20040722 Ver 1_Monitoring Report Year 5_20091218

I 1:
ELK SHOALS STREAM RESTORATION SITE
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT FOR 2009 (YEAR 5)
CONTRACT NUMBER AW03003 -B
Prepared For:
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 203
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
iPre ared By:
i elm
� � d6tlolhd�71NF
1b= W�A6b�
fi[e10A61E1m
December 2009
O
CP
0i

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
SUMMARY .......................................................................................... ..............................1
2.0
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... ............................... 3
2.1
Project Description ............................................................................ ............................... 3
2.2
Purpose .............................................................................................. ...............................
3
2.3
Project History ................................................................................... ...............................
4
3.0
STREAM MONITORING ............................................................... ...............................
10
3.1
Description of Stream Monitoring ..:.......:...........................:............ ...............................
10
3.2
Stream Restoration Success Criteria ............................................... ..............................:
10
3.3
Results of Stream Monitoring ......................................................... ...............................
11
4.0
VEGETATION MONITORING ..................................................... ...............................
14
4.1
Description of Vegetation Monitoring ............................................ ...............................
14
4.2
Vegetation Success Criteria ............................................................ ...............................
15
4.3
Results of Vegetative Monitoring ................................................... ...............................
15
4.4
Vegetation Observations ................................................................. ...............................
15
4.5
Vegetative Conclusions ......................:............................................ ...............................
16
4.5.1 Climatic Data ........................................................................... ...............................
16
5.0
PROJECT MAINTENANCE ............................................................ ............................... 9
5.1
Kudzu Control ................................................................................... ...............................
9
5.2
Beaver Activity ................................................................................. ...............................
9
5.3
Stream Maintenance .......................................................................... ...............................
9
6.0
OVERALL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .......................... ...............................
10

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site ................:........ ............................... 5
Figure 2. As -built Figures for the Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site ... ............................... 6 -9
Figure 3. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2009 Observed Rainfall ..................... 16
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Background Information ............................................................... ............................... 2
Table 2. Summary of As -built Lengths and Restoration Approaches ......... ............................... 3
Table 3. Tree Species Planted in the Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site ............................... 13
Table 4. 2009 (Year 5) Vegetation Monitoring Plot Species Composition ............................. 14
Table 5. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2009 Observed Rainfall (Inches)........ 16
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. Photo Log
APPENDIX B. Stream Monitoring Data

' r
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2009 ()(EAR 5)
Elk Shoals' Stream Restoration Site
1.0 SUMMARY
This Year 5 Annual Report describes the monitoring activities during the 2009 growing season at
the Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site (Site) and summarizes data and activities during the five -
year monitoring period (2005- 2009). Construction of the Site, including planting of trees, was
completed in April 2005. The 2009 data represent results from the fifth year of stream and
vegetation monitoring.
The design for the Elk Shoals project involved the restoration of channel dimension, pattern, and
profile on Elk Shoals Creek and two of its unnamed tributaries (UTs). After construction was
complete, 5,376 linear feet (LF) of stream had -been restored and enhanced on the Site.
This Annual Report presents the data from 3 vegetation monitoring stations, 21 photo point
stations, 1 crest gauge and 10 cross - sections. The cross - sections are of Elk Shoals Creek and two
UTs, as described in the approved Restoration Plan for the Site. Photos were taken of cross -
sections and at in- stream structures.
Year 5 vegetation monitoring indicated a range of survivability between 421 and 596 stems per
acre. Following Year 5 of monitoring the vegetation plots showed an average survivability of
514 stems per acre. Seeded herbaceous vegetation has also thrived onsite during each year of
monitoring and has provided adequate ground cover during all growing seasons. -It is concluded
that all three vegetation plots on the Site have met the final success criteria of 260 stems per acre
after Year 5.
Part of the monitoring effort for this project includes observation of the project's response to local
climatic conditions. Weather data from the Statesville Weather Station (ULAN: 14362, COOP:
318292) were used to document precipitation. Historical average rainfall totals were compared to
the 2009 observed rainfall totals. For 2009, total rainfall observed at the weather station between
the months of April and October was 39.68 inches, compared to the long -term average of 38.96
inches for the same period. Monthly precipitation values were close to normal averages for'April,
August, and October and varied from above average to below average values for the other months
of the growing season, with the total growing season rainfall being 0.72 inches above normal.
The on -site crest gauge documented the occurrence of at least one bankfull flow event during the
Year 5 monitoring period. It is noted that the onsite crest gauge recorded bankfull flow events
during every year of monitoring. The highest onsite crest gauge recordings observed are as
follows: Year 1 (0.80 feet), Year 2 (0.94 feet), Year 3 (1.8 feet), Year 4 ( >4.0 feet) and Year 5
(1.64 feet). Therefore, it is concluded that the onsite crest gauge has met the final success criteria
of two bankfull flow events in separate years.
Year 5.cross- section monitoring data and longitudinal monitoring data for. stream stability were
collected during November 2009. The riffle and pool cross - sections show that there has been
some adjustment to stream dimension since construction. The longitudinal profiles show that
there have been adjustments and fluctuatiohs4o the restored stream channel since as- built,
conditions.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 1

,y
Visual observations of all structures for the Year 5 monitoring season revealed that structures and
stream features are functioning as designed., However, two repairs, were completed during Year 5
and following re- construction, the repairs were functioning properly.
During Year 5, approximately '' /z acre of kudzu (Pueraria montana.).was treated at the Site. This
was a follow -up to treatment of the same area made in 2007 and 2008.
Table 1. Background Information.
Project Name
Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site
Primary Contractor
Restoration Systems, LLC
1001 Haynes Street, Suite 203, Raleigh, NC 27604
(919) 755 -9490
Designer
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200, Cary, NC, 27518
(919) 463 -5488
Construction Contractor
River Works, Inc.
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200, Cary, NC, 27518
(919) 459 -9001
Project County
Alexander County
Directions to Project Site
From Raleigh, follow I -40 west to exit 144 (Old
Mountain Rd.). Head north on Old Mountain Rd to Old
Concord Church Rd. Turn left on Old Concord Church
Rd., Site entrance is on the right after crossing Elk
Shoals Creek.
Drainage Area
Elk Shoals Creek = 4.6 square miles
UT1 = 0.38 square miles
UT2 = 0.5 square miles
USGS Cataloging Unit
03050101
NCDWQ Sub -basin
03 -08 -32
Project Length
5,376 LF (Restoration and Enhancement Level I)
Restoration Approach
Restore and enhance channel dimension, pattern and •
profile to three separate stream reaches (As -built stream
restoration units = 5,1.88)
Date of Completion*
April 2005
Monitoring Dates
2005 -2009,
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5
2

