20080785 Ver 1_Restoration Plan_20080507

RESTORATION PLAN (FINAL)
NICHOLLS FARM WETLAND ENHANCEMENT SITE
BERTIE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CHOWAN RIVER BASIN CATALOGING UNIT 03010203
PREPARED FOR:
1{,17 0 I1 ?'L.' 7l111 To I t
FRi}L:N AM
NCDENR - ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
Project Manager: Jessica Kemp
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-16152
March 2008
RESTORATION PLAN
NICHOLLS FARM WETLAND ENHANCEMENT SITE
BERTIE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CHOWAN RIVER BASIN CATALOGING UNIT 03010203
PREPARED BY:
EcoScience
DESIGN FIRM: ECOSCIENCE CORPORATION
Project Manager: Jens Geratz ([e-mail])
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Office: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) is currently evaluating wetland and
stream enhancement and preservation opportunities at the Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement
Site (Site) in Bertie County, North Carolina. During the initial Site evaluation, several initiatives
were proposed that were anticipated to become part of the overall goals and objectives of the
project. The two primary initiatives were 1) to provide full restoration of the riparian headwater
system located on what is currently referred to as the eastern parcel of the Site and 2) the removal
and restoration of the stockpiled organic waste area associated with the cotton gin, located
immediately off-site along the northeast Site boundary. Based on groundwater gauge data, soil
data, and considerations presented in "Information Regarding Stream Restoration with Emphasis
on the Coastal Plain" (United States Army Corps of Engineers [USSACE] and North Carolina
Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ], unpublished), it was concluded that none of the conditions
met the criteria of appropriate riparian headwater mitigation. However, subsequent discussions
and on-site meetings with EEP have proposed the removal of a ditch feeding the headwater
system in order to provide functional lift to the existing headwater system. The headwater system
remains in the conservation easement providing wetland enhancement and upland plant
community restoration opportunities. The removal of the cotton gin compost has been postponed
until results from further testing, evaluation of waste removal options, and subsequent discussions
with Tarheel Cotton, the owners of the cotton gin.
The Site, delimited by an EEP-owned conservation easement, encompasses approximately
72.6 acres and is located approximately 10 miles east of Windsor. Site acquisition was made
through a fee simple purchase in 2007. The Site is located within the Chowan River Basin in
Hydrologic Cataloguing Unit 03010203. The Site is situated within the watershed of a UT to
Salmon Creek. The Site outfall within the western parcel supports a drainage area of
approximately 1.4 square miles. The Site supports a variety of agricultural, silvicultural, light
residential, and light commercial/industrial land uses. Land use within the Site is primarily
forested and agricultural.
Under existing conditions, the Site contains approximately 4,719 linear feet of perennial streams
and 24.2 acres of riparian and non-riparian jurisdictional wetlands, a portion of which have been
recently used for timber production. As a consequence, vegetative community biodiversity
within jurisdictional areas was adversely affected, resulting in lower species diversity and fewer
niche habitat opportunities for area wildlife.
Proposed Site restoration activities include ditch backfill activities as well as riparian and non-
riparian wetland enhancement via Site plantings. Areas of upland forest will also be planted to
establish or enhance existing forest buffers that will further protect water and wildlife resources.
Additionally, the conservation easement will encompass and preserve existing riparian wetlands,
headwater systems, and significant length of first and second order stream channels. Planting
units within the enhancement areas have been designed to best recreate the pre-disturbance
vegetative communities present within each wetland and upland type. Preserving and enhancing
Site plant communities will increase vegetative diversity, improve channel shading in riparian
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement i Bertie County
wetland areas, filter pollutants from adjacent agricultural runoff, and diversify wildlife habitat and
food sources.
The primary goal of this project is to enhance historic wetland and stream functions that existed at
the Site prior to major anthropogenic disturbances that have come from large scale agriculture,
road construction, and forestry activities. After implementation, restoration activities are
expected to provide the following design units:
• Enhancement of approximately 12.7 acres of riparian wetlands
• Enhancement of approximately 7.3 acres of non-riparian wetlands
• Preservation of approximately 3.9 acres of riparian wetlands
• Preservation of approximately 4719 linear feet of stream channel
Project monitoring will be performed over a five year period (i.e., five growing seasons)
following Site restoration activities (or thereafter until success criteria are achieved).
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement ii Bertie County
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................. ................................ i
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. ............................... 1
1.1 Restoration Project Description .................................................... ............................... 1
1.2 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives ..................................... ............................... 1
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... ............................... 3
2.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use ................................... ............................... 3
2.2 Historical Land Use and Development Trends ............................. ............................... 3
2.3 Soils .............................................................................................. ............................... 4
2.4 Hydrology ..................................................................................... ............................... 5
2.4.1 Surface Water Hydrology ................................................... ............................... 5
2.4.2 Groundwater Hydrology ..................................................... ............................... 6
2.4.3 Albemarle Sound ................................................................. ............................... 7
2.5 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams ............................................ ............................... 7
2.6 Water Resources ........................................................................... ............................... 7
2.7 Plant Communities ........................................................................ ............................... 8
2.8 Federally Protected Species .......................................................... ............................. 12
2.9 Constraint Analysis ....................................................................... ............................. 12
3.0 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT PLAN .................................................. ............................. 14
3.1 Ditch Backfilling ........................................................................... ............................. 14
3.2 Invasive Plant Control .................................................................. ............................. 14
3.3 Wetland Enhancement .................................................................. ............................. 15
3.4 Plant Community Associations ..................................................... ............................. 15
3.5 Planting Plan ................................................................................. ............................. 16
4.0 MONITORING PLAN ........................................................................... ............................. 17
4.2 Headwater Hydrology Monitoring ................................................ ............................. 17
4.3 Vegetation Monitoring .................................................................. ............................. 17
4.3.1 Vegetation Success Criteria ................................................ ............................. 18
4.3.2 Vegetation Contingency ...................................................... ............................. 18
5.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................... ............................. 19
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................... 21
Appendix A: Figures
Appendix B: Tables
Appendix C: Photos
Appendix D: Groundwater Gauge Location and Hydrographs
Appendix E: USACE Routine Wetland Data Forms
Appendix F: NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms
Appendix G: HPO Concurrence Letter
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement iii Bertie County
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Site Location
Figure 2: Aerial Photography
Figure 3: USGS Hydrologic Unit Map
Figure 4: Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
Figure 5: NRCS Soil Units
Figure 6: Drainage Area
Figure 7: Jurisdictional Mapping
Figure 8: Restoration Design Units
Figure 9: Ditch Removal
Figure 10 : Planting Plan
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Project Mitigation Structure and Objectives
Table 2: Planting Table
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement iv Bertie County
RESTORATION PLAN
NICHOLLS FARM WETLAND ENHANCEMENT SITE
BERTIE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CHOWAN RIVER BASIN CATALOGING UNIT 03010203
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Restoration Project Description
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) proposes to perform wetland
enhancement at the Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Site (hereafter referred to as the Site) in
Bertie County. The 72.6-acre Site, which is delimited by an EEP-owned conservation easement,
is located approximately 10 miles east of Windsor (Figure 1, Appendix A). The Site is bordered
to the south by North Carolina State Road 1502 (SR 1502 [Avoca Farm Road]) and to the east by
SR 1540 (Old Merry Hill Road) between the communities of Midway and Merry Hill. North
Carolina Highway 45 (NC 45 [Sans Souci Road]) bisects the Site into two parcels: an eastern
parcel containing approximately 16.2 acres and a western parcel containing approximately
56.4 acres (Figure 2, Appendix A).
The eastern parcel consists primarily of a fallow agricultural field bisected by a drainage ditch
and a headwater drainage feature bordered by vegetated buffers that have recently been timbered.
Features of note within the eastern parcel include a first-order unnamed tributary (UT) to Salmon
Creek (Figure 1, Appendix A), a linear drainage ditch, and a small farm pond. The sparsely
forested (recently timbered) wetlands adjacent to the UT to Salmon Creek and within a nearby
riparian headwater system in the eastern parcel, offer the riparian wetland enhancement
opportunities.
The western parcel consists primarily of forested uplands and wetlands, freshwater marsh
wetlands, several UTs to Salmon Creek, and a borrow pit adjacent to an off-site cotton gin. An
extensive beaver impoundment is located in the northwestern portion of this parcel. Jurisdictional
areas within the western parcel offer opportunities for riparian and non-riparian wetland
enhancement, as well as stream and riparian wetland preservation.
1.2 Restoration Project Goals and Objectives
The primary goals of future restoration and conservation management at the Site are to restore
and improve natural resources within the stream buffers and wetlands to provide a wide variety of
opportunities for water quality improvements and protection, outdoor recreation, environmental
education and open space for a rapidly developing area of North Carolina. Restoration activities
will be designed to restore historic wetland and stream functions that existed at the Site prior to
major anthropogenic disturbances that have come from large scale agriculture, road construction,
and forestry activities. Many ecological benefits are anticipated as a result of on-site enhancement
activities including:
• Improvements to water quality within the watershed by reducing sediment and nutrient
loading via enhanced forested buffers and wetlands.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 1 Bertie County
• Filling the existing ditch feeding into the riparian headwater system to provide
enhancement of the functions benefiting existing headwater wetlands.
• Diversification and improvement of terrestrial and aquatic habitat.
• Implementation of an invasive plant control program, to minimize.
• The reestablishment of native forested riparian plant community with an upland buffer
area.
• Increasing local vegetation biodiversity.
• Preserve and enhance the existing forest corridor to provide an unimpeded regional
wildlife corridor between the natural areas located in and around the Site, and between
the ecological resources of Salmon Creek and the greater Albemarle Sound ecosystem.
After implementation, objectives for the restoration project are expected to provide the following
design units (Table 1, Appendix B):
• Enhancement of approximately 12.7 acres of riparian wetlands.
• Enhancement of approximately 7.3 acres of non-riparian wetlands.
• Preservation of approximately 3.9 acres of riparian wetlands.
• Preservation of approximately 4,719 linear feet of stream channel.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 2 Bertie County
2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
The Site is located within sub-basin 03-01-04 of the Chowan River Basin (NCDWQ 2002a). This
sub-basin is part of United States Geologic Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Cataloguing Unit
03010203 of the South Atlantic-Gulf Region (Figure 3, Appendix A). The Site is located within
the Mid-Atlantic Flatwoods ecoregion of North Carolina (Griffith et al. 2001) in the Middle
Coastal Plain physiographic province. This ecoregion is characterized by low elevations, slight
topographic relief, and broad interstream flats. Site topography is characterized by generally flat
to mildly sloping landscapes with the exception of moderate relief on valley escarpments leading
down to UTs to Salmon Creek. Elevations within the Site range from approximately 36 feet
National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) in the highest portions of the Site east of Highway 45
to approximately 10 feet NGVD along a UT to Salmon Creek floodplain (Figure 4, Appendix A).
The Site is comprised of two parcels: an eastern parcel containing approximately 16.2 acres and a
western parcel containing approximately 56.4 acres (Figure 2, Appendix A). The eastern parcel
includes a fallow agricultural field bisected by a linear, drainage ditch extending from SR 1540 to
the top of a headwater drainage feature in the center of the parcel. The drainage ditch currently is
not connected to the road ditch but rather drains a depressional, hydric soil feature located
adjacent to SR 1540 (Figure 4, Appendix A). The hydric soils feature was historically part of an
adjacent headwater system which flowed east (rather than west) but has been severed by the
construction of SR 1540. Most of the hydric soils associated with this feature are not contained
within the easement. The watershed divide for the on-site headwater system bisects the
conservation easement as shown on Figure 4 (Appendix A). The entire catchment area at the
ditch outflow is less than 5 acres. Wetlands associated with the headwater system coalesce into a
perennial stream that flows west for approximately 500 feet before entering a culvert beneath NC
45. The slopes of the headwater drainage are vegetated with secondary undergrowth following a
recent timber harvest. Other features of note include a first-order unnamed tributary (UT) to
Salmon Creek, a small farm pond, and old tobacco barn (Photos 1-5, Appendix Q.
The western parcel consists primarily of forested uplands and wetlands, freshwater marsh
wetlands, several UTs to Salmon Creek, and a naturalized borrow pit. An extensive beaver
impoundment is located in the northwestern portion of this parcel. Water levels within the beaver
pond also regulate the water elevation within the borrow pit. A cotton gin is located northeast
corner of the parcel. The cotton gin produces a residual organic waste which is composted on the
side-slope of the borrow pit. A portion of the stockpile location is located within the Site
(Photos 6-10, Appendix Q.
2.2 Historical Land Use and Development Trends
Land uses within and adjacent to the Site has historically been dominated by rural uses, including
large scale sylvicultural and agriculture operations, scattered home sites, and state roads with
limited commercial development occurring in the vicinity of small towns and communities in the
area. Buckleberry Pocosin, a large area (approximately 6,000 acres) of managed forest is located
west of the Site. Based on USGS mapping forests occupy approximately 65 percent of the land
area, while agriculture occurs within approximately 30 percent of the surrounding area.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 3 Bertie County
The coastal regions of North Carolina including the Albemarle and Pamlico Sound waterfronts
have become highly desirable for development in recent years. Increased development pressure
in the vicinity is anticipated as large scale residential developments are established near or
adjacent to the Albemarle Sound. With the suburbanization of the surrounding rural areas, the
demand for infrastructure will also increase including road improvements, shopping centers, and
various public services. Indeed, access to the area has improved with the recent completion of
US 64 directly to the south. US Highways 13 and 17 run through the center of Bertie County
providing direct connection with US 64, which leads to the Outer Banks going east and Raleigh,
going west. US Highway 11 connects the county to southern Virginia to the north and Greenville
to the south. With the impending development, the area surrounding the Site, including the
associated watershed, is expected to undergo land use changes in the next several decades to more
urban, residential, and infrastructural uses.
2.3 Soils
Based on Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) soil mapping for Bertie County
(MRCS 1990), the Site is underlain by eight soil mapping units: Craven fine sandy loam (Aquic
Hapludults), Lenoir fine sandy loam (Aeric Paleaquults), Wehadkee loam (Typic Fluvaquents),
Leaf loam (Typic Albaquults), Goldsboro sandy loam (Aquic Paleudults), Winton fine sandy loam
(Aquic Hapludults), Bibb-Johnston loam complex, and Udorthents (Figure 5, Appendix A). The
Bibb-Johnston, Leaf, and Wehadkee series have been designated hydric soils by the NRCS
(MRCS 1997).
The Craven series (Cr) consists of moderately well drained soils occurring on rounded ridges and
on side slopes of main drainage ways. Permeability is slow to very slow and the seasonal high
water table occurs at a depth of 1.5 to 3 feet. The Craven series is considered non-hydric, with
hydric inclusions of Bibb and Johnston series in Bertie County (NRCS 1997). The Craven series
makes up approximately 70 percent of the Site.
The Lenoir series (Ln) consists of nearly level, somewhat poorly drained soils with slow
permeability. Lenoir occurs on low ridges in uplands. The seasonal high water is 1 to 2 feet
below the land surface. The Lenoir series is considered non-hydric with hydric inclusions of Leaf
series in Bertie County (NRCS 1997). The Lemor series makes up approximately 8 percent of
the Site.
The Wehadkee series (We) consists of nearly level, poorly drained, moderately permeable soils.
Wehadkee occurs on floodplains adjacent to larger streams. The seasonal high water table is
located at or near the surface, and the soil is frequently flooded. The Wehadkee series is
considered hydric in Bertie County (NRCS 1997). The Wehadkee series makes up approximately
5 percent of the Site.
The Leaf series (Lf) consists of nearly level, poorly drained soils with slow permeability. Leaf
soils usually occur on broad flats and in depressions. The seasonal high water table is located at
or near the surface. The Leaf series is considered hydric in Bertie County (NRCS 1997). The
Leaf series comprises approximately 5 percent of the Site.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 4 Bertie County
The Goldsboro series (Go) consists of moderately well drained, moderately permeable soils that
occur on smooth ridges and flats in uplands. The seasonal high water table occurs at a depth of 2
to 3 feet. The Goldsboro series is considered non-hydric in Bertie County (MRCS 1997). The
Goldsboro series makes up approximately 4 percent of the Site.
The Bibb and Johnston loams (BB) were not separated in mapping because use and management
of them are similar. The Bibb series makes up approximately 50 percent of the mapping unit, and
the Johnston series comprises approximately 35 percent, with other soil inclusions making up the
remaining 15 percent. These soils are poorly to very poorly drained, with moderate to rapid
permeability. They occur on floodplains. The Bibb soil has a seasonal high water table that
occurs at a depth of 0.5 to 1.5 feet, and the Johnston soil has a seasonal high water table that
occurs at or above the surface. The Bibb and Johnston loams are considered hydric in Bertie
County (MRCS 1997). The Bibb and Johnston loams make up approximately 4 percent of the
Site.
The Udorthents (Ud) soil mapping unit consists of borrow pits from which the surface layer and
most of the subsoil have been removed and areas of fill or dredged material. The Udorthents
mapping unit consists of a farm pond (located in the center of the eastern Site parcel) and lagoon
located in the northwestern portion of the western Site parcel. Udorthents make up
approximately 3 percent of the Site.
The Winton series (Wt) consists of moderately well drained, moderately permeable soils that
occur on side slopes. The seasonal high water table occurs at a depth of 2 to 4 feet. The Winton
series is considered non-hydric with hydric inclusions of Bibb and Johnston loams in Bertie
County (MRCS 1997). The Winton series comprises less than one percent of the Site.
2.4 Hydrology
