Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002.07.00 - CT Pipeline Monitoring Report Year 4City of Port Townsend CT Pipeline Monitoring Report July 2002 Year 4 Prtpared for: City of Port Townsend Waterman & Katz Building 181 Quincy Steet, 2od Floor Port Townsend, WA 98368 Preparcd by: DixieLlewellin Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. 856 50t Sfieet Port Townsend, WA, 98368 Olympic Wetlond Resources, lnc. 360 dllewell@olympus.net City of Port Townsend CT Pipeline Monitoring Report July 2ffi2 Year 4 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction l.l Project History 1. l. I Wetland A 1.1.2 Wetland B L l.3 Planting and Maintenance of Wetland A and B 2.0 Methodology 2.1 Projea Goals and Objectives 2.2 Montoring Methodology 2.2.1 Determining Survival Rates of Trees, Shrubs, and Emergents 2.2.2 Documenting Wetland Changes with Photographs 3.0 Monitoring Schedule Table l. Monitoring and Maintenance Schedule 4.0 Results and Discussron 4.1 Wetland A 4. l.l Mixed Upland Forest Survival 4.1.2 Scrub/Shrub Wetland Survival 4 1.3 Scrub/Sbrub Upland Survival 4.1.4 Weedy Species 4.2 Wetland B 4.2.1 ltrhxed Upland Forest Survival 4.2.2 Scrub/Shrub Wetland Survival 4.2.3 Scrub/Shrub Upland Survival 4.2.4 Weedy Species 4.3 Recommendations For Replacements 4.4 Action Items for Wetland A and Wetland B 5.0 Summary Table Of Contents Continued Appendix Figures I. Location Map Wetland A and Btr. wetland A Monitoring Zones and photopoint Locationsm Wetland B Monitoring Area and photopoint Locations Monitoring Forms IV. Wetland A Zones I and?V. Wetland B Photopoints VI. Wetland APhotopoints l-3VII. Wetland APhotopoints 4 & 5 VItr. Wetland B Photopoints l,2,3, & 4 City of Port Townsend CT Pipeline Monitoring Report July 2002 Year 4 1.0 lntroduction The City of Port Townsend constructed a water supply pipeline in 1998 to meet chlorine contact time (CT) requirements for the domestic water supply. The new pipeline passed through five wetlands causing wetland degradation and alteration, which required mitigation meazures. The initial mitigation plan, City Of Port Townsend Wetland Plan CT Pipeline Projea (Macrow, CH2IvIhill, April 1998) required the revegetation of two wetlands, henceforth referred to as Wetland A and Wetland B in this report. This monitoring report summarizes the mitigation compliance n2002 for revegetation, maintenance, and monitoring for Wetland A and Wetland B using the methodology outlined in City of Port Townsend CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Plan (Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc January 1999). The goal of monitoring Wetlands A and B is to determine whether the performance standards identified in the plan have been met. Primary performance standards require zurvivorship of 80oh or more of all planted species after the five-year monitoring period. Another factor evaluated during the monitoring process is overall plant cover, which includes planted and all desirable volunteer species. A project is considered successful if the plant cover consists of greater than 80% desirable cover at the end of the five years (2003). This report evaluates conditions during year four of the five year monitoring project. 1.1 Project History 1.1.1 Wefland A Wetland A is located direaly west of the commercial businesses Seaport Fabric and Peninsula Floor Coverings at the intersection of Sims Way and the undeveloped section of Howard Street. This wetland was impacted (filling of approximately 1,500 square feet of wetland and 9,595 square feet permanent buffer loss) and altered (disturbance of approximately 14,500 square feet in the buffer) during the 1998 CT pipeline construction. A new wetland was created on the site and Olyrnpic Wetland Resources- Inc. CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Report Page I Julv 2002 the buffers were enhanced with trees and shrubs. The location of Wetland A is shown in the Location Map included in the Appendix (Figure I). The City has compensated for 1,500 square feet of filled wetland by the creation of 3,300 square feet of wetland. Buffer averaging includes the enhancement of 12,922 square feet in exchange for the 9,595 s$ure feet of buffer impacted from construction. A l0-foot wide gravel pedestrian path has been installed on