20181271 Ver 1_HoneyMill_100083_MY3_2023_20240205

MONITORING YEAR 3
ANNUAL REPORT

FINAL

HONEY MILL MITIGATION SITE
Surry County, NC
DEQ Contract No. 7619
DMS Project No. 100083

Yadkin River Basin HUC 03040101
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2018-01789
NCDEQ DWR#: 18-1271
RFP #: 16-00746
RFP Issuance Date: December 7, 2017

Data Collection Period: January 2023 – October 2023
FINAL Submission Date: January, 2024

PREPARED FOR:

NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203
January 4, 2024

Mr. Kelly Phillips
Project Manager
NCDEQ – Division of Mitigation Services
610 East Center Ave., Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115

RE: Draft: Year 3 Monitoring Report
Honey Mill Mitigation Site, Surry County
Yadkin River CU 03040101
DMS Project ID No. 100083 / DEQ Contract #007619

Dear Mr. Phillips:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments
from the Draft Year 3 Monitoring Report for the Honey Mill Mitigation Site that were received on January
3, 2024. The report has been updated to reflect those comments. The Final MY3 Report is included. DMS’
comments are listed below in bold. Wildlands’ responses to DMS’ comments are noted in italics.
DMS’ comment: Report Cover: Thank you for including the data collection dates.
Wildlands’ response: You’re welcome.
DMS’ comment: Executive Summary: Thank you for providing concise status updates on the primary
project monitoring items and referencing measures to accomplish the IRT requests.
Wildlands’ response: You’re welcome.
DMS’ comment: Section 1.3 Project Attributes - Table 3: Convert the Lat/Long to decimal degrees.
Wildlands’ response: The Lat/Long coordinates have been changed to decimal degrees in Table 3 in Section
1.3.
DMS’ comment: Section 1.4.1 Vegetation Assessment - IRT Requested Forested Transect Results:
Thank you for conducting the planted stem assessment in the forested areas. The reported survival
rates are encouraging in these shaded areas.
Wildlands’ response: Noted.
DMS’ comment: Section 1.4.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity: The full boundary
assessment conducted during MY3 is appreciated. Please continue monitoring the easement
boundary and document the results in the MY4 report.
Wildlands’ response: Noted.
DMS’ comment: Section 1.4.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity - Invasive Species
Management: The overall reduction in the invasive species population has been effective over the
course of the project, the ongoing treatment is appreciated.
Wildlands’ response: Noted.
Digital Support File Comments:
DMS’ comment: Please submit stream and vegetation visual assessment tables in digital format.

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203
Wildlands’ response: All stream visual assessment tables have been included in the final digital submittal.
As requested, Wildlands has included two (2) hard copies of the final report, a full final .pdf copy of the
report with the DMS comment letter and our response letter inserted after the cover page, and a full
final electronic submittal of the support files. A copy of the DMS comment letter and our response letter
have been included inside the front cover of each report’s hard copy, as well. Please let me know if you
have any questions.

Sincerely,
Kristi Suggs
Senior Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]

PREPARED BY:

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203

Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) implemented a full-delivery stream mitigation project at the
Honey Mill Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The project restored and enhanced a total of 8,683 linear feet
(LF) of perennial and intermittent stream in Surry County, NC. The Site is located within the Rutledge,
Stoney and Flat Shoal Creek – Ararat River targeted local watershed (TWL) and NC Division of Water
Resources (DWR) Subbasin 03-07-03. The project is providing 4,793.432 cool stream mitigation units
(SMUs) for the Yadkin River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101110020.
The Site’s immediate drainage area and the surrounding watershed have a long history of agricultural
activity. The project excludes livestock, creates stable stream banks, converts pasture to forest, and
implements BMPs to filter agricultural runoff. These actions address stressors by reducing fecal,
nutrient, and sediment inputs to project streams, and ultimately to the Ararat River, and reconnect
instream and terrestrial habitats on the Site to upstream and downstream resources. Approximately
20.2-acres of land has been placed under permanent conservation easement to protect the Site in
perpetuity. The established project goals include:
• Improve stream channel stability,
• Treat concentrated agricultural run-off,
• Improve in-stream habitat,
• Restore and enhance native floodplain and wetland vegetation,
• Exclude livestock from streams, and
• Permanently protect the project Site from harmful uses.
The Site is meeting the required stream, vegetation, and hydrology success criteria for Monitoring Year
3 (MY3). In MY3 the Site has met the required stream success criteria. The average planted stem density
is 460 stems per acre and all plots met the MY3 density criteria. Three bankfull events were documented
on the Venable Creek Reach 3 in MY3. The Site is on track to meet the MY7 bankfull flow requirements.
No stream areas of instability were documented, and areas monitored per IRT request have remained
stable. All fences are intact, and no encroachments present at the Site as of October 2023. Invasive
species areas will continue to be monitored and adaptive management measures will be implemented
as necessary to benefit the ecological health of the Site.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL iv
HONEY MILL MITIGATION SITE
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW .....................................................................................................1-1
Section 2: METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................2-1
Section 3: REFERENCES .................................................................................................................3-1

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL v
TABLES
Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits ……………………………………………………………………………………………1-1
Table 1.1: Credit Summary Table …………………………………………………………………………………………………….1-2
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements ………………………………………………1-3
Table 3: Project Attributes ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1-4

FIGURES
Figure 1 Current Condition Plan View (Key)
Figures 1a-d Current Condition Plan View

APPENDICES
Appendix A Visual Assessment Data
Table 4a-c Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 5 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Stream Photographs
Culvert Crossing & BMP Photographs
Mature Tree Photographs
Supplemental Photographs
Permanent and Mobile Vegetation Plot Photographs
Forested Vegetation Transect Photographs

Appendix B Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6a-b Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6c Forested Vegetation Transect Data
Table 7 Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table

Appendix C Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 8 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Section)
Cross-Section Plots

Appendix D Hydrology Data
Table 10 Bankfull Events
Table 11 Rainfall Summary
Recorded Bankfull Event Plots

Appendix E Project Timeline and Contact Info
Table 12 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 13 Project Contact Table

Appendix F Supplemental Planting March 2022
IRT Approved Planted Supplemental Stems: Species and Quantities

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-1
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW
1.1 Project Quantities and Credits
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) implemented a full-delivery stream mitigation project at
the Honey Mill Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
(DEQ) Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The project restored and enhanced a total of 8,683
linear feet (LF) of perennial and intermittent stream in Surry County, NC. The Site is located within
the Rutledge, Stoney and Flat Shoal Creek – Ararat River targeted local watershed (TWL)and NC
Division of Water Resources (DWR) Subbasin 03-07-03. A conservation easement has been
recorded and is in place on 20.2 acres. The project is providing 4,793.432 cool stream mitigation
units (SMUs) for the Yadkin River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101110020. The Site
contains eight unnamed tributaries (UTs) to Venable Creek (UT1, UT2, UT2A, UT2B, UT3, UT4, UT5,
and UT6) and the mainstem of Venable Creek, which has been broken into four reaches and flows
in a north easterly direction through the Site. Multiple riparian wetlands exist on-site; however, no
credit is being sought for project wetlands.
Please refer to Table 1 and Table 1.1 for project credits by stream and the credit summary table
respectively. Annual monitoring will be conducted for seven years with close-out anticipated to
commence in 2027 given the success criteria are met.
Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits
Project Components
Project Stream
Mitigation
Plan
Footage1, 2, 3
As-Built
Footage
Mitigation
Category
Restoration
Level
Mitigation
Ratio (X:1) Credits
Venable Creek Reach 1 91 91.000 Cool EII 2.500 36.386
Venable Creek Reach 2 211 211.000 Cool EI 1.500 140.566
Venable Creek Reach 3 1647 1,647.000 Cool R 1.000 1,646.644
Venable Creek Reach 4 1958 1,958.000 Cool EII 2.500 783.042
UT1 273 273.000 Cool R 1.000 272.885
UT2 Reach 1 742 742.000 Cool EII 4.000 185.462
UT2 Reach 2 342 332.000 Cool R 1.000 342.364
UT2A 893 893.000 Cool EII 4.000 223.310
UT2B 70 70.000 Cool N/A 0.000 0.000
UT3 Reach 1 784 784.000 Cool EII 3.000 261.279