2.4.1 Surface Water Hydrology
The Site is situated within the watershed of a larger UT to Salmon Creek (Figure 6, Appendix A).
The Site outfall within the western parcel supports a drainage area of approximately 1.4 square
miles. The watershed is comprised of approximately 2000 linear feet of main stem stream
channel upstream of the Site and approximately 4719 linear feet of perennial stream within the
Site. Although some evidence of past impacts and alteration is apparent, no on-Site stream
reaches were identified as candidates for restoration.
On-Site stream reaches are generally classifiable as E-type streams (Rosgen 1996). E-type
streams, which are common in the Coastal Plain, usually occur within flat (section-wise), low
gradient alluvial valleys (Valley Type VIII) (Rosgen 1996). E-type streams are characteristically
sinuous with low bankfull slopes. In order to effectively transmit watershed materials, they have
a low width-to-depth ratio, which results in hydraulically efficient sediment transport dynamics.
At the time of field investigations, on-Site streams were assessed in order to evaluate channel
stability. In general, all on-Site stream reaches were observed to be both vertically and laterally
stable, with adjacent intact vegetated (though recently timbered) riparian buffers.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 5 Bertie County
2.4.2 Groundwater Hydrology
Site groundwater hydrology is driven primarily by inputs from precipitation, sheet flow/runoff,
and overbank flooding of Site stream channels. Removal of forest vegetation, conversion of
adjacent forest to agriculture fields, ditching and other surface water feature manipulations, and
leveling of soil surfaces decreases water infiltration and accelerates the rate of near-surface
groundwater discharge from the Site. Ditching of the land surface also results in an increased rate
of groundwater discharge into the receiving drainage, thereby lowering the adjacent water table.
Site groundwater hydrology was initially investigated to provide evidence in support of wetland
restoration opportunities associated with the riparian headwater system located within the eastern
parcel. The single drainage ditch that bisects the agricultural fields above the headwater system
was specifically targeted for evaluation to ascertain weather the hydric soils directly adjacent to
the ditch were affected by lateral drainage affects.
Groundwater Monitoring
To investigate the potential degradation to wetland caused by the drainage ditch bisecting the
headwater system, six continuous recording gauges were installed in February 2006.
Groundwater gauge locations are provided in Appendix D. Nested gauges (Gauges 2-3 and
Gauge 4-6) were placed perpendicular to the ditch to measure lateral drainage effects.
The ground elevations of the nested gauges (relative to each other) were surveyed and found to
differ by less than 0.2 feet. Therefore, the depths to groundwater shown in the hydrographs are
vertically relative to each other within the nested transect. A single gauge (Gauge 1) was placed
with a hydric soils area adjacent to Old Merry Hill Road to verify wetland hydrology. The
gauges were initially monitored for six months beginning in February 2006. However, due to
prolonged landowner negotiations and project delays, more recent attempts to download the
gauges resulted in additional monitoring data that extends through the 2006 and 2007 growing
seasons.
Groundwater Monitoring Results
Gauge 3 malfunctioned in April 2006 and was not replaced. As evidenced in the hydrographs,
the Site experienced abnormally dry conditions during the 2007 growing season. All gauges
exhibited a major drawdown at the beginning of the 2007 growing season; therefore analysis is
confined to the 2006 growing season data.
Nested groundwater gauges (Gauges 4-6) installed at the Site show a modest groundwater
drawdown in locations directly adjacent to the drainage ditch. Gauge hydrographs are provided
in Appendix D. The current on-site trend shows a decrease in the depth of groundwater table
from Gauge 6 (furthest from the ditch) to Gauge 4 (closest to the drainage ditch). However,
while the data shows a lateral drainage affect from the ditch, the results suggest that these
effected areas continue to exhibit wetland hydrology above jurisdictional limits. This finding is
corroborated by the jurisdictional delineation performed at this location. The gauge data results
in combination with the jurisdictional confirmation has discounted these hydric soil areas from
wetland restoration consideration. However, the proposed removal (i.e. filling) of the drainage
ditch may increase the existing wetland hydroperiod and provide a functional lift to the headwater
system including increase in water storage capacity, residence times, and aquatic resources.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 6 Bertie County
Gauge 1 provides evidence that the water table frequently saturates or floods soils within the top
12 inches of the surface inside the hydric soil represented by this gauge. However, minor
enhancement is anticipated in this area post project because the restorable area is less than
0.1 acres (Figure 4, Appendix A).
2.4.3 Albemarle Sound
The Albemarle Sound is one of the least urban of America's major estuaries and consequently
one of the least polluted. However, the Albemarle Sound still has numerous water pollutions
problems including primarily sedimentation and nutrient loading.
Sedimentation is the erosion and runoff of soil into waterways. It occurs naturally, but clearing
land for development and agriculture has caused an excess in many streams that flow into the
Albemarle Sound. Excess sediment clouds water (turbidity), which depresses aquatic life by
smothering habitat, reducing oxygen, and stressing health. Though it is the single biggest cause
of water quality degradation in local waterways, sedimentation is easily reduced by leaving buffer
strips of vegetation between waterways and cleared areas.
Nutrient loading refers to the over-enrichment of nutrients into waterways. Nutrients (i.e.,
nitrogen and phosphorus) are natural and necessary for plankton growth, but excess amounts
cause algae blooms. As the blooms die, oxygen-using bacteria decompose them. Heavy blooms
cause these bacteria to multiply rapidly, resulting in a depletion of oxygen in the surrounding
water that can kill fish. Excess nutrients get into waterways from human and animal wastes, and
agricultural/residential fertilizers. Vegetated buffers and wetlands are a simple and effective way
to filter out nutrients before they reach the waterways.
2.5 Jurisdictional Wetlands and Streams
Jurisdictional areas are defined using the criteria published in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE) Wetland Delineation Manual (USACE 1987). Wetlands are defined by the presence of
three criteria: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology (USACE 1987).
Site jurisdictional delineation located 4719 linear feet of perennial streams, 24.2 acres of
vegetated wetlands, and 2.0 acres of open water. Jurisdictional areas were delineated and mapped
using GPS technology on February 9, 10, and 14, 2006. Section 404 jurisdictional areas are
depicted on Figure 7 (Appendix A). The delineation was approved by the USACE (Mr. Josh
Pelletier, regional field office representative) on May 5, 2006. USACE Routine Wetland
Determination data forms and NCDWQ Stream Identification Forms are provided in Appendix E
and F, respectively.
2.6 Water Resources
The Site is located within sub-basin 03-01-04 of the Chowan River Basin (NCDWQ 2002a) and
part of USGS Hydrologic Unit 03010203 (USGS 14-digit Hydrologic Unit 03010203090040) of
the South Atlantic-Gulf Region. Salmon Creek is the closest named stream to the Site and has
been assigned Stream Index Number 25-24 by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ [NCDWQ 2002a]). Salmon Creek is a major tributary to the Albemarle Sound. The
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 7 Bertie County
Site includes one primary, unnamed tributary to Salmon Creek (UT1) and four associated
unnamed tributaries (UT2 to UT5) (Figure 7, Appendix A).
Classifications are assigned to waters of the State of North Carolina based on the existing or
contemplated best usage of various streams or segments of streams in the basin. A Best Usage
Classification of C, along with the supplemental classification of Nutrient Sensitive Waters
(NSW) has been assigned to all UTs to Salmon Creek within the Site (UT I, UT2, UT3, UT4, and
UT5) (NCDWQ 2002a). Class C waters are suitable for aquatic life propagation and protection,
agriculture, and secondary recreation. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other
uses not involving human body contact with waters on an organized or frequent basis. The
supplemental classification of Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) indicates waters that require
additional nutrient management due to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic
vegetation. Management strategies for point and nonpoint source pollution control require
control of nutrients (nitrogen and/or phosphorus usually) so that excessive growth of vegetation
are reduced or prevented. Management strategies are site-specific. Within waters with the NSW
supplemental classification, NCDWQ enforces the state in-stream standards and wastewater
discharge rules. No Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW), Water Supply I (WS-1), Water
Supply 11 (WS-11) waters, or watershed Critical Areas (CA) occur within 1.0 mile of the Site
(NCDWQ 2002a).
NCDWQ has initiated a whole-basin approach to water quality management for the 17 river
basins within the state. Water quality for the Site is summarized in the Chowan River Basinwide
Water Quality Plan (NCDWQ 2002b). Salmon Creek is currently listed by NCDWQ as Not
Rated. The closest benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring station occurs 1.3 miles upstream from
the confluence of UT1 and Salmon Creek (NCDWQ 2002b). With respect to temperature
regimes, UT1 is designated as a warm water stream (USACE et al. 2003).
2.7 Plant Communities
Plant community descriptions are based on a classification system used by the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) (Schafale and Weakley 1990). When appropriate,
community classifications were modified to better reflect field observations. Vascular plant
names follow nomenclature found in Radford et al. (1968) with adjustments for updated
nomenclature (Kartesz 1998).
Four plant communities were identified within the Site: 1) Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp;
2) disturbed/maintained land; 3) mixed pine/hardwood forest; and 4) Coastal Plain Semi-
Permanent Impoundment. These communities are described below. Wildlife directly observed
within plant communities or determined to be present through field evidence (i.e., calls, tracks,
scat, burrows, etc.) during field investigations are indicated with an asterisk (*).
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp - Approximately 35 percent of the Site is Coastal Plain
Small Stream Swamp. This plant community includes wetlands adjacent to UT1 and all its
associated tributaries (UT2, UT3, UT4, UT5, and UT6). Areas of this plant community located in
the eastern parcel of the Site have been recently timbered. Canopy species identified during field
investigations include tulip popular (Liriodendron tulipifera), swamp tupelo (Nyssa biflora), red
maple (Acer rubrum), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua), river birch (Betula nigra), swamp
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 8 Bertie County
chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana), pond pine (Pinus serotina),
and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda). Shrubs observed include American holly (Ilex opaca), titi
(Cyrilla racemifora), tag alder (Alnus serrulata) and fetter-bush (Leucothoe racemosa). Vines
are common and include poison ivy (Toxicodendron radicans), common greenbrier (Smilax
rotundifolia), laurel-leaf greenbrier (Smilax laurifolia), and muscadine grape (Vitis rotundifolia).
No mammals were observed during field investigations; however, white tailed deer* (Odocoileus
virginianus) tracks were observed throughout the Site. Amphibian species observed in this plant
community during field investigations include southern chorus frog* (Pseudacris nigrita) and
southern cricket frog (Acris gryllus). Other reptile and amphibian species expected to be found
include cottonmouth (Agkistrodon piscivorus), spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata), green tree frog
(Hyla cinerea), and eastern mud salamander (Pseudotriton monatnus).
Birds observed utilizing habitat within this plant community include the blue Jay* (Cyanocitta
cristata) and American cardinal* (Cardinalis cardinalis), which are omnivorous birds that feed
on insects, fruits, and seeds. Two open water predators were observed during field visits, a great
blue heron* (Ardea herodias), which feeds on fish, amphibians, and reptiles, and a belted
kingfisher* (Ceryle alcyon), which feeds on small fish, amphibians, and insects.
Disturbed/Maintained Land - Approximately 30 percent of the Site is disturbed/maintained
land. This community includes agriculture fields, roadside shoulders, and residential lots. Within
disturbed/maintained land, grasses and herbs dominate the vegetation, with scattered trees within
residential yards. Agricultural fields present within the Site were not planted at the time of field
investigations and were dominated by common field weeds including fescue (Festuca spp.),
Carolina geranium (Geranium carohmanum), chickweed (Cerastium spp.), and dog fennel
(Eupatorium capillifolium). Representative species along roadside shoulders include fescue, red
clover (Trifolium pretense), white clover (T. repens), wild onion (Allium canadense), Carolina
geranium, soft rush (Juncus effusus), and Carex spp. Trees that occur in recently timbered areas
as saplings include winged elm (Ulmus alata), red maple, loblolly pine, American beech (Fagus
grandifolia), American holly, swamp chestnut oak, sweet gum, sourwood (Oxydendrum
arboreum), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and tulip popular. Shrubs include giant cane
(Arundinaria gigantea), Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), persimmon (Diospyros virginiana),
elderberry (Sambucus canadensis), and sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana). Herbaceous and vine
understory vegetation includes cross vine (Anisostichus capreolata), St. John's wort (Hypericum
perforatum), laurel-leaf greenbrier, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), yellow jessamine
(Gelsemium sempervirens), and meadow beauty (Rhexia sp.).
Although this community is primarily comprised of maintained fields, some mammalian and
avian species are expected to use this community because of the low residential density and light
vehicular traffic in the area. Terrestrial herbivorous mammals observed during field
investigations include eastern cottontail* (Sylvilagus foridanus) and white-tailed deer*. There
are several species well-adapted to using the ecotone of the disturbed/maintained land and
adjacent forest communities. Opportunistic omnivores consume a wide variety of food such as
wild fruit, fish, small mammals, reptiles, and birds. Omnivorous species with such adaptations
that would utilize the Site include red fox (Vulpes vulpes), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), and
Virginia opossum (Didelphis virgimana). Insectivorous species expected to occur within open
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 9 Bertie County
portion of the Site include eastern mole (Scalopus aquaticus), red bat (Lasiurus borealis), and
meadow vole (Microtus pennsylvanicus). The bobcat (Lynx rufus) is a carnivorous species that
uses disturbed/maintained land for predation.
One omnivorous terrestrial reptile was noted during field visits, eastern box turtle* (Terrapene
carolina). No amphibians were observed. Additional terrestrial reptiles and amphibians expected
to occur in this plant community include rat snake (Elaphe obsolete), green frog (Rana
clamitans), and green anole (Anolis carolinensis).
Birds observed utilizing habitat within disturbed/maintained land include American Crow
(Corvus brachyrhynchos), an open area hunter of small animals, birds, and insects; and turkey
vulture (Cathartes aura), a terrestrial soaring scavenger. Species observed that utilize this
community and forage on invertebrates in the summer and fruits, nuts, and seeds in the winter
include blue jay*, field sparrow* (Spizella pusilla), gray catbird* (Dumetella carolinensis) and
American cardinal*. Other common species that may occur include common grackle (Quiscalus
quiscula), eastern bluebird (Sialia sialis), red-winged blackbird (Agelius phoeniceus), and eastern
meadowlark (Sturnella magna).
Mixed Pine/Hardwood Forest - Approximately 29 percent of the Site is mixed pine/hardwood
forest. This plant community occurs in the northwestern and southwestern quadrants of the
western parcel. This plant community consists of several loblolly pine seed trees over 80 years
old. A midstory of loblolly pine, shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata) and various hardwood species
have grown up around the mature pines. Hardwood species include white oak (Quercus alba),
laurel oak (Q. laurifolia), northern red oak (Q. rubra), cherrybark oak (Q. pagoda), swamp
chestnut oak, black cherry (Prunus serotina), green ash, mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa),
shagbark hickory (Carya ovata), winged elm, red maple, American beech, ironwood, American
holly, sweet gum, sourwood, and tulip popular. Due to the dense canopy, understory vegetation
is limited and includes persimmon, bigleaf snowbell (Styrax grandifolia), devils walking stick
(Aralia spinosa), red chokeberry (Aroma arbutifolia), Chinese privet, elderberry, yellow
jessamine, Japanese honeysuckle, red bay (Persea palustris), sweetbay, and cross vine.
No mammals were observed during field investigations; however, white tailed deer* tracks were
observed throughout this community. Open sub-canopy habitat that occurs within the this plant
community may support little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus), silver-haired bat (Lasionycteris
noctivagans), red bat, and evening bat (Nycticeius humeralis), which all forage for insects along
streams, fields, occasionally trees, and roost in wooded areas. Other mammals more specialized
to inhabit wooded areas are southern flying squirrel (Glaucomys volans), gray fox (Urocyon
cinereoargenteus), and long-tailed weasel (Mustela frenata).
No terrestrial reptile or amphibian species were observed in mixed pine/hardwood forest areas
during field investigations. Some terrestrial reptiles and amphibians which may occur this
community include eastern box turtle, northern fence lizard (Sceloporus undulatus), five-lined
skink (Eumeces fasciatus), southern ringneck snake (Diadophis punctatus), copperhead
(Agkistrodon contortrix), gray treefrog (Hyla versicolor), spring peeper (Pseudacris crucifer),
American toad (Bufo americanus), and slimy salamander (Plethodon glutinosus).
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 10 Bertie County
Birds observed during the field visits include northern cardinal* and Carolina wren* (Thryothorus
ludovicianus). Many bird species frequent the edges between wooded areas and open fields.
Bird species that may utilize this habitat include ruby-throated hummingbird (Archilochus
colubris), downy woodpecker (Picoides pubescens), great crested flycatcher (Myiarchus crinitus),
eastern wood-pewee (Contopus vixens), blue jay, tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor), white-
breasted nuthatch (Sitta carolinensis), house wren (Troglodytes aedon), blue-gray gnatcatcher
(Pohoptila caerulea), eastern towhee (Pipilo erythrophthalmus), and chipping sparrow (Spizella
passerina).
Coastal Plain Semi-Permanent Impoundment - Approximately 6 percent of the Site is
classifiable as Coastal Plain Semi-Permanent Impoundment. This plant community occurs in the
extreme northern portions of the western Site parcel. Beaver (Castor canadensis) activity in the
area is extensive and has led to widespread inundation of the surrounding floodplain. Mortality
has ensued to adjacent bottomland and low-lying upland tree communities as evidenced by
numerous snags and fallen trees. The pervasive flooding and tree mortality has led to the creation
of an extensive freshwater marsh community. This plant community is characterized by
permanent inundation near the beaver dam, grading outward to prevailing hydrology in the
surrounding area. Several large bald cypresses (Taxodium distichum) were the only remnant
overstory species observed during field investigations. A dominate herbaceous stratum of
floating and submergent aquatic species typically occurs in this plant community. Species
identified include arrow arum (Peltandra virginica), white water lily (Nymphaea odorata),
common cattail (Typha latifolia), pickerelweed (Pontederia cordata), and smartweed
(Polygonum spp.).
Several mammalian and avian species are expected to utilize this community and adjacent
ecotones. Omnivorous mammals noted during field visit include beaver* and raccoon* (Procyon
lotor). Raccoons are likely to occur near the streams or near man-made structures. Other
mammals expected to be found in this community include the river otter (Lutra canadensis) and
muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus). Beaver ponds provide foraging habitat for bats, while dead snags
provide roosting habitat. Bat species expected to utilize this habitat include the silver-haired bat,
big brown bat (Eptesicus fuscus), and red bat.
One amphibian species was observed during the site visit, American bullfrog* (Rana
catesbeiana). Reptile and amphibian species expected to be found in this community include
cottonmouth, brown water snake (Nerodia taxispilota), red belly water snake (N. erythrogaster),
northern water snake (N. sipedon), common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina serpentina),
southern cricket frog, southern chorus frog, marbled salamander (Ambystoma opacum), and two-
toed amphiuma (Amphinuma means).
Bird species observed utilizing this habitat include wood ducks* (Aix sponsa), which forage on
invertebrates in the summer and fruits, nuts and seeds in the winter, and Canada goose* (Branta
canadensis), a granivore that feeds on grasses. Other bird species expected to be found in this
community include mallard duck (Anas platyrhynchos), belted kingfisher, and pileated
woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus).
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 11 Bertie County
2.8 Federally Protected Species
The most current USFWS (2007) listing of federally protected species with ranges extending into
Bertie County (July 24, 2007) has been used in support of this document. North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program (NCNHP) records documenting the presence of federally or state listed species
were consulted before commencing field investigations. A review of NCNHP maps for known
populations of protected species was conducted on February 15, 2006. NCNHP record searches
produced a historical record of two red-cockaded woodpecker cavity trees in 1978, located
approximately 2,200 feet southeast of the Site (NCNHP 1999).
Species with the federal classification of Endangered, Threatened, or officially Proposed for such
listing are protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.). The term "Endangered Species" is defined as, "any species which is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range," and the term "Threatened Species"
is defined as "any species which is likely to become an Endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (16 U.S.C. 1532). Three federally
protected species are listed for Bertie County (USFWS 2007; July 24, 2007): bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), red cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), and shortnose
sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum).
2.9 Constraint Analysis
An Environmental Resources Technical Report (ERTR) has been completed for the Site
(EEP 2006). The purpose of the ERTR is to evaluate the suitability of the Site for restoration
activities and identify any outstanding issues which may jeopardize the success of the project.
Specific tasks performed for the ERTR include 1) a general description of watershed conditions,
2) an assessment of biological features within the Site including descriptions of vegetation,
wildlife, protected species, jurisdictional wetlands, and water quality, 3) a delineation of Section
404 jurisdictional areas and subsequent mapping of jurisdictional boundaries, 4) an
Environmental Data Resources Report, 5) environmental screening documentation (including the
Categorical Exclusion [CE] checklist), and 6) a constraints analysis.
A summary of environmental screening results for the Site is provided below.
• The Site is not located on tribal territory, federal lands, in a federally designated
Wilderness Area, or in an estuarine system.
• The Site does not include land purchases or improved with Land and Water Conservation
funds.
• This project is not "full-delivery;" however, a limited Phase 1 Site Assessment was
scoped and performed.
• A search of available environmental records was conducted by EDR. No mapped sites
were found in EDR's search of available ("reasonably ascertainable") government
records either on the target property or within the search radius around the target property
for any databases searched.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 12 Bertie County
• No federally Threatened or Endangered species occurrences are documented within a
2.0 mile radius of the Site. No suitable habitat for any federally protected species occurs
in the Site.
• NRCS has determined that the Site includes prime, unique, statewide, or locally
important farmland (Farmland Conversion Impact Rating; May 5, 2006).
• NCWRC had no recommendations regarding the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
issues.
• USFWS had no recommendations regarding the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act or
the Migratory Bird Treaty issues.
• The CE document was submitted and has been approved.
• Proposed Site restoration activities are not expected to adversely impact any cultural or
archaeological resources identified by the North Carolina State Historic Preservation
Office (HPO) (see HPO Concurrence Letter in Appendix F). This item had not been
resolved as of the time of the NRTR letter is included.
• Proposed on-Site enhancement activities include the filling of an on-site drainage ditch.
No hydrologic trespass is anticipated to occur beyond Site boundaries. No hydraulic
modifications are proposed for existing stream channels.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 13 Bertie County
3.0 WETLAND ENHANCEMENT PLAN
The enhancement concepts being developed for the Site follow a watershed-based approach for
wetland improvements. Therefore, the Site design takes into account surrounding land use and
management practices that could realize benefits from Site restoration activities. This concept
also subscribes to the enhancement of all ecosystems within the Site, including upland
communities. The design planning units are depicted on Figure 8 (Appendix A). After
implementation, enhancement activities are expected to provide the following mitigation planning
units (see Table 1, Appendix B).
• Enhancement of approximately 12.7 acres of riparian wetlands
• Enhancement of approximately 7.3 acres of non-riparian wetlands
• Preservation of approximately 3.9 acres of riparian wetlands
• Preservation of approximately 4719 linear feet of stream
Components of the enhancement plan may be modified during the final design stage based on
planting, site preparation, or access constraints. Primary activities planned to enhance on-Site
wetland complexes included 1) drainage ditch removal, 2) invasive plant control, 3) riparian and
non-riparian wetland enhancement, and 4) plant community restoration. Stream channel and
wetland preservation will also be provided by the Site. A monitoring plan is proposed to provide
the means to evaluate the success on-Site restoration activities.
3.1 Ditch Backfilling
The drainage ditch will be plugged using on-site, earthen material taken from existing spoil piles
as depicted on Figure 9 (Appendix A). The plug locations will be cleaned, as needed, to remove
unconsolidated sediments within the lower portion and sides of the cross-section. Accumulated
sediment within the ditch represents relatively high permeable material that may act as a conduit
for continued drainage if not removed. The unconsolidated sediments will be lifted from the
channel to expose the underlying, relatively impermeable clay substrate along the ditch. The
unconsolidated material will be incorporated into the adjacent soils. The plugs will consist of a
core of impervious material and be sufficiently wide and deep to form an imbedded overlap in the
existing ditch banks and ditch bed.
The remaining ditch sections will be partially back-filled using adjacent earthen material from
excavated depressions located behind each ditch plug as depicted on Figure 9 (Appendix A)..
Following removal of earthen material, depreesional areas shall remain as irregularly shaped
depressions with gently graded side slopes and a finished depth of less than one foot. The
constructed depressions will provide habitat, flood storage, and energy dissipation. All grading
quantities will be field adjusted at the time of construction.
3.2 Invasive Plant Control
Non-native invasive plants and their effect on native plant communities and wildlife are well
documented. The Site contains many aggressive invasive including, but not limited to, Chinese
privet (Ligustrum sinense) and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica). Invasive plant control
entails the complete removal of the most aggressive non-native plants within the Site.
Reclamation of existing infestation locations can be achieved by control measures and the
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 14 Bertie County
reestablishment of native plant communities. Strategies of surveillance and treatment of new
arrivals over the Site monitoring period should help safeguard the Site from severe infestations.
Through thoughtful long-term forest management practices the effect of invasive, non-native
species can be kept to a minimum.
Invasive plant control will be accomplished through the use of chemical and mechanical means.
All stems of Chinese privet and Japanese honeysuckle within the Site will be cut and treated with
herbicide. Several areas with large concentration of these species have been identified; and a
thorough surveillance of the entire Site will be required. Densities and specific location of
Chinese privet populations vary throughout the Site, but are most prevalent along the small
drainages. Specific recommended control procedures as recommended by the United State Forest
Service (Miller 2003).
3.3 Wetland Enhancement
Timber production and agricultural practices have led to a decrease in vegetative cover diversity
and wildlife habitat within many areas on-Site. Enhancement of wetland and upland forest
communities provides habitat for area wildlife and allows for development and expansion of
characteristic vegetative community types across the landscape. Ecotonal changes between
community types contribute to diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced
feeding and nesting opportunities for mammalian, avian, amphibian, and other wildlife species.
On-Site riparian and non-riparian wetland enhancement is proposed via supplemental planting
with bare-root seedlings to best recreate the suite of species present within historic Site wetland
vegetative communities.
Planting Site wetland and adjacent upland buffers will improve vegetative diversity, provide
additional channel shading in riparian wetland areas, filter pollutants from adjacent runoff, and
diversify wildlife habitat and food sources. Where necessary, scarification of the soil surface
within wetland enhancement areas will be performed prior to planting to improve local soil
conditions.
3.4 Plant Community Associations
Site-specific environmental factors (e.g. soil moisture regime, landform, and soil type/texture)
and community descriptions from Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina
(Schafale and Weakley 1990) were used to develop the primary plant community associations
within wetland enhancement areas and deforested upland communities within the Site. Targeting
the appropriate plant communities using this methodology has been endorsed by North Carolina
State University and is now a requirement of EEP (Department of Biological and Agricultural
Engineering and North Carolina Water Quality Group, Plant Community Workshop, June 2006).
The community associations include: 1) Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp; 2) Non-Riverine
Wet Hardwood Forest; 3) Cypress-Gum Swamp; and 4) Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
(Figure 10, Appendix A). Species within each planting unit are listed below.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 15 Bertie County
Coastal Plain Small Stream Swamp
1. Swamp Tupelo (Nyssa bif ora)
2. Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
3. Laurel Oak (Quercus laurifolia)
4. Overcup Oak (Quercus lyrata)
5. Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii)
6. American Elm (Ulmus americana)
7. Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
Non-Riverine Wet Hardwood Forest
1. Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)
2. Swamp Tupelo (Nyssa bif ora)
3. Laurel Oak (Quercus laurifolia)
4. Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii)
5. American Elm (Ulmus americana)
6. Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
7. Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest
1. Tulip Poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
2. White Oak (Quercus alba)
3. Southern Red Oak (Quercus falcata)
4. American Beech (Fagus grandifolia)
5. Northern Red Oak (Quercus rubra)
6. Pignut Hickory (Carya glabra)
7. Mockemut Hickory (Carya tomentosa)
8. River Birch (Betula nigra)
9. Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
10. Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
11. American Holly (Ilex opaca)
12. Sweetbay Magnolia (Magnolia virginiana)
13. Red Bay (Persea borbonia)
14. Fetterbush (Lyonia lucida)
8. American Holly (Ilex opaca)
9. Highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum)
10. Paw paw (Asimina triloba)
11. Pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia)
12. Spicebush (Lindera benzoin)
13. Red Bay (Persea borbonia)
8. Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
9. Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)
10. Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
11. Southern Sugar Maple (Acer f oridanum)
12. American Holly (Ilex opaca)
13. Sourwood (Oxydendron arboretum)
14. Hop-hornbeam (Ostrya virginiana)
3.5 Planting Plan
The purpose of the planting plan is to reestablish vegetative community patterns across the
landscape. The plan consists of 1) acquisition of available plant species, 2) implementation of
proposed Site preparation, and 3) planting of acquired species.
Species selected for planting will be dependent upon the availability of local seedling sources.
Advance notification to plant nurseries will facilitate stock availability of various non-
commercial species. Bare-root seedlings or small containerized plant material of the listed
species will be planted within specified map areas at a density of 680 stems per acre on 8-foot.
Table 2 (Appendix B) details the number of stems and species distributions within each proposed
plant community.
Since Site soil conditions are generally favorable for planting, limited Site preparation is
anticipated prior to planting. Soil scarification is proposed within deforested areas in the eastern
Site parcel. Planting will be performed between December 1 and March 15 to allow bare-root
seedlings to stabilize during the dormant period and set roots during the beginning of the growing
season. A total of approximately 25,340 tree and shrub specimens will be planted within the Site.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 16 Bertie County
4.0 MONITORING PLAN
Following restoration activities, Site monitoring to meet objectives will be performed over a
5 year period (i.e., five growing seasons), or thereafter until success criteria are achieved. The
objectives for wetland enhancement activities will be achieved via two primary parameters:
hydrology and vegetation. Wetland and stream preservation objectives will be achieved via site
descriptions and photographic documentation.
An invasive species control efficacy evaluation shall be conducted yearly, concurrent with the
rest of the site monitoring. The evaluation shall include the surveillance of the Site for the
occurrence of invasive species and provide documentation for the presence or absence of known
invasive species, location, and recommended control measures for the future.
Monitoring reports will be submitted to EEP at the end of each monitoring year. The report will
include a compilation of collected data in spreadsheet, tabular, and graphical format. The reports
will follow the most current format provided by EEP (Content, Format and Data Requirements
for EEP Monitoring Reports). Monitoring is proposed for wetland enhancement areas only.
Monitoring of these areas will entail only vegetation monitoring. The vegetation monitoring task
is discussed below.
4.2 Headwater Hydrology Monitoring
Following ditch removal, groundwater monitoring gauges will be placed in accordance with
specifications in the USACE Installing Monitoring Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands (WRP
Technical Note HY-IA-3.1, August 1993). Monitoring gauges shall be situated in various
landscape positions within the headwater system and depressional areas at a frequency sufficient
to provide representative coverage. Data collected from these gauges will help determine how
the local hydrology responds following ditch removal.
4.3 Vegetation Monitoring
Vegetation monitoring procedures are designed in accordance with the Stream Mitigation
Guidelines (USACE et al. 2003) and guidelines and procedures developed by the Carolina
Vegetation Survey (CVS) (CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot
Sampling Only, Version 4.0, 2006). A general discussion of the plant community restoration-
monitoring program is provided.
After planting has been completed in winter, an initial evaluation will be performed to verify
planting methods and to determine initial species composition and density. Supplemental
planting and additional site modifications will be implemented if necessary. During the first year,
vegetation will receive cursory, visual evaluation on a periodic basis to ascertain the degree of
overtopping of planted elements by nuisance species.
Collection of the first year data will be performed during the month of September. The second
and all subsequent vegetation sampling will be collected between June 1 and September 31 or
until the vegetation success criterion is achieved.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 17 Bertie County
As part of the post-project As-built Mitigation Plan, approximately twelve (12), permanent 100-
square meter sampling plots (modules) will be established at stratified locations within the Site.
The sampling plots will equally represent the various hydrologic regimes and plant communities
located within the Site. In each sample plot, protocol Level 1 and 2 will be used to identify and
track both planted and volunteer stems. Exotic vegetation will also be noted during data
collection. One photograph of each plot will be required.
4.3.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
Success criteria have been established to verify that the wetland vegetation component supports
community elements necessary for wetland forest development. Success criteria are dependent
upon the density and survival of planted species identified in Plant Community Associations
(Section 3.2).
An average density of 320 stems per acre of planted species must be surviving in the first year of
monitoring. Subsequently, 290 character tree stems per acre must be surviving in Year 3, and
260 character tree stems per acre in Year 5. This is consistent with USACE Wilmington District
guidelines for wetland mitigation (USACE 1993).
4.3.2 Vegetation Contingency
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved based on average density calculations from
combined sample plot data, supplemental planting will be performed with the tree species listed
in the planting plan. Supplemental planting will be performed thereafter as needed until
achievement of vegetation success criteria. No quantitative sampling requirements are proposed
for herb assemblages. Development of wetland forests over several decades shall dictate the
success in migration and establishment of desired understory and groundcover populations.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 18 Bertie County
5.0 REFERENCES
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. 2006. EDR Radius Map with GeoCheck. Environmental
Data Resources, Inc. Milford, CT.
Griffith, GE., J.M Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F.
MacPherson„ J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelburne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and
South Carolina, (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and
photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,500,000).
Kartesz, J. 1998. A Synonymized Checklist of the Vascular Flora of the United States, Puerto
Rico, and the Virgin Islands. Biota of North America Program.
Miller, J. H. 2003. Nonnative Invasive Plants of Southern Forests: A Field Guide for
Identification and Control. Revised. Gen. Tech. Rep. SRS-62. Ashville, NC: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station. 93 pp.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 1990. Soil Survey of Bertie County, North
Carolina, USDA National Cooperative Soil Survey.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1997. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Hydric
Soils, Bertie County, N.C. Technical Guide, Section II-A-2.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2002a. Chowan River Basinwide Water
Quality Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Raleigh.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2002b. Chowan River and Pasquotank
River Basins - Basinwide Assessment Report. North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh.
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). 2006. Environmental Resources
Technical Report: Nicholls Farm. Raleigh.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP). 1999. List of Significant Natural Heritage
Areas. North Carolina Division of Parks and Recreation, Department of Environment
and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC.
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles, and C.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas.
The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC. 1183 pp.
Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa
Springs, Colorado.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 19 Bertie County
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of
Parks and Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland
Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Waterways Experiment
Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. 169 pp.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1993 (unpublished). Corps of Engineers
Wilmington District. Compensatory Hardwood Mitigation Guidelines (12/8/93).
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and N.C. Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003. State of North Carolina.
26 pp.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2007. Bertie County Endangered Species,
Threatened Species, and Federal Species of Concern (online). Available: hitp://nc-
es.fivs.gov/es/cpiylist/Bertie.html [July 24, 2007]. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 20 Bertie County
APPENDICES
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement 21 Bertie County
APPENDIX A: FIGURES
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix A Bertie County
Todd - r Z
A
C S oa_ds \? PD
` ?_ ,a AD shI\ dyYf BNduo ; oi?
tea- ?-' _., w Z I p
1 ?J b F . ? ;,,)
? t , r/'?F,rF9T ' '?f/ t?\N 90 J' Y ? ? t
f
I? * Todds
Airport ?P?O ,?', - •, -..t _
f / 4 k? Syr G Son'
i T vl rs ,house
'Paint
ti p Q?3 TAYLORS STORE RD - °i.?.,.,,.._"-?
mid-v
f
it i _
3
Cl
okaur r ,
RD (p
O
17
SITE LOCATION
-4- LAT 36' 00' 51"
LONG 76° 46' 47" ON AVOCA FAflM RD ?a
t
t, ?' i :ti• rout ?`
l ?' i I ' sun d ?
S ?a
i
gc?c;helor
O i 2
MILES
iource: DeLorm® 2003 NC Atlas and Gazetteer, p. 46-47 -`
t E< -', Lashoke - Porn1 `
ADlan er 9? .i -? Powellsville
uJP 3 a 42 CDlerai
tag Con narit?sa 13 to
7 _
;If?rdy Bu rdeni
42 MDDnt G-
s
i q Ask
B E ?R T I E?
308 y MsJway
Ca ha da Drew 6 -

