20181271 Ver 1_HoneyMill_100025_MY4_2024_Final_20250224

MONITORING YEAR 4
ANNUAL REPORT

FINAL

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

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

Data Collection Period: February 2024 – October 2024
Submission: December 9, 2024

PREPARED FOR:

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

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203
December 9, 2024

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

RE: Draft: Year 4 Monitoring Report
Honey Mill Mitigation Site, Surry County
Yadkin River CU 03040101
DMS Project ID No. 100083 / DEQ Contract #007619

Dear Mr. Phillips:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments
from the Draft Year 4 Monitoring Report for the Honey Mill Mitigation Site that were received on
December 2, 2024. The report has been updated to reflect those comments. The Final MY4 Report is
included. DMS’ comments are listed below in bold. Wildlands’ responses to DMS’ comments are noted in
italics.
DMS’ comment: Report Cover: Thank you for including the data collection dates.
Wildlands’ response: You’re welcome.
DMS’ comment: Executive Summary: Thank you for providing summary of post-Helene site conditions.
Wildlands’ response: You’re welcome.
DMS’ comment: Section 2.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity: Please notify DMS once the
boundary marking repairs have been completed so that a follow-up inspection can be scheduled.
Wildlands’ response: We will notify DMS once the boundary repairs have been completed for a follow up
inspection.
DMS’ comment: Digital Review: Photos with .HEIC file extensions were included in the Support Files
folder. Please use the .jpg format in future reports.
Wildlands’ response: All photos have been updated to .jpg for the final digital submittal.
As requested, Wildlands has included two (2) hard copies of the final report, a full final .pdf copy of the
report with the DMS comment letter and our response letter inserted after the cover page, and a full
final electronic submittal of the support files. A copy of the DMS comment letter and our response letter
have been included inside the front cover of each report’s hard copy, as well. Please let me know if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,

Ella Wickliff
Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]

PREPARED BY:

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

Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) implemented a full-delivery stream mitigation project at the
Honey Mill Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). The project restored and enhanced a total of 8,683 linear feet
(LF) of perennial and intermittent stream in Surry County, NC. The Site is located within the Rutledge,
Stoney and Flat Shoal Creek – Ararat River targeted local watershed (TWL) and NC Division of Water
Resources (DWR) Subbasin 03-07-03. The project is providing 4,793.432 cool stream mitigation units
(SMUs) for the Yadkin River Basin Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03040101110020.
The Site’s immediate drainage area and the surrounding watershed has a long history of agricultural
activity. The project excludes livestock, creates stable stream banks, converts pasture to forest, and
implements BMPs to filter agricultural runoff. These actions address stressors by reducing fecal,
nutrient, and sediment inputs to project streams, and ultimately to the Ararat River, and reconnect
instream and terrestrial habitats on the Site to upstream and downstream resources. Approximately
20.2-acres of land has been placed under permanent conservation easement to protect the Site in
perpetuity. The established project goals include:
 Improve stream channel stability,
 Treat concentrated agricultural run-off,
 Improve in-stream habitat,
 Restore and enhance native floodplain and wetland vegetation,
 Exclude livestock from streams, and
 Permanently protect the project Site from harmful uses.
Monitoring year (MY) 4 is a reduced monitoring year, so vegetation plot and cross-section data were
not collected. However, visual assessment data, an assessment of the easement boundary condition,
and hydrologic monitoring data are included in this report. To preserve clarity and continuity of the
reporting structure, this report maintains section and appendix numbering from previous monitoring
reports. Omitted sections are denoted in the Table of Contents. MY3 data for vegetation plots and
cross-sections are included in the respective appendices for reference.
Site assessments were completed between February and October 2024. The Site met the required
stream, vegetation, and hydrology success criteria for Monitoring Year 3 (MY3) and has continued to
do so for applicable performance standards in Monitoring Year 4 (MY4). Multiple bankfull events
were recorded and the project is on track to meet the bankfull performance standards by the end of
the monitoring period. The Site has maintained stability despite multiple large storm events in MY4.
In September 2024, Wildlands performed the MY4 visual assessment and did not identify any areas
of concern prior to Hurricane Helene. In early October 2024, a post-storm follow-up visual
assessment found the Site maintained stability. The minor fencing encroachments observed by DMS
during the MY4 boundary inspection will be rectified by the start of 2025 and a comment response
letter is included in Appendix F. Overall, herbaceous and woody vegetation are performing well.
Areas of invasive species affect <1% of the Site and re-sprouts will be treated as-needed. The Site will
continue to be monitored, and adaptive management measures will be implemented as necessary to
benefit the ecological health of the Site.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL iii
HONEY MILL MITIGATION SITE
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW ....................................................................................................... 1-1
Section 2: MONITORING YEAR 4 DATA ASSESSMENT ...................................................................... 2-1
Section 3: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 3-1
Section 4: REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 4-1

TABLES
Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits ..................................................................................................... 1-1
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements ...................................................... 1-3
Table 3: Project Attributes ......................................................................................................................... 1-5

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

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

Appendix C* Stream Geomorphology Data

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL iv
Table 8 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Section)
Cross-Section Plots

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

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

Appendix F Correspondence
Boundary Inspection Report- MY4
Boundary Inspection Report- MY4 WEI Comment Response Letter
*Content not required for Monitoring Year 4. Data included from Monitoring Year 3 for reference.

LIST OF ACRONYMS
Best Management Practice (BMP)
Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Cross-section (XS)
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
Enhancement II (EII)
Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC)
Interagency Review Team (IRT)
Monitoring Year (MY)
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR)
Stream Mitigation Unit (SMU)
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Unnamed Tributary (UT)

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

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-2
Table 1: Project Quantities and Credits
Project Components
Project Stream
Mitigation
Plan
Footage1, 2, 3
As-Built
Footage
Mitigation
Category
Restoration
Level
Mitigation
Ratio (X:1) Credits
UT3 Reach 2 306 306.000 Cool R 1.000 306.172
UT4 440 440.000 Cool EII 3.000 146.780
UT5 518 518.000 Cool EII 3.000 172.553
UT6 Reach 1 214 213.000 Cool EII 3.000 71.242
UT6 Reach 2 205 205.000 Cool R 1.000 204.747
Total: 4,793.432
Notes:
1. Internal culvert crossing, and external break excluded from the credited stream footage.
2. No direct Credit for BMPS.
3. UT6 originates within an overhead powerline easement. The conservation easement extends up to UT6’s origin under the
powerline, but proposed crediting does not begin until the stream exits the overhead easement.
Table 1.1: Credit Summary Table
Project Credits
Restoration Level Stream
Warm Cool Cold
Restoration N/A 2,772.812 N/A
Enhancement I N/A 140.566 N/A
Enhancement II N/A 1,880.054 N/A
Preservation N/A N/A N/A
Totals N/A 4,793.432 N/A

1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The Site is providing numerous ecological benefits within the Yadkin River Basin. The Site was selected
based on its potential to support the objectives and goals of multiple conservation and watershed
planning documents such as the 2009 Upper Yadkin River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) and the
2015 North Carolina Wildlife Resource Communion’s (NCWRC) Wildlife Action Plan (WAP). Table 2 below
describes the project goals and how functional uplift at the Site will be measured and monitored.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-3
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements
Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional
Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement
Cumulative
Monitoring
Results
Exclude
livestock
from stream
channels.
Install livestock
fencing on all or
portions of the Site
and/or permanently
remove livestock
from all or portions of
the Site to exclude
livestock from stream
channels and riparian
areas.
Reduced
agricultural runoff
and cattle
trampling in
streams.
There is no required
performance standard
for this metric.
Visually
monitor
fenced
portions of
Site to ensure
no cattle are
entering the
easement.
No cattle
observed in
easement in MY0-
MY4.
Improve
stability of
stream
channels.
Construct stream
channels that will
maintain stable cross-
sections, patterns,
and profiles over
time.
Reduction in
sediment inputs
from bank erosion,
reduction of shear
stress, and
improved overall
hydraulic function.
Bank height ratios
remain below 1.2 over
the monitoring period.
Visual assessments
showing progression
towards stability.
11 cross-
section
surveys in
MY1, 2, 3, 5, &
7.
Cross-section
monitoring is not
required in MY4.
Channels are
stable have
maintained the
constructed riffle
and pool
sequence.
Reconnect
channels
with
floodplains.
Reconstruct stream
channels with
appropriate bankfull
dimensions and
depth relative to the
existing floodplain.
Dispersion of high
flows on the
floodplain.
Four bankfull events,
occurring in separate
years during the
monitoring period.
Venable Creek
Reach 3- 1
Manual Crest
Gage and 1
automated
Crest Gage.
In MY4 three
bankfull events
were recorded on
Venable Creek.
The Site has
recorded bankfull
events 3 of 4
monitoring years
and is on track to
meet criteria.
Improve
instream
habitat.
Install habitat
features such as
constructed riffles,
cover logs, and brush
toes into
restored/enhanced
streams. Add woody
materials to channel
beds. Construct pools
of varying depth.
Increase and
diversify available
habitats for
macroinvertebrate
s, fish, and
amphibians leading
to colonization and
increase in
biodiversity over
time.
There is no required
performance standard
for this metric.
N/A N/A

