Fortuna City Council
March 20, 2023

0 0
0 For Office Use:

Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Revised ~~~~:b 27, 2018)
Alliance I Final database#: I Final vegetation type: Association I. LOCATIONAUENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTlON I cin:le: Releve or {RA - Database II: Date: Name of r etorder: \L . 'IV\ ~ ~ \../ I(E,~~e:o?- 4 !~ '?-\ Other surveyors:

UID: Location Name:

GPS nam~: Ac<(jl...) For Releve only: Bearing•, left axis at 10 point __ of Lon~: l ort side UTME UTMN Zone: II NAD83 GPS error: ftJ mJ PDOP __ --- --- - --- - -- '- Decimal degrees: LA - - ---- LONG ------ - - - --- GPS within tand ~/ No If No, cite f'rom GPS to stand: distanco (m) _ _ bearing• __ inclination ° _ _ and : Base polat ID Projtcltd UTI\b: UTr.tE UTMN
Camera Name: {>~ Cardinal photos at ID point: \-..:£ SW Other photos:

Stand Slu (acres):@ l .S, >5 1_ Plot Area m'): 100 I __ 1 Plot Dimensions __ x __ m Exposur e, Actuat •: __ NE NW SE ~ Flat Variable I Steepness, Actual •: _ _ o• us m I 0 > ZS Topo~:raphy: Macro: top upper .• . lower bottom I Micro: convex nat concave Cundulatl'hm '\..

Geology code: Soli Texture code: I Upland or \~ rcle one) % Surface cover: (Incl. outcrops) md am) (25-60cm) (7.5·25cm) (2mm-7.Scm) (loci sand, mud) H10: \ BA Stems:,>S Lltter O Bedrock:Q Boulder: 0 Stone: 0 Cobble: I Grave1:_3 Fines ~(J100% % Current year biotu~n ..J..__ Past bioturbation present? Yes I No 1 o/o Hoof punch _l__ Fire evidence: Yes I o ircle one) If yes, describe in Site history section, including date of fire, if known.

Site hlstor:y, stand ag m.ments: p 1 C-.::>&R~5~*'~ ("'(~~!._:_ ~ ---- - -- -- - ---"- - -- -
- - - - - - - - -
-- -- -
Disturbance code I I ntensity (L,M,R): I I I I I "Other" I n. HABITAT DESCRIPTION
Tree DBH : T l (<l" dbb), T2 (l..(j" dbh@tl" b~l-24" dbh), TS (>24" dbh), T6 multi-layered (T3 orT4 1ayerW>derTS, ><>O% covcr) Shrub: Sl s,eedling (<3 yr. old), S% young (<l% dead) S3 ture (t-25% de4d), ~decadent (>25% dead) Herbaceous@:t2" plant ht.), H2 (>12" ht.)
Desert RJparian Tree/Shrub: 1 (<.!ft. stem ht.), 2 (2-lOft. ht), 3 (10-20ft. llt.), 4 (>20ft. ht.) Desert Palm/Joshua Tree: 1 (<t.S" b:ISc diameter), 2 (1.5-6" diam.), 3 (>6" dirun.) Ill. INTERPRETATION OF STAND
Field-assessed vegetation Alliance name: ~ '&;\ \.~A~2 ~~~ Field-assessed Association name (optional):==\'\)( -= 1 ( = ~ ~ ===: == \. S . ~ S:w..Q~~ Adjacent Alliances/direction: 1 1 Confidence in Alliance Identification: L @> H Explain: _S'()Lc .o~~orrN \'V\:l..k~ 1"\tfn r!aN\\MI"l' Pbenolol!.v (E,P L): Herb Shrub Tree(:> Other Identification or mappln~ Information: 0 . -·
Page I
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form \/J·. (Revised March 27, 2018) Data base#: H:: VJX:m).. SPECIES SHEET
IV. VEGETATION OESCIUPTION
o/o Non Vase cover : T otal o/o Vase Veg cover:~
%Cover - Conifer tree I Hardwood tree: ..Q_I iJ.Q. Regenerating Tree: ~ Shrub: 5S,_ Herbaceous: _Q_ Height Class -Conifer tree I Hardwood tree: __ I ___.r_ Regenerating Tree: _ _ Shrub: ~ baceous:~ Height classes: l-<112m, 2•112-lm, 3•1-2m, 4a2-5m, 5• 5-IOm, 6• 10-15m, 7• 15-20m, 8-20-35m, 9• 35-50m, HP.>50m Stratum categories: ~Tree, A- SApling, E ~SEedling, S - Shrub, H• Herb, N• Non-vascular '~~• Cover Intervals for reference: r =trace, + = <1%, 1-5%, >5-15%, >15-25%, >25-50%, >50-75%, >75% Stratum Sped es Y. cover c FlnalspecleJ determination
-r ~h'>< \{.~· a_n~ ;l, rc:~c \ \ ~c,
I t..h'\\. \0)~ ~~(\· ( ,.,
T('\ "-~\' .)( -~~\S c~lli'\ tR ~ I- rV'osi\'{ S . .Si+O....U,.ji5\-o 5 . 1 S' ,I ;;a~\ ~
5 ~, v.,\ \ ~W_> (C.:: ~(,) 6<...:> -1--r- \,..:. * csV""Cri-ap ~ lr ...... 1 vV" ~c:,b t'\A .A I - I ~L\r }vv.j \.. d "l;.,p-0.{'" I i-"l i"'\\.)("'\ I..AJ\~~ ~~ \
~ r."'l. <'<""A ~~ "l
\V t. ~ \-t ~ \ol\', wl 'Z-
~ C_ i',.e+-~~ NA.~~ I
_\L'S. _._<;-1. t ~'I( l <._.I(\ \e1f~<... l" ~~
Unusual species:

Page2
0 0
0 For Office Use:

Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (RilViscd Murch 27, 2018) I Final database II: I Finn! vegdatlon type: Alliance
Assuclutlon /
I. LOCATIONAUENVffiONMENTAL DESCRIPTION I circle: Relev~ or lRA) Database II: Date: Name of ncorder: . r ~.-:.vv.\. \ .\.. f:NtJ\00.3 t...I J.-\ Other surveyors:

UID: Location Name:

GPS name: ~ For Relev6 only: Bearing• , left axis at 10 point _ _ of Lon~: I §hort side UTME ----- - UTMN --- - --- Zone: 11 NAD83 GPS error: ftJ mJ POOP _ _ Decimal degrees: LAT -- LONG --- - - - --- - ----- GPS within tand~ No If No, cite from OPS 10 stand: dislance (m) __ bearing• _ _ inclination • __ and record: Base polat JD Projected UTMs: UTME UTMN
~a era Name: ~......_.'t'\.IL
Other photos:

Cardinal photos at ID nt: \-.::)(....OS~
Stand Size (acres): <1, >S I PlotArea (m2
): ~ 1 PlotDimcnslons _ _ x _ _ m I RA Radius ill m
Exposure, Actual •: __ NE NW SE SW Flat Variab I Steepness, Actual •: _ _ o• ·-soB >25 Topography: Macro: top upper mid lower bottom I Micro: convex ~co~ ve und'iiiatlng Geology code: Soli Texture code: I Upland or Wetla d/Rlpart~ (circle one) % Surface cover: (Incl. outcrops) (~cmdiam) (25~m) (7.S-2Scm) (2mm-7.Scm) (loci sand, mud) H20: \C:) BA Stems: Y1- Liller: 1.-S Bedrock: CJ oul~er:C> Stone: I Cobble: z... Gravel: ) 0 Fines: \ 0 100"/o (• Current year bioturbation _ _ Past bioturbation present? Yes I No I % Hoof punch __ Fire evidence: Yes I No (circle one) If yes. describe in Site history section, including date office, if known. ~!!~ tory, stand ~~mm nts: JJ~~ _f?.~oi' ~ . ~y aG+-u\_Z..\ ~ - .trocv:\ ()~~ of \t..e...ci~M . C.Cro~'~ · _ _ - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - -
.
-- . - -
--- - ---- ~
- - ---- -- - - - - -- -- -
Disturbance code I Intensity (L,M,H): I I I I I "Other" I ll. HABITAT DESCRIPTJON
Tree DBB ; T1 (<l" dbh), 1'2 (1-0 dbb),~~)~bh), T5 (>24"dbb), T6multi-layered tnorT41aycrunde ,>60%co~~<r) "'"''' Sl """"'""' ~· • ., ij~8( % -~ (0-25% dad), S4 ·~'"' (>25% """' Herbaceous: H I (<1 2" plant ht.) H2 (> 2" ht.)
Des~ Rlpartan Tree/Shrub: 1 ft. stem ht.), 2 (2-lOft. hl), 3 (I0-20ft. bt.), 4 (>20ft. bt.) Desert Palm/Joshua Tree: 1 (<1.5" base diameter), 2 (I.S-0" diam.), 3 (>6" diam.) lll. INTERPRETATION OF STAND
Field-assessed vegetation Alliance name: sa~\x ~a :~ \f (2\ <,. 1\U i ;t..V'I~ Field-assessed Association name (optional):

Adjacent Alliances/direction: I I
Confidence In Alliance identlfic.ation: L @ H Explain: )\(XI'\ 1 h \ $ d. w~r~\*'t Pbenoloey (E,P L): Herb Shrub Tree Other ldentUlcatlon or mapplne Information:

Page I
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Revised Mpn:h 27, 2018)
Database#: ~E: MOCJ:S SPECIES SHEET
IV. VEGETATION DESCRIPTION
%Non Vase cover:_ Total % Vase: Veg ve ~
%Cover - Conifer tree 1 Hurdwood tree: __ lfQS Regenerating Tree: _L_ Shrub: Ld_Q rbaceous:~ Height Class -Conifer tree I Hardwood tree: __ t.:.!,e_ Regenerating Tree: ~ Shrub: ..!::L... Herbaceous: ..:::b::_ ~ight cla.sse.s: 1-<112m, 2•112-lm, 3=1-2m, 4-2-Sm, 5•5-IOm, 6-10- 15m, 7•15-20m, 8•20-35m, 9~35-50m, 10=>50m Stratum categories: T=Tree, A • SApling, E • SEedling, S =Shrub, H= Herb, Na Non-vascular % Cover Intervals for r efer ence: r =trace + = <1%, 1-5%, >5-15%. >15-25%, >25-50%, >50-75% >75% Stratum ~cles v. covtr c Final species determination
-1 I Sa\\'>( ~,iW<~ (?K,\..)\ \S ;(;..~ .~ \~,~rD 0 \ <.. 7c~C\~ I~ ~ \V"I \.) ....... .n~'ov ~ \ (~ (\ fJ I G\ J~ 10 .. ,oh .:: r.\,-\,.~\,,<..... tO ¥ i>J\il"'~~ "'"'~'\... ~ l /" . U I \
< I R 1-v.\.)~ ~\~~ lce:...O ~
. ~\ I"Y.1-AJ UdV ~ ?t.
'v II cr\ wa. iN Dtoc ..r.\.h ?
H fin .. \ r ~ Alt-,u· ~ -c<= ~ ~
S..r ~)0\~i'.\ t r~ :'L....
(-..J I.1'Y\ 1\.f) -Q.( rNL \
t'to \C..u<... l~M-b~> \
.\-{ .p r <S,l'o.. .._;,r> -..rt::>.\0. N\.-a 1._
(\)(' or \. ~ I
P,..h -HcJ,..wv'\'Y\vA~. ~ I
r') .,. ~,... ..... "d, . I > <.. "':l, ~
(Z.::l.ft. V'\ l".U \ U'- . _ _..... <.,." \
\--.h.~"Tlf-F ,,..r 1"\ l c_·, "'~ '2..
~UA '-""\ ~\'>( ~e.H'il"\~ \ r .....
'
.

Unusual species:

0 0
0 '
Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Revised Man:h 27, 2018)
For Office Use: I Final database#: I Final vegetation type: A.lllance Association
I. LOCATIONAUENYIRONMENT AL DESCRIPTION I circle: Releve Database#: Date: Nameofrecorder: _h~~
~~(P'-\ '--\ /Bf?- \ Other surveyors:

UID: Location Name: -~· "'ll .. ~
r , ~RA )
\....._./
GPS name: J:t...c ( o..0 For Releve only: Bearing•, left axis sl iD point~ of Long I Short side UTME ------ UTMN ------- Zone: II NAD83 OPS error: ftJ mJ POOP __ Decimal degri:es: LAT ----- - -- LONG --------- GPS within stand'r & I No If No, cite from GPS to stand: distance (m) __ bearing• __ inclination ° -- and nx:ord: Base point ID Projected UTMs: UTME UTMN Camera Name: \CV..~
Other photos:

CardJnal p~otos at lD point: tv~W
Stand Stze (acres): · <~>5 I Plot Area (m1): 1001...., __ 1 Plot Dimensions __ x __ m I RARadiu~m Exposure, Actual":--·- E N}V SE SW Flat Variab~ Steepness, Actual ": __ ® e > 5-25~ >25 Topography: Macro: top upp~ lower bottom I t(~~cnvex na~~~ undulating Geology code: Soil Texture code: or Wetland/Riparian (circle one) % S~ce cover: (Incl. outcrops) (>60cm diam) (25~m) (7.5-25cm) (2mm-7.5cm) (Incl sand, mud) it'\( H:O: BA Sttms: . L..\t:titter:l-\f) Bedrock(:> Boulder: cJ Stone: () Cobble: \ Gravel:"'(_ Fines: l () =100% % Current year bioturbation__ Past bioturbation present? Yes /i~ 1 o/o Hoof punc.b __ Fire evidence: Yes I (R}(circle one) If yes, describe in Site history section, inc uding date of fife, iflcnown. _§ite history" sta!ld a.ce,e.o~nts: ~.s A. __ -~~ M.~ ~~--~ ~<A"\ '""\.ed ~....0. ~ MoL\~ f'\o..L\:;.::_pce.v t __ ,_ ()C) a~l ~,c\R._s_ \: ~~o~~~\l .;. ~~AXX>d.S1 tM.~c.h ~ ~\~ \ a_~~ :(6.s4:.ar_+LNt ,(\_~~~ __ -- -- -- -- -- .. - --- ·- --- --- ·-- -·- -------- - - - -·~·. - -· -- --··----------~------- ---- - --- - -- ·--- -- --· - - --- Disturbance code /Intensity (L,M,H): I '---'- I I "Other" I U. HABIT AT DESCRIPTION
Tree OBH :Tl (<!"dbh), T2 (1-6"dbb), !1 (6-ll"dbh), T~4"d~~4"dbh), J1 multi-layered (T3 orT41ayerunderTS,>®%cqver) Shrub: 'Sl seedling (<3 yr. old), S2 young (<l%dead), S3 mature (1-25% dead), S4 decadent (>25% dead) Herbaceous: e" plant ht.), H2 t>l2" bt.)
Desert Riparian Tree/Shrub: 1 (<2ft. stem bt.), 2 (2-lOft. bt.), 3 (10-2011. hL), 4 (>2011. ht.) Desert Palm/Joshua Tree: 1 (<1.5" base diameter), 2 (1.5-6" diam.), 3 (>6" diam.) Ill. INTERPRETATION OF STAND
:::;-eq on ,l ~ -$-e,.,N\. Q.e .c ~' ~ ~ 1\l\iYl(.& . Field-assessed vegetation Alliance name:

