20030512 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20120823

Mary's Creek (EEP #241)
Restoration Site
2011 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5)
Alamance County
EEP Project No. 241
Design Firm: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.
March 2012
Prepared for:
r-�J
",-ysielll
NCDENR/ Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1619 !'•I I D V
AUG 2 3 ni2
,. - WATER UUALI I V
AND STORIuN1'.ITER BRAWA
Prepared by:
The Catena Group
410 -B Millstone Dr.
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Ph: 919 - 732 -1300
Fax: [phone]
RECEIVED
APR 2 0 2012
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

I. Executive Summary
The Mary's Creek (EEP #241) stream restoration project consists of 2,082 linear feet of
stream restoration, and of this length, only 2034 linear feet are counted as the stream
restoration assets, which excludes a reserved crossing not within the conservation
easement and the cattle crossing The project is in Alamance County north of Siler City,
north of Greensboro Chapel Hill Road (SR 1005) and east of Lindley Mill Road (SR
1003) (Figure 1) Site construction and plantings were completed in March of 2006 The
goals and objectives for Mary's Creek (EEP #241) stream restoration are
• Improving water quality
• Providing wildlife habitat through the creation of a riparian zone
• Improving aquatic habitat with the use of natural material stabilization structures
and a riparian buffer
• Excluding cattle from the stream
• Reducing nutrient loads from entering the stream through a filtration buffer
• Increasing the streams access to its floodplain
• Reducing erosion and sedimentation
There are five vegetation monitoring plots within the conservation easement which are all
meeting the stem density criteria for total stems with 2894 total stems/acre The success
criterion for total woody stems is 260 stems /acre for Monitoring Year (MY) -05 Post
construction only two plots (Plot 4 &5) were established An additional three plots (1, 2,
&3) were added during MY -02 Since planted vs natural stems were indistinguishable,
stems, planted or not, were identified as natural stems within the added plots Three
black willow livestakes located within Plot 4, and four black willow livestakes located
within Plot 5 were identified as planted stems Level II of the CVS -EEP protocol was
administered for Monitoring Year (MY) -05, which includes planted and natural woody
stems An accurate number of planted stems /acre could not be determined since the
planted stems could not be distinguished from natural stems
Invasive exotics are the only notable vegetation problems areas for MY -05 Tree of
heaven (Ailanthus altissima) and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) have reached levels
of concern Tree of Heaven and Chinese privet are considered a species of "High
Concern" according to EEP's invasive plant ranking list Tree of Heaven is concentrated
in patches near southern end of the conservation easement Chinese privet is scattered
throughout with high concentrations occurring between stations 16+00 to 26+00 Areas
of low planted stem densities occur in areas near the outer limits of the conservation
easement where the invasice exotic, tall fescue (Schedonurus arundinaceus), is dominant
These areas were cattle pastures previous to construction See Current Conditions Plan
View (Appendix B) Other invasive exotics observed sparsely scattered within the
conservation easement include Gill over the ground (Glechoma hederacea), Johnson
grass (Sorghum halapense), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicerajaporuca), Japanese
stiltgrass (Microstegium vimineum), and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) Tall fescue,
Johnson grass, and Japanese stiltgrass are species of "Low/Moderate Concern"
Although these species have been given different ranks of severity, the functionality of
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
Year 5 Monitoring Report FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

1
_l the project is not expected to be impaired significantly by these species For additional
information relating to vegetation, see Appendix C
Overall, the stream banks are stable and well vegetated on Mary's Creek and the unnamed
tributary (UT) to Mary's Creek Neither monitoring reach has notably changed in pattern,
profile or dimension as compared to MY -04 The UT and Mary's Creek upstream of the
confluence both have large amounts of submerged organic material and woody debris
within the channel This is not affecting the stability of the channel A woody debris pile
is present at station 16 +65, Stream Problem Area (SPA) 1 This debris is not causing
f I noticeable backwater or stream stability effects A large beaver dam was removed at
approximate station 24 +25 during MY -05 There is still a remnant beaver dam present
with a small opening to allow the channel to flow Debris accumulation is expected to
occur at this location in the future No further beaver activity was observed The former
beaver dam at station 24 +25 created Substantial impacts upstream to the culvert crossing
The backwater and beaver activity impacted the vegetation of the floodplam and stream
banks but vegetation regeneration is evident The majority of the structures are stable
and functioning The two structures at stations 25 +25 and 26+00 still have dislodged
_ boulders that have moved into the center of the channel, however, no bank degradation
has occurred in the past two monitoring years The main channel pebble counts remain
�— stable and consistent comparable to the previous monitoring year data The tributary
pebble count is trending slightly coarser, which is largely due to the absence of the
backwater that was a result of the woody debris obstructions, reported in the initial site
visit letter
Summary information/data related to the occurrences of items such as beaver or
encroachment, and statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring
elements, can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices Narrative
background and supporting information formerly found in these reports can be found in
t the mitigation plan and restoration plan documents available on EEPs website All raw
data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from EEP upon
request
II. Methodology
Methodologies follow the current EEP monitoring report template, Version 13 1115110,
and the version 4 2 of the CVS -EEP protocol for recording vegetation (Lee et al 2008)
Photos were taken with a digital camera A Trimble Geo XT handheld unit with sub-
meter accuracy was used to locate stream and vegetation problem areas
A. Vegetation Methodologies
s Level II of the EEP /CVS protocol Version 4 2, which includes natural stems, was used to
collect data for MY -05 for five vegetation monitoring plots on August 30, 2011 Data
collected for these plots are in Appendix C
B. Stream Methodologies
Stream profile and cross - sections were surveyed on January 18, 2012 using total station
equipment and methods The survey data was plotted using AutoCAD Civil3D The
longitudinal profile was generated using the MY -02 alignment Cross sectional data was
Mary s Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 2 March 2012
F--',

extracted based on a linear alignment between the end pins Pattern parameters were
calculated by measuring the plotted dimensions of the W -05 surveyed thalweg Profile
parameters were determined through analysis of a Microsoft Excel generated plot of the
profile based on the aforementioned baseline alignment
III. References
Lee, Michael T Peet, Robert K Roberts, Steven D , Wentworth, Thomas R (2008)
CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4 2
Weakley, Alan (2007) Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding
Areas http / /www herbarium unc edu/flora htm
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
3
Year 5 Monitoring Report -FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

1
Appendix A. Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
ri
L9
r;
Mary s Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
r�
4
Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
Year 5of5
March 2012

r.
white
r
Oxon Lamb Ln
Site Directions: From Raleigh, head south on US 1 to US 64.
Take US 64 west to Pittsboro and exit onto NC 87. Head North
onto NC 87 and turn left on East Greensboro Chapel Hill Rd
(SR 1005). Go approximatley 2.5 miles to turn right onto Lindley Mill
Rd (SR 1003). Turn right onto Dixon Lamb Ln (SR 2336) and go
to the end of the road. UT to Mary's is located within the fenced
conservation easement within the cattle pasture.
9
N
o\
Mary's Creek Conservation Easement I
10 Cnapel
E Greevs� \ n
Legend
Cape Fear River Basin Streams
0 1,000 2,000 4,000
Feet
The
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Site �� Figure
Cateno Site Location Map
Group Alamance County, North Carolina
Microsoft Virtual Earth Roads hlap Mate
EEP Project No 241 March 2012

Ta1,la 10 and 16 P—moo* ir—nnan *e and Qnmmalmnc
Table 1 a Project Components
Ma 's Creek EP #241
Project
Riparian
Wetland Ac
Non-
Riparian
(Ac)
Upland
(Ac)
Footage
BMP
Rlverme
Non-
Rlverme
Restoration
Component
Existing
Restoration
Approach
or
Stationing
Buffer
BMP i
Comment
or Reach
Feet/Acres
Level
Acreage
Acres
Elements
1D
Enhancement II
Mary's
1750
R
P2
1565 If*
10+00-
5 3
Instream Structure and
Creek
Preservation
26+62
Vegetated Buffers
HQ Preservation
CF =4505
If
0
0
UT to
Totals
2034
0
10+00-
0
0
Instream Structure and
Mary's
360
R
P2
4691f
14+69
15
Vegetated Buffers
Creek
CF = Cattle Fencing, WS = Watering System, CH = Livestock Housing
*Excludes the 68ft reserved crossing length outside of the Conservation Easement and the 301f culvert within the cattle crossing
Tohla 116 !`-nnan* Q��mmafinna
Table 1 b Component Summations
Mary's Creek EEP #241
Restoration
Level
Stream
(If)
Riparian
Wetland Ac
Non-
Riparian
(Ac)
Upland
(Ac)
Buffer
(Ac)
BMP
Rlverme
Non-
Rlverme
Restoration
2034
Enhancement
Enhancement I
Enhancement II
Creation
Preservation
HQ Preservation
0
0
Totals
2034
0
0
0
0
Count
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
6
Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

Table 2 Protect Activity and Renort no History
Mary's Creek EEP #241
Activity or Reporting
Scheduled
Completion
Data Collection
Complete
Actual
Completion
Date
Restoration Plan
N/A
-
April 2003
Final Design-90%
N/A
N/A
October 2005
Construction
N/A
N/A
March 2006
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area
N/A
N/A
March 2006
Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area
N/A
N/A
March 2006
Bare -Root and Livestake planting
N/A
N/A
March 2006
Mitigation Plan/As -built Year 0 Monitonn - baseline
N/A
May 2006
June 2006
Year 1 Monitoring
N/A
February 2007
March 2007
Year 2 Monitoring
N/A
July 2008
December 2008
Year 3 Monitoring
N/A
November 2009
March 2010
Year 4 Monitoring
N/A
January 2011
March 2011
Year 5 Monitoring
N/A
January 2012
March 2012
Tnhle 3 Prnwrt Cantart TAhlp
Project Contact Table
Mary's Creek EP #241
Stantec Consulting Services Inc
Designer
801 Jones Franklin Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, North Carolina 27606
David Bidelspach - (919) 851 -6866
Shamrock Environmental Corp
Construction Contractor
6101 Corporate Park Drive
Browns Summit, North Carolina 27699
Bill Wright - (800) 881 -1098
Seal Brothers Contracting, LLC
Planting Contractor POC
P O Box 86
Dobson, North Carolina 27017
Brian Seal
Shamrock Environmental Corp
Seeding Contractor POC
6101 Corporate Park Drive
Browns Summit, North Carolina 27699
Bill Wright - (800) 881 -1098
Seed Mix Sources
contact Shamrock Environmental Corp
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Hills Nursery Co, Inc
(931) 668 -4364
MorrItoring Performers
Ward Consulting Engineers
Stream Monitonng
8368 Six Forks Road, Suite 104
Raleigh, NC 27613 -5083
The Catena Group
Vegetation Monitoring
410 -B Millstone Dr
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
Year 5 Monitonng Report-FINAL
Year 5of5
March 2012