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-4
Table 2: Goals, Performance Criteria, and Functional Improvements
Goal Objective/Treatment Likely Functional
Uplift Performance Criteria Measurement
Cumulative
Monitoring
Results
Restore and
enhance
native
floodplain
and
streambank
vegetation.
Plant native tree and
understory species in
riparian zones and
plant appropriate
species on
streambanks.
Reduction in
floodplain
sediment inputs
from runoff,
increased bank
stability, increased
LWD and organic
material in streams
In open planting areas
a survival rate of 320
stems per acre at MY3,
260 planted stems per
acre at MY5, and 210
stems per acre at MY7.
Height requirement is 6
feet at MY5 and 8 feet
at MY7.
9 permanent
vegetation
plots, 5 mobile
vegetation
plots in MY1,
2, 3, 5, & 7.
Vegetation plot
monitoring is not
required in MY4,
but the Site is on
track to meet
MY5 criteria.
Treat
concentrated
agricultural
runoff
Install agricultural
BMPS in areas of
concentrated
agricultural runoff.
Treatment of
runoff before it
enters the stream
channel.
There is no required
performance standard
for this metric.
N/A N/A
Permanently
protect the
project Site
from harmful
uses.
Establish
conservation
easements on the
Site.
Protect Site from
encroachment on
the riparian
corridor and direct
impact to streams
and wetlands.
Prevent easement
encroachment.
Visually
inspect the
perimeter of
the Site to
ensure no
easement
encroachment
is occurring.
Minor fencing
encroachments
were observed in
MY4 but will be
rectified by the
start of 2025.

1.3 Project Attributes
The Site’s immediate drainage area as well as the surrounding watershed has a long history of
agricultural activity. Stream and wetland functional stressors for the Site were related to both
historic and current land use practices. Major stream stressors for the Site pre-restoration included
livestock trampling and fecal coliform inputs, lack of stabilizing stream bank and riparian
vegetation, active erosion, and incision. The effects of these stressors resulted in channel
instability, degraded water quality, and the loss of both aquatic and riparian habitat throughout
the Site’s watershed when compared to reference conditions.
The overall Site topography consists of steep, confined, and moderately confined valleys along the
tributaries and flow into a more open and gradually sloped valley along the mainstem of Venable
Creek. The project begins at a roadway culvert located at the intersection of Little Mountain
Church Road and Venable Creek. The watersheds for UT3, UT4, and UT6 are roughly bound by
Venable Farm Road to the west. All reach watersheds are encompassed by the Venable Creek
watershed, which extends south past Little Mountain Church Road. The Site is typically defined by
forested and agricultural land use with sporadic development of rural homes.
Pre-construction conditions are outlined in Table 3 below and Table 8 of Appendix C.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-5
Table 3: Project Attributes
Project Information
Project Name Honey Mill Mitigation Site County Surry County
Project Area (acres) 20.2 Project
Coordinates 36.428619, -80.610836
Planted Acreage 5 acres (full planting) plus supplemental planting
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic
Province Piedmont River Basin Yadkin River
USGS Hydrologic
Unit 8-digit 03040101 USGS Hydrologic
Unit 14-digit 03040101110020
Project Watershed Summary Information
DWR Sub-basin 03-07-03
2011 NLCD Land
Use
Classification
Forest (65%), Cultivated (21%), Shrubland
(5%), Urban (9%), Open Water (0%)
Project Drainage
Area (acres) 705
Project Drainage
Area Percentage
of Impervious
Area
0.8%
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Venable Creek UT1 UT2 UT2A UT2B UT3 UT4 UT5 UT6
R1 R2 R3 R4 R1 R2 R1 R2 R1 R2
Length of reach
(linear feet) - post-
restoration
91 211 1,647 1,958 273 742 332 893 80 784 306 440 518 213 205
Valley confinement Unconfined to Confined
Drainage area
(acres) 183 519 599 705 334 21 43 21 9 15 18 9 12 8 10
Perennial (P),
Intermittent (I),
Ephemeral (E)
P P P P P I/ P P P P P P P I/ P P P
NCDWR Water
Quality
Classification
Class C
Morphological
Description (stream
type) - Pre-
Restoration
N/A E4 E/C4 N/A E4b N/A C4b N/A N/A N/A E4b N/A N/A N/A A4
Morphological
Description (stream
type) - post-
restoration
N/A B4 C4 N/A C4b N/A B4 N/A N/A N/A C4b N/A N/A N/A A4
Evolutionary trend
(Simon's Model) -
Pre- Restoration
N/A III IV N/A III N/A V->V N/A N/A N/A III N/A N/A N/A III

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report – FINAL 1-6
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United
States - Section 404 Yes Yes USACE Action ID #SAW-2018-01789
Waters of the United
States - Section 401 Yes Yes DWR# 18-1271
Division of Land
Quality (Erosion and
Sediment Control)
Yes Yes NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit NCG010000
Endangered Species
Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion Document in Mitigation Plan
Historic Preservation
Act Yes Yes Categorical Exclusion Document in Mitigation Plan
Coastal Zone
Management Act
(CZMA)/Coastal Area
Management Act
(CAMA)
No N/A N/A
FEMA Floodplain
Compliance No N/A N/A
Essential Fisheries
Habitat No N/A N/A

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL 2-1
Section 2: MONITORING YEAR 4 DATA ASSESSMENT
Annual monitoring for MY4 took place between February and October 2024. The stream, vegetation,
and hydrologic success criteria for the Site follows the approved success criteria presented in the Honey
Mill Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2020). Monitoring features and locations are shown in Figures 1a – 1d.
Refer to Table 12 for the project’s activity and reporting history.
2.1 Vegetation Assessment
Detailed vegetation inventory and analysis is not required during MY4. However, a visual assessment
was conducted and indicated that vegetation is performing well. Mature trees were photographed and
overall have performed well in the restored and enhanced forested areas. In March of 2022 (MY2),
Wildlands conducted supplemental planting in 2.5 acres of wetland. Stems were also planted in
enhancement II reaches within the existing forested buffer (approximately 7 acres). The supplemental
planting has improved woody stem survivorship, vigor, and diversity substantially across the Site.
Attaining the interim success criteria of 260 stems per acre, with an average height of 5-ft, is likely
during next year’s data collection. Please refer to Appendix A for mature tree photographs and Appendix
B for MY3 vegetation summary data.
2.2 Stream Assessment
MY4 is a reduced monitoring year and detailed geomorphologic cross-section surveys are not required.
Field observations from MY0- MY4 indicate project reaches have remained stable, and the channels are
functioning as designed. Along restoration reaches, large alder stands have established on the banks
providing vegetation cover for the channel and bank stabilization. There have been few areas of concern
at this Site, and it is expected to remain stable throughout the remaining monitoring period. Please refer
to Appendix C for MY3 cross-section plots and summary data.
2.3 Stream Hydrology Assessment
An automated pressure transducer, “crest gage (CG)” or CG1, is being used to monitor for bankfull flow
events on Venable Creek. A manual crest gage located at XS7 is also being used to corroborate the
results of CG1. In MY4, three bankfull events were recorded on 1/9/2024, 9/17/2024, and 9/27/2024.
The manual crest gage and wracklines also provided evidence of bankfull events in April and October
2024.
Bankfull events were recorded during the previous two monitoring years; therefore, the site has
recorded bankfull events in three separate monitoring years. One more bankfull event recorded in
monitoring years MY5-MY7 is required to meet the performance criteria. The Site could potentially meet
criteria in MY5.
The 30th and 70th percentile data were collected from Mount Airy 2 W, WETS station for years 1971-
2023. As of October 2024, there has been an annual precipitation total of 48.87 inches per USGS
362416080334345 RAINGAGE AT ARARAT RIVER AT ARARAT, NC located around 4 miles from the Site.
The amount of precipitation the Site will sustain is likely to fall within the average range (44.32 inches-
53.25 inches per Table 11). The immediate watershed will have received multiple large rain events
recorded by the USGS gage. One such event recorded 4 inches of rain on a single day on 9/17/2024 and
a cumulative 3-inch rain event from the hurricane occurred approximately 10 days later between
9/25/2024- 9/27/2024. The 30-day rolling precipitation totals were higher than the average range for
both the months of September and October. Despite the large rain events, the Site has maintained
stability based on field observations in early October 2024 in both the restoration and enhancement
reaches and the channel condition will be further assessed during the MY5 survey. Please refer to