Field-assessed Association name (optional):

Adjacent Alliances/direction: I I
Confidence In Alllance ldentiOcatJon: LG)u Explain:

Phenoloey (E,P L): Herb Shrub Tree Other Identification or mappine information:
- -
Page I
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
~
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Revised March 27, 20 18)
Database#: ~~ SPECIES SHEET
IV. VEGETATION DESCRIPTION
%Non Vase cover: Total ty. Vase Veg cover:..:::I2
%Cover - Conifer tree I Hardwood tree: ~.!L- Regenerating Tree: .G._ - Shrub: , .LQ_ Herbaceous:
~ '
Height Class -Conifer tree I Hardwood tree: 1.£l_ RegeneratlnK Tree: 0 Shrub: ~ Herbaceous: ----\.-- Height classes: l-<112m, 2=112-lm, 3•1-2m, 4• 2-5m, 5•5-IOm, 6•10-15m, 7=15-20m, !!•20-35m, 9=35-50m, 10=>50m Stratum categories: T-Tree, A = SApling, E • SEedling, S • Shrub, H= Herb, N .. Non-vascular % Cover Intervals for reference: r "' trace, +=<I%, 1-5%, >5-15%, >15-25%, >25-50%, >50-75%, >75% Stratum Species Vo cover c Flnal1peclea determination
\ \-0~<... '(" d j i ~ ~ \ <;
I ~..,., l"W~ <-- ~ .... /\/l ~ (,. \0 J.i. A.\~\ <,~~' ._ -:2,
v
p r- 1 -r~\ t'\ ~a W""' vUJ 1-
S, ~ ~ r..r.. .• \a' tihr ~k. 6.1'~ 1
V'2.\\-,p~ '~f\r, • .-.~\-."' I
~ l1 \n\.J \ ~ ~ .r"\ ; '\ ,..\ ' ' < rt~K"~t ...-c.~'J,~;:< ~. 1'\\ ~ r t \.--A....-L~ ~ 0.\.1\ 'l. { i < I
v <:.u h.)( l ~ <; \~ A6\..." ~
\
,..\ te.-v-r..w.v> J\~ <.. 1" "\."~.r:l. v 'A Cv W\. ~ r 1,.1\0. 1... .I..LI-,.. u.., 1-:j.J\ A_l - {. ~
~- .~-t~ c-":\ .::;1 O.u ~ lD
Tv ~'_u. \~""" ,.;, ~ l6 ~ ]g ;.s ro_rGN\ 'l) 1.'
.f""h )~ C~-::t · \
p, :J'\ ~ ~D,J'L\A i
\-l\.velr", ~~ " \ ') r.u ,,. ~-;l 1
' ~~'\ ,-.,-::.. .1\~v.M .... .lor:.\..~ '6
5~ UP ..lo /A 1 .... ., \\ V \
\
Unusual species:

Page2
0 0
0 GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Appendix E – Site Photographs
All photographs taken February 24, 2021
Photo 1. Representative upland conditions, taken along the Highway 101 off ramp.

Photo 2. Representative upland conditions, taken along Highway 101.

GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Photo 3. A downstream view of Ditch 1 located within the Coastal Zone.

GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Photo 4. An upstream view of Ditch 1 located within the Coastal Zone.

GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Photo 5. Mill Creek, considered a Water of the U.S., shown flowing beneath Kenmar Road in the eastern extent of the Project Area.

GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Photo 6. Downstream Mill Creek, adjacent to the interchange road between Kenmar Road and South Fortuna Blvd.

GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Photo 7. Mill Creek, on right, looking upstream towards Kenmar Road.

GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Photo 8. Wetland 1 contained ponding water and strongly hydric soil and vegetation. Wetland 1 was located along a constructed roadside ditch.

GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Appendix F – NRCS Custom Soil Resource
Report
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Humboldt County,
Central Part,
California
Kenmar Road/US 101
Interchange Project
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
April 12, 2021
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Humboldt County, Central Part, California......................................................13 210—Dungan, 0 to 2 percent slopes...........................................................13 340—Fiedler-Petellen-Nanningcreek complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes.... 14 1010—Urban land-Friendlycity association, 0 to 2 percent.........................17 References............................................................................................................19 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).

Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.

The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.

These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.

Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report
7 Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4491840 4491930 4492020 4492110 4492200 4492290 4492380 4492470 4492560 4491840 4491930 4492020 4492110 4492200 4492290 4492380 4492470 4492560 402470 402560 402650 402740 402830 402920 403010
402470 402560 402650 402740 402830 402920 403010
40° 34' 41'' N
124° 9' 9'' W
40° 34' 41'' N
124° 8' 44'' W
40° 34' 16'' N
124° 9' 9'' W
40° 34' 16'' N N 124° 8' 44'' W
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 150 300 600 900
Feet
0 50 100 200 300
Meters
Map Scale: 1:3,750 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Humboldt County, Central Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 6, Jun 1, 2020
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: May 8, 2019—Jun 21, 2019
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
10 Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 210 Dungan, 0 to 2 percent slopes 1.5 9.4%
340 Fiedler-Petellen-Nanningcreek
complex, 15 to 30 percent
slopes

1.5 9.0%
1010 Urban land-Friendlycity
association, 0 to 2 percent

13.2 81.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 16.1 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.

Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or Custom Soil Resource Report
11 landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.

Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.

These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
12 Humboldt County, Central Part, California
210—Dungan, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hs2j
Elevation: 10 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 80 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F
Frost-free period: 275 to 330 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Dungan and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dungan
Setting
Landform: Fan remnants, alluvial fans, flood-plain steps Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed sources
Typical profile
Ap1 - 0 to 3 inches: silt loam
Ap2 - 3 to 13 inches: silt loam
Bw - 13 to 29 inches: silt loam
C1 - 29 to 37 inches: fine sandy loam
C2 - 37 to 61 inches: silty clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 39 to 61 inches
Frequency of flooding: RareNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 10.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2s
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Ferndale
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
13 Landform: Flood-plain steps
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Arlynda
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Backswamps, depressions, flood-plain steps, meander scars Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Russ
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Natural levees
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
340—Fiedler-Petellen-Nanningcreek complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1j78q
Elevation: 50 to 1,480 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 45 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 330 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Fiedler and similar soils: 32 percent
Petellen and similar soils: 28 percent
Nanningcreek and similar soils: 25 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Fiedler
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 Parent material: Colluvium derived from conglomerate and/or residuum weathered from conglomerate
Typical profile
Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material
A - 1 to 12 inches: loam
Bt1 - 12 to 20 inches: loam
Bt2 - 20 to 41 inches: clay loam
Bt3 - 41 to 60 inches: clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.60 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 11.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Petellen
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Colluvium derived from conglomerate and/or residuum weathered from conglomerate
Typical profile
Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material
A - 1 to 9 inches: gravelly loam
Bt1 - 9 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam
Bt2 - 20 to 48 inches: very cobbly loam
Cd - 48 to 60 inches: very cobbly loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 30 to 79 inches to densic material Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: Moderate (about 6.2 inches)
Custom Soil Resource Report
15 Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Nanningcreek
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Colluvium derived from sandstone and/or residuum weathered from sandstone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 6 inches: loam
Bt1 - 6 to 20 inches: loam
Bt2 - 20 to 30 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt3 - 30 to 60 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 20 to 39 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 9.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Rootcreek
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Salmoncreek
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Custom Soil Resource Report
16 Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
1010—Urban land-Friendlycity association, 0 to 2 percent Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2w91d
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 44 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F
Frost-free period: 300 to 360 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Urban land, residential: 65 percent
Friendlycity and similar soils: 25 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Urban Land, Residential
Setting
Landform: Terraces, alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Friendlycity
Setting
Landform: Terraces, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, tread Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from metamorphic and sedimentary rock Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam
A - 6 to 13 inches: silty clay loam
A/B - 13 to 24 inches: silty clay loam
Bw1 - 24 to 35 inches: silty clay loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
17 Bw2 - 35 to 55 inches: silty clay loam
C - 55 to 67 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 20 to 39 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 9.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Canalschool
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood-plain steps
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Carlotta
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Ferndale
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood-plain steps
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
18 References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 19 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
20 GHD | Wetland Delineation Report - City of Fortuna Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project | 11214735 Appendix G – Record of Climatological
Observations and WETS Table
WETS Table

WETS Station: EUREKA

WFO WOODLEY ISLAND, CA
Requested years: 2001 -
2021
Month Avg Max
Temp
Avg Min
Temp
Avg
Mean
Temp
Avg
Precip
30%
chance
precip less
than
30%
chance
precip
more than
Avg number
days precip

0.10 or more
Avg
Snowfall
Jan 55.4 40.8 48.1 6.16 3.71 7.47 11 0.0
Feb 55.1 40.9 48.0 5.26 3.15 6.38 10 0.0
Mar 56.1 42.5 49.3 5.81 4.03 6.91 11 0.0
Apr 57.5 44.4 50.9 3.68 2.40 4.42 8 0.0
May 59.9 48.0 54.0 1.54 0.65 1.88 4 0.0
Jun 62.5 50.6 56.5 0.67 0.18 0.74 2 0.0
Jul 63.6 52.8 58.2 0.16 0.04 0.16 0 0.0
Aug 64.4 53.4 58.9 0.15 0.05 0.17 0 0.0
Sep 64.4 50.8 57.6 0.77 0.19 0.89 2 0.0
Oct 62.0 47.2 54.6 2.53 0.83 3.02 5 0.0
Nov 58.3 43.4 50.8 4.65 3.23 5.54 9 0.0
Dec 54.9 40.5 47.7 8.41 4.80 10.24 13 0.0
Annual: 33.71 44.70
Average 59.5 46.3 52.9 - - - - -
Total - - - 39.79 75 0.1

GROWING SEASON DATES
Years with missing data: 24 deg = 1 28 deg = 1 32 deg = 1 Years with no occurrence: 24 deg = 20 28 deg = 17 32 deg = 0 Data years used: 24 deg = 20 28 deg = 20 32 deg =
20 Probability 24 F or
higher
28 F or
higher
32 F or
higher
50 percent * No
occurrence
No
occurrence
2/17 to
12/7:
293 days
70 percent * No
occurrence
No
occurrence
2/8 to
12/16:
311 days
* Percent chance of the
growing season occurring
between the Beginning and
Ending dates.