Table 4 Proiect Attribute Table
Project County
Alamance
Physiographic Region
Piedmont
Ecwregion
Carolina Slate Belt
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS HUC for Project (14 digit)
03030002050020
NCDWQ Subbasm for the Project
Mary's Creek
Within extent of EEP Watershed Plan?
Watershed Restoration Plan for the Cape Fear River Basin 2001
WRC Hab Class (Warm, Cool, Cold)
Warm water
% of Project easement fenced or demarcated
100% fenced beyond the 50 ft easement buffer
Beaver activity observed during the design phase?
Unknown
Restoration Component Attnbute Table
Reach 1(Main)
Reach 2 (Tnb)
Drainage Area
815acres
330 acres
Stream Order
3rd
1st
Restored Length
1632
450
Perennial or Intermittent
Perennial
Perennial
Watershed Type (Rural, Urban, Developing, etc)
Rural
I Rural
Watershed LUL Distribution
Residential
100/0*
5 %*
Ag — Row Crop
25 %*
25 %*
Ag — Livestock
20 %*
35 %*
Forested
45 %*
35 %*
Watershed Impervious cover ( %)
<5%
<5%
NCDWQ AU/Index Number
16 -26
16-26
NCDWQ Classification
C, NSW
C, NSW
303d listed9
Downstream of the site, Mary's Creek was listed on the 2002 list,
but removed firom the 2006 list
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor
U I U
Total acreage of easement
7 3 acres
Total Vegetated Acreage within Easement
7 3 acres
Total Planted Acreage as Part of the Restoration
7 3 acres
Rosgen Classification of Pre- Existing
C4/F4
C4
Rosgen Classification of As -built
C
C
Valley Type
VIII
Vlll
Valley Slope
0 009611/11
0 0096ft/ft
Valley Side Slope Range
0 1076 -0 328511/11
0 1076-0 3285 ft/ft
Valley Toe Slope Range
0 0111 -0 028511/11
0 0111 -0 028511111
Cowardm Classification
Stream (R3UB1)
Stream (R3UB1)
Trout Waters designation
No
No
Species of Concern, Endangered, etc
No
No
Dominant Sod Series Type
Senes
Herndon
Herndon
Depth
U
U
Clay %
U
U
K
U
U
T
U
U
-^+ Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
LI4 NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
0
8
Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
9
Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

rr
The
Coteno
Group
`
.V
Cenle Crossing: 3011 Culvert
�
rDate:
-2a 6 b Structure
POng
March 2012
X
and Scouring Z
Scale:
As Shown
SPA -3. Former Beaver Oam
EEP Job No.:
t
SPA -5 Rock vane
241
sll rock dislodged
SPA -4. Rock vane
al rock dislodged
Title:
x.
igur
Mary's Creek
F'g a
MY -05
Current
Veg_Plot POINT POINTY
66 ft wide Reserved Crossing
_X —
Veg Plot 1 - 79.33554443790 35.91574855850
Conditions
Veg Plot 2 - 79.33640112020 35.91610424720
Plan View
+�
Veg Plot 3 - 79.33652373270 35.91474249460
Veg Plot4 - 79.33662056210 35.91392868780
IrroA
Veg Plot 5 -79.336233640801 35.91401894510
SPA-1: Dee
uf,iodrermel. l.
Le end
9
N
2010 Aerial Orthophotography
Source. NCOneMaps
Stream Stations
`,dam
Vegetation Problem Areas -MY05
L
Ailanthus altissima
Ligus t rum sinense
Low Stem Density
Client:
Conservation Easement
t'r
`� r
h'r -
Vegetation Plot Origins
_ • Cross Section Pins
r
„
ary.. - .>, °'
•- 0 Rootwads
-5.�.{
_
5
4
�i1i l a i i ilt
Match Lines
1a�:a ��pti
Vegetation Plots
¢ M ♦�e.�a+
;a b ♦ ♦�����:y�a
.. q 4
�� + +♦
Cross Sections
u�
•waatW •o -sa
Structures
MY 5 Thalweg
L_
Bankfull
Figure
:. Stream Crest Gauge
0 150 300
Feet

' _ _ - ..�i�lt;_ - - - -►r "- _ 7.i::: -e: - - _
The
y1l?±G
Cateno
Group
►.
Date:
¢� sti4sr tr,
��.�.♦ �, .
March 2012
Scale:
s
As Shown
EEP Job No.:
' °�':��.•° �. •
241
•f _ is A
J rcf.�l`
Title:
+.•. - ' � "'
�• •,�'"<
' �.1`'
.
+mil ;fie 4r *
Mary's Creek
� `
MY -05
♦ w ®ice � °a', a`� c °,l�aa�' •� +e�+ ��g.►�� ; . { -
.o�•<° ���•••;�. ♦.. ,c w 4 >.�. +�
+�t!,�,s+r4♦ �• ,. a ♦ye
Current
♦ ♦i1 kt +lei♦ ♦� a ♦♦ ♦♦
a• ti $ dv
Conditions
; ...
U � •
.��• +b ♦._•. ±`� - � r �tio�9•.loao•
l... �.
i a X4!4• ♦a♦
Plan View
"�♦
+�•bda °!�� 4 r ° r ♦
♦•: , lvti ♦'.iiwlite�♦� ♦. ♦♦ ♦.,♦�!y ♦.!
i• uw♦a• •, • w � • k .� . is°iwwi ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦wow♦ w♦
@oa ♦♦ }. 4< p.�. rr, a •vb0•!•! ♦'i6♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ate ♦d ♦♦
♦lid: ° :' _ t rp �`' -- :` f , b `' 4�i+ r s♦ a��i° i�o''��i ♦i +i ♦�i•:�i•s ♦��a +�'w +s e♦e �'
♦
- ♦ !- e - �v 's w S.OW ♦;,'o!•• ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦EC'MaFrs.ol.
d ♦ v 4 .,. >Pf , !•s ♦�s! V� ,q�dr ♦a�ija ♦ ♦•ii�•i ♦ ® ♦ipK�g t4 . ♦ ♦o +s
#i '3 u` �": e a '> ..-• o. « a c♦ a♦ fi v e p a s o s
♦.' ie•. •.a..i+ "i'
f s ♦ - o,o♦ • °+. ! i !`0 • i '• ♦ ♦ • + i•� l .�6 b a a, 0A w4ia l asir � + 9y •0- -0, V
o!!¢ ♦�v• I vw ♦ !•�
2010 Aerial Orthophotography
Source: NCOneMaps
• ♦ ♦ ! ♦ ♦ +r ! • . ! ♦a ♦♦ 9i a ♦eltiE;f4�, 'ttt r, g >�• ♦�A: V!'tl + ♦ ♦i• ♦ei . _ ,
♦ ♦ ♦elei0 ♦?�A '1 F }Ar w
♦ is ♦e ♦ ♦ ♦•io>,l�a�. }q ♦y ♦+ ot�F+�b ♦,� ♦ie��,�2 J • p h . 4 i a 0 ! ! ♦ ♦ +is • ,
ate«. *s l�ae♦w•♦
,a•ii�►4 ♦sad bit ". .� > `. ♦ •` +�sisaioo� +� ♦ • `o" + .*' s"••isili`� +°i��'n��'.''asi °iwi
sas".17- Fss +o�wv :- ►f'ta -rw `9�� ♦ •w•� ♦♦> ias� a! ♦soi•FS♦o•o-.ia♦
r ♦i ♦ ♦� ♦tai..vit rd♦ C ♦ ♦ ♦a!•♦a ♦w1+ t i• ♦ ♦♦
s < sa,i r r s� • ' ,'► ♦•♦♦ •wa • ♦e♦! ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦. �e ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ! ♦si+ ♦ w ♦ ♦eat.leail�OPis ♦ase�ss� ♦ ♦r,�!
r R x i w•a ♦♦ ♦ ♦iw♦ s.• ♦e♦i •9 ♦ ♦ ♦♦•♦ • •••
r r •r ♦ „ i. s y� r s, .t ". c w ;+ sai•,► ♦♦ eid�rr,•w ?! ♦ ♦ ♦�► ♦.�! ♦a! ♦r'� ♦ ♦ ♦ %►'_,!.♦ i ♦ ♦e4�R 3,' ♦iOwO•w ♦ ♦♦ + c+ ♦0 ♦ ♦ ♦!�♦
G .',. Uhl ,w °�. >, d�f � y �.♦ - +- r! '�♦+♦ ♦!+Y - ♦� ♦ ♦!♦� ♦ ♦♦ ♦O �Aa 1•♦
• k 4P •A ro r r �''r �`k. , av� C ♦i „ { v .: ,P ° �! ♦'4�'9;� ♦ ♦ ♦e♦ ♦♦ ♦ i!f lAii
Client:
. ♦-0 .• �:� �..i , a • 0.. >� .. .♦ t„ ♦♦ . ♦ ..♦ .. ♦ +�. .•.
4•aa! •O•'el! ^ ^ ♦ •♦ i4• : b + r •e t 30♦ 4 w ♦ ♦•e •♦''ee'.4 ♦ ♦e': � -W, v9
w ♦ ♦d ♦1•��a'J ♦•8ltwti< y d,,� ♦•i ♦• *+.! ♦ ♦T'i' ♦i ♦ ♦♦♦ ♦v "/ .i ♦ ♦t AC ! ^'!4
i +•� !i ♦i ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦tP. ^;�l +lia1 ♦ ♦�1lSi�!•atl,��s� 4�'�rw,. � ♦ ♦ ! + ♦ ♦iwe3��•a�8�. ' � � ; ' ,f g. > n , y�S• �!'1►►0 +�+'i9�+8 ♦ ♦ ♦� ♦ ® ♦@3 ♦ ®trl3♦ ♦i ` +1i• t f ��t� -
♦ ♦i ♦o ♦ ♦ ♦osi +w ♦i ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦e ♦ ♦ ♦�a<6 ♦ ♦ +! i�•i ♦sl�mP•iw ♦Q +i, -_ . ass♦ a v ♦�i ♦ ♦sa ♦!ye l�9: ; { ^,'o + ♦rtl s•�`�Va_s.* . _, _ Vie♦ s�, ♦w ♦�► ♦♦i a ♦ +c ° ♦a!e ♦ ♦♦ e• ♦♦i,lRi� ♦w�! !
,� ♦ ♦01w ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦♦♦• ♦5 ♦ ♦& ♦♦ ♦8�r�♦ O♦ ♦ a^ QP ♦ ♦ ♦•• ♦♦• w ra ' lA ♦•!♦ +� ♦i! ®e♦ ♦i ♦♦ <���'ylii
�4ae♦e ♦�♦+ sa ♦♦! �.els ♦e♦vass os• soy' • ♦ ♦♦♦ ♦ +� - 4♦ �•♦ ♦ ♦s^ > {: ♦ >e♦♦ ♦•♦`� ♦
++ �►
♦ ♦♦♦e♦el � irs ♦o!♦ ♦o ♦bs ♦♦♦as ♦♦ !••♦ ..� -�!• ♦ eon L � !! ••• ♦ ! ° a♦♦ � �
♦♦ i'►eesew�•� ws��ee♦ ♦♦w ♦ ♦ ♦�+• • • ♦ 4il•�-a•�♦ ♦! .f os ise ♦® ♦♦♦ a
s♦ Nmow ♦ ♦�•„♦`e ; .+ a • ♦c ��r�o ♦ o ♦ o•c o ♦ ! ! ♦�'i ♦ . • . ♦ ♦ a . -` . , ♦ • o .• •
i ♦O ♦ ♦���♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ �•s� of ♦ ♦! P •! i "N �� a ♦ 9
♦♦ e♦ic�♦ +a ♦ys� ♦�� ♦ ♦ ♦ v a�►
�.
d ♦ ♦ ♦�.o♦ ♦�� ♦�♦ ao ♦o ♦�+ +� ♦ ♦♦♦ i�• .
����i�� �; °tae• ♦s� ♦ ♦
.; .:
•��a .•spa ♦♦ ♦�♦ ♦ ♦
ri���a� ® ®e♦ ♦•i•♦0♦e ♦ Legend
- - ♦♦�
♦�
aI ement
. ♦.
• Stream Stations 0 Rootwads
rl
Vegetation Problem Areas -MY05 Match Lines
Ailanthus attissima
Vegetation Plots
Ligustrum sinense
�. Cross Sections
Low Stem Density
Figure
Structures
QConservation Easement MY 5 Thalweg
3 Vegetation Plot Origins Bankfull
1111111111116 • Cross Section Pins Stream Crest Gauge
50 100
- _ Feet