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-2
Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits
Project Components
Project Stream
Mitigation
Plan
Footage1, 2, 3
As-Built
Footage
Mitigation
Category
Restoration
Level
Mitigation
Ratio (X:1) Credits
UT3 Reach 2 306 306.000 Cool R 1.000 306.172
UT4 440 440.000 Cool EII 3.000 146.780
UT5 518 518.000 Cool EII 3.000 172.553
UT6 Reach 1 214 213.000 Cool EII 3.000 71.242
UT6 Reach 2 205 205.000 Cool R 1.000 204.747
Total: 4,793.432
Notes:
1. Internal culvert crossing, and external break excluded from the credited stream footage.
2. No direct Credit for BMPS.
3. UT6 originates within an overhead powerline easement. The conservation easement extends up to UT6’s origin under the
powerline, but proposed crediting does not begin until the stream exits the overhead easement.
Table 1.1: Credit Summary Table
Project Credits
Restoration Level Stream
Warm Cool Cold
Restoration N/A 2,772.812 N/A
Enhancement I N/A 140.566 N/A
Enhancement II N/A 1,880.054 N/A
Preservation N/A N/A N/A
Totals N/A 4,793.432 N/A
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The Site is providing numerous ecological benefits within the Yadkin River Basin. The Site was selected
based on its potential to support the objectives and goals of multiple conservation and watershed
planning documents such as the 2009 Upper Yadkin River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) and the
2015 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Communion’s (NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). Table 2 below
describes the project goals and how functional uplift at the Site will be measured and monitored.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-3
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements
Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional
Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement
Cumulative
Monitoring
Results
Exclude
livestock
from stream
channels.
Install livestock
fencing on all or
portions of the Site
and/or permanently
remove livestock
from all or portions of
the Site to exclude
livestock from stream
channels and riparian
areas.
Reduced
agricultural runoff
and cattle trampling
in streams.
There is no required
performance standard
for this metric.
Visually
monitor
fenced
portions of
Site to ensure
no cattle are
entering the
easement.
No cattle
observed in
easement in MY3.
Improve
stability of
stream
channels.
Construct stream
channels that will
maintain stable cross-
sections, patterns,
and profiles over
time.
Reduction in
sediment inputs
from bank erosion,
reduction of shear
stress, and
improved overall
hydraulic function.
Bank height ratios
remain below 1.2 over
the monitoring period.
Visual assessments
showing progression
towards stability.
11 cross-
section
surveys in
MY1, 2, 3, 5, &
7.
In MY3, all cross
sections have a
BHR <1.2.
Channels are
stable have
maintained the
constructed riffle
and pool
sequence.
Reconnect
channels
with
floodplains.
Reconstruct stream
channels with
appropriate bankfull
dimensions and
depth relative to the
existing floodplain.
Dispersion of high
flows on the
floodplain.
Four bankfull events,
occurring in separate
years during the
monitoring period.
Venable Creek
Reach 3- 1
Manual Crest
Gage and 1
automated
Crest Gage.
In MY3 three
bankfull events
were recorded. In
MY2, one bankfull
event was
recorded. The Site
is on track to
meet criteria.
Improve
instream
habitat.
Install habitat
features such as
constructed riffles,
cover logs, and brush
toes into
restored/enhanced
streams. Add woody
materials to channel
beds. Construct pools
of varying depth.
Increase and
diversify available
habitats for
macroinvertebrates,
fish, and
amphibians leading
to colonization and
increase in
biodiversity over
time.
There is no required
performance standard
for this metric.
N/A N/A
Restore and
enhance
native
floodplain
and
streambank
vegetation.
Plant native tree and
understory species in
riparian zones and
plant appropriate
species on
streambanks.
Reduction in
floodplain sediment
inputs from runoff,
increased bank
stability, increased
LWD and organic
material in streams
In open planting areas
a survival rate of 320
stems per acre at MY3,
260 planted stems per
acre at MY5, and 210
stems per acre at MY7.
Height requirement is
6 feet at MY5 and 8
feet at MY7.
9 permanent
vegetation
plots, 5 mobile
vegetation
plots in MY1,
2, 3, 5, & 7.
14/14 (100%) of
the vegetation
plots met the
MY3 success
criteria of 320
stems per acre.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-4
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements
Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional
Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement
Cumulative
Monitoring
Results
Treat
concentrated
agricultural
runoff
Install agricultural
BMPS in areas of
concentrated
agricultural runoff.
Treatment of runoff
before it enters the
stream channel.
There is no required
performance standard
for this metric.
N/A N/A
Permanently
protect the
project Site
from harmful
uses.
Establish
conservation
easements on the
Site.
Protect Site from
encroachment on
the riparian corridor
and direct impact to
streams and
wetlands.
Prevent easement
encroachment.
Visually
inspect the
perimeter of
the Site to
ensure no
easement
encroachment
is occurring.
No easement
encroachments
were observed in
MY3.
1.3 Project Attributes
The Site’s immediate drainage area as well as the surrounding watershed has a long history of
agricultural activity. Stream and wetland functional stressors for the Site were related to both
historic and current land use practices. Major stream stressors for the Site pre-restoration included
livestock trampling and fecal coliform inputs, lack of stabilizing stream bank and riparian
vegetation, active erosion, and incision. The effects of these stressors resulted in channel
instability, degraded water quality, and the loss of both aquatic and riparian habitat throughout
the Site’s watershed when compared to reference conditions.
The overall Site topography consists of steep, confined, and moderately confined valleys along the
tributaries and flow into a more open and gradually sloped valley along the mainstem of Venable
Creek. The project begins at a roadway culvert located at the intersection of Little Mountain
Church Road and Venable Creek. The watersheds for UT3, UT4, and UT6 are roughly bound by
Venable Farm Road to the west. All of the reach watersheds are encompassed by the Venable
Creek watershed, which extends south past Little Mountain Church Road. The Site is typically
defined by forested and agricultural land use with sporadic development of rural homes.
Pre-construction conditions are outlined in Table 3 below and Table 8 of Appendix C.
Table 3: Project Attributes
Project Information
Project Name Honey Mill Mitigation Site County Surry County
Project Area (acres) 20.2 Project
Coordinates 36.428619, -80.610836
Planted Acreage 5 acres (full planting) plus supplemental planting
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic
Province Piedmont River Basin Yadkin River
USGS Hydrologic
Unit 8-digit 03040101 USGS Hydrologic
Unit 14-digit 03040101110020

