HomeMy WebLinkAbout20040243 Ver 1_Monitoring Report Year 5_20101115oq-N43
WHITELACE CREEK STREAM ENHANCEMENT
AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
MONITORING REPORT (YEAR 5 OF 5)
Lenoir County, North Carolina
EEP Project No. 420
Prepared for:
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652
r- �.-
I
Ecosystem
PROGRAM
Status of Plan: Final
Submission Date: November 2010
RECEIVED NO _
2010
lc�y
ivc /1'V GEAQr �,4
4
Monitoring Firm:
l
i
Stantec
Stantec Consulting Services Inc
801 Jones Franklin Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, NC 27608
Table of Contents
10 Executive Summary
20 Methodology
2 1 Vegetation Assessment
22 Stream Assessment
23 Wetland Assessment
3 0 References
Project Condition and Monitoring Data Appendices
Appendix A General Figures and Plan Views
Figure 1 — Location Map
Figure 2 — Consolidated Current Condition Plan View
Appendix B General Project Tables
Table I — Project Restoration Components
Table 2 — Project History and Reporting Activity
Table 3 — Project Contacts Table
Table 4 — Project Background Table
4
7
9
11
11
12
13
Appendix C Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 5 — Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table 15
Photos — Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos 16
Table 6 — Vegetation Metadata Table 21
Table 7 — Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species 23
Vegetation Problem Area Photos (electronic submission only)
Vegetation Problem Area Inventory Table (electronic submission only)
Appendix D Stream Assessment Data
Photos — Stream Station Photos 25
Appendix E Wetland Assessment Data
Figures — Water Level and Precipitation Plots 27
Table 10 — Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment 38
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page i
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 — Final November 2010
1.0 Executive Summary
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) enhanced 5,901 linear feet of the Whitelace
Creek stream channel located west of Kinston, in Lenoir County, North Carolina Additionally, 7 7 and
13 0 acres of wetland area were restored and enhanced, respectively The site construction was completed
in August of 2005, and planting occurred in March of 2006 This report provides the monitoring
information for year five (5) of the stream enhancement and wetland restoration project
Previous dredging and straightening of Whitelace Creek had lowered the streambed elevation, thereby
causing a reduction in the acreage of riverine wetlands due to a lowered water table Restoration and
enhancement objectives for this project included the restoration of historic stream and wetland functions
that existed on -site prior to dredging and vegetation removal Site alterations at Whitelace Creek included
the excavation or reestablishment of the floodplain and in -situ stream channel modification to the existing
stream The goals of these activities are as follows
• to introduce surface water flood hydrodynamics from a 10 1 square mile watershed along the
restored length of stream and floodplain
• to restore wetland hydrology
• to reforest the site with streamside and riparian forest communities
Vegetative monitoring was performed using the Carolina Vegetation Survey Level 2 methodology on 9 of
the original 15 plots, as requested by NCEEP Monitoring revealed that only 3 of the 9 plots (33 %) met
the 5 -year vegetative success criteria of 260 planted stems or greater per acre There are a number of
issues causing the failure of the remaining 6 plots Excessive beaver activity has affected many of the
planted trees in vegetation plots, in fact, as was the case last year vegetation plot 11 has zero planted
stems remaining as a result of beavers Additionally, planted trees have been damaged by deer browsing,
flooding, and vine strangulation in some of the vegetation plots It should be noted that vigorous woody
volunteer recruitment (especially Betula nigra) was observed in the upper section of the reach near
Vegetation Plots 1 and 2 This will contribute to meeting success criteria for riverine wetlands but will not
count toward riparian buffer success Supplemental planting should be undertaken onsite to ensure
vegetative success
Overall, the mayor issues on the site include localized flooding and foraging caused by beaver activity
The three downstream dams were removed on May 7, 2010 As of the monitoring visit on September 22,
2010 beavers had not rebuilt any dams in the lower half of the project However, the partial dam (labeled
as Dam 4 in MY4) is now much larger and is causing significant flooding on the upstream end of the site
The beaver lodge is still located approximately 20 feet from Vegetation Plot 11, although this area is no
longer flooded The beavers should be removed to allow the hydrology of the site to return to conditions
outlined in the restoration plan Beaver activity is likely to continue, therefore, areas of the site currently