the west side of Wetland A. 1.1.2Wetland B Wetland B is located near Rainier Street at the north end of the CT pipeline project. The location of Wetland B is shown in the Location Map included in the Appendix (Figure I). Wetland B was impacted by the CT pipeline construction with the temporary disturbance of 9,750 square feet ofthe buffer and permanent disnrrbance of 4,500 square feet of the buffer. Measures to mitigate fis imFacts include enhancing approximately 6,700 square feet of the disturbed right of way. Bollards were installed at the end of Rainier, 186, and 206 Streets to prevent motorized access into the mitigation area. 1.1.3 Planting and Maintenance of Wefland A and B The majority of plants were installed on December 14 and 15, 1998 by Matia Contractors of Ferndale, WA with the remainder installed in January 1999. Many of.the shrubs were bare-rooted or installed as live stakes and were seasonally dormant at the time of planting. Mid winter is not the best time of year to plant; optimum planting months are October or April. According to the maintenance agreement the Matia Contactor was responsible for the maintenance of the planted species for one year after final planting to ensure their zurvival. Records show that no maintenance was done except minimal irrigation in Wetland AZone #Zby The City Of Port Townsend Water Department. Recorded plant mortality during the monitoring of 1999 was high so Matia Contractor returned in the fall (November 7, 2000) and replaced many plants: 2 vine maple, 8 serviceberry, 56 red-osier dogwood, 25 oceanspray, 23 twinberry, 3l ninebark, 17 shore pine, 60 cottonwood, 13 quaking aspen" and 13 Douglas' Fir. No irrigation or maintenance was conducted on Wetland A or B after the plants were replaced during the years 2001 or 2002. In the lower regions ofWetland A regular water is present year-round and wetland species (both planted and native volunteers returning to the site) are thriving without any irrigation. 2.0 Methodology Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. has been retained to collect the data and report on the mitigation monitoring for the CT pipeline. Monitoring was completed on July 18, 2002. Ollrnpic Wetland Resources- Inc. CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Report Page 2 Jull'2002 2.1 Projecl Goals and Objectives The primary goal for this project is to compensate for unavoidable impacts from the construction of the CT Pipeline. Wetland loss is to be compensated at a replacement ratio of 2'.1and the function and values of disturbed buffers are to be increased with native plantings. Environmental objectives are to enhance the structural and biological diversity of the site and to further protect the water quallty of the wetland by upgrading the buffers through a revegetation plan. 2.2 Monitoring Methodology Monitoring methodology includes counting individual trees, shrubs, and emergents to determine plant zurvivorship, habitat density, and general condition of planted species. Trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants were planted in well-defined plant communities and zones. Planting areas in both Wetlands A and B are small enough in size that all individual plants were counted. Actual survival percentages were calculated by comparing numbers of plants observed against total numbers planted. Percentages do not include species that did not survive the initial planting. Survival rates are listed on the monitoring forms, totals are averaged as total percent zurvival for each plant community. Monitoring forms for each of the plant communities are included in the Appendix (Figures IV and V). 2.2.1 Determining Survival Rates of Trees, Shrubs, and Emergents Wetland A has been divided into two zones (Zone #l and Zone#2) to facilitate documentation of species. Quantitative data were gathered using the monitoring forms to determine the survival rate of tree, shrub, and emergent species within the plant communities. Information presented on monitoring forms includes plant names (common and scientific), type (tree, shrub, herb), numbers planted, plant community (mixed upland forest, scrub/shrub wetland, scrub/shrub upland), general condition of planted species (alive, stressed, dead), and percent survival rate. Also recorded is the presence ofnatives that are naturalizing from adjacent populations and invasive non-native weed species. 