BR-0250 JD data

s
Ila
^, Jurisdictional Features Map
Project Study Area t� Avery County BR-0250
Streams SA Bridge No. 149 Replacement
(Horse Creek) r NCDOT Division 11
Wetlands WA/WB ` Avery County
t
Parcels OF NORTH Cy Figure 4
N i p�
m F-�GANNETT
0 25 50 �' 9 F EMING
Feet Q�Q
yF o
r NTOFTRANSR September 2023

/S, - UZSO
NC DWO Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: ?z 3- tJ /� 3 n --_ LL Project/Site: Latitude:36,
Evaluator: URN �' -County: Y Longitude: -�
Total Points: Stream Deterrn€nati (c�e�rennla
Other �/ f� �i %G
Stream is at least lnterml8errr Ephemeral Intermittent a 9q Quad Name:
if t 19 or nsnttlal if z 30' � r
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal •d ) Absent Weak r Moderate Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank 0 1 2
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg 0 1 - 3
3 In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool, 0 1 - 2
ri le- _ol sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate _._._ .. 0 1 2
5 Active/relict tfoodplain 0 1 - 2 3
6 Depositional bars or benches 0 1. 2 3
7 Recent alluvial deposits _ 0 2 3
8. Headcuts 0 _ . m 2 3
9. Grade control 0 0.5 7
10. Natural valley 0 0.5 1.5
11 Second or vreater order channel _ _ No = 0 es =
s artirrial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. H drol Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow 0 1 2�
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria 1 i ~ - Y2 3 T�
14. Leaf litter _ 1 0.5 0
15. Sediment on plants or debris 05
16. Organic debris lines or piles 05 1 1 5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table? No = 0
C. Biology Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed 1 3 6D 1 F 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed <2>2 1 0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) 01
2 3
21. Aquatic Mollusks 0 2 3
22. Fish 0 1 1.5
23. Crayfish 0.5 _ 1 1.5
24. Amphibians -� 0.5 1 1.5
25. AI ae 0.5 - 2 1 5 _
26. Wetland plants in streambed _ FACW = 0, 75, OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also eidentified using other methods See p 35 of manual
Notes: --_� ...,..,.,.._..---_.�.__._....._.
Sketch: /VY r V / A, 4�4
I

WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM — Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
Project/Site: BR-0250 Bt#050149 Bridge Replacement city,'County. Avery Sampling Date. 08/30/2023
Appl.cant/Owner. NCDOT Division 11 State: NC Sampling Point: WA1
lnveshgator(s): John Thomas (Gannett Fleming) Section. Township Range. NIA
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Riparian Floodplain Terrace Local relief (concave, convex, none): Concave Slope (%): 0-2%
Subregion (LRR or MLRA) LRR N Lat 36.104258 Long.-81.993083 Datum: NAD 83
Soil Map Unit Name: Saunook fine loam _ NWI classification- R5uBH / adjacent stream
Are climatic I hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes X No (If no, explain in Remarks.)
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are "Normal Circumstances" present? Yes X No
Are Vegetation Soil or Hydrology naturally problematic? (if needed. explain any answers in Remarks.)
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes X No
Is the Sampled Area
Hydric Sail Present? Yes X No within a Wetland? Yes X No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
Remarks -
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Secondary
Indicators minimum of two re uired
Surface Soil Cracks (136)
Sparsely Vegetated Concave Surface (B8)
Prima Ind-cators minimum of one is re u•red all that apply)
ED Surface Water (Al) LJ True Aquatic Plants (B14)
0 ❑✓
PJ
High Water Table (A2)
El
Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (Cl)
❑Drainage
Patterns (B10)
Saturation A3)
(
❑Oxidized Rhizos heres on Living Roots C'3:
p g {
Moss Trim LEnes B16)
Q Water Marks (131)
❑ Presence of Reduced Iron (C4)
Dry -Season Water Table (C2)
Q Sediment Deposits (132)
❑ Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6)
Crayfish Burrows (C8)
HDrift Deposits (63)
❑ Thin Muck Surface (C7)
Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9)
Algal Mat or Crust (64)
0 Iron Deposits
Other (Explain in Remarks)
El
❑
Stunted or Stressed Plants (D1)
Geomorphic
(85)
Position (D2)
Inundation Visible on Aerial Imagery (67)
Shallow Aquitard (03)
H
❑ Water -Stained Leaves (139)
Microtopographic Relief (D4)
❑ Aquatic Fauna (B13)
FAC-Neutral Test (D5)
r7
Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes No X Depth (inches): 0
Water Table Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): 3"
Saturation Present? Yes X No
Depth (inches): Surface
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes X No
includes capillary fringe)
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
Wetland saturated to surface with auger hole filled with water within three inches of the surface.
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