exhibiting weak planted species survival should be replanted with trees of appropriate species and size to
withstand periodic inundation
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 1
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Other problems continue to include the presence of invasive or exotic species such as Typha lat folia and
Murdannia keisak, and Lespedeza cuneata Existing areas of Typha are located in small pockets along the
middle to lower end of the project with the densest areas at the downstream end of the site Further
downstream (offsite) large communities of Typha are present in the swamp which will make long term
eradication of this species within the project site difficult Currently Typha does not appear to be
negatively impacting the planted woody vegetation Lespedeza is present along the drier slopes near
Vegetation Plots 1 and 2 and does not appear to be spreading into the floodplain Since flooding has been
reduced in the downstream end of the site due to removal of the beaver dams, Murdannia has expanded to
include a fairly large area in and around Veg Plot 11 A few small areas were noted around the former
beaver dam near the gate The Typha, Murdannia, and Lespedeza will continue to be observed throughout
the monitoring period to ensure they do not negatively affect the growth and survival of planted species
On September 22, 2010 the Year 5 monitoring survey was completed for the vegetation at the Whitelace
Creek project site As in previous years, a general assessment of stream stability was conducted Results
were the same as in the past in that the stream is stable and is well connected to the floodplain Stream
channels bars are still present which could lead to lateral migration and bank instability, however,
migration and instability were not observed during current monitoring As discussed above, beavers
continue to be active on site Photos of current beaver activity in the stream channel and adjacent
floodplain are included in the Vegetation Problem Area Photos All of the checks of the crest gauge
indicated that the stream was either above bankfull at the time of the visit or had recently been at that
level
Groundwater data collected through November of 2010 was used to assess the compliance of the site with
wetland hydrology criteria Seven groundwater monitoring gauges are currently active on the project site
A site is considered to meet the requirements for wetland hydrology if the groundwater level is within 12
inches of the ground surface for 12 5% of the growing season consecutively All 7 of the gauges met the
criteria during the growing season of 2010 Three reference gauges are also currently active All three of
the reference gauges met the success criteria in 2010
The groundwater level data continues to show that the restoration site exhibits longer hydroperiods than
the reference site While the reference wetlands should serve as an accurate hydrologic model for the
restored site, the riverme reference wetlands seem to have a different hydrologic regime than the riverme
wetlands onsrte Factors such as floodplain elevation, beaver activity, floodplam width,
evapotranspiration and others may contribute to the differences
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment, and
statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and
figures in the report appendices Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in
these reports can be found in the mitigation and restoration plan documents available on ESP's website
All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from EEP upon request
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 2
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
2.0 Methodology
2.1 VEGETATION ASSESSMENT
Fifteen vegetative sample plots were quantitatively monitored during the first growing season Species
composition, density, and survival were monitored during Year 0 and Year 1 The number of plots was
reduced to nine for monitoring in the second year, as requested by NCEEP These plots include the
original plots named VP1, VP2, VP4, VP6, VP8, VP9, VP11, VP14, and VP15 The Carolina Vegetation
Survey (CVS) methodology Version2 2 7 was utilized for vegetative monitoring in Years 2, 3, 4, & 5
Level 2 (planted and natural stems) methodology was completed on all monitored plots
As per the mitigation plan, the vegetative success criteria are based on the US Army Corps of Engineers
Stream Mitigation Guidelines (USAGE, 2003) The final vegetative success criteria is the survival of 260
5 -year old planted woody stems per acre at the end of the Year 5 monitoring period An interim measure
of vegetation planting success was the survival of at least 320 3 -year old planted woody stems per acre at
the end of year 3 of the monitoring period A ten percent mortality rate was accepted in year four (288