Figu B
The
i
Catena
'-
E -- Group
18 +00
Date:
March 2012
Scale:
As Shown
ea tt vnde Reserved Crossrtg
E E P Job No.-
241
Title:
• 17 +00
_
Mary's Creek
MY -05
Current
Conditions
Plan View
l
+� w
2010 Aerial Orthophotography
ems., ,z •.,,,, 16 00
Source: NCOneMaps
A,64 + +- +�� ♦ +,. .�' tiP4-1 Debris build
+ +:•,Y.
f + +. uo in channel
•. + * °.�!. °.+ s
Client:
- sl�laOf r
y
a• 4 eaat}� *f�f _
_
15 0 .3
Le end
5 00
1 a
iament
..'�',, • Stream Stations" Rootwads N`
"��'a�a "�'z"� v ' •* 14 +00 (Tfib) Vegetation Problem Areas -MY05 Match Lines
Ailanthus altissima
-Vegetation Plots
Ligustrum sinense
Cross Sections
w Low Stem Density
Structures
L _ Conservation Easement MY 5 Thalweg
Vegetation lot Origins
t3ankfull
Figure
• • Cross Section Pins
" a Stream Crest Gauge
0 50 100
Feet
Fi ur

The
T Catena
Group
Cattle Crossing 30!t Co e,:
Date:
i ^t March 2012
Scale:
As Shown
EEP Job No.:
t� 241
SPA.2a 8 b Structure
Piping an nny Title-
d Scou 2'Z +00
2 Mary's Creek
MY -05
Current
f Conditions
Plan View
1"
2010 Aerial Orthophotography
20 +00 Source: NCOneMaps
Client:
19 +00
s�y�lstem
Legend '% aii ,c lent
• Stream Stations Rootwads N hoctw
Vegetation Problem Areas -MY05 Match Lines
I
Ailanthus altissima
Vegetation Plots
Ligustrum sinense
Cross Sections
Low Stem Density - -- --- -- — — -- - - -- - - - - --- - - - ---- - - - -- - ',-- - --- - - --- -- -- - - -- - -- -- - - Structures
Conservation Easement
M Y 5 Tha �e g
Figure
Vegetation Plot Origin s
I Ba nktull
O Cross Section Pins
I :\ Stream Crest Gauge
18+00 0 50 100
Feet
Figure C

W-.
Sol,
Legend
The
Cage Crossing 3'Yt Cutvelt
Stream Stations
Rootwads I v
N
COtenQ
GrOUp
Vegetation Problem Areas -MY05
Match Lines
Ailanthus altissima
r�
L� Vegetation Plots
Ligustrum sinense
Cross Sections
Low Stem Density
r
n-
a
Conservation Easement
Structures
MY S Thalweg
Date:
rrA 0 J'
`
Vegetation Plot Origins
Bankfull
March 2012
w..
'
• Cross Section Pins
Stream Crest Gauge
Scale:
0 50
100
As Shown
t'
Feet
" `'s+oo
EEP Job No.:
i
22 +00
241
Title:
21+00
d
Mary's Creek
SPA -9 Former Beaver nam
Current
x �, -
Conditions
,..•
�"
�►,'�
Plan View
�
��-
T
20+00 A.
1
2010 Aerial Orthophotography
-
z
Source: NCOneMaps
A
�I.
25 +00
SPA-5 Roue vane
sill rock disiodged.
Y
r r
19 }00
SPA 2a & b St", W,e _
�F
. ,
Client:
SPA-4 Rock vane
- -'�� -�
W rock drslodgea
}'ill
r
26 -
+00
lai ement
f:
r
18 +00
Figure
i

Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Main Channel
Assessed Length 1652
Adjusted %
Number
Number vdth
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number In
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
292wrx.
Sub-Cateaory
Metric
as Intended
As-bultt
SeVents
Foote
as Intended
Vegetation
X9j.9tation
Ve tatlon
Bed
1 Vertical Stability
(Portia and firm urdis)
1 9 - Bar formatlon4rowfh sumderd to sigrdllcardly deflect
laterally (not to Include point bars)
100%
2 Degradation - Evidence of downadting
100%
Riffle Condition
1 Texture/Substrate Rlrtk maintains coarser substrate
22
23
96%
Meander Peel
Condition
1 Depth Sufllderd (Lime Pool Depth Mean BanOdUO Depth > 1 6)
21
21
100%
i2M appropriate (:-30% of centerline distance between tall of
upstream Mile and head of downstrem dit)
21
21
100%
7halweg Position
1 TheMreg centering at upstream of meander bend (FLm)
20
21
95%
2 F ;:Zg eerdeftrg at domutream of meander (Gilds)
21
21
100°i6
F 1
Bank
7 ScouredlEroding
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor grwMh and/or
scour and erosion
100%
100%
Banks undererd/avefhenging to the extend that mass wasting appears
2 undercut
likely Does NOT I netude undercuts that are modest appear atrstatrneble
100%
100%
and we providing hebflet
Mass wasting
Bankslumping calving or collapse
100%
100%
TOWS
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3.Erigineered
Structures
Overati ln"rtry
Structures physically intact WIN no dislodged boulders or logs
15
17
88%
Orate Control
Grade control structures exhlblUng mandenance of grade across the sill
14
17
82%
s. Piping
Structures laddng any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
14
17
82%
Bradt Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of Irdl uence doesnd exceed
16% (See guidance fbr title table in EEP monitoring guider= dwume
16
17
94%
Nabftd
forming structures makdatrdng - Max Pool Depth Mean Bmikft l
ratio > 16 Rootwadsiftp providing some cover at base -flow
14
17
82%