VEGETATION (Four Strata) — Use scientific names of plants.
Absolute Dominar
Tree Stratum (Plot size: 30radius — % Cover
1 Acer rubrum 5
y Quercus phellos 5
3 Liquidamber styraciflua 5
6.
7.
sa
50% of total cover: 7.5
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius
1 Alnus serrulata 10
9 Quercus phellos 5
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Sampling Point: WA1
av­ca r . Kakua Number of Dominant Species
Yes FAC That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 7 (A)
Yes FACW
Yes FAC Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: 7 (B)
= Total Cover
20% of total cover: 3
Yes FACW
Yes FACW
15
= Total Cover
50% of total cover! 7.5
20% of total cover: 3
Herb Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius )
1 Saururus cemuss
50
Yes OBL
2.,Boehmeria cylindria_
10_
No OeL_
3 Impatiens capensis
5
No FACW
4 Typha sps.
5
No OBL
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
50% of total cover: 35
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: 30' radius )
1 Smilax rotundifolia
2.
3.
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100%
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of:
Multiply by:
OBL species
85
x 1 = 65
FACW species
25
x 2 = 50
FAC species
20
x 3 = 60
FACU species
0
x 4 = 0
UPL species
0
x 5 = 0
Column Totals:
110
(A) 175 (8)
Prevalence Index = BlA= 1.59
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
1 - Rapid Test for Hydrophytic Vegetation
_ X 2 - Dominance Test is >50%
X 3 - Prevalence Index is 53 0'
4 - Morphological Adaptations (Provide
supporting data in Remarks )
_Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation' (Explain)
'Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Definitions of Four Vegetation Strata:
Tree - Woody plants, excluding vines, 3 in. (7.6 cm) or
more in diameter at breast height (DBH), regardless of
height.
SaplingfShrub -Woody plants, excluding vines, less
than 3 in. DBH and greater than or equal to 3,28 fi (1
m) tau.
Herb - All herbaceous (non -woody) plants, regardless
70 = Total Cover of size, and woody plants less than 3.28 R tall.
20% of total cover: 14
- Woody vine -All woody vines greater than 3.28 ft in
10 Yes FAC
10 = Total Cover
50% of total cover: s 20% of total cover: 2
(Include photo numbers here or on a separate sheet.)
Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes X No
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2 0

SOIL
Sampling Point: WAI
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the Indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.)
Depth Matrix Redox Features
(inches) Color (moist) % Color (moist) % Type Loc Texture Remarks
0-12 10YR 3/1 100 loam
RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains,
H dric Soil Indicators:
Hislosol (Al)
❑ Hislic Epipedon (A2)
❑ Black Histic (A3)
Hydrogen Sulfide (A4)
❑ Stratified Layers (A5)
❑2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR N)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (All 1)
Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)
Sandy Mucky Mineral (Si) (LRR N,
n MLRA 147, 148)
1--I Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4)
LLLJJJ Sandy Redox (S5)
Stripped Matrix (S6)
Restrictive Layer (if observed):
Type:
Depth (inches):
zLocation PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
rugIcators for Problematic Hydric Sc
Dark Surface (S7)
2 cm Muck (A10) (MLRA 147)
Polyvalue Below Surface (S8) (MLRA 147, 148)
❑
Coast Prairie Redox (A16)
Thin Dark Surface (S9) (MLRA 147, 148)
(MLRA 147, 148)
Loamy Gleyed Matrix (172)
HPiedmont
Floodplain Soils (F19)
Depleted Matrix (F3)
(MLRA 136, 147)
Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Very Shallow Dark Surface (TF12)
Depleted Dark Surface (F7)
❑
Other (Explain in Remarks)
Redox Depressions (F8)
Iron -Manganese Masses (1712) (LRR N,
MLRA 136)
Umbric Surface (1713) (MLRA 136, 122)
Piedmont Floodplain Soils (F19) (MLRA 148)
Red Parent Material (F21) (MLRA 127, 147)
3indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
wetland hydrology must be present,
unless disturbed or problematic.
Hydric Soil Present? Yes X No
Remarks:
Check boxes seemed to be jumbled. I intended to check box for "Thick Dark Surface (Al 2)".
US Army Corps of Engineers Eastern Mountains and Piedmont - Version 2.0