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-5
Table 3: Project Attributes
Project Watershed Summary Information
DWR Sub-basin 03-07-03
2011 NLCD Land
Use
Classification
Forest (65%), Cultivated (21%), Shrubland
(5%), Urban (9%), Open Water (0%)
Project Drainage
Area (acres) 705
Project Drainage
Area Percentage
of Impervious
Area
0.8%
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Venable Creek UT1 UT2 UT2A UT2B UT3 UT4 UT5 UT6
R1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2
Length of reach
(linear feet) - post-
restoration
91 211 1,647 1,958 273 742 332 893 80 784 306 440 518 213 205
Valley confinement Unconfined to Confined
Drainage area
(acres) 183 519 599 705 334 21 43 21 9 15 18 9 12 8 10
Perennial (P),
Intermittent (I),
Ephemeral (E)
P P P P P I/ P P P P P P P I/ P P P
NCDWR Water
Quality
Classification
Class C
Morphological
Description (stream
type) - Pre-
Restoration
N/A E4 E/C4 N/A E4b N/A C4b N/A N/A N/A E4b N/A N/A N/A A4
Morphological
Description (stream
type) - post-
restoration
N/A B4 C4 N/A C4b N/A B4 N/A N/A N/A C4b N/A N/A N/A A4
Evolutionary trend
(Simon's Model) -
Pre- Restoration
N/A III IV N/A III N/A V->V N/A N/A N/A III N/A N/A N/A III

Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United
States - Section 404 Yes Yes USACE Action ID #SAW-2018-01789
Waters of the United
States - Section 401 Yes Yes DWR# 18-1271
Division of Land
Quality (Erosion and
Sediment Control)
Yes Yes NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit NCG010000
Endangered Species
Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion Document in Mitigation Plan

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-6
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation
Historic Preservation
Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion Document in Mitigation Plan
Coastal Zone
Management Act
(CZMA)/Coastal Area
Management Act
(CAMA)
No N/A N/A
FEMA Floodplain
Compliance No N/A N/A
Essential Fisheries
Habitat No N/A N/A
1.4 Monitoring Year 3 Data Assessment
Annual monitoring for MY3 was conducted between January and October 2023. The stream, vegetation,
and hydrologic success criteria for the Site follows the approved success criteria presented in the Honey
Mill Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2020).
1.4.1 Vegetation Assessment
Supplemental Planting Background, IRT Approval, and Table 7 Densities
Please note that Table 7 only summarizes stem densities for the species included in the approved
Mitigation Plan Performance Standard. However, with IRT approval, Wildlands conducted supplemental
planting in 2.5 acres of wetland across the Site to support woody stem growth in March of 2022. During
the same planting, additional stems were also planted in the enhancement II reaches with existing forest
(approximately 7 acres) per IRT request. All species approval and substitutions were documented in the
MY1 Annual Monitoring Report (Wildlands, 2021) and MY2 Annual Monitoring Report (Wildlands, 2022).
Please refer to the IRT approved planted supplemental stems species and quantities in Appendix F.
The approved supplemental wetland and riparian species have been included in the vegetative survey
and factored into the density and species composition for all vegetation data analysis as “Approved Post
Mitigation Plan” species. To account for the IRT approved supplemental species please refer to Table 6
“Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard” densities discussed in the results below.
Permanent and Mobile Vegetation Plot Results
The MY3 permanent plot planted stem density using the “Post Mitigation Plan” performance
standard ranged from 324 to 486 stems per acre. All densities within the permanent plots (9/9)
exceeded the MY3 criteria of 320 stems per acre. The MY3 “Post Mitigation Plan” planted stem
densities in random mobile vegetation plots ranged from 324 to 688 stems per acre and all 5 mobile
plots met the MY3 density criteria. The mobile plots are distributed across the Site to provide
representative data of the open planting riparian corridor.
IRT Requested Forested Transect Results
As requested by the IRT in MY2, two forested woody vegetation transects have been added to monitor
the survivorship of the shaded supplemental planting and will be assessed through MY7 but are not held
to the Site’s density or height requirements. Forested transect 1 was established on UT2 R1 and had a
total stem count of 14 planted stems in MY2 and 13 stems in MY3 resulting in a 93% survival rate.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-7
Forested transect 2 was established on UT4 and had a total stem count of 11 stems in MY2 and 9 stems
in MY3 for an 82% survival rate.
Vegetation Data Results Summary
Overall, 100% (14/14) vegetation plots met the MY3 density criteria. The average stem height was 3 feet
and is on track to meet MY5 criteria. Additionally, the overall planted density for the Site in MY2 was
460 stems per acre. There was an average of 7 species present per plot in MY3, despite dense
herbaceous cover in wetlands areas. Following the supplemental planting in March 2022 woody stem
survivorship, vigor, and diversity have improved substantially across the Site when compared to the
initial planting.
Please see the Current Condition Plan View (CCPV) maps for permanent vegetation plot locations, MY3
mobile plot locations, and the March 2022 wetland and shaded supplemental planting areas. Vegetation
plot and vegetation transect photographs are located in Appendix A. All vegetation summary data for
plots and transects are in Appendix B.
1.4.2 Stream Assessment
Riffle cross-sections (XS) on the restoration reaches should be stable and show little change in bankfull
area, maximum depth ratio, and width-to-depth ratio. All riffle cross-sections should fall within the
parameters defined for the designated stream type. If any changes do occur, these changes will be
evaluated to assess whether the stream channel is showing signs of instability. Indicators of instability
include a vertically incising thalweg and/or eroding channel banks.
Morphological surveys for MY3 were conducted in June 2023. Cross-section survey results indicate that
channel dimensions are stable and functioning as designed on all restoration reaches with minimal
adjustments from MY1 to MY3. There are no indicators of stream instability across this Site in MY3.
1.4.3 Stream Hydrology Assessment
An automated pressure transducer is being used to monitor for bankfull flow events. Henceforth, this
device is referred to as an automatic “crest gage (CG)” of CG1. A manual crest gage located at XS7 is also
being used to corroborate the results of CG1. At the end of the seven-year monitoring period, four or
more bankfull flow events must have occurred in separate years.
One bankfull event was recorded on Site in MY2 by CG1 on Venable Creek Reach 3. In MY3, three
bankfull events were recorded by CG1 on 4/28/23, 6/20/23, and 8/6/23. Additionally, evidence of a
bankfull event was captured at the manual crest gage in August 2023. Therefore, two bankfull events
have been recorded in two separate years, the Site is on track to meet the performance criteria of four
bankfull events occurring in separate years during the monitoring period. The 30th and 70th percentile
data were collected from the Mount Airy 2 W, WETS station for years 1971-2020. As of August 2023,
there has been an annual precipitation total of 30.95 inches per USGS 362416080334345 RAINGAGE AT
ARARAT RIVER AT ARARAT, NC. The amount of precipitation the Site experiences is likely to fall in the
average range for MY3.
The manual crest gage and automatic crest gage locations are included on the MY3 CCPV Figures 1a - 1d.
Please refer to Appendix D for hydrology summary data and gage plots, and the Supplemental
Photographs located in Appendix A for bankfull documentation at the manual crest gage.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-8
1.4.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity
Stream Stability
The streams appear stable and functioning with vegetation developing on the channel banks. No areas
of instability were noted during the MY3 visual assessment that took place on 8/30/23.
Per IRT request, a few areas that appeared to be stabilizing in MY2 have continued to be monitored in
MY3. The spring wetland seep in the right floodplain of Venable Creek Reach 3 provides important
floodplain storage and is filling in with stabilizing vegetation. The pour point from the seep to the
channel is stable. Wildlands will continue to monitor the seep in future monitoring years. UT2B (not for
credit) which was dry during the MY2 Site walk, was flowing during the MY3 visual assessment on
8/30/23 and has remained stable. During dry times of the year, UT3 flows subsurface to the Venable
Creek Reach 3 confluence. A marker was installed at the UT3 confluence to monitor vertical incision and
no incision has occurred since installation in MY2. The meander bend above the UT3 confluence has
continued to fill in with willows armoring the bank after being live staked in before the start of the MY3
growing season. All of these areas have been monitored and photographed in MY3. Please refer to
Appendix A for the supplemental photolog.
All culverts, crossing areas, and BMPs have remained stable with riparian vegetation filling in nicely in
the surrounding riparian corridor. The visual assessment tables and Supplemental BMP photographs are
located in Appendix A.
Easement Exception and Fencing
There are three areas of easement exceptions that were documented at baseline conditions and will
remain on the CCPV maps throughout the seven-year monitoring period per IRT request. No easement
encroachments were observed in MY3.
Additional fencing was installed and any breaks in fencing were also repaired in September 2022. A full
boundary inspection has been completed in MY3. All fences on the Site are intact and no encroachments
were present as of October 2023.
Invasive Species Management
There were four established wooded areas with understory invasive species including multiflora rose
(Rosa multiflora), Japanese barberry (Berberis thunbergia), and Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense).
within the project area. These areas occupy less than 2% of the easement and are located within the
existing forests along UT2, UT2A, UT3, and UT6, as shown on CCPV Figures 1a - 1d.
Treatments in MY2 were effective and there was a reduction in density of invasives within the mapped
polygons from MY2 to MY3. In order to continue to keep the population in check throughout MY3, re-
sprout treatments took place in May and July of 2023. Invasive areas will continue to be monitored for
re-sprouts and treated as necessary. The open planting areas have established native herbaceous
vegetation and are largely free of invasive species. See the vegetation condition assessment Table 5 in
Appendix A.
1.5 Monitoring Year 3 Summary
Overall, the Site has met the required stream success criteria for MY3. The average planted stem density
was 460 stems per acre and all vegetation plots met the MY3 density requirement of 320 stems per
acre. Geomorphic surveys indicate that cross-section bankfull dimensions closely match the baseline
monitoring with some minor adjustments, and streams are functioning as intended. Three bankfull
events were documented in MY3, and the Site is on track to meet the MY7 bankfull flow requirements.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 1-9
The MY3 visual assessment identified a few areas of invasive vegetation re-sprouts in wooded
enhancement II reaches that were treated as needed throughout the year. The open planting areas have
established native herbaceous vegetation and are largely free of invasive species. No stream areas of
instability were documented. No easement encroachment was observed on the Site and boundary is
intact. Wildlands will continue to monitor the Site and adaptive management measures will be
implemented as necessary to benefit the ecological health of the Site.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 2-1
Section 2: METHODOLOGY
Geomorphic data were collected following the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site:
An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural
Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). All Integrated Current Condition Mapping was recorded
using a Trimble handheld GPS with sub-meter accuracy and processed using Pathfinder and ArcGIS.
Stream gages were installed in riffles and monitored quarterly. Hydrologic monitoring instrument
installation and monitoring methods are in accordance with the United States Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE, 2003) standards. Vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP
Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008); however, vegetation data processing follows the NCDMS Vegetation
Data Entry Tool and Vegetation Plot Data Table (NCDMS, 2020).