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL 2-2
Appendix D for hydrology summary data and gage plots, and the Supplemental Photographs located in
Appendix A for bankfull documentation at the manual crest gage.
2.4 Areas of Concern and Management Activity
Easement Exception and Boundary Inspection Follow Up
There are three easement exceptions that were documented at baseline conditions and will remain
on the CCPV maps throughout the seven-year monitoring.
All fences on the Site are intact and Wildlands will continue to closely monitor the easement and
fencing throughout the monitoring period. In response to the DMS boundary inspection, Wildlands
began addressing easement encroachments and installing missing signs during MY4. A
comprehensive boundary inspection and repair effort follow up will be completed in MY5 (tightening
fasteners, replacing nails etc.). Outside of those identified by DMS, no new encroachments were
observed. Please refer to Appendix F for the MY4 Boundary Inspection Comment Response Letter.
Stream and Vegetation Management Activities
The MY4 visual stream assessment took place in September and October 2024. All streams, culverts,
crossing areas, and BMPs have remained stable in MY4. The UT2B, UT3, and UT5 confluences to Venable
Creek flow subsurface during dry periods of the year and have remained stable. Wildlands will continue
to monitor all confluences. Wildlands plans to live-stake small erosional areas on the stream bank to
ensure stability as needed.
The MY4 visual vegetation assessment revealed that the open planting areas along the restoration
reaches have established native herbaceous vegetation and are largely free of invasive species. Invasive
treatments have been effective and reduced to 0.5% of the easement area using consistent treatments
in MY0-MY3. Wildlands consistently monitors the EII reaches of UT3 and UT6 for Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense) and will treat any re-sprouts in November 2024. Overall, herbaceous ground cover is
well established and planted stems throughout the Site are thriving.
Any future management activities will be documented in the MY5 report. Please refer to Appendix A for
stream stability tables and vegetation condition assessment, and supplemental photographs.
2.5 Monitoring Year 4 Summary
Overall, the Site has met the required visual assessment and hydrology success criteria for MY4.
Herbaceous ground cover and trees along the channel banks are establishing well throughout the
Site. While the Site sustained several large storms in MY4, the stream channels have remained
stable. Multiple bankfull events were documented in MY4 and the project is on track to meet the
required bankfull performance standards. A post-storm follow-up visual assessment was conducted
in October 2024 and the Site was found to have maintained stability. Areas of invasive species affect
<1% of the easement and re-sprouts treatments will be on-going on an as-needed basis. Minor
fencing encroachments will be rectified by the start of 2025 and no other easement encroachments
were present. Wildlands will continue to monitor the Site, and adaptive maintenance measures will
be implemented as necessary throughout the seven-year monitoring period to benefit the ecological
health and geomorphic stability of the Site.

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL 3-1
Section 3: METHODOLOGY
Geomorphic data was collected following the standards outlined in The Stream Channel Reference Site:
An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al., 1994) and in the Stream Restoration: A Natural
Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al., 2003). All Integrated Current Condition Mapping was recorded
using a Trimble handheld GPS with sub-meter accuracy and processed using ArcGIS. Crest gages, stream
gages, and groundwater gages are monitored quarterly. Monitoring instrument installation and
methods are in accordance with the 2016 NC IRT Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update
and NC DMS Annual Monitoring and Closeout Template (2015). Vegetation monitoring protocols
followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008).

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 4 Annual Report - FINAL 4-1
Section 4: REFERENCES
Doll, B.A., Grabow, G.L., Hall, K.A., Halley, J., Harman, W.A., Jennings, G.D., and Wise, D.E. 2003.
Stream Restoration a Natural Channel Design Handbook.
Harrelson, Cheryl C; Rawlins, C.L.; Potyondy, John P. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An
Illustrated Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest, and Range Experiment Station. 61 p.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2020. Vegetation Data Entry Tool and
Vegetation Plot Data Table. Raleigh, NC. https://ncdms.shinyapps.io/Veg_Table_Tool/
NCDMS. 2017. DMS Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements, and Content Guidance.
June 2017, Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services and Interagency Review Team Technical Workgroup. 2018.
Standard Measurement of the BHR Monitoring Parameter. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services and Interagency Review Team Technical Workgroup. 2021.
Pebble Count Data Requirements. Raleigh, NC.
NCDMS. 2009. Upper Yadkin Pee-Dee River Basin Restoration Priorities. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. 2015. North Carolina Wildlife Action Plan. Raleigh,
NC.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR), 2015. Surface Water Classifications.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/ps/csu/classifications.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Pagosa Springs, CO: Wildland Hydrology Books.
Simon, A. 1989. A model of channel response in disturbed alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and
Landforms 14(1):11-26.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)., October 2016. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. USACE,
NCDENR-DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resource Conservation District (NRCS), 2022.
WETS Station, Mount Airy 2 W, Surry County, NC.
https://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/climate/navigate_wets.html.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2023. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 3
Annual Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2022. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 2
Annual Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2021. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Monitoring Year 1
Annual Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2021. Honey Mill Mitigation Site As-built Baseline
Monitoring Report. DMS, Raleigh, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (Wildlands), 2020. Honey Mill Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan. DMS,
Raleigh, NC.

FIGURES

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

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

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

1
c
Figure 1b
Figure 1a
UT6
Figure 1. Current Condition Plan View Key
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Surry County, NC
¹0 250 500125 Feet
2018 Aerial Photography
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Design to As-Built Alignment Deviation
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
[Fence Line
[New Fence Line Installed 2022
Overhead Utility
Cross Sections
!A Manual Crest Gage
!A Automatic Crest Gage
!A Barotroll
GF BMP Photo Points
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY4)
Not Monitored
!A
!5
!5
!5
!5
!P
!P
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
XS3
X
S
2
XS
1
XS4
X
S
5
1
0
0
+
0
0
1
0
1
+
0
0
1
0
2
+
0
0
1
0
3
+
0
0
1
0
4
+
0
0
10
5
+
0
0
10
6
+
0
0
10
7
+
0
0
108+00
1
0
9
+
0
0
110+0
0
1
1
1
+
0
0
11
2
+
0
0
113+
0
0
1
1
4
+
0
0
309
+
0
0
310+00
200+00
201+00
20
2
+
0
0
PP1
PP2
PP3
PP4
PP5
PP6
Barotroll
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
10 ft. Farm Path Exception (MY0)
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