STATS TABLE - total
precipitation (inches)
Yr Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annl 1886             9.
78 9.78
1887 8.86 9.00 2.28   3.51 1.92 0.06 0.07 0.
21 0.
55 2.
66 5.
43 34.
55 1888 12.95 1.98 4.09   0.76 4.66 0.44 0.00 0.
06 1.
15 3.
41 5.
93 35.
43 1889 4.25 1.93 5.91   7.27 0.37 0.15 0.13 0.
32 8.
36 3.
71 12.
88 45.
28 1890 18.26 13.88 11.57 1.43 1.71 0.90 0.08 0.02 0.
79 0.
44 0.
18 5.
48 54.
74 1891 3.33 9.81 5.83 6.37 1.55 1.53 0.28 0.31 1.
45 1.
64 2.
72 10.
97 45.
79 1892 3.29 2.53 5.32   3.63 0.45 0.00 0.09 0.
99 2.
90 8.
19 6.
55 33.
94 1893 3.65 6.27 10.59 2.99 2.43 0.33 0.00 0.00 2.
39 4.
33 9.
87 6.
69 49.
54 1894 12.38 6.13 7.46 M1.28 1.31 1.67 0.02 0.04 1.
84 3.
12 2.
03 12.
31 49.
59 1895 9.37 3.60 5.31 2.88 5.39 0.06 0.23 0.11 3.
14 0.
05 3.
88 7.
50 41.
52 1896 8.14 4.61 6.93 6.88 6.22 0.51 0.00 0.70 1.
60 2.
37 8.
00 9.
41 55.
37 1897 3.04 11.23 9.85 1.36 0.75 1.60 0.03 0.15 1.
05 2.
63 5.
44 6.
18 43.
31 1898 3.23 8.00 1.80 1.82 2.62 1.21 0.00 0.06 1.
48 2.
13 4.
43 3.
17 29.
95 1899 6.50 5.03 8.53 1.91 1.73 0.75 0.00 0.42 0.
88 4.
28 14.
80 7.
05 51.
88 1900 6.63 6.04 3.42 4.43 2.08 1.70 T 0.07 0.
21 7.
07 8.
01 5.
27 44.
93 1901 9.93 7.41 3.86 4.08 1.50 0.12 0.03 T 4.
26 2.
46 3.
96 4.
43 42.
04 1902 1.95 19.49 7.85 4.56 2.70 0.27 0.25 T 0.
14 2.
34 10.
88 8.
33 58.
76 1903 16.07 3.80 7.42 1.23 0.70 0.57 0.06 0.53 0.
28 2.
42 10.
79 4.
03 47.
90 1904 5.24 16.10 19.05 5.14 1.02 0.55 0.75 T 1.
36 2.
67 4.
41 8.
18 64.
47 1905 4.81 0.99 7.41 0.78 1.99 0.12 0.02 0.00 0.
38 1.
50 3.
93 4.
32 26.
25 1906 7.63 6.27 7.72 2.14 3.57 1.56 0.01 0.01 0.
76 0.
67 3.
13 7.
59 41.
06 1907 10.40 10.57 11.83 3.30 1.69 0.58 T 2.66 0.
63 1.
48 2.
38 8.
59 54.
11 1908 7.23 6.59 2.82 0.85 2.57 0.19 T 0.16 0.
02 5.
09 3.
97 3.
91 33.
40 1909 14.41 11.54 2.72 0.24 0.76 0.14 0.55 T 0.
61 3.
78 12.
60 4.
29 51.
64 1910 7.26 7.33 1.97 0.83 0.64 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.
01 0.
82 6.
86 3.
43 29.
64 1911 8.63 3.75 1.45 3.39 3.52 0.23 T 0.08 0.
29 1.
68 2.
09 4.
74 29.
85 1912 10.17 5.73 4.73 5.92 1.98 1.29 0.05 0.04 2.
40 1.
55 6.
86 5.
83 46.
55 1913 8.10 0.87 3.61 3.41 1.67 1.60 0.28 0.03 0.
48 0.
88 5.
29 7.
58 33.
80 1914 9.75 4.20 3.13 3.27 0.70 1.73 0.01 T 1.
82 3.
79 2.
42 7.
09 37.
91 1915 9.75 12.39 1.65 1.38 2.07 0.05 0.26 0.00 0.
11 0.
79 6.
15 5.
19 39.
79 1916 13.02 5.18 4.83 1.98 1.48 1.00 1.34 0.12 0.
38 0.
47 3.
13 5.
47 38.
40 1917 5.53 5.10 5.01 3.78 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.
66 0.
00 6.
43 1.
17 28.
72 1918 2.55 6.29 5.84 1.15 0.29 0.02 0.22 0.21 1.
42 1.
00 4.
74 4.
29 28.
02 1919 7.84 8.18 6.25 4.03 1.48 0.14 0.01 0.01 1.
52 0.
24 2.
99 4.
33 37.
02 1920 1.87 2.11 5.79 3.12 0.04 1.92 0.13 0.49 2.
47 4.
11 6.
35 10.
83 39.
23 1921 8.37 7.45 3.04 1.67 2.54 1.30 0.00 0.01 0.
27 1.
59 6.
21 4.
48 36.
93 1922 2.54 9.75 6.43 2.39 0.95 0.14 0.00 0.03 0.
37 3.
38 3.
32 7.
62 36.
92 1923 3.88 0.50 0.80 2.95 1.26 1.07 0.03 0.02 1.
54 2.
55 2.
86 4.
93 22.
39 1924 1.95 3.19 2.85 0.67 0.08 0.05 0.02 1.03 0.
41 6.
84 6.
37 4.
07 27.
53 1925 3.97 6.49 2.02 7.47 2.57 0.24 T 0.25 3.
56 0.
95 3.
71 4.
84 36.
07 1926 4.69 6.64 0.07 0.94 1.13 T 0.01 0.54 0.
43 3.
49 13.
65 6.
47 38.
06 1927 5.83 10.30 3.95 3.32 1.68 0.91 0.00 0.02 0.
86 1.
17 5.
89 3.
10 37.
03 1928 3.40 2.78 7.01 5.86 0.12 0.32 0.02 0.05 M0.
58 2.
21 4.
90 7.
82 35.
07 1929 4.31 2.06 2.31 2.61 0.14 2.39 T 0.01 0.
00 0.
21 T 7.
13 21.
17 1930 6.32 4.92 1.23 2.54 1.04 0.13 T T 1.
12 1.
21 3.
20 2.
50 24.
21 1931 4.09 2.39 3.35 1.61 0.49 1.33 0.01 0.01 0.
54 2.
28 5.
75 9.
06 30.
91 1932 6.84 1.20 4.54 4.87 1.41 0.11 0.14 0.03 0.
01 1.
32 5.
11 5.
54 31.
12 1933 7.04 M2.93 7.20 0.97 4.23 0.30 T 0.05 0.
70 2.
08 0.
38 6.
50 32.
38 1934 3.83 2.31 3.61 1.68 1.23 0.29 T 0.01 0.
47 3.
98 8.
63 5.
28 31.
32 1935 7.25 2.73 5.60 4.86 0.30 0.27 0.09 T 1.
10 3.
02 1.
35 6.
79 33.
36 1936 8.84 5.89 1.77 2.13 2.23 1.34 0.09 T 0.
04 0.
49 0.
01 3.
97 26.
80 1937 4.27 5.41 7.19 6.55 0.88 1.35 0.03 0.05 0.
19 4.
33 10.
95 4.
26 45.
46 1938 6.28 13.94 13.97 2.23 0.31 0.01 T T 1.
74 3.
34 3.
12 5.
97 50.
91 1939 4.49 4.41 5.03 0.37 1.85 0.56 0.23 0.06 0.
05 1.
82 0.
91 12.
13 31.
91 1940 4.37 9.62 7.47 0.81 2.54 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.
91 4.
03 2.
29 8.
87 41.
23 1941 11.37 6.68 4.31 4.49 3.61 1.52 0.06 0.18 0.
48 2.
64 3.
91 12.
87 52.
12 1942 4.08 6.22 1.77 4.05 5.43 0.57 0.07 0.06 0.
06 1.
21 8.
60 8.
52 40.
64 1943 5.23 3.51 5.83 3.23 4.25 0.47 0.04 0.21 0.
01 4.
61 3.
59 1.
67 32.
65 1944 2.92 3.62 2.25 4.25 3.49 1.19 0.10 0.19 0.
19 2.
79 9.
11 5.
92 36.
02 1945 3.64 9.55 6.03 2.27 3.43 T T 0.10 1.
09 3.
38 9.
47 9.
93 48.
89 1946 4.32 5.10 4.68 0.42 1.26 0.30 0.12 0.01 0.
32 2.
26 4.
36 1.
56 24.
71 1947 3.93 1.33 3.91 1.84 0.17 1.58 1.20 0.10 0.
59 6.
50 1.
72 3.
09 25.
96 1948 8.23 5.20 6.16 6.53 2.16 0.77 0.25 0.13 1.
71 3.
33 3.
19 7.
35 45.
01 1949 1.63 6.09 6.94 0.41 2.56 0.06 0.16 0.02 0.
50 2.
03 3.
23 4.
49 28.
12 1950 13.79 4.61 7.71 1.93 1.30 1.03 0.05 0.07 0.
35 13.
04 3.
43 5.
99 53.
30 1951 8.47 7.56 3.94 2.05 1.38 T 0.05 0.02 0.
79 3.
88 7.
80 9.
10 45.
04 1952 10.67 6.22 3.78 1.34 1.77 1.98 T 0.01 0.
73 0.
62 2.
13 11.
87 41.
12 1953 12.63 3.44 5.95 3.18 5.83 1.24 T 0.41 0.
61 3.
84 9.
57 3.
62 50.
32 1954 11.78 3.29 3.76 2.78 0.16 2.57 0.04 1.24 0.
87 1.
47 5.
09 9.
65 42.
70 1955 5.73 1.83 1.82 5.56 0.03 0.11 0.21 T 1.
18 2.
64 5.
77 11.
63 36.
51 1956 11.51 7.47 2.36 0.31 1.58 1.71 0.06 T 0.
33 5.
47 0.
49 7.
18 38.
47 1957 4.22 4.36 8.77 1.96 3.42 0.30 0.34 0.02 1.
37 6.
00 4.
44 5.
69 40.
89 1958 8.57 10.80 6.09 3.67 1.26 0.71 0.05 T 0.
78 1.
17 3.
71 4.
06 40.
87 1959 7.23 10.65 3.37 0.52 0.91 0.25 T 0.01 1.
54 0.
74 0.
28 3.
64 29.
14 1960 3.87 7.48 8.13 2.92 6.05 T 0.02 0.04 0.
01 1.
31 9.
87 5.
08 44.
78 1961 4.54 7.53 7.90 3.49 3.97 0.50 0.03 0.30 0.
53 2.
28 5.
65 3.
44 40.
16 1962 3.26 6.08 4.04 2.62 0.60 0.11 T 1.92 0.
71 6.
49 6.
77 2.
58 35.
18 1963 1.70 4.74 6.28 10.68 1.74 0.33 0.11 0.07 0.
68 5.
41 6.
91 3.
20 41.
85 1964 11.13 1.20 5.91 0.67 1.59 0.72 0.83 0.03 0.
07 1.
82 12.
11 10.
96 47.
04 1965 5.82 1.36 1.23 5.60 0.44 0.35 T 0.36 T 0.
70 5.
20 5.
22 26.
28 1966 9.44 3.12 6.57 1.34 0.06 0.30 0.25 0.50 1.
33 1.
02 9.
86 6.
52 40.
31 1967 8.87 1.47 7.44 5.29 1.52 0.32 0.00 T 1.
32 2.
15 4.
40 4.
34 37.
12 1968 7.59 2.93 3.85 0.40 1.04 0.20 0.04 1.98 0.
60 2.
81 5.
88 8.
32 35.
64 1969 13.92 7.82 1.56 3.22 1.01 0.34 0.05 T 0.
36 3.
20 3.
49 9.
60 44.
57 1970 12.46 3.15 2.70 1.54 1.38 0.29 T T 0.
32 2.
11 13.
20 10.
24 47.
39 1971 5.41 3.28 7.91 2.92 1.28 1.51 0.16 0.55 2.
08 0.
92 6.
36 6.
38 38.
76 1972 7.96 5.93 5.08 2.27 1.11 0.88 0.01 0.07 1.
06 1.
97 5.
41 7.
42 39.
17 1973 6.47 3.85 7.10 0.35 0.85 0.23 T 0.08 2.
35 4.
14 16.
58 7.
02 49.
02 1974 6.02 5.98 6.98 3.15 0.42 0.33 0.11 0.32 T 1.
76 2.
75 6.
40 34.
22 1975 5.20 7.68 10.73 3.29 1.05 0.58 0.10 0.58 0.
01 6.
77 4.
72 5.
38 46.
09 1976 1.88 7.51 3.12 2.80 0.54 0.14 0.20 1.70 0.
04 0.
28 2.
98 0.
52 21.
71 1977 1.90 2.24 4.33 1.20 2.10 0.07 T 0.20 3.
35 2.
79 4.
51 6.
60 29.
29 1978 4.52 6.06 2.88 4.10 0.82 0.34 0.03 0.59 2.
72 0.
04 2.
39 1.
16 25.
65 1979 3.82 6.26 1.70 3.94 2.25 0.05 0.31 0.13 1.
15 6.
14 6.
19 3.
75 35.
69 1980 3.19 4.67 6.14 4.18 1.70 0.42 T 0.07 0.
14 1.
38 2.
49 6.
10 30.
48 1981 7.67 3.72 4.64 0.71 2.02 0.57 T 0.01 0.
97 3.
71 9.
39 9.
88 43.
29 1982 4.75 5.76 7.06 5.97 0.07 0.78 0.08 0.03 0.
62 4.
89 7.
83 10.
30 48.
14 1983 8.48 9.18 10.73 5.47 1.12 0.65 0.89 3.42 0.
87 1.
87 10.
40 14.
13 67.
21 1984 0.76 5.18 4.70 2.76 2.51 1.07 0.03 0.05 0.
55 3.
67 15.
15 4.
27 40.
70 1985 0.66 3.69 4.68 0.45 1.14 0.89 0.15 0.52 1.
06 4.
07 2.
98 2.
78 23.
07 1986 7.19 10.08 6.12 1.46 2.34 0.21 0.02 T 2.
70 1.
75 1.
85 3.
83 37.
55 1987 6.48 3.38 6.10 1.15 0.41 0.26 0.20 0.06 0.
02 1.
05 4.
23 10.
92 34.
26 1988 7.13 0.54 1.18 2.06 2.70 2.22 0.05 T 0.
12 0.
41 8.
93 6.
26 31.
60 1989 4.71 2.88 7.63 2.01 1.67 0.21 0.08 0.13 0.
85 2.
90 1.
60 0.
80 25.
47 1990 7.20 4.50 3.30 1.41 3.74 0.32 0.22 0.71 0.
19 1.
73 3.
07 2.
91 29.
30 1991 1.65 2.75 6.94 2.52 2.16 0.26 1.13 0.37 T 1.
06 1.
95 2.
36 23.
15 1992 3.99 3.80 3.51 2.42 0.06 1.27 0.25 0.01 0.
33 2.
08 2.
21 9.
33 29.
26 1993 7.15 5.93 4.72 5.94 4.44 1.23 0.37 0.54 0.
03 0.
56 1.
35 7.
12 39.
38 1994 5.09 7.12 2.06 3.30 1.10 0.71 0.08 T 0.
06 0.
54 8.
21 7.
00 35.
27 1995 12.74 1.40 11.18 7.47 1.21 1.85 0.08 0.22 0.
69 0.
53 2.
26 11.
56 51.
19 1996 10.74 8.11 3.51 4.64 2.40 0.05 0.03 T 1.
21 3.
50 5.
16 21.
26 60.
61 1997 8.81 2.55 2.73 3.06 0.90 1.25 T 0.84 2.
05 2.
73 7.
39 4.
73 37.
04 1998 13.42 13.95 7.83 2.23 3.12 0.33 0.16 0.01 0.
08 3.
06 14.
09 5.
40 63.
68 1999 4.37 10.32 8.94 1.79 1.62 0.15 0.04 0.30 0.
05 1.
60 7.
36 3.
02 39.
56 2000 9.71 7.00 2.81 2.15 1.86 0.54 0.04 T 0.
55 2.
99 3.
51 1.
97 33.
13 2001 3.79 3.60 2.45 2.54 0.71 0.69 0.20 0.21 0.
28 1.
00 7.
71 11.
56 34.
74 2002 6.37 5.76 4.32 2.42 0.55 0.28 0.03 0.01 0.
06 0.
06 2.
66 23.
31 45.
83 2003 5.51 3.84 4.91 11.25 1.74 0.04 0.02 0.49 0.
35 0.
55 5.
78 11.
35 45.
83 2004 6.29 8.12 2.38 1.68 1.37 0.06 0.06 0.43 0.
68 5.
71 1.
87 9.
43 38.
08 2005 5.91 2.41 6.24 4.70 3.90 3.08 0.05 0.07 0.
08 2.
40 8.
52 12.
72 50.
08 2006 12.09 6.34 11.11 4.08 1.03 0.35 0.04 T 0.
09 0.
58 7.
41 7.
09 50.
21 2007 1.86 11.86 2.51 2.72 0.86 0.46 0.97 0.08 0.
60 4.
92 2.
33 7.
30 36.
47 2008 9.70 2.73 3.16 2.12 0.04 0.24 0.02 0.47 0.
05 0.
93 4.
05 6.
66 30.
17 2009 1.58 6.20 5.45 1.23 2.93 0.18 0.06 0.02 1.
03 1.
95 4.
15 4.
17 28.
95 2010 9.29 4.20 6.06 7.76 3.51 2.31 0.04 0.15 1.
39 4.
26 4.
69 10.
08 53.
74 2011 2.23 3.62 11.88 4.07 1.43 1.29 0.17 0.04 0.
37 4.
21 3.
86 2.
22 35.
39 2012 7.76 2.63 12.02 4.76 0.77 2.00 0.67 0.07 0.
04 2.
72 6.
36 10.
97 50.
77 2013 2.57 1.78 3.09 2.44 1.17 0.43 0.00 0.08 3.
14 0.
05 1.
29 0.
56 16.
60 2014 1.35 6.09 6.25 1.37 0.58 0.35 0.02 0.02 3.
09 4.
74 3.
89 9.
75 37.
50 2015 1.36 5.04 3.21 2.57 0.07 0.04 0.15 0.41 0.
27 1.
18 4.
88 14.
66 33.
84 2016 12.06 2.98 8.11 2.84 0.76 0.02 0.54 0.04 0.
01 10.
92 6.
98 7.
87 53.
13 2017 10.51 11.10 7.97 5.46 1.31 0.59 0.07 0.05 1.
01 1.
64 7.
40 1.
94 49.
05 2018 7.86 2.87 8.50 5.02 0.79 0.70 0.03 0.05 0.
19 0.
85 4.
94 4.
95 36.
75 2019 6.67 14.43 4.79 2.51 2.61 0.00 0.00 0.18 1.
92 1.
51 1.
75 7.
63 44.
00 2020 7.50 0.60 3.69 2.05 4.73 0.20 0.03 0.08 0.
74 0.
41 2.
55 3.
96 26.
54 2021 7.10 4.32 3.93 M0.00             15.
35 Notes: Data missing in any
month have an "M" flag. A
"T" indicates a trace of
precipitation.

