SAW-2024-00900 Clearwater_Yadkin 03 UMBI_Draft Prospectus

CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS
YADKIN 03 UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
DRAFT PROSPECTUS

Sponsored by:
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions

Prepared for:
The North Carolina Inter-Agency Review Team
for distribution and comment

Sponsored by:
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions

POC: Kevin Yates
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, North Carolina
Phone: [phone]

Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

POC: Grant Lewis
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Ph: 919-215-1693

April 2024

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Table of Contents
Phase 1 – Prospectus
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Project Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Bank Sponsor and Contact Information ...................................................................................... 2
2 ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION ............................................................................................ 2
2.1 Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument ................................................................................... 2
2.2 Credit Determination .................................................................................................................. 2
2.3 Credit Release Schedule.............................................................................................................. 3
3 GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA AND USE OF CREDITS ............................................................. 3
4 WATERSHED CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................................. 3
4.1 Watershed Environmental Concerns and Mitigation Needs ....................................................... 3
4.2 Bank Site Selection ..................................................................................................................... 3
5 OWNERSHIP, EASEMENT HOLDER, AND LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT .............................. 4
6 QUALIFICATIONS OF SPONSOR .................................................................................................... 5
7 ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY OF SITES ......................................................................................... 5
8 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES .............................................................................................................. 5
9 MITIGATION PLAN ........................................................................................................................... 6
9.1 Reference Data ............................................................................................................................ 6
9.1.1 Stream Reference ........................................................................................................... 6
9.1.2 Reference Forest Ecosystem .......................................................................................... 6
9.2 Design Approach ........................................................................................................................ 7
9.2.1 Stream Restoration ......................................................................................................... 7
9.2.2 Stream Enhancement I ................................................................................................... 8
9.2.3 Stream Enhancement II .................................................................................................. 8
9.2.4 Stream Preservation ....................................................................................................... 8
9.2.5 Riparian Restoration ...................................................................................................... 8
9.3 Site Work Plans ........................................................................................................................... 9
9.3.1 Belt-width Preparation and Grading .............................................................................. 9
9.3.2 Channel Excavations ...................................................................................................... 9
9.3.3 Channel Plugs .............................................................................................................. 10
9.3.4 Channel Backfilling ..................................................................................................... 10
9.3.5 Stream Crossings ......................................................................................................... 10
9.3.6 In-stream Structures ..................................................................................................... 11
9.3.7 Pond Removal .............................................................................................................. 11
10 MONITORING PLAN ............................................................................................................. 12
10.1 Stream Monitoring .................................................................................................................... 12
10.2 Vegetation Monitoring .............................................................................................................. 12
10.3 Visual Monitoring ..................................................................................................................... 13
11 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AND REMEDIAL MEASURES ........................................... 13
11.1 Stream Instability ...................................................................................................................... 13
11.2 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................. 13
11.3 Invasive Species ........................................................................................................................ 13
12 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ......................................... 13
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Table of Contents
Phase 1 – Prospectus
13 ENDANGERED AND PROTECTED SPECIES ..................................................................... 14
13.1 Tricolored Bat ........................................................................................................................... 14
13.2 Atlantic Pigtoe .......................................................................................................................... 15
13.3 Schweinitz’s Sunflower ............................................................................................................ 15
13.4 Preliminary Biological Conclusions ......................................................................................... 15
14 ASSURANCE OF SUFFICIENT WATER RIGHTS............................................................... 15
15 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................... 15
16 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 17
17 FIGURES .................................................................................................................................. 18

List of Tables
Table 1: Phase 1 Site Summary .................................................................................................................... 1
Table 2: Hydrological Function Objectives and Proposed Actions .............................................................. 1
Table 3: Water Quality Function Objectives and Proposed Actions ............................................................ 2
Table 4: Habitat Function Objectives and Proposed Actions ....................................................................... 2
Table 5: Reference Forest Ecosystem Species .............................................................................................. 7
Table 6: Monitoring Schedule..................................................................................................................... 12
Table 7: Federal Species of Concern, Site Locations in Randolph County, NC ......................................... 14
Table 8: Mitigation Bank Site Summary .................................................................................................... 16

List of Figures
Figure 1: Site Locations Map
Figure 2: Hydrologic Unit and Geographic Service Area Map

Appendices
Appendix A: Cow Path East Mitigation Site
Appendix B: Cow Path West Mitigation Site

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 1
Phase 1 – Prospectus
1 INTRODUCTION
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions ("Bank Sponsor") proposes to develop a stream and riparian
wetland Site, known as Cow Path, (referred to as the "Cow Path Site") under the to-be-developed
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank ("the Bank"). The
Cow Path Site consist of two sets of unnamed tributaries (UTs) which drain into the same named
tributary just downstream. The unnamed tributaries of the Cow Path Site are broken out and
described in the Prospectus as Cow Path East and Cow Path West located in Randolph County,
North Carolina (Figure 1; Table 1). The proposed umbrella structure of the Bank is designed to
initially permit the Cow Path Site while allowing for the establishment of future mitigation bank
parcels not yet identified.

Table 1: Phase 1 Site Summary
Site Coordinates Hydro
Status*
Existing
Length (LF) Mitigation Type Approx. Final
Length (LF)
Cow Path East
SAW-2024-00000
35.828337,
-79.893158
Per/Int
Warm Water 5,175
Restoration,
Enhancement I,
Enhancement II
Preservation
5,347
Cow Path West
SAW-2024-00000
35.83231,
-79.898794
Per/Int
Warm Water 3,727
Restoration,
Enhancement I,
Enhancement II
4,555
Totals 8,902 9,902
* Per = perennial; Int = intermittent

The purpose of the Bank is to provide stream and wetland mitigation credits to compensate for
impacts to Waters of the United States and/or State Waters within the service area, Hydrologic
Unit 03040103 (Figure 2). The proposed Bank's structure, operation, and management are
detailed in the main prospectus document. Existing conditions and proposed site work for the
Cow Path Site are described in the attached appendix: Appendix A (Cow Path East) and
Appendix B (Cow Path West).

1.1 Project Objectives
The overall objectives of the Bank are to restore or otherwise improve the following functions:
1) hydrological, 2) water quality, and 3) habitat. Tables 2-4 provide an overview of the Bank's
Phase 1 objectives and the specific actions proposed to accomplish them.

Table 2: Hydrological Function Objectives and Proposed Actions
Functional Improvement Objectives Proposed Actions
Floodplain Connectivity Reconnect channels with historic floodplains
Floodplain Resistance Plant woody riparian buffers; increase microtopography
Stream Stability &
Sediment Transport
Reconstruct stream channels, sized to convey bankfull discharges
and watershed sediment supplies
Surface and Subsurface Storage and
Retention
Channels constructed or raised to historic floodplain elevations;
increased floodplain hydraulic resistance by planting woody
vegetation and increasing microtopography
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 2
Phase 1 – Prospectus

Table 3: Water Quality Function Objectives and Proposed Actions
Functional Improvement Objectives Proposed Actions
Remove Pollutant Sources Cattle exclusion
Upland Pollutant Filtration Plant woody riparian buffers; construct marsh treatment features
intercepting overland flows
Floodplain Biogeochemical Processing Increase floodplain connectivity, plant woody riparian buffers;
increase microtopography; construct marsh treatment areas
Thermal Regulation Plant woody riparian buffers to provide shade

Table 4: Habitat Function Objectives and Proposed Actions
Functional Improvement Objectives Proposed Actions
In-channel Habitat Construct stable channels, geomorphology designed to increase
hydraulic and bedform habitat heterogeneity
Riparian Habitat and Structure Plant native, woody riparian buffers to provide foraging, nesting, and
cover for terrestrial species as well as refugia for aquatic species

1.2 Bank Sponsor and Contact Information
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Kevin Yates
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, NC 27609
[e-mail]
919.624.6901

2 ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION
2.1 Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument
The Sponsor proposes the Bank under an umbrella mitigation banking instrument ("UMBI"). As
proposed, the UMBI would allow for multiple phases. Cow Path is described in this prospectus
and, if approved, will serve as the Bank's first source of mitigation credit. The Sponsor also
proposes the incorporation of additional sites not yet identified but within the Geographic
Service Area (Section 3) into the Bank, following Interagency Review Team ("IRT") review and
approval.

2.2 Credit Determination
Credit for Cow Path, and all additional phases, shall be based on the US Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) most current mitigation credit determination methodology. Presently, the
USACE is utilizing CFR part 332 (Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources )
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 3
Phase 1 – Prospectus
along with Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update (IRT
2016) to quantify mitigation project credit potential. If other methods are released and become de
facto requirements for stream mitigation projects by the USACE, future phases will utilize these
methods as appropriate.

2.3 Credit Release Schedule
Credits generated by actions described and approved in the Bank's final UMBI shall be released
in predetermined increments according to the milestones agreed to by the Sponsor and the IRT in
the UMBI's credit release schedule. The Sponsor will use the credit release schedule detailed for
stream mitigation banks in IRT (2016).

3 GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA AND USE OF CREDITS
Located within the Southern Outer Piedmont level III ecoregion and the Yadkin-Pee Dee River
basin, the Bank's geographic service area ("GSA") is defined by the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) 8-digit Hydrological Unit Code ("HUC") within which the Bank's site is located,
the Yadkin 03040103 (Figure 2).

The Bank's credits are proposed to be used to offset unavoidable, permitted impacts within the
Bank's GSA. Use of the Bank's credits outside of its GSA may be permissible with approval by
the USACE, which will be considered on a case-by-case basis.

4 WATERSHED CONSIDERATIONS
4.1 Watershed Environmental Concerns and Mitigation Needs
North Carolina’s portion of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin includes seven eight-digit
watersheds and 230 14-digit watersheds, covering an area of 7,200 square miles. Many waters in
the Yadkin-Pee Dee basin have been given a use-support rating of impaired by NCDWQ.
Within HU 03040103, approximately 57 percent of this watershed remains forested, and another
27 percent is agricultural, with approximately 13 percent of the area developed.

By 2030, the population for the portion of the Yadkin-Pee Dee River basin located within North
Carolina is expected to grow from the present approximately 2.7 million residents to more than
3.9 million residents, a roughly 47-percent increase (NCDWQ 2009).

General basin-wide recommendations to preserve water quality in these expanding areas include
the continuation of watershed improvement efforts already ongoing, protection of valuable
wildlife resources, improved management of stormwater runoff to these waters and mitigation of
impacts resulting from urbanization in the area. In addition, contributing to the restoration of
water quality in NCDWQ-identified impaired streams.

4.2 Bank Site Selection
Based on the analysis presented in Section 4.1, the Yadkin-Pee dee was targeted as a watershed
in need of stream and riparian wetland mitigation. The Sponsor and its consultant, Axiom
Environmental, Inc. (Axiom), searched for sites possessing stream and riparian wetland
restoration and enhancement opportunities. Identified sites were prioritized based on geomorphic
condition and land use, and the necessary landowners were contacted to gauge their interest in
participating in a mitigation project. Sites with willing landowners were then pursued further. As
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 4
Phase 1 – Prospectus
real estate in the area is generally well subdivided, many of the identified opportunities are not
currently feasible because such sites require the cooperation of several landowners to achieve
sufficient ecological and economic scale. Therefore, the selection of the Cow Path properties was
based on a combination of geomorphic conditions, land use, and the willingness of landowners to
participate.

5 OWNERSHIP, EASEMENT HOLDER, AND LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT
The Cow Path properties are currently owned by the following people or organizations:

 Cow Path East (PIN 7735685225) – Redding, Curtis A
 Cow Path East (PIN 7735575616) – Redding, Christopher A. & Nicole L.
 Cow Path East (PIN 7735575616) – Newby, Jerry G. & Janie B.

And

 Cow Path West (PIN 7735383178) – Farlow, Seth A. & Megan H.

Hereafter, these owners will collectively be referred to as "the Landowners."

The Sponsor and the Landowners have executed separate Agreements for Purchase and Sale of
Conservation Easements covering approximately 21.8 acres along the Cow Path East Site and
12.9 acres along the Cow Path West Site. Following USACE approval of the UMBI and the Cow
Path Site Mitigation Plans, the Sponsor will exercise its rights provided under the above-
referenced agreements.