2-2.2 Documenting Wetland Ghanges with Photographs Photographic monitoring provides a method for documenting vegetative changes over time. Five permanent photopoints at Wetland A (two photopoints in Zone I and three rnZone 2) and four photopoints in Wetland B have been established. Photopoint locations and photographs are included in the Appendix (Figures II, IIL VI, VII, and VIII). 3.0 Monitoring Schedule This report represents the forth year of monitoring following initial plant installation in December 1998 (with further installation in January 1999 and November 2000). Monitoring will continue for 5 years (until the year 2003). Ollmpic Wetland Resources. Inc. CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Report Page 3 Julv 2002 The Monitoring and Maintenance Schedule is outlined in Table I Table 1. Monito and Maintenance Schedule 4.0 Results and Discussion Total survival rates of trees and shrubs introduced to Wetland A (Zone I and Zone 2) has decreased from last year's monitoring from 77o/o to 59o/o. Survival rates have also decreased in Wetland B from 77oh to 63%o. The plants planted in November of 20p0 are not zurviving on either site without minimal maintenance or water during the dry seasons as required by the plan. The City of Port Townsend CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Plan (1999) states: 3.4 Maintenance and Weed Control. .... It is recommended that weeding be conducted once or twice a year for I years (first year this is done by contractor) afler final planting is complete. The City will provide all maintenance for the 3 years after that time under the direction of the Public Works Director. 3.5 Irrigation... . .. Most plonts must be inigated to augment rainfall during the months of May through September. Trees and shrubs require a minimum of I inch of water per week. Inigation must continue for 3 years after finol planting is complete to ensure the success of the revegetation project. After three years plonts should be able to survive with no watering. The City has installed a l-inch diameter pipe at both Wetlnrd A and Wetland B to irrigote all planted material. 4.1 Wetland A 4.1.1 Mixed Upland Forest Survival The survival rate in the mixed upland forest (Zone I and 2) was moderate, at 50%. Some native populations, including red alder and salal, are spreading. Ninebarlq planted in 2000, is healthy but covered with weeds. Natural water present in the low-lying area is critical for water loving plants such as willows, cottonwoods, ninebarh and dogwood. The Douglas firs are hardy but five of the Ollmpic Wetland Resources. Inc. CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Repon Fall 1 998 Spring 2000 Fall 2001 Spnng Fall 1999 1999 Fall Spring 2000 2001 Spnng Fall 2002 2002 Spnng Fall 2003 2003MaintenanceDec lru"Nor' None None lNone NonelNone lNone lNone NonelNone lNone lNoneMay.Oct lMut- Yes Planting Maintenance lrrigation Replace plants as needed no Monitoring 9/00 1 7to28t99 8/99 9/00 1 7t02 Vegetation and Habitat Photopoint Annuat Report 9199 91019100 7102 i+4+++.++.i+.i+.;+.;1 i+;+;+;+;+.;+.i+.;tj Page 4 July 2002 large Shore pines are standing dead. These trees blew over after the initial planting and were staked in January 2001. 4.1.2 Scrub/Shrub Wetland Survival The overall zurvival rate within the scrub/shrub wetland (Zone 2) was moderate, at 70Yo. The deer population has impacted several planted species. There are signs of grazing and the deer are rubbing their antlers, removing bark from the small trees. Fewer numbers of aspen, dogwood, and cedars were counted this year than last. Cottonwood, planted as live stakes, were present and healthy in the moist areas of the wetland. Most of the willows (Pacific, Scouler's, and Hooker's), planted as live stakes, have had a very good success rate in the wet areas bordering the standing water and below the parking area; trees are from 5 to l0 feet tall. 4.1.3 Scrub/Shrub Upland Survival Findings reveal a low to moderate zurvival rate of 52Yo of species in the Scrub/Shrub Upland plant community, even after the replanting in 2000. Most of the plants in this community are in Zone #I, north of Wetland A. Conditions on the exposed hillside are harsh and dry: not even the most drought tolerant native plants will survive at this location if not maintained until the plants become established; this requires minimal irrigation and maintenance. Over 50 salmonberry and 40 Indian plums were planted; only 4 zurvived. Both snowberry and oceanspray are present but tley are small and stressed due to lack of water. The dominant species at this location is a mixture of grasses (planted fescue, bentgrass, rye, and velvet grass) that stabilize the slope. Several shore pines and firs are standing dead at this location. 