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

C
r
e
e
k
VP2
VP1
Figure 1a. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Surry County, NC
¹
2018 Aerial Photography
0 80 160 Feet
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
[Fence Line
Overhead Utility
Cross Sections
!A Barotroll
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
Easement Exception (MY0)
10 ft. Farm Path Exception
Crossing Exception
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY4)
Not Monitored
0 90 180 Feet
!A
!A
!A
!P
!P
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[
[
[
[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
XS6
X
S
7
XS8
1
0
9
+
0
0
110+0
0
1
1
1
+
0
0
11
2
+
0
0
113+
0
0
1
1
4
+
0
0
115+0
0
11
6
+
0
0
117
+
0
0
118+00
119
+
0
0
300+00
301+00302+00
303+00304
+
0
0
305+00
306+00
307+0
0
308+0
0
309
+
0
0
310+00
3
1
1
+
0
0
400+
0
0
401+00402+00
403+
0
0
404+00
405+00
406+00
407+
0
0
4
0
8
+
0
0
509+00
510+
0
0
51
1
+
0
0
100+00
PP5
PP6
PP13
PP12
PP10
PP9
PP8
PP11
PP18
PP19
MT1
PP7
PP14
PP15
Manual CG
Barotroll
CG1
X
S
9
XS10
UT2
UT2A
Reach 3
Reach 1
UT2B Figure 1b
10 ft. Farm Path Exception (MY0)
Crossing Exception
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
VP3
VP2
VP4
VP5
Reach 2
Reach 2
Figure 1b. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Surry County, NC
¹
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY4)
Not Monitored
Easement Exception (MY0)
10 ft. Farm Path Exception
Crossing Exception
[Fence Line
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
Cross Sections
!P Reach Breaks
!A Manual Crest Gage
!A Automatic Crest Gage
!A Barotroll
GF Photo Points
!A
!P
!P
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
XS6
11
7
+
0
0
118+00
11
9
+
0
0
120+00
12
1
+
0
0
12
2
+
0
0
1
2
3
+
0
0
1
2
4
+
0
0
12
5
+
0
0
126+
0
0
1
2
7
+
0
0
128
+
0
0
500+00
501+00
502+00 503+00
504+00 505+0
0
506+
0
0
507+
0
0
508+0
0
509+0
0
510
+
0
0
51
1
+
0
0
600+0
0
601+
0
0
602
+
0
0
603+00 604
+
0
0
100+00
PP17
PP16
PP18
PP19
PP20
PP21
PP22
MT2
PP7
CG1
XS9
XS10
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
UT4
UT3
Reach 3
Reach 1
Reach 4
Figure 1c
VP4
VP6
VP5
Reach 2
Figure 1c. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Surry County, NC
¹0 100 200 Feet
2018 Aerial Photography
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Existing Wetlands
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Cross Sections
Bankfull
[Fence Line
[New Fence Line Installed 2022
!A Automatic Crest Gage
GF BMP Photo Points
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY4)
Not Monitored
Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY4)
Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts)
!5
!5
!P
GF
GFGF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[[[[[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[[[
[
[
[
[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[[[[[[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

C
r
e
e
k
XS1
1
12
7
+
0
0
128+
0
0
12
9
+
0
0
13
0
+
0
0
131
+
0
0
132+00
13
3
+
0
0
13
4
+
0
0
135+
0
0
1
3
6
+
0
0
137
+
0
0
1
3
8
+
0
0
139+00
140+00
700+00
70
1
+
0
0
702+00
703
+
0
0
7
0
4
+
0
0
800+00
801+00
802+00
803+00
804+00 805+00
PP22
MT2
PP24
PP23
PP25
PP26PP27
PP28
PP29
UT6
UT5
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 4
VP7
VP8
VP9
Figure 1d. Current Condition Plan View
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Surry County, NC
¹
2018 Aerial Photography
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Internal Crossing
Existing Wetlands
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement II
No Stream Credit
Design to As-Built Alignment Deviation
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
[Fence Line
[New Fence Line Installed 2022
Overhead Utility
Cross Sections
GF BMP Photo Points
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY4)
Not Monitored
Vegetation Areas of Concern (MY4)
Chinese Privet (Re-sprouts)
0 90 180 Feet

APPENDIX A. Visual Assessment Data

Table 4a. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
Venable Creek R2
141
282
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are providing
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping,
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
grade across the sill. 5 5 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of
influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100%
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
Venable Creek R3
1,647
3,294
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are providing
habitat.
0 100.0%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping,
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
grade across the sill. 15 15 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of
influence does not exceed 15%. 18 18 100%
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As-built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank
Totals:
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank
Totals:
Structure
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As-built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Table 4b. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
UT1
273
546
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are providing
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping,
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
grade across the sill. 6 6 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of
influence does not exceed 15%. 4 4 100%
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
UT2 R2
342
684
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are providing
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping,
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
grade across the sill. 15 15 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of
influence does not exceed 15%. 1 1 100%
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As-built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank
Totals:
Structure
Totals:
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As-built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank
Table 4c. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
UT3 R2
306
612
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are providing
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping,
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
grade across the sill. 11 11 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of
influence does not exceed 15%. 5 5 100%
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
UT6 R2
205
410
Surface Scour/
Bare Bank
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from
poor growth and/or surface scour.0 100%
Toe Erosion
Bank toe eroding to the extent that bank failure
appears likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are
modest, appear sustainable and are providing
habitat.
0 100%
Bank Failure Fluvial and geotechnical - rotational, slumping,
calving, or collapse.0 100%
0 100%
Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of
grade across the sill. 6 6 100%
Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of
influence does not exceed 15%. N/A N/A N/A
Structure
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As-built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank
Totals:
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Assessed Stream Length
Assessed Bank Length
Bank
Totals:
Structure
% Stable,
Performing as
Intended
Major Channel Category Metric
Number
Stable,
Performing
as Intended
Total
Number in
As-built
Amount of
Unstable
Footage
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
Planted Acreage 4.97
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
(ac)
Combined
Acreage
% of Planted
Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.0.10 0 0%
Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count
criteria.0.10 0 0%
00%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 0 0%
0.0 0%
Date of visual assessment: October 10, 2024
Conservation Easement Acreage 20.20
Vegetation Category Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
(ac)
Combined
Acreage
% of
Easement
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern
Invasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will
therefore be calculated against the total easement acreage. Include species with the
potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term or
community structure for existing communities. Invasive species included in
summation above should be identified in report summary.
0.10 0.1 0.5%
Easement Encroachment Areas*
Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists of
any violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common
encroachments are mowing, cattle access, vehicular access. Encroachment has no
threshold value as will need to be addressed regardless of impact area.
none
* The fence line encroaches slightly into the easement at two corners but is too small to quantify in acres per the mapping threshold. The fence line encroachment affects less that 1% of the easement
and will be rectified by the start of MY5. No other encroachments observed on the site.
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Total
Cumulative Total
<1%

STREAM PHOTOGRAPHS

PHOTO POINT 1 Venable Creek R1 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 1 Venable Creek R1 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 2 UT1 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 2 UT1 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 3 Venable Creek R2 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 3 Venable Creek R2 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 4 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 4 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 5 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 5 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 6 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 6 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 7 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 7 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 8 UT2 R1 Stream Start – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 8 UT2 R1 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 9 UT2 R1 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 9 UT2 R1 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 10 UT2 R1 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 10 UT2 R1 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 11 UT2A – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 11 UT2A – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 12 UT2A – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 12 UT2A – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 R2 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 13 UT2 R2 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R2 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 14 UT2 R2 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 15 UT2 R2 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 16 UT3 R1 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 16 UT3 R1 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 17 UT3 R1– downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R2 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 18 UT3 R2 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 19 Venable Creek R3 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 19 Venable Creek R3 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 20 UT4 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 20 UT4 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 21 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 21 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 22 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 22 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 23 UT5 Stream Start– upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 23 UT5 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 24 UT5 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 24 UT5 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 25 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 25 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 26 Venable Creek R4 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 26 Venable Creek R4 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 27 UT6 R2 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 27 UT6 R2 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 28 UT6 R1 – upstream (04/22/2024) PHOTO POINT 28 UT6 R1 – downstream (04/22/2024)

PHOTO POINT 29 Venable Creek R4 Ford Crossing – (04/22/2024)

MATURE TREE PHOTOGRAPHS
Mature Tree Photo Point 1 (Northeast) – Venable Creek Reach
3, beginning to bud out (04/23/2024)
Mature Tree Photo Point 2 (Northeast) – Venable Creek Reach 4
(04/23/2024)

CULVERT CROSSING & BMP PHOTOGRAPHS

Venable Creek R1 Culvert – Outlet (04/22/2024) Venable Creek R2 Crossing - Looking Upstream (04/22/2024)

Venable Creek R2 Crossing - Looking Downstream (04/22/2024) Venable Creek R4 Crossing - Looking Upstream (04/22/2024)

Venable Creek R4 Crossing - Looking Downstream (04/22/2024) UT1 Culvert – Outlet (04/22/2024)

UT2 Crossing Culvert – Inlet (04/22/2024) UT2 Crossing Culvert – Outlet (04/22/2024)

UT3 BMP – Looking Downstream (04/22/2024) UT4 BMP – Looking Downstream (04/22/2024)

UT6 BMP – Looking Downstream (04/22/2024)

