20050615 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20120211

TF
05 -0615
Year 5 Monitoring Report for South Muddy Creek Tributaries
(Queen Properties)
South Muddy Creek Tributaries
McDowell County, NC
SCO # D04006 -01
Prepared for
NCDENR — EEP
2728 Capital Blvd, Suite 1H 103
Raleigh NC 27604
IcoSVStem
F w�t
Submitted February 2010
�Qe

Prepared by
Wetlands Resource Center
3970 Bowen Road
Canal Winchester, Ohio 43110
Project Manager Cal Miller
P (614) 864 -7511
F (614) 866 -3691
EMH &T, Inc.
5500 New Albany Road
Columbus, Ohio 43054
Project Manager Miles F Hebert, P E
P (614) 775 -4205
F (614) 775 -4802
Main (614) 775 -4500
Evans Mechwart Hambleton & Tilton Inc
Engineers Surveyors Planners Scienhsts
��c

C)
Table of Contents
I Executive Summary
II Protect Background
A Location and Setting
B Project Structure, Mitigation Type, Approach and Objectives
C Project History and Background
D Monitoring Plan View
III Protect Condition and Monitoring Results
A Vegetation Assessment
1
Soil Data
2
Vegetative Problem Areas
3
Vegetative Problem Areas Plan View
4
Stem Counts
5
Vegetation Plot Photos
B Stream Assessment
1
Hydrologic Criteria
2
Stream Problem Areas
3
Stream Problem Areas Plan View
4
Stream Problem Areas Photos
S
Fixed Station Photos
6
Stability Assessment
7
Quantitative Measures
IV Methodology
List of Fizures
Figure 1 Location Map
Figure 2 Monitoring Plan View
List of Tables
Table I
Project Structure Table
Table II
Project Mitigation Objectives Table
Table III
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table IV
Project Contact Table
Table V
Project Background Table
Table VI
Preliminary Soil Data
Table VII
Vegetative Problem Areas
Table VIII
Stem Counts for Each Species Arranged by Plot
Table IX
Venfication of Bankfull Events
Table X
Stream Problem Areas
Table XI
Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
Table XII
Baseline Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
Table XIII
Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitonng Report — South Muddy Creek Tributanes Monitonng Year S of S
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page i
1
5
20
44

List of Appendices
Appendix A Vegetation Raw Data
1 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
2 Vegetation Data Tables
Appendix B Geomorphologic Raw Data
1 Fixed Station Photos
2 Table 131 Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment
3 Cross Section Plots
4 Longitudinal Plots
5 Pebble Count Plots
6 Bankfull Event Photos
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Moratonng Report — South Muddy Creek Tnbutanes Monitonng Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page u

C
I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The South Muddy Creek Tributaries restoration project is located near Dysartsville in McDowell
County, North Carolina The stream channels included in this project are designated as
Tributaries A, A2, B and C Prior to restoration, Tributaries A and A2 were drainage channels
that had experienced modification in the form of ditchmg and vegetative management Tributaries
B and C were natural channels that were in a degraded condition attributed to head -cuttmg and
streambank erosion exacerbated by cattle intrusion The project consists of a combination of
Priority 1 and Priority 2 Restoration and Enhancement Level 1 The project goal for the
restoration plan, completed in 2005, was to re- establish geomorphologic features consistent with
natural stream channel characteristics Elements of the restoration design included grade control
and bank stabilization using natural materials and native plantmgs, reconnection of the channels to
functional floodplams, and the incorporation of mstream habitat features including nffle/pool
complexes to re- establish, sort and transport substrate materials The following report documents
the Year 5 Annual Monitoring for this project
Vegetative monitoring was completed in September 2010 using the methodology of the Carolina
Vegetation Survey Year 5 stem counts completed in 30 vegetation plots showed an average
density of 522 stems per acre for the site, which exceeds the success criteria of 260 stems /acre
after 5 years Two individual plots have stem densities below the m,mmum, planted stems have
been added to these plots, increasing the stem count over the original monitoring period and
bringing these plots to a stem count that meets the final Year 5 criteria In addition, a substantial
number of recruit stems have been found across the site The recruit stems increase the total stem
density across the site to 841 stems per acre
A few vegetative problem areas of low concern were noted in the project area in previous
monitoring years These included scattered populations of rapidly - spreadmg species The
problematic species have been proactively managed by herbicide treatment and currently pose no
threat to the survival of planted woody species throughout the project reaches
Previous monitoring identified some problem areas along the tributaries of South Muddy Creek,
including areas of bank scour and aggradation Areas first noted as problems in a previous year of
monitoring now have extensive vegetative development, which has increased streambank stability
Several areas of aggradation were noted in Year 5 Sand is the dommant streambed substrate in
the project reaches, and as such, sediment deposition is attributed to high sediment supply readily
available in the contribution watershed It is noted that at all locations of aggradation, the channel
and streambanks are stable In 2009 one area of noted aggradation involved the upstream portion
of Tributary A2 This section of the stream developed vegetation within the stream channel,
which appeared to have decreased flows, thereby allowing additional sediment to drop into the
channel As was observed during the 2010 monitoring, the channel was returned to initial design
conditions by removing fine sediment and m- stream vegetation in late 2009 Because of this, the
tributary is better able to carry it's sediment load and maintains a stable morphology As
evidenced in the stream profile depicted in Appendix B , clearing of excessive sediment in
Tributary A2 has created a generalized decrease in average stream bed profile elevations The
tributary has maintained stable dimensional characteristics throughout the final year of stream
monitoring A non - functional log sill on Tributary B, noted in the Year 4, was fixed prior to this
Year 5 monitoring report This fix has returned the grade control function of the structure
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 1

The visual stream stability assessment revealed that the majority of stream features are
functioning as designed and built on the project reaches In Year 5, some log sills on Tributary B
0 continue to be embedded in sand size sediment However, the channel is stable at each location
where aggradation has covered a structure A few meanders were found in a limited state of
erosion, none of which required maintenance In addition, the meanders that had some level of
erosion in previous years have contmued' to improve in 2010, due to the increased vegetative
cover along the stream corridors The pools and riffles that were noted to be performing in a state
unlike that of the as -built conditions were the result of aggradation along the corresponding
reaches
0
Year 5 dimensional measurements of the monumented cross - sections remain stable, generally
within the range of values measured in previous years Comparisons of the yearly long -term
stream monitoring data show successive increases in channel- floodplain connectivity and
increasingly stable channel dimensions throughout monitoring years 1 -5 The comparison of the
As- Built, Years 14, and Year 5 long -term stream momtonng profile data show natural evolution
in the development of pool/nffle features as compared to as-built conditions Median particle
sizes of the stream channels ranged from very fine sand to very coarse sand Median particle
sized has therefore increased for the project, when compared to Year 4 Based on the crest gage
network installed on the project reaches, the required two banldull events have been recorded
along each stream reach since construction was completed
The following tables summarize the geomorphological changes along the restoration reaches for
each stream
Tributary A (Upper)
Parameter
Pre-
Restoration
As -built
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Length
1,283 ft
1,609 ft
1,609 ft
1,609 ft
1,609 ft
1,609 ft
1,609 ft
Bankfull Width
6 6 ft
12 5 ft
16 3 ft
16 2 ft
15 3 ft
13 5 ft
10 5 ft
Bankfull Mean
0 9 ft
0 9 ft
0 9 ft
0 9 ft
0 8 ft
0 6 ft
0 8 ft
Depth
Bankfull Max
18 ft
15 ft
19 ft
19 ft
18 ft
16 ft
14 ft
Depth
Width/Depth
7.3
161
176
182
195
229
133
Ratio
Entrenchment
14
41
32
32
37
41
41
Ratio
Bank Height
36
11
11
10
10
10
10
Ratio
Sinuosity
11
15
15
15
15
15
15
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 2

0
1
Tributary A (Middle)
Parameter
Pre-
As -built
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Restoration
Length
809 ft
1,094 ft
1,094 ft
1,094 ft
1,094 ft
1,094 ft
1,094 ft
Bankfull Width
66ft
150ft
146ft
147ft
146ft
138ft
145ft
Bankfull Mean
0 9 ft
0 8 ft
11 ft
11 ft
11 ft
10 ft
12 ft
Depth
Bankfull Max
18 ft
15 ft
2 4 ft
21 ft
2 2 ft
2 3 ft
2 5 ft
Depth
Width/Depth
73
179
128
140
137
140
117
Ratio
Entrenchment
14
40
46
42
42
48
46
Ratio
Bank Height
36
11
11
11
11
10
10
Ratio
Sinuosity
10
13
13
13
13
13
13
Tributary A (Lower)
Parameter
Pre-
As -built
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Restoration
Length
5,179 ft
7,349 ft
7,349 ft
7,349 ft
7,349 ft
7,349 ft
7,349 ft
Bankfull Width
6 6 ft
221 ft
24 4 ft
25 3 ft
251 ft
26 0 ft
24 6 ft
Bankfull Mean
07ft
08ft
09ft
09ft
09ft
09ft
09ft
Depth
Bankfull Max
14 ft
18 ft
19 ft
19 ft
19 ft
19 ft
2 0 ft
Depth
Width/Depth
89
235
290
286
277
314
310
Ratio
Entrenchment
16
32
26
24
28
25
25
Ratio
Bank Height
59
10
11
11
11
10
10
Ratio
Sinuosity
10
14
14
14
14
14
14
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 3

Tributary A2
Parameter
Pre-
Restoration
As -built
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Length
322 ft
480 ft
480 ft
480 ft
480 ft
480 ft
480 ft
Bankfull Width
71 ft
17 9 ft
214 ft
217 ft
22 3 ft
213 ft
16 8 ft
Bankft l Mean
06ft
10 ft
08ft
08ft
07ft
06ft
10 ft
Depth
0 6 ft
0 6 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
Bankfull Max
11 ft
18 ft
16 ft
15 ft
13 ft
12 ft
19 ft
Depth
12 ft
16 ft
19 ft
19 ft
18 ft
2 0 ft
2 1 ft
Width/Depth
118
177
261
272
302
366
167
Ratio
126
413
320
311
386
338
378
Entrenchment
16
26
22
21
22
22
28
Ratio
15
27
25
23
23
25
22
Bank Height
59
10
12
10
10
10
10
Ratio
44
10
10
10
10
10
10
Sinuosity
11
14
14
14
14
14
14
Tributary B
Parameter
Pre-
As -built
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
1,601 ft
Restoration
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
Bankfull Width
9 0 ft
Length
1,279 ft
2,041 ft
2,041 ft
2,041 ft
2,041 ft
2,041 ft
2,041 ft
Bankfull Width
7 8 ft
24 9 ft
24 8 ft
27 0 ft
28 4 ft
27 5 ft
28 5 ft
Bankfull Mean
0 6 ft
0 6 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
0 8 ft
Depth
09ft
Depth
Bankfull Max
12 ft
16 ft
19 ft
19 ft
18 ft
2 0 ft
2 1 ft
Depth
Entrenchment
Width/Depth
126
413
320
311
386
338
378
Ratio
Entrenchment
15
27
25
23
23
25
22
Ratio
Bank Height
44
10
10
10
10
10
10
Ratio
Sinuosity
11
16
16
16
16
16
16
Tributary C
Parameter
As -built
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Length
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
1,601 ft
Bankfull Width
9 0 ft
9 4 ft
9 0 ft
9 4 ft
9 9 ft
9 8 ft
Bankfull Mean
05ft
05ft
05ft
05ft
06ft
06ft
Depth
Bankfull Max
07ft
09ft
08ft
09ft
09ft
09ft
Depth
Width/Depth
253
191
226
182
183
175
Ratio
Entrenchment
25
25
27
27
19
24
Ratio
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributanes Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 4

H PROJECT BACKGROUND
A Location and Setting
The project is located in McDowell County, North Carolina, approximately two rules south of
Interstate 40, between Manon and Morganton near the community of Dysartsville The tributaries
lie east of Muddy Creek Road, north of Pinnacle Church Road and west of Dysartsville Road, as
shown on Figure 1 The stream channels included in the project are designated as Tributaries A,
A2, B and C Tributaries A, B and C confluence directly with South Muddy Creek Tributary A2
confluences with Tributary A
Directions to the project site are as follow
From Manon, follow Interstate 40 east to Dysartsville Road (Exit 94) Turn right onto
Dysartsville Road to travel south for approximately 2 miles to Pinnacle Church Road
Follow Pinnacle Church Road to Muddy Creek Road, and turn right The project site is
on the east side of the road This is private property, access to the stream corridor is
lumted to the dedicated ingress/egress included as part of the recorded Conservation
Easement Coordination with the property owner is encouraged prior to accessing the
property
B Protect Structure, Mitigation Type, Approach and Objectives
Pre - restoration land use surrounding the project tributaries consisted of agricultural croplands
0 along Tributaries A and A2 and cattle pastureland along Tributaries B and C The upper reaches
of Tributaries A2, B and C were characterized by a mix of pastureland and limited wooded
corridor Tributaries A and A2 were drainage channels that had experienced modification in the
form of ditchmg and vegetative management prior to restoration Tributaries B and C are natural
channels that, prior to restoration, were in a degraded condition attributed to head -cutting and
streambank failure and erosion exacerbated by cattle intrusion and associated hoof shear All of
the tributary channels, prior to restoration, had narrow or denuded riparian corridors
Tributaries A, A2 and B were surrounded by either cropland or pasture with no significant buffer
prior to restoration Tributaries B and C lacked cattle intrusion fencing that adversely impacted
streambank stability Tributary C was less degraded, prior to restoration, in that it had a
sigmficant wooded riparian corridor on the south (left) bank with well sorted and well graded bed
materials However, Tributary C was impacted by a significantly degraded riparian corridor on the
north (right) bank, with numerous locations of streambank erosion and failure associated with
cattle intrusion
Restoration of the project streams re- established geomorphologic features consistent with
natural stream channel characteristics Results achieved are listed below
Bankfull channels constructed with the appropriate geometries to convey bankfull flows
and transport suspended and bedload materials available to the streams
Stable channel patterns consistent with natural streams in the region
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year S of S
Page S

mom
�
U m
cvon,wcoh~ort,HomUicton&rilton.mc.
Engineers -Planners ^SciLnUsts
sam New Albany Road, Columbus, o*400s
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
w c w x x v /
,
Ij
lip
WDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES
MONITORING
FIGURE 1
Date: January, 2011 Job No. 2004-2359 Scale: 1"=2000'
ftft-
`.
Age IVI
em
71 1

• Grade control and bank stabilization features that enhance environmental attributes of
the stream channels through the use of natural materials and native plantings
• In- stream habitat features, including nffle /pool complexes to re- establish, sort and
transport substrate materials available to the streams
• Reconnection of project stream channels to functional floodplams
• Extensive indigenous instream and riparian revetment
Restoration of Tributaries A, A2 and B was accomplished through the modification of the existing
pattern, profile and dimension of the tributary channels to a stable condition The
restored channels are on an alignment that is offset from the pre - existing stream channels Post -
construction, the existing tributary channels were abandoned and filled Restoration along these
reaches was either Priority 2, where the elevation of the floodplam was lowered through
excavation to re- connect it to the restored stream channel, or a combination of Priority 2 and
Priority 1, where the floodplain was lowered and the stream thalweg was raised above the existing
channel profile
The lower reach of Tributary A has a low gradient, which flattens to 0 0012 ft/ft Due to a
relatively flat profile gradient, a series of successive pool and riffle complexes was not proposed
Instead, the restored stream channel has constructed point bars on the inside of meander bends at
pool locations and is transporting its bedload through the run/pool complexes as the bed form of
the channel naturally evolves The steeper gradient associated with the restored stream channels
along Tributaries A2 and B allowed the construction of a sinuous channel with constructed
nffle/pool sequences
Enhancement Level I was implemented along one of the reaches on Tributary A by modifymg the
profile and dimension of the channel Along this segment, improvements were constructed along
the alignment of the existing stream channel Enhancement Level I on Tributary C provides bank
J stabilization through cattle exclusion, with one hard - engmeered, fenced and controlled cattle
access point for watering, combined with continuous preservation of the riparian buffer zone via
live stock exclusion fencing Stabilization was accomplished by re- grading steep, undercut
channel banks, and the use of jute matting and live plantings
O
An important component of the restoration of Tributaries B and C is cattle exclusion As
mentioned previously, these channels are adjacent to pastureland, where cattle frequented the
streams for shade and drinking water Prior to restoration, the cattle accessed the streams at
random locations and, in doing so, denuded and destabilized the pre - existing channel banks The
restoration of Tributary B includes fencing that permanently excludes cattle from the stream
corridor The fencing along Tributary C limits cattle access to a single point along the stream
reinforced with stone underlain by non -woven geotextile to prevent degradation that would
otherwise occur All fencing has been placed at the outer edge of the perpetual conservation
easement held by the State of North Carolina Information regarding the project structure and
objectives is included in Tables I and II that follows
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 7

Table I Protect Structure Table
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Project Reach/Segment ID
Linear Footage
• (upper)
1,6091 f
A middle
1,0941 f
A
1,0521 f
• lower
7,349 1 f
A2
4801 f
B
2,0411 f
C
1,6011 f
TOTAL
15,226 1 f
Table H Protect Mitigation Oblechves Table
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Protect
Linear
Segment/ Reach
IVLhgation
Footage or
ID
Type
Approach
Acreage
Comment
Priority
Restore dimension, pattern, and
A (upper)
Restoration
1&2
1,609 1 f
profile
A
Enhancement
Level 1
1,0521 f
Restore dimension and profile
Priority
Restore dimension, pattern, and
A middle
Restoration
1 &2
1,094 1 f
profile
Restore dimension, pattern, and
A lower
Restoration
Priority 2
7,3491 f
profile
Restore dimension, pattern, and
A2
Restoration
Priority 2
4801 f
profile
Restore dimension, pattern, and
B
Restoration
Priority 2
2,0411 f
profile
C
Enhancement
Level 1
1,6011 f
Restore dimension and pattern
TOTAL
15,226 1 f
C Project History and Background
Project activity and reporting history are provided in Table III The project contact information is
provided in Table IV The project background lustory is provided in Table V
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year S of S
Page 8

0)
Table III Protect Activity and Reporting History
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Designer
Actual
Construction
Scheduled
Contractor
Completion
Activity or Report
Completion
Data Collection Complete
or Delivery
Restoration plan
Aug 2005
Fall 2004
Mar 2005
Final Design - 90 %'
N/A
N/A
N/A
Construction
Feb 2006
N/A
A r 2006
Temporary S &E applied
to entire project areal
Ju12005
N/A
A r 2006
Permanent plantings
A r 2006
N/A
A r 2006
Mitigation plan/As-built
Jun 2006
Nov 2006
Jan 2007
Sep 2006 (vegetation)
Year 1 monitoring
2006
Apr 2007 (geomorphology)
Jun 2007
Sep 2007 (vegetation)
Year 2 monitoring
2007
Oct 2007 (geomorphology)
Jan 2008
Sep 2008 (vegetation)
Year 3 monitoring
2008
Oct 2008 (geomorphology)
Dec 2008
Sep 2009 (vegetation)
Year 4 monitoring
2009
Sep 2009 (geomorphology)
Dec 2009
Sep 2010 (vegetation)
Year 5 monitoring
2010
Sep_ 2010(geomorphology)
Feb 2011
'Full delivery project 90% submittal not provided
2Erosion and sediment control applied incrementally throughout the course of the project
N/A Data collection is not an applicable task to these project activities
Table IV Protect Contact Table
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Designer
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Construction
South Mountain Forestry
Contractor
6624 Roper Hollow, Morganton, NC 28655
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Performers
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus OH 43054
Stream Monitoring POC
Jud M Hines, EMH &T
Vegetation Monitoring
POC
Megan F Wolf, EMH &T
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 9

0
O
Table V Protect Background Table
South Muddy Creek Tnbutanes Restorahon / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Project County
McDowell
Drainage Area - A (upper & huddle
138 sq nu
Drainage Area -A lower
2 03 sq nu
Drainage Area -A2
0 27 sq nu
Drainage Area-13
0 44 sq nu
Drainage Area -C
0 37 sq nu
Drainage Impervious Cover Estimate
2 % -6%
Stream Order
Tributary A, B, C -2nd
Tributaries A2 —1 st
Physiographic Region
Blue Ridge Mountains
Ecoregion
Eastern Blue Ridge Foothills
Ros en Classification of As -built
C4 /C5
Dommant Soil Types
Iotla sandy loam Dillard loam
Reference Site ID
South Muddy Birchfield,
South Mudd "Tributary 4"
USGS HUC for Project and Reference
3050101
NCDW Sub -basin for Project and Reference
03 -08 -30
NCDWQ Classification for Project and Reference
C
Any portion of any project segment 303d listed?
No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a
303d listed segment?
No
Reason for 303d listmg or stressor
N/A
% of project easement fenced
24%
D Momtoring Plan View
The monitoring plan view is included as Figure 2
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries Monitoring Year S of S
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 10

WDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES Date: January, 2011
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tifton, Inc. MONITORING
Scale: 1" = 600'
Engineers• Surveyors• Planners• Scientists FIGURE 2A
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fox: 614.775.4800 INDEX MAP
M C M x x v I .lob No: 2006 -1627

t,\1; } I
` \ \\ \\
W" \ \xv,X��
1 i 1�� \\ \ \ \� \ \ \\�\ \ \ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \ \�1 \tl l lift \y N,
;
&`1\
*-28
rrl!l!llj/ j�� / /1/�ti►I �il�l�ll1�`1 \1 1 ��
/
j6+ �4.2111
! Lon itudinal Profile-
i -�0P! 111+ , I g
13—Upper /
Profile No. 1 i
12 +10.65
Riffle /
/ 8 +39.41
/ P001
7-
(1 � 1
+0 .07 lf�l� Longitudinal Profile
I Riffle Tributary B Lower
/— Profile No. 1
VP -25
tK
P�, J
LEGEND
l- Conservation Easement
Longitudinal Profile
Photo Locations
/ � Benchmark
Surveyed Location of
Vegetative Monitoring Plot
\_ / ,�-•— © Crest Gauge
Constructed Riffle
Constructed Log Sill
WDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES Date: January, 2011
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton 8 Tilton, Inc. MONITORING Scale: 1 " = 600'
Engineers • Surveyors • Planners • Scientists FIGURE 2B
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] TRIBUTARY B
M C M x x v i Job No: 2006 -1627