4.1.4 Weedy Species Weedy species identified at Wetland A include Himalayan blackberry, Canadian thistle, and Scot's broom. Weedy species represent far less than 10% cover; this meets compliance with performance standards and projea goals. 4.2 Wefland B Wetland B has been re-vegetated along the access road to the water tower and adjacent corridor roads, which consist of narrow strips surrounded by forests. Desirable native vegetation, which grows nearby, is dense and is a great asset in re-vegetating the disturbed area. Presently, small alders and salal far exceed the numbers of planted species. 4.2.1 Mixed Upland Forest Survival Survival rate for the mixed upland forest layer is down significantly from last year (94%o) for planted species at 55oh. The Douglas' firs that were planted in 2000 were dead or extremely stressed. Native populations of alder are forrring a grove in the southeast corner and native salal and trailing blackberry are forming a dense carpet. The 25 sword fern, 5 cottonwood, and the 10 elderberry planted did not zurvive. Four of the fifteen ninebark survived in the wet area and appear healthy. One 4' aspen planted in November 2000 is still surviving but may be crowded out by the 12' alders that surround it. Ollmpic Wetland Resources. Inc. CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Report Page 5 Julr 2002 4.2.2 Scrub/Shrub Wefland Survival There was 83% survival rate in this plant community; hawthorns and serviceberry were both present but stressed by the drought conditions. 4.2.3 Scrub/Shrub Upland Survival All plants observed were healthy, with a 56Yo survival rate. Snowberry planted along the access road has a low survival rate but native populations are rapidly spreading. Only one Hookers' willow was observed this year although 10 were planted. 4.2.4 Weedy Species Weedy species identified include Himalayan blackberry, Canadian thistle, curly dock, and tansy r€wort. Grass is the dominant ground cover along the access road; weedy species are not a major problem at this time. 4.3 Recom mendations for Replacements Pre-construction edge vegetation (including alders, thimbleberry, rose, essanspriry, and salal) is spreading to disturbed areas in both Wetland A and Wetland B. Replacement planting in either wetland is not recommended unless a maintenance and watering plan will be followed. 4.4 Action ftems For Wetland A and Weiland B Weed/mow invasive weeds, especially around plants (fall) Remove all Scot's broom (annually) Re-evaluate goals and re-vegetation plan according to current success rates Determine whether current vegetation cover is adequate or more plants should be included 5.0 Summary This report represents year four of the five year monitoring for the CT pipeline as required by the City of Port Townsend Building and Community Development Department. Performance standards are evaluated after five years and require survivorship of SOYo or greater of all planted species with an overall plant cover of 80% or greater of planted and desirable volunteer species. Dutiog the2002 monitoring period the zurvivorship of planted species is below the projected standards (Wetland A average 59%, WetlandB 63%) but the overall aerial cover is greater than 80% desirable species. This dominant cover consists of grass from the original seed mix that was spread after the initial project construction. The "weed species" constitute far less than l0% aerial cover at either restoration site, thus meeting prescribed performance standards. Both Scot's broom and Himalayan blackberry, observed at both sites, should be eliminated (not just cut) since they often overcome planted species. Olrmpic Wetland Resources- Inc. CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Report