The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20030179 Ver 9_Monitoring Report_20130627Duke Energy® Carolinas January 18, 2012 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N. E. Washington, DC 20426 HYDRO STRATEGY & LICENSING Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC EC12YI526 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28202 -1802 Mailing Address: EC12Y/P.O. Box 1006 Charlotte, NC 28201 -1006 Subject: Dillsboro Hydroelectric Project (FERC # 2602) Restoration Plan - Second Year Monitoring Reports Following Dam Deconstruction Dear Secretary Bose: On March 30, 2009, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issued an Order Approving Restoration Plan (Order) to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke Energy) pursuant to Ordering Paragraphs (E) and (N) of the Commission's July 19, 2007 Order Accepting Surrender and Dismissing Application for Subsequent License and an April 22, 2008 Order on Rehearing and Clarification for the Dillsboro Project. This Restoration Plan was implemented following dam and powerhouse deconstruction (January -March 2010, as noted in Duke Energy's June 14, 2010 Final Demolition Report for Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse submitted to the Commission, D2SI, Atlanta Regional Office). Duke Energy hereby submits two reports (Spring 2011 Monitoring Report and Fall 2011 Monitoring Report) detailing the 2011 (second year) shoreline restoration and monitoring activities. These two reports compliment those filed with the Commission on February 7, 2011 (first year), and constitute the final action required by the approved Restoration Plan. Please direct your staff to contact Hugh Barwick at 704.382.0805 or __ a ic @ u e- 9 .ca should they have questions regarding these reports. Sincerely, �_* 4M4___J Jeffrey G. Lineberger, PE Director, Hydro Strategy & Licensing Enclosures: Reports cc w /enclosures: William Allerton, FERC Wayne King, FERC Secretary Kimberly Bose Page 2 Chuck Wooten, Jackson County, NC Mark Cantrell, USFWS Chris Goudreau, NCWRC Phil Fragacane, Duke Energy Steve Johnson, Duke Energy Hugh Bat-wick, Duke Energy Spring 2011 Monitoring Report Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Jackson County, North Carolina Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation June 2011 526 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28202 -1802 Prepared by: Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. EQUINOX rNNFRr'NItVNNTwi, 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville, NC 28801 Table of Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................... ............................... 1 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................. ............................... 1 2.1 Location and Setting ........................................................................... ............................... 1 2.2 Project Goals and Objectives ............................................................. ............................... 3 2.3 Methods ................................................................................................. ..............................3 2.4 Project History and Contacts ............................................................. ............................... 4 3.0 PROJECT MONITORING ................................................................... ............................... 5 3.1 Feature Monitoring Methods and Results ........................................ ............................... 5 3.1.1 Bank and Sediment Stability ....................................................... ............................... C 3.1.2 Vegetation ..................................................................................... ............................... C 3.1.3 Permanent Photo Stations ........................................................... ............................... 7 3.1.4 Visual Assessment ........................................................................ ............................... 8 4.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN ............................... ............................... 8 5.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................ ............................... 9 Fi ures Figure1. Vicinity Map ....................................................... ..............................2 Tables Table 1. Project Activity and Reporting History ........................ ..............................4 Table 2. Project Contacts .................................................... ..............................5 Table 3. Planted and Total Stem Counts ................................. ..............................7 Appendices Appendix A. Monitoring Plan View Appendix B. Cross - Section Plots Appendix C. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Appendix D. Permanent Photo Station Photos Appendix E. Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Restoration Plan i 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The project is located on the Tuckasegee River and includes monitoring the restored reach of river inundated prior to removal of the Dillsboro Dam. Restoration involved the stabilization of approximately 6,700 linear feet of stream bank. The primary goal of the project was to stabilize the existing stream banks following removal of the Dillsboro Dam. Five treatment types were used to accomplish the project objectives and included stream bank toe protection using small rocks, stream bank toe protection using boulders, minor stream bank grading, riprap /joint staking, and revegetation only. Riparian habitats were restored by revegetating with native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plant species. Semi - annual monitoring will occur over a two -year period in 2010 and 2011. Baseline monitoring efforts occurred in August 2010 with subsequent monitoring to occur in the fall 2010, spring 2011, and fall 2011. Monitoring efforts included bank stability monitoring, vegetation monitoring, and visual assessments. 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND 2.1 Location and Setting The Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration site is located on parcels owned by Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy) and other private landowners (Figure 1). The site is on the Tuckasegee River in the Little Tennessee River watershed (8 -digit HUC - 06010204). The lower project boundary is located approximately 500 feet east of the US Highway 441 bridge and just south of the Town of Dillsboro in Jackson County, North Carolina. The Federal Energy Regulatory Committee (FERC) accepted an application from Duke Energy to remove the Dillsboro Dam. This order required Duke Energy to provide a restoration plan for the impounded area upstream of the dam and required a two -year monitoring period to ensure its success (Duke Energy 2008). Prior to removal, the Dillsboro Dam stood 12 feet high, 300 feet long, and impounded approximately 4,200 linear feet of the Tuckasegee River. After the dam was removed in February 2010, the exposed banks upstream of the dam were predominately vertical or undercut with bank substrate consisting of fine silt and sand. Because the majority of the exposed bank angles were so steep and substrate so fine, they were considered highly unstable. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 N Figure 1- Vicinit A-lap Dillshamo Shoreline Restoration EgUI -\ OX 2010 aerial I F II V11I:hl +.I F-et Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 2 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 2.2 Project Goals and Objectives The primary goals and objectives for the Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration project were to develop and implement a restoration plan to stabilize the exposed river banks. 2.3 Methods Five different treatments were employed to stabilize the previously inundated banks of the Tuckasegee River. These treatments included 1) revegetation only, 2) revegetation with minor grading, 3) rock -toe installation with bank shaping, 4) riprap /joint staking, and 5) boulder -toe construction. Revegetation consisted of planting native seed mixes, live stakes, and bare root trees. Level I: Revegetation Only Treatment The banks in these reaches never displayed evidence of erosion, settling, or slumping throughout the course of the project. Generally, this coincided with areas previously stabilized with boulders or riprap or reaches at the upper end of the project area where the drop in water surface after removal of the dam was relatively small ( <2 feet). These areas were planted with native seed mixes to provide temporary erosion control and with live stakes and bare root trees to provide long -term bank stability. Level II: Revegetation and Minor Grading Treatment Banks along these reaches exhibited some evidence of settling or slumping requiring additional stabilizing measures. An additional concern in these areas was the upper portions of the banks were nearly vertical and contained significant vegetation, including many large trees that were either leaning towards the river or perched at the top of the bank. The approach taken in these reaches was to compact the upper bank with a track -hoe bucket and remove large trees that could potentially become unstable. Large trees that were leaning or located close to the top of the bank were cut just above the ground and the root balls left in place. This action was intended to have the combined effect of removing the weight of the tree from the bank to reduce the likelihood of bank failure and retain the root structure for bank stability. This also eliminated the possibility high winds or water would cause a particular tree to topple and thereby expose the bank to additional erosion. The compaction of the upper banks reduced the upper bank angle and thus reduced the occurrence of erosion and bank failure. The slopes were compacted versus re- graded in order to maintain existing vegetation. Additionally, the bank was seeded and planted with live stakes and bare root woody plants. Level III: Rock -Toe Treatment These reaches exhibited highly unstable banks that were generally associated with scour along the toe of the slope resulting in undermined and vertical banks. The approach taken in these reaches was to reconstruct the bank with rock and boulders to secure the toe of the slope and to excavate a bench at bankfull elevation. The rock -toe was constructed to at least two feet above the low water elevation in order to accommodate daily flow fluctuations associated with the upstream reservoir flow releases. Additionally, matting was placed along the bank below the bankfull bench and the entire bank was seeded and planted. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 3 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Level IV: Boulder -Toe Structure Treatment Both banks within the downstream reach; from the dam to approximately 700 feet upstream, were subject to the greatest potential for stream bank erosion. This was partly due to the fact this area contained the deepest sediment deposits and highest unvegetated banks when the dam was removed. Bank erosion potential was further aggravated by the presence of a rock ledge that created an area of high water velocity and scour. Site specific variations of boulder -toe structures were required to stabilize the south bank due to the presence of the existing rock ledge. The bank upstream of the rock ledge was treated as a point bar area with the toe of the bank being constructed two feet above the low flow elevation and a bench constructed at the bankfull elevation. Downstream of the rock ledge the banks were reconstructed with a series of curved boulder -toe structures with the concavities of the structures oriented to provide relief around the existing bedrock features. The bank in close proximity to the rock ledge was reinforced with a series of boulder vanes angled to redirect flow to the center of the river and to allow flow adjacent to the bank to step down over the vane arms. Additionally, the bank was seeded and planted with native vegetation. Level V.