All sites governed by the Bank will be protected in perpetuity by a conservation easement
approved by the USACE. At a minimum, conservation easements will be written to prohibit
incompatible uses that might jeopardize the objectives of the Bank. As Grantee of the
conservation easement, the Sponsor will first acquire the easement and then assign it to a
qualified easement holder to be held in perpetuity. Potential easement holders include but are not
limited to the North Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation or the North Carolina State Property
Office. The Sponsor will provide the Easement Holder with a financial sum in an amount
agreeable to both parties.

Easements will be stewarded in general accordance with the guidelines published by the National
Land Trust Alliance. Specific responsibilities include:

 Conservation easement compliance – annual inspection of a site
 Site visit coordination with the landowner when possible
 Annual compliance reports are sent to the landowner when possible
 Violations and potential violations are addressed following protocols outlined in the
conservation easement.

The Sponsor will be responsible for Site management actions during the operational period.
Following a Site closeout, the Long-Term Manager would assume long-term management
obligations. Site design and construction will ensure Sites are self-sustaining. As a result, long-
term management activities will be limited to routine boundary inspections and, when necessary,
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 5
Phase 1 – Prospectus
marking easement boundaries to provide clear identification of conservation areas. The Long-
Term Manager and Easement Holder will likely be the same entity. The Sponsor will provide the
easement holder with a financial sum in an amount agreeable to both parties.

6 QUALIFICATIONS OF SPONSOR
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions, LLC (CMS), a North Carolina Limited Liability Company, was
founded in 2015, but has over 20 years of experience in water resources consulting, regulatory
experience, environmental site investigations, mitigation plan development, permitting,
implementation, and monitoring, with proven ability to carry out large-scale ecological
restoration projects. CMS has worked on a broad range of projects in the public and private
sector over the years, which has provided for a well-rounded approach to problem solving and a
unique ability to manage the complex needs of ecological restoration projects.

CMS’s project manager on this project will be Kevin Yates. Mr. Yates has over 20 years of
experience in water resources, stream, wetlands, stormwater, riparian buffer, environmental
restoration, and mitigation. CMS has developed and managed several turn-key mitigation banks
in North Carolina. CMS is currently under contract with NCDMS on six full-delivery mitigation
sites, including the Bull Chute project which upstream and adjacent to the proposed Cow Path
Sites, in the Yadkin 03 HUC of Randolph County.

7 ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY OF SITES
Primary considerations for selecting the Cow Path Site included the potential for
protection/improvement of water quality within a region of North Carolina under development
and livestock/agricultural pressure. More specifically, considerations included desired aquatic
resource functions, hydrologic conditions, soil characteristics, aquatic habitat diversity, habitat
connectivity, compatibility with adjacent land uses, reasonably foreseeable effects the mitigation
projects will have on ecologically important aquatic and terrestrial resources, and potential
development trends and land-use changes.

Restoration, enhancement, and preservation work proposed at the Phase 1 Sites (Appendix A and
B) will reduce existing nutrient and sediment loads to downstream waters. Furthermore,
restoration work will improve in-channel aquatic and riparian habitats. Finally the proposed
Phase 1 Sites are proposed adjacent and adjoining an existing 31.7-acre NCDMS Conservation
Easement with 9,200 lf of stream channel and 4-acres of riparian wetlands known as the Bull
Chute project.

8 FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
For each Site, the Sponsor will provide financial assurances in a form acceptable to the IRT and
sufficient to ensure completion of all mitigation work, required reporting and monitoring, and
any remedial work that may be required according to the final UMBI and site-specific Mitigation
Plan.

Before the first Phase 1 credit release, as well as all additional sites permitted under the proposed
UMBI, the Sponsor shall furnish a financial assurance instrument covering all reasonably
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 6
Phase 1 – Prospectus
anticipated costs relating to construction, operation, monitoring, maintenance, and any remedial
measures associated with each bank parcel. This instrument shall consist of either a Performance
Bond underwritten by a surety company licensed to do business in North Carolina with a Best's
current rating of not less than "A-," or a casualty insurance policy in an appropriate form to be
approved by the USACE in compliance with current USACE policy and guidance documents.
The total value of such a bond or policy will be based on reasonably expected costs associated
with approved Mitigation Plans, plus a reasonable contingency, which collectively shall be
sufficient to ensure the project will be successfully completed in accordance with applicable
performance standards.

If performance bonds are utilized, the initial performance bond shall be replaced following
completion of construction and USACE approval of the as-built report. The Sponsor shall then
furnish a replacement monitoring bond to be valued based on reasonably anticipated costs
associated with project monitoring and maintenance. Once all performance standards have been
met, the Sponsor may withdraw monies from or otherwise terminate the financial assurance
instrument described in this paragraph.

9 MITIGATION PLAN
The primary goals of the Cow Path mitigation plan include: 1) reducing and/or eliminating non-
point source pollution associated with agricultural activities; 2) improving water quality
functions by restoring native, woody riparian vegetation adjacent to Cow Path channels; 3)
improving floodplain function by increasing hydraulic resistance to floodwaters; 4) improving
aquatic habitat through channel stabilization and increased habitat heterogeneity; and 5)
improving near-channel habitat for terrestrial species and refugia for aquatic species through the
restoration of native, woody riparian vegetation.

Site-specific information for Phase 1 Sites is provided in Appendix A (Cow Path East) and
Appendix B (Cow Path West). Common mitigation plan data, methodologies, monitoring
protocols, cultural resources, and endangered/protected species are detailed in Sections 9-13.

9.1 Reference Data
9.1.1 Stream Reference
At this time, Site-specific reference streams have not been identified. However, relatively
undisturbed sections of streams in the Phase 1 Sites along with data collected at reference sites
are expected to be used for reference information. Reference stream data may include cross-
sectional data, benthic macroinvertebrate collections, and hardwood forest composition. This
data will be utilized to approximate mitigation potential of Phase 1 Sites. Reference reaches will
be compared to regional curves for the Piedmont of North Carolina (Harman et al. 1999),
allowing for a comparison of existing, disturbed conditions to relatively undisturbed reference
conditions at the proposed Phase 1 Sites.

9.1.2 Reference Forest Ecosystem
According to Mitigation Site Classification ("MiST") guidelines (USEPA 1990), Reference
Forest Ecosystems ("RFEs") must be established for restoration sites. RFEs are forested areas
used to model restoration efforts in relation to soils, hydrology, and vegetation. RFEs should be
ecologically stable climax communities and should represent believed historical conditions of the
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 7
Phase 1 – Prospectus
restoration site. Data describing plant community composition and structure are collected at the
RFEs and subsequently applied as reference data for the design of each Phase 1 Site.

Reference vegetation communities for Phase 1 Sites have not been identified. A site-specific
reference forest will be located during detailed mitigation plan development, with tree and shrub
species identified. In addition, other relevant species descriptions for Montane Alluvial Forest
(Small River Subtype) and Montane Oak-Hickory Forest (Acidic Subtype) (Schafale 2023) will
be used to develop a final RFE. Species that may occur in these vegetative communities are
listed in Table 5.

Table 5: Reference Forest Ecosystem Species
Montane Alluvial Forest, Small River
Subtype
(Floodplains and Riparian Forest)
Montane Oak-Hickory Forest, Acidic
Subtype
(Upland Side Slopes)
Canopy Species Understory Species Canopy Species Understory Species
Pinus strobus Cornus florida Carya tomentosa Acer rubrum
Quercus alba Carpinus caroliniana Carya glabra Oxydendrum
arboreum
Platanus occidentalis Halesia tetraptera Liriodendron
tulipifera Nyssa sylvatica
Betula nigra Rhododendron
maximum Acer rubrum Amelanchier arborea
Acer rubrum Nyssa sylvatica Quercus coccinea Sassafras albidum
Quercus rubra Oxydendrum
arboreum Quercus alba Cornus florida
Prunus serotina Quercus montana
Liriodendron
tulipifera Quercus rubra
Tsuga canadensis

9.2 Design Approach
9.2.1 Stream Restoration
Stream restoration is designed to restore stable, meandering streams that approximate
hydrodynamics, stream geometry, and local microtopography relative to reference and on-site
conditions. Streams will be evaluated in winter for the detailed plan, in order to identify
problematic areas necessitating bank stabilization. Restoration of Phase 1 Sites will be mainly
Priority I restoration throughout. Within Priority I restoration areas, bankfull elevations will be
raised to meet the adjacent valley floodplain elevation. Stream Restoration is expected to entail
1) channel excavation, 2) channel stabilization, 3) channel diversion, and 4) channel backfill,
further detailed in Section 9.3 – Site Work Plans.

In portions of Cow Path, the use of restoration may not be necessary to improve a system's
ecological function. In such cases, enhancement activities will be implemented. For the purposes
of the UMBI, Stream Enhancement I and Stream Enhancement II are defined per USACE
(2016).
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 8
Phase 1 – Prospectus

9.2.2 Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement I is expected to include the alteration of dimension and profile of a stream
reach within the existing stream channel. Similar mitigation treatments as stream restoration will
be employed including the use of instream structures, channel contouring, stabilization and the
cessation of agricultural activities. Stream enhancement I will extend a minimum distance of 30-
feet from the top of stream banks.

9.2.3 Stream Enhancement II
Stream Enhancement II is expected to include the cessation of agricultural activities (including
hay production and/or livestock grazing), removal of invasive species, and supplemental planting
with native, woody tree species. Stream enhancement II will extend a minimum distance of 50-
feet from the top of stream banks. These measures are expected to facilitate stream recovery and
prevent further degradation of the streams.

9.2.4 Stream Preservation
Stream Preservation will entail the preservation and protection of 1,387 linear feet of stream
channel with at least 50-ft riparian buffers adjacent to each bank and placement into a permanent
conservation easement.

9.2.5 Riparian Restoration
Restoration of floodplain forest and streamside habitat allows for the development and expansion
of characteristic species across the landscape. Ecotonal changes between community types
contribute to diversity and provide secondary benefits, such as enhanced feeding and nesting
opportunities for mammals, birds, amphibians, and other wildlife.

Planted streamside trees and shrubs will include species with high value for sediment
stabilization, rapid growth rates, and the ability to withstand hydraulic forces associated with
bankfull and overbank flow events. Streamside trees and shrubs will be planted within 15-feet of
the channel throughout the meander beltwidth. Shrub elements will be planted along
reconstructed stream banks, concentrated along outer bends. Plantings will also take into
consideration the slope of the bank and existing shade coverage from the canopy.

Deeply rooted riparian vegetation will be restored as needed at all Cow Path and future sites.
Planting vegetation on cleared stream banks is proposed to reestablish native/historic community
patterns within the stream corridor as well as associated side slopes and transition areas.
Revegetating floodplains and stream banks will provide overall system stability, shade, and
wildlife habitat. In addition, viable riparian communities will improve system biogeochemical
function by filtering pollutants from overland and shallow subsurface flows and providing
organic materials to adjacent stream channels.

Variations in vegetative planting will occur based on the topography and hydraulic condition of
soils. Vegetative species composition will be based on RFEs, site-specific features, and
community descriptions from the Guide To The Natural Communities Of North Carolina Fourth
Approximation (Schafale 2023). Communities will be verified through on-site evaluations;
however, we expect community associations to include 1) Montane Alluvial Forest (Small River
Subtype) and 2) Montane Oak-Hickory Forest (Acidic Subtype). Species from vegetation
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 9
Phase 1 – Prospectus
communities in onsite preservation areas will be used as RFEs when possible. A list of species
organized by Schafale (2023) communities is presented below. This list is for planning purposes
only. Final planting may include some or all of the species below. In addition, other species may
be added if appropriate and available. If desirable species from onsite communities are not
available at the time of initial planting, they may be planted at a later date.