Data missing for all days in
a month or year is blank.

Creation date: 2016-07-22
GHD
718 Third Street
Eureka CA 95501
T: 707.443.8326 E: [email protected]
© GHD 2021
This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorized use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited.

G:\561\11214735\Tech\05 Environmental Mapping and Studies\5.2 Wetland Delineation www.ghd.com
Appendices
City of Fortuna Kenmar Road and US 101 Interchange Project This document is in draft form. The contents, including any opinions, conclusions or recommendations contained in, or which may be implied from, this draft document must not be relied upon. GHD reserves the right, at any time, without notice, to modify or retract any part or all of the draft document. To the maximum extent permitted by law, GHD disclaims any responsibility or liability arising from or in connection with this draft document.

Appendix G
Botanical Report
Kenmar Road/Highway 101
Interchange Project
City of Fortuna
Botanical Report
September 2021
GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | i Table of Contents

1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Summary .................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Project Description ................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Location .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.4 Regulatory Background ............................................................................................................ 1

2. Methods .............................................................................................................................................. 2

2.1 Pre-Survey Investigations ......................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Floristic Surveys ....................................................................................................................... 3

2.3 Vegetation Mapping and Assessment ...................................................................................... 3

3. Results ................................................................................................................................................ 4

3.1 Special Status Plants ................................................................................................................ 4

3.2 Sensitive Natural Community Assessment .............................................................................. 4

4. Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................ 5

5. Special Terms and Conditions ............................................................................................................ 6

5.1 Purpose of this Report .............................................................................................................. 6

6. References .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Appendices
Appendix A – Figures
Figure 1. Project Location Map
Figure 2. Project Area
Figure 3. Vegetation Mapping
Figure 4. CNDDB Map
Figure 6. NRCS Soils Map
Appendix B – Scoping Table
Appendix C – Plant Observations
Appendix D – Rapid Assessment Forms
Appendix E – Site Photographs
Appendix F – NRCS Custom Soil Resource Report
GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | 1

1. Introduction

1.1 Summary
GHD prepared this botanical survey report and accompanying appendices on behalf of the City of Fortuna, in support of the proposed Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project (Project) (Appendix A Figures 1-2). Botanical studies consisted of seasonally appropriate floristic surveys for special status plants and assessment of Sensitive Natural Communities (SNC). No special status plants were detected in the Project Area. Shining willow groves, a SNC, occur to the west of Highway 101. Please see the Kenmar Road Wetland Delineation Report (GHD 2021) for complete results of the delineation of wetlands and other waters. GHD conducted surveys for special status plant species and vegetation assessments during the spring and summer of 2021 (April 7 and July 30). This report supports the Project’s environmental documentation, permitting, and construction planning. Upland Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas will be addressed in the Natural Environmental Study.

1.2 Project Description
The proposed Project will replace the existing intersections of US 101 and Kenmar Road at the interchange with two roundabouts, improving traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle operations. The Project also includes modifications to the US 101 on-ramps and off-ramps and the realignment of Eel River Drive. In addition to the proposed motor vehicle-related roadway safety improvements, the Project includes a segment of Class I bike path through the Project Area in addition to other at-grade pedestrian and bicycle improvements to enhance pedestrian connections and promote regional bicycle network continuity. The Project will simplify and improve navigation and traffic operations on Kenmar Road and Eel River Drive, including the Kenmar Road and US 101 interchange.

1.3 Location
The Project is located in the City of Fortuna in Humboldt County, California, on the Fortuna USGS quadrangle (Appendix A Figure 1). The Project Area encompasses the Highway 101 Kenmar Road interchange and adjacent areas (Appendix A Figure 2). The Project Area intersects the California Coastal Zone, with primary permitting jurisdiction or Humboldt County under the Eel River Area Plan (Appendix A Figure 3).

1.4 Regulatory Background

1.4.1 Federally Listed Species
Special status plant species under Federal jurisdiction include those listed as endangered, threatened, or as candidate species by the Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) under the U.S.

Endangered Species Act (ESA).

1.4.2 State Listed Species
Special status plant species under California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) jurisdiction include the following:

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | 2  Endangered, Threatened, or Candidate plant species listed under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA),
 Plants listed as Rare under California Native Plant Protection Act (Fish & G. Code, § 1900 et seq.), and
 California Rare Plant Ranking (CRPR) rare plants on the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Lists 1 and 2.

Plant species on CNPS Lists 1 and 2 are considered eligible for state listing as Endangered or Threatened pursuant to the California Fish and Game Code, and CDFW has oversite of these special status plant species as a trustee agency. Such species are considered during the CEQA process because they meet the definition of Threatened or Endangered under Sections 2062 and 2067 of the California Fish and Game Code. Plants on CNPS Lists 3 and 4 do not have formal protection under CEQA but may merit consideration in certain circumstances. CDFW publishes and periodically updates lists of special status species which include all taxa of concern that are tracked by CDFW. Additionally, locally significant plants (CEQA Guidelines, § 15125, subd. (c)), or as designated in local or regional plans, policies, or ordinances) are considered special status plant species (CDFW 2018).

1.4.3 Sensitive Natural Communities
Natural vegetation communities listed as Sensitive in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and on the California SNC List are to be addressed within the CEQA review process (CDFW 2021a). Sensitive Natural Communities (SNCs) are primarily classified at the Alliance level according to A Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009). Legacy SNCs are listed in CNDDB according to the Holland classification system (1986), and Holland types may be used when a current Alliance-level classification does not exist (CDFW 2021a). CDFW considers alliances with a NatureServe State Rank of S1 to S3 to be SNCs, and therefore these alliances are considered during the CEQA process (CDFW 2021a).

2. Methods

2.1 Pre-Survey Investigations
A scoping list of special-status plant species and habitats with recorded occurrences in the Project vicinity (defined by the 9-quad area) was compiled prior to surveys by consulting the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) (CDFW 2021b), the CNPS Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants (CNPS 2021), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Information for Planning and Consulting (IPaC) database (USFWS 2021). The scoping list includes special-status plants that occur in habitat similar to the Project Area with documented occurrences on the Fortuna USGS quadrangle or adjacent quadrangles. CDFW and CNPS searches included nine USGS quadrangles with the survey area located in the central quad (Appendix A Figure 4). The 9-quad query yielded 30 special status plant species of CRPR ranking 1 to 3, and a table of scoping results is provided in Appendix B. All species were reviewed and classified by their potential to occur in the Project Area (Appendix A Figure 2) prior to field surveys. Of the species identified during scoping, two have a moderate probability of occurring within the Project Area: Howell’s montia (Montia howellii, 2B.2) and Siskiyou checkerbloom (Sidalcea malviflora ssp. patula, 1B.2). Two GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | 3 survey visits are recommended to observe potentially occurring plants within the peak blooming periods, including one in early spring, and one in early-to-mid-summer.

2.2 Floristic Surveys
GHD botanists Kelsey McDonald and Rose Dana conducted seasonally appropriate floristic surveys for special status plants and evaluated the area for SNCs according to CDFW protocol.

The special status plant surveys followed Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities by the California Natural Resource Agency (CDFW 2018) and General Rare Plant Survey Guidelines by the Endangered Species Recovery Program (USFWS 2002). The special status plant survey was conducted by walking the site and identifying all plant species encountered to the lowest taxonomic level necessary for rare plant identification. Nomenclature follows The Jepson Manual (Baldwin et al 2012).

GHD Botanist Kelsey McDonald has a M.S. in Environmental and Natural Resource Sciences from Humboldt State University, and she is a CNPS Certified Consulting Botanist with over six years of experience conducting special-status plant surveys. GHD Botanist Rose E. Dana has a degree in Plant Ecology from Humboldt State University, with over 10 years of experience conducting biological and botanical surveys. Kelsey McDonald conducted the initial spring botanical survey on April 7, 2021. The weather was overcast and approximately 50 degrees Fahrenheit. Rose Dana conducted the summer survey for later-blooming plants on July 30, 2021. The weather was sunny and approximately 72 degrees Fahrenheit. The total survey effort was 9 person-hours. A list of species observed within the Project Area is provided (Appendix C).

2.3 Vegetation Mapping and Assessment
Vegetation communities onsite were documented in the field and classified at the alliance level according to the Manual of California Vegetation (Sawyer et al. 2009) using the Rapid Assessment method. Kelsey McDonald assessed potential Sensitive Natural Communities according to protocol (CDFW 2018) on April 8, 2021. Vegetation Rapid Assessment forms (Appendix D) are used to characterize dominant vegetation and evaluate habitat quality, and these assessments provide the basis for designating vegetation as SNCs per CDFW. Photo documentation of habitats observed onsite can be found in Appendix E. Vegetation communities were mapped using points collected in the field with an Eos Arrow 100 Submeter Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Receiver and an iPad running ArcGIS Collector software in the WGS84 datum. Vegetation community boundaries were then digitized with GIS from aerial imagery based on field observations and visible vegetation signatures. A Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soils map was consulted prior to conducting surveys (Appendix A Figure 5), as is required by CDFW’s protocols for surveying and evaluating impacts to special status native plant populations and sensitive natural communities (CDFW 2018).

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | 4

3. Results

3.1 Special Status Plants
No special status plant species were observed during floristic surveys of the Project Area.

Seasonally appropriate surveys for special status plants have been completed, including reconnaissance an early season survey April, and a summer survey in July. Surveys were timed to observe potentially occurring special status species during the blooming period. The observe early blooming potentially occurring plants such as Howell’s montia (Montia howellii), which may occur in compacted wet roadside habitats. The July survey was suitably timed to observe later blooming species such as Siskiyou checkerbloom (Sidalcea malviflora ssp. patula), which may also occur in similar roadside edge habitats.

3.2 Sensitive Natural Community and Habitat Assessment
Vegetation communities were documented using the rapid assessment method as needed to classify them at the alliance level and evaluate potential Sensitive Natural Communities (SNCs) and other sensitive habitats. The Project Area contains a vegetation community characterized by Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra var. lasiandra), also known as shining willow in a Manual of California Vegetation (syn. Salix lucida ssp. lasiandra) (Sawyer et al. 2009), a SNC. The Shining Willow SNC was mapped within the Project Area (Project Boundary) as shown in Appendix A Figure 3. Other vegetation communities discussed below were characterized by rapid assessment and did not meet criteria for SNCs.

3.2.1 Shining Willow Groves (Salix lasiandra var. lasiandra Alliance, G4 S3.2) Shining willow groves are an SNC based on the state ranking of S3.2 (Sawyer at al. 2009, CDFW 2021). The shining willow alliance was observed along the boundary of the agriculture pasture concentrated near the intersection of Riverwalk Drive and the Highway 101 southbound on ramp, located along the western extent of the Project Area (Appendix A Figure 3). The shining willow alliance contained a diverse mixture of willows at approximately even dominance, with approximately 25% shining willow cover, 22% arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) cover, and 18% Sitka willow (Salix sitchensis) cover. Shining willow, arroyo willow and Sitka willow are all Facultative Wetland (FACW) indicator species, meaning they usually occur in wetlands, but are occasionally found in non-wetlands (Lichvar et al. 2016). Red alder (Alnus rubra, FAC) and other trees also occurred in the area. The shining willow alliance was concentrated along the slope above the wet pasture and around a ditch where stormwater runoff collects from southern Riverwalk Drive and Highway 101. Shining willow, arroyo willow and Sitka willow dominate the canopy along the edge of the agricultural field up to approximately 475 feet west of the Riverwalk Drive and Highway 101 intersection. Associated understory vegetation included high cover (50%) of invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) (FAC), with poison hemlock (Conium maculatum, FAC), spiny sow thistle (Sonchus asper, FACU), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens, FAC), Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis, FAC), and creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera, FAC). The strip of willows occurs on an anthropogenic slope in highly altered landscape and the understory is dominated by invasive Himalayan blackberry. Because the SNC is dominated by wetland indicator species and GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | 5 within the Coastal Zone, it was mapped as a Coastal Commission 1-parameter wetland. Please see the Wetland Delineation Report (GHD 2021) for additional details on wetlands that may be subject to Coastal Commission, state water board, and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdiction.