2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Project Description
The Site is located near the town of Stony Point in Alexander County within the Piedmont
physiographic province of North Carolina (Figure 1). The Site lies in US Geological Survey
(USGS) Cataloging Unit 03050101 and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ)
sub -basin 03 -08 -32 of the Catawba River Basin. Environmental components monitored in this
project are those that allow an evaluation of channel stability and survivability of riparian
vegetation. The design for the restored streams involved the construction of stable meandering
channels for the purpose of improving water quality and wildlife habitat.
The stream systems that historically flowed through the Site were degraded by past land
management practices including land'clearing, straightening and ditching of streams; row crop
production (corn and soybeans), and livestock production. The streams on the Site were
channelized, and riparian vegetation was cleared in most locations to increase arable acreage and
improve drainage for agricultural purposes. Stream and riparian functions on the Site had been
severely impacted as a result of agricultural conversion.
The project involved the restoration and enhancement of 5,376 LF of channelized stream on Elk
Shoals Creek and 2 UTs. Table 2 shows the as -built lengths and restoration type per reach. The
as -built plans presented in Figure 2 illustrate the construction and planting that were completed
for this project in April 2005.
Table 2. Summary of As -built Lengths and Restoration Approaches.
Reach Name
As -built Length (LF)
Mitigation Units
Restoration Approach
Elk Shoals Creek
563
375
Enhancement Level I
Elk Shoals Creek
3,531
3,531
Restoration
UTl
613
613
Restoration
UT2
669
669
Restoration_
Total
5,376
5,1 -88
2.2 Purpose
Monitoring of the Elk Shoals Site is required to demonstrate successful stream restoration based
on the criteria described in the approved Restoration Plan for this Site. Vegetation and stream
stability monitoring were conducted on an annual basis. Success criteria for this site must be met
for five consecutive years. This'Annual Report details the results of the monitoring efforts
performed during 2009 (Year 5) at the Elk Shoals Site.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5
3

2.3 Project History
October 2004
April 2005
April 2005
December 2005
March 2006
June 2006
December 2006
November 2007
November 2008
December 2009
Approved Mitigation Plan
Construction Completed
Planting Completed
1 st Annual Monitoring Report
Supplemental Planting
Channel Repair Work
2nd Annual Monitoring Report
3rd Annual Monitoring Report
4th Annual Monitoring Report
5th Annual Monitoring Report
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 4

Figure 1. Location of Elk Shoals Stream Restoration Site.
f
vna R',
q \., "� I
Mclale d
L /
t a I jSsf11 owl
-1
Rd
Project Area
1 b Im Rd Qa rr 9+
6
t�d
xFtd It — �TJ ~` L
�5 - ,�tr1 R� Rd �
lgJ�jl -- • Qa
IF qd� f�daey �.. alab
oa 4 3@ j
5 ix Apt
+C a rrm 101
1
Jy 3� rrI� �
811 b
• a _may l
Figure 1.1. Project Vicinity Map
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 203
Raleigh, NC 27604
0 0.5 1 2
Miles
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 5

W
i-
M i
z
F�1
j
O
U
W
�zl
N
Q
U
qU
O
U
14
o a
w
O
N
w0
U � 0.W,
N L
1
H Z
O
° R0 \ U_
pro �s
O
U 1n a
O Ny
�0
2
ofY
Y
W
a
_
0
U
O 66
O
N ox
-
O
W
W
o�
N N
O
2
z
U
R
23
O
-
Up
IN
O
0
z=
U o
c
=W
_�
_yW
O
U 1n a
O Ny
�0
2
ofY
Y
W
a
_
0
U
O 66
O
N ox
-
4 � -
LU
o�
N N
y
LL
-
IN
O
0
z=
U o
c
=W
U
o
v
wF
4 � -
LU
LU
y
LL
U-
0
N
R
U
o
v
M
M_
N
O
m
�
I�
W
It
M
II
11
If
II
O
F
F=-
4
LLI
9L
z
w
F-
J
qJ
y
W
J
z
Z
Q
Z
�
m
LU
L
co
Q
XNX
w
8
VVV
O
h
Z
5
�
O
c�
"
O
)gfo4ycf

K
w
z
Z U
F D mF
g WNwx
p o
6 m
wt`
m qq
�•UW W` mW
x
0 d �Q
OD
Q
2
1
N
W
w
D
0
LL
8
£n
m� 8
pU
90 1.11
V
M�
O
0
O
0
0
H
co
D
m
W
a
z
z
R
0 LLI n Jff1oW
W S 1111JJ
1=O~ WzdQ?
U uz � J
UO+10� JUWOw
w"'S ESaa
d =L,Wwwwmo
0 CL
0 O C) iL it
CL a I- mFILz
d
z
O
x
/1 1
7`
Ok
O�
Z u
as
op
o
io
aL)
H
O
z
rc
O
f
z
O
rn
ol �
gar -
m
CD M
M
ED =�U
z
Zj
h w
i ¢
2tt aU
oa ¢ N' om
z
r2 II 30
25 1'Q .- Li �5
o $o
do
aU
w
0
f
/
I
1\
W
U
Z
oW
J
U) W
J Ill
W 1'd'
z C
S
Q
U =
F-
uioa
IS
z U) Q
Q
CD
+ Z
U)
j~O
~ CO Cl)
Z
O
QC)U
ZY❑
Z J Z
D W W
O H
H
� N
=U
c?
JLD
W
W m
-sa-MI,
O
W
C
h
N
N
iii
'.'.q i
N!..
III1
\ °
1gII1N1\
\ €
e 110
41 1 I \
g
\
•I) \ \
1 1 1 1
C7 ice-
<
z2d
NXF
/°
\yr \ \-„
. .,
.
1 1
1 \ 1111
m
pppp
\
/L
/ tW W
s� \
\ \
m
N 4
\
W
\
II t
2
0.
\ \ \
I
I
0�
Jl
Om
\
f
/
I
� S
/
1
1
/
/ �u!
/ �
m
SSS tttTTT
Fa
tmi
= >F
0 LLI n Jff1oW
W S 1111JJ
1=O~ WzdQ?
U uz � J
UO+10� JUWOw
w"'S ESaa
d =L,Wwwwmo
0 CL
0 O C) iL it
CL a I- mFILz
d
z
O
x
/1 1
7`
Ok
O�
Z u
as
op
o
io
aL)
H
O
z
rc
O
f
z
O
rn
ol �
gar -
m
CD M
M
ED =�U
z
Zj
h w
i ¢
2tt aU
oa ¢ N' om
z
r2 II 30
25 1'Q .- Li �5
o $o
do
aU
w
0
f
/
I
1\
W
U
Z
oW
J
U) W
J Ill
W 1'd'
z C
S
Q
U =
F-
uioa
IS
z U) Q
Q
CD
+ Z
U)
j~O
~ CO Cl)
Z
O
QC)U
ZY❑
Z J Z
D W W
O H
H
� N
=U
c?
JLD
W
W m
-sa-MI,
O
W
C
h
N
N
iii