Montane Alluvial Forest (Small River
Subtype)
1. Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
2. Eastern hemlock (Tsuga canadensis)
3. Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
4. River birch (Betula nigra)
5. Hornbeam (Carpinus caroliniana)
6. Smooth alder (Alnus serrulata)
7. Sweet birch (Betula lenta)
8. White Oak (Quercus alba)
9. Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica)

Montane Oak-Hickory Forest (Acidic
Subtype)
1. White oak (Quercus alba)
2. Red oak (Quercus rubra)
3. Chestnut oak (Quercus montana)
4. Mockernut hickory (Carya tomentosa)
5. Pignut hickory (Carya glabra)
6. Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)
7. Flowering dogwood (Cornus florida)
8. Black Gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
9. Sourwood (Oxydendrum arboreum)

9.3 Site Work Plans
9.3.1 Belt-width Preparation and Grading
Invasive species will be treated before and during construction. Care will be taken to avoid the
removal of existing, deeply rooted vegetation within the belt-width corridor, which often
provides channel stability. Material excavated during grading will be stockpiled immediately
adjacent to abandoned channel segments and ultimately used as backfill for abandoned segments
following stream restoration.

Spoil material may be placed to stabilize temporary access roads, minimizing the underlying
floodplain's compaction. However, all spoil will be removed from floodplain surfaces upon
completion of construction activities.

After the preparation of the corridor, the design channels and updated profile surveys will be
developed, and the locations of each meander wavelength will be plotted and staked along the
profile. Pool locations and other channel features may be modified in the field based on local
variations in the floodplain profile.

9.3.2 Channel Excavations
Channels will be constructed within the range of values developed during detailed planning.
Regional curves and/or reference stream reaches will be used to develop various stream
geometry attributes.

Stream banks and local belt-width areas of constructed channels will be immediately planted
with shrub and herbaceous vegetation to initiate stability, preventing unintended erosion.
Deposition of shrub and woody debris into and/or overhanging the constructed channels will be
used to further increase each channel's resistance to shear stress. Particular attention will be
directed toward providing vegetative cover and root growth along the outer bends of each stream
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 10
Phase 1 – Prospectus
meander. Live willow stakes will be purchased and/or collected on-site and inserted through the
root/erosion mat into underlying soils.

9.3.3 Channel Plugs
Impermeable plugs will be installed within abandoned channel segments. Plugs will consist of
low-permeability materials or hardened structures designed to be of sufficient strength to
withstand the erosive energy of surface flow events. Dense clays, imported from off-site if
necessary, will be compacted within each channel for plug construction. Each plug will be of
sufficient width and depth to form an embedded overlap in the existing banks and bed.

9.3.4 Channel Backfilling
After impermeable plugs have been installed, abandoned channels will be backfilled. Stockpiled
materials will be pushed into abandoned channels. Suitable material used for backfilling may be
derived from on-site or off-site sources. Topsoil and vegetation debris (e.g., root mats, shrubs,
woody debris, etc.) will be redistributed across the backfill area upon completion.

9.3.5 Stream Crossings
Landowner use will necessitate the installation of pipe, bridge, or ford crossings to allow access
to portions of property otherwise isolated by mitigation activities. Specific crossing types have
not been determined for Phase 1 Sites. A general approach for each type is detailed below.

Pipe Crossing
Pipe crossings would be constructed with a suitably sized baseflow pipe to allow for stormwater
flows. Smaller floodplain pipes would be installed to enable overflow discharge from the
upstream floodplain to pass freely to the downstream floodplain. Materials will include
hydraulically stable rip-rap or suitable rock. The crossing would be large enough to handle
anticipated vehicular traffic. Approach grades to a piped crossing would be at an approximate
10:1 slope and constructed of hard, scour-resistant crushed rock or other permeable material, free
of fines. If necessary, fencing would be installed on the roadbed to restrict livestock access to the
site.

Bridge Crossing
Bridge crossings would span beyond the proposed bankfull width and at a height to allow for
stormwater flows. If appropriate, adjacent floodplain pipes would be installed to enable overflow
discharge from the upstream floodplain to pass freely to the downstream floodplain.
Hydraulically stable rip-rap or suitable rock would be placed along the stream banks under the
bridge to prevent scour and erosion. The crossing would be large enough to handle anticipated
farm and livestock use. If necessary, fencing would be installed on the roadbed to restrict
livestock access to the site.

Ford Crossings
On very low-volume roads and trails, ford crossings can be more appropriate than pipe and
bridge crossings. Designed to be overtopped by high flows, debris, or ice-laden flows. The
roadbed of a ford crossing can be armored to prevent erosion from vehicular use and significant
storm events. Appropriately sized rocks (boulders) are firmly placed on the downstream side of
the crossing to reduce scour and dissipate energy. Approach grades to a ford crossing would be
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 11
Phase 1 – Prospectus
at an approximate 10:1 slope and constructed of hard, scour-resistant crushed rock or other
permeable material, free of fines.

9.3.6 In-stream Structures
In-stream structures for grade control and habitat are essential for successful stream restoration.
In-stream structures may be placed in the channel to elevate local water surface profiles,
potentially flattening the water-energy slope or gradient. The structures will likely consist of
log/rock cross-vanes or log/rock j-hook vanes designed primarily to direct stream energy into the
center of the channel and away from banks. In addition, structures will be placed in relatively
straight reaches to provide secondary (perpendicular) flow cells during bankfull events.

Log vanes may also be used to direct high-velocity flows during bankfull events toward the
center of constructed channels. Log vanes will be constructed utilizing large tree trunks
harvested on-site or imported from off-site as necessary. Tree stems harvested for a log cross-
vane arm must be long enough to be embedded into the stream channel and extend several feet
into the floodplain. Logs will create an arm that slopes from the center of the channel upward to
each stream bank at an angle of 20 to 30-degrees. A trench will be dug into the stream channel
that is deep enough for the head of the log to be at or below the channel invert. The trench is then
extended into the floodplain, and the log is set into the trench such that the log arm is below the
floodplain elevation. If the log is not of sufficient size to completely block streamflow (gaps
occur between the log and channel bed), a footer log will be installed beneath the header log.
Support pilings will then be situated at the base of the log and at the head of the log to hold the
log in place. Once these vanes are in place, filter fabric is toed into a trench on the upstream side
of the vane and draped over the structure to force water over the vane. The upstream side of the
structure is then backfilled with suitable material.

Drop structures will be necessary at the outfalls of some constructed channels to match
preconstruction elevations. Drop structures will be constructed out of suitable natural materials,
depending upon anticipated scour from the restored stream channels. The structures will be
constructed to resist erosive forces associated with hydraulic drops.

9.3.7 Pond Removal
This project has an agriculture pond dam to be removed. The dam will be drained through the
use of silt/sediment bags and then notched and stabilized early in the construction process and
the pond bed will be seeded with temporary grasses to stabilize sediments remaining in the pond.
Care will be taken during notching of the dam to drain the maximum amount of water, thereby
allowing sediments to dewater.

Once the pond has dewatered and sediment has stabilized, the dam will be removed with finished
grades matching elevations of the valley and floodplain above and below the dam location.
Material removed from the dam, if suitable, may be used as channel backfill for reaches of
stream to be abandoned during Priority I stream restoration efforts. If additional backfill
remains, the material will be stockpiled outside of the easement, or spread evenly across the
adjacent property and seeded for stabilization. Erosion control measures such as silt fence,
seeding, and mulching will be implemented on all stockpiled or spread soil materials.

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 12
Phase 1 – Prospectus
Excavation of the design channel will occur in the pond bed similar to other reaches of restored
stream, with stabilization using approved erosion control materials and techniques.

10 MONITORING PLAN
The Bank's performance standards and monitoring plan will be based on the IRT (2016)
guidance document titled Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update. Monitoring will occur over seven years, as outlined in Table 6. Additional monitoring,
aside from site-specific performance standards, will occur to identify areas under an IRT-
approved Adaptive Management or Remedial Action Plan (Section 11).

Table 6: Monitoring Schedule
Resource Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
Streams x x x x x
Vegetation x x x x x
Visual
Assessment x x x x x x x
Report Submittal x x x x x x x

10.1 Stream Monitoring
Stream monitoring protocols will be developed for all reaches involving Stream Restoration.
Protocols will include a collection of the following: longitudinal profile (collected as part of a
sites' as-built surveys), permanent channel cross-sections, and crest gauges to monitor frequency
and magnitude of bankfull events. Visual assessments will be conducted by walking the length of
each channel. Preconstruction and post-construction photographs will be compiled.

10.2 Vegetation Monitoring
Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation are designed in accordance with CVS-EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation Level 1-2 Plot Sampling Only (Version 4.2 ) (Lee et al. 2008),
or the latest NC Division of Mitigation Services data entry tool. Permanent and random
vegetation plots, measuring 100 meters square would be established to sample two percent of a
site's planted area. In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored and reported
include species, count, height, date of planting, and grid location of each planted stem. Volunteer
species encountered during monitoring will be counted, identified to species level, measured, and
recorded.

After planting has been completed in winter or early spring, an initial evaluation will be
performed to verify planting methods and determine initial species composition and density. If
necessary, supplemental planting and additional site modification would be implemented.
Baseline vegetation data would be reported in a Baseline Monitoring / As-built Report.

During the first year, vegetation will receive visual observation periodically to ascertain the
degree of overtopping of planted stems by nuisance species. Year 1 quantitative sampling will
occur at a minimum of six months after the initial planting. During monitoring years 2-7,
quantitative vegetation sampling would be performed between July 1 and leaf drop.
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 13
Phase 1 – Prospectus

10.3 Visual Monitoring
Visual monitoring of general site conditions that may or may not be part of stream and
vegetation monitoring protocols will be conducted at least twice during each monitoring year.
One visual inspection can be completed during the stream and/or vegetation monitoring. The
other inspection will occur independently and must be separated by at least 5 months.
Monitoring will be conducted by traversing the entire site to identify and document areas of low
stem density, poor plant vigor, prolonged inundation, native and exotic invasive species, beaver
activity, excessive herbivory, easement encroachment, indicators of livestock access, and other
areas of concern.

11 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT AND REMEDIAL MEASURES
If monitoring results indicate a site will not meet one or more of its performance standards, an
adaptive management plan will be developed and remedial actions implemented following
notification and approval by the Bank's USACE project manager. Adaptive management and
remedial measures are discussed in general below and will be developed further in each Bank
Parcel's Mitigation Plan.

11.1 Stream Instability
If stream monitoring and/or visual monitoring identify stream stability or sedimentation
problems that worsen or otherwise threaten other portions of a mitigation site, repairs will be
made as necessary. Persistent problems will be evaluated to determine if design or construction
are contributing factors. Should such systemic problems be identified and reasonably determined
to be unfixable, the IRT may decide to adjust a site's mitigation credit potential.

11.2 Vegetation
Vegetation remedial action may include replanting and, if needed, corrective measures based on
a determination of potential reasons for mortality (e.g., portions of a site are too wet for planted
species). Low vegetation vigor remedial action may include but is not limited to deep ripping,
replanting (same or similar species), mowing, herbicide application, fertilization, and replanting
with other species possessing condition-specific tolerance.

11.3 Invasive Species
If invasive or otherwise undesirable species—as defined in an appendix to the NC SAM Users
Manual (NC SFAT 2014)—reasonable efforts will be made to eradicate or otherwise control the
growth and distribution of the species across the mitigation site. Such actions may involve
herbicide applications, mechanical and/or hand removal, or prescribed burns.

12 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS
An in-person and digital review of Cow Path was conducted during the spring of 2024 to
ascertain the presence of structures or other features that may be eligible for inclusion on the
National Register of Historic Places. No structures were identified within proposed easement
boundaries; however, coordination with State Historic Preservation Office will occur during the
Mitigation Plan development to determine if any significant cultural resources are present. This
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 14
Phase 1 – Prospectus
review would include coordination with any American Indian groups through the USACE
project manager.

13 ENDANGERED AND PROTECTED SPECIES
Three federally protected species are listed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) –
Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website "as occurring in the vicinity" of the
project sites in Randolph County (IPaC 2024) (Table 7).

Table 7: Federal Species of Concern, Site Locations in Randolph County, NC
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status
Potential
Habitat
Present
Preliminary
Biological
Conclusion
Tricolored Bat Perimyotis subflavus Proposed
Endangered Yes
Not Likely to
Jeopardize the
Existence of the
Species
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Threatened No No effect
Schweinitz’s
Sunflower
Helianthus
schweinitzii Endangered Yes Unresolved

13.1 Tricolored Bat
Tricolored bats are often found roosting in road-associated culverts, where they exhibit shorter
torpor bouts and forage during warm nights. During the spring, summer, and fall, tricolored bats
are found in forested habitats where they roost in trees, primarily among leaves of live or
recently dead deciduous hardwood trees, but may also be found in Spanish moss, pine trees, and
occasionally human structures. Tricolored bat habitat is present at the Site (trees and culverts).