Hlil
l2 141,
,NOKF RIVFR
".rAvp

EGoSGienGe
1?'?Y?s
Ye SITE LOCATION Dwn By. DGJ FIGURE
Ckd By: JWG
EEP NICHOLLS FARM
Date:
ys
u WETLAND ENHANCEMENT SITE
FEB 2008
Corporation

?e?. NO?, --
Project: 06-279.00
BERTIE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
4.1

f j >r
i

¦ e?
[: '
' R`
?
i
i
,a ..p
1
# ;?'JYt.C:
w?::1
$/
:d:l
r
?
4
?
,
EcoScience
Corporation
Raleigh, North Carolina
REVISIONS

Client
i
E?teln 1

Project:
EEP
NICHOLLS FARM
WETLAND
ENHANCEMENT
SITE
BERTIE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Title.
AERIAL
PHOTOGRAPHY
- : Uick/Srville o! neynv,cr,...
>oard SaYem:?` - -- -
JPendlet n °Buckland
J Rbd uc -
n ury
_?f?rsons Co ilnway ? ' Sure -
- '" ?A Sates ll;e G p rdvtne
?MwarYKea M _.
eksville
Pa ec nt _ LL 'o`_ -
ackson -Trotvilleo _
ekfior is ofield , m ` 5 ndY Gress h - _?
?{{T ?? I?
Potecasi?? r 4 `dart@r
of Lam 3Men a Hobb v le
e e olalUnion l ° Se
owo# E
ti
?e Gliden ? _- EI1ZtI1 Ely
l p Harrellsvil 1 6
? p r r Pagkville -
??-- taba e _ Sk1 hueie Lloyo "?' + od t
d i 5
Brya' ossroad ra B v`odere ?-Chapanok , isko
90 j t?.7
dvill
? F•
?P; ulander b?? 'C Powellsville?, er r NTi 1 1
6A 5?T Colerarn
Roxopel
-(y _ 5 r klediord
rscc I r nts
elf" rd ?R ck7`h ocl5 1 r" GNo ts
S.va 7 -T L
\1 I? /V
Burdego t -
N6rfleet?\ errytow o 1 ?- ?o ahalla o o'-?? `- S -
Burgess'... \s
- Lewist
?o oodv r ..le t Goutd C ?r? ? ? - Bethel
Askewvil
Todds 1 y Uta ock;o ?P
?, <. was Crossroads t r
'•,R?puhlican0 p -
,B - E R T _L_' dg¢ton Drummond 'Pt
al a ~ 4
Laurai Pt
ay
Vr t4,
ak City
Hamilton
ltdackeys
SITE-LOCATION
i r Pleasant ( Colc
Grove fr _ 1 Travi -
z1k
esto ver = Scirpuemong0 \ T
7? -?? -_? -
;y i ?oIdl,POiR r I:. Py n ttth& - cb'erry 5 va ` r L
?
GS ?Everet rn -on
rden
' _ obersonv Ile - f -f - -+ _- ?? -_
Pa ree lames+ntl@.
r? rf ? ?f\J/ ? - Prsrc- rtnI?-4 _
Vfhitehurst
Oakley
ti Stokes, ` `\ rcV \- - -a1 < ANeno'na
1 4 *c\' ?
Staton
1 \ l k- 4"44"'""" 11
L_.a-M,neoia z ?Pu71go" •3 - _ /-Krtkann w'
? r
actolus? m" '•\ ^lrlk?nsoA
Ile R1VPI netawn Jerr Cera
---- _ ?.
c-re G6rc PanteSo
Walla - _ ,POflze"g L -v
s 11a Watta A ,yi ? ir+rR °
Sl4np.nn? ,-? -Grb" ashin ton ?-
`i-F do f vs Bel aven d? _ _
q ?7 °7 - hyan B4d,<wrth `- Ol
' Wint$rvi va 1 ?-k ! s hi Stan at°svillo U•' _ ?+
?X
ti m - r a
a { hocb?ralty Ssrai _
• _ -_
o Cre Srdnssr eY ds
-yR
Rose y
\y JJ? "???'?rRanso vrl? aR2eYvrllSlad C _o
Aden 1 B
A
/ N e McC m?ell
Bavvrev?s' S --ZBeW h L----?
C
Lritlefie n Cpve Porn" - ?\ ' o z i
C licoo l t\ M - rti?,. ?'? Swan4uar[er
anrahan j- JJ
HIM
O Pamlico Beach
lif
?_ F-` tree sor,r Bonnertwl E R _ r5
tiE? ,. _ •`r rf, ??-,,,?,o yi - _
dwar 3auth Crc R-to O 1 r1
Aur \ 1U'?' ?LOw4astd P m-,cod,
MILES `- Cam?b,T
?R?ar "o' ?.?

EcoScience
1?'?Y?s
Ye USGS HYDROLOGIC UNIT MAP Dwn By. DGJ FIGURE
Ckd By: JWG
EEP NICHOLLS FARM
Date:
ys
u WETLAND ENHANCEMENT SITE
FEB 2008
Corporation

?e?.NO?, --
Project: 06-279.00
BERTIE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
;??y ?' w+.,y ?"? tis P ?` 1?t *' Y,?7Yr?.'?-ti??"'R qC`, , µ fA ?' ..
?' ' f? ?,?"', C Lt r _" ?` '" LEGEND
r. w ?1
w, r ?.r ti , rII ?` ..Itr?w, + ?rF ,+ '??+`? ?y?r _4< 3??. 0.o y ,:IiI,
„Fr: .. m may,.'. e `" , SITE BOUNDARY * 72.6acres
' 1 _ drkkrr M 'F,1'{ _ ,,'fir` rr>? r'.
Ix '?+'??d r°., e??w".""??•_••?? EXISTING STREAM CHANNELS
?. ;? ,?r ,y?,,?, y? Yy? F " * J ?,, f 1 S. Q . 'l' $ ;f x,
iNt.EF? dr« ?N °i 30 r j d s j`4: A?1? 3o MAJOR CONTOUR (ft.)
w
r x t f: , '
?? ,?//vwv? r ?, rq t MINOR CONTOUR
d M?nr ?? nr ,#Y y? .? • fir, ?, ,nom
Y xrl `?? a,r t' ' ?? o Y r~r BORROW?? i "
?{? by y;'?? y` *" PIT N„"'.y
1 t ?'F4? .3i t .f. CSL YTf-1.. p'' ?k ... Y { •s T? .,'?? ?' A .? Y °`h i
'?a*'?'r?'?" ? r . " '+I??zat«? ???kV °s. ,fit.. _ '? ?` ' .,1. ?'r
+,e?a. +p ?'N, a??OTTON GIN ??
r ? .?? E'? Yr?, rY??. .. ? ,??. o, ?" ?` ?? COTTON GIN T:? t
¢+?t? F1} V? j?„ r; '? COMPOST 1? 'y,
r,
?? +. „'' `?? BEAVER APPROXIMATE
?' ??/ _ ".` ` IMPOUNDMENT WATERSHE
*+ ' ?;' r4
r ?'?
rt? , _ ?- HYDRIC SOILS
?'T RFv ? ? ?#?. , ' ? cw sY'$, " 7 *? r, ','& ;2 X?r ?`.. I
°.» 1 r,,;4tA !! ra $' 4 .a!% -? ;.ate DRAINAGE I• 0
F +? y .??tl?? DITCH I. <
y?iw ??•q5: ?'i+,?'t ,w? jai ` °? ??;?? + °,t?.n??}?' ?+?`? .`. ?? ??? .?;"x +?y? I??
''a cif i r „? O? a F? , r` 4 ,
? y1? r? '?5 ?3' ?,j?a ,?, +j ,? ? j ,, F AS.4 ` rr??„? ? a f, ? y u
-"G` rL } rt.,#r ,.,-i. r'?4 ?F'4 i? }?+° S_' n, o `I
'' y', ,aYr? ar? ° ?`+'' W '6? \ TIMBERED i+.
' ? ?' ?uyTr t 3G????'?` ? ? ,I? R'tml?,,??? ? ??, r??? ? ' AREAS
??n?,."? ,F ??? , ;y } ??i• ¢ ?? "gr ? i,??.f ? ,,?i t s .#r ?" ?i ?'oY' ? j ? I ;A'
?? e,, * 'fiF`?r,? j;, t 30 FARM POND -•,
' ?, r'? { -.
` i p y r + 1F f `{ TOBACCO BARN ?r
'. f ?.T A ?f hv?F 4f?S- T??I. ? ? ? ) .Yb F 'R y 4? ,? 1 '?R??. `1• 'j.? t P ry It
,,1r ?. `try.v .I!<...+tp.','^'cr. .?, lr-?,+j,; i?y+? +':a,Rv 1
DIY *,, ar t7; r i. , " , ..
` r ?? .?
cw ?? 1Y .x r ?f! :.:C??? rr?Tdn•°r .' ? t•' w If..?
b' n
?+? ,?.r .? - f 4 R °? ' ,?i9 - C r • Dwn By: Date.
tFa,. 4 F ;ti'f'f ?,Tt,?? 1ra :, ??., Y aJ,
' ?"?• a?; ,,.?? ? ??' ?a-,,?``?"?? .?alr??. ?,?;:` ? -a ?? ,t,?t' ?' ?? .1? DGJ FEB2008
?? ?.' ".; `,4` ^}?? t ,?'. ,;.t+ yw ?r'?'..?? .ia. r ?????, ?? ???, < Ckd By. Scale.
., a3:, R V
,
I
o
JWG 1" 400'
?r?? .? s- 4'( i C f t No..
?h `fix ? ? a ,Y '.`? ;h,.. t ES Pro'ec
'°" ?? '' a' Vw n v, , _.,, 06-279.00
r
µ
r r w e+
r
., w, ,? / ,. , ,? . ,?, FIGURE
? a r ? + a??' y C
.?® w:, W? Merry Hill ';{ Q t
(?Aii iR3f! ? Pr•y3-n "?"..?,f?i?''i'ti v'?? r *ij?A "T?I99+"?''??.'?T .lrM ??? i""y?, ? ? ? ,?, ??,. ? S??,P 14 ??Y kra ?. ? " ? ?
C ?r'i t ? ? ? ? ,.{? p;r. y??Fp1 V ? 4 ?•r iX ? ;?y[ Tr¢'S y 1?`?yY ? tom.
;, _ ?,. fW?..Y 1A,.Lrv ??•rM^ t ?,^ 1? y £3? A '?J 7?l irr 1 ?` f.y'I? q.F r y,, ri
?t. ????;??.??I?F4??''???,, ..W-?.Y?P Y??.. ? ??r?'r''i?:?'i.? .?'::Ft.?L':?r?? i1 ..,ri??* ?,JIll7??• +?K'O.?.. :•?-
EcoScience
Corporation
Raleigh, Noah Carolina
REVISIONS

ClienT.
i
Lco?jl?te?n 1

Project:
EEP
NICHOLLS FARM
WETLAND
ENHANCEMENT
SITE
BERTIE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Title.
PHYSIOGRAPHY,
TOPOGRAPHY,
AND LAND USE
SOIL SERIES
BB BIBB AND IOHNSTON LOAMS Lf LEAF LOAM
(FREQUENTLY FLOODED)
CrA CRAVEN FINE SANDY LOAM Ln LENOIR FINE SANDY LOAM
(0-1% SLOPES)
CrB CRAVEN FINE SANDY LOAM Ud UDORTHENTS LOAMY
(1-4% SLOPES)

CfC CRAVEN FINE SANDY LOAM
WE WEHADKEE LOAM
(4-8% SLOPES) (FREQUENTLY FLOODED)
GOA GOLDSBORO SANDY LOAM WtE WINTON FINE SANDY LOAM
(0-3% SLOPES) (15-60% SLOPES)
Q9
?Q
r.. A , I

600 0 600
FEET
Tarty'
7
lhl7L:1 #
ARY
r
'l? ..

Eeoseienee
1?'?Y?s
Ye NRCS SOIL UNITS Dwn By. DGJ FIGURE

JWG
Ckd By: EEP NICHOLLS FARM
Date:
ys
u WETLAND ENHANCEMENT SITE
FEB 2008
Corporation

?e?.NO?, --
Project: 06-279.00
BERTIE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
r I
51TE BOU
AVOCA
ri FgRM

4 it
Hill
111 ` l
r1 ,_
.f ohn ?e+?y
45 ? sin l`
2,000 0 2,000
Source: Maptech,lnc.© 2004
FEET- ?_-?- - Merry Hill and Woodard, NC Quadrangle

EcoSelenee
1?'?Y?s
Ye DRAINAGE AREA Dwn By. DGJ FIGURE
Ckd By: JWG
EEP NICHOLLS FARM
Date:
ys
u WETLAND ENHANCEMENT SITE
FEB 2008
Corporation

?e?.NO?, --
Project: 06-279.00
BERTIE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
P?

m
ft7p7'Avoc

-ryR?
N'. ' "ate
M
00
0
a
z
j
,400 0 400
1 FEET Imagery Source: USGS

r
fin'
AQ?
R !.
K ,1 .?
N
7
N
0
G
0
100
?o
J

SITE BOUNDARY 72.6 acres
PERENNIAL STREAM *4719In,ff.
JURISDICTIONAL WETLAND 24.2 acres
OPEN WATER * 2.6 acres
kt. 4 a.
Y.
I
r
0
a
o4
? t
EcoScience
Corporation
Raleigh, North Carolina
REVISIONS

Client.
i
E?telii 1

Project:
EEP
NICHOLLS FARM
WETLAND
ENHANCEMENT
SITE
BERTIE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Title.
JURISDICTIONAL
MAPPING
Own By: Date.
DGJ FEB 2008
Ckd By. Scale.
JWG 1" = 400'
ESC Project No.:
06-279.00
FIGURE
7

m

M
00
0
a
z
400 0 400
FEET C
EcoScience
Corporation
Raleigh, North Carolina
REVISIONS

Client
i
E?telii 1

Project:
EEP
NICHOLLS FARM
WETLAND
ENHANCEMENT
SITE
BERTIE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Title.
RESTORATION
DESIGN
UNITS
Own By: Date.
DGJ FEB 2008
Ckd By. Scale.
JWG 1" = 400'
ESC Project No.:
06-279.00
FIGURE
8
M
00
0
a
z
k;r
SITE BOUNDARY
N
y
` f
N

OG w3:` •.?°
T k
j

t
o

F s.{,

^,
?a
i
I(INI

VA
TARGET ELEVATION
(TOP OF BANK)
CHANNEL
BACKFILL
IMPERVIOUS SELECT CHANNEL PLUG
MATERIAL MAY BE SELECTED
ON-SITE AND APPROVED BY SECTION A-A
PROJECT MANAGER
EXAMPLE DITCH PLUG DETAIL
(T
EXISTING
CHANNEL BED
EcoScience
Corporation
Raleigh, North Carolina
REVISIONS

Client
Lcc? ?tei<n 1

Project:
EEP
NICHOLLS FARM
WETLAND
ENHANCEMENT
SITE
BERTIE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Title.
DITCH
REMOVAL
Dwn By Date.
DGJ FEB 2008
Ckd By. Scale.
JWG ASSHOWN
ESC Project No.:
06-279.00
FIGURE
9
LEGEND
SITE BOUNDARY * 72.6acres
EXISTING SPOIL PILE
00 DITCH PLUG (8)
„i CONSTRUCTED DEPRESSION (6)
T DITCH BACKFILL (120 ft.)
gar ? ? 4 T? ? f'
..r 4r' O qv''o
r m
dG DITCH
LEFT OPEN
EXISTING
DITCH
(TO BE FILLED)
EXAMPLE CONSTRUCTED DEPRESSION
VARIES
TOP VIEW
I I- !' -

w-
#?rP?

r
4' a
" 1111111114,
N
y2
N
N
12n
1o
a
W
J

I
gVpOA
qRM
R
? (SR i
?SD2J ,,?.
r`ta
go R1 /
Z:
400 0 400
FEET Imagery Source: USGS

r =

P ? T
d
W
r
a' r

v

Dwn By. Date:
DGJ FEB2008
Ckd By: Scale:
JWG V = 400'
ESC Project No.:
06-279.00
FIGURE
10
Y ,xa
+ A
LEGEND
SITE BOUNDARY ± 72.6 acres
® COASTAL PLAIN SMALL STREAM SWAMP ± 12.7 acres
® MESIC MIXED HARDWOOD FOREST 11.2 acres
NONRIVERINE WET HARDWOOD FOREST 13.4 acres
TOTAL PLANTED AREA *. 37.3 acres
f a
4r ..3^
h`
1
r
x
d ?. u t
t w1
EcoScience
Corporation
Raleigh, Nortlt Carolina
REVISIONS
r~
Lcosystenn
Project.
EEP
NICHOLLS FARM
WETLAND
ENHANCEMENT
SITE
BERTIE COUNTY,
NORTH CAROLINA
Title
PLANTING
PLAN
APPENDIX B: TABLES
I EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix B Bertie County
Table 1: Project Mitigation Structure and Objectives
Project Restored
Segment or Mitigation Acreage(AQ or
Reach ID Type Approach Linear Footage LF Stationing Comment
Enhancement
Riparian Wetland E NA 12.7 AC NA achieved via Site
Enhancement planting and ditch
backfillin
Non-Riparian Enhancement
Wetland E NA 7.3 AC NA achieved via Site
Enhancement planting
Riparian Wetland

Preservation P NA 3.9 AC NA
Stream P NA 4719 LF NA
Preservation
R = Wetland Restoration
E = Wetland Enhancement
P = Preservation
NA= Not Applicable
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement B-1 Bertie County

Table 2. Planting Table

Vegetation Association
(Planting area) Coastal Plain
Small Stream
Swamp Non-Riverine
Wet Hardwood
Forest Mesic Mixed
Hardwood
Forest Total
Stems
Planted
Area (acres) 12.7 13.4 11.2 37.3
Stem Target (per acre) 680
(8-ft. spacing) 680
(8-ft. spacing) 680
(8-ft. spacing)
SPECIES' # planted # planted # planted
#
lanted
Common Name Scientific Name (% total) (% total) (% total) p
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum 690(8) 690
Swamp Chestnut Oak Quercus michauxii 690(8) 690
River Birch Betula nigra 690(8) 690
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 690(8) 690
Sweetbay Magnolia Magnolia virginiana 345(4) 345
Fetterbush Lyonia lucida 345(4) 345
Swamp Tupelo Nyssa Mora 690(8) 730(8) 1420
Overcup Oak Quercus lyrata 690(g) 820(9) 1510
American Elm Ulmus americana 690(8) 820(9) 1510
Laurel Oak Quercus laurifolia 690(8) 820(9) 1510
Red Bay Persea borbonia 345(4) 455(5) 800
Tulip Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 690(8) 820(9) 455(6) 1965
American Holly Ilex opaca 690(8) 820(9) 530(7) 2040
Ironwood Carpinus caroliniana 690(8) 820(9) 530(7) 2040
Highbush Blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum 455(5) 455
Paw-paw Asimina triloba 820(9) 820
Pepperbush Clethra alnifolia 455(5) 455
Spicebush Lindera benzoin 455(5) 455
Cherrybark Oak Quercus pagoda 820(9) 610(8) 1430
White Oak Quercus alba 610(8) 610
Southern Red Oak Quercus falcata 610(8) 610
American Beech Fagus grandifolia 610(8) 610
Northern Red Oak Quercus rubra 610(8) 610
Pignut Hickory Carya glabra 610(8) 610
Mockemut Hickory Carya tomentosa 610(8) 610
Black Gum Nyssa sylvatica 455(6) 455
Southern Sugar Maple Acer floridanum 455(6) 455
Sourwood Oxydendron arboretum 455(6) 455
Hop-hornbeam Ostrya virginiana 455(6) 455
TOTAL 8625 9110 7605 25,340
1 Some non-commercial elements may not be locally available at the time of planting. The stem count for unavailable species should be
distributed among other target elements based on the percent (%) distribution. One year of advance notice to forest nurseries will
promote availability some non-commercial elements. However, reproductive failure in the nursery may occur.
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement B-2 Bertie County
APPENDIX C: PHOTOS
1?hP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix C Bertie County
Photo 1. Field ditch looking east toward Old Merry Hill Road (SR 154(
( 1
?iY S1'ri
i- '
Y r
J
1,1
•. q ?a?4r. rA ? t? ?9'?gi? ?: ?>1,',??ti!'? ??, }' ,,_ Fix . <! a??l . .
fi f a?''lM ? +/Jr ??B; ?,}? Lf ail w?Y` "* ? +' t•`
` ?Y?a , ?".!", +? ?'?/ea: A ,. ? .M, ,,,"`an/+a r ? 4 ? X' S? « .n'?• > .?+?( ,y ? yo- ? .
/ ,rr .,, s: C"'`?' J p W'.#A#j''k x rd'aS ! sl xtiS?!i?w` t fas." .i `8
VNI,
'a ,?? ? ?1Rt? -A;?'^F? i ? 4 l? p a? $,,W:t ? ?• z s A ?, it _?„s
pp t 'p. k w: .+
to ?? 1 ?„}y;? F?s .^?tl'1" ?• :•?mt?„?-h..' ?x; k p .?.?,
Photo 2. Farm field looking south toward riparian headwater wetland
Photo 3. Farm pond looking west
Photo 4. Tobacco barn

^'
F

Photo S. Hydric soils directly east of SR 1540. Note Groundwater
Gauge 1 in center of photo
Photo 6. UT5 looking upstream

/t

?x ii 3

d ;? ?• .9
IVA!
?I

t.
:. y k '(j Li 1 y

$ ,,, ?• -??, S' y``'" ,, .,,. a "3< ff r .cam. -k'?„".1?