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0
Wetland Site Name WA Date 8 30 2023
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Jthomas/Gannett FleminE
Notes on Field Assessmentfarm (y ) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y/N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y/N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y/N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (YIN) NO
Sub -function Ratina Summa
Function
Sub -function
Metrics
_ Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Particulate Change Condition
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Soluble Change Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Physical Change Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
Habitat Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics/Notes
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NLTRT Uanridge Habitat Assessment Form Updated 3/23/21
Bat Habitat Assessment Form
_ NCDOT Bridges
Observers: �� �'f�� tIP or DOT project number: - 02511)
Date: Bridge Road (Name of facility carried) b/
County: Bridge Number:. & r SU / Yf 8id_[!►�illgr n 4�
Crossing (Nary intersected': _ t' r
% Surrounding habitat w/in 1 mi. Urban/Commercial Suburban/Residential_
of project footprint (approx) Herb/Shrub/Grassland Agricultural
Deciduous/Evergreen/Mixed Forest . /b
Woody Wetland/Herb Wetland/Open Water
Any trees >3" DBH within project footprint? N/A des no
Complete this section for Indiana bat counties (Avery: Cranberry Mine-Irrea only, Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood,
Jackson, Macon, Rutherford: Bat Cave/Lake Lure area only, Swain)
Any shaggy trees or snags >5" DBH? N/A yes no
If yes to shag/snag, how much sunlight do they receive duri ng the day? N/A 1-3 hours 4-6 hours 7+ hours
If yes to shag/snag, list species of habitat trees >5' dbh
If snags >5"DBH are present in sunlit areas, provide photos and location.
If large hollow trees are present, provide photos and location.
Presence of: In project footprint
In vicinty (0.5 mi)
Caves yes
yes
no)
Abandoned mines yes
no
yes
If 'yes' to any of the above, provide photos, description,
and location.
Major water source in project footprint N/A river
tream/cree
pond
lake swamp
Suitable drinking habitat in the form of non-sta gnant, s -nooth or sla
k water.
no N/A
Structure specific questions:
Artificial lighting unknown yes
n
Guard rails none concrete
imbe
metal
Deck type concrete metal
timber
open grid
Beam type none concrete
steel
timber
End/back wall type concrete imber
masonry
Creosote evidence
(9)
no
Suitable roosting crevices present ( %: - 1%" wic e)
yes
Deck drains
yes
n
Max height of bridge deck above ground or water (ft): 6
Bridge alignment N S <!�
NW/SE
NE/SW
Human disturbance under bridge high med
low
none
Evidence of bats using bridge? (photos needed)
yes
no
Below section completed only if bats/evidence of bats observed:
Emergence count performed? (If yes, complete form next page)
yes
no
Evidence of bats using bird nests, if present?
yes
no
Type of Evidence (circle all that apply)
guano
staining
bats observed
Roost Type
crevice
open area
Roost Material
metal
concrete
Bat species present (list all species):
Notes (list each species locations and estimated number of each species):

0
Bridge.,No:252'
tA
AN
,z
Jurisdictional Features Map
Project Study Area Caldwell County BR-0250
Streams SA (UT to ,' " ; Bridge No. 252 Replacement
Zack's Fork Creek) s NCDOT Division 11
Parcels `� , Lenoir i Caldwell County
N \ 1=♦ �' ti �pQ RORTH Cygo v y GANNETT
0 25 5o Morga�tIIn— Feet Figure 4 y Y FLEMING
�
e�OF TRpH'eO September 2023