Table 6 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Tributary
Assessed Length 450
Adjusted %
Number
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number In
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
ate
Sub-Category
Metric
as Intended
As4)ullt
Se marts
Foote
as Intended
Vegetation
Ve elation
V lotion
lied
7 Vertical Sfabittty
and Run unss)
7 Bar fornetlon1growth sulklerd to a rty defied
laterally (not to Include PON bars)
100%
2 Dearadatlon - Evidence of doYA uring
100%
Rtlrle Condition
1 Texhy g- We maintains coarser substrate
6
10
60%
Meander Pool
ttion
1 Deli Suffldent (Mac Pool Depth Mean BardMA Depth > 1 6)
6
11
55%
2 L gip appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream rifle and head of downstrem rfflle)
7
11
64%
The" Position
1 The" centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
3
11
27%
12 Thahveg centering at dowrMream of meander (Glide)
3
11
27%
Bank
I lcmrredfErodin S
Bank tacking vegetative cover resubV sy from poor growth and/or
O lmp
scour and erosion
100%
100%
Banks underccebvertCg to the exterd that mass wasting appears
ll+dera t
Mwfy Doss NZ Include undercuts that are modest appear sustalrreble
100%
100%
and are providing habitat
Mass Wasting
Bank slumping calving or co0apse
100%
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
F.ngmeemd
Structures
Overall trftft
physically Intact with no dislodged boulders or logs
5
5
100%
Grade Control
Grade control stnutures exhblib maintenance of grade across the sill
5
5
100%
Ptphrg
SUuctum lacking any substantial now underneath slits or arms
5
5
100%
Bank Protection
erosion wehln the stnxhues extent of trdYrence doesno exceed
15% (See guidance for this table In EEP monitoring guidance doom
5
5
100%
Hatittalt
r
Pool forming structures mairdalning — Mac Pool Depth Mean Bankhdl
[Depth ratio a 16 RootwadsAo its providing some cover et base -flow
5
5
100%

Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Planted Acreage' 4.56
Easement Acreage 7.3
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
2. Invasive Areas of Concern `
Areas of Ailanthus altissima.
Mapping
CCPV
Number of
Combined
Planted
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Threshold
Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
Acreage
1. Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based visual observation.
0.1 acres
yellow hatch
3
1.59
34.9%
Total
3
1.59
34.9%
Easement Acreage 7.3
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
CCPV
Depiction
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Easement
Acreage
2. Invasive Areas of Concern `
Areas of Ailanthus altissima.
1000 SF
Solid Yellow
4
0.08
1.1
3. Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas of Ligustrum sinense.
1000 SF
Solid Green
5
1.42
19.5
= Enter the planted acreage within the easement. This number is calculated as the easement acreage minus any existing mature tree stands that were not subject to supplemental planting of the understory, the
acreage, crossings or any other elements not directly planted as part of the project effort.
= The acreage within the easement boundaries.
= Encroachment may occur within or outside of planted areas and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. In the event a polygon is cataloged into items 1, 2 or 3 in the table and is the result of
encroachment, the associated acreage should be tallied in the relevant item (i.e., item 1,2 or 3) as well as a parallel tally in item 5.
= Invasives may occur in or out of planted areas, but still within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. Invasives of concern/interest are listed below. The list of high concern
spcies are those with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term (e.g. monitoring period or shortly thereafter) or affect the community structure for existing, more established tree /shrub
stands over timeframes that are slightly longer (e.g. 1 -2 decades). The low /moderate concern group are those species that generally do not have this capacity over the timeframes discussed and therefore are not expected to
be mapped with regularity, but can be mapped, if in the judgement of the observer their coverage, density or distribution is suppressing the viability, density, or growth of planted woody stems. Decisions as to whether
remediation will be needed are based on the integration of risk factors by EEP such as species present, their coverage, distribution relative to native biomass, and the practicality of treatment. For example, even modest
amounts of Kudzu or Japanese Knotweed early in the projects history will warrant control, but potentially large coverages of Microstegium in the herb layer will not likley trigger control because of the limited capacities to
impact tree /shrub layers within the timeframes discussed and the potential impacts of treating extensive amounts of ground cover. Those species with the "watch list" designator in gray shade are of interest as well, but have
yet to be observed across the state with any frequency. Those in red italics are of particular interest given their extreme risk /threat level for mapping as points where isolated specimens are found, particularly ealry in a
projects monitoring history. However, areas of discreet, dense patches will of course be mapped as polygons. The symbology scheme below was one that was found to be helpful for symbolzing invasives polygons,
particulalry for situations where the conditon for an area is somewhere between isolated specimens and dense, discreet patches. In any case, the point or polygon /area feature can be symbolized to describe things like high
or lowconcem and species can be listed as a map inset, in legend items if the number of species are limited or in the narrative section of the executive summary.
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 17 March 2012

Mary's Creek EEP# 241
MY -05 Photo Points
Main Channel Cross Section #1 Looking Downstream
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 18 March 2012

Main Channel Cross Section #3 Looking Downstream
Main Channel Cross Section #4 Looking Downstream
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 19 March 2012

Tributary Channel Cross Section #1 Looking Downstream
Tributary Channel Cross Section #2 Looking Downstream
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 20 March 2012

Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 2
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 21 March 2012

Vegetation Monitoring Plot 3
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 4
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 22 March 2012

Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number: 241
The Catena Group
tit
c04
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 5
23
Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data
�— Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
1
24
B
Year 5 Monitoring Report FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

Table 7 Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
Mary's Creek EP #241
Veg Plot ID
Vegetation Survival Threshold Met9
260 total woody stems/acre
Tract Mean
VP 1
Yes
100%
VP2
Yes
VP3
Yes
V P4
Yes
V P5
Yes
Mary s Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
25
Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

I!
�I
t
TahiP R VaaPtntrnn MpfadatA Tahip
database name
cvs -ee n ool -v2 2 7 mdb
database location
11/5/2011
computer name
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS
DOCUMENT------- -
Metadata
Descnption of database file, the report worksheets, and a
summary of project(s) and project data
Proj, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for
each ear This excludes live stakes
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for
each year This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and
all natural/volunteer stems
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live
stems dead stems, missing, etc
Vigor
Frequency distnbution of vigor classes for stems for all
plots
Vigor b Spp
Frequency distnbution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of
occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by for each species
Damage by Plot
Dam a values tallied by e for each plot
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matnx of the count of total living stems of each species
(planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot,
dead and missing stems are excluded
PROJECT SUMMARY—
Project Code
241
project Name
Mary's Creek (EEP #241
Description
2096 If of stream restoration no wetlands
River Basm
Fear
length(ft)
-Cape
2096
stream-to-edge width It
area m
Required Plots calculated
Sampled Plots
5
1 Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
I , NCEEP Project number 241
1 i
The Catena Group
26
Year 5 Momtormg Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

Table 9. Stem Count Total Planted by Plot and Species
EEP Proiect Code 241. Proiect Name: UT to Mary's Creek
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 27 March 2012
Current Plot Data (MY5 2011)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
E241 -01 -VPI
E241- 01 -VP2
E241 -01 VP3
E241- 01 -VP4
E241- 01 -VP5
MY5 (2011)
MY4 (2010)
MY3 (2009)
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
1
26
3
30
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub Tree
1
1
Carpinu s caroliniana
American hornbeam
Shrub Tree
14
14
Celtislaevigata
sugarberry
Shrub Tree
1
1
Cornusamomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
3
1
1
1
4
Diospyrosvirginiana
common persimmon
Tree
2
1
3
Fraxinuspennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
28
22
7
13
6
76
Gleditsia triacanthos
honeylocust
Shrub Tree
1
1
Juniperusvirginiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
5
3
1
5
115.5
129.5
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
6
5
6
20
24
61
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
1
1
3
5
Platanusoccidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
1
Prunu s serotina
black cherry
Shrub Tree
1
2
3
Pyrus
pear
Tree
1
1
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
1
1
3
3
4
5
7
10
3
3
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub Tree
3
5
4
12
Ulmus
elm
Tree
1
1
2
Ulmusalata
winged elm
Tree
1
1
Ulmusrubra
slippery elm
Tree
1
1
2
Stern count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Sterns per ACRE
0
0
62
0
0
33
0
0
29
0
3
73
0
5
160.5
0
8
357.5
0
0
0
0
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
5
5
5
0.024710538
0.024710538
0.024710538
0.024710538
0.024710538
0.123552691
0.123552691
0.123552691
0
0
10
0
0
6
0
0
12
0
1
8
0
2
9
0
2
19
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
10
12509
10
10
11335
0
10
147 4,
0
121.4
2954
0
202.3
6495
0
64.75
2894;
0
0
2695
0
24.28
24.28
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number: 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 27 March 2012

Appendix D. Stream Assessment Data
�— Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
�I
28
Year 5 Momtonng Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