stems /acre) and another ten percent in year five resulting in a required survival rate of 260 trees /acre
through year five
The Year 5 stem counts within each of the nine vegetative monitoring plots are included in Exhibit Table
7 in Appendix C Photos of the vegetative monitoring plots are also included in Appendix C
2.2 STREAM ASSESSMENT
Changes in stream profile and pattern were not included in the stream enhancement project for Whitelace
Creek As such, cross - section and longitudinal profile surveys and pebble counts were not performed for
the Year 5 monitoring, as directed by NCEEP However, a general assessment of stream stability and
problem areas was performed during field reconnaissance
2.3 WETLAND ASSESSMENT
A site is considered to meet the requirements for wetland hydrology if the groundwater saturation is
within 12 inches of the ground surface consecutively for 12 5% of the growing season (30 Days) The
growing season in this area is from March 18''' to November 8"' for a total of 234 days (MRCS 2002)
Seven groundwater monitoring gauges are currently active on the project site Data from these gauges
were collected and analyzed to assess their success Three reference gauges are located northwest of the
project site Reference gauges 1 & 2 are located near the intersection of Sutton Road with Moseley Creek
Reference gauge 3 is located between Hillcrest Road and Moseley Creek, approximately 5500 feet north
of Route 70 Please refer to the project Vicinity Map (Figure 1) in Appendix A for locations of the
reference groundwater monitoring gauges Graphs of precipitation and water level plots are included in
Appendix E
Whrtelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 3
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
3.0 References
Lee, Michael T, R K Peet, S D Roberts, and T R Wentworth 2008 CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Version 4 2 (http / /cvs bio unc edu/methods htm)
NC CRONOS 2010 NC CRONOS Database — Cunningham Research Station (KINS) North Carolina
State University State, Climate Office of North Carolina http / /www nc- climate ncsu edu /cronos
NCEEP 2009 Revised Table of Contents for 2009 Monitoring Report Submissions North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program Raleigh, NC
Version 12 1 June 1, 2009
NRCS 2002 WETS Table for Lenoir County, NC Natural Resource Conservation Service, National
Water and Climate Center
USACE, EPA, NCWRC, NCDWQ 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines
Weakley, Alan S 2007 Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and surrounding areas University of
North Carolina Herbarium Chapel Hill, NC Working draft as of January 11, 2007
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 4
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
I- i
Project Condition and Monitoring Data Appendices
APPENDIX A. GENERAL FIGURES AND PLAN VIEWS
Whrtelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final
Page 5
November 2010
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 6
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
A.. F �. �.d
i/ 'v _..:_ ,.. /. .\ _ '.•.!."�.•• - 't::.
`.' • �. _ Aefere ce Gauge 2 Hei�ere e Gain . =-
\. F' 5.313 N 2 ]N 35.31331 -7 .731836 •W%(' f -
..
• � i' ,rt ... • .�.. ,~ .. 3 736 $33 - - - I r I s� - -
tt '
•ra' I .. L i � I .ice.. _• A,al. �i •
, I
1 ---G -- - 1'' • V Grea ,�' < - j ' - r - fir;, ..e `F • - ' - .;.; ` � \'� + -
`, ,:�. ` • �� "' - '' •.1' ,irk+ .k - -
grange j ,
%, A I /• `\ I _ �/ . `, _'. / fly °A / -�` _� l_ \_ - �'' ,k ) - •-._J: ` f 1 . i � : `_ l'� - \ `
I " I\ °r -i. •\ t r• `'1'w...,.d �oQQ ,_ -1 ..'J . ;� '.'.. "�` r , `�' ;::.. �b
-,. ..Xi.__ .v.; /' � ^� -._�/ /�.. 1 `„ "�-' _ r ^•J _'--- -�-'.,, �'v.., i ��;.� ~ \� � , yut,,,,�''•, L •r 1\ -- - 6 1
c'
-
.._ —_� A�ferencef;4luge,3"
1 ..
_• - - -\ ( -.- - \ .1- _ _ I 35. 75996 - 77.63403 � �. _ •�_+.... �, ,.'.
1 .. _ • ��,, � Kinston I
99
64 rl
-Jon `Paunn \ -. _. - - - 1 �`O% 1 �:j: `/ •q`+.Y _ q'
,
j i �. �. ;�,..W. 1 , • L_ _ ' - <.\ / 1 jnedy Dalr f Rd _
-
- --
Baptist Orphanage Rd ? r';
a yr +, urniwoR - , -.. , -_ - ., - -_ - • — �/
I' - 4• i- / s 1 ! I _ `6.�. r - _ Yom; / - - y 7. -
1
I"'._ -.1 , i d 1 RIVER T - - I _ •
Site directions: From Raleigh follow US 70 East toward Kinston. 4, ��' �:� �...... ,
Approximately 8 miles east of La Grange, take a right on - ; - h:
Kennedy Home Rd. Continue approximately 0.3 miles and take i /' t _ Whitelace Project Site °
the first left onto Kennedy Dairy Road. Follow Kennedy Dairy �� ` j Y 5.244 N, - 77.689 W
f 3
Road through the Kennedy Home complex. Continue through rte `, ! �� I _ _ _ _.__I - 1 •I se • .
the traffic circle, stay right, and merge onto Baptist Orphanage `� ! - 4 ' : - - • •� /
Data Source:
Road. Travel approximately 0.5 miles until reaching a small
•�' ��C I 1 , .. USGS 7.5 Min. Topoquads:
concrete bridge spanning Whitelace Creek. This point is near Deep Run, Falling Creek, Kiriston .
the middle of the site.
