Maine wetlands conservation priority plan an addendum to the state comprehensive outdoor recreation plan (SCORP)

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

DO NOr REMOVE ... Jast Cop

MAINE WETLANDS
CONSERVATION PRIORITY PLAN

sv@ "ffv

@ WN

QH 'JREAU OF PARKS AND RECREATION
76.5 'ATE. PLANNING OFFICE
.M2 ')s SUBCOMMITTEE, LAND AND WATER RESOURCES COUNCIL
W5

boa--

MAINE WETLANDS
CONSERVATION PRIORITY PLAY

ANADDENDUMTOTHE
STATE COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN
(SCORP)

Lissa Widoff

July, 1988

Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation
Maine State Planning Office
Wetlands Subcommittee, Land and Water Resources Council

r US DepaAment of Coinmerce
NOAA Coasto Services Center Library
22134 South Iffobson Avenue
C -to
Charleston, SC 29405-2413

The preparation of this plan was financed in part through a planning grant from the National Park
Service, Department of the Interior, under the provisions of the Land and Water Conservation Fund
Act of 1965 (Public Law 88-578). The plan was also funded in part by a general appropriation to
the Bureau of Parks and Recreation.

Acknowledgernents

Many people contributed to various aspects of this report. The members of the Wetlands
Subcommittee of the Land and Water Resources Council contributed their expertise and carefully
reviewed this report. Others were contacted for assistance with information on historic losses of
wetlands, as well as current losses and threats. The staff people of several state and federal
agencies amicably tolerated my questioning and data gathering, and joined in the support of this
report.

Specific thanks go to Ken Anderson and Gary Donovan of Maine Department of Inland
Fisheries and Wildlife, Duane Scott and Bill Reid of Maine Department of Transportation, Bob
Wengrzynek of the U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service, and Edward Zip
Kellogg of the University of Southern Maine Library. Finally,-thanks go to Tom Cieslinski, Cindy
Bastey and Herb Hartman of the Bureau of Parks and Recreation who developed the work plan for
this project, and to Jim Bernard of the Maine State Planning Office who oversaw its progress and
completion and provided steady support in concept, content and editing.

Credit is due to Hank Tyler for use of the cover photo of the Great Heath in Cherryfield,
Maine, one of the state's largest wetlands.

Executive Summary

Maine is 25% wetland. More than 5,000,000 acres of freshwater wetlands and approximately
160,000 acres of tidal wetlands are currently estimated to occur in Maine. The diversity of climatic
and physiographic conditions in Maine accounts for the diversity of wetland types and their extent
in Maine. Forested and shrub swamps are most abundant, while tidal marshes and beach systems are
least abundant. Each have important natural values and the latter are crucial for the survival of
many species of migratory birds. Other wetland types in Maine include mudflats and rocky shores,
freshwater marshes, bogs and fens, floodplain wetlands and other seasonally flooded flats or basins
with wetland vegetation and/or soils, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service definition of
wetland.

Wetlands have many natural and cultural values and provide many important functions such as
fish, wildlife and endangered species habitat; flood control, nutrient retention and sediment
trapping; production of timber and other natural resources; and recreation, education and research,
and use as natural areas. The "critical edge" or wetland-upland transition zone is extremely
important for wildlife, providing a buffer protecting the wetland from indirect or secondary
impacts, such as pollution.

Existing wetland inventories give only a partial indication of the extent and type of wetlands
in Maine. Inventories have used different wetland definitions and classifications, size criteria for
inclusion and inventory methodologies. Though a number of wetland inventories exist in Maine,
there is a critical lack of a single comprehensive wetland mapping system that could be used for
regulatory, planning and management purposes. The absence of a complete mapping or inventory
system not only precludes the determination of current extent and location of wetlands, it makes
wetland losses and other trends impossible to monitor.

Historically, 1-2% of Maine's original vegetated wetland acreage has been lost or converted to
other uses. There has also been a net gain in open water wetland areas, althoiLgh extent of this is
_RgLw_Q1Lrec6`r-d @nproI`ecs @ creation-65f -some
@e io ave rues-ulffe--d in the
__@_ Some restorat
vegetated coastal and inland wetland areas, but their replacement value for wildlife or other
functions is not well known.

When wetlands are altered or destroyed for various kinds of development, maintenance and
operating costs are generally higher than wisely developed upland sites. There are more
environmental and socioeconomic costs associated with wetland alterations that must be considered,
since these costs will inevitably be passed on to the consumer.

Alterations which result -in outright wetland loss include filling, dredging and draining. Losses
of wetland function,and, value are far more difficult to measure, but are just as serious and in fact
more widespread. Important here is the loss of riparian or buffer areas adjacent to wetlands which
are crucial for preserving the integrity of wetland functions and values. The conversion of land
use around a wetland can also alter or destroy the natural values or integrity of a wetland.

The filling of wetlands has occurred throughout Maine's history of settlement as these
61 wastelands" were "improved" for residential and commercial development. Agricultural activities
have converted vegetation types and when located in or near floodplains may have reduced some
natural flood control features. Other wetland values have been lost or reduced, even thought the
area may still be classified as wetland. Dam construction has created open water habitats while
often flooding vegetated wetland types.

Currently, wetland losses are greatest in smaller wetlands in rapidly developing areas of the
state, e.g. southern York County, south coastal areas and other high-growth urban centers. Coastal
salt marshes are experiencing the greatest threats from fringing development, whereas inland

wetlands, especially smaller ones, are being filled. While the values of individual sMall wetlands may
not be great, they are extremely important within a larger landscape context. The cumulative loss
of many small wetlands via development activities may be just as severe as the loss of a smaller
number of large wetlands when habitat and cultural values are considered.

Inconsistency between state and federal wetland laws, in terms of differing definitions, size of
wetland. regulated and exemptions, has complicated matters for developers and regulators alike.
Within Maine, different agencies of state government have different mandates, (e.g. DEP regulates
activities in wetlands to preserve their functions and MDOT is, required to build safe roads for the
public, which may include filling wetlands). Nationally, there are similar conflicting mandates, but
these are being merged into a more unified policy in favor of stronger wetland protection.

Enforcement and implementation of regulatory wetland protection programs varies at all levels
- federal, state and local - and are generally outpaced by the current rate of wetland alterations.
Many wetland alterations are'inadequately regulated, especially developments on smaller wetlands
and the cumulative impacts on specific wetlands or wetland complexes. Regulation is ineffective in
evaluating how seriously or permanently an alteration impairs wetland functions. It is unknown to
all
what extent certain wetland functions are being lost by what degree of alteration.

Many losses of wetland function and value are attributed to activities in upland areas
immediately adjacent to wetlands, (e.g. housing and industrial development, landfills). Most
regulatory programs deal with the wetland itself and not specific activities on adjacent lands that
could adversely affect the wetland indirectly. Regulation may not stop development from occurring
near wetlands; however, non-regulatory initiatives (designation, registry, easements, etc.) may
provide important opportunities to address problems created by adjacent and upland developments
that affect wetlands.

Acquisition is often the only means to ensure the long-term protection of certain high-value
wetlands and their component species. Permanent protection is also required for buffer areas around
these high priority wetlands, to avert the potential for secondary impacts upon protected wetlands.
Although the state and private entities have already protected some important wetlands, there are
still acquisition needs which have not been met. There is agreement within the conservation
community, wildlife biologists and natural area managers, that wetland acquisition is a high priority
fos*Aaine. The potential for wetlands as educational resources has scarcely been developed in the
4 Statm,-and may be contributing to any lack of understanding of the biological and cultural
impFanai; a*of these ecosystems.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

1. Introduction and Scope I

2. Roles and Responsibilities 3

3. The Distribution of Wetlands in Maine 4
The Origin of Wetlands in Maine 5
Major Wetland Types 5
Wetland Inventories 9

4. Wetland Functions and Values 30
Intrinsic Values of Wetlands 30
Ecologocal Values of Wetlands 31

5. Wetland Alterations: Threats and Losses 42
Historic Wetland Losses 42
Land Use History 42
Types of Wetland Alteration 43
Causes and Amounts of Wetland Loss 44
Cumulative Impacts 52
Economic Values of Wetland Loss 53
- Case Studies of Wetland Loss 53
Mitigation 69
Present Threats and Losses 56
Future Threats and Losses 56

6. Evaluation of Wetland Protection Programs in Maine 57
Federal Programs 57
State Programs 70
Private Land Acquisition Efforts 80

7. Wetland Acquisition Priorities 83

Recommendations 85

Literature Cited 87

Appendices
I Emergency Wetlands Protection Act A-1
11 Maine Wetland Inventory Classification A-7
III U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wetland
Classification A-1 3
IV Comparison between U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Wetland Classification (Cowardin, 1979)
and Classificatibn of U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Circular 39 (Martin et al., 1953). A-1 5
V Wetlands Assessment Threshold Criteria A-1 7

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. PAGE

3.1. Estimated Wetland Area of New England. 4
3.2. Comparison of Wetland Inventories in Maine. 10
3.3. Total Maine Wetland Inventory Coverage by Type 11
3.4. Maine Wetland Inventory Coverage in Acres by
Type and County. 14-
3.5. Total State Wetland Acreage in the Coastal Zone,
by System Type, From An Ecological Characterization
of Coastal Maine. 20
3.6. Results of the Maine Peat Resource Evaluation
Program. 21
3.7. Inland Freshwater Wetlands along the Maine Coast,
Cape Elizabeth to Calais. A Comparison of Wetland
Inventory Results. 27
3.8. Acres of Wetlands By Type in Maine 28
5.1. Historically and Currently Harvested Peatlands
in Maine. 51
6.1. EPA Region I Listing of Priority Wetlands in Maine. 61
6.2. Wetlands Owned, Managed or Designated by the U.S.
Department of the Interior in Maine. 66
6.3. Protected Units in the National Coastal Barrier
Resources System in Maine. 69
6.4. "A' and "B" Designated Rivers with Noted Wetland
Features. 73
6.5. Department of Conservation-Owned and Managed
Wetlands. 78
6.6. Summary of Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and
Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) and Properties with
Wetland Acreage. 79
6.8. Summary of Wetland Protection Programs 82

OCLC: 23464398 Rec stat: n
Entered: 19890324 Replaced: 19950602 Used: 19910412
S Type: a Bib LvL: m Source: Lang: eng
Repr: Enc Lvl: Conf pub: 0 Ctry: meu
Indx: 0 Mod rec: Govt pub: s Cont: b
Desc: a Int LvL: Festschr: 0 ILLus: a
F/B: 0 Dat tp: s Dates: 1988, %
$ 1010 89-620337 %
$ 2040 DLC Ic DLC %
S 3043 n-us-me %
$ 4050 00 QH76.5.M2 Ib W5 1988 %
S 5082 00 333.91/816/09741 12 20 %
S 6090 Ib %
$ 7049 NON %
S 8100 1 Widoff, Lisse. %
$ 9245 10 Maine wetlands conservation priority plan : Ib an addendum to
the state comprehensive outdoor recreation plan (SCORP) / Ic Lissa Widoff. %
S 10 260 [Augusta] : Ib Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation, Maine State
Planning Office, Wetlands Subcommittee, Land and Water Resources Council, Ic
[19883 %
$ 11 300 91, 26 p. : Ib RL. ; Ic 28 cm. %
$ 12 500 "JULY 1988.11 %
S 13 504 Includes bibliographical references. %
S 14 650 0 WetLand conservation Iz Maine. %
$ 15 650 0 Wetlands Iz Maine. %
$ 16 710 2 Maine Land and Water Resources Council. %

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. PAGE

3.1. Distribution of Inland Wetland Types in Maine By
County According to Maine Wetland Inventory Data. 12
3.2. Distribution of Open Fresh Water Wetlands in Maine
by County According to Maine Wetland Inventory Data. 13
3.3. Distribution of Coastal Wetland Types in Maine By
County According to Maine Wetland Inventory Data. 13-
3.4. Percent of COunty Land Area classified as wetland
by the Maine Wetland Inventory. 15
3.5. Percent of Total State Wetland Area in the Maine
Wetland Inventory Found in Each County or Region. 16
3.6. The 6 Regions of the Maine Coast Characterization
Area From An Ecological Characterization of Coastal
Maine. 19
3.7. Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands in Maine, 1988
Estimates (Based on Table 3.7). 29
4.1 The Landed Value of Maine Fisheries From
1960-1984. 37
4.2. The Landed Value of Lobsters, Clams and Scallops
1960-1984. 38
4.3. The Total Catch of Principal Shellfish Species in
Pounds From 1960 - 1986. 39
4.4. Numbers of Harvesting Licenses for Shellfish, Worms
and Commercial Fishing from 1970 - 1984. 40
5.1. Estimated Loss of Vegetated Wetlands in Maine Since
European Settlement. 44
6.1. Wetlands Protected by Federal Acquisition in Maine. 67
6.2. Number of Wetland and Dune-Related DEP applications
processed, 1980 - 1987. 72
6.3. Wetlands Protected by State Acquisition in Maine. 75
6.4. Wetlands in Maine Protected by Registry Programs 77
6.5. Protected Wetlands.Held in Private Ownership (and
Conservation Easements) in Maine. 81

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE

The Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986 (Appendix 1) was enacted, by the U.S.
Congress to promote wetland conservation in order to maintain the public benefits they provide, as
well as help fulfill international obligations contained in various migratory bird treaties and
conventions. A broad variety of measures are specifically outlined in the Act to protect wetlands
and curb wetland losses. The Act amends the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Act to:

(1) Eliminate the restriction on acquiring migratory waterfowl areas;

(2) Require that State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plans (SCORPs) specifically address
wetlands as important outdoor recreation resources; and

(3) Qualify wetlands as suitable replacement lands for LWCF lands converted to other uses.

In addition, the Act requires the Department of the Interior to establish a National Wetlands
Priority Conservation Plan (NWPCP) specifying the types of and interests in wetlands, to be given
priority for federal and state acquisition. The NWPCP provides the basic policy framework for the
various wetland protection efforts underway by different federal agencies.

The Maine Wetlands Conservation Priority Plan is an addendum to the Maine SCORP,
satisfying the requ'irement for a wetlands component as outlined in (2) above. This Plan addresses
the types and distribution of wetlands in Maine based on available data from existing inventories
and assessments. No new data was collected. Estimates of historic wetland losses and analysis of
future threats have been addressed. Existing wetland protection programs were evaluated including
regulatory, acquisition and registration/designation programs administered at the state and federal
levels. The natural functions and values of wetlands in Maine are outlined with special reference to
impending threats and losses in quality and function. These considerations have been coalesced into
recommendations for wetland acquisition priorities for the state. A set of criteria has been
developed in consultation with various state agencies and experts that will provide a framework for
wetlands later proposed for acquisition.

This report will serve a dual function by fulfilling the state requirement to the National Park
Service and a background document to coordinate future state wetland policy development. The
Land and Water Resources Council approved the broad approach to be taken in the preparation of
this report. The recommendations proposed at the end of the report include some which are
applicable to in-state interests only.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is simultaneously developing a State Wetlands Concept
Plan which will be consistent with this wetland component of SCORP and outline site-specific
wetland acquisition priorities for the Service. The State Concept Plan is produced by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service in Concord, New Hampshire and will drive their protection efforts.

The net result of these different programs is that for many federally funded land acquisition
programs, states must fully and cooperatively address the diverse interests in wetlands protection
before they can remain eligible for these funds.Similarly, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must
demonstrate consistency with state wetland protection priorities.

In Maine, a subcommittee of the Land and Water Resources Council was established to provide
guidance and oversight of this effort to articulate a unified interest in a coordinated wetlands
protection effort. Many unresolved issues remain, yet the unequivocal importance of wetlands in the
Maine landscape, both culturally and biologically, was supported by all participants.

The members of the Wetlands Subcommittee of the Land and Water Resources Council are:

James Bernard State Planning Office
Ken Anderson Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife
Gary Donovan Department of Inland. Fisheries and Wildlife
John Williams Maine Geological Survey
Tom Cieslinski Bureau of Parks and Recreation
Hollis Tedford Bureau of Public Lands
Walter Foster Department of Marine Resources
Frank Ricker Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Resources
Duane Scott Department of Transportation
William Reid Department of Transportation
Judy Dorsey Maine Audubon Society
Bob Wengrzynek U. S. D. A. Soil Conservation Service
Don Witherill Department of Environmental Protection
John Albright The Nature Conservancy
Dr. Ronald Davis University of Maine

CHAPTER 2 - ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Many state agencies and departments retain some control or interest in activities relating to
the use and protection of Maine's wetlands resources. Responsibilities include the mapping of
resources, the regulation of development activities, management of wildlife habitat, the designation
of wetlands as natural areas, wetlands as recreation resources, and even wetlands as economic
resources. The involvement of each of the state agencies in wetlands will be described in later
chapters as appropriate and is summarized here.

Maine Department of Conservation

Maine Geological Survey - Responsible for mapping efforts including wetlands, distribution
and sale of wetland maps, identification of peat resources and other wetland inventory efforts
both geological and ecological.

Maine Bureau of Parks and Recreation - Owns and manages over 2000 acres of wetland
habitats.

Maine Bureau of Public Lands - Owns and manages over 14,000 acres of wetland habitats.

Maine Land Use Regulation Commission - Responsible for regulation and monitoring land use
activities in the unorganized territories of Maine.

Maine Department of Environmental Protection

Bureau of Land Quality Control - Regulates several land use laws that pertain to wetlands
both directly and indirectly. Laws include Site Location of Development Law, Natural Resources
Protection Act (coastal wetlands, freshwater wetlands, strearnside and lakeside wetlands) and the
Rivers Act.

. Bureau of Water Quality Control - Regulates activities resulting in the discharge of pollutants
into water bodies and wetlands.

Bureau of Oil and Hazardous Materials - Regulates and monitors the disposal of hazardous
materials into the environment, including the remediation of unauthorized activities. Responsible for.
the identification of hazardous waste sites, some of which include wetlands.

Maine Department of Marine Resources - Responsible for the management and protection of
commercial marine resources including fish and shellfish habitats, and interticlal areas.

Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife - The Department's mandate is to preserve,
protect and enhance the inland fisheries and wildlife resources of the state; to encourage the wise
use of these resources; to ensure coordinated planning for the future use and preservation of these
resources; and to provide for effective management of these resources. The Department currently
manages over 16,000 acres of wetlands, and has programs in place to purchase additional areas.

Maine State Planning Office - Responsible for coordinating policy and planning efforts of natural
resources agencies through the Land and Water Resources Council and through special projects.

CHAPTER 3 - THE DISTRIBUTION OF WETLANDS IN MAINE

Maine, with its variegated coastline and topography shapedby glaciation, has been endowed
with a diversity of wetlands unmatched in the northeast exclusive of Canada'. Maine has four times
the wetland area of all New England states combined based on state and national wetland
inventories, and 63% of the wetland area of New England based on hydric soil types (Tiner and
Venneman, 1987). In most cases, hydric soils harbor wetla'nd vegetation and communities. The
wetland area of Maine is nearly equivalent in area to the state of Massachusetts. Maine also has
the greatest percentage of its land area in wetland compared to other New England States.

Table 3.1. Estimated wetland area of New England

a) Based on national and state wetland inventories.

Percent of
STATE Wetland Area State's Land Area

Maine 5,160,000 25
New Hampshire 95,000 2
Vermont 220,000 4
Massachusetts 587,000 10
Rhode Island 65,000 10
Connecticut 418,000 14
TOTAL 6,545,000

b) Based on extent of hydric soils (Tiner and Vennernan, 1987)

Area of Percent of
STATE Hydric Soil State's Land Area

Maine 6,460,000 32.6
New Hampshire 983,000 17.2
Vermont 1,395,000 24.7
Massachusetts 818,000 16.5
Rhode Island 112,000 16.6
Connecticut 438,000 14.1
TOTAL 10,206,000

The diversity of wetland types found in Maine is a result of many physical, climatic, and
biological factors. The maritime influence of a cooler climate, glaciated landscapes and poor soil
drainage conditions have contributed to the extent and character of Maine's wetlands. The salt
marsh systems of the southern Maine coast and inland bogs, marshes and swamps are some of the
general types of wetlands found in Maine.

THE ORIGIN OF WETLANDS IN MAINE

To aid in understanding the diversity of wetland types in Maine, the conditions of wetland
formation are discussed here. The glaciers which covered Maine until approximately 13,000 years
ago left a cool, moist and saturated landscape as they retreated. The weight of the ice and the
volume of melting water caused the sea to inundate coastal Maine and inland areas along some of
the major river valleys (Stuiver and Borns, 1975). Water filled depressions lined with impermeable
marine clays left by the transgressing sea. Other areas remained saturated. These poorly drained
areas gave rise to the extensive wetland areas seen in Maine today. In other cases, wetlands
formed where a flooding regime was established, or where drainage along a slope favored wetland
vegetation.

The cool climate also favored the growth of many wetland plants. Shallow ponds gradually
filled with the remains of plant materials and gave rise to a succession of plant communities that
continued to thrive and maintain the waterlogged conditions in which they.grew. Peatlands (bogs
and fens) are widespread in Maine, and contain deposits of undecomposed plant material known as
peat, often several meters thick (Cameron et al., 1984; Davis et al., 1983; Tolonen et al., in press).
In areas with better, but slow drainage patterns, shallower peat deposits formed. Peat deposits
generally accumulate vertically because organic matter is deposited in a confined area. In many
cases, however, peatland has been shown to spread laterally over adjacent mineral soils under
suitable climatic conditions (Davis et al., in prep; Sorenson, 1986).