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 3 Annual Report – FINAL 3-1
Section 3: REFERENCES
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003.
Stream Restoration a Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest, and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2020. Vegetation Data Entry Tool and
Vegetation Plot Data Table. Raleigh, NC. https://ncdms.shinyapps.io/Veg_Table_Tool/
NCDMS. 2017. DMS Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements, and Content Guidance.
June 2017, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services and Interagency Review Team Technical Workgroup. 2018.
Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services and Interagency Review Team Technical Workgroup. 2021.
Pebble Count Data Requirements. Raleigh, NC.
NCDMS. 2009. Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2015. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh,
NC.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR), 2015. Surface Water Classifications.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications.
Phillips, K. 2021. Email correspondence, pebble counts MY1-MY7. 18 November 2021.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms 14(1):11-26.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)., October 2016. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE,
NCDENR-DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resource Conservation District (NRCS), 2022.
WETS Station, Mount Airy 2 W, Surry County, NC.
https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/climate/navigate_wets.html.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2022. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2
Annual Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2021. Honey Mill Mitigation Site As-built Baseline
Monitoring Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2021. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 1
Annual Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2020. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan. DMS,
Raleigh, NC.

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[
[[

[
[
[
[
[
[

[
[
[[
[
[
[

[

[
[

[
[
[
[[[[[[[[

[

[
[

[
[
[ [ [[
[
[
[[

[
[
[[[
[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[
[

[
[
[

[
[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[[

[

[

[
[[[[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[
[

[
[

[
[

[

[

[
[
[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[
[

[

[
[
[
[

[
[
[

[

[

[
[[[[[
[
[
[
[[

[

[
[

[
[
[
[[
[

[

[

[
[
[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[
[
[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[
[[
!A
!A
!A
!5
!5
!5
!5!5
!5
!5!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
!P
!P
!P
!P
!P
!P
[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
GF
GF
GF
GF
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
UT4
UT3
Reach 1
UT
1
UT2
UT2A
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 2
Reach 1
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 4
UT5
Reach 1
Reach 2
UT2B
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
10 ft. Farm Path Exception
Crossing Exception
Figure 1d
Figu
r
e

1
c
Figure 1b
Figure 1a
UT6
Figure 1. Current Condition Plan View Key
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Surry County, NC
¹0 250 500125 Feet
2018 Aerial Photography
GF
GF
!A
!P
!A
!A
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5
Acres, March 2022)
Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0
Acres, March 2022)
Forested Vegetation Transects
Vegetation Plots- Permanent (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Vegetation Plots- Mobile (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3)
Multiflora Rose, Japanese Barberry,
Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts)
Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts)
Easement Exception (MY0)
10 ft. Farm Path Exception
Crossing Exception
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Design to As-Built Alignment Deviation
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
[Fence Line
[New Fence Line Installed 2022
Overhead Utility
Cross Sections
!A Manual Crest Gage
!A Automatic Crest Gage
!A Barotroll
GF BMP Photo Points
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
[[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[

[

[

[

[

[
[ [ [ [ [ [ [
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
!A !A
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF GFGF
!P
!P
XS3
X
S
2
X
S
1
XS4
X
S
5
1
0
0
+
0
0
1
0
1
+
0
0
1
0
2
+
0
0
1
0
3
+
0
0
1
0
4
+
0
0
10
5
+
0
0
10
6
+
0
0
10
7
+
0
0
108+0
0
1
0
9
+
0
0
110+0
0
1
1
1
+
0
0
11
2
+
0
0
113
+
0
0
200+00
201+00
20
2
+
0
0
PP1
PP2
PP3
PP4
PP5
PP6
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
10 ft. Farm Path Exception (MY0)
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
UT1
V
e
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
VP2
VP1
MP1
Figure 1a. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Surry County, NC
¹
2018 Aerial Photography
0 80 160 Feet
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022)
Vegetation Plots- Permanent (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Vegetation Plots- Mobile (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Easement Exception (MY0)
10 ft. Farm Path Exception
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
[Fence Line
Overhead Utility
Cross Sections
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
0 90 180 Feet
[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[