LEGEND
\ \ i / I \ - - - - - Conservation Easement
%1 �' Longitudinal Profile
Photo Locations
r,
\ -- Benchmark
1 \
I � 1
I
1
II
i1
I I �
in
N I
to
3 � I
a
ti I I I
0
o
s \
J
1
1
I�
IM9,
urveyed Location of
\ \ ^ \ Vegetative Monitoring PI
Crest Gauge
\� j' \� N $ Constructed Riffle
(; 3 +18.00 \ ME Constructed Log Sill
Rifle
41+31.01
�ool
I
F \�\
I I 1 \ r
VP -24
1 \ \ \ \X 1
�o
9. \
Longitudinal Profile
Tributary A -Lower
\\ \Profile• No. 4
,l,
i
1 VP -23
I 1
1
N
,
k
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc.
Engineers - Surveyors - Planners - Scientists
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Phone: 614,775.4500 Fox; 614.775.4800
M C M X X v I
w \ V_,- I
\\XI
\ \
� � ` \ • � \ - - - 1III \`' 11 }�
\ 11 I \ \I \
VP -21
VI 2
6 V'
�--t'
Fsee Figure 2D'` \.\ \ \ ' \�
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES
MONITORING
FIGURE 2C
TRIBUTARY A - LOWER
1\ 1
1
Date: January, 2011
Scale: 1 " = 100'
Job No: 2006 -1627

W
2
k
h
See PIgure
N\1\ \
\5 )Ir ...\ \ \�.1
\ \1111 1111
21+16.53
Pool
\ 11\11 1 \\
1
21 +31.26
Riffle
25 +39.47 I�
Riffle 1 1
ti
128+23.53
Pool
1 /J
I �
� 1 II I I II I 111 1 1 1 1 1 l' 1'1'1'1 l'l /' l/� l'l� 'j •�' �i1
1
P VP 19
J 1 > >I / / 1�!l1� � � � 1! 1 f 1/1� 11/ i l /'/ % l'�' � � • � �l
r!
, I
// i/ // /'� 7/ A l i �� l I l l l l (1 ! I I I I I I �. '•
l�rl\1 1� 1 ,l� / \; //' J I i l l l I�I /I •� �� �
j
1/40+1 5.80
Rifflg
/See Figure 2
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton Milton, Inc.
Engineers • Surveyors • Planners • Scientists
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, CH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fox: 614.775.4800
a
{I­-
/
r'l!
`' 1111(1 r1
l
�1t �
1 1111111 1
�111� 1'111 I1 l
f 1 111 `
,►►� X111 � �
I illy \
Illl Ill! i Longitudinal Profile)
II IIIII Tributary A -Lower
II llil 1 Profile No. 3
I
- - Conservation Easement
— Longitudinal Profile
Photo Locations
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES
MONITORING
FIGURE 2D
TRIBUTARY A - LOWER
Date: January, 2011
Scale: 1 " = 100'
M C M X X v I I I Job No: 2006 -1627
Benchmark
Surveyed Location of
Vegetative Monitoring PI
©
Crest Gauge
IEE
Constructed Riffle
3EE
Constructed Log Sill
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES
MONITORING
FIGURE 2D
TRIBUTARY A - LOWER
Date: January, 2011
Scale: 1 " = 100'
M C M X X v I I I Job No: 2006 -1627

LEGEND / / 11 r \ \ % '
Conservation Easement / / Se6 Fig 1 / �/ /F /
Longitudinal Profile 7r-
Ill I
Photo Locations
Benchmark 1 \ 7!// J� �l i
Surveyed Location of�� l ; f / ll //
Vegetative Monitoring Plot
(w� Crest Gauge
Constructed Riffle
ME Constructed Log Sill
I JIJI/i/
:� I , I , � � / 1 � ! //, /� ,/ 1, ,,�1 %j,�li :• � , hl
Il 111 / !/l � r / /) / r\
% i�' 50 +53.37
Riffle
�C X111 I 1 �_� 11 (f 1 li 1�ir
fl �
-
1I I' I I I I l l I I� 1II 11 11 _ iI' I Yl I II �`
I I 111 1 1( 1 r JVP 15 lli 1
I1�
e� �• II .1 1 /r 111111�1II : II'I1 � J II1 N�I - -I /
2 0 11 � j l (1` 11111 1 I I I l l Ill \
111 I �54 +85.21
POOI
l
P..
Ln
a 1111
I
See Figure 2F
ti I
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc.
Engineers • Surveyors • Planners • Scientists
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
S Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
&ar�
43+93.88
Pool
J� C
J)
1 II
1
1
r \�
l
Longitudinal Profile
Tributary A —Lower
Profile No. 2
/J
II
rte`
I
11
1
1
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES
MONITORING
FIGURE 2E
TRIBUTARY A - LOWER
1
Dace: January, 2011
Scale: 1" = 100'
81 M c M X X v I I I Job No: 2006-1627

6;
s
4
2
Q
H
�p
�e
O
h
xN
h
Y
V
V
k
N
e
H
See Figure 2E
64 +13.80 co
Riffle
66 +01.49
Pool
r
Il I! 681
VPl -11
t
70 +96.05
Riffle
i
J
I - ,
I ,
III � cl
I1i Longitudinal Profile -
Tributary A —Lower
/ e Profil NO. 1
Ilr .l 1 I !.
1 � �
72 +02.58
Pool lJ
1
1
i
- — — — - Conservation Easement
Longitudinal Profile
Photo Locations
+ Benchmark
Surveyed Location of
Vegetative Monitoring PI
rSee Figure 2G — — —
i
i
R•
,d
, �.
© Crest Gauge I
$t Constructed Riffle
Constructed Log Sill / I
. I
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc. MONITORING
Engineers - surveyors •Planners •scientists FIGURE 2F
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus. OH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] TRIBUTARY A - LOWER
M c M X X v I
\
I`
/Y\
I
CIO
k
a ■i
Iill 1 \\
i
Date: January, 2011
Scale: 1" = 100'
,lob No: 2006 -1627
1

1
1
I
u
N
Longitudinal Profile
Tributary A2 2 +18.05
Riffle
i
VP -8 /
3 +23.00 /
Pool
1-"**- i
lmh
p
I r
LO
\1V111 VA�
X \ �\ \\\
IR
\1 \\
I
ll!; �VP 16 \ ,
pl I III I
See Figure 2Fj
i
- — — — -
Conservation Easement
Longitudinal Profile
Photo Locations
Benchmark
Surveyed Location of
Vegetative Monitoring PI
©
Crest Gauge
�
Constructed Riffle
a=-
Constructed Log Sill
I,J141 `l 185 +64.09 i Longitudinal Profile
(II / Riffle Tributary A- Middle -=
I / I
i
87 +92.18
Pool
\� ��\�IIIIVII\(
\\
11��lll\
111 J A r
� I
-_ J, � �\ , ,III � ►�I �� ►}�
DWI\ ��► I I I i
See Figure 2H V�\
WDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES
Evans, Mechwarf, Hambleton &Tilton, Inc.
MONITORING
Engineers• surveyors• Planners• scientists FIGURE 2G
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] TRIBUTARY A2 AND TRIBUTARY A - MIDDLE
M c M x x v I
I
Date: January, 2011
Scale: 1" = 100'
,lob No: 2006 -1627

i
e
x
N
% rrojocw: Ix" Vioti%tumiotienvlorg%cmimis%rwv cn- 1.9r9vpurW M.- - c AnV1W
web/ ~k2004�2APi2M9%Dwg�42J39xbs.drg 42J39xtp.dwDJ - No bnopss - SowsdBY• RAAER (117J 12011
r.. IN yypiuc0 ff AT /mlf o• T7- PA AW
Figure 2G
pry jl I'rrf1' I I,
All
J/1 li
- -- - _ _ _ , f -- - - , � _ _ _ - 1,'ll►llll,� 411, j,
ll,l;
� /-- ,ll(a,
- Longitudinal Profile
I� \ _Tributary A— Upper
IVP -1
,116 +35.21
Riffle / 11034-74.70
Riffle
Riffle
\
l�)ll \`\113 +37.13
Pool 108 +96.23
Riffle , 105+ 1
110 +48.78 / / // , 1 38.70
I �
PAoi , ' '/ % / / I Pool
VP72�
x`
\� \\�\ \\ ��`��� \ \\ \ \ •,, I ( III 11 1 1 �\ \ \ \ �� \ � ` \ \� \\ � —
�� \ \�\ \\
\Q�-
LEGEND
Mt
Conservation Easement
Longitudinal Profile
\ \
Photo Locations
Benchmark
Surveyed Location of
Vegetative Monitoring Plot
g
Crest Gauge
$ Constructed Riffle
ME Constructed Log Sill
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES Date. January, 2011
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc. MONITORING scale: 1" = 100'
Engineers • Surveyors • Planners • Scientists FIGURE 2H
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fox: 614.775.4800 TRIBUTARY A - UPPER
M C M X X v I Job No: 2006 -1627

r�
8+57. Rif 51'
fle \
i;� \,\
�rr111'
i7 / r
i • rig � ! I
,� / / I 1 Illu�llllllll
VP -29
\, 11� \1�1 },
4 +11.50
Riffle I� \\
111�, i
I11�1lI� 1 � e
l /r�lll
I, ?::
is
\\1
X11 } }I
/
I
x111,1\
1� ll Ill,
7,
I
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES Date. January, 2011
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc. MONITORING scale: 1" = 100'
Engineers • Surveyors • Planners • Scientists FIGURE 21
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] TRIBUTARY C
M C M X X v I Job No: 2006 -1627
h
0
s
h
6i
zz
N
w
m�
E
2°
Q
U
q
ti
a
h
h
H
b
N
W
E
b
e
0
0
3O
3
— — — — Conservation Easement
- Longitudinal Profile
Photo Locations
Benchmark
Surveyed Location of
Vegetative Monitoring Plot
Crest Gauge
Constructed Riffle
EE Constructed Log Sill
McDOWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SOUTH MUDDY CREEK TRIBUTARIES Date. January, 2011
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc. MONITORING scale: 1" = 100'
Engineers • Surveyors • Planners • Scientists FIGURE 21
5500 New Albany Road, Columbus, OH 43054
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] TRIBUTARY C
M C M X X v I Job No: 2006 -1627
h
0
s
h
6i
zz
N
w
m�
E
2°
Q
U
q
ti
a
h
h
H
b
N
W
E
b
e
0
0
3O
3

III PROJECT CONDITION AND MONITORING RESULTS
A Vegetation Assessment
1 Soil Data
The project area is contained within the Iotla- Braddock - Rosman- Potomac soil association This
soil association typically consists of nearly level to very steep, somewhat poorly drained soils,
which have a predominantly loamy, clayey or sandy subsoil formed in alluvium on floodplams
and stream terraces (USDA, NRCS 1995)
The majority of Tributary A is mapped within Iotla sandy loam with 0 -2% slopes, occasionally
flooded The upstream portion of the tributary flows through additional soil units including
Elsinboro loam with 1-4% slopes, rarely flooded, Braddock clay loam with 6 -15% slopes, eroded
and Hayesville -Evard complex with 15 -35% slopes Tributary A2 is mapped in Iotla sandy loam
The portion of tributary B that is included in the restoration is mapped within Dillard loam, 1-4%
slopes, rarely flooded The portion of Tributary C that is included in the restoration is mapped
within the Iotla sandy loam unit
Data on the soils series found within and near the project site is summarized in Table VI
Table VI Preliminary Soil Data
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Series
Max
Depth in
% Clay on
Surface
1W
T
% Organic
Matter
Braddock clay loam rC2)
80+
27-40
032
5
0 -2
Dillard loam dB
80+
10 -15
032
5
4 -8
Elsinboro loam EsB
60+
8 -18
028
5
1 -3
Ha esville -Evard complex (HeD)
60+
7 -25
0 24 -0 28
5
1 -5
Iotla sandy loam oA)
60+
12 -18
02
5
4 -8
'Erosion Factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion ranging from 0 05 to 0 69
2Erosion Factor T is an estimate of the maximum average annual rate of soil erosion by wind or water that
can occur without affecting crop productivity measured in tons per acre per year
2 Vegetative Problem Areas
Vegetative Problem Areas are defined as areas either lacking vegetation or containing populations
of exotic vegetation All problem areas identified during each year of monitoring are summarized
in Table VII Since no vegetation problem areas of concern were observed in 2010, no
photographs of the vegetative problem areas have been included in Appendix A
aEvans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 20

1
Table VII Vegetative Problem Areas
South Muddy Creek Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Feature/Issue Station # / Ran a Probable Cause Photo #
NA I NA I NA NA
Sericea lespedeza is a common component of pasture mixes and, as this project is adjacent to
pasture lands, has likely spread into the project area from the surrounding landscape This species
has been present throughout the project condor since Year 1 monitoring Management for this
species in 2009 included the continuation of herbicide treatments, begun in the fall of 2008
Further spraying has been conducted throughout Year 5, as it was deemed necessary to enhance
survival of the planted species Since this species has been actively managed by herbicide
treatment, and the woody stem counts are meeting performance standards in Year 5, it has been
taken off of the vegetation problem area table (Table VII )
3 Vegetation Problem Area Plan View
Since no vegetation problem areas of concern were observed in 2010, the vegetative problem area
plan view is not included in Appendix A
4 Stem Counts
A summary of the stem count data for each species arranged by plot is shown in Table VIII
Table V1IIa provides the survival information for planted species, while Table VH1b provides the
total stem count for the plots, including all planted and recruit stems This data was compiled
from the information collected on each plot using the CVS- -EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4 0 Additional data tables generated using the CVS -EEP format are included
in Appendix A All vegetation plots are labeled as VP in Figure 2
In Year 5, the average stem density of planted species for the site exceeds the 5 year munmum
criteria with 528 stems /acre All vegetation plots are meeting the Year 5 mmunum criteria of 260
stems/acre In addition, a substantial number of recruit stems have been found in most of the plots
along all project reaches In 2010, the recruit stems resulted in a 63% increase in the total stem
density across the site
Remedial plantings were first conducted in late April 2007 Approximately 2,000 trees were
planted at this time including 500 trees along Tributary C, and 1,500 trees along the other
reaches These additional trees brought the average live stem density to 323 stems per acre in
Year 2, an increase over the average live stem density of 284 stems per acre in Year 1 An
additional round of remedial tree plantings were conducted in 2008, bringing the planted density
total to 336 stems per acre A final round of remedial tree plantings was conducted throughout the
2009 monitoring period This planting was intended to bring deficient areas of the site back into
compliance with the 320 stems per acre nummam The 2009 planting occurred on April 7 At
that tune, 1,000 stems of each of the following species were planted along the project streams
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 21

Botanical Name
Acer rubrum
Alnus incana
C ) Aroraa arbutifolia
Ilex verticillata
Platanus occidentalis
Quercus alba
Quercus velutina
Common Name
Red maple
Speckled alder
Red chokeberry
Wmterberry
Sycamore
White oak
Black oak
The remechal planting efforts have resulted in a net gam of woody stems for the entire site and the
achievement of the minimum performance standard
5 Vegetation Plot Photos
Vegetation plot photos are provided in Appendix A
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 22

Table VIlIa Stem counts for each species arranged by plot —planted stems
South If ddvCreeVT-,Tbuto-wmMv.tii-.—tou4SEI'Prol"-t-4u.-D(KTTOF—D1
Cornus amomum
Platanusoccidentahs

Table VIUb-Stem counts for each species arranged by plot all stems-
;�utblfuddvCreeVT-rbuta-ces,'?,estiir..tion/FRP roler V U
t o D 006 01
Cornus amomm
�Rosa multiflora
Platanui acmdentalu
Quercus michauru
Quercus rubra

0
B Stream Assessment
1 Hydrologic Criteria
A network of six crest -stage stream gages was installed on each of the project reaches The
locations of the crest -stage stream gages are shown on the monitoring plan view (Figure 2) No
bankfull events were documented for this site during the first year of monitoring Bankfull events
have been recorded during Years 2, 3,4, and 5 as documented in Table IX Photographic
documentation of the bankfull events is provided in Appendix B
Table IX Venficahon of Bankfull Events
Date of Data
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo #
Collection
7/18/07
Unknown
Crest gage at Station 5 +00 on
BF 1
Tributary B
7/18/07
Unknown (3 events)
Crest gage at Station 54 +85 on
BF 2
Tributary A Lower
10/19/07
9/14/07 - 9/15/07*
Crest gage at Station 113 +37 on
BF 3
Tributary A (Upper)
9/11/08
9/11/08
Photographed on site
BF 4, 5, 6, 7
9/21/09
1/6/09 - 1/8/09*
Five crest gages across the site
BF 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
5111110
1/25/10- 1/26/10
*Crest gage at station 113 +37 on
BF 13, 14, 15, 16
and /or 3/22/10*
Tributary A (Upper)
* Crest Gage at station 54 +85 on
Tributary A (Lower)
• Crest Gage on Tributary B
• Crest Gage on Tributary A2
*Date is approximate based on a review of recorded rainfall data
In May 2010, the crest gage at station 113 +37 on Tributary A (Upper) registered a bankfull event
at a level of 2' above the bottom of the crest gage The crest gage at station 54 +85 on Tributary
A (Lower) registered a bankf ill event at a level of 9 50" above the bottom of the crest gage The
crest gages on Tributaries B and A2 also documented a bankfull event, at heights of 3" and 6"
above the bottom of the crest gages, respectively These crest gages are set at or above the
bankfull elevation of each stream channel
The most likely date for the bankfull event was after the ram events that occurred on January 25
and January 26, and/or after the ram event that occurred on March 22, 2010 As these were the
largest precipitation events of significance since the documentation of the bankfull event in
September 2009, these are likely the bankfull event(s) recorded by the crest gages These dates
correspond to high discharge events, as well as high gage height observations, on January 25 and
26, and March 22, 2010, as recorded at USGS Gage 02138500 at Nebo, NC, which lies
approximately 15 miles west of Morganton and 5 miles east of Marion, NC Maxi num daily
discharge was 3,780 ft3 /s, 4,560 ft3 /s, and 4,200 ft3 /s for January 25, 26, and March 22,
respectively The discharge and gage height recorded at the above - mentioned Nebo station are
shown on the hydrographs below
�JEvans, Mechwart, Hambleton &Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tnbutanes Monitonng Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 25

USGS Surface-Water Daily Data for North Carolina
http //waterdata usgs gov/nUnwis/dO
USGS 02138500 LINVILLE RIVER NEAR NEBO, NC
6 0
58
48
4
3 8
320
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Rpr May Jun Jul Rug S"
2869 2899 204.8 2818 MO MS 2018 2818 2e16 2610 2918
— Provisional Oata Subject to Revision - - median daily statistic (6 years) — Daily muumm gage height
— Daily awaium gage height — Daily nean gage height
USGS Surface Water Daily Data for North Carolina
http Hwaterdata usas gov/nc/nwis/dv9
The documentation provided by the onsite crest gage network in Year 5 provided the fourth
monitoring year with a bankfull discharge event and the third monitoring year by which a
bankfull event was documented by the crest gage network This exceeds the total number of
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 01 Page 26
USGS 02138500 LINVILLE RIVER NEAR NEBO, NC
3M
2888
ion
=L
L
9 ift
Dec Mov Jan Feb Mar
Apr May Jun Jul Rug Sev
2869 2889 2818 2910 2619
2816 2818 MIS 2816 2819 2816
— Provisional Data Subject to Revision —
—
median daily statistic (87 years) — Daily nean discharge
—
Daily naxmnm discharge
— Estinated duly nean discharge
—
Daily nmumm discharge
USGS Surface-Water Daily Data for North Carolina
http //waterdata usgs gov/nUnwis/dO
USGS 02138500 LINVILLE RIVER NEAR NEBO, NC
6 0
58
48
4
3 8
320
Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Rpr May Jun Jul Rug S"
2869 2899 204.8 2818 MO MS 2018 2818 2e16 2610 2918
— Provisional Oata Subject to Revision - - median daily statistic (6 years) — Daily muumm gage height
— Daily awaium gage height — Daily nean gage height
USGS Surface Water Daily Data for North Carolina
http Hwaterdata usas gov/nc/nwis/dv9
The documentation provided by the onsite crest gage network in Year 5 provided the fourth
monitoring year with a bankfull discharge event and the third monitoring year by which a
bankfull event was documented by the crest gage network This exceeds the total number of
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 01 Page 26

C �
J� \
bankfull events that are required to be documented for this project by the end of the fifth year of
monitoring
2 Stream Problem Areas
A summary of the areas of concern identified during the visual assessment of the stream for each
year of monitoring is included in Tables Xa through Xe
Table Xa Stream Problem Areas — Year 1
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Feature
Issue
Station
Numbers
Suspected Cause
Photo Number
4+50(A2)
Large bar 25 feet a ded
SPA 1
AggradaUon
3+00(A2)
Overwidened channel 40 feet aggraded
(Year 1 Report)
SPA 1
79 +50 A Middle
Mat failed scour hole 5'
SPA 2 SPA 3
Bank failure
12 +10
Complete loss of riffle, bank failure
(Year 1 Report)
103 +00 A Upper)
Large hole scour 15 feet
Bank scour/ sloughing
SPA 2
83 +30 A Middle
Sloughing coin log undercut and fallen into pool
15 feet
(Year 2 Report)
82 +70 A Middle)15
Sloughing, coir log undercut and fallen into pool
feet
Bank scour/ sloughing heavily vegetated and
3 +00 A Lower
Sloughing
SPA 4, SPA 5,
Bank scour
19 +70
Bank scour around log sill
SPA 6
1 Report)
18 +50
Scour at outside meander bend, significant
aggradation
(Year
16 +00
Scour, mattin g loose and failing bank slough
15+70(C)
Bank scour/ sloughing
4 +50 C
Bank scour/ sloughing
Table Xb Stream Problem Areas — Year 2
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Pro ect No D04006 -01
Feature
Station
Issue
Numbers
Suspected Cause
Photo Number
Complete loss of riffle, bank recovering as a
SPA 1
Bank failure
12 +10
result of Cluck vegetation
ear 2 Report)
85 +64 A Middle
Minor bank erosion
Bank scour
15+70(C)
Bank scour/ sloughing
SPA 2
(Year 2 Report)
Bank scour/ sloughing heavily vegetated and
4+50(C)
stable
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 27

0
0
C.?
Table Xc Stream Problem Areas — Year 3
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Feature
Photo
Issue
Stahon Numbers
Suspected Cause
Photo Number
Complete loss of riffle, banks are heavily
SPA 1,2
Bank failure
12 +10
vegetated and stable
ear 3 Report)
Aggradation
2 +18 4 +50 A2
Bank scour /sloughing approximately 20 feet
4
84 +75 A Middle
from stream at top of slope
(Year report)
Minor bank erosion, heavily vegetated and
Aggradation in channel is embedding log vanes
85 +64 A Middle
stable
SPA 3,4
Bank scour
16 +50
Bank scour/sloughmg on left bank
(Year 3 Report)
Bank failure
15 +25 to15 +70 C
Bank scour/ sloughing
ear 4 report)
4 +11 to 4 +50 C
Bank scour/ sloughing
Table Xd Stream Problem Areas — Year 4
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Feature
Photo
Issue
Station Numbers
Suspected Cause
Number
Aggradation in channel is causing the stream to
form wetland conditions Structures are
SPA 1
Aggradation
2 +18 4 +50 A2
embedded in sediment *
4
(Year report)
1+10,6+00,11+50,
Aggradation in channel is embedding log vanes
13 +80
under sedunent
Complete loss of riffle, banks are heavily
SPA 2
Bank failure
12 +10
vegetated and stable
ear 4 report)
Sloughing on left bank mid - channel bar forming
83 +30 A Middle
downstream from this bank slum
Bank scour /sloughing approximately 20 feet
from stream at top of slope heavily vegetated
84 +75 A Middle
and stable
Bank scour
Bank scour around log sill, heavily vegetated
SPA 3 4
19 +70
and stable
(Year 4 report)
Bank scour /sloughing on left bank heavily
16 +50 B
vegetated and stable
15 +25 tol5 +70 C
Bank scour/ sloughing vegetated and stable
4 +11 - 5 +00 C
Bank scour/ slougfung
Engineered
SPA 5
structure
0+00
Water is flowing beneath the log sill
ear 4 report),
*Area was repaired as part of monitonng/mamtenance activities and will be revisited next monitoring period
to verify stability
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 28