Salt marshes are similar to peatlands in that they are aggrading environments, (i.e. ones
which accumulate sediment and continue to "grow" over time). As Maine's coastline moved seaward,
salt marsh communities followed, retaining their proximity to the tidal influence on which they
depend. Hence, in contrast to peat deposits, salt marsh sediment accumulation (which also contains
substantial amounts of peat) tends to occur along a diagonal slope below ground.

Where ponds and lakes formed that were fed by groundwater or surface runoff, wetland
vegetation became established along the edges or in calm coves. The rate of renewal of the volume
of water in the basin and the configuration of the shoreline are two possible determinants of
whether wetland vegetation invades and to what degree.

In general, natural wetlands exist because of saturated soil conditions, a regular flooding
regime, impoundment, or seepage, and these conditions have their origin in Maine's glacial history.
Even areas that were not covered by ice received meltwater or prolonged flooding or saturation
during post-glacial periods. The diversity of wetland types found in Maine reflects the composite
assemblage of plants and animals which have adapted to a given set of conditions over millennia.

MAJOR WETLAND TYPES

The wetland types which will be discussed throughout this report fall into a few broad
categories. Freshwater wetlands include marshes, swamps and peatlands (bogs and fens). These may
be isolated wetlands or associated with water bodies such as streams, lakes or ponds. Coastal
wetlands include salt marshes, interticlal flats, rocky shores and other tidal marshes with varying
salinity (brackish, fresh/brackish, etc.).

In the Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, "wetland" means land that has a predominance of
hydric soils and that is inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and
duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances does support, a prevalence of
hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. It is implied here that
an area must have all these characteristics to be considered a wetland, and is consistent with the

Army Corps of Engineers wetland definition (33 CFR 328.3(b)) employed in the regulation of the
discharge of dredged or fill material into wetlands under the Section 404 Program of the Clean
Water Act.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service defines wetlands for their classification system as:

"lands transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water
table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by
shallow water. Wetlands must have one or more of the following three
attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly
hydrophytes, (2) the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil,- and (3)
the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water at some time during the
growing season of the year.

The term wetland includes a variety of areas that fall into one of five
categories: (1) areas with hydrophytes and hydric soils, such as those
commonly known as marshes, swamps and bogs; (2) area without hydrophytes
but with hydric soils-for example, flats where drastic fluctuations in water
level, wave action, turbidity, or high concentration of salts may prevent the
growth of hydrophytes; (3) areas with hydrophytes but nonhydric soils, such as
margins of impoundments or excavations where hydrophytes have become
established but hydric soils have not yet developed; (4) areas without soils
but with hydrophytes such as the seaweed-covered portions of rocky shores;
and (5) wetlands without soil and without hydrophytes, such as gravel beaches
or rocky shores without vegetation." (Cowardin et al., 1979). -

In the U.S. Fish and Wildlife classification, deepwater (or aquatic) habitats are those
permanently flooded lands lying below the deepwater boundary of wetlands and are classified
separately from wetlands as described above. Wetlands and deepwater habitats may be within each
of the five major Systems defined in the classification: Marine, Estuarine, Riverine, Lacustrine,
and Palustrine. The Palustrine by definition includes all freshwater wetlands. Wetlands are
associated at the margins of cleepwater habitats of all other systems.

For the purposes of this report, it is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service definition of wetlands
that is used in discussions of wetlands. Although deepwater habitats are classified in most wetland
inventories, later discussions on extent, distribution and threats and losses will not include these.
Furthermore, this definition of wetland is a biological one and not limited to legal definition of
wetlands which are included in particular laws or programs. The wetland classification system used
by the Maine Wetland Inventory is given in Appendix 11 and that used by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service is given in Appendix 111.

Each of the wetland types found in Maine is represented by a variety of plant associations or
natural communities and is affected by several variables such as geographic location (or location
within an "ecoregion"), proximity to the coast, bedrock and surficial geology, drainage, flood
regime, etc. These variables will be briefly described here.

The geographic location of a wetland will influence its species composition. Wetlands in
northern Maine share a closer affinity.in species composition with Canadian, or boreal systems. For
example, fens in northernmost and northwestern Maine have vegetation and surface features that
classify them as "ribbed fens" or "string bogs", such as those in adjacent Canada. Bogs are
abundant throughout Maine, with different types characteristic of different parts of the state with

overlap between them (Davis et al., in prep.). Coastal plateau bogs are restricted to the extreme
eastern portion of the Maine coast in Washington and Hancock Counties (Worley, 1980, Damman,
1979). Distinctly "domed" bogs are apparently only found in central and eastern Maine, whereas
other types, such as kettlehole bogs are found throughout the state.

Conversely, wetlands. in southern Maine may contain species which are more common further
south and reach the northern limit of their distribution in Maine. One example is Atlantic White
Cedar (Chamaecyparis thvoides) which occurs in southern Maine swamps and Oeatlands, occasionally
with tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica , another species of southern affinity. Along with these rare
occurrences of plant species, associated organisms may likewise be found and similarly uncommon.
One example is the butterfly Hessel's hairstreak (Mitoura hesseli) which is associated with Atlantic
White Cedar wetlands to the south, and recently discovered for the first time in Saco Heath, a
raised bog with Atlantic White Cedar in southern Maine (Maine Natural Heritage Data Base, 1987).

The proximity to the coast and tidal influence is another distinguishing factor for many
wetlands, especially marshes. Saline or salt marshes are those regularly flooded by the tides. Other
tidal marshes are also associated with freshwater systems, such as rivers, and the mixing of saline
and fresh water in wetland systems will affect species composition. Saltwater influence diminishes
inland from the coast, with a corresponding change in vegetation. Exposed flats are also affected
by differing salinity in terms of species composition. The flora of brackish and fresh/brackish
intertidal mudflats include several species which are considered rare in Maine. In addition, brackish
wetlands associated with water bodies near the coast, such as Merrymeeting Bay, are also important
for nesting and feeding waterfowl.

The chemical nature of the bedrock or surficial deposits associated with wetlands may affect
the water chemistry and hence the vegetation composition of the wetland. Since most of the
subsurface geology in Maine is acidic in nature, there are often similar species between similar
wetland types. However, in a few areas in Maine, water passing through calcareous (lime-rich)
sediments may enrich a wetland and encourage the growth of a number of lime-loving plants
considered rare in Maine, primarily due to the scarcity of these environmental conditions. This
condition is found in several "calcareous fens", i.e. shallow groundwater-fed peatlands, primarily
restricted to a small region in northeastern Aroostook County. Elsewhere, calcareous sediments
along rivershores, such as the St. John River, harbor a unique association of plants, including the
federally endangered St. John River endemic, Furbish's Lousewort (Pedicularis furbishiae .

The kind of drainage in a wetland is another determinant of the type of wetland or the
vegetation composition. Most wetlands are in low-lying areas, and are often catch basins for the
associated watershed. Some wetlands may be in a stagnant basin with no outflow. Water levels may
fluctuate with spring runoff and ensuing evapotranspiration, yet may stay saturated all year and be
inhabited by a suite of species adapted to these conditions. Wetlands may also be in seepage areas,
where water moves through the system at a regular rate, providing a steady influx of water,
oxygen and nutrients and a natural flushing away of biological waste products. Seepage wetlands
may also remain saturated all year, but do not become stagnant.

Finally, the vegetation structure imparts a primary distinguishing factor between wetlands.
Wetlands may beforested or shrub-dominated (swamp), grass or sedge-dominated (marsh), heath
shrub- and moss-dominated (bog) or non-vegetated (mudflat), or a combination o 'f these. It is the
vegetation structure as well as composition which has a bearing on the presence of particular
animal species at a wetland. Diversity of species and structure contributes to the diversity of
animal communities present.

The water regime or flood regime is an important factor in the distribution of wetlands in the
state. Many wetlands are associated with water bodies which flood seasonally, or at least
periodically. Inundation of the wetland provides the enrichment necessary for plant growth. In
Maine, floodplain wetlands are most common along broad and flat river and stream valley systems.
Floodplain vegetation may vary regionally or locally from silver maple floodplain forests to alder-
lined stream banks, to sparsely vegetated cobble shores to sedge and rush-dominated marshes along
slow moving streams. Physical and topographical conditions influence the vegetation structure and
composition, forming many different kinds of floodplain plant communities. Historically, floodplain
soils with higher mineral soil content have been more vulnerable to development.

WETLAND INVENTORIES

Overview

A number of different wetland inventories have been conducted in Maine, each with its own
purpose, using different wetland definitions, classification, and methodology. None of these are
comprehensive for all wetland types on a statewide basis, except for the Maine Wetlands Inventory
(MWI) of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), which provides a usable
classification scheme and a statewide approach for use as baseline for comparison of wetlands data
in the state.

All existing wetland inventories have been evaluated for their usefulness to SCORP,
particularly as they may provide accurate acreage estimates for wetland types statewide and
regionally. A comparison of different wetland inventories is given in Table 3.2. Since most
inventories focus on one region or group of wetland types,- different sources may be used for the
best estimates of each type. As justification for this approach, a chronology of wetland inventories
is presented here.

The Maine Wetland Inventory (MWI)

In 1954, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), through its Office of River Basin
Studies, conducted the first inventory of wetlands in Maine (USDI, 1954). At that time there was
the first inkling of nationwide recognition* of wetlands as important resources, particularly for
their value as waterfowl habitat. To avert potential losses, selected wetlands >40 acres in size
were selected by MDIFW staff and typed by the USFWS using aerial photo analysis. These were
then surveyed on the ground and rated for their value to waterfowl (high-medium-low).

The study results have shown that Maine wetlands were not seriously threatened at that time,
although wetland "development" to enhance waterfowl productivity was encouraged. Although 2/3 of
the wetlands inventoried occurred in inland Maine, it was recognized then as now, that the coastal
region contains the highest proportion of high value wetlands, especially true because of the tidal
mudflats and marshes which host migratory and wintering shorebirds and waterfowl and sustain
commercial shellfish production.

A companion study to this followed in 1959, in which permanent water areas in Maine >1 0
acres were surveyed. This study found a greater abundance of coastal saline areas than inland fresh
areas that were significant to migratory waterfowl (USFWS, 1959). Then in the 1960's, MDIFW, also
recognizing the importance of various wetland habitats to waterfowl, began the Maine Wetland
Inventory (MWI). The purpose of the inventory was to locate and evaluate existing and potential
wetlands in the state, especially those suitable as habitat for breeding waterfowl (McCall, 1972).
For approximately ten years (1963-1973) data was collected on wetlands at least ten acres in size
and entered into the MWI computerized data base. Information. such as type, location, habitat value,
etc. is computerized for each wetland entry, allowing the data base to still serve as a primary
management tool for the Department. Wetlands were also identified by major and minor watershed.
Thirteen major river drainage systems comprising 129 minor watersheds form the basic unit of
organization of the maps and data base.

Table 3.2. Comparison of Wetland Inventories in Maine

PARAMETERS SMI PRI FWI NWI MCI MWI(1972) MWI(1954)

Date completed 1987 1984 1983 1980 1977 1972 1954

Duration I yr. 5 yrs. 6 mo. 5 yrs. 5 yrs. 10 yrs

Lead Agency UMO/MGS MGS MGS/DEP USFWS SPO MDIFW USFWS

Base Map Scale 1:24,000 1:24,000 1:50,000 1:24,000, 1:48,000 1: 125,000 1: 1.25,000
(in prep.) 1:64,000, 1:62,500
1:100,000

Minimum wetland 150m2 80 ac. 10 ac.. 3-5 ac. 5 ac./20 ac. 10 ac. 40 ac.
Size

Classification Timson, Cameron, none Cowardin general Martin et Martin et
System 1977 1984 et al., 1979 al., 1953 al., 1953

Number of Types I (salt 1 (Bogs) several 14 14
identified marsh)

Methods planimetry aerial aerial aerial aerial A.P. and A.P. and
photo photo photo photo,1966 Field Chk. F.C.
Photo Scale 1:20,000 1:40,000 1:80,000 1:1320

Regional coastal statewide organized coastal coastal statewide statewide
Coverage towns

Acreage Data Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes
(partial)

Useful for Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No
SCORP

KEY: SMI=Salt Marsh Inventory (Jacbson et al., 1987); PRI=Maine Peat Resource Inventory (Cameron
et al., 1984); FWI=Maine Freshwater Wetland inventory (MGS,1985); NWI=National Wetland Inventory
(USFWS,1980); MCI=Maine Coastal Inventory; MWI= Maine Wetland Inventory (MDIFW).

Although all wetland types were documented in the inventory (including open water wetlands),
only their suitability or potential as waterfowl breeding habitat was evaluated. Today, MDIFW
ground surveys are reviewing more than just waterfowl habitat, recognizing that all wetland types
have various wildlife values (G. Donovan, K. Anderson, pers. communication; Jones et a[., 1988). At
present, nearly 1.8 million acres of wetland comprise the MWI database, and updates are
incorporated incidental to ongoing work (Table 3.3). The distribution of wetland types included in
the current Maine Wetland Inventory is illustrated in Figures 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3.

Table 3.3 TOTAL MAINE WETLAND INVENTORY COVERAGE BY TYPE:

TYPE # ACRES WETLANDS

Flat/Basin 10,249 126
Fresh Meadow 58,772 1295
Fresh Marsh 57,602 9431
Open Fresh Water 913,003 4224
Shrub Swamp 208,342 5559
Wooded Swamp .279,599 5239
Bog 168,895 2265
Coastal Fresh Marsh 11,399 27
Coastal Open Fresh Water 1,462 5
Salt Marsh 16,917 140
Sound or Bay (mudflat) 56,689 not determined
Unknown 1,853 15
TOTALS 1,781,798 19,848

The MWI is the only statewide inventory which has catalogued acreage of individual wetlands
by type and county, and is therefore a useful frame of reference with other inventories (Table 3.4).
Figure 3.4 illustrates the extent of wetland in each county as a percent of the total area in the
county, based on MWI data. Figure 3.5 portrays the proportion of the total state wetland area
found in each county. While Penobscot, Hancock and Washington Counties all have higher
percentages of their county area in wetland, nearly half of the state's wetland area is found in
Aroostook, Piscataquis and Penobscot Counties combined.

The classification system used by the MWI (Martin et. al., 1953)- was a widely used system,
and is a precursor to the current USFWS Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States in Appendix III (Cowardin et al., 1979). Appendix IV provides a direct comparison
between these two systems.

Other wetland inventories and researchers have used segments of the MWI data base to review
distribution of a particular wetland type, correlate data or determine ownership or land use
patterns (Davis et al., 1983; Reed and D'Andrea, 1973).

Figure 3.1. D istribution of Inland Wetland Types in Maine by County According to Maine Wetland
Inventory Data
Distribution of Inlan d Wetland Types in Maine By County
According to Maine Wetland Inventory Data

180000--

160000--

140000--

120000--

100000--

80000--

60000--

40000-- .. .....

20000.- =
0.01
ANDR AROO CLW FRAN HAW- KeN KNOX UNC cxm pENo p1sc sAGA sme wALD WAsH yOpK

EM Bog
ED Wooded Swamp
12 Shrub Swamp

Fresh Marsh/Meadow
El Flat/Basin

12
*M:

XfflPN

ggg

Figure 3.2. Distribution of Open Fresh Water Wetlands in Maine By County According to Maine
Wetland Inventory Data

Distribution of inland Open Fresh Water Wetlands in Maine
By County
According to Maine Wetland Inventory Data

180000..

160000.-

140000--

A 120000..
C 100000
R
E 80000
S 60000

40000

20000
-ilk
0
ANDR AROO CUMB FRAN HANC KDN 10M LNC CDFO PRO PISC SAGA SOME WALD WASH YCPX

Flaure 3.3. Distribution of Coastal Wetland Types in Maine by County According to Maine Wetland
Inventory Data (excluding mudflats)

Distribution of Coastal Wetland Types in Maine By County
According to Maine Wetland Inventory Data

14000

12000

10000-
A Coastal Open Fresh Water
C 8000-
R Salt Marsh
E 6000- Coastal Fresh Marsh
S
4000-
2000- czm-
0
CUMB HANC PWX LINC SACA WALD WASH Y0FK

Table 3.4. Maine Wetland Inventory Coverage in Acres by Type and County

COUNTY Flat/ Fresh Fresh Open Fresh
Basin Meadow Marsh Water
ANDROSCOGGIN 5- 2782 1060 17310
AROOSTOOK 1901 3483 6907 102469
CUMBERLAND 59 1622 903 45349
FRANKLIN 1574 3878 1921 36011
HANCOCK 53 2961 3658 65505
KENNEBEC 0 602 6385 48281
KNOX 0 401 660 7445
LINCOLN 0 2202 1332 10918
OXFORD 3387 2910 4416 47349
PENOBSCOT 673 16003 4799 100702
PISCATAQUIS 967 2012 4548 173980
SAGADAHOC 0 1025 152 817
SOMERSET 1320 7953 9141 120866
WALDO 0 2648 4077 11665
WASHINGTON 315 7455 6003 110784
YORK 0 835 1140 13552
Total 10249 58772 57602 913003

COUNTY Shrub Swamp Wooded Swamp Bog
ANDROSCOGGIN 1038 463 3382
AROOSTOOK 39005 83096 31815
CUMBERLAND 2214 2939 1527
FRANKLIN 12324 6109 782
HANCOCK 8626 11675 9965
KENNEBEC 6638 3845 2499
KNOX 721 465 783
LINCOLN 1738 1760 266
OXFORD 11521 9015 4073
PENOBSCOT 28539 55413 36644
PISCATAQUIS 24099 50742 33058
SAGADAHOC 2774 1494 157
SOMERSET 31843 24991 12040
WALDO 6080 3462 655
WASHINGTON 26836 22956 30953
YORK 4346 4174 296
Total 208342 279599 168,895

Coastal Coastal Salt Sounds/
COUNTY Fr. Marsh Open Fr.Water Marsh Bays
CUMBERLAND 348 454 4367
HANCOCK 56 0 751
KNOX 0 0 273
LINCOLN 586 0 931
SAGADAHOC 10365 958 2482
WALDO 0 0, 435
WASHINGTON 0 0 1953
YORK 44 50 4254
Total 11399 1462 16,917 56,689

Aroostook County

6.38%

piscataquis County

io.76%

89.25
omerset County Penobscot County
8,07%
10.90%

Washington County

12.33%
9J.93% 89.101/0

W,,,WM MAVO ROOM
Hancock County

9.45%
87.67%

Cgpjtoj Region
24.25%
7.68%

90.5 %

ca Say Region

7.52%

02.12%

STATE OF
MAINE

02.48% COUN TIES

Figure 3.4. Percent of county land area classified as wetland by the Maine Wetland Inventory.
@4y 15 0 U I

Figure 3.5. Percent of total state wetland area in the Maine Wetland Inventory found in each
county or region.

Percent of Total State Wetland Area
in the Maine Wetland Inventory
Found in Each County or Region 0 Aroostook County
7.64% 7% El Piscataquis County
7.440/co M Penobscot County
10 Somerset County
8.42%
Washington County
16.78%
5.99% Hancock County

Western Maine Region
12.03% 22 Capitol Region
14.07%
12.07% El Casco Bay Region
Total Wetland Area in MWI 1,781,798
Acres

Maine Coastal Inventory (MCI)
In the mid-1 970's, the Maine .State Planning Office began the Maine Coastal Inventory (MCI)
"to collect and display social, economic and natural resource information for the whole coast" (SPO,
1977). The inventory consists of both mapped and statistical information. The coast was divided into
29 mapping units, each containing a group of towns. A variety of maps were produced for each of
the 29 units and included one each of Topography, Slopes, Watersheds and Water Classification,
Soils, Fish and Wildlife (two maps) * Land Cover Types and Recreation Facilities. In most cases the
minimum resolution for land types @r wetlands was five acres. The Land Cover Type map and the
Fish and Wildlife maps contain wetland location information. The Land Cover Type maps identify
wetlands as a land type, including those which are periodically or permanently flooded, such as
beaver flowages, bogs, hardwood swamps, tidal flats, salt marshes and shrub swamps. Different
wetland types are not distinguished. The Fish and Wildlife maps identify wetlands with important
fish and wildlife values such as wetlands important to waterfowl, shellfish beds (e.g. clam flats),
tidal flats and other wetlands as identified by air photo interpretation, the MWI, the Department of
Marine Resources (DMR)and other sources.

The MCI maps provide locational data only, and are based on pre-1 977 data. The base maps
are 1:48,000 and could still provide some use to coastal towns for planning purposes, but present
knowledge suggests that these are not widely used.

An Ecological Characterization of Coastal Maine (ECCM) and The National Wetland Inventory (NWI)

The most comprehensive broad ecological survey of the Maine coast is depicted in the 1980
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report "An Ecological Characterization of Coastal Maine" (Fefer and
Shettig, eds., 1980). When the USFWS Officeofeiological Sciences (OBS) was established in the
early 1 970's, the proposals for offshore energy development led to the selection of four major
coastal ecosystems for characterization including the Maine coast. Cape Elizabeth to Calais was
divided into six regions (Figure 3.6) and the biology and ecology of the natural wetland, aquatic
and terrestrial systems of the landscape were described.