Olivia, La Grange, Seven Springs
- is I I ..; • .. .
Reference Gauges
Conservation Easement
0 0.45 0.9 1.8
Miles
Figure 1 - Vicinity Map
Whitelace Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration, EEP #420
Lenoir County, North Carolina
November, 2010
r�
EC0system
(•R(. f.R.M
Mdn'Lm
APPENDIX B. GENERAL PROJECT TABLES
Table 1. Project Restoration Components
Whitelace Creek Wetland Restoration Site/EEP Pro ect No. 420
Scheduled
Completion
iv
Actual Completion
or Delivery
r
Lo
NA
Feb 2004
Final Design - 90%
NA
NA
o
� �
Aug 2005
NA
Reach ID
F j pro
NA
a
G:°, "
Stationin
Comment
NA
Aug 2006
Bare Root Seedling Installation
Mar 2006
NA
Mar 2005
Total accounts for 301 f gap in
Reach 1
3693
1 E1
P2
3693
1 0+35-37+58
easement at road crossing
Reach 2
2208
E2
P2
2208
37 +58 - 59 +66
Nov 2007
Riverme Wetland
Year 3 Monitoring
Nov 2008
Nov 2008
Nov 2008
Year 4 Monitoring
Stations 0 +00 to 37 +58 mark the
Restoration
Nov 2009
R
NA
7 7 ac
NA
extent of the flood lam grading
Riverme Wetland
Enhancement
E
NA
13 0 ac
I NA
Neuse River Buffer
Restoration
R
NA
27 1 ac
NA
Neuse River Buffer
Enhancement
E
NA
7 2 ac
NA
R = Restoration
El = Stream Enhancement 1
E2 = Stream Enhancement 2
S = Stabilization
P= Preservation
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Whitelace Creek Wetland Restoration Site /EEP Project No. 420
Active or Report
Scheduled
Completion
Data
Collection
Complete
P
Actual Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
NA
NA
Feb 2004
Final Design - 90%
NA
NA
Nov 2004
Construction
Aug 2005
NA
Aug 2005
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area
NA
NA
Jul 2005
Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area
NA
NA
Aug 2006
Bare Root Seedling Installation
Mar 2006
NA
Mar 2005
Mitigation Plan / As -built ear 0 Monitoring - baseline
NA
NA
Apr 2005
Final Report
NA
NA
Apr 2005
Year 1 Monitoring
Nov 2006
Nov 2006
Nov 2006
Year 2 Monitoring
Nov 2007
Nov 2007
Dec 2007
Year 3 Monitoring
Nov 2008
Nov 2008
Nov 2008
Year 4 Monitoring
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Nov 2009
Year 5 Monitoring
Nov 2010
Nov 2010
Nov 2010
NA = Not Applicable
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 11
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Table 3 Project Contacts
Wbitelace Creek Wetland Restoration Site/EEP Project No 420
Designer
EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street
Suite 101
Ralei h NC 27604
Construction Contractor
Shamrock Environmental Corporation
PO Box 14987
Greensboro, NC 27415
Planting Contractor
Emerald Forest Incorporated
4651 Backwoods Road
Chesapeake, VA 23322 -2456
Seeding Contractor
Wheat Swamp Landscaping
4675 Ben Dail Road
LaGran e, NC 28551 -8038
Seed Mix Sources
IKEX, Inc
PO Box 250
Middlesex, NC 27557
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Warren County Nursery
6492 Beersheba Highway
McMinnville, TN 37110
Pinelands Nursery and Supply
323 Island Road
Columbus, NJ 08022
Coastal Plain Conservation Nursery
3067 Connors Drive
Edenton, NC 27932
Monitoring Performers (Year 0 -1)
EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Raleigh NC 27604
919 828 -3433
Monitoring Performers (Year 2 -4)
Stantec Consulting Services, Inc
801 Jones Franklin Road, Ste 300
Ralei h, NC 27606
Stream Monitoring POC
David Bidelspach (919)851 -6866
Vegetation Monitoring POC
Amber Coleman (919)851 -6866
Wetland Monitoring POC
Amber Coleman (919)851-6866
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 12
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Table 4 - Project Attribute Table
Whitelace Creek Wetland Restoration Site/EEP Project No. 420
Project County
Lenoir
Drainage Area
10 1 sq mi
Drainage impervious cover estimate %
< 1 percent
Stream Order
2nd order
Ph sio ra hic Region
Coastal Plain
Ecore ion
Southeastern Flood plains and Low Terraces
Ros en Classification of As -built
CIE
Cowardin Classification
R2UB23Cb ( Riverme, Lower Perennial,
Uncosolidated Bottom, Sand/Mud, Seasonally
Flooded, Beaver
Dominant soil types
Riverine Wetland Restoration
Riverme Wetland Enhancement
Johnston, stream channels, 80% of Site
Johnston, stream channels, 80% of Site
Reference site ID
01- 05471 -OIA
USGS HUC for Project
USGS HUC for Reference
03020202040020
03020202040020
NCDWQ Subbasin for Project
03 -04 -05
NCDWQ Subbasin for Reference
03 -04 -05
NCDWQ Classification for Project
C SW NSW
NCDWQ Classification for Reference
C SW NSW
Any portion of any project segment 303d listed9
No
Any portion of any project segment upstream of a 303d listed
segment'?