C
Table Xe Stream Problem Areas — Year 5
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Pro ect No D04006 -01
Feature
Station
Photo
Issue
Numbers
Suspected Cause
Number
NA
NA
NA
NA
Tributaries B and the Middle section of Tributary A each had some areas of very minor bank
scour and/or bank erosion The majority of those areas were first noted in a previous year, all of
which have become heavily vegetated in Years 4 and 5, providing streambank stability The
riparian corridor is densely covered by herbaceous vegetation, which is expected to stabilize the
sloughing banks in future years Because of these reasons, the areas mentioned above have been
taken off of Table Xe
A few areas of bank scour have been noted on Tributary C in previous years of monitoring and
some of these areas have remained in Year 5 These locations were not identified as areas for
enhancement in the Restoration Plan, and as such, no restoration activities have occurred along
these banks The state of these banks are remnants of an pre - existing condition, and are therefore,
not considered problem areas in need of maintenance Because of this, they are not included in
Table Xe
Four areas of aggradation were noted in Year 5 Three structures along Tributary B were noted to
have been affected by aggradation Sand is the dommant streambed substrate in the project
reaches and, as such, sediment deposition over the noted structures is attributed to high sediment
supply readily available in the contribution watershed Because the issue for these structures
arises from depositional trends, rather than a concern with the physical structure, these areas are
listed in the table as aggradation issues, not failed structures It is noted that at all locations where
the structures are embedded, the channel and streambanks are stable
As previously mentioned, the other area of past aggradation involved the upstream portion on
Tributary A2 Throughout 2009, this section of the stream was developing wetland vegetation
within the stream channel, with heavy colonization by aquatic macrophytes In late 2009, this
area was repaired and returned to a more stable design condition The Year 5 stream survey
demonstrated that the repair on the Tributary has succeeded in decreasing aggradation along the
upstream portion Accordingly, this area of Tributary A2 has been taken off of the stream
problem area table in Year 5
In 2009, the most downstream of the constructed log sills was noted to be non - functional along
Tributary B The channel appeared to have downcut under the structure, allowing the water to
flow under, rather than over the log sill as designed This log sill was fixed in late 2009 and has
returned the grade control function of the structure, according to Year 5 stream monitoring
observances This structure, therefore, is no longer considered a stream problem area
During the Year 5 stream survey in September 2010, it was noted that a beaver dam had been
constructed on Tributary A (Lower) at station 0+00 Beavers had used the culvert between
Tributary A and South Muddy Creek to construct the dam At the time of survey, channel water
level was noted to be at, or above, bankfull stage The beaver dam increased water levels in the
upstream direction for an estimated 1,000 feet along Tributary A (Lower) It should be noted that
the dam was only a temporary problem area It was deconstructed a week after the stream survey
was completed, returning Tributary A (Lower) water levels to the appropriate elevation
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 29

Cl
3 Stream Problem Areas Plan View
Since no problem areas of concern were noted in 2010, the stream problem area plan view is not
included in Appendix B
4 Stream Problem Areas Photos
Since no problem areas of concern were noted in 2010, photographs of the stream problem areas
are not included in Appendix B
5 Fixed Station Photos
Photographs were taken at each established photograph station on September 16, 2010 These
photographs are provided in Appendix B
6 Stability Assessment Table
The visual stream assessment was performed to determine the percentage of stream features that
remain in a stable state after the first year of monitoring A summary of the assessment for each
reach is included in Table XIa through Table XIf This summary was compiled from the more
comprehensive Table B1, included in Appendix B Only those structures included in the as-built
survey were assessed during monitoring and reported in the tables
Table XIa Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Protect No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach A (Upper)
Feature
Initial
MY -01
MY -02
I MY -03
MY -04
MY -05
A Riffles,
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
B Pools,
100%
100%
100%
100%
99%
100%
C Thalwe
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
D Meanders
100%
99 %*
99%
100%
100%
100%
E Bed General
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
F Vanes / J Hooks etc 2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
G Wads and Boulders2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
C� Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tnbutaries Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 30

Table XIb Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Protect No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach A (Middle)
Feature
Initial
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
MY -05
A Riffles'
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
B Pools'
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
C Thalwe
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
10000
D Meanders
100%
96 %*
99%
99%
98%
100%
E Bed General
100%
100%
100%
100%
99%
100%
F Vanes / J Hooks etc 2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
G Wads and Boulders2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Table YJc Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Protect No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach A (Lower)
Feature
Initial
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
MY -05
A Riffles'
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
B Pools'
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
C Thalwe
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
D Meanders
100%
99 %*
99%
100%
100%
99%
E Bed General
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
F Vanes / J Hooks etc 2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
G Wads and Boulders2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Table XId Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Protect No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach Tributary A2
Feature
Initial
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
MY -05
A Riffles'
100%
97 %*
100%
100%
89 % **
94%
B Pools'
100%
100%
100%
91%
71%**
76%
C Thalwe
100%
100%
100%
100%
1 100%
100%
D Meanders
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
E Bed General
100%
93 %*
100%
100%
100%
100%
F Vanes / J Hooks etc 2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
G Wads and Boulders2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Does not reflect repairs made to the upper end of the reach
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributanes
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year S of S
Page 31

0
Table XIe Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Protect No D04006 -01
Se ment/Reach B
Feature
Initial
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
MY -05
A Riffles'
100%
99 %*
99%
99%
92%
94%
B Pools'
100%
100%
100%
100%
97%
100%
C Thalwe
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
D Meanders
100%
97 %*
98%
100%
99%
99%
E Bed General
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
F Vanes / J Hooks etc s
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
G Wads and BoulderS2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
H Log Sills
100%
97 %*
100%
100%
97%
97%
Table XIf Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Protect No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach C
Feature
Initial
MY -01
MY -02
I MY -03
MY -04
MY -05
A Riffles'
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
B Pools'
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
C Thalwe
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
D Meanders
100%
99 %*
98%
98%
96%
93%
E Bed General
100%
100%
100%
1009/10
100%
100%
F Vanes / J Hooks etc 2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
G Wads and BoulderS2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
* The percentages for Year 1 were updated, using the percentages derived from Table BI in Appendix B,
using the Feature Performance Mean percentages located in the last column of Table B1 The Feature
Performance Mean percentages were used for Year 2, therefore, the percentages are now comparable across
the years
'The tables were completed to include a percentage of stability for pool and riffle features using the
definitions provided below for the stream reaches along Tributary A
Riffle A portion of the linear stream segment located between two consecutive meander bends
Pool A portion of the curvilinear stream segment located in each meander bend
zThose features not included in the stream restoration were labeled N/A This includes features such as
vanes J -hooks rootwads and boulders
The visual stream stability assessment revealed that the majority of in- stream features are
functioning as designed and built on the project reaches Some of the stream reaches included
unstable meanders, where mmor erosion occurring along the outer bends of meanders However,
the meanders that had been in a state of degradation in previous years have continued to improve
in Year 5 due to increasing vegetative cover and associated root mass along the stream corridors
As the vegetation matures, the root mass is expanding in size, depth and density, enhancing
streambank stability As a result, the overall percentage of stability at meanders remained
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Trtbutanes
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 32

comparable to Year 4 on most every reach, indicating a trend toward sustained channel stability
over time The percentage of stability declined slightly on Tributary C in 2010, due to a few
meanders with limited states of erosion
Aggradahon is the cause for the percentages of instability noted under the riffle, pool and bed
general categories along Tributaries A2 and B When compared to Year 4, these Tributaries
exhibit less aggradation and resultant embedded structures This can also be seen when looking at
the longitudinal profiles for these two reaches What little aggradation was occurring in 2009
along Tributary A (upper, middle and lower) was observed to be reduced in 2010 As in Year 4,
the majority of the unstable riffles along Tributary B are associated with embedded features
(again as noted under the stream problem areas table) The number of unstable/embedded
features along Tributary B has decreased from 2009 to 2010 Again in Year 5, on Tributary B, the
majority of the installed log sills are functioning, with the exception of those noted to be under
aggradation for the riffle feature category As depicted in Table B1 , the number of aggraded
riffle features has decreased between Year 4 and Year 5 stream survey In 2009, it was observed
that the most downstream of the constructed log sills had lost its utility in maintaining grade
control As mentioned previously, this structure was fixed in late 2009 and has restored the grade
control function for this structure
As mentioned previously, sand is a dominan t substrate in the watershed As such, a high
sediment supply is readily available for the project reaches, and the minor depositional trends seen
in these project reaches is anticipated as a natural component of the system, rather than a concern
with the physical structure of the project
In Year 5, aggradation is no longer considered to be a source of unstable pools and riffles on
Tributary A2 The level of aggradation found along this reach has been much alleviated between
C 2009 and 2010 through adaptive management (remedial maintenance) in the form of sediment
overload removal Maintenance activities were completed to return the channel to initial design
standards As discussed previously, this section of the stream developed wetland vegetation into
2009, thereby allowing excessive sedimentation to occur As a result of the cleaning of this
channel in late 2009, the channel no longer continues the trend toward further colonization and
growth of wetland plants A few of the pools along this reach, which had become too shallow to
function as pool features, and several of the embedded riffle features are now able to function as
designed
7 Quantitative Measures
Graphic interpretations of cross - sections, profiles and pebble counts are provided in Appendix B
A summary of the baseline morphology for the site is included in Table XII for comparison with
the monitoring data shown in the tables in the appendix The data provided in Table XII for Years
1 -5 reflects data from only the long -term monitoring reaches assessed along the Year 1
longitudinal profiles The As -Built data documents the entire stream restoration project The
stream pattern data provided for Year 1 through Year 5 is the same as the data provided from the
As -Built survey, as pattern has not changed based on post - construction stream surveys and
comprehensive visual field assessments along each of the project reaches
Data provided for Table X1H Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary, reflects all years
of stream monitoring The table depicts basic morphological and dimensional measurements for
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc January 2010
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries Monitoring Year 5 of 5
EEP Contract # D04006 -01 Page 33

each monumented cross section of the project Table XI1I makes it easy to compare these
dimensional values from year to year, thus illuminating trends in channel evolution
Bedform features continue to evolve along the restored reaches as shown on the long -term
longitudinal profiles As is exhibited in Table XIH, dimensional measurements of the
monumented cross - sections remain stable, generally within the range of values measured in
previous years Some bankfull width measurements have decreased in Year 5, particularly along
Upper A, A2 and B, tributaries noted in previous years to have general aggradation When
compared to Year 4, a few cross sections on Tributary B are also exhibiting slightly decreased
bankfull depth measurements However, comparisons of the yearly long -term stream monitoring
data show successive increases in channel - floodplain connectivity and increasingly stable channel
dimensions, interpreted from width/depth ratios, entrenchment ratios, bank height ratios, and
channel geomorphologic parameters as shown on the long -term monitoring cross - sections
The comparison of the As- Built, Years 1-4, and Year 5 long -term stream monitoring profile data
show successive increases in the development of pool/nffle features as compared to as-built
conditions This was anticipated due to the sand -bed nature of the stream channels Riffle
lengths, pool lengths, and pool to pool spacings have steadily decreased from the as-built
conditions, as pool and riffle features continue to develop in the appropriate positions along the
reach, or have remained within the range found in previous years of monitoring A few
exceptions to these generalities occur on Tributaries A Lower (profile 2), A2 and B On Tributary
B, A2 and A Lower (profile 2), the riffle lengths have increased On most reaches of Tributary A,
the decreased pool length corresponded to a decreased riffle length due to the development of
additional pool and riffle features, thus a decreased pool to pool spacing The increased pool
spacing, observed on Tributary A2 in 2009 has been reduced with the cleaning of excess sediment
that occurred in late 2009 Aggradation along the upstream portion of this reach has been
lessened by the channel clean -out and has restored functionality to the stream features
Median particle sizes of the stream channels ranged from very fine sand to very coarse gramed
sand, following a trend of decreased median particle sizes from the as -built conditions, as fine
particulates settle during low flows in the pools, and to a smaller extent, in riffle features It
should be noted that particle sized increased slightly from Year 4 to Year 5 stream monitoring
This is due to the fact that all stream reaches exhibited less aggradation and more functional flow
in Year 5 This has allowed some of the smallest particles to be swept further downstream,
therefore increasing 2010 median particle sizes Remedial maintenance work on the restored
reaches beyond that which was discussed under the problem area section of this report is not
deemed necessary
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 34

Table MI Baseline Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Upper Tributary A (Long Term Monitoring Profile Station 0+00 to 9+7147 (97147 feet))
Reference Reach Data i
XS 114+6161 35 13
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Parameter
S Muddy Buchf►eld Z
S Mud
Tnb 4 Z
Pre - Existing
Design
As Budt3
Year 1 4
Year 2 4
Year 3
Year 4 4
Year 5 4
n
pMuiage Area M, 2
13
014
138
138
138
138
1.38
138
138
1 38
Bankfull Width fL
108
735
655
760
1100
1400
1250
1242
2022
16 32
12 21
20 20
16 21
12 33
18 34
1534
12 99
13 93
1346
9.24
12 68
10 49
Flood Prone Width ft
100
43
912
5000
50
3882
65 6
5221
3919
5152
4536
5183
5762
5473
5236
5838
5537
4027
5147
51 45
Bankfull Cross- Section Area Abkt) ft 2
207
91
591
1044
886
1224
1055
1169
1864
1517
1119
1778
1449
808
1649
1229
673
1008
841
713
833
826
Bankfull Mean Depth ft.
19
13
090
1 15
063
1 11
087
092
094
093
088
091
090
066
09
078
048
078
063
056
089
079
Bankfull Max Depth ft
25
18
178
180
128
166
147
152
23
191
152
223
188
172
196
184
1 48
161
155
127
167
139
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
728
661
991
2222
1607
1321
2198
1760
1345
2295
1820
1868
2038
1953
1665
2909
2287
1038
2264
1328
Entrenchment Ratio
93
3
139
658
357
455
406
313
325
3 19
320
320
320
314
421
368
403
419
411
384
557
406
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
359
100
1 11
100
1 11
106
100
100
100
]Go
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Wetted Perimeter R
146
995
835
909
1200
1438
13 19
13 15
2095
1705
1285
2090
1688
1300
1893
1597
1340
1441
1391
1036
1358
1099
H draulic radius ft
142
091
071
115
062
102
082
089
089
089
085
087
086
062
087
075
047
075
061
053
080
076
Belt Width It fL
50
4638
649
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
Radius of Curvature ft
10
1900
1067
2471
1626
1067
2471
1626
1067
2471
1626
1067
2471
1626
1067
2471
1626
1067
2471
1626
Meander Len ft
50
76
1064
60
107
785
60
107
785
60
107
785
60
107
785
60
107
785
60
107
785
Meander Width Ratio Wblt/Wb
68
658
357
455
400
247
403
325
248
410
329
273
406
339
359
385
372
394
541
468
Riffle Length ft
16
10
238
1303
533
106
924
316
803
524
2319
806
6349
2205
871
4162
2088
848
4805
2034
Riffle Slope Sn ftJft
0 026
0 032
00026
00069
00048
00014
00078
00038
00054
00112
00078
00028
00428
00185
00023
00280
00108
00015
00055
00023
Pool Len 1 ft
9
24
268
968
468
426
996
737
3014
6432
4974
3031
55 18
422
1547
4848
2659
1507
8479
3555
Pool Pool Spacing ft
40
27
853
1599
1287
888
1422
1045
4978
11168
691
2431
8864
5587
2063
6395
3942
30 15
14791
6438
�
�s9
d. (mm)
20
26
20
34
34
70
06
03
02
ds4 (mm)I
1
1 38
1
76
1
1
38
125
1
1 1
125 1
163
1
1
160 1
1 1
05
1
1
09
d s Sara e �
Valley Length ft
295
2520
1049
1097
61448
66140
66086
66086
66086
Channel Len ft
236
479
2644
1539
1609
90329
97226
97147
97147
97147
Sinuosity
16
105
147
147
147
147
147
147
147
Water Surface Slope Save
0 006
0 022
00035
00030
00023
00025
00031
00028
00032
00031
Bankfull Slope Sval
NA
0 025
00044
00033
00029
00026
00031
00030
00030
Ros en Classification
E4
E4
F/G
E4
C4
C4
C4
C5
C5
C5
Bankfull mean velocity
473
659
440
198
196
136
129
152
222
226
Bankf ill Discharge (Qbkf)
98
60
2600
207
207
207
18 65
1865
1865
1865
i Data provided by Natural Systems Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tributaries
Note When only two measurements were taken, they are listed as 'Min and Max values with no Med value
Z S Muddy Birchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for Tnbs B & C
when only one measurement was taken that is listed as a Med value
3 A Built dimension data includes each riffle cross sections in a described reach
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report
4 Monitoring Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long term profile reach only

� 1
i
Reference Reach Data i
Burchfield 2 S ddy Tnb 4 =
Drainage Area nu `
13
014
Bankf ill Width OMI &
108
735
Flood Prone Width ft
100
43
Bankfull Cross Section Area (Ablcf) ft 2
207
91
Bankfull Mean It
19
13
Bankfull Max Depth &
25
18
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
Entrenchment Ratio
93
3
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
Wetted Perimeter ft
146
995
H ftulic radius ft
142
091
Belt Width It ft
50
Radius of Curvature c It
10
Meander Len &
50
Meander Width Ratio ffblgWbkf)
6 8
P
'
Riffle Len n ft
16
10
Riffle Slope Sn f) Uft
0 026
0 032
Pool Len I ft
9
24
Pool Pool Spacing ft
40
27
d. (mm)
20
26
ds4 (mm)I
1
38
76
e
Valley Len ft
295
Channel Len ft
236
479
Sinuosity
-
16
Water Surface Slope Save
0 006
0 022
Bankfull Slope Sval)
NA
.K.
�
x
01025
Ros en Classification
�
Y'
:., . •xt.:.�'.
E4
4'�i>`.w}.a„
%
E4
Bankfull mean velocity
473
•:e, ': ^`
�,::
659
Bankfull ascharge (Qbkf)
:f.:., ......:...
98
�..
.rs,a
......s.:.1�Y'xs
60
1 Data provided by Natural Systems Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tributaries
2 S Muddy Burchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref
for Tnbs B & C
�•✓� ...i
;As Built dimension data includes each nflle cross sections in a described reach
"�z.��.ti
4 Momtonng Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long term profile reach only
.. z...,
f,
Table XII Basehne Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Station/Reach Middle Tributary A (Long Term Monitoring Profile Station 0+00 to 5 [phone] feet))
XS 114+6161 35 13
ring Monitoring
1 4 Year 2 4
4
Year 4 4
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Mn and Max values with no'Med value
where only one measurement was taken that is listed as a Med value
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report
-
?.g'� . n
.K.
�
x
. ^Y,': r.
. -.
�
Y'
:., . •xt.:.�'.
a�x
4'�i>`.w}.a„
%
"?.�:'.t
a' --r«n r;... r.:3:'::
�...�s:.>a:in7�k}:3x.
•:e, ': ^`
�,::
�:)�..
�qi,
"°.z°.T'iF.. -R
:f.:., ......:...
�..
.rs,a
......s.:.1�Y'xs
.:a
:•.::.- ^:�.�'.......
SS ^,
�::�.,.'x.:.a..a.,:..z'�..�
<f.
�•✓� ...i
"�z.��.ti
:is �
..._..�..�
.. z...,
f,
..
n:�' ;:.
.:,.
f,:.,. �
.°.::.xi::
r: d":'k._:_._.e�."s,::.r._.^.x
t:;A',�`,"".
:1 11
11
li
• 11
1'1
11
11
11
PI
11
11
11
• 11
1'1
11
• 11
11
11
11
11
3,
�g i
'.. a;:....�.�•1
�-t. >,':e."' . s. i
.s -.
. ' 'Yt"
`.;a"
a,a
'
MT j ..i
^�,.
, �,•s;-^
..z...;,�_»e, -..
'" `.2y�i
.
<-:
.A.. "c'1�:aa�
.. ...
..
...
,
d. i�iy
#°� �'.r
..
:.. 17�i.'.
� •tiA'�%a�..
y`"
i.°
6,. y�:
i�'T^SRfiA'�'•,aE,4�.�i�':'.:"`x
____
111
111
111 .
111 1
111
111
111•
11 •
11 1•
111 1
111
111
111
11 ••
111
111
1 11
11 1
r
^•a.
Vin_,.: e.
.p:..m.+<
� lSJ..:�..:�F:....,•.,_
- __.
L.a^3s.: =. ..
°��..�Sl�..
.^.'•.r!"JL'•5.�`.l
`�',
:
'.."�b:o�.
1
1••
1
1
1•
1•
1•
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Mn and Max values with no'Med value
where only one measurement was taken that is listed as a Med value
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report