Wetlands and cleepwater habitats were described using Cowardin's 1979 classification system
(Appendix 111). Detailed floral and faunal characterizations of the different systems were provided
by experts in these fields in Maine and compiled into the five primary volumes of the report.
Marine, Estuarine, Palustrine, Riverine, Lacustrine and Terrestrial Systems were described in depth
and are further broken down @accorcling to vegetation structure and/or substrate. System "Classes"
include: Emergent Wetland, Aquatic Bed, Flat, Reef, Rocky Shore, as appropriate to each system.
Acreage data for wetlands in Marine and Estuarine intertidal areas, and all Palustrine areas are
used for comparison and evaluation for SCORP purposes (Table 3.5). These data are not digitized as
they have been in other states with operational geographic information systems (Tiner, 1985a,b).

The Ecological Characterization of Coastal Maine was one, of the first major efforts of the
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) team of the USFWS. Their methodology and resolution has
dramatically improved in the ten years since the report was first prepared. At that time, 1:80,000
scale black-and-white aerial photos were used to delineate wetlands at least 3-5 acres in size. Now,
with color infra-red aerial photography at 1:58,000 scale, wetland units of 1 acre are distinguished
(Ralph Tiner, pers. communication).

The NWI was completed for the entire Maine coast and maps are presently available through
the Maine Geological Survey (MGS). Areas are mapped at 1:62,500 (15') or 1:24,000 (75) but not
both. Some areas are available in 1:100,000. Although debate currently exists over the usefulness of
NWI maps to Maine, a recent study in Massachusetts of the accuracy of NWI maps found >95%--

accuracy in wetland vs. upland delineation, and >85% accuracy in wetland type classification
(Startwout et al., 1982). In Maine, the Soil Conservation Service field-tested the accuracy of
selected areas in the NWI mapping project, and found nearly 87% correlation between their
respective welland delineations.

More recent inventories have focused on a particular wetland type, a particular resource value or a
given geographic region. The vastness of the state's wetland resources has necessitated a narrower
approach in these instances. The results are uneven, yet these efforts have shed light on previously
unknown aspects of the state's wetlands in terms of distribution of types and their functions and values
(Worley, 1982; Sorenson, 1986; Davis et al., in prep.).

Fic e
wre 3.6. The Six Regions of the Main Coast Characterization Area, From an Ecological
Characterization of Coastal Maine (Shettig and Fefer, 1980)

03,

k ITC

us"

"CO

Table 3.5. Total State Wetland Acreage in the Coastal Zone, by System Type, from an Ecological
Characterization of Coastal Maine (Fefer and Shettig, 1980)

WETLANDS IN MARINE AND ESTUARINE INTERTIDAL SUBSYSTEMS

MARINE Regions of ESTUAR'i NEE Regions of
CLASS INTERTIDAL Abundance INTERTIDAL Abundance
Non-Vegetated I
Beach/Bar 2897 6,4 1089 4,6
Flat 28,827 6,5,4,1 41,650 2,6
Reef 108 5 138 3
Rocky Shore 21,521 4,65,11 2911 6

Vegetated
Aquatic Bed 6202 1,6 2729 4,5,6
Emergent 0 13,802 2,6
Emergent/OW 0 499 1
Emergent/UB 0 406 5
Flat/Emergent 0 5 1
Flat/ 0 47 1
Scrub-shrub
Scrub-shrub 0 66 6

TOT. INTERTIDAL 59,566 65,382
TOT. SUBTIDAL 113,139 66,693
SYSTEM TOTAL 172,705 130,075

WETLANDS IN PAILUSTRINE SYSTEM
Regions of Regions of
CLASS Acres Abundance #S Abundance

Non-vegetated
Open Water (OW) 3449 4 1251 4
Unconsol. bottom 52 4 1 4
Vegetatedi
Forested 106,810 6 5775 6,4,5
Forested/Shrub 13,728 5 1086 5,4
Scrub-shrub 47,307 6 3759 6
Emergent 9097 2 1222 4
Shrub/Emergent 8771 5 484 5
Forested/Emergent 633 5 81 5
Aquatic bed 57 4 1 4

TOTALACRES 189,702 13,650

1 The occurrence of a wetland class in combination with open
water generally occurs on <I% of wetland area for each type and is
therefore combined into the dominant vegetation class.

Maine Peat Resource Inventory (PRI)

In the late 1970's, the Maine Peat Resource Inventory (PRI) began. Under the direction of
the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), several states including Maine started peat resource
inventories. The oil and energy crisis of the mid-seventies precipitated DOE encouragement of
research on alternative energy sources, such as peat.

The Maine Peat Resource Program was administered by the Maine Office of Energy Resources
(OER) and conducted by the MGS and Cornelia Cameron, peat resource specialist of the U.S.
Geologic Survey in Reston, Virginia. Peat depth, quality and extent was determined for 233 peat
deposits throughout the state, totalling 72,957 acres (Table 3.6). The actual acreage of peatland
ecosystems (domed bogs, coastal plateau bogs, ribbed fens, etc.) is far greater since the inventory
only included acres of commercial peat and peat deposits of at least 80 acres, with a minimum
average thickness of five feet and an ash content of < 25%. General estimates of total peatland -
acreage are approximately 700,000 acres.

The results of the survey were published in a series of MGS Bulletins (Cameron et al., 1984)
recording the commercial qualities and extent of each of the 233 deposits, as well as classification
of the geological setting in which the peatland formed. A new series of MGS Surficial Geology maps
will incorporate the results from the peatland inventory and the freshwater wetland maps, giving
more detail to the kind of wetland habitats that are mapped on the 1:24,000 scale surficial geology
maps.

Table 3.6. Results of the Maine Peat Resource Evaluation Program (Cameron et al., 1984)

NUMBER OF - ESTIMATED RESOURCES
COUNTY DEPOSITS SURVEYED ACREAGE (Short Tons)

Androscoggin 4 1,160 2,383,000
Aroostook 43 11,498 18,851,400
Cumberland 1 200 400,000
Franklin 3 1,185 2,414,000
Hancock 5 1,338 2,559,200
Kennebec 8 2,010 4,260,000
Knox 2 227 447,000
Lincoln 4 402 776,200
Oxford 5 563 932,000
Penobscot 47 21,666 40,923,000
Piscataquis 29 5,896 8,311,200
Sagadahoc 0 0 0
Somerset 20 7,056 14,371,800
Waldo 8 2,893 4,835,800
York 6 1,875 2,923,000

TOTALS 223 72,957 136,502,400

Freshwater Wetland Inventory (FWI)

In 1982, the State Legislature ordered a freshwater wetland mapping project for the
organized towns which led to the identification of many wetlands which were unregulated by
existing laws. This mapping project, undertaken by the MGS for DEP, formed the basis of the 1985
Freshwater Wetlands Act, where wetland was defined as non-forested vegetated wetlands >10 acres
on very poorly drained soils. The newly enacted Natural Resources Protection Act of 1988 broadens
theTreshwater Wetlands Act definition to include forested wetlands and deletes the soils criteria.

The maps,served primarily to locate and identify freshwater wetlands which were unregulated,
with the maps providing a "red flag" for potential development activities. Of the 8,245 freshwater
wetlands mapped, acreage calculations were completed only for the 1674 freshwater wetlands mapped
in coastal towns and comprising 70,000 acres (M.Mullen, unpublished data). The exclusion of
wetlands less than ten acres in size has led to an underestimate of wetlands in this inventory as
well. Maps are available from MGS. With the recent changes in freshwater wetland definition to
include forested types, these are incomplete in terms of their identification of the regulatory status
of mapped wetlands.

Salt Marsh Inventory (SM11)

The most recent inventory of Maine's salt marshes uses MGS Coastal Geology maps by Barry
Timson (1977), where several coastal environments are quite finely delineated. Researchers at the
University of Maine, Orono (UMO) and MGS determined the areal extent of salt marsh in Maine
by planimetric measurementof ear,@ Timson's 1977 coastal geology maps (Jacobson et al., 1987).
The minimum size mapped is 150m and all such units were measured. This inventory provides the
most accurat acreage calculations of salt marsh in Maine. The total acreage calculated was 18,960
acres (79 km with most of the acreage in a few larger systems in the southern half of the coast,
namely the Wells Embayment, Saco Bay and the Kennebec River Estuary. Numerous salt marshes
even smaller than the minimum size mapped occur along the coast and would increase this
estimate.

The same methodology for salt marsh acreage calculation could be applied to other coastal
environments using Timson's maps. The contribution of organic matter by tidal marshes, flats and
other coastal wetlands to the Gulf of Maine, suggests the importance of accurate documentation of
the extent of coastal ecosystems.

National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS)

The National Cooperative Soil Survey of the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) has been
mapping the soils of Maine since the 1950's. Several county surveys are now complete in the
southern and coastal portions of the state. Northern and inland Maine is still largely unmapped.
The soil survey reports provide locational information mapping the occurrence of different soil
types across the landscape. From a classification of soil types, wetland soils are a reasonable
predictor of wetland community occurrence. Since many wetland types or size classes have been
excluded from other inventories, these documents provide a baseline for comparison where the
inventory is complete.

Based on soils types (i.e. hydric soils)2, it is estimated that 30% of the cover of Maine, or 6
million acres is in wetland soils, with the greatest proportion of this found as forested and shrub
wetlands inclu'ding bottomlands, floodplains and swamps. About one million acres of this is in small
lakes and ponds and their associated wetlands (B. Wengrzynek, pers. communication). The favorable
correlation between wetland soils delineation and NWI maps supports the use of Soil Survey results
as the best available wetland maps for the state, using the USFWS wetland definition. However,
acreage is not specifically calculated here either.

Other Wetland Inventories/Data

Other specific wetland inventories include research at universities and surveys by state
agencies or private organizations. A peatland data base is being created by Dr. Ronald Davis at
the University of Maine at Orono, cataloguing ecological characteristics of all types of peatlands in
Maine. The Critical Areas Program has supported surveys of a number of more unusual peatland
types including coastal plateau bogs, ribbed fens and eccentric raised bogs. The Nongame Program
of MDIFW'is maintaining information on habitats important to rare, threatened and endangered
animal species, and often includes data on wetlands.

The Maine Natural Heritage Program of The Nature Conservancy maintains an up-to-date
computerized and mapped data base documenting the occurrences of rare, threatened and
endangered plants, animals and natural communities, the latter including a range of wetland types
classified on the basis of species assemblages and hydrologic conditions,. The Natural Heritage
Program classification of wetland types and their biotic features will be discussed later.

The Land Use Regulation Commission (LURC) provides no wetland acreage calculations,
although it maps wetland protection zones (P-WL) on its planning maps, However, wetland acreage
in P-WL in LURC territories is estimated to be 3% of the total jurisdiction or about 310,000 acres
(Fred Todd, pers. comm.) .

Problems and Deficiencies

Despite the range of inventories and mapping projects conducted in Maine to date, no single
inventory can provide an accurate estimate of acres or numbers of wetlands in Maine by type or
by county. By evaluating each inventory and focusing on its strongest aspect, acreage figures can
be extracted from different sources for use in describing the types and distribution of wetlands in
Maine. However there are many inherent differences between the inventories that make
comparisons difficult (Table 3.2). These basic problems and deficiencies are summarized below.

1. Inventory purpose - Inventories were undertaken for different purposes and with different goals
in mind. This may bias or restrict the type of data collected in each. The Salt Marsh Inventory had
the primary purpose of determining extent or acreage, the Maine Wetland Inventory evaluated
wetlands for their value as waterfowl habitat and others have been used in land use planning,
resource management, regulation or ecological characterization. This in turn determines the
classification system used, the methodology, approach, map scales and final products:

2. Wetland classification and definition - Comparison of data becomes difficult when the
classification of wetlands types and their respective definitions differ. Wetland definition is closely
related to the purpose of the. inventory. This problem is compounded when an inventory was

2
Lists of the hydric soils of Maine are available from SCS
for the state and by county where soil surveys are complete.

conducted using a legal definition of wetland rather than an ecological one. The Freshwater
Wetlands Inventory is a case in point. The FW1 defined wetlands by size class, > 10 acres, which
already excludes a large number of small wetlands which are under the greatest threat of loss. The
inclusion of wetlands only containing ve[y poorly drained soils excludes another large set of
wetlands found on poorly drained or periodically flooded soils which also harbor wetland
vegetation and communities. The earlier definition of freshwater wetlands excluded forested
wetlands, which according to soils and NWI data and maps comprise about 80% of all wetlands in
Maine (Bob Wengrzynek, pers. comm.). All wetland inventories, except perhaps the NWI, have
greatly underestimated the acreage and extent of forested wetlands, primarily due to differences in
definition of what constitutes a forested wetland.

3. Geographic coverage and distribution of types - Inventories covered different geographic regions
(e.g. coastal vs. statewide, etc.) or different types. Most inventories encompassed the coastal zone,
resulting in an absence of usable inland wetland data. Most inventories are not comprehensive on a
statewide basis nor in coverage of the full range of wetland types. Even detailed regional surveys
pose some problems. For example, of the several inventories including Maine's coast, all define the
coastal zone differently: The MCI divides the whole coast into 29 regions, comprising 141 towns and
The Ecological Characterization divides the coast from Cape Elizabeth to Calais into 6 regions
consisting of 131 towns.

4. Map scales - Map scales used in final map products differed among inventories.

5. Acreage data - Most inventories do not include the calculation of acreage data. Available data
tends to underestimate actual wetland acreage in the state.

6. Date of inventory data - Most inventory data or maps of significant wetland areas are several
years old. New information has rendered some of this data unreliable, by not their omission of
recent land use changes or changes in wetland values. Inventories were often based on older aerial
photos for interpretation.

7. Tracking/Monitoring - None of the inventories except the MWI has a mechanism for updating
data. There appears to be no system which has the capacity to track changes in particular wetland
features or parameters, or their ecological or legal status.

8. Biotic Diversity - Most inventories fail to reflect the natural biological diversity of wetlands.
Many endangered and threatened species reside in specific wetland types, often with specific plant
associations. Inventories or mapping projects need to refine their scale of resolution to capture this
important component of wetlands.

Discussion

The current U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classification (Cowardin et al., 1979) is the most
widely used classification system for wetland inventories nationally. Using this system,the National
Wetlands Inventory Team has completed wetland inventories for all states in USFWS Region 5
(Northeastern U.S.) except New York and Maine (R. Tiner, pers. communication). To compare data,
one must first align or "crosswalk" similar wetland types between classifications, and then decide
-which has the best estimate for each type.

The 'classification used by the MWI was an earlier USFWS classification and has been
crosswalked with Cowardin's (Appendix IV) indicating sbme compatibility of definition. Certain
types will not readily correspond. For example, the MWI uses the terms "shrub swamp" and "bog"
to represent separate wetland types. The NWI uses scrub-shrub to represent all units dominated by

shrubs or stunted woody vegetation and can therefore be found in either of the MWI types. Taken
out of the context of a single wetland system or occurrence (e.g. floodplain, bog, marsh, etc.), the
NWI figures can be somewhat misleading. The NWI does, however, provide the best available
resolution and classification for delineation of wetland vegetation types in the areas it has mapped.

One problem with this fine degree of resolution is that since a single wetland may contain
several vegetation classes (emergent wetland, open water, forested wetland, etc.) the unity of the
single wetland system as a separate entity may be lost. However, the degree of refinement of
these maps allows them to be used in several arenas - planning, regulation, management and
research. When these maps are part of a computerized GIS, trends of wetland loss or changes in
wetland character (e.g. flooding by beaver activity) can be accurately delineated and recorded over
time (Tiner, 1984; Tiner, 1985a,b).

Published NWI findings are limited to the 6 regions of the coastal zone as defined in the
Ecological Characterization of Coastal Maine from Cape Elizabeth to Calais (Fefer and Shettig,
eds., 1980) and provides the best available acreage data for wetlands in the coastal zone. This was
compared with MWI data sorted for the same towns and regions and unpublished acreage data for
MGS-mapped freshwater wetlands in the coastal zone. Comparison of the palustrine wetland data
from these three inventories of the coastal zone are used to give an indication of their relative
accuracy and comprehensive coverage in the coastal zone (Table 3.7).

In NWI, 63% of all palustrine wetland acres mapped are forested and forested/shrub, 25% are
scrub-shrub wetlands. 5% are emergent wetland, another 5% are shrub/emergent and 2% are open
water. The breakdown of wetland.units mapped is 77% forested, forested/shrub and scrub-shrub, 9%
emergent, 4% shrub/emergent and 9% open water. Since a single wetland mapped by NWI may have
..more than one mapped unit, the acreage figures are a more accurate basis for comparison.

The FWI included 33% of the number of freshwater wetlands mapped by the NW1. Of the
wetlands mapped by the FWI in the coastal zone, 96% were also mapped by NWI, whereas only 39%
were mapped by the MWI.

According to the NWI, 35% of the Marine System and 49% of the Estuarine System are
intertidal wetlands comprising 122,948 acres. Marine and Estuarine intertidal flats occupy the
largest area of any single intertidal class, comprising 48% of Marine Intertidal and 66% of
Estuarine Intertidal subsystems. Intertidal rocky shores are a close second, occupying 36% of
Marine intertidal areas. Emergent Estuarine marshes (salt marshes), comprise 22% of Estuarine
intertidal areas, and 11% of the entire Estuarine System. Acres given by NWI (Table 3.5) for
Marine and Estuarine Systems can be considered reliable for these wetland types.

More than half the acreage mapped by the MWI is in Open Fresh Water which is the
equivalent of Great Ponds and is the most common type by acres in every county except Sagadahoc,
where Coastal Fresh Marsh is most abundant. However, Open Fresh Water habitats comprise 21 % of
the numbers of wetlands mapped. The next most abundant wetland types in acres as well as
numbers are wooded and shrub swamps, but their extent in relation to Open Fresh Water may be
underestimated. In the NWI, most open water habitats are classified not as wetlands per se but as
deepwater habitats. In NWI, only 2% of Palustrine wetlands mapped are in the open water class.

Based on the best available data, minimum existing acreage is suggested for each type in the
state (Table 3.8, Figure 3.7) and is explained as follows:

a) Estimates for Marine (saline) and Estuarine (brackish) wetlands are determined from NWI
acreage plus additional estimated acreage for areas not included in the ECCM. Salt marsh acreage
was taken directly from the recent results of Jacobsons' 1987 salt marsh inventory.

b) In general, the MWI mapped 37% of the wetland acreage mapped in the NWI regions.
Therefore, for all Palustrine wetland types, MWI data were extrapolated proportionally. However,
for shrub swamps and wooded swamps, where the relative coverage of MWI to NWI wetland
inventory acres in the coastal zone regions was 20% and 6% respectively, a severe underestimate for
these types is likely with the given extrapolation. SCS Soil Survey Mapping results are given for
these two types as the best known estimate for their actual extent in Maine (B. Wengrzynek, pers.
comm.)

c) Open water wetlands which are also great ponds ( > ten acres in size) are excluded from
these wetland estimates, however lakeshore and pondshore emergent wetlands and shallow aquatic
beds are included.

Table 3.7. Inland Freshwater Wetlands along the.. Maine Coast, Cape Elizabeth to Calais. A
compeirison of Wetland Inventory Results in Acres (and Number of wetland units).

ECCM NWI NWI FWI* MW1** mwl**
Region All WILs Non-For. WLs All WLs All WLs Non-For.WL

1 7096 3185 1302 10739 10461
(758) (454) (53)

2 24134 11872 8722 25265 22107
(2424) (1401) (265)

3 19349 6359 8249 3604 3217
(1848) (902) (247)

4 40303 13522 14877 8958 6827
(3323) (1715) (468)

5 40989 16036 13662 10017 9380
(2584) (1110) (373)

6 57831 18292 15002 12300 12110
(2713) (1230) (268)

TOTAL 189,702 69,266 61,814 70,883 64,102

WL (13,650) (1230) (1674)
UNITS

Key:
ECCM = Ecological Characterization of Coastal Maine
NWI = National Wetland Inventory
MWI = Maine Wetland Inventory
FWI Freshwater Wetland Inventory
WIL Wetland
WIL Units = Mapped units; wetland classes in NWI, MWI wetland types.
Non-For. WL = Non-forested wetlands
includes all wetlands on maps, both forested and non-forested
includes all wetland types in MWI data base except Open Fresh Water; Regions 1-6 =60,859
acres of open freshwater wetlands or 46% of wetlands delineated by MWI.

