20080511 Ver 3_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20170929

La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II
Third Annual Report / September 2017
Greene Environmental Services, LLC
Neuse River Umbrella Mitigation Bank / DWR#: 2008-05110
Submitted to:
Katie Merritt
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources — Water Quality Programs
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Phone: [phone]; Fax: [phone]
Submitted by:
Greene Environmental Services, Jeff Becker and David Knowles
Ham Farms, 963 Hwy 258 S
Snow Hill, NC 28580
[phone]

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Location and Description................................................................. 3
2.0 Plantings of Seedlings............................................................................. 4
3.0 Monitoring Plot Survey Results................................................................. 6
4.0 Monitoring, Maintenance and Supplemental Planting ....................................... 11
5.0 Nutrient Offset and Buffer Potential........................................................... 12
6.0 Appendices......................................................................................... 13
Appendix A: Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity map of LaGrange Mitigation Bank
Figure 2: Local aerial photograph of LaGrange Mitigation Bank
Figures 3: Aerial map of tracts
Figures 4: Survey plat of Phase II
Figure 5. Monitoring plot locations on Phase II
Appendix B: Monitoring Plots and Photographs
Plot page: LAG -3
Plot page: LAG -4
2

1.0 Project Location and Description
Greene Environmental Services, LLC (GES) of Snow Hill, North Carolina expanded a mitigation
bank at near La Grange, NC to include additional acreage for riparian buffer and nutrient offset
credits. The original bank, La Grange Bank Parcel, is in its fifth and final post -implementation
monitoring year. As with the initial project, the expansion acreage is included in the Greene
Environmental Services Neuse River Basin Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Umbrella Bank.
The expansion project is named the La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II (Bank); this report is the
third of five annual monitoring reports submitted for review to the North Carolina, Division of
Water Resources.
The Bank is immediately adjacent to the initial La Grange Bank Parcel and is situated southwest
of the intersection of NC 903 and Old Jason Road (SR 1501), north of La Grange, in Lenoir
County, North Carolina (Appendix A: Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4). The latitude/longitude coordinates of
the site area approximately 35° 20'30.00" N and 77°47'21.56" W. The purpose of the Phase II
mitigation bank expansion is to improve water quality within the Neuse River Basin by reducing
nutrient and sediment inputs to the watershed and providing off-site mitigation for development
requiring nutrient offsets.
The Phase 11 bank parcel is located within the Middle Neuse Watershed (HUC: 03020202).
Storm water runoff from this site drains into Meeting House Branch (Stream Index # 27-72-3)
and via a farm drainage ditch and maintained canal system (un -named tributary, UT). Meeting
House Branch discharges to Bear Creek (Stream Index # 27-72-(0.1)), a major tributary to the
Neuse River (Appendix A: Figures 1 and 2).
The Phase II parcel is 3.50 acres. Of this 3.50 acres, 2.97 acres (6,750.87 lbs -N) were restored to
generate nutrient offsets and 0.52 acres (22,620.63 ft2) were restored to generate Neuse Riparian
Buffer Mitigation. The buffer restoration acreage was reduced by 30.57 ft2 as compared to the
BPDP. For reporting purposes, all acreages are rounded to the nearest hundredth of an acre.
Riparian buffer mitigation acreage was established in two sub -tracts labelled A and C in the
survey plat provided in Appendix A: Figures 4 and 5. Sub -tract A is 0.03 acres (1,491.00 ft2)
3

