WETLAND/PRAIRIE/SAVANNA EWG SITE CHARACTERIZATION RANKING CRITERIA

General Site Information
Date of site evaluation:

EWG member name:

Site Name/Designation
Location/Street Address/lat&long
Property Owner & contact info

Has Owner been contacted and informed of GI strategy?
Map available for site?

SITE RANK/SCORE (Circle applicable score)
Estimated acreage
< 1.0
1 point 1.0 to 5.0
2 points >5.0 to 10.0
3 points >10 to 20.0
5 points >20.0
5 points/each 10 ac.
Habitat Type disturbed/degraded field
0 points wetland
1 point prairie
3 points wet prairie
5 points savanna
10 points

Rare plants present?
No – 0 points
Good potential – 1 point
Yes – 2 points
Aquatic resource(s) present on site? No – 0 points Yes – 2 points
Aquatic resource type? Heavily used cattle pond
1 point Clean pond
2 points Channelized stream
3 points Minimally disturbed stream
4 points Marsh
5 points
Is aquatic resource is stream, does it have protected riparian zone? Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Is adjacent resource is wetland, does it have upland buffer zone?
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Potential as avian nesting habitat Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Potential seasonal use by migratory songbirds, waterfowl, shorebirds
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Mammal use – Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
Amphibian/reptile use –
Poor
0 points Fair
1 point Good
2 points
% Non-native/invasive plant species cover – >50%
0 points 25%-50%
2 points <25%
5 points
Landowner interest in preservation/restoration Poor
0 points Fair
2 point Good
5 points
Environmental features "Landscape Context" of surrounding area, such as topography, geology, soils, water resources, vegetation, zoning districts, land uses, wildlife habitat, Environmental regimes/processes (fire, flooding), Connectivity (ability of organisms to disperse/recolonize), public parks and farmlands: Rank, then describe in comments. Poor
0 points Fair
5 point Good
10 points
Site structure/ecological integrity/unique features: Current ecological conditions indicate site is a rare ecosystem remnant and considers degree of degradation and potential for preservation/restoration. Rank, then describe in comments. Poor
(severely degraded)
0 points Fair
(moderately degraded)
5-10 points Good
10-20 points
(minimally degraded)

Potential to be critical Hub/Link - Poor
0 points Fair
5-10 points Good
10-20 points
Site is: Hub Link
Hub/Link Type Reserve: protected significant ecological site, including wildlife areas typically in their pristine state.
10 points Conservation Corridor: Linear area, such as river or stream corridor that serves primarily as biological conduits for wildlife and may provide recreational opportunities. Greenways and riparian buffer areas are examples of conservation corridors.
10 points
Managed Native Landscapes: Large publicly owned lands, managed for resource extraction as well as natural and recreational values.
8 points Greenbelts: Protected natural lands or working landscapes that serve as a framework for development while also preserving native ecosystems and/or farms or ranchlands. They often act as partitions within a community – a form of visual and physical relief in the landscape – separating adjacent land uses and buffering the impacts of these uses. Farmland preservation areas can be considered greenbelts.
8 Points


Working Lands: Private working lands, including farmland, forests,and ranch lands.

6 points Landscape Linkages: Open spaces that connect wildlife reserves, parks, managed and working lands and provide sufficient space for native plants and animals to flourish. In addition to protecting the local ecology, these linkages may contain cultural elements, such as historic resources, provide recreational opportunities and preserve scenic views that enhance the quality of life in a community or region. Landscape linkages may include streetscapes and recreational trail corridors.
6 points


Site is: Hub (continued) Link (continued)
Parks and Open Space Areas: Landscapes at the national, state, regional, county, municipal and private level that may protect natural resources and/or provide recreational opportunities. Examples include public parks, natural areas, playgrounds, and golf courses.
4 points Traditional Landscaped Area: Is largely landscaped with non-native plant species on public/private lands subjected to routine excessive mowing/brush removal, but has some vegetative cover utilized by wildlife.



4 points
Recycled Land: Land that was previously damaged by intense public or private use and that have since been restored or reclaimed. Mined lands, landfills or brownfields that have been improved in total or in part to provide an environmental function are examples of recycled lands.
2 points Utility Easement: Land where water, sewer, gas, or electrical lines have been constructed and vegetation is largely non-native species and vegetation management does not optimize wildlife habitat.



2 points


TOTAL SCORE Site Category



Comments:

Category 1 Site: Site size and location make it a prime candidate for preservation/restoration with minimal expenditure of financial and human resources; site may be protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site may provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and may be inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna that has been minimally impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group willing to consider preservation/restoration; protection of site will very likely have high potential to provide a critical wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will likely have significant community support.

Category 2 Site: Site size and location make it a possible candidate for preservation/restoration although requirements for expenditures of financial and human resources may not be optimal on a cost/acre basis; site may be a wetland, but not necessarily protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site’s capability to provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna is moderate, questionable, or unknown and site is not likely to be inhabited by rare native flora species; site does not represent an endangered ecosystem such as a prairie or savanna and/or is a very small remnant fragment of such ecosystems that has been impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and/or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group that may not be willing to consider preservation/restoration due to land value, planned site use, or lack of interest; protection of site will provide a minimal to moderate potential to provide a wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will have questionable or minimal community support.

Category 3 Site: Site size and location make it an unlikely candidate for preservation/restoration since a substantial expenditure of financial and human resources would be required; site is not protected by federal regulations as a “jurisdictional wetland”; site does not provide critical habitat for resident and/or migratory fauna and is not inhabited by rare native flora species; site represents only a remnant prairie or wetland that has been substantially impacted by anthropogenic activities such as grading, filling, structures, removal of vegetation, and or substantial habitat fragmentation; site is owned and operated by city, county, or state entity, or private individual or group most likely not willing to consider preservation/restoration; protection of site will provide little potential to provide even a minimal wildlife habitat hub or linkage corridor; protection of site will likely have little community support.