Project:
Mary's Creek
Summary
an
u
Cross Section:
Cross Section
1
MYO
MY
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY
Feature
Pool
A(BKF)
30.4
27.3
24.5
22.9
24.0
24.5
Station:
12+83
W (8KF)
19.7
16.3
18.0
18.2
18.0
18.1
Date:
1/18112
Mend
3.0
2.8
2.8
2.7
2.9
2.9
Crew.
ZAP, SV
Wend
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.3
13
WAD
12B
12.3
112
14.5
13.4
13.4
MY04 -2010
MY06 -2011
MY01 -2007
-2
Station Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
0
Elevation
Notes
L N
Station
Elevation Notes
IN
.i -PrN
COO 505.85 LPIN
0,00 506.11 LPIN
0.00 506.15 IN
13.19 505.91
ikfulLeftT
3.19
505.80
10.12
505.97
0.10
505.93
6.38
50624
1.20
506.15
15.06 505.43
766
50595
14.20
505.83
ikfull Left T
4.68
506.19
10.70
506.23
4.91
506.05
16.38 504.98
13.95
505.87
:FULL Left
17.56
504.93
9.09
505.89
12.92
506.20
TOBL
9.18
50610
20.25 504.74
18.75
504.71
20.95
504.80
13.86
505.85
TOBL
14.09
506.13
1320
506.16 BL bankfull r
24.14 503.85
26.60 502.66
TW
20.56
21.75
50463
504.57
22.60
23.53
504.36
503.99
16.45
21.49
505.20
504.95
3ankfuY Let
16.13
16.15
505.43
505.51
1599
18.57
505.63 f I
505.29
28.82 502.86
30.37 50120
23.01
23.62
504217
504.14
24.51
25.07
503.99
503.61
25.42
27,25
503.10
503.13
TOEL
TW
18.51
20.02
50536 NKFULL U
504.94
19.98
2234
504.90 1 �
504.96 -
31.74 505.22
32.91 505.80
ankfull Rig
23.93
24.56
503.89
50367
26.38
2777
503.15
503.06
TW
29.97
30.73
503.52
505.57
TOER
21.77
23.50
505.06
50477
23.82
24.61
504.50
503.71 TOE L
33.82 506.20
25.00
503.35
29.60
503.68
3212
505.78
24.35
503.79
TOE L
25.68
503.09
34.27 506.51
TO13R
26.36
503.18
30.20
505.04
33.58
506.40
anklull Rig
26.25
503.04
2730
502.96 17W BROC
37.19 506.16
27.06
503.15
33.89
506.50
dull Right
34.91
506.55
TOBR
27.66
503.05
(WS=
26.56
503.25
47.65 506.52
RPIN
28.44
503.97
TW
42.26
506.22
36.65
506.38
26.98
503.24
30.11
503.62 TOE R
48.65 506.40
29.76
503.26
47.61
506.48
RPIN
38.69
506.34
30.30
503.55
TOE
3097
505.24
31.41
505.39
45.88
506.42
31.28
505.60
32,37
505.76
32.29
505.80
Tankful Right
47.58
506.48
RPIN
32.52
505.84 4KFULL Rli
3364
506.54 )R bankfull
34.16
50851
TOBR
34.15
506.53
TOBR
3676
506.51
39.06
50624
37.40
506.25
40.14
506.34
44.58
506.30
40.67
506.48
4327
506.37
47.50
506.40
RPIN
44.63
47.96
506.41
506.52
RPIN
46.35
47.86
506.36
506.51 RPIN
Photo of XS-1, looking in the downstream direction
Cross Section 1
507.00
506.50
506.00
505.50
505.00
C
504.50
W
504.170
503.50
503.00
502.50
0.00
10.00
2000 .
3000
4000 50.00 60.00
Station (Feel)
-O-As- Buii 40-Yeart +Year2 tYear3 --&-Yesr4 -1&-Year5 tBKF

ate
a Creek
Sumirrtwary
an
Cross Section:
Close Section
Z
MY
M
M
Feature
RrOe
(BICFj
29.6
30.5
21.4
25.4
21.3
22.3
Steti0n:
13+62
(BKF)
28.0
29.3
20.2
22.1
16.6
178
Date:
1ABA2
Maxd
2.1
2.4
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.6
Crew:
ZAP, SV
Wand
1.1
1 0
1 .1
1.2
1.3
1.3
A)
26.4
28.1
19.0
192
13.3
14.0
W04 -2010
MYOS-2011
7
=.W9
Station Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
L IN
0.00 506.74 L
N
000 50689 LPIN
8.67 505.33
ikful Left T
3.13
505.89
6.42
505.51
2.42
506.33
2.10
50622
0.38
506.45
17.19 504.84
709
505.50
3ankfull Lei
15.01
50522
ikful Left
4.91
505.79
5.60
505.58
1.49
506.31
19.72 503.78
1123
50524
TOBL
18.81
504.82
1294
505.48
Mull Left T
8.65
505.58
3.64
505.81
1
22.65 503.34
17.37
50483
20.40
504.07
17.56
505.12
1 t.52
505.49
6.18
505.54
••�. '
24.19 503.19
TW
19.51
504.48
2126
503.15
1954 .
504.65
13.82
505.50
10.43
505.53
a A"
25.84 503.30
20.32
503.86
22.93
503.01
20.94
503.86
16.23
505.63 TOBL
16.91
505.56 BL bankfull
27.96 503.40
29.94 503.71
21.06
21.80
50329
503.13
TW
24.45
25.91
503.04
503.34
TW
2183
2446
503.15
503.26
TOEL
TW
19.39
20.80
505.03 3ankfull
504.32
1831
1991
505.38
504.38
31.47 503.82
23.65
503.14
27.46
503.46
27.36
503.34
TOER
20.95
503.02 TOE L
20.82
503.05
TOE L
q•.
32.48 504.25
25.11
503.28
29.64
504.35
2926
504.41
2216
502.89
2183
502.99
n {,
35.16 505.18
d'ul RightT
27.04
50325
33.73
504.97
crul(RightT
3123
504.36
23.07
502.95
23.36
502.97
TW
35.89 505.28
28.14
503.52
37.14
505.56
34.21
505.06
24.35
502.94 / (yyS
25.63
503.39
t•�i {
47.65 506.06
RPIN
28.93
50388
43.16
505.81
35.31
505.62
26.50
503.29
2689
503.76
TOE 11
y
49.72 505.79
29.08
504.21
46.75
505.80
3948
505.67
du 11 Rg ht T
27.95
503.36 TOE
27.37
504.54
-
30.28
504.21
47.64
506.11
RPIN
4524
50531
28.92
504.91
28.43
504.88
31.68
504.19
4753
506.18
RPIN
31.31
504.64
29.66
504.91
32.18
504.56
32.54
504.99 1@nkfullRI
30BI
504.74
33.68
504.95
dull Right
0138
33.98
505.18 T08R
32.14
505.01
36.40
505.51
36.22
505.68
34.67
505.59 3R
ban Mull
42.27
505.75
39.40
505.69
39.14
505.72
47.42
505.84
RPIN
43.02
505.87
4432
505.90
47.58
505.93
4705
505.98
47.68
506.12 RPIN
47.10
508.17
RPIN
Photo of XS -2, looking in the downstream direction
Cross See1Son 2
507.50
507.00
506.50
506.00
_ 505.50
50500
s
50450
W
504.00
503.50
503.00
502.50
0.00
10.00
2000 .
30,00
40 m
50.00
60.00
Station (Feet)
- - As6uil
- Yesrl -+-Yecr2 -ia-Year3 - O -Year4 --W-Yeer5 --&-BKF

Project:
s roe
am
an
Cross Section:
Cross Section 3
Feature
Pool
A (W)
NA
NA
23.6
25.6
23.7
310
Station:
18x04
Wf)
NA
NA
25.2
26.6
24.9
29.4
Date:
1ABA2
Maxd
NA
NA
2.1
2.3
2.3
2.6
Crew.
ZAP, SV
Wend
NA
NA
09
1.0
0.9
1.1
JD
NA
NA
27.0
27.7
28.2
279
Station Elevation
0.00 507.38
Notes
LPIN
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station Elevation Notes
Station Elevation Notes
Station Elevation Notes
Station Elevation Notes
0.00 507.43 LPIN
0.00 5U7.37
2.84
506.91
5.16
506.29
0.35 50721
3.42
506.74
8.44
505.88
10.92
505.53
1.91 507.22
8.22
505.72
28.65
504.25
FULL LEFT
18.00
505.07
5.75 506.33
16210
505.19
31.80
503.13
24.57
504.73
10.57 505.54
23D5
504.75
34.56
502.55
28.94
504.33
ddull Lett T
17.37 505.17
2588
504.56 BL bankfull left
35.53
502.30
2970
503.79
21.61 504.95
2887
504.08
37.26
502.18
TW
31.99
503.13
24.67 504.77
TOBL
31 B9
503.30
39.70
502.25
3389
502.94
27.30 504.36
33.19
502.91
40.30
502.65
3523
502.34
TOEL
30.05 503.77
NITULL
34.16
502.29
TOE L
41.47
503.30
3684
50216
32.33 503.16
3653
502.06
43.22
503.62
'ULLRIGK
38.32
502.13
TW
33.88 503.01
37.71
502.00
TW
48.26
503.92
40.47
502.35
TOER
34.58 502.63
TOE L
39.71
502.27
53.74
504.39
41.55
503.43
TOBR
36.83 502.17
4077
502.43
TOE R
61.56
504.79
43.25
503.83
dull RigM 1
37.86 502.01
(WSJ SM
41.96
503.48
73.73
505.35
4529
503.91
38.97 502.20
4407
503.92 3R
banldUll
85.80
50(3.09
49.35
504.03
40.86 502.46
TOE R
4958
504.13
86.38
508.19
RPIN
53.83
504.43
41.70 503.40
5809
504.77
SB.86
504.73
42.94 503.56
41KFULL RI
6589
504.97
64.10
504.90
44.54 503.94
TOBR
75DB
505.44
78.48
505.80
46.07 504.00
8028
505.93
8326
506.19
51.29 504.22
85 B2
506.02
86.24
506.19
RPIN
55.28 504.63
86 D4
506.17
RPIN
8629
5013.03
59.19 504.81
95 DO
507.00
65.53 505.05
75.09 505.42
82.14 506.08
Photo o1XS3 bolting In the downstream dWeWen
Cross Section 3
x08.00
5D7.00
a0e 00
506.00
1_.
604.00
W
503.00
502.00
501.00
0.00
10.00
211.00
30.00
40.00
5000
60.00
70.00 60.00 80.00 100.00
Station (Feat)
-0-As- Butt -}Year 1 --&-Yeer2 !Year 3
-41--Yeer 4 ♦-Year 5 -"KF