co
N
w
LL
f
titim tea-, _ �t�
\ N m W
1
8
\\
1
\
y W
1
N
_:a
z
u
u°
w o
<
O
W
m�
OW
R
_m
�_
�a
O
WF
2
�Om
ci'gry
�F<
Y
m _
co
N
w
LL
f
titim tea-, _ �t�
\ N m W
NS �N`�N�ydW
9 f Uil i
i
o\
\
\ i
i
\ =�Tj
Sm
\� ; ID
Ott .$ Q
oa i
f
f OU
mo
aU
o�
® ma
0
V= 00
F
LL 6z
F- FD a0
1�
!J
,tl � � •,,li i`I , �,,�,.11
I�tl 'i1
\ 1
N
to y?
mW
� � i� 1'i 1 '•i
f 1a1,
f
1 it 11 VIII;
lilt
VZe li''' •ii .I
CD
\ a
W
08 1 � LU
r
10
W
I i
00 00+'VZ b.S �' II
,1
sa
W
1
\i
\\
1
\
y W
1
N
z
0
g
O
1
R
�a
z
MD
RE
U
0
1
z
i
11 qp.
d
3
N
aD
1
\� N
1
1
1
1
N
1
1
1
t
m
I.
1
1
1
'
fl
1
t ,
1
Q
=LL W
o�
.9
'1
f
o f
av �
i
f
ULOU cn 'C")v
U- co
I
0Wwa0ao
a.
f
W'V -47N�
W W N
m
1
tv
`
a-
=J~'m mm
,
W0.
I
wNOOO
W
1
t
�?
t
t
�
1
1
1
i
\
\
N
C
\
\9
PB
\
m
NS �N`�N�ydW
9 f Uil i
i
o\
\
\ i
i
\ =�Tj
Sm
\� ; ID
Ott .$ Q
oa i
f
f OU
mo
aU
o�
® ma
0
V= 00
F
LL 6z
F- FD a0
1�
!J
,tl � � •,,li i`I , �,,�,.11
I�tl 'i1
\ 1
N
to y?
mW
� � i� 1'i 1 '•i
f 1a1,
f
1 it 11 VIII;
lilt
VZe li''' •ii .I
CD
\ a
W
08 1 � LU
r
10
W
I i
00 00+'VZ b.S �' II
,1
sa
W
Q
U
D
Z
OW
U�
y W
J W
W MW
Z >
Q
2
U
WF
y
0 2
z fA Q
L. rn
co
g CD
0v -jaaa
W a.W NNM
o_
z-j -mrmro
a-
4 °d- sa- eue\- -ld\u6
0
0
\\
N
y W
1
N
z
0
g
O
R
�a
z
MD
RE
U
Q
U
D
Z
OW
U�
y W
J W
W MW
Z >
Q
2
U
WF
y
0 2
z fA Q
L. rn
co
g CD
0v -jaaa
W a.W NNM
o_
z-j -mrmro
a-
4 °d- sa- eue\- -ld\u6

W W
0
i i
w U
W
m
U F Z
W
�jY��m 3 ow
�o
S
�nSg
f �
gt
�U6
2
V�
Y
Y
U
1
N
W
V
LL
\\ \\ \\\sfe
a
I OP \ �\ \cam\ \
I I I \ \ \
I I a I I \ \
I I I I I i� I 1
1 I I I I 1 1 I i
' t
j I I I j ry a
j rn�� i I i it
I I � Iti I I I
&m 01 I m o
W I
I
I
00 I O I
I Oj N I
I CL 0
I I I I
I a I I I
gz II W..
\
z
O
H
U
D
z
O
U
A
z
LLl_
I \m9 \ \ \ \ \ \ I I
CD 1 \ \ 1 I 1
w
U
D
z
V)
O W
LUF-
U�_
N LL
J W
lil
z
I
O �
;�pGp�poQJ0
j ��OGpC� QQd�
p d�
�6
\ \
m cn
U
m
0
z�¢
W-
p
�a
I 1
x o
U W
w
De
U H o
z � �
1 1
I
I 1
1
"10-
;�pGp�poQJ0
j ��OGpC� QQd�
p d�
�6
\ \
1 I
m
N 1 \
1
I
1 m
I 1
I•I
11
1 1
I
I 1
1
I
V
I
I m
1 \ \
D
0
1
\ \
m 1
\ \\
z
\ mwc
W
1
0 \
\ \
u
1
01
\ \
1
\
1
1
maw
m
g i
;c \
a \ gam\
- ad- 4sd- s8-C/j0\
_J
M2!
d03
— d03
O
o
c
� lL
LLI
8
O N
in
N
h
M