and buffers southerly flowing Meeting House Branch; sub -tract C is 0.49 acres (21,129.63 ft2)
and buffers the westerly flowing unnamed tributary to Meeting House Branch. Nutrient offset
acreage was established in two sub -tracts, B and D. Sub -tract B is 0.16 acres along the unnamed
tributary to Meeting House Branch and sub -tract D is 2.81 acres along a drainage ditch at the
eastern border of the Phase II tract that discharging to the UT that flows into Meeting House
Branch, and adjacent to the sub -tract C riparian buffer area. The riparian buffers extended from
the top of the ditch -banks 50 feet perpendicular to the buffered steam segments. The nutrient
offset acreage extended from the top of the ditch -banks a minimum of 50 feet and a maximum of
200 feet perpendicular to the buffered stream segments or to the border of Phase I. A 0.06 -acre
(2,613.60 ft2) triangular portion of the site adjacent to L-13 on the survey plat is beyond the 200 -
foot allowable limit for mitigation credit thus is not included in the mitigation credit calculations.
However, this isolated portion had to be purchased by Greene Environmental Services, LLC to
avoid the need to provide access an access easement concerns. This Phase II bank parcel was
established under the terms and conditions of the Greene Environmental Services Neuse River
Basin Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Umbrella Bank.
The Phase II parcel was previous agricultural cropland and approximately one acre was planted
with bald cypress and river birch saplings during March of 2010, at which time staff from the
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources (now renamed the Department of
Environmental Quality), Division of Water Resources visited the site and determined that it was
suitable for mitigation. Katie Merritt with DWR visited the site in June of 2013 and determined
this Phase II acreage was still suitable for mitigation purposes.
2.0 Plantings of Seedlings the La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II
In an effort to restore some ecological functions and improve water quality in the local and
regional watersheds, the La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II project site was planted with
seedlings of native trees species and placed under permanent conservation easement. As a result
of these actions, the project site has been taken out of agricultural production, soils should
become better stabilized, and nutrient loading in adjacent streams should be reduced. Seedlings
of character tree species were planted in three installments during separate years prior to the
4

creation of the 3.50 -acre, La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II. In late winter of 2010 and 2014,
seedlings of river birch and bald cypress were planted in portions of the area that was to become
the Phase II expansion acreage (Table 1). In late winter of 2014 and 2015, yellow poplar, black
gum and sycamore were planted in the Phase II tracts. Also, in March of 2015, three oak species:
overcup oak, cherrybark oak and Shumard's oak were planted in the Phase II acreage.
Considering all planting installments, bald cypress and sycamore were the most frequently
planted species with the oak species least frequently planted (Table 1). A total of 1890 seedlings
were planted in the Phase II expansion acreage for an estimated density of 541.5 seedlings per
acre prior to the first annual monitoring effort.
Plantings by sub -tract were as follows: riparian buffer sub -tracts A and C were planted in 2015
with a mix of yellow poplar, black gum, sycamore, overcup oak, cherrybark oak and Shumard
oak, from the top of the stream bank outward to 50 feet. Nutrient offset sub -tract B was planted
in 2015 with the same tree species from the top of the stream bank to the border of the pre-
existing La Grange Bank Parcel (roughly 30 feet). Nutrient offset sub -tract D was planted the
same mix of species from the existing stand of trees (mostly bald cypress and river birch)
initially planted in 2010, to the pre-existing La Grange Bank Parcel boundary or up to 200 feet
from the top of the ditch bank. Survival rates of the planted seedlings were assessed by counting
stems in two 100m2 monitoring plots that were established in representative stands of the project
site.
In December 2016, during a site visit by GES personnel, an easement violation was discovered at
the La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II. This violation consisted of a mechanized vehicle
(tractor) entering the Bank and mowing approximately 0.58 acres of sub -tracts II -a and II -d
(Figure 4). The mowing was done without the knowledge or consent of GES, and presumably by
a local farmer or farm worker who mistook the area containing 2 to 3 year old saplings as weeds,
even though the site was well -marked with signage prohibiting these activities. NC Division of
Water Resources staff was notified and following a site visit, a remedial plan was developed and
subsequently implemented in February 2017. In the affected area, 150 bald cypress, 100
sycamore and 5 black cherry saplings were planted as per guidance from DWR. A portion of
monitoring plot LAG -4 was mowed and remedial planting of two sycamore saplings in that plot
was accomplished. The additional planting of 255 saplings increased the planted stem density
5