Various strategies to minimize impacts to bat species may occur at the Site, including the
following.

 Conduct mist netting during the appropriate time of year for the proper duration to
ascertain the presence or absence of these bat species. Mist netting and other survey
methods will be conducted by licensed personnel, and documentation will be provided to
the USFWS and IRT as necessary.
 Any culverts that are over 24 inches in diameter, and proposed to be altered during the
project, will be investigated by trained personnel to determine if bats are roosting in the
culverts. If trained personnel determine that no bats are roosting in the culvert, humane
exclusionary methods will be utilized until culvert manipulations occur.
Or
 All tree clearing will be conducted during winter to minimize impacts to these species
during the pupping season (May 15 – July 31).
 Any culverts over 24 inches in diameter that are proposed to be altered during the project
will be investigated by trained personnel to determine if bats are roosting in the culverts.
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 15
Phase 1 – Prospectus
If trained personnel determine that no bats are roosting in the culvert, humane
exclusionary methods will be utilized until culvert manipulations occur.

13.2 Atlantic Pigtoe
The Atlantic pigtoe needs clean, flowing water characterized by high dissolved oxygen
concentrations and prefers gravel beds and coarse sand habitats just downstream of riffles (i.e.,
rocky or shallow stream areas with swift water currents). This species has several specific habitat
requirements, including clean and perennially flowing, highly oxygenated waters with sufficient
velocity to maintain uncompacted stream bed habitats. They require substrates that are free of
fine sediments to support mussel aggregations and oxygenated pore water for juveniles. Site
streams do not support habitat for Atlantic pigtoe.

13.3 Schweinitz’s Sunflower
The current range of this species is within 60 miles of Charlotte, North Carolina, occurring on
upland interstream flats or gentle slopes, in soils that are thin or clay in texture. The species
needs open areas protected from shade or excessive competition, reminiscent of Piedmont
prairies. Disturbances such as fire maintenance or regular mowing help sustain preferred habitat.
Surveys will be conducted at the Site to ascertain if suitable habitat occurs within the Site. If
detailed surveys are necessary, they will be conducted during the optimal survey window for this
species (September to first frost).

13.4 Preliminary Biological Conclusions
Preliminary biological conclusions are provided in Table 7. A more detailed assessment of
habitat, search for nearby records from North Carolina Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP), and
coordination with USFWS will occur as part of environmental planning prior to the detailed
planning stage.

14 ASSURANCE OF SUFFICIENT WATER RIGHTS
In the State of North Carolina, water rights are owned by the State (General Statute 142-211 (NC
GS § 143-211(a)). Developed using the "riparian rights" doctrine, water law in North Carolina
entitles a riparian landowner to the natural flow of a stream running through or along their land.
The landowner has the right to make "reasonable use" of the watercourse, meaning the
landowner may use the water as long as their use does not interfere with the reasonable use of
another downstream riparian landowner.

Native waters supplied through rain events, surface runoff, overbank flooding events, and
groundwater will sustain the Site's hydrology. Restoration of the Site will not result in the
impoundment of streams. Native waters will be allowed to flow downstream for use by other
riparian landowners. There is no concern of upstream land activities having an adverse effect on
the Site's hydrology.

15 CONCLUSIONS
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions is pleased to offer the Yadkin Umbrella Mitigation Bank ("the
Bank"). The proposed umbrella structure of the Bank is designed to initially permit the
establishment of two stream mitigation sites, comprising Cow Path, while enabling the
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 16
Phase 1 – Prospectus
establishment of future mitigation sites not yet identified. Cow Path consists of the following
sites in Randolph County, North Carolina: 1) Cow Path East and 2) Cow Path West (Figure 1;
Table 8).

Table 8: Mitigation Bank Site Summary
Stream Site Hydro
Status*
Existing
Length
(LF)
Mitigation Type Approx. Final
Length (LF)
Cow Path East Per/Int 5,175
Restoration,
Enhancement I,
Enhancement II
Preservation
5,347
Cow Path West Per/Int 3,727
Restoration,
Enhancement I,
Enhancement II
4,555
Totals 8,902 9,902
* Per = perennial; Int = intermittent
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 17
Phase 1 – Prospectus
16 REFERENCES

Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.A. O’Hara, A. Jessup, R.
Everhart. 1999. Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. N.C.
State University, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC). 2024. United States Fish and Wildlife Service
(online). Available: https://ipac.ecosphere.fws.gov/ (March 28, 2024).

Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, SD. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.

North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team (NC SFAT). 2014. NC. Stream Assessment
Method (NC SAM) User Manual (Version 2). 178 pp.

North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland
Assessment Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.

Schafale, M.P. 2023. GUIDE TO THE NATURAL COMMUNITIES OF NORTH CAROLINA
FOURTH APPROXIMATION. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina.

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), United States Environmental Protection
Agency (USEPA), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and North Carolina Division of Water Quality
(NCDWQ). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990. Mitigation Site Type
Classification (MiST). EPA Workshop, August 13-15, 1989. EPA Region IV and Hardwood
Research Cooperative, NCSU, Raleigh, North Carolina.

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 18
Phase 1 – Prospectus
17 FIGURES

Figure 1: Site Locations Map
Figure 2: Hydrologic Unit and Geographic Service Area Map

Edgar Rd
O l d M a r l b o r o R d
B e e s o n F ar m R d
U
S
-3
1
1
M a rl b o r o C h u r c h R d
Stewart St
Roy Farlow Rd
Old Edgar Rd
Grey Dr
Nelson Rd
C l o v e r D r
Hardins Farm Rd
Mt Olive Church Rd
L o b l o l l y D r
Pearl Ave
Caraway Trl
Eugene St
Giant Oaks Dr
M e a d o w L a r k L n
P a r t r i d g e L n
Pine Needle Ln
Copyr ight:© 2013 Na tion al Geo gr aphic So ciety, i-c ubed
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
WG L
MA R 2024
1:13,600
19-008.07
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Randolph County, N C
SITELOCATIONS
1
³
Copyr ight :© 2013 Na tion al G eo gr aphicSociety, i-cube d
Copyr ight :© 2013 Na tion al G eo gr aphicSociety, i-cube d US GS 7.5 Min ute Top og raph ic Ma p (Glen ola, NC Qu ad)
YAD KINMITIGATIO NBANK
Archdale
£¤22 0
£¤311
C ow P a thWest
Cow P a thEast
NCDMS F ull De liv eryBull Ch ute S ite
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
1:414,000
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
HYD ROLOGICUNIT AN DGEOGRAPH ICSERVICE A REAMAP
2
³
Cow P a thEast S ite
0 10 205Mi le s
Legend
Mit ig ati on B an k S it e L o ca tio ns
NC DM S Fu ll D eliv er y B ull Ch ute S ite Lo cat ion
Yad kin Hy dro log ic Un it 0 30 40 103
WG L
MA R 2024
19-008.07
Randolph County, N C
YAD KINMITIGATIO NBANK
Cow P a thWest S i te NCDMS B ullChute S ite
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Appendix A – Cow Path Mitigation Site
Phase 1 – Prospectus
Appendix A

Cow Path East Mitigation Site

CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS
YADKIN UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK

DRAFT PROSPECTUS – COW PATH EAST MITIGATION SITE
SAW-2024-*****

Sponsored by:
CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS

Prepared for:
The North Carolina Inter-Agency Review Team
for distribution and comment

Sponsored by:
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions

POC: Kevin Yates
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, North Carolina
Phone: [phone]

Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

POC: Grant Lewis
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Ph: 919-215-1693

April 2024

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Table of Contents
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site
Table of Contents
1 EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use ................................................................................ 1
1.2 Water Quality ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.4 Soils ............................................................................................................................................ 2
1.5 Hydrology .................................................................................................................................. 2
1.6 Existing Stream and Wetland Functions .................................................................................... 3
1.7 Fluvial Geomorphology ............................................................................................................. 4
1.8 FEMA ......................................................................................................................................... 4
2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT ........................................................................... 5
2.1 Stream Restoration ................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Stream Enhancement I .............................................................................................................. 5
2.3 Stream Enhancement II ............................................................................................................. 5
2.4 Preservation .............................................................................................................................. 5
2.5 Wetlands ................................................................................................................................... 5
3 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 6

List of Tables
Table 1: Cow Path East Site Soils .................................................................................................................. 2
Table 2: Cow Path East Existing Stream Flow Regime .................................................................................. 2
Table 3: Cow Path East NC SAM Summary ................................................................................................... 3
Table 4: Cow Path East NC WAM Summary .................................................................................................. 4
Table 5: Cow Path East Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary ................................................................ 5

Appendix

A: Figures & Landowner Authorization Form
Figure 3A: Cow Path East – Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 3B: Cow Path East – Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 3C: Cow Path East – LiDAR
Figure 3D: Cow Path East – Proposed Conditions

Landowner Authorization Form

B: Baseline Assessment Forms

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 1
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site
COW PATH EAST MITIGATION SITE
The Cow Path East Mitigation Site (“Site”) is characterized by primarily forested slopes with some open
pasture/grassy areas. The main hydrologic features include Unnamed Tributaries (UTs) to Caraway
Creek. The proposed conservation easement area contains approximately 21.8 acres (Figures 3A and
4B).

1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
1.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
The Site is located within the Southern Outer Piedmont ecoregion of the Piedmont Physiographic
Province (Griffith et al. 2002). The ecoregion is characterized by dissected irregular plains, some
rounded hills and ridges, and low to moderate gradient streams with cobble, gravel, and sandy
substrates. Onsite elevations range from a high of 790 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) at
the upper reaches to a low of approximately 690 feet NGVD at the Site outfall (USGS Glenola, North
Carolina 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle) (Figure 3A, Appendix A).

The Site drains an approximately 0.67-square mile (430.0-acres) watershed (Figure 3A). The watershed is
dominated by pasture, forest, and sparse residential development. Impervious surfaces account for less
than 2 percent of the upstream watershed land surface.

Land use at the Site is characterized by forest and herbaceous pasture. Riparian zones in forested
portions of the Site are primarily composed of woody vegetation and/or pasture. Livestock have access
to the entire easement with the exception of spray fields adjacent to a hog farm.

1.2 Water Quality
The Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed and Local Watershed Plan Area (Caraway Creek) 14-
digit HUC (03040103050040) of the Yadkin River basin. Stream and wetland mitigation areas are located
along UTs to Caraway Creek (North Carolina Division of Water Resources [NCDWR] subbasin number 03-
07-09). UTs to Caraway Creek have been assigned Best Usage Classifications of C (NCDWR 2013).

NCDWR has assembled a list of impaired waterbodies according to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d)
and 40 CFR 130.7, which is a comprehensive public accounting of all impaired waterbodies. An impaired
waterbody is one that does not meet state standards, including designated uses, numeric and narrative
criteria, and anti-degradation requirements defined in 40 CFR 131. Caraway Creek downstream from the
Site, is not listed on the final 2022 303(d) list (NCDEQ 2022).

1.3 Vegetation
The Site is characterized primarily by a mature forest community with portions of hay fields and
pastureland. The fields are dominated by fescue (Festuca sp.) and clover (Trifolium sp.) with blackberry
(Rubus spp.) and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) common along the woodland edges and streams.

The forested portions include a more mesic community including species such as tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), American sycamore (Platanus
occidentalis), hackberry (Celtis laevigata), red bud (Cercis canadensis), American holly (Ilex opaca), and
elm (Ulmus sp.). Wetland mitigation areas frequently have a significant stands invasive species such as
Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), and blackberry (Rubus sp.);
however, most wetlands are open areas primarily characterized by grasses (Festuca sp.) planted for
livestock grazing, sedges (Carex spp.), and rushes (Juncus spp.).
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 2
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site

1.4 Soils
Based on Web Soil Survey mapping (USDA 2024), proposed conservation easement areas associated
with the Site contain two soil series (Figure 3B and Table 1): Badin-Tarrus complex (Typic Hapludults -
Typic Kanhapludulds), and Wynott-Enon complex (Typic Hapludalfs – Ultic Hapludalfs).