• Riprap/.Ioint Staking The area immediately upstream of the dam on the right bank descending exhibited steep, unstable banks that were stabilized to permanently protect SR 1359 (River Road). Boulder -sized riprap was placed along this reach to armor the banks. The rip -rap was backfilled with soil, seeded, and live staked to further promote bank stabilization. 2.4 Project History and Contacts Duke Energy Corporation contracted Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc (Equinox) and Wolf Creek Engineering to initiate planning and data collection for the Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration project. Data collection and planning began in April 2010 and was completed in July 2010. Construction began in May 2010 and was completed in August 2010, with baseline monitoring data collection initiated immediately after construction was completed (Table 1). Primary design and construction was completed by Equinox and Wolf Creek Engineering. Additional subcontractors and materials suppliers were also used (Table 2). Project personnel and contact information for the design and monitoring components is presented in Table 2. Table 1. Project Activity and Reporting History Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Number of Reporting Years: 2 Activity or Deliverable MonthtYear Restoration Plan Apr -10 Final Design - Construction Plans Jul -10 Construction Completed An,,- 10 Planting Completed An,,- 10 Baseline Monitoring Sep -10 Invasive Species Treatment Sep -10 Fall 2010 Monitoring Nov -10 Supplemental Planting Apr -11 River Cane Transplant Apr -11 Invasive Species Treatment May -11 Spring 2011 Monitoring J un -11 Fall 2011 Monitoring Scheduled Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 4 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Table 2. Project Contacts Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Designer Equinox Environmental Consultation & Design, Inc. 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Primary Project Design POC David Tuch 828- 253 -6856 Wolf Creek Engineering 51 North Knob Lane Weaverville, NC 28787 Primary Project Design POC Grant Ginn 828 - 658 -3649 Construction Contractor Quartermaster Environmental 658 Floyd Church Road Lexington, NC 27292 Construction Contractor POC Brooks Cole 704 - 473 -5021 Planting Contractor Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. PO Box 1 197 Fremont, NC 27830 Planting Contractor POC Bryan Ellis 919- 242 -6551 Seeding Contractor Quartermaster Environmental 658 Floyd Church Road Lexington, NC 27292 Seeding Contractor POC Brooks Cole 704 - 473 -5021 Seed M ix Sources Dykes & Son Nursery 825 Maude Etter Road McMinnville, TN 37110 931 -668 -8833 Nursery Stock Suppliers Mellow Marsh Farm 1312 Woody Store Road Siler City, NC 27344 919- 742 -1200 Monitoring Contractor Equinox Environmental Consultation & Design, Inc. 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Stream M onitoring POC Steve Melton (828) 253 -6856 Vegetation M onitoring POC Steve Melton (828) 253 -6856 3.0 PROJECT MONITORING 3.1 Feature Monitoring Methods and Results Features selected for baseline data collection and future semi - annual (fall and spring) monitoring purposes included bank profile monitoring stations, vegetation monitoring plots, and photographic monitoring stations (Appendix A — Monitoring Plan View). Additionally, a visual assessment of the entire project site will occur semi - annually to identify and document any potential areas of concern not identified at the established monitoring locations. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 5 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 3.1.1 Bank and Sediment Stability To document post - construction cross - sections and sediment stability along the restored stream banks, fourteen permanent streambank cross - section monitoring stations were established on July 27, 2010. They were spaced at approximately 500 -foot intervals along the revegetated stream reach (Appendix A — Monitoring Plan View). Spring monitoring occurred on April 7, 2011. Due to the depth of the Tuckasegee River, cross - section data were collected only to depict the bank profile and not the stream bed. Cross - section transects were marked at the toe and top of bank with rebar flagged with fluorescent pink tape. Measurements were collected using a total station (Appendix B — Cross - Sections). The cross - section survey data revealed little change in bank profiles between July (baseline conditions) and April 2011. Cross - sections 4, 5, 6, and 11 show evidence of toe retreat of approximately 1 to 1 1/2 feet. There is no strong evidence of scour at these locations and the retreat of the toe appears to be associated with the winnowing of silt that was deposited along the toe of the bank during the impoundment. At the time of the most recent inspection the loss of this material has not progressed to the point where it is threatening the stability of the bank and there is no evidence of bank loss or slumping above these locations. Continued observation is appropriate and no action is required. Cross - section 14 shows approximately 2 feet of change in the bank profile, but this was attributed to differing survey technique between years. During the As -built survey the top of the boulders were surveyed while on subsequent surveys it was decided to survey the ground surface between the boulders. This change in procedure was employed to capture potential loss of material between the boulders since the boulders and the voids between them are substantial in this area. 3.1.2 Vegetation Prior to the Dillsboro Dam removal in 2008, scientists from HDR (HDR Engineering Inc. of the Carolinas) /DTA (Devine Tarbell and Associates, Inc.) performed a baseline vegetation survey to document natural community types adjacent to the reservoir (Duke Energy 2009). Five 15 foot x 60 foot plots were established on the top of the stream bank (Appendix E Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project). These plots were not utilized for the post - restoration monitoring. New vegetation monitoring plots were established by Equinox on July 27, 2010 and targeted banks where restoration occurred. Five 5 meter x 20 meter (0.025 acre) monitoring plots were established in the riparian area using the CVS -EEP protocol (Lee et al. 2008). Together these plots comprise 5% of the entire area replanted. Plot placement was determined based on the specific treatment applied to the bank. Baseline data were collected on August 4, 2010 and spring monitoring data were collected on May 18, 2011. Plot corners and planted stems were also marked with fluorescent orange flagging tape. Additionally, wooden stakes were set at the vegetation plot origin and labeled with the plot identification number. Vegetation monitoring plot corners were marked with rebar and recorded with a handheld Global Positioning System unit. Data for the baseline monitoring report was collected according to the CVS -EEP Level I protocol (Lee et. al. 2008). The primary purpose of the Level I protocol is to determine the pattern of installation of plant material with respect to species, spacing, and density. Subsequent semi- annual monitoring data collection efforts will follow the CVS -EEP Level II protocol (Lee et al. 2008) to monitor overall plant survival and growth. Level II monitoring will capture planted woody stem data and naturally regenerated plants by species and size class. These methods allow for an accurate and rapid assessment of the overall trend of woody -plant restoration and Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 6 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 regeneration on a site. The success of the riparian vegetation plantings will be determined by planted stem densities within established monitoring plots. Based on the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stream mitigation guidelines, survival of woody species planted at mitigation sites should be at least 320 stems /acre through year three and 260 stems /acre through year five (USACE 2003). While this is not a requirement for the project, it is a way to measure success. Native riparian plant species were planted during the summer of 2010. According to the North Carolina Climate Retrieval and Observations Network of the Southeast (NC CRONOS) database, Sylva received 2.24 inches of rain during June leading to drought conditions during planting (NC CRONOS August 2010). Supplemental planting was conducted during the spring of 2011, which included the transplant of 53 clusters of river cane Arundineria gigantea . In addition, a second herbicide treatment of invasive exotic species occurred during the week of May 10, 2011. Vegetation monitoring data were collected in May 2011. Stem counts for each of the five vegetation monitoring plots were recorded by species (Table 3). Results from the spring documentation indicate a planted stem density (including live stakes) ranging from 81 to 1,012 stems per acre with an average of 550 stems per acre, which exceed the mitigation success criteria. Excluding live stakes, the average stem density for the entire restoration site is 299 stems per acre; of these, 71% were noted to have either good or excellent vigor values. However, vegetation plot 3 did not meet the interim success criteria of 320 stems per acre. Seventy -eight percent of the planted stems in this plot are dead or missing (Appendix C, page 2). The soil composition in this plot is predominately sand and may be contributing to the high stem mortality. In addition, the invasive exotic Japanese honeysuckle Loll ice ra japonica, Oriental bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus, and morning glory Ipomoea sp. were recorded in several of the vegetation monitoring plots, particularly plots 2 and 5. Herbicide treatments of these species occurred during the week of October 13, 2010 and May 10, 2011. Invasive species within these plots appear to have been controlled. Table 3. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot oith Ammal Means) Dillsboro Shoreline Monitoring Scientific Name ® ® ® ®® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®® Dead ,tc,n,ot-- kided- iii pIottaII -- P- LS — Planted L,: c Stake all — Planed Allpn,J ud,IKar oot potted or ballv,dburlap7.T— Total( clud� pkiwed I, c ,taked . and ,atundk_ ,.rt,d plants) 3.1.3 Permanent Photo Stations Permanent photo stations were established at each cross - section to digitally document semi- annual conditions of the banks (Appendix B — Cross- Section Plots). Each vegetation monitoring Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 7 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 plot includes a photo station located at the origin; the photo was taken across the plot towards the opposite corner. Additionally, 15 permanent photo stations were established throughout the project area to provide representative digital documentation of stream bank and vegetation conditions. Permanent photo station points were recorded with a GPS unit and marked in the field with labeled wooden stakes and red flagging tape. Baseline photos were taken on August 5, 2010 and spring monitoring photos were taken on May 18, 2011 (Appendix D- Permanent Photo Locations). The photos reflect the overall health of the stream banks and riparian vegetation throughout the entire stream reach. 