SUPPLEMENTAL PHOTOGRAPHS

UT2B- channel confluence with mainstem looking upstream
(04/22/2024)
UT3- Subsurface flow to Venable Creek stable upstream
(04/22/2024)
UT5- channel confluence with mainstem looking upstream (09/19/2024) R3VC - wrackline evidence of bankfull event (04/22/2024)
VC R3- bankfull event recorded at manual gage (04/22/2024)VC R3- bankfull event recorded at manual gage (10/17/2024)

APPENDIX B. Vegetation Plot Data
Vegetation assessment and analysis not required in Monitoring Year 4
Data Included from Monitoring Year 3

Table 6a. Vegetation Plot Data
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 ‐ 2024
5
2021‐03‐01
2022‐03‐21
2023‐08‐08
0.0247
Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total Planted Total
Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 111122 1111 33
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1111
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FACU 11331111
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW 22
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 332211 112211 11
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1 112211
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 1 1 11222211
Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU 3 3 1 1 111122 11
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC 1111
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Shrub UPL
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 112233222222221112
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU 1 1
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 1 1 1 1 2222
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC 11
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 2211 2233
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL 1111 22
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW 22 11
Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1 1 1 1
Sum Performance Standard 12 12 9 9 12 12 9 9 10 10 11 11 13 13 8 8 10 11
Post Mitigation 
Plan Species Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 2 2 1 1 2211
Sum Proposed Standard 12 12 9 9 14 14 9 9 11 11 11 11 13 13 10 10 11 12
12 9 12 9 10 11 13 8 11
486 364 486 364 405 445 526 324 445
777687867
25 22 21 22 18 18 15 30 25
235445325
000000000
12 9 14 9 11 11 13 10 12
486 364 567 364 445 445 526 405 486
778697878
25 22 21 22 18 18 15 30 25
235445335
000000000
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species 
that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular 
font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation 
plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems.
Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Indicator 
Status
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F Veg Plot 4 F
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Table 6b. Vegetation Plot Data
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4‐ 2024
5
2021‐03‐01
2022‐03‐21
2023‐08‐08
0.0247
Veg Plot 1 R Veg Plot 2 R Veg Plot 3 R Veg Plot 4 R Veg Plot 5 R
Total Total Total Total Total
Acer negundo boxelder Tree FAC 3 1 1
Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree FAC 1 3
Carya cordiformis bitternut hickory Tree FACU
Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub FACW
Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree FAC 3
Hamamelis virginiana American witchhazel Tree FACU 1 1
Lindera benzoin northern spicebush Tree FAC 1
Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree FACU 2 2 2
Morus rubra red mulberry Tree FACU 1
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree FAC
Oxydendrum arboreum sourwood Shrub UPL 2
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree FACW 3 5 5 2
Prunus serotina black cherry Tree FACU
Quercus alba white oak Tree FACU 2 1 2
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree FAC
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree FACU 1 6
Salix nigra black willow Tree OBL
Ulmus americana American elm Tree FACW
Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree FAC 1
Sum Performance Standard 8 7 8 12 17
Post Mitigation 
Plan Species Alnus serrulata hazel alder Tree OBL 2 4
Sum Proposed Standard 8 9 12 12 17
8781217
324 283 324 486 688
54 447
38 33 42 42 35
32 432
00 000
8 9 12 12 17
324 364 486 486 688
55 547
38 33 42 42 35
33 432
00 000
1). Bolded species are proposed for the current monitoring year, italicized species are not approved, and a regular font indicates that the species has been approved.
2). The "Species Included in Approved Mitigation Plan" section contains only those species that were included in the original approved mitigation plan. The "Post Mitigation Plan Species" section includes species 
that are being proposed through a mitigation plan addendum for the current monitoring year (bolded) , species that have been approved in prior monitoring years through a mitigation plan addendum (regular 
font), and species that are not approved (italicized).
3). The "Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" section is derived only from stems included in the original mitigation plan, whereas the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" includes data from mitigation 
plan approved, post mitigation plan approved, and proposed stems.
Stems/Acre
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Post Mitigation 
Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Current Year Stem Count
Indicator 
Status
Planted Acreage
Date of Initial Plant
Date(s) of Supplemental Plant(s)
Date(s) Mowing
Date of Current Survey
Plot size (ACRES)
Scientific Name Common Name Tree/Shrub
Species 
Included in 
Approved 
Mitigation Plan
Current Year Stem Count
Stems/Acre
Mitigation Plan 
Performance 
Standard
Species Count
Dominant Species Composition (%)
Average Plot Height (ft.)
% Invasives
Scientific Name Performance Standard Approval MY2 Stems MY3 Stems
Ilex opaca Approved Mit Plan 4 4
Lindera benzoin Approved Mit Plan 2 1
Platanus occidentalis Approved Mit Plan 3 3
Oxydendrum arboreum Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Liriodendron tulipifera Approved Mit Plan 3 2
Fagus grandifolia Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Diospyros virginiana Approved Mit Plan 0 1
TOTAL STEM COUNT: 14 13
TOTAL SPECIES COUNT: 66
AVERAGE PLOT HEIGHT (Meters) 0.5 0.7
Scientific Name Performance Standard Approval MY2 Stems MY3 Stems
Morus rubra Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Carpinus carolinana Approved Mit Plan 2 1
Cornus florida Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Ulmus americana Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Lindera benzoin Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Acer negundo Approved Mit Plan 2 1
Prunus serotina Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Platanus occidentalis Approved Mit Plan 1 1
Quercus rubra Approved Mit Plan 1 1
TOTAL STEM COUNT: 11 9
TOTAL SPECIES COUNT: 99
AVERAGE PLOT HEIGHT (Meters) 0.6 0.7
Table 6c.  Forested Vegetation Transect Table
Vegetation Plot Data 
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 ‐ 2024
Transect 1: UT2
Transect 2: UT4
*Transects represent understory planting and are not held to density or height requirements
per MY1 IRT site walk comments (8/16/2022).
Table 7.  Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4‐ 2024
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
486 2 7 0 364 3 7 0 486*5 7 0
526 2 8 0 364 3 7 0 405*4 6 0
486 2 7 0 405 2 8 0 364 3 5 0
567 2 8 0 526 2 10 0 445 2 6 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
364 4 6 0 405*4 8 0 445 5 7 0
324 3 5 0 405*2 8 0 283 3 6 0
202 2 4 0 324 2 7 0 324 2 6 0
567 2 9 0 364 2 8 0 607 2 10 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
526 3 8 0 324*2 6 0 445*5 7 0
486 3 9 0 364 2 6 0 486*3 6 0
526 2 9 0 486 2 8 0 243 2 4 0
526 2 9 0 607 2 9 0 405 2 9 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
324 3 5 0 283*2 4 0 324*4 4 0
324 5 4 0 607*4 5 0 405*2 5 0
81 2 2 0 445 2 10 0 405 2 5 0
445 2 7 0 567 2 11 0 445 2 8 0
Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives Stems/Ac. Av. Ht. (ft) # Species % Invasives
486 3 4 0 688 2 7 0
445*2 7 0 729 2 10 0
405 2 4 0 607 2 8 0
567 2 10 0 688 2 8 0
Each monitoring year represents a different plot for the random vegetation plot "groups". Random plots are denoted with an R, and fixed plots with an F. 