Table X11 Basehne Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Lower Tributary A (Long Term Monitoring Profile No 1 Station 0+00 to 5+80 47 (580 47 feet))
Reference Reach Data i
XS 1+66 16 4 60
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Parameter
S Muddy
Birchfield 2
S Muddoy
Tnb 4 2
Pre- Exisbng
Design
As -Bud?
Year 14
Year 2 4
Year 3 4
Year 4 4
Year 5 4
Drainage Area im 2
13
014
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
Bankfull Width (Wbkf) R
108
735
659
1000
1300
3123
2212
1978
1887
2008
2023
2112
Flood Prone Width (Wfpa) ft
100
43
1041
6000
6000
8228
7114
71.26
4974
7989
6205
6205
Bankfull Cross Section Area Ab fL 2
207
91
489
2016
710
3036
1873
1946
1712
1950
2144
2391
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf) ft
19
13
074
280
055
116
083
098
091
097
106
113
BankfWl Max Depth (Dmax) ft
25
18
1.39
100
257
179
202
191
208
204
2 37
WiddA)epth Ratio
56
61
891
400
1479
3220
2350
2018
2074
2070
1908
1869
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf)
93
3
158
600
263
462
322
360
264
398
307
294
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
585
100
100
100
100
128
129
124
100
100
Wetted Perimeter ft
146
995
734
1232
1328
2359
1676
2021
1929
2053
2076
2167
Hydraulic radius ft
142
091
067
164
053
112
081
096
089
095
103
1 10
Pa
�
Belt Width (Whit) ft
50
6100
8540
6000
6000
6000
6000
6000
6000
Radius of Curvature (Rc) It
10
2500
1522
3994
2486
1670
2655
2170
1670
2655
2170
1670
2655
2170
1670
2655
2170
1670
2655
2170
Meander Length (Lm) ft
50
10000
14000
9000
14500
10700
9000
14500
10700
9000
14500
10700
9000
14500
10700
90 00
14500
10700
9000
14500
10700
Meander Width Ratio (WblMkf)
68
600
237
462
271
303
318
299
297
284
Riffle Length (Imo ft
16
10
2790
4190
3220
1030
3435
2245
3007 4637
3559
1081 3446
2075
958
2648
2076
Riffle Slope (Snf) ftJft
0 026
0 032
00020
00072
00048
00035
00096
00057
00032 00063
00044
00013 00129
00051
00010
00050
00030
Pool Length (Lpool) ft
9
24
4860
6290
5220
19 61
62 34
4163
2879 6349
4192
1551 5879
3679
1127
4901
3131
Pool Pool Spacing ) ft
40
27
5150
8870
7230
5963
8776
7355
3032 10011
7224
35 14 85 15
6472
2479
7098
4939
ubstra
z
d50 (—)I
20
26
013
013
021
016
004
0 13
d,4 (mm)I
38
1
1
1 76
1
1
1
1
1
1
029
1
1
0 29
025
1
037
017
130
eters`�
_ Valley Length (ft)
295
5710
5164
5178
41500
40878
40878
40878
Channel Length (ft)
236
479
5948
7391
7349
58930
58047
58047
58047
Sinuosity
1 6
104
1 43
1 42
1 42
1 42
1 42
1 42
Water Surface Slope (Save)
0 006
0 022
0 0019
0 0014
0 0012
0 0012
0 0012
]5546
0 0015
0 0016
0 0012
0 0013
Bankfull Slope (Sval)
NA
0 025
0 0020
0 0007
0 00099
0 00084
0 0016
0 0012
0 0012
0 0012
Rosgen Classification
E4
E4
F/G
E
CS
C5
C5
C6
C5
Bankfull mean velocity (Vblcf)
4 73
6 59
8 32
1 03
I i i
1 21
1 06
0 97
0 8Bankfull
Discharge (QUO
98
60
40 7
20 70
20 70
207
207
207
207
i Data provided by Natural Systems Engmeenng (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tnbutanes
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Min and 'Max values with no Med value
2 S Muddy Birchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for Tnbs B & C
where only one measurement was taken that is listed as a Med value
3 A Built dimension data includes each nffle cross sections in a described reach
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report
Monitoring Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long term profile reach only

i
Reference Reach Data r
S Muddy Bnchfield 2 1 S Muddy Tnb 4
Drama a Area ml 2
13
014
Bankf ll Width (Wbkf) fL
108
735
Flood Prone Width (Wfpa) ft
100
43
Bankfull Cross - Section Area Ab R Z
207
91
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbki) ft
19
13
Banldul1 Max Depth (Dmax) ft
25
18
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbki)
93
3
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
Wetted Perimeter ft
146
995
Hydraulic radius ft
142
091
r
Belt Width (Wblt) ft
50
Radius of Curvature (Rc) R
10
Meander Length (Lm) ft
50
Meander Width Ratio (Wbit/Wbkf)
68
Riffle Length (lnf) ft
16
10
Riffle Slope (Snf) ftJR
0 026
0 032
Pool Length (Lpool) ft
9
24
Pool Pool Spacing (p-p) ft
40
27
d5o (mm)
20
26
d& (mm)
38
76
A on Reach ar
Valley Length (R)
295
Channel-Length (ft)
236
479
Sinuosity
16
Water Surface Slope (Save)
0 006
0 022
Bankf ill Slope (Seal)
NA
0 025
Rosgen Classification
„r �.� .+
:.ter"-7.
E4
� .kY..
�
r'�-= `a...;::.'x
E4
Bankfull mean velocity (Vbkf)
473
`�°;:•'�
•• �.
�aa�.�_.;:.:.w.:
�'';�:.,__"
659
Bankfull Discharge (Qbkf)
:;;r
98
�.,.s.... �
EIRE, mot.
60
i Data provided by Natural Systems Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tributaries
2 S Muddy Buchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for
Tnbs B & C
r I
3As -Built dimenswn data includes each riffle cross sections in
a described reach
.
4 Momtonng Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long term profile reach only
Table MI Baseline Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Lower Tributary A {Long Term Monitoring Profile No 2 Station 0+00 to 6+23 77 (623 77 feet))
XS 1+6616 4 60
4
Monitoring
34
Monitoring
Momtoring
- - -- � 4
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Mm and Max values with no Med value
where only one measurement was taken, that is listed as a Med value
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report
:�
„r �.� .+
:.ter"-7.
�,..a..e..aa__...
� .kY..
�
r'�-= `a...;::.'x
"' °$
�
m :
`�°;:•'�
•• �.
�aa�.�_.;:.:.w.:
�'';�:.,__"
:;;r
�.,.s.... �
EIRE, mot.
...
d.,
..z�._....
_ s..l:.. _v..:.....sk
r I
C!'= .....x'�i `F:
• �'
.
4x�+ .,s>_,..x.:.��.�:�:�:'1r::c�::.
<<:
..
�.:.::m..ar..�..�.r�°
_
1.111
•111
'111
11
1 11
�����m
���������
Zvi
�:F��
Ua•
:AV3�^.
^r,.�v".�. �Y'.
F y. k
�x14��.'
:.�
� _ �k;.
�;^..
'�
::h�'�.3..
•�'
.._4:
z �
�•ry •.
3'�. h.: %f
�.�
l���>
.,°�•rl
° §:
':��YY,§S'�
..�..^1,._��:
..��:!�'
.'.?a
@:�f,..�
_��:�.�:
.�.
�'�.�- 4:�'1i9n�_
..�X:
r>�i
�rz'�
$ .I
#.Ya
bO
M.
.k 'tiX.:A
�:. aim''
e
"• ; -�'�j
av::.,,,,.,
��t
- .
---
1 -
s< a
:i <:•:r"-
*.,...,�
:�:'
�
�'E���L3�F:`;i
".'.3 `
_ba�v
�«.�xa
��'X'
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Mm and Max values with no Med value
where only one measurement was taken, that is listed as a Med value
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report

�l
Reference Reach Data
S
2
Table XH Baseline Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Lower Tributary A {Long Term Monitoring Profile No 3 Station 0+00 to 5 [phone] feet))
XS 1+66 16 4 60
rig Monitoring Monitoring
4 Year 2 4 Year 3 4
4
4
Drainage Area mi `
1
13
014
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
203
Bankfuill Width fL
108
735
659
1000
1300
3123
2212
2484
2584
2302
2339
2197
Flood Prone Width &
100
43
1041
6000
6000
8228
71 14
6833
7073
6955
6947
6947
Bankfull Cross - Section Area (Ab fL'
207
91
489
2016
710
3036
1873
1990
2088
2107
2093
18.24
Bankfull Mean ft
19
13
074
100
055
1 16
083
081
092
089
083
Bankfull Max Depth ax ft
25
18
139
280
100 1
257
179
--0-80
178
187
179
182
182
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
891
400
1479
3220
2350
3105
3190
2502
2628
2647
Entrenchment Ratio
93
3
158
600
263
462
322
275
274
302
297
316
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
585
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Wetted Perimeter &
146
995
734
1232
1328
2359
1676
2515
2617
2351
2368
2232
H draulic radius ft
.142
0 91
0 67
164
0 53
1 12
0 81
0 79
080
090
088
082
Flil m
Belt Width it ft
50
6100
8540
7320
6000
6000
6000
6000
6000
6000
Radius of Curvatiue R
10
2500
1522
3994
2486
1956
3282
2953
1956
3282
2953
1956
3282
2953
1956
3282
2953
1956
3282
2953
Meander Len ft
50
10000
14000
12000
9000
14500
10700
90
145
107
90
145
107
90
145
107
90
145
107
90
145
107
Meander Width Ratio lt/Wb
6 8
0 14
2 37
4 62
2 71
2 42
2 32
261
2 57
273
Yl�
�
Riffle Len n ft
16
10
1370
4680
2800
137S
22 00
1669
1092
4053
2579
686
3680
1631
1183
3155
1976
Riffle Slo Sn ft /ft.
0 026
0 032
00016
00151
00064
00031
00055
00044
00019
00066
00034
00020
00135
00057
00040
00096
00051
Pool Len 1 ft
9
24
2090
5590
3820
1480
4690
2902
2713
4412
3390
1934
3805
2879
1859
5014
2858
Pool Pool Spacing ft
40
27
4210
7620
6330
2888
8612
4893
3588
7681
5449
2869
7984
4491
2366
7774
4474
s� pie
d5o (mm)
20
26
013
013
021
016
004
013
ds4 (mm)
38
76
029
029 1
025
037
017
130
A dr ' c apa
N—
Valley Le ft
295
5710
5164
5178
35928
35882
37794
37794
37794
Channel Len ft
236
479
5948
7391
7349
510 18
50953
53667
53667
53667
Sinuosity
16
104
143
142
142
142
142
142
142
Water Surface Slope Save
0 006
0 022
00019
00014
00012
00012
00012
00010
00007
00007
00011
00010
Bankfull Slope Sval)
NA
0 025
00020
00007
00010
00-008
0 0022
00016
00008
00008
00004
Ros en Classification
E4
E4
F/G
E
C5
C5
C5
C5
C6
C5
Bankfull mean velocity
4 73
659
832
103
1 11
104
099
098
194
223
Bankfull Discharge (Qbkf)
98
60
407
2070
2070
20 70
2070
2070
4070
4070
i Data provided by Natural Systems Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tributaries
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Min and Max values with no Med value
r S Muddy Birchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for Tnbs B & C
where only one measurement was taken that is listed
as a Mod value
3 A Built dimension data includes each nfile cross sections in a described reach
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was
taken or data were not available
at the time of this report
Monitoring Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long tens profile reach only

,1
Data i
2
Drainage Area nu'
1 13
014
Bankfiill Width ft
108
735
Flood Prone Width ft
100
43
Bankfull Cross Section Area (Ab" R2
207
91
BankM Mean ft
19
13
Bankfull Max Depth &
25
18
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
Entrenchment Ratio
93
3
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
Wetted Perimeter &
146
995
Hy draulic radius ft
142
091
now
Belt Width It ft
50
Radius of Curvature &
10
Meander Len R
50
Meander Width Ratio ]t(Wb
68
Riffle Len ftl
16
10
Riffle Slope Sn f) ftJft
0 026
0 032
Pool Len 1 ft
9
24
Pool Pool S &
40
27
d. (mm)
20
26
da4
38
76
dd o IReae ar in
Valley Len ft
295
Channel Len ft
236
479
Sinuosity
16
Water Surface Slope Save
0 006
.. yp�
�
0 022
Bankfull Slope Sval)
�
NA
0 025
Ros en Classification
�
�
FA
�-
E4
Bankf ill mean veloci k
_ ..
.. �
4 73
.... .',-.
..., r..
.........
.:e
..
,. r
.:..�r
6 59
Bankfiill Discharge (Qb
.:.:'
Inc; >;
............:;<mr."
98
•::t :.f:.
:rs::_._u:.;.:�
.i
s .� � �
t1..
> :.:....:r;u.:...
�..:�_��
60
1 Data provided by Natural Systems -Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tributaries
2 S Muddy Birchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for Tnbs B & C
r?C`�.
..
�:..:.::.•� ..Y�.3E.�;:��
IAs Built dimension data includes each riffle cross sections
in a described reach
::�.�:�:
4 Monitoring Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long term profile reach only
Table XH Baseline Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Lower Tributary A (Long -Term Monitoring Profile No 4 Station 0+00 to 3 [phone] feet))
Year 14
4
Year 4 4
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Mm and Max values with no Med value
where only one measurement was taken that is listed as a Med value
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report
..
.. yp�
�
?.';.'�
'....:
�
iiR'�'1':':.�+w...':1
ta�
�
�
<%�x�3���.
�-
..
_ ..
.. �
�
.t,
.... .',-.
..., r..
.........
.:e
..
,. r
.:..�r
.:,'•,s _r,j,
......'
.:......... :§ 'tea...
•:6i'%
„o
.:.:'
Inc; >;
............:;<mr."
•::t :.f:.
:rs::_._u:.;.:�
.i
s .� � �
t1..
> :.:....:r;u.:...
�..:�_��
sa;iw
,c r:i?
.._�a__.
'.,.�
-� .��
� :.,..x':...........
r?C`�.
..
�:..:.::.•� ..Y�.3E.�;:��
%2.5 ._i.....
_ ,fie''
t?..�. 5 T"
::�.�:�:
1111
•111
'111
11
1 11
���������������
_______
111••
111 1
111
111
111
111
111
11
11 11
111 1
11 1
111::
11 1
11 1
11 1
11
.1
'1
1 11
1
•1
'1
,.
�'�
�'
-
� 3��=�a
a
��..
�� �9``.
r ..
.. �, .,
.y, ^.�`
i;x,..
.yam,.
�: +o- �i:d
a >: ":vr,'��".:NF•.
�r :, ^•.
�
F ,5.
Y:�'"'
` vJ Y.. �i .s`�".a.''^���"'�•�a.�..,�9�._
C.x l,s -�=
A�id:':5
T,•e
�}�'
"5�5. ''u° -"y
.�.Sn'Aw::i
_k�•�
__
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Mm and Max values with no Med value
where only one measurement was taken that is listed as a Med value
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report

l�
Reference Reach Data i
Parameter
42
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Tributary A2 (Long -Term Monitoring Profile Station 0+00 to 1+96 06 (196 06 feet))
XS 3+6177 216 17
Monitoring
Year 2 4
ing Monitoring
..__ .4
54
Drainage Area mi 2
13
014
0.27
0.27
0.27
0.27
027
027
0.27
027
Bankfitll Width (Wbkf) ft
108
735
709
500
1785
2143
2174
2231
2125
1684
Flood Prone Width (Wfpa) ft.
100
43
11 19
3000
4681
4681
4456
4449
4628
4677
Bankfull Cross - Section Area Ab R 2
207
91
429
481
1821
1752
1747
1646
1229
1696
Bankfiill Mean Depth (Dbkf) ft.
19
13
060
080
102
082
080
074
058
101
Banldull Max Depth (Dmax) ft.
25
18
1 12
130
178
155
152
128
1 17
191
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
1182
385
1765
2613
2717
3015
3664
1667
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf)
93
3
158
600
262
218
205
224
218
278
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
585
100
too
118
100
100
100
100
Wetted Perimeter ft
146
995
752
608
1825
2173
2198
225
2139
1783
Hydraulic radius ft
142
091
057
079
100
081
079
073
057
095
Belt Width (Wblt) R
50
3050
4270
3660
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
4000
Radius of Curvature (Rc) ft
10
1250
819
1426
1200
819
14.26
1200
819
14.26
1200
819
1426
1200
819
14.26
1200
819
1426
1200
Meander Length (Lm) ft
50
5000
7000
6000
4700
5700
5100
4700
5700
5100
4700
57 00
5100
4700
5700
5100
47 00
5700
5100
4700
5700
5100
Meander Width Ratio (Wblt/Wb ko
68
600
224
187
184
179
188
238
Raw
Riffle Length (Lnf) ft
16
10
830
1120
980
2 56
2420
1460
1680
4782
2975
2362
4040
3201
1587
3929
2491
1502
3000
2011
Riffle Slope (Snf) ftJft
0 026
0 032
00534
00718
00626
0 0255
01033
00523
00155
00328
00242
00134
00296
00215
00092
00181
00134
00010
00120
00060
Pool Length (Lpool) ft
9
24
3190
4710
3950
1260
3030
2430
2072
2629
23 75
3742
3846
3794
2446
3460
2879
3620
4270
3930
Pool Pool Spacing p) ft
40
27
5550
7940
6760
26 10
4860
3480
1878
3708
2750
1947
3940
3129
2654
9653
5158
1620
5540
3889
u`
d,O (—)1
20
26
26
ds, (—)1
38
76
76
ditlona am
°
Valley Length (ft)
295
310
334
334
16978
24182
24183
24183
24183
Channel Length (ft)
236
479
325
462
480
24400
347 526
348 235
3482352
3482352
Smuosity
16
105
138
144
144
144
144
144
144
Water Surface Slope (Save)
0 006
0 022
00156
00206
001025
00095
00069
00066
00081
00074
Bankfull Slope (Sval)
NA
0 025
1
1
00284
001035
00080
00063
00067
00200
00068
Rosgen Classification
E4
E4
F/G
E4
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
C4
Bankfull mean velocity (Vbkf)
473
659
1
429
3 83
101
105
105
112
1 50
108
Bankfull ascharge (Qbkf)
98
60
1 18 4
184
184
184
184
184
184
184
i Data provided by Natural Systems Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tributaries
Note Where only two measurements were taken, they are listed as Mn and Max values with no Med value
2 S Muddy Birchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for Tnbs B & C
where only one measurement was taken that is listed
as a Med value
3 A Built dimension data includes each nffle cross sections in a described reach
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was
taken or data were not available
at the time of this report
° Monitoring Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long tern profile reach only

C -)
Table MI Baseline Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Tributary B {Upper Tributary B Long Term Monitoring Profile Station 0+00 to 5+0436 (504.36 feet))
Reference Reach Data
XS 12 [phone]
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring
Parameter
S Muddy
Birchfield 2
S Muddy
Tnb 4
Pre- Existmg
Design
As-Budt3
Year 1
Year 2'
Year 3 4
Year 4 4
Year 5 4
EgMENNEMM
Drainage Area mi 2
13
014
044
044
044
044
044
044
044
044
BankfWl Width (Wbkl) ft
108
735
783
620
2183
2789
2486
2232
2507
2407
2401
2652
Flood Prone Width (Wfpa) ft.
100
43
1186
4538
6175
6912
6544
6175
6179
5739
61.22
6116
Bankfuil Cross-Section Area Ab ft 2
207
91
486
736
1207
1821
1514
1870
2079
1996
1863
1818
Bankfull Mean Depth (Dbkf) ft
19
13
062
160
055
065
060
084
083
083
078
069
Bankfull Max Depth (Dmax) ft
25
18
122
152
167
160
206
218
207
219
233
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
1263
388
3969
4291
4130
2657
2079
2900
3078
3843
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf)
93
3
151
732
248
283
266
277
247
238
255
231
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
440
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Wetted Perimeter ft
146
995
822
753
2249
28 15
2532
2365
2662
2520
2497
2792
H draulic radius ft
142
091
059
098
054
065
060
079
079
079
075
065
Belt Width (Wblt) ft
50
4538
5295
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
Radius of Curvature (Re) ft
10
1550
1020
1938
1405
1295
1938
1679
1295
1938
1679
1295
1938
1679
1295
1938
1679
1295
1938
1679
Meander Length (Lm) ft
50
6200
8680
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
6000
80 00
7000
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
Meander Width Ratio (WbIV Wbkf)
6 8
7 32
2 29
1 79
2 01
224
199
208
208
189
� 3
n
Riffle Length (Lnf) ft
16
10
13 10
1560
1440
1306
1882
1531
1249
2090
1632
743
3144
1677
657
2394
1685
Riffle Slope (Snf) RA
0 026
0 032
00216
00754
00501
00160
00497
00396
0025
00577
00439
00058
00569
00262
00027
00660
00240
Pool Length (Lpool) ft
9
24
1360
6740
2860
1466
6775
3056
1433
4305
2715
1258
3944
2266
1831
5352
2964
Pool Pool Spacing (p-p) ft
40
27
5680
12820
7970
2781
8646
58 15
2870
7508
5349
2172
6688
3962
1596
9764
4037
d30 (mm)
20
26
5506
55 1
019
016
023
028
dg4(mm)l
1
1 38
1
1
1 76 1
8388
839
023
023
8827
049
A t R
-f-
Valley Length (ft)
295
1360
1302
1312
32486
32620
32331
32331
32331
Channel Length (ft)
236
479
1455
2052
2041
50678
50887
50436
50436
50436
Sinuosity
16
107
158
156
156
156
156
156
156
Water Surface Slope (Save)
0 006
0 022
00124
00123
00091
00099
00093
00090
00088
00086
00116
Bankfull Slope (Sval)
NA
0 025
00078
00089
00097
00093
00100
00083
00055
00118
Rosgen Classification
E4
E4
B
E
E4
C4
C4
E4
C5
C5
C5
C5
Bankfull mean velocity (Vbkf)
473
659
420
277
135
109
098
102
1 10
112
Bankfull Discharge (Qbkf)
98
60
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
i Data provided by Natural Systems Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tnbutanes
Note Where only two measurements were taken, they are listed as Min and Max values with no Med value
S Muddy Birehfield Ref for Trib A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for Tnbs B & C
where only one measurement was taken that is listed as a Med value
3 A Built dimension data includes each nfile cross - sections in a described reach
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available at the time of this report
Momtonng Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long term profile reach only

