The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20110766 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20170119YEAR 5 of 7 (2016) ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT HERMAN DAIRY STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE Alexander County, North Carolina DMS Project No. 94642 Full Delivery Contract No. 003271 Catawba River Basin Cataloging Unit and Targeted Local Watershed 03050101120030 Submitted to: North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services Raleigh, North Carolina December 2016 YEAR 5 of 7 (2016) ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT HERMAN DAIRY STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION SITE Alexander County, North Carolina DMS Project No. 94642 Full Delivery Contract No. 003271 Catawba River Basin Cataloging Unit and Targeted Local Watershed 03050101120030 Prepared By: Restoration Systems, LLC 1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 and Axiom Environmental, Inc. 218 Snow Avenue Raleigh, North Carolina 27603 Submitted to: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services Raleigh, North Carolina December 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................................1 2.0 METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Vegetation Assessment................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Stream Assessment....................................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Wetland Assessment..................................................................................................................... 4 2.4 Biotic Community Changes.......................................................................................................... 4 3.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................. 5 wfllll &f Figure1. Site Location................................................................................................................ Appendix A Figures 2, 2A -2B. Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View ............................................... Appendix A Figure E1. Annual Climatic Data vs. 30 -year Historic Data........................................................Appendix E APPENDICES APPENDIX A. FIGURES Figure 1. The Site Location Figures 2, 2A -2B. Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View APPENDIX B. GENERAL TABLES Table 1. Project Restoration Components Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Table 3. Project Contacts Table Table 4. Project Attributes Table APPENDIX C. VEGETATION ASSESSMENT DATA Table 5. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table Table 6. CVS Vegetation Metadata Table Table 7. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species Vegetation Plot Photographs APPENDIX D. STREAM ASSESSMENT DATA Stream Station Photos Table 8a -8d. Visual Assessment Tables Table 9. Verification of Bankfull Events Tables IOa- IOc. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables 11 a-11 e. Monitoring Data -Dimensional Data Summary Longitudinal Profile Plots Cross-section Plots Substrate Plots 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Table of Contents page i Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site APPENDICES (continued) APPENDIX E. HYDROLOGY DATA Table 12. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment 2016 Groundwater Gauge Graphs Figure E1. Annual Climatic Data vs. 30 -year Historic Data APPENDIX F. BENTHIC DATA 2016 Benthic Data Lab Results 2016 Habitat Assessment Field Datasheets 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Table of Contents page ii 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Restoration Systems, LLC has established the Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site (Site) located approximately 1.5 miles northwest of Taylorsville, in central Alexander County within 14 -digit Cataloging Unit and Targeted Local Watershed 03050101120030 of the Catawba River Basin. The Site encompasses approximately 31.12 acres of land previously used for agricultural row crop production and the spray application of sludge from a lagoon associated with a dairy cattle operation. The Site was identified to assist the Department of Mitigation Services (DMS) in meeting its stream and wetland restoration goals. This report (compiled based on DMS Guidance and Content Requirements for DMS Monitoring Reports Version 1.2.1 dated 12/1/09) serves as the Year 5 (2016) annual monitoring report. The primary goals and objectives of this stream and wetland restoration project focused on improving water quality, enhancing flood attenuation, and restoring wildlife habitat and will be accomplished by the following. 1. Removing nonpoint sources of pollution associated with agricultural production including a) cessation of broadcasting sludge, fertilizer, pesticides, and other agricultural materials into and adjacent to Site streams/wetlands and b) restoration of a forested riparian buffer adjacent to streams and wetlands to treat surface runoff. 2. Reducing sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters through a) reduction of bank erosion, vegetation maintenance, and plowing to Site streams and wetlands and b) restoration of a forested riparian buffer adjacent to Site streams and wetlands. 3. Reestablishing stream stability and the capacity to transport watershed flows and sediment loads by restoring stable dimension, pattern, and profile supported by natural in -stream habitat and grade/bank stabilization structures. 4. Promoting floodwater attenuation by a) reconnecting bankfull stream flows to the abandoned floodplain, b) restoring secondary, entrenched tributaries thereby reducing floodwater velocities within smaller catchment basins, c) restoring depressional floodplain wetlands to increase the floodwater storage capacity within the Site, and d) revegetating Site floodplains to increase frictional resistance on floodwaters crossing Site floodplains. 5. Improving aquatic habitat by enhancing stream bed variability and the use of in -stream structures. 6. Providing a terrestrial wildlife corridor and refuge in an area extensively developed for agricultural production. 7. Restoring and reestablishing natural community structure, habitat diversity, and functional continuity. 8. Enhancing and protecting the Site's full potential of stream and wetland functions and values in perpetuity. Vegetation Success Criteria: An average density of 320 stems per acre of Characteristic Tree Species must be surviving in the first three monitoring years. Subsequently, 290 Characteristic Tree Species per acre must be surviving in year 4, 260 Characteristic Tree Species per acre in year 5, and 210 Characteristic Tree Species per acre in year 7. No single volunteer species (most notably red maple, loblolly pine, and sweet gum) will comprise more than 20 percent of the total composition at years 3, 5, or 7. If this occurs, remedial procedures/protocols outlined in the contingency plan will be implemented. During years 3, 5, and 7, no single volunteer species, comprising over 20 percent of the total composition, may be more than twice the height of the planted trees. If this occurs, remedial procedures outlined in the contingency plan will be implemented. If, within the first 3 years, any species exhibits greater than 50 percent mortality, the species will either be replanted or an acceptable replacement species will be planted in its place as specified in the contingency plan. Vegetation Results: Vegetation sampling across the Site was above the required average density with 441 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) page 1 Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site planted stems per acre surviving. In addition, 9 out of 10 individual plots exceeded success criteria, with plot 4 being one stem shy of the required stem density. However, when including natural recruits of sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) and elm (Ulmus sp.), plot 4 exceeds success criteria. The number of native tree and shrub species observed in plots ranged from three (Plot 3) to seven (Plot 5), with 12 total native planted species observed. Treatment for invasive species, primarily Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), was initiated prior to construction and has continued as necessary throughout the life of the project. The treatments are conducted in order to restore species composition of Site existing forested areas to native, natural communities. The primary invasive treatment areas are denoted on Figures 2 and 2A-213 (Appendix A). Replanting occurred during the winter of 2013/2014 in the southeastern portion of the Site between UT2 and UT3 with 3 -gallon containerized trees as follows. Overall, newly planted stems appear vigorous, and stem counts have risen well -above success criteria in this area. 175 Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera) 150 Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana) 175 American elm (Ulmus americana) 500 TOTAL Stream Success Criteria: Success criteria for stream restoration will include 1) successful classification of the reach as a functioning stream system (Rosgen 1996) and 2) channel variables indicative of a stable stream system. The channel profile will be measured on 3000 linear feet of stream and 20 cross-sections on an annual basis in order to track changes in channel geometry, profile, or substrate. These data will be utilized to determine the success in restoring stream channel stability. Specifically, the width -to -depth ratio and bank - height ratios should be indicative of stability with minimal changes in cross-sectional area, channel width, and/or bank erosion along the monitoring reach. In addition, channel abandonment and/or shoot cutoffs must not occur and sinuosity values must remain relatively constant. Visual assessment of in -stream structures will be conducted to determine if failure has occurred. Failure of a structure may be indicated by collapse of the structure, undermining of the structure, abandonment of the channel around the structure, and/or stream flow beneath the structure. Stream Results: As a whole, monitoring measurements indicate there have been minimal changes in both the longitudinal profile and cross-sections as compared to as -built data. The as -built channel geometry compares favorably with the emulated, stable E/C type stream reach as set forth in the detailed mitigation plan and construction plans. Current monitoring has demonstrated dimension, pattern, and profile were stable over the course of the monitoring period. Pebble counts were performed at six cross sections (3 on UT 1, 2 on UT2, and 1 on UT3). These pebble counts provide a representative sample of the site substrate. Throughout the monitoring period, UT 1 has received a significant amount of fine sediment deposition as the result of upstream land uses, which include livestock pastures, dairy operations, and cleared riparian buffers. This fine sediment moves through the Site during high flow storm events; however, the dominant substrate in UT1 now appears to be sand. No additional stream problem areas were noted during Year 5 (2016) monitoring. Beaver activity has been observed onsite throughout the monitoring period, however no beaver dams or signs of recent beaver activity were observed during Year 5 (2016) monitoring. Hydrology Success Criteria: According to the Soil Survey of Alexander County, the growing season for Alexander County as recorded in Hickory, North Carolina during the period from 1951-1984 is from March 20 -November 9 (235 days) (USDA 1995). Year 1 (2012) groundwater gauge installation occurred between March 30 and April 4, 2012; therefore, given the date of groundwater gauge installation and the initiation of 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) page 2 Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site monitoring, Year 1 groundwater monitoring utilized the published growing season dates from the county soil survey for success criteria. However, in future monitoring years, if soil temperatures and/or vegetative growth (bud burst) is documented, project gauge hydrologic success will be determined using those dates to more accurately represent the period of biological activity (see following "Summary of Hydrology Success Criteria by Year" table. Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for 8 percent of the monitored period, during average climatic conditions. During years with atypical climatic conditions, groundwater gauges in reference wetlands may dictate threshold hydrology success criteria (75 percent of reference). These areas are expected to support hydrophytic vegetation. If wetland parameters are marginal as indicated by vegetation and/or hydrology monitoring, a jurisdictional determination will be performed. Summary of Hydrology Success Criteria by Year Year Soil Temperatures/Date Bud Monitoring Period Used for 8 Percent of Monitoring Burst Documented Determining Success Period March 20 -November 9 2012 (Year 1) -- 19 days (235 days) No bud burst during February March 20 -November 9 2013 (Year 2) 19 days 13-14, 2013 Site visit (235 days) No bud burst during February March 20 -November 9 2014 (Year 3) 19 Days site visit (235 days) No bud burst during February March 20 -November 9 2015 (Year 4) 19 days site visit (235 days) No bud burst during February March 20 -November 9 2016 (Year 5) 19 days site visit (235 days) Hydrology Results: All ten Site groundwater monitoring gauges and the reference gauge exhibited inundation/saturation within 12 inches of the surface for greater than 8 percent of the growing season. All gauges were well -above success criteria for monitoring Year 5 (2016). Benthics: Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet scores for UT 1 increased from a total score of 45 prior to restoration to 84 after five annual monitoring years. Similarly, UT 2 improved from a score of 36 to 84 and UT3 improved from a score of 21 to 92 after five annual monitoring years. No benthic samples were obtained from UT3 because the stream was dry at the time of the site visit. Benthic results and Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheets are included in Appendix F. In summary: Site vegetation, streams, and wetland hydrology met success criteria for Year 5 (2016) monitoring. Based on achievement of success criteria in Years 1-5 (2012-2016), the project will be presented for IRT close-out. Summary information and data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment and statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in tables and figures within this report's appendices. Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Document (formerly Mitigation Plan) and in the Mitigation Plan (formerly called the Restoration Plan) documents available on the DMS website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from DMS upon request. 2.0 METHODOLOGY Monitoring of the Site's restoration efforts will be performed until agreed upon success criteria are fulfilled. Monitoring is proposed for the stream channel, riparian vegetation, and hydrology (Figure 2, Appendix A). Stream morphology is proposed to be monitored for a period of five years. Riparian vegetation is proposed to be monitored for a period of seven years. Wetland hydrology is proposed to be monitored for a period of 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) page 3 Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site five years; at which time a request will be made to the IRT to discontinue groundwater hydrology monitoring. The IRT reserves the right to request additional groundwater monitoring if it deems necessary. Monitoring reports of the data collected will be submitted to the IRT no later than December of each monitoring year. 2.1 Vegetation Assessment After planting was completed, an initial evaluation was performed to verify planting methods were successful and to determine initial species composition and density. Ten sample vegetation plots (10 -meter by 10 - meter) were installed and measured within the Site as per guidelines established in CVS -DMS Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008). Plots were measured in August 2016 for Year 5 monitoring. Vegetation plots are permanently monumented with 4 -foot metal garden posts at each corner. In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species composition and species density. Visual observations of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species will also be documented by photograph. Vegetation plot information can be found in Appendix C. 2.2 Stream Assessment Restored stream reaches are proposed to be monitored for geometric activity for five years. Annual fall monitoring will include development of 20 channel cross-sections on riffles and pools and a water surface profile of the channel. The data will be presented in graphic and tabular format. Data to be presented will include 1) cross-sectional area, 2) bankfull width, 3) average depth, 4) maximum depth, 5) width -to -depth ratio, 6) water surface slope, and 7) sinuosity. The stream will subsequently be classified according to stream geometry and substrate (Rosgen 1996). Significant changes in channel morphology will be tracked and reported by comparing data in each successive monitoring year. Stream data can be found in Appendix D. 2.3 Wetland Assessment Ten groundwater monitoring gauges were installed within Site wetland restoration areas and one additional gauge was installed in a reference wetland to monitor groundwater hydrology (Figure 2, Appendix A). Hydrological sampling will continue for five years throughout the growing season at intervals necessary to satisfy the hydrology success criteria within each design unit (USEPA 1990). In addition, an onsite rain gauge will document rainfall data for comparison of groundwater conditions with extended drought conditions. Finally, groundwater gauges located within riverine wetlands adjacent to restored stream reaches will supplement crest gauge measurements to confirm overbank flooding events. Graphs of groundwater hydrology and precipitation from a nearby rain station are included in Appendix E. 2.4 Biotic Community Changes Changes in the biotic community are anticipated from a shift in habitat opportunities as tributaries are restored. In -stream, biological monitoring is proposed to track changes during the monitoring period. The benthic macroinvertebrate community will be sampled using North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) protocols found in the Standard Operating Procedures for Benthic Macroinvertebrates (NCDWR 2006) and Benthic Macroinvertebrate Protocols for Compensatory Stream Restoration Projects (NCDWR 2001). Biological sampling of benthic macroinvertebrates will be used to compare preconstruction baseline data with post -construction restored conditions. Benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring locations were established within Site restoration reaches. Post - construction collections occurred in approximately the same locations as pre -construction sampling; however, sampling was not possible in UT 3 in Year 4 (2015) due to lack of stream flow. Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected using the Qual-4 collection method. Sampling techniques of the Qual-4 collection method consist of kick nets, sweep nets, leaf packs, and visual searches. Post -construction biological sampling occurred on June 23, 2016 for Year 5 monitoring; post -construction monitoring will occur in June of each monitoring year. Identification of collected organisms was performed by Pennington and Associates, a NCDWR certified laboratory. Results and Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheets are enclosed in Appendix F. 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) page 4 Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site 3.0 REFERENCES Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS -DMS Protocol for Recording Vegetation. Version 4.2. Department of Environmental Quality. Division of Mitigation Services. Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2001. Benthic Macroinvertebrate Monitoring Protocols for Compensatory Mitigation. 401/Wetlands Unit, Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, North Carolina. North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2011. Standard Operating Procedures for Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Version 3.0). Biological Assessment Unit, Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, North Carolina. Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa Springs, CO. Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina: Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, North Carolina. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1995. Soil Survey of Alexander County, North Carolina. Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1990. Mitigation Site Type Classification (MiST). USEPA Workshop, August 13-15, 1989. EPA Region IV and Hardwood Research Cooperative, NCSU, Raleigh, North Carolina. Weather Underground. 2014. Station at Hickory Airport, North Carolina. (online). Available: http://www.wunderaround.com/history/airport/KHKY/2014/10/31/Dail, H�ry.html [October 31, 2014]. Weather Underground. 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) page 5 Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendix A. Figures Figure 1. The Site Location Figures 2, 2A -2B. Consolidated Current Conditions Plan View 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices �. f fe � Herman Dairy Site Location -Access from Three Forks Ch. Rd. r J mss', Latitude 35.931617 Longitude -81.206949 "` (NAD83/WGS84) _^ �1 Zeb Watts. R Access Site from —. - Driveway on -Three Forks Three Forks Rd.ve -+_ k CJS 6 /Nc 90. NG�ov rl [ �4C. ;,. Reference Reach 1 _, _ _ `f' r 1 I t tr a — Li{edam ''P From the Town of Statesville " - From Interstate 40 take exit 148 onto NC 64 north - Travel - 17 miles on NC 64 north and turn north (right) on NC 16 (towards Taylorsville) - Travel - 1 mile and turn west (left) on NC 90 - Travel - 1.5 miles and turn right on Three Forks Ch. Road 0 0.375 0.75 1.5 - Travel -2 miles and Site is on right Miles Axiom Environmental HERMAN DAIRY DwnW6L/CLF FIGURE 218 Snow Avenue STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE Date: Raleigh, NC 27603 THE SITE LOCATION May 2012 1 (919) 215-1693 Project: h<Iom Emironme lal, Inc. Alexander County, North Carolina 10-016 Legend C3Easement Boundary (Not Fenced) Stream Restoration Jnr+ Restored Channel Braided Stream Enhancement (Level 1) QIn -stream Structures NCWAM Wetland Types = Bottomland Hardwood Forest Benthic Macroinvertebrat Crest Gauge Invasives Treatment Area - -1 Feet 2014 CGIA leaf -off aerial photography 0 150 300 600 900 Dwn. By: FIGURE Axiom Environmental HERMAN DAIRY KRJ 218 Snow Avenue STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE Date: Raleigh, NC 27603 CONSOLIDATED CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW Nov. 2016 2 (919) 215-1693 Alexander County, North Carolina Project: R'km Emnnnn W I- 10-001 Feet 0 100 200 400 600 2014 CGIA leaf -off aerial photography, ; 2 ' O❑ ry r + 10; Legend 1 Q End Profile C3 Easement Boundary (Not Fenced) 2 O Tributary 1 - Stream Restoration $ ro ^M^- Restored Channel Braided Stream 7 2 Enhancement (Level 1) Wetland Assets 0,6 Nonriparian Wetland Enhancement 5 Nonriparian Wetland Restoration — Riparian Wetland Enhancenment Riparian Wetland Restoration O O In -stream Structures i r 4 Cross-sections 3 CVS Plots O Groundwater Gauges �' SIE Pipe Crossing Photo Points �, IT ra Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Stations Crest Gauge Invasives Treatment Area A �54 ❑ Power Line Terrace]] ` 2a ti 14 Start Profile Tributary 1 1 13 �. 12 ❑ ❑ 14 3 F� �-, _ . 1 Dwn. By: HERMAN DAIRY KRJ/CLF FIGURE Axiom Environmental Date: 218 Snow Avenue STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE Raleigh, NC 27603 CONSOLIDATED CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW Nov. 2016 2A (919) 215-1693 Alexander County, North Carolina Project: ...rrc Ena�nn4n�o i,r. 10-001 Legend 8 .1 Y II Easement Boundary (Not Fenced) Stream Restoration 11 7 Restored Channel Braided Stream 4 Enhancement( Level I) F 1 Wetland Assets Nonnpanan Wetland Enhancement Nonriparian Wetland Restoration • - - T "� .��' C• - i , = • K Riparian Wetland Enhancenment Riparian Wetland Restoration • C'—'- ! !O ¢ O In -stream Structures Cross-sections w i�+ CVS Plots • 'd-�� k 4 3 _ 0 Groundwater G auges Photo Points •+� *, J Pipe Crossing _Y End Pr le Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling Stations - I- - - Tributary 2 Crest Gauge Invasives Treatment Area Power Line z ._. - - s — - - - - --g- �Tenacell s 5, 16 14 15 ,r End Profile .� ' 20 Tributary 3_" 18 17{ Start Profile $ Il ,�. Tributary 2 Start Profile w ..;. Tributary 3 2014 CGIA leaf -off aerial photography Feet NCO eM.. 0 125 250 500 750 Axiom Environmental HERMAN DAIRY Dwn By. KRJ/CLF FIGURE _ 218 Snow Avenue STREAM AND WETLAND MITIGATION SITE Date: ' Raleigh, NC 27603 CONSOLIDATED CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW Nov. 2016 V 2B Project: (919) 215-1693 Alexander County, North Carolina 10-001 Appendix B. General Project Tables Table 1. Project Restoration Components Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Table 3. Project Contacts Table Table 4. Project Attribute Table 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Table 1. Project Restoration Components Herman Dairy Restoration Site Mitigation Credits Stream Ri arian Wetland Nonri arian Wetland Restoration Restoration Equivalent Restoration Restoration Equivalent Restoration Restoration Equivalent 4780 0 7.2 1.1 1.2 0.05 Pro'ects Com onents Existing Linear Restoration/ Restoration Priority Mitigation Station Range Footage/ Restoration Linear Footage/ Comment Acreage Approach Equivalent Acreage Ratio UTI 10+00-31+67.8* UT1A 10+00-10+85.71 I Restoration 3997 1:1 Priority I stream restoration through construction of UT2 10+00-16+69.04, 21+50.67-27+10.09 stable channel at the historic floodplain elevation. UT3 10+00-17+28.39 4540 UT2 16+69.04-21+50.67 Braided stream restoration by redirecting diffuse flow UT3 upper 8 1. 10 linear feet -- Restoration 563 1:1 across riparian wetlands. Linear footage of stream is based on a straight line valley distance. Level I stream enhancement by altering profile and UTI upper 330.00 linear feet 330 Level I Enhancement 330 1.5:1 dimension, cessation of current land use practices, removing invasive species, and planting with native forest vegetation. Restoration of riparian wetlands within the floodplain Riparian Wetlands 0 -- Restoration 7.2 1:1 as the result of stream restoration activities, filling abandoned channels and ditches, removing spoil castings, and planting with native forest vegetation. Enhancement of existing riparian wetlands Riparian Wetlands 2.2 -- Enhancement 2.2 2:1 characterized by disturbed pasture by planting with native forest vegetation. Restoration of nonriparian wetlands by removing spoil Nonriparian Wetlands 0 - Restoration 1.2 1:1 castings, filling abandoned ditches to rehydrate hydric soils along the slope, eliminating land use practices, and planting with native forest vegetation. Enhancement of existing nonriparian wetlands Nonriparian Wetlands 0.1 -- Enhancement 0.1 2:1 characterized by disturbed pasture by planting with native forest vegetation. Component Summation Restoration Level Stream (linear footage) Riparian Wetland (acreage) Nonriparian Wetland (acreage) Restoration 4560 7.2 1.2 Enhancement (Level 1) 330 -- -- Enhancement -- 2.2 0.05 Totals 4890 9.4 1.25 Mitigation Units 4780 SMUs 8.3 Riparian WMUs 1.25 Nonriparian WMUs *Restoration linear footage excludes 145.76 linear feet of stream located within the utility easement and 67.79 linear feet of stream located within a culverted crossing, which are both excluded from the easement. 