[

[

[
[[ [ [ [ [
[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[[[[[[[[[[[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[[[[[[[[
[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
!A
!A
!A
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
!P
!P
!P [[[[[[[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
XS6
X
S
7
XS8
1
0
9
+
0
0
110+0
0
1
1
1
+
0
0
11
2
+
0
0
113
+
0
0
1
1
4
+
0
0
115+
0
0
11
6
+
0
0
117
+
0
0
118+0
0
119
+
0
0
300+00
301+
0
0302+00
303+0030
4
+
0
0
305+00
306+00
307+
0
0
308+
0
0
30
9
+
0
0
310+00
3
1
1
+
0
0
400
+
0
0
401+0
0402+0
0
403
+
0
0
404+0
0
405+00
406+00
407
+
0
0
4
0
8
+
0
0
509+00
510+
0
0
51
1
+
0
0
100+00
PP5
PP6
PP13
PP12
PP10
PP9
PP8
PP11
PP18
PP19
MT1
PP7
PP14
PP15
Manual CG
Barotroll
CG1
T-1
X
S
9
XS10
UT2
UT2A
Reach 3
Reach 1
Reach 2
UT2B Figure 1b
10 ft. Farm Path Exception (MY0)
Crossing Exception
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
VP3
VP2
VP4
VP5
UT3 Reach 2
Reach 2
MP3
MP2
Figure 1b. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Surry County, NC
¹
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022)
Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0 Acres, March 2022)
Forested Vegetation Transects
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Mobile Vegetation Plots (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3)
Multiflora Rose, Japanese Barberry, Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts)
Easement Exception (MY0)
10 ft. Farm Path Exception
Crossing Exception
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Non-Project Streams
Cross Sections
Bankfull
[Fence Line
[New Fence Line Installed 2022
!P Reach Breaks
!A Manual Crest Gage
!A Automatic Crest Gage
!A Barotroll
GF Photo Points
[
[
[
[
[[[[
[

[
[[[[[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[
[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[
[[ [ [ [ [ [ [ [ [[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[[[[[[[[ [ [ [ [ [
!A
!A
GF
GF GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
!P
!P
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
GF
GF
XS6
11
7
+
0
0
118+00
11
9
+
0
0
120+00
12
1
+
0
0
12
2
+
0
0
1
2
3
+
0
0
1
2
4
+
0
0
12
5
+
0
0
126
+
0
0
1
2
7
+
0
0
12
8
+
0
0
500+0
0
501+00
502+00 503+00
504+00 505+0
0
506
+
0
0
507+
0
0
508+0
0
509+
0
0
510
+
0
0
51
1
+
0
0
600+0
0
601
+
0
0
602
+
0
0
603+00 604
+
0
0
100+00
PP17
PP16
PP18
PP19
PP20
PP21
PP22
MT2
PP7
CG1
XS9
XS10
T2
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
UT4
UT3
Reach 3
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 4
Figure 1c
VP4
VP6
VP5
UT3 Rea
c
h

2
MP3
MP4
Figure 1c. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Surry County, NC
¹0 100 200 Feet
2018 Aerial Photography
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022)
Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0 Acres, March 2022)
Forested Vegetation Transects
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Mobile Vegetation Plots (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3)
Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts)
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Cross Sections
Bankfull
[Fence Line
[New Fence Line Installed 2022
!A Automatic Crest Gage
GF BMP Photo Points
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[

[

[
[[
[

[
[[[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[[[
[
[
[
[[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[[[[[[[[[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[

[
!5
!5
!5!5
GF
GF
GFGF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
!P
[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
GF
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
XS1
1
12
7
+
0
0
128
+
0
0
12
9
+
0
0
13
0
+
0
0
131
+
0
0
132+00
13
3
+
0
0
13
4
+
0
0
135
+
0
0
1
3
6
+
0
0
13
7
+
0
0
1
3
8
+
0
0
139+00
140+00
700+0
0
70
1
+
0
0
702+00
70
3
+
0
0
7
0
4
+
0
0
800+00
801+00
802+0
0
803+0
0
804+00 805+00
PP22
MT2
PP24
PP23
PP25
PP26PP27
PP28
PP29
UT6
UT5
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 4
VP7
VP8
VP9
MP4
MP5
Figure 1d. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Surry County, NC
¹0 90 180 Feet
2018 Aerial Photography
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Wetland Supplemental Planting (2.5 Acres, March 2022)
Shaded Supplemental Planting (7.0 Acres, March 2022)
Vegetation Plots- Permanent (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Vegetation Plots- Mobile (MY3)
Meets Criteria
Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY3)
Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts)
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Design to As-Built Alignment Deviation
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
[Fence Line
[New Fence Line Installed 2022
Overhead Utility
Cross Sections
GF BMP Photo Points
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
APPENDIX A. Visual Assessment Data
Table 4a.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023
Venable Creek R2
141
282
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 5 5 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100%
Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023
Venable Creek R3
1,647
3,294
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 15 15 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 18 18 100%
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
Structure
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Table 4b.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023
UT1
273
546
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 6 6 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100%
Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023
UT2 R2
342
684
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 15 15 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100%
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
Structure
Totals:
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Table 4c.  Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023
UT3 R2
306
612
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 11 11 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. 5 5 100%
Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023
UT6 R2
205
410
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from 
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure 
appears likely.  Does NOT include undercuts that are 
modest, appear sustainable and are providing 
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical ‐ rotational, slumping, 
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of 
grade across the sill. 6 6 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of 
influence does not exceed 15%. N/A N/A N/A
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank 
Totals:
Structure
% Stable, 
Performing as 
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number 
Stable, 
Performing 
as Intended
Total 
Number in 
As‐built
Amount of 
Unstable 
Footage
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Date of visual assessment: August 30, 2023
Planted Acreage 4.97
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping 
Threshold 
(ac)
Combined 
Acreage
% of Planted 
Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.0.10 0 0%
Low Stem Density 
Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count 
criteria.0.10 0 0%
00%
Areas of Poor Growth 
Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 0 0%
0.0 0%
Date of visual assessment: October, 2023
Easement Acreage 20.20
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping 
Threshold 
(ac)
Combined 
Acreage
% of 
Easement 
Acreage
Invasive Areas of 
Concern
Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will 
therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the 
potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short‐term or 
community structure for existing communities.  Invasive species included in 
summation above should be identified in report summary.  
0.10 0.42 2%
Easement 
Encroachment Areas
Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists of
any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common
encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has no
threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area. 
none
Table 5.  Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Total
Cumulative Total
0%

STREAM PHOTOGRAPHS

PHOTO POINT 1 Venable Creek R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 1 Venable Creek R1 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 2 UT1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 2 UT1 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 3 Venable Creek R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 3 Venable Creek R2 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 4 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 4 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 5 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 5 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 6 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 6 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 7 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 7 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 8 UT2 R1 Headcut – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 8 UT2 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 9 UT2 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 9 UT2 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 10 UT2 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 10 UT2 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 11 UT2A – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 11 UT2A – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 12 UT2A – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 12 UT2A – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 16 UT3 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 16 UT3 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1– downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 19 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 19 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 20 UT4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 20 UT4 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 21 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 21 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 22 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 22 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 23 UT5 Headcut – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 23 UT5 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 24 UT5 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 24 UT5 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 25 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 25 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 26 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 26 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 27 UT6 R2 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 27 UT6 R2 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 28 UT6 R1 – upstream (03/23/2023) PHOTO POINT 28 UT6 R1 – downstream (03/23/2023)

PHOTO POINT 29 Venable Creek R4 Ford Crossing – (03/23/2023)

CULVERT CROSSING & BMP PHOTOGRAPHS

Venable Creek R1 Culvert – Outlet (03/23/2023) Venable Creek R2 Crossing - Looking Upstream (03/23/2023)

Venable Creek R2 Crossing - Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) Venable Creek R4 Crossing - Looking Upstream (03/23/2023)

Venable Creek R4 Crossing - Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) UT1 Culvert – Outlet (03/23/2023)

UT2 Crossing Culvert – Inlet (03/23/2023) UT2 Crossing Culvert – Outlet (03/23/2023)

UT3 BMP – Looking Downstream (03/23/2023) UT4 BMP – Looking Downstream (03/23/2023)

UT6 BMP – Looking Downstream (03/23/2023)

MATURE TREE PHOTOGRAPHS

Mature Tree Photo Point 1 (Northeast) – Venable Creek Reach 3 
(08/30/2023) 
Mature Tree Photo Point 2 (Northeast) – Venable Creek Reach 4 
(08/30/2023) 