1. Veg Plot Group 2R met criteria in MY3 with a density of 364 Stems/Ac. when "Post‐Mitigation Plan" IRT approved species (including March 2022 supplemental stems) were included in table 7.
*For stem densities in plots that inlcude post‐mitigation plan approved species planted during the March 2022 supplemental planting please refer to table 7 for the "Post Mitigation Plan Performance Standard" referenced in the text. 
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Veg Plot 1 F Veg Plot 2 F Veg Plot 3 F
Veg Plot 4 F Veg Plot 5 F Veg Plot 6 F
Veg Plot 7 F Veg Plot 8 F Veg Plot 9 F
Veg Plot Group 1 R Veg Plot Group 2 R1 Veg Plot Group 3 R
Veg Plot Group 4 R Veg Plot Group 5 R
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Vegetation Performance Standards Summary Table
Monitoring Year 2
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 1
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
Monitoring Year 3
Monitoring Year 0
Monitoring Year 7
Monitoring Year 5
APPENDIX C. Stream Geomorphology Data
Stream assessment and analysis not required in Monitoring Year 4
Data Included from Monitoring Year 3
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Parameter
Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)1 10.5 10.8 2 1 1 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft)1 90 113 2 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1.6 1.7 2 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 2.2 2.3 2 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 16.9 18.1 2 1 1 1 1
Width/Depth Ratio 1 6.1 6.9 2 1 1 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio1 1 8.6 10.5 2 1 1 1 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1.3 1.6 2 1 1 1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 2 1 1 1 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2
Parameter
Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 1 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 1 1 1 1 1
Width/Depth Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 1 1 1 1 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
Sinuosity
Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2
Parameter
Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n Min Max n
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)1 14.6 15.8 3 1 1 1 1
Floodprone Width (ft)1 93 104 3 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)1 1.1 1.2 3 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)1 1.8 2.0 3 1 1 1 1
Bankfull Cross-sectional Area (ft2)1 1 16.0 19.4 3 1 1 1 1
Width/Depth Ratio 1 12.8 14.2 3 1 1 1 1
Entrenchment Ratio1 1 6.0 6.7 3 1 1 1 1
Bank Height Ratio 1 3 1 1 1 1
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull 1 3 1 1 1 1
Rosgen Classification
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)78 100 3
Sinuosity
Bankfull/Channel Slope (ft/ft)2
1. ER for the baseline/monitoring parameters are based on the width of the cross-sect
2. Channel slope is calculated from the surface of the channel bed rather than water surface.
(---): Data was not provided, N/A: Not Applicable
14.8
33
0.7
5.0
1.0
17.7
1.0
19.0
6.2
51
0.5
0.7
2.8
13.5
8.2
1.0
6.2
1.0
14.8
9.3
57
0.5
0.8
4.8
17.8
6.1
20.2
11.1
1.0
17.1
12.1
75
0.9
1.6
11.0
1.0
2.0+
1.0-1.1
24.1
5
---
1.4+
1.0-1.1
8.5
11.2
5.6
11
0.5
---
2.6
12.1
9.5
4.9
10
0.4
---
1.9
12.3
2.0+
1.0-1.1
3.1
1.0-1.1
---
11.5
25
1.0
---
11.1
11.8
2.2+
1.0-1.1
16.4
13.8
1.0-1.1
---
15.6
34
1.1
---
17.3
14.1
8
1.1
3.7
2.6
8.5
15.0
6.4
1.5
3.1
1.4
30
1.1
---
24.1
4.2
27
0.9
1.1
3.8
4.7
9.5
4.0
11
0.3
0.4
1.2
12.7
2.7
1.01.6
40.6 13.3
8.7
69
1.1
1.6
9.8
7.6
10.6
46
1.5
2.0
15.6
7.2
0.0245
B4
4.5
15.0
68
0.0152 0.0232 0.0440 0.0387 0.0869
1.03 1.31 1.20 1.05 1.05 1.05
142 54 24 12 19
C4 C4b B4 B4 A4
6.6
0.4
3.0
15.013.4
1.3
2.1
As-Built/ Baseline
Venable Creek R2 Venable Creek R3 UT1 UT2 R2 UT3 R2 UT6 R2
0.0230 0.0140 0.0210 0.0380 0.0340 0.0822
1.08 1.29 1.14 1.02 1.02 1.00
75 83 52 10 6 4
B4 C4 C4b B4 B4 A4
0.0870
Pre-Existing Condition
Venable Creek R2
E4
75
1.08
0.0190
Venable Creek R3
E/C4
83
1.14
0.0136
Design
Venable Creek R2 Venable Creek R3 UT1 UT2 R2 UT3 R2 UT6 R2
1.01
2.1
UT1 UT2 R2
652
UT6 R2
A4
0.8
4
C4b
UT3 R2
4.3
E4b
10
E4b
3.7
0.0212 0.0352
1.471.04
2.7
1.6
7.9
24.7
2.0+2.2+
0.3
1.2
1.18
0.0369
Table 9. Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross-Section)
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1039.2 1039.3 1039.3 1039.3 1034.6 1034.7 1034.7 1034.7
Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1037.6 1037.5 1037.6 1037.7 1037.6 1037.7 1037.7 1037.8 1032.5 1032.6 1032.6 1032.4
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1039.7 1039.7 1039.7 1039.7 1039.2 1039.3 1039.3 1039.3 1034.6 1034.7 1034.5 1034.6
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.1 2.2 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.2
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)18.1 16.7 17.0 14.5 11.0 11.1 10.7 10.5 20.2 19.3 18.5 19.1
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1024.1 1024.0 1024.1 1024.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1021.4 1021.6 1021.3 1021.5 1022.3 1022.2 1022.3 1022.2 1013.1 1013.0 1013.1 1013.0
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1024.7 1024.8 1024.7 1024.7 1024.1 1024.0 1024.1 1024.1 1016.3 1016.3 1016.3 1016.3
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)3.3 3.2 3.5 3.1 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.9 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.3
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)33.4 33.6 35.9 34.1 17.1 18.1 17.5 18.3 33.3 35.0 35.9 36.1
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 1015.9 1015.9 1015.9 1015.9 1020.0 1020.4 1020.4 1020.4 1011.6 1011.6 1011.6 1011.6
Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1013.9 1013.9 1013.8 1013.8 1019.1 1019.4 1019.3 1019.2 1009.8 1009.8 1009.9 1009.8
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1015.9 1015.9 1015.8 1015.8 1020.0 1020.1 1020.1 1020.1 1011.6 1011.7 1011.7 1011.5
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)2.0 2.0 2.1 2.1 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 1.8
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)19.4 18.5 18.6 19.9 4.8 2.9 3.1 2.9 16.0 16.8 16.7 15.0
Dimension and Substrate Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-Bankfull1 Area 1011.9 1012.0 1012.0 1012.0 998.6 998.7 998.7 998.7
Bank Height Ratio - Based on AB Bankfull1 Area 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.9
Thalweg Elevation (ft) 1011.2 1011.2 1011.2 1011.2 997.9 998.1 998.0 998.0
LTOB2 Elevation (ft)1011.9 1011.9 1011.9 1011.9 998.6 998.6 998.6 998.6
LTOB2 Max Depth (ft)0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.7
LTOB2 Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2.8 2.4 2.2 2.0 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.6
1Bank Height Ratio (BHR) takes the As-built bankful area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent year's bankfull elevation.
N/A
N/A N/A
UT1 Cross-Section 1 Pool UT1 Cross-Section 2 Riffle
Venable Creek R3 Cross-Section 5 Riffle Venable Creek R3 Cross-Section 6 Pool
Venable Creek R2 Cross-Section 3 Riffle
Venable Creek R3 Cross-Section 7 Riffle
N/A N/A N/A
N/A
UT6 R2 Cross-Section 11 Riffle
Venable Creek R3 Cross-Section 4 Pool
UT2 R2 Cross-Section 8 Riffle
2LTOB Area and Max depth - These are based on the LTOB elevation for each years survey (The same elevation used for the LTOB in the BHR calculation). Area below the LTOB elevation will be used and tracked for each year as above. The difference between the LTOB elevation
and the thalweg elevation (same as in the BHR calculation) will be recroded and tracked above as LTOB max depth.
Venable Creek R3 Cross Section 9 Riffle
UT3 R2 Cross Section 10 Riffle
N/AN/A
N/AN/A
Bankfull Dimensions
14.5 x-section area (ft.sq.)
15.5 width (ft)
0.9 mean depth (ft)
2.0 max depth (ft)
16.6 wetted perimeter (ft)
0.9 hydraulic radius (ft)
16.5 width-depth ratio
Survey Date:06/2023
Field Crew:Wildlands Engineering
View Downstream
Cross-Section 1-UT1
Monitoring Year 3 - 2023
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Cross-Section Plots
1036
1038
1040
1042
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(
f
t
)
Width (ft)
803+64 Riffle
MY0 (03/2021)MY1 (12/2021)MY2 (06/2022)MY3 (06/2023)
Bankfull Bankfull (Based on MY0 Area)Floodprone Area