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Appendices Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History Herman Dairy Restoration Site Activity or Deliverable Data Collection Complete Completion or Deliver Technical Proposal (RFP No. 16-002830) -- March 2010 DMS Contract No. 003271 -- July 23, 2010 Restoration Plan -- January 2011 Construction Plans -- August 2011 Construction Earthwork March 2012 Invasive Species Treatment 919-215-1693 Ongoing As -Built Documentation Erosion Control Plans June 2012 Year 1 (2012) Annual Monitoring September 2012 October 2012 Year 2 (2013) Annual Monitoring October 2013 November 2013 Replanting -- Late 2013/Early 2014 Year 3 (2014) Annual Monitoring November 2014 January 2015 Year 4 (2015) Annual Monitoring November 2015 December 2015 Year 5 (2016) Annual Monitoring November 2016 December 2016 Table 3. Project Contacts Table Herman Dairy Restoration Site Full Delivery Provider Restoration Systems 1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211 Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 George Howard and John Preyer 919-755-9490 Designer Axiom Environmental, Inc. 218 Snow Avenue Raleigh, NC 27603 Grant Lewis 919-215-1693 Construction Plans and Sediment and Sungate Design Group, PA Erosion Control Plans 915 Jones Franklin Road Raleigh, NC 27606 W. Henry Wells, Jr, PE 919-859-2243 Construction and Planting Contractor Land Mechanic Designs 780 Landmark Road Willow Spring, NC 27592 Lloyd Glover 919-639-6132 As -built Surveyor K2 Design Group 5688 US Highway 70 East Goldsboro, NC 27534 John Rudolph 919-751-0075 Baseline Data Collection and Annual Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring 218 Snow Avenue Raleigh, NC 27603 Grant Lewis 919-215-1693 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Appendices Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Table 4. Project Attribute Table Herman Dairy Restoration Site Project County Alexander County, North Carolina Physiographic Region Northern Inner Piedmont Ecoregion Carolina Slate Belt Project River Basin Catawba USGS HUC for Project (14 digit) 03050101120030 NCDWQ Sub -basin for Project 03-08-32 Identify planning area (LWP, RBRP, other)? Yes — Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities 2009 WRC Class (Warm, Cool, Cold) Warm % of project easement fenced or demarcated 100 Beaver activity observed during design phase? Yes Unnamed Tributaries to Mu dy Fork UT 1 UT 2 UT 3 Drainage Area 1.0 0.06 0.04 Stream Order (USGS topo) 2nd 1st 1st Restored Length (feet) 2156 1684 760 Perennial (P) or Intermittent (1) P P I Watershed Type Rural Rural Rural Watershed impervious cover <5% <5% <5% NCDWQ AU/Index number 11-69-4 11-69-4 11-69-4 NCDWQ Classification C C C 303d listed? No No No Upstream of a 303d listed Yes Yes Yes Reasons for 303d listed segment aquatic life/sediment aquatic life/sediment aquatic life/sediment Total acreage of easement 31.12 31.12 31.12 Total existing vegetated acreage of easement 8 8 8 Total planted restoration acreage 31.5 31.5 31.5 Rosgen Classification of preexisting Cd5 Fc5/6 Fc5/6 Rosgen Classification of As -built E/C 4/5 E/C 4/5 E/C 4/5 Valley type VIII VIII VIII Valley slope 0.0066 0.0052 0.0013 Cowardin classification of proposed R3UB1/2 R3UB1/2 R4SB3/4 Trout waters designation NA NA NA Species of concern, endangered etc. NA NA NA Dominant Soil Series Codorus/Hatboro Codorus/Hatboro Codorus/Hatboro 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Appendix C. Vegetation Assessment Data Table 5. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table Table 6. CVS Vegetation Metadata Table Table 7. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species Vegetation Plot Photographs 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Table 5. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table Vegetation Plot ID Vegetation Survival Threshold Met? Tract Mean 1 Yes 90% 2 Yes 3 Yes 4 No* 5 Yes 6 Yes 7 Yes 8 Yes 9 Yes 10 Yes *Plot 4 did not meet success criteria based on planted stems alone; however, when including natural recruits of American sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) and elm (Ulmus sp), plot 4 exceeds the required stem density. 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Table 6. CVS Vegetation Metadata Table Report Prepared By Corri Faquin Date Prepared 11/14/2016 12:58 database name RS-HermanDiary-2016-A-v2.3.1.mdb database location S:\Business\Projects\10\10-001 RS 10 Monitoring\Herman Dairy\2016\CVS computer name CORR12-PC file size 61960192 DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT------------ Metadata Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data. Proj, planted Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year. This excludes live stakes. Proj, total stems Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all natural/volunteer stems. Plots List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc.). Vigor Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots. Vigor by Spp Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species. Damage List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each. Damage by Spp Damage values tallied by type for each species. Damage by Plot Damage values tallied by type for each plot. Planted Stems by Plot and Spp A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded. ALL Stems by Plot and spp A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded. PROJECT SUMMARY ------------------------------------- Project Code Herman project Name Herman Dairy Description Stream and wetland restoration Alexander County NC River Basin Catawba Sampled Plots 10 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Appendices Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Table 7. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species Project Code Herman. Project Name: Herman Dairy Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes P -all = Planting including livestakes T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes T includes natural recruits Current Plot Data (MY5 2016) Scientific Name Common Name Species Type Herman -P-0001 Pnol-S P -all T Herman -P-0002 PnoLS P -all T Herman -P-0003 Herman -P-0004 Herman -P-0005 Herman -P-0006 Herman -P-0007 Herman -P-0008 Pnol-S P -all T PnoLS P -all T PnoLS P -all T Pnol-S P -all T PnoLS P -all T Pnol-S P -all T Acer negundo boxelder Tree 20 Acer rubrum red maple Tree 12 Betula nigra river birch Tree 3 3 3 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 Carya hickory Tree 1 1 1 Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cornus dogwood Shrub or Tree Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 2 2 2 1 1 1 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree 1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 7 3 3 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 5 5 5 6 6 6 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 1 11 1 1 1 6 5 5 5 2 2 2 Nyssa tupelo Tree 4 4 4 S 5 S Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 1 1 1 1 1 Quercus oak Tree Quercus nigra water oak Tree 2 2 2 Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 1 1 Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry Shrub Ulmus elm Tree 1 Ulmus americana American elm Tree Unknown Shrub or Tree Stem count size (ares) size (ACRES) Species count Stems per ACRE 10 6 404.7 10 1 0.02 6 404.7 11 7 445.2 8 4 323.7 8 1 0.02 4 323.7 25 5 1012 9 9 136 6 8 14 14 14 12 12d32 10 10 10 13 13 13 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 3 3 4 3 3 5 7 7 7 5 5 6 4 4 4 5 5 5 364.2 364.2 526.1 242.8 242.8 323.7 566.6 566.6 566.6 485.6 485.6 1295 404.7 404.7 404.7 526.1 526.1 526.1 Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes P -all = Planting including livestakes T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes T includes natural recruits Table 7. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species (continued) Project Code Herman. Project Name: Herman Dairy Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes P -all = Planting including livestakes T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes T includes natural recruits Current Plot Data (MY5 2016) Annual Means Scientific Name Common Name Species Type Herman -P-0009 Pnol-S P -all T Herman -P-0010 PnoLS P -all T MY5 (2016) Pnol-S P -all T MY4 (2015) PnoLS P -all T MY3 (2014) PnoLS P -all T MY2 (2013) Pnol-S P -all T MY1 (2012) PnoLS P -all T MYO (2012) Pnol-S P -all T Acer negundo boxelder Tree 20 19 39 9 15 Acer rubrum red maple Tree 9 8 29 33 20 21 7 Betula nigra river birch Tree 2 2 2 2 2 4 16 16 18 16 16 16 16 16 16 18 18 18 19 19 19 41 41 41 Carpinus caroliniana American hornbeam Tree 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 Carya hickory Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 Cornus dogwood Shrub or Tree 2 2 Cornus amomum silky dogwood Shrub 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree 1 1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 9 9 9 2 1 2 2 34 34 37 35 35 36 34 34 34 34 34 34 33 33 33 32 32 32 Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 3 3 3 1 1 1 13 13 18 13 13 16 14 14 20 15 15 19 17 17 18 25 25 25 Nyssa tupelo Tree 3 3 3 12 12 12 12 12 12 15 15 15 16 16 16 14 14 14 Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 1 1 18 2 2 21 2 2 24 2 2 311 2 2 36 46 1 1 1 Quercus oak Tree 1 1 1 61 6 6 Quercus nigra water oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 20 20 20 20 20 20 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 22 23 23 23 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Sambucus canadensis Common Elderberry Shrub 1 Ulmus elm Tree 1 Ulmus americana American elm Tree 1 2 2 2 2 Unknown Shrub or Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 10 10 Stem count size (ares) size (ACRES) Species count Stems per ACRE 161 51 647.5 71 1 0.02 51 647.5 42 6 1700 111 51 445.2 111 1 0.02 51 445.2 23 7 930.8 109 12 441.1 109 191 10 0.25 12 171 441.1 772.9 1101 121 445.2 110 10 0.25 121 445.2 192 171 777 115 121 465.4 1151 210 10 0.25 121 1413 465.4 849.8 1201 485.6 120 188 10 0.25 13 15 485.6 760.8 118 12 477.5 118 187 10 0.25 12 15 477.5 756.8 145 10 586.8 145 145 10 0.25 10 10 586.8 586.8 Color for Density Exceeds requirements by 10% Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10% Fails to meet requirements by more than 10% Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes P -all = Planting including livestakes T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes T includes natural recruits r.lo F� a F� r� a Herman Dairy 2016 (Year 5) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs Taken July 2016 (continued) 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Appendices Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendix D. Stream Assessment Data Stream Station Photos Table 8a -8c. Visual Assessment Tables Table 9. Verification of Bankfull Events Tables 1Oa- 1 Oc. Baseline Stream Data Summary Tables 11 a-11 e. Monitoring Data -Dimensional Data Summary Longitudinal Profile Plots Cross-section Plots Substrate Plots 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Herman Dairy Fixed Station Photographs Taken July 2016 Photo Point 5 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Photo Point 6 Appendices Herman Dairy Fixed Station Photographs (continued) Taken July 2016 Photo Point 7 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Appendices Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Table BA Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Reach ID Tributary 1 Assessed Length 1374 Adjusted % Number Number with Footage with for Major Stable, Total Number of Amount of % Stable, Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing Channel Channel Performing Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Woody Woody Woody Category Sub-Cateclory Metric as Intended As -built Segments Footage as Intended Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation 1. Bed 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars) 0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 19 19 100% 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth :Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 20 20 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle) 100 100 100% 47halweg Position 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 100 100 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 100 100 100% 2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 100% Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears 2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable 0 0 100% 100% and are providing habitat. 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 100% Totals 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 2 2 o 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 2 2 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 2 2 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 2 2 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow. 2 2 100°/0 Table 86 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Reach ID Tributary 2 Assessed Length 1522 Adjusted % Number Number with Footage with for Major Stable, Total Number of Amount of % Stable, Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing Channel Channel Performing Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Woody Woody Woody Category Sub-Cateclory Metric as Intended As -built Segments Footage as Intended Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation 1. Bed 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars) 0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 39 39 100% 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth :Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 37 37 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle) 100 100 100% 47halweg Position 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 100 100 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 100 100 100% 2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 100% Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears 2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable 0 0 100% 100% and are providing habitat. 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 100% Totals 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 3 3 ° 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 3 3 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 3 3 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) 3 3 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow. 3 3 100% Table 8C Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Reach ID Tributary 3 Assessed Length 644 Adjusted % Number Number with Footage with for Major Stable, Total Number of Amount of % Stable, Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing Channel Channel Performing Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Woody Woody Woody Category Sub-Cateclory Metric as Intended As -built Segments Footage as Intended Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation 1. Bed 1. Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units) 1. Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect flow laterally (not to include point bars) 0 0 100% 2. Degradation - Evidence of downcutting 0 0 100% 2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate 27 27 100% 3. Meander Pool Condition 1. Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth :Mean Bankfull Depth > 1.6) 27 27 100% 2. Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle) 100 100 100% 47halweg Position 1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run) 100 100 100% 2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide) 100 100 100% 2. Bank 1. Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour and erosion 0 0 100% 100% Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears 2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable 0 0 100% 100% and are providing habitat. 3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping, calving, or collapse 0 0 100% 100% Totals 0 0 100% 0 0 100% 3. Engineered Structures 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. $ $ o 100% 2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. $ 8 100% 2a. Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100% 3. Bank Protection Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%. (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document) $ $ 100% 4. Habitat Pool forming structures maintaining — Max Pool Depth : Mean Bankfull Depth ratio > 1.6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow. $ $ 100°/0 Table 9. Verification of Bankfull Events Date of Data Date of Method Photo (if Collection Occurrence available) Bankfull event documented when sediment May 11, 2013 May 6, 2013 deposits were observed on top of banks after 3.00 inches of rain was documented* over a two-day period. Bankfull event documented after wrack was July 18, 2013 June 6, 2013 observed on top of bank and throughout 1-2 floodplain after 4.27 inches of rain was documented* over a two-day period. Bankfull event likely occurred after 3.61 inches of rain over a two-day period that was November 19, 2014 August 11, 2014 preceeded by 0.56 inches and followed by an -- additional 0.78 inches as documented by an onsite rain gauge. Bankfull event likely occurred after 2.2 inches July 31, 2015 April 19, 2015 of rain was documented over a one day period by an onsite rain gauge. Bankfull event documented after sediment November 21, deposits were observed in floodplain of the November 23, 2015 2015 main tributary and 1.96 inches of rain was 3 documented over a three day period by an onsite rain gauge. Bankfull event likely occurred after 2.84 inches August 8, 2016 July 3, 2016 of rain was documented over a two day period by an onsite rain gauge. *Weal 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Table 10A. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary Herman Dairy UT 1 Parameter USGS Gage Data Pre -Existing Condition Project Reference Stream UT Catawba* Project Reference Reach 1 Design As -built Dimension Min I Max I Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med BF Width (ft) USGS gage data is unavailable for this project 16 19 18 26 150 150 20.2 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.9 2.3 2 12 17 16 1.6 9.6 7.9 1.8 3.1 1.9 =__ ___ No pattern of riffles and pools due to straightening activties No pattern of riffles and pools due to straightening activties ___ 1.1 0.62% Cd 5 9 25 1.1 1.5 8 2.7 30 12.5 25 2.9 0.30% 22 12 150 1.3 1.8 13 14.6 40 25 70 3.9 0.36% 62 10 50 10.9 1.1 1.7 10 4.9 1 ___ ___ 35 18 45 3.4 =__ 0.34% =__ 39 ___ 1.4 0.28% E 4/5 9 22 1.2 1.5 7.2 2.3 35 10 65 3.7 0.34% 29 10 25 1.3 1.6 8 2.7 58 32 128 6.1 4.31% 103 10 24 11.8 1.3 1.6 7.6 2.5 1 ___ ___ 45 16 81 4.7 ___ 2.48% ___ 60 ___ 1.4 1.27% E 4/5 16 36 1.1 1.4 12 8 1 50 34 101 3 1.10% 50 18 53 1.3 1.8 16 10 1.3 101 168 202 6 1.65% 134 17 150 20.2 1.2 1.6 14 9 1.1 __= __= 67 50 143 4 __= 1.38% === 67 __= 1.2 0.55% Ec4/5 15.5 14 0.9 1.2 14 15 15.9 0.9 50 34 101 3 23 0.00% 10 50 16.4 18.2 1.1 1.6 17 16 16.8 1.1 101 168 202 6 65 1.50% 54 134 16.1 250 16.4 1 1.4 16 16 1 16.7 1 67 50 143 4 36 0.64% 32 67 2108 1.2 0.53% E/C 4/5 Floodprone Width (ft) BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2) BF Mean Depth (ft) BF Max Depth ft Width/Depth Ratio Entrenchment Ratio Bank Height Ratio Wetted Perimeter ft Hydraulic radius (ft) Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) Radius of Curvature ft Meander Wavelength (ft) Meander Width ratio Profile Riffle len th ft Riffle slope (ft/ft) Pool length ft Pool spacing (ft) Substrate d50 (mm) d84 (mm) Additional Reach Parameters Valley Length ft Channel Length (ft) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) BF slope (ft/ft) Rosgen Classification "UT to Catawba River Reference Site includes measurements from a stream measured in 2008. Table 10B. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary Herman Dairy UT 2 Parameter USGS Gage Data Pre -Existing Condition Project Reference Stream UT Catawba* Project Reference Reach 1 Design As -built Dimension Min I Max I Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med BF Width (ft) Floodprone Width (ft) BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2) BF Mean Depth (ft) BF Max Depth ft Width/Depth Ratio Entrenchment Ratio Bank Height Ratio Wetted Perimeter ft Hydraulic radius (ft) Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) Radius of Curvature ft Meander Wavelength (ft) Meander Width ratio Profile Riffle length ft Riffle slope (ft/ft) Pool length ft Pool spacing (ft) Substrate d50 (mm) d84 (mm) Additional Reach Parameters Valley Length ft Channel Length (ft) SinuosLtL Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) BF slope Rosgen Classification USGS gage data is unavailable for this project (ft/ft) 6 15 9 9 12 10 9 10 10 5.3 6.1 5.7 6.8 7.9 6.9 14 19 15 25 150 50 22 25 24 150 150 2.3 10.9 11.8 2.3 2.2 2.4 2.3 0.2 0.4 0.3 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.5 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.6 1.6 0.4 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 16 76 30 8 13 10 7.2 8 7.6 12 16 14 20 27 21 1.3 2.2 1.6 2.7 14.6 4.9 2.3 2.7 2.5 14 38 26 19 22 22 5 12 7 1 1 1 1.3 1.1 1 =__ ___ ___ __= 7 8 7.1 ___ ___ ___ __= 0.3 0.3 0.3 No pattern of riffles and pools due to straightening activties 30 40 35 35 58 45 17 34 23 17 34 23 12.5 25 18 10 32 16 11 57 17 11 57 17 25 70 45 65 128 81 34 68 49 34 68 49 2.9 3.9 3.4 3.7 6.1 4.7 3 8 4 3 8 4 No pattern of riffles and pools due to straightening activties =__ ___ __= 6 44 14 0.30% 0.36% 0.34% 0.34% 4.31 % 2.48% 0.86% 1.29% 1.08% 0.00% 1.25% 0.39% =__ ___ __= 6 32 13 22 62 39 29 103 60 17 46 23 17 46 23 ___ ___ ___ __= 1696 1.04 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 0.85% 0.28% 1.27% 0.43% 0.40% Fc 5/6 E 4/5 E 4/5 Ec4/5 C 4/5 "Measured as -built numbers do not include D -type reach. *UT to Catawba River Reference Site includes measurements from a stream measured in 2008. Table IOC. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary Herman Dairy UT 3 Parameter USGS Gage Data Pre -Existing Condition Project Reference Stream UT Catawba* Project Reference Reach 1 Design As -built Dimension Min I Max I Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med BF Width (ft) USGS gage data is unavailable for this project 6 9 7 12 13 12 3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.6 1 0.9 1 0.7 13 31 17 1.4 1.9 1.7 4 7 6 =__ =__ No pattern of riffles and pools due to straightening activties No pattern of riffles and pools due to straightening activties ___ 1.01 9 25 1.1 1.5 1 8 2.7 30 12.5 25 2.9 0.30% 22 12 150 1.3 1.8 13 14.6 40 25 70 3.9 0.36% 62 10 50 10.9 1.1 1.7 10 4.9 1 ___ ___ 35 18 45 3.4 =__ 0.34% =__ 39 ___ 1.4 9 22 1.2 1.5 7.2 2.3 35 10 65 3.7 0.34% 29 10 25 1.3 1.6 1 8 2.7 58 32 128 6.1 4.31% 103 10 24 11.8 1.3 1.6 7.6 2.5 1 ___ ___ 45 16 81 4.7 ___ 2.48% ___ 60 ___ 1.4 6 0.4 0.6 12 22 1 20 13 39 3 0.22% 20 7 0.6 1 0.8 16 25 1.3 39 65 78 8 0.33% 52 6.5 150 3 0.5 0.7 14 23 1.1 __= __= 26 20 55 4 __= 0.28% __= 26 __= 1.2 6.8 2.2 0.3 0.5 21 17 7 0.3 20 13 39 3 5 0.00% 7 20 8.5 3.1 0.4 0.5 1 23 22 8.7 1 0.4 39 65 78 8 26 1.59% 21 52 7.7 150 2.7 0.4 0.5 22 19.5 1 7.9 0.4 26 20 55 4 11 0.22% 13 26 743 1.2 Floodprone Width (ft) BF Cross Sectional Area 112 BF Mean Depth ft BF Max Depth ft Width/Depth Ratio Entrenchment Ratio Bank Height Ratio Wetted Perimeter ft Hydraulic radius ft Pattern Channel Beltwidth ft Radius of Curvature ft Meander Wavelength (ft) Meander Width ratio Profile Riffle len th (ft) Riffle slope ft/ft) Pool length ft Poolspacing ft Substrate d50 (nun) d84(mm) Additional Reach Parameters Valley Length ft Channel Length (ft) Sinuosity Water Surface Slope ft/ft) (ft/ft) 0.40% Fc 5/6 0.28% E 4/5 1.27% E 4/5 0.11% Ec4/5 0.12% C 4/5 BF slope Rosgen Classification "UT to Catawba River Reference Site includes measurements from a stream measured in 2008. Table 11A. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Herman Dairy - Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Parameter Cross Section 1 Pool (UT 1) Cross Section 2 Riffle (UT 1) Cross Section 3 Riffle (UT 1) Cross Section 4 Pool (UT 1) Dimension MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYI MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYl MY2 MY31 MY4 MY5 BF Width (ft) 20.9 19.6 18.1 24.8 20.9 26.7 16.9 17.1 17.4 18.2 17.2 17.5 16.4 17 18.9 14 13 8.9 16.8 18.2 20.2 10.2 14 9.7 Floodprone Width (ft) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 19.9 18.9 17.4 17.4 14.8 14.2 16.3 16 14.9 14 11 9.3 16.7 17 17.5 10 7.9 8.3 14.4 14.5 13.8 10.5 10.6 10.6 BF Mean Depth (ft) 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 1.0 0.8 1.1 BF Max Depth (ft) 2.3 1 2.2 2.1 1.7 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 2.1 2.1 2.3 1.5 1.7 1.8 Width/Depth Ratio ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 17.5 18.3 20.3 23.7 26.9 32.9 16.1 17.0 20.4 19.6 21.4 9.5 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Entrenchment Ratio ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 14.8 14.6 14.4 13.7 14.5 14.3 15.2 14.7 13.2 17.9 19.2 28.1 ---- ---- ---- ---- Bank Height Ratio ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 ---- ---- ---- ---- Wetted Perimeter (ft) 21.7 20.4 18.8 25.6 21.6 27.3 17.2 17.4 17.8 18.6 17.5 18.1 16.8 17.6 19.5 14.6 13.7 9.6 17.6 19.1 21.2 10.9 14.8 10.7 Hydraulic Radius (ft) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 1 1 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 1 0.7 1 Substrate d50 (mm)---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 0.4 0.4 NA 0.1 ---- 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- d84 (mm) 15 14 1 1 ---- 10 4 1 1 Parameter MY -00 (2012) MY -01 (2012) MY -02 (2013) MY -03 (2014) MY -04 (2015) MY -05 (2016) Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 Radius of Curvature (ft) 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 Meander Wavelength (ft) 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 Meander Width Ratio 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 23 65 36 16 49 28 5 82 33 5 117 36 8 135 49 6 93 35 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.00% 1.50% 0.64% 0.05% 1.05% 0.57% 0.14% 1.92% 0.65% 0.11% 1.13% 0.37% 0.01% 1.27%1 0.41% 0.17% 1.21% 0.56% Pool Length (ft) 10 541 32 18 62 35 12 63 31 7 49 30 11 56 30 11 51 33 Pool Spacing (ft) 501 1341 67 50 134 67 50 134 67 50 134 67 50 1341 67 50 134 67 Additonal Reach Parameters Valley Length (ft) 1757 1373 1525 1513 1508 1319 Channel Length (ft) 2,108 1,648 1830 1816 1809 1583 Sinuosity 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0053 0.0045 0.0054 0.0051 0.005 0.0046 BF Slope (f /ft) ------ ------ ------ Rosgen Classification C/E 4/5 C4/5 C 4/5 C 4/5 C4/5 C4/5 Table 1113. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Herman Dairy - Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Parameter Cross Section 5 Riffle (UT 1) Cross Section 6 Pool (UT 1) Cross Section 7 Riffle (UT 1) Cross Section 8 Pool (UT 1) Dimension MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 BF Width (ft) 16.1 16.3 16.7 9.5 11 8.8 20 17.2 19.5 8.3 14.8 8.8 15.5 14.6 16.8 10.4 9.7 9.2 16.1 18.4 18.7 9.6 9.1 10 Floodprone Width (ft) 250 250 250 250 250 250 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 250 250 250 250 250 250 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 18.2 16.6 15.2 7.5 8.9 9.5 20.3 17.7 15 7.8 8 10.5 14 14 14.5 9.3 8 10.6 15.5 16 16 11.7 10.3 13.4 BF Mean Depth (ft) 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.5 1.2 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.2 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.2 1.1 1.3 BF Max Depth (ft) 1.6 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.4 1.6 2.3 2.2 2.2 1.5 1.5 1.8 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.1 1.8 2.2 Width/Depth Ratio 14.2 16.0 18.3 12.0 13.6 8.2 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 17.2 15.2 19.5 11.6 11.8 8.0 ---- ---- ---- ---- I ---- --- Entrenchment Ratio 15.5 15.3 15.0 26.3 22.7 28.4 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 16.1 17.1 14.9 24.0 25.8 27.2 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Bank Height Ratio I 1 1 1 1 1 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 1 1 1 1 1 1 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Wetted Perimeter (ft) 16.8 16.9 17.2 10 11.8 9.6 21 18.3 20.5 9.1 15.5 10.2 15.9 15.1 17.3 11.2 10.4 10.4 16.8 19.1 19.6 10.8 10.1 11.2 Hydraulic Radius (ft) 1.1 1 0.9 0.8 0.8 1 1 1 0.7 0.9 0.5 1 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 1 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.1 1 1.2 Substrate d50 (mm) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- d84 (min) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -------- ---- I ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Parameter MY -00 (2012) MY -01 (2012) MY -02 (2013) MY -03 (2014) MY -04 (2015) MY -05 (2016) Pattern Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Channel Beltwidth (ft) Radius of Curvature (11) 50 34 101 168 67 501 50 34 101 168 67 501 50 34 101 168 67 50 50 34 101 168 67 50 50 34 101 168 67 50 50 34 101 168 67 50 Meander Wavelength (ft) Meander Width Ratio 50 3 101 6 67 4 50 3 101 6 67 4 50 3 101 6 67 4 50 3 101 6 67 4 50 3 101 6 67 4 50 3 101 6 67 4 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 23 65 36 16 49 28 5 82 33 5 117 36 8 135 49 6 93 35 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) Pool Length (ft) 0.00% 10 1.50% 54 0.64% 0.05% 32 18 1.05% 0.57% 62 35 0.14% 12 1.92% 63 0.65% 31 0.11% 7 1.13% 49 0.37% 30 0.01% 11 1.27% 56 0.41% 30 0.17% 11 1.21% 51 0.56% 33 Pool Spacing (ft) 501 1341 67 50 134 67 50 134 67 50 1341 67 50 134 67 50 1341 67 .4dditonal Reach Parameters Valley Length (ft) 1757 1373 1525 1513 1508 1319 Channel Length (ft) 2,108 1,648 1830 1816 1809 1583 Sinuosity Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 1.2 0.0053 1.2 0.0045 1.2 0.0054 1.2 0.0051 1.2 0.005 1.2 0.0046 BF Slope (ft/ft) Rosgen Classification ------ C/E 4/5 ------ C-4/5 ------ C 4/5 ------ C 4/5 C4/5 C4/5 Table 11C. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Herman Dairy - Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Parameter Cross Section 9 Pool (UT 1) Cross Section 10 Riffle (UT 1) Cross Section 11 Riffle (UT2) Cross Section 12 Pool (UT2) Dimension MY O MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY O MYl MY2 MY3 NIY4 NIY5 NIY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY O MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 BF Width (ft) 18.7 16.2 16.6 17.8 17.5 16.9 16 17 15.5 8.4 8.4 8.5 7.9 5.2 5.8 6.1 6 6.8 5.5 5.8 5.3 5.2 5.4 6.3 Floodprone Width (ft) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 250 250 250 250 250 250 150 150 150 150 150 150 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- BF Cross Sectional Area (112) 15.7 15.4 16 12.8 13 12.4 16 15.6 13.2 8.5 8.3 8.3 2.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.5 2.3 2.1 2 2 2 2.2 BE Mean Depth (ft) 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 BE Max Depth (ft) 2 2.3 2.4 2 2.1 2.1 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.7 Width/Depth Ratio ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 16.0 18.5 18.2 8.3 8.5 8.7 27.1 20.8 24.0 28.6 27.7 30.8 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Entrenchment Ratio ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 15.6 14.7 16.1 29.8 29.8 29.4 19.0 28.8 25.9 24.6 25.0 22.1 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Bank Height Ratio ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Wetted Perimeter (ft) 19.5 17 17.8 19 18.8 18.2 16.5 17.6 15.9 9.1 9.1 9.5 8 5.3 5.9 6.2 6.1 6.9 5.8 6 5.5 5.4 5.6 6.5 Hydraulic Radius (ft) 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.7 1 0.9 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 Substrate EEE. ---- ---- ---- ---- --- 9.8 8 0.8 1.2 ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- d84 (min) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 21 17 13 20 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Parameter MY -00 (2012) MY -01 (2012) MY -02 (2013) MY -03 (2014) MY -04 (2015) MY -05 (2016) Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max I Med Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 Radius of Curvature (ft) 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 34 168 50 Meander Wavelength (ft) 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 50 101 67 Meander Width Ratio 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 17 111 51 16 49 28 5 82 33 5 117 36 8 135 49 3 31 15 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.43% 4.80% 1.54% 0.05% 1.05% 0.57% 0.14% 1.92% 0.65% 0.11% 1.13% 0.37% 0.01% 1.27%1 0.41% 0.00%3.50% 0.58% Pool Length (ft) 26 78 46 18 62 35 12 63 31 7 49 30 11 56 30 5 20 11 Pool Spacing (11) 76 176 126 50 134 67 50 134 67 50 134 67 50 134 67 50 134 67 Additonal Reach Parameters Valley Length (11) 1757 1373 1525 1513 1508 1279 Channel Length (11) 2,108 1,648 1830 1816 1809 1535 Sinuosity 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0053 0.0045 0.0054 0.0051 0.005 0.0044 BF Slope (11/11) ------ ------ ------ ------ Rosgen Classification C/P 4/5 C-4/5 C 4/5 C 4/5 C4/5 C4/5 Table 111). Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Herman Dairy - Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Parameter Cross Section 13 Riffle (UT 2) Cross Section 14 Pool (UT 2) Cross Section 15 Riffle (UT2) Cross Section 16 Pool (UT2) Dimension MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYI MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYI MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYI MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 BE Width (ft) 6.9 7 6.3 6.5 6.6 7.8 6.6 6.8 6 5.8 6 5.7 6.8 6.9 6.9 7.1 6.8 7 5.7 7.1 5.6 3.6 5.8 5.3 Floodprone Width (ft) 150 150 150 150 150 150 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 150 150 150 150 150 150 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 2.4 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.7 2.4 2.6 2.5 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.2 1.6 1.8 2.3 2.4 2.1 1.4 1.6 1.7 BE Mean Depth (ft) 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 BE Max Depth (ft) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.9 Width/Depth Ratio 19.8 32.7 23.3 24.9 27.2 35.8 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 21.0 21.6 21.6 42.0 28.9 27.2 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Entrenchment Ratio 21.7 21.4 23.8 23.1 22.7 19.2 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 22.1 21.7 21.7 21.1 22.1 21.4 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Bank Height Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 1 1 1 1 1 1 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- Wetted Perimeter (ft) 7.1 7.2 6.5 6.7 6.8 8 6.8 7 6.3 6.1 6.2 5.9 7 7.1 7.1 7.2 7 7.2 6 7.3 6 4.1 6.3 5.7 Hydraulic Radius (ft) 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Substrate --- 24.6 26.5 24.6 21.6 ---- ---- 24.2 23.9 22 20.3 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- 40 48 43 38 -------- I ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 45 49 45 43 ---- ---- ---- ---- Parameter MY -00 (2012) MY -01 (2012) MY -02 (2013) MY -03 (2014) MY -04 (2015) MY -05 (2016) Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Pattern Channel Beltwidth (ft) 17 34 23 17 34 23 17 34 23 17 34 23 17 34 23 17 34 23 Radius ofCurvature(ft) 11 57 17 11 57 17 11 57 17 11 57 17 11 57 17 11 57 17 Meander Wavelength (ft) 34 68 49 34 68 49 34 68 49 34 68 49 34 68 49 34 68 49 Meander Width Ratio 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 Profile Rifle Length (ft) 6 44 14 6 41 11 6 28 12 6 34 12 3 24 12 3 31 15 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.00% 1.25% 0.39% 0 3.39 0.42 0.00% 3.33% 0.42% 0.00% 2.76% 0.39% 0.00% 2.94% 0.51% 0.00% 3.50% 0.58% Pool Length (ft) 6 32 13 7 21 11 6 21 11 4 20 10 5 37 13 5 20 11 Pool Spacing (11) 17 46 23 17 46 23 17 46 23 17 46 23 17 461 23 50 134 67 Additonal Reach Parameters Valley Length (11) 1413 1522 1298 1316 1314 1279 Channel Length (ft) 1,696 1,827 1557 1579 1577 1535 Sinuosity 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.004 0.0041 0.0042 0.0043 0.0044 0.0044 BF Slope (ft/ft) I ------ ------ -------- Rosgen Classification C E 4/5 C 4/5 C 4/5 C 4/5 C4/5 C4/5 Table 11E. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary Herman Dairy - Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Parameter Cross Section 17 Riffle (UT 3) ---- ---- Dimension MY 0 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY BE Width (ft) 8.5 7.7 7.7 8.5 8 8 Floodprone Width (ft) 150 150 150 150 150 15( BE Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 3.1 2.6 2.7 2.9 2.7 2.8 BE Mean Depth (ft) 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 BF Max Depth (ft) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Width/Depth Ratio 23.3 22.8 22.0 24.9 23.7 22.! Entrenchment Ratio 17.6 19.5 19.5 17.6 18.8 18.' Bank Height Ratio 1 1 1 1 1 1 Wetted Perimeter (ft) 8.7 7.8 7.8 8.7 8.2 8.2 Hydraulic Radius (ft) 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Substrate d50 (mm) d84 (mm) ---- ---- ---- 28.2 43 27.7 45 24 48 20. 46 Parameter MY -00 (2012) MY -01 (2012) 11 Min Max Med Min Max Me, Pattern 0.28% 0.00% 1.66% 0.26% 0.00% 2.32% Channel Beltwidth (ft) 20 39 26 20 39 21 Radius of Curvature (ft) 13 65 20 13 65 20 Meander Wavelength (ft) 39 78 55 39 78 52 Meander Width Ratio 3 6 4 3 6 Profile Riffle Length (ft) 5 26 11 5 27 Riffle Slope (ft/ft) 0.00% 1.59% 0.22% ---- ---- ---- Pool Length (ft) 8 21 13 7 24 Pool Spacing (ft) 20 52 26 20 52 Cross Section 18 Pool (UT 3) ---- ---- ---- ---- Cross Section 19 Pool (UT3) MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY 0 MYl I MY2 I MY3 MY4 6.2 6.5 6.5 6.4 5.9 6.8 6.5 6.4 6.2 9 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.5 3.4 3 3 2.9 2.7 2.9 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 1.1 1 1 1 1 0.9 1 0.9 0.9 0.9 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- MY-02 (2013) MY -03 (2014) MY -04 (2015) MY -05 (2016) 14in Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Med Min Max Met 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0012 ---- 0.0015 0.0015 0.0013 0.0018 BF Slope (ft/ft) ------ 20 39 26 20 39 26 20 39 26 20 39 13 65 20 13 65 20 13 65 20 13 65 39 78 55 39 78 55 39 78 55 39 78 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 3 6 4 27 10 5 27 11 5 19 11 5 25 .00% 1.43% 0.28% 0.00% 1.66% 0.26% 0.00% 2.32% 0.54% ##### 1.42% 0.29 7 21 13 6 21 14 7 22 13 7 24 20 52 26 20 52 26 20 52 26 20 52 Additonal Reach Parameters Valley Length (ft) 619 645 616 609 601 596 Channel Length (ft) 743 774 739 731 721 715 Sinuosity 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.0012 ---- 0.0015 0.0015 0.0013 0.0018 BF Slope (ft/ft) ------ ---- Rosgen Classification C/E 4/5 C 4/5 C 4/5 C 4/5 C4/5 C4/5 Cross Section 20 Riffle (UT3) et Name Herman Dairy - Year 5 (2016) Profile t Tributary 1 97.6 ire Profile 97.8 98.9 2/20/16 98.4 99.0 Perkinson, Jernigan 98.6 99.1 2012 97.8 99.2 As -built Survey 98.1 Itation Bed Elevation Water Elevation 0.0 93.3 93.9 34.6 94.0 94.3 64.3 94.8 95.2 74.2 95.1 95.4 113.3 97.0 97.5 133.7 97.2 97.9 138.4 96.2 98.0 145.3 96.3 97.9 154.5 96.3 98.0 167.2 97.5 98.0 182.9 97.5 98.1 195.8 97.6 98.1 204.1 97.1 98.1 221.9 969 98.1 225.5 97.4 98.1 240.5 97.8 98.2 259.8 97.8 98.3 263.0 97.3 983 266.2 973 98.3 269.8 97.9 98.4 282.4 98.2 98.5 297.4 98.4 98.7 303.3 97.6 98.7 331.6 97.7 98.7 338.2 98.3 98.8 364.5 98.4 98.9 370.8 979 99.0 103.0 101.0 99.0 39 3. a, 97.0 e 0 95.0 W 93.0 91.0 0 2012 Year 1 Monitoring \Survey Itation Bed Elevation Water Elet 309.6 97.6 98.9 328.9 97.8 98.9 338.1 98.4 99.0 361.2 98.6 99.1 372.6 97.8 99.2 384.9 98.1 99.2 399.8 98.8 99.2 425.9 98.8 99.2 442.1 98.2 992 448.7 98.0 99.3 460.2 98.8 99.3 495.5 99.0 99.5 505.1 98.4 99.5 517.5 98.5 99.5 534.0 98.6 99.4 542.1 99.2 99.5 569.5 99.1 99.6 587.1 98.6 99.6 599.2 98.6 99.6 615.4 99.0 99.6 620.7 99.4 99.7 647.1 99.6 99.9 656.5 99.1 100.0 665.6 99.0 100.0 6720 99.7 100.0 705.7 99.8 100.2 719.8 99.1 100.2 2013 Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Itation Bed Elevation Water Ele 216.9 97.5 98.2 233.1 97.9 98.2 251.0 97.7 98.3 255.4 97.3 98.2 258.6 97.3 98.3 263.3 98.1 98.4 288.3 98.3 98.7 295.3 97.6 98.7 307.2 97.5 98.7 316.9 97.5 98.7 326.0 97.6 98.7 331.1 98.3 98.8 358.4 98.4 99.0 363.8 97.9 99.1 368.9 97.7 99.1 378.8 97.9 99.1 386.9 98.0 363.3 396.6 98.6 99.1 423.5 98.8 99.1 430.5 98.1 99.2 438.9 97.8 99.2 446.6 9T8 99.2 452.6 98.3 99.1 458.2 98.8 99.3 472.7 98.9 99.3 493.2 98.9 99.5 502.7 98.2 99.5 2016 Year 5 Monitoring \Survey itation 2014 Water Ele, 225.6 2015 98.8 233.7 Year 3 Monitoring \Survey 98.8 242.8 Year 4 Monitoring \Survey m Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elei 287.0 98.6 98.8 287.0 98.4 99.0 292.2 98.6 98.9 302.5 97.7 99.1 298.1 98.1 98.9 316.7 97.9 99.2 323.8 98.2 99.1 323.6 98.2 99.3 339.8 98.7 99.1 355.9 98.8 99.4 356.5 98.8 99.2 357.8 98.2 99.4 363.3 98.5 99.2 388.1 98.3 99.5 374.5 98.1 99.3 391.4 98.8 99.6 381.1 98.6 99.3 419.2 98.9 99.7 402.4 98.8 99.4 422.9 98.4 99.7 408.9 98.8 99.4 451.4 98.7 100.2 416.2 98.7 99.4 464.7 99.2 100.2 425.2 98.9 99.4 484.6 99.4 100.4 433.9 99.3 99.5 493.4 98.7 100.5 438.3 98.3 99.5 509.5 99.0 100.6 452.1 98.6 99.5 519.5 99.0 100.7 458.1 98.9 99.6 524.7 100.0 100.6 471.9 99.0 99.6 574.5 99.8 100.7 496.2 99.1 99.7 584.0 99.2 100.8 500.7 98.5 99.7 602.9 99.2 100.9 510.7 98.7 99.7 607.3 100.3 100.8 522.8 98.5 99.8 645.9 100.3 101.0 535.7 98.8 99.8 667.3 100.5 101.1 541.2 99.2 99.8 671.0 100.0 101.0 546.1 98.9 99.9 696.2 100.0 101.1 553.4 98.9 99.9 699.4 100.6 101.2 559.6 99.4 99.9 707.0 100.5 101.2 Herman Dariy (Tributary 1) Year 5 Profile - Reach 00+00 to 10+00 2016 Year 5 Monitoring \Survey itation Bed Elevation Water Ele, 225.6 98.4 98.8 233.7 97.7 98.8 242.8 98.0 98.8 262.0 98.0 98.9 268.6 98.4 98.9 293.8 98.5 99.1 301.1 97.9 99.2 324.3 98.1 992 330.8 98.6 992 356.2 98.7 99.3 364.4 98.4 994 385.2 98.1 99.5 391.4 98.8 99.5 426.8 99.1 99.6 433.5 98.5 99.6 451.9 98.7 99.7 465.3 98.7 99.7 470.6 99.0 99.8 497.8 99.2 99.9 501.2 99.1 99.9 513.0 98.7 100.0 516.3 99.3 100.0 519.0 98.8 100.0 541.2 99.1 100.2 544.8 99.6 100.2 586.2 99.7 100.4 590.9 99.0 100.4 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Distance (feet) . -Bed As -built 3/21/12 Year 1 (2012) Bed -Year 2 (2013) Bed - (-Year 3 (2014) Bed -rt-Year 4 (2015) Bed -*-Year 5 (2016) Bed -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface 1000 As -built 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 A, g. Water Surface Slope 0.0053 0.0045 0.0054 0.0051 0.0050 0.0046 Riffle Length 36 28 36 38 49 35 Avg. Riffle Slope 0.0064 0.0057 0.0075 0.0049 0.0041 0.0056 Pool Length 32 35 32 30 30 33 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Distance (feet) . -Bed As -built 3/21/12 Year 1 (2012) Bed -Year 2 (2013) Bed - (-Year 3 (2014) Bed -rt-Year 4 (2015) Bed -*-Year 5 (2016) Bed -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface 1000 Terracell KV Piped Crossing o a° o v, U U 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Distance (feet) . -Bed As -built 3/21/12 Year 1 (2012) Bed -Year 2 (2013) Bed - (-Year 3 (2014) Bed -rt-Year 4 (2015) Bed -*-Year 5 (2016) Bed -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface 1000 Project Name Herman Dairy - Year 5 (2016) Profile Reach Tributary I Feature Profile Date 2/20/16 990.2 1001.8 1015.7 1053.0 1061.5 1094.8 1106.1 1141.7 1145.7 1158.5 1163.3 1183.3 1197.8 1214.6 1226.9 1242.5 1251.9 1275.5 