Table 3.8. Acres of Wetlands By Type in Maine

WETLAND TYPES ACRES SOURCE STATE ESTIMATE

SALINE WETLANDS

Tidal Flat 28,837 NWI' 35,000
Rocky Shore 21,521 NWI 2,000
Beach/Bar 2,897 NWI 4,000
Reef 108 NWI 500
Aquatic Bed 6,202 NWI 7,000
Salt Marsh 18,960 SMI 19,000
TOTAL 87,500

BRACKISH WETLANDS

Tidal Flat 41,700 NWI 45,000
Rocky Shore 2,911 NWI 3,000
Beach/Bar 1,089 NWI 2,500
Reef 138 NWI 500
Aquatic Bed 2,729 NWI 4,000
Fresh/Brackish 12,861 NWI 15,000
Marsh
TOTAL 70,000

PALUSTRINE WETLANDS

Floodplains/Flats 10,249 MWI 27,700
Inland Fresh Meadow 58,772 MWI 158,843
Inland Fresh Marsh 57,602 MWI 155,140
Shrub Swamp SCS 1,000,000
Wooded Swamp SCS 3,000,000
Bog 700,000 OER/DEP 700,000
5,041,683

TOTAL ESTIMATED WETLANDS
SALINE 87,50,0
BRACKISH 70,000
PALLISTRINE 5,041,683
TOTAL 5,195,183

Fjoure 3.7 Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands in Maine, 1988 Estimates (Based on Table 3.8)

Freshwater Wetlands in Maine

Bogs

Fresh Meadows
Fresh Marshes
Floodplains

--g
.. .........

Wooded Swamps
Shrub Swamps

Total Freshwater Wetlands 5,041,683 Acres

Tidal Wetlands in Maine
(Saline and Brackish Wetlands)

Rocky shores

Beach/Bars
Reef

Aquatic Bed
Tidal flats

Salt Marsh

. .... ......
Fresh/Brackish
Marsh
Total Tidal Wetlands 157,500 Acres

CHAPTER 4 - WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES

INTRINSIC VALUES OF WETLANDS

Wetlands, as unspoiled natural ecosystems have certain values which contribute to their
aesthetic appeal and the desire to preserve them. While many wetlands have been impacted by
development, they still may retain important natural values for wildlife, recreation, education, etc.
Many of these same functions and values may be found in upland habitats, b,ut only wetlands will
be treated here. The following discussion describes some of the more commonly recognized'
intrinsic values of wetlands, although many of these do not lend themselves to measurable study or
quantification (Odum, 1978).

Wetlands as Natural Areas

Wetlands are often the last areas in a region to be developed. As such, they have a high
wilderness value, the last enclave of a sense of remoteness and solitude. Quite often, there are
associated aesthetic qualities which rank high in comparison with other landscape types. The
interface between land and water, edges and other contrasts add to the scenic qualities of
we-flands. Small wetlands may contribute to local landscape variety and interest, whereas larger
wetlands may have diversity and variety within a site providing different visual impressions
(Smardon, 1973, Adamus, 1983). The unique flora and fauna of some wetlands are attractive to
viewers and enhance their appreciation of these areas.

Now, however, due to changing aesthetic values in society, development in or near wetlands
is desirable. Wetlands are being altered, converted or filled to provide residential proximity to
wetlands. Adjacent development is now a serious external threat to wetland ecosystems.

Wetlands for Recreation and Education

In Maine, both tidal and inland wetlands are areas of great diversity and beauty, and provide
open space for recreational and visual enjoyment. Recreation in wetlands is usually of a passive
nature and dispersed. Hiking, boating, fishing, hunting and wildlife observation are typical uses of
wetlands by the general public. Quite often, it is these activities which contribute an economic
value to wetlands. National Wildlife Refuges which comprise large areas of wetland were originally
created to protect migratory waterfowl habitat. These areas receive heavy visitor use and attest to
the importance of wetlands from a cultural or humanistic viewpoint.

In Maine, an estimated 20,000 visitors hike the trails at the Rachel Carson National Wildlife
Refuge and thousands more birdwatch and explore the marsh on the many roads that cross it (A.
French, pers. comm.). Although there may be some negative aspects of visitation, there is still a
need to enhance public access to wetlands for recreation, education, and research.

Wetlands associated with open water bodies tend to have a higher recreational value. The
naturalness and general environmental quality of a site may be coupled with other values of
cultural significance such as historic or archaeological values, thereby increasing the recreational
value. Again, the proximity of NWRs to highly populated areas has contributed to their recreational
and perceived values.

While recreational use can be a favored attribute of wetlands, careful management guidelines
are necessary to prevent unwanted negative impacts associated with human use. Certain wildlife
species (herons, loons, eagles, etc.) are vulnerable to human disturbance as are rare plant habitats
and natural communities.

The potential of wetlands for general public education and scientific research ma-y vary from
interest in botany and ornithology to demonstrating basic ecological principles and concepts of
energy flow, biotic change and recycling in natural systems. Wetlands are living classrooms and
their value for education has become more important in recent years as outdoor and environmental
awareness have increased (Wengrzynek, unpublished). Since the Wells unit of the Rachel Carson
NWR has been recognized as part of a National Estuarine Reserve, fundamental kinds of research
have begun there and include studies on salt marsh productivity, hydraulic and sediment transport
in the Webhannet and Little River estuaries, critical habitats and species biology.

Potential Resource Values

By preserving a natural system and all the "parts" within it, species and resource values
currently unknown may be preserved and eventually discovered. Species may hold medicinal or
commercial values that would otherwise be unknown to us if they had not been preserved and
available for research. Natural areas also provide baseline conditions which can be models for
restoration of degraded habitats.

Other potential resource values of wetlands include their importance in public water supplies,
both for ground water and surface waters. Wetlands may help protedt the water quality of public
water supplies and other surface water bodies. Wetlands may indicate areas of groundwater
discharge and may warrant protection to preserve water quality of an aquifer.

The high natural productivity of wetlands have unrealized food production potential for marsh
vegetation, aquaculture and -game animal species. Minnesota has been harvesting wild rice
commercially for many years. In Maine, the cultivation of cranberries is being contemplated, and
natural wetlands containing cranberries may provide essential information on their growth, habitat
requirements and insect pests. Natural wetland areas also contribute to the feeding and breeding
requirements of many game and non-game species and, if conserved could ensure maintenance of
strong populations for public use and enjoyment.

Under appropriate management schemes, forested wetlands can provide an important source of
timber, despite the physical restraints of harvesting in wetlands. Several wetland tree species such
as red maple, northern white cedar, black ash and others provide important wood products.

ECOLOGICAL VALUES OF WETLANDS

Wetlands provide certain services or natural functions that are beneficial to society. These
services include reducing floodpeaks of high water periods; retaining, recycling and filtering -
nutrients; trapping harmful materials and providing natural habitats for fish and wildlife species,
and endangered or threatened plants, animals and natural communities. The ecological services or
resource values provided by wetlands in general and in Maine are described below, recognizing that
some of these functions are performed by upland habitats as well.

Hydrological Functions

1) Flood Conveyance and Flood Storage

Topography generally determines the ability of a wetland to store and convey floodwater..
Riverine wetlands and floodplains usually form natural pathways for the conveyance offloodwater
from upstream to downstream points. Inland wetlands may store water during floods and release it
slowly to downstream areas, lowering floodpeaks. The vegetation itself may reduce the flow
velocity of river floodwater by friction. The amount of friction depends on the type and amount

of vegetative cover, but is significant in comparison to river channels without wetlands. Studies are
still underway to predict the magnitude of the water storage capacity of wetlands, and the
importance of such variables as wetland area, downstream location, magnitude of flooding and
degree of encroachment on the wetland (OTA, 1984).

Lower floodpeaks are generally found in watersheds with a large percentage of wetland, yet
total streamflow in the spring was found to be higher in basins with large lake and wetland areas
(Novitski, 1979). Analysis of flood hydrographs (displays of amounts of water released over time)
reveal that certain wetland types, especially peatlands with perched (raised) water tables
temporarily store and then slowly release storm waters (Boelter and Verry, 1977).
Evapotranspiration rates and other factors contribute to flood storage capacity. Saturated wetlands
may be unable to moderate floodwater as well as uplands because they may discharge water more
rapidly under these conditions. Flood height may not be reduced, but water flow may be slowed
somewhat. Certain undeveloped terrestrial environments may have greater flood storage value
(Adamus and Stockwell, 1983), however the importance of wetlands for these functions on a local
level cannot be understated. A study of the wetland and peatland systems in Washington County,
Maine confirms these concepts (B. Nichols, U.S. Geological Survey, pers. comm.) Very few studies
have measured inflow and outflow in wetlands to calculate the amount of floodwater stored in
particular wetlands.

The role of vegetation in flooding depends on the degree to which certain vegetation types
may actually decrease floodflow velocity. The filling and development of wetlands is apt to alter
this ability. In water storage capacity models generated by the Army Corps of Engineers for the
Charles River watershed in Massachusetts, a reduction in wetland area would result in a
proportional increase in floodpeak and flood height, with the potential for millions of dollars in
flood damage. Filling simply reduces the storage capacity of wetlands. If a wetland is filled above
the natural floodplain level, the ability of the floodplain to convey or carry and distribute
floodwater is lost, further contributing to increased flood hazard. The Charles River Plan therefore
calls for the acquisition and protection of large areas of wetlands in the floodplain to serve as
natural storage areas. The economic value of this service is valued at over $1 million (1978 dollars)
which is "the difference between'annual flood losses based on present land use and conditions"
(CEO, 1978).

Draining floodplains (e.g. by ditching or diking) may also increase floodpeaks by speeding
runoff and reducing potential storage. However, some argue that drainage may actually reduce
floodpeaks by draining away heavy rains that would otherwise saturate wetlands leaving them
unable to further capture snowmelt or floodwater in spring (OTA, 1984). In developed landscapes,
wetlands are more effective than terrestrial environments for flood storage and desynchronization,
i.e. offsetting the intensity of peak flows over time (Adamus, 1986).

2) Groundwater Recharge and Discharge

Groundwater recharge refers to the ability of a wetland to supplement groundwater through
infiltration of surface water to the saturated zone. Given the low permeability of organic soils and
the relatively impermeable clay layers, the probability that particular wetlands will have this
function is low (Adamus, 1986). Hence, uplands may provide a greater recharge function than
wetlands. A study in Minnesota found greater recharge in upland sands and the lowest recharge
ability found in wetland peats (Verry and eoelter, 1979). Since water quality and quantity of
recharge varies, the usefulness of this function in public drinking water or other uses cannot be
presumed without careful site-specific study.

Strong evidence exists that wetlands more commonly act as water discharge areas, specific
areas, of groundwater contribution to surface waters. Groundwater discharge supplies water to many
wetlands and these areas m6y be the only surface water outflow from an aquifer. Filling,
sedimentation or impoundment may affect the quantity or quality of water discharge, possibly
affecting downstream wetlands.

Shoreline Erosion Control

This function is important in wetlands associated with open water bodies such as lakes, rivers
and along the coast. Natural river currents, tidal wave currents and waves generated by wind along
lakeshores, estuaries and barrier islands all may contribute to shoreline erosion, -as do the wakes
from boat traffic. Vegetation may reduce erosion because the low-gradient shore and the plants
themselves absorb and dissipate wave energy. The binding root structure and peat development in
wetlands further stabilize the shore. The dense growth of wetland plants then encourages the
deposition of suspended sediment (OTA, 1984).

Wetland vegetation does not usually establish itself in high-energy environments susceptible to
erosion, but where established, it does control erosion, stabilize soil, encourage sediment deposition
and dampen wave energy. Generally, vegetated wetlands experience less erosion (or shoreline
retreat) than non-vegetated wetlands. Studies have been undertaken to measure the ability of
wetlands to control erosion, including the creation or establishment of vegetated wetlands (e.g.
marshes) in highly erodible (disturbed/developed) areas, but success of marsh creation is strongly
correlated with lower wave-energy environments. Even small, fringe wetlands along rivers and lakes
may be important for shoreline stability/anchoring.

The potential economic importance of shoreline erosion control is a major concern in many
coastal areas nationwide and as well as in Maine. The loss of public and private property and its
associated taxable income, sedimentation of waterways and water bodies, increased turbidity of
waters, siltation of fish and wildlife habitat and loss of beaches are a few of the potential
impacts. The ability of coastal or other wetlands to moderate storm surges is related to the degree
of water saturation of the wetland at the time of the flood or storm event. If the wetland is
already saturated by high tide or a previous flood event, its capacity to temper storm water is
limited.

The dredging of coastal harbors and waterways has historically resulted in the disposal of
dredged material onto marshland. Although current laws and practices forbid the disposal of dredge
spoils in wetlands, the removal of sand or other mineral sediments may reduce the rate of
accretion of these sediments into salt marsh systems, which is necessary for their maintenance
relative to rates of sea level rise (Hackney and Cleary, 1987). Dredging activities may also
contribute to increased erosion of marsh habitats by increasing rates and volume of water flow
through tidal channels and a resultant increase in erosive wave action. This trend has been
suggested in Wells, Maine (Almquist, in prep.) and Scarborough Marsh (J. Kelley, pers. comm.).

Water Quality Improvement

The quality (i.e. the chemical, physical and biological condition) of water flowing-over and
through wetlands may be improved by the wetlands ability to retain pollutants and nutrients albeit
temporarily. The potential for water quality improvement by a wetland depends on the effect of
such storage on an adjacent or connected body of water,,and the timing of nutrient retention and
release. Materials captured by wetlands via natural processes include suspended sediments, excess
nutrients, toxic chemicals, heavy metals, disease-causing microorganisms and dissolved nutrients
such as nitrogen and phosphorous.

1) Sediment Trapping

The ability of wetlands to trap suspended sediment is largely a function of wetland
vegetation which reduces flow velocity and captures sediment loads. This function is particularly
important in marine or estuarine environments, such as salt marshes, where nutrient accumulation
(accretion) takes place. Wetlands may trap sediments for as long as they are inundated by
sediment-laden waters or until they silt up completely. Floodplain wetlands provide a similar
function.
Upstream alteration or destruction of wetlands can create problems downstream by accelerating
sedimentation of wetlands.

The absence of this function would result in increased erosion and turbid waters which
interferes with fishing, swimming, aesthetic appeal of water, aquatic vegetation growth and
b6ttom-dwelling fauna (invertebrates and spawning fish). High content of organic materials in
sediments may result in a high biological oxygen demand to break it down in water, thereby
reducing oxygen availability to aquatic life. Increased development activity in southern Maine has
resulted in increased sediment loads into wetlands, causing some deterioration and potential loss of
water quality (Adamus, 1986).

2) Filtration

Suspended organic and inorganic materials tend to absorb other pollutants (e.g. nutrients,
tbxics, pathogens) which are then deposited with the sediment in the wetland. The "fate" of these
pollutants greatly depends on this trapping and filtering function of wetlands and their ability to
further degrade or retain harmful materials.

Persistent harmful materials such as heavy metals and chlorinated or petroleum hydrocarbons
may be trapped in wetlands either temporarily or permanently. For example, heavy metals remain
bound in the oxygenated zone of sediment surfaces, whereas they are mobilized under anaerobic
conditions. Organic compounds such as pesticides which degrade in soil may be trapped by wetland
soils, efficiently removing them from the aquatic system, and improving water quality. It is
unknown to what degree wetlands can remove toxic substances from water over the long-term.

I One negative effect of the use of wetlands to filter toxic materials is the transfer of these
materials through the food chain,. as may occur with some metals such as mercury (but not in other
metals like lead). Food chain effects of synthetic materials are becoming better known, but
experience with persistent organic chemicals like DDT and dioxin warn of the potential dangers.
Although wetlands may remove toxics from water, this removal may eventually contaminate higher
trophic levels by food chain transport, unless the affected vegetation is removed from the system.
Dispo'sal of such removed vegetation can pose difficulties.

3) Nutrient Retention/Removal

Excess amounts of the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorous can cause proliferation of algal
growth (algal bloom), which can degrade water quality and impinge upon recreational and other
uses. Ensuing decomposition can then reduce available dissolved oxygen to dangerously low levels.
Wetlands may trap and assimilate excess nutrients, which may then be recycled as detritus into the
aquatic system.

Ducks Unlimited of Canada has experimented with the use of wetlands to treat agricultural
and domestic waste using cattails and bulrushes. These species were found to secrete an antibody

that kills fecal bacteria. Other researchers estimate the value of phosphorus removal by wetlands to
be $480-1420. per acre annually.

Determination of the aggregate effects of nutrient input vs. output on water quality, and the
behavior of wetlands as nutrient sinks is thus far inconclusive, given the variable methodology of
existing studies and the many interactive processes. The primary consideration of this function may
be site-specific where high nutrient loading to aquatic systems can be moderated by the
preservation of certain wetlands. Timing of nutrient inputs and outputs is also important, with some
studies indicating much of the nutrient load being retained by wetlands during flood periods
(Mitsch, 1977).

In Maine, hydrological studies on the Great Heath in Washington County indicate that
nutrient retention in the surface peat depends upon the retention time of the water and the water
source. The small amount of nutrients in precipitation coupled with active surface water flow
contributes to the low nutrient levels in these upper peat layers. Nutrients do accumulate at the
lower depths by the partial ddcay of plant materials in situ.

In southern Maine, Adamus (1986) found that septic leakage was the largest potential source
of nutrients into wetlands he sampled in York County (31%). Highway runoff was the next most
serious source (21%) with lesser but identifiable threats also from pesticides (5%), sewage (4%),
dumps (3%) and industrial outfalls (2%). There has been direct evidence of increases in nutrients at
the outlets of forested watersheds even with housing densities as low as one per acre.

Non-point source pollution is a serious threat to the water quality of water bodies and
wetlands alike. Runoff from pastureland or sewage effluent may carry disease-causing
microorganisms such as viruses and bacteria which can contaminate drinking water, recreational
water and commercial fisheries. Such harmful organisms may also be bound in sediment loads
trapped in wetlands and either die off or remain viable (OTA, 1984). Very little data are available
on the fate of pathogens in wetland systems,

Fish and Wildlife Values

Wetlands are important to many fish and wildlife species for food, habitat and support of the
food chain. Because of their value for food and habitat, wetlands often become a focal point for
varied wildlife populations within a particular region. This is illustrated in the National Wildlife
Refuge System where nationwide, 40% of the NWR System is wetland while only 5% of the land area
of the coterminous states is wetland. Certain species are "wetland specialists" such as waterfowl,
freshwater game fish, some endangered species, etc. Losses of wetlands will cause significant and
adverse impacts on these indigenous populations.

The suitability of wetlands as animal or fish habitat is often strongly correlated to the
density and diversity of vegetation. Vegetation diversity is often a major determinant of wildlife
diversity. Criteria which are important in such an evaluation are: diversity of wetland types present
within a system; dominant wetland types (some types are more valuable to a diversity of species);
habitat and physiognomic diversity (height and shape of vegetation); interspersion and contrasts
between edges; vegetation cover types; location of wetland in landscape, i.e. whether wetland is
associated with a water body; wetland size (small wetlands are important for individual breeding
pairs while larger wetlands are important for statewide populations and flocks); naturalness of
surrounding habitat types; proximity to other wetla.nds and water chemistry as it affects vegetation
type and value as a food source to different species (Golet, 1973).

In wetlands with regular flood regimes, nutrient input during spring floods contributes to the
higher plant productivity in wetlands resulting in their well-known high fertility. It is the periodic.
drying cycle that allows sediments and nutrients to change chemically and become available to
plants. Coastal marshes receiving regular nutrient supply have some of the.highest plant
productivity rates of any natural ecosystem, in part due to the flowing or regularly fluctuating
wler levels. This high productivity is an important food chain link.The estimated 300-900 g dry wt
/m /yr produced by Maine salt marshes (Jacobson et al., 1987) ends up as biomass entering the
carbon cycle of the Gulf of Maine. Up to 20% of net primary productivity may be exported from
wetland to open water areas, and mostly from areas closest to the water's edge, where detritus
(organic debris) feeds filter feeders and other detritivores (Nixon, 1980; OTA, 1984).

The quantitative significance of wetland-derived cletritus to estuarine food supplies relative to
detritus from other terrestrial or open-water food sources is not generally known, but varies widely
with both species and estuary. There is not yet sufficient evidence to conclude tha 't coastal marshes
play a significant role in supporting marine fish and shellfish productivity through export of
detritus; phytoplankton is probably more important.

Both wetlands and their associated water bodies have multiple values for wildlife species,
including those which aren't strictly wetland-dependent. Conversely, riparian zones (upland areas
immediately adjacent to a water body or wetland) may be extremely important to wetland species by
providing a buffer for maintenance of wetland environmental (e.g. water ) quality, food resources,
etc. Similarly, some species, including many furbearers, are quite often found in this interface
between aquatic or wetland and upland habitats (Jones et al., 1988).

In coastal areas, wetlands and tidal flats provide valuable habitat for nesting and migratory
shorebirds, wading birds, waterfowl, gulls, terns and raptors. Salt marshes are generally considered
high value waterfowl habitat because of the large concentrations of breeding pairs and the use of
the marshes as overwintering and stopover areas during biannual migrations. Wetland vegetation
usually comprises a significant component of the diet of ducks, geese and swans. Some species
prefer the submergent aquatic vegetation, while others, especially geese and swans, favor emergent
vegetation.

Migratory shorebirds include sandpipers, plovers, turnstones, curlews, clowitchers, phalaropes
and the endangered piping plover. These depend on just a few coastal habitats during their long
migrations from the Arctic breeding grounds to the South American wintering areas. Most of these
birds congregate in extensive mudflat areas, such as those between Lubec and Quoddy Head (Lubec
Flats), where they build up their fat reserves before continuing their migrations. The piping plover
(Charadrius melodius nests on sand dunes which are highly susceptible to human disturbance.