3.1.4 Visual Assessment Visual stream and vegetation assessments were conducted to document specific areas of concern such as bank erosion, bank scour, sediment inputs, plant survivability, and invasive species that were not otherwise documented. Visual inspection of the bank stability consisted of a site walk along the toe of the bank throughout the entire length of the project. Areas appearing susceptible to upper bank instability were inspected along the top of bank for evidence of slumping, tension cracks, and rill formation. The visual assessment revealed no significant areas of bank scour or instability. There are a few locations of minor rill formation and minor scour of the silt deposits below the low water elevation. However, these locations were identified during the as -built inspection and do not appear to have degraded further. There were no areas of identifiable bank slumping, tension cracks, or erosional scarp formation. Areas of concern noted during this assessment included low survivability of bare root planted trees in the upstream rock toe treatment area on both banks (Appendix A — Monitoring Plan View). In particular, the right bank descending showed high planted stem mortality and the lack of herbaceous vegetation. Twenty -two percent of the planted stems in plot 3 survived. There was the presence of several invasive plant species including those previously mentioned in section 3.1.2 as well as Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense, johnsongrass Sorghum halepense, multiflora rose Rosa multiflora, and mimosa Albizia julibrissin. An initial herbicide treatment of these species was conducted during the fall and a subsequent treatment occurred during the week of May 10, 2011. Triclopyr and glyphosate were used to control these invasive species. 4.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN During semi - annual monitoring efforts any potential factors affecting project success criteria will be documented and maintenance recommendations will be based on the severity of the problem and in consultation with Duke Energy. The project as a whole is meeting the success criteria; however, the southern end of the project where the rock -toe treatment was performed had low survivability of planted stems. The soil is currently being tested in this area and recommendations will be made to address this deficiency. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 8 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 5.0 REFERENCES Duke Energy Corporation. 2009. Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project (FERC # 2602), Restoration Plan Addendum — Baseline Documentation. Duke Energy Corporation. 2008. Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project (FERC # 2602), Restoration Plan. Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation. Version 4.2. NR CRONOS. State Climate Office of North Carolina. Version 2.7.2 Sylva 6.3 NE (NC -JC -S) http:// www.nc- climate.ncsu.edu /cronos/ Accessed August 2010. USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — Wilmington District, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality. Wilmington, North Carolina. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 9 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix A Monitoring Plan View Monitoring Plan View - - It s I,¢ � 3; ��, r ,S, , ,y ;. )z t ,} , t�"St�'�€',,�, {Mn`r' • "?'�`4F ,-��" {�S �d ,-7`'?) g 4 e� §'�'� h {f1�A" tti`tN Y, ;; ,t r } t�{�t;�"+ '+ - r t 14 ,k Kt ' )��?��kS k - - 7j2 1 y,,�lt' +� >•;~ -. *�!!�S' °r `"`tit` `. �L�''}; °r s � 'r,, f - t )s PR ) t , "IN �s1)� { r ' '�tf�jrih'� t \„ ' 1 }�r � } � ! rz a 1;� �tv \ 4 ,. rr S� ' � _ € ), i {tt � t +�v - �� ! �t•..� �; s ''' ` i t , + � t l�trr$£ i + . r �" t tll S, t;tt ! AN "t ' -;�R't ,;>r•rsS ' �,.u,, , - ' ,,t,,r \} i,''. 3r{ t,r #'r'w ,4„ _t _� ,�a k �� \,�.� } r \�}��t�kk,��, )�'r,f!^ .- „;,,.. , ��`` � �r,! =;,• ,`� „!. ��' �r)< s(, + \� �; � iiiS {' -'ittti °'t)� +'�� 7flrlt }v ttt!}r. +1��` t, � �'�;.,, � t 4 ' r t ; c !{ � t t. e . ,� •tom. S . r � �is �; } � r ` i� Irra>tti xzih �,i'v N, ;;(y I :� + r i t ;� t u d1�t(�`Lr' i\ tdl { , ,� , � • �. � t v fir _ � n `a •, `� d� }i�,�' 1) `,< ) _ - z? € ,r,,. •l ^; ' -e. : ! ,1u• t 7 (S ��ti P , 7y� r y (� � 1 l ” zta7s '.riy„ zl�l yltf+ i +� r�3 rf�' i Ar. �r F`��, an t tr tt1 t r - t ' � _ } \tf f ;• . +} sir ' 2 i )I r r i' }} � s`� 3`211' f 3 t , '*"•tr ., ''4 v, v 3t +�r, � baG. �s 41 ,!� ,,; ;; � t,1 kr e rrr ,), ,, �� _ Ik }rr ,t. -_ �� >• 4 -: }`l,, � sr � r'' ,t, t' -. r ' 5 - t `,,. }�, {t r.,1S ,Rol„ c A , },., }r a Ftsf �� LIfIY ?� . €9, ,•i ,.:, '�, + i, . kk.. y ` }f „ k 7. S'a ' V � i�„ }v- )�� R "av)t"yk;} ,,,, l #�,t{ !» � „u e s i t 71 '3` - � \ °'Y!,` -' r. )t� +s r64 t '�>i a = '�".,� ?�"• ! #' f r ! r f d t � , s k, 1 }j �, - �, ,a ��i ' IW Monitoring ` Features ® Vegetation Plots A Gross Sections �ay,� as t � { �t Sri r �t Photo Points , Bank Treatments ' dl °' , tri ltl ` r tit �., s •:u 0 Boulder-Toe Treatment Rip Rap /Joint Staking l t �� {- 1R {raX,w ',�, �h •a � SF, '” a { }r = = -., a�' _ 1l }\ � �,. � .,,,t,,,.i� }��Rs \SV��tS,l`�. '�`u`;?, rr)j,} < it;, Rock Toe Treatment TIN �V Slash /Smash lo �RevegetatrtOnly Appendix B Cross - Section Plots Appendix B DiRsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 1 Cross- Section Plots got 900 899 898 897 896 89; 894 893 v 892 w C 891 0 899 a' 889 W 888 887 886 88± 884 —_ 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 0 +45 0 +50 0 +55 0 +60 0 +65 0 +70 Station (feet) gy Base — Fa112010 -°- -- Spring 2011 - - - -° Water Surface Cross - Section 1 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 2 Cross- Section Plots 9"t 0 899 898 897 896 89s 894 893 v 892 w C 891 0 890 a� 889 w 888 887 886 sss 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 0 +4s 0 +s0 0 +ss 0 +60 0 +6s 0 +70 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 -°-- Spring 2011 - - -- Water Surface Cross - Section 2 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 2 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B DiRsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 3 Cross- Section Plots 901 900 899 898 897 896 89; 894 893 v 892 w C 891 890 a� 889 w 888 887 88, sss 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 -°-- Spring 2011 - - -- Water Surface Cross - Section 3 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 3 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B DiRsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 4 Cross- Section Plots 947 946 94; 944 943 942 v 941 w_ C vao 939 w 938 937 936 93; 934 933 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 -°-- Spring 2011 - - -- Water Surface Cross - Section 4 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 4 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 5 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 996 v v 99 C 0 R 994 v W 993 992 991 990 989 - ._....... 988 987 0 +00 0 +0; 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) gy Base - Fa112010 -°---- Spring 2011 -- -- Water Surface Cross - Section 5 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 5 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 6 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1 000 999 77 S 998 997 v 996 v w_ O R 994 d W 993 992 991 990 �°"� a aaa..uuuaaaa...0 u u u u.u.u.u.u.u.0 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) gy Base - Fa112010 -°- Spring 2011 ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 6 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 6 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 7 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 v w_ O 994 d W 993 992 991 990 989._ 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) gy Base - Fa112010 -°- Spring 2011 ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 7 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 7 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross - Section 8 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 v C 99; 0 994 v W 993 992 i 991 990 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0; 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) gy Base - Fa112010 -°- -- Spring 2011 - - Water Surface Cross - Section 8 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 8 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross - Section 9 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 w_ O R 994 d W 993 992 991 990 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 0 +45 Station (feet) gy Base - Fa112010 -°- Spring 2011 ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 9 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 9 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 10 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 w_ O R 994 -- v W 993 992 991 990 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) gy Base - Fa112010 -°- Spring 2011 ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 10 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 10 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 11 Cross- Section Plots 947 946 94; 944 943 942 v 941 w_ C O 940 a R v 939 W 938 937 936 93; 934 933 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 -°-- Spring 2011 - - -- Water Surface Cross - Section 11 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 12 Cross- Section Plots 947 94(, 94; 944 943 942 v 941 w_ C vao 939 w 938 937 936 93; 934 933 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 -°-- Spring 2011 - - -- Water Surface Cross - Section 12 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 12 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 13 Cross- Section Plots 901 900 899 898 897 896 89; 894 893 v 892 ❑ 891 0 890 a� 889 w 888 887 88( sss 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 -°-- Spring 2011 - - -- Water Surface Cross - Section 13 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 13 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Spring 2011 Cross- Section 14 Cross- Section Plots 901 900 899 898 897 896 89; 894 893 v 892 w C 891 0 890 a� 889 w 888 887 88, sss 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 -°-- Spring 2011 - - -- Water Surface Cross - Section 14 Spring Monitoring — April 7, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 14 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Vegetation Monitoring Plot 1 Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Vegetation Monitoring Plot 2 Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Vegetation Monitoring Plot 3 Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Vegetation Monitoring Plot 4 Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 2 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Vegetation Monitoring Plot 5 Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 3 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 1 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 1 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 1 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 