1
C�11
Table XII Baseline Geomorphologic and Hydraulic Summary
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Station/Reach Tributary B {Lower Tributary B Long Term Monitoring Profile Station 0+00 to 5+ 0436 (50436 feet))
Reference Reach Data i XS 12 [phone] Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring Monitoring
Parameter S Muddy Buchfield 2 1 S Muddy Tnb 4 2 Pre- Ensting I Design I As-Built 3 Year 14 Year 2 4 Year 3 4 Year 4 4 Year 5 4
Drainage Area mi `
1
13
014
044
044
1
1
044
044
044
044
044
044
Bankfull Width (Wbkf) ft
108
735
783
620_
2183
2789
2486
2735
2885
3279
3094
3045
Flood Prone Width (Wfpa) ft.
100
43
1186
4538
6175
6912
6544
6349
6346
7198
6262
6325
BankfWl Cross - Section Area Ab R 2
207
91
486
736
1207
1821
1514
1993
1968
2241
2598
25
Bankfiill Mean Depth (Dbkf) R
19
13
062
100
055
065
060
073
069
068
084
082
Bankfull Max Depth (Dmax) ft
25
18
122
160
152
167
160
169
169
158
187
179
Width/Depth Ratio
56
61
1263
388
3969
4291
4130
3747
4138
48.22
3683
3713
Entrenchment Ratio (Wfpa/Wbkf)
93
3
151
732
248
283
266
2.32
222
220
244
208
Bank Height Ratio
10
18
440
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Wetted Perimeter It
146
995
822
753
2249
2815
2532
2784
2905
331
31 19
312
H draulic radius It
142
091
059
098
054
065
060
072
068
068
083
08
Belt Width (Wblt) It
50
4538
5295
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
5000
Radius of Curvature (Re) fl.
10
1550
1020
1938
1405
1020
1554
1334
1020
1554
1334
1020
1554
1334
1020
1554
1334
1020
1554
1334
Meander Length (In) R
50
6200
8680
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
6000
8000
7000
Meander Width Ratio (Wblt/Wbkf)
68
732
229
179
201
183
1 73
152
162
164
8
Riffle Length (Lnf) ft
16
10
130
1230
650
900
1239
1017
913
2010
1303
705
2026
1365
958
2634
1808
Riffle Slope (Snf) f Jft
0 026
0 032
00171
00934
00469
00275
00778
00444_
00164
00405
00291
00050
00509
00170
00020
00087
00052
Pool Length (Lpool) ft
9
24
1780
3720
2670
2579
4257
3622
1792
3494
2819
1366
3524
2428
1357
3631
2559
Pool Pool Spacing ) R
40
27
4160
6080
4770
2006
4707
3409
3931
5652
4578
25 11
5418
4707
1516
5108
3324
d5o (mm)
20
26
5506
55 06
019
016
023
028
d,4 (nvn)
38
76
8388
8388
023
023
8827
049
1 ea P e e
ANN-
Valley Length (11)
295
1360
1302
1312
32486
32620
32331
32331
32331
Channel Length (ft)
236
479
1455
2052
2041
50678
50887
50436
50436
50436
Sinuosity
16
107
158
156
156
156
156
156
156
Water Surface Slope (Save)
0 006
0 022
00124
00123
00091
00099
00073
00067
00059
00052
00087
Bankfull Slope (Sval)
NA
0 025
00078
00089
00097
00069
00070
00059
00103
00094
Rosgen Classification
E4
E4
B
E
E4
C4
C4
C4
C5
C5
C5
C5
Bankf ill mean velocity (Vbkf)
473
659
420
277
135
102
104
091
079
082
Bankfull Dscharge (Qbkf)
98
60
204
204
204
204
204
204
204
i Data provided by Natural Systems Engineering (NSE) and used in the Restoration Plan for S Muddy Tributaries
_204
Note Where only two measurements were taken they are listed as Min and Max values with no Mod value
2 S Muddy Birchfield Ref for Tnb A S Muddy Tnb 4 Ref for Tnbs B & C
where only one
measurement was taken that is listed
as a Med value
3 A Built dimension data includes each nfiie cross sections in a described reach
Blank fields indicate either no measurement was taken or data were not available
at the time
of this report
Monitoring Year 1 thru 5 data is derived by EMH &T from the long term profile reach only

Table XHI Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A (Upper)
Parameter
Cross Section (Riffle 1) XS 115 +35 21
Cross Section (Pool 2) XS 113 +37 13
Cross Section (Pool 3) XS 110+48 78
Dimension
MY 0 IMY11MY2
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (ft)
1687
12421
1224
1834
1299
1049
2329
1141
11551
1251
1528
1413
2336
794
558
16 65
1538
1231
Flood cone Width ft
4559
38821
3919
5762
5236
4027
50
543
5697
3604
6566
4983
5002
278
2676
49 97
4942
4987
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft=
1725
1169
1119
1649
1008
833
2822
969
1089
1137
11
1242
2686
446
364
13
1178
803
BF Mean Depth (ft)
102
094
091
09
078
079
121
085
094
091
072
088
115
056
065
0 78
077
065
BF Max Depth (ft)
16
152
152
196
161
1391
227
163
184
191
219
228
239
149
137
2 32
2191
249
Width/Depth Ratio
1654
1321
1345
20381
1665
1328
1925
1342
1229
13751
2122
1606
2031
1418
858
2135
1997
1849
Entrenchment Ratio
27
313
32
3141
403
384
215
476
493
288
43
353
214
35
479
3
321
405
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
I 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
1728
13 15
1285
1893
134
1099
2378
1203
123
1331
1619
1544
2407
872
6 28
1774
1631
1415
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1
089
087
087
075
076
119
081
089
085
068
08
1121
051
058
073
072
057
Substrate
D50 (mm )l
343
6981
0641
028
r
r
s
*
r
*
r
*
r
*
r
r
r
D84 (mm)
**
*r
rs
rr
rs
r*
rr
*r
r*
sr
rs
**
**
rr
rr
*r
rr
**
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A (Upper)
Parameter
Cross Section (Riffle 4) XS 108+96 23
Cross Section (Pool 5) XS 105 +38 70
Cross Section (Riffle 6) XS 103 +74 70
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (ft)
4063
2022
202
1233
1393
1268
2253
1035
1094
1011
8 38
965
2419
1164
1073
1021
807
924
Floodprone Width (ft )
6558
656
6462
5183
5838
5147
4999
50
5008
4998
4998
4998
6953
5283
5152
5215
5098
5145
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft)
22
1864
1778
808
673
713
2023
632
755
633
54
8 181
2432
949
908
861
702
826
BF Mean Depth (ft)
092
092
088
066
048
056
09
061
069
063
064
085
101
082
085
084
087
089
BF Max Depth (ft)
239
23
223
172,
148
127
183
159,
147
151,
167
18
226
18,
1 56
171
174
167
Width/Depth Ratio
4416
2198
2295
1868
2902
2264
2503
1667
1586
1605
1309
1135
2395
142
2162
12 15
928
1038
Entrenchment Ratio
161
325
32
421
419
406
222
483
458
494
596
5 18
287
454
48
5 11
632
5571
Bank Height Ratio
1
I
I 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
4103
2095
29
13
1441
1358
2317
11 15
1191
1101
9 25
11 131
2464
1229
114
1092
882
1036
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
091
089
085
062
047
053
087
057
063
057
058
073
099
077
08
079
08
08
Substrate
D50 (mm)
343
6981
0641
028
0211
*
*
*
*
s
s
r
s
s
r
D84 (mm)
1248
16321
161
051
0881
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D0400601
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A (Middle)
Parameter
Cross Section (Pool 7) XS 87 +92 18
Cross Section (Riffle 8) XS 85+64 09
Dimension
MY 0
MY I.
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (ft)
2338
1643
1336
1649
1748
1468
3665
1463
1468
1455
1376
1454
Flood prone Width (ft )
5001
5722
5737
5793
5005
52 18
6733
6733
6133
6137
6643
6705
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft'
2296
176
1633
1622
1463
1492
3826
1662
1535
1548
1354
1804
BF Mean Depth (ft)
098
107
1
098
084
102
104
1 14
105
106,
098
124
BF Max Depth (ft)
202
183
188
19
185
178
2761
238
211
224
226
247
Width/Depth Ratio
2386
1536
1636
1683
2081
1439
3524
1283
1398
1373
1404
1173
Entrenchment Ratio
214
348
351
3 511
286
355
184
46
418
422
483
461
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
I
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft
2377
1702
173
1713
179
1562
3742
1554
1541
15 34
14 63
1644
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0 97
103
094
095
082
096
102
107.
I
101
093
1 1
Substrate
D50 (mm)
*
023
003
046
0 OS
0111
D84 (mm)
**
041
005
1 191
0241
077
**
**
**
**
**
**

c;
0
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Protect No D04006-01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tribute A (Lower)
Parameter
Cross Section (Pool 9) XS 72+02 58
Cross Section (Riffle 10) XS 70+96 05
Cross Section (Pool 11) XS 66+0149
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3 I
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
-
BF Width (ft)
18 13
1641
997
25131
23
2059
1426
1564
1522
2294
2178
2303
2411
1209
1284
249
1377
2364
Floodprone Width (11)
64
5784
5685
71771
7454
7278
4985
5693
5161
7629
7699
7629
6305
3613
3532
6774
3661
6774
BF Cross Sectional Area ft2
1768
1112
8 11
1499
1705
1468
126
1263
1224
1971
2178
19331
2129
861
692
2226
776
2286
BF Mean Depth (ft)
098
068
081
06
074
071
088
081
08
086
1
084
088
071
054
089
056
097
BF Max Depth (ft)
191
1841
178
186
225
191
165
188
179
2251
232
19
172
1341
123
1 88
1 19
23
Width/Depth Rah
185
24131
1231
4188
3108
29
162
1931
1902
2656
2178
2742
274
17031
2378
2798
2459
2437
Entrenchment Ratio
353
3531
57
286
324
354
3491
364
339
334
353
331
262
299
275
272
266
287
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
I 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
1866
1786
11 11
2629
241
2121
1469
1636
1568
2337
2277
23391
244
1251
13 11
2525
1399
2434
Hydraulic Radms (ft)
095
062
073
057
071
069
086
077
078
084
096
083
087
069
053
088
055
094
Substrate
D50 (mm)
+
*
*
*
*
*
s
r
*
s
s
s
s
s
*
*
+
+
D84(mm )
**
**
**
**
**
s+
**
029
021
037
017
1 3
**
**
**
**
**
Table XIH Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006-01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A (Lower)
Parameter
Cross Section (Riffle 12) XS 64 +13 80
Cross Section (Pool 13) XS 54 +85 21
Cross Section (Riffle 14) XS 50+53 37
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
-
BF Width (11)
2557
1978
1887
2008
2023
21 12
279
1615
1393
2288
2327
2466
3414
1721
2089
2159
21 13
2107
Flood prone Width (ft)
7971
7126
4974
7989
6205
6205
5973
3904
3329
70
3845
4528
7978
3125
3854
3952
3597
3401,
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft=
3347
1946
1712
195
2144
2391
4627
1356
967
2827
3251
2845
4731
887
158
1578
993
9271
BF Mean Depth (ft)
131
098
091
097
106
113
166
084
069
124
14
1 15
139
052
076
073
047
044
BF Max Depth (ft)
255
202
191
208
2041
237
325
223
1921
2821
28
27
272
1171
134
1371
094
088
Width/Depth Ratio
19521
2018
2074
207
1908
1869
1681
1923
2019
1845
1662
2144
2456
33 1
2749
29581
4496
4789
Entrenchment Ratio
3 12
36
264
398
307
294
214
242
239
306
1651
184
234
182
184
1831
17
161
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter ft
2609
2021
1929
2053
2076
2167
291
1732
1469
239
2468
2561
3463
1746
2112
2182
2121
2114
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
128
096
089
095
103
1 1
159
078
066
118
132
1 11
137
051
075
072
047
044
Substrate
D50 (mm)
+
*
*
*
*
*
*
013
006
016
004
013
D84(mm)
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
029
021
037
017
1 3
**
**
**
**
**
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A (Lower)
Parameter
Cross Section (Pool 15) XS 43 +93 88
Cross Section (Riffle 16) XS 40+13 89
Cross Section (Pool 17) XS 28 +23 53
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
-
BF Width (ft)
1867
1562
1499
1859
1964
1875
2307
2091
2044
2006
1752
1855
1745
166
1579
20 3
1617
1734
Floodprone Width (ft
4764
6007
6471
6755
5734
6914
6055
5193
5177
4702
4762
4084
4838
5777
5438
63 67
5.015
5596.
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft'
2064
174
1656
2021
21 15
21 16
2935
2209
2036
1857
1569
1471
1645
1412
1272
19 38
168
1587
BF Mean Depth (ft)
1 11
111
1 1
109
108
1 13
127
106
1
093
09
079
094
085
081
095
104
092
BF Max Depth (ft)
231,
268,
287
2871
267
337
235,
207
212
193
19
174
185
213,
193
228
205
229
Width/Depth Ratio
1682
1407
1363
1706
18 19
18 17
1973
2044
21 57
1947
2348
1856
1953
1949
2137
1555
1885
Entrenchment Ratio
255
385
432
363
292
262
248
2531
2321
272
221
277
348
344
3 14
3 1
323
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
I
1
1
E20
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
1938
1703
1637
1992
2061
23 58
21 43
21 13
20 48
18
18 94
17 93
17 41
16 53
20 99
16 75
1844
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1 06
1 02
1 01
1 01
1 03
124
1 03
096
091
087
078
092
081
0771
092
1
0 86
Substrate
D50 (mm)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
013
006
016
004
013
D84 (mm)
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
029
021
037
017
1 3
**
**
**
**
**
**

0
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A (Lower)
Parameter
Cross Section (Riffle 18) XS 25 +39 7
Cross Section (Riffle 19) XS 22+3126
Cross Section (Pool 20) XS 21 +16 53
Cross Section (Riffle 4) XS 5+00 07
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (ft)
3123
2484
2584
2302
2339
2197
3522
1209
122
199
2126
2176
1261
1534
1495
2389
2413
2325
2789
2735
2855
3279
3094
3045
Floodprone Width (ft
8228
6833
7073
6955
6947
6947
8047
2784
2798
4524
5944
7409
4251
6784
6747
6327
6879
6831
6912
6349
6346
80
6262
6325
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2
3036
199
2088
2107
2093
1824
4676
567
534
1416
1806
21691
1243
1813
1659
2817
3125
3084
1821
1993
1968
2241
2598
25
BF Mean Depth (ft)
097
08
081
092
089
083
133
047
044
071
085
1
099
118
1 11
1 18
13
133
065
073
069
068
084
082
BF Max Depth (ft)
257
178
1871
179
182
1821
3 1
1141
1 11
146
181
215
202
274
2621
324
335
337
1521
169
1691
158
187,
179
Width/Depth Ratio
322
3105
319
2502
2628
2647
2648
25721
2773
2803
2501
2176
12741
13
13 47
2025
1856
1748
4291
3747
4138
4822
36831
37 13
Entrenchment Ratio
264
275
274
302
297
3 16
228
231
2291
227
28
34
337
442
4511
265
285
294
248
232
222
244
202
208
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
318
25 15
2617
2351
2368
2232
3584
1255
1263
202
2659
2226
1343
1669
1643
25321
2561
2537
28 15
2784
2905
33 1
31 19
312
Hydrauhc Radius (ft)
095,
079
08
09
088
082.
13
045
042
071
084
097
093
107
101
1 11
122
1221
065
072
068
068
083
08
Substrate
D50 (mm
*
*
*
*
►
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
■
D84 (mm
**
**
**
**
**
**
*s
**
**
**
R*
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A (Lower)
Parameter
Cross Section (Pool 21) XS 4+3101
Cross Section (Riffle 22) XS 3 +18 00
Cross Section (Pool 3) XS 8 +39 41
Cross Section (Riffle 4) XS 5+00 07
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 21
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (ft)
2277
2528
255
2564
2504
2598
2925
3585
3563
3561
3925
343
1761
993
978
3152
274
28
2789
2735
2855
3279
3094
3045
Floodprone Width (ft
599
713
6758
6653
4736
6824
8299
83
8294
829
8282
8265
4279
4375
4204
80
4822
5458
6912
6349
6346
80
6262
6325
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft' )
2997
4721
4557
4276
4239
3938
297
4043
3704
3545
4345
38461
1 1
557
52
2011
1633
1803
1821
1993
1968
2241
2598
25
BF Mean Depth (ft)
132
1 87
179
167
169
1 52
102
1 13
104
1
1 11
112
063
056
053
064
06
064
065
073
069
068
084
082
BF Max Depth (ft)
259
375
36
3391
344
32
251
278
262
2461
294
299
158
142
139
215
192,
194
1521
169
1691
158
187,
179
Width/Depth Ratio
1725
1352
1425
1535
1482
1709
2868
3173
3426
3561
3536
3062
2795
17 73
18 45
4925
4567
4375
4291
3747
4138
4822
36831
37 13
Entrenchment Ratio
263
2821
265
259
189
263
284
232
233
233
211
241
243
441
43
254
176
195
248
232
222
244
202
208
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter ft
2352
2682
2694
2684
2638
2713
2974
3637
3622
3607
3987
3523
18 15
1056
1046
3221
2872
2872
28 15
2784
2905
33 1
31 19
312
Hydraulic Radms (ft)
127
176
169
159
161
145
1
1 11
102
098
109
109
061
053
05
0 62
057
063
065
072
068
068
083
08
Substrate
D50 (mm)
*
004
003
004
006
0081
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
■
D84 (mm)
**
007
005
028
021
04
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary B
Parameter
Cross Section (Pool 1) XS 15 +34 21
Cross Section Mflle 2) XS 12 +10 65
Cross Section (Pool 3) XS 8 +39 41
Cross Section (Riffle 4) XS 5+00 07
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 21
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (ft)
1233
1008
1011
2956
2818
2992
2183
2232
2507
2407
2401
2652
1761
993
978
3152
274
28
2789
2735
2855
3279
3094
3045
Floodprone Width (ft)
4783
5291
5545
70
496
5602,
6175
6175
6179
5739
6122
6116
4279
4375
4204
80
4822
5458
6912
6349
6346
80
6262
6325
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft'
1068
941
964
2675
2235
2485
1207
187
2079
1996
1863
18 18
1 1
557
52
2011
1633
1803
1821
1993
1968
2241
2598
25
BF Mean Depth (ft)
087
093
095
09
079
083
055
084
083
083
078
069
063
056
053
064
06
064
065
073
069
068
084
082
BF Max Depth (ft)
225
216
224
302
242
247
167
206,
218
207,
219
2331
158
142
139
215
192,
194
1521
169
1691
158
187,
179
Width/Depth Ratio
1417
1084
1064
3284
3567
3605
3969
2657
302
29
3078
3843
2795
17 73
18 45
4925
4567
4375
4291
3747
4138
4822
36831
37 13
Entrenchment Ratio
388
525
548
237
1761
187
283
277
247
238
255
231
243
441
43
254
176
195
248
232
222
244
202
208
Bank Height Ratio
1
1
1
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
1376
1136
I 1 5
3097
2938
31 14
2249
2365
2622
252
2497
2792
18 15
1056
1046
3221
2872
2872
28 15
2784
2905
33 1
31 19
312
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
078
083
084
086
076
081
054
079
079
079
075
065
061
053
05
0 62
057
063
065
072
068
068
083
08
Substrate
D50 (mm)
*
1 004
003
016
023
028
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
■
D84 (mm)
**
0 18F
005
04
047_
0491
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**

_ —i
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary A 2
Parameter
Cross Section (Pool 1) XS 3 +23 00
Cross Section (Riffle 2) XS 2 +18 05
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (ft)
I8 04
847
85
1687
1654
1599
1117
2143
2174
2231
2125
1684
689
745
667
637
817
883
Flood prone Width (ft
6066
3205
3016
576
5235
5835
F46
46 81
44 56
44 49
46 28
46 77
2424
2622
2625
2607
1965
275
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft'
19 02
1264
5 16
12 05
9 74
11 6
309
17 52
17 47
16 46
12 29
16 96
442
441
366
353
482
5 18
BF Mean th (ft)
1 05
0 67
0 61
0 71
0 59
0 73
028
082
08
074
058
101
064
059
055
055
059
059
BF Max Depth (ft )
195
127
117
161
136
17
178
155
152
1281
117
191
091
091
104
1021
1071
1
Width/Depth Ratio
1718
1264
1393
2376
2803
2191
175
2613
2717
3015
3664
1667
1077
1263
1213
1158
1385
1497
Entrenchment Ratio
336
378
355
341
3 17
3651
262
218
205
199
218
278
352
352
394
409
24
3 11
Bank Height Ratio
I
1
I 1
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
1852
892
885
1726
1682
1647
1825
2173
2198
225
2139
17831
749
797
709
675
848
932
Hydrauhc Radius ft
103
064
058
07
058
07
1
081
079
073
057
095
059
055
052
052
057
056
Substrate
D50 (mm)
*
*
D84 (mm)_
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
**
Table XIII Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
South Muddy Creek and Unnamed Tributaries Stream Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 01
Reach South Muddy Creek Tributary C
Parameter
Cross some hea{ Pool- 17)-XS45+ 7
ross Section (Riffle 2) XS-8457
Dimension
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY i
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
MY 0
MY 1
MY 2
MY 3
MY 4
MY 5
BF Width (11)
367
678
74
865
695
527
1117
1125
1124
1239
1163
1085
689
745
667
637
817
883
Flood prone Width (ft)
2961
3783
376
3656
3772
3979
1598
1571
1522
1616
1625
1782
2424
2622
2625
2607
1965
275
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft= )
231
655
676
509
481
458
309
491
38
623
597
587
442
441
366
353
482
5 18
BF Mean Depth ft
063
097
091
059
069
087
028
044
034
05
051
054
064
059
055
055
059
059
BF Max Depth (ft)
089
1421
124
088
0961
1 18
053
079
061
075
076
075
091
091
104
1021
1071
1
Width/Depth Rah
583
699
8 13
1466
1007
606
3989
2557
33061
2478
228
2009
1077
1263
1213
1158
1385
1497
Entrenchment Ratio
808
558
508
423
542
754
143
14
135
131
14
164
352
352
394
409
24
3 11
Bank Height Ratio
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
428
795
8 51
937
757
618
1147
114
1133
1257
1287
1107
749
797
709
675
848
932
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
054
082
079
054
064
074
027
043
034
05,
046
053
059
055
052
052
057
056
Substrate
D50 (mm
D84 (trim
* D50 pebble information was not calculated (pebble counts were not collected)
** D84 pebble information was not calculated (pebble counts were not collected)

0
0
Year 1 vegetation monitoring was conducted in September 2006 using the CPS -EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation Version 4 0 (Lee, M T, Peet, RK , Roberts, S R Wentworth, T R 2006)
Year 5 vegetation monitoring was conducted in September 2010 using the same protocol as used
in Years 1 through 4 Year 1 stream monitoring was conducted in April 2007 to provide adequate
time between the as-built survey (accepted in January 2007) and the Year 1 monitoring survey
Stream monitoring for Year 2 occurred in October 2007, to provide six months between the Year
1 and Year 2 surveys Year 3, 4 and 5 monitoring occurred in the fall of 2008, 2009, and 2010
respectively, in order to provide a full year between surveys This report documents the fifth year
of both vegetation monitoring and stream survey
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc
Monitoring Report — South Muddy Creek Tributaries
EEP Contract # D04006 -01
January 2010
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Page 44

APPENDIX A
Vegetation Raw Data
1 Vegetation Momtonng Plot Photos
2 Vegetation Data Tables

Vegetation Plot 1
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 2
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 3
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 4
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot ;
Monitoring Year
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 6
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)

Vegetation Plot 7
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/09)
Vegetation Plot 8
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/09)

Vegetation Plot 9
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Vegetation Plot 10
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 11
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 12
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 13
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 14
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 15
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 16
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 17
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 18
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 19
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 20
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 21
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 22
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
�a.
r►
Vegetation Plot 22
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 23
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Vegetation Plot 24
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 25
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Vegetation Plot 26
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 27
Monitoring Year 5
Vegetation Plot 28
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

Vegetation Plot 29
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Vegetation Plot 30
Monitoring Year 5
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)