Bald eagles, ospreys and wading birds (herons, etc.), typically nest near open water and feed
on a variety of fresh and saltwater organisms. These species are especially sensitive to disturbance
during their nesting periods and management recommendations for their protection in coastal areas
in southern Maine have been recommended (Jones et al., 1988).

Salt marshes and tidal flats are also important for commercially sought fish species, worth
millions of dollars annually to Maine fishermen. Many of these require wetlands at some stage of
their life cycle. Juvenile marine fish also use coastal marshes, especially brackish marshes.

Mammals like furbearers (e.g. muskrats) live in wetlands banks in houses made of wetland
vegetation. Many other wildlife species use wetlands although are not necessarily restricted to
them. The use of different wetland types by different wildlife species is included in Appendix 11.

About 30% of all plant and animal species found on'the federal government's list of
endangered and threatened species heavily depend on wetlands for food and or habitat, even
though only 5% of the nation's area is wetland. In Maine 42% of the official state-listed
endangered and threatened plants are found in wetland habitats, including one federally endangered
species, Furbish's Lousewort. Of rare and endangered animal species in Maine, 30% are also found
in wetlands during at least part of their life cycle or are known to feed or breed in wetlands. The
Official List of Maine's Endangered and Threatened Plants is maintained by the Maine Critical
Areas Program and state-listed animal species are monitored by the Non-game Program of the
Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. Lists can be obtained from these agencies.

Of all wetland functions, wildlife habitat may be the most sensitive to disruption. Increasing
development has fragmented formerly continuous areas of habitat for wildlife species. Roads
separate wetlands, decreasing their value and accessibility for some species, especially mammals and
amphibians (Adamus, 1986). Impacts of development include increased pollution and sediment sources
as well as human disturbance of wildlife areas. The loss of riparian habitat, upon which many
wetlands and resident animal populations depend, is also of great importance.

The economic value of wetlands as wildlife habitat is difficult to determine, and cannot be
computed simply by license sales or other user values. Economic values include non-consumptive
uses such as photography, wildlife observation, etc. and expenses incurred by the user.
Consumptive uses such as hunting and fishing, usually include expenses to the user for licenses,
food, travel and equipment, which contribute to the value of the wildlife, but not necessarily the
wetland itself (Boyle, 1987).

An estimated 81 % of Maine's population older than 6 years old participate in non-
consumptive uses of wildlife to some clegree. The participation of non-residents brings revenue into
the state, but has not been quantified.

General consumptive use values for wildlife (namely in hunting and fishing) have been
preliminarily evaluated (Boyle, 1987). The total value of waterfowl hunting however is impossible to
determine in the absence of accurate numbers of hunters. Furthermore, the value of hunting for
different species has not been determined. However, thegeneral increase in hunting and fishing
licenses is countered by the general decline in duck hunting participation since 1981 (Boyle, 1987).
This latter trend may be attributable to population declines in the more popular game ducks, such
as the black duck, as well as increases in hunting costs (licenses and duck stamps).

Maine's fishery resources include some species which depend on or use wetland habitats for
some part of their life cycle. In coastal areas this includes shellfish found in near shore waters
which receive nutrients and cletritus from adjacent salt marsh and wetland systems. Soft shelf
clams, bloodworms and sandworms are harvested commercially in intertidal areas.

Maine shellfish contribute the largest proportion of the landed value of Maine fisheries
(Figure 4.1) especially due to their high value per pound (e.g. lobsters). In 1984, the total shellfish
landing was valued at $ 76,476,000. The landed value of principal shellfish species has generally
increased (Figure 4.2), even while the total catch in pounds of certain species fell (Figure 4.3).

Figure 4.1. The landed value of Maine fisheries from 1960 - 1984 (Colgan et al., 1986).

MAJNE FISHERIES LANDED VALUE
`120000 - Nominal Dollars (Thousands) -

100000-

80C)OO -

60000- Shellfish

40000

2uuuu Finfish

0
r r-T-= T
6@ 64 6 G 6'8 7 0 72. 74 76 718 8@ 812 84

Figure 4.2. The landed value of lobsters, clams and scallops from 1960 - 1984 (Colgan et al., 1986).

LOBSTER

55000 . .....i.....r............i......r..... F....1 .....T.....7....... .....;1......r.....r............ ............ ......
50000 . ........... ...... ..... ..... ...... ...... ......
45000 ..... .*: ..... ....
: . I .....L..... . . .....
. . ..... .... . . ..... . ..... ......
40000 . ..... ..... ......L..... Z ..... ............ ..... . ..... ......
.... ...... ..... .I
"6 35000 1.......I..... ..... ............. ..... ..... . ..... .. ..... ...... ......
30000 ......! ......
..... ......
25000 ..... J .....
..... ..... ..... ...... ..... ..... ......
20000 :. ......
...... ...... ..... .... . ..... :7 ..... .....%..... . ..... ..... . ......7....... .... ..... . ..... . .....
15000 ..... . .....
10000
60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84
61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83

12000 . ..... ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ..... . ............ ..... . ..... . ..... ...... ......r.....r.....r.... . ......

1
0 . .....
000 ..................?

8000 . ..... ..... ...... ... .....
..... ..... ......
"6
6000 . ..... ......
r.... . ..... ........... ..... ..... ... .... .... ...... . ..... ......

4000 . ..... . . . . . .
..... .. ..... F..... ...... ......

2000 . .....1..... ... . ...... ..... ...... ................. . ..... . ..... ..... . ..... . ..... ........... ..... ..... . ..... ...... ..... ......

0
60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84
61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83

16000 . ...... ............ ............................ ..... . .... . ..... . ..... . ..... ...... ...... ...................................
14000
. ..... ..... ..... ..... .... .. . ....
,2000 . ..... .0..... . . ..... ..... ....... ........... . .....

..........e..... .... . ..
10000 . ..... f: ..... @:.
"6 ......
8000 . ......I......:.... .fl ......:..... . .... J ..... ..... .... . ..... . ..... ..... . ... ..... ..... ........
6000 ..... ......
.... . ...... ...... ....... .... !..... ...... ...... .... ....
4000 . ..... ...... ..... ..... ..... ..... 3.....6.... ....4.....6......b.....I
2000 T r . ......
...... ....... .... ...... . .. A ..... Z. ...... ... ....7..... . ..... ...... ......
0
60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84
61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77-79 81 83

38
. ..... . ..

Finure 4.3. The total catch of principal shellfish species in pounds from 1960 - 1986 (Maine State
Planning Office, 1988).

ILOBSTER,, SHRIMP, AND CRAB
25000 . ...................... .... ..... ..... .... .... . .... ..... ...........rT.....

20000 . ...... ..... ..... ......
Lobster"
0
a.

I ------------- -----
150 00 - .... . .. .... .... .... .... .... L .. .......... .... .... .... . .....

Shr
imp ...... ....
10000 . ..... .. . ..... ........... . .... .. . ........ .... . .....
W

.... .. . . . . ....... . . ..... ..... . .... .... . ....
0 5000-
I Crab

0
rl
60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 8 2 84 86
61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85

Year

L
LAMS, MUSSELS, AND SCALLOPS
C

...............
8000 . ..... . .....r .....
......... .....
7000 . ...... :1 ..... . .. . ....
0 6000 . ..... ? ..... . . .. ..... ......

. ... ..... . .. . . ....
5000 . ..... ..... .....
0
..... ......
4000 . ..... Clams
mussels'
3 0 0 0 - . . ........
cu
Cn . . . .
. . : :
........ ... ..... .
2000
0
. ........... . ..... . ..... .. ..... .
1000
bcaiiops
0
60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78, 80 82 84 86
61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85

Year

Shellfish species which are increasing in commercial importance are mussels and quahogs.
One-third of the mussel catch in 1985 was cultivated, and quahogs have only recently gained
economic importance. The number of harvesting licenses issued from 1970 - 1984 for shellfish,
worms and commercial fishing is found in Figure 4.4.

Canned, fresh and frozen seafood processing of Maine's marine fisheries held a commercial
value of nearly $70,000,000. and Ermployed 1700 people in 1984. However, the proportion of this
attributable to shellfish species is minor (Colgan et al., 1986).

Figure 4.4. Numbers of harvesting licenses for shellfish, worms and commercial fishing from 1970 -
1984 (Colgan et al., 1986).

[LOBSTE@
11000
105W
10000
9500
9DOO
!500
-- - -------
7500
7000 + J
6500
6000
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984
1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983

CLAM AM MARINE V@OW

6000- ...... ......... .

6000-_

4000-..--

3000

2000 -------

0
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1964
1971 1973 1975 1 W7 1979 1981 1 9a3

10MVERCAL FISHING AND SCALLOP
1600 COMM
1400 -____,..'--Fkshing
1200 . ...... ....
I OW00 ......... --]@@scabp
800
. . ..... ....... ..... Ov.
Goo . ....... ....... .... . ..

400 -
F-T
200 1
1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 19,84
1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 19S3

40
T_
- -_ X`

k -7F

Climatic and Atmospheric Functions

There has been little research on this topic, but several hypotheses have been suggested
regarding the biospheric importance of wetlands.

There is growing evidence that wetlands help maintain global atmospheric stability. Terrestrial
detritus is a large pool of carbon (e.g. peat) or highly organic wetland soils. Methane (a by-product
of anaerobic decomposition) is thought to regulate the ozone layer. Wetland conversion results in
accelerated oxidation of organic matter and release of C02 instead of methane.

Large bodies of water are known to moderate local temperature and/or precipitation. Similar
functions may be associated with wetlands and their associated water bodies or by the large
quantities of water they contain and their contribution to local climatic conditions via
evapotranspiration.

CHAPTER 5 - WETLAND ALTERATIONS: THREATS AND LOSSES

HISTORIC WETLAND LOSSES

Nationwide, wetland losses are great. It is estimated that 30-50% of original wetland acreage
in the lower 48 states has been converted to other uses within the last 200 years. Between the
1950's and 1970's alone, eleven million acres were converted, at a rate of about 550,000 acres per
year. With federal and state governmental regulations in effect, this rate of loss has slowed
somewhat, to about 300,000 acres per year (OTA, 1984). Coastal wetlands, which experienced the
greatest wetland losses during the early periods of settlement, seem reasonably well protected
through state coastal zone management programs. However, development pressures are greater now
than ever, resulting in serious degradation of remaining coastal wetlands. Inland freshwater
wetlands have never been w6ll protected and continue to face serious losses.

According to the EPA, New England wetlands are not disappearing as rapidly as other areas
in the U.S., primarily because of stronger wetland protection laws, fewer remaining wetlands and a
more environmentally aware population. (EPA, 1986). Historic losses have occurred mostly on
coastal wetlands, although at present there is increasing development pressure on inland freshwater
wetlands (OTA, 1984). Trends in Maine mayr be similar to the rest of New England. However,
regulation of many freshwater wetlands is still inadequate and the large number of wetlands in
Maine's natural landscape will result in more pressure to develop them as the population increases.

More importantly, the absence of statewide comprehensive wetland or land use maps make
historic losses difficult to assess, future threats difficult to manage, and wetland trend studies
impossible to produce. Wetland losses include both the physical loss of wetland acreage through a
variety of manipulative or destructive alterations and loss of wetland function(s) by these same
physical activities or by chemical or biological alterations. Nationally, the major types of wetland
alterations are water diversions.through activities such as road building; drainage and channelization
for agricultural purposes; chemical and nutrient contamination from various development and
agricultural activities; and the cumulative impacts of other activities conducted in areas adjacent to
wetlands (OTA, 1984).

Historic wetland losses in Maine will -be described in this section and reported by type of
activity involved. Many of these activities continue to threaten wetlands while others have been
curtailed by regulation. In some cases, wetlands have been created by human and non-human
_h
influences. T e types of habitats lost or alt@@,e -regions of greatest loss by human activity is
@@n_ _c ---- --d-
@@@en where own. In most cases, t ere is no definite acreage documentation of wetFan
-losses overall, only the-expert recollection of individuals, regulators, planners and field biologists in
Maine, who supplied the bulk of the following information.

Land Use History
I The history of European settlement in Maine and the ensuing patterns of land use give some
indication of the historic impacts upon wetlands. The early settlements were restricted to coastal
areas where fishing and farming was the mainstay of most communities. Salt marshes used f6r "salt
hay" production and the productive fishery resources of offshore estuarine areas enabled a
continuous -history of habitation along the coast. Urban centers often grew from these coastal
towns and later followed inland waterways up the major rivers such as the Kennebec and the
Penobscot. As the timber industry grew, settlements spread further inland, yet maintained the
critical connection with the sea.

The later expansion of urban areas was unconcerned with wetlands, and filling was common
along coastal wetlands, adjacent spits, beaches, and along river floodplains. Many of Maine's
major coastal towns and cities are situated at the mouths of such rivers, or in protected coves
where salt marshes and other wetland communities are prevalent. Examples of wetlands situated
on inland river floodplains include: Gardiner, Hallowell, and Augusta along the Kennebec River, and
in Bangor along the Penobscot River. Adjacent, silt-laden soils of floodplains and river valleys
were also converted to agricultural use, and many river valley farms remain highly productive
farmland today.

Types of Wetland Alteration Contributina to Wetland Loss

There are many causes or motives for wetland alteration that result in wetland loss. Some
alterations may result in the total loss of the wetland habitat and natural functions alike, or may
slightly or partially impair one or more functions, leaving the wetland intact. Other activities may
degrade the wetland more slowly, resulting in eventual loss of function and value.

Today most federal and state regulations focus on those activities wh ich tend to destroy
wetlands (i.e. filling and dredging). The placement of fill into a wetland terminates its water-
holding capacity, diminishes its ability to sustain wetland vegetation and alters soil characteristics.
When filled, wetlands become upland or dry sites and their development potential is much higher.
However, the drainage problems associated with developing wetlands may be simply shifted to
neighboring areas including residences.

Filling wetlands may be intentional as in the creation of residential development sites, or it
may be incidental to other activities, such as dredging, where the dredged material is placed in a
wetland. Dredging is often done to keep intertidal channels and subtidal areas clear and passable
for navigation.

. Drainage of wetlands has been less of an issue in Maine, where the pressure to develop
wetland sites for agricultural purposes has not been as great as in the midwest. With farm
abandonments on the rise, conversion of wetland soils becomes less attractive. Drainage of
wetlands may become important when considered in the context of other development activities
such as filling or peat mining.

All of these activities can be described as conversion from one "land" type to another,
generally from wet to dry. Other kinds of conversions may result in a net gain of wetland
acreage, or no net change in acreage, but a change in wetland type. Fishery and wildlife
management techniques often alter one characteristic of a wetland in favor of another. For
example, water-level control structures may increase the area of permanent water and enhance the
value of the wetland for waterfowl. Provided that management decisions consider the full range
of values present at a given site before determining its appropriateness for change, such effects
upon other natural wetland values may be small.

Other types of wetland alteration include the clearing of vegetation (by burning, digging,
herbicide application, scraping, mowing, grazing or otherwise cutting); the diversion or
impoundment of water flow through a wetland by dam construction, channelization, etc.; too much
shading of vegetation; and activities on adjacent upland areas which directly or indirectly impact
wetlands. The latter may include chemical changes induced by nutrient runoff or the introduction of
toxic materials, or the reduction of populations of existing species and/or the introduction of exotic
species.

Causes and Amounts of Wetland Loss

Many of the increased development pressures on wetlands relate directly to population
growth. Increasing urbanization, residential and commercial development, increased roadways and
use of wetland resources all result in direct and indirect adverse impacts on wetlands. The
following factors and activities have been identified as contributors to historic wetland loss. The
net effect of these activities on wetland loss is illustrated in Figure 5.1.

Ficiure 5.1 Estimated loss of vegetated wetlands in Maine since European settlement.

Estimated Loss of Vegetated Wetlands
Since European Settlement
(Estimated losses represent 2% of total resource) -
40000--

35000--

30000--

25000--
C
r 20000--
15000--

10000..

5000.-

0 +-
Commercial Transportation Hydropower PIeat Agriculture
and Residential and Roads and Water Harvesting
Development I Storage
Causes of Wetland Alteration

1. Commercial, Residential,and Urban Development

Commercial and residential development has been and continues to be an important cause of
wetland loss in Maine. Initially restricted to coastal areas and major waterways, inland freshwater
wetlands are now subject to the same threats. Typical wetland development involves filling to
provide a suitable substrate for construction. In addition to direct and secondary impacts of
development on wetlands themselves, impacts from associated upland development is prevalent.

The early losses of coastal wetlands to urbanization are based on assumptions of which cities
or towns may rest on former wetlands. One can suspect a similar trend is valid for all of New
.England, although greatest in southern New England. The urban and residential expansion of the
1950's and 1960's had the greatest affect on coastal wetlands as such growth outpaced protection.

The extent and nature of such wetland losses are not well documented. While certain
wetlands may not have been lost or filledoutright, many development activities have secondary
impacts such as water quality deterioration (via stormwater runoff, sewage control, etc.), chemical
pollution (industrial, agricultural, etc.) and habitat degradation. The loss of important wildlife -
habitat along wetland borders is often at least as important as the wetland itself to some species.
Another secondary impact of population growth in and around coastal wetlands was the ditching and
partial.drainage of many salt marshes for mosquito abatement. These ditches are still visible on
the ground and from aerial photos, although many have since filled in.

2. Transportation and Roads

Wetland. losses associated with early periods of road building were not recorded, but may
range in the hundreds of acres. Federal highway projects document more recent wetland losses and
mitigation. Hundreds of acres of wetland are likely to have been filled by the Maine Department
of Transportation (MDOT), the Maine Turnpike Authority (MTA) and by the construction of local,
town or private roads. Historical reco'rd of wetland fills by roadbuilding is incomplete and archival
in nature. Some estimates exist in environmental documentation ("categorical exclusions") for
federally funded projects and federally (Corps) permitted activities, but they have not been
tabulated foe the hundreds of such cases.

Most of the road construction in Maine over the last 40-50 years has been through the
upgrading-of dirt roads. The rapid growth rates of the 1950's were accompanied by increased road
and hig[WrWt building. At the same time, wetlands were not an area of major concern and actual
wetland losses were not recorded. Now, however, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
requires federally funded roadway projects consider ways to avoid or minimize wetland losses.
There are 22,000 miles iof public roadways in'Maine and MbOT is responsible for 8,700 miles.
For FHWA.projects, MDOT must explain why there are no practicable alternatives to impacting the
wetlands and explain why the proposed action,includes all practicable measures to minimize harib
to wetlands. Currently, MDOT fills and alters about 10 acres per year, some of which is
compensated by the creation and enhancement of wetland perhaps to different types.

The Maine Turnpike Authority was responsible for filling large areas of wetland during
construction of the Maine Turnpike, possibly in the hundreds of acres. 0
-pen water wetland areas
,3@ @reg@@at@d @aswe!@!, as mitigation for some wetland losses, and inadvertently as construction
altered drainage patterns. MDIFW coordinated closely with MTA during highway construction to
avoid the crossing or disturbance of,certain high value wetlands.

LITERATURE CITED

Adamus, P. R. and L. T. Stockwell. 1983. A Method for Wetland Functional Assessment. Vol. 1.
FHWA-IP-82-24. U.S. Department of Transportation. Washington, D.C.

Adamus, P. R. 1983. A Method for Wetland Functional Assessment. Vol. 2. FHWA-[P-82-24. U.S.
Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C.

Adamus, P.R. 1986. The Cumulative Impacts of Development in Southern Maine: Wetlands: Their
Locations, Functions and Value. Maine State Planning Office. Augusta, ME 04333. 69 pp.

Arbuckle, J. and M. Lee. 1987. The Cumulative Impacts of Development in Southern Maine: A study
of habitat changes in 5 coastal towns. Maine Audubon Society for the Maine State Planning Office.
Maine State Planning Office. Augusta, Maine 04333. 50 pp. and Appendices.

Batie, S. S. and L. A. Shabman. 1982. Estimating the Economic Value of Wetlands: Principles,
Methods and Limitations. Coastal Zone Management Journal 10(3): 255-278.

Boelter, D. H. and Verry, E. S. 1977. Peatland and Water in the Northern Lake States. U.S.D.A.
Forest Service. General Technical Report NC-31, North-Central Forest Experiment Station, St. Paul,
MN.

Boyle, K. J., V. A. Trefts, P. S. Hesketh. 1987. A Preliminary Investigation of the Economic Value
and Use of Maine's Inland Fish and Wildlife Resources. A Report to the Maine Department of
Inland Fisheries and Wildlife and the Maine Department of Conservation. 52 pp.

Cameron,C.C.; M.K. Mullen, C.A. Lepage and W.A. Anderson. 1984. Peat Resources of Maine. Maine
Geological Survey, Department of Conservation, Augusta, Maine. MGS Bull. Nos. 28-32. 5 Vols.

Colgan, C.S., L.C. Irland, J. Benson. 1986. The Natural Resource Industries of Maine. An Assessment
and Statistical Repom Maine State Planning Office and Finance Authority of Maine, Augusta, ME.
135 pp.

CoWardin, L.M.; V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Services. FWS/OBS-79/31. 131 pp.