R G�SU
NC DWG Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: U .�3 Project/Site: g rj 0 a�Z
Evaluator. �t County: �G �l �i✓e
Total Points: Stream Determination (cir u n
Stream is at least Intermittent Ephemeral Intermittent erenn
it 19 or perennial it z 30' ✓•C �
Latitude: �FY22
Longitude:
d
Other ,car r
e q Quad Namd. S
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = it S•S )
1* Continuity of channel bed and bank
Absent
Weak
Moderate r
Strong
0
1
3
3
_ _
2_ Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3 In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
(�
2
3
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
_
0
a1
1
5. Activehelict floodplain
3
3 f
3 1
6 D ositional bars or benches
0
0
-�_
1
®
7 Recent alluvial deposits _
8. Headcuts
2
0
1
2
3
15
1.5
9. Grade control
1
10. Natural valley
0
05
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
as
`artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
I 1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris T _
_ 1
05 _
0.5 0
1 1.5
]� I 1 5
_
0
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
05
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
es = 3
C. Biolo Subtotal = _
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
0
2
1
I 0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
20. Macrobenlhos (note diversity and abundance)
2
1
1
_ _ _ 2
T 2
0
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
3
22. Fish
0
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians
®
®
0,5
- 0.5
1
1.5
1
1.5
25. AI ae
0
0.5
_ _
W 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0 75, OBL = 1,5 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also be identified using other methods See p 35 of manual,
Sketch:

NOUfUalnridge Habitat Assessment Form Updated 3/23/21
Bat Habitat Assessment Fo-r-m
AVW--
Observers: ri & 7 0 ) n 0—S
Date:
County: C4Id A,4? H.
Crossing (Name of the feature intersected):
NC�D,OOT Bridges
TIP or DOT project number: f.7v` ~ 0,07S U
Bridge Road (Name of facility carried)
Bridge Number:-Sk 13 0P`6 „ Y
Surrounding habitat w/in 1 mi. Urban/CommercialSuburban/Residential rZ 1
of project footprint (approx) Herb/Shrub/Grassland Agricultural
Deciduous/Evergreen/Mixed Forest
Woody Wetland/Herb Wetland/Open Water
Any trees >3" DBH within project footprint? N/A (Y-dD no
Complete this section for Indiana bat counties (Avery: Cranberry Mine area only, Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood,
Jackson, Macon, Rutherford: Bat Cave/Lake Lure area only, Swain)
Any shaggy trees or snags >5" DBH? N/A yes no
If yes to shag/snag, how much sunlight do they receive duri ng the day? N/A 1-3 hours 4-6 hours 7+ hours
If yes to shag/snag, list species of habitat trees >5" dbh
If snags >5"DBH are present in sunlit areas, provide photos and location.
If large hollow trees are present, provide photos and location.
Presence of: In project footprint
In vicinty (0.5 mi)
Caves yes
no
yes
Abandoned mines yes
o
yes
If 'yes' to any of the above, provide photos, description,
and location.
Major water source in project footprint N/A river
stream cree
pond
lake
swamp
Suitable drinking habitat in the form of non-sta gnant, s -nooth or sla
k water?
y s
no
N/A
Structure specific questions:
Artificial lighting unknown yes
Guard rails none concrete
timber
metal
Deck type concrete metal
imbe
open grid
Beam type none concrete
steel
timbe
End/back wall type concrete <ED
masonry
Creosote evidence
es
no
Suitable roosting crevices present ( %: - 1%" wi( e)
yes
0)
Deck drains
yes
i
Max height of bridge deck above ground or water (ft): ,S
Bridge alignment N LS E/W
W/5
NE/SW
Human disturbance under bridge hi h med
low
none
Evidence of bats using bridge? (photos needed)
yes
no
Below section completed only if bats/evidence of bats observed:
Emergence count performed? (If yes, complete form next page)
yes
no
Evidence of bats using bird nests, if present?
yes
no
Type of Evidence (circle all that apply)
guano
staining
bats observed
Roost Type
crevice
open area
Roost Material
metal
concrete
Bat species present (list all species):
Notes (list each species locations and estimated number of each species):

t01
• L
SR-1337
4171, f; . T-
Z
,
,y
� 1
1.
� IY
ap
!� •/ ems.
r.Mk — � f ' � � k•
dge No.
%V
� sue.•
Jurisdictional Features Map
Project Study Area Watauga County BR-0250
Streams SA/SB _ ; Bridge No. 231 Replacement
(Norris Fork) �' NCDOT Division 11
Parcels �' Watauga County
� / of NoarH eqq
Figure 4
N � yP� °; * — — — — F-� GANNETT
0 25 50 FLEMING
o =
Feet 321 9 p
9�yeNTOFTRPIII el September 2023