Project:
Mary's Creek
Summa
fulb
MYI
MY2
M 4
Cross Section. Cross Section 4
Feature
Riffle
(BKF)
NA
35.2
34.2
48.4
394
Station:
22-30
(BKF)
7NA
NA
30.6
32.1
25.0
33.6
Date:
11181,12
Max d
NA
2.7
2.7
2.9
2.9
Crewe
ZAP, SV
Mean d
NA
1 2
1.1
1.9
1.2
/D
NA
26.6
30.1
12.9
26.6
M194 -2010
MY06 -2011
MY00-2006
MY01 -2007
M02 -2008
MY03 -2009
Station Elevation
Notes
Station
Bevadon Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Bevation
Notes
Station
0.00
Elevation
9D5.96
Notes
LPIN
Station
0.00
Elevation
505.96
Notes
LPIN
0.00 505.96 LPIN
0.00 505.96 LPIN
4.91
505.15
0.35
505.60
1.69
505.55
0.28
505.55
22.52
503.91
14.19
504.36
8.03
504.63
638
504.60
26.54
503.85
25.49
50190
18.70
504.27
14.97
504.18
36.24
501.88
31.39
502.48
25.27
504.62
24.66
503.88
43.42
500.83
36.35
501.73
31.48
502.59
31 Ot
502.50
56.44
500.76
42.42
501.06
39.45
501.28
38.80
501.25
59.97
500.52
kfull Left T
5255
500.63
43.87
500.76
38,87
501.26
63.15
499.85
59.64
500.41
ddull Le/tT
47.62
500.82
43.45
500.62
66.73
49878
6564
498.85
50.92
SWA6
4885
500.72
66.83
498,01
6640
498.08
TOEL
51.66
500.73
51.07
500.24
70.49
497.81
TW
6738
49777
54.74
500.83
52.76
500.58
73.45
498.30
6900
497.75
TW
58.79
500.70
56.42
500.52 BLbankfull
76.93
499.00
71.18
497.88
TOER
60.64
500.32
TOBL
59.94
500.37
82.39
9533
500.28
500.66
cfull Right T
7326
76.02
496.32
499.12
63.96
66.11
499.33 NKFULL Lf
497.87 70EL
62.34
64.48
499.93
499.02
104.85
501.03
77.10
498.93
67.84
497.79
65.67
498.70
107.13
501.45
RPIN
8062
499.86
68.32
497.79
66.48
49714
TOE L
11500
503.00
83.44
500.33 Cull Riglhtl
69.27
497.58
(WS - 497
6760
497.62
90.49
500.38
7D.68
498.00
69.36
497.57
TW
9866
500.55
71.08
497.78
TOE R
71.17
496.02
106.60
501.10
RPIN
71.70
498.23
73.45
498.07
TOE R
114.63
503.05
72.81
498.42
7450
498.49"
73.42
496.21
75.98
499.01
76.71
499.05 IKFULL RI
7856
499.08
78.54
499.71
80.62
499.87
82.61
500.28
TOW
8241
500.17
85.45
500.56
8623
500.32
88.78
500.45
92.07
500.44
Photo of X54, Woking in the downstream direction
92.31
500.48
101.82
500.53 3R ban kfull right
96.62
50084
106.66
500.94
100.22
500.69
106.96
501.28
RPIN
106.94
501.49
RPIN
Cross Section
50700
500.00
605.00
50400
503.00
LL_
C
O
5100
5050o
W
500.0)
400.00
406.00
407.00
000
2000
40.00
80.00
8000
10000 120.00 140.00
Station [Feet)
- I- As-Buit
- t -Yeart -m Year2 -0-Year3 --C-Year4
-i&-Year5 i-BKF

roe
a Creek ry
umm
an
CroseSection:
Crow SedlenI
MY1
M
MY
eahme
Pool
A(BKF)
171
13.0
11.3
9A
7.4
88
Station:
11+02
W(BAn
15.1
14.7
13.4
12.8
8.7
9.8
Dab:
12MMO
Nhx d
2.1
1 B
1.8
is
1.8
1.4
row.
ZAP. SV
Mean d
1.1
0.9
0.0
0.7
0.9
0.7
NOD
13.3
16.5
15B
17.2
102
13.8
Station
1.81
Elevation
506.55
Noted
Station
1.63
Elevation Notes
506.33
Ralson Elevation Notes
Ration Elevation Notes
Station Elevation Notes
Station Elevation Notes
QiD9 508.15 3ankfull Lal
1.71 50820
12.84 506.17 3snkfut Lal
5.73 506.41
978
506.08
TOM
7.67
50626
16.05
505.70
9.55
W830
6.02
506.53
4.93
506.42
12.30
16.01
505.76
505.24
1057
13.58
50620
505.96
Mull Left T
17.11
18.96
504.99
504.62
1377
15.96
506.15 Mul Left T
50581
9.57
13.86
506.46
506.26
9.21
13.79
50637
50628
16.96
18.86
20.48
504.49
504.18
504.05
TW
1570
1637
1701
505BS
505.60
50481
20.35
22.44
23.23
504.38
504.76
505.69
TW
1785
1853
20.17
905.50
50527
50491 TOEL
16.27
17.53
10.46
508.12 TOEL
505.73 NKFULL Lf
505.63
16.43
18.57
20.02
506.00 3LBankNl V
505.63
504.98 TOEL ..
22.51
504.44
17.63
50492
28.36
50619
tankful Rig
21.00
504.78 TW
18.91
505.35
21 AB
504.81
24.91
505.85
TOBR
1855
504.50
32.36
506.77
21.62
504.73
19.48
504.98
TOE L
21.89
504.76
32.88
508.84
tankful Rig
20.64
504.37
41.74
508.86
23.36
504.88 TOER
20.04
504.44
22.52
504.70 TW
39.75
S08.20
2125
50435
TW
47.13
510.73
25.19
50625 dull Right T
20.89
504.41
(WSJ SOS
2291
504.79 TOE
46.83
510.61
RPIN
2237
504.47
47.43
511.60
RPIN
29.56
506.49
2154
50456
23.30
505.61
47.34
511$1
2298
504215
33.17
50891
22.72
504.76
TOE R
24.13
505.81
47.37
511.58
2331
50521
36.57
907.42
23.22
505.89 4WULL RI
24.77
50815 R Bankfu1
47.37
511.61
23.49
505.46
39.70
50829
24.18
506.14
25.71
506.15
50.96
311.24
24.46
505.85
44.71
51029
25.34
506.32
TOM
28.95
506.43
2526
506.10
dull Right TOOR
47.13
S11 SB RPIN
27.52
506.76
31.87
50691
2522
SOSDS
31.58
508.76
3630
507.44
30176
50650
35.10
507.72
40.84
508.53
34.75
50719
40.93
508.69
44.60
51001
40.80
508.66
44.46
510.21
47.18
510.69
45DO
51021
46.88
510.85
47.41
511.48 RPIN
47A3
510.75
RPIN
46.91
511.65
RPIN
Photo ofXSTt ,lookngIn the downdreamdirection
Cross Section labeled X511 to differentiate between man channel XS1
Tributary Cross Section 1
513.00
512.00
511.00
510.00
509.00
lb
508.00
507.00
506.00
505.00
504.00
903.00
0.00
10.00
20.00
30A0
40.00 50.00 60110
Station (Feel)
-0-AsBult -6-Yeart - + -Year2 --4I-Yesr3 -41--Year4 -s -Years - 41-BKF

Project:
s Creek Tributary
an
NfM
M
MY
Cross Section: Cross Section 2
Feature
We
A (BKF)
10.0
BB
8.9
7.4
7.3
6.4
Station:
11+81
W (BKF)
11B
11.2
12.2
12.0
10.1
1 OB
Date:
12.30110
Mazd
14
1.4
13
1.4
1.4
1.4
Crew.
ZAP. S/
Won
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.6
W4)
13.9
14.3
We
19.5
14.0
17.7
4- 10
- 1
MVW -2006
MIMI -2
-2009
Staton Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation Notes
N
Station
0,00
Elevation Notes
506.27 L IN
0.00 SW.27 LPN-
L I
.1
0.01 506.27
0.59
505.93
0.57
505.97
2.90
505.91
0.37
506.06
1.09
505.88
0.50 505.94
3.09
505.88
15.70
505.88
NKFULL LJ
7.32
506.04
1.74
505.85
4.43
505.88
15.88 SD5.71
NKFULL U
7B4
505.96
19.13
505.08
10.59
505.86
5.74
505.89
9.19
505.91
17.73 505.11
12.19
505.87
2037 .
504.64
15.54
505.93
rkrull Left T
10.75
505.85
12.67
505.86
19.77 504.56
15.96
505.82
NKFULL Ll
21.85
504.47
TW
1775
505.30
1182
505.86
1620
506.01 3LBankrull
h
22.14 50430
TW
17.46
505.38
23.68
504.69
19.16
505.11
16.10
505.93 TOBL
1732
505.43
24.39 504.52
27.63 505.78
35.79 505.82
4KFULL RI
17.62
19.36
20.02
505.12
504.83
504.71
28.37
34.52
42.91
505.77
505.96
506.95
4KFULLRIi
21.31
2277
23.52
504.49
504.40
504.33
TOEL
TW
TOER
16.75
18.11
18.38
505.46 3ankfull
505.31
505.37
1854
2034
2097
505.49-
504.99
504.47 TOE L
's`x
47.35 507.47
20.43
504.51
48.27
507.63
24.58
505.19
19.21
505 A5 TOE
21.80
504.37 TW'
49.66 507.69
21.17
504.37
49.39
507.70
RPIN
25.90
505.50
dug "ht 1
20.66
504.68
22 A3
504.41
49.72 507.71
RPIN
21.91
504.39
27.44
505.67
22.87
504.29 1(WS=
22.44
504.35
57.01 507.95
23.19
504.31
TW
29.19
505.76
23.66
504.39
23 B2
504.51 TOE R
23.85
50438
35.80
506.04
24.29
504.93 TOE R
2397
504.97
23.97
504.50
3935
506.63
25.51
505.46 )ankrullRig
25.06
505.37 RBanKull
24.46
504.89
4427
507.08
25.81
505.64
25.86
505.52
25.33
505.18
49.54
507.60
28.91
505.76 TOBR
28.04
505.79
2719
505.68
4KFULLRI
HT
49.62
507.69
RPIN
29.95
505.89
3151
505.84
30.40
505.72
33.15
505.79
35.49
505.92
33.71
505.79
36.70
506.04
38.13
508.19
37.17
506.07
40.89
506.64
4053
506.73
41.30
506.81
46.98
SWAS
4357
507.04
45,83
507.41
49.32
507M RPIN
4723
507.56
Photo of XS-T2, looking in the downstream direction
49.41
507.57
4937
507.65
Cross Section lsbeledXS12 to differentiate between main channel XS -2
Tributary Cross Saction 2
508.50
508.00
507.50
507.00
j 506.50
C
4
506.00
W
505.50
74\v
A/Z
505.00
604.50
504.00
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
60.00 60.00
Station (Feeq
- 4�!•AS Buit
-4-Yeart �Year2 -111i - 4-Year4 fYesrS - 4►-BKF