No
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor
No
Percent of project easement fenced
No
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 13
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 14
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 5 - Vegetation Plot Mitigation
Succes Summary
Whitelace Creek Wetland Restoration Site
/ EEP Project No. 420
Vegetation
Vegetation
Density Met
Tract Mean
Plot ID
(260 stems /acre)
VP1
N (202)
33%(216
stems /acre)
VP2
N (81)
VP4
Y (405)
VP6
N (162)
VP8
Y (364)
V139
Y (324)
VP11
N (0)
VP14
N (243)
VP15
N (162)
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 15
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Photo Station 1: Vegetation Plot 1 (9/22/10).
Photo Station 2: Vegetation Plot 2 (9/22/10).
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 16
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Photo Station 3: Vegetation Plot 4 (9/22/10)
Photo Station 4: Vegetation Plot 6 (9/22/10)
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 17
Stantec— Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final ' o' ember 20 10
Photo Station 5: Vegetation Plot 8 (9/22/10)
Photo Station 6: Vegetation Plot 9 (9/22/10)
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 18
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Photo Station 7: Vegetation Plot 11 (9/22/10)
Photo Station 8: Vegetation Plot 14 (9/22/10)
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 19
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Photo Station 9: Vegetation Plot 15 (9/22/10)
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 20
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Table 6. Vegetation Metadata
Report Prepared By
Alex Baldwin
Date Prepared
11/2/2010 13 00
database name
Stantec Whitelace2010 A mdb
database location
U \171300316\ ro ect\2- Whitelace \site data \cvs
computer name
BALDWINA
file size
37093376
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS-DOCUMENT------------
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary
of project(s) and project data
Pro', planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each
year This excludes live stakes
Pro', total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year
This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural /volunteer stems
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems,
dead stems, missing, etc
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots
Vigor b Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by specie
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences
and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by e for each species
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by e for each plot
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for
each plot, dead and missing stems are excluded
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted
and natural volunteers combined) for each plot, dead and missing
stems are excluded
PROJECXSUNIAARY---------= ------ -- =- _ _ '__
Project Code
420
project Name
Whitelace Creek
Description
Wetland restoration and enhancement
River Basin
Neuse
len th ft
5900
stream-to-edge width ft
100
areas m
80,937
,Required Plots calculated
NA
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 21
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 22
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 —Final November 2010
Table 7 - Stem Count Total by Plot and Species Whitelace Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site EEP Project #420
Current Plot Data (MYS 2010) Annual Means
420 - Amber -0001
420 - Amber -0002 1
420- Amber -0004
420- Amber -0006
420- Amber -0008
420- Amber -0009
420 - Amber -0011
420 - Amber -0014 1