2 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 2 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 2 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 3 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 3 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 4 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 3 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 4 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 4 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 4 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 5 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 5 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 7 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 5 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 6 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 6 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 6 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 9 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 7 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 7 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 10 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 7 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 8 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 11 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 8 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 8 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 12 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 9 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 9 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 13 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 9 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 10 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 14 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 10 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 10 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring — May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 15 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 11 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 11 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 16 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 11 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring — May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 12 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 17 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 12 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 12 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring — May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 18 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 13 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 13 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 19 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 13 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring — May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 14 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 20 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 14 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 14 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring — May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 21 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 15 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 15 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring —May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 22 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Spring Monitoring June 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 15 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Spring Monitoring — May 18, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Spring Monitoring 23 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. June 2011 Appendix E Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project (FERC 2602) Restoration Plan Addendum — Baseline Documentation DILLSBORO DAM AND POWERHOUSE REMOVAL PROJECT (FERC #2602) RESTORATION PLAN ADDENDUM - BASELINE DOCUMENTATION Prepared For: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Duke Energy Prepared By: HDR Engineering Inc. of the Carolinas April 2009 K c s t o r a t i o n r I a n AJJenJurn - E)aseIine Documentation In compliance with Ordering Paragraph (E) of the Dillsboro Surrender Order issued by the FERC in July 2007, scientists from HDR /DTA performed a baseline vegetation survey in areas adjacent to the Dillsboro Reservoir in December 2008. The survey consisted of creating vegetation plots (VP), locating the plots with physical markers and with a handheld global positioning device (GPS), and surveying the vegetation within the plots. Independent photostations were also established around the reservoir to monitor any changes to the banks and riparian zones during project activities. The purpose of this study is 1) to accurately identify the natural community types adjacent to the reservoir, 2) develop a vegetation baseline for post - removal restoration efforts, and 3) identify invasive species within the restoration area. Figures and photos are located in Appendix A and data sheets are located in Appendix B. Five 15 by 60 foot vegetation plots were established adjacent to the Dillsboro Reservoir (Figure 1). Three are located on the western side of the reservoir within the dredging laydown area, and two are located within the riparian zone on the eastern side of the reservoir. Location criteria included proximity to the water line, community structure, and property access. Precise latitudinal and longitudinal locations are provided on Data Sheets 1 through 5 of Appendix B. The northwest corners of Plots 1, 2, and 5, and the southeast corners of Plots 3 and 4 were marked with a labeled PVC stake and located with a GPS. The plots were established using the Carolina Vegetation Survey Level 2 protocol as a guideline (Peet et al. 1998). Plants were identified to the species level where possible using the Winter Guide to Woody Plants of Wetlands and Their Borders: Northeastern United States (liner 2000). The community types were identified using the Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990). HEIR IDTA HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas 2 1 MIR 1A\ ral A r—woll U. W Li BJ m Kestoration Flan Addendum - Fja.5chne Documentation Plots 1 and 2 are located on the eastern side of the reservoir. Plot 1 is located partially within a previously delineated (but unverified) isolated wetland. Plot 2 is located within an upland riparian zone. The community classification of both is best described as the Piedmont /Mountain Levee Forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990). Dominant woody species are typical of this community and include red maple (Acer nibrnm), sycamore (Platanus ocddentalis), black willow (Salix niara), American elm (Ulmus americana), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), and Chinese privet (Li grrstrzrm sinense). Herbaceous and woody vine species dominant at the time of the survey include false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), tear -thumb (Polygonaam sagittatum), wingstem (TVerbesina alternifolia), deer tongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus). Known invasive species include the Japanese honeysuckle, oriental bittersweet, and Chinese privet. Bittersweet may be an element of concern and is thriving in several locations around the reservoir. Plots 3, 4 and 5 are located on the western side of the reservoir. Plots 3 and 4 are located near the waterline and are best described as the Piedmont /Mountain Levee Forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990). The vegetation composition found within these Plots is similar to Plots 1 and 2 with exception of the presence of honey locust (Gleditsia iriancanthos) and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora). The majority of the multiflora rose found adjacent to the reservoir is located within the dredging laydown and staging area. The clearing of this area for Project activities may eliminate the majority of this invasive. Plot 5 is located farther inland and has an upland community composition that is indicative of a lowered water table and changes in microtopography. Precise community classification is difficult because of the small size and changes in micro topography, but is best described as an upland variant of the Piedmont /Mountain Levee Forest. Dominant woody species include green ash (Fraxinus pennsglvanica), black cherry (Prins serotina), tulip poplar, red maple, silky dogwood, and multiflora rose. Dominant herbaceous and woody vine species include goldenrod varieties (Solidago spp.), red raspberry (Rebus idaeus), saw -tooth blackberry, and Japanese honeysuckle. Again, the clearing of this area for Project activities may aid in controlling and /or removing invasive plant species. HDRIDTA HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas Restoration P I an ,addendum m baseline Documentation Thirteen photostations were installed around the perimeter of the reservoir and in areas immediately downstream of the dam (Figure 1). Most of the stations consist of a PVC stake labeled with a north arrow and the photostation number. However, several of the stations are located in areas that have high public accessibility that make installation of a physical station unfeasible. In these instances, a permanent landmark was selected as the photostation. All station locations have been mapped and recorded on a GPS unit. Station locations were chosen to give the maximum visual coverage of the opposite bank while maintaining some overlap for later reference. Property accessibility was also considered when determining station location. Several photos were taken at each station. After each photo was taken, the camera was rotated 45 degrees and another photo was taken. This was repeated until all pertinent areas were photographed for later reference. For example, the stations located on the west side of the reservoir, in areas that are to be cleared and later restored, have eight photos showing the opposite bank and the proposed Project area. In contrast, the stations located on the east side of the reservoir, where no clearing is proposed, have between four and six photos showing the opposite bank and reservoir only. HORIOTA HOR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas l\ Kesto rat ion Phan Addendum - 5aseIine Documentation INNIUM Peet, R.K., T.R. Wentworth and P.S. White. 1998. A flexible, multipurpose method for recording vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262 -274. [Online] URL: http:/ /cvs.bio.unc.edu /methods.htm (-accessed December 2008). Schafale, M.P. and A.S Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina. Third approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Raleigh, NC. 325 pp. Tiner, R.W. 2000. Winter Guide to Woody Plants of Wetlands and Their Borders: Northeastern United States. Institute for Wetland and Environmental Education and Research. Leverett, HDRIDTA HDR Engineering. Inc. of the Carolinas APPENDIX APPENDIX A FIGURE AND REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS Photo 001— Vegetation Plot 1— Southeast Photo 002 — Vegetation Plot 2 - Southeast Photo 003 — Vegetation Plot 3 — Northwest Photo 004 — Vegetation Plot 4 — Northwest Photo 005 — Vegetation Plot 5 - Southeast APPENDIX B DATA SHEETS �i I� �J I� I� I� ;� ,Y �. �, � , � °� ! � -� s .