3.2.2 Arroyo Willow Riparian (Salix lasiolepis Alliance, G4 S4) Arroyo willow thickets are currently ranked as “Apparently Secure” in the state (S4), and are not considered an SNC. Arroyo willow dominated the Mill Creek riparian area (approximately 30% cover in the tree layer) along Kenmar Road with lesser amounts of shining willow (15% cover), red alder (8% cover), and blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus, 8% cover). The understory was dominated by invasive Himalayan blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and stinging nettle (Urtica dioica). The arroyo-willow dominated Mill Creek riparian area is outside of the Coastal Zone. Riparian areas are subject to Streamside Management Area policy for the City of Fortuna and CDFW jurisdiction.

Please see Appendix D Rapid Assessment data form for KENM003 for additional details.

3.2.3 Landscaped Monterey Pine-Redwood (Not Rated)
Monterey pine (Pinus radiata) and coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) appear to have been planted along the railroad that runs north to south, parallel to Highway 101. Most of the understory consisted of mowed grass, with some brush overgrowing the rail. The landscaped area is not a naturally occurring community and is not ranked as an alliance in A Manual of California Vegetation. Please see Appendix D Rapid Assessment data form for KENM004 for additional details.

3.2.4 Invasive Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus) and French Broom (Genista monspessulana) Thickets (Not Rated)
Himalayan blackberry and French broom have invaded the western edge of Riverwalk Drive and established dense overlapping thickets. Both Himalayan blackberry and French broom are rated by Cal-IPC as highly invasive (Cal-IPC 2021). These aggressive non-native species have the potential to spread and outcompete native species, especially in disturbed areas. Removal of these species may be suitable mitigation for potential disturbance of the shining willow SNC or Mill Creek riparian area. Please see Appendix D Rapid Assessment data form for KENM001 for additional details.

4. Conclusions
The purpose of this evaluation was to conduct seasonally appropriate surveys for state, federal, and other sensitive listed plant species, and to evaluate potential SNCs within the Project Area.

Floristic surveys were completed according to protocol (CDFW 2018), and no special status plant species were detected. The southwestern slope of the Project Area is classified according as the shining willow alliance, a SNC. The shining willow alliance is located within the Coastal Zone and mapped as a one-parameter wetland. The arroyo willow-dominated Mill Creek riparian area is not considered an SNC, but riparian habitats are subject to City of Fortuna Streamside Management Area policies and CDFW jurisdiction. Please see the accompanying Wetland Delineation Report for details on wetlands and other waters within the Project Area (GHD 2021). Planted redwoods and Monterey pines occurring in the Project Area have not been classified as an SNC. Dense thickets GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | 6 of invasive Himalayan blackberry and French broom along Riverwalk Drive are recommended for removal as mitigation for disturbance to the shining willow SNC, Mill Creek riparian area, or other sensitive resources. No Critical Habitat for plants occurs within the Project Area. Surveys were seasonally appropriate, and conditions were suitable for surveying. No additional rare plant surveys are needed within the designated Project Area at this time. Additional surveys and on-site impact/mitigation evaluation might be needed if it is determined that the project has the potential to significantly impact the SNC or other sensitive resources as mapped and discussed in this report.

5. Special Terms and Conditions

5.1 Purpose of this Report
GHD prepared this report for the Caltrans Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project, and Caltrans and the City of Fortuna may only use and rely on this report for the purpose agreed upon between GHD and Caltrans, as set out in the scope and contract for work effort reported herein.

GHD Inc. is not liable for any action arising out of the reliance of any third party on the information contained within this report. GHD otherwise disclaims responsibility to any entity other than Caltrans arising in connection with this report. GHD also excludes implied warranties and conditions, to the extent legally permissible.

6. References
Baldwin, B. D. 2012. The Jepson Manual, Second Edition. University of California Press. Berkeley, CA.

Cal-IPC. 2021. The Cal-IPC Inventory. California Invasive Plant Council, Berkeley, CA. 2006-2021. https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/inventory/
California Coastal Commission [CCC] 2013. LCP Update Guide, Section 4. Environmentally Sensitive Habitats and Other Natural Resources. San Francisco, CA: State of California—Natural Resources Agency.

CDFW. 2018. Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Sensitive Natural Communities. Sacramento, CA.

CDFW. 2021a. Natural Communities. California Department of Fish and Wildlife website. https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Data/VegCAMP/Natural-Communities/List.

CDFW. 2021b. BIOS California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) Quickview 9-Quad Species List. California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Sacramento, California. https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios/
CNPS. 2021. Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants. California Native Plant Society (CNPS).

Sacramento, CA. Developed by Rincon Consultants, Inc.
https://rareplants.cnps.org/Search/Advanced
GHD. 2021. Kenmar Road/Highway 101 Interchange Project Wetland Delineation Report. Prepared for Caltrans, August 2021.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 | 7 Humboldt County Planning Department. 2014. Eel River Area Plan of the Humboldt County Local Coastal Program. Certified by the State Coastal Commission April 8, 1982, date of this edition:

December 2014. Available at: https://humboldtgov.org/DocumentCenter/View/50843/Eel-RiverArea-Local-Coastal-Plan Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List:
2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 v733X.

Available at https://cwbi-app.sec.usace.army.mil/nwpl_static/v34/home/home.html Natural Resources Conservation Service [NRCS]. 2021. Web Soil Survey https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.

Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, and J.M. Evans. 2009. A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society. Sacramento, CA. https://vegetation.cnps.org/ USFWS. 2002. General Rare Plant Survey Guidelines by the Endangered Species Recovery Program.

USFWS. 2021. IPaC-Information for Planning and Consultation. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Appendices

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Appendix A – Figures
Paper Size ANSI A

1.000 2.000 3.000 4.000
Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD 1983 StatePiane CaiWornia I FIPS 0401 Feet
N
$ \\gl'ldnet'qldiUS\Eu~eb\ProjeCIS\561 12 4735\G IS\MapalDeive ables\11 214735 Botanicai\11214735 Bolanical.apn~· 11214735_001_Pro}ect_locMJon Pnrndate: 12Aug2021·11:17
<m:l1
§ it
City of Fortuna
Kenmar Road/ US 1 01 Interchange Project
Project No. 11214735
Revision No.

Date August 2021
Project Location Map FIGURE 1 Data sowee: World m~~fY' (Clantyl Source: Esn, Di~IOJobe, OeoEye, Ed star GeO'iJrapha, CNESihtlus OS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and lhe GIS User Commll'lrty trampor1abrm: USGS The National Map: Nabonallr n~ Da\.u.et; U.S. CeniUS Bureau - TIGERII.Jne. U.S. ForestSerw::e. Data Refreihed July, 2021 Worid TopographiC Map: Esn, HERE, Gannn, FAO, USGS, EPA, NPS. Created by: Jopez4 Paper Size ANSI A
300 600 900
Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD 1983 StatePiane Cal~omia I FtPS 0401 Feet
N
$
City of Fortuna
Ken mar Road/ US 1 01 Interchange Project
Project Area
Project No. 11214735
Revision No. Date August 2021
FIGURE 2 \\gl'ldnet'q!diUS\Eu,.b\ProJ«<S\561111214735\GIS\MapalDeiverables\11214735_Botanicai\11214735_Bolanical.apn0ala source: CNOOB, November Slh, 2018: Worid lmiQefY (CI« IIy): Source: Esri, Oi~IGiobe, GeoEye, Eartl1starGeograplucs, CNESIA.tlus OS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and lhe GIS UserCommll"lrty 11214735_(XJ2_Reljlional Created by:Jopez4
Pnntdate: 12Au92021·13:12
Paper Size ANSI A
100 200 300
Feet
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD 1983 Sla1ePiane Cal~omia I FIPS 0401 Feet
N
$ \\gl'ldnet'lghdiUSIEil.eka\Proj«<S\561111214735\GIS\MapalDeMrables\11214735_Botanicai\11214735_Bolanical.aprx ftWltdate: 12fw9 2021-13:41
City of Fortuna
Kenmar Road/ US 1 01 Interchange Project
Vegetation Mapping
AnERBERRY LN
Project Boundary
Shining willow groves
Rapid Assesment Points
Appeal Jurisdiction
Project No. 11214735
Revision No.

Date August 2021
FIGURE 3 Datasource: NAJP2020, . Createdby:Jopez4
^

CANNIBAL

ISLAND FIELDS

LANDING

MCWHINNEY
CREEK

FERNDALE

FORTUNA

HYDESVILLE

CAPETOWN TAYLOR PEAK
SCOTIA
FIGURE 4
0 1 2 3 4
Miles
Project No.

Revision No. -
11214735
Date 9/23/2021
City of Fortuna
Kenmar Road/ US 101 Interchange Project
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A
o \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Eureka\Projects\561\11214735\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\11214735_Botanical\11214735_Botanical_V2.aprx Data source: CNDDB, April 2021; World Imagery: Earthstar Geographics. Created by: jlopez4 - 11214735_004_CNDDB
Print date: 23 Sep 2021 - 12:19
Legend
^ Project Location

7.5 min USGS Quads
3 mile Buffer
CNDDB Plant Occurrences within
3 miles
Cascade downingia
Oregon polemonium
Pacific gilia
Siskiyou checkerbloom
Whitney's farewell-to-spring
Minute pocket moss
CNDDB Map
Data Disclaimer
Data within the CNDDB Database require biological expertise for proper analysis, interpretation, and application. It is the user’s responsibility to ensure that the data obtained from CDFW are used correctly.
101
US HWY 101

KENMAR RD

ROSS HILL RD

EEL RIVER RD

ATTERBERRY LN

S FORTUNA BLVD

RIVERWALK DR
1010
340
340
210
210
210
FIGURE 5
0 75 150 225 300
Feet
Project No.

Revision No. -
11214735
Date Sep 2021
City of Fortuna
Kenmar Road/ US 101 Interchange Project
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California I FIPS 0401 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A
o \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Eureka\Projects\561\11214735\GIS\Maps\Deliverables\11214735_Botanical\11214735_Botanical_V2.aprx Data source: World Imagery (Clarity): Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community. Created by: jlopez4 11214735_005_NRSC_Soils
Print date: 22 Sep 2021 - 16:28
Legend
Project Boundary
NRSC Soil Map Units
210 - Dungan, 0-2%
slopes
340 - Fiedler-PetellenNanningcreek complex,
15-30% slopes
1010 - Urban landFriendlycity association,
0-2% slopes
NRCS Soils Map
GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Appendix B – 9 Quad Scoping Table
Scientific Name Common Name FESA CESA CRPR GRank SRank Blooming Period
Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in the
Project Area
Abroniaumbellata var.breviflora
pink sand‐verbena
None None 1B.1 G4G5T2 S2 Jun‐Oct Coastal dunes No Potential. Dune and beach habitats do not occurin the Project Area.

Astragaluspycnostachyusvar.pycnostachyus
coastal marshmilk‐vetch
None None 1B.2 G2T2 S2 (Apr) Jun‐
Oct
Coastal dunes (mesic),Coastal scrub,Marshes, and swamps(coastal salt,streamside) No Potential. Dune andcoastal marsh habitats donot occur in the ProjectArea.

Cardamineangulata
seasidebittercress
None None 2B.1 G4G5 S3 (Jan) Mar‐
Jul
North coast coniferousforest, lower montaneconiferous forest. Wetareas, streambanks.

Low Potential. Marginal wetareas may occur in theProject Area.

Carex leptalea bristle‐stalked
sedge
None None 2B.2 G5 S1 Mar‐Jul Bogs and fens,
Meadows and seeps(mesic), Marshes andswamps
Low Potential. Marginalwetland habitat may occurin the Project Area.

Carex lyngbyei Lyngbye's sedge None None 2B.2 G5 S3 Apr‐Aug Marshes and swamps (brackish orfreshwater)
No Potential. Coastalmarshes do not occur in theProject Area.

Castillejaambigua var.humboldtiensis
Humboldt Bayowl's‐clover
None None 1B.2 G4T2 S2 Apr‐Aug Marshes and swamps
(coastal salt)
No Potential. Coastal saltmarshes do not occur in theProject Area.

Castillejalitoralis
Oregon coastpaintbrush
None None 2B.2 G3 S3 Jun‐Jul Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal dunes, Coastalscrub; sandy
No Potential. Sandy coastalbluff and dune habitats donot occur in the ProjectArea.

Chloropyronmaritimum ssp.palustre
Point Reyesbird's‐beak
None None 1B.2 G4?T2 S2 Jun‐Oct Marshes and swamps
(coastal salt)
No Potential. Coastal saltmarshes do not occur in theProject Area.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Scientific Name Common Name FESA CESA CRPR GRank SRank Blooming Period
Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in the
Project Area
Clarkia amoenassp. whitneyi
Whitney'sfarewell‐to‐spring
None None 1B.1 G5T1 S1 Jun‐Aug Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal scrub
Low Potential. Marginalscrub habitat may occur inthe Project Area. Previouslydocumented 1.5 miles westof Fortuna.

Downingiawillamettensis
Cascadedowningia
None None 2B.2 G4 S2 Jun‐Jul
(Sep)
Cismontane woodland(lake margins), Valleyand foothill grassland(lake margins), Vernalpools Low Potential. Marginalseasonally wet areas andgrasslands may occur in theProject Area. Previouslydocumented in the area 0.5miles south of Fortuna in1937.

Erysimummenziesii
Menzieswallflower
FE CE 1B.1 G1 S1 Mar‐Sep Coastal dunes No Potential. Coastal dunes do not occur in the ProjectArea.

Erythroniumoregonum
giant fawn lily None None 2B.2 G4G5 S2 Mar‐Jun
(Jul)
Cismontane woodland,Meadows and seeps;sometimesserpentinite, rocky,openings Low Potential. Marginal wetmeadows, seeps, andwoodlands may occur in theProject Area.

Erythroniumrevolutum
coast fawn lily None None 2B.2 G4G5 S3 Mar‐Jul
(Aug)
Bogs and fens,Broadleafed uplandforest, North Coastconiferous forest;Mesic, streambanks Low Potential. Marginal wetand mesic areas may occurin the Project Area.

Fissidenspauperculus
minute pocketmoss
None None 1B.2 G3? S2 North Coast coniferous
forest (damp coastalsoil)
No Potential. No coniferousforest occurs in the ProjectArea.

Gilia capitatassp. pacifica
Pacific gilia None None 1B.2 G5T3 S2 Apr‐Aug Coastal bluff scrub, Chaparral (openings),Coastal prairie, Valleyand foothill grassland Low Potential. Knownoccurrences within 3 milesof the Project Area.Marginal scrub and GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Scientific Name Common Name FESA CESA CRPR GRank SRank Blooming Period
Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in the
Project Areagrassland habitat may occurin the Project Area.