0
Table L Vegetation Matadata
Report Prepared By
M Itm Wolf
Date Pr red
1/19/201113 57
database name
cvs-e Pentrytool 2 2 6 Bak p mdb
database location
ENVIRONMENTAL M it 1 EEP V R t b D t b se
compuW name
HXSN941
file she
152396032
DESOUPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS
DOCUMENT
Metedsta
Desuiptio of database file the w and a s mm rY of nd Prwd d ta
ProL pftnted
Ea& project Is listed with Its PLANTED it ms W a f tit Ve This dudes We stakes.
ProL total steeu
Each project l listed with Its TOTAL st ms pu as fa ach ve r Th s Includes Uve stak U plMted stems a d all natural Unto stems
Plots
list of plots wrveyed with looU n and summa ry data V ve st m de d stem m ssl g, etc
VIM
Freg e cy dkvMutkm of N or classes for stems for all plotL
VI& or bySpp
F equerKy diMbutl ofvfitw classes listed
Danoge
list of most i eqtwd dam go d m with n mber f oa ffe d percmt of total st ms Impacted ach
Da
Dam evalues talUed fore cis es
Dema • Plot
Dam val es taJUed for ach of
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
lAmabix f the count It tal Imo stem of cis es t d and tool vcl t m combmed f esth d ad and miss) itst ms are excluded
PROJECT SUMMARY
Proect Code
00400601
prolect Name
South M ddy Cr It
n
R st ration of tnbutarle A, A2 B and C f So th Muddy Cr It
Rl," Bests
knKth(ft)
stream•t width h
Brea m
R wired blots cakvlated
ISompled Plots
130

Table 2 Vegetation Vigor by Species
Species
4
3
2
1
0
Missing
Alnus serrulata
19
6
1
1
2
3
Aronia arbutifolia
1
2
Aronia melanocarpa
1
Betula nigra
41
1
1 2
2
Cephalanthus occidentalis
1
1
1
Cornus amomum
46
17
5
41
4
14
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
53
31
5
51
1
11
Juglans nigra
1
Quercus alba
16
8
3
Quercus michauxii
13
10
3
1
1
Quercus pagoda
7
2
4
Quercus palustns
2
2
Quercus phellos
24
1
31
1
2
Salix nigra
5
2
1
1
1
Sambucus canadensis
4
1
1
Linodendron
1
Linodendron tulipifera
12
5
1
1
2
3
Platanus occidentalis
31
15
7
11
2
8
Crataegus
2
1
1
2
Prunus
1
Prunus virginiana
1
Uknown
1
TOT
22
243
104123117116
57

Table 3 Vegetation Damage by Species
H
d
O
G
0
4j
CO
V
.-.
a
E
2
3
UO
ro
3
r
E
M
in
0
3:
-M
Alnus serrulata
32
28
11
1
3
Aronia arbutifolia
3
3
Aronia melanocarpa
1
1
Betula mgrs
8
6
2
Cephalanthus occidentalis
2
2
Cornus amomum
91
831
1 1
11
51
1
Crataegus
6
5
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
107
101
5
1
Juglans nigra
1
1
Linodendron
1
1
Linodendron tulipifera
25
22
3
Platanus occidentalis
64
60
2
2
Prunus
1
1
Prunus virgmiana
1
1
Quercus alba
28
28
Quercus michauxn
29
25
4
Quercus pagoda
14
14
Quercus palustris
41
4
Quercus phellos
31
28
3
Salix nigra
12
12
Sambucus canadensis
6
51
1
1
F
Uknown
1
1
J3
TOT
22
1468
432
11
11
11
28
2

Table 4 Vegetation Damage by Plot
CL
H
d
O
to
V
N
cc
to
Q
E
cc
a
v
L
0
CL
f0
M
=
3
o
H
=
3
0
>
=
O
h0
L
cc
1-
40
>
0
M
-a
a
v
D0400601 -01- 0001 -year 5
15
13
1
2
D0400601 -01- 0002 -year 5
111
10
1
D0400601 -01- 0003 -year 5
241
22
11
1
1
D0400601 -01- 0004 -year 5
151
15
D0400601 -01- 0005 -year 5
141
14
D0400601 -01- 0006 -year 5
191
16
3
D0400601 -01- 0007 -year 5
ill
11
D0400601 -01- 0008 -year 5
131
10
31
1
D0400601 -01- 0009 -year 5
211
21
D0400601 -01- 0010 -year 5
201
20
D0400601 -01 -0011 year 5
25125
D0400601 -01- 0012 -year 5
211
19
1
1
D0400601 -01 0013 -year 5
21
20
1
D0400601 -01- 0014 -year 5
17
16
1
D0400601 01 -0015 -year 5
17
17
D0400601 -01- 0016 -year 5
17
15
2
D0400601 -01- 0017 -year 5
231
23
D0400601 -01- 0018 -year 5
18
17
1
D0400601 -01- 0019 -year 5
131
11
2
D0400601 -01- 0020 -year 5
171
14
3
D0400601 -01- 0021 -year 5
151
14
1
D0400601 -01- 0022 -year 5
101
9
'1
1
D0400601 -01 -0023 year 5
121
9
1
1
31
1
D0400601 -01- 0024 -year5
141
13
1
D0400601 -01- 0025 -year 5
11
10
1
D0400601 -01- 0026 -year 5
12
12
D0400601 -01- 0027 -year 5
8
7
1
D0400601 -01- 0028 -year 5
16
16
D0400601 01- 0029 -year 5
Ill
7
3
1
D0400601 -01- 0030 -year 5
71
6
1
TOT
30
468
432
1
1
1
28
2
3

Table 5 Stem Count by Plot and Species Planted Stems
N
O
S
N
yA
N
4
�'QaaQ4r1
O
N
A
NN
4
N
O
N
l0
M
R
rl
O
N
A
R
ei
O
N
A
4
'1
O
N
R
ei
O
N
A
PP
4
�-1
O
N
10
4
'/
O
N
A
§
4
�-1
O
N
A
4
4
N
O
N
A
NQ
4
rl
O
N
N
QN
R
'1
O
N
A
rQ/1
4
r�QaQgfjl
O
N
10
.QO
R
ei
V
N
A
Q
R
�-1
O
N
A
Qt0
4
'i
O
N
A
1Q�
4
'i
O
N
A
Q
R
'i
O
N
A
Q
4
9
O
N
A
Q
R
'1
S
N
A
rQl
4
e-0
O
N
NQ
4
rl
O
N
�
NQ
4
'1
O
N
QN
R
N
O
N
4
rl
O
N
A
NQ
4
rl
S
N
A
^
R
rl
S
N
��`1j
rl
S
N
A
.QN
9
4
N
A
C
9
R
Alnusserrulata
27
13
208
31
2
2
11
4
4
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
Aroma arbutifolia
3
2
15
1
2
Aroma melanocar a
1
1
1
1
Betula ni ra
4
3
133
11
21
1
Ce halanthus cccidentahs
1
1
1
1
Cornus amomum
72
26
277
6
3
6
3
2
2
1
4
5
10
2
1
1
1
1
3
2
3
3
2
5
1
1
1
2
1
Cratae us
3
2
15
1
2
fraxinus pennsylvanica
97
27
348
S.
2
5
1
1
5
1
2
4
4
S.
10
2
7
2
13
2
4
4
1
3
1
4
3
3
1
2
Ju lans m ra
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Uriodendron full ifera
19
12
1 58
1
1
1
31
3
2
1
2
11
2
2
Platanusoccidentahs
55
22
245
1
3
1
1
3
5
2
5
2
1
4
1
1
1
51
2
1
21
2
3
1 5
4
Prunus
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Prunus vi miana
1
1
1
1
Quercus alba
24
12
2
1
1
3
1
2
3
1
1
2
6
1
2
Quercus michauxu
26
12
217
2
4
1
1
3
5
1
2
2
1
31
1
Quercus goda
9
6
15
1
1
1
4
1
1
Quercus palustns
4
3
133
1
1
2
Quercus hellos
28
12
2 33
2
3
3
1
3
7
1
2
1
2
1
Salix ni ra
9
6
15
2
3
1
1
1
1
Sambucuscanadensis
5
3
167
Is
3
1
1
TOT
21
391
21
15
9
19
10
11
16
8
18
12
21
16
20
16
14
15
21
15
11
15
14
9
11
13
9
11
8
10
8
8

\� �
.�
�
�
©�
®�
©
®m��
®gym
®m
®m
®
®
©©
©gym
®
©
©
©mmm��

1
APPENDIX B
Geomorphologic Raw Data
1 Fixed Station Photos
2 Table B1 Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment
3 Cross Section Plots
4 Longitudinal Plots
5 Pebble Count Plots
6 Bankfull Event Photos
C )

Fixed Station 1
Overview of Tributary A (upper), facing upstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. /19/06)

Fixed Station 2
Overview of valley along confluence of Tributary A2 with Tributary A, facing upstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 3
Overview of valley along Tributary A (lower) near station 31 +50, facing downstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 4
Overview of valley along Tributary A (lower) near station 31 +50, facing upstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 5
Overview of valley on Tributary A (lower) at large culvert, facing upstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 6
Overview of valley on Tributary A (lower) at large culvert, facing downstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 7
Overview of valley along Tributary B, facing upstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 8
Overview of valley along Tributary B, facing downstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 9
Overview of valley along Tributary C near station 6 +50, facing downstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Fixed Station 10
Overview of valley along Tributary C near station 8 +50, facing downstream.
Year 5 — top photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/16/ 10)
Year 1- bottom photo (EMH &T, Inc. 9/19/06)

Table B1 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach A (upper)
Feature Category
Metric (per As -built and reference baselines)
(# Stable )
Number
Performing
as Intended
Total
number per
As -built
Total Number/
feet in unstable
state
% Perform
in Stable
Condition
Feature
Perform
Mean or
Total
A Riffles
1 Present?
24
24
0
100
2 Armor stable a g no displacement)?
24
24
0
100
3 Facet grade appears stable?
24
24
0
100
4 Minimal evidence of embedding/fining?
24
24
0
100
5 Length appropriate?
24
24
0
100
100%
B Pools
1 Present?(eg not subject to severe aggrad or mi rat
25
25
0
100
2 Sufficient) deep Max Pool D Mean Bkf >1 6?
25
25
0
100
3 Length appropriate?
25
25
0
100
100%
C Thalweg
1 Upstream of meander bend run /inflection centering?
25
25
0
100
2 Downstream of meander (glide /inflection) centering?
25
25
0
100
100%
D Meanders
1 Outer bend in state of limited /controlled erosion?
25
25
0
100
2 Of those eroding # w /concomitant point bar formation?
25
25
0
100
3 Apparent Rc within spec?
25
25
0
100
4 Sufficient floodplain access and relief?
25
25
0
100
100%
E Bed General
1 General channel bed aggradation areas bar formation
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100
2 Channel bed degradation - areas ot increasing downcutting
or headcutting?
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100
100%
F Vanes
1 Free of back or arm scour?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
2 Height appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
3 An le and geometry appear appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
4 Free of piping or other structural failures?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
G Wads/ Boulders
1 Free of scour?
N/Al
0
N/A
N/A
2 Footing stable?
N/Al
0
N/A
N/A
N/A

Table B1 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 01
Seement/Reach A (middle)
Feature Category I Metric (per As built and reference baselines)
A Riffles 1 Present
2 Armor stable a g no dis lacement
3 Facet grade appears stable
4 Minimal evidence of embedding/fining?
5 Length appropriate?
B Pools 1 Present?(eg not subject to severe aggrad or m
3 Angle and geometry appear appropn
4 Free of piping or other structural fadu
Iders 1 Free of scour?
2 Footing stable?
Number Total ITotal Number/ % Perform I Perform
Performing I number per Ifeet in unstable I in Stable IMeanor
as Intended
2 Sufficiently deep Max Pool D Mean Bkf >1 6?
state
3 Length appropriate?
C Thalweg
1 Upstream of meander bend run /inflection centering?
18
2 Downstream of meander (glidelinflection) centering?
D Meanders
1 Outer bend in state of limited /controlled erosion?
18
2 Of those eroding # w /concomitant point bar formation'
0
3 Apparent Rc within spec?
4 Sufficient floodplain access and relief?
E Bed General
1 General channel bed aggradation areas bar formation
100
2 Channel bed degradation areas of increasing downCL
or headcutting?
F Vanes
1 Free of back or arm scour?
0
2 Heiaht aooroonate?
3 Angle and geometry appear appropn
4 Free of piping or other structural fadu
Iders 1 Free of scour?
2 Footing stable?
Number Total ITotal Number/ % Perform I Perform
Performing I number per Ifeet in unstable I in Stable IMeanor
as Intended
As -built
state
Condition
Total
18
18
0
100
10
18
18
0
100
18
18
0
100
18
18
0
100
18
181
0
100
100%
19
19
0
100
19
19
0
100
10
19
19
0
100
100%
19
19
0
100
19
19
0
100
10
19
191
0
100
19
19
0
100
19
19
0
100
19
19
0
100
10
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100
N/A
N/A
1 0/ 0 feet
100
10
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
I
N/Al
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
1 01
N/A
N/A
I I

Table B1 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach A lower
Feature Category
Metric (per As built and reference baselines)
# Stable
Number
Performing
as Intended
Total
number per
As built
Total Number/
feet in unstable
state
% Perform
in Stable
Condition
Feature
Perform
Mean or
Total
A Riffles
1 Present?
93
931
0
100
2 Armor stable a g no displacement)?
93
931
0
100
3 Facet grad e appears stable?
93
931
0
100
4 Minimal evidence of embedding/fining?
93
931
0
100
5 Length appropriate?
93
93
0
100
100%
B Pools
1 Present?(eg not subject to severe aggrad or mi rat
95
95
0
100
2 Sufficient) deep Max Pool D Mean Bkf >1 6?
95
95
0
100
3 Length appropriate?
95
95
0
100
100%
C Thalweg
1 Upstream of meander bend run/inflection centering?
95
95
0
100
2 Downstream of meander (glidelinflection) centering?
95
951
0
100
100%
D Meanders
1 Outer bend in state of limited /controlled erosion?
95
95
0
100
2 Of those eroding # w /concomitant point bar formation?
95
95
0
100
3 Apparent Rc within spec?
95
95
0
100
4 Sufficient floodplam access and relief?
92
95
3
97
99%
E Bed General
1 General channel bed aggradation areas bar formation
N/A
WA
0/ 0 feet
100
2 Channel bed degradation areas of increasing downcutting
or headcutting?
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100
100%
F Vanes
1 Free of back or arm scour?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
2 Height appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
3 Angle and geometry appear appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
4 Free of piping or other structural failures?
N/A
0
WA
WA
N/A
G Wads/ Boulders 11
Free of scour?
WA
0
N/A
WA
2 Footing stable?
N/A
0
N/A
WA
N/A

Table B1 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach A2
Feature Category
Metric (per As built and reference baselines)
# Stable
Number
Performing
as Intended
Total
number per
As built
Total Number/
feet in unstable
state
% Perform
in Stable
Condition
Feature
Perform
Mean or
Total
A Riffles
1 Present?
7
71
1
100
2 Armor stable a g no displacement)?
7
7
0
100
3 Facet grade appears stable?
7
7
0
100
4 Minimal evidence of embedding/fining?
5
7
0
71
5 Length appropnate?
7
7
0
100
94%
B Pools
1 Present?(eg not subject to severe aggrad or mi rat
5
7
0
71
2 Sufficiently deep Max Pool D Mean Bkf >l 6?
5
71
0
71
3 Length appropriate?
6
7
0
86
76%
C Thalweg
1 Upstream of meander bend run /inflection centering?
11
11
0
100
2 Downstream of meander (glide/inflection) centering?
11
11
0
100
100%
D Meanders
1 Outer bend in state of limited /controlled erosion?
11
11
0
100
2 Of those eroding # w /concomitant point bar formation?
11
11
0
100
3 Apparent Re within spec?
11
ill
0
100
4 Sufficient floodplain access and relief?
11
11
0
100
100%
E Bed General
1 General channel bed aggradation areas bar formation
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100%
T7UFa—n-n—eTFe-d degradation - areas of increasing downcutting
or headcutting?
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100%
100%
F Vanes
1 Free of back or arm scour?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
2 Hei ht a ro nate?
WA
0
N/A
N/A
3 Angle and geometry appear appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
4 Free of piping or other structural failures?
N/A
0
WA
N/A
N/A
G Wads/ Boulders
I 1 Free of scour?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
2 Footing stable?
N/A
0
N/Al
N/A
N/A

Table Bl Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach B
Feature Category
Metric (per As built and reference baselines)
(# Stable)-
Number
Performing
as Intended
Total
number per
As built
Total Number/
feet in unstable
state
% Perform
in Stable
Condition
Feature
Perform
Mean or
Total
A Riffles
1 Present?
22
23
1
96
2 Armor stable a g no displacement)?
22
231
1
96
3 Facet grade appears stable?
22
23
1
96
4 Minimal evidence of embedding/fining?
20
23
3
87
5 Length appropriate?
22
23
1
961
94%
B Pools
1 Present?(eg not subject to severe aggrad or mi rat
23
23
0
100
2 Sufficient) deep Max Pool D Mean Bkf >1 6?
23
23
0
100
3 Length appropriate?
23
231
0
100
100%
C Thalweg
1 Upstream of meander bend run /inflection centering?
36
36
0
100
2 Downstream of meander (glidelinflection) centering?
36
36
0
100
100%
D Meanders
1 Outer bend in state of limited /controlled erosion?
35
36
1
97
2 Of those eroding # w /concomitant point bar formation?
36
36
0
100
3 Apparent Rc within spec?
36
36
0
100
4 Sufficient floodplam access and relief?
36
361
0
100
99%
E Bed General
1 General channel bed aggradation areas bar formation
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100
2 Channel bed degradation areas of increasing downcutting
or headcuttmg?
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100
100%
F Vanes
1 Free of back or arm scour?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
2 Height appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
WA
3 Angle and geometry appear appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
WA
4 Free of piping or other structural failures?
N/A
0
N/A
WA
N/A
G Wads/ Boulders
1 Free of scour?
N/A
0
N/A
WA
2 Footing stable?
WA
0
WA
WA
N/A
H Log Sills
1 Maintaining grade control?
14
14
0
100
2 Minimal evidence of sedimentation in adjacent pool?
13
141
1
93
97%

O',� 01
Table B1 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration / EEP Project No D04006 -01
Segment/Reach C
Feature Category
Metric (per As built and reference baselines)
Stable)
Number
Performing
as Intended
Total
number per
As built
Total Number/
feet in unstable
state
% Perform
in Stable
Condition
Feature
Perform
Mean or
Total
A Riffles
1 Present?
33
33
0
100
2 Armor stable a g no displacement)?
33
331
0
100
3 Facet grade appears stable?
33
331
0
100
4 Minimal evidence of embedding/fining?
33
331
0
100
5 Length appropriate?
33
33
0
100
100%
B Pools
1 Present?(eg not subject to severe aggrad or mi rat
34
34
0
100
2 Sufficient) deep Max Pool D Mean Bkf >1 6?
34
34
0
100
3 Length appropriate?
34
34
0
100
100%
C Thalweg
1 Upstream of meander bend run /inflection centering?
19
19
0
100
2 Downstream of meander (glide/inflection) centering?
19
191
0
1001
100%
D Meanders
1 Outer bend in state of limited /controlled erosion?
29
34
5
85
2 Of those eroding # w /concomitant point bar formation?
32
34
2
94
3 A arent Rc within spec?
34
34
0
100
4 Sufficient floodplain access and relief?
32
34
2
94
93%
E Bed General
1 General channel bed aggradation areas bar formation
N/A
N/A
0/ 0 feet
100
2 Channel bed degradation areas of increasing downcutting
or headcutting?
N/A
WA
0/ 0 feet
100
100%
F Vanes
1 Free of back or arm scour?
N/A
0
WA
N/A
2 Height appropriate?
N/A
0
N/A
N/A
3 Angle and geometry appear a ro nate?
WA
0
WA
N/A
4 Free of piping or other structural failures?
N/A
0
N/A
WA
WA
G Wads/ Boulders
11 Free of scours
I N/Al
0
N/A
N/A
2 Footing stables
I N/Al
01
WA
N/A
WA

Summary Data
PROJECT South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area 8.33 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width 10.49 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth 0.79 ft
REACH Upper A
Maximum Depth 1.39 ft
Width/Depth Ratio 13.28
DATE 9/26/10
Entrenchment Ratio 3.84
Classification C
` CROSS 115 +35
SECTION:
1!�05�fe'ni FEATURE: Riffle
i i ial c l,. ,tit
XS 115 +35.21 Riffle
V1116A0 J6i �66YY �1161fg10 1111 AY AC Amown 17 1110.11 vvwftv1 '_11060YS
116116]1 Yimq IaY6 1-21 1161.121 1161.171 111.121 1161.121
1110
WOkf - 10.5 DDkf - .79 BDkf - 8.33
� Ar
1108
.Y 1107
w
1106
1105
1100
Cross - section photo — looking upstream
0 10 20 30 40 50 fi0
Horizontal Distance (ft)

PROJECT
South Muddy
Summary Data
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
12.42 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
14.13 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.88 ft
REACH A Upper
Maximum Depth
2.28 ft
DATE 09126110
Width/Depth Ratio
16.06
Entrenchment Ratio
3.53
CROSS
113 +37.13
SECTION:
Ecosystelll FEATURE:
Pool
XS 113 +37.13 POOL
Uvl16IOOL}S
11).]I.q
�dn1Y VIlrl !\ Yw 0u A VUML= V YRI 0LM V VRMGl j_)YNr
YOIa'i IOYI{ 117.i.p Iq .o ""M 1LM71.9
L=
II
.13
Wbkf - 14.1 DbkF - .68 BbkF - 12.4
1110.0
1108.4
O
\ ,i
W
1105.2
5\:
11036--
11020
0 16 32 48
64 80
Cross - section photo —
looking left to right bank
Horizontal Distance (it)
Channel obscured by vegetation.