1280.7 1289.3 1300.0 1321.8 1364.7 1376.2 1386.5 1397.1 108.0 107.0 106.0 105.0 R 104.0 0 a 103.0 W 102.0 101.0 2012 As -built Survey led Elevation Water Elevation Station 2012 Year 1 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station 2013 Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water Ele 100.6 101.7 994.2 101.2 102.0 990.0 100.6 101:8 100.7 101.7 1015.4 101.2 102.1 1001.2 100.6 101.8 101.4 101.7 1027.3 101.5 102.1 1005.6 100.9 101.8 101.5 101.9 1056.7 101.7 102.3 1020.3 101.5 101.9 101.0 1019 1069.3 101.0 102.3 1052.0 101.8 102.3 101.1 102.0 1085.1 101.0 102.3 1066.9 101.0 102.3 101.6 102.2 1105.4 101.3 102.4 1079.1 100.7 102.3 102.0 102.4 1111.8 101.8 102.4 1095.5 100.9 102.3 101.2 102.3 1139.4 102.2 102.7 1106.7 101.1 102.3 101.1 102.3 1151.1 100.8 102.7 1115.3 101.9 102.3 102.0 102.4 1158.5 101.0 102.7 1128.3 102.1 102.5 102.4 102.7 1168.8 102.1 102.7 1147.1 101.9 102.6 102.3 102.8 1174.7 102.2 102.7 1149.9 101.3 102.6 102.0 102.8 1199.3 102.4 102.9 1157.0 101.2 102.6 101.9 102.8 1207.4 101.2 103.0 1165.6 1013 102.6 102.1 102.8 1219.3 101.9 103.0 1170.8 102.1 102.6 102.4 102.8 1235.6 101.9 103..0 1188.6 102.4 102.8 102.6 102.8 1248.9 102.1 103.1 1202.2 102.1 102.8 101.7 102.9 1258.6 102.6 103.2 1208.7 100.9 102.9 102.0 102.9 1276.2 102.5 103.3 1226.2 101.7 102.9 102.6 102.8 1285.3 101.6 103.3 1234.8 102.0 102.9 102.5 102.9 1295.7 102.4 103.3 1257.0 102.4 102.9 102.6 1247.6 1302.3 102.6 103.4 1270.7 102.5 103.0 102.2 103.0 1318.4 102.6 103.5 1280.9 102.2 103.0 102.0 103.1 1326.0 102.7 103.5 1292.0 102.0 103.0 101.9 103.1 1333.8 102.3 103.5 1304.3 102.6 103.0 100.0 1000 Station 2014 Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station 2015 Year 4 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station 2016 Year 5 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water Elegy 992.7 101.5 102.2 998.1 101.6 102.3 995.6 101.7 102.4 1002.4 IOL5 102.2 1002.5 IOL2 102.3 1000.0 1012 102.4 1008.0 100.9 102.2 1018.4 101.6 102.3 1004.8 101.4 102.4 1013.1 IOLO 102.3 1023.6 101.8 102.4 1006.2 IOL8 102.4 1022.9 1015 102.3 1063.3 101.8 102.5 1034.8 1020 102.7 1045.3 101.7 102.3 1071.0 101.5 102.5 1041.2 I OL7 102.7 1056.9 101.8 102.3 1092.6 1013 102.6 1056.7 101.5 102.8 1062.7 101.3 102.4 1096.7 102.1 102.7 1066.8 101.7 102.8 1081.8 1009 102.4 1140.7 102.2 1029 1080.2 102.0 102.7 1097.5 101.6 102.7 1146.3 102.0 102.9 1097.7 102.2 102.8 1104.2 102.4 103.0 1164.0 102.0 102.9 1141.2 102.4 102.9 1144.4 1025 103.2 1169.2 102.5 102.9 1 148.1 101.9 103.0 1147.7 102.0 103.2 1201.7 102.4 103.1 1163.3 102.1 103.1 1162.6 102.0 1032 1213.2 101.9 103.0 1 175.6 101.7 103.1 1183.3 102.6 103.3 1238.1 102.1 103.3 1179.2 102.5 103.1 1190.6 102.6 103.3 1251.2 101.8 103.3 1217.1 102.4 103.2 1211.9 102.7 103.4 1257.6 102.8 103.4 1221.3 101.8 103.2 1215.7 101.9 103.4 1274.8 102.7 103.4 1238.0 102.2 103.2 1221.5 101.8 103.4 1279.4 102.1 103.4 1242.7 102.6 103.2 1227.7 102.8 103.5 1289.0 102.0 103.5 1247.6 102.3 103.3 1256.2 102.8 103.6 1294.9 102.9 103.6 1256.8 102.3 103.3 1288.7 103.1 103.8 1329.8 103.1 103.6 1264.7 102.8 103.3 1319.8 103.1 103.9 1349.3 103.2 103.8 1284.9 102.8 103.5 1344.6 103.2 1039 1367.6 103.2 103.8 1287.9 101.8 103.5 1348.5 102.8 104.0 1372.2 102.9 103.8 1301.5 102.3 103.6 1352.5 103.2 104.0 1382.7 102.7 103.9 1307.1 102.9 103.7 Herman Dairy (Tributary 1) Year 5 Profile -Reach 10+00 to 21+08 1200 -Bed As -built 3/21/12 -Year 1 (2012) Bed 1400 1600 Distance (feet) -a -Year 2 (2013) Bed -t-Year 3 (2014) Bed -Year 4 (2015) Bed 1800 -0--Year 5 (2016) Bed 2000 -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface As -built 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Avg. Water Surface Slope 0.0053 0.0045 0.0054 0.0051 0.0050 0.0046 Riffle Length 36 28 36 38 49 35 Avg. Riffle Slope 0.0064 0.0057 0.0075 0.0049 0.0041 0.0056 Pool Length 32 35 32 30 30 33 1200 -Bed As -built 3/21/12 -Year 1 (2012) Bed 1400 1600 Distance (feet) -a -Year 2 (2013) Bed -t-Year 3 (2014) Bed -Year 4 (2015) Bed 1800 -0--Year 5 (2016) Bed 2000 -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface o Log Vane °y 0.0 Log Vane a O O Remnant Beaver Dam O ami O V y U m v ��] 04 P. U U O 0 N 0 U U c 0 U U o 0 a a, o 0 y Tn 0 U � U U 1200 -Bed As -built 3/21/12 -Year 1 (2012) Bed 1400 1600 Distance (feet) -a -Year 2 (2013) Bed -t-Year 3 (2014) Bed -Year 4 (2015) Bed 1800 -0--Year 5 (2016) Bed 2000 -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface Name Herman Dairy -Year 5 (2016) Profile Tributary 2 Profile 2/20/16 Station 0.0 11.2 14.9 20.1 22.2 34.9 37.6 41.7 44.1 60.6 62.3 69.1 71.7 81.1 85.9 93.8 99.3 110.8 113.8 116.9 126.7 138.4 143.4 146.8 150.8 2012 As -built Survey Bed Elevation Water Elevation 97.9 98.2 97.9 98.2 97.5 98.2 97.5 98.2 98.0 98.0 98.0 98.3 97.6 98.1 97.7 98.1 97.9 98.4 98.0 97.6 97.4 98.1 97.8 98.1 98.0 97.9 98.0 106.8 97.7 98.3 97.9 98.3 98.0 98.3 98.2 98.2 97.9 98.4 98.2 141.4 98.1 98.4 98.2 98.2 97.7 98.4 97.7 98.5 98.3 97.9 2012 Year 1 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 53.5 98.0 98.4 58.4 97.7 98.4 62.3 97.5 98.3 67.7 98.0 98.3 77.5 98.1 98.4 84.1 97.6 98.4 87.5 97.7 98.4 92.2 97.9 98.4 106.8 98.0 98.4 110.6 97.8 98.3 114.0 98.1 98.2 137.1 98.1 98.4 141.4 97.7 98.4 147.7 98.2 98.3 168.6 98.2 98.5 176.9 97.9 98.5 182.9 98.2 98.4 209.1 98.5 98.5 223.9 98.4 98.6 226.4 98.0 98.6 231.4 98.0 98.6 235.9 98.4 98.7 257.1 98.5 98.8 261.1 98.1 98.8 267.6 98.5 98.8 2013 Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 20.0 97.9 98.5 33.8 97.9 98.5 36.0 97.5 98.6 39.4 97.6 98.6 43.6 97.8 98.4 57.3 97.9 98.6 60.4 97.5 98.6 67.4 97.7 98.6 69.4 97.9 98.6 80.5 97.9 98.6 84.1 97.7 98.7 87.7 97.6 98.7 91.8 97.8 98.6 95.9 98.0 98.7 107.8 98.1 98.7 112.1 97.7 98.7 115.2 98.1 98.7 136.8 98.1 98.8 142.5 97.6 98.8 144.2 97.6 98.8 149.8 98.2 98.8 169.3 98.2 98.8 174.4 97.8 98.8 175.4 97.7 98.8 179.1 97.8 98.8 2014 Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 40.8 97.8 98.4 48.9 98.0 98.4 57.4 97.8 98.4 59.6 97.5 98.4 66.0 97.6 98.4 67.6 98.1 98.4 78.2 98.2 98.5 81.4 97.7 98.5 87.5 97.7 98.5 90.9 98.0 98.5 108.0 98.2 98.6 110.9 97.9 98.5 111.5 97.9 98.5 113.6 98.2 98.6 137.1 98.1 98.6 139.6 97.8 98.6 143.6 97.7 98.6 146.9 98.2 98.6 169.5 98.2 98.7 172.8 97.9 98.7 179.2 97.9 98.7 182.2 98.3 98.8 209.6 98.3 98.8 212.1 97.9 98.8 213.9 98.3 98.8 2015 Year 4 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 40.8 97.9 98.3 58.1 98.0 98.4 61.7 97.6 98.4 64.3 97.6 98.4 67.4 97.9 98.4 76.7 98.0 98.4 79.3 97.8 98.4 83.3 97.6 98.3 88.5 97.8 98.3 93.8 98.0 98.3 104.9 98.1 98.4 108.6 97.8 98.4 111.7 97.8 98.4 114.1 98.1 98.4 134.0 98.1 98.5 137.6 97.8 98.5 143.2 97.8 98.5 147.8 98.1 98.5 166.7 98.2 98.6 170.7 98.0 98.5 176.0 97.9 98.5 183.4 98.2 98.5 195.1 98.2 98.6 198.5 97.9 98.6 202.3 98.2 98.6 2016 Year 5 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 40.8 97.9 98.3 63.0 98.0 98.4 72.0 98.1 98.4 73.4 97.9 98.4 75.1 97.8 98.4 77.2 98.2 98.4 79.8 97.7 98.4 87.2 97.8 98.4 91.2 97.9 98.4 106.1 98.0 98.5 108.1 97.9 98.5 109.3 97.9 98.5 112.9 98.2 98.5 136.1 98.1 98.5 138.1 97.8 98.5 142.9 97.7 98.5 145.8 98.1 98.5 169.2 98.2 98.6 171.7 97.9 98.6 177.9 97.8 98.6 180.4 98.2 98.6 195.9 98.3 98.6 198.7 97.9 98.6 201.1 98.2 98.6 221.9 98.4 98.7 As -built 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Avg. Water Surface Slope 0.0040 0.0041 0.0042 0.0043 0.0044 0.0044 Riffle Length 14 13 13 14 12 15 Avg. Riffle Slope 0.0039 0.0042 0.0061 0.0057 0.0051 0.0058 Pool Length 13 12 11 11 13 11 Herman Dariy (Tributary 2) Year 5 Profile - Reach 00+00 to 10+00 102.0 101.5 101.0 n 0 ao, o 100.5 2'. o 100.0 o v 0 99.5 r: o o U U 99.0 0 W 98.5to Iff PC AL wx 98.0 97.5 97.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Distance (feet) -Bed As -built 3/21/12 +Year 1 (2012) Bed -4 -Year 2 (2013) Bed Year 3 (2014) Bed - Year 4 (2015) Bed +Year 5 (2016) Bed -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface Name Herman Dairy -Year 5 (2016) Profile Tributary 2 Profile 4/6/16 Station 524.8 1041.2 1041.8 1043.5 1060.7 1071.8 1074.4 1095.6 1098.7 1110.0 1116.6 1122.1 1128.3 1137.3 1139.8 1146.0 1147.4 1156.8 1160.6 1167.7 1172.0 1191.8 1195.0 1201.3 1205.2 1220.4 1225.1 106.0 105.0 104.0 E 103.0 L 102.0 W C 101.0 D W 100.0 99.0 98.0 1000 2012 As -built Survey Bed Elevation Water Elevation 2012 Year 1 Monitoring \Survey Station 99.4 100.2 100.8 101.2 101.2 101.5 101.5 101.4 101.7 101.3 101.7 101.0 101.6 101.2 101.7 101.7 101.7 102.2 101.3 101.6 102.3 101.8 102.3 102.3 101.6 102.3 1109.7 102.0 102.6 102.0 102.6 103.1 1120.4 102.8 103.1 102.4 103.1 102.5 103.1 102.9 103.1 102.9 103.2 102.4 103.2 102.6 103.2 103.0 103.2 103.1 103.3 102.8 103.3 2012 Year 1 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 503.3 99.1 99.6 1041.2 101.5 101.5 1064.1 101.3 101.6 1072.4 101.1 101.7 1078.9 101.2 101.7 1087.0 101.3 101.7 1094.2 101.1 101.7 1096.1 101.6 101.9 1109.7 102.0 102.4 1115.0 101.5 102.4 1120.4 101.8 102.4 1125.5 102.1 102.4 1134.2 102.4 102.8 1137.5 101.9 102.6 1144.2 102.0 102.8 1145.5 103.0 102.7 1153.5 102.9 103.1 1159.3 102.4 103.1 1165.4 102.5 103.1 1170.1 102.8 103.1 1188.5 102.9 1032 1192.5 102.5 1032 1198.5 102.6 103.3 1202.8 103.0 103.3 1217.5 103.0 10114 1222.8 102.7 103.4 1226.2 103.1 103.5 2013 Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 495.4 98.7 99.7 1041.2 101.4 101.5 1055.1 101.2 101.8 1068.9 101.3 102.0 1071.4 101.0 102.0 1076.4 101.1 102.0 1079.6 101.3 102.0 1086.6 101.3 102.0 1090.3 101.1 102.0 1093.7 101.1 102.0 1096.8 101.7 102.2 1109.1 102.0 102.6 1114.1 101.6 102.6 1117.1 101.6 102.6 1120.4 101.7 102.6 1126.1 102.2 102.7 1134.2 102.4 103.0 1137.5 101.9 103.0 1143.7 101.7 103.0 1145.3 103.0 103.3 1155.2 102.7 103.4 1158.5 102.4 103.4 1162.1 102.3 103.4 1166.4 102.5 103.4 1170.4 102.9 103.4 1190.0 103.0 103.5 1193.6 102.4 103.5 2014 Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 498.0 99.0 99.7 1043.6 101.4 101.5 1063.5 101.3 101.9 1067.5 101.2 102.0 1079.6 101.1 102.0 1083.8 101.4 102.0 1089.6 101.6 102.1 1094.1 101.1 102.1 1096.7 101.1 102.1 1098.7 101.7 102.1 1112.5 102.0 102.5 1116.7 101.6 102.5 1124.5 101.8 102.5 1130.2 102.2 102.6 1136.9 102.3 102.8 1139.6 101.9 102.8 1146.4 102.0 102.8 1147.4 103.0 103.2 1158.3 102.8 103.3 1161.3 102.4 103.3 1168.9 102.6 1032 1172.1 102.9 103.3 1190.9 103.0 103.4 1195.5 102.5 103.3 1201.1 102.6 103.3 1204.7 103.0 103.4 1222.7 103.1 103.5 2015 Year 4 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 1043.6 101.4 101.5 1052.0 101.2 101.6 1064.2 101.6 101.9 1068.5 101.3 102.0 1075.7 101.1 102.0 1088.6 101.4 102.1 1096.7 101.2 102.1 1101.1 101.8 102.1 1112.4 102.2 102.5 1117.8 101.6 102.6 1123.2 101.8 102.6 1129.5 102.1 102.7 1138.7 102.3 102.7 1141.8 101.9 102.9 1147.6 101.8 102.8 1149.3 103.1 103.1 1158.6 102.8 103.2 1162.8 102.4 103.2 1165.7 102.5 103.2 1168.7 102.6 103.3 1172.4 102.8 103.3 1191.6 103.0 103.3 1195.5 102.4 103.4 1201.5 102.7 103.4 1204.5 102.9 103.4 1222.2 103.1 103.5 1225.8 102.7 103.5 Herman Dairy (Tributary 2) Year 5 Profile - Reach 10+00 to 16+96 2016 Year 5 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation 494.7 98.9 99.5 1043.6 101.4 101.4 1063.5 101.3 101.8 1065.8 101.0 101.8 1075.7 101.0 101.9 1079.2 101.0 101.9 1082.1 101.3 101.9 1094.3 101.5 102.0 1097.0 101.0 102.0 1100.3 101.6 102.1 1114.8 101.8 102.6 1117.5 101.6 102.6 1123.7 101.5 102.6 1126.7 102.0 102.7 1138.0 102.2 102.7 1140.9 101.8 102.7 1147.2 101.8 102.7 1148.7 103.0 103.1 1159.8 102.6 103.2 1162.2 102.3 103.2 1170.3 102.4 103.2 1173.2 102.7 103.3 1194.7 102.6 103.4 1195.6 102.3 103.4 1202.1 102.5 103.4 1204.3 102.8 103.4 1223.8 102.8 103.5 Log Vane As -built 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Avg. Water Surface Slope 0.0040 0.0041 0.0042 0.0043 0.0044 0.0044 Riffle Length 14 13 13 14 12 15 Avg. Riffle Slope 0.0039 0.0042 0.0061 0.0057 0.0051 0.0058 Pool Length 13 12 ll 11 13 11 Log Vane Log Vane 11-1 O a O a O lu 91 OO N lu N Braided Reach o U U U 1100 1200 -Bed As -built 3/21/12 -$-Year 1 (2012) Bed +Year 2 (2013) Bed 1300 1400 1500 1600 -1-(-Year 3 (2014) Bed -*-Year 4 (2015) Bed -4--Year 5 (2016) Bed -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface 1700 Project Name Herman Dairy - Year 5 (2016) Profile Reach Tributary 3 Feature Profile Date 2/20/16 Station 2012 As -built Survey Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station 2012 Year 1 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water F.levatior Station 2013 Year 2 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water ElevatioE Station 2014 Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station 2015 Year 4 Monitoring \Survey Bed Elevation Water ElevatioE 2016 Year 5 Monitoring \Survey Station Bed Elevation Water ElevatioE 0.0 94.6 11 82.0 99.6 89.0 99.7 99.9 69.8 99.4 99.7 83.8 99.6 100.0 69.0 99.5 99. 22.2 97.1 13 85.1 99.1 100.1 99.7 99.9 82.0 99.6 99.9 116.3 99.7 100.1 77.7 99.6 100. 42.1 98.7 86.6 99.2 116.2 99.7 100.0 84.0 99.1 99.9 121.3 99.2 100.1 81.4 99.2 99. 69.9 99.5 c 89.0 99.7 118.7 99.0 100.0 87.2 99.3 99.9 123.6 99.3 100.1 84.9 99.2 99. 82.7 99.6 116.0 99.6 122.8 99.2 100.0 89.0 99.7 99.9 125.8 99.8 100.1 88.1 99.5 100. 85.8 99.2 99.9 118.9 99.0 124.9 99.7 99.9 116.3 99.5 100.0 140.0 99.9 100.1 113.4 99.6 100. 89.2 99.7 99.9 122.4 99.1 138.9 99.7 100.0 121.0 99.1 100.1 144.6 99.1 100.1 116.2 99.2 100. 115.5 99.6 99.9 125.1 99.6 142.8 99.0 100.0 125.1 99.6 100.0 152.8 99.3 100.2 119.9 99.1 100. 119.0 99.0 99.9 138.8 99.7 146.9 98.9 100.0 139.9 99.6 100.1 155.8 99.7 100.1 122.7 99.7 100. 122.7 99.1 99.9 143.8 99.0 153.0 99.1 100.0 145.4 99.0 100.1 172.3 99.7 100.1 136.6 99.7 100. 125.8 99.6 99.9 151.9 99.1 155.7 99.6 100.0 150.6 99.1 100.1 177.0 99.2 100.2 139.6 99.2 100. 138.2 99.6 99.9 158.4 99.6 163.8 99.6 100.0 156.5 99.7 100.1 183.1 99.2 100.1 148.8 99.1 100. 142.3 99.1 99.9 171.8 99.6 171.9 99.5 100.0 172.5 99.7 100.1 185.9 99.7 100.1 153.0 99.7 100. 146.4 99.0 99.9 176.8 99.0 178.1 98.9 100.0 177.9 99.0 100.1 197.7 99.6 100.0 168.5 99.7 100. 151.0 99.1 99.9 182.1 99.1 184.5 99.0 100.0 181.6 99.0 100.1 201.1 99.2 100.1 172.6 99.1 100. 156.1 99.6 99.9 185.4 99.5 187.8 99.5 100.0 185.6 99.6 100.1 206.1 99.1 100.0 180.0 99.0 100. 170.2 99.6 99.9 197.4 99.4 198.4 99.6 100.0 195.7 99.5 100.2 209.5 99.7 100.1 182.9 99.5 100. 175.3 99.0 99.9 199.7 99.0 203.3 98.9 100.0 201.2 99.0 100.1 216.9 99.6 100.0 193.3 99.6 100. 182.1 99.1 99.9 204.8 98.8 208.4 98.9 100.0 205.5 98.9 100.1 219.4 99.1 100.0 198.2 99.0 100. 