Table 1: Cow Path East Site Soils
Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Hydric
Status Description
BaE Badin-Tarrus
complex Non-hydric
This series occurs on gently sloping uplands. The soils are well
drained, moderately permeable with a loamy surface layer and a
predominantly clayey subsoil. The depth to seasonal high water
table is generally more than 6.0 feet.
WvC2 Wynott-Enon
complex Non-hydric
This series occurs on convex slopes of uplands. The soils arewell
drained with slow permeability with a loamy surface and a
clayey subsoil. The depth to seasonal high water table is
generally more than 6.0 feet.

Existing wetlands and hydric soils were mapped by a licensed soil scientist (NC LSS # 1233) on May 2,
2024 as soils of the Wehadkee series (Figure 3B, Appendix A); soil boring logs are included in Appendix
B. Although soils mapped by the NRCS are listed as non-hydric, map units are frequently lumped
together as individual soil polygons are not sufficient in size. Hydric soils mapped at the Site are less
than an acre in size (ranging from 0.03 to 0.77 acre), which is too small to be mapped on the scale of a
soil survey. Hydric soils located on the Site exhibit F3 (Depleted Matrix).

1.5 Hydrology
On-site investigations using NCDWQ stream forms (Table 2; Figure 3B) suggest that UT1 and UT2 are
perennial and UT3 is intermittent (Table 3).

Table 2: Cow Path East Existing Stream Flow Regime
Stream Stream Length
(ft)
Stream Order USGS Stream
Classification
In-field Stream
Classification
UT 1 3,871 2nd Intermittent/Perennial Perennial
UT-2 1037 1st Intermittent Perennial
UT-3 267 NAt Not mapped Intermittent
Total 5,175

This hydro-physiographic region is characterized by moderate rainfall with precipitation averaging 46.9-
inches per year (based on WETS data from station Asheboro 2 W). Based on regional curves (Harman et
al. 1999), the bankfull discharge for a 0.67-square mile watershed is expected to average 66.8-cubic feet
er second (CFS). Based on empirical evidence a bankfull discharge of 66.8-CFS is expected to occur
approximately every 1.3 to 1.5 years (Rosgen 1996, Leopold 1994).

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 3
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site

1.6 Existing Stream and Wetland Functions
Stream and wetland functions have been evaluated through the use of North Carolina Stream
Assessment Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) analyses of
existing stream systems at the Site (NC SFAT 2015 and NC WFAT 2010). Site functional assessment data
forms are available upon request; model output is included in Appendix B and is summarized in the
following table. Metrics targeted to meet the Site’s goals and objectives are depicted in bold, within
Tables 3 and 4, below.

Table 3: Cow Path East NC SAM Summary
NC SAM Function Class Rating Summary UT 1 UT 2 UT 3
(1) HYDROLOGY LOW LOW HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM LOW HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW HIGH LOW
(4) Microtopography MEDIUM LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM LOW HIGH
(4) Channel Stability HIGH LOW HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM LOW HIGH
(1) WATER QUALITY LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH
(2) Stream-side Area Vegetation LOW MEDIUM LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM HIGH LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM HIGH HIGH
(1) HABITAT LOW HIGH LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH
(3) Substrate MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH LOW HIGH
(3) In-Stream Habitat MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW HIGH LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW MEDIUM LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM HIGH LOW
OVERALL LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 4
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site
Based on NC SAM output, all three primary stream functional metrics (Hydrology, Water Quality and
Habitat), as well as 15 sub-metrics are under-performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating (see Figure
3B, Appendix A for NC SAM data reaches). LOW performing metrics are to be targeted for functional
uplift through mitigation activities, goals and objectives, as well as, monitoring and success criteria.

Table 4: Cow Path East NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub-function Rating Summary WAM 1
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest
(1) HYDROLOGY MEDIUM
(2) Surface Storage & Retention MEDIUM
(2) Sub-surface Storage & Retention LOW
(1) WATER QUALITY LOW
(2) Pathogen change MEDIUM
(2) Particulate Change LOW
(2) Soluble change MEDIUM
(2) Physical Change LOW
(1) HABITAT LOW
(2) Physical Structure LOW
(2) Landscape Patch Structure LOW
(2) Vegetative Composition MEDIUM
OVERALL LOW

Based on NC WAM output, two of the primary wetland functional metrics (Hydrology and Habitat), as
well as 5 sub-metrics are under-performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating. LOW performing
metrics are to be targeted for functional uplift through mitigation activities, goals and objectives, as well
as, monitoring and success criteria.

1.7 Fluvial Geomorphology
Currently, channels targeted for restoration are characterized as entrenched and/or incised G-type
channels with little to no sinuosity, little to no riffle-pool morphology, oversized cross-sectional areas,
and no access to floodplains during high discharge events (Bank Height Ratio [BHR] approximately 2.2).
Sinuosity was measured at 1.02 from topographic surveys, aerial photography, and visual observation
during field surveys.

In general, sediment and nutrient inputs, channel incision and straightening, removal of cobble
substrate, and removal of woody vegetation have impacted streams within and adjacent to the Site.

1.8 FEMA
Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3710773500J, effective January 2, 2008, indicates
that Site streams are not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the project should not alter FEMA
flood zones. Therefore, a “Conditional Letter of Map Revision” (CLOMR) is not expected for this Site.

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 5
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site
2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT
A summary of the actions proposed at Cow Path East is provided in Table 5 and in Figure 3D. In general,
proposed activities involve Stream Restoration, Stream Enhancement I, Stream Enhancement II, and
Wetland Enhancement. Stream restoration and enhancement occurs in reaches that have been
impacted by straightening, diversion, clearing of vegetation, and other historic land uses. Finally,
riparian buffer areas will be established through planting of appropriate vegetation, treatment of
invasive species, removal of livestock.

Table 5: Cow Path East Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary
Stream Reach Approx. Final
Length (LF) Mitigation Activity
UT 1 2,593 Stream Restoration, Stream Enhancement I and Wetland Enhancement
UT 2 1,089 Stream Restoration and Wetland Enhancement
UT 3 278 Stream Enhancement II
UT1 1,387 Preservation
Total 5,347

2.1 Stream Restoration
Stream Restoration at the Site includes Priority 1 techniques along ditched and incised (G-type)
channels. Restoration will entail excavation of a new channel at the appropriate elevation and location
within the floodplain. Mechanical and/or chemical treatment of invasive species including rose (Rosa
multiflora), will be undertaken along these reaches.

2.2 Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement I will entail backfilling the existing channel and contouring a new channel within
the old channel footprint. The installation of instream structures such as log vanes will occur to stabilize
stream banks and to provide habitat. Invasive species will be treated, livestock will be fenced out of the
easement and supplemental planting will occur, if necessary.

2.3 Stream Enhancement II
Stream Enhancement II will entail planting vegetative buffers along streams that have fields abutting the
channel. In addition, minor bank stabilization treatments will occur. The treatment of fescue (festuca
sp.) will be conducted prior to planting where appropriate. The installation of livestock fence will occur
to protect the reach from cattle encroachment.

2.4 Preservation
Stream Preservation will entail the preservation and protection of 1,387 linear feet of stream channel
with at least 50-ft riparian buffers adjacent to each bank and placement into a permanent conservation
easement.

2.5 Wetlands
Wetland enhancement will focus on the removal of livestock and restoration of vegetative communities
resulting in the enhancement of up to 2.216 acres of jurisdictional riparian riverine wetlands.
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 6
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site
3 REFERENCES

Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B.
Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. U.S. Geological
Survey, Reston, Virginia.

Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.A. O’Hara, A. Jessup, R. Everhart. 1999.
Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. N.C. State University, Raleigh,
North Carolina.

Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA. 298 pp.

North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2022. NC 2022 Category 5 Assessment “Final
303(d) List” (online). Available: https://www.deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-
planning/modeling-assessment/water-quality-data-assessment/integrated-report-files

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2013. North Carolina Water Bodies Report
(online). Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=10c60296-dcc8-439f-
a41c-d475ea7ad1fa&groupId=38364

North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team (NC SFAT). 2014. N.C. Stream Assessment Method
(NC SAM) User Manual (Version 2). 178 pp.

North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team (NC WFAT) 2010. N.C. Wetland Assessment
Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2024. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [March 2024].

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Attachment A
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site
APPENDIX A – FIGURES & LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM

Figure 3A: Cow Path East – Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 3B: Cow Path East – Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 3C: Cow Path East – LiDAR
Figure 3D: Cow Path East – Proposed Conditions

Landowner Authorization Form

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Attachment B
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path East Mitigation Site
APPENDIX B – BASELINE ASSESSMENT FORMS
NC Ce nt er f or G eo gr aphic I nf orm a tion & An aylsis
³
Copyr ight:© 2013 Na tion al Geo gr aphic So ciety, i-c ubed
Legend
Cow P ath E ast E as ement = 21.8 ac
NC DMS B ull Chu te S ite E ase ment
Si te Drai nage Area = 478 .8 ac (0.7 5 sq m i)
UT1 U pstrea m Drai nage A rea = 265 .2 ac (0.4 1 sq m i)
UT2 D rainag e A rea = 148.2 ac (0.23 s q mi)
UT3 D rainag e A rea = 14.0 ac (0.02 sq mi)
0 2,0 0 0 4,0 0 01,0 0 0 Fe e t
³FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
WG L
MA R 2024
1:11,700
19-008.07
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Randolph County, N C
COW PATHEAST
TOPOGR AP HYANDDRAINAGE A RE A
3A
YAD KINMITIGATIO NBANK
US GE 7 .5 M in u te Top o gr ap h ic Qu a dra n gle (Glen o la, NC)
!.
!.
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
Wv C 2
MeB 2
MeB 2
BaE
MeC 2
Wv C 2
MeB 2
MeB 2
Wv B2
NCCGIA, NC 9 11 Boar d
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
WG L
MA R 2024
1:2700
19-008.07
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Randolph County, N C
YA DK INMITIGATIONBANK
COW PATHEAST
EXISTIN GCONDITIONSAND SOILS
3B
³
0 1,0 0 0500Fe e t
Lege nd
Cow Pat h East Easement = 21.8 ac
NCDMS Bull Chut e Sit e Easement
Exi sting Str eams = 5,194 ft
Exi sting Wetl ands = 2.216 ac
Cross Sect ion
^_NCSAM Form Locati on
^_NCDW Q For m Locat ion
^_NCWAM Form Locat ion
NRCS Soil Boundaries
!.Soil Prof ile
U
T
-
2
UT-1
UT-1
Soil Map HydricUnitSoil Series S tatusBaEBadin-Tarrus Complex Non- HydricMacMecklenburg loam Non- HydricMeC2 & MeB2 Mecklenburg clay loam Non- HydricWvB2 & WvC2 Wynott-Eno n Complex Non- Hydric
94.5
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
98.0
98.5
99.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
DA = 0.21 sq miAbkf = 7.5 sq ftWbkf = 6.0 ftDbkf = 1.3 ftWbkf/Dbkf = 4.8 FPA = 8 ftENT = 1.3Dmax = 1.5 ftLBH = 3.1 ftBHR = 2.1
Abkf
Cross Section 1 (UT 2 Upstream)
94.595.095.596.096.597.097.598.098.599.099.5100.0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Abkf
Cross Section 2 (UT 1)
DA = 0.36 sq miAbkf = 10.7 sq ftWbkf = 9.4 ftDbkf = 1.1 ftWbkf/Dbkf = 8.3 FPA = 12.5 ftENT = 1.3Dmax = 1.4 ftLBH = 3.6 ftBHR = G-type
NC D WQ F o rmScore - 38
N C D WQ F o rmScore - 38
N C D WQ F o rmScore - 26 .5
NC S A M F o rmRating - L OWNC S A M F o rmRating - M E D IU M
N C S A M F o rmRating - M E D IU M
NC WA M F o rmRating - L OW
So i l P ro fi l e P 2
So il P ro file P 1
XS 1
XS 2
UT-3
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
WG L
MA R 2024
1:2700
19-008.07
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Randolph County, N C
YA DK INMITIGATIONBANK
COW PATHEAST
LIDA R
3C
³
0 1,0 0 0500Fe e t
Lege nd
Cow Pat h East Easement = 21.8 ac
NCDMS Bull Chut e Sit e Easement
Exi sting Str eams = 5,194 ft
UT-1
U
T
-
2
UT-1
UT-3
NC Ce nter for Geo gr aphic Inform a tion & An aylsis
FIGU R E
Dra wn b y:
Da te:
Sca le :
Pro jec t N o.:
WG L
MA R 2024
1:2200
19-008.07
Tit le:
Pro jec t:
Pre pa red fo r:
Randolph County, N C
YA DK INMITIGATIONBANK
COW PATHEAST
PROPOSEDCONDITIONS
3D
³
0 50 0 1,0 0 0250Fe e t
Lege nd
Cow Pat h East Easement = 21.8 ac
NCDMS Bull Chut e Sit e Easement
Wetland Enhancem ent = 2.216 ac
Str eam Rest orati on = 3373 f t
Str eam Enhancement (Level I) = 309 f t
Str eam Enhancement (Level II ) = 278 ft
Str eam Rest orati on = 1387 f t
No Cr edit
UT-1
U
T
-
2
UT-1
Tie in to the up stre ammitigation dro p s tru ctu reand b eg in P 1 s tre a mrestoration.
Con tin ue P 1 s tre a mrestoration a nd en ha n ceadjacent we tla n ds .
In sta ll pip ed strea mcrossing.
Ke e p re li ct d am i nplace a nd by pa s s thedam w i th res tore dstream c ha nn e ls .
UT-3
Ti e in to the up stre amgrade an d s tep up to P1 stre am re sto rati on .
Ti e in to e xi sti ng ch an ne l ,co un tou r be d/b an ks , a n dinstall gra de co ntro l struc ture s.
Cut off tigh t me an de rat ero din g o ute r b e nd .
Fe nc e c ow s , p l an t,an d c on du ct mi n orbank stab i li za tio n .
Pre se rve stre amwith a co ns e rv a ti o neasement.
Feet Ratio SMU/WMUStream - Restoration 3373 1 3373Stream - Enhancement (Level I)309 1.5 206Stream - Enhancement (Level II)278 2.5 111Stream - Preservation 1387 10 139Totals53473829
Wetland - Enhancement 2.216 2 1.1Totals2.216 1.1
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path East - UT1 Date of Assessment 4/2/24
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Lewis/Smith

