Watershed Health Index (Ranks & Scores) (2)
| Healthiest (Top 10 Percentile) |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Least Healthy (Bot. 10 Percentile) |
% Natural Land Cover (4)
| >=95% |
| 95% - 85% |
| 85% - 75% |
| 75% - 65% |
| 65% - 55% |
| 55% - 45% |
| 45% - 35% |
| 35% - 25% |
| 25% - 15% |
| <15% |
% Natural Land Cover (Hydrologically Active Zone) (5)
| >=95% |
| 95% - 85% |
| 85% - 75% |
| 75% - 65% |
| 65% - 55% |
| 55% - 45% |
| 45% - 35% |
| 35% - 25% |
| 25% - 15% |
| <15% |
Population Density (6)
| 95% - 0 % (Highest Density) |
| 98% - 95% |
| 98.9% - 98% |
| 99.4% - 98.9% |
| 100% - 99.4% (Lowest Density) |
Population Density (Riparian Zone) (7)
| 91.5% - 0% (Highest Density) |
| 96.1% - 91.5% |
| 97.8% - 96.1% |
| 98.9% - 97.8% |
| 100% - 98.9% (Lowest Density) |
% Watershed Ag. on Nitrogen Sensitive Soil (8)
| 100% - 97% (Lowest) |
| 97% - 90% |
| 90% - 79% |
| 79% - 61% |
| 61% - 0% (Highest) |
% Watershed Ag. on Hydric Soil (9)
| 100% - 99% (Lowest) |
| 99% - 96% |
| 96% - 88% |
| 88% - 72% |
| 72% - 0% (Highest) |
Dam Storage Ratio (11)
| 99.2% - 0% (Highest Density) |
| 99.9% - 99.2% |
| 100% - 99.9% (Lowest Density) |
% Forest Remaining (12)
| >=95% |
| 95% - 85% |
| 85% - 75% |
| 75% - 65% |
| 65% - 55% |
| 55% - 45% |
| 45% - 35% |
| 35% - 25% |
| 25% - 15% |
| <15% |
% Wetlands Remaining (13)
| >=95% |
| 95% - 85% |
| 85% - 75% |
| 75% - 65% |
| 65% - 55% |
| 55% - 45% |
| 45% - 35% |
| 35% - 25% |
| 25% - 15% |
| <15% |
| Below Calculation Threshold |
% Impervious Cover (14)
| 100% - 99% (Lowest Impervious Cover) |
| 99% - 98% |
| 98% - 97% |
| 97% - 93% |
| 93% - 0% (Highest Impervious Cover) |
Wetlands By Design: Surface Water Supply (15)
| 100% - 38% (Highest Remaining Capcity) |
| 38% - 25% |
| 25% - 15% |
| 15% - 7% |
| 7% - 0% (Lowest Remaining Capacity) |
Density Road-Stream Crossings (16)
| 100% - 90% (Lowest Density) |
| 90% - 83% |
| 83% - 73% |
| 73% - 57% |
| 57% - 0% (Highest Density) |
Dam Density (18)
| 100% - 96% (Lowest Density) |
| 96% - 93% |
| 93% - 0% (Highest Density) |
% Ditch Drained Area (19)
| 100% - 99% (Least Ditched) |
| 99% - 99.6% |
| 99.6% - 94% |
| 94% - 82% |
| 82% - 0% (Most Ditiched) |
Road Density (Riparian Zone) (20)
| 100% - 87% (Least Density) |
| 87% - 80% |
| 80% - 73% |
| 73% - 59% |
| 59% - 0% (Highest Density) |
% High Intensity Land Cover (Riparian Zone) (21)
| 100% - 98% (Lowest) |
| 98% - 84% |
| 84% - 67% |
| 67% - 49% |
| 49% - 0% (Highest) |
Wetlands by Design: Flood Abatement (22)
| 100% - 38% (Highest Remaining Capacity) |
| 38% - 25% |
| 25% - 15% |
| 15% - 6.7% |
| 6.7% - 0% (Lowest Remaining Capacity) |
Habitat Condition Index (Riparian Buffer) (24)
| 100% - 99.6% (Low Degradation Potential) |
| 99.6% - 90% |
| 90% - 74% |
| 74% - 55% |
| 55% - 0% (High Degradation Potential) |
Wetlands By Design: Fish and Aquatic Habitat (25)
| 100% - 36% (Highest Remaining Capacity) |
| 36% - 23% |
| 23% - 13% |
| 13% - 6% |
| 6% - 0% (Lowest Remaining Capacity) |
Mean River and Stream Biologic Condition (27)
| 100% - 69% (Good Condition Probability) |