3.0 STREAM MONITORING
3.1 Description of Stream Monitoring
To document the stated success criteria, the following monitoring program was instituted
following construction completion on the Elk Shoals Creek Restoration Site:
Bankfudl Events: A crest gauge was installed on the Site to document bankfull events. The
gauge is checked during yearly site visits, and records the highest out -of -bank flow event that
occurs during the year. The gauge is located at stream station 47 +00, near permanent cross -
section 10 (see Figure 2 -C).
Cross - Sections: As per the design criteria, 2 permanent cross - sections were installed per 2,000
LF of stream restoration work, with 1 of the locations being a riffle cross - section and 1 location
being a pool cross - section. A total of 10 permanent cross - sections were established on the Site, 6
on Elk Shoals Creek, 2 on UT1, and 2 on UT2. Each cross - section was marked on both banks
with permanent pins to establish the exact transect used. Permanent cross - section pins were
surveyed and located relative to a common benchmark to facilitate easy comparison of year -to-
year data. The annual cross - section surveys include points measured at all breaks in slope,
including top of bank, bankfull, inner berm, edge of water, and thalweg. Riffle cross - sections are
classified using the Rosgen stream classification system.
Longitudinal Profiles: A complete longitudinal profile was surveyed following construction
completion to record as -built conditions. For monitoring years 1, 3, and 5 the longitudinal
profile will be surveyed for at least 1,000 LF of the restored channel on Elk Shoals Creek, which
shall include a 500 -foot reach of the restored channel near the upstream section of the project and
another 500 -foot reach measured downstream. Measurements will include thalweg, water
surface, bankfull, and top of low bank. Each of these measurements will be taken at the head of
each feature (e.g., riffle, pool, and glide). In addition, maximum pool depth will be recorded.
All surveys will be tied to a single permanent benchmark.
Photo Reference Stations: Photographs are used to visually document restoration success. A
total of 21 photo reference stations were established to document conditions at the constructed
grade control structures across the Elk Shoals Creek Site, and additional photo stations were
established at each of the 10 permanent cross - sections. The GPS coordinates of each photo
station have been noted as additional references to ensure the same photo location is used
throughout the monitoring period. Reference photos are taken at least once per year.
Both stream banks are photographed at each permanent cross - section photo station. For each
stream bank photo, the photograph is framed so that the survey tape is centered in the photo
(appears as a vertical line at the center of the photograph), keeping the channel water surface line
horizontal and near the lower edge of the frame, to include as much of the photographed bank as
possible in the photo. A photo log of structures and photographs taken at the permanent cross -
sections at the Elk Shoals Creek Site is included in Appendix A of this report.
3.2 Stream Restoration Success Criteria
The approved Restoration Plan requires the following criteria be met to achieve stream
restoration success:
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 10

Bankfudl Events: Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the five -year
monitoring period. The two bankfull events must occur in separate years.
Cross - Sections: There should be little change in the as -built cross - sections. If cross - section
changes are observed, they should be minor changes representing an increase in stability
(e.g., settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth
ratio). Cross - sections shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method and
all monitored cross - sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for
"C4/E4" type channels.
• Longitudinal Profiles: The longitudinal profiles should show that the bedform features are
remaining stable (not aggrading or degrading). The pools should remain deep with flat water
surface slopes and the riffles should remain steeper and shallower than the pools. Bedforms
observed should be consistent with those observed in "C" or "E" type channels.
Photo Reference Stations: Photographs will be used to subjectively evaluate channel
aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation and effectiveness of
erosion control measures. Photos should indicate the absence of developing bars within the
channel, no excessive bank erosion or increase in channel depth over time, and maturation of
riparian vegetation.
3.3 Results of Stream Monitoring
The on -site crest gauge documented the occurrence of at least two bankfull flow events during
the Year 5 monitoring period. An inspection of site conditions during the April and September
visits revealed visual evidence of out -of -bank flow, such as debris and wrack lines, confirming
the crest gauge readings. The largest on -site bankfull flow documented by the crest gauge during
Year 5 of monitoring was in April 2009, and was 1.64 feet above the bankfull stage. Photos of
the April bankfull evidence are located in Appendix A.
The onsite crest gauge recorded bankfull flow events during every year of monitoring. The
highest onsite crest gauge recordings observed are as follows: Year 1 (0.80 feet), Year 2 (0.94
feet), Year 3 (1.8 feet), Year 4 ( >4.0 feet) and Year 5 (1.64 feet).
The longitudinal profile survey was also collected during Year 5 of monitoring and was
completed in November 2009. For this report the Year 5 longitudinal survey data for all reaches
were compared to the longitudinal profiles from the as -built survey and Years 1 and 3 of
monitoring. Longitudinal profile data are included in Appendix B of this report.
The profile for UT1 shows that meander bend pools have decreased in depth while the pools at
cross vanes have deepened. According to the survey data, the riffles on UT 1 have remained
relatively stable. The UT2 Year 5 longitudinal profile demonstrates that the pools within the
meander bends have fluctuated slightly throughout the monitoring period. The pools at the two
cross -vanes on UT2 have also changed overtime, showing a tendency to fill during low rainfall
periods and to scour back out during higher rainfall periods.. The riffles on UT2 have remained
relatively stable and are within the quantitative parameters defined for the restored stream type.
The Year 5 monitoring data for the Elk Shoals Creek profile show that the riffles and pools are
stable upstream of the cross vane at station 16 +20. According to the survey data, the thalweg
downstream of the cross vane at station 16 +20 has aggraded since as -built conditions. This
aggradation has occurred in the section of remnant channel that was restored, upstream of the
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 11