NC DW Stream Identification Fi
Date:
Evaluator: f�L' i tnloS
Total Points:
Stnsam is at least intermittent 410
if x 19 orwenniaf if z 30*
A. Geomorphol2gy (Subtotal = ,5 1
18 Continuity of channel bed and bank
2 Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3 in -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple-p2ol s2quence
4. Particle size of stream substrate Y-
5. Activehelict floodplain
6. Depositional bars or benches
7 Recent alluvial deposits
B Neadcuts
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley-�-
11. Second or greater order channel
artificial ditches are not rated, see discussions in manual
B. H drol Subtotal = r S
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
C_Biology (Subtotal =
13I, _ 02S
Version 4.11 _
Project/Site. 3 O 23 �! Latitude-3
County: Longitude:
Stream Determination (cir I one) - other Z •vwv;11� �'
Ephemeral Intermittent erenn 89 quad Name: {
Absent
0
Weak
Moderate
2
Strong
1
0
1
2
2
2 -
2
0
1
Q
—
w 0
0
3
0
1
3
0
1
2
3
0
0.5
1.5
No
e-
-3
0
1
2
-2--
3
V T 0
1V
05
0.5
V
G9
1.5
0
05
15
Nn=n
ea_
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
i p
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
0
2
_ 1
2
J 2
0
_
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance) —�
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
3
— - 1.5
22. Fish -
0
Cy
1
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
x 0
25. Algae
0.5
26. Welland plants in strearnbed
FACW = 0J5- OBL = 15 Other = 0
'perennial streams may also beVentified using other methods See p. 35 of manual
Sketch:

NLDDTBMridge Habitat Assessment Form Updated 3123/21
Bat Habitat Ass e—ssm-ent Form
ffle, NCDOT Bridges
Observers: ,,A vWoywi QL� TIP or DOT project number: fk ` 0;257D
Date: Bridge Road (Name of facility carried) .SQ /33% / �r
—County: Bridge Number:�J�h--•--._...�.._.__ �3
Crossing (Name the teature tersecte :
Surrounding habitat w/in 1 mi. Urban/Commercial Suburban/Residential_
of project footprint (approx) Herb/Shrub/Grassland Agricultural
Deciduous/Evergreen/Mixed forest?
Woody Wetland/Herb Wetland/Open Water
Any trees >3" DBH within project footprint? N/A yes no
Complete this section for Indiana bat counties (Avery: Cranberry Mine area only, Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood,
Jackson, Macon, Rutherford: Bat Cave/Lake Lure area only, Swain)
Any shaggy trees or snags >5" DBH? N/A yes no
If yes to shag/snag, how much sunlight do they receive duri ng the day? N/A 1-3 hours 4-6 hours 7+ hours
If yes to shag/snag, list species of habitat trees >5" dbh
If snags >5"DBH are present in sunlit areas, provide photos and location.
If large hollow trees are present, provide photos and location.
Presence of: In project footprint
In vicinty (0.5 mi)
Caves yes
RPo'�
yes
Abandoned mines es
es
If'yes' to any of the above, provide photos, description,
and location.
Major water source in project footprint N/A river
stream/cree
pond
lake swamp
Suitable drinking habitat in the form of non-sta gnant, s -nooth or sla
k water.
es
no N/A
Structure specific questions:
Artificial lighting unknown yes
Lg
Guard rails none concrete&'!
metal
Deck type concrete metal
open grid
Beam type none concrete
st
timber
End/back wall type concrete <29
masonry
Creosote evidence
0
no
Suitable roosting crevices present ( % - 1%" wi( e)
yes
Deck drains
yes
n
Max height of bridge deck above ground or water (ft):
Bridge alignment N/S E/W
NW/SE
NE/SW
Human disturbance under bridge <0med
low
none
Evidence of bats using bridge? (photos needed)
yes
no
Below section completed only if bats/evidence of bats observed:
Emergence count performed? (If yes, complete form next page)
yes
no
Evidence of bats using bird nests, if present?
yes
no
Type of Evidence (circle all that apply)
guano
staining
bats observed
Roost Type
crevice
open area
Roost Material
metal
concrete
Bat species present (list all species):
Notes (list each species locations and estimated number of each species):