| 69% - 51% |
| 51% - 38% |
| 38% - 23% |
| 23% - 0% (Degraded Condition Probability) |
River and Stream Biologic Condition (Watershed Outlet) (28)
| 100% - 78% (Good Condition Probability) |
| 78% - 57% |
| 57% - 38% |
| 38% - 23% |
| 23% - 0% (Degraded Condition Probability) |
% Wadeable Streams with Good to Excellent IBI Scores (29)
| 100% - 99.9% (Good Condition Probability) |
| 99.9% - 94% |
| 94% - 76% |
| 76% - 32% |
| 32% - 0% (Degraded Condition Probability) |
% CWA 303(d) Supporting Area (31)
| 100% - 99% |
| 99% - 62% |
| 62% - 0% |
% CWA 303(d) Supporting Stream Length (32)
| 100% - 99% |
| 99% - 65% |
| 65% - 19% |
| 19% - 0% |
Wetlands by Design: Sediment Retention (33)
| 100% - 34% (Highest Remaining Capacity) |
| 34% - 18.9% |
| 18.9% - 9.6% |
| 9.6% - 3.9% |
| 3.9% - 0% (Lowest Remaining Capacity) |
Wetlands by Design: Nutrient Transformation (34)
| 100% - 37% (Highest Remaining Capacity) |
| 37% - 24% |
| 24% - 13% |
| 13% - 5.7% |
| 5.7% - 0% (Lowest Remaining Capacity) |
Opportunity Index (Ranks & Scores) (36)
| Most Opportunity (Top 10 Percentile) |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Least Opportunity (Bot.10 Percentile) |
Freshwater Fishing Demand (38)
| Highest Demand |
| |
| |
| |
| Lowest Demand |
Conservation Opportunity Area (Stream & River Length) (39)
Conservation Opportunity Area (Terrestrial & Lake Area) (40)
Brook Trout Environmental Resilience Reserve Areas (41)
| Reserve Areas |
| Not a Reserve Area |
Count of Lake, River & Watershed Assoc. (42)
TMDL Protection Priority Watersheds (43)
| Protection Priority |
| Not a Protection Priority |
Forest Abundance (44)
| Most Abundance |
| |
| |
| |
| Least Abundance |
Forest Rarity (45)
Vulnerability Index (Ranks & Scores) (47)
| Most Vulnerable (Top 10 Percentile) |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Least Vulnerable (Bot. 10 Percentile) |
% Urban Change (2001 - 2016) (49)
% Proj. Developed Cover Change (2010 - 2050) (50)
% Agricultural Cover Change (2001 to 2016) (51)
| Gaining Agriculture |
| |
| Losing Some Agriculture |
| |
| Losing More Agriculture |
% Human Use Change (2001 - 2016, Hydro Con Zone) (52)
| Gaining Most Urban Cover |
| |
| Gaining Some Urban Cover |
| |
| Losing Most Urban Cover |
% Waters Near ≥ 5% Impervious Cover (53)
| Most % (Top 20 Percentile) |
| |
| |
| |
| Least % (Bot. 20 Percentile) |
Avg. Proj. Summer Air Temp. Change (2061-2090) (54)
| 5.14 - 5.16 degrees |
| 5.12 - 5.14 degrees |
| 5.08 - 5.12 degrees |
| 5.02 - 5.08 degrees |
| 4.94 - 5.02 degrees |
% Proj. Change in Spring Runoff Vol. (2061 - 2095) (55)
| 24.36 - 31.38% |
| 19.62 - 24.36% |
| 16.61 - 19.62% |
| 12.72 - 16.61% |
| 6.98 - 12.72% |
Count of Waterway and Wetland Permit Requests 2015-2020 (56)
| 13 - 106 |
| 7 - 13 |
| 4 - 7 |
| 2 - 4 |
| 1 - 2 |
Wetlands By Design: Cumulative Loss of Wetland Ecosystem Functions (57)
Protection Potential Index (Ranks & Scores) (59)
| Most Potential (Top 10 Percentile) |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| Least Potential (Bot. 10 Percentile) |
|