APPENDIX H
WRAP
Appendix H
Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP)
Field Data Sheets
Several on-site evaluations were performed to determine the relative functional value of
the wetland areas proposed for impact at the Choctaw Point Terminal project site. These
evaluations were conducted on September 3, 4, and September 18, 2002 using the
Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP), a standardized evaluation format
developed by the South Florida Water Management District (Miller & Gunsalus 1999).
The sites evaluated are shown on Figure H-1. Sites 1, 3, and 8 were evaluated by
Volkert biologists on September 3 and 4, and sites 4 and 6 were evaluated on September
18 by Volkert biologists along with representatives of Federal and state environmental
agencies.
The WRAP scores are provided for information purposes only since they are not used to
determined mitigation requirements for the proposed project. Two types of wetlands,
fringing tidal marsh and emergent floodplain wetlands, are proposed for impact through
dredge and fill activities at the Choctaw Point Terminal project site. In order to
determine the relative functional values currently provided by these wetlands the WRAP
evaluations were conducted within wetlands that are considered as being representative
of the 24.3 acres of wetlands proposed for impact.
During the standardized WRAP procedure, including review of maps, aerial photography,
and identification of numerous physical conditions on-site, numeric ranking values
between 0 and 3 were assigned for various parameters represented within the wetland
areas. Specific variables that are considered for WRAP evaluation scores include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Wildlife Utilization
Wetland Canopy
Wetland Ground Cover
Habitat Support/Buffer
Field Hydrology
Water Quality Input and Treatment
To produce the overall rating score, individual scores for each of these elements were
totaled and divided by the number of applicable elements, to produce an average rating
value for the wetlands.
During the evaluation on September 3, 2002, a representative portion of the fringing tidal
marsh habitat (Site 1) was assigned a ranking value of ‘1.1’ by Volkert biologists.
Specific element scores and justification for the wetlands are as follows:
Variable Evaluated
Wildlife Utilization
Wetland Canopy
Wetland Ground Cover
Habitat Support/Buffer
Field Hydrology
Water Quality Input
and Treatment
WRAP Score
Rating Score (0-3)
1
N.A.
0
1.5
Explanation of rating value
Exhibits minimal evidence of wildlife use
(canopy not typical within tidal marsh)
No desirable vegetative ground cover present
Natural buffer less than 300 feet in width,
containing desirable plant species
2
Hydrologic regime adequate, but hydrology
may be impacted by external features
1
Only dry-detention for stormwater, receives
runoff from industrialized areas
(1 + 0 + 1.5 + 2 + 1) ÷ 5 = 1.1
The rating score of 1.1 out of a possible value of 3 indicates a poor functional value for
the fringing tidal marsh wetlands at the Choctaw Point Terminal project site.
During the evaluation on September 4, 2002, the forested/emergent floodplain wetlands
(Site 3) were assigned a ranking value of ‘1.4.’ Specific element scores and justification
for the wetlands are as follows:
Variable Evaluated
Wildlife Utilization
Wetland Canopy
Wetland Ground Cover
Habitat Support/Buffer
Field Hydrology
Water Quality Input
and Treatment
WRAP Score
Rating Score (0-3)
2
1.5
Explanation of rating value
Exhibits moderate evidence of wildlife use
Minimal to moderate desirable canopy
species present
2
Moderate amount of desirable vegetative
ground cover present
.5
Natural buffer less than 30 feet in width,
containing desirable plant species
2
Hydrologic regime adequate, but hydrology
may be impacted by external features
.5
No treatment, receives runoff from
industrialized areas
(2 + 1.5 + 2 + .5 + 2 + .5) ÷ 6 = 1.4
The rating score of 1.4 out of a possible value of 3 indicates poor to moderate functional
value for the existing emergent floodplain wetlands at the Choctaw Point Terminal
project site.
During the evaluation on September 4, 2002, the floodplain marsh habitat (Site 8) was
assigned a ranking value of ‘1.2.’ Specific element scores and justification for the
wetlands are as follows:
Variable Evaluated
Wildlife Utilization
Wetland Canopy
Wetland Ground Cover
Habitat Support/Buffer
Field Hydrology
Water Quality Input
and Treatment
WRAP Score
Rating Score (0-3)
1
1
Explanation of rating value
Exhibits minimal evidence of wildlife use
Minimal canopy components present,
dominated by Chinese Tallow and Black
Willow
1.5
Species present include torpedo grass, big
cord grass, common reed, and cattail
1
Contains significant amounts of invasive
exotic species, debris, and contaminants
present
2
Hydrologic regime adequate, but hydrology
may be impacted by external features
.5
No pre-treatment present, receives runoff
from industrialized areas
(1 + 1 + 1.5 + 1 + 2 +.5) ÷ 6 = 1.17
The rating score of 1.2 out of a possible value of 3 indicates a poor functional value for
existing floodplain marsh wetlands at the Choctaw Point Terminal project site.
During the evaluation on September 18, 2002, the fringing tidal marsh habitat (Site 4)
was assigned a ranking value of ‘2.2.’ Specific element scores and justification for the
wetlands are as follows:
Variable Evaluated
Wildlife Utilization
Wetland Canopy
Wetland Ground Cover
Habitat Support/Buffer
Field Hydrology
Water Quality Input
and Treatment
WRAP Score
Rating Score (0-3)
2
N/A
2.5
Explanation of rating value
Exhibits moderate evidence of wildlife use
(canopy not typical within tidal marsh)
Moderate amount of desirable vegetative
ground cover present
2
Natural buffer >30’ but less than 300’ width
contains desirable plant species
3
Tidally influenced
1.24
No treatment of stormwater from Tennessee
Street Drain. Runoff from vacant forested
land.
(1 + 2.5 + 2 + 3 + 1.24) ÷ 5 = 2.15
The rating score of 2.2 out of a possible value of 3 indicates a moderate functional value
for existing tidal marsh wetlands at the Choctaw Point Terminal project site.
During the evaluation on September 18, 2002, the fringing tidal marsh areas (Site 6) were
assigned a ranking value of ‘2.0.’ Specific element scores and justification for the
wetlands are as follows:
Variable Evaluated
Wildlife Utilization
Wetland Canopy
Wetland Ground Cover
Rating Score (0-3)
2
N/A
2
Habitat Support/Buffer
1.5
Field Hydrology
Water Quality Input
and Treatment
WRAP Score
3
1.25
Explanation of rating value
Exhibits moderate evidence of wildlife use
(canopy not typical within tidal marsh)
Few undesirable species present, lots of
debris and trash within area
Buffer contains some desirable species, not
connected to wildlife corridors
Tidally influenced
Grass swales
(2 + 2 + 1.5 + 3 + 1.25) ÷ 5 = 1.95
The rating score of 2.0 out of a possible value of 3 indicates a moderate functional value
for existing tidal marsh wetlands at the Choctaw Point Terminal project site.
The WRAP data sheets are included in this appendix.