APPENDIX D. Hydrology Data

Reach MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027)
Venable Creek R3 None 11/6/2022
4/28/2023,
6/20/2023,
8/6/2023
1/9/2024,
9/17/3024,
9/27/2024
MY1 (2021) MY2 (2022) MY3 (2023) MY4 (2024) MY5 (2025) MY6 (2026) MY7 (2027)
Annual Precip Total
(Inches)1 35.67 46.89 46.22 48.87
WETS 30th
Percentile (Inches)44.25 44.09 44.19 44.32
WETS 70th
Percentile (Inches)53.30 53.12 53.16 53.25
Type of Year2 Average Average Average *
30th and 70th percentile rainfall data collected from WETS Station: MOUNT AIRY 2 W, NC for years 1971-2023. Updated to include each previous monitoring year into date range.
1. Precipitation data collected from USGS 362416080334345 RAINGAGE AT ARARAT RIVER AT ARARAT, NC. The gage is located approximately 4 miles from the Site.
2. Type of year refers to amount of rainfall in the current year compared to the average percentiles i.e. Below Average, Average, Above Average.
* Annual precipitation total was collected until 10/09/2024. Data will be updated in MY5.
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Table 10. Bankfull Events
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Table 11. Rainfall Summary
Recorded Bankfull Flow Events Plot
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
Pr
e
c
i
p
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

(
i
n
)
El
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
t
)
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Daily Precipitation Water Level Thalweg Bankfull 30-Day Rolling Precip Total 30th & 70th Percentile
Honey Mill: Crest Gage #1 (Venable Creek, Reach #3)

APPENDIX E. Project Timeline and Contact Information

Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 4 - 2024
Seed Mix Sources
Bare Roots
Live Stakes
Herbaceous Plugs
October 2022August 2022Year 2 Monitoring
Fencing Installation/ Repair
N/A
Mitigation Plan August 2019 - October 2020 October 2020
Final Design - Construction Plans September 2020 September 2020
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments March 2021 March 2021
Baseline Monitoring (Year 0)
Stream Survey March - June 2021 June 2021
Vegetation Survey March 2021
Remediation
Encroachment
N/A N/A
IRT MY1 Credit Release Site Walk
Stream Survey
Year 1 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Vegetation Survey December 2021
N/A
Table 12. Project Activity and Reporting History
Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Completion or Delivery
404 Permit September 2020 October 2020
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments1 February 2021 February 2021
Construction November 2020 - February 2021 February 2021
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project area1 February 2021 February 2021
September 2022
January 2022
Invasive Treatment
Encroachment
Encroachment
March- October 2021
Year 4 Monitoring
Stream Survey N/A N/A
Vegetation Survey N/A N/A
Year 3 Monitoring
Stream Survey June 2023
Vegetation Survey August 2023
Invasive Treatment May & July 2023
Invasive Treatment
June 2022
Vegetation Survey
Year 6 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Vegetation Survey
Year 5 Monitoring
Stream Survey
Vegetation Survey `
Remediation
Encroachment
January 2025
Encroachment N/A N/A
Vegetation Survey
Remediation
Remediation
Encroachment
November 2024
Fencing Encroachment Repairs September 2024, Winter 2024
Live Staking Winter 2024 March 2025
PO Box 1197
March 2022
704.332.7754
Construction Contractors Main Stream Earthworks, Inc.
631 Camp Dan Valley Rd
Designers Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Aaron Earley, PE, CFM 1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Encroachment
1Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed.
Table 13. Project Contact Table
Year 7 Monitoring
Stream Survey
October 2023
N/A N/A
October 2021
Monitoring, POC Ella Wickliff
[phone] x.121
Green Resource LLC
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
Wetland Plants Inc.
Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
Fremont, NC 27830
Seeding Contractor
Main Stream Earthworks, Inc.
631 Camp Dan Valley Rd
Reidsville, NC 27320
Reidsville, NC 27320
Planting Contractor Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
APPENDIX F. Correspondence

1

April 4, 2024
Mr. Aaron Earley, PE, CFM
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203

Subject: Boundary Inspection Report – MY4
Honey Mill Mitigation Site, Surry County, NC; DMS ID No. 100083

Aaron,

The MY4 boundary inspection was conducted by DMS on February 28, 2024. The inspection was conducted in
accordance with the DMS Property Checklist which included an office review of the project files and a site visit to
document site conditions. The entire easement boundary was inspected during the site visit to validate easement
integrity and identify any potential issues on the site. This report and attached .kmz map summarize the inspection
results but additional items may need to be identified and addressed during boundary maintenance and future
monitoring.

Office Review:

• The plat clearly depicted the conservation easement and numbered corners.
• No encroachments were noted in the MY3 report.
• Platted right of ways and the farm road modification were shown on the plat and supplemental documentation.

Field Inspection and Action Items:

• Please review the attached kmz map showing individual observations and repair recommendations. The repair
effort must include a comprehensive review of the boundary markings in addition to the inspection summary
provided in this report. Additional items will need to be added based on your comprehensive repair/inspection.
• The easement was generally well monumented and marked with #5 rebar with stamped aluminum caps and
witnessed with a nearby post. In-line signs were mostly present along the boundary, but several in-line markers
and a few corner posts could not be found and must be installed/located. Please install witness posts with signs
at all missing corners and in-line signage at a maximum spacing of 200 feet as indicated by the applicable DMS
standards “Survey Requirements for Full Delivery Projects 8/13/2013”. Any missing corner monuments must be
located or reinstalled if absent. Numerous signs require maintenance at locations where the fasteners have
turned loose and on trees where small nails have been driven flush to the tree. DMS recommends using 16d
aluminum nails for sign installation on trees which leave ample room for the trees to grow. Small roofing nails
appear to have been used to fasten signs to treated fence posts. Roofing nails have consistently proven to be
inadequate for this purpose and DMS recommends using screw type fasteners rated for exterior treated post
application.
• Fencing is suspected to be positioned within the conservation easement near corner 46, corner 57 and along line
57 between corners 74-75. Any fencing internal to the easement should be repositioned outside the easement to
minimize potential issues at closeout or for Stewardship.
• The missing witness post at platted corner #1 (Corner of Siloam Road and Little Mountain Church Road) should
be reinstalled if possible. If the corner is located within the active maintenance zone for the road and cannot be

2
reinstalled, please summarize the issue in your correspondence. The in-ground monumentation and aluminum
cap will need to be located or reinstalled if missing.

Let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.

Sincerely,
Kelly Phillips
Property Specialist
NCDEQ-DMS
610 East Center Avenue, Suite 301
Mooresville, NC 28115
Cell: [phone]

cc: R:\EEP PROJECT LIBRARY FILES\PROJECT DELIVERABLES(REPORTS)\FD PROJECTS\Honey Mill_7619_(#100083)\
4_T2_Cons_Ease\DMS Easement Inspections\MY4

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203
October 23, 2024

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

RE: Boundary Inspection Report- MY4
Honey Mill Mitigation Site, Surry County
Yadkin River CU 03040101
DMS Project ID No. 100083 / DEQ Contract #007619

Dear Mr. Phillips:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) has reviewed the Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) comments
from the Boundary Inspection Report for the Honey Mill Mitigation Site that were received on April 4,
2024. The report has been updated to reflect those comments. DMS’ comments are listed below in bold.
Wildlands’ responses to DMS’ comments are noted in italics.
DMS’ comment:
Office Review:
• The plat clearly depicted the conservation easement and numbered corners.
• No encroachments were noted in the MY3 report.
• Platted right of ways and the farm road modification were shown on the plat and supplemental
documentation.
Wildlands’ response: Noted, thank you.
DMS’ comment: Please review the attached kmz map showing individual observations and repair
recommendations. The repair effort must include a comprehensive review of the boundary markings in
addition to the inspection summary provided in this report. Additional items will need to be added
based on your comprehensive repair/inspection.
Wildlands’ response: The KMZ has been reviewed. A comprehensive boundary inspection and repair
effort will take place in MY5.
DMS’ comment: The easement was generally well monumented and marked with #5 rebar with
stamped aluminum caps and witnessed with a nearby post. In-line signs were mostly present along
the boundary, but several in-line markers and a few corner posts could not be found and must be
installed/located. Please install witness posts with signs at all missing corners and in-line signage at a
maximum spacing of 200 feet as indicated by the applicable DMS standards “Survey Requirements for
Full Delivery Projects 8/13/2013”. Any missing corner monuments must be located or reinstalled if
absent.
Wildlands’ response: By the start of 2025- In-line markers will be installed to meet the spacing
requirements and witness posts with signs will be installed at all missing corners per the DMS standards
“Survey Requirements for Full Delivery Projects 8/13/2013.”