?,{+
, 77
T
vi

P
_
4- "CW

71
fir. '.- ,r ;r r sa I
?r
'4"G?r, } .IIS4z'WY p'- sy*w;. ?.f I "R?".rd qfr
Photo 7. Wetland located in floodplain of UT1
Photo 8. Semi-permanent impoundment from beaver activity
., z

b
? ? P
s
?,. Y
? ..
g
, py

irk..

b .tv 6 aF
"7t„ ,
Y
f
o nW »- ,
S
r7
Aa, 2 l?,r?
t
a ?
Fg 4
Photo 9. Stockpiled residual organic waste and cotton gin.
Photo 10. Naturalized borrow pit with emergent vegetation. Note
stabilized cotton tin waste deposited on side slopes.

1
APPENDIX D: GROUNDWATER GAUGE LOCATION AND HYDROGRAPHS

1

EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
r
EcoScience
Corporation
` + Raleigh, North Carolina
4 r
REVISIONS
Gauge 1
%
ell
Site Boundary
sYf
Client,
rY=/?"r? if Y'F+ r. i l,. ?, ?frt t Gauge 6 ,.f ?/?`•w ti.. ',•-
? M?
'?? s?. f iN_'•, e?,i,J,'..i ? ? j mystelli
1J` r
r ,
Gauge 3
Gauge 5 ,
ft%
Project:
µ
EEP
NICHOLLS FARM
.,? Y:MS ) `?I t" a +f ! y l F?/1- .;« i ,. g F x'
-fit
WETLAND
t4M+? ENHANCEMENT
Gauge 4 SITE
Gauge 2
' • f ?` +' BERTIE COUNTY,
r'
NORTH CAROLINA
?; , " " 1M i : P ,(?s? Y •?$• 5.? J Title:
f 4L.
•,, ,.. ' : 11'' 1 : ,? t.;?? ?' ..'' 1.= GROUNDWATER
GAUGE
LOCATION
2i kill
imp
a ;
T '? , ,, s '• ?? i Dwn By:
JRW Date:
OCT 2007
,f +?'?•,.w?. •, Ckd By: Scale:

' JWG As Shown
+
J ? " ?{ r •.
, ' r +
f :: " . ? ' a'' j 1
ESC Project No.:
06-279.00
f
FIGURE

lZ ja9o}op - uo,

L
U.
N
O
t
V
Z
0
CO
CO
Q
ti

O ?
?
O
N M
C?

c
O O l, Aew - uose

gZ 1udy - uc
O g l Judy - uos
2
(u!) yjdaa aajaM
O
2it
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O CO N w T O CO N wq1t OqqT w N CO CD 'IT w N CO O
LZ jegoloo - uo,
c
CO
CO
a
ti
E
M
U-
V? O ?
O N

Z C
O l, Ae" - uose
O
•? gZ 1udy - uc
M g 6 Judy - uos

2t
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
a CO N w NT O CO N M't O? w N (O N N N M CAM a
? M M N N N ?- ? .- ?
(u!) yjdaa aajaM
6Z jagoloo - uo.
V

O
O
M
m
E a
L
M N
w O 0

O N
0
t
V ?
Z
O O l, Aew - uose

9Z I!jdy - u(
O 96 I!jdy - uos
2
r-
-1--+
C
O

EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O (O N M NT O (O N w't (D 't w N (O C) 'IT w N (0 O
? M M N N N ? ? '' ? ? N N N M M?
(ui) yjdaa aajeM
6Z aagoloo - uos
V
le
O
?O
M
m
E a
L
M N
U.
N
O ?
O N
M
V ?

Z ?L Q ? Aew - uOse
O
9Z 1!jdy - uc
=
0 g ? lady - uos
I--+
O

I EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O CO N w d' O c0 N w? OIt w N (0 O't w N CO O
? M M N N N - ? ' ' -- N N CV M M d
(u!) ujdaa aajaM
[Z jagotoo - uosi
LL
0

LL
M
M
E a

M M
U.
N
O ?
O N
M
V ?
Z
O O6 Aew - uose?

9Z I!jdV - uo
2 96ludy-u0si
O

t EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O (D N w? O (0 N 00 It O w N (0 O'IT M N (0 O
M M N N N r ? ' ' --N N N (M CM 'It
(u!) Ujdaa aajaM
4Z jagojop - uos
le
O
O
U
ti
E

M '
U-
O
0
O
O N cv

.v ?
Z
06 Aen - uose
O
9Z I!jdy - uc
?
0 g 6 lady - uos
O

EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O (O N w O (o N w? O d w N (O CD 'IT M N (O O
?t M M N N N- r- ' ' -- N N N CM (M
(u!) yjdaa aajaM
LZ jagotoo - uo
d'
O
O
U
ti
E

U-
O
to ?
O ?
O N ca
t C?
.v ?
Z ?
.
i O l, Aen - uose
O
? 9Z lady - uc
0 g [ lady - uo?
O

EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O CO N op O w N w? (D 'IT O N O C) 't w N O O
(ui) ujdaa aajeM
LZ jagotop - uos
LCD
U
cc
co
M
Q
O
t0 C?
CID
N O ?
? N M
V ?
O
O
2
06 AeN - uosei
9Z I!jdy - uo
9l I!jdy - uos
!`
O

EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
a CO N 00 'T O CO N 00 qt O't M N CO O T 00 N (0 O
M M N N N ?- ' ' -- N N N M CM
(u!) yjdaa aajaM
6Z jagoloo - uos
LC>
U
co
co
M
E Q
L6
LL
ti 0
CID
N O ?
0 N ?
V ?
O
O
2
06 Aew - uose;
9Z I!jdy - uo
9l Iudy - uos
O

EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O co N ep a (O N w cr O d' w N O C) O 19T w N O O
M M N N N - • ' ' -- N N N C`M C`M
(u!) ujdaa aajaM
LZ jagolo0 - uoi
CO
O
M
Q
CO
E
L ?

N O ?

V ?

0 Ae" - uose
O
9Z 1!jdy - uc

g 6 1!jdy - uos
O
G
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix D Bertie County
O CO N CO - O CO N o0 - O M N CO O? w N CO O
,;TM M N N N-- -- N N N M M t
i i i I i
(ui) yjdaa aajeM
M
M
0
z
0
N
v
3
CD
0)
7
CL
M
7
3
N
7
0
CD
3
CD
7
D
0
(D
a
x
0I
40
36
32
28
24
20
16
12
8
CD 4
-4
i -8
N
-12
-16
-20
-24
-28
-32
-36
-40
Nicholls Farm
2007
Monitoring Gauge 6- A28A308
Month
(D
a
n
O
C
*Well malfunction 4/21/07-5/2/07
7
II
O N
CD r ?
0 T N -0
O O
C a U
Q o

1

APPENDIX E: USACE ROUTINE WETLAND DATA FORMS
1

1

1

1
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix E Bertie County
U.S, ARMY CORPS OF Fit 1- F FRS
If _
t -`' ( :1 'Nit'3??2?1 -1F>- i,?rtlr "n;= ltc rn Ih1i
NO Ti'FICATION W 11 E i wllit_ CIC? 1t IIE; fl;Rti11 ('.1 1"It7
I (?,tirr??r 1c-;' «ili?.),==ir lf?ctfiu?€i_,t Cifrirc?ti
1Jd .V.0 Bot 23S
yea,
ecru
'? Sli?rr>< IIi1(
?_,r? [ lr`ai r.=„_?. i T ti, ".,b?rt•(3 h r?th c ?..?.: 1fl?eit) 17-1 1
o'i)I I(7
r, I'rr? .cr1t is lix:itcd .1 m0k, South "t inter>vcfiorl of M IM } 1"'ant) Iii(' i{WY
4;. i:r,t frf t<IV irn IIIII, tiertir t e?ti(itl snr(t3 C :?riti,r:c.
Ini iftlIC `SS'IIich trf tItc VoIIfi;N,iIt thy:
!i pr'Ai sI (" }? ft>, n
_. . _t leatic
.. .`. l l .> _.. 'ri''. l (, rt..?at }III .3? i 1•.. <<I,Y?1?4' iait ?tlt?
aIEICCtII+ ?e
11 t;rr r
b i
h 't fti tilt' ddle iii this
1 here iri. 1+C11tar 1ti a t` r .eI s V 41Vtit rIhc•i a +3ca Ss ;uh cti t#?c pi rmif rcctu(rcIli ell t), ti f ti ectsn t 41)4{ rjf the Clean
,'', ilcr At41,33 1 s( 1 s.}.Ii t n1c,e Ihrrc r L'11utt,1t In €hc 1,1rti .-r sr.,utrli*bed reui„3I;Itueut. this
tctcaurin:rtir,aa lu.tti ! t r_ c=sa it?atli I, r i ?? I rtt4 I,' .01.'d 5E 1oari from the ilme of his ntiiiric..ltiarn
,nine
Foi .1 itwil trli.Gt?
_.?.,n? 3! sin, , I, ? i. . E ...3t st .r _ _...... i , ?... .1: ti•.1 ;_.,
X FIic i.cIL13l11 ' rotcrts b e, ?? cri tlelut? tell anti the c!_lincati,,n has been seril3cti hs the Cures. We
,rrony;h si( 1 e,r %jitl ;i.is t, tfik dyhric oil,n sti," Ncs? I ?r?ur_ ituaitrl?i?+?u. this ,itr ct should he rc,icsied and verified
I1 the C.ur1 i)zlre ?rriIfILA. this ?lir%vN s+il6 (;nis i lc in ars Ir.iic ifcnicticin ,f u11 areas subico If, f ti4' luri,ilietion
n Nour pvcpi:rt? ,s hic h tiro c nlci?I flicrt i. 91,+, tian-?e in the la» ri...ur tiuhlicbc 1 rri=alt ethane rnati be artitiecl Upejn
for I Ucriod no ' ? cc?k vcd Co scar,. -
I h a et r.r I: I ti t) J
t,l Lt.r: CJI _ ! r 1 E i _ it ?ti
r r
--?CCl.ui1 lEiriri ? ... -. .., u_ I .ar , _.? • ? ? ? ? t } _
r r? ttr? n? __.c, - i
to
C 3 ? , °_cI
., t i[I.`r'2 "1 - r
71 fi I
UC Mfr
- ail
'.. Ti c_ riipcril' i jUt__at 3 it, qnf rjrTbl CI ??_ xZ ??iiCr rf TPC? St1 I7-2cC C7 r:?tuhliC,,n 'uniller the
'???QSLai Sr?;3 ?]•:1 [7a??rTfif t#?
pct rL NI1 A3. 1„u sh ,uIJ c?trtacI tilt: Dfij6 r ,r"C a t:al ?Iara?cment it ! Ii7:ibeth C its ?C, at (_25:? 264-J901 to
f rurmliiP rhelr 1-q l.iit"?1711 en rc,
_ ti .. pr "E'`t ? ? .., a . D 7 ,1mo , r S
ril cCrnlH nu"
L tlU? ' a vinhit,t n WS-1- q _ _ ? tai to Coon Aj?- AO 33 SC 1711, < w }_:. , _ w j iu y... ii _ Jdmg thf
Ji,nst JIC?]CttCr a? _;? V"3 lirlh etitensh,n 34,
I 1f? OcIci7mror z: Thu We ecWhm s+Ward criteria as rfcwNhc,:j €n tht 19S- C'urp: of tn,*iactrs Wetf-In 1
Dchnr atwn Manual and a a pad oft lr wr d C ?ntinuum of sactlauds a<s;)ciatcd anti Sainiom CrCO, a trihutiry to thr

pup 2 Df -1

,3UMSDIC IO-N.AL DUITIOIEtiATI€ N L'r d 6113A)4

I`bt+:}.Ii:CT A-?){"AT3t7? I`FI-IFtit 1T3fiti

I(a1: 11K7IONAL 14 i £EttitE?s 1i WN
t ulnlliclcll; ) d? .. .. ,,n

JI1T I1{III : {I IIII NI Ilrt;'r 111111 nl fi,.:. 11
c Iri it; s I ? _ f e'lie •
e
? I
111' C-
?-

if CA m

1. 1,.141N M It Rv"1)1( I ItJ, \E 1I1'.I Km IN.Z I I{J .
4. tti Item Ae5ocd If n Itr s? ( E R 1rar1 3? .u, + ttlr tIaIt rti of t!Ir ! nrtc:l

atcr5 drhn cti unrl -r ? t { Fit IT?rt t??+' ?? ";.atu? ut lflr ? r ..
_. t'nilr3 tr.c>.

' n C r 1 I llf

_.., ?...
_

lt:a r l tsar Ha i Jur td l ,3l 11, ;11 Deter n 1 n.„ ?f,r? to zm trues the fie:; ah IFeh r

J-1 it c ettli6a,c ti? td? ! t 1 n3 Ilesel shed xn the SCI ure. g(
F;lhlCl? Cti ?tcl?,lild L?l?(IJi, 31 ?j 11 lA JllIj I, ,rrl ??f.ti'rl?i;l l! .7t!'I9f?_Cil Clf +l'[?:7F11?S ;ILS;..Lllll? 7IhAIT1on C"{•y'

.1 Ir11,1 i-.le?. n+ I IL'f f ?,?,;11 €tII cr. .
d_?l:ersrl Extent of .7u ? ?I:t;_.: -
r.,ct t .
t J,:xi33 l) V?.._

' t v c : il?s? ?Y{ 11Ci

5 r. I. _ ,. 7 - ... ..1 ., _.

C2

fi 1'i ?lt ilt@WI-DItW 1l kl)iblt IIf iN1( PEIIattW,+Ilr)V"(ir.r.?;ati tS?L I p;

u ,.

ti t 1 l;tL
'IA, If ?

J OTII"ICA IUD GAF ADM I lk'iTRArIt?'E -?LPPF-,?L OPTION ''S:1ND PROCESS"A.,'
Rt7 'F1` FOR 1' AL ;r i.t41,h? -r
sx ?fi
C hUT-Ch die m; ne
:'I-it :fl I I c(,.
,r; ;i=s<<rtl _ _
tii..1..1 f'l'I'Ilit l 4' i ??I ??i:11,?• utl
f?
--------- -- ---
i-l1C
r I l 1. 1 ;P;lI11it1lSttalll L' a?Dc:11 of the aboVe
tfC'C15I?1?l. :?'?liil:UIl;li t11f'-II?S:i.::il.'II 1i'.:11' i>? :Uil.'?; ;:? 1i!i!??,?tAAVv?',t:?„Li. ;gill,_1?11i1Til'IlillaC?f('.i?S.?C??r'ICC.-C14'l7r(C'{! Cdr
33 t?
? i0 I L1I. I`R(t1'1 F'ftl f) 1't:K?tl!° 5"?rI an;Er a i.;,t ?r ; .•'ia ttar t rr:,?,t_ __.
.
Noll (i?l+) t: 3:.f t ;'t'( Ut[, i;,i 'I : ?Iiti ! ._t,11 tl? . i u,; t+.'iLa `FI li. li.' lI7C t.?l,'t :a,.i ;.7LJ?f itN t111Hf
?I, [`i:,'c ,';t ?_ Sri+, ( 4?. '1`> .:l s?1 ', `il 17'.ri ;7? ?1C ,)t, RP1? 1311' u? [r, i:< ,'3 }r ftflv'ij. ?rlrUt ?IL'R1?aUR'
,li t `? sip {.l (Cj I?t_flllt Sf .i1 c. it 75 >. ? ?i' t _ 1 ? ?:.. ,F ,.. ? '.< 4',lht Clj, ! i -ti i ? Ii? fil_1h C'+ I1) ;1}7('C:.I l!1':
s (li 1f't_ ? J? t'?111 s?'JtC.; It's iil;` l'?:r11111 (?I;i.. i,?+,3 i ? }.(?tf',I i??';1:1-->r _ ,.,;Clal!; Ic?IJlti a:lt; Cc?C;?llflUllti lflCt-CIIZ, `.ti;1
16I?j( Iil:[1 I!: 1 4[ 'v ISltt ?l?l.ii.;4t .;iCF "l; - 1 t,u "1'l': it C?L !?[Ioll li ?i (3;1? :i:'IIEI iktl?f fCIIIII'1
.
Ill to t!]i' t:t°(I` E`:f ?1 oiir
1 !'lri?, zt _IIII C1?
:I?
,l4hl,11); - L-;?-_ ,111 ). l1 .iL S tit
t I J* 1,
a? t :' I "i file +t t° ,:i rL c '1p1 tit lI
? '? Il
111-c lI5IT411 address all w Our
lt?.. 1f71 717C?? c .I not I Io'l.f`? ifi? O?tt'ltl fla`.'lllu
1?1?llCd Ifl. 11!1' ?f ..:. i}:, ?l1d f"
%_I !I tit i?ilf ,?f??C?I[callS. tlic
t ; ? .._ t-
T t.
B
ai1_ t iC o.l
I, ?.,i "4 Your 4r?rr ? r
I;d Id
_ ti 1 , _1Ir.: to
1 ?11u it it_ 1 Icy `
1 C"'u _ 71C I v f l i )
t Li + x5 '' lt! F a'II75 ?I13?..
:T, I 1
L i r' L1 4rCV C i
_-,2 This 1C+CIi1 Must
L I-
z I? I Lal i\? i_tl
' t ? 4 I
s1? 1 i Cc t .i31 :l ?1 t; ?I S.i ail „ ' ??77 1 t I1? x .11 .fl }atS ?I?,t31
I`y 'I t?'I:U J1: F'1?I .rt F'?.1. DI ":"?;\".Iles, 41 rT:..;.._ ?.?t r It????I I s Y L,:,E,; cef JD or
fir;:
't"o"I tit t.o, --7 .. „ The co '-_ ?) . ?. __ ..? _,iIf tf;=? 0 ,?.,.?s trf` thL: d L L C