420 - Amber -0015
MYS (2010)
MY4 (2009)
MY3 (2008)
MY2 (2007)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
P -LS
P -all
T
P -LS
P -all
T JP-LS
P -all IT
P -L
P -all IT
P -LS
P -all
T
P -LS
P -all
T
P -LS
P -all
T
P -LS
P -all
T JP-LS
IP
-all
T
P -LS
Pall IT
P-LS IP
-all IT
P -LS
P -all
T
PAS
P -all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
4
1
48
25
5
11
1
-
84
87
19
Acer saccharinum
silver maple
Tree
24
23
Baccharis
baccharis
Shrub Tree
22
6
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub Tree
4
5
1
17
27
81
1
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
80
1
1
1
1
84
2
6
2
61
1
26
Carpinus caroliniana var. cai
Coastal American Horn
Shrub Tree
1
1
1
1
21
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Carya
hickory
Tree
1
11
1
1
Carya aquatica
water hickory
Tree
1
1
1
1
21
21
2
2
2
2
2
3
Chamaecyparis thyoides
Atlantic white cedar
Tree
1
1
11
11
2
2
2
2
3
3
Diospyros
diospyros
Tree
1
3
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
3
1
41
4
Fraxinus
ash
Shrub Tree
1
11
1
1
1
2
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
1
1
1
11
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
Ilex opaca
American holly
Shrub Tree
1
1
1
Ligustrum sinense
Chinese privet
Shrub Tree
1
1
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
4
2
1
7
38
18
15
Liriodendron tulipifera var. I
Tulip -tree, Yellow Popli
Tree
2
2
Nyssa biflora
swamp tupelo
Tree
3
3
1
1
2
2
6
6
6
6
51
5
6
9
Pinustaeda
loblolly pine
Tree
8
8
Platanus occidentalis var. oc
Sycamore, Plane -tree
Tree
1
1
11
1
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Shrub Tree
1
1
Quercus
oak
Shrub Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Quercus laurifolia
laurel oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
3
3
4
4
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
2
2
1
1
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
12
11
2
3
28
38
18
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
2
2
1
1
1
1
3
3
1 3
3
6
6
16
16
18
18
16
16
15
15
Toxicodendron radicans
eastern poison ivy
Shrub Vine
4
4
Ulmus americana var. amen
American Elm, White E
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Ulmus rubra
slippery elm
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Unknown
unknown
1
1
Vitis
grape
1
1
Stem count
size (ares)
01
51
16
01
2
82
0
10
28
0
41
20
0
9
61
0
8
62
01
01
9
01
61
7
01
41
6
01
481
291
0
57
345
0
50
221
0
53
108
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
9
9
9
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.22
0.22
0.22
0.22
Species count
01
41
7
01
2
3
01
71
111
01
71
11
01
5
1SI
01
0
3
01
11
2
01
41
6
01
171
29
01
18
28
0
15
23
01
161
20
Stems per ACRE
0
202.3
647.5
0
80.94
3318
0
404.7
1133
0
161.9
809.4
0
364.2
2469
0
323.7
2509
0
0
364.2
0
242.8
283.3
0
161.9
242.8
0
215.8
1308
0
256.3
1551
0
224.8
993.7
0
238.3
485.6
Appendix D. Stream Assessment Data
Photo Station 1 (Sl) — Overview of Project (looking downstream from Sta.10 +00 (09/22/10)
Photo Station 2 (S2) - Overview of upstream portion of reach (looking upstream from Sta.10 +00
(09/22/10)
Whitelace Wetland Restoration Projects (EEP Project No. 420) Page 25
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 — Final November 2010
Photo Station 3 (S3) — Looking downstream from bridge (09/22/10)
Photo Station 4 (S4) — Crest gauge (09/22/10)
Whitelace Wetland Restoration Projects (EEP Project No. 420) Page 26
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 — Final November 2010
o �
o "
-c
�o
�w
U =.
0
U ^�I
� O
5 �
d
M
m
-o
Cl.
C
m
z
0
A
N
O
z
0
a
�b
N �
O
N
O J
20
15
10
5
0
-5
c
r� -10
CL
c' -15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well 1 (SN: 000009BE9090)
NO, ONO ONO O ^O O ^O ONO ONO ONO ONO O ^O OHO OHO
Date
N.