SUPPLEMENTAL PHOTOGRAPHS  

UT2B‐ channel confluence with mainstem upstream (08/30/2023) UT3‐ Subsurface Flow to Venable Creek stable upstream 
(08/30/2023) 

VC R3‐ Meander Bend stabilizing above UT3 confluence after live 
staking in winter 2022 (08/30/2023) 
VC R3‐ Wetland seep filling in with vegetation and forming vernal 
pool (08/30/2023) 

VC R3‐ Wetland Seep to Main Channel on right floodplain stable 
(08/30/2023) VC R3‐ bankfull event recorded at manual gage (08/30/2023) 

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 1 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 2 (08/08/2023)

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 3 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 4 (08/08/2023)

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 5 (08/08/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 6 (08/08/2023)

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 7 (08/30/2023) PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 08 (08/08/2023)

PERMANENT VEGETATION PLOT 9 (08/08/2023)

MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS

MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 1 (08/08/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 2 (08/08/2023)

MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 3 (08/08/2023) MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 4 (08/08/2023)

MOBILE VEGETATION PLOT 5 (08/08/2023)

FORESTED VEGETATION TRANSECT PHOTOGRAPHS

FORESTED VEGETATION TRANSECT 1 (08/08/2023) FORESTED VEGETATION TRANSECT 2 (08/08/2023)