T
A. •J ... n?,f tk;: Ct i, ... F )liL'C i'? r??.?I111flISf i'Sll?e
oc IJ ui1'
'ii- t uiu5t he rcc ttCj hi
'iii
1T5
r?ar;l nil, II.ais;'
U I t?. ( I?'€: rta PV 3hPb,. rll?ido new
is;f???r r,;t?.flt fir 1•Llrtl,cl ??. , ?,if;..tlt,,)aI h. ;f,? f :f?» zk ,_, ?,Itlatt i1:_ .'? I-
SFCT10 It - RIw( UFST FOR AT'P'FAL or OB.iFC" IONS TO AN INNITIAI'.'PRC1Ft ERM PERM 7
1"oR ;1l' T I 0101 ,t' [ IS:I ,? i):,t.:ht• ?„ul r .. , :; { ?r ,th;, rlitt, M dcvt';IOlr Or oMjr
ill luvwotlon. to
thi ; 1?? ?:?? .?) ?E<Irii??• ?.:??rc ?.??, ..r .,,?:. ., - _tz ? ,. _. _ ;I???f.r? __? 1...i?_ .., ? , _
_ . ?r_ •.Il?tstr.itl r;_cs=r.#,I
It1,? I :l ) .1 i h'. 'i the F I I I l ?. oI l,
t)1_rI:_"1;.!tt Eilll 10'' tht: 1'c'Lt)..I 41. ! tti .if?I}L`.EI t'Il.???.. ? .1I ?2 4..? . -„ ?Lt?? ? ! than tftc
l l l ;7lClll.t; ;',i ,Ill li fl
<<•+. ???. .I=?t•r h;? ?lt•tcn:rl:l?_f ? ;?,;:?i? : ;?, ?.?n,? t:....?.rnu,,r_:t„. ? r;i 'ticltht?r ?I:_ :,?;:?E1:rlt nc7t' 11rc t?ctrf?s
?Ot: 71`idl::l1J,hI11T.Ltl lnloml;ltioll Its ?lctril5°
;la?? s_?4sti_?t; c}f irlE<yrtnatt??}, r'?,.= _ .Il:?atir t?? .t...i:Ir?rl:?tzsrti?t• rc? ;?i
P oIN f t_lI.' twONTAC I 1:0R t U'ESTIONS C.)IR INi OR-MA'IXIN:
L ? It"') R t
?-
,1u?11
(."S Arlin Corps of Frwinccv, I
i
Nst Office Box 1000 U.S- Am n°
C ', uth Adantie [fit i4,*Ull
lt? t?llilrt?tlrn, \rlrtti C rr+?lirr:i "Stilt ! 61:, l car>Vdl

)[' FN l F"Y- r ' 1 t-t
Fn??i and
the CE???? (If t - -t 7edI Prtrce5ti )"()U
Cal ill all ?iw.

Bate: T-'l-,p omt number.

DIVISION F-.N-CfINFFTZ:
C' IllI'MInder
C . . Arm) Fnvintrj- DIN i ion. South Atlantic
(?(1 ?,_?rs? th titr+,?et, I?a?urrr ???I ]
t?u? C?ur?, t ??t
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm
Applicant/Owner: EEP
Investi ator: EcoScience/O'Lou hlin
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? []Yes ®No
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No
If needed, ex lain on reverse.
VEGETATION
Date: 2/10/06
County: Bertie
State: NC
community ID: upland
rransect ID: DOB
'lot ID: DOB06

HYDROLOGY =oil
FNo Data (Describe in Remarks):
m, Lake, or Tide Gauge
Photographs

ed Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
Inundated
?
? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines

Field Observations: ?
? Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands

Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.)

Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
[] Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
El Water-Stained Leaves
El Local Soil Survey Data

Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in.) ?
? FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sand loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Ha pludults Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-4 A 10YR 5/4 loam
4-18 B 2.5Y 5/4 loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
11
1
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks
?Yes ®No (Check) (Check)
?Yes ®No
?Yes ®No Ils this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ?Yes ®No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02

I

1
1

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'Lou hlin State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transect ID: DOB
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: DOB06
If needed, explain on reverse.
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Juncus effusus Herb FACW+ 9.
2. Ludwigia sp. Herb FACW 10.
3. Acer rubrum Canopy FAC 11.
4. Liriodendron tulipifera _ Canopy FACU 12.
5. Arundinaria i antea Herb FACW 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC- . >50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
® Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >12 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 8 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
1
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sand loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): AgUiC Ha plUdultS Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions

inches Horizon (Munsell Moist)
(Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast ,
Structure, etc,
0-6 A 10YR 3/3 clay
6-18 B 10YR 6/1 7.5YR 6/6 common loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Li
t
d
L

? R s
e
on
ocal Hydric Soils List
educing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
[Remarks: Hydric soil indicator F3
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks
®Yes ?No (Check) (Check)
?Yes ?No
?Yes ?No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ®Yes ?No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1102
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'Lou hlin State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transect ID: DOE
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: DOE10
(If needed, explain on reverse.)
VEGETATIAN
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Baccharis halimifolia Shrub FAC 9.
2. Lonicera japonica Vine FAC- 10.
3. Eupatorium capillifolium Herb FACU 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC- . <50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
El Aerial Photographs
F1 Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
El Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludults Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-4 A 10YR 3/2 loam
4-18 B 2.5Y 6/6 5YR 5/8 common loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks
?Yes ®No (Check) (Check)
?Yes ®No
?Yes ®No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ?Yes ®No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

1

1

Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'LOu hlin State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transact ID: DOE
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: DOE10
If needed, explain on reverse.) I
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Scirpus cyperinus Herb OBL 9.
2. Juncus effusus Herb FACW+ 10.
3. Arundinaria gigantea Herb FACW 11.
4. Lonicera japonica Vine FAC- 12.
5. Pinus taeda Sapling FAC 13.
6. Quercus pagoda Sapling FAC+ 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species t hat are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC- . >50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ® Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
® FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: >12 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: vegetation removed recently

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sand loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Ha pludults Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-5 A 10YR 3/2 loam
5-18 B 10YR 6/2 7.5YR 6/6 common clayey loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Laye r in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydric soil indicator F3
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks
®Yes ?No (Check) (Check)
®Yes ?No
®Yes ?No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ®Yes ?No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

1

1

Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'LoU hlin State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transect ID: DOE
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: DOE02
If needed, explain on reverse.) 1 11
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Baccharis halimifolia Shrub FAC 9.
2. Lonicera japonica Vine FAC- 10.
3. Eupatorium capillifolium Herb FACU 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species tha t are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC- . <50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:

SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Ha pludults Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Col ors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-6 A 10YR 3/2 clayey loam
6-18 B 10YR 5/6 clayey loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks
?Yes ®No (Check) (Check)
?Yes ®No
?Yes ®No Ils this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ?Yes ®No
Approved by HQUSACE 3192
Forms version 1/02
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: ECOScience/O'Lou hlin State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transect ID: DOE
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: DOE02
If needed, explain on reverse.) I
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Juncus effusus Herb FACW+ 9. Quercus pagoda Subcanopy FAC+
2. Diospyros virginiana Canopy FAC 10. Scirpus cyperinus Herb OBL
3. Acer rubrum Canopy FAC 11.
4. Liriodendron tulipifera Canopy FACU 12.
5. Carpinus caroliniana Subcanopy FAC 13.
6. Fraxinus pennsylvanica Canopy FACW 14.
7. Ulmus rubra Subcanopy FAC 15.
8. Quercus michauxii Subcanopy FACW- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
( excluding FAC . >50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
® Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 10 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 5 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hap ludults Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-4 A 10YR 3/2 loam
4-18 B 10YR 4/1 7.5YR 6/6 common clayey loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydric soil indicator F3
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
I Remarks
®Yes ?No (Check) (Check)
®Yes ?No
NYes ?No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ®Yes ?No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

1

1
1
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'Lou hlln State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transect ID: DOF
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: DOF05
If needed, explain on reverse.) 1 11
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Carya ovata Canopy FACU 9.
2. Liriodendron tulipifera Canopy FACU 10.
3. Platanus occidentalis Canopy FACW- 11.
4. Juniperus virginiana Subcanopy FACU- 12.
5. Fagus grandifolia Subcanopy FACU 13.
6. Quercus alba Canopy FACU 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC . <50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
? Saturated in upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
I
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Ha pludults Confirm Mapped Type? ElYes
® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-4 A 10YR 4/2 loam
4-18 B 2.5Y 5/6 loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Laye r in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
I Remarks
?Yes ®No (Check) (Check)
?Yes ®No
?Yes ®No Ils this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ?Yes ®No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'Lou hlln State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? SYes ?No Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes SNo Transect ID: DOF
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes SNo Plot ID: DOF05
If needed, explain on reverse.
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Ulmus rubra Canopy FAC 9.
2. Acer rubrum Canopy FAC 10.
3. Liquidambar styraciflua Subcanopy FAC+ 11.
4. Sambucus canadensis Shrub FACW- 12.
5. Juncus effusus Herb FACW+ 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC- . 100
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
® Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 4 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: vegetation removed recently
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aqulc Ha pludults Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-2 A 10YR 3/2 loam
2-18 B 10YR 5/1 7.5YR 6/6 common clayey loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Laye r in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydric soil indicator F3
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Remarks
®Yes ?No (Check) (Check)
®Yes ?No
®Yes ?No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ®Yes ?No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

1
1

1

Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'Lou hlin State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: upland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transect ID: DO
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: D002
If needed, explain on reverse.) I
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Festuca sp. Herb 9.
2. 10.
3. 11.
4. 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC- . <50
Remarks: mown field
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
? Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: >18 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: >18 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
t
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam Drainage Class: PD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-3 A 10YR 3/2 loamy clay
3-18 B 10YR 4/2 loamy clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
? Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
I Remarks
?Yes ®No (Check) (Check)
?Yes ®No
?Yes ®No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ?Yes ®No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)

1
1

1
1

t
1

1

1
1
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: EcoScience/O'Lou hlin State: NC
Do Normal Circumstances exist on the site? ®Yes ?No Community ID: wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical Situation)? ?Yes ®No Transect ID: DO
Is the area a potential Problem Area? ?Yes ®No Plot ID: D002
If needed, ex lain on reverse.) 1 11
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum Canopy FAC 9.
2. Liriodendron tulipifera Canopy FACU 10.
3. Liquidambar styraciflua Subcanopy FAC 11.
4. Quercus michauxii Subcanopy FACW- 12.
5. Carpinus caroliniana Subcanopy FAC 13.
6. Arundinaria gigantea Herb FACW 14.
7. Lonicera japonica Vine FAC- 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC
(excluding FAC- . >50
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
? Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks):
? Stream, Lake, or Tide Gauge
? Aerial Photographs
? Other
® No Recorded Data Available Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators:
? Inundated
® Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
? Water Marks
? Drift Lines
? Sediment Deposits
Field Observations: ? Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators (2 or more required):
Depth of Surface Water: 0 (in.) ? Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
? Water-Stained Leaves
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in.) ? Local Soil Survey Data
? FAC-Neutral Test
Depth to Saturated Soil: 8 (in.) ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
1
SOILS
Map Unit Name
(Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam Drainage Class: PD
Field Observations
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaq uentic Endoaquepts Confirm Mapped Type? ?Yes ® No
Profile Descriptions:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Abundance/ Texture, Concretions,
(inches) Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Size/Contrast Structure, etc,
0-3 A 10YR 3/2 clay
3-18 B 10YR 4/1 7.5YR 6/6 common clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
? Histosol ? Concretions
? Histic Epipedon ? High Organic Content in Surface Layer in Sandy Soils
? Sulfidic Odor ? Organic streaking in Sandy Soils
? Aquic Moisture Regime ? Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
? Reducing Conditions ? Listed on National Hydric Soils List
® Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors ? Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydric soil indicator F3
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
I Remarks
®Yes ?No (Check) (Check)
?Yes ?No
?Yes ?No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland? ®Yes ?No
Approved by HQUSACE 3/92
Forms version 1/02
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/9/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland/Farm field
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: JA33

,1 I
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
=??]J
VFGFTATIC)N
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Juncus effuses H FACW+ 9.
2. Rhynchospora sp. H N/A 10.
3. Geranium maculatum H FACU 11.
4. Typha latifolia S OBL 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 67%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 8 (in.)
Remarks: ponding noted.
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-10 A I OYR 5/2 l OYR 5/6 Common, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
10 - 12+ B I OYR 6/1 l OYR 6/6; Common, Prominent; Fine
Clay loam
10YR 5/6 Few, Faint ,
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks: Area adjacent to active farm field.
L- -
t
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/9/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: JA46
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Upland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Panicum sp. H N/A 9.
2. Rubus sp. H N/A 10.
3. Andropogon virginicus H FAC- 11.
4. Lonicera japonica V FAC- 12.
5. Ulmus alata S FACU+ 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
6. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 0%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
_ Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 12 (in.)
I Remarks:
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_ Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
_ Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture, Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-8 A I OYR 5/3 l OYR 4/4 Few, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
8 - 12+ B 2.5Y 5/3 l OYR 6/6 Few, Faint Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATIAN
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:

1
i
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site; Nicholls Farm Date: 2/9/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: JA46
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Juncus effuses H FACW+ 9. Carex sp. H N/A
2. Eupatorium capillifolium H FACU 10.
3. Lonicera japonica H FAC- 11.
4. Scirpus cyperinus H OBL 12.
5. Arundinaria gigantean S FACW 13.
6. Ligustrum sinense S FAC 14.
7, Rosa mult flora S UPL 15.
1
8. Rhexia sp. N/A 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 80%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 12 (in.)
Remarks:
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
_ FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-12 A I OYR 5/2 l OYR 5/6 Few, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol x Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:

DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
roject/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/9/06
pplicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
vestigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
o Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No
[ Community ID: Riparian Wetland
the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: JC04
Is
the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Upland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Arundinaria gigantean S FACW 9.
2. Ilex opaca S FAC- 10.
3. Scirpus cyperinus H OBL 11.
4. Lonicera japonica V FAC- 12.
5. Eupatorium capillifolium H FACU 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 66%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
_ Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 12 (in.)
11 Remarks:
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moistl Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A I OYR 5/2 Course, Sandy loam
6 - 12+ B I OYR 6/3 7.5YR 5/8 Few, Prominent Fine, Sandy clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
IL-
I
WIM Amn nPTGRM1KJAT1r%K1
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:

1
i
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/9/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: JC04
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar styraciua S FAC+ 9.
2. Liriodendron tulipifera S FAC 10.
3. Arundinaria gigantean S FACW 11.
4. Typha latifolia S OBL 12.
5. Ludwigia alternifolia H OBL 13.
6. Scirpus cyperinus H OBL 14.
7. Carex sp. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 5 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
I Remarks:
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A I OYR 3/2 Fine, Loam
4 - 12+ B 1 OYR 511 7.5YR 6/8 Few, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/14/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: J006
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No
11 Plot ID: Upland
VFGFTATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Pinus taeda C FAC 9. Woodwardia areolata H OBL
2. Liquidambar slyraci, flua C FAC+ 10. Symplocus tinctoria H FAC
3. Fagus grandifolia C, SC FACU 11.
4. Ilex opeca SC FAC- 12.
5. Acer rubrum SC FAC 13.
6. Oxydendrum arboretum SC NI 14.
7. Arundinaria gigantea S FACW 15.
8. Gelsemium sempervirens H FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 87.5%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: > 12 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
9 Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Leaf loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Albaquults
Drainage Class: PD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A I OYR 3/2 Fine, Loam
3 - 12+ B 2.5Y 6/3 10YR5/8 Many, Prominent Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface la yer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
i
i
1
1
1
1
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/14/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: J006
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Acer rubrum C FAC 9. Sphagnum Sp. H N/A
2. Liquidambar styraciua C FAC+ 10.
3. Myrica cerifera S FAC+ 11.
4. Smilax rotundifolia S FAC 12.
5. Vaccinium corymbosum S FACW 13.
6. Lonicera japonica H FAC- 14.
7. Bignonia capreolata H FAC 15.
8. Woodwardia areolata H OBL 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
- Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 6 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Remarks:
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_ Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Leaf loam
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Typic Albaquults
Drainage Class: PD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 A I OYR 3/2 Fine, Loam
3-6 E I OYR 3/2 7.5YR 5/8 Few, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
6 - 12"+ Bg I OYR 6/1 10YR 6/8 Many, Prominent Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/9/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TC07
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Upland
VEGETATInN
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liriodendron tulipifera SC FAC 9.
2. Quercusfalcate SC FACU- 1o.
3. Lonicera japonica V FAC- 11.
4. Arundinaria gigantea S FACW 12.
5. 13.
6. 14.
17. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 66%
Remarks:
IL
-
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 12 (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
11 Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A I OYR 5/3 Course, Loam
2- 12+ B 2.5Y 6/3 l OYR 3/4 Few, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATIC)N
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/09/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TC07
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liriodendron tulipifera S FAC 9.
2. Fagus grandifolia S FACU 10.
3. Carpinus caroliniana S FAC 11.
4. Scirpus cyperinus H OBL 12.
5. Lonicera japonica V FAC- 13.
6. Arundinariagigantean S FACW 14.
7. Gelsemium sempervirens V FAC 15.
8. Juncus effusus H FACW+ 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 4 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
_ Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 4 to 8 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludult
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A I OYR 5/2 l OYR 5/8 Few, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
4 - 12+ B I OYR 6/1 l OYR 6/8 Many, Prominent Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TF14
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Upland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratu
1ndicator
1. Pinus taeda C FAC 7
9. Vitis rotundifolia H
2. Acer rubrum C FAC 10.
3. Fagus grandifolia C FACU 11.
4. Juniperus virginiana SC FACU- 12.
5. Ilex opaca SC FAC- 13.
6. Arundinariagigantea S FACW 14.
7. Lonicera japonica H FAC- 15.
s. Smilax rotundifolia H FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 60%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 12 (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
I Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Drainage Class: PD, VPD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moistl (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A I OYR 4/3 Fine, Clay loam
4-8 Btl I OYR 6/4 Fine, Clay loam
8 - 12+ Bt2 2.5Y 6/6 Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks: Active floodplain for UT to Salmon Creek.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TF14
,11s the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar styraciua C FAC+ 9.
2. Acer rubrum C FAC 10.
3. Pinus serotina C FACW+ 11.
4. Arundinariagigantea S FACW 12.
5. Juncus effuses H FACW+ 13.
6. Microstegium vimineum H FAC+ 14.
7. Carex Sp. H N/A 15.
8. Smilax rotundifolia H FAC 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
- Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 2 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
9 Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Drainage Class: PD, VPD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-6 A I OYR 4/1 l OYR 4/6 Few, Faint Fine, Loam
6 - 12+ B I OYR 4/1 l OYR 4/6 Many, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface la yer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks: Active floodplain for UT to Salmon Creek.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TG02
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Pinus taeda C FAC 9.
2. Liriodendron tulipifera C FAC 10.
3. Quercus laurifolia C FACW 11.
4. Ilex opeca SC FAC- 12.
5. Liquidambar styraciua S FAC+ 13.
6. Smilax rotundifolia H FAC 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 8 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
x Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Crash holes
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludults
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moistl Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A I OYR 4/3 Fine, Loam
4-8 Btl I OYR 5/1 l OYR 4/6 Few, Faint Fine, Sandy loam
8 - 12+ Bt2 10YR 511 10YR 4/6 Many, Prominent Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No
Yes No
Remarks:
L

1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TG02
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Upland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Fagus grandifolia C, SC FACU 9.
2. Liquidambar styraciua C FAC+ 10.
3. Pinus taeda C FAC 11.
4. Ilex opeca SC FAC- 12.
5. Arundinariagigantean S FACW 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 75%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 12 (in.)
I Remarks: Crawfish holes
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
_ Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Craven fine sandy loam, 1 to 4 percent slopes
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Aquic Hapludults
Drainage Class: MWD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A I OYR 4/3 Fine, Loam
2-10 Btl 2.5Y 6/4 Fine, Clay loam
10 - 12+ Bt2 2.5Y 6/6 Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks: wetland disturbed from former logging, many skid ruts in ground.