� I -`� �� a r �,� � �� A a �> � I ��r �� ry{ I I a n 4' ., = 0 2.n _ d ` I! v -s.S � 'a "a _ � _ � p� �,' j � -� � � a � V � # i P 1? U i _ � s `° � � C y � } � Z '-i `i '4. 4 a c ry � s :: �� Y _ __ `�� V a n V �' �. � �. b � .3 O w 4 � - ,C o '. fY' r ry � V1 � \� .3 \, 3r Rr ' j 1 t 1 _ ,� gi �� 3 l ei _, Z � - a ,,. n u � ., ,� �r. z. n, - Q .. � i n :. .._a..._.__ ,_ — __. _. .__a m� J. '� :. � 3 = - � = f '� n _ t i � � s .. 4 - _ _ i, $ i 9 _ n � �. �_ � � E 9 I E j ' � 3 � .,. Z � i ...� _ U =7 F �.. L - z c m - � - - v Z a � � - ^_ :. e u w � ... n. '' i 1 _ � f y4\ I U d 6 �� rf w u a w° � I O = �4 jl - C o z33 Ea s u I W7 L Ll I c V4 5i II lz lb Js az t _ L J1. �:.. -.: �� .,. �� }` I ��. �::3a 's 3 � 3 • ; � -n s s `�3� 3 > i � 3 � � j a a -° �_ i _`� a.? I }J _ _ � � ng o i � ? � � u Ij 3 a. s � 3 > L _si E 1 _� va , 7 3 � n s# L e + _ $ ,� 1 t o � '° � �� .M + P� � °� � d � � i a � w � � �j ' '�3 V` ' � � g s § U _ Q E '� -. - =i a i "[g t'..'a c!' a 5 __�....._ �� r � '^ rn C � � �^ '_ , a.�- ,�« -..... a ..i y .J _ _�.,._.___.. _ v _ _ -_ _._ - _...... C __ iY '•� I I. r � 4 l: > e u U -__ u f a u� � � � � � - �® r A _ n e r - � v E ,., � � - .. z s d � _ ,� u _- _ .w. E .I ._ ._ T.. C 'Jl � .� _ .. J .. y ..� ,� � � a u ;: v z :: .d n= n � i _...... - e - �; 4 J � _ � � I u E _ � � � r � � _ u � _ i 3 Yr } v. � 4 Y� X J � V; _ � � � � y O O � � K - 7 +� C _ 1 m Y .f .a _ .".. �. V iJ � w 3 J � i t. __ _._ I .. f � _ 'fi a I _ _ - � e � - � � Y � _ iVJ ° 'vy i � s1 � E 3t :n a �'8 x M a J U - A Z f 0 d } a y e r :Y3 V — c `¢ J ry G i c - W r I h a t 4 y C Mile L-Irl V n 741 _ ' e Fall 2011 Monitoring Report Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Jackson County, North Carolina Prepared for: Duke Energy Corporation November 2011 526 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28202 -1802 Prepared by: Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. EQUINOX rNNFRr'NItVNNTwi, 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville, NC 28801 Table of Contents 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................... ............................... 1 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................. ............................... 1 2.1 Location and Setting ........................................................................... ............................... 1 2.2 Project Goals and Objectives ............................................................. ............................... 3 2.3 Methods ................................................................................................. ..............................3 2.4 Project History and Contacts ............................................................. ............................... 4 3.0 PROJECT MONITORING ................................................................... ............................... 5 3.1 Feature Monitoring Methods and Results ........................................ ............................... 5 3.1.1 Bank and Sediment Stability ....................................................... ............................... C 3.1.2 Vegetation ..................................................................................... ............................... C 3.1.3 Permanent Photo Stations ........................................................... ............................... 8 3.1.4 Visual Assessment ........................................................................ ............................... 8 4.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN ............................... ............................... 8 5.0 REFERENCES ........................................................................................ ............................... 9 Fi ures Figure1. Vicinity Map ....................................................... ..............................2 Tables Table 1. Project Activity and Reporting History ........................ ..............................4 Table 2. Project Contacts .................................................... ..............................5 Table 3. Planted and Total Stem Counts ................................. ..............................7 Appendices Appendix A. Monitoring Plan View Appendix B. Cross - Section Plots Appendix C. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Appendix D. Permanent Photo Station Photos Appendix E. Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Plan i 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The project is located on the Tuckasegee River and includes monitoring the restored reach of river inundated prior to removal of the Dillsboro Dam. Restoration involved the stabilization of approximately 6,700 linear feet of stream bank. The primary goal of the project was to stabilize the existing stream banks following removal of the Dillsboro Dam. Five treatment types were used to accomplish the project objectives and included stream bank toe protection using small rocks, stream bank toe protection using boulders, minor stream bank grading, riprap /joint staking, and revegetation only. Riparian habitats were restored by revegetating with native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plant species. Semi - annual monitoring was scheduled to occur over a two -year period in 2010 and 2011. Baseline monitoring efforts occurred in August 2010 with subsequent monitoring to occur in the fall 2010, spring 2011, and fall 2011. Monitoring efforts included bank stability monitoring, vegetation monitoring, and visual assessments. 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND 2.1 Location and Setting The Federal Energy Regulatory Committee (FERC) accepted an application from Duke Energy to remove the Dillsboro Dam. This order required Duke Energy to provide a restoration plan for the impounded area upstream of the dam and required the site be monitored for two years to document successful restoration (Duke Energy 2008).The Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration site (Figure 1) is located on parcels owned by Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy) and other private landowners. It encompasses properties adjacent to the Tuckasegee River in the Little Tennessee River watershed (8 -digit HUC - 06010204). The lower project boundary is located approximately 500 feet east of the US Highway 441 bridge and just south of the Town of Dillsboro in Jackson County, North Carolina. Prior to removal, the Dillsboro Dam stood 12 feet high, 300 feet long, and impounded approximately 4,200 linear feet of the Tuckasegee River. Removal of the dam in February 2010, exposed extensive amounts of vertical and undercut banks with substrates comprised of fine silt and sand. The majority of the exposed banks were so steep and substrate so fine, they were considered highly unstable. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 N Figure 1- Vicinity- Map POM Dillshamo Shoreline restoration EglTn -()X 2010 Aerial I F II V11I:hl +.I w..., .. 504 I'Xll 2,000 3,M0 Faet Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 2 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 2.2 Project Goals and Objectives The primary goals and objectives for the Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration project were to develop and implement a restoration plan to stabilize the exposed river banks. 2.3 Methods Five different treatments were employed to stabilize the previously inundated banks of the Tuckasegee River. These treatments included 1) revegetation only, 2) revegetation with minor grading, 3) rock -toe installation with bank shaping, 4) riprap /joint staking, and 5) boulder -toe construction. Revegetation consisted of planting native seed mixes, live stakes, and bare root trees. Level I: Revegetation Only Treatment The banks in these reaches never displayed evidence of erosion, settling, or slumping throughout the course of the project. Generally, this coincided with areas previously stabilized with boulders or riprap or reaches at the upper end of the project area where the drop in water surface elevation after removal of the dam was <2 feet. These areas were planted with native herbaceous seed mixes to provide temporary erosion control and with live stakes and bare root trees to provide long -term bank stability. Level II: Revegetation and Minor Grading Treatment Banks along these reaches exhibited evidence of settling or slumping that required additional stabilizing measures. Another concern in these areas was the upper portions of the banks were nearly vertical and contained significant herbaceous and woody vegetation, including many large trees that were either leaning towards the river or precariously perched at the top of the bank. The approach taken in these reaches was to remove large trees likely to become unstable and then to compact the upper bank with a track -hoe bucket. Trees that were leaning or located close to the top of the bank were cut just above the ground and the root balls left in place. This action was intended to have the combined effect of removing the weight of the tree from the bank to reduce the likelihood of bank failure and to retain the root structure for bank stability. This also eliminated the possibility high winds or water would cause a particular tree to topple and thereby expose the bank to additional erosion. The compaction of the upper banks reduced the upper bank angle and thus reduced the risk of erosion and bank failure. The slopes were compacted rather than being re- graded so as to maintain existing vegetation. The bank also was over - seeded with a native herbaceous seed mix and planted with live stakes and bare root woody plants. Level III: Rock -Toe Treatment These reaches exhibited highly unstable banks that were generally associated with scour along the toe of the slope and resulted in undermined and vertical banks. The approach taken in these reaches was to reconstruct the bank with rock and boulders to secure the toe of the slope and to excavate a bench at the bankfull elevation. The rock -toe was constructed to an elevation of at least two feet above the low water elevation in order to accommodate daily flow fluctuations associated with the upstream reservoir flow releases. Additionally, matting was placed along the bank below the bankfull bench and the entire bank was seeded and planted with native seed mix and live stakes. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 3 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Level IV: Boulder -Toe Structure Treatment Both banks within the 700 feet upstream of the dam were subject to the greatest potential for streambank erosion. This was partly due to the fact this area contained the deepest sediment deposits and highest unvegetated banks when the dam was removed. Bank erosion potential was further aggravated by the presence of a rock ledge that created an area of high water velocity and scour. Site specific variations of boulder -toe structures were required to stabilize the south bank due to the presence of the existing rock ledge. The bank upstream of the rock ledge was treated as a point bar area with the toe of the bank being constructed two feet above the low flow elevation and a bench constructed at the bankfull elevation. Downstream of the rock ledge the banks were reconstructed with a series of curved boulder -toe structures with the concavities of the structures oriented to provide relief around the existing bedrock features. The bank in close proximity to the rock ledge was reinforced with a series of boulder vanes angled to redirect flow to the center of the river and to allow flow adjacent to the bank to step down over the vane arms. Additionally, the bank was seeded and planted with native seed mix and live stakes. Level V.