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N)
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access MEDIUM
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW
(4) Microtopography MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(4) Channel Stability HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology MEDIUM
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability HIGH
(3) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA
Overall LOW

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path East - UT2 Date of Assessment 4/2/24
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Lewis/Smith

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer HIGH
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation MEDIUM
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance HIGH
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat HIGH
(2) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM
(2) Stream-side Habitat HIGH
(3) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation HIGH
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA
Overall MEDIUM

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path East - UT3 Date of Assessment 4/2/24
Stream Category Pa1 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Lewis/Smith

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology HIGH HIGH
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH
(2) Flood Flow HIGH HIGH
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Floodplain Access HIGH HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH HIGH
(4) Channel Stability HIGH HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology HIGH HIGH
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance HIGH NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability HIGH HIGH
(3) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM HIGH
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA NA
Overall MEDIUM MEDIUM

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name NCWAM-1 Date of Assessment 240402
Wetland Type Bottomland Hardwood Forest Assessor Name/Organization Perkinson/Axiom

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y/N)
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)
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition MEDIUM

Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition LOW
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Particulate Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Soluble Change Condition MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Physical Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Habitat Condition LOW

Overall Wetland Rating LOW

Cross Section Cross Section
section:Cow Path East XS 1 (UT 2 Upstream)section:Cow Path East XS 2 (UT 1)
Riffle Riffle
------
------
description:Cow Path East XS 1 (UT 2 Upstream)description:Devils Alley XS 2 (UT 4)
height of instrument (ft):100.00 height of instrument (ft):100.00
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's
notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n" notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"
####01.4498.56 3.6 2 8.0 ####00.6499.36 3.44 1.22 12.5
####31.4198.59 96.4 98 ####30.8999.11 96.56 98.78
####51.698.4 ####4.7 1.22 98.78
####6298 dimensions ####5.2 3.25 96.75 dimensions
####6.5 4.72 95.28 7.5 x-section area 1.3 d mean ####64.6295.38 10.7 x-section area 1.1 d mean
####7.5 4.77 95.23 6.0 width 7.9 wet P ####74.695.4 9.4 width 10.7 wet P
####94.9995.01 1.5 d max 1.0 hyd radi ####10 4.82 95.18 1.4 d max 1.0 hyd radi
####10 5.04 94.96 3.1 bank ht 4.8 w/d ratio ####12 4.7 95.3 3.6 bank ht 8.3 w/d ratio
####11 5.1 94.9 8.0 W flood prone area 1.3 ent ratio ####13.5 4.52 95.48 12.5 W flood prone area 1.3 ent ratio
####11.5 4.91 95.09 ####14.5 4.09 95.91
####12 4.72 95.28 hydraulics ####15 2.77 97.23 hydraulics
####12.5 2.8 97.2 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)####16.5 2.43 97.57 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)
####13 2.59 97.41 0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)####17 2.22 97.78 0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)
####14 2.01 97.99 0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)####18 1.8 98.2 0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)
####15 1.48 98.52 0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####19 1 99 0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)
####16 1.36 98.64 0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####23 0.69 99.31 0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)
####19 1.55 98.45 0.00 Froude number #####N/A 0.00 Froude number
#####N/A 0.0 friction factor u/u*#####N/A 0.0 friction factor u/u*
#####N/A 0.0 threshold grain size (mm)#####N/A 0.0 threshold grain size (mm)
#####N/A #####N/A
#####N/A check from channel material #####N/A check from channel material
#####N/A 0 measured D84 (mm)#####N/A 0 measured D84 (mm)
#####N/A 0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor #####N/A 0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor
#####N/A 0.000 Manning's n from channel material #####N/A 0.000 Manning's n from channel material
#####N/A #####N/A
94.5
95
95.5
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Cow Path East XS 1 (UT 2 Upstream) Riffle ---
94.5
95
95.5
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
0 5 10 15 20 25
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Cow Path East XS 2 (UT 1) Riffle ---
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919‐215‐1693
Date: 4/2/2024
Project/Site: Cow Path ‐ East
County, State: Randolph, NC
Sampling Point/ 
Coordinates:Soil Profile P1 (35.829029, ‐79.889987)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Wynott‐Enon Complex
Color % Color % Type Location
0‐310 YR 4/2 100 Silty Clay Loam
3‐10 10 YR 5/1 85 10 YR 5/6 15 C M Silty Clay Loam
10+ 10 YR 5/1 90 10 YR 4/6 10 C M Silty Clay Loam
Type:  C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.  Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist 
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:  
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
919‐215‐1693
Date: 4/2/2024
Project/Site: Cow Path ‐ East
County, State: Randolph, NC
Sampling Point/ 
Coordinates:Soil Profile P2 (35.828396, ‐79.892656)
Investigator: W. Grant Lewis
Soil Series: Wynott‐Enon Complex
Color % Color % Type Location
0‐410 YR 4/2 100 Loam
4‐10 10 YR 5/2 90 7.5 YR 5/6 10 C PL Clay Loam
10‐14 10 YR 6/2 85 7.5 YR 5/6 15 C M Clay Loam
14+ 10 YR 4/2 90 10 YR 4/6 10 C M Loamy Clay
Type:  C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, MS=Masked Sand Grains.  Locaction: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix
North Carolina Licensed Soil Scientist 
Number: 1233
Signature:
Name/Print: W. Grant Lewis
Notes:  
Depth (inches)
Matrix Mottling
Texture
SOIL BORING LOG
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Appendix B – Farlow Mitigation Site
Phase 1 – Prospectus
Appendix B

Cow Path West Mitigation Site

CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS
YADKIN UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK

DRAFT PROSPECTUS – COW PATH WEST MITIGATION SITE
SAW-2024-00000

Sponsored by:
CLEARWATER MITIGATION SOLUTIONS

Prepared for:
The North Carolina Inter-Agency Review Team
for distribution and comment

Sponsored by:
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions

POC: Kevin Yates
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, North Carolina
Phone: [phone]

Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.

POC: Grant Lewis
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Ph: 919-215-1693

April 2024

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Table of Contents
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site
Table of Contents
1 EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use ................................................................................ 1
1.2 Water Quality ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Vegetation ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.4 Soils ............................................................................................................................................ 2
1.5 Hydrology .................................................................................................................................. 2
1.6 Existing Stream and Wetland Functions .................................................................................... 3
1.7 Fluvial Geomorphology ............................................................................................................. 4
1.8 FEMA ......................................................................................................................................... 4
2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT ........................................................................... 5
2.1 Stream Restoration ................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Stream Enhancement I .............................................................................................................. 5
2.3 Stream Enhancement II ............................................................................................................. 5
2.4 Wetlands ................................................................................................................................... 5
3 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 6

List of Tables
Table 1: Cow Path West Site Soils ................................................................................................................. 2
Table 2: Cow Path West Existing Stream Flow Regime ................................................................................. 2
Table 3: Cow Path West NC SAM Summary .................................................................................................. 3
Table 4: Cow Path West NC WAM Summary ................................................................................................ 4
Table 5: Cow Path West Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary .............................................................. 5

Appendix

A: Figures & Landowner Authorization Form
Figure 4A: Cow Path West – Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4B: Cow Path West – Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 4C: Cow Path West – LiDAR
Figure 4D: Cow Path West – Proposed Conditions

Landowner Authorization Form

B: Baseline Assessment Forms

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 1
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site
COW PATH WEST MITIGATION SITE
The Cow Path West Mitigation Site (“Site”) is characterized by livestock pasture, a 0.8 acre impoundment,
and recently timbered forest land. The main hydrologic features include Unnamed Tributaries (UTs) to
Caraway Creek. The proposed conservation easement area contains approximately 12.9 acres (Figures 4A
and 4B).

1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
1.1 Physiography, Topography, and Land Use
The Site is located within the Southern Outer Piedmont ecoregion of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
(Griffith et al. 2002). The ecoregion is characterized by dissected irregular plains, some rounded hills and
ridges, and low to moderate gradient streams with cobble, gravel, and sandy substrates. Onsite elevations
range from a high of 770 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) at the upper reaches to a low of
approximately 690 feet NGVD at the Site outfall (USGS Glenola, North Carolina 7.5-minute topographic
quadrangle) (Figure 3A, Appendix A).

The Site drains an approximately 0.15-square mile (95.8-acres) watershed (Figure 4A). The watershed is
dominated by pasture, forest, and sparse residential development. Impervious surfaces account for less
than 2 percent of the upstream watershed land surface.

Land use at the Site is characterized by recently timbered forest and herbaceous pasture. Riparian zones
of the Site are primarily composed of clearcut debris and/or pasture. Livestock have access to the entire
easement.

1.2 Water Quality
The Site is located within Targeted Local Watershed and Local Watershed Plan Area (Caraway Creek) 14-
digit HUC (03040103050040) of the Yadkin River basin. Stream and wetland mitigation areas are located
along UTs to Caraway Creek (North Carolina Division of Water Resources [NCDWR] subbasin number 03-
07-09). UTs to Caraway Creek have been assigned Best Usage Classifications of C (NCDWR 2013).

NCDWR has assembled a list of impaired waterbodies according to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d)
and 40 CFR 130.7, which is a comprehensive public accounting of all impaired waterbodies. An impaired
waterbody is one that does not meet state standards, including designated uses, numeric and narrative
criteria, and anti-degradation requirements defined in 40 CFR 131. Caraway Creek downstream from the
Site, is not listed on the final 2022 303(d) list (NCDEQ 2022).