I
1
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TF40
the area a potential problem area? Yes No
PS Plot ID: Upland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liquidambar styraciflua C FAC+ g.
2. Pinus taeda C FAC 10.
3. Acer rubrum SC FAC 11.
4. Cornus florida SC FACU 12.
5. Ilex opaca SC FAC- 13.
6. Juniperus virginiana SC FACU- 14.
7. Carpinus caroliniana SC FAC 15.
8. Lonicera japonica H FAC- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 67%
Remarks: J1
HYDROLOGY
11
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 11 (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Drainage Class: PD, VPD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moistl Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-3 A 2.5Y 6/4 Fine, Clay loam
3 - 12+ Bt 2.5Y 6/6 l OYR 5/8 Few, Faint Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TF40
,11s the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liriodendron tulipifera C, SC FAC 9. Lonicera japonica H FAC-
2. Acer rubrum SC FAC 10. Vitis rotundifolia H FAC
3. A1nus serrulata SC FACW+ 11. Smilax rotundifolia H FAC
14. Ligustrum sinense S FAC 12. Athyrium asplenioides H FAC
5. Microstegium vimineum H FAC+ 13.
6. Juncus effuses H FACW+ 14.
7. Carex Sp. H N/A 15.
8. Impatiens pallida H FACW 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks:
IL-
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: 0 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
x Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
x Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
x FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
11 Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Drainage Class: PD, VPD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A I OYR 511 l OYR 4/6 Few, Faint Fine, Loam
4 - 12+ B 1 OYR 4/1 10YR 4/6 Many, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks: Active floodplain for UT to Salmon Creek.
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TF84
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Upland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Quercus rubra C FACU 9.
2. Pinus taeda C FAC 10.
3. Prunus serotina C FACU 11.
4. Cornus florida SC FACU 12.
5. Acer rubrum SC FAC 13.
6. 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 40%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
_ Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
_ Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: > 12 (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
Drift Lines
Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
_ Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Drainage Class: PD, VPD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Depth Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-4 A 2.5Y 6/4 Fine, Clay loam
4 - 12+ Bt 2.5Y 6/6 2.5Y 6/8 Few, Faint Fine, Clay
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks:
DATA FORM
ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION
(1987 COE Wetlands Delineation Manual)
Project/Site: Nicholls Farm Date: 2/10/06
Applicant/Owner: EEP County: Bertie
Investigator: M. Thomas - EcoScience State: North Carolina
Do Normal Circumstances Exist on the Site? Yes No Community ID: Riparian Wetland
Is the site significantly disturbed (Atypical)? Yes No Transect ID: TF84
Is the area a potential problem area? Yes No Plot ID: Wetland
VEGETATION
Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator Dominant Plant Species Stratum Indicator
1. Liriodendron tulipifera C FAC 9.
2. Pinus taeda C FAC 10.
1
3. Liquidambar styraciflua SC FAC+ 11.
4. Acer rubrum SC FAC 12.
5. Ilex opeca SC FAC- 13.
6. Carpinus caroliniana SC FAC 14.
7. 15.
8. 16.
Percent of Dominant Species that are OBL, FACW or FAC (excluding FAC-) 100%
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Recorded Data (Describe in Remarks)
Stream, Lake or Tide Gauge
Aerial Photographs
Other
x No Recorded Data Available
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water: (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit: (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil: 10 (in.)
Primary Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Inundated
x Saturated in Upper 12 Inches
Water Marks
_ Drift Lines
_ Sediment Deposits
Drainage Patterns in Wetlands
Secondary Indicators: (2 or more required):
_ Oxidized Root Channels in Upper 12 Inches
x Water-Stained Leaves
_ Local Soil Survey Data
FAC-Neutral Test
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
SOILS
Map Unit Name (Series and Phase): Wehadkee loam, frequently flooded
Taxonomy (Subgroup): Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
Drainage Class: PD, VPD
Field Observations Confirm Mapped Type: Yes No
Profile Description:
Death Matrix Color Mottle Colors Mottle Texture. Concretions
inches Horizon (Munsell Moist) (Munsell Moist) Abundance/Contrast Structure, etc.
0-2 A I OYR 4/2 Fine, Clay loam
2 - 12+ B I OYR 511 10YR 5/6 Many, Prominent Fine, Clay loam
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Histosol Concretions
Histic Epipedon High Organic Content in Surface layer in Sandy Soils
Sulfidic Odor Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils
Aquic Moisture Regime Listed on Local Hydric Soils List
x Reducing Conditions Listed on National Hydric Soils List
x Gleyed or Low-Chroma Colors Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
WETLAND DETERMINATION
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No Is this Sampling Point Within a Wetland?
Hydric Soils Present? Yes No Yes No
Remarks: Active floodplain for UT to Salmon Creek.
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: EEP 2. Evaluator's name:_ ESC/C. Terwilliger

1
3. Date of evaluation: 2/9/06
5. Name of stream: UT to Salmon Creek
7. Approximate drainage area: 1.75 mil
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50'
11. Site coordinates (if known): 36.0119°N, 76.7778°W
4. Time of evaluation: 12 p.m.
6. River basin: Chowan
8. Stream order: 2"d
10. County: Bertie
12. Subdivision name (if any):
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
' North of Avoca Farm Rd west of NC 45
14. Proposed channel work (if any): None
15. Recent weather conditions: above avg temps, avg. ppt.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny, 50°F
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 05% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 35% Agricultural
45% Forested 15% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
' 22. Bankfull width: 6' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 2 -3'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
' there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 66 Comments: moderate flow, silt/sand/eravel substrate perennial
1
Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

# ?
. CHARACTERISTICS ECOREGION POIN T RANGE ;-
SCORE'
Coastal Piedmont tjNlouritairi'`
l Presence of flow / persistent pools in streann
(no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = ma.x oints) 0 0 - 4 0 - 5 4
Evidence of past human alteration
(extensive alteration 0; no alteration = max points)
0-6
0 -5
0-5
2
Riparian zone
(no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points) 0 6 0 - 4 0-5 3

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical dischar«es

(extensive discharges - O; no discharges = max points) 0- 5 0 4 0- 4 4
Groundwater discharue
5
(no discharge. = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = niax points)

0-3

0 4

0 - 4

3

-.r
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain

r
(no hood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max oints) 0--4 0-4 0-? 3
a" Entrenchment / floodplain access
a (deeply entrenched _ 0; fret cent flooding = max points 0 0 4 0 2 4
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands

(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max point,,) 0-6 0-4 0-2 g
9 Channel sinuosity
(extensive channel ization = 0; natural meander = max points) 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 3 3
10 Sediment input

(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
- 5
0 4
0--4 3

1 1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate r €
(fine, homoz;enous - 0; large, diverse sizes = max Points) 0 -4 0 -5 NA
1 , Evidence of channel incision or widening

(deeply incised = 0; stable hed & banks = max points) 5
0 -
0 - 4
0 --
5
4
l l Presence of major bank failures
0 -5
0
5
0

(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) - -5 4
Root de
th and densit
on banks
14 p
y 0 ; 0 4 0 5

F
(no visible roots -- 0; dense roots throughout = max Dints) 3
COC
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production

(substantial impact =0; no evidence - max points) 0- 5 0-4 0-5 2
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes

no riffles/ripples pales or pools = 0; well-dcvelo red = max oanU) 0-3 0 5

-
0--6 3
17 Habitat complexity
0
6
h (little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max oints) - 0 - 6 0 - 6 4
l 8 Campy coverage over streambed 0
5

?
??ctation = 0; continuous canopy = max points) . 0 5 0

-5 2

1 Substrate embeddedness
'
v embedded = 0; loose stnieture - max) NA 0 - 4 0 - 4 NA
,0 s
ce of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
= 0; common, numerous types = max points 4 0 - S 0 - 5 3
L 1 E
Presence of amphibians p
4 0
4

O
= 0; common, numerous types = max points) _ _ - 0 4 3

O ?2 Presence of fish

= 0; common
nwus tv es max oints) 0-4 0-4 0-4 0
,
E
id
f
ildlif
2 3 v
ence o
w
e use

nce = 0; abtmdant evidence = max points) 0-6 0- 5 0- 5 4
Total Points Possible 100 100 , 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on First page) 66
These characteristics are not assessed to coastal streams.
USACE AID# DW
Q # Site #CB/DOA (S3)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
i
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: EEP 2. Evaluator's name:ESC/C. Terwilliger
3. Date of evaluation: 2/9/06 4. Time of evaluation: 12 pm
5. Name of stream: UT to Salmon Creek 6. River basin: Chowan
7. Approximate drainage area: 2.5 ac 8. Stream order: 1 st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 30' 10. County: Bertie
11. Site coordinates (if known): 36.0134°N, 76.7778°W 12. Subdivision name (if any):
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
' North of Avoca Farm Rd. west of NC H 45
14. Proposed channel work (if any): none
15. Recent weather conditions: above avg temps, avg ppt.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: 50°F
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
' Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 0.2 ac
' 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 70% Agricultural
_% Forested 30% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 3' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 1'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
' each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
' Total Score (from reverse): 53 Comments: moderate flow, silt substrate perennial
' Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
I?ECOREGION POLNT RANGE t L CHARACTERISTICS Coastal Piedmont „ ,,Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = max points) 0 5 0-4 0-5

Evidence of past human alteration
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) 0-6 0 -5 0- 5 2
3
Riparian zone

(no buffer = 0; continuous, wide buffer = max points) 0 -6 0

-4

0-5 2
4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
(extensive discharges = 0; no dischar yes = max points) 0 -5 0 -4 0-4 2
Groundwater discharge

d
(no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points)) 0-3 0 d 0--4 3

6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
v?
(no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max Points) 0--4 0- 4 0-2 3
Entrenchment / floodplain access

(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding - max points) 0- 5 0 4 0- 2 3
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 0 6 0-4 0-2 5
9 Channel sinuosity,

(extensive channelizatio? = 0; natural meander = max Dints) 0-5 0-4 0-3 3
10 Sediment input 0
5

extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment _ max points) _ 0- 4 0- 4 3
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate a ?
(1 (fine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes _ max Points) ', ?NA* ? 0 - 4 0 - 5 NA
12 Evidence of channel incision or widening
? (deeply incised = 0; sLible hed & banks = max points) 0 - 5 0-4 0-5 4
H
13 Presence of major bank failures

(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable hanks = max points) 0--5 0--5 0-5 4
14 Root depth and density on banks
(
0 3
0
4
0
5
no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points) - - 3

15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
-

substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) 0-5 0
4 0-5 2
L16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes

no riffles/ri > >les or pools = 0; well-developed rnax points) 0-3 0-5 0 6 2
1 Habitat complexity
(little or no habitat == 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points) 0 6 0-6 0-6 2

18 Canopy, coverage over streambed
d
(no shading ve??ctation -0; continuous canopy = max points) 0-5 0-5 0- 5 1
19 Substrate embeddedness °NA? _ 4 0-4 NA
(deeply embedded = 0; loose stricture = max)

20 Presence of stream invertebrates see page 4)
(see page

(no evidence = 0; common, numerous tv es _ max points) 0--4 0-5 0-5 1
(? l Presence of amphibians

O
(no evidence= 0; common, numerous t?pes max Points) 0-4 0- 4 0-4 2
Presence of fish
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points) 0 - 4 0 4 0 - 4 0

23 Evidence of wildlife use

(tic) evidence = 0; abundant evidence = nuLx Joints) 0 6 0-5 0-5 3
Total Points Possible 100' 100' 100
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 53
i nese characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.
' USACE AID# - DW
T Q # Site #GB S2
t t
? ? i ? ? STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: EEP 2. Evaluator's name: M. Thomas - EcoScience Corporation
3. Date of evaluation: 2/10/06 4. Time of evaluation: 9 am
5. Name of stream: UT to Salmon Creek 6. River basin: Chowan
7. Approximate drainage area: 1.8 ac 8. Stream order: I't
9. Length of reach evaluated: 50' 10. County: Bertie
' 11. Site coordinates (if known):_ 36.0130°N, 76.7786°W 12. Subdivision name (if any):
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
North of Avoca Farm Road west of NC 45
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Easement
' 15, Recent weather conditions: Above ave temps, ava ppt
16. Site conditions at time of visit: sunny, 30°F
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
' Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
' 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial _% Agricultural
75% Forested 25% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
22. Bankfull width: 2' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 0.5'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
' Total Score (from reverse): 64 Comments: stream begins as seep from u lp and low flow until
confluence with GA/CA.
' Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
1

STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
# CHARACTERISTICS
ECOREGION POINT-RANGEr
*
;C
t
l- i ' SCORE
oas
a P
edmont ., Mountai
n
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
1
no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = coax points) 0-5 0 -4 0 - 5 2
Evidence of past human alteration

(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max oints) 0-6 0-5 0-5 6
1 Riparian zone

(no buffer = 0; conti(uious, tivide buffer= max points) 0--6 0--4 0-5 4
4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
(extensive dischar-es = 0; no discharges = rnax points) 0 5 0 4 0 4 5
Groundwater discharge

d
(no discharge = 0; s rings, Seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) 0-3 0--4 0 4 3
U
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
(no flood. lain = 0; extensive flood .lain = max points) 0-4 0-4 0-2 4
"
? Entrenchment / floodplain access

(deeply entrenched = 0; tTeq cent flooding = max points) 0-5 0-4 0-2 $

8 Presence of adjacent wetlands

(no wetlands = 0; tar Te adjacent wetlands = max points) 0- 6 0-4 0-2 6
q Channel sinuosity
?
L
extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 0- S 0- 4 0- 3 3
10 Sediment input 0- 5 0 4 0-4 2
extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment - max Dints
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate '
11 (line, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points) r ;'?* 0 _ 4 0 - 5 NA
1 Evidence of channel incision or widening
y (deeply incised - 0; stable bed & banks = max points) 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 $
1 3 Presence of major bank failures
0 -
0 - 5
0
5
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks ? max Points,) - $

14 Root depth and density on bank
0
3
0
4

H' (no visible roots = 0; dense roots throug lout = max points) - - 0-5 3
Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
15
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) 0-5 0-4 0-5 2
16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes
(no riffles/ripples ales or pools = 0; well-developed = max points 0-3 0 - 5 0 - 6 0
bi
H

1 I a
tat complexity
little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max oints) 0 - 6 0 - 6 0 - 6 2
1 Canopy coverage over streambed
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
0-5
0-5
0-5
3
Substrate embeddedness N
#

(dee plv embedded - 0; loose structure = max) A 0 4 0- 4 NA
_ ?O Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous t es = max Dints) 0-4 0-5 0-5 0
Presence of amphibians

no evidence - 0; conunon, numerous types = max points) 0--4 0- 4 0-4 0
Presence of fish 0-4 0-4 4
0

?-
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous tv pes= max points - 0

23 Evidence of wildlife use

(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points) 0-6 0-5 0-5 4
Total Points Po`ssible' ;100 '? 100 `1005 f-
TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) 64
1 nese cnaractertst?cs are not assessed to coastal streams.
' USACE AID#
DWQ#
Site # S4 (DOD)
t ?
i STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
1. Applicant's name: NCDOT
3. Date of evaluation: 02/10/06
5. Name of stream: UT
7. Approximate drainage area: 10 ac
9. Length of reach evaluated: 350 ft
11. Site coordinates (if known): 36.0147 °N, 76.7782°W

2. Evaluator's name:. O'Louehlin/EcoScience Corp
4. Time of evaluation: 8:00 a.m..
6. River basin: Chowan
8. Stream order: 1 s`
10. County: Bertie
12. Subdivision name (if any):
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
1 Runs east to west from a culvert under NC 45, on the west side of the road.
14. Proposed channel work (if any):
' 15. Recent weather conditions: cool and dry
16. Site conditions at time of visit: partly cloudy, 21 °F, low winds
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
' Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: 10 % Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 80_% Agricultural
22. Bankfull width: V
10 % Forested
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends
05% Cleared / Logged _% Other
23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 6"
Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (>10%)
Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
Total Score (from reverse): 48 Comments: Stream line DOD;
' Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

#
CHARACTERISTICS ECOREG[ON POINT RANGE - Y
"
Coastal, Piedmont . 111(ountainr SC
OR?
Presence of flow ; persistent pools in stream
(tic) flow or saturation = 0; strong
flow = max points) 0 - 5 0--4 0-5 3
2 Evidence of past human alteration
extensive alteration = 0; no alteration max points) 0-6 0-5 0 - 5 1
Z Riparian zone