Dahl, T. E. 1985. Use of National Wetlands Inventory Data for Wetland assessment. In: Proceedings:
National Wetlands Assessment Symposium, June 17-20, 1.985. Association of State Wetland Managers.
pp. 146-150.

Damman, A. W. H. 1979. Geographic patterns in peatland development in eastern North America. In:
Classification of Peat and Peatlands. Proc. of the International Symposium, Hyytiala, Finland, Sept.
17-21, 1979. International Peat Society. pp 42-57.

Davis, R.B. (in prep.) Eccentric Raised Bogs in Maine. Report to the Critical Areas Program.
Davis, A. B., A. Zlotsky, G. L. Jacobson, E. Sorenson and L. Widoff. (in prep.). Maine's Freshwater
Peatlands: Typology and Distribution. Can. J. Botany.

Davis, R.B.; G.L. Jacobson, Jr., L.S. Widoff, A. Zlotsky. 1983. Evaluation of Maine Peatlands For
Their Unique and Exemplary Qualities. Report prepared for Dept. of Conservation, Augusta, Maine.
186 pp.

Eckstorm, F. H. 1904. Penobscot Man. Juniper Press, 1978 (reprint). 362 pp.

Fefer, S.I. and P.A. Shettig (Principle Investigators). 1980. An Ecological Characterization of
Coastal Maine (North and East of Cape Elizabeth). U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-80/29. 6 volumes.

Giffen, R.A. 1988. Filling.Coastal Wetlands. A history of decisions under Maine's Alteration of
Coastal Wetlands Act. A report to the Maine Audubon Society. 12 pp.

Golet, F. C. 1973. Wetlands and Wildlife. In: A Guide to Important Characteristics and Values of
Freshwater Wetlands in the Northeast. Publ. No. 31 Reprint, Water Resources Research Center,
University of Mass, Amherst.

Golet, F. C. 1978. Rating-the Wildlife Value of Northeastern Freshwater Wetlands. In: Wetland
Functions and Values: The State of Our Understanding, P. E. Greeson, J. R. Clark and J. E. Clark
(eds.) Proc. of the Nationa I Symposium on Wetlands, pp. 63-73.

Gutis, P.S. 1988. Troubled Seas: Global Red Tides of Algae Bring New Fears. The New York Times.
May 3, 1988.

Hackney, C.T. and W.J. Cleary. 1987. Salt marsh loss in Southeastern North Carolina lagoons:
importance of sea level rise and inlet dredging. Journal of Coastal Research, 3(1)93-97.
Charlottesville, ISSN 0749-0208.

Haynes, G. H. 1889. Ellsworth, Maine. The picturesque city of the east. Green Lake, the tourist's,
angler's and hunter's paradise. Journal Press, Lewiston, ME. obl. pp.24.

Horwitz, E. L. 1978. Our Nation's Wetlands: An Interagency Task Force Report. Council on
Environmental Quality. 70 pp. I.,.

Jacobson, H.A.; G.L. Jacobson and J.T. Kelley. 1987. Distribution and Abundance of Tidal Marshes
Along the Coast of Maine. Estuaries 10(2): 126-131.

Jones, J. J. 1986. The Cumulative Impacts of Development in Southern Maine: Important Wildlife
Habitats. Maine State Planning Office, Augusta, Maine.

Jones, J. J., J. P. Lortie, U. D. Pierce, Jr. 1988. The Identification and Management of Significant
Fish and Wildlife Resources in Southern Coastal Maine. Maine Department -of Inland Fisheries and
Wildlife, Augusta, Maine, 043.33.140 pp.

Maine Department of Conservation. 1982. Maine Rivers Study. Maine D.O.C. and U.S.D.I. National
Park Service. 249 pp.

Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. 1988. Maine Wetland Inventory Data Base.
Unpublished Data. Augusta, Maine. 04333.

Maine State Planning Office. 1986. Coastal Program Core Laws and Their Administration. Augusta,
ME 04330.

Maine State Planning Office. (in prep.) The State of the Environment. Augusta, ME.

Martin, A. C., N. Hotchkiss, F. M. Uhler, and W. S. Bourn. 1953. Classification of the Wetlands of
the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Spec. Sci. Rep. Wildl. 20. 14 pp.

McCall, C.A. 1972. Manual for Maine Wetlands Inventory. Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and
Wildlife, Game Division. Augusta, Maine. 38 pp.

Mitsch, W. J., Dorge, C. L., and Weimhoff, J.R., 1977. Forested Wetlands for Water Resource
Management in Southern Illinois, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign ? Water Resources
Center, Research Report No. 132, NTIS No. PS 276659.

Novitski, R. P. 1979. The hydrologic characteristics of Wisconsin wetlands and their influence on
Flood, Streamflow and sediment. In: Wetland Functions and Values: The State of our Understanding,
P. E. Greeson, J. R. Clark and J. E. Clark, (eds.)., Proc. of the National Symposium on Wetlands.
American Water Resources Association, Minneapolis, MN. pp.377-388.

Odum, E.P. 1978. The Value of Wetlands: A Hierarchical Approach In: Wetland Functions and Values:
The State of our Understanding. E. P. Greeson, J.R. Clark and J.E. Clark (eds.). Proc. of the-
National Symposium on Wetlands. American Water Resources Assoc., Minneapolis, MN. pp 16-25.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). 1984. Wetlands: Their Use and Regulation. U. S. Congress,
Washington, D. C. OTA-0-206. 208 pp.

,Payson, H. 111. 1982. The economic impact of less dredging by the Army Corps of Engineers:
Selected Maine ports through 1990. For New England Governors Conference. Maine State Planning
Office, Augusta, Maine.

Platt, R. H. 1987. Coastal Wetland Management: The Advance Designation Approach. Environment
29(9):16-43.

Platt, R. H. 1987. Coastal Wetland Management: Strengthening EPA's Role. Report prepared for the
Office of Wetlands, E.P.A. Land and Water Policy Center, Univ. of Mass., Amherst. 46 pp plus
Appendices.

Reed and D'Andrea.1 973. The Tidal Wetlands Dilemma. Conservation Priorities Plan. Land and Space
Planning, South Gardiner, Maine.

Scheirer, B. 1982. A Report on Unauthorized Wetland Filling in Wells, Maine. U.S. Dept. of the
Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Unpublished report. 8 pp.

Sewall Company, 1945. Report on the Proposed Flowage Area Above Long Falls Dam in TWP 3 R 4,
BKP, WKR, Carrying Place, Dead River, Flagstaff, Bigelow, Eustis and Coplin for Central Maine
Power. Old Town, Maine. 9 pp. and maps.

Shaw, S. P. and C. G. Fredine. 1956. Wetlands of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Circular 39. 67 pp.

Smarcion, R. C. 1973. Visual-Cultural Values of Wetlands. In: A Guide to Important Characteristics
and Values of Freshwater Wetlands in the Northeast. (J. S. Larson, ed.) Publication #31 Reprint.
Water Resources Research Center. University of Mass., Amherst. pp 9-12.

Sorenson, E. 1986. The Ecology and Distribution of Ribbed Fens in Maine. Critical Areas Program
Planning Report No. 81. State Planning Office, Augusta, Maine 04333.

Spencer, H. E., Jr. 1963. Man-made Marshes for Maine Waterfowl. Game Div. Bull. No. 9, Dept.
Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Augusta, Maine, 04333. 79 pp.

Startwout, D.J. 1982. An Evaluation of the National Wetlands Inventory in Massachusetts. Proc. of
In-Place Resource Inventories Workshop. University of Maine, Orono, Maine. pp 685-691.

State Planning Office. 1977. Maine Coastal Inventory Handbook. Coastal Planning Program. Land Use
Information Series - IV. 31 pp.

Stockwell, S.S. and M. Hunter, Jr. 1983. A Description of the Wildlife in 27 Maine Peatlands. Report
prepared for Maine Dept. Of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife. 144 pp.

Stuiver, M. and H. W. Borns. 1975. Late Quaternary Marine Invasion in Maine. Its Chronology and
Associated Coastal Movement. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 86:99-104.

Tiner, R.W. 1984. Wetlands of the United States: Current Status and Recent Trends. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory, Newton, MA 59 pp.

Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985a. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands
Inventory, Newton Corner, MA and Delaware Dept. of Natural Resources and, Environmental Control,
Wetlands Section, Dover, DE. Cooperative Publication. 77 pp.

Tiner, R.W. 1985b. Wetlands of New Jersey. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands
Inventory, Newton Corner, MA. 117 pp.

Tiner, R.W. and B. Veneman. 1987. The Hydric Soils of New England. University of Mass. Cooerative
Extension Bull. C-1 83, Amherst, MA. 27 pp.

Tolonen, K., R. B. Davis and L. Widoff. (in press). Peat accumulation rates in selected Maine
peatlands. Maine Geological Survey, Augusta, Maine. Bulletin No. 33. 97 pp.

U.S. Department of the Interior. 1954. Wetlands Inventory of Maine. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,'
Office of RIver Basin Studies. Boston, MA. 30 pp + map.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1959. Inventory of Permanent Water Areas of Significant Value to
Waterfowl in the State of Maine. U.S. Dept. of the Interior. March, 1959.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1965. A Supplementary Report on the Coastal Wetlands Inventory of
Maine. U.S. Dept of the Interior. 11 pp.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Environment Canada. 1986. North American Waterfowl
Management Plan. U. S. Dept. of the Interior and Canadian Wildlife Service. 33 pp.

Verry, E. S. and Boelter, D. 1979. Peatland Hydrology. In: Wetland Functions and Values: the State
of Our Understanding, P. E. Greeson, J. R. Clark, and J.E. Clark (eds.). Proc. of the National
Symposium on Wetlands. American Water Resources Association, Minneapolis, MN. pp. 389-402.

Worley, 1. A. 1980. Botanical and Ecological Aspects of Coastal Raised Peatlands in Maine. Maine

State Planning Office, Critical Areas Program, Augusta, Maine. Planning Report No. 69. 175 pp.
Worley, 1. 1982. Botanical and Ecological Aspects of Coastal Raised Peatlands in Maine. Critical
Areas Program Planning Report No. 69. State Planning Office, Augusta, Maine 04333.

00 SrAT. 3582 PUBLIC LAW 99-645--NOV. 10, 1986 PUBLIC LAW 99-645-IIOV. 10, 1986 100 STAT.11
Public Law 99-645 (7) wetlands constitute only a small pares. of the land
99th C6ngress area of the United States. are eatiniated to have been reduced
An Act by hair in the contiguous States since the founding -of our
Nation. and continue to disappear by hundreda.of thousands of
To promft the conservation of miltratm waterfowl and to offset or p event acres each year,
Now. 10. 19M the (8) certain activities of the Federal Governmerit have inappm
(S.7401 serious iose or wetlands by the aNuisition of wetlands and other essential habitat, priately altered or sasisted in the alteration of wetlands.
and for other pu. thereby unnecessarily stimulating iknd accelerating the low of
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the these valuable resources and the eiivironmental and economic
.Vetlands United States ofAmerica in Congress assemblec@ 4 benefits that they provide; and >
RVOM. Act of Z)
9146. SEMON 1. SHORT TITLE. (9) the existing Federal. State, and private cooperation in V
6 u9c 3901 wetlands conservation should be strengthened in order to mini- M
ote. This Act may be cited as the "Emergency Wetlands Resources Act mize further losses of these valuable areas and to assure :3
of 1986". ' I their management in the public interest for this and future 9:
6 V.9c 2901. SEC L VINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF PURPOSF. generations. X
(b) PuRposE.-It is the purpose of this Act to plion in concert
(8) ANDINcs.-The Congress rinds that-
with other Federal and State statutes and programs. the conserva. (D
(1) wetlands play an integral role in maintaining the quality tion of the wetlands of the Nation in order to maintain the public _n
of life through material contributions to our national economg. benefits they provide and to help fulfill international obligations (D
food supply, water supply and quality. nc.:)d control. and fis contained in various migratory bird treaties and conventions with a-
CD
wildlife, and plant resources, and thus to the health, safety, Canada, Mexico. Japan, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and
recreation, and economic well-being of all our citizens of the with various countries in the Western lff!misphere by-
Nation; (1) intensifying cooperative efforts among private interests M
(2) wetlands provide habitat essential for the breeding, spawn- 3
and local, State. and Federal governments for the management (D
ing, nesting, migration, wintering and ultimnte survival of a and conservation of wetlands-, and
major portion, of the migratory and resident fish and wildlife of (0
(2) intensifying efforts to protect the wetlands of the Nation (D
the Nation; including migratory birds. endangered species, through acquisition in fee, easements or other interests and :3
infish, shellfish methods by local, State, and Federal governments and the 1<
commercially and recreationally important F 0
and other aquatic organisms, and contain many unique species private amtor. ::E
> and communities of wild plants; CD
(3) the migratory bird treaty obligations of the Nation with SEC. I DEFINITION&
Canada. Mexico. japan. the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. For the purpose of this Act-
CL
and with various countries in the Western Hemisphere require (1) The term "Committees" means the Committee on Mer- co
Federal protection of wetlands that am used by migratory birds chant Marine and Fisheries and the Committee on Interior and :0
for breeding, wintering or migration and needrd toechieve and Insular Affairs of the House of Representatives and the CD
to maintain optimum population levels, distributions. and pat@ Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Commit- 0
terns of migration; I C
tee on Energ
ish, wildlife, and plants dependent on 0
(4) wetlands. and the r . y and Natural Resources of the Senate.
(2) The term "designated unit" means a unit of the National CD
wetlands. provide significant recreational and commercial bene- Wildlife Refuge System designated by the Secretary under sec- 0)
rite. including- tion 201(aX2). >
(A) contributions to a commercial marine harvest valued 1 (3) The term "hydric soil" means soil that. in its undrained
at over $10.000,000,000 annually; condition, is saturated, flooded. or ponded long enough during a
(B) su port for a major portion of the Nation's multi- (0
million T, growing season to develop an anaerobic condition that supports
ollor annual fur and hide harvest; and ca
(C) Fishing. hunting, birdwatching, nature observation the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation.
and other wetland-mlated recreational activities that gen- (4) The term "hydrophytic vegetation' means a plant growing
erate billions or dollars annually; In-
(5) wetlands enhance the water quality and water supply or (A) water, or
the Nation by serving an groundwater recharge areas, nutrient (B) a substrate that in at least periodically deficient in
traps, and chemical sinks; oxygen during a growing season as a result of excessive
(6) wetlands provide a natural means of flood and erosion water content.
control by retaining water during periods of high runoff, (6) The term "wetland" means land that has a predominance
thereby protecting against loss of life and property; of hydric soils and that is inundated or saturated by surface or
groundwater at a frequency and duration sufflicient, to support,
and that under normal circumstances does support. a preva-
lence of hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in
saturated soil conditions.

100 STAT. M PUBLIC LAW 99-645-NOV. 10, 1986 PUBLIC LAW 99-M-NOV. 10, 1986 100 STAT.
TITLE I-EXTENSION OF WETLANDS L40AN ACT (13) a valid lifetime admission permit as authorized in section
4(aX5) of such Act.
SEQ 101. EXTENSION OF WETLANDS LOAN ACT. (2) Permits for a single visit to any designated unit shall be made
available by the Secretary of the Interior for a reasonable fee. but
(a) AVAILABTUTT or APPROPRIATIONs.-The first section of the Act not to exceed $3 ror individuals or $7.50 per vehicle. For purposes or
entitled "An Act to promote the conservation of migratory water. this subsection, the term "single visit" means a more or less
fowl by the acquisition of wetlands, and for other ementisil water- continuous stay within a designatA4 unit by a person or group
fowl habitat, and for other purposes", approved October 4, 1961 (16 described in subsection (d). Payment of a single visit fee and issu-
U.S.C. 715k-3). is amended by striking out "September 30,1986!' and ance of a single visit permit shall authorize exits from and re-entries
inserting in lieu thereof "September 30,1988". to a single designated unit for a period of from one to fifteen days.
(b) RzpAymENT PRovisioNs.-Section 3 or such Act (16 U.S.C. Such period shall be defined for ea@h designated unit by the Sec-
715k-5) is amended by striking out the first three sentences. retary based upon a determination ef the period of time reasonably
and ordinarily necessary for such a single visiL
Trl@LE 11-REVENUES FOR REFUGE OPERATIONS AND THE (3) Special admission permits for uses such.as group activities may
Wildlife PA%p MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION FUND be issued in accordance with procediires and at fees established by
syrtem. the Secretary.
16 use 3911. SEC "I. SALE OF ADMISSION PERMIT ATCERTAIN REFVGE trNrM (4) A person may not be required twi purchase an admission permit
(a) SAts or ADuissioN NRMrffl.-(I) Notwithstanding the Land under subsection (a)(1) in order to travel by private noncommercial
vehicle over any road or highway-
and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 4601-4 et seq.). . (AXi) established is part of the National Federal Aid System
in order to provide additional revenues for the conservation of (as defined in section 101 of title 23, United States Codek. and
wetland resources of the Nation and for the operation and mainte- 60 commonly used by the pub] ic as a means of travel between
nance of refuges-
(A) the Secretary of the Interior may. at units of the National two places which are outside the designated unit; or
(B) to any land in which such person has a property interest if
Wildlife Refuge System designated by the Secretary under para- such land is within any designati A unit.
graph (2@-
(i) charge fees for admission permits; (5) A person may not be required to purchase tin admission permit
60 sell Golden Eagle passports and Golden Age passports; under subsection (aXI) for entrance or admission to a unit of the
(iii) issue at no charge lifetime admission rmits as National Wildlife Refuge System created, expanded, or modified by
> authorized in section 4(aX5) of the Land and Cater Con. Public Law 96-487. 16 u9c a)
(c) DisimiBUTION or Amouirm Commcmm-Amounts collected a*&
servation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 4601-4-4601-1 It, from the sale or admission permits under this section and from fees
(B) the amounts collected by the Secretary as a result of the collected at any unit of the National Wildlife Refuge Sy tem under
activities described in subparagraph (A) sh" be distributed as
provided in subsection (c). subsections (b) and (c) of section 4 of the Land and Water Conserva.
e
(2) The Secretary shall designate a unit of the National Wildlif tion Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 46WL-6a Ab). 10i shall be distributed
Refuge System for purposes of this Act if the Secretary determines, as follows:
with respect to such unit. that- (A) Thirty per centum shall be available to the Secretary of
(A) The level of visitation for recreational purposes is high the Interior until expended. The Secretary shall use such
enough to justify the collection of fees for admission permits for amount-
economic reasons. (i) first, to defray the cost Pf collection;
(ii) next, for operation anti maintenance of the collecting
(B) There is a practical mechanism in existence for im. unit; and
plementing and operating a "stem of collecting fees for admis. and maintenance of all units
sion permits. (iii) next, for operation
within the National Wildlife Refuge System. except those
(C) Imposition of a fee for admission permits is not likely to units created, expanded, or modified by Public Law 96487.
result in undue economic hardship for a significant number of (B) Seventy percent shall, be deposited into the migratory bird
visi" to the unit.
(b) EXCEMONS.--4 1) The Secretary may not require an admission conservation fund established under section 4 of the Act of
permit under subsection (aXI) for entry by a person into a des. March 16.1934 (16 U.S.C. 718d).
ignated unit if such person is the holder of- (d) PERsoNs AccomPANYiN(; PFRmrrmzL-A person who holds a
stamp, passport, or permit described in subsection (b) shall be
(A) a valid migratory bird hunting and conservation stamp entitled to general entrance into. any designated unit, along with-
issued under section 2 of the Act of March 16, 1934 (16 U.S.C. (1) any persons accompanying such person in a single. private,
718b) (commonly known an the Duck Stamp Act),
(B) a valid Golden Eagle Passport issued under section 4(aXI) noncommercial vehicle; or
(2) where entry to the area is by any means other than single.
of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. private. noncommercial vehicle, the person and any accompany-
4601-6a(aXIA,
(0 a valid Golden Age Passport issued under section 4(aX4) of Ing spouse, children, or parents.
such Act; or (e) RiFzrsIcnoN&-A permit ismed under this section is
nontransferable. Such a permit may not authorize any uses for