1.3 Vegetation
The Site is characterized primarily by a combination of agriculture fields and timbered forest. Agricutlre
fields are scattered throughout the Site but abut in the streams in the upper reaches of the Site. These
reaches (primarily upstream from the pond dam have a narrow fringe of scrubby vegetation composed of
Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), blackberry (Rubus sp.), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), and eastern
red cedar (Juniperus virginiana) on the channel banks with pasture grasses surrounding the channels.
Wetlands in these upper pastures have rushes (Juncus spp.) intermixed with the pasture grasses.
Downstream from the pond dam is characterized by disturbed forest or timbered forest composed of the
following species: American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis), sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana), black willow (Salix nigra), and various oaks (Quercus spp.), elms
(Ulmus spp.), and hickories (Carya spp.). Invasive species largely include Chinese privet (Ligustrum
sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), and honey suckle (Lonicera japonica).
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 2
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site
1.4 Soils
Based on Web Soil Survey mapping (USDA 2024), proposed conservation easement areas associated with
the Site contain two soil series (Figure 3B and Table 1): Mecklenburg clay loam (Ultic Hapludalfs) and
Wynott-Enon complex (Typic Hapludalfs – Ultic Hapludalfs).

Table 1: Cow Path West Site Soils
Map Unit
Symbol Map Unit Name Hydric
Status Description
MeB2 Mecklenburg
clay loam Non-hydric
This series occurs on broad, convex ridges. The soils are well
drained, slowly permeable with a loamy surface layer and a
predominantly clayey subsoil. The depth to seasonal high water
table is generally more than 6.0 feet.
WvC2 Wynott-Enon
complex Non-hydric
This series occurs on convex slopes of uplands. The soils arewell
drained with slow permeability with a loamy surface and a
clayey subsoil. The depth to seasonal high water table is
generally more than 6.0 feet.

Existing wetlands and hydric soils were mapped by a licensed soil scientist (NC LSS # 1233) on May 8, 2024
as soils of the Wehadkee series (Figure 4B, Appendix A). Although soils mapped by the NRCS are listed as
non-hydric, map units are frequently lumped together as individual soil polygons are not sufficient in size.
Hydric soils mapped at the Site are less than an acre in size (ranging from 0.01 to 0.228 acre), which is too
small to be mapped on the scale of a soil survey. Hydric soils located on the Site exhibit F3 (Depleted
Matrix).

1.5 Hydrology
On-site investigations using NCDWQ stream forms (Table 2; Figure 4B) suggest that UT1 downstream from
the pond and UT 3 are perennial and the remaining tributaries are intermittent (Table 3).

Table 2: Cow Path West Existing Stream Flow Regime
Stream Stream Length
(ft)
Stream Order USGS Stream
Classification
In-field Stream
Classification
UT 1 2,353 1st Intermittent/Perennial Intermittent/Perennial
UT-2 573 NAt Not mapped Intermittent
UT-3 609 NAt Not mapped Perennial
UT-4 192 NAt Not mapped Intermittent
Total 3,727

This hydro-physiographic region is characterized by moderate rainfall with precipitation averaging 46.9-
inches per year (based on WETS data from station Asheboro 2 W). Based on regional curves (Harman et
al. 1999), the bankfull discharge for a 0.15-square mile watershed is expected to average 22.6-cubic feet
per second (CFS). Based on empirical evidence a bankfull discharge of 22.6-CFS is expected to occur
approximately every 1.3 to 1.5 years (Rosgen 1996, Leopold 1994).
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 3
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site

1.6 Existing Stream and Wetland Functions
Stream and wetland functions have been evaluated through the use of North Carolina Stream Assessment
Method (NC SAM) and North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NC WAM) analyses of existing stream
systems at the Site (NC SFAT 2015 and NC WFAT 2010). Site functional assessment data forms are
available upon request; model output is included in Appendix B and is summarized in the following table.
Metrics targeted to meet the Site’s goals and objectives are depicted in bold, within Tables 3 and 4, below.

Table 3: Cow Path West NC SAM Summary
NC SAM Function Class Rating
Summary
UT 1
upstream
UT 1
downstream UT 2 UT 3 UT 4
(1) HYDROLOGY LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM LOW LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW LOW MEDIUM LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(1) WATER QUALITY LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Stream-side Area Vegetation LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES YES YES NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW
(1) HABITAT LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH HIGH MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate LOW LOW LOW MEDIUM LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM LOW LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-Stream Habitat LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW MEDIUM MEDIUM LOW LOW
OVERALL LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 4
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site

Based on NC SAM output, all three primary stream functional metrics (Hydrology, Water Quality and
Habitat), as well as 21 sub-metrics are under-performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating (see Figure
4B, Appendix A for NC SAM data reaches). LOW performing metrics are to be targeted for functional uplift
through mitigation activities, goals and objectives, as well as, monitoring and success criteria.

Table 4: Cow Path West NC WAM Summary
NC WAM Sub-function Rating Summary WAM 1 WAM 2
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Headwater Forest
(1) HYDROLOGY MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Surface Storage & Retention LOW LOW
(2) Sub-surface Storage & Retention HIGH HIGH
(1) WATER QUALITY LOW LOW
(2) Pathogen change LOW LOW
(2) Particulate Change LOW LOW
(2) Soluble change LOW LOW
(2) Physical Change LOW LOW
(1) HABITAT LOW HIGH
(2) Physical Structure LOW MEDIUM
(2) Landscape Patch Structure LOW LOW
(2) Vegetative Composition LOW HIGH
OVERALL LOW MEDIUM

Based on NC WAM output, two of the primary wetland functional metrics (Water Quality and Habitat), as
well as 8 sub-metrics are under-performing as exhibited by a LOW metric rating. LOW performing metrics
are to be targeted for functional uplift through mitigation activities, goals and objectives, as well as,
monitoring and success criteria.

1.7 Fluvial Geomorphology
Currently, channels targeted for restoration are characterized as entrenched and/or incised G- and F-type
channels with little to no sinuosity, little to no riffle-pool morphology, oversized cross-sectional areas, and
no access to floodplains during high discharge events (Bank Height Ratio [BHR] ranging from 3.3 to more
than 7). Sinuosity was measured at 1.04 from topographic surveys, aerial photography, and visual
observation during field surveys.

In general, sediment and nutrient inputs, channel incision and straightening, removal of cobble substrate,
and removal of woody vegetation have impacted streams within and adjacent to the Site.

1.8 FEMA
Inspection of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 3710773500J, effective January 2, 2008, indicates that
Site streams are not located in a Special Flood Hazard Area, and the project should not alter FEMA flood
zones. Therefore, a “Conditional Letter of Map Revision” (CLOMR) is not expected for this Site.

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 5
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site
2 SITE WORK PLAN & PROPOSED MITIGATION CREDIT
A summary of the actions proposed at Cow Path West is provided in Table 5 and in Figure 4D. In general,
proposed activities involve Stream Restoration, Stream Enhancement I, Stream Enhancement II, and
Wetland Enhancement. Stream restoration and enhancement occurs in reaches that have been impacted
by straightening, diversion, clearing of vegetation, and other historic land uses. Finally, riparian buffer
areas will be established through planting of appropriate vegetation, treatment of invasive species,
removal of livestock.

Table 5: Cow Path West Work Plan & Mitigation Credit Summary
Stream Reach Approx. Final
Length (LF) Mitigation Activity
UT 1 3055 Stream Restoration, Stream Enhancement I and Wetland Enhancement
UT 2 660 Stream Restoration and Stream Enhancement I
UT 3 657 Stream Restoration
UT 4 183 Stream Enhancement II
Total 4,555

2.1 Stream Restoration
Stream Restoration at the Site includes Priority 1 techniques along ditched and incised (G- and F-type)
channels. Restoration will entail excavation of a new channel at the appropriate elevation and location
within the floodplain. Mechanical and/or chemical treatment of invasive species including multiflora rose
(Rosa multiflora), will be undertaken along these reaches.

2.2 Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement I will entail backfilling the existing channel and contouring a new channel within the
old channel footprint. The installation of instream structures such as log vanes will occur to stabilize
stream banks and to provide habitat. Invasive species will be treated, livestock will be fenced out of the
easement and supplemental planting will occur, if necessary.

2.3 Stream Enhancement II
Stream Enhancement II will entail planting vegetative buffers along streams that have fields abutting the
channel. In addition, minor bank stabilization treatments will occur. The installation of livestock fence will
occur to protect the reach from cattle encroachment.

2.4 Wetlands
Wetland enhancement will focus on the removal of livestock and restoration of vegetative communities
resulting in the enhancement of 0.637 acres of jurisdictional riparian riverine wetlands.

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Page 6
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site
3 REFERENCES

Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson, J.B.
Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina. U.S. Geological
Survey, Reston, Virginia.

Harman, W.A., G.D. Jennings, J.M. Patterson, D.R. Clinton, L.A. O’Hara, A. Jessup, R. Everhart. 1999.
Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for North Carolina Streams. N.C. State University, Raleigh,
North Carolina.

Leopold, L.B. 1994. A View of the River. Harvard University Press. Cambridge, MA. 298 pp.

North Carolina Division of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2022. NC 2022 Category 5 Assessment “Final
303(d) List” (online). Available: https://www.deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/water-
planning/modeling-assessment/water-quality-data-assessment/integrated-report-files

North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2013. North Carolina Water Bodies Report
(online). Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=10c60296-dcc8-439f-
a41c-d475ea7ad1fa&groupId=38364

North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team (NC SFAT). 2014. N.C. Stream Assessment Method
(NC SAM) User Manual (Version 2). 178 pp.

North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team (NC WFAT) 2010. N.C. Wetland Assessment
Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.

Rosgen, D. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology (Publisher). Pagosa Springs, Colorado

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2024. Web Soil Survey (online). Available:
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx [March 2024].

Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Attachment A
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site
APPENDIX A – FIGURES & LANDOWNER AUTHORIZATION FORM

Figure 4A: Cow Path West – Topography and Drainage Area
Figure 4B: Cow Path West – Existing Conditions and Soils
Figure 4C: Cow Path West – LiDAR
Figure 4D: Cow Path West – Proposed Conditions