connection with the new section of restored channel that was constructed across the floodplain.
This remnant channel section was lower in elevation than the design, but the design approach
was to allow this section to aggrade over time to reach equilibrium. The in -stream structures in
this section were placed to center the thalweg flows while this process was occurring; therefore,
aggradation around the structures was planned. The thalweg stabilizes back to the as -built
elevation at approximate station 19 +75. From stations 45 +25 to station 50 +93 it was observed
that the channel deepened in some locations due to scour downstream of structures; however, the
channel bed elevation has changed little since the Year 3 data were collected and it appears that
the channel has equilibrated.
Year 5 cross - section monitoring data for stream stability were collected during November 2009
and compared to baseline stream data collected in May 2005 (as -built conditions), Year 1 data
collected in November 2005, Year 2 data collected in September 2006, Year 3 data collected in
August 2007 and Year 4 data collected in August 2008. The ten, permanent cross - sections along
the restored channels (five located across riffles and five located across pools) were re- surveyed
to document stream dimension at the end of monitoring Year 5. Data from each permanent
cross - section are included in Appendix B of this report.
The riffle and pool cross - sections for all monitoring years show that there has been some
adjustment to stream dimension since construction. Cross - sections 1, 4, 6, 7, and 9 are located in
pools found at the apex of meander bends. Cross - sections 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 are located in riffles
before and after pools.
Cross - sections 1 and 2 are located on UT between stations 12 +00 and 15 +00. The dimensions
of pool cross - section 1 have changed significantly throughout the monitoring period. Cross -
section 1 was originally constructed with a bankfull area of 13.4 feet. During Year 5 the cross -
sectional area of the channel has decreased to approximately 2.4 square feet and is now
functioning as a riffle. Riffle cross - section 2 on UT after Year 5 has remained very stable since
as -built conditions. Given that the pool cross - sectional area has decreased and the riffle cross -
section has remained stable, it appears that after Year 5 of monitoring UT is reaching a state of
equilibrium.
UT2 pool and riffle cross sections 7 and 8 respectively, were also compared to the earlier
monitoring survey data. The dimension of pool cross - section 7 changed throughout the
monitoring period to decrease the cross - sectional area. During as -built conditions cross - section
7 showed a bankfull area of 13.7 feet, after Year 5 it was determined to have a channel area of
6.9 feet. Riffle cross - section 8 remained relatively stable throughout the monitoring period; the
apparent shift in the cross - section seen in the Year 5 data was caused by the survey crew needing
to shift around growing woody vegetation along the bank. Since the pool bankfull area has
decreased and the riffle bankfull has remained stable, it appears that after Year 5 of monitoring,
UT2 is also reaching a natural equilibrium. The cross - section data show that UT and UT2 are
experiencing similar year -to -year variability.
Six cross - sections, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 and 10 on Elk Shoals Creek were also re- surveyed in November
2009 and compared to the earlier years of survey data. According to the survey data, for all
years of monitoring, the pool cross - sections (4, 6, and 9) have deepened since as -built conditions
while developing point bar features. Riffle cross - sections 3 and 5 on Elk Shoals Creek have
deepened since as -built conditions, while cross - section 10 has remained relatively stable.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 12

Survey data from all pool cross - sections indicate the continued development of point bar features
on the inside bank of the meander bends. All monitored cross - sections fell within the
quantitative parameters defined for "C" or "E" type channels.
Flow through a meander bend possesses higher conveyance velocity along the outer bank of the
bend, and lower flow velocity along the bend's inner bank. As flow velocity decreases, sediment
transport capacity also declines, causing transported sediment to fall out and settle on the bottom
as it slows down. Point bar formation along the inside of a meander bend indicates flow velocity
vectors occurring as designed, and is therefore expected.
In- stream structures installed within the restored stream included constructed riffles, rock cross
vanes, rock j -hooks and vanes, log bank toe protection, and root wads. A constructed riffle and
three rock cross vanes were installed on the lower end of the project to step down the elevation
of the restored stream bed to match the existing channel invert at the outlet of the project. Two
cross vanes were repaired in June 2006 after minor piping or head cuts were noted upstream.
Visual observations of all structures during Year 4 and 5 of monitoring revealed that the cross
vane at station 49 +50 exhibited minor piping occurring on the left bank. The cross -vane piping
has remained stable since Year 4. The ephemeral step pool sequence located just upstream of
Old Concord Church Road along the N.C. Department of Transportation (DOT) right -of -way
experienced erosion on the left bank and a large headcut had formed in this area. These two
areas were repaired during Year 5 of monitoring. Details of these and other repairs are presented
in Section 5.3
Rock vanes and J -hooks placed in meander pool areas have provided scour to keep pools deep
and provide cover for fish. Cross vanes placed in riffle areas have maintained riffle elevations
and provided a downstream scour hole that provides habitat. Root wads and brush layers placed
on the outside of meander bends have provided bank stability and in- stream cover for fish and
other aquatic organisms.
Photographs of the channel were taken during the Year 5 monitoring season to document the
evolution of the restored stream geometry (see Appendix A and B).
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 13

4.0 VEGETATION MONITORING
4.1 Description of Vegetation Monitoring
At the completion of construction activities, stream margins and riparian areas of the Site were
planted with bare root trees, live stakes, and a permanent herbaceous seed mixture. The woody
vegetation was planted randomly six to eight feet apart from the top of the stream banks to the
outer edge of the project's re- vegetation limits at a density of 680 stems per acre. The tree
species planted at the Site are shown in Table 3. The seed mix of herbaceous species applied to
the project's riparian area included Soft rush (Juncos ejfusus), Joe - pie -weed (Eupatorium
maculatum), Wool grass (Scirupus cyperinus), Fringe sedge (Carex crinata), River Oats (Uniola
latifolia), and Cardinal flower (Lobelia cardinalis). This seed mixture was broadcast on the Site
at a rate of 21 pounds per acre. All planting was completed in April 2005.
Table 3. Tree Species Planted in the Elk Shoals Restoration Area.
ID Number
Scientific Name
Common Name
FAC Status
1
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
FACW-
2
Quercits phellos
Willow Oak
FACW-
3
Quercus rubra
Northern Red Oak
FACU
4
Quercus alba
White Oak
FACU
5
Betzda ni ra
River Birch
FACW
6
Diospyros vir iniana
Persimmon
FAC
7
Hamamelis vir iniana
Witch Hazel
FACU
8
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
FACW
9
Liriodendron tuli i era
Tulip Poplar
FAC
10
Quercusfialcata
Southern Red Oak
FACU-
*11
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut
FACW
*12
Quercus vir iniana
Live Oak
FACU
*13
Quercus shumardii
Shumard Oak
FAC
*September 2006 after supplemental planting conducted by River Works, Inc *
At the time of planting, three vegetation plots, labeled M1, M2, and M3, were established on -site
to monitor survival of the planted woody vegetation. Each vegetation plot is 0.057 acre in size
or 25 feet x 100 feet dimensionally. Plot delineation involved using metal fence posts at each of
the four corners to clearly and permanently establish the area that was to be sampled. Then ropes
were hung connecting all four corners to help in determining if trees close to the plot boundary
were inside or outside of the plot. Trees on the boundary and trees just outside of the boundary
that appear to have greater than 50 percent of their canopy inside the boundary were counted
inside the plot. All of the planted stems inside the plot were flagged to distinguish them from
any colonizing individuals and to facilitate locating them in the future.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 14