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203
DMS’ comment: Numerous signs require maintenance at locations where the fasteners have turned
loose and on trees where small nails have been driven flush to the tree. DMS recommends using 16d
aluminum nails for sign installation on trees which leave ample room for the trees to grow. Small
roofing nails appear to have been used to fasten signs to treated fence posts. Roofing nails have
consistently proven to be inadequate for this purpose and DMS recommends using screw type
fasteners rated for exterior treated post application.
Wildlands’ response: By the start of 2025- sign fastenings will have been inspected and secured on all
signs.
DMS’ comment: Fencing is suspected to be positioned within the conservation easement near corner
46, corner 57 and along line 57 between corners 74-75. Any fencing internal to the easement should
be repositioned outside the easement to minimize potential issues at closeout or for Stewardship.
Wildlands’ response: Wildlands confirmed that the fencing between corners 74-75 was not within the CE.
New fencing installed in 2021 was installed within the CE at corner 57 and along line 57. Wildlands
relocated the fencing to outside the easement in September 2024. Wildlands will remove old fencing
within the CE near easement corner 46 by the start of 2025.
DMS’ comment: The missing witness post at platted corner #1 (Corner of Siloam Road and Little
Mountain Church Road) should be reinstalled if possible. If the corner is located within the active
maintenance zone for the road and cannot be reinstalled, please summarize the issue in your
correspondence. The in-ground monumentation and aluminum cap will need to be located or
reinstalled if missing.
Wildlands’ response: By the start of 2025- Wildlands will confirm it is possible to install a witness post
within the active maintenance zone for the road and install the missing witness post at platted corner #1.
Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Ella Wickliff
Environmental Scientist
[e-mail]

Wildlands Engineering, Inc.  phone [phone]  fax [phone]  1430 S. Mint Street, # 104  Charlotte, NC 28203
Fencing at corner 57 re-located outside of easement corner monument (September 2024)

MEETING NOTES

MEETING: MY1 Credit Release Site Walk
HONEY MILL Mitigation Site
Yadkin 03040101; Surry County, NC
DEQ Contract No. 7619
DMS Project No. 100083
Wildlands Project No. 005-02178

DATE: Tuesday, August 16, 2022

LOCATION: Little Mountain Church Road
Mt. Airy, NC

Attendees
Kim Browning, USACE
Erin Davis, NCDWR
Paul Wiesner, DMS
Kelly Phillips, DMS
Melonie Allen, DMS
Ella Wickliff, Wildlands
Sam Kirk, Wildlands
Aaron Earley, Wildlands

Meeting Notes
The meeting began at 8:30AM. Attendees discussed the site conditions and issues noted in the MY1 reports as
summarized in the Opening Remarks section below. From there, the group walked the farm road to UT2
crossing, along Venable Creek to the restoration/enhancement transition, and then on to the UT3 confluence
and UT1. The meeting concluded at 10:00 AM.
1) Opening Remarks
a) Erin asked that all in-stream vegetation treatment be called out in the MY reports.
b) Kim asked if all the replanted were in JD wetlands. Ella replied that a portion of the replanted areas were
wetlands.
c) Kim asked if understory plantings are being monitored. Ella replied that mobile plots were moved to
understory areas. Kim suggested that periodic transects be done as well.
d) Regarding CG1, which hasn’t recorded a bankfull event: Erin remarked that they normally see them
installed in pools and asked how often readings were taken. Ella responded every 3 hours. Ella said that
a manual gage was added to XS7 near CG1. Kim suggested that CG1 be moved to a different location in
the same reach and leave the manual gage at the current location. The addition of a manual gage and
relocation of crest gage should be noted in the MY2 report. The new crest gage location is noted in the
attached figure.
e) Aaron said that the eastern landowner plan on returning cattle to his fields. The landowner knows that
fencing must be repaired and installed prior to cattle returning. Aaron was meeting a fence crew after

Wildlands Engineering, Inc. page 2
HONEY MILL Mitigation Site
August 16, 2022 MY1 Credit Release Site Walk Meeting Notes
the meeting to discuss repairs and installation. Paul asked that installation and repairs dates be included
in the MY2 report.
f) Paul asked that full easement boundary inspection and documentation be included in the MY2 report.
g) When walking UT2, Erin noted that the aggradation noted in the MY1 report seems to have washed
away and not be a problem any longer.
h) Kim asked if livestock were present on the other side of Siloam Road at the upstream end of UT1. Aaron
replied affirmatively.
i) Paul and Aaron clarified that at the easement exception areas (farm road and UT2 culvert crossing), the
easement was not revised. The exceptions were documented in the baseline report.
j) Erin asked if the UT2 and UT3 confluence headcuts were stable and being monitored. Ella and Aaron
replied that the headcuts have not moved and photo points were added at the confluences.
k) Ella asked for confirmation on mobile plot locations. Erin replied that they seem to be well distributed
but to be sure to include invasive documentation in the monitoring report.
l) Kim asked that the downed tree inside the easement on UT2 shole be moved out of the easement.
m) Kim asked that vegetation be moved or cut back at photo points so the channel condition is obvious. She
suggested that photo points at culvert crossings be taken upstream, downstream, and across the
crossing. Ella replied that is how photos are typically taken at crossings and an additional photo point
was added at the Ford Crossing. Photo points will be updated in the MY2 report.
n) Kim requested that photo points be added at BMPs. The attached figure shows the additional BMP
photo points.
o) Kim asked that an eye be kept on the spring seep in the right floodplain of Venable Creek.
p) Erin suggested that matting and live stakes be added to the Venable Creek meander bend just upstream
of UT3 confluence.
q) On UT2, Kim suggested that a transect be added upstream of the culvert crossing in the wooded area to
monitoring understory planting. She said that understory planting will not be held to density or height
requirements. Erin added that they are open to understory planting suggestions on materials/methods
that produce the best results. The monitoring results will be evaluated to assess the viability and
monitoring approach for future understory planting plans. The transect locations are shown in the
attached figure.
r) Paul asked that the minutes of this meeting be included as an appendix to the MY2 report.
s) Kim confirmed that credits can be released as proposed.

These meeting minutes were prepared by Aaron Earley August 25, 2022. and represent the authors’ interpretation of events.

[
[
[

[

[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[

[
[
[
[

[
[

[
[
[[[
[[

[
[

[

[
[

[

[
[
[
[
[

[
[ [ [ [
[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[[
[
[ [ [ [[

[

[

[
[[[
[
[

[

[
[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[
[
[
[

[
[

[
[

[
[[[[[

[

[

[

[

[

[

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

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[
[[

[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[

[

[

[
[
[
[

[
[

[
[

[

[

[
[[

[

[

[
[
[[
[
[[

[

[

[
[

[
[[

[
[[
[

[

[

[

[
[

[

[
[

[

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

[

[

[
[

[
!A
!A
!A
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GF
GFGF
GF
GFGF
GF
GF
GF
!5
!5
!5
!5!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!5
!P
!P
!P
!P
!P
!P
UT6
Ve
n
a
b
l
e

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

C
r
e
e
k
10 ft. Farm Path Encroachment
Crossing EncroachmentGF
GF
GF
GF
GF
1
3
2
4
7
6
5
8
9
MP5
MP2
MP1
MP3
MP4
MP3
MP1
MP2
MP4
MP5
Figure MY1 Credit Release Site Walk Meeting Notes
Honey Mill Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100083
Monitoring Year 1 - 2021
Surry County, NC
¹0 250 500125 Feet
2018 Aerial Photography
Conservation Easement
Project Parcels
Existing Wetlands
Internal Crossing
Vegetation Plots - Permanent (MY1)
Meets Criteria
Did Not Meet Criteria
Vegetation Plots - Mobile
MY1
MY2 (proposed)
Vegetation Areas of Concern
Multiflora Rose, Barrberry, Privet
Privet
MY1 Supplemental Planting
Easement Encroachment
10 ft. Farm Path Encroachment
Pipe
Stream Restoration
Stream Enhancement I
Stream Enhancement II
No Credit
Alignment Deviation
Bankfull
Non-Project Streams
[Fence Line
Overhead Utility
Cross Sections
!A Manual Crest Gage at XS7
!A Automatic Crest Gage moved in MY2
!A Barotroll
GF Photo Points
!P Reach Breaks
Additional Features from IRT site walk
Woody Stem Supplemental Planting Vegetation Transects
GF MY2 BMP and Ford Crossing Photos
!A Manual Crest Gage at XS7
!A Automatic Crest Gage moved in MY2