Landowner Authorization Form

NC Center for Geographic Information & Anaylsis
³
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
Legend
Cow Path West Easement = 12.9 ac
UT 1 Drainage Area = 95.8 ac (0.15 sq mi)
UT 2 Drainage Area = 16.8 ac (0.03 sq mi)
UT 3 Drainage Area = 21.1 ac (0.03 sq mi)
UT4 Drainage Area = 4.3 ac (0.01 sq mi)
0 1,800900
Feet
³FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
WGL
MAR 2024
1:4,500
19-008.07
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Randolph County, NC
COW PATH
WEST
TOPOGRAPHY
AND
DRAINAGE AREA
4A
YADKIN
MITIGATION
BANK
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
WvC2
MeB2
WvC2
MeB2
WpC
WvB2
WtB
MeB2
WtC
WvC2
WtC
WvB2
WtC
BaENCCGIA, NC 911 Board
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
WGL
MAR 2024
1:3200
19-008.07
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Randolph County, NC
YADKIN
MITIGATION
BANK
COW PATH
WEST
EXISTING
CONDITIONS
AND SOILS
4B
³
0 1,000500
Feet
Legend
Parcel
Cow Path West Easement = 12.9 ac
Existing Streams = 3,727 ft
Existing Wetlands
Cross Section
^_NCSAM Form Location
^_NCDWQ Form Location
^_NCWAM Form Location
NRCS Soil Boundaries
U
T-2
U
T
-
1
U
T
-
3
NC DWQ Form
Score - 23
NC SAM Form
Rating - LOWXS 1
UT-1
Soil Map Hydric
Unit Soil Series Status
MeB2 Mecklenburg clay loam Non‐ Hydric
WvC2 Wynott‐Enon Complex Non‐ Hydric
UT-4
NC DWQ Form
Score - 23.5
NC DWQ Form
Score - 41
NC DWQ Form
Score - 26
NC SAM Form
Rating - LOW
NC SAM Form
Rating - LOW
NC SAM Form
Rating - LOW
NC SAM Form
Rating - LOW
XS 2
XS 3
NC WAM Form 1
Rating - LOW
NC WAM Form 2
Rating - MEDIUM
95.0
95.5
96.0
96.5
97.0
97.5
98.0
98.5
99.0
99.5
024681012141618
Abkf
Cross Section 1 (UT 2)
DA = 0.03 sq mi
Abkf = 1.5 sq ft
Wbkf = 2.8 ft
Dbkf = 0.5 ft
Wbkf/Dbkf = 5.6
FPA = 3.0 ft
ENT = 1.1
Dmax = 0.7 ft
LBH = 2.7 ft
BHR = 5.4
G-type
93.0
94.0
95.0
96.0
97.0
98.0
99.0
100.0
101.0
0 5 10 15 20 25
DA = 0.02 sq mi
Abkf = 2.1 sq ft
Wbkf = 7.0 ft
Dbkf = 0.3 ft
Wbkf/Dbkf = 23.3
FPA = 9 ft
ENT = 1.3
Dmax = 0.6 ft
LBH = 3.3 ft
BHR = 11.0
Abkf
Cross Section 2 (UT 3)
93.0
94.0
95.0
96.0
97.0
98.0
99.0
100.0
02468101214161820
Cross Section 3 (UT 1 Downstream)
Abkf
DA = 0.13 sq mi
Abkf = 5.4 sq ft
Wbkf = 7.3 ft
Dbkf = 0.7 ft
Wbkf/Dbkf = 10.43
FPA = 9 ft
ENT = 2.1
Dmax = 1.0
LBH = 5.0 ft
BHR = 7.14
Eg-type
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
WGL
MAR 2024
1:3200
19-008.07
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Randolph County, NC
YADKIN
MITIGATION
BANK
COW PATH
WEST
LiDAR
4C
³
0 1,000500
Feet
Legend
Cow Path West Easement = 12.9 ac
Existing Streams = 3,727 ft
U
T-2
U
T
-
1
U
T
-
3
UT-1
U
T-4
NCCGIA, NC 911 Board
FIGURE
Drawn by:
Date:
Scale:
Project No.:
WGL
MAR 2024
1:3200
19-008.07
Title:
Project:
Prepared for:
Randolph County, NC
YADKIN
MITIGATION
BANK
COW PATH
WEST
PROPOSED
CONDITIONS
4D
³
0 1,000500
Feet
Legend
Cow Path West Easement = 12.9 ac
Stream Restoration = 3,308 ft
Stream Enhancement I = 1,064 ft
Stream Enhancement II = 183 ft
No Credit
Wetland Enhancement = 0.637 ac
U
T-2
U
T
-
1
U
T
-
3
Remove pond
dam.
Begin EI at grade and
step up channel to
historic floodplain, install
instream structures, and
contour channel to
appropriate dimension.
UT-1
UT-4
Begin EI at grade and
step up channel to
historic floodplain, install
instream structures, and
contour channel to
appropriate dimension.
Tie into upstream EI and begin
P1 stream restoration, fence livestock,
plant native forest vegetation.
Tie into upstream elevation and begin
P1 stream restoration, fence livestock,
plant native forest vegetation.
Install Crossing
Fence livestock, minor bank
stabilization, and plant forest
vegetation.
Feet Ratio SMU/WMU
Stream ‐ Restoration 3308 1 3308
Stream ‐ Enhancement  (Level I) 1064 1.5 709
Stream ‐ Enhancement  (Level II) 183 2.5 73
Totals 4555 4091
Wetland ‐ Enhancement 0.637 2 0.3
Totals 0.637 0.3
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions - Yadkin 03040103 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Attachment B
Phase 1 – Prospectus, Cow Path West Mitigation Site
APPENDIX B – BASELINE ASSESSMENT FORMS
Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path West - UT1
Upstream Date of Assessment 4/8/24
Stream Category Pa1 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Perkinson/Smith

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA NA
Overall LOW LOW

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path West - UT1
downstream Date of Assessment 4/8/24
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Lewis/Heider-Metour

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM
(2) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA
Overall LOW

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path West - UT2 Date of Assessment 4/8/24
Stream Category Pa2 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Lewis/Heider-Metour

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer MEDIUM
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability LOW
(4) Sediment Transport LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow HIGH
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow HIGH
(3) Substrate LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(3) In-stream Habitat MEDIUM
(2) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Stream-side Habitat MEDIUM
(3) Thermoregulation MEDIUM
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA NA
Overall LOW

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path West - UT3 Date of Assessment 4/8/24
Stream Category Pa1 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Lewis/Heider-Metour

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Perennial

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport MEDIUM
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(1) Water Quality LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors YES
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance MEDIUM
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA
(1) Habitat LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM
(3) Substrate MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA
Overall LOW

Draft NC SAM Stream Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 2.1

Stream Site Name Cow Path West - UT4 Date of Assessment 4/8/24
Stream Category Pa1 Assessor Name/Organization Axiom - Perkinson/Smith

Notes of Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) NO
Additional stream information/supplementary measurements included (Y/N) YES
NC SAM feature type (perennial, intermittent, Tidal Marsh Stream) Intermittent

Function Class Rating Summary
USACE/
All Streams
NCDWR
Intermittent
(1) Hydrology LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Flood Flow LOW LOW
(3) Streamside Area Attenuation LOW LOW
(4) Floodplain Access LOW LOW
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer LOW LOW
(4) Microtopography LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability LOW LOW
(4) Channel Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(4) Sediment Transport LOW LOW
(4) Stream Geomorphology LOW LOW
(2) Stream/Intertidal Zone Interaction NA NA
(2) Longitudinal Tidal Flow NA NA
(2) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(1) Water Quality LOW LOW
(2) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(2) Streamside Area Vegetation LOW LOW
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Indicators of Stressors NO NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance LOW NA
(2) Intertidal Zone Filtration NA NA
(1) Habitat LOW LOW
(2) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Baseflow MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) Substrate LOW LOW
(3) Stream Stability MEDIUM MEDIUM
(3) In-stream Habitat LOW LOW
(2) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Stream-side Habitat LOW LOW
(3) Thermoregulation LOW LOW
(2) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(3) Flow Restriction NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh Stream Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Channel Stability NA NA
(4) Tidal Marsh Stream Geomorphology NA NA
(3) Tidal Marsh In-stream Habitat NA NA
(2) Intertidal Zone NA NA
Overall LOW LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name WAM-1 Date of Assessment 240408
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Perkinson/Axiom

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
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) YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW

Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Particulate Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Soluble Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Physical Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Pollution Change Condition NA
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Habitat Physical Structure Condition LOW
Landscape Patch Structure Condition LOW
Vegetation Composition Condition LOW

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Habitat Condition LOW

Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 5.0

Wetland Site Name WAM-2 Date of Assessment 240408
Wetland Type Headwater Forest Assessor Name/Organization Perkinson/Axiom

Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y/N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y/N) YES
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) YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y/N) NO

Sub-function Rating Summary
Function Sub-function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Surface Storage and Retention Condition LOW

Sub-surface Storage and
Retention Condition HIGH
Water Quality Pathogen Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Particulate Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity NA
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NA
Soluble Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Physical Change Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
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 MEDIUM
Vegetation Composition Condition MEDIUM

Function Rating Summary
Function Metrics Rating
Hydrology Condition MEDIUM
Water Quality Condition LOW
Condition/Opportunity LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y/N) NO
Habitat Condition HIGH

Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

Cross Section Cross Section
section:Cow Path West XS 1 (UT 2 )section:Cow Path West XS 2 (UT 3)
Riffle Riffle
------
------
description:Cow Path West XS 1 (UT 2 )description:Cow Path West XS 2 (UT 3)
height of instrument (ft):100.00 height of instrument (ft):100.00
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's
notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n" notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"
###01.5598.45 4.05 2.04 3.0 ###00.299.8 5.25 2.6 9.0
###21.5198.49 95.95 97.96 ###10.299.8 94.75 97.4
###52.3697.64 ###50.7499.26
###7.5 3.4 96.6 dimensions ###60.9699.04 dimensions
###84.4995.51 1.5 x-section area 0.5 d mean ###71.9598.05 2.1 x-section area 0.3 d mean
###94.5795.43 2.8 width 3.7 wet P ###83.5196.49 7.0 width 7.3 wet P
###10 4.68 95.32 0.7 d max 0.4 hyd radi ###94.5795.43 0.6 d max 0.3 hyd radi
###10.5 4.74 95.26 2.7 bank ht 5.4 w/d ratio ###10 5.16 94.84 3.3 bank ht 22.7 w/d ratio
###11 2.04 97.96 3.0 W flood prone area 1.1 ent ratio ###11 5.86 94.14 9.0 W flood prone area 1.3 ent ratio
###12 1.5 98.5 ###12 5.74 94.26
###13 1.09 98.91 hydraulics ###13 5.44 94.56 hydraulics
###14.5 0.91 99.09 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)###16 5.59 94.41 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)
###16 0.85 99.15 0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)###17.5 5.12 94.88 0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)
####N/A 0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)###19 3.38 96.62 0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)
####N/A 0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)###21 2.6 97.4 0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)
####N/A 0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)###23 2.59 97.41 0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)
####N/A 0.00 Froude number ####N/A 0.00 Froude number
####N/A 0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A 0.0 friction factor u/u*
####N/A 0.0 threshold grain size (mm)####N/A 0.0 threshold grain size (mm)
####N/A ####N/A
####N/A check from channel material ####N/A check from channel material
####N/A 0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A 0 measured D84 (mm)
####N/A 0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor ####N/A 0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor
####N/A 0.000 Manning's n from channel material ####N/A 0.000 Manning's n from channel material
####N/A ####N/A
95
95.5
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
024681012141618
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Cow Path West XS 1 (UT 2 ) Riffle ---
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
0 5 10 15 20 25
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Cow Path West XS 2 (UT 3) Riffle ---
Cross Section Cross Section
section:XS 3 Cow Path West XS 3 (UT1 D)section:
Riffle Riffle
------
------
description:XS 3 Cow Path West XS 3 (UT1 D)description:
height of instrument (ft):100.00 height of instrument (ft):
omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's omit distance FS FS FS W fpa channel Manning's
notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n" notes pt. (ft) (ft) elevation bankfull top of bank (ft) slope (%) "n"
###00.499.6 4.96 0.96 9.0 ####N/A
###1.5 0.59 99.41 95.04 99.04 ####N/A 0 ---
###31.2598.75 ####N/A
###42.0697.94 dimensions ####N/A dimensions
###53.6696.34 5.4 x-section area 0.7 d mean ####N/A 0.0 x-section area 0.0 d mean
###64.695.4 7.3 width 8.0 wet P ####N/A 0.0 width 0.0 wet P
###75.0694.94 1.0 d max 0.7 hyd radi ####N/A 0.0 d max 0.0 hyd radi
###85.6194.39 5.0 bank ht 9.9 w/d ratio ####N/A 0.0 bank ht 0.0 w/d ratio
###11 5.85 94.15 9.0 W flood prone area 1.2 ent ratio ####N/A 0.0 W flood prone area 0.0 ent ratio
###12 5.93 94.07 ####N/A
###13.5 5.87 94.13 hydraulics ####N/A hydraulics
###14 5.36 94.64 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)####N/A 0.0 velocity (ft/sec)
###14.5 2.97 97.03 0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)####N/A 0.0 discharge rate, Q (cfs)
###15 2.32 97.68 0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)####N/A 0.00 shear stress ((lbs/ft sq)
###16 1.54 98.46 0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)####N/A 0.00 shear velocity (ft/sec)
###17 1.16 98.84 0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)####N/A 0.000 unit stream power (lbs/ft/sec)
###18 0.96 99.04 0.00 Froude number ####N/A 0.00 Froude number
###19 0.79 99.21 0.0 friction factor u/u*####N/A 0.0 friction factor u/u*
####N/A 0.0 threshold grain size (mm)####N/A 0.0 threshold grain size (mm)
####N/A ####N/A
####N/A check from channel material ####N/A check from channel material
####N/A 0 measured D84 (mm)####N/A 0 measured D84 (mm)
####N/A 0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor ####N/A 0.0 relative roughness 0.0 fric. factor
####N/A 0.000 Manning's n from channel material ####N/A 0.000 Manning's n from channel material
####N/A ####N/A
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
XS 3 Cow Path West XS 3 (UT1 D) Riffle ---
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Width from River Left to Right (ft)
Riffle ---