Gilia millefoliata dark‐eyed gilia None None 1B.2 G2 S2 Apr‐Jul Coastal dunes No Potential. Coastal dunes do not occur in the ProjectArea.

Hesperevaxsparsiflora var.brevifolia
short‐leavedevax
None None 1B.2 G4T3 S2 Mar‐Jun Coastal bluff scrub
(sandy), Coastal dunes,Coastal prairie
Low Potential. Marginalscrub habitat may occur inthe Project Area.

Hesperolinonadenophyllum
glandularwestern flax
None None 1B.2 G2G3 S2S3 May‐Aug Chaparral, Cismontane
woodland, Valley andfoothill grassland;usually serpentinite No Potential. No serpentinehabitat occurs in the ProjectArea.

Layia carnosa beach layia FE CE 1B.1 G2 S2 Mar‐Jul Coastal dunes, Coastal scrub (sandy)
No Potential. Coastal dunesdo not occur in the ProjectArea.

Liliumoccidentale
western lily FE CE 1B.1 G1 S1 Jun‐Jul Bogs and fens, Coastal bluff scrub, Coastalprairie, Coastal scrub,Marshes and swamps(freshwater), NorthCoast coniferous forest(openings) Low Potential. Marginalscrub and wetland habitatmay occur in the ProjectArea.

Montia howellii Howell's montia None None 2B.2 G3G4 S2 (Jan‐Feb) Mar‐May
Meadows and seeps,North Coast coniferousforest, Vernal pools;vernally mesic,sometimes roadsides Moderate Potential.Seasonally wet roadsidesare likely to occur in theProject Area.

Oenotherawolfii
Wolf's evening‐primrose
None None 1B.1 G2 S1 May‐Oct Coastal bluff scrub,
Coastal dunes, Coastalprairie, Lowermontane coniferous
Low Potential. Marginalscrub and grassland habitatmay occur in the ProjectArea.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Scientific Name Common Name FESA CESA CRPR GRank SRank Blooming Period
Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in the
Project Area
forest; sandy, usuallymesic
Packerabolanderi var.bolanderi
seacoastragwort
None None 2B.2 G4T4 S2S3 (Jan‐Apr)
May‐Jul(Aug)
Coastal scrub, NorthCoast coniferousforest; Sometimesroadsides Low Potential. Marginalscrub and roadside habitatoccur in the Project Area.

Piperia candida white‐flowered
rein orchid
None None 1B.2 G3 S3 (Mar)
May‐Sep
Broadleafed uplandforest, Lower montaneconiferous forest,North Coast coniferousforest; sometimesserpentinite Low Potential. The ProjectArea is largely developed.

Polemoniumcarneum
Oregonpolemonium
None None 2B.2 G3G4 S2 Apr‐Sep Coastal prairie, Coastal scrub, Lower montaneconiferous forest
Low Potential. Knownoccurrences within 3 milesof the Project Area.Marginal scrub andgrassland habitat may occurin the Project Area.

Puccinelliapumila
dwarf alkaligrass
None None 2B.2 G4? SH Jul Marshes and swamps
(coastal salt)
No Potential. Coastal saltmarshes do not occur in theProject Area.

Sidalceamalviflora ssp.patula
Siskiyoucheckerbloom
None None 1B.2 G5T2 S2 (Apr) May‐
Aug
Coastal bluff scrub,Coastal prairie, NorthCoast coniferousforest; often roadcuts Moderate Potential. Knownto occur within 3 miles ofthe Project Area. Scrub andopen roadside habitatsoccur in the Project Area.

Sidalceaoregana ssp.eximia
coastcheckerbloom
None None 1B.2 G5T1 S1 Jun‐Aug Lower montane
coniferous forest,Meadows and seeps,North Coast coniferousforest Low Potential. Marginalhabitat may occur, notdocumented in Fortunaarea.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Scientific Name Common Name FESA CESA CRPR GRank SRank Blooming Period
Habitat Requirements Potential to Occur in the
Project Area
Sisyrinchiumhitchcockii
Hitchcock'sblue‐eyed grass
None None 1B.1 G2 S1 Jun Cismontane woodland
(openings), Valley andfoothill grassland
Low Potential. Marginalgrasslands and openingsoccur in the Project Area.

Spergulariacanadensis var.occidentalis
western sand‐spurrey
None None 2B.1 G5T4 S1 Jun‐Aug Marshes and swamps
(coastal salt)
No Potential. Coastal saltmarshes do not occur in theProject Area.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Appendix C – Plant Observations
Scientific Name Common Name Status Family Date Indicator Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf maple native Sapindaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Acmispon americanus American bird's foot
trefoil
native Fabaceae 7/30/2021 FACU
Alnus rubra Red alder native Betulaceae 4/7/2021 FAC
Anthoxanthum odoratum Sweet vernal grass invasive non‐native Poaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Arctostaphylos uva‐ursi Kinnikinnick native Ericaceae 7/30/2021 FACU Artemisia douglasiana California mugwort native Asteraceae 4/7/2021 FACW Athyrium filix‐femina Common ladyfern native Woodsiaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Avena barbata Slim oat invasive non‐native Poaceae 7/30/2021 UPL Baccharis pilularis Coyote brush native Asteraceae 4/7/2021 UPL Bellis perennis English lawn daisy non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 UPL Brassica rapa Common mustard invasive non‐native   Brassicaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Briza maxima Rattlesnake grass invasive non‐native Poaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Bromus diandrus Ripgut brome invasive non‐native Poaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Cardamine oligosperma Idaho bittercress native Brassicaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Carduus pycnocephalus Italian thistle invasive non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 UPL Carex obnupta Slough sedge native Cyperaceae 4/7/2021 OBL Ceanothus thyrsiflorus Blueblossom native Rhamnaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Cedrus sp. cedar cultvar non‐native Pinaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Centaurium tenuiflorum Slender centaury non‐native Gentianaceae 7/30/2021 FACW Cerastium glomeratum Large mouse ears non‐native Caryophyllaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Cirsium vulgare Bullthistle invasive non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 FACU Conium maculatum Poison hemlock invasive non‐native   Apiaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Cortaderia jubata Andean pampas grass invasive non‐native Poaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Cotoneaster pannosus Woolly cotoneaster invasive non‐native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Cyperus eragrostis Tall cyperus native Cyperaceae 4/7/2021 FACW Dactylis glomerata Orchardgrass invasive non‐native Poaceae 7/30/2021 FACU Daucus carota Carrot non‐native   Apiaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Dipsacus fullonum Wild teasel invasive non‐native Dipsacaceae 7/30/2021 FAC Epilobium ciliatum Slender willow herb native Onagraceae 4/7/2021 FACW Equisetum telmateia ssp.
braunii
Giant horsetail native Equisetaceae 4/7/2021 UPL
Erodium botrys Big heron bill non‐native Geraniaceae 7/30/2021 FACU Eucalyptus globulus Blue gum invasive non‐native Myrtaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Euphorbia lathyris Gopher plant invasive non‐native Euphorbiaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Festuca arundinacea Reed fescue invasive non‐native Poaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Festuca perennis Italian rye grass invasive non‐native Poaceae 7/30/2021 UPL Foeniculum vulgare Fennel invasive non‐native   Apiaceae 4/7/2021 UPL GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Scientific Name Common Name Status Family Date Indicator Frangula purshiana Cascara sagrada native Rhamnaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Galium aparine Cleavers native Rubiaceae 4/7/2021 FACU
Genista monspessulana French broom invasive non‐native Fabaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Geranium dissectum Wild geranium invasive non‐native Geraniaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Geranium robertianum Robert's geranium non‐native Geraniaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Hedera helix English ivy invasive non‐native   Araliaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Helminthotheca echioides Bristly ox‐tongue invasive non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 FAC Heracleum maximum Common cowparsnip native Apiaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Holcus lanatus Common velvetgrass invasive non‐native Poaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Holodiscus discolor Oceanspray native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Hordeum murinum Foxtail barley invasive non‐native Poaceae 7/30/2021 FAC Hypericum perforatum Klamathweed invasive non‐native Ericaceae 7/30/2021 FACU Hypochaeris radicata Hairy cats ear invasive non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 FACU Juncus effusus Common bog rush native Juncaceae 4/7/2021 FACW Juncus hesperius Coast or bog rush native Juncaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Juncus patens Rush native Juncaceae 4/7/2021 FACW
Lamium purpureum Purple dead nettle non‐native Lamiaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Lathyrus latifolius Sweet pea non‐native Fabaceae 7/30/2021 UPL Leucanthemum vulgare Oxe eye daisy invasive non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 FACU Linum bienne Flax non‐native Linaceae 4/7/2021 UPL
Lonicera hispidula Pink honeysuckle native Caprifoliaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Lonicera involucrata Coast twinberry native Caprifoliaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Lotus corniculatus Bird's foot trefoil non‐native Fabaceae 7/30/2021 FAC Lupinus rivularis Riverbank lupine native Fabaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Mentha pulegium Pennyroyal invasive non‐native Lamiaceae 7/30/2021 OBL Myosotis latifolia Wide leaved forget me
not
invasive non‐native   Boraginaceae 4/7/2021 UPL
Oemleria cerasiformis Oso berry native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Oenanthe sarmentosa Water parsley native Apiaceae 4/7/2021 OBL Oenothera glazioviana Red sepaled evening
primrose
non‐native Onagraceae 7/30/2021 UPL
Pentagramma triangularis Gold back fern native Pteridaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Phalaris aquatica Harding grass invasive non‐native Poaceae 7/30/2021 FACU Picea sitchensis Sitka spruce native Pinaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Pinus muricata Bishop pine native Pinaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Pinus radiata Monterey pine rare, native Pinaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Plantago lanceolata English plantain invasive non‐native Plantaginaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Polypodium glycyrrhiza Licorice fern native Polypodiaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Polystichum munitum Western sword fern native Dryopteridaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Populus trichocarpa Black cottonwood native Salicaceae   7/30/2021 FAC Poterium sanguisorba Garden burnet non‐native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 UPL GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Scientific Name Common Name Status Family Date Indicator Pseudotsuga menziesii Douglas fir native Pinaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Ranunculus sardous Hairy buttercup non‐native Ranunculaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Raphanus raphanistrum Jointed charlock non‐native   Brassicaceae 7/30/2021 UPL Raphanus sativus Jointed charlock invasive non‐native   Brassicaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Ribes sanguineum Flowering currant native Grossulariaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Rosa rubiginosa Sweet brier non‐native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Rubus armeniacus Himalayan blackberry invasive non‐native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Rubus parviflorus Thimbleberry native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Rubus ursinus California blackberry native Rosaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Rumex acetosella Sheep sorrel invasive non‐native Polygonaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Rumex crispus Curly dock invasive non‐native Polygonaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Salix hookeriana Coastal willow native Salicaceae 4/7/2021 FACW Salix lasiandra Pacific willow native Salicaceae 4/7/2021 FACW Salix lasiolepis Arroyo willow native Salicaceae 4/7/2021 FACW Salix sitchensis Sitka willow native Salicaceae 4/7/2021 FACW Sambucus racemosa Red elderberry native Adoxaceae 7/30/2021 FACU Scirpus microcarpus Mountain bog bulrush native Cyperaceae 4/7/2021 OBL Scrophularia californica California bee plant native Scrophulariaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Senecio vulgaris Common groundsel non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 FACU Sequoia sempervirens Coast redwood native Cupressaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Silybum marianum Milk thistle invasive non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 UPL Stachys rigida Rough hedgenettle native Lamiaceae 4/7/2021 FACW Stellaria media Chickweed non‐native Caryophyllaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Taraxacum officinale Red seeded dandelion non‐native   Asteraceae 4/7/2021 FACU Tellima grandiflora Fringe cups native Saxifragaceae 4/7/2021 FACU Toxicodendron
diversilobum
Poison oak native Anacardiaceae 4/7/2021 FAC
Trifolium repens White clover non‐native Fabaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Umbellularia californica California bay native Lauraceae 4/7/2021 FAC Urtica dioica Stinging nettle native Urticaceae 4/7/2021 FAC Veronica sp. veronica Plantaginaceae 4/7/2021 UPL
Vicia sativa Spring vetch non‐native Fabaceae 4/7/2021 UPL Vinca major Vinca invasive non‐native   Apocynaceae 4/7/2021 UPL GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Appendix D – Rapid Assessment Forms
Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Revised Man:h 27, 2018)
circle: Releve or RA
GPS name: P..~ For Relev6 only: Bearlng•,teft axis at ID point __ of Long I Short side UTME _ _____ OTMN ----- - _ Zone: 11 NAD83 GPS error: ftJ mJ PDOP __ Decimal degrees: LAT LONG _ __ . _____ _
0 GPS within stand? Yes I No If No, cite from GPS to stand: distance (m) __ bearing • _ _ inclination • _ _ 0 t-;:;:::a::•lll::.rec~o:.;;rd:::.:...:B::a;::se::po~ln::.t_:: ID::..====::======-~P~ro~1ec~ted~U~T~M~s:_: ~U~TME~========-UT~!.:M~N-========-=---j 0 C.hmeraNa~e: t>~ ~!!:C'~_!IphotosatiDpolnt:hlf,~ w_ _____ . --·-- . ___ ___ 0 t er photos:
<, 0 -5, >5 I PlotArea(m1): 100/ __ 1 PlotDimenslons __ x __ m A RARadiusiQm __ NE NW@ SW Flat Variable 1 Steepness,Actuat•: __ o• ~ >5-25" >25 "' 0 Topography: Macro: top uppe "' mid lower bottom I concave undulating Geology code: Soil Texture codeY. (avtA >lo etland/Riparian (circle one) 0 0
o/o Surface cover: (Incl. outcrops) (>QOcm diam) {25-60cm) {7.5-25cm) {2mm-7.5cm) {Incl sand, mud) H10: BA Stems:C)(} ·Litter: Bedrock: Boulder: r Stone: Cobble: 1- Gravel:' "'2._ Fines: L{. =too•;. 0 % Current year bioturbation __ Past bioturbation present? Yes A No % Hoof punch _ _ 0 Fire evidence: Yes I No (circle one) If yes, describe in Site history section, in ding date of fire, if known. o ~--------~----~~~-------~----~---- ----------~ _ ~Jte histo~, stand age, comments: D' . be' ~ CQ~ ~ ~tv") ,~\':::(_ 't I'\ V ~ ~ "€.6_._ -·~~vo.~ ~~f-o-t.. nc:e~ v:r_ . ..sbc.ub\_~~-\:.c.c£1 --1J:l1.'!1:1a1~~ IM..~~~e.lA. 'tsccc'f'/LdQM.uda£lCL-..s.lao.¥ca.~ ·--- -------- ----·---------
---··- - ---·---·----- ·------~------~-·-----
Tree DBH : T1 (<I" dbh), T2 (1-6" dbh), T3 (6-11" dbh), T4 (11-24" dbh), TS (>24" dbh), T6 multi-layered (T3 orT41ayer underTS, >()()%cover) Shrub: Sl seedling (<3 yr. old), - oung (<1% deac!)@ture (1-25% dead), S4 decadent (>25% dead) Herbaceous: HJ (<12" plant .), H2 < 2'' bt.)
Desert Riparian Tree/Shrub: <2ft. stem bt.), 2 (2-lOft. hl), 3 (I0-20ft. ht.), 4 {>20ft. bt.) Field-assessed vegetation Alliance name: ~~~~~ru:~~.l)~I&U.:~:J~'e.J.~~3J~ItM~~~~Ia0(~6t~ Field-assessed Association name (optional):------------------,...,.------------- Adjacent Allianees/~rection: -------------!------'---'------------' 0 0
0 0
0 0
Confidence in Alliance identification: L M H Explain:---------------------- o ~~~~~~~~~-~S=b~ru~b~--~T~r~e~--~O~th~e~r~ld~e n~tlfi~ca~ti~·o~n~o~ m~a~~in~ln~fu ~a~t~io~n~: ___________________ -; o Page I
Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Revised March 27, 2018) Database #: \Lf-,'10JV'\CX:.; \ SPECIES SHEET IV. YEGETATIO!~tDESGRlPTION ·,, ~·~ m;n•-~ I • l ~ I '
%Non Vase cover: Total % Vase Veg cover:K;Q_
~~over Conifer tree I Hardwood tree: _ _ I __ Regenerating Tree: __ Shrub: · Herbaceo s:~ . Height Class - Con.ifer tree I Hardwood tree: --'-- Regenerating Tree: __ Shrub: ~ rbaceo s:~ £!!eight classes: 1=<112m, 2=112-1m, 3=1-2m, 4=2-5m, 5=5-lOm, 6=10-15m, 7,.15-20m, 8=20-35m, 9=-35-50m, 10=>50m I/ Stratum categories: T=Tree, A= SApling, E =SEedling, S .. Shrub, H- Herb, N= Non-vascular % Cover Intervals for reference: r = trace +=<I% 1-5% >5-15%, >15-25%, >25-50%, >50-75% >75% Stratum Species v. cover c Final•pecies determin1tlon
~ tZ i~ \S ttme..ni ac..t ,._, (C ~l\ 1-,~
s l£:k-e .o 6;h Jv"CY\s::a.. ~.v-'l. ( UPL' ~
\A ICr'lPn\w\\.t('l') J~\a.~ fv\'~\ __10
lt2\ ~~ c: !~ .r~ ic~C.."- l'L
c ex"\.) l ""' ~ ( \\ '"""-l...t.. ............. 2.. ~ttN'UY .( <,~ ',.. I 11~""'-.:\,.c:.,.. ~~ ;;.....