Page 6 Julv 2002 The locations with the highest plant mortality areZone #1 in Wetland A and along the access road of Wetland B. These sites are both very dry and dominated by a grass cover. Appropriate upland natives were planted but due to lack of any irrigation or maintenance very few plants zurvived. Fortunately in Wetland B the adjacent vegetation is a dense cover of native tre.es and shrubs that will spread over time. Zone#l of Wetland A is larger in size and will not develop a naturally vegetated layer easily without replanting. A patch of Canadian thistle is growing larger every year. In both wetlands plants are thriving where there is shade or in areas where naturally moist soils exist. Standing water was present in Wetland A and planted species of willow and cottonwood were thriving. Original environmenial goals and objectives should be evaluated. Original goals include wetland and buffer replacement, increasing functions and values of the wetland, water quality treatment, increasing species in wetland, enhancing plant diversity, removal of non-indigenous and weed species, and creating a pedestrian path. Most goals have been met; one primary performance standard not met is the zurvival rate of planted species. In Wetland A 484 plants still zurvive from the original 892 trees, shnrbs, and emergents planted. In Wetland B 64 plants are surviving from the original 164 introduced to the site. Final evaluation for this projea is after next year's monitoring. I would be happy to discuss any slanges you may like to make prior to the final evaluation next yea.r. Ollmpic Wetland Resources. Inc. CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Report Page 7 Julv 2002 Appendix Figures I Location Map Wetland A and B il Wetland A Monitoring Zones and Photopoint Locations III Wetland B Monitoring Area and Photopoint Locations Monitoring Forms [V Wetland AZones I and2V Wetland B PhotopointsVI Wetland A Photopoints l-3 VII Wetland A Photopoints 4 &, 5 VIII Wetland B Photopoint s 7. , 2, 3 , &. 4 Figrne Wetland A Monitoring Zones and Photopoint Locations Photopoint # 3 II Photopoint # 4 Photo,point # 2 /- ._ frtrrt I \2 a 'ia + f! dtj- :_-trE )C IHdiryffi ./lswrc,d- DETMS PLAAI "=*fl#otopoint# I --> Photopoints .ir. - E i:' .. Olynpr kllrJ lerourcer, lrc 856 50h lhal PorlhrncrJ, U 98368 160 385-6132 Iirle fi Pipeline Uetlond A fronitorirq'Zmer md Pholopoinh ;JFisure tr' luh 2002 hb #: kole $ili 0ial: Port ua 98368 trty of Porl Istrnmd, UA 5210 Kuln Figure TfT. Wetland B Monitoring Area and Photopoint Locations Monitoring Area Photopoint Photopoint# 3 4 WETLA tD B g,tFFER MtTIGATtot\t .!_Sotopoint # 2 Photopoint # I ccs€gDUE8ED.s. c.ta- sxv,ot a.trs s -/aovsi''''Eraaze,E- Pl-AA/ -- - : t'41a -\-__ :!l- v5:t-ldo-a .,t -02ctlprEFEr sca --> Photopoints ttEv I sALrAGeo.n te€Es €.< -'f^;': ..:? 0lyrqir UellcJ lcoura, llr 85650h5hd Port hmdJ, tA 98368 360385$32 IiHc fl Pioeline kllond B toniloring'fum od Pholopoinh liat Ci+y of Porl lotrnmd, UA 5210 Kuln lolc Jh€d F'igur€ Porl UA 0oic hb f: luly 2002 Figure VI. Photopoifi#l Photopoint#2 CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigatioq Mgntlgring ?002 Wetland A Photopoints 1-3 July 18, 2002 Olympic l{ellond Renunet, lnc. Photopoint #3 Figure VI. Figure VII. Photopoint#4 Photopoint#5 2002 July 18, CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Wetland A Photopoints 4 and 5 0lympic lllellond Retounet, lnc. Flowering Twinberry Figure VII. Figure VIIL CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Morritoring 2002 Wetland B Photopoints 1,2,3, and 4 July 18,2002 Photopoint#l Photopoirrt#3 Photopoint#2 0lympic llletlond Renurcer, lnc. Photopoint #4 Figure VIII. City of Port TownsendCT PipelineALegendA/.,v u',,I Wet Areas/!g/4gt pipeline/\/ 2 foot contour,,'\, to foot contour,lpBasin Boundary,".,' Critical Drainage Corridorgg Basin Numberl-_l Orynership ParcelsFtqvRr5N1 inch = 400 feettI,\(:1JaaI0aoahlt{\{IittIgIaI_.)