PROJECT
South Muddy
Summary Data
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
8.03 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
12.31 ft
TASK Cross -
Mean Depth
0.65 ft
Section
Maximum Depth
2.49 ft
REACH A Upper
Width/Depth Ratio
18.94
DATE 9/26/10
Entrenchment Ratio
4.05
�-
CROSS
110 +48.78
Ea�em SECTION:
111211 CIllCiii FEATURE:
Pool
YR5 POOL XS 110 +48.78
U Y116100L1Pr
gown
*eerae
weoeos
V—.l tv , -; MI MOLLS A YMIOOLM'7 M]MOLA VY.PWLA "'M OS
we Iowan q.a.n Lo.eze L+o.ue o.an
WOkF - 12.3 DDkF - .65 ODkF - 8.03
1109
i
1107
O
R i
�
1106
IJJ
\
1105
7
i
t
1101
Cross - section photo — looking downstream
1103
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
50 55
Horizontal Distance (R)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
Bankfull Area
7.13 ft'
D04006 -1
Bankfull Width
12.68 ft
5 -YEAR
Mean Depth
0.56 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Maximum Depth
1.27 ft
REACH A Upper
Width/Depth Ratio
22.64
DATE 9/26110
Entrenchment Ratio
4.06
Classification
C
CROSS
108 +96.23
SECTION:
11�Cosysfeni FEATURE:
Riffle
r
XS 108 +96.23 Riffle
1
d
0M.0
owsa
#w A YMNOZ W'..r. c ... .1p n
m b.t o.�a o.ra s.aa owa swa
}
Q I
1109
VOkf - 12.7 DOkf • .56 Nhkf - 1.13
1107
i
1106
C
s
1703
1102
Cross - section photo —
looking downstream
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
60 65 70 75
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
8.18 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
9.65 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.85 ft
REACH A Upper
Maximum Depth
1.8 ft
DATE 9126110
Width/Depth Ratio
11.35
Entrenchment Ratio
5.18
CROSS
105 +38.70
SECTION:
Em FEATURE:
Pool
lllill
! l Y'll lt'l1I
XS 105 +38.70 POOL
O res
�m
rooiss �na� ♦rrram p r�o rooirs A p r-1. V ­woirs
was ro`s m am �aem rwsm �.am
m�xm
1106
WDkf - 9.65 DOkf AS BDkf - 8.18
r
_
v
1101
r
lit
1103
1102
1101
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
15 50 55
Cross - section photo — looking upstream
Horizontal Distance (1t)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
8.26 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
9.24 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth
0.89 ft
REACH A Upper
Maximum Depth
1.67 ft
DATE 9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
10.38
Entrenchment Ratio
5.57
Classification
E
CROSS
103 +74.70
SECTION:
1,kosyst('.111 FEATURE:
Riffle
XS 103 +74.70 Riffle
ovwrrzs #1—. c. ve0*wM �vn�nr �a: v m.rn V,MNrns 1.:iv���rm
004.10 wim. ro�0 004A m 431 mN..m � 4R m m
YDkf 9.24 DDkf - .89 BDkf - 8.26
1107
'
1106
.w
1105\
--
\
d
A; ,K
110
3�1M+
w
I St.
,\ r-
1103
1
1102
1101
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
Horizontal Distance (ft)
60 65 70 75
Cross - section photo — looking upstream

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
14.92 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
14.68 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth
1.02 ft
REACH A Middle
Maximum Depth
1.78 ft
DATE 9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
14.39
Entrenchment Ratio
3.55
CROSS
87 +92.18
SECTION:
l
lem FEATURE:
:rl l�tl
Pool
ti ,
XS 87 +92.18 POOL
�,
�•;`
8.92.4 90�s
V1199ihf4 pYY9Y00LX9 AYR2 gOl1B (j YIII IOOl lOi TTYAlOOLk9 L)Y91100L%9
1999 A+ID.W YT19Y.M RN291 W.@.YI N1920
+
WDkf - 14.7 ODkf 1.02 OGkf
1105
- 14.9
1
1103
1102
1101
o
_ -
1100
a+
W
1099
1098
1097
109s
1095
0 10
20 30 {0 50 60
70 90
Cross section photo — looking downstream
Horizo30 al Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
18.04 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
14.54 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth
1.24 ft
REACH A Middle
Maximum Depth
2.47 ft
DATE 9126/10
Width/Depth Ratio
11.73
Entrenchment Ratio
4.61
Classification
C
CROSS
85 +64.09
SECTION:
11�COSy�tf I FEATURE:
Riffle
XS 85 +64.09 Riffle
Vru 11r>s ��ww� �wllptb ;_`. Y1011r 1R �M211r� pvei rrm �Ygrrm , iM�llr
fr6�10 fir bY� 6M�m ENIm i.�lm iM�r• AIf1m
lm
1102
Wbkf - 14.5 Dbkf - 1.24 8bkf - 18
,� .♦
1101.
�
1100
�-
..r
1
�
1099--
i
tit
1098
r
.
A
1097
1096
1095
Cross section photo — looking downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
60 55 70 75
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
20.59 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
14.68 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.71 ft
REACH A Lower
Maximum Depth
1.91 ft
DATE 9126/10
Width/Depth Ratio
2.90
Entrenchment Ratio
3.54
CROSS
72 +02.58
SECTION:
I1 �Stens _ FEATURE:
11111L1'll101i
Pool
•l�,u.t.
XS 72 +02.58 POOL
�
.��•1e`+ ;. ;�b�r'1T7,� }`'��
�} • t; t'RJe �.>
OiMML �0
>t.ss Sao
Vs rWr _, YMMLM ArC"Ln C7"IMLA VYMMLM -1 Mro M
w►• tt A mm. Tans rx s VH z
VOkf - 29.6 DDkf .71 Abkf
1099
14.7
1097--
-hl: - r
�i:.��,.
1096
/
�}►�
4 p-
�
N 1095
'
��
-+
r.
1094-
1093
1092
Cross section photo
— looking downstream
0 5 10
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 56 60
45
65 70 75 80
Horizontal Distance

Summary Data
PROJECT South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area 19.33 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width 23.0 ft
TASK
Cross - Section
Mean Depth 0.84 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth 1.9 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio 27.42
Entrenchment Ratio 3.31
Classification C
CROSS 70 +96.05
SECTION:
(Stelll
FEATURE: Riffle
1'111,11 •,llt'lli
XS 70 +96.05 Riffle
.. y 4 •4 „
Or��a ♦�iu a�� • am. :.'. ro�ws�m�
�$� Rio ss be max '..Im�
I* ok
1086 YOkf = 23
DDkf .84 DOkf ='19.3
1097 :'?12�
r- i•'` ~ Y
A.
•\
o
V
U.1
� r
1094--
;r ..
1093
1092
Cross section photo — looking downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
35 40 45 SO 55 60 65 70 75 60
Horizontal
Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
22.86 ftz
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
23.64 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.97 ft
REACH A Lower
Maximum Depth
2.3 ft
Width/Depth Ratio
24.37
DATE 9/26/10
Entrenchment Ratio
2.87
CROSS
66 +01.49
SECTION:
L�osystenl FEATURE:
l i l;li'
Pool
XS 66 +01.49 POOL
e
O VR31001>S �
Wli
Ytll� �Y�If1T �f Yllp l00llS � �M�OOI� C,' YIII100 \l9 � VIIJ IOOlX1 ...
Iqi'{ M\ f1Y1K f.01.1i iMIK FOI.IP f.011Y
Mtn
1096
YDkf - 23.6 DGkf - .97 Abkf - 22.9
1097
1096
2
C;
W
1094
\\
1093
1092
1091
Cross section photo
— looking downstream
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
65 70 75 60
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
23.91 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
21.12 ft
TASK
Cross - Section
Mean Depth
1.13 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth
2.37 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
18.69
Entrenchment Ratio
2.94
Classification
C
CROSS
64 +13.80
SECTION:
Ecosystem
FEATURE:
Riffle
XS 64 +13.80 Riffle
OVMII /A
WOlO
.Yi�l1Y �MIreGAUY ;_, Ypll /YC �YR311 /A V'YIII III ]S. �MJ11•X ;_J HII / /)L
� YY�/ Wl)� WNi WOO WOO WO✓0
1090
WDkf - 21.1
DGkf - 1.13
Abkf - 23.9
1097
b _ _
4
1096--
G
V
W
1091
1093
1092
1091
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 15 50
Horizontal Distance (ft)
55 60 65 70 75 90
Cross section photo — looking downstream

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
28.45 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
24.66 ft
TASK
Cross- Section
Mean Depth
1.15 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth
2.7 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
21.44
Entrenchment Ratio
1.84
�-
CROSS
54 +85.21
SECTION:
tens
11lill Y'I11E111
FEATURE:
Pool
XS 54 +85.21 POOL
JY{6AOLX
GIRSI
4{ 9 VY [QI [. YNnOIA A VAIMM 17 Y11210 M V YII2 IA !.�1
\Olia 10{{ N1i31
MM LM
Ay
Wbkf - 24.7
G1R21 WR21 Q 21 N 21
Dbkf - 1.15 Abkf - 28.4
I -
1100
1099
1098
1097
C
O
1096
V
W
1094
1093
1092
4
....
a.a >.
(J iY
1091
1090
Cross section photo — looking downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
55 50 65 70
Channel is obscured by vegetation.
Horizontal
Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
9.27 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
21.07 ft
TASK
Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.44 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth
0.88 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
47.89
Entrenchment Ratio
1.61
Classification
B
CROSS 50 +53.37
SECTION:
E�'m�teni
IA if1,111lVil lel It
FEATURE: Riffle
XS 50 +53.37 Riffle
Or�a�w �s ��aru •w��a� _. vMllva �r���►m
aaa yams /aYS an]r
pvll]Ils �s �ria��a []r����m
Olaf= apJr O�Oa ow�r
1098
WDkF 21.1
DUkF - .ffk RDkF - 9.27
1097
1096
N
/
1095--
\
O
1094
W
1093
\�
1092
1091
\/
1090
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
Cross section photo — looking downstream
Horizontal
Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
21.16 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
18.75 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth
1.13 ft
REACH A Lower
Maximum Depth
3.37 ft
DATE 9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
16.59
Entrenchment Ratio
3.69
.
CROSS
43 +93.88
SECTION:
Ecosystem FEATURE:
Pool
XS 43 +93.88 POOL
e J
onw roo.� ♦
waw
u+u ��ie.m , na.00ua ire rao s 17 "2M s V vu rooiu ; r ML
•m rw a.00e o.ms wnw wmm uw�
��
i
1100
Ybkf - 18.8 Dbkf - 1.13 Abkf
- 21.2
1099
1098
1
1097
.2 C
10
1091
W
1093
1092
1091
1090
1089
1088
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
Horizontal Distance (ft)
65 70 75 80
Cross section photo — looking downstream
Channel obscured
by vegetation.

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area 14.71 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width 18.55 ft
TASK
Cross- Section
Mean Depth 0.79 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth 1.74 ft
DATE
9/26110
Width/Depth Ratio 23.48
Entrenchment Ratio 2.2
Classification C
CROSS
ao +13.8s
SECTION:
't0111
1 11i1K't'lllt'll(
FEATURE:
Riffle
XS 40 +13.89 Riffle
4 �. .r '.� �
�� Y� ��:GiO :`•IGI]#� •Or0
I IIG�1ID�
�IpN1 vlMq.®� •Yr0
1098
#�
Whkf - 183
#� #�
DDkf - .79 ROkf - 14.7
1097
a. .•,1
1096--,
ly
1095
C
1094'��
'
1093
-- ---
•�\
- - ----
7 — — — - --
. E.�d f. ; +1 ;.y,r•.
r,
W
1092
�V
d"
1091
1090
1089
1088
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
35 40 45 50 55 60
65 70 75 80 85
Cross section photo — looking downstream
Horizontal
Distance (ft)
Channel obscured by vegetation.

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
15.87 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
17.34 ft
TASK
Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.92 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth
2.29 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
18.85
Entrenchment Ratio
3.23
CROSS
28 +23.53
SECTION:
' Clll
:I 1:II
FEATURE:
Pool
XS 28 +23.53 POOL
O YI16gO16
s.an
�� ��Iplp ,^� YIIp I00lIS A
alas wIw swm
YIII WO '7 YIU/OOI IS V 1111p011S
s•aa s.am a.am
-1 VIII IOOIIm
a.mm
1097
Wbkf - 17.3
Dbkf - .92 Abkf - 15.9
1096
1095
1094
1093
/
— — — — — —
— — — — — — — —
— — — — — -
1092
4W
1os1
"
UA
1090
1088
�
1087
1086
Cross section photo — looking downstream
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56
60 64 68 72 76 80
Channel obscured by vegetation.
Horizontal
Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
18.24 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
21.97 ft
TASK
Cross - Section
Mean Depth
.83 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth
1.82 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
26.47
Entrenchment Ratio
3.16
Classification
C
y
CROSS
25 +39.47
SECTION:
L� stem
_.,p
FEATURE:
Riffle
XS 25 +39.7 Riffle
r�? #��o Vftb. '3 �.a�
AYRINVA A Vs auM WY MAN= = Il
+s A
7094
Vbkf - 22
Dbkf - .83 pbkf - 18.2
1093
.er
1097
�C
1091
— — — — — — — — —
���•
—
�'
Z
s5'
O
�1�
/
1090
W
i�
4,
1089
j,
y • � • 1� � :
7 oee
1097
1086
Cross section photo
— looking downstream
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
40 45 50 55 60 65
70 75 80 85 90
Channel is obscured
by vegetation.
Horizontal
Distance (ft)

Summary Data
Bankfull Area
21.69 ft2
Bankfull Width
21.76 ft
Mean Depth
1.0 ft
Maximum Depth
2.15 ft
Width/Depth Ratio
21.76
Entrenchment Ratio
3.4
Classification
C
Cross section photo — looking downstream
Channel is obscured by vegetation.
C
O
N
V
W
PROJECT South Muddy
D04006 -1
5 -YEAR
TASK
Cross - Section
REACH
A Lower
DATE
9/26/10
r - CROSS 22 +31.26
SECTION:
'telll FEATURE: Riffle
11 111 Y 111Ci l l
XS 22 +31.26 Riffle
Uvrerr� ♦uu� �r��wm. ::, narr� �ve��r a� Orurr» ♦r��rrn rn�rrn
n.ais .asr rat arcs a.ars a.ais aa�s mars
HbkF - 21.8 Dbkf - 1 BbkF - 21.7
Horizontal Distance (ft)
s

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area 30.84 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width 23.25 ft
TASK
Cross- Section
Mean Depth 1.33 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth 3.37 ft
Width/Depth Ratio 17.48
DATE
9/26/10
Entrenchment Ratio 2.94
CROSS
21 +16.53
SECTION:
11P)SYStelll
FEATURE:
Pool
r' '
'L �
XS 21+16.53 POOL
O'/IiO gOLIA
�IiOY
�YNIp�tY LYYOIOpIYi
�6 bt 3NWID
AY111 gOLm C'YY]gOLYA V1'IAgOLm ;-J
INYYID 2N6ID 3NYSID
YILIgOIYIi
]NIY!
=c: ;, i►.` !' L -Y v
1093
bkf - 23.3
DDkf - 1.33 BDkf - 38.8
1092
1091
1090
d. +
O
is
V
1089
1068
1
1007
1086
1085
0 5
f0 15 20 25
30
0
3 35 10 45 50 55
60 65 TO 75
Cross section photo — looking downstream
Channel is obscured by vegetation.
Horizontal
Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area 39.38 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width 25.99 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth 1.52 ft
REACH A Lower
Maximum Depth 3.2 ft
DATE 9/26110
Width/Depth Ratio 17.1
Entrenchment Ratio 2.64
CROSS 4 +31
SECTION:
r_d�,s
r"C( Stelll FEATURE: Pool
R T-• i --
XS 4 +31.01 POOL
SC>M6IOOl]6
'^, ��
�L.il. VWr.B MW L] &VIIIPOO V Ln TV111POOLO 11044 Lm
O��
NJl➢I Mfi� P NJllil MJIDI MJIOI Mi1N INllll
.11 - 26 DDkf - 1.52 BDkf - 99.11
1091
1090
1088
O
1087
N
1006
W
i
1085
j
1081
1083
1082
1081
1080
Cross section photo — looking downstream
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 10 15 50 55 60 65 70 75
Note high water level.
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
38.46 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
34.3 ft
TASK
cross- Section
Mean Depth
1.12 ft
REACH
A Lower
Maximum Depth
2.99 ft
DATE
9/26110
Width/Depth Ratio
30.62
Entrenchment Ratio
2.41
Classification
C
r_,�j
CROSS
3 +8.00
SECTION:
�,ftells
ihv'l
FEATURE:
Riffle
v1 ;
XS 3 +18.00 Riffle
• .1_,r �•,.
TN •.'�._
GYI1611Y'JS .��Y �YIiGlin ;`, YtO11k IZ �YIII t1ID �YIIY IIY'S �YII]II ►� �]YIIItfK
>.YlID YYttOt btt lYlID h0m Mqm HIRID
.MMD
f
'
loeo
WDkf - 34.3
DDkf - 1.12 pDkf - 38.5
s
1088
1087
4J
Y
1085
1085
1084
0 10 20 30
40 50 50
7o 80 so
Cross section photo — looking upstream
Note high water level.
Horizontal
Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
11.6 ft'
6 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
15.99 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.73 ft
REACH A2
Maximum Depth
1.7 ft
Width/Depth Ratio
21.9
DATE 9/26/10
Entrenchment Ratio
3.65
CROSS
3 +23
SECTION:
1?c�x stem FEATURE:
Pool
l
�—Alm
r"1 �d
Uv�s roo�� �rq�
�.am Imo.
XS 3 +23.00 POOL
♦ura��w ur�o rooim �r�rooas Pvq �oo�m �nwrooie
rw� �.am ram awm aam
Ll r��roo��
amm
1110
WDkf . 16 DDkf - .79 NUkf - 11.6
/
..
1
/.
�• 1107
IOU
1106
�
1104
Cross - section photo
— looking downstream
0 5
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
50 55 60 65
Channel completely obscured by vegetation.
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
16.96 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
16.84 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Mean Depth
1.01 ft
REACH A2
Maximum Depth
1.91 ft
DATE 9/26110
Width/Depth Ratio
16.67
Entrenchment Ratio
2.78
Classification
C
z +1a
S ECTI
SECTION:
{ tem A FEATURE:
�'.11 111
Riffle
tillll'f I
XS 2 +18.05 Riffle
(�111611Y
Y5 �IiY1Y V—,I 6 `. YW III.ri' A111 -rm 1]111 AI MIDI --
'NI6� Yes Iii 9.116 NRi S.1lm ].Fi
F)VX1MRr
9F.X
1708
WOkF - 16.8 DDkF - 1.01
BDkF - 17
'
1107
l i
/ .
105
7103
1102
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
10 15 50
Cross- section photo — looking downstream
Channel obscured by vegetation.
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
24.85 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
29.92 ft
TASK
Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.83 ft
REACH
B
Maximum Depth
2.47 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
36.05
Entrenchment Ratio
1.87
CROSS
15 +34.21
SECTION:
Ftenl
�',I1 1'11 Y'111ci ll
FEATURE:
Pool
XS 15 +32.21 POOL
Oresr
w
L. *ft.. V�,O_
21
A-- 17YNro &m VYII]IO -
—Z
w 21
;y
1102
VDkf - 29.9
DDkF - .83 BDkf - 241.9
..
Y
1100
N
1096
V/
U1
1097
/
f
1096
'�'• = { --
1095
1094
Cross - section photo — looking right to left bank.
0 4 6 12 16 20 24 26 37 36 40 44
46 52 56 60
Horizontal
Distance (R)

Summary Data
PROJECT South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
18.18 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
26.52 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth
0.69 ft
REACH B
Maximum Depth
2.33 ft
DATE 9/26110
Width/Depth Ratio
38.43
Entrenchment Ratio
2.31
Classification
C
CROSS 12+10.65
SECTION:
Ecosystelll FEATURE: Riffle
-F-
XS 12 +10.65 POOL
f)
'
1_.
aasrr.m �m� ♦rram ,: rrrrrn A'. .1. C7 naum ♦re�ers l;vu nr yes
IMLL � IWr I]rLi IkOL i3VO! Wei rNN6
1096
VDkf - 26.5 DDkf - .69 9Ukf - 19.2
1
1097
.-�
C
1096--
b a
10
1095
y
+
ED
1094
1093
Cross - section photo
— looking downstream
1092
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
18.03 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
28.0 ft
TASK Cross - Section
Mean Depth
0.64 ft
REACH B
Maximum Depth
1.94 ft
Width/Depth Ratio
43.75
DATE 9/26/10
Entrenchment Ratio
1.95
` CROSS
8 +39.41
SECTION:
Ecosystem
Ecosystem FEATURE:
Pool
XS 8 +39.41 POOL
r.
�'
OYI16pOl» t►mr Vr'W— Lrt '--'-A prratoot.x ♦rlR root.0
!afar satstr. rap "Al shit Milt still
it Ma100l1m
sa1Jt
WDkF - 28 DDkf .64
BDkf - 18
1094
R t
1093
y
-
v
1092
W roar Y~
1090
1089
1068
Cross - section photo — looking downstream.
0
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
55 60 65 70
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
25.0 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
30.45 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth
0.82 ft
REACH B
Maximum Depth
1.79 ft
DATE 9129/10
Width/Depth Ratio
37.13
Entrenchment Ratio
2.08
Classification
C
�- CROSS
5 +00.07
' SECTION:
F
ossteni FEATURE:
1'dl IEIItL't111CII:
Riffle
XS 5 +00.07 Riffle
{ \` • i4 N' I I � �
_1 V11Ygwn VIII II�JB D VII]116 AC � VRT IIi JR
s.mm Yams NN�� s.mw 6.m0 samor Fm01
I.. YIIl11M k6
FV001
�]
� 9,
1093
Wbkf - 30.4 Dbkf - .82
Bbkf - 25
1092
w'4
C
1090
W
1089
/
1088
\
Z# \A
1087
1086
Cross - section photo — looking left to right bank
0 6 12 19 21 30 38 12 {8 5/ 60
66 72 78 8/ 90
Channel totally obscured by vegetation.
Horizontal Distance (ft)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
4.58 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
5.27 ft
TASK
Cross- Section
Mean Depth
0.87 ft
REACH
C
Maximum Depth
1.18 ft
DATE
9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
6.06
Entrenchment Ratio
7.54
`
CROSS
15 +70.17
SECTION:
mmtern
1,11 lilltl'l'll lc�i .
FEATURE:
Pool
XS 15 +70.17 POOL
O YR6 P0OL ♦ SanMWI ♦ WaW. '. YRO POOL
x315.70.17 InWCn0r9 SA— X8 15-70.17
P.—
L YRt POOL V YR3 POOL V YR3 POOL
X815.70.17 X016.70.17 X8 1S•10.17
POOL
I I YR/ POOL
X815.70.17
- 'f
1115
Wk f - 13.3
D4kr - .N
Dkkr - 5.8
1111
1113
-
1113
y,1
I1iD
LR
iG
1109
1100
1107
1105
1105
Cross - section photo —
looking right bank to left
0 5
10 16 30 35 30 35 30 15 50
Horizontal Distance (R)
55 50 65 70
bank

PROJECT
South Muddy
Summary Data
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
5.87 ft2
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
10.85 ft
TASK Cross- Section
Mean Depth
0.54 ft
REACH C
Maximum Depth
0.75 ft
DATE 9/26/10
Width/Depth Ratio
20.09
Entrenchment Ratio
1.64
Classification
B
CROSS
8 +57.59
SECTION:
'tem FEATURE:
l�:n
Riffle
iainit:ut
XS 8 +57.59 Riffle
�•�AI.
O
YRS RIF XS Ban1709 V Wa , '. YRO Rif XS ♦ YRI Rif XS L' YR1 RIF XS V YR3
B•5759 N5k61019 Surt— 0.5759 9.5759 8.57.59 B-57
Panlc
RIF XS -i
59
YRa RIF XS
8.5759
110]
Mkf - 17.6 09kf - 4.5
kOkf - 71.9
1106
1105
1101
1�
c 1103
p
1101
W
�..
i
1101--
1100
•
Yom.
1099
` rF
1098
Cross - section photo
— looking downstream
1097
10
15 50 65
0 5 10 15 10 25 30 35
Horizontal Distance (R)