C~P r"-"'~ i.~ •I - ...,
V.i.r ~ ~:Lt'l\1 :1 ~I
If' ;..1..\.Joll<. 0/(" f10C'.~ -;t( u"" l.\
(2.,,-\ \\~ ~IV\~ I
J?b-:1. ~~ b·~ ((-~ B
G.( r..litM r \ cu-!-cifi ~ 1 ~\f"A1<. ~ S_ ";
\ ""' t\U.-b.; <Ar.!\~~.__6[~ • L<; ~ tJ
'
I
. Unusual species:

Page2
0 0
0 For Office Use:

Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Revised Maroh 27, 2018)
I Float database II: I Fin 1 1 tl Allllace a veae a oo type: Assodalloo ~ I. LOCATIONAUENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION I circle: Relevt or {RA', Database II: o'ite: Nameofreeorder: \L. M~\)." \./
I(E,~~~?- 4 1~1'?- \ Other surveyors:

UID: Location Name:

GPS nam,e: Ac<C)\o.) For Relev~ only: Bearing•, left axis at lD point __ of Long I Short side UTME - ----- UTMN Zone: 11 NAD83 GPS error: ftJ mJ POOP __ ------ - Decimal dcgJeeS: LA LONG --------- ---- - ---- GPS within stand? ~/ No If No, cite from GPS to stand: distance (m) __ bearing• _ _ inclination • __ and record: Base point ID Projected UTMs: UTME UTMN
Camera ~·~e: \~~
Other photos:

Cardl.nal p_!l~os at lD point: ~ ~
Stand Slu (acres):~ 1-S, >S 1 Plot Area (m~: 100 1 _ _ 1 Plot Dlmensloos __ x __ m Exposure, Actual":-- NE NW SE @ Flat Variable I Steepness, Actual ":-- o• 1 ~us~m > 25
Topography: Macro: top upper :~< lower bottom I Mlcro: convex nat concave Gt_odula~ "\...

Geology code: SoU Textu. code: I Upland or ~circleone)
% Surface cover: (Incl. outcrops) (>®em diam) (2S-60cm) (7.S·2Scm) (2mm-7.Scm) (Inc! sand, mud) H10: \ BA Stems:SS Lltter:~O Bedrock:Q Boulder: 0 Stone: 0 Cobble: ·1 Grave1:3 Fines: 1> (Jt 00% ~. Curreat year biotu~n _i_ Past bioturbation present? Yes I No 1 % Hoof pu.nch _j_ Fire evidence: Yes I o ircle one) If yes, describe in Site history section, including date of fire, if known.

Site history, stand ag!,~ments : 5-tne 'i-~~ ~tk~l..XSU') rca~~ a~ _,
- - - ---- - -
- - -- -
-
-
-- --- - ~ - - ------ -- - - 1-·-- -
-- - . Disturbance code / Intensity (L,M,H): I I I I I "Other" I ' U. HABJJf.l\11' DESORIPTION ~~ : . ··~j ,, ''· ~· ·'/ ,. , I ,. ""' ~t·.

Tree DB It : Tt (<I" dbb), n (1-6" dbh@-11" db'& 1-24" dbh), TS (>24" dbh), T6 multi-layered (Tl or T4 tayor """"TS. >60% OOYCI) Shrub: M~ing (<3yr okl), §!young (<l%dead) ~ ture(I-2S%dead), ~decadent(>2S%dead) Herbac~u@t2" plant ht.), Hl (>12" bt.)
Desert Riparian Tree/Shrub: 1 (<2ft. stem bl), 2 (2-lOft. ht.), 3 (10-2011. ht), 4 (>20ft. ht.) Desert Palm/Joshua Tree: 1 (<I.S" base diameter), 2 (I.S-6" diam.), 3 (>6" diam.) W ;\lNTERPRE!rA'FfON,OF STAND :,~· ·~, ,:·;• i!t'~ •.;,··' '(~'\'.; 'il ··~·"' i '11 'T'oj ... i"fl' " " .. ..-;,;:·,f:..:··· .:

Fl d-assessed vegetation Alliance name: ~\~ ~~Ai2 ~~~ Field-assessed Association name {optional): =\-\)( ~~ ~ S: : 3s-S. s. \ lct.W.O(it} Adj acent Alliances/direetlon: I I
D
D
D
D
D
D
0 0
D
D
D
0 D
0 0
0 0
0 D
D
0 Confidence In Alliance identincatloo: t@H Esplalo: ~..n.Pr io~ ~()ffi'i.i.m1~ P' " n All/11\\MI'i'· Other Identification or mappln; information: O
0 Pbenolo2Y (E.P,L): Herb Shrub Tree£ D
-- - - ---- ----- -----
Page I
Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Relev6 Field Form 1/, (Revi$«1 Mon:l\ 27, 2018) Database#: K.~~). SPECIES SHEET
IV. VEGETATION DESCRIPTION -
%Non Vase cover: Total 'Yo Vase Veg cover:~ 0
% Cover - Conlrer tree I Hardwood tree: _Q_J .!J.Q. Regenerating Tree: =-- -;;;;;,b: SS,_ Herbaceoua: _L Height Class - Conlrer tree / Hardwood tree: _ _ 1-L.. Regentrttlng Tree: __ Sbrub: :i_ rbac ous:~ D
D
H~igltt classes: 1-<lllm, 1•1/2-lm, 3=1-1m, 4-2-Sm, S=S-IOm, 6•10-15m, 7=15-20m, 8=10-35m, 9•35-50m, io->SOm Stratum categories: 1'-Trce. A • SApling, B ~SEedling, S =Shrub, H• Herb, N= Non-vascular "'o Cover Intervals ror rererence: r=trace, +• <1%, 1-S% >S-15%, >15-25%, >2S-SO% >50-15%, >75% Stratum S\>«lu y. cover C Final species dtttrmlnatlon
lk <. " \',v <- \.} ,·tGD.dS'I tfi ~~ J'I'\Os\\'{ S. 5<.\-c.WflJ'•s\-o5.1 S'. l:as1a\ep\ \I,N . <; ,e;,\,,.,\>, ~~C..U_!> ((; C...\ 50 ~f- \.....o}- csV'(ri-ap Unusual species:

Pagc2
For Office Use:

Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Re ev~ Field Form (Revised Mordl27, 2011) Alliance I Final database II: I Final veaetaUon type: Aasoclltlon .........

I. LOCATIONAUENVIRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION cirelc: Rc ev~ or-{RA'\ Database II:
rt;?>~'>-\ Name ofrccorder: 'II. ~ ,.,...,.,.\.\._
~f:Nf-/\003 Otber Slln'eyon:
um: Loutloa Name:

GPS name: ~ For Relev6 only: Bearlnc .. left axis oliO point __ or Lon& l § hort side UTME ------ UTMN ------- Zone: 11 NAD83 OPS errer: ftJ mJ POOP _ _ Decimal degrees: LAT - ------- LONG - -------- GPS within stan ~/ No If No, eite from GPS to stand: diSIOnCo (m) __ bearing• __ inclination ° __ and tc<Ord: 8ap point ID Prej ocled tn'MI: UTME UTMN
Camera N~me: ()\....to~
Other photos:

Cardinal pb~s at lD point: \-.::>(.~~
Stand Size (acres): <1, w>5 I PlotAru(m1) : Q~ 1 PlotDimenslons __ x _ _ m ~usiD m Exposure, Actual •: _ _ NE NW SE SW at~ 1 Steepness, Actual •: __ 0" t-s• > s-2 > 2s Topography: Mono: top upper mid lower bottom I Micro: convex ~~~e und';;lating Geology code: Soli Texture code: I Uplaad or Wttla d/Ripula (cirele one) % Sul'fact cover: (loci. OUicrops) ~diam) (2S~m) (7.S.2Sem) (2mm-7.Sem) (lnel sand, mud) HtO: \0 BA Stems: 41-Litter: 1..5 Bedrock: CJ ou ~er:CJ Stone: I Cobble: Z.. Gravel:) 0 Fin es: \ () • 100% % Current year bioturbation __ Past bioturbation present? Yes I No I %Hoof puncb __ Art evidence: Yes I No (circle one) lfycs, describe in Site bistory section, including date offue, if known.

Sltel!!_st.2.._ry standa~te.tollllllents: ~J.Q c..ct.eL~~\6-('\. ~a&-aC.+<r\L~ -- .((ocv.3... d.cv.::.fi~~ _.of_ ¥-WOC).M • ~<"CiS~ \~· __ _ - - --- ---- -- ' -- -- ~--
- -- -
----- -- --- ~-- --- -- - - --- --- 1-· -- --- - -- Dlsturbauce code / Intensity (L,M,R): I I I I I wothtt" I n. HABITAT DESCRIP'fJON
Tree DBH:TI (<l"dbb), TI (I~"dbb),~~), T5 (>24"dbb). I!multi-layercd (T3C<T41ayn-n.~,_) Sbrob' S< .... ;OJ(<I~ .... ~g(<;%-~('·U%- !i< ....... , OU%_, Herbaceous: HI (<12" plantht) H2(:>: 2" bl.)
es~rt Riparia n Tree/Sbrub: 1 ~stem ht.), 2 (2-lOft. ht), 3 (I0-20ft. ht), 4 (>20ft. ht.) Desert Palm/Josbua Tree: 1 (<1.5" base diameter), 2 (1.5~" diam.), 3 (>6" diam.) lO. INTERPRETATION OF STAND --::-::o
Field-assessed vegetation Alliance n ame: sa~\~ ~aj.'lQ~ qf\~ ~ll a&acg Field-assessed Association name (optional):

Adjacent Alliancesldlrcction: I I
Collfidenee io Alliance identification: L @ H ExplaiD: >ICXA 1 "'-' $ J,\:rtrS\h/ Pbenolol!Y (E,P L): Herb
I
Shrub T ree Otber Identification or manoln11 Information:
- - -- -- -- --
Page I
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Relev~ Field Form (Revised Murch 27, 2018)
Database#: ~E:\..J't'\O():S SPECIES SHEET
IV. VEGETATION DESCRIPTION .,, - %Non Vase cover:_ Total % Vase Veg cover: 9'i RtgtneratingTree: _L Shrub:Y..Q HerbaceouJ:~ %Cover- Conifer tree I Hn dwood tree: __ I q? Heleht Class - Conifer tree I Hardwood tree: __ 1.:..f£_ Regenerating Tree: J:.\._ Shrub: ~ Herbaceous: ~ Height clasm: l=«l/2m, 2•112-lm, 3~1-2m, 4• 2-Sm, 5•5-Wm, 6ool0-15m, '7• 15-20m, 8-20-35m, 9•35-50m, 1Qooo>50m Stratum eategorieJ: T-Tree, A • SApling, E • SEedling, S =Shrub, H= Herb, N• Non-vascular o/oCoverlntervalsfor reference: r=trace, +-<1% 1....5%, >S-15%, >15-25%, >25-50%, >50-75%, >75% Stral\lm Species. Yo tover c Final spedes dttermlnallon 1-t ISa\\'J( b.,\~~~ {fw:_'...)) \S
.s;.-:l \i.v \~'i.dL o\ <... -(c;~n~ 110 f)...\""'\~ .n.'l'o,,.-~ \ '( c:; c'\ ~ ' If\ j~-1. 0 tDh,,-r.\,.,_\.-v\t\<..... s
v I F"r~f\n.""~~ m~'\...\ an-~ l ./ • 1.) I \
< IR,MJ<.. \~~ ( c:~C..'\ tp
I~ 1" t"Y.LN lUcfll ~ ~
'v II orH.JUa. t\J()\ ··~..b ?
t" fin. .. \ r ::\ J..; r-H ~ 1c~ \~
Srr~\.A~l~ , ~O tr~ :'2:·
r- .J , tW'Y\ ~l)...cff'Jt r ~o\C\. 1C..... l'.\. Mk-~ \ I -r~rO. - ·N\.-a 1
'I """'""'" of\ ~ I
p,...," '"~c#.~W\~~. I
)
(\,,..~ 1.--:l. '.i fl..~ rt V'\l'.Hlu<.. ~~ \
\-... '!l.~l('""" r..J" ..... ct1 C:~~~ "/_
f\\ \ • :llM ~h~ ~e.N" l"~ \
r
.