510
508
506
504
^., 502
4-
r.r•
C
0
> 500
d
W
498
496
494
492
10 +00
Mary's Creek
Longituclinal Profile
Main Channel: Station 10 +00 - 27 +00
11+00 12+00 13+00 14 +00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18 +00 19 +00 20 +00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25 +00 26 +00 27+00
Station (feet)
TW MY-00 - BKF MY-00 -TW MY-01 - BKF MY-01 - TW MY-02 BKF MY-02 —TW MY-03
BKF MY-03 TW MY-04 L BKF MY-04 --4--TW MY-05 - WS MY -05 o BKF MY-05
O
cna
- O
via
M
_
+,
r n
a 00
N
M
N
(N
O+
O
O
CN
v T
v C")
v �
�
CO
�
U
N
N
c
• =a
°
°
°
..
-
0..°
�...
Q
-f
U
00
.• ;�
v► +
- - -- .-
--
- -
p 0
-
Cr
ON
s-
- --
�• -
10
00
-
..
-
T
y N
YW
r
-
-r
-
-
In
-
- -
-
0 0
`
- -
0-
Y -
cF
,t
w
-
-
- o
-
-
o !''
drock
Outcrop
Cr
6
O-
-
0 0
Bedrock
annel
° 0.-
0�...
Y
11+00 12+00 13+00 14 +00 15+00 16+00 17+00 18 +00 19 +00 20 +00 21+00 22+00 23+00 24+00 25 +00 26 +00 27+00
Station (feet)
TW MY-00 - BKF MY-00 -TW MY-01 - BKF MY-01 - TW MY-02 BKF MY-02 —TW MY-03
BKF MY-03 TW MY-04 L BKF MY-04 --4--TW MY-05 - WS MY -05 o BKF MY-05

Maru's Creek Tributary
Longitudinal Profile
Main Channel: Station 10+00 - 14+75
508
-
+
x o
°-
507
CIA
y
x • - N
506
-X
•
- - - -
_ - J-
-
- X
•
-IX _ -
-•. - x
X.
x
505
504
W
- Z _
503
502
501
10+00 11 +00 12+00 13+00 14+00
Station (feet)
TW MY -00 - BKF MY -00 TW MY-01 - BKF MY -01 —TVV MY -02 - BKF MY-02 TW MY -03
- BKF MY -03 TW MY-04 - BKF MY -04 TW MY -05 - WS MY-05 x BKF MY-05

PEBBLE COUNT
Project: Ma s Creek Date: 1/182012
Location: Cross Section 02
Particle Counts
Inches
Particle
Millimeter
Riffles
Pools
Total No.
Item %
% Cumulative
90%
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
?S!C» ?::
8
0
8
7%
7%
Jib
Very Fine
.062 - .125
::::: S:::::::::
4
0
4
4%
11%
Fine
125-25 .25
>: ?:::A
4
0
4
4%
15%
50%
Medium
25-50 .50
N
2
0
2
2%
17%
Coarse
50-1.0
D
6
0
6
6%
22%
.04-.08
Very Coarse
1.0-2.0
S
0
0
0
0%
22%
'08-16 .16
Very Fine
2.0-4.0
4
0
4
4%
26%
.16-22 .22
Fine
4.0-5.7
G
12
0
12
11%
37%
.22 - .31
Fine
5.7-8.0
R
6
0
6
6%
43%
.31 - .44
Medium
8.0-11.3
A
0
0
0
0%
43%
.44 - .63
Medium
11.3 - 16.0
V
8
0
8
7%
50%
.63-.89
Coarse
16.0-22.6
:::: E
4
0
4
4%
54%
,89-1.26
Coarse
22.6-32.0
:: >: s L
8
0
8
7%
61%
1.26 - 1.77
Very Coarse
32.0-45.0
:::::::::5
12
0
12
11%
72%
1.77 - 2.5
Very Coarse
45.0-64.0
6
0
6
6%
78%
2.5-3.5
Small
64-90
8
0
8
7%
85%
3.5-5.0
Small
90-128
?? d
2
0
2
2%
87%
5.0 - 7.1
Large
128-180
:::::B
0
0
0
0%
87%
7.1 - 10.1
Large
180-256
?` L < .:
0
0
0
0%
87%
10.1 - 14.3
Small
256-362
B::'::::?
0
0
0
0%
87%
14.3-20
Small
362-512
L
0
0
0
0%
87%
20-40
Medium
512 - 1024
:`. < D
0
0
0
0%
87%
40-80
Lr - Very Lrg
1 1024-20481
R
0
0
0
0%
87%
Bedrock
BORK : -:
14
0
14
13%
100%
Totals 108 0 108 100% 1000/0
d16 d35 d50 d84 d95
0.4 5.6 16.0 85.8 Bedrock
Bed Particle Size Distribution
Cross Section 2: Riffle
100 °k
- B 81 E63 691 E61 El
90%
80%
70%
Jib
-19 MY -01
60%
-O- MY -02
- tr- MY -03
50%
40%
--X-- MY -04
30%
a2
20%
10%
0%
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
100000
Particle Size - Millimeter

PEBBLE COUNT
Project: Mary's Creek Date: 1/18/2012
Location: Cross Section #4
Particle Counts
Inches
Particle
Millimeter
Riffles
Pools
Total No.
Item %
% Cumulative
90%
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
a,l:::::::.
6
0
6
5%
5%
Very Fine
.062 -.125
::::::::::::::::
4
0
4
3%
9%
Fine
.125-.25
2
0
2
2%
10%
Medium
.25-.50
::::fJ :::::
2
0
2
2%
12%
Coarse
.50 - 1.0
D ::::
10
0
10
9%
21%
.04-.08
Very Coarse
1.0-2.0
5::::::::::
12
0
12
10%
31%
.08 - .16
Very Fine
20-4.0
0
0
0
0%
31%
.16-.22
Fine
4.0-5.7
0
0
0
0%
31%
,22-.31
Fine
5.7-8.0
R:::::::
6
0
6
5%
36%
.31 -.44
Medium
8.0-11.3
J$ :::::::
6
0
6
5%
41%
.44-.63
Medium
11.3 - 16.0:
U::::::::'
8
0
8
7%
48%
.63 - .89
Coarse
16.0-22.6
:..::.::.::::::::::
6
0
6
5%
53%
.89-1.26
Coarse
22-6-32.0
s:L::`: :.:
24
0
24
21%
74%
1.26 - 1.77
Very Coarse
32.0-45.0
:: :: ::` :.
8
0
8
7%
81%
1.77 - 2.5
1 Very Coarse
1 45.0-64.0
:::::::::::::
4
1 0
4
3%
84%
2.5 -3.5
Small
64 -90
8
0
8
7%
91%
3.5-5.0
Small
90-128
'' ' 0
0
0
0
0%
91%
5.0-7.1
Large
128-180
B
0
0
0
0%
91%
7.1 - 10.1
Large
180-256
L... ....
0
0
0
0%
91%
10.1 - 14.3
Small
256-362
:::::: B::::':
0
0
0
0%
91%
14.3-20
Small
362-512
: G:::::
0
0
0
0%
91%
20-40
Medium
512-1024
:::::::::::#::::::::::
0
0
0
0%
91%
40-80
Lr - Very Lr
1024 - 2048
>''
0
0
0
0%
1 91%
Bedrock
BDRK:
10
0
10
9%
100%
: Totals 116 0 116 100% 100%
d16 d35 d50 d84 d95
0.7 7.5 18.0 61.3 Bedrock
Bed Particle Size Distribution
Cross Section 4: Riffle
100%
90%
80%
70%
--�— MY -02
75 9
60%
a-- MY -03
U
50%
X MY -04
40%
—0-- MY -05
30%
LL
�[
20%
10%
0%
0.1
1 10 100 1000 10000
100000
Particle Size -Millimeter

PEBBLE COUNT
Project: Marys Creek Tributary Date: 1/18/2012
Location: Cross Section #2
Particle Counts
Inches
Particle
Millimeter
Riffles
Pools
Total No.
Item %
% Cumulative
90%
SilUCla
< 0.062
:alC::::::
20
0
20
19%
19%
Very Fine
.062-.125
70%
4
0
4
4%
23%
Fine
.125 - .25
A:_::::::
4
0
4
4%
26%
Medium
.25-.50
fV :::::
0
0
0
0%
26%
Coarse
50 - 1.0
>D <::
0
0
0
0%
26%
.04-.08
Very Coarse
1.0-2.0
5::: ::.
14
0
14
13%
40%
.08-.16
Very Fine
2.0-4.0
0
0
0
0%
40%
.16-.22
Fine
4.0-5.7
fa:;::::::::
24
0
24
23%
62%
.22 - .31
Fine
5.7-8.0
::::::fit ::::::
14
0
14
13%
75%
31 - .44
Medium
8.0 - 11.3
:
14
0
14
13%
89%
.44-.63
Medium
11.3 - 16.0
Sl:::::
6
0
6
6%
94%
.63-.89
Coarse
16.0-22.6
::::::: E~::::::::::
2
0
2
2%
96%
.89-1.26
Coarse
22.6-32.0
::::::L::::::
0
0
0
0%
96%
1.26 - 1.77
Very Coarse
32.0-45.0
::::::::::::::
0
0
0
0%
96%
1.77 -2.5
1 Very Coarse
45.0-64.0
10%
0
0
1 0
0%
96%
2.5-3.5
Small
64-90
100000
2
0
2
2%
98%
3.5-5.0
Small
90-128
0::::::
2
0
2
2%
100%
5.0-7.1
Large
128-180
8::::::::::
0
0
0
0%
100%
7.1 - 10.1
Large
180-256
< L::::`
0
0
0
0%
100%
10.1 - 14.3
Small
256-362
f::::::`:::
0
0
0
0%
100%
14.3-20
Small
362-512
l ::::::
0
0
0
0%
100%
20-40
Medium
512-1024
:::::::::#?::::::::
0
0
0
0%
100%
40-80
Lr - Very Lrq
1024 - 2048
# `
0
0
0
0%
1 100%
Bedrock
BDPK
0
0
0
0%
100%
Totals 106 0 106 100% 100%
d16 d35 d50 d84 d95
0.1 1.7 4.9 9.9 18.1
Bed Particle Size Distribution
Cross Section 2: Riffle
100%
90%
80%
70%
—a MY -01
60%
—0 MY -02
— A MY -03
50%
"(
x MY -04
F
40
—0--my-05
30%
LL
y2
20%
10%
0%
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
100000
Particle Size - Millimeter

