrology in a portion of the site. Early spring hydrology <br />data may also indicate wetland hydrology throughout the entire site if collected during a normal <br />precipitation year. The data suggest that the wetland areas at well sites 1, 3, 4, and 7 are likely <br />functioning as non-wetland or a seasonally flooded wetland type, possibly partially drained or fully <br />drained by the adjacent ditches. Well sites 2 and 5 are functioning as a seasonally flooded <br />wetland or fresh wet meadow but are also possibly partially drained. Elimination of adjacent <br />ditches and restoration of wetland hydrology could potentially restore a large portion of the site to <br />either seasonally flooded/fresh wet meadow or fresh wet meadow/shallow marsh, allowing water <br />to be within 12 inches of the soil surface or inundated for 14 or more consecutive days within the <br />growing season. <br /> <br />Based on the data, actions that could generate wetland replacement credits at this site are listed <br />in Table 4. Option A is if well sites 1, 3, 4, and 7 are fully drained. Option B is if the entire project <br />area wetland is considered partially drained. Acreages are estimates to give an idea of what a <br />wetland bank at this site could generate but would be further refined during the prospectus phase <br />of the wetland banking process. <br /> <br />Table 4. Actions To Generate Wetland Credits <br />Action Percent of <br />Acreage <br />Receiving <br />Credit <br />Acres of Site Estimated <br />Credit Potential <br />Establish upland buffer adjacent to a <br />wetland <br />25 Option A: 16.5 <br />Option B: 16.5 <br />Option A: 4.125 <br />Option B: 4.125 <br />Restoration of a completely <br />drained/filled wetland <br />100 Option A: 97 <br />Option B: 4 <br />Option A: 97 <br />Option B: 4 <br />Restoration of a partially drained or <br />filled wetland without cropping history <br />50 Option A: 30 <br />Option B: 123 <br />Option A: 15 <br />Option B: 61.5 <br />Option A Total Credits: 116.125 <br />Option B Total Credits: 69.625