Unusual species:

0 0
0 For Offiee Use:

Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Releve Field Form (Reviled Man:h 27, 2018)
l. LOCATIONAUENVJRONMENTAL DESCRIPTION
Database#: Date: j....:.:N.::am::: ...::_e :::of:.:.::.tco::rd:::e::.r.:._: ...t..:~ .U..Llllo....;~---------- -i Y.,~(J..:f-\ 1.-\ /CCJ(? ... \ Other surveyors: 0
~--- ~U~lD~:~ ____ JLL~o~t~A~II o~n~N~A~m~e~:~~~~~ ~~~~~~~:---- --~ 0 GPS name: N ( o..0 For lev~ only: Beerlng",left axis at!D point __ or L9ng I Short side 0 UTME _ _____ UTMN _ _____ _ Zone: 11 NAD83 GPS error: rtJ mJ PDOP _ _ Decimal degrees: LAT LONG ___ . _____ _
GPS within standT e I No lfNo, cite from GPS to stand: distance (m)__ bearing •__ inclination •__ 0 1-::-=an::::.:.rec~rd,::::..;B:::a:::se':!po':::::ln::,t ;;ID~======___;P:_:ro!!1!,:;:cc:,::lcd~IJTM~~~::;:VTME~!.::======::.....:U:.:T~M.:.:N.:..=========-; 0 Camera Name; I~ Cardinal photos at ID point: W 0
Other photos: --
RAR2diu~m
> 5-25" > 25
(J
0 Topography: Macro: 0
Geology code: o
% Su.A!_ce cover: (Incl. outcrops) (>60cm dlam) ~~~e~
HtO:C,l BA Ste'ms: . 1...\Cttlter:l..\,<J BedrockC> Boulder: Gravei:""'L Fines: t ();JOO% 0 ~--------------~----~~----~~~~----~----------------~ 0
r------- ------------------------------~---- ------------~ 0 il ehis .!l)standag comments ~~~ b. i~ o
~e-o !:.c.c ~~-; ~ ~. o(L-\:. f'-\<:l.L\~ pcev~\- _ 0(1 a.\L s_ _ , - ~n~~\.L ~eli, ~~\.ili __ ~ ~1~\ _a ~~ Ul.S+ of +~tLh~O§- -----------
Tree DBH :Tl (<!"dbh). T2 (l-6"dbb). T3 (6-l l"dbh), ~" , TS 4"dbh), :llmulti-layered (T30<T41ayuW>dcfTS.>(i()%cq.,.,J Sltnab: seedling (<3 yr. old), 52 young (<l%dead). mature (I ·2S ead), S4 decadent (>2S%dead) Herbaceous: e · plant ht), H2 (>12" ht .. )
Desert Riparian Tree/Shrub: 1 (<2ft. stem ht.), 2 (2-lOft. ht.), 3 (10-20ft. bt.), 4 (>20ft. ht.) Desert Palm/Joshua Tree: 1 {<I.S" base diameter), 2 (I.S-6" diam.), 3 (>6" di11m.) m .lNTERPREil'AIFION OF SF AND
0 0
0 Field-assessed vegetation Alliance name: _p:!..--:\u;p...xu.a..:::;;~::::!:!~'-"2_...Ll O::::Le~CU!L,. ....l..:l!J~..(J~~~ll'1 0 Fteld·assessed Association name (optional): ______ _______________ _____ _ Adjacent AJIJancesldirection: ----~~------~----•- ---------...! 0 0
Confidence in Allianu Identification: L ~ H Explain:--------------------- o ~Ph~e~~o~o~~~~~~~S ub~--~T~re~e~--~O~ e~r~~de~n~ti~fi=~~ti~o~n~r~m~a~l~n~l~~fu~r~m~a~tio~n~: __________________ ~ o

Combined Vegetation Rapid Assessment and Relev~ Field Form (Revised Marc1127, 2018) Database 1#: \LC;J-.\t'~ SPECIES SHEET
IV. VEGETATION DESCRIPTION - - 0/o Non Vase covtr: Total % Vase Vee cover:..J..2 -I '«1Q_ Conlfertree / Hardwoodtree: ~~ ReceneratlnaTret: b_ Shruli: lQ._ Herb1ceo11J: D Hcfgbt C!•u - Conlfertree / Hudwoodtree: 1..£1_ RegenentlaaTree: 0 Shrub: :1.:_ Hub•eeou•:--\.- Height classes: l-<112m, 2•112-lm, 3•1-2m, 4•2-5m, 5•5-IOm, 6•10-15m, 7•15-20m, 8-20-35m, 9•35-SOm, IG->50m Stratum categories: Tree, A- SApling, I! • SEedling, S • Shrub, H• Herb, N• Non-vascular %Conr lntcrnls for nftrtnce: r-trace, + • <1%, 1-5% >5-15% >15-25%, >25-50% >S0-15%, >15% Stratum Spt<IH Y. cover c Final species dtlormlnallon
\ Pi<()\,<. -raJi~~ ,c; I <.- ,..., ~ "' "l~oC... 1(5
,L.. li.t I ) <, <1.}~' ........ ~ v Pr . .1'\\1 ~ ~Cl c.v\\o-oJ~ 1- < c:-;. "'"' .. ~ n .rSh\ ~~ 1
'1'2:.( P~ '-::l.."r . .• ~. "' I
~u~ \ "!1~.-:'l I.. < h-,x-,, ~~·A .-,<.tbhl 1-\1
,. \<AA< ,., 0\.1\~ [~ < I
,~...-
I~ ~ \j,~ ..o-\...\. I
w I(_,.,......,.J> J.\ at' .£..-t j (. 1
'I~J'"'"'\. v'1Cv1.-A ..s~rL.. ... O.. 'L
l.L.!'. ~ ... -1<1"'..... <. .:::)
~- .... ~ ;":\:ilo.L(~ i75 I '~'--~·.e:.. ·l...W"\., ~ pLA5> l6 &M-.s ~\..) ~
fl.. c..<l~ C:L-o\.--:1.. I
A-,A~~~\ 'l
\::!.~--~/\ "!> rut,.~'?. 1.
' ~ ..th~~vf'#o ... .k..r1..~ 6
5/ ll,. .lo /'A. Lu. \\ 'v
1 '
\ I
Unusual sptdes:

Pagc2
0 0
0 GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Appendix E – Site Photographs
Photo 1. Looking at the western slope with the shining willow Sensitive Natural Community and wet pasture from west of the Project Area. Redwoods and Monterey pine planted around Hwy 101 can be seen in the background.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Photo 2. Redwood and Monterey pine were planted around the Highway 101 Kenmar Road Interchange.

Photo 3. The western side of the Kenmar Road Interchange.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Photo 4. The northwestern portion of the Project Area was highly invaded by Himalayan blackberry and French broom.

Photo 5. Shining willow and Himalayan blackberry along the western slope.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Photo 6. Shining willow, arroyo willow, and Sitka willow on the slope above wet pasture.

Photo 7. Arroyo willow and red alder in the Mill Creek riparian crossing.

GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 Appendix F – NRCS Custom Soil Resource
Report
United States
Department of
Agriculture
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Humboldt County,
Central Part,
California
Kenmar Road/US 101
Interchange Project
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
April 12, 2021
Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.

They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.

Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment.

Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.

The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.

Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951).

Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations.

The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey.

Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
3 Contents
Preface....................................................................................................................2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Humboldt County, Central Part, California......................................................13 210—Dungan, 0 to 2 percent slopes...........................................................13 340—Fiedler-Petellen-Nanningcreek complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes.... 14 1010—Urban land-Friendlycity association, 0 to 2 percent.........................17 References............................................................................................................19 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity.

Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.

The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape.

Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.

Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).

Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research.

The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.

The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.

These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.

Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties.

While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.

Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil.

Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.

After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report
6 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.

Custom Soil Resource Report
7 Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 9
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
4491840 4491930 4492020 4492110 4492200 4492290 4492380 4492470 4492560 4491840 4491930 4492020 4492110 4492200 4492290 4492380 4492470 4492560 402470 402560 402650 402740 402830 402920 403010
402470 402560 402650 402740 402830 402920 403010
40° 34' 41'' N
124° 9' 9'' W
40° 34' 41'' N
124° 8' 44'' W
40° 34' 16'' N
124° 9' 9'' W
40° 34' 16'' N N 124° 8' 44'' W
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 150 300 600 900
Feet
0 50 100 200 300
Meters
Map Scale: 1:3,750 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.

Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (AOI)
Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
Landfill
Lava Flow
Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
Aerial Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:24,000.

Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.

Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale.

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.

Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:

Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required.

This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below.

Soil Survey Area: Humboldt County, Central Part, California Survey Area Data: Version 6, Jun 1, 2020
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger.

Date(s) aerial images were photographed: May 8, 2019—Jun 21, 2019
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.

Custom Soil Resource Report
10 Map Unit Legend
Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 210 Dungan, 0 to 2 percent slopes 1.5 9.4%
340 Fiedler-Petellen-Nanningcreek
complex, 15 to 30 percent
slopes

1.5 9.0%
1010 Urban land-Friendlycity
association, 0 to 2 percent

13.2 81.6%
Totals for Area of Interest 16.1 100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.

A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.

Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.

Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape.

The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or Custom Soil Resource Report
11 landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.

An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.

Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities.

Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.

Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.

Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.

These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.

A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.

The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.

An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.

Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.

Custom Soil Resource Report
12 Humboldt County, Central Part, California
210—Dungan, 0 to 2 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: hs2j
Elevation: 10 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 35 to 80 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F
Frost-free period: 275 to 330 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Dungan and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Dungan
Setting
Landform: Fan remnants, alluvial fans, flood-plain steps Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Concave
Parent material: Alluvium derived from mixed sources
Typical profile
Ap1 - 0 to 3 inches: silt loam
Ap2 - 3 to 13 inches: silt loam
Bw - 13 to 29 inches: silt loam
C1 - 29 to 37 inches: fine sandy loam
C2 - 37 to 61 inches: silty clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 39 to 61 inches
Frequency of flooding: RareNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 10.8 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2s
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Ferndale
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Custom Soil Resource Report
13 Landform: Flood-plain steps
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Arlynda
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Backswamps, depressions, flood-plain steps, meander scars Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Russ
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Natural levees
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
340—Fiedler-Petellen-Nanningcreek complex, 15 to 30 percent slopes Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1j78q
Elevation: 50 to 1,480 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 45 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F
Frost-free period: 240 to 330 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Fiedler and similar soils: 32 percent
Petellen and similar soils: 28 percent
Nanningcreek and similar soils: 25 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Fiedler
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Custom Soil Resource Report
14 Parent material: Colluvium derived from conglomerate and/or residuum weathered from conglomerate
Typical profile
Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material
A - 1 to 12 inches: loam
Bt1 - 12 to 20 inches: loam
Bt2 - 20 to 41 inches: clay loam
Bt3 - 41 to 60 inches: clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.60 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 11.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Petellen
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Colluvium derived from conglomerate and/or residuum weathered from conglomerate
Typical profile
Oi - 0 to 1 inches: slightly decomposed plant material
A - 1 to 9 inches: gravelly loam
Bt1 - 9 to 20 inches: very gravelly loam
Bt2 - 20 to 48 inches: very cobbly loam
Cd - 48 to 60 inches: very cobbly loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 30 to 79 inches to densic material Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: Moderate (about 6.2 inches)
Custom Soil Resource Report
15 Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Nanningcreek
Setting
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank
Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Colluvium derived from sandstone and/or residuum weathered from sandstone
Typical profile
A - 0 to 6 inches: loam
Bt1 - 6 to 20 inches: loam
Bt2 - 20 to 30 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt3 - 30 to 60 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.60 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 20 to 39 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 9.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Rootcreek
Percent of map unit: 10 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Down-slope shape: Concave
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Salmoncreek
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank Custom Soil Resource Report
16 Down-slope shape: Convex
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
1010—Urban land-Friendlycity association, 0 to 2 percent Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2w91d
Elevation: 20 to 160 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 44 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 55 degrees F
Frost-free period: 300 to 360 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Urban land, residential: 65 percent
Friendlycity and similar soils: 25 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.

Description of Urban Land, Residential
Setting
Landform: Terraces, alluvial fans
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8
Hydric soil rating: No
Description of Friendlycity
Setting
Landform: Terraces, alluvial fans
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope, tread Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Alluvium derived from metamorphic and sedimentary rock Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 6 inches: silt loam
A - 6 to 13 inches: silty clay loam
A/B - 13 to 24 inches: silty clay loam
Bw1 - 24 to 35 inches: silty clay loam
Custom Soil Resource Report
17 Bw2 - 35 to 55 inches: silty clay loam
C - 55 to 67 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.20 to 2.00 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 20 to 39 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Maximum salinity: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water capacity: High (about 9.3 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): 1
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2s
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Canalschool
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood-plain steps
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Carlotta
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Ferndale
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Flood-plain steps
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down-slope shape: Linear
Across-slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
18 References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.

Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31.

Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.

Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.

Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States.

National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.

Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section.

United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1.

United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 19 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.

National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report
20 GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735

GHD
718 Third Street
Eureka CA 95501
T: 707.443.8326 E: [email protected]
© GHD 2021
This document is and shall remain the property of GHD. The document may only be used for the purpose for which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission.

Unauthorized use of this document in any form whatsoever is prohibited. \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Eureka\Projects\561\11214735\Tech\05 Environmental Mapping and Studies\5.3 Botanical and SNC Survey GHD | Botanical Report for Kenmar Road Interchange 11214735 www.ghd.com