5
4
C
c
0
3
'a
'U
a
K
I
A
i
"C
A�
D
n y
I �
Vj
o�
rto
S
o �
a
7
0
0
-o
0
z
0
a
N �
O
N
O
00
15
10
5
0
-5
S-10
CL -15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well 2 (SN: OOOOOEBD106E)
N'3 N �o N3 ,Zo NZ NZ NZ �o �o N3
o;h 1�0 ��o ono NZ\ N N' �
Date
Lei
5
4
c
0
32
2
1
0
CL
m
a
S
o�
5' m
ao
�CD
CD
U
o �
-n
cn
-n n.
a
z
0
m
o'
ro
0
z
0
N �
O
N
O �D
20
15
10
5
0
-5
C
r� -10
CL
d
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well 3 (SN: 0000OA287A2A)
I I
I I
I I
1 Well replaced+i
aiting fordatato
be extracted
Ground Surface
I I
1 I
Required Dept I 1
1 153 Day!1
I 1
Beginning of End of 1
Growing Season Grow i g Season--,,,,
1
03/18/10 11/08/10 1
I I
I I
I I
I 1
I 1
° °^° ° ^° ^° ° ^° °^° °^° ° ^° °^° °^°
Date
In
I&7
4
C
C
o_
3"
2
1
we
CL
v
d
CL
7 S
CD
CD
uo
m
S
E� ry
�n
o n
�a
a
0
0
0
b
0
z
0
3
N �
O �
O O
20
15
10
5
0
-5
c
-10
a
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well 4 (SN: OOOOOEBDA66C)
No ono ono ono ono ono ono ono ono ono ono
ti \� o\a \ti a\b \ti 4�\� \ti o\y \ti �\o \ti �\o \ti o\o \ti .o�A \T
Date
0
5
4
c
c
0
3g
K
1
L
a
a
n F
o:
o' E
Ej i
v.
o S
-n E
w
z
0
a
N �
O
.r W
O —
20
15
10
5
0
-5
CL
r
-10
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
2010 Groundwater Data
Well 5 (SN: OOOOOEBCFF87)
I I
I I
L I
I
I
round Surface
I
I I
Required Depth 1
70 Days 2 Days-
I
Beginning of
AGrowing Season
1 03/18/10 I
End of %0I
1 G ing Season I
r I
11/08/10
o ^° o^° o ^° o ^° o ^° o ^° o ^° o ^° o ^° o^°
Date
6
5
4
2
c
0
3
2
1
0
CL
m
a`
� o
I �
o =
O =
7 C
vo =
et
�e
E�cc
O �
w
0
z
0
CD
3
Cr -o
w
N Go
O
O N
20
15
10
5
0
-5
C
10
CL
is -15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well 6 (SN: OOOOOA28C526)
oNo ono ono ono ono ono ono ono ono ono oN
Date
5
4
c
C
O
3
2
1
9
CL
V
a
n F
I <
o:
a' E
ao :
� E
in
o
� E
z
0
b
w
N �
O
W
O w
20
15
10
5
0
-5
c
r� -10
a
-15
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well 7 (SN: OOOOOEBD182C)
�yo �,yo
N,yo �yo �yo �yo Grp
Date
0
5
4
c
C
0
32
2
1
9
CL
CL
n y
I �
o-
=ry
tro
E�CD
o�
�a
d
7�
0
d
0
-o
0
z
0
a
ro
w
N eD
O
O A
10
5
0
-5
-10
C
-15
a
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well Ref -1 (SN: OOOOOEBD3CE6)
I I
I I
Ground Surface
I
1
Well replaced,
waiting to have
1
data extracted
Required Depth 44 Days I
1
I
I
Beginning of
I
1
A----Growing Season
End of
03/18/10
I
I
I
I
Grow
on
911/08/10 \�I
I
I
I
I
ti
Date
^O ^O O
^�\�O ^O ^
^ ^ ^
5
4
c
C
3
49
6
1
9
CL
CL
5
F
I �
C�
C, -�
�h
E�
o�
�E4
CD
�a
a
C
0
0
z
O
CD
3
C b
N �
O
O �
10
5
0
-5
-10
c
-15
CL
d
D
-20
-25
-30
-35
-40
2010 Groundwater Data
Well Ref -2 (SN: 000011310FE0)
1 I �
Ground Surface
I
I
I
I� 83 Days
Required Depth
3 Days
Beginning of
I
Growing Season
03/18/10
End of/*
wing Season
11/08/1
NIZI
ti
144f A�
Date
N
R
5
4
c
c
0
3=
3
PA
1
N1
CL
CL
S
o �-
^: w
o �
m
ao 0
�eD
o eD
eD
�a
_e
a
0
d
o'
0
z
0
rD
B
N�
0
0 0�
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
c
L -20
a
a�
-25
-30
-35
-40
-45
-50
2010 Groundwater Data
Well Ref -3 (SN:000009DE7694)
I
I
I
I
I
I
Required Depth 82 Days 0
I
I
I
I
1 Beginning of
Growing Season
03/18/10
1
I
I
Ground Surface
G
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
x--42 Days --*I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
End of �I
Season
11/08/10 1
I, I
o ^° o^° o ^° o ^° o ^° o^° o^° o^° o^° o ^° o^° o^°
o\ °Kti x\41 °\6�ti °\14 ^o��ti ^ ^ -\ti ^�4
Date
tI
5
4
c
C
0
3=
K
1
m
a
v
a
S
�
o^
' m
18
� S
16
�a
w �
14
a.