APPENDIX B. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6a. Vegetation Plot Data
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
5
2021‐03‐01
2022‐03‐21
2023‐08‐08
0.0247
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 111122 1111 33
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1111
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FACU 11331111
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 22
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 332211 112211 11
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1 112211
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 1 1 11222211
Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU 3 3 1 1 111122 11
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 1111
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Shrub UPL
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 112233222222221112
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU 1 1
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 1 1 1 1 2222
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 11
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 2211 2233
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 1111 22
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 22 11
Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1 1 1 1
Sum Performance Standard 12 12 9 9 12 12 9 9 10 10 11 11 13 13 8 8 10 11
Post Mitigation 
Plan Species Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 2 2 1 1 2211
Sum Proposed Standard 12 12 9 9 14 14 9 9 11 11 11 11 13 13 10 10 11 12
12 9 12 9 10 11 13 8 11
486 364 486 364 405 445 526 324 445
777687867
25 22 21 22 18 18 15 30 25
235445325
000000000
12 9 14 9 11 11 13 10 12
486 364 567 364 445 445 526 405 486
778697878
25 22 21 22 18 18 15 30 25
235445335
000000000
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species 
that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular 
font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation 
plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems.
Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Indicator 
Status
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Table 6b. Vegetation Plot Data
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
5
2021‐03‐01
2022‐03‐21
2023‐08‐08
0.0247
Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Veg Plot 5 R
Total Total Total Total Total
Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 3 1 1
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1 3
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FACU
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 3
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC 1
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 2 2 2
Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU 1
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Shrub UPL 2
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 3 5 5 2
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 2 1 2
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 6
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW
Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1
Sum Performance Standard 8 7 8 12 17
Post Mitigation 
Plan Species Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 2 4
Sum Proposed Standard 8 9 12 12 17
8781217
324 283 324 486 688
54 447
38 33 42 42 35
32 432
00 000
8 9 12 12 17
324 364 486 486 688
55 547
38 33 42 42 35
33 432
00 000
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species 
that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular 
font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation 
plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems.
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Indicator 
Status
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Vegetation Plot Data 
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Scientific Name Performance Standard Approval MY2 Stems MY3 Stems
Ilex opaca Approved Mit Plan 4 4
Lindera benzoin Approved Mit Plan 2 1
Platanus occidentalis Approved Mit Plan 3 3
Oxydendrum arboreum Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Liriodendron tulipifera Approved Mit Plan 3 2
Fagus grandifolia Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Diospyros virginiana Approved Mit Plan 0 1
TOTAL STEM COUNT: 14 13
TOTAL SPECIES COUNT: 66
AVERAGE PLOT HEIGHT (Meters) 0.5 0.7
Scientific Name Performance Standard Approval MY2 Stems MY2 Stems
Morus rubra Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Carpinus carolinana Approved Mit Plan 2 1
Cornus florida Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Ulmus americana Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Lindera benzoin Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Acer negundo Approved Mit Plan 2 1
Prunus serotina Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Platanus occidentalis Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Quercus rubra Approved Mit Plan 1 1
TOTAL STEM COUNT: 11 9
TOTAL SPECIES COUNT: 99
AVERAGE PLOT HEIGHT (Meters) 0.6 0.7
Table 6c.  Forested Vegetation Transect Table
Transect 1: UT2
Transect 2: UT4
*Transects represent understory planting and are not held to density or height requirements 
per MY1 IRT site walk comments (8/16/2022). 
Table 7.  Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
486 2 7 0 364 3 7 0 486* 5 7 0
526 2 8 0 364 3 7 0 405* 4 6 0
486 2 7 0 405 2 8 0 364 3 5 0
567 2 8 0 526 2 10 0 445 2 6 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
364 4 6 0 405* 4 8 0 445 5 7 0
324 3 5 0 405* 2 8 0 283 3 6 0
202 2 4 0 324 2 7 0 324 2 6 0
567 2 9 0 364 2 8 0 607 2 10 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
526 3 8 0 324* 2 6 0 445* 5 7 0
486 3 9 0 364 2 6 0 486* 3 6 0
526 2 9 0 486 2 8 0 243 2 4 0
526 2 9 0 607 2 9 0 405 2 9 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
324 3 5 0 283* 2 4 0 324* 4 4 0
324 5 4 0 607* 4 5 0 405* 2 5 0
81 2 2 0 445 2 10 0 405 2 5 0
445 2 7 0 567 2 11 0 445 2 8 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
486 3 4 0 688 2 7 0
445*2 7 0 729 2 10 0
405 2 4 0 607 2 8 0
567 2 10 0 688 2 8 0
Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F. 
1. Veg Plot Group 2R met criteria in MY3 with a density of 364 Stems/Ac. when "Post‐Mitigation Plan" IRT approved species (including March 2022 supplemental stems) were included in table 7. 
*For stem densities in plots that inlcude post‐mitigation plan approved species planted during the March 2022 supplemental planting please refer to table 7 for the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" referenced in the text. 
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F
Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F
Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Veg Plot Group 1 R Veg Plot Group 2 R1 Veg Plot Group 3 R
Veg Plot Group 4 R Veg Plot Group 5 R
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
APPENDIX C. Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Parameter
Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)1 10.5 10.8 2 1 1 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft)1 90 113 2 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1.6 1.7 2 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 2.2 2.3 2 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 16.9 18.1 2 1 1 1 1
Width/Depth Ratio 1 6.1 6.9 2 1 1 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio1 1 8.6 10.5 2 1 1 1 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.3 1.6 2 1 1 1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 2 1 1 1 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2
Parameter
Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 1 1 1 1 1
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 1 1 1 1 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2
Parameter
Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)1 14.6 15.8 3 1 1 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft)1 93 104 3 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1.1 1.2 3 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 1.8 2.0 3 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 1 16.0 19.4 3 1 1 1 1
Width/Depth Ratio 1 12.8 14.2 3 1 1 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio1 1 6.0 6.7 3 1 1 1 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 3 1 1 1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 3 1 1 1 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)78 100 3
Sinuosity
Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2
1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross-sect
2. Channel slope is calculated from the surface of the channel bed rather than water surface.
(---): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable
14.8
33
0.7
5.0
1.0
17.7
1.0
19.0
6.2
51
0.5
0.7
2.8
13.5
8.2
1.0
6.2
1.0
14.8
9.3
57
0.5
0.8
4.8
17.8
6.1
20.2
11.1
1.0
17.1
12.1
75
0.9
1.6
11.0
1.0
2.0+
1.0-1.1
24.1
5
---
1.4+
1.0-1.1
8.5
11.2
5.6
11
0.5
---
2.6
12.1
9.5
4.9
10
0.4
---
1.9
12.3
2.0+
1.0-1.1
3.1
1.0-1.1
---
11.5
25
1.0
---
11.1
11.8
2.2+
1.0-1.1
16.4
13.8
1.0-1.1
---
15.6
34
1.1
---
17.3
14.1
8
1.1
3.7
2.6
8.5
15.0
6.4
1.5
3.1
1.4
30
1.1
---
24.1
4.2
27
0.9
1.1
3.8
4.7
9.5
4.0
11
0.3
0.4
1.2
12.7
2.7
1.01.6
40.6 13.3
8.7
69
1.1
1.6
9.8
7.6
10.6
46
1.5
2.0
15.6
7.2
0.0245
B4
4.5
15.0
68
0.0152 0.0232 0.0440 0.0387 0.0869
1.03 1.31 1.20 1.05 1.05 1.05
142 54 24 12 19
C4 C4b B4 B4 A4
6.6
0.4
3.0
15.013.4
1.3
2.1
As-Built/ Baseline
Venable Creek R2 Venable Creek R3 UT1 UT2 R2 UT3 R2 UT6 R2
0.0230 0.0140 0.0210 0.0380 0.0340 0.0822
1.08 1.29 1.14 1.02 1.02 1.00
75 83 52 10 6 4
B4 C4 C4b B4 B4 A4
0.0870
Pre-Existing Condition
Venable Creek R2
E4
75
1.08
0.0190
Venable Creek R3
E/C4
83
1.14
0.0136
Design
Venable Creek R2 Venable Creek R3 UT1 UT2 R2 UT3 R2 UT6 R2
1.01
2.1
UT1 UT2 R2
652
UT6 R2
A4
0.8
4
C4b
UT3 R2
4.3
E4b
10
E4b
3.7
0.0212 0.0352
1.471.04
2.7
1.6
7.9
24.7
2.0+2.2+
0.3
1.2
1.18
0.0369
Table 9.  Morphology and Hydraulic  Summary (Dimensional Parameters ‐ Cross‐Section)
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1039.2 1039.3 1039.3 1039.3 1034.6 1034.7 1034.7 1034.7
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1037.6 1037.5 1037.6 1037.7 1037.6 1037.7 1037.7 1037.8 1032.5 1032.6 1032.6 1032.4
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1039.7 1039.7 1039.7 1039.7 1039.2 1039.3 1039.3 1039.3 1034.6 1034.7 1034.5 1034.6
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.1 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.2
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)18.1 16.7 17.0 14.5 11.0 11.1 10.7 10.5 20.2 19.3 18.5 19.1
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1024.1 1024.0 1024.1 1024.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1021.4 1021.6 1021.3 1021.5 1022.3 1022.2 1022.3 1022.2 1013.1 1013.0 1013.1 1013.0
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1024.7 1024.8 1024.7 1024.7 1024.1 1024.0 1024.1 1024.1 1016.3 1016.3 1016.3 1016.3
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)3.3 3.2 3.5 3.1 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.3
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)33.4 33.6 35.9 34.1 17.1 18.1 17.5 18.3 33.3 35.0 35.9 36.1
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 1015.9 1015.9 1015.9 1015.9 1020.0 1020.4 1020.4 1020.4 1011.6 1011.6 1011.6 1011.6
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1013.9 1013.9 1013.8 1013.8 1019.1 1019.4 1019.3 1019.2 1009.8 1009.8 1009.9 1009.8
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1015.9 1015.9 1015.8 1015.8 1020.0 1020.1 1020.1 1020.1 1011.6 1011.7 1011.7 1011.5
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.8
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)19.4 18.5 18.6 19.9 4.8 2.9 3.1 2.9 16.0 16.8 16.7 15.0
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) ‐ Based on AB‐Bankfull1 Area 1011.9 1012.0 1012.0 1012.0 998.6 998.7 998.7 998.7
Bank Height Ratio ‐ Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.9
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1011.2 1011.2 1011.2 1011.2 997.9 998.1 998.0 998.0
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1011.9 1011.9 1011.9 1011.9 998.6 998.6 998.6 998.6
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.7
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2.8 2.4 2.2 2.0 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.6
1Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As‐built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent year's bankfull elevation.  
UT6 R2 Cross‐Section 11 Riffle
Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 4 Pool
UT2 R2 Cross‐Section 8 Riffle
2LTOB Area and Max depth ‐ These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation).  Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above.  The difference between the LTOB elevation 