for the Bank from 541.5 saplings per acre as reported above, to 612.9 per acre (Table 1).
Table 1. Species planted in the 3.50 acre, La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II.
Species
Common name
Year planted
Seedlings planted
Betula nigra
River birch
2010, 2014
270
Liriodendron tulipifea
Yellow poplar
2014, 2015
200
Nyssa sylvatica
Black gum
2014, 2015
220
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
2014,2015,2017*
420/100*
Prunus serotina
Black cherry
2017*
5*
Quercus lyrata
Overcup oak
2015
100
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark oak
2015
100
Quercus shumardii
Shumard oak
2015
100
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
2010,2014,2017*
480/150*
Total
1890 (541.5 per acre)
2145 (612.9 per acre)*
*Based on remedial plantings in February 2017.
3.0 Monitoring Plot Survey Results for Year 2017
Two l Om x l Om (0.0247 acre) monitoring plots, LAG -3 and LAG -4, were established in the
3.50 -acre, La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II project area (Appendix A: Figure 5).
Monitoring plot LAG -3 was established in a portion of Phase II that was planted with bald
cypress and river birch saplings in 2010 and one yellow poplar planted in 2015. A plot
survey in September 2017 indicated that there were eleven planted character trees in LAG -3
for an estimated density of 445 saplings per acre (Table 2). Bald cypress was the most
frequently encountered species with seven stems in the plot; there were three stems of river
birch and one yellow poplar. One native, naturally colonizing red maple was found in the
plot thus increasing the total stem density in LAG -3 to 486 stems per acre (Table 3).
The second monitoring plot, LAG -4, was situated in a portion of the Phase II expansion area
9

that was planted with saplings in 2015, with an additional remedial planting in 2017. Four
planted species were found in the monitoring plot, yellow poplar, sycamore, cherrybark oak
and Shumard's oak. A total of fourteen planted saplings were found in the plot for an
estimated density of 567 saplings per acre (Table 2). There were four stems of cherrybark
oak and three stems of Shumard's oak in plot LAG -4. There were five stems of sycamore
and two stems of yellow poplar in plot LAG -4. Two stems of naturally colonizing species,
black cherry and persimmon were found in the plot thus increasing total stem density in
LAG -4 to 648 saplings per acre (Table 3). Combining LAG -3 and LAG -4, the average
planted stems was 506.1+85.9 saplings per acre (Table 2). The combined average stem
density for planted and colonizing species for the two monitoring plots was 566.9+114.4
saplings per acre (Table 3). Based on the two monitoring plots in the Bank, planted sapling
density and total sapling density both exceeded the target density of 320 stems per acre.
Stem heights in monitoring plots averaged 8.0+2.9 m (26.1+9.6 ft) in plot LAG -3 and
1.3+0.4 m (4.2+1.4 ft) in Plot LAG -4 (Table 4). Stem heights were higher in Plot LAG -3
since most of these trees were as 4 to 7 years older than those in Plot LAG -4.
A comparison of survivorship in monitoring plots between those reported in the La Grange
Mitigation Bank, Phase II, Second Annual Report (2016) to the survey conducted in
September 2017 and those reported in this document (Third Annual Report, 2017) indicated
that Plot LAG -3 did not change in planted species composition or stem density (Table 5). In
Plot LAG -4, stem density increased as a consequence of colonizing volunteer species,
remedial planting, and coppice sprouting from mowed stems or below ground tissue from
previously planted saplings but that was not evident in 2016. Based on both monitoring plots,
stem density of planted species increased by 60 stems and for all species by 100 stems.
The monitoring plots in the Phase II acreage were photo -documented using digital
photography imaged from the northwestern corner of the plot. All saplings or trees were
flagging and their position within the plots were mapped (Appendix B).
7

Table 2. Planted tree sapling species, stem density and estimated stems per acre based on
surveys of 100m2 monitoring plots at the La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II.
Plot/Species
Common name
Stems per plot
Estimated stems per acre
LAG -3
Betula nigra
River birch
3
121
Liriodendron tulipifera
Yellow poplar
1
40
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
7
283
LAG -3 Total
11
445
LAG -4
Liriodendron tulipifera
Yellow poplar
2
81
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
5
202
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark oak
4
162
Quercus shumardii
Shumard's oak
3
121
LAG -4 Total
14
567
Combined Average of
LAG -3 and LAG -4
12.5+2.1
506.1+85.9
H