• Riprap/.Ioint Staking The area immediately upstream of the dam on the right bank descending exhibited steep, unstable banks that were stabilized to permanently protect SR 1359 (River Road). Boulder -sized riprap was placed along this reach to armor the banks. The rip -rap was backfilled with soil, seeded, and live staked to further promote bank stabilization. 2.4 Project History and Contacts Duke Energy Corporation contracted Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc (Equinox) and Wolf Creek Engineering to initiate planning and data collection for the Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration project. Data collection and planning began in April 2010. Construction began in May 2010 and was completed in August 2010, with baseline monitoring data collection initiated immediately after construction was completed (Table 1). Primary design and construction was completed by Equinox and Wolf Creek Engineering. Additional subcontractors and materials suppliers were also used (Table 2). Project personnel and contact information for the design and monitoring components is presented in Table 2. Table 1. Project Activity and Reporting History Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Number of Retwting Years: 2 Activity or Deliverable Month/Year Restoration Plan Apr -10 Final Dcsign - Construction Plans Jul -10 Construction Completed Aug -10 Plantins Com lctcd Aug -10 Baseline Monitoring Scp -10 Invasive Species Treatment Scp -10 Fall 2010 Monitoring Nov -10 Supplemental Planting Apr -11 Rivcr Cane Transplant Apr -11 Invasive Species Treatment May -11 Spring 2011 Monitoring Jun -11 Fall 2011 Monitorins Nov -11 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 4 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Table 2. Project Contacts Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Designer Equinox Environmental Consultation & Design, Inc. 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Primary Project Design POC David Tuch 828- 253 -6856 Wolf Creek Engineering 51 North Knob Lane Weaverville, NC 28787 Primary Project Design POC Grant Ginn 828 - 658 -3649 Construction Contractor Quartermaster Environmental 658 Floyd Church Road Lexington, NC 27292 Construction Contractor POC Brooks Cole 704 - 473 -5021 Planting Contractor Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. PO Box 1 197 Fremont, NC 27830 Planting Contractor POC Bryan Ellis 919- 242 -6551 Seeding Contractor Quartermaster Environmental 658 Floyd Church Road Lexington, NC 27292 Seeding Contractor POC Brooks Cole 704 - 473 -5021 Seed M ix Sources Dykes & Son Nursery 825 Maude Etter Road McMinnville, TN 37110 931 -668 -8833 Nursery Stock Suppliers Mellow Marsh Farm 1312 Woody Store Road Siler City, NC 27344 919- 742 -1200 Monitoring Contractor Equinox Environmental Consultation & Design, Inc. 37 Haywood Street, Suite 100 Asheville, North Carolina 28801 Stream M onitoring POC Steve Melton (828) 253 -6856 Vegetation M onitoring POC Steve Melton (828) 253 -6856 3.0 PROJECT MONITORING 3.1 Feature Monitoring Methods and Results Features selected for baseline data collection and future semi - annual (fall and spring) monitoring purposes included bank profile monitoring stations, vegetation monitoring plots, and photographic monitoring stations (Appendix A — Monitoring Plan View). Additionally, a visual assessment of the entire project was scheduled to occur semi - annually to identify and document any potential areas of concern not identified at the established monitoring locations. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 5 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 3.1.1 Bank and Sediment Stability To document post - construction cross - sections and sediment stability along the restored stream banks, fourteen permanent streambank cross - section monitoring stations were established on July 27, 2010. They were spaced at approximately 500 -foot intervals along the revegetated stream reach (Appendix A — Monitoring Plan View). Fall monitoring occurred on October 10, 2011. Due to the depth of the Tuckasegee River, cross - section data were collected only to depict the bank profile and not the stream bed. Cross - section transects were marked at the toe and top of bank with rebar flagged with fluorescent pink tape. Measurements were collected using a total station (Appendix B — Cross - Sections). The cross - section survey data revealed little change in bank profiles between July 2010 (baseline conditions) and October 2011. Cross - sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, and 13 show evidence of toe retreat of approximately 1.0 to 1.5 feet. There is no strong evidence of scour at these locations and the retreat of the toe appears to be associated with the winnowing of silt that was deposited along the toe of the bank during the impoundment. At the time of the most recent inspection the loss of this material has not progressed to the point where it is threatening the stability of the bank and there is no evidence of bank loss or slumping above these locations. Continued observation is appropriate and no action is required. Cross - section 14 shows approximately 2 feet of change in the bank profile, but this was attributed to differing survey technique between years. During the baseline survey the top of the boulders were surveyed, whereas on subsequent surveys it was decided to survey the ground surface between the boulders. 3.1.2 Vegetation Prior to the Dillsboro Dam removal in 2008, scientists from HDR (HDR Engineering Inc. of the Carolinas) /DTA (Devine Tarbell and Associates, Inc.) performed a baseline vegetation survey to document existing natural community types adjacent to the reservoir (Duke Energy 2009). Five 15 foot x 60 foot plots were established on the top of the stream bank (Appendix E Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project). These plots were not utilized for the post - restoration monitoring. New vegetation monitoring plots were established by Equinox on July 27, 2010 and targeted banks where restoration and revegetation occurred. Five 5 meter x 20 meter (0.025 acre) monitoring plots were established in the riparian area using the CVS -EEP protocol (Lee et al. 2008). Together these plots comprise 5% of the entire area replanted. Plot placement was based on the specific treatment applied to the bank. Plot corners and planted stems were marked with fluorescent orange flagging tape. Additionally, wooden stakes were set at the vegetation plot origin and labeled with the plot identification number. Vegetation monitoring plot corners were marked with rebar and geographic coordinates recorded with a handheld Global Positioning System unit. Fall monitoring data were collected on September 26, 2011. Vegetation data for the baseline monitoring report (Duke Energy 2010) was collected according to the CVS -EEP Level I protocol (Lee et. al. 2008). The primary purpose of the Level I protocol is to determine the pattern of installed plant material with respect to species, spacing, and density. Subsequent semi - annual monitoring data collection efforts followed the CVS -EEP Level II protocol (Lee et al. 2008) to monitor overall plant survival and growth. Level II monitoring captured both planted woody stem data and naturally regenerated plants by species and size class. These methods allow for an accurate and rapid assessment of the overall trend of woody -plant restoration and regeneration on a site. The success of the riparian vegetation plantings was determined by calculating planted stem densities within the established monitoring Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 6 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 plots. Based on the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stream mitigation guidelines, survival of woody species planted at mitigation sites should be at least 320 stems /acre through year three and 260 stems /acre through year five (USACE 2003). While this is not a requirement for this project, it provides an accepted way to measure success. Native riparian plant species were planted during the summer of 2010. According to the North Carolina Climate Retrieval and Observations Network of the Southeast (NC CRONOS) database, Sylva received 2.24 inches of rain during June, which resulted in drought conditions at the site during planting (NC CRONOS August 2010). Supplemental planting conducted during the spring of 2011 included the transplant of 53 clusters of river cane Arundineria gigantea. In addition, a second herbicide treatment of invasive exotic species occurred during the week of May 10, 2011. Vegetation monitoring data collected in September 2011 revealed planted stem densities (including live stakes) ranging from 40 to 769 stems per acre with an average of 421 stems per acre (Table 3). These densities exceed the established mitigation success criterion of 320 stems per acre. Excluding live stakes, the average stem density for the entire restoration site is 219 stems per acre; of these, 39% were noted to have either good or excellent vigor values. However, vegetation plot 3 did not meet the interim success criteria of 320 stems per acre. Eighty -nine percent of the planted stems in this plot were dead or missing (Appendix C, page 2). The soil composition in this plot is predominately sand and may be contributing to the high stem mortality. Despite these site conditions, natural woody stem recruitment was high in this plot and included American sycamore Platanus occidentalis, tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera, American elderberry Sambucus canadensis, and black locust Robinia pseudocacia. Invasive exotic plants recorded in the monitoring plots included Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera Japonica, Oriental bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus, and air potato Dioscorea bulbifera. They were particularly prevalent in plots 2 and 5. To control these species they were sprayed with herbicides during the week of October 13, 2010 and May 10, 2011. These treatments were not sufficient to completely control the infestations. Table 3. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species bv Plot oith Ammal Means) Dills1wo Shoreline Monitoring Scientific Name Common Name ® ® ® ®® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®® ®0 ®00 ® ®0 ® ®0 ®0 ® ®0 ®® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®® Dead ,t ii. iiot - iic kid cd -, pIot taII -es P -LS— Planted L, :c Stake P -aII — Planed Al (1- Itid , Bi- i..ot potted of ba ll a,d hudap). T— I Otal(1 clid� pla iited. I , c ,taked and ,awr 11 ...... r t,d plants) Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 7 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 3.1.3 Permanent Photo Stations Permanent photo stations were established at each cross - section to digitally document semi- annual conditions of the banks (Appendix B — Cross- Section Plots). A photo station was located at the origin of each vegetation monitoring plot; the photo was taken diagonally across the plot towards the opposite corner. Additionally, 15 permanent photo stations were established throughout the project area to provide representative photo documentation of stream bank and vegetation conditions. They were marked with labeled wood stakes and red flagging tape; station coordinates were obtained using a recreational grade GPS unit. Baseline photos were taken on August 5, 2010 and fall monitoring photos were taken on October 12, 2011 (Appendix D- Permanent Photo Locations). The photos reflect the overall condition of the stream banks and health of riparian vegetation throughout the entire stream reach. 