z
12
0
-o
c
=10
^
o
49
CL
8
a
70th Percentile
6
4
30th Pe
2
0
z
0
m
N �
O �
O J
Whitelace Creek 2010 30 -70 Percentile Graph
Lenoir County, North Carolina
Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sept
Month
� 2010 Rainfall 30th Percentile 70th Percentile
Oct Nov
Table 10 - Summary of Groundwater Results for Years 1 - 5
Whitelace Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project / EEP Project
No. 420
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Da s During Gr ing Season
Year 1 2006
Year 2 2007
Year 3 2008
Year 4 2009
Year 5 2010
Gua a
GW 1
Yes /234 days
Yes /73 days
Yes /216 days
Yes /234 days
Yes /234 days
(100 %)
(31 %)
(92%)
(100 %)
(100 %)
GW2
Yes/ 140 days
Yes /128 days
Yes/ 182 days
Yes /100 days
(60 %)
No
(55%)
(78 %)
(43 %)
GW3
Yes /234 days
Yes/ 137 days
Yes/ 168 days
Yes /234 days
Yes /153 days
(100 %)
(59%)
(72%)
(100 %)
(65 %)
GW4
Yes /119 days
Yes /70 days (30
Yes /230 days
Yes/ 223 days
(51 %)
No
%)
(98 %)
(95 %)
GW5
Yes /234 days
Yes/ 109 days
Yes /149 days
Yes/ 190 days
Yes /112 days
(100 %)
(47%)
(64%)
(81 %)
(48 %)
GW6
Yes /234 days
Yes /233 days
Yes/ 180 days
Yes /234 days
Yes /153 days
(100 %)
(99%)
(77%)
(100 %)
(65 %)
GW7
Yes /234 days
Yes /234 days
Yes/ 173 days
Yes /234 days
Yes /90 days
(100 %)
(100%)
(74%)
(100 %)
(38%)
Reference
Yes /70 days (30
Yes /80 days
Yes /39 days
Yes /44 days
Well 1
%)
(34 %)
Unknown
(17 %)
(19 %)
Reference
Yes /70 days (30
Yes /132 days
Yes /45 days
Yes /126 days
Well 2
%)
(56%)
Unknown
(19 %)
(54 %)
Reference
Yes /70 days
Yes /159 days
Yes /112 days
Yes /125 days
Yes/ 124 days
Well 3
(30 %)
(68%)
(48%)
(53 %)
(53 %)
Whitelace Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Project Page 38
Stantec — Monitoring Year 5 of 5 - Final November 2010
f
.r 35.2450787-77.6 90397
F'
s
1
rcj 2 012 Gpogle ,
Image U 5 Geological Survey ;'
35.245078, - 77.690397 - Google Maps
Got.' SIC Address North Carolina
Page 1 of 1
Whitelace Creek
20040243 -2
rr (,tz -41
4-
Kinston Regicnal
.jetport at
.Staliinp 9d
70
kvc
1: z
Kinston o
Cold" Ciro
W Vern-'A" m
tiZ g Kinston
�o
�a
ti) 2
TM cn Rn
2%
Wo ndington
r
http: // maps.google.com/ maps ?f--q &source= s_q &hl= en &geocode = &q =3 5.245078, + - 77.690... 5/5/2012
g
ray
h/M
�O
oy
70
kvc
1: z
Kinston o
Cold" Ciro
W Vern-'A" m
tiZ g Kinston
�o
�a
ti) 2
TM cn Rn
2%
Wo ndington
r
http: // maps.google.com/ maps ?f--q &source= s_q &hl= en &geocode = &q =3 5.245078, + - 77.690... 5/5/2012
351245078, - 77.690397 - Google Maps
60k-, Address North Carolina
Page 1 of 1
Whitelace Creek
20040243 -2
P4, 12 ` 3�
http://maps.google.com/maps?f--q&source=s� 5/5/2012