Table 3. Combined colonizing and planted tree sapling species, stem density and estimated
stems per acre based on surveys of 100p2 monitoring plots at the La Grange Mitigation Bank,
Phase II.
Plot/Species
Common name
Stems per plot
Estimated stems per acre
LAG -3
*Acer rubrum
Red maple
1
40
Betula nigra
River birch
3
121
Liriodendron tulipifera
Yellow poplar
1
40
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
7
283
LAG -3 Total
12
486
LAG -4
Diospyros virginiana
Persimmon
1
40
Liriodendron tulipifera
Yellow poplar
2
81
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
5
202
Prunus serotina
Black cherry
1
40
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark oak
4
162
Quercus shumardii
Shumard's oak
3
121
LAG -4 Total
16
648
Combined Average of
LAG -3 and LAG -4
14.0+2.8
566.9+114.4
*Acer rubrum (red maple), is a native, naturally colonizing species.
p]

Table 4. Colonizing and planted tree sapling species, average stem heights of stems in 100m2
monitoring plots at the La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II.
Plot/Species
Common name
Average Stem Height
LAG -3
Meters+Std
Feet+Std
*Acer rubrum
Red maple
4.0+0.0
13+0
Betula nigra
River birch
9.7+4.9
31+13
Liriodendron tulipifera
Yellow poplar
1.5+0.0
5+0
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
7.4+1.9
24+6
LAG -3 Total
8.0+2.9
26.1+9.6
LAG -4
Meters+Std
Feet+Std
*Diospyros virginiana
Persimmon
1.0+0.0
3+0
Liriodendron tulipifera
Yellow poplar
1.4+0.2
4+1
*Prunus serotina
Black cherry
1.0+0.0
3+0
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
1.5+0.5
5+2
Quercus pagoda
Cherry -bark oak
0.8+0.2
2+1
Quercus shumardii
Shumard's oak
1.5+0.0
5+0
LAG -4 Total
1.3+0.4
4.2+1.4
*Native, colonizing volunteer species.
10

Table 5. Comparison of seedling/sapling stem density per acre between the September 2016
and September 2017. Negative numbers represent a decline in stem density. Estimated stems
per acre are based on surveys of 100m2 monitoring plots at the La Grange Mitigation Bank,
Phase II.
Plot/Species
Common name
Estimated
stems per
acre Sept
2016
Estimated
stems per
acre Sept
2017
Change in
stem density
Acer rubra*
Red maple
20
20
0
Betula nigra
River birch
61
61
0
Dipspyros virginiana*
Persimmon
0
20
20
Liriodendron
tulipifera
yellow poplar
40
61
21
Taxodium distichum
Bald cypress
142
142
0
Prunus serotina*
Black cherry
0
20
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
40
101
61
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark oak
81
81
0
Quercus shumardii
Shumard's oak
81
61
-20
Total for All Species
467
567
100
Total for Planted Species
447
507
60
4.0 Monitoring, Maintenance and Supplemental Planting
The LaGrange Mitigation Bank, Phase II will be monitored seasonally during 2017 to ensure that
the terms of the conservation easement are not being violated. Signage that designates the site as
a conservation area will be maintained. Based on monitoring plot field data collected in
September, 2017, the Bank is performing adequately.
11

5.0 Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Potential
The 3.50 -acre, La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II consists of 0.52 acres (22,620.63 ft2) of
potential Neuse Riparian Buffer credits in two sub -tracts as indicated in the Table 6 below. Two
separate sub -tracts, totaling 2.97 acres, have the potential to generate 6,750.87 pounds of
nitrogen nutrient offset credits at 2273.02 lbs/ac.
Table 6. Potential riparian buffer and nutrient offset credits at the La Grange Mitigation Bank,
Phase Il.
Sub -tract
Riparian Buffer
Sq.ft. Acres
Nutrient Offset
Acres
Nitrogen
Credits (lbs.)
A
1,491.00
0.03
NA
NA
B
NA
NA
0.16
363.68
C
21,129.63
0.49
NA
NA
D
NA
NA
2.81
6,387.19
Totals
22,620.63
0.52
2.97
6,750.87
12