4.2 Vegetation Success Criteria
To determine vegetation success criteria objectively, specific goals for woody vegetation density
have been defined. Data from vegetation monitoring plots should display a surviving tree
density of at least 320 trees per acre at the end of Year 3 monitoring, and a surviving tree density
of at least 260 trees per acre at the end of the 5 -year monitoring period. Although the selected
native canopy species planted throughout the Site are the target woody vegetation cover, up to 20
percent of the Site's established woody vegetation at the end of the monitoring period may be
comprised of volunteer species.
4.3 Results of Vegetative Monitoring
Table 4 presents stem counts of surviving individuals found at each of the monitoring stations at
the end of Year 5. Each planted tree species is identified across the top row, and each plot is
identified down the left column. The numbers on the top row correlate to the ID column of
Table 3. Trees within each monitoring plot are flagged regularly to prevent the occurrence of
unmarked trees due to flag degradation. It is important for trees within the monitoring plots to
remain marked to ensure they are all accounted for during the annual stem counts and calculation
of tree survivability. Volunteer individuals found within the plots are also flagged during this
process. Flags are used to tag trees because they do not interfere with the growth of the tree.
Table 4. 2009 (Year 5) Vegetation Monitoring Plot Species Composition.
*September 2006 after supplemental planting conducted by River Works, Inc *
4.4 Vegetation Observations
All of the herbaceous species seeded throughout the Site after construction (see Section 4.1 of
this report) were found on -site at the end of the Year 5 monitoring period. In addition, Switch
grass (Panicum virgatum) and Deer tongue (Panicum clandestinum) were observed throughout
the Site. Microstegium (Microstegium vimineum), a non - native grass, was also noted within the
riparian area.
Two invasive species plants were present on the Site following Year 5 monitoring. The plant
kudzu (Pueraria montana.) was noted on the Site within the conservation easement at the
permanent stream crossing and within vegetation plot M2. The kudzu within vegetation plot M2
has started to take over several five -year old planted stems within the plot boundaries. Chinese
privet plants (Ligustrum sinense) were noted within vegetation plot M1 following Year 5
monitoring.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 15
•
eeeeeee
:
e�
®
®®
• .
®
•
©
}sk3
U1
1 .
s,�.^t,!;.'
mE
Y 'h. iW
�L �* 17:.
� .d"l��i.,
� r +. s2iv
�
•
Mon
Es
-100®r.77,-E
Average
I
L
Stems/acre
*September 2006 after supplemental planting conducted by River Works, Inc *
4.4 Vegetation Observations
All of the herbaceous species seeded throughout the Site after construction (see Section 4.1 of
this report) were found on -site at the end of the Year 5 monitoring period. In addition, Switch
grass (Panicum virgatum) and Deer tongue (Panicum clandestinum) were observed throughout
the Site. Microstegium (Microstegium vimineum), a non - native grass, was also noted within the
riparian area.
Two invasive species plants were present on the Site following Year 5 monitoring. The plant
kudzu (Pueraria montana.) was noted on the Site within the conservation easement at the
permanent stream crossing and within vegetation plot M2. The kudzu within vegetation plot M2
has started to take over several five -year old planted stems within the plot boundaries. Chinese
privet plants (Ligustrum sinense) were noted within vegetation plot M1 following Year 5
monitoring.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 15

4.5 Vegetative Conclusions
The survival of woody vegetation at all 3 vegetation monitoring plots was notably low at the end
of 2005. This low survival rate of planted trees was attributed to late planting (April 2005)
combined with drier than average conditions throughout the growing season.
The initial low survivability of woody vegetation suggested the Site may not meet the minimum
success criteria established as goal at the end of Year 3 monitoring. To increase the density of
successfully established trees at the Site, supplemental planting of woody vegetation took place
during March 2006. The entire Site was planted with 50 percent of the original plantings, or
2,200 additional trees.
At the end of Year 5 monitoring, the density of the 3 vegetation plots ranged from 421 to 596
stems /acre and had an average survivability of 514 stems /acre, as shown in Table 4. Following
Year 5 vegetation monitoring, it was determined that the Site has met the final success criteria of
260 stems per acre after Year 5. Photographs of the vegetation plots are presented in Appendix
B.
4.5.1 Climatic Data
Table 5 and Figure 3 show a comparison of the 2009 monthly rainfall to historical precipitation
(WETS table for Iredell County, collected between 1971 and 2000) for the project area. Historic
climate information for Alexander County is not readily available; therefore, data from Iredell
County were used due to its proximity to the Site. Weather data from the Statesville Weather
Station (UCAN: 14362, COOP: 318292) were used to document precipitation for the monitoring
year. Historical average rainfall totals were compared to the 2009 observed rainfall totals. For
2009, total rainfall observed at the weather station between the months of January and November
was 46.01 inches, compared to the long -term average of 42.26 inches for the same period.
Monthly precipitation values were close to normal averages for April, August, and October and
varied from above average to below average values for the other months of the growing season,
with the total growing season rainfall being 3.75 inches above historic average.
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 16