and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth. 
Venable Creek R3 Cross Section 9 Riffle
UT3 R2 Cross Section 10 Riffle
UT1 Cross‐Section 1 Pool UT1 Cross‐Section 2 Riffle 
Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 5 Riffle Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 6 Pool
Venable Creek R2 Cross‐Section 3 Riffle
Venable Creek R3 Cross‐Section 7 Riffle
Bankfull Dimensions
14.5 x-section area (ft.sq.)
15.5 width (ft)
0.9 mean depth (ft)
2.0 max depth (ft)
16.6 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.9 hydraulic radius (ft)
16.5 width-depth ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 1-UT1
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1036
1038
1040
1042
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
200+77 Pool
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
10.5 x-section area (ft.sq.)
12.0 width (ft)
0.9 mean depth (ft)
1.5 max depth (ft)
12.5 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.8 hydraulic radius (ft)
13.6 width-depth ratio
74.9 W flood prone area (ft)
6.3 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 2-UT1
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1036
1038
1040
1042
20 30 40 50 60 70
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
201+02 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
19.1 x-section area (ft.sq.)
14.3 width (ft)
1.3 mean depth (ft)
2.2 max depth (ft)
15.3 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.2 hydraulic radius (ft)
10.7 width-depth ratio
68.1 W flood prone area (ft)
4.8 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 3-Venable Creek R2
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1032
1034
1036
1038
20 30 40 50 60 70
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
102+85 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
34.1 x-section area (ft.sq.)
20.9 width (ft)
1.6 mean depth (ft)
3.1 max depth (ft)
22.2 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.5 hydraulic radius (ft)
12.8 width-depth ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 4-Venable Creek R3
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1020
1022
1024
1026
0 10 20 30 40 50
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
107+61 Pool
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
18.3 x-section area (ft.sq.)
16.2 width (ft)
1.1 mean depth (ft)
1.9 max depth (ft)
16.8 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.1 hydraulic radius (ft)
14.3 width-depth ratio
103.7 W flood prone area (ft)
6.4 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 5-Venable Creek R3
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1021
1023
1025
1027
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
107+94 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
36.1 x-section area (ft.sq.)
20.0 width (ft)
1.8 mean depth (ft)
3.3 max depth (ft)
21.7 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.7 hydraulic radius (ft)
11.1 width-depth ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 6-Venable Creek R3
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1012
1014
1016
1018
10 20 30 40 50
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
114+68 Pool
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)Bankfull
Bankfull Dimensions
19.9 x-section area (ft.sq.)
15.5 width (ft)
1.3 mean depth (ft)
2.1 max depth (ft)
16.3 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.2 hydraulic radius (ft)
12.1 width-depth ratio
93.1 W flood prone area (ft)
6.0 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 7-Venable Creek R3
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1013
1015
1017
1019
20 30 40 50 60 70
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
115+18 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
2.9 x-section area (ft.sq.)
5.7 width (ft)
0.5 mean depth (ft)
0.9 max depth (ft)
6.1 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.5 hydraulic radius (ft)
11.2 width-depth ratio
57.5 W flood prone area (ft)
10.1 entrenchment ratio
0.7 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 8-UT2 R2
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1018
1020
1022
0 10 20 30 40
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
310+51 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
15.0 x‐section area (ft.sq.)
13.9 width (ft)
1.1 mean depth (ft)
1.8 max depth (ft) 
14.6 wetted perimeter (ft)
1.0 hydraulic radius (ft)
13.0 width‐depth ratio
101.7 W flood prone area (ft)
7.3 entrenchment ratio
1.0 low bank height ratio
Survey Date: 06/2023
Field Crew: Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross‐Section 9‐Venable Creek R3
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site  
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross‐Section Plots
1009
1011
1013
1015
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Width (ft)
117+20 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
2.0 x-section area (ft.sq.)
5.7 width (ft)
0.3 mean depth (ft)
0.7 max depth (ft)
6.0 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.3 hydraulic radius (ft)
16.4 width-depth ratio
50.0 W flood prone area (ft)
8.7 entrenchment ratio
0.8 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 10-UT3 R2
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1011
1012
1013
10 20 30 40
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
510+87 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
Bankfull Dimensions
2.6 x-section area (ft.sq.)
6.5 width (ft)
0.4 mean depth (ft)
0.7 max depth (ft)
6.7 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.4 hydraulic radius (ft)
16.3 width-depth ratio
36.3 W flood prone area (ft)
5.6 entrenchment ratio
0.9 low bank height ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 11-UT6 R2
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
997
999
1001
0 10 20 30
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
803+64 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area
APPENDIX D. Hydrology Data
Reach MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027)
Venable Creek R3 None 11/6/2022
4/28/2023, 
6/20/2023, 
8/6/2023
MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027)
Annual Precip Total 
(Inches)1 35.67 46.89 30.95*
WETS 30th 
Percentile (Inches)32.45 32.45 32.45
WETS 70th 
Percentile (Inches)58.85 58.85 58.85
Type of Year2 Average Average *
30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from WETS Station: MOUNT AIRY 2 W, NC for years 1971‐2020
1. Precipitation data collected from USGS 362416080334345 RAINGAGE AT ARARAT RIVER AT ARARAT, NC. The gage is located approximately 4 miles from the Site. 
2. Type of year refers to amount of rainfall in the current year compared to the average percentiles i.e. Below Average, Average, Above Average. 
* Annual precipitation total was collected until 8/30/2023. Data will be updated in MY4. 
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Table 10. Bankfull Events
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Table 11. Rainfall Summary
Recorded Bankfull Flow Events Plot
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1006
1007
1008
1009
Pr
e
c
i
p
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
 (i
n
)
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n
 (f
t
)
Monitoring Year 3 ‐2023
Daily Precipitation Water Level Thalweg Bankfull 30‐Day Rolling Precip Total 30th & 70th Percentile
Honey Mill: Crest Gage #1 (Venable Creek, Reach #3)
APPENDIX E. Project Timeline and Contact Info
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 3 ‐ 2023
Seed Mix Sources
Bare Roots
Live Stakes
Herbaceous Plugs
October 2023
N/A N/A
October 2021
Monitoring, POC Kristi Suggs
[phone] x.110
Green Resource LLC
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
Wetland Plants Inc.
Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Fremont, NC 27830
Seeding Contractor
Main Stream Earthworks, Inc. 
631 Camp Dan Valley Rd
Reidsville, NC 27320
Reidsville, NC 27320
Planting Contractor Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
PO Box 1197
March 2022
704.332.7754
Construction Contractors Main Stream Earthworks, Inc. 
631 Camp Dan Valley Rd
Designers Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Aaron Earley, PE, CFM 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Encroachment
1Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed.  
Table 13.  Project Contact Table
Year 7 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Encroachment N/A N/A
Vegetation Survey
Remediation
Remediation
Encroachment
Encroachment
Year 6 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Vegetation Survey
Year 5 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Vegetation Survey
Remediation
Encroachment
September 2022
January 2022
Invasive Treatment
Encroachment
Encroachment
March‐ October 2021
Year 4 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Vegetation Survey
Year 3 Monitoring
Stream Survey June 2023
Vegetation Survey August 2023
Invasive Treatment May & July 2023
Remediation
June 2022
Vegetation Survey August 2022
Year 1 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Vegetation Survey
Remediation
December 2021
N/A
Table 12.  Project Activity and Reporting History
Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Completion or Delivery
404 Permit September 2020 October 2020
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments1 February 2021 February 2021
Construction November 2020 ‐ February 2021 February 2021
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area1 February 2021 February 2021
Fencing Installation/ Repair
October 2022
N/A
Mitigation Plan  August 2019 ‐ October 2020 October 2020
Final Design ‐ Construction Plans September 2020 September 2020
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments March 2021 March 2021
Baseline Monitoring (Year 0)
Stream Survey March ‐ June 2021 June 2021
Vegetation Survey March 2021
Remediation
Encroachment
N/A N/A
Year 2 Monitoring
Stream Survey
APPENDIX F. Supplemental Planting March 2022
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 2 ‐ 2022
Species Common Name Max Spacing (ft)Indiv. Spacning (ft)Min. Caliper Size Stratum Percentage
Wetland Indicator 
Code Quantity
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 10% FACW 76
Carya cordiformis Bitternut Hickory 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FACU 38
Ulmus rubra Slippery Elm 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FAC 38
Carpinus caroliniana* Ironwood 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FAC 38
Diospyros virginiana Persimmon 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 10%FAC 76
Morus rubra*Red Mulberry 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38
Nyssa sylvatica Black Gum 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FAC 38
Eunoymus americanus*American Strawberry Bush 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Shrub 5%FAC 38
Calycanthus floridus* Sweetshrub 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Shrub 5%FACU 38
Hamamelis virginiana* Witch Hazel 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38
Quercus rubra Northern Red Oak 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 5%FACU 38
Fagus grandifolia American Beech 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 7%FACU 53
Quercus alba White Oak 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Canopy 8%FACU 61
Lindera benzoin*Spicebush 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Shrub 5%FAC 38
Cornus florida*Flowering Dogwood 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38
Ozydendron arboreum* Sourwood 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%UPL 38
Ilex opaca*American Holly 25 12‐25 0.25" ‐ 1.0" Subcanopy 5%FACU 38
100%Total 760
Species Common Name Max Spacing (ft)Indiv. Spacing (ft)Min. Caliper Stratum Percentage
Wetland Indicator 
Code Quantity
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore 12 6 x 12 0.25" Canopy 15% FACW 164
Ulmus americana American Elm 12 6 x 12 0.25" Canopy 10% FACW 109
Sambucus canadensis* Elderberry 12 6 x 12 0.25" Subconopy 10%FAC 109
Acer negundo Boxelder 12 6 x 12 0.25" Canopy 10%FAC 109
Cephalanthus occidentalis* Buttonbush 12 6 x 12 0.25" Shrub 5%OBL 54
Alnus serrulata*Tag Alder 12 6 x 12 0.25" Subconopy 10%OBL 109
60%Total 654
Live Stake
Salix nigra Black Willow 12 6 x 12 0.5" cal. Canopy 20%OBL 218
Salix sericea*Silky Willow 12 6 x 12 0.5" cal. Subconopy 12%OBL 130
Cornus amomum*Silky dogwood 12 6 x 12 0.5" cal. Subconopy 8% FACW 88
40%Total 436
* Subcanopy or shrub species ‐ not held to monitoring height requirements
Italicized species were approved post‐mitigation plan 
IRT Approved Planted Supplemental Stems: Species and Quantities
Shaded Bare Roots (7.0 AC)
Wetland Planting Zone (2.5 AC)