6.0 Appendices
Appendix A: Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity map of La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II
Figure 2: Local aerial photograph of La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II
Figure 3: Aerial map of tracts at La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II
Figure 4: Survey plat of La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II
Figure 5. Monitoring plot locations at La Grange Mitigation Bank, Phase II
Appendix B: Monitoring Plot Maps and Photographs
Plot: LAG -3
Plot: LAG -4
13

.#_by=$
�' hiooicerton''
l
ENE
-�Goldsty oroif
New Hope �"f► ° ' ' r. �f
It Bear ek ti
,z t. -Troy i
Mar -Mac
Walnut Creeka G
4rang
�Hrog'den t�'t Y� 4-t•
Kin, ston
%W
Seven gprings Neu a+R,+v�r `,_ � a' �$,G. , y
�, - ,e - ,., '. Google ear-tf�
r 7 ml � r,�. � � .� , t.�,
r r
E%�
%, by,

Rd
JLAG Phase I
LAG,Phase 11
-
)Un -Warn i ular'-(IJT)"--
Meeting House'Bra'n, h
is
d
Bear Cr e iikL&
3550 fl
■ B 0 2014
ALl"i, W&'
GOO,W-Aarth

N
GES'
Figure 3. Aerial photograph depicting GES La Grange Mitigation Banks, Phases I and II. The area in red is Phase I.
Phase II includes: II -a nutrient buffer to field drainage ditch, II -b nutrient buffer to UT, II -c nutrient buffer to UT, II -d riparian buffer
to UT and II -e riparian buffer to Meeting House Branch.

■a+uiP ��e.,".'ru�w.ILrisr�enum�i u�.mn •i
❑n �u au® L"..r. lO mv.M
PAaF, 1k
69. 159), Pp
REs£PRNGFS9,b. 1 z Pp. 154
A. 12 Pq. 92
a �i"-°-fir v-•-1�•°mru wM+� a EXEM"ON APPROVAL STATEMENT
ru u `+' �"+ ��ex�eim «w• TMS PAO 1- IS E— — TUE IF.NgR CmxN1Y SJBflM90N O0. —C
b -t a ,N€Pmr.
AOPi �SM1UYBfl
ACREACE DATA FOR OvFFER ARM
ARG 'B" - ].1PB.] •q.R.
APG T' • 2i.12P.63 e9.A.
Pxu 'a' - 2p,epp.z q
W. Pp. 114
fl
11
__rA'r' a rxry
e H.1Y STOPAGE, llC
P.C. ,2. P9. p•
Q2
S
M pcmpNer � 1-]' niw 2-I�
aP. o l O 6 T899'E6'W €
r cl 31 R
S 1 Y55'w
L
_ 2:w7w 72a
°^• �1V '�.�r SURVEY FOR
_---LL-1.1 4 O GREENE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, LLC
OWNERS: HAM STORAGE, LLC.
C (CONSERVATION EASEMENT)
rAr1AP A PORTIUN OF THE PROPERTY RECORDED IN U.R. 15971Pg. 114,
P.C. 12, Pg. 99, AND INCLUDES ALL OF THE 3.62 ACRE TRACT
RECORDED IN P.C. 13. Pg. 371 OF THE LENOIR COUNTY REGISTRY.
CEFRIFICAIE OF REYIEM OFFICER
CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION OY REGISTER OF DEEDS MOSELEY HALL TNSP. – LENOIR CO, N.C.
rroNirl cARsurx Mxmlq cmuNn NPPrN cwwuw IT1gmIP emum
TwT rwE wP oR PIAT m gausu Tres mmn cIT ATlox Is Amzm lac)s us AT m F---te.m✓P.m.7NAwm mxLY' REemPmm w nAr mAb.��.
N.—
SCALE:
.rscALE: 1' = 150' — DATE: D7/14/2014
flPnsTER er mEms
Figure 4. Survey plat of the LaGrange Mitigation Bank, Phases I and II.