100 STAT. 3586 PUBLIC LAW 99-645-NOV. 10, 1986 PUBLIC LAW 99-645-NOV.10,1986 100 STAT. 3
which fees are charged under the Land and Water Conservation terest in wetlands which should be given
Fund Act of 1965 (16 U.S.C. 4601-4 et seq.). Federal and State acquisition.
(f) EsTAblishmENT or FEES; POSTING or NoTices.-(1) All fees (b) CONSULTATION.-The Secretary shall establish the plan re-
established pursuant to this section shall be fair and equitable. In quired by subsection (a) after consultation with-
establishing such fees, the Secretary shall consider the following: (1) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
(A) The direct and indirect cost to the Government. Agency;
(B) The benefits to the permit holder. (2) the Secretary of Commerce;
(C) The public policy or interest served. (3) the Secretary of Agriculture; and
(D) The comparable fees charged by non-Federal public (4) (the chief executive officer of) each State. State and loe
agencies. (c) FAcToRs To Be CONSIDERED.-The Secretary, in establishing governments.
(E) The economic and administrative feasibility of fee collec- the plan required by subsection (a), shall consider-
tion and other pertinent factors. (1) the estimated proportion remaining of the respective types
(2) The Secretary shall require that notice that a fee has been of wetlands which existed at the time of European settlement;
established under this Section- (2) the estimated current rate of loss and the threat of future
losses of the respective types of wetlands; and
(A) be prominently posted at each designated unit and at (3) the contributions of the respective types of wetlands to-
appropriate locations in each such unit; and (A) wildlife, including endangered and threatened spe-
(B) to the extent practicable, be included in publications cies, migratory birds, and resident species;
distributed at such units. (B) commercial and sport fisheries;
(g) VoLunteer-The Director of the United States Fish and (C) surface and ground water quality and quantity, and
Wildlife Service may accept services of volunteers to sell admission flood control;
permits under this section or to sell Golden Eagle and Golden Age (D) outdoor recreation; and
Passports or Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamps. The (E) other areas or concerns the Secretary considers
Director may use funds appropriated or otherwise made available to appropriate.
the Service to cover the cost of any surety bond that may be
required of a volunteer performing the services authorized under SEC. 302. REMOVAL OF RESTRICTION ON ACQUISITION.
this subsection. Section 7(a)(1) of the Land and Water Conservtion Fund Act of
SVC 202. PRICE OF MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING AND CONSERVATION 1965 (16 U.S.C. 4601-9(a)(l)) is amended by striking out "national
STAMP. wildlife refuge areas under section 7(a)(5)of the Fish and Wildlife
16 USC 718b. Section 2(b) of the Act of March 16, 1934 (16 U.S.C. 718(b)), is which are authorized to be acquired by the Migratory Bird Con-
amended in the first sentence-- servation Act of 1929. as amended (16 U.S. 715-715s)" and insert-
(1) by striking out "7.50" and inserting in lieu thereof ing in lieu thereof "national wildlife refuge areas under section
"$10.00"; 7(a)(4) of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C 742(f)(a)(4) and
(2) by striking out "any hunting year and inserting in lieu wetlands acquired under section 304 of the Emergency Wetlands
thereof "hunting years 1987 and 1988. $12.50 for hunting years Resources Act of 1986".
1989 and 1990, and $15.00 for each hunting year thereafter."
and SEC. 303. INCLUSION OF WETLANDS IN COMPREHENSIVE STATEWIDE OUT.
(3) by inserting "available for obligation and" before "attrib- DOOR RECREATION PLANS.
utable Section 6 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act of 1965
16 U9C 3912 SEC. 203. TRANSFERS TO MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION FUND. (16 U.S.C. 4601-8) is amended-
(1) in subsection (d), by adding at the end thereof the following
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an amount equal to new paragraph:-
the amount of all import duties collected on arms and ammunition, "For fiscal year 1988 and thereafter each comprehensive state-
as specified in subpart A of part 5 of schedule 7 of the Tariff wide outdoor recreation plan shall soecufucakkt address wetlands
19 U8C 1202. Schedules of the United States. shall. beginning with the next fiscal within that State as an important outdoor recreation resource as a
year quarter after the date of enactment of this Act, be paid prerequisite to approval, except that a revised comprehensive state-
quarterly into the migratory bird conservation fund established wide outdoor recreation plan shall not be required by the Secretary,
under section 4 of the Act of March 16, 1934 (16 U.S.C. 718d). if a State submits. and the Secretary, acting through the Director of
the National Park Service, approves,as a part of and as an adden-
TITLE 111--STATE AND FEDERAL WETLAND ACQUISITION durn to the existing comprehensive statewide outdoor recreation
plan, a wetlands priority plan developed in consultation with the
16 U9C 3921. SEC. 301. NATIONAL WETLANDS PRIORITY CONSERVATION PLAN. State agency with responsibility for fish and wildlife resources and
state and local consistent with the national wetlands priority conservation plan
governments. (a) Im General.-The Secretary shall establish, and periodically developed under section 301 of the Emergency Wetlands Resources
review and revise, a national wetlands priority conservation plan Act or, if such national plan has not been completed, consistent with
which shall specify, on a region-by-region basis or other basis consid- the provisions of that section";
ered appropriate by the Secretary. the types of wetlands and in-

iTAT. 3588 PUBLIC LAW 99-645-NOV. 10, 1986 PUBLIC LAW 99-M-NOV. 10, 1986 100 STAI
(2) in subsedion (01), by inserting. in the first sentence SEC- 40L REP011TS TO CONGRESS. le USC I
thereof. after "For the acquisition of land, waters, or interests (a) IN GENrs.Ai.-The Secretaryi' in consultation and cooperation
in land or waters" the following: ", or wetland areas and in- with the Secretary of Agriculture. shall prepare and submit to the
terests therein as identified in the wetlands provisions of the committees-
comprehensive plan"; and (1) by March 30,1987, a report regarding the status. condition.
(3) in subsection (fX3),, by adding at the end thereof the and trends of wetlands in the lower Mississippi alluvial plain
following- ": P@,vvide&4 That wetland areas and interests therein and the prairie pothole regions of the United States; and
as identified in the wetlands provisions of the comprehensive (2) by September 30, 1987, a report regarding trends of wet,
plan and proposed to be acquired as suitable replacement prop- lands in all other areas of the United States.
erty within that same State that is otherwise acceptable to the (b) CONTENTS ov RzPoRTs.-The reports required under subsection
Secretary. acting through the Director of the National Park (a) shall contain-
Service, shall be considered to be of reasonably e
,,quivalent
usefulness with the property proposed for conversion. (1) an analysis or the factors responsible for wetlands deBtruc-
tion, degradation, protection and enhancement;
SEC. 3H. FEDERAL ACQUISITION. (2) a compilation and analysis of Federal statutory and regu. Tazm
The Secretary is authorized to purchase wetlands or interests in latory mechanisms, including expenditures, financial assist,
wetlands, which are not acquired under the authority of the Migra- ance. and tax provisions which-
tory Bird Conservation Act of 1929 (16 U.S.C. 715-715s), consistent (A) induce wetlands destruction or degradation; or
with the wetlands priority conservation plan established under (B) protect or enhance wetlands;
section 301. (3) a compilation and analysis of Federal expenditures result,
SM. SEC. 30L RESTRIMON ON USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN IN ACQUISITIONS. ing from wetlands destruct-ion, degradation, protection or
ad enhancement;
The powers of condemnation or eminent domain shall not be used (4) an analysis of public and private patterns or ownership of
in the acquisition of wetlands under any provision of this Act where wetlands;
such wetlands have been constructed for the purpose of farming or (5) an analysis or the environmental and economic impact of
ranching, or result from conservation activities associated with eliminating or restricting future Federal expenditures and
farming or ranching. financial assistance, whether direct or indirect. which have the
effect of encouraging the destruction. degradation, protection or
TinE IV-WETLANDS INVENTORY AND TREND ANALYSIS enhancement of wetlands. including-
(A) public works expenditures;
SEC. 401. NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY PROJEM (B) assistance programs such as price support Plogg Irks, Loam
(a) IN Gr:NERAi.-The Secretary. acting through the Director of commodity loans and purchase programs and disaster
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, shall continue the assistance programs;
National Wetlands Inventory llro*ect and shall- (C) soi I conservation programs; and
(1) produce. by September 30,1988, National Wetlands Inven- (D) certain income tax provisions; Taus.
tory maps for the areas that have been identified by the Service (6) an analysis of the environmental and economic impact of Tam&
an top priorities for mapping, including- failure to restrict future Federal expenditures, financial assist-
(A) the entire coastal zone of the United States; ance, and tax provisions which have the effect of encouraging
(B) floodplains of major rivers; and the destruction, degradation, protection or enhancement of wet-
(C) the Prairie Pothole region; lands, including-
(2) produce, by September 30. 1998, National Wetlands Inven- (A) assistance for normal silviculture activity (such as AgaricultL
tory maps for those portions of the contiguous United States for lowing, seeding, planting, cultivating, minor drainage, or wri-Itu
which final maps have not been produced earlier; Earvesting for the production of fiber or forest products); ammodi,
(3) produce, as soon as racticable, National Wetlands Inven- (B) Federal expenditures required incident to studies For"ta a
toriy maps for Alaska ans other noncontiguous portions of the evaluations, design. construction, operation, maintenance forest P"
United States; and or rehabilitation of Federal water resource development
(4) produce. by September 30. 1990, and at ten-year intervals activities. including channel improvements-,
thereafter, reports to update and improve the information con- (0 the commodity loans and purchases program and tA*m
tained in the report dated September 1982 and entitled "Status cotton, feed grain, wheat. and rice production stabilization Agri-alt-
and Trends of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitat in the Cotermi- programs administered by the Department of Agriculture; agricultu
nous United States, 1950's to 1970's". and w...di,
MW low (b) NoTica.-The Secretary shall notify the appropriate State and (D) Federal expenditures for the construction of publicly Highwa."
local units of government at such time as he proposes to begin map owned or publicly operated highways, roads, structures, or
preparation under subsection (a) in an area. Such notice shall facilities that are essential links in a larger network or
include, but is not limited to. the identification of the area to be system; and
mapped. the proposed schedule for completion, and the identifica- (7) recommendations for the conservation or wetlands re- State and
tion of a source for further information. sources based on an evaluation and comparison of all manage- v--

100 STAT. 3590 PUBLIC LAW 99-645-NOV. 10,1986

ment alternatives, and combinations of management alternatives, such as State and local actions, Federal actions, and initiatives by private organizations and individuals.

TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

6 USC 668dd SEC 501. MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT.

Section 6(b) of the Act of July 3, 1918 (16 U.S.C. 707(b)) is amended bydeleting "shall" the first place it appears therein and by inserting in lieu thereof "shall knowingly".
Sec. 502. BAYOU SAUVAGE URBAN NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.

(A) pURPOSES OF rEFUGE--The purposes of the Bayou Sauvage Urban National Wildlife Refuge are--
(l) to enhance the populations of migratory, shore, and wading birds within the refuge;
(2) to encourage natural diversity of fish and wildlife species within the refuge;
(3) to protect the endangered and threatened species and otherwise to provide for the conservation and management of fish and wildlife with the refuge;
(4) to fulfill the international treaty obligations of the United States respecting fish and wildlife;
(5) to protect the archeological resources of the refuge;
(6) to provide opportunities for scientific research and environmental education, with emphasis being given to the ecological and other values of wetlands; and
(7) to provide opportunities for fish and wildlife oriented public uses and recreation in an urban setting.
(b) ACQUISTION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF REFUGE.-
(1) ACQUISITION.-Within four years after the effective date of this section the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter in this Act referred to as the "Secretary")
shall acquire the approximately nineteen thousand acres of lands and waters, and interests therein, located in Orleans Parish, Louisiana, that are depicted on the
map entitled "Bayou Sauvage Urban National Wildlife Refuge". dated September 15,1986, and on file at the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior.
The lands and waters, and interests therein, acquired under this paragraph comprise the Bayou Sauvage Urban National Wildlife Refuge. The acquistion shall be made through donation,
purchase with donated or appropriated funds, or exchange,or through any combination of the foregoing.
(2) ESTABLISHMENT.--At such time as sufficient lands and waters, and interests therein, have been acquired under paragraph (1) to constitute an initial area that can be administered to carry out the purposes set forth insubsection (a), the Secretary shall establish the Bayou Sauvage Urban National Wildlife Refuge by publication of notice to that effect in the Federal Register.
(3) BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS--The Secretary may make such adjustments with respect to the boundary of the Bayou sauvage Urban National Wildlife Refuge as may be necessary to facilitate the acquisition of lands and waters, and interests therein, for the refuge and to facilitate the administration of the refuge.
(c) ADMINISTRATION OF REFUGE.--The Secretary shall administer all lands and waters, and interests therein, acquired under subsec

PUBLIC LAW 99-645-NOV. 10, 1986 100 STAT. 3

tion (b) in accordance with the provisions of the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) to carry out the purposes set forth in subsection (a). The Secretary may utilize suchg additional statutory authority as may be available to him for the conservation and development of wildlife and natural resources, the development of outdoor recreation opportunities, and interpretive environmental education as he considers appropriate to carry out such purposes. Within two years after the effective date of this section, the Secretary shall complete a master plan for the development of the Bayou Sauvage Urban National Wildlife Refuge.
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.-There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of the Interior-
(1) from funds not otherwise appropriated from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, such sums as may be necessaryfor the acquisition of lands and waters, and interests therein, for the Bayou Sauvage Urban National Wildlife refuge; and
(2) $5,000,000 for the development of the refuge
The moneys appropriated under subparagraphs (1) and (2) shall remain available until expended.
(e) EFFECTIVE DATE-- This sectiontakes effect on the later of the date of enactment of this Act or October 1, 1986.
Approved November 10, 1986.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY- S. 740 (H.R. 1203):
HOUSE REPORTS: NO. 99-86, PT. 1 accompanying H.R. 1203 (Comm. on Merchant
Marine and Fisheries).
SENATE REPORTS: No. 99-445 (Comm. on Environment and Pulbic Works).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Vol. 132 (1986):
Oct. 3, considered and passed Senate.
Oct. 14, considered and passed House.

Appendix 11 List and Definition of Maine Wetland Inventory Wetland Types (Maine Department of
Inland Fisheries and Wildlife)

TYPE 1 - seasonally Flooded Basins or Flats

These flats occur in upland depressions, whichmay fill
with water during periods of heavy rain or melting snow, and
along river courses, where flooding ordinar 'ily occurs in
late fall, winter, or spring. The soil is covered with
water or is waterlogged during variable seasonal periods,
but is generally well-drained during the growing season.
Where the water recedes early, smartweeds, fall panicum,
chufa, wild millet, and cockleburs are likely to occur.*
Areas that are only temporarily submerged rarely develop any
wetland vegetation. Ducks often use flooded upland
depriessions when feeding - eating seeds that were present
before flooding and invertebrates that developed wither
before or after submergence.

TYPE 2 - Inland Fresh Meadow.

These meadows often fill sha llow lake basins or
potholes; they may also be found bordering the landward side
of shallow marshes. The soil is waterlogged to within a few
inches of the surface during the growing season. Vegetation
characteristic of northern meadows includes cares, rushes,
redtop, reed grasses, mannagrasses, prairie cordgrass, and
mints. When associated with permanent water areas, fresh
meadows are commonly used by nesting.waterfowl. Deer and
moose frequent them while resting and feeding.

TYPE 3 - Inland Shallow Fresh Marsh.

Shallow marshes may nearly fill shallow lake basis or
potholes, or they may border the landward side of deep fresh
marshes occupying such depressions. The soil, normally
waterlogged during the growing season, may be flooded with
as much as 6 inches of water. Common plant species found in
northern regions are plume grass, rice cutgrass, carex, and
giant burreed. various other marsh plants (cattails,
arrowheads, pickerel weed, smartweeds) may also be found.
These marshes are used heavily by nesting and feeding
waterfowl, and they are visited frequently by other birds,
moose, deer, and various furbearers.

TYPE 4 - Inland Deep Fresh Marsh.

These marshes often occupy shallow lake basins and
potholes, or they may border open water occurring in such
areas. The soil is covered with 6 inches to 3 feet of water
during the growing season. Shallow-water vegetation
consists mainly of cattails, plume grass, spikerushes, and

The scientific names of all plants mentioned here and on
the following pages are listed at the end of this
Appendix.

A-7

wild rice; pondweeds, duckweeds, coontail, spatterdock
sometimes occur in the more open areas. These areas are
important not only to nesting and feeding waterfowl, but
also to numerous other wildlife species, such as herons and
rails, muskrats, otters, and beavers, turtles, frogs, and
fish.

TYPE 5 Inland Open Fresh Water.

open fresh water of variable depth occurs in artificial
lakes, ponds, and reservoirs. It may also be found in
shallow lake basins, potholes, or streambeds, and is
commonly fringed with marsh vegetation. In shallow areas
(less than six feet) vegetation may include pondweeds, wild..
celery, coontail, water milfoil, water lilies, and
spatterdocks. These open water areas are useful to diving
ducks, coots, and occasionally to geese. The bordering
vegetation provides cover and the open surface areas are
particularly good for brooding and resting.

TYPE 6 - Shrub Swamp.

Shrubby swamps occur primarily along sluggish streams.
The soil is generally waterlogged but may be covered with a
foot or more of water. Alder and dogwood predominate on the
drier areas; willow, buttonbush, and sweet gale characterize
the wetter sites. These swamps are used to varying degrees
by ducks, moose, deer, woodcock, and raccoons.

TYPE 7 - Wooded Swamp.

These swamps occur along sluggish streams, on flat
uplands, and in shallow lake basins or potholes. The soil
is normally waterlogged but may be seasonally covered with
as much as one foot or more of water. (When such areas are
flooded for a period of one or more years, the trees die and
the site reverts to a meadow-for a period of one or more
years, the trees die and the site reverts to a meadow
association). Northern swamps are composed of tamarack,
arborvitae, black spruce, balsam fir, red maple, and black
ash. The coniferous swamps usually have a thick carpeting
of mosses; deciduous swamps often support duckweeds,
smartweeds, and other herbaceous vegetation. Wooded swamps
are frequently used by hole-nesting ducks, feeding
waterfowl, deer, moose, beaver, and numerous small birds and
mammals.

=E 8 - Bog.

Bogs occur most often in shallow lake basins, and
potholes, along sluggish streams, and on flat uplands. The
soil is generally saturated and supports a spongy
ground-cover of mosses or other plant material. Vegetation
May be woody, herbaceous, or both. Northern representatives

A-8

include Labrador-tea, leather-leaf, cranberries, carex,
cottongrass, sweet gale and sphagnum moss. Stunted black
spruce and tamarack may also occur. In Maine, these bogs,
especially those with an interspersion of open water,.are of
importance to some nesting waterfowl. Moose, deer, beaver,
and hares also-frequent these areas.

TYPE 12 - Coastal Shallow Fresh Marsh.

These marshes occur along tidal rivers and adjacent the
landward side of deeper marshes. The soil is waterlogged
and may be flooded with as much as 6 inches of water at high
tide. Vegetation consists of various grasses and sedges,
cattails, arrowheads, smartweeds, and arrow-arum. These
marshes are highly important to feeding wildfowl and herons;
they are of lesser importance to mink, raccoons, and snipe.

E 13 - Coastal Deep Fresh Marsh.

These deep marshes occur primarily along tidal rivers.
During the growing season the soil is covered with 6 inches
to 3 feet of water at average high tide. Common plants
found are cattails, wildrice, pickerel weed, and
spatterdocks; pondweeds, widgteon grass, and other submerged
species often occur in marsh openings. Where suitable
vegetation dominates, these marshes are heavily used by
feeding waterfowl, sora rails, and herons. Raccoons, mink,
muskrats, and fish also utilize these areas.

TYPE 14 - Coastal Open Fresh Water.

These waters are of variable depth and occur in tidal
rivers and sounds. Vegetation is generally found at depths
less than six feet and consists of pondweeds, naiads, wild
celery, coontail, water milfoils, and waterweeds. Such
areas are heavily used by diving ducks and other water
birds, and by fish.

TYPE 16 - Coastal Salt Meadow.

Salt meadows border the landward side of salt marshes,
or open water. The soil is always saturated during the
growing season but is rarely inundated by tidal water.
Indigenous plant species are salt meadow cordgrass (Apartina
patens) and black rush; common three-square occurs in
fresher areas. Salt meadows are of great importance to
resident and wintering waterfowl, particularly when well
interspersed,with potholes and ditches. Such areas support
large populations of amphipads, clams, and snails, and
afford wildfowl an ample source of food.

TYPE 18 - Regularly Flooded Salt Marshes.

Salt marshes occur most often-along coastal bays. At

A-9

average high tide during the growing season, the soil is@
covered with six inches or more of water. The predominant
plant species is saltmarsh cordgrass (Spartina
alterniflora). open water areas often support widgeon
grass, eelgrass, and Sago pondweed. Feeding wildfowl use
these wetlands heavily, as do herons, rails, other shore
birds, fish, and shellfish.

TYPE 19 - Sounds and Bays.

This type consists primarily of mud flats laid bare at
low tide and occurring along salt-water rivers, sounds, and
bays. Vegetation, if present, may consist of eel-grass,
widgeon grass, Sago pondweed, and muskgrasses. These tidal
flats support large shellfish populations and are extremely
important to wintering waterfowl populations.

It should be emphasized that each of these wetland
types is generally found in conjunction with one ore more of
the other types; very seldom will an area be found that is
entirely fresh meadow or entirely deep fresh marsh. When
classifying a wetland, select the type which most closely
identifies the greater portion (50-75%) of the area as it is
delineated on the map.

A-10

Glossary of Plant Names

These are the common and scientific names of plants
referred to in this appendix (from Fernald, 1950 and
Fasset, 1957).