PAftrome Roach(es) Data
iiiiiimiiimmmmmmiiimmommm
iMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
iMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
iMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
iMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
TMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
iMmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
mmmmmm
commmmm
MMM=M=
omoomm
mmmmmm
mmmmmm
mmmmmm
Timm
Timm

Table 10b Baseline Stream Data Summary
(450 feet)
Data
.:
Monitoring Baseline
•
�0m0
®00��0
®0�0�000�
®��0�0
Sb,dd cem nde.0 tdt d— adtyp,, gym t be Lees n
1 ibe d•eLmneu Wr Uw..p.nmaeo ..e mlde vfn m.tne ham both thecm.w emo.tmey..d the bv.mdmlpofb Z -For popcu u.h. poeem IIBOS Po¢e nits Mhub pm�cst mch (.ddd b.vklW et(c.mn rmey
3 Uh.te.mwyd.upodw e.1mYe ofLI bmk&I(b,dpbn.m.,,cm..hch.houN be them. fiemthe upofb.oluthe u. oftheum.e neA.bp
- Pmponueofmach.eh•..teb.ek. th.tememdrybe.edoothe�vuelem+ f ... mpar wm —mgdeu SOfvekr/mded —kfd. n.—&3
Mary s Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 41 March 2012

Table 11 a MonrEonng Data - Dlrnenmlonal Morphology Slarrrrary_�I Parame6ers —Cross Sections)
ftway s Creek 241 - Main Channel 1632
Cross Seaton 1 (Pod)
Crows Secdw 2 (Rft11B)
(;roes Sectli n 3 ( M
races Section 4 (fMft)
ai�flxee4�ese�lria`baifldtit( oB °4�-Jl
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY-
Bess
MY1
MY2
MY3
I MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
I MY21
M13
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
risoordeleWAM(daharl um4
147
505.9
5M8
5062
505L9
505.9
118
112
50&3
505.2
5055
5063
5053
Floodprone Width (ft)
36
N4
NA
5021
5043
5043
36
N4
500.5
500.4
5045
5044
Baid9Wdh
1 1
18L.3
18
18.2
1795
1814
8
28.6
2419
2474
1684
1484
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
N4
25.22
2&63
24.92
24.92
145
M
2128
23.28
2497
2497
136
rmo*rCe Wdh (R
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
64
54
54
54
54
6 875
54
54
54
54
54
6 373
N4
8180
88,05
62
62
102
1384
N4
81 77
8445
82
82
14
Ber*Ul Meat Depth (R
15
1 361
1 299
1 337
1349
4 125
3 691
1
1 061
1 127
1255
1 266
3 564
3 392
M
490.5
Q%1
0 %
a%
0 966
0 977
N4
1 381
146
1 906
1 936
0 794
am*fdl Mar Depth
0 735
28
277
27
287
293
1032
22
221
2425
244
244
5408
N4
2055
225
232
232
NA
NA
N4
247
258
292
292
018
BaiaillCM ssedrons!Area
1 38
273
2449
22-92
24
24481
2 &8
12141
2787
2131
213
N4
23,57
2559
2386
23651
N4
29.4
33,78
4&35148.351
eark 1 V*RhDepth
123
1371
1446
1343
1345
26.6
1904
219B
13L32113.321
N4
12&98
2771
26.25
25.251
M
15.4
1808
129
129
Bald A Entrenchment
295
3001
2956
3.008
2977
2
2675
2183
3208
3206
Nat
3307
329
329
N4
3.843
3.628
3,264
a284
Bal" Bari iFk
1
1
1
1 098
1085
1
Q873
0915
Q918
Q918
N4
09M
0.S32
0.832
N4
1
1
0.925
4925
Cross Secbcrd Ame betmerr e d pre ("
35.79
3 &69
61 85
61 85
g&2417
1739
17&9
2822
2822
d50(MTI
N4
M
N4
N4
N4
0.23
2175
477
8.9
16
N4
N4
N4
N4
N4
507
173
123
18
1 = Wdtm and depfm for rrrorrrlodrg resuveyW it be based an to bmehne bariMA datum regatdass ol drtrarrsrormYdeposrdortal dwhopmerf. Input fie dewSon used as fie d*m afNdr shoM be consistent and based on to baseline datum established. Ito perkmra has
INrenEad to protect and�nd eng refredetranusedforprioryeastmmuat bedscussed NrtlEW Iffis gnat be resdred in fine for a gnaw yeas report submasran a footnote in fife shorld be irduded amt elates nrsuroafanrftremautonngdabunhasbom ..stard
aertmnwrdonrghmhory Muchmayintuenae®Ialeted%aiues AddhmWdat afomapriorpafamarsbergaccp to prwde confirnmakri, Xftjes w0 be recawated in a forte submission based meaonsister datum ddetermined to be necessary.
Table 11a. Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters — Cross
Sections) Mar 's Creek 241 -Tributary 450 feet
Cross Section 1 (Pool)
Cross Section 2 (Riffle)
Base�'�yCe dabs' setinelbait <t(ftilkel_e,�ftloli� � �- ---�, , r
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Base
MY1
I MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY+
Record elevation (datum) used
5062
5062
5062
5062
5062
5062
5067
5058
1
5059
5059
5057
5057
Bankfull Width (ft)
151
147
1339
1276
8 727
9 754
118
112
122
1202
101
1061
Floodprone Width (ft)
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1 1
09
0 845
074
09
0 705
8
08
0 728
0 617
07
06
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
21
1 8
181
147
1 8
145
14
14
13
1 385
14
136
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
172
13
11 32
9 443
74
6 875
10
88
8 881
7 421
73
6 373
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
133
165
1585
1724
102
1384
139
143
1676
1947
14
1768
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
24
26882821
4 125
3 691
32
2 951
2 995
3 564
3 392
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1
1
0 966
0 977
0 897
1
1
0 794
1 032
0 735
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ft2)
1032
1036
5408
5367
d50 (mm)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
18
018
14
1 38
1 49
Mary s Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
42
Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012

Mary s Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 43 March 2012
=417 Kr 1
Paltem datavAll riottypically becolleclac! Wass visual data dimensional data orprofiledida
iridicedesigrificaritshftfmmbasdne
i---------------
-..----.
« < r'1•
/ 11(:
1 II:Y
I /IG•
1 /1.
1 11.
1 II:G
1 II:G.
Mary s Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 43 March 2012

ExhitiftTablellb Monitoring Data Data , feeQ
-.
..:,
lliiilloillliollliiolillioliilioiill
:.
iiillllmilllimlllllmlllli�llilimilil
:: , • ., ,!!!!!
!!milli!
®ililimlilli�llliimilii
., .:.., •:..
illllilllllll�lllll�lllll0llll!
®ilia
•
iililimi
©
©li
©l
®mll
©im0ii
®�
®�
®m�
®
®
®m�
iiiiii
11
l
l l
11I
llni
11I
I1[
ilnl
11
I IL
ll
11
I IL
11
I1:
11
m
11
11I
11/
I IC
11
•l
illili
®lmollmlmoli
©l
®
®ll�
®
®mmm����m�
•
illiliillllliiilllilllllmmm
®mmm�����
.•
illili
®lomllolomli
®looll��mm�m
®
©
®���
• lliiill�IliA
!lii�ll�li�liii�sl_�-��iill�i�!
, .:.
lip rT!
1 11[
1 11
1 11
1 11
1 11 :Y
1 IIR
1 11:
1 11.
1 11[
1 IIL
iiiiiillllli
®l
®lll
©l
®ill
©l
®lll
®i
®iii
::'.
iiiiiilililio�000momm000mmmmoom�momm
. .. . ._ . . ...
_____
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number 241 Year 5 of 5
The Catena Group 44 March 2012

rl
a
+L
Appendix E. Stream Assessment Data
Mary s Creek Stream Restoration Year 5 Monitoring Report-FINAL
NCEEP Project number 241 Year 5 of 5
_ t The Catena Group 45 March 2012

Table 12 Verification of Bankful Events
Mary's Creek EP #241
Date of Data Collection
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo #
Late 2005/Early 2006
Late 2005/Early 2006
Visual during
construction
N/A
September 18, 2008
September 7, 2008
Wrack lines
N/A
July 24 2009
Unsure June 6 2009
Crest Gauge
N/A
June 15, 2010
May 17, 2010 (3 3" rain
event )
Wrack lines/Crest Gauge
N/A
August 30, 2011
Unknown
Wrack lines
N/A
Mary's Creek Stream Restoration
NCEEP Project number 241
The Catena Group
46
Year 5 Monitoring Report -FINAL
Year 5 of 5
March 2012