\)a001{riIiRuinl: C;"K+Ii{',!atIIaJl\)r itl:jt/eo-t Jt'it? (,.r''rCrC'rItII] Figure v. wetland B Date: Julv 18.2002CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Monitoring FormCommon NameSpecies NameForestMixedTotalsScrub/Shrub WetlandSCrataegus douglasiiDouglas hawthornSAmelanchier alnifoliaServiceberryTotalsScrub/Shrub UplandSSvmphoricarpos albusSnowberrySSalix hookBrianaHookers willowSOemleria cerasifurmisIndian-plumObserver: D.Llewellin(l)E6rcosaloOal€q)q)0!ottcONEE(Dt(l)OEoltecltr€q)t(Dt)Eo+-EeFr FlEEI--* EE A =o&t'rEotra!ac)6ACommentst2/98ll99t2/98I 1/00121981rl0012198U99t2198t219812198t2/9812/9812/9850Vog30h560/oTotalsList all invasive non natives: Himalayan blackberry, Canadian thistle, and tansy ragwort.Other natives that are spreading to site: Madrona, Nutka rose, oceanspray, salal, alder, snowbenl'.Survival Rate of Species Planted 63ohSurvival rate does not include species that did not survive initial planting.0413I00224420IIIDid not survive initial0o/o0004l0dead tees observed30o/oJ74610tree observedbe overalders25%I4004not survive initial0%00005not survive initial0%000I25stressed100%22227o/o430Il5li'om nativer6%444625Very thick stand ofto 20'tallt00%20202220RedSambucus racemosaSFirTPseudotsuga meraesiiTPopulus trbmuloidesCottonwoodTPopulus balsamiferaSword FernHPolystichum munitumShore pineTPinus contortaNinebarkPhysocarpus capitatusSSalalGaultheria shallonSRed alderTAlnus rubra42observed67%44566Small but healthyt00%22022t527oft00%15l5l51515with alders20%2121010Covered with salal and fiailing blackberry47%77t2t215Figure V. Figure IV. Wetland A ZONES # I and # 2CT Pipeline Wetland Mitigation Monitoring FormCommon Name SPecies NameMixed Upland Forest12198y991219812198ll99t2198TotalScrub/Shrub Wetland12198t2t98Date: July 18.2002Observer: D.Llewellin55o/oCommentsa)6lralLasGIcclE!)oetEts6lg6lO\CFO\OE( o\. OEF{CI.:.j ri r-lrDtl)a)Eli>>v)--rr<'E6,.A.A6)Latl Cllth :thrd fr)e2,2.xo otr N N€c)Eclaq)t.6a(D€coat2198N/At2198121981219812198t2198t21984520sSambucus racemosaRed elderberry11TPseudotsusa mewesiiDouslas Fir0HPolvstichum munitumSword Fern53TPinus contortaShore pine40SPhysocarpus caPitatusNinebark6SGaultheria shallonSalall4TAlnus rubraRed alderNever survived original Planting0%000048Several fre,es are thriving,over 15'tall with new growth44%l11113t725None obssrved0%02t22119Stressed, many large trees standing dead73%81111Weed covered but healthy, plants small5r%40270778Small plant, original plant near large firsspreading5o/o6152201192' to20'hees, healthy and sPreading100%t432313t47TThuia plicataWestern cedar, red35TSalix scouleranaScouler's willow2925SSalix lucida var. lasiandraPacific willowITPyrus fuscaWestern0SPrunus virgiana4TPopulus tremuloides11TPopulus balsamiferaCottonwood205SLonicera involucrataBlack126SHolodiscus discolorOcean34sCrataegus douglasi!,--.Douglas hawthorn35SCornus sericeaRed-osier dogwoodIIIIYoung treils healthy88%78588Willows aie thriving65%3535205454Willows are thriving100%5435355454Small tree healthyt3%I22)8Did not survive initial planting0%000I8Aspen areismall and have signs of deer gtazng36%462211Cottonwcirds emerging from grasses, plantedas live stakes100%1l000l1pGnts no&ering and healthy, some signs of grazing54%3016l81056Oceansprdy inTnne I is stressed, barely out competing grass100%181818Ptu"trrrfit64%7771111Plants heaithy but havebeen grazed80%3540202044Total70o/oFigure IV. Figure IV. ContinuedWetlandA ZONES#l and#Zt2t98a)EGIa6htasooctEErl)trDa,eo!hat6toEGI.tq5E EEEiialllJ:*<Ea)O* E Et'{ Clit :tlrT1 ri2ZZxo otrNNComments121981219812t98r2198t219812198TotalCommon Name SPecies NameScrub/Shrub Upland6525SWphoricarposalbusSnowberry36SSalix hookerianaHookers willow2sRubus spectabilisSalmonberrySRosa pisocarpaWild clustered rose56sRosa nutkanaNootka rose2sOemleriaIndian-plumITFraxinus latifoliaOregon ashIsAmelanchierService-berry7-one #l is on the south side of Wetland A and includes all the area south of the bioswale (Paula's creek).Zone #2is on the north side of Wetland A and includes all the area north of the bioswale.520h1Snowbeny spreading from nearbY98%9037353592Willowhealthy78%3616264646Fewseen4%20355627o/o151515l056andl00o/o56l3131056not survive well5%20034lasir is still100%IIIOne smallobserved6%162218List all invasive non nativesreedCanadianScotsseen on site withlocation:other native species that are appearing on site include thimbleberry, red-flowering currant, and oceanspray salal, alder, horsetarl, cattail, and trailing blackberry'fromwetland tnZonelCanadian thistle iswall and in the top corner of Zone Ithistle are growing beneath the retainingblackberry and CanadianTotalsSurvival of Species Planted59(JhFigure IV.