Summary Data
PROJECT
South Muddy
D04006 -1
Bankfull Area
5.18 ft'
5 -YEAR
Bankfull Width
8.83 ft
TASK
Cross- Section
Mean Depth
0.59 ft
REACH
C
Maximum Depth
1.0 ft
Width/Depth Ratio
14.97
DATE
9/26/10
Entrenchment Ratio
3.11
Classification
C
`
CROSS
4 +11.50
'
SECTION:
fee
3 I I mill 'l'lllt -
FEATURE:
Riffle
XS 4 +11,50 Riffle
10
:YRSRIf %S �D'.rINWk VW:W, YRO RIF X9 AYRI RIF XS ,i YR2 RIF X6 VYR3 RIF X9 YRI RIF XS
4.11 .50 wmlawrs Sufa 1.1150 1.11.50 1.11.50 1.11 SO 1.11.50
POw18
94kF - 13.5 DOkF - .50 9Dkf 7.53
709
\
t
lose
C
109
`f
091
1093
C �
1 i5
f`.
Cross - section photo — looking
right to left bank
0
5 10 15 20 35 30 35
Horizontal Distance (ti)
10 15 60

1
H
1'
11
11
11
11
11i
Upper Tributary A Year 5
v IUU IUU 4UU c;jU JUU J!3u 4UU 45U bUU 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000
• Year 5 O Water • Bankfull 4 Left Bank Q Right Bank + Left Edge of x Right Edge
Channel Surface Water of Water

11
11
11
11
11
111
11(
11[
Upper Tributary A Year 5
U ju iuu IDU Zuu LDu Juu Jb u 400 450 5u0 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000
• Year 5 Q Water T Bankfull + Left Bank Q Right + Left Edge X Right ❑ Year 0 [S Year 1 ❑ Year 2 q Year 3 0 Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

11 AA
11
10
10!
M
109
109
Middle Tributary A Year 5
I�%j lUU «U JuU 350 400 450 500 550
Year 5 Channel Best Fit Slope = 0_00212
Water Surface Best Fit Slope = p. p ©235 Year 5 Water Bankfull ♦Left Bank Right Bank +Left Edge X Right Edge
Channel Surface of Water of Water
Bankfull Best Fit Slope = ©.pp2g1

449%4
1
1
1
1
11
Middle Tributary A Year 5
u 5u Iuu 15u 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550
# Year 5 Q Water V Bankfull + Left Bank O Right + Left Edge y Right ❑ Year 0 Q Year 1 ❑ Year 2 p Year 3 0 Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

1
1
1
1
11
ill
1[
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 1
U 5u Iuu 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
• Year 5 0 Water V Bankfull ♦ Left Bank O Right Bank + Left Edge X Right Edge
Channel Surface of Water of Water

1
1
1
1
1
11
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 1
DU iUU IDU tuU 15U 3UU 350 400 450 500 550 600
• Year 5 Q Water Bankfull ♦ Left Bank Q Right + Left Edge y Right ❑ Year 0 d Year 1 ❑ Year 2 q Year 3 0 Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

1
1
1
1i
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 2
Luu «u Juu 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
* Year 5 0 Water V Bankfull * Left Bank O Right Bank + Left Edge of X Right Edge
Channel Surface Water of Water

1
1
1
1
1
1
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 2
:Ju iuu IUU zuu Juu 35u 400 450 500 550 600 650
• Year 5 Q Water T Bankfull ♦ Right Left Bank + Right x Left Edge ❑ Year 0 Year 1 ❑ Year 2 V Year 3 fti1, Year 4
Channel Surface Bank Edge of ofWAter Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

1
L
1
1
1
11
11
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 3
IJu zuu 1ou .juu 350 400 450 500 550 600
• Year 5 O Water T Bankfull ♦ Left Bank <� Right Bank + Left Edge of X Right Edge
Channel Surface Water of Water

10
10!
`III,
10E
10E
108
108
108!
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 3
v� �v I Ju Luu 1Z)u suu Jbu 400 450 500 550 600
• Year 5 Q Water Bankfull ♦ Left Bank Q Right + Left Edge y Right ❑ Year 0 / Year 1 ❑ Year 2 q Year 3 f; Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

1
1
1
1
1
1i
11
1(
1(
1C
10
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 4
yu ou Flu 1bu 1uu 240 280 320 360 400
• Year 5 0 Water V Bankfull + Left Bank O Right Bank + Right Edge X Left Edge of
Channel Surface of Water Water

1
1
1
1
1
r
fI
Lower Tributary A Year 5 - Profile 4
I+u ou i.Zu IN IN 240 280 320 360 400
• Year 5 p Water Bankfull ♦ Left Bank 0 Right -l-- Left Edge X Right ❑ Year 0 Q Year 1 ❑ Year 2 7 Year 3 f.• Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

11
lily[
11(
11(
110
110
110
110'
110(
Tributary A2 Year 5
f J
• Year 5 O Water
Channel Surface
I V V
I1O
15u
175
V Bankfull } Left Bank O Right Bank + Left Edge of X Right Edge
Water of Wate r
200
225
250

1
1
1'
11
11
11
11
11l
11(
Tributary A2 Year 5
iuu iii 15u 175 200 225 250
• Year 5 0 Water Bankfull ♦ Left Bank Q Right + Left Edge X Right ❑ Year 1 Q Year 0 ❑ Year 2 q Year 3 !_) Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Upper Tributary B Year 5
au iuu IOU iuu 15u 300 350 400 450 500
! Year 5 0 Water V Bankfull ♦ Left Bank O Right Bank + Left Edge of X Right Edge
Channel Surface Water of Water

1
1
1
1
1
1
r
1
1
1
1i
11
Upper Tributary B Year 5
u Ou iuu I5u 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
i Year 5 p Water Bankfull * Left Bank Q Right + Left Edge X Right ❑ Year 0 d Year 1 ❑ Year 2 7 Year 3 :.f Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water

109
109
1091 —�
10
1
1
1087
108
1085 L
0
Lower Tributary B Year 5
r--.
CI
0
TI
CO
x
U-
Year 5 Channel Best Fit Slope = 0.0 0713 LnI
Water Surface Best Fit Slope = 0.00869 >-
Bankfull Best Fit Slope = 0.00840 I
25
A
75 100
125
vlrn
275 300 325 350 375 400 425
• Year 5
0 Water
V Bankfull ♦ Left Bank 0 Right Bank + Left Edge of
X Right Edge
Channel
Surface
Water
of Water
001
U) l
x
v
J
Q
a_
I
1091 —�
10
1
1
1087
108
1085 L
0
Lower Tributary B Year 5
r--.
CI
0
TI
CO
x
U-
Year 5 Channel Best Fit Slope = 0.0 0713 LnI
Water Surface Best Fit Slope = 0.00869 >-
Bankfull Best Fit Slope = 0.00840 I
25
A
75 100
125
150 175 200 225 250
275 300 325 350 375 400 425
• Year 5
0 Water
V Bankfull ♦ Left Bank 0 Right Bank + Left Edge of
X Right Edge
Channel
Surface
Water
of Water

1
I
1091
109
108
108
1087
1
1085 L
0
�I
rnl
�I
07
xi
0
of
a
�I
It
Lower Tributary B Year 5
r
Ln
CO
xl
�I
�I
(� I
I
25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350
• Year 5 C) Water Bankfull ♦ Left Bank Q Right + Left Edge X Right ❑ Year 0 Q Year 1 ❑ Year 2 p Year 3 0 Year 4
Channel Surface Bank of Water Edge of Channel Channel Channel Channel Channel
Water
375 400 425

ebble Count - Pool
aterial
Particle Size mm
Count
% in Range
% Cumulative
ilt/Cla
<0.062
20
29
29
Very Fine Sand
0.062 -0.125
3
4
34
ine Sand
0.125 -0.25
8
12
46
Medium Sand
0.25 -0.5
27
40
85
oarse Sand
0.5 -1.0
10
15
100
Very Coarse Sand
1.0 -2.0
0
0
100
Very Fine Gravel
2.0 -4.0
0
0
100
ine Gravel
4.0 -5.7
0
0
100
ine Gravel
5.7 -8.0
0
0
100
edium Gravel
8.0 -11.3
0
0
100
Medium Gravel
11.3 -16.0
0
0
100
Coarse Gravel
16.0 -22.6
0
0
100
Coarse Gravel
22.6 -32
0
0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
32 -45
0
0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
45 -64
0
0
100
mall Cobble
64 -90
0
0
100
mall Cobble
90 -128
0
0
100
are Cobble
128 -180
0
0
100
are Cobble
180 -256
0
0
100
mall Boulder
256 -362
0
0
100
Small Boulder
362 -512
0
0
100
edium Boulder
512 -1024
0
0
100
are Boulder
1024 -2048
0
0
100
edrock
<2048
0
0
100
Totals
68
100
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration EEP Project No. D04006 -01
Reach
B
X Sec
N/A
Date
9/26/2010
Sta No.
15 +34
Histogram
45
40
35
30
25
of 20
s 15
10
5
0
�,
■ /ll�!;il ■11111111 ■11111111 ■11111111■
■1111111
INIll�llll
■■
1111111■
■1111111■
■1111111■
■1111111
!Illilllll■
11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■
/ %IIIIIIII
■■
1111111■
■1111111
■1111111111111111
.,
■//,1111111■
■1111111■
■1111111■
■1111
1111
_
J.�IIIIIII■
■1111111■
■1111111■
■1111
IIII
•
. ,
��■
1111111■
■1111111■
■1111111■
■1111
1111
,
' - '
■■
1111111
■■
1111111■
■1111111■
■1111..,__.
,
■.JIII
■■
,
1111111
■■
1111111■
■1111111■
■1111111■
■1111111
■■ 1111111 ■■ 1111111■ ■1111111■
■1111111■ ■1111111
,

ebble Count - Riffle
aterial
Particle Size mm
Count
% in Range
% Cumulative
ilt/Cla
<0.062
12
20
20
Very Fine Sand
0.062 -0.125
8
13
33
ine Sand
0.125 -0.25
1
2
35
edium Sand
0.25 -0.5
21
35
70
oarse Sand
0.5 -1.0
5
8
78
Very Coarse Sand
1.0 -2.0
0
0
78
Very Fine Gravel
2.0 -4.0
0
0
78
ine Gravel
4.0 -5.7
0
0
78
ine Gravel
5.7 -8.0
0 1
0
78
edium Gravel
8.0 -11.3
0
0
78
edium Gravel
11.3 -16.0
0
0
78
Coarse Gravel
16.0 -22.6
0
0
78
oarse Gravel
22.6 -32
0
0
78
Very Coarse Gravel
32 -45
3
5
83
Very Coarse Gravel
45 -64
4
7
90
Small Cobble
64 -90
3
5
95
mall Cobble
90 -128
0
0
95
are Cobble
128 -180
3
5
100
are Cobble
180 -256
0
0
100
Small Boulder
256 -362
0
0
100
Small Boulder
362 -512
0
0
100
Medium Boulder
512 -1024
0
0
100
are Boulder
1024 -2048
0
0
100
Bedrock
<2048
0
0
100
Totals
60
100
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration EEP Project No. D04006 -01
Reach
B
1
X Sec
N/A
Date
9/26/2010
Sta No.
2 +25
40
35
30
25
eo
a 20
15
s
10
5
0
Histogram
0.062 0.25 1 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 2048
Particle Size (nun)
Particle Size Distribution
�,
■I�Illlli
■■
1111111
■11111!�;J
■�������
■IIIIIIII
■IIIII�I�I�IIIIIIII�II�ill;i■
■1111111■
■1111111
.,
111mup,
al■■IIIIIII■■IIII'ill
■11111111
■11111111
��11
►�I6111
■■
1111111
■111�IIII
■1111111111111111
.,
I/11111�
■
■�11111���
'
■1111111
- -
II
,.
►���JIII�..�IIIIIr■1111111
■1111111
■11111111■
■111111
II
. , ,
11
/1111111■
- -
r.��llllll�
■!!!!!!!!!
■�IIIIII■
■111111
-' "
II
,
JIIII��II
■11111111
■11111111
■1111111
-
II
/l:iilllll■
■1111111
11111111
■11111111
■11111111■
r�11111111■
11111111
■11111111■
■1111111
■11111111

ebble Count - Pool
aterial
article Size mm
Count
% in Range
% Cumulative
ilt/Cla
<0.062
27
45
45
Very Fine Sand
0.062 -0.125
11
18
63
ine Sand
0.125 -0.25
6
10
73
edium Sand
0.25 -0.5
11
18
92
Coarse Sand
0.5 -1.0
5
8
100
Very Coarse Sand
1.0 -2.0
0
0
100
Very Fine Gravel
2.0 -4.0
0
0
100
ine Gravel
4.0 -5.7
0
0
100
ine Gravel
5.7 -8.0
0
0
100
Medium Gravel
8.0 -11.3
0
0
100
edium Gravel
11.3 -16.0
0
0
1 100
oarse Gravel
16.0 -22.6
0
0
100
oarse Gravel
22.6 -32
0
0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
32 -45
0
0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
45 -64
0
0
100
Small Cobble
64 -90
0
0
100
mall Cobble
90 -128
0
0
100
are Cobble
128 -180
0
1 0
100
are Cobble
180 -256
0
0
100
Small Boulder
256 -362
0
0
100
Small Boulder
362 -512
0
0
100
Medium Boulder
512 -1024
0
0
100
are Boulder
1024 -2048
0
0
100
Bedrock
<2048
0
0
100
Totals
60
100
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration EEP Project No. D04006 -01
Reach
A (lower)
X Sec
N/A
Date
9/26/2010
Sta No.
4 +31
50
45
40
35
30
eo
m
25
x`
a 20
b` 15
to
5
0
Histogram
0.062 0.25 l 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 2048
Particle Size (mm)
:1 • ���IIIII■ 11IIII�I .11'lllll■1"IIIII.,'I'llll
1 �/ �111IIII. 1"' llll■1111IIII■111'llll.'11IIIII
.1 ■, 11IIIII■"' lllll■„I'IIII■,1'lllll.,'!lilll
1 ■ 11'IIIII.,1"IIII■„'lllll■,'III� ' • III
1 ■' 1'lllll■„'IIIII■,11'llll■,11'll III
1 ■ 1'llllll■,11IIIII■1"IIIII■1"III =. III
�IIIIIIII ■1111111111111111 ■11111 - • III
1 1 11 111 1111

ebble Count - Riffle
aterial
Particle Size mm
Count
% in Range
% Cumulative
ilt/Cla
<0.062
24
40
40
Very Fine Sand
0.062 -0.125
6
10
50
ine Sand
0.125 -0.25
2 1
3
53
odium Sand
0.25 -0.5
10
17
70
oarse Sand
0.5 -1.0
6
10
80
Very Coarse Sand
1.0 -2.0
8
13
93
Very Fine Gravel
2.0 -4.0
2
3
97
ine Gravel
4.0 -5.7
0 1
0
97
Fine Gravel
5.7 -8.0
2
3
100
Medium Gravel
8.0 -11.3
0
0
100
edium Gravel
11.3 -16.0
0
0
100
oarse Gravel
16.0 -22.6
0
0
100
oarse Gravel
22.6 -32
0
1 0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
32 -45
0
0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
45 -64
0
0
100
mall Cobble
64 -90
0
0
100
mall Cobble
90 -128
0
0
100
are Cobble
128 -180
0
0
100
are Cobble
180 -256
0
0
100
mall Boulder
256 -362
0
0
100
mall Boulder
362 -512
0
0
100
odium Boulder
1 512 -1024
0
1 0
100
are Boulder
1024 -2048
0
0
100
edrock
<2048
0
0
100
Totals
60
100
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration EEP Project No. D04006 -01
Reach
A (lower)
X Sec
N/A
Date
9/26/2010
Sta No.
40 +13
80
70
60
o.
50
e
40
c
s 30
20
10
0
Histogram
0.062 0.25 1 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 2048
Particle Size (mm)
�11
�
�/1
'IIIII■1'llllll■,1"IIII■„I'llll
/�/'llll
��II!'>t��■'1
IIIIII
.,1'lllll■„II'III■11'lllll
t
. /����IIII■11
IIIIII
■111IIIII■'11IIIII■_1_'llllll
. �
" "' '111111
' ,
. , ,
I'_-
JIIIIIIII�11111111
■�IIIIIII�IIIIIIII
X11111111■
X1111111
■IIIIIIII�IIIIIIII
11111111�11111111�111
■11111111
■11111111
■111
■111
■111
_ �
- - •IIIIII
IIIIII
....,_:_JIIIII
■�IIIIIII��IIIIIII
■1111111111111111
■11111111
��IIIIIII
■�IIIIIII
■11111111
■�IIIIIII��IIIIIII

ebble Count - Pool
aterial
Particle Size mm
Count
% in Range
% Cumulative
ilt/Cla
<0.062
19
32
32
Very Fine Sand
0.062 -0.125
16
27
58
ine Sand
0.125 -0.25
1
2
60
edium Sand
0.25 -0.5
8
13
73
Coarse Sand
0.5 -1.0
12
20
93
Very Coarse Sand
1.0 -2.0
4
7
100
Very Fine Gravel
2.0 -4.0
0
0
100
ine Gravel
4.0 -5.7
0
0
100
ine Gravel
5.7 -8.0
0
0
100
edium Gravel
8.0 -11.3
0
0
100
edium Gravel
11.3 -16.0
0
0
100
oarse Gravel
16.0 -22.6
0
0
100
oarse Gravel
22.6 -32
0
0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
32 -45
0
1 0
1 100
Very Coarse Gravel
45 -64
0
0
100
Small Cobble
64 -90
0
0
100
mall Cobble
90 -128
0
0
100
are Cobble
128 -180
0
0
100
ar e Cobble
180 -256
0
0
100
Small Boulder
256 -362
0
0
100
Small Boulder
362 -512
0
0
100
Medium Boulder
512 -1024
0
0
100
ar a Boulder
1024 -2048
0
0
100
Bedrock
<2048
0
0
100
Totals
60
100
I /I�IJII■
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration EEP Project No. D04006 -01
Reach
A (middle)
X Sec
N/A
Date
9/26/2010
Sta No.
87 +92
35
30
25
00 20
c
15
10
5
0
Histogram
0.062 0.25 1 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 2048
Particle Size (nun)
■ �I�illll!% �IIIIIII ■�������� ■��������
■�IIIIIII
■11,11141Ililllllll
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
I111�11�I■
11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
I /I�IJII■
11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■_I_IIIIIII
"'
11111111
/.�IIIIII
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■1111
■11111
"'1111
1111
/111111111
1111111111■
■11111111
11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■11111
■IIIIL.,,__.
IIII
,
■■1111
X11111111■
11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
,
■ 11111111■ 11111111 ■11111111 ■11111111
■11111111
,

ebble Count - Riffle
aterial
Particle Size mm
Count
% in Range
% Cumulative
ilt/Cla
<0.062
20
30
30
tery Fine Sand
0.062 -0.125
7
10
40
Fine Sand
0.125 -0.25
9
13
54
Medium Sand
0.25 -0.5
14
21
75
oarse Sand
0.5 -1.0
8
12
87
Very Coarse Sand
1.0 -2.0
7
10
97
Very Fine Gravel
2.0 -4.0
1
1
99
ine Gravel
4.0 -5.7
1
1
100
ine Gravel
5.7 -8.0
0
0
100
edium Gravel
8.0 -11.3
0
0
100
edium Gravel
11.3 -16.0
0
0
100
oarse Gravel
16.0 -22.6
0
0
100
oarse Gravel
22.6 -32
0
0
100
ery Coarse Gravel
32 -45
0
0
100
Very Coarse Gravel
45 -64
0
0
100
Small Cobble
64 -90
0
0
100
mall Cobble
90 -128
0
0
100
are Cobble
128 -180
0
0
100
are Cobble
180 -256
0
0
100
mall Boulder
256 -362
0
0
100
mall Boulder
362 -512
0
0
100
edium Boulder
512 -1024
0
0
100
are Boulder
1024 -2048
0
0
100
edrock
<2048
0
0
100
Totals
67
1 00
South Muddy Creek Tributaries Restoration EEP Project No. D04006 -01
Reach
A (upper)
X Sec
N/A
Date
9/26/2010
Sta No.
108 +96
35
30
25
& 20
c
sc 15
10
5
0
Histogram
0.062 0.25 1 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 2048
';
■ Ilill�il/. iillllll /Ililllll��lllllll
■IIIIIIII
■111II!���IIIIIII
■11111111
■11111111
■111,
IIII
■1�.�!1d
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
•
■1
►�III�III
/�Illilll
■11111111
■1111111111111111
,,
■I11111,,�i�11111111
■11111111
■1111111
=-
11
I
►JI�IIIII
■111111111
■11111111
■1111111
- �
II
.
, ,
X11111111
■
%illllll
■11111111
■1111111
—Year 41
Year 5
,
■IIIIIIIII
/IIIIIIII
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111
■11111111 %11111111 ■11111111 ■11111111
■11111111
,
l e t
�•

BF 1
Crest Gage at station 5 +00 on Tributary B.
(EMH &T, Inc. 7/18/07)
BF 2
Crest Gage at station 54 +85 on Tributary A (lower).
(EMH &T, Inc. 7/18/07)

BF 3
Crest Gage at station 113 +37 on Tributary A (upper).
(EMH &T, Inc. 10/19/07)
BF 4
Bankfull event in progress on Tributary A (Lower) near station 3 +18, looking upstream.
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/11/08)

BF 5
Bankfull event in progress on Tributary A (Lower) near station 3 +18, looking across the
channel.
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/11/08)
BF 6
Bankfull event in progress on Tributary A (Lower) near station 40 +13, looking upstream.
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/11/08)

BF 7
Bankfull event in progress on Tributary A (Lower) near station 40 +13, looking across the
channel.
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/11/08)
BF 8
Crest Gage on Tributary A (upper).
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/21/09)

BF 9
Crest Gage on Tributary A (middle).
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/21/09)
BF 10
Crest Gage on Tributary A2.
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/21/09)

BF 11
Crest Gage on Tributary B.
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/21/09)
BF 12
Crest Gage on Tributary C.
(EMH &T, Inc. 9/21/09)

BF 13
Crest Gage at station 113 +37 on Tributary A (upper).
(EMH &T, Inc. (documented, 5111/10))
BF 14
Crest Gage at station 54 +85 on Tributary A (lower).
(EMH &T, Inc. (documented, 5111/10))

BF 15
Crest Gage on Tributary B.
(EMH &T, Inc. (documented, 5111/10))
BF 16
Crest Gage on Tributary A2.
(EMH &T, Inc. (documented, 5/11/10))