3.1.4 Visual Assessment Visual stream and vegetation assessments were conducted to document specific areas of concern such as bank erosion, bank scour, sediment accumulation, plant survival, and invasive species present that were not otherwise documented. Visual inspection of the bank stability consisted of walking along the toe of the bank throughout the entire length of the project. Areas appearing susceptible to upper bank instability were then inspected along the top of bank for evidence of slumping, tension cracks, and rill formation. The visual assessment revealed no significant areas of bank scour or instability. There are a few locations of minor rill formation and minor scour of the silt deposits below the low water elevation. However, these locations were identified during the as -built inspection and do not appear to have degraded further. There were no areas of identifiable bank slumping, tension cracks, or erosional scarp formation. One item of concern noted during this assessment was the low survival of bare root planted trees in the upstream rock toe treatment areas on both banks (Appendix A — Monitoring Plan View). In particular, the right bank descending showed high planted stem mortality and a lack of herbaceous vegetation. Eleven percent of the planted stems in plot 3 survived. In addition to the invasive plant species mentioned in section 3.1.2, Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense, johnsongrass Sorghum halepense, multiflora rose Rosa multiflora, princess tree Paulownia tomentosa, and mimosa Albizia julibrissin were also present. Applications of triclopyr and glyphosate, one in fall 2010 and one in May 2011, were used to control these invasive species Despite these treatments, some individuals were still present during the October 2011 visual assessment. 4.0 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN During semi - annual monitoring efforts any potential factors affecting project success criteria were documented and maintenance recommendations developed in consultation with Duke Energy. The southern end of the project where the rock -toe treatment was performed had low survivability of planted stems (Appendix A — Monitoring Plan View). Soil tests indicated a low ph throughout the project area specifically near vegetation plots 3, 4, and 5; therefore, lime treatments were administered to improve this deficiency. Despite these problem areas, the project as a whole is meeting the success criteria. No additional formal monitoring will be required. Continued visual observation of the site is recommended to ensure the banks remain stable and the vegetative communities show success. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 8 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 5.0 REFERENCES Duke Energy Corporation. 2009. Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project (FERC # 2602), Restoration Plan Addendum — Baseline Documentation. Duke Energy Corporation. 2008. Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project (FERC # 2602), Restoration Plan. Duke Energy Corporation. 2010. Monitoring Baseline Report Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration. Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation. Version 4.2. NR CRONOS. State Climate Office of North Carolina. Version 2.7.2 Sylva 6.3 NE (NC -JC -S) http:// www.nc- climate.ncsu.edu /cronos/ Accessed August 2010. USACE (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers — Wilmington District, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality. Wilmington, North Carolina. Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 9 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix A Monitoring Plan View I Y I Ul I I LU'l I I 1U r- 10 11 V I IZ MY Appendix B Cross - Section Plots Appendix B DiRsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 1 Cross- Section Plots 901 900 899 898 897 896 895 894 893 v 892 v w ❑ 891 0 890 889 888 887 886 sss 884 883 882 881 uuuu u _u ---- -- 880 EL! 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 0 +4s 0 +s0 0 +ss 0 +60 0 +6s 0 +70 Station (feet) Base —Fa 112010 Spring 2011 — Fa112011 ° ° ° ° °Wa ter Surface Cross - Section 1 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 2 Cross- Section Plots 9"1 0 899 898 897 S 89(i 89; 894 893 i d 892 C 891 0 890 u 889 w 888 887 886 88s 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 0 +45 0 +50 0 +55 0 +60 0 +65 0 +70 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 - Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 2 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 2 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B DiRsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 3 Cross- Section Plots 901 900 899 898 897 896 89; 894 893 v 892 v w ❑ 891 0 890 u 889 w 888 887 - 88 sss 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 -Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 3 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 3 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Cross- Section Plots DiRsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 4 947 946 94; 944 943 942 v 941 w_ C a vao 939 w 938 937 93(i 935 934 933 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 -Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 4 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 4 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B DiRsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 5 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 w_ O R 994 d W 993 992 P, 991 990 989 - - 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 Spring 2011 -Fa112011 ,m ° ° ° °Wa ter Surface Cross - Section 5 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 5 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B DiRsboro Fall 2011 Cross - Section 6 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 w_ C »' O 7 ca 994 d W 993 992 991 990 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 - Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 6 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 6 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 7 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 w_ O a 994 d W 993 992 991 99() ,.. 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 -Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 7 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 7 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross - Section 8 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 i 996 v w C 995 O n 994 d W 993 992 991 990 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 Spring 2011 -Fa 112011 ° ° °° °Water Surface Cross - Section 8 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 8 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross - Section 9 Cross- Section Plots 1002 tool 1000 999 998 997 v 996 v w_ O n 94 d W 993 s, 992 991 990 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 0 +45 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 - Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 9 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 9 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 10 Cross- Section Plots 1002 1001 1000 999 998 997 v 996 v w_ O n 994 d W 993 992 991 990 ----------- 989 988 987 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 Spring 2011 -Fa112011 ,m ° °° °Water Surface Cross - Section 10 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 10 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Cross- Section Plots Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 11 947 946 94; 944 943 942 v 941 w_ C •a° 940 v 939 W 938 937 936 93; 934 933 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 -Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 11 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 1 1 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Cross- Section Plots Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 12 947 946 945 944 943 942 v 941 w_ C 0 940 a v 939 W 938 937 936 935 934 933 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +25 0 +30 0 +35 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 Spring 2011 -Fa112011 ,m ° °° °Water Surface Cross - Section 12 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 12 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 13 Cross- Section Plots 901 900 899 898 897 89(i w 89; 894 893 v 892 v w ❑ 891 0 890 u 889 w 888 887 886 sss 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 Station (feet) Base -Fall 2010 Spring 2011 - Fall 2011 ,m ° ° °° Water Surface Cross - Section 13 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 13 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix B Dillsboro Fall 2011 Cross- Section 14 Cross- Section Plots 901 900 899 898 897 896 89; 894 893 v 89 v w ❑ 891 0 890 u 889 w 888 887 88( sss 884 883 882 881 880 0 +00 0 +0S 0 +10 0 +15 0 +20 0 +2s 0 +30 0 +3s 0 +40 Station (feet) Base - Fa112010 Spring 2011 -Fa112011 ,m ° ° ° °Wa ter Surface Cross - Section 14 Fall Monitoring — October 10, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 14 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Vegetation Monitoring Plot 1 Fall Monitoring — September 26, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Vegetation Monitoring Plot 2 Fall Monitoring — September 26, 2011 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Vegetation Monitoring Plot 3 Fall Monitoring — September 26, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Vegetation Monitoring Plot 4 Fall Monitoring — September 26, 2011 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix C Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos Vegetation Monitoring Plot 5 Fall Monitoring — September 26, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 3 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 1 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 1 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 1 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 2 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 2 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 2 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 3 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 3 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 3 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 4 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 5 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 4 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 4 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 5 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 5 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 5 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 6 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 6 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 6 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 7 — Looking at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 7 — Looking Downstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 10 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 7 — Looking Upstream at