Common Names Scientific Names

Alders Alnus spp. B. Ehrh.
Arborvitae Thuja occidentalis L.
Arrow-arum Peltandra virgnica (L.)
Kunth.
Arrowheads Sagittaria spp. L.
Balsam Fir Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.
Black Ash Fraxinus nigra Marsh.
BlackrUsh JUncus gerardi Loisel.
Black spruce Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP
Bulrushes Scirpus spp. L.
Buttonbush Cephalanthus occidentalis L.
Carex Care- spp. L.
Cattails Typha spp. L.
Chuf a Cyperus esculentus L.
Cockleburs Xanthium spp. L.
Common three-square SCirPUs americanus pers.
Coontail Ceratophyllum demersUm L.
Cottongrass Eriophorm spp. L.
Craberr ies Vaccinium spp. L.
Dogwoods Cornus spp. L.
Duckweeds Lemnaceae
Eelgrass Zostera marina L.
Fall panicum Panicum dichotomiflorum Michx.
Giant burreed SparganiUM eUrYCarpUM Engelm.
Gr asses Gr am ineae
Labrador-tea Ledum groenlandicum Oeder.
Leatherleaf Chamaedaphne calyculata (L.)
Moench .
Mannagrasses Glyceria spp. R. Br.
mints Labiatae
Muskgrasses Chara spp. L.
Naiads Najas spp. L.
Pickerel weed Pontederia cordata L.
Plumegrass Phragmites communis Trin.
Pondweeds Potamogeton spp. L.
Prairie cordgrass Spartina pectinata Link.
Red Maple Acer rubrum L.
Redtop Agrostis stol0nifera. L.
Reed grasses Calamagrostis spp. Adams.
Rice cutgrass Leersia oryzoides (L.) Swartz.
Rushes Juncus spp. L.
SAgo pondweed Potamogeton pectinatus L.
Saltmarsh cordqrass Spartina alterniflora Loisel.
Saltmeadow cordgrass Spartoma patens (ait.) Muhl.
Sedges Cyperaceae

A-11

Smartweeds Polygonum spp. L.
Spatterdocks Nuphas spp. Sm.
Sphagnum moss Sphagnum spp.
Spikerushes Eleocharis spp. R. Br.
Sweet gale Myrica gale L.
Tamarack Larix laricina (DuRoi) K.
Koch

Water lilies Nymphaea spp. L.
Water milfoils Myriophylius spp. L.
Waterqweeds Elodea spp. Mich.
Widgeon grass Ruppia marinima L.
Wild celery Vallisneria americana
Michx.
Wild millet Echinochloa spp. Beauv.
Wild rice Zizania aquatica L.
Willow Salix spp. L.

A-12

Appendix III U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of
the United States (Cowardin et al., 1979).

System Subsystem Class

Rock Bottom
Unconsolidated Bottom
Subtidal
Aquatic Bed
Reef
Marine
Aquatic Bed
Intertidal - - Reef
- Rocky Shore
- Unconsolidated Shore

Rock Bottom
Subtidal - Unconsolidated Bottom
- Aquatic Bed
- Reef

Estuarine Aquatic Bed
- Reef
- Streambed
Intertidal - Rocky Shore
- Unconsolidated Shore
- Emergent Wetland
- Scrub-Shrub Wetland
- Forested Wetland

- Rock Bottom
- Unconsolidated Bottom
- Aquatic Bed
Tidal Streambed
Rocky Shore
Unconsolidated Shore
Emergent Wetland

Rock Bottom
Unconsolidated Bottom
Aquatic Bed
Lower Perennial - Rocky Shore
z Riverine - Unconsolidated Shore
- Emergent Wetland

z Rock Bottom
- Unconsolidated Bottom
Upper Perennial Aquatic Bed
Rocky Shore
Unconsolidated Shore

Intermittent Streambed

Rock Bottom
Limnetic Unconsolidated Bottom
Aquatic Bed
Lacustrine Rock Bottom
Unconsolidated Bottom
Littoral- Aquatic Bed
Rocky Shore
Unconsolidated Shore
Emergent Wetland

Rock Bottom
Unconsolidated Bottom
Aquatic Bed
Palustrine Unconsolidated Shore
Moss-Lichen Wefland
F
Emergent Wetland
Scrub-Shrub Wetland
-Forested Wetland

A- I

APPENDIX IV

Camparison Between U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Wetland Classification (Cowardin, 1979)
and Classification of-U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39 Martin et al., 1953).

Circular 39 type and references for examples of typical vegetation Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats
Water
Classes Water regimes chemistry
Type I-Seasonally flooded basins or flats
Wet meadow (Dix and Smeins 1967; Stewart and Emergent Wetland Temporarily Flooded Fresh
Kantrud 1972) Forested Wetland Intermittently Mixosaline
Bottornland hardwoods (Braun 1950) Flo@ded
Shallow-freshwater swamps (Penfound 1952)

Type 2-Inland fresh meadows
Fen (Heinselman 1963) Emergent Wedand Saturated - Fresh
Fen, northern sedge meadow (Curtis 1959) Mixosaline
Type 3-Inland shallow fresh marshes -
Shallow marsh (Stewart and Kantrud 1972; Golet and Emergent Wetland Semipermanently Fresh
Larson 1974) Flooded Mixosaline
Seasonally Flooded
Type 4-Inland deep fresh marshes
Deep marsh (Stewart and Kantrud 1972; Golet and Emergent Wetland Permanently Flooded Fresh
Larson 1974) Aquatic Bed Intermittently Mixosaline
Exposed
Semipermanently
Flooded
Type 5-Inland open fresh water
Open water (Golet and Larson 1974) Aquatic Bed Permanently Flooded Fresh
Submerged aquatic (Curties 1959) Unconsolidated Intermittently Mixosaline
Bottom Exposed
Type 6-Shrub swamps
Shrub swamp (Golet and Larson 1974) Scrub-Shrub All nontidal regimes Fresh
Shrub-carr, alder thicket (Curtis 1959) Wetland except Permanently
Flooded
Type 7-Wooded swamps
Wooded swamp (Golet and Larson 1974) Forested Wetland All nontidal regimes Fresh
Swamps (Penfound 1952; Heinselman 1963) except Permanently
Flooded
Type 8-Bogs
Bog (Dansereau and Segadas-vianna 1952; Heinselman 1963) Scrub-Shrub Saturated, Fresh
Pocosin (Penfound 1952; Kologiski 1977) Wetland (acid only)
Forested Wetland
Moss-Lichen
Wetland
Type 9-Inland saline flats
Intermittent alkali zone (Stewart and Kantrud 1972) Unconsolidated Seasonally Flooded Eusaline
Shore Temporarily Flooded Hypersaline
Intermittently
Flooded
Type 10-Iniand saline marshes
Inland salt marshes (Ungar 1974) Emergent Wetland Semipermanently Eusaline
Flooded
Seasonally Flooded
Type 11-Inland open Wine water
Inland saline lake community (Ungar 1974) Unconsolidated Permanently Flooded Eusaline
Bottom Intermittently
Exposed
Type 12-Coastal shallow fresh marshes
Marsh (Anderson et al. 1968) Emergent Wetland Regularly Flooded Mixohaline
Estuarine bay marshes, estuarine river marshes Irregularly Flooded Fresh
(Stewart 1962) Sernipermanently
Fresh and intermediate marshes (Chabreck 1972) Flooded-Tidal

A-1 5

ApPENDix iV continued

Circular 39 type and references for examples of vegetation Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats-
Water
Classes Water regimes chemistry
Type 13-Coastal deep fresh marshes
Marsh (Anderson et al. 1968) Emergent Wetland Regularly Flooded Mixohaline
Estuarine bay marshes, estuarine river marshes Semipermanently Fresh
(Stewart 1962) Flooded-Tidal
Fresh and intermediate marshes (Chabreck 1972)

Type 14-Coastal open fresh water
Estuarine bays (Stewart 1962) Aquatic Bed Subtidal Mixohaline
Unconsolidated Permanently Fresh
Bottom Flooded-Tidal
Type 15-Coastal salt flats
Panne, slough marsh (Redfield 1972) Unconsolidated Regularly Flooded Hyperhaline
Marsh pans (Pestrong 1965) Shore Irregularly Flooded Euhaline

Type 16-Coastal salt meadows
Salt marsh (Redfield 1972; Chapman 1974) Emergent Wetland Irregularly Flooded Euhaline
Mixohaline
Type 17-Irregularly flooded salt marshes
Salt marsh (Chapman 1974) Emergent Wetland Irregularly Flooded Euhaline
Saline, brackish, and intermediate marsh (Eleuterius 1972) Mixohaline

Type 18-Regularly flooded salt marshes
Salt ma@sh (Chapman 1974) Emergent Wetland Regularly Flooded Euhaline
Mixohaline
Type 19-Sounds and bays
Kelp beds, temperate grass flats (Phillips 1974) Unconsolidated Subtidal Euhaline
Tropical marine meadows (Odum 1974) Bottom Irregularly Exposed Mixohaline
Eelgrass beds (Akins and Jefferson 1973; Eleuterius 1973) Aquatic Bed Regularly Flooded
Unconsolidated Irregularly Flooded
Shore
Type 20-Mangrove swamps
Mangrove swamps (Walsh 1974) Scrub-Shrub Irregularly Exposed Hyperhaline
Mangrove swamp systems (Kuenzler 1974) Wetland Regularly Flooded Euhaline
Mangrove (Chapman 1976) Forested Wetland Irregularly Flooded Mixohaline
Fresh

A-1 6

APPENDIX V Wetlands Assessment Threshold Criteria

NATIONAL WETLANDS PRIORITY CONSERVATION PLAN

WETLANDS ASSESSMENT THRESHOLD CRITERIA

INSTRUCTIONS: Complete this page to determine whether a wetland site
(refer to Wetlands Profile guidance) qualifies for acquisition consideration
under the National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan.

Use the attached guidance for estimating wetland losses, threats and
functions and values thresholds. The guidance is organized in the same
sequence as the threshold criteria and will direct the user to an
appropriate conclusion. Complete all questions and statements.

1. WETLANDS PROFILE:

a. Wetland Site Name: File No:
b. USGS 1:24,000 Map Quadrangle Name:
c. Township: Section:
d. Longitude: Latitude:
e. City: County: State:
f. Ecoregion: (refer to Cowardin, et al., 1979, p.27).
g. Size: (acres). Date of wetlands assessment:

2. WETLAND Loss PRIORITY: (circle one) 1 2 3 4 5
Must be priority level 1, 2, or 3 to meet threshold.

3. IS THE WETLAND SITE THREATENED (refer to the attached guidance under
Wetland Threats)? Must be circled "yes" to meet threshold.

YES NO

4. WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES
Check all that apply. Must check at least two to meet threshold.

a. Wildlife
b. Fisheries
c. Water Supply/Quality, Flood and Erosion Protection
d. Outdoor Recreation
e Other Areas or Concerns

5. CONCLUSION

Yes, wetland site meets all threshold criteria and qualifies
for acquisition consideration under provisions of the National
Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan.

No, wetland site does not meet all the threshold criteria and
therefore does not qualify for acquisition consideration under
provisions of the National Wetlands Priority Conservation
Plan.

A-17

National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan - May 1988

GUIDANCE FOR ESTIMATING WETLAND LOSSES,
THREATS AND VALUES THRESHOLDS

1. WETLANDS PROFILE

Complete items (a) through (g) to give a name and address to each wetland
site.

For the purpose of the National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan, a
wetland site is an identifiable property, tract, area, or region containing
wetlands or a complex (aggregation) of physically- or functionally-related
wetlands. A wetland site may contain a variety of wetland types,
interspersed habitat of other types and associated upland buffer areas.
The boundary of the site should be specific and as geographically restricted
as practical, determined by application of sound acquisition principles.
In other words, regardless of size, a wetland site should be treated in
terms of a unit which would generally fit the acquisition goals, process
and needs of the user.

2. WETLAND LOSSES

Wetlands will be classified as follows: System, subsystem, class and water
regime according to Cowardin et al., 1979 (refer to key on next page).
Estimate percent of site for each type.

TYPE PERCENT OF SITE

system
subsystem
class
water regime

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k. Upland
Total 100

Example:

System:Estuarine
E:2:E M:N Subsystem: Intertidal
Class:Emergent
Water Regime:Regularly Flooded

A-18

National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan - May 1988

Letter and number key for classificaticn of wetlands to the level of water,
regime:

SYSTEMS AND SUBSYSTEMS

M Marine R Riverine
1 Subtidal 1 Tidal
2 Intertidal 2 Lower Perennial
3 Upper Perennial
4 Intermittent 4 Intermittent
5 Unknown Perennial

E Estuarine L Lacustrine
1 Subtidal 1 Limnetic
2 Intertidal 2 Littoral

P Palustrine
No Subsystem Upland

Classes

AB Aquatic Bed RS Rocky Shore
EM Emergent SB Streambed
FO Forested SS Scrub-Shrub
ML Moss/Lichen UB Unconsolidated Bottom
RB Rocky Bottom US Unconsolidated Shore
RF Reef

WATER REGIME MODIFIERS

A Temporary
B Saturated L Subtidal
C Seasonal M Irregularly Exposed
F Semipermanent N Regularly Flooded
G Intermittently Exposed P Irregulary Flooded
H Permanent
J Intermittently Flooded

Wetland losses by type. Determine whether the wetland types identified
above are decreasing, stable or increasing. Apply to the formula and
priority table on the next page.

If supportable infonnation is available to substantiate trends for various
wetland types other than that shown by the NWI trends study, this
information may be used to support departures from the trends groupings
presented above.

Explain:

A-19

National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan - My 198

In the absence of more reliable data, the following ccnclusions based on
Prayer St Al. (1983) ray be used:

Decreasing: Palustrine'emergent
Palustrine forested
Palustrine scrub-shrub
Estuarine intertidal emergent
Estuarine intertidal forested
Estuarine intertidal sanib-sIxub
Marine intertidal

Stable: Estuarine intertidal r=i-vegetated
Estuarine subtidal
lacustrine

Increasing: Palustrine open water
Palustrine unconsolidated shore
Palustxine non-vegetated

Decreasing wetlax-Ad types % OF SITE X 1=
Stable wetland types % OF SITE X 2=
Increasing wetland types 96 OF SITE X 3--
Uplands 96 OF SITE X 3=

a. Priority 1 (0-139) t
b. Priority 2 (140-179)
c. Priority 3 (180-219) WE LVM LOSS PRICRITY
d. Priority 4 (220-259)
e. Priority 5 (260-300)

3. WEMANDS THPY-PaS

For the purpose of the National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan, threat
is defined as the likelihood that a wetland site, or portion thereof, wi-11
be destrcyed.or degraded,, directly or indirectly,, through human actions.

In establishing the threat threshold, a wetland site is cm-Lsidered to be
threatened if an estimated > 10 percent of the site's wetland functions
and values are likely to be@-destroyed or adversely affected through direct,
indbxect., or cuTulative inpacts over the next tan years considering:

1. the array of potential -wetland threats; and

2. the prcbable degree of protection provided by the varicus
relevant laws, ordinances and regulations.

A-20

National wetlands Priority conservation Plan - may 1988

At a minimum, the following items should be considered when evaluating
wetland threat (indicate activities that either destroy or degrade wetlands
at the site)

a. or filling
b. Agricultural conversion or use
C. livestock grazing
d. Groundwater withdrawal/depletion
e. Toss of instream flows
f. Residential or commercial development
g. oil, gas, mineral development
h. Power plants
i. Transportation (roads and bridges)
J. Navigation project, port, marina or pier
k. Water deve1opment project(s)
l. Water pollution
m. other, (e.g., timber or vegetation removal, mosquito control
practices, diverse ownership with no individual commitment to
protection):

Indicate all laws, ordinances or that have same degree of wetland
protection potential for this site:

a. Clean Water Act (Corps section 404 regulatory program)
b . River and Harbor Act (Corps section 10 regulatory program)
C. Endangered Species Act
d . Water Resources Development Act 1986
e. Food Security Act of 1985
f. local zoning or ordinances (e.g., local wetland or floodplain
zoning)
g. State ordinances or authorities (e.g., State wetland protection
laws, state permit program for activities in wetlands)
h. Coastal wetlands Protection Law
i. Inland Wetlands Protection law
j. Owner(s) favors protection
k. other:

Considering the relative effectiveness of the combination of the above
factors to protect the public values and services of the wetlands, is the
wetland site threatened using the definition of threat?

YES NO

If yes, explain type, degree and imminence of
threat:

A-21

National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan - May 1988

4. WETLAND FUNCTIONS AND VALUES

It is assumed that virtually all wetlands provide important public benefits
in several functions is and values categories. Many wetlands, however, have
been recognized, identified and/or listed as having certain of these
functions and values. In order to lead to greater objectivity and provide
a technique for u by persons of many disciplines, this wetlands assessment
method relies on documented data or information rather than allowing for
interpretation by users across many disciplines.

Indicate all functions and values which can be attributed to wetland
site. If any of the statements within a category (wildlife, fisheries,
water supply/quality, flood and errossion protection, outdoor recreation and
other areas or concerns) is affirmative, check that category on the cover
sheet, under item 4.

A. Wildlife (endangered and threatened species, migratory birds and
resident species)

1. Y N Are Federal or State threatened or endangered
plants or animals known to use the wetland
site on a regular basis? If yes, list species
names:

2. Y N Have any wildlife resources of the wetland
site been recognized, identified, or listed
by a Federal or State agency, conservation
organization, institution (educational or
research) or private group due to specific
legislation, designations or management or
planning documents (e.g., high wildlife value,
declining populations/numbers, edge of range,
Audubon Blue List, list(s) or species of special
concern or emphasis)? If yes, list
recognition:

3. Y N Has the wetland site been specially designated,
or is it part of a region specially designated,
by a Federal or State agency or private group
as important for migratory birds or resident
wildlife (e.g., referenced in the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan or a State Waterfowl
Concept Plan or on a list maintained by The
Nature Conservacncy? If yes, list designation:

A-22

National Wetlands Priority Conservation plan - may 1988

B. Commercial and Sport Fisheries

1. Y N Does commercail fishing occur on the site?
If so, fishery:

2. Y N Does sport fishing occur on the site? If so,
name fishery:

3. Y N Does the wetland site have fishery resource
value (s) (e.g. anadromous fishery, spawning,
nursery, juvenile or foraging habitat) that is
recognized, identified or listed by a Federal
or state agency, conservation organization,
institution or private group due to specific
legislation,, designations, or management or
planning documents? if so, name recognition:

C. Surface and Ground Water Quality and Quantity and Flood Control

1. Y N Are the groundwater recharge and/or discharge
(water supply) functions of the wetland site
recognized, identified or listed by a Federal,
State, or local agency, conservation
organization, institution or private group due
to specific legislation, designations, or
management or planning douments (e.g., sole
source aquifer, municipal water supply)? If
so, name recognition:

2. Y N Are the water quality functions (e.g., nutrient
assimilation, sediment trapping, toxic substance
uptake and transformation) of the wetland site
recognized, identified or listed by a Federal,
State, or local agency, conservation
organization, institution or private group due
to specific legislation, designations, or
ranagement or planning documents (e.g., presence
of a downstream dredged channel or reservoir
which requires periodic dredging, eutrophic
waterbodies downstream, low dissolved oxygen
problems, fishkills)? If so, name recoqgnition:

A-23

National Wetlands Priority Cons@rvation Plan - May 198

3. Y N Are the flood oontrol, erosion and/or shoreline
damage reduction functions of the wetland site
recognized, identified or listed by a Federal,
State, or local agency, conservation
organization, institution or private group due
to specific legislation, designations, or
ranagement or planning documents (e.g., flood
control project, wetland site within the 100-
year floodplain, identified by a city as
iqportant for coastal shoreline protection)?
If so, name recognition:

D. Outdoor Recreation

1. Y N Is there a recognized or documented demand foi
the recreational opportunities available in
the wetland site? If yes, explain:

.2. Y N Is the wetland site within 50 miles of a
Metropolitan Statistical Area or within 50
rrLiles of a tourist area receiving rore than
100,000 visitors per year7 If yes, name
location:

E. Other Areas or Cbncerns

1. Y N Does the wetland site have ecological or
geological features consistently considered
by regional scientists to be rare for wetlands
in the region (e.g., fens in the midwest,
cypress swanps in northern States, spring
camunities in various regions)? If yes, name
the feature:

2. Y N Is the wetland site included in a national or
statewide listing of historical or
archaeological sites? If yes, name list:

A-24

National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan - May 1988

3. Y N Is the wetland site being used, or could it
be used, for educational or research purposes
(e.g., used by a nature center, school, camp,
or college, essential to an on-going
environmental research or monitoring program)?
If yes, name use:

4. Y N Does the wettland site have other public values
of concern to the Secretary of the Interior?
If yes, name and document:

A-25

National. Wetlands Priority Consexvation Plan May 1988

5. Conclusion

7b qualify for acquisition consideration under the provisions of the
National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan, a wetland site mist: 1)
include predominantly (50 percent or greater) wetland types which are
rare or declining in the ecoregion; 2) be threatened with I and/or
degradation; and 3) offer inportant vali to society in two
identifiable functional categories. References, literature citations,
agency contacts and personal caTmmcations mist be provided to support
the assessment and conclusions rade in this checklist.

6. Map of Wetland Site

Reproduce and mftdt a USGS quadrangle rap, National Wetlands Inventory
Map or other appropriate rap delineating the wetland. site, its principal
features where appropriate (e.g., bald eagle nest sites) and other
relevant features of the assessment area where appropriate (e.g..,
downstream mmicipal water supply or public a point)

p@-26

L
1@1 millimill III * .
3 6668 14102 6767