(no buffer = 0; contiguous wide buffer = max points) 0- 6 0 4 0-5 4
Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges

?
extensive discharges = 0: no discharges = max points) 0--$ 0-4 0-4 0
,.a 5 Groundwater discharge

?

no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc, = max points)
-
0- 3

0-4

0-4 3
--
6 Presence of adjacent iloodplain
s (no flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max points) 0-4 0-4 0-2 3
7 Entrenchment / floodplain access

(deeply entrenched - 0; frequent flooding = max points) 0
-5
0- 4 `
0 -
4
Presence of adjacent wetlands

no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points 0_ 6 0- 4 0- 2 4
9 Channel sinuosity
(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander= max points) 0 0-4 0- 3 3
10 Sediment input

(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points 0- 5 0 4 0-4 4

1 1 Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
NA*
0
4
*
(fine, homogenous - 0; lar re, diverse sizes = max points) - 0 - 5 NA
1 Evidence of channel incision or widening
r (deeply incised = 0; stable bed d< banks = max points) 0 - 0 - 4 0 - 5 3

13 Presence of major bank failures

(severe erosion= 0: no erosion, stable banks =niax points) 0-5 0 5 0-5 3

14 Root depth and density on banks

(no visible roots = 0; dense roots throughout = max points) 0 3 0
-4
0-5 1

15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial impact =0; no evidence = max points) 0-5 0-4 0-5 5
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes
(no riffles/ripples les or pools = 0; wall-devclo ?cd = max points)

17 Habitat complexity

(little or no habitat - 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points) 0-6 0-6 0--6 1
4 l Canopy coverage over streambed
(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points)
0 5
0 -5
0- 5
4
?? Substrate enrbeddedness -

L
(deeply embedded ? 0; loose structure = Max) NA 0-4 0-4 NA*
?0 Presence of stream invertebrates (,,cc page 4)
(no evidence = 0; common, nunncrous types = max points) 0- 4 0-5 0-5 0
V l Presence of amphibians

(no evidence = 0; conunon, numerous t es = max points) 0. 4 0- 4 0- 4 1
2 2 Presence of fish

p (no evidence = 0; common, numerous types = max points) 0 - 4 0 - 4 0 - 4 0

23 Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence = max points) 0-6 0 - 5 0 - > 0
Total Points Possible 100 100 100
TOTAL SCORE (also ender on first page) -' 48
1 nese cnaracteristics are not assessed to coastal streams.
USACE AID# DWQ # Site #CG (S6)
AMMONNOWWAft
t ?
? ' ? ? ? STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
t
' I. Applicant's name: EEP 2. Evaluator's name: ESC/C. Terwilliger
3. Date of evaluation: 2/9/06 4. Time of evaluation: 12 pm
' 5. Name of stream: UT to Salmon Creek 6. River basin: Chowan
7. Approximate drainage area: I ac 8. Stream order: 15`
9. Length of reach evaluated: 40' 10. County: Bertie
' 11. Site coordinates (if known): 36.0185°N, 76.7837°W 12. Subdivision name (if any):
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
' North of Avoca Farm Rd. west of NC 45
14. Proposed channel work (if any): none
' 15. Recent weather conditions: above av temps., avg. t.
16. Site conditions at time of visit: Sunny, 50°F
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known: Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area: 2.4 ac
' 19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential -% Commercial 35% Industrial
_% Agricultural
30% Forested 35% Cleared / Logged _.% Other ( )
' 22. Bankfull width: 4' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 1
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (>10%)
25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
' there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
' Total Score (from reverse): 52 Comments: low flow, silt substrate
' Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET I
- ECOREGION POIN T RANGE,
# CHARACTERISTICS ?SCOkE
L Coastal Piedmont F ,(-' NTountaini'
,.
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
2
1 (no flow or saturation = 0; strong flow = mtix points) 0-5 0-4 0-5
Evidence of past human alteration
2
(extensive alteration = 0; no alteration = max points) 0- 6 0- 5 0-5 2
Riparian zone
(no buffer = 0; contiguous. wide buffer = max points) 0-6 0--4 0-5 4

4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges

-extensive discharges - 0; no discharges = mar points) 0-5 0--4 0-4 1
.j Groundwater discharge

no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands, etc. = max points) 0- 3 0- 4 U- 4 3
...
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain

(no Hood .lain = 0; extensive Hood. lain = max points) 0-4 0-4 0-2 3
Entrenchment / flood
lain access
p 0- 5 0
4 0
2

(dee lv entrenched = 0; frequent flooding, = max points) - - 3
Presence of adjacent wetlands
(no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points,) 0 -6 0-4 0-2 4
9 Channel sinuosity

(extensive channelization = 0; natural meander = max points) 0-5 0-4 0-3 1
] 0 Sediment input 0- 5 0--4 0- 4 3
extensive deposition- 0; little or no sediment = max points)
Size & diversity of channel bed substrate
1 1
tine, homogenous = 0; large, diverse sizes = max points) 0--4 0-5 NA
1 Evidence of channel incision or widening 0
5

(deeply incised - 0; stable bed & banks = max points) - 0-41 0- 5 4
l 3 Presence of major bank failures

?.
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) 0 5 0-5 0-5 4

14 Root depth and density on banks
d (no visible roots - 0; dense roots throw Zhout = max points) 0 - 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 2

15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production
substantial impact =0; no evidence = niax points) 0 - 5 0 - 4 0 - 5 4
16 Presence of riffle-pool/ripple-pool complexes

(no ritfles!ri > ples or ?oots = 0; well-developed = max points) 0-3 0-5 0-6 1

1? Flabitat complexity
0-6
0-6
0-6
2
., (little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats = max points)
l Canopy coverage over streambed

(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous canopy = max points) 0- 5 0-5 0-5 4
19 Substrate entbeddedness
N?
0 - 4
0 - 4
NA
(deeply cnibedded - 0; loose structure = max
'0 Presence of stream invertebrates (sec page 4)

no evidence = 0; common, numerous t - pes = max Points) 0--4 0-5 0-5 1
Presence of amphibians

(no evidence = 0; conunon, numerous types = max points) 0 4 0-4 0-4 1
r?7 Presence of fish 0 4 p_} 0--4 0
(no evidence = 0; common, numerous tv )es = max points)
23 Evidence of v<ildlife use
(n0 evidence 0, abundant evidence = max points) 0-6 0 5 0-5 3
Total Points Possible 100 .100 :100

TOTAL SCORE (also enter on first page) ` 52
i nese cnaractertsttcs are not assessea to coastal streams.
2
?USACE AID#????? DW # ??
? ??? _ ! Site #GC/JM (SS)
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Provide the following information for the stream reach under assessment:
' 1. Applicant's name: EEP 2. Evaluator's name: M. Thomas - EcoScience
3. Date of evaluation: 2/14/06 4. Time of evaluation: 2 pm
5. Name of stream: UT to Salmon Creek 6. River basin: Chowan
7. Approximate drainage area: 51 ac 8. Stream order: I st
9. Length of reach evaluated: 100' 10. County: Bertie
11. Site coordinates (if known): 36.0151 °N, 76.7831 °W 12. Subdivision name (if any):
13. Location of reach under evaluation (note nearby roads and landmarks and attach map identifying stream(s) location):
north of Avoca Faun Road west of NC 45
14. Proposed channel work (if any): Conservation Easement
15. Recent weather conditions: above av . temps, avg. t.
' 16. Site conditions at time of visit:- sunny, 55°F
17. Identify any special waterway classifications known' Section 10 Tidal Waters Essential Fisheries Habitat
' Trout Waters Outstanding Resource Waters Nutrient Sensitive Waters Water Supply Watershed (I-IV)
18. Is there a pond or lake located upstream of the evaluation point? YES NO If yes, estimate the water surface area:-
19. Does channel appear on USGS quad map? YES NO 20. Does channel appear on USDA Soil Survey? YES NO
' 21. Estimated watershed land use: _% Residential _% Commercial _% Industrial 15/° °
Agricultural
75% Forested 10% Cleared / Logged _% Other ( )
' 22. Bankfull width: 2'- 3' 23. Bank height (from bed to top of bank): 0.5' to 1'
24. Channel slope down center of stream: Flat (0 to 2%) Gentle (2 to 4%) Moderate (4 to 10%) Steep (>10%)
' 25. Channel sinuosity: Straight Occasional bends Frequent meander Very sinuous Braided channel
Instructions for completion of worksheet (located on page 2): Begin by determining the most appropriate ecoregion based on
location, terrain, vegetation, stream classification, etc. Every characteristic must be scored using the same ecoregion. Assign points to
' each characteristic within the range shown for the ecoregion. Page 3 provides a brief description of how to review the characteristics
identified in the worksheet. Scores should reflect an overall assessment of the stream reach under evaluation. If a characteristic cannot
be evaluated due to site or weather conditions, enter 0 in the scoring box and provide an explanation in the comment section. Where
there are obvious changes in the character of a stream under review (e.g., the stream flows from a pasture into a forest), the stream may
' be divided into smaller reaches that display more continuity, and a separate form used to evaluate each reach. The total score assigned
to a stream reach must range between 0 and 100, with a score of 100 representing a stream of the highest quality.
' Total Score (from reverse): 73 Comments: stream begins near Avoca Farm Road as
ria arin/headwater wetlands channel forms from wetland with braided stream then forms clear channel until it reaches the confluence
with the wetland complex
' Evaluator's Signature Date
This channel evaluation form is intended to be used only as a guide to assist landowners and environmental professionals in
gathering the data required by the United States Army Corps of Engineers to make a preliminary assessment of stream
quality. The total score resulting from the completion of this form is subject to USACE approval and does not imply a
particular mitigation ratio or requirement. Form subject to change - version 06/03. To Comment, please call 919-876-8441 x 26.
STREAM QUALITY ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET I
s ECOFtEGIOI P(JIN
T ANGE
? '
_
CHARACTERIST L
P ,tYv y
,f I
Coa a
'
: j It ^£^?•..
l'i
il
t
i
r ,
.
, e
mon ouofa
[i
Presence of flow / persistent pools in stream
1
no floxv or saturation .= 0; strong flow = max points 0-5 0-4 0-5 2
Evidence of past human alteration

extensive alteration =0• no alteration = max points) 0-6 0- 5 0-5 6
E Riparian zone
3 (no buffer = 0; contiguous, wide buffer = max points) 0 6 0-4 0-5 6
4 Evidence of nutrient or chemical discharges
(extensive discharges = 0 no discharges = max points _ 0 5 0 4 0 - 4 5
.?
5
Groundwater discharge

no discharge = 0; springs, seeps, wetlands etc. = max points) 0-3 0-4 0-4 3

rn
6 Presence of adjacent floodplain
0--4
0 4
0 2
n
o flood lain = 0; extensive flood lain = max outs .,
_ 2

7 Entrenchment / iloodplain access ?

(deeply entrenched = 0; frequent flooding = max points) 0-5 0-4 0-2 3
8 Presence of adjacent wetlands

no wetlands = 0; large adjacent wetlands = max points) 0-6 0- 4 0-2 5
9 Channel sinuosity
_
-
extensive channelization - 0; natural meander - max oints 0-5 0-4:
3
0
4
10 Sedimentinput
'
i f
(extensive deposition= 0; little or no sediment = max points)
0 - 5
0 - 4
0 4
4
- Size & diversity of channel bed substrate k Y?
11 (fine, homogenous = O; large, diverse sizes = max oints) ?a s r? = 0 - 4 0 5. • NA
Evidence of channel incision or widening
} (deeply incised = 0; stable bed &-banks = max oints 0 0 4 0 - 5 4
13 Presence of major bank failures
(severe erosion = 0; no erosion, stable banks = max points) 0- 0 - 5 0 - 5 4
Z Root depth and density on banks
14 no visible roots = 0; dense roots throu out = max points 0 3 0 - 4 0 - 5 3
15 Impact by agriculture, livestock, or timber production '
•
substantial inn act =0; no evidence =. max oints 0 5 ; 0 - 4 0 5-. , 5
16 Presence of riffle-pooUripple-pool complexes - 3 0
? '

no riffles/ripples or pools = 0; well-developed = max points) 5 0 6 2
?
17 Habitat complexity -
"little or no habitat = 0; frequent, varied habitats -max points) 0 6 0-6. 0 6 4

18 Canopy coverage over streambed
u

(no shading vegetation = 0; continuous cano = max oints 0-5 0 5 0-5.. 5

19 Substrate embeddedness vet `°?

(deeply embedded = 0; loose structure = max Q --4 0 4 NA
20 Presence of stream invertebrates (see page 4)

no evidence = 0• conmmon, numerous types = max oints 4 0-5 . 0 - 5 •.. 2
(? - 21 Presence of amphibians

J.
no evidence = 0; common numerous es = max points) 0 4 0-4 . 0 4 0
n

21 Prese
ce of fish

(no evidence - 0; conunon
numerous types max
oints) 0 4 0-4 0- 4 0
,
p
23 Evidence of wildlife use
(no evidence = 0; abundant evidence - nix points- 0-6 0-5 0-5 4
'`'• fit' ' *, x? .,

k61 x Totai"Pomts`Po'ssibl??'?'' r .,.? ? ti
rw

,1..OQ -,. ,? t ,?

' • ,?,x r

Y

,..
?.?'it?
TOT
L S
O
'
A
C
RE . (also enter 44 1
sl pa e 73
These characteristics are not assessed in coastal streams.

APPENDIX F: NCDWQ STREAM IDENTIFICATION FORMS
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix F Bertie County
North Caroiina Divis loo of Water Quality - Stream Identification Fornn,
Version 3.1

1
1
bate: -
Evidwator:
Total Paint:
Project-
Site:
Latitude ,e
Longitude:
Other
?irh c?!"I= Absent 'Neck roo'derate Sfran [
1- U? nI n gin"
3
r=,i? t ? • . _ =err a ?_.? ? ?? :. _i._ _ ___..
Y 3
i.5 F
0 -
15
13. S J, t: _ h-rrir
ENI?n-rr --? ='•='?-- - -,??c ;?e
3
i
fi
} ., '
II
L:t .Ci rf f)Cii ref - _
01 jt?? co) of vj,nt,c

1
1
1
1
1

North Carolina Division of Water Quality - Sream Edentiticaticn Form; Version 3.1 ?
D2 e T r Prraject: G --`t Latitude,
'Evatuatcr ,' a l 1 i`r?,at1 ,0v (Longitude:
Tot T Fointscounty: Qtder

`?UCIC I = Absent Weak Moderate SLmn
?d nrid L2 2

_ r ,u
cfrh? D _•?r_?- i
-

2
r is

,_r r--i inarj%a
LJf 'Tilt or
ry
Sr?bi?? 31= I

_ _ - .
1

. 1
35
..-.?..-

or pres
• _ ?i d it i r'?Inc' ... --t _,--- ,..? = ?? ? - -
" I?=??'Ot2l ? f s ? s
- - - c; anne3
in rhonnel 1
1

10

i Nortfr Carolina Division of Vi'7-c ua;ilEty - Sreanl Jaci-i fication Forst; VersFon 3.1
L. __
13t@- -, r 7'?jCG -nalitude:
` ?ralUator' i1 ; a c' !l ?'rr iLong itude:
r of d Points'
-1 ?! s ! .'1 / s Y•?.1 :?r."`-tr7T? ?- - , ? ?1 '?!fY?J 111 ??
`Y t i:}SCiai I ?rAifiil? t ?aC}Gi??fdt?' C Jr?l"Q flCj
I
.. .I6 ?? _- ? ... ..?. .ter.,

S
I North Carolina Division of Water Qualify - Srearn IdentHiCation Form; Version 3.1
(Date: 'd? 114104 ProJecf: - / latitude;
Evaluator: - s Site; Longitude,
Total Points: County: Other.
:, at feast, `:-r
ciyC?t?iy/r;f7fiJn '- I f
Absent j Weak Moderate Strong

• ;3'r ral Ievecs
-
a y
1
t
1 cuts
`.r dc-rnn1,-o
10
1.5
inr;t7i:l C,1 L?xlslirsq USCu.; I., 4NRt;5 rrr of

.... ur d'.va l'vr f
9
_ .'. t r in ct,inne! -i-,a _ . %e rain, or v D r r-?r rid -::1ryc",

_ t• .: r u _ .3Si?ra
` 9
F _„ -__ 1 2?r`

F 'r
i15 rl: ,wit
' ?

`.__ _'_:(llh? I___

1 5
?J7, tithe . rl

APPENDIX G: HPO CONCURRENCE LETTER
EEP Nicholls Farm Wetland Enhancement Appendix G Bertie County
e
North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
t State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Alichael F. Easley, Governor Office of Arrchivcs and History
Lisberb C. Evans, Secretary Division of Historical Resources
' Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Seactaq David Brook, Director
August 15, 2007
Dawn Reid
Archaeological Consultants of the Carolinas, Inc.
121 E. First Street
Clayton, NC 27520
Re: Archaeological Surrey of the Nicholls Property, Bertie County, ER 06-0530
Dear Ms. Reid:
' Thank you for your letter of August 13, 2007. We have reviewed the report associated with the project
referenced above and offer the comments given below.
An archaeological surrey was conducted across the project tract within areas proposed for ground-
disturbing activities. No archaeological sites were recorded as a result of this effort, Based on the results of
the survey, it is concluded that the proposed undertaking will not impact significant cultural resources. No
further work: is recommended for the Nichols tract. We concur with these recommendations.
The report meets our office's guidelines and those of the Secretary of the Interior. There are no specific
concerns or corrections which need to be addressed in this regard. The present version of the document
' will serve well as the final report.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36
CFR Part 800,
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment, contact
Renee Gledhill-Earley, environmental review= coordinator, at 919-733-4763, eat. 246. In all future communication
concerning this project, please cite the above referenced tracking number.
' Sincerely,
L?, t, u&
' titer Sandbecl,
c: Iatdiew Thomas, EcoScience Corporation
Julia Aunt
Location ?nailing Address Telepbone, Fax
ADMINISTRATION 50 N. Blounr Strecr Raleigh NC 4617 Mail Servicc Center, Ralcigh `C 27699-461 [phone],733-8653
RESTORATION 515 N. Blount Street lWeigh NC 4617 Mail Sen* cc (,enter, Raleigh NC 27699-461; /,917)733-6547/715-4801
SURVEY & PLANNING 515 N, $loun(Street, Raleigh, NC 4617 :Mail Service. Center, Ra cigh NC 27699-4617 91)) a33-6545/715-4SC1