Right Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 8 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 11 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 8 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 8 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 12 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 9 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 9 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 13 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 9 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 10 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 14 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 10 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 10 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 15 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 11 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 11 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 16 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 11 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 12 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 17 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 12 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 12 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 18 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 13 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 13 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 19 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 13 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 14 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 20 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 14 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 14 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 21 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 15 — Looking at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Permanent Photo Station 15 — Looking Downstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration 22 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. Fall Monitoring November 2011 Appendix D Permanent Photo Station Photos Permanent Photo Station 15 — Looking Upstream at Left Bank Descending Fall Monitoring — October 12, 2011 Dillsboro Shoreline Restoration Fall Monitoring 23 Equinox Environmental Consultation and Design, Inc. November 2011 Appendix E Dillsboro Dam and Powerhouse Removal Project (FERC 2602) Restoration Plan Addendum — Baseline Documentation DILLSBORO DAM AND POWERHOUSE REMOVAL PROJECT (FERC #2602) RESTORATION PLAN ADDENDUM - BASELINE DOCUMENTATION Prepared For: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Duke Energy Prepared By: HDR Engineering Inc. of the Carolinas April 2009 K c s t o r a t i o n r I a n AJJenJurn - E)aseIine Documentation In compliance with Ordering Paragraph (E) of the Dillsboro Surrender Order issued by the FERC in July 2007, scientists from HDR /DTA performed a baseline vegetation survey in areas adjacent to the Dillsboro Reservoir in December 2008. The survey consisted of creating vegetation plots (VP), locating the plots with physical markers and with a handheld global positioning device (GPS), and surveying the vegetation within the plots. Independent photostations were also established around the reservoir to monitor any changes to the banks and riparian zones during project activities. The purpose of this study is 1) to accurately identify the natural community types adjacent to the reservoir, 2) develop a vegetation baseline for post - removal restoration efforts, and 3) identify invasive species within the restoration area. Figures and photos are located in Appendix A and data sheets are located in Appendix B. Five 15 by 60 foot vegetation plots were established adjacent to the Dillsboro Reservoir (Figure 1). Three are located on the western side of the reservoir within the dredging laydown area, and two are located within the riparian zone on the eastern side of the reservoir. Location criteria included proximity to the water line, community structure, and property access. Precise latitudinal and longitudinal locations are provided on Data Sheets 1 through 5 of Appendix B. The northwest corners of Plots 1, 2, and 5, and the southeast corners of Plots 3 and 4 were marked with a labeled PVC stake and located with a GPS. The plots were established using the Carolina Vegetation Survey Level 2 protocol as a guideline (Peet et al. 1998). Plants were identified to the species level where possible using the Winter Guide to Woody Plants of Wetlands and Their Borders: Northeastern United States (liner 2000). The community types were identified using the Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990). HEIR IDTA HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas 2 1 MIR 1A\ ral A r—woll U. W Li BJ m Kestoration Flan Addendum - Fja.5chne Documentation Plots 1 and 2 are located on the eastern side of the reservoir. Plot 1 is located partially within a previously delineated (but unverified) isolated wetland. Plot 2 is located within an upland riparian zone. The community classification of both is best described as the Piedmont /Mountain Levee Forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990). Dominant woody species are typical of this community and include red maple (Acer nibrnm), sycamore (Platanus ocddentalis), black willow (Salix niara), American elm (Ulmus americana), silky dogwood (Cornus amomum), and Chinese privet (Li grrstrzrm sinense). Herbaceous and woody vine species dominant at the time of the survey include false nettle (Boehmeria cylindrica), tear -thumb (Polygonaam sagittatum), wingstem (TVerbesina alternifolia), deer tongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and oriental bittersweet (Celastrus orbiculatus). Known invasive species include the Japanese honeysuckle, oriental bittersweet, and Chinese privet. Bittersweet may be an element of concern and is thriving in several locations around the reservoir. Plots 3, 4 and 5 are located on the western side of the reservoir. Plots 3 and 4 are located near the waterline and are best described as the Piedmont /Mountain Levee Forest (Schafale and Weakley 1990). The vegetation composition found within these Plots is similar to Plots 1 and 2 with exception of the presence of honey locust (Gleditsia iriancanthos) and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora). The majority of the multiflora rose found adjacent to the reservoir is located within the dredging laydown and staging area. The clearing of this area for Project activities may eliminate the majority of this invasive. Plot 5 is located farther inland and has an upland community composition that is indicative of a lowered water table and changes in microtopography. Precise community classification is difficult because of the small size and changes in micro topography, but is best described as an upland variant of the Piedmont /Mountain Levee Forest. Dominant woody species include green ash (Fraxinus pennsglvanica), black cherry (Prins serotina), tulip poplar, red maple, silky dogwood, and multiflora rose. Dominant herbaceous and woody vine species include goldenrod varieties (Solidago spp.), red raspberry (Rebus idaeus), saw -tooth blackberry, and Japanese honeysuckle. Again, the clearing of this area for Project activities may aid in controlling and /or removing invasive plant species. HDRIDTA HDR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas Restoration P I an ,addendum m baseline Documentation Thirteen photostations were installed around the perimeter of the reservoir and in areas immediately downstream of the dam (Figure 1). Most of the stations consist of a PVC stake labeled with a north arrow and the photostation number. However, several of the stations are located in areas that have high public accessibility that make installation of a physical station unfeasible. In these instances, a permanent landmark was selected as the photostation. All station locations have been mapped and recorded on a GPS unit. Station locations were chosen to give the maximum visual coverage of the opposite bank while maintaining some overlap for later reference. Property accessibility was also considered when determining station location. Several photos were taken at each station. After each photo was taken, the camera was rotated 45 degrees and another photo was taken. This was repeated until all pertinent areas were photographed for later reference. For example, the stations located on the west side of the reservoir, in areas that are to be cleared and later restored, have eight photos showing the opposite bank and the proposed Project area. In contrast, the stations located on the east side of the reservoir, where no clearing is proposed, have between four and six photos showing the opposite bank and reservoir only. HORIOTA HOR Engineering, Inc. of the Carolinas l\ Kesto rat ion Phan Addendum - 5aseIine Documentation INNIUM Peet, R.K., T.R. Wentworth and P.S. White. 1998. A flexible, multipurpose method for recording vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262 -274. [Online] URL: http:/ /cvs.bio.unc.edu /methods.htm (-accessed December 2008). Schafale, M.P. and A.S Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina. Third approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. Raleigh, NC. 325 pp. Tiner, R.W. 2000. Winter Guide to Woody Plants of Wetlands and Their Borders: Northeastern United States. Institute for Wetland and Environmental Education and Research. Leverett, HDRIDTA HDR Engineering. Inc. of the Carolinas APPENDIX APPENDIX A FIGURE AND REPRESENTATIVE PHOTOGRAPHS Photo 001— Vegetation Plot 1— Southeast Photo 002 — Vegetation Plot 2 - Southeast Photo 003 — Vegetation Plot 3 — Northwest Photo 004 — Vegetation Plot 4 — Northwest Photo 005 — Vegetation Plot 5 - Southeast APPENDIX B DATA SHEETS �i I� �J I� I� I� ;� ,Y �. �, � , � °� ! � -� s .� I -`� �� a r �,� � �� A a �> � I ��r �� ry{ I I a n 4' ., = 0 2.n _ d ` I! v -s.S � 'a "a _ � _ � p� �,' j � -� � � a � V � # i P 1? U i _ � s `° � � C y � } � Z '-i `i '4. 4 a c ry � s :: �� Y _ __ `�� V a n V �' �. � �. b � .3 O w 4 � - ,C o '. fY' r ry � V1 � \� .3 \, 3r Rr ' j 1 t 1 _ ,� gi �� 3 l ei _, Z � - a ,,. n u � ., ,� �r. z. n, - Q .. � i n :. .._a..._.__ ,_ — __. _. .__a m� J. '� :. � 3 = - � = f '� n _ t i � � s .. 4 - _ _ i, $ i 9 _ n � �. �_ � � E 9 I E j ' � 3 � .,. Z � i ...� _ U =7 F �.. L - z c m - � - - v Z a � � - ^_ :. e u w � ... n. '' i 1 _ � f y4\ I U d 6 �� rf w u a w° � I O = �4 jl - C o z33 Ea s u I W7 L Ll I c V4 5i II lz lb Js az t _ L J1. �:.. -.: �� .,. �� }` I ��. �::3a 's 3 � 3 • ; � -n s s `�3� 3 > i � 3 � � j a a -° �_ i _`� a.? I }J _ _ � � ng o i � ? � � u Ij 3 a. s � 3 > L _si E 1 _� va , 7 3 � n s# L e + _ $ ,� 1 t o � '° � �� .M + P� � °� � d � � i a � w � � �j ' '�3 V` ' � � g s § U _ Q E '� -. - =i a i "[g t'..'a c!' a 5 __�....._ �� r � '^ rn C � � �^ '_ , a.�- ,�« -..... a ..i y .J _ _�.,._.___.. _ v _ _ -_ _._ - _...... C __ iY '•� I I. r � 4 l: > e u U -__ u f a u� � � � � � - �® r A _ n e r - � v E ,., � � - .. z s d � _ ,� u _- _ .w. E .I ._ ._ T.. C 'Jl � .� _ .. J .. y ..� ,� � � a u ;: v z :: .d n= n � i _...... - e - �; 4 J � _ � � I u E _ � � � r � � _ u � _ i 3 Yr } v. � 4 Y� X J � V; _ � � � � y O O � � K - 7 +� C _ 1 m Y .f .a _ .".. �. V iJ � w 3 J � i t. __ _._ I .. f � _ 'fi a I _ _ - � e � - � � Y � _ iVJ ° 'vy i � s1 � E 3t :n a �'8 x M a J U - A Z f 0 d } a y e r :Y3 V — c `¢ J ry G i c - W r I h a t 4 y C Mile L-Irl V n 741 _ ' e