Table 5. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2009 Observed Rainfall (Inches).
Month
Average
30%
70%
Observed Precipitation,
P (in)
Month
P
January
3.83
2.65
4.74
January 2009
2.75
February
3.48
2.53
4.22
February 2009
1.46
March
4.4
3.13
5.19
March 2009
5.16
April
3.42
2.13
4.53
April 2009
3.30
May
4.15
2.67
5.00
May 2009
7.96
June
4.49
2.99
5.39
June 2009
6.94
July
3.95
2.57
4.95
July 2009
1.70
August
3.72
2.59
4.65
August 2009
3.85
September
4.07
2.41
5.88
September 2009
2.47
October
3.45
1.99
4.13
October 2009
4.24
November
3.3
2.45
3.84
November 2009
6.18
December
3.64
2.51
4.41
December 2009
Notes:
* Data not available for Statesville Weather Station before submittal date of this report
Figure 3. Comparison of Historic Average Rainfall to 2009 Observed Rainfall
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 17
Elk -Shoals Restoration Site
Historic Average vs. Observed Rainfall
10
----------- --
_- �- Historic 30 percentile - Historic 70 percentile
-___ ____ _ - • Historic Average -=�
- =- .Obsenied 2009
8
-
J
d
t
u
E
6
Q
�
4
t,.
L
a
0
&
�cJm�
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 17
- -- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - --
----------- --
J
t
t
Elk Shoals Monitoring Year 5 17

5.0 PROJECT MAINTENANCE
5.1 Kudzu Control
During Year 5, approximately lh acre of kudzu (Pueraria montana.) was treated at the Site. This
was a follow -up to treatments of the same area made in 2007 and 2008. The area treated in 2009
is located between Stations 42 +00 and 44 +00 on the western portion of the restored stream
channel. Treatment was made with Milestone VM herbicide at a rate of 7 oz. per acre. The area
has been a concern since as -built conditions and has been closely observed and/or treated during
each year of monitoring.
5.2 Beaver Activity
During Years 1 — 4 the Site experienced numerous beaver problems. Throughout this period,
many beaver were trapped and the dams were subsequently removed. During Year 5 monitoring,
beaver activity was not a concern on the Site.
5.3 Stream Maintenance
During Year 5 stream repairs were completed on the Site. The first repair is located at the road
side swale along Concord Church Road. Storm flows in the swale had created a large headcut
above the right top of bank. This repair was completed by adding class B stone to the affected
area, thus, creating a riprap Swale above and below the headcut to stabilize the area. The second
repair was located at the upstream area of the project between stations 13 +00 and 14 +00. The
repairs in this area included bank stabilization and installation of transplants. A toe log held in
place with boulders provided bank stabilization. Transplants were used to provide extra
reinforcement within the repair. Before and after photos of the repaired swale are included in
Appendix A.

6.0 OVERALL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Stream Monitoring. The total length of stream channel restored or enhanced on the Site
was 5,376 LF, resulting in 5,188 stream mitigation units. This entire length was
inspected during Year 5 of the monitoring period to assess stream performance.
The on -site crest gauge documented the occurrence of at least two bankfull flow events
during the Year 5 monitoring period. The largest on -site bankfull flow documented by
the crest gauge during Year 5 of monitoring was in April 2009, and was 1.64 feet above
the bankfull stage. After Year 5 of monitoring, it was noted that the onsite crest gauge
recorded bankfull flow events during every year of monitoring. The highest onsite crest
gauge recordings during each year of monitoring are as follows: Year 1 (0.80 feet), Year
2 (0.94 feet), Year 3 (1.8 feet), Year 4 ( >4.0 feet) and Year 5 (1.64 feet).
It is concluded that the Site has met the final success criteria of two bankfull flow events
in separate years.
The longitudinal profile and cross - sections for Year 5 monitoring were compared to
previous monitoring years during 2009. It was found that the pools and riffles within the
project area have reached a relatively stable condition on all reaches. During the
monitoring period, various minor repairs were made to different areas or structures when
there was concern that the stability of the channel might be compromised. The repaired
areas were closely observed throughout the monitoring period. These repairs are
currently functioning properly and will continue to be monitored until closeout of the
project. Two repairs were completed during Year 5 and following re- construction, the
repairs were functioning properly.
It is concluded that the Site has met the final success criteria for bankfull events, cross -
section variability was within expected parameters, and the geomorphic assessment
indicated that the restored reaches were retaining the characteristics of "C" and "E" type
streams, based on the Rosgen Classification system.
Vegetation Monitoring. During Year 5, vegetation monitoring indicated a range of
survivability between 421 and 596 stems per acre. Following Year 5 monitoring the
vegetation plots showed an average survivability of 514 stems per acre. Seeded
herbaceous vegetation has also thrived onsite during each year of monitoring, providing
adequate ground cover during the all growing seasons.
Monthly precipitation values were close to normal averages for April, August, and
October and varied from above average to below average values for the other months of
the growing season, with the total growing season rainfall being 0.72 inches above
normal. The average rainfall observed during the Year 5 growing season has maintained
and assisted the survivability and success of the vegetation plots.
It is concluded that the all vegetation and stream success criteria were met at the Elk
Shoals Site throughout the five -year monitoring period on the Site have met the final
success criteria of 260 stems per acre after Year 5.

APPENDIX A
PHOTO LOG

Constructed Riffle 1
Constructed Riffle 2
Constructed Riffle 3
Constructed Riffle 4
Constructed Riffle 5
Constructed Riffle 6

Cross Vane 2
Cross Vane 3
Cross Vane 4
Cross Vane 5
Cross Vane 6
Cross Vane 7

Fl
i1
f ,

Bankfull evidence — Wrack lines with direction of
flow, photo taken 4/1/2009
Bankfull evidence — Debris at base of crest gauge,
photo taken 4/1/2009
Bankfull reading — 1.64 feet, photo taken
4/1/2009
Bankfull reading — 1.54 feet, photo taken
9/15/2009
Headcut at Concord Church Road roadside swale — August 2009 - Repaired roadside swale using Class
before repair B stone, installed above and below the headcut

APPENDIX B
STREAM MONITORING DATA

tn
N
N
0
O
N
Y
lC
Y
O
�
N
m
m
o
all
O
H
a
H
v
U
N
CO
t
:
N
m
t0
3
O
M
M
ti
ti
t
M
CD
V%
y o
F
p
C p
O
N
`�
N
N
Ln
CN
O
Co
E
}�-.
O
O
C
W Z
z
o
L
fit
M
�
kn
00
tU
V R
tV
�
O
CD
L
a
r
O
R
L
IL
�
O
H
�
Y_
rn
=
o
c
F-
Y
W
W
v I
N
m
H
w
W
N
O Vl O
N —
V1
N
O
a*,
C all ON
r.
(;3) UOIJUAal:l
O
kn
M
On
cq
cl, 71
(13) UOIJUAala
tn
N
N
i
Y
lC
�
00
N
o
~
a
H
v
7
O
t0
3
M
ti
Lo
L
y o
F
O N
`�
N
= L
� d
m
CN
co
}
E
r O
C
W Z
M
kn
00
tU
V R
�
O
L
a
r
R
O
�
co
Y_
rn
m
t
F-
Y
W
Q
v I
N
N
O Vl O
N —
V1
N
N
O
a*,
C all ON
(;3) UOIJUAal:l