s D526'3T�'f
31.42' NPS — — —
�GANAL —
— — — — —3/4' EIP 118.73'
HAM STORAGE, LLC
D.B. 1597. Pg. 114
P.C. 12, Pg. 99
C3
Z
3f4' EIP
+s
J
P.C. 13, Pg. 44 1
3f4' EIP
W19
LAG — 3
I
13
�n
3.55 acres
EIP
rq
101
sr
ti
P
EIP
t-$
t-8
EIP
NI
C3
Z
3f4' EIP
+s
J
P.C. 13, Pg. 44 1
3f4' EIP
W19
LAG — 3
13
�n
3.55 acres
by computer
rq
101
sr
ti
LAC — 4
3f4' EIP'
r /
NIP NIP
€}*
IP
—L— g
CANAL
IN
GE�7
.. Figure 5. Locations of 10m x 10m vegetation monitoring plots, LAG -3 and
LAG -4 in Phase II tract. LAG -3 is entirely within the nutrient offset acreage; LAG -4 is entirely
within the riparian buffer acreage.

Plot LAG -3
IN
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
10m
SE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NW
Seedling ID / Species
1. River birch
2. River birch
3. Bald cypress
4. Bald cypress
5. Bald cypress
6. Bald cypress
7. Bald cypress
8. Bald cypress
9. River birch
10. Bald cypress
11. Red maple VOLUNTEER
12. Yellow poplar
SW

Plot LAG -4
NE 10 m SE
NW
Seedling ID / Species
1. Shumards oak
2. Sycamore
3. Sycamore R
4. Cherrybark oak
5. Cherrybark oak
6. Sycamore C
7. Sycamore D
8. Shumards oak
9. Shumards oak
10. Shumards oak D
11. Sycamore D
12. Sycamore D
13. Cherrybark oak
14. Cherrybark oak
15. Yellow poplar C
16. Sycamore
SW
17 Persimmon V
18 Sycamore R
19 Yellow poplar C
20 Black cherry V
D= Dead
R= Remedial Planting
C= Coppicing
V= Volunteer
10
♦
9
*
10 DEAD
13
1�
♦
1 DEAD
♦ 19
♦ 18
8
♦ 4
7
0 20
4
12 DEAD
6
14
7 DEAD
5
0
4
5
3
0 16
2
01
1
0
0 1
2 3 4 5 6 7
8
9
10
NW
Seedling ID / Species
1. Shumards oak
2. Sycamore
3. Sycamore R
4. Cherrybark oak
5. Cherrybark oak
6. Sycamore C
7. Sycamore D
8. Shumards oak
9. Shumards oak
10. Shumards oak D
11. Sycamore D
12. Sycamore D
13. Cherrybark oak
14. Cherrybark oak
15. Yellow poplar C
16. Sycamore
SW
17 Persimmon V
18 Sycamore R
19 Yellow poplar C
20 Black cherry V
D= Dead
R= Remedial Planting
C= Coppicing
V= Volunteer
♦
1�
♦
♦ 19
♦ 18
3
♦ 4
NW
Seedling ID / Species
1. Shumards oak
2. Sycamore
3. Sycamore R
4. Cherrybark oak
5. Cherrybark oak
6. Sycamore C
7. Sycamore D
8. Shumards oak
9. Shumards oak
10. Shumards oak D
11. Sycamore D
12. Sycamore D
13. Cherrybark oak
14. Cherrybark oak
15. Yellow poplar C
16. Sycamore
SW
17 Persimmon V
18 Sycamore R
19 Yellow poplar C
20 Black cherry V
D= Dead
R= Remedial Planting
C= Coppicing
V= Volunteer