0
I
i I
I i
i
M
r
i
M
r
I i I
C 07
0 0
i
i
O
N
O
Z
i
0
cc
U O
U
� m
o
O
r
m Q
O
I
l0
Q �
I � I
I
O O*1
Q1
00 [-- \�O N M N
01 01 O� Q1 ON1
OIN
M
'�
(jj) UOIIUAai:l

1
I
I
m
I
i
o
�
0
i
i
N
f
to
+
j
r
I
�
I
I
Go
j
I
kn
+
tn
O
O
i
*J i
CO) a)
LO
G1
r >
i
to
N
C
O
O
3
co
cu
s=
I
U O
I
I
cc
kn
O ea
s
d-
N
cu
�
I
I
O
cm
t
�
3
w
m
I
I
I
I
I
M
M N
•--� O G� 00 l� "O V1
,:t
(1j) U01JUA31:1

UT1 Permanent Cross - section #1
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
T e
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth !
Max BKF
De th
W/D _
BH Ratio..
; - ER .,,
BKF-Elev
TOB Elev W _f Pa
Pool
2.4
4.49
0.53
0.9
1 8.45
1 1.1
16.5
1 928.45
1 928.51
933
932
UT1 Cross - section #1
931
$ 930
c----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- - - - --
929
:0
r
> 928
w
927
A5 -Built Year 1
Year 2 Year 3
926
Year 4 — 0 Year 5
- - -o - -- Bankfull --- 0--- Floodprone
925
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
Station (ft)

UT1 Permanent Cross - section #2
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
I
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
1
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio ER BKF Elev TOB Elev
Riffle
C
12.4
14.03
0.89
2.07
15.85
1 1 4 928.55 928.56
UT1 Cross - section #2
933
932
931
_ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -o
930
c
929
R----------------
928
W As Built Year 1
927 Year 2 year 3
926 Year 4 — Year 5
-- :j - -- Bankfull - --9- -- Floodprone
925
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
Station (ft)

Permanent Cross-section #3
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
BK
ShOW
933
Riffle
E
60.1
21.01
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross-section #3
933
--------------------------------------------------
931
929
927
-----------------
925
W
923
- As-Built
Year 1
— Year 2
Year 3
921
- Year 4
t Year 5
--- Bankfull
-- -0--- Floodprone
919
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180
190 200 210
Station (ft)

Permanent Cross - section #4
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type ;:
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
1
BH Ratio
1
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
1
Pool
92
37.23
2.47
6.46
15.06
1
2.1
925.68
925.58
932
930
$ 928
0 926
w
�a
y 924
W
922
920
918
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross - section #4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -o
---------------------------------
As -Built Year 1
Year Year
Year t Year
- o- -- Bankfull -o-- Floodprone
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)

Permanent Cross - section #5
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
_:_Stream , "" BKF ! BK,
Type BKF Area Width Dep IM
Riffle I E 1 59.9 1 23.49 1 2.55 1 4.86 1 9.21 1 4.1 921.3 1 921.46
928
926
924
c 922
0
920
as
w 918
916
914
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross - section #5
8-------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- ------ -----------0
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)
As -Built
Year 1
Year
Year
Year 4
--a -- Year 5
- - -0 - -- Bankfull
- --6 - -- Floodprone
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)

Permanent Cross - section #6
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type .
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
I =Rabo
R
B KF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
45.8
15.95
2.87
4.22
5.55
1
5.9
920.08
920.09
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross - section #6
927
925 -
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- - - - -o
923
921
.
-------- - - - - --
«
919
m
w
917 -
As -Built
Year 1
Year
Year
915
Year 4
- - Year 5
-- -0 --- Bankfull
- -4- -- Floodprone
913
100
110 120 130 140 150 160
170 180
190 200 210
Station (ft)

UT2 Permanent Cross - section #7
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Dept
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev.
Pool
10.3
10.37
0.99
1.77
10.47
1 1
7.1
1 920.95
920.97
UT2 Cross - section #7
924
923
922
c 921
----- - - - - --
0
r
> 920
_d
w 919
As -Built Year 1
Year 2 Year 3
918
Year 4 —a— Year 5
- - -0 - -- Bankfull - --9- -- Floodprone
917
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Station (ft)

UT2 Permanent Cross - section #8
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
1
Riffle
E
6
8.13
0.74
1.56
10.93
1
8.1
920.85
920.87
UT2 Cross - section #8
924
923
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -o
922
c 921
-- - - - - --
0
920
01
As -Bui@ Year 1
W 919
Year 2 Year 3
918
Year 4 9 Year 5
- - -e -- Bankfull - --e- -- Floodprone
917
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Station (ft)

Permanent Cross - section #9
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009)
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
65.9
26.39J
2.5
5.36
10.57
1
4.2
919.1
918.95
926
924
922
920
0
M 918
a�
w 916
914
912
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross - section #9
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -o
--------------------
As -Built Year 1
Year 2 Year 3
Year 4 —0-- Year 5
- e--- Bankfull - --0- -- Floodprone
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)

Permanent Cross - section #10
(Year 5 Data - Collected November 2009 )
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
1
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
1
BH Ratio
1
I ER
BKF Elev
I TOB Elev
Riffle
C
1 38.8
24.31
1.59
3.24
15.24
3.6
919.11
919.11
Elk Shoals Creek
Cross - section #10
927
925
923
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -o
a 921
w
> 919 ---------------------
m
w
917 As -Built Year 1
Year 2 Year 3
915 Year 4 —+— Year 5
- --e --- Bankfull - -6 - -- Floodprone
913
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210
Station (ft)