185.9 99.6 99.9 209.1 99.6 212.7 99.7 100.0 210.5 99.7 100.1 223.9 99.3 100.0 204.7 99.0 100. 196.0 99.6 99.9 215.3 99.6 217.1 99.7 100.0 215.1 99.7 100.1 226.4 99.5 100.1 212.0 99.7 100. 199.5 99.0 99.9 218.7 99.0 220.5 99.1 100.0 220.4 99.1 100.1 236.1 99.9 100.1 216.3 99.0 100. 205.7 98.8 99.9 223.9 99.1 226.5 99.1 100.0 227.2 99.6 100.2 238.8 99.3 100.1 221.0 99.2 100. 208.9 99.6 227.8 99.7 229.2 99.7 100.0 235.4 99.7 100.1 246.4 99.4 100.1 225.5 99.5 100. 214.2 99.8 100.0 234.9 99.8 237.8 99.6 100.1 238.8 99.2 100.1 249.9 99.6 100.1 233.0 99.8 100. 217.5 99.0 100.0 239.4 99.1 240.6 99.1 100.1 245.3 99.2 100.1 258.2 99.7 100.1 236.3 99.2 100. Herman Dariy (Tributary 3) Year 5 Profile - Reach 00+00 to 07+43 As -built 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Avg. Water Surface Slope 0.0012 NA 0.0015 0.0015 0.0013 0.0018 Riffle Length 11 10 11 11 11 10 Avg. Riffle Slope 0.0022 NA 0.0042 0.0040 0.0054 0.0038 Pool Length 13 13 13 13 13 14 Herman Dariy (Tributary 3) Year 5 Profile - Reach 00+00 to 07+43 102.0 101.0 100.0 a~ VdA 99.0 .o w 98.0 o Telracell 0 O 0 97.0 c t� 0 Q ^, W . � .0 .moo °' 96.0 rig vi U U U U 95.0 94.0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Distance feet -Bed As -built 3/21/12 -4-Bed Year 1 (2012) -&-Year 2 (2013) Bed - Year 3 (2014) Bed - Year 4 (2015) Bed -tYear 5 (2016) Bed -Year 5 (2016) Water Surface Station Elevation 0.00 99.49 r, X Site Name: Watershed: 1.01 Herman Dairy 30501001120030 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan 20.16 99.60 21.15 99.24 21.83 98.74 X5 ID 98.31 Tributary 1 XS - 1, Pool) 98.05 24.66 98.14 Drainage 98.10 26.54 98.20 a 98.38 28.90 98.29 29.67 98.92 30.8 99.14 32.05 99.44 33.06 �R` 33.86 99.55 35.30 99.40 38.53 ' d . 42.6 99.67 45.5 99.7 48.9 �. } 51.4 99.7 r 7 {. JOIL Stream Type E Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS -1, Pool) 101 100 --------- -Bankfull 99 As-Built 4/3/12 0 � MY-Ol 2012 W MY-02 2013 98 MY-03 2014 MY-04 2015 97 t MY-05 2016 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Station (feet) Station Elevation 0.00 99.49 8.84 99.74 Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.00 99.49 8.84 99.74 14.44 99.80 17.92 99.82 19.00 99.76 20.16 99.60 21.15 99.24 21.83 98.74 22.71 98.31 23.79 98.05 24.66 98.14 25.45 98.10 26.54 98.20 27.74 98.38 28.90 98.29 29.67 98.92 30.8 99.14 32.05 99.44 33.06 99.48 33.86 99.55 35.30 99.40 38.53 99.58 42.6 99.67 45.5 99.7 48.9 99.7 51.4 99.7 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 99.7 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 14.2 Bankfull Width: 26.7 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.6 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.5 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: - Bank Height Ratio: - Site Name: Watershed: Herman Dai 30501001120030 XS ID 1.01 Tributary 1 XS - 2, Pool) 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Drainage Station Elevation ' t iG 0.00 100.12 Bankfull Elevation: 100.4 3.23 100.29 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 9.3 12.69 100.39 Bankfull Width: 17.5 18.03 100.41 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 101.8 - 22.52 100.02 Flood Prone Width: >80 24.23 100.11 Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.4 25.34 100.00 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.5 A 26.28 99.68 W / D Ratio: 32.9 26.89 99.19 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 27.44 98.97 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 28.62 98.99 29.53 99.03 Stream Type E 31.02 99.08 31.42 99.54 32.3 100.08 Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS - 2, Riffle) 33.4 100.27 35.6 100.33 102 37.6 100.49 _____________________________________________________________ 41.7 100.46 47.6 100.46 101 50.6 100.59 54.4 100.75 d 0 100 _ _ _ • Bankfull _ _ _ • Flood Prone Area ti As -Built 4/3/12 W 99 MY -01 2012 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 98 MY -04 2015 0 10 20 30 40 60 Station (feet) .�. MY -05 2016 SUMMARY DATA Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan SUMMARY DATA Site Name: Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 1 XS - 3, Riffle) Drainage Area (sq mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan SUMMARY DATA Station Elevation 1.20 103.06 10.27 102.91 12.68 103.11 15.57 103.12 17.87 103.14 20.03 103.18 21.50 103.27 22.30 103.31 23.50 103.06 24.12 102.77 24.72 102.30 25.48 101.98 25.96 101.61 27.13 101.56 28.0 101.59 28.9 101.71 29.8 101.68 30.7 101.77 31.2 102.12 32.0 102.59 33.3 103.17 34.8 103.30 36.2 103.24 39.5 103.26 41.9 103.16 44.2 103.08 48.3 102.78 51.52 102.99 54.31 102.74 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 102.9 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 8.3 Bankfull Width: 8.9 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 104.2 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.3 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.9 W / D Ratio: 9.5 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Stream Type I E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS - 3, Riffle) 105 �rlri,� 1 4 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 101 MY -04 2015 0 10 20 30 40 t MY -05 2016 60 Station (feet) ------------------------------------------------------------- 104 E) -- - - Bankfull o 103 -- - • Flood Prone Area ti As -Built 4/3/12 W 102 MY -01 2012 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 101 MY -04 2015 0 10 20 30 40 t MY -05 2016 60 Station (feet) Site Name: Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 1 XS - 4, Pool) Drainage Area (sq mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 103.1 X1.6 103.2 10.8 103.4 14.5 103.5 16.3 103.5 17.8 103.5 18.9 103.4 19.9 102.8 21.0 102.7 21.5 102.2 22.6 102.1 23.3 102.1 25.0 101.8 25.6 101.8 26.3 101.64 27.6 102.89 28.5 103.46 30.3 103.23 31.9 103.11 33.0 103.12 36.5 103.09 38.9 103.09 44.5 102.94 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 103.5 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 10.6 Bankfull Width: 6.7 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.8 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.6 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio: Stream Type E Site Name: 1.01 Herman Dai 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 1 XS - 5, Riffle) Drainage r Station Elevation SUMMARY DATA 0.0 103.7 Bankfull Elevation: 104.3 8.1 104.0 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 9.5 13.8 104.2 Bankfull Width: 8.8 17.7 104.4 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 105.9 20.0 104.5 Flood Prone Width: >80 x 21.8 104.5 Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.6 i 22.8 103.9 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.1 23.9 103.3 W / D Ratio: 8.2 - 24.6 103.1 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 25.3 102.9 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 a 26.3 102.7 27.2 102.7 Stream Type E/C 27.9 102.9 28.6 102.96 29.6 103.08 Herman Dairy Tributary 1 (XS - 5, Riffle) 30.6 104.02 31.4 104.52 107 34.7 104.51 39.5 104.24 46.2 103.99 106................................................................., 52.2 104.12 58.7 104.28 � 105 ----Bankfull • Flood Prone Area � - - - - - - - � � �- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - As -Built 4/3/12 104 W MY -01 2012 MY -02 2013 103 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 102 0 10 20 30 40 MY -05 2016 60 Station (feet) Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan { i, 11 -- Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS - 6, Pool) 105 104 w Bankfull m ---- Flood Prone Area 103 As -Built 4/3/12 ti MY -01 2012 W 102 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 101 t MY -05 2016 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 Station (feet) Site Name: Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 1 XS - 6, Pool) Drainage Station Elevation 0.0 103.8 7.4 103.7 Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan { i, 11 -- Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS - 6, Pool) 105 104 w Bankfull m ---- Flood Prone Area 103 As -Built 4/3/12 ti MY -01 2012 W 102 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 101 t MY -05 2016 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 Station (feet) Site Name: Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 1 XS - 6, Pool) Drainage Station Elevation 0.0 103.8 7.4 103.7 12.8 104.3 14.6 104.3 16.5 104.5 17.4 104.6 18.6 104.3 19.2 103.0 20.2 102.5 21.1 102.5 21.8 102.7 22.7 102.7 23.5 102.9 25.1 103.1 26.1 103.9 27.9 104.4 29.7 104.5 33.7 104.3 35.5 104.5 37.4 104.4 39.7 104.5 41.1 104.3 42.4 104.2 43.5 104.3 45.5 104.3 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 104.3 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 10.5 Bankfull Width: 8.8 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.8 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.2 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: - Bank Height Ratio: - Site Name: Herman Dai 104.8 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 10.6 Watershed: 1.01 30501001120030 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan XS ID 1.6 Tributary 1 XS - 7, Riffle) 1.2 W / D Ratio: 8.0 Drainage >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Station Elevation -0.5 104.8 - ` 7.0 104.9 14.2 104.9 16.7 105.1 18.8 105.5 20.0 105.3 22.1 105.3 23.1 103.6 23.9 103.4 24.9 103.3 26.3 103.3 -- .- -- 27.3 103.3 Stream Type E/C 28.5 103.3 29.2 103.52 30.2 104.45 Herman Dairy Tributary 1 (XS - 7, Riffle) 31.6 104.84 32.9 104.90 107 34.3 105.10 36.0 105.06 -------------------------------------------------------------- 38.0 104.98 106 41.4 104.88 46.5 105.00 � ---•Bankfull `� 50.4 105.21 _ _ •Flood Prone Area 51.1 105.04 p 105 _________ � � _ _ _ As -Built 4/3/12 53.6 105.18 W MY -01 2012 104 MY -02 2013 4_90V MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 103 0 10 20 30 40 t MY -05 2016 60 Station (feet) SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 104.8 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 10.6 Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 104.8 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 10.6 Bankfull Width: 9.2 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 106.4 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.6 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.2 W / D Ratio: 8.0 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Site Name: Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 1 XS - 8, Pool) Drainage Area (sq mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 105.5 5.2 105.5 8.3 105.8 11.5 105.8 16.5 105.5 17.7 104.9 18.8 103.9 19.4 103.7 20.6 103.5 21.5 103.3 22.3 103.3 23.1 103.4 23.8 103.7 24.8 104.48 26.0 105.25 27.0 105.66 28.1 105.77 30.0 105.63 35.0 105.56 43.0 105.79 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 105.5 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 13.4 Bankfull Width: 10.0 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 2.2 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.3 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio: 107 r Stream Type I E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS - 8, Pool) 106 Err Bankfull 105 • Flood Prone Area As -Built 4/3/12 104 MY -012012 W MY -02 2013 103 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 102 t MY -05 2016 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 354U 4 Station (feet) 50 Site Name: Elevation Herman Dairy 106.6 2.8 106.5 Watershed: 1.01 30501001120030 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan XS ID 106.4 Tributary 1 XS - 9, Pool) 106.5 11.3 106.4 Drainage 106.1 12.6 105.7 s` 104.9 14.0 104.6 15.3 104.6 16.0 104.46 16.6 104.38 16.9 104.56 17.5 104.99 18.0 105.47 18.8 105.89 19.7 106.33 21.1 106.74 23.0 106.93 25.5 106.71 29.4 106.62 ;. INIFEWT Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS - 9, Pool) +88 107 _ _ _ • Bankfull d_ _______ _____________ _____ _ _ _ _ • Flood Prone Area 106 � As -Built 4/3/12 MY -01 2012 W MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 t MY -05 2016 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 35 Station (feet) Station Elevation -0.3 106.6 2.8 106.5 Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation -0.3 106.6 2.8 106.5 5.9 106.3 7.7 106.2 9.3 106.0 9.9 106.4 10.5 106.5 11.3 106.4 12.1 106.1 12.6 105.7 13.3 104.9 14.0 104.6 15.3 104.6 16.0 104.46 16.6 104.38 16.9 104.56 17.5 104.99 18.0 105.47 18.8 105.89 19.7 106.33 21.1 106.74 23.0 106.93 25.5 106.71 29.4 106.62 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 106.5 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 12.4 Bankfull Width: 16.9 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 2.1 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.7 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: - BankHeight Ratio: - Site Name: Elevation Herman Dai 106.7 r 106.9 Watershed: 1.01 30501001120030 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan XS ID 105.3 Tributary 1 XS - 10, Riffle) 105.2 14.0 105.1 Drainage 105.2 16.3 106.0 16.8 106.5 17.8 106.9 18.8 107.1 20.2 106.94 22.0 106.63 25.3 106.95 28.9 106.91 32.6 106.87 �.r4ma Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 1 ( XS -10, Riffle) 109 108 -------------------------------------------------------------- 108 107 ----Bankfull 107 ____________ �__��_�_��_�� _ �� ___-Flood Prone Area 0 � As -Built 4/3/12 106 W MY -01 2012 106 MY -02 2013 105 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 105 0 5 10 15 20 25 -MY -052016 5 Station (feet) Station Elevation 0.0 106.7 4.7 106.9 Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 106.7 4.7 106.9 7.1 106.9 9.8 106.4 11.4 105.5 11.7 105.3 12.8 105.2 14.0 105.1 15.7 105.2 16.3 106.0 16.8 106.5 17.8 106.9 18.8 107.1 20.2 106.94 22.0 106.63 25.3 106.95 28.9 106.91 32.6 106.87 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 106.6 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 8.3 Bankfull Width: 8.5 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 108.1 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.5 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.0 W / D Ratio: 8.7 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Site Name: Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 2 ( XS - 11, Riffle) 99 99 99 99 99 s 98 98 Bankfull ti 98 ___ Flood Prone Area W 98 As -Built 4/3/12 98 MY -01 2012 98 MY -02 2013 98 MY 03 2014 0 10 MY -04 2015 20 Station (feet) MY -05 2016 Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 2 XS - 11, Riffle) Drainage Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 98.6 2.9 98.5 4.3 98.4 5.2 98.4 6.5 98.1 7.3 98.1 8.1 98.0 9.2 98.2 10.0 98.1 11.1 98.2 12.3 98.5 13.6 98.5 15.1 98.6 17.0 98.49 19.6 98.66 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 98.4 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 1.5 Bankfull Width: 6.8 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 98.8 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.4 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.2 W / D Ratio: 30.8 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Site Name: Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 2 XS - 12, Pool) Drainage Area (sq mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 98.9 3.1 98.8 7.1 98.8 8.2 98.7 8.5 98.5 9.5 98.1 10.1 98.1 10.6 98.1 11.4 98.3 12.1 98.5 12.8 98.6 13.9 98.8 16.5 99.0 19.3 98.96 18.2 98.90 19.2 98.95 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 98.8 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 2.2 Bankfull Width: 6.3 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.7 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.3 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio: 99 99 99 d 99 98 98 98 98 Stream Type I E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 2 ( XS - 12, Pool) atanon (feet/ Site Name: Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 2 ( XS - 13, Riffle) 100 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 100 d 99 0 99 • Bankfull --- •Flood Prone Area W 99 As -Built 4/3/12 99 MY -01 2012 MY -02 2013 99 MY -03 2014 0 10 MY -04 2015 20 Station (feet) t MY -05 2016 Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 2 XS - 13, Riffle) Drainage Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 99.2 2.4 99.2 6.8 99.3 7.5 99.2 8.2 98.9 8.7 99.1 9.9 99.0 11.3 99.1 12.5 99.0 13.4 99.2 14.9 99.4 17.2 99.4 19.7 99.4 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 99.3 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 1.7 Bankfull Width: 7.8 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 99.7 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.4 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.2 W / D Ratio: 35.8 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Site Name: Herman Dairy Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 2 XS - 14, Pool) Drainage Area (sq mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 103.1 3.1 103.3 5.9 103.3 6.6 103.2 7.6 102.8 8.3 102.6 8.8 102.4 9.3 102.4 10.0 102.6 10.4 102.6 10.8 102.8 11.2 102.8 11.9 102.9 12.5 103.14 13.9 103.16 16.4 103.22 17.6 103.28 19.7 103.16 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 103.1 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 2.4 Bankfull Width: 5.7 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.7 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.4 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: Bank Height Ratio: 104 103 .A.: 4 i, +- 1 Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 2 ( XS - 14, Pool) 1 1 1 1 102 102 0 10 Station (feet) • Bankfull • Flood Prone Area As -Built 4/3/12 MY -01 2012 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 t MY -05 2016 20 Site Name: Elevation Herman Dai ry 104.1 3.4 104.2 Watershed: 1.01 30501001120030 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan XS ID 103.7 Tributary 2 XS - 15, Riffle) 103.7 8.9 r Drainage 103.7 10.2 103.7 11.1 103.8 11.8 104.1 12.6 104.1 14.3 104.19 16.9 104.17 19.1 104.17 Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 2 ( XS - 15, Riffle) 105 105 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 104 d 104 s ------- 0 ��---------� ----Bankfull 104 • Flood Prone Area tiNX W 104 As -Built 4/3/12 MY -01 2012 104 MY -02 2013 103 MY -03 2014 0 10 MY -04 2015 20 Station (feet) t MY -05 2016 Station Elevation 0.0 104.1 3.4 104.2 Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 104.1 3.4 104.2 5.8 104.2 6.3 104.1 7.2 104.0 7.6 103.7 8.4 103.7 8.9 103.6 9.5 103.7 10.2 103.7 11.1 103.8 11.8 104.1 12.6 104.1 14.3 104.19 16.9 104.17 19.1 104.17 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 104.1 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 1.8 Bankfull Width: 7.0 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 104.6 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.5 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.3 W / D Ratio: 27.2 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 ry { �• t �"s s 3 t�� ,� Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 2 ( XS - 16, Pool) 105 105 105 104 -------------- ------ ------------------------- 0 104----Bankfull IAl ---•Flood Prone Area 104 W As -Built 4/3/12 104 MY -01 2012 104 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 103 0 10 MY -04 2015 F20 Station (feet)}MY-052016 Site Name: Herman Dai Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 2 XS - 16, Pool) Drainage Station Elevation -0.3 104.6 2.7 104.5 Area (s mi): 1.01 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan ry { �• t �"s s 3 t�� ,� Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 2 ( XS - 16, Pool) 105 105 105 104 -------------- ------ ------------------------- 0 104----Bankfull IAl ---•Flood Prone Area 104 W As -Built 4/3/12 104 MY -01 2012 104 MY -02 2013 MY -03 2014 103 0 10 MY -04 2015 F20 Station (feet)}MY-052016 Site Name: Herman Dai Watershed: 30501001120030 XS ID Tributary 2 XS - 16, Pool) Drainage Station Elevation -0.3 104.6 2.7 104.5 5.4 104.4 6.4 104.2 7.2 104.3 8.1 104.0 8.4 1039 8.8 103.7 9.4 103.5 9.9 103.9 10.4 104.4 10.7 104.4 12.1 104.6 14.2 104.48 16.8 104.57 19.0 104.80 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 104.4 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 1.7 Bankfull Width: 5.3 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.9 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.3 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: - Bank Height Ratio: - Site Name: Elevation Herman Dai ry 100.2 4.3 100.0 Watershed: 0.06 30501001120030 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan XS ID 99.7 Tributary 3 XS - 17, Riffle) 99.6 13.5 99.5 Drainage 99.6 15.8 99.5 16.4 99.7 17.2 100.0 18.3 100.1 20.1 100.12 23.4 100.01 26.9 100.00 1 s a, Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 3 ( XS - 17, Riffle) 101 ------------------------------------------------------------ 100 100 0 100----------------- ---------------� -ft n � - • Bankfull W 100 - -Flood Prone Area As -Built 4/3/12 100 MY -01 2012 MY -02 2013 99 MY -03 2014 0 5 10 15 20 MY -04 2015 30 Station (feet) MY -05 2016 Station Elevation 0.0 100.2 4.3 100.0 Area (s mi): 0.06 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 100.2 4.3 100.0 8.5 100.2 9.2 100.0 10.1 99.7 10.9 99.7 12.3 99.6 13.5 99.5 14.7 99.6 15.8 99.5 16.4 99.7 17.2 100.0 18.3 100.1 20.1 100.12 23.4 100.01 26.9 100.00 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 100.0 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 2.8 Bankfull Width: 8.0 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 100.5 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.5 l: Mean Depth at Bankful-71 0.4 W / D Ratio: 22.9 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Site Name: Elevation Herman Dai ry 100.6 Watershed: 100.7 30501001120030 0.06 XS ID 2/20/2016 Tributary 3 XS - 18, Pool) Perkinson, Jernigan Drainage 99.7 11.7 99.5 12.6 99.6 13.6 99.9 14.4 100.2 15.0 100.5 16.3 100.4 17.9 100.6 20.2 100.66 3, 100.58 Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 3 ( XS - 18, Pool) 101 101 101 ---------------------- 100 ------------- - ---------------- 100 Bankfull s; - - -- Flood Prone Area 100 ti As -Built 4/3/12 4j 100 MY -012012 100 MY -02 2013 99 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 99 t MY -OS 2016 10 20 Station (feet) Station Elevation 0.3 100.6 4.4 100.7 Area (s mi): 0.06 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.3 100.6 4.4 100.7 7.1 100.8 8.6 100.6 9.9 100.3 10.6 99.7 11.7 99.5 12.6 99.6 13.6 99.9 14.4 100.2 15.0 100.5 16.3 100.4 17.9 100.6 20.2 100.66 22.9 100.58 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 100.5 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 3.4 Bankfull Width: 5.9 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: LO Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.6 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: - Bank Height Ratio: - Station Elevation 0.0 100.4 4.6 100.4 Area (s mi): Site Name: Date: Herman Dai ry Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan 11.8 100.0 Watershed: 99.5 30501001120030 99.4 14.4 99.6 15.3 XS ID Drainage Tributary 3 XS - 19, Pool) 100.2 17.3 100.3 y , 100.4 20.1 100.68 22.3 100.76 25.8 100.71 «w1 } x ti oF►m, Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 3 ( XS - 19, Pool) 101 101 101 100_______________ 100 Bankfull s; - - -- Flood Prone Area 100 ti As -Built 4/3/12 zj 100 MY -012012 100 MY -02 2013 99 MY -03 2014 MY -04 2015 99 0 -0-W-05 2016 10 20 Station (feet) Station Elevation 0.0 100.4 4.6 100.4 Area (s mi): 0.06 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 100.4 4.6 100.4 7.9 100.4 9.9 100.5 10.8 100.2 11.8 100.0 12.5 99.5 13.2 99.4 14.4 99.6 15.3 99.9 16.2 100.2 17.3 100.3 18.4 100.4 20.1 100.68 22.3 100.76 25.8 100.71 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 100.4 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 3.4 Bankfull Width: 7.2 Flood Prone Area Elevation: - Flood Prone Width: - Max Depth at Bankfull: 1.0 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.5 W / D Ratio: - Entrenchment Ratio: - Bank Height Ratio: - Site Name: Elevation Herman Dairy 100.7 3.7 100.8 Watershed: 0.06 30501001120030 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan XS ID 100.3 Tributary 3 XS - 20, Riffle) 100.3 10.4 100.2 Drainage 100.3 12.1 100.1 13.0 100.4 13.8 100.8 14.9 100.8 16.8 100.79 19.3 100.98 �s_r dv v �c ♦� Y�1 t C f Stream Type E/C Herman Dairy Tributary 3 ( XS - 20, Riffle) 102 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 101 101 101 0 101 - - - • Bankfull 101 - - - - Flood Prone Area W 100 As -Built 4/3/12 MY -01 2012 100 MY -02 2013 100 MY 03 2014 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 MY -04 2015 20 Station (feet) MY -05 2016 Station Elevation 0.0 100.7 3.7 100.8 Area (s mi): 0.06 Date: 2/20/2016 Field Crew: Perkinson, Jernigan Station Elevation 0.0 100.7 3.7 100.8 6.5 100.8 7.2 100.7 8.0 100.4 8.8 100.3 9.6 100.3 10.4 100.2 11.0 100.3 12.1 100.1 13.0 100.4 13.8 100.8 14.9 100.8 16.8 100.79 19.3 100.98 SUMMARY DATA Bankfull Elevation: 100.8 Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area: 3.1 Bankfull Width: 7.5 Flood Prone Area Elevation: 101.5 Flood Prone Width: >80 Max Depth at Bankfull: 0.7 Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.4 W / D Ratio: 18.1 Entrenchment Ratio: >5 Bank Height Ratio: 1.0 Summary Data D50 0.1 D84 1 D95 5 Feature: Riffle Cumulative Percent 100% 2016 Description Material Size (mm) Total # Item % I Cum % Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 21 42% 36% Sand very fine sand 0.125 5 10% 44% fine sand 0.250 7 14% 48% medium sand 0.50 3 6% 48% coarse sand 1.00 6 12% 56% very coarse sand 2.0 3 6% 60% Gravel very fine gravel 4.0 1 2% 68% fine gravel 5.7 3 6% 72% fine gravel 8.0 0 0% 84% medium gravel 11.3 1 2% 92% medium gravel 16.0 0 0% 92% course gravel 22.3 0 0% 96% course gavel 32.0 0 0% 96% very coarse gravel 45 0 0% 96% very coarse gravel 64 0 0% 100% Cobble small cobble 90 0 0% 100% medium cobble 128 0 0% 100% large cobble 180 0 0% 100% very large cobble 256 0 0% 100% Boulder small boulder 362 0 0% 100% small boulder 512 0 0% 100% medium boulder 1024 0 0% 100% large boulder 2048 0 0% 100% Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100% TOTAL % of whole count 50 100% 100% Summary Data D50 0.1 D84 1 D95 5 Individual Class Percent 100% 90% 80% 0 70% p0 60% 50% U 40% c 30% 0 20% S 10% 0% oob'Loly5 oy5 05 5!� 4,,"> tib ,tiry'? n�'L a5 bb �O `,�� 1y�0 ry.,�b �b`L �ti'L`0 Particle Size (mm) EMY2-2013 ■MY3-2014 ■MY4-2015 ■MY5-2016 Cumulative Percent 100% 90% 80% a 70 60^i a 50% y 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% O01 �1 'ti �O -'61 �O Particle Size (mm) 1 -MY2-2013 -MY3-2014 -MY4-2015. -MY5-2016 Individual Class Percent 100% 90% 80% 0 70% p0 60% 50% U 40% c 30% 0 20% S 10% 0% oob'Loly5 oy5 05 5!� 4,,"> tib ,tiry'? n�'L a5 bb �O `,�� 1y�0 ry.,�b �b`L �ti'L`0 Particle Size (mm) EMY2-2013 ■MY3-2014 ■MY4-2015 ■MY5-2016 Summary Data D50 0.2 D84 1 D95 6 Feature: Riffle Cumulative Percent 100% 90 2016 80 Description Material Size (mm) Total # Item % Cum % Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 9 18% 33% Sand very fine sand 0.125 6 12% 43% fine sand 0.250 14 28% 48% medium sand 0.50 5 10% 52% coarse sand 1.00 1 8 16% 62% very coarse sand 2.0 2 4% 67% Gravel very fine gravel 4.0 1 2% 67% fine gravel 5.7 2 4% 67% fine gravel 8.0 3 6% 71% medium gravel 11.3 0 0% 76% medium gravel 16.0 0 0% 86% course gravel 22.3 0 0% 90% course gravel 32.0 0 0% 95% very coarse gravel 45 0 0% 95% very coarse gravel 64 0 0% 95% Cobble small cobble 90 0 0% 100% medium cobble 128 0 0% 100% large cobble 180 0 0% 100% very large cobble 256 0 0% 100% Boulder small boulder 362 0 0% 100% small boulder 512 0 0% 100% medium boulder 1024 0 0% 100% large boulder 2048 0 0% 100% Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100% TOTAL % of whole count 50 100% 100% Summary Data D50 0.2 D84 1 D95 6 Individual Class Percent 100% 90% 80% d 70°fo a 60% 50% V 40% 0 30% s 20% 10- 0% oohtio, ,y5 Z. bo �yb �,�ti yeti a v�p0aoo�b Particle Size (mm) Cumulative Percent 100% 90 80 e 70% 60 P, 50 40% 30% 7 U 20% 10% 0% ,O Particle Size (mm) �MY23013 —MY3-2014 —MY4-2015 —MY5-2016 Individual Class Percent 100% 90% 80% d 70°fo a 60% 50% V 40% 0 30% s 20% 10- 0% oohtio, ,y5 Z. bo �yb �,�ti yeti a v�p0aoo�b Particle Size (mm) Project Name: Herman Dairy UTI Cross-Section: 10 Cumulative Percent 100% 901/. 80% 70% OF a 60% 50%m000 y 40% 30% 20% l0% 717111 0% Feature: Riffle 2016 Description Material Size (mm) Total # Item % Cum % Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 10 19% 24% Sand very fine sand 0.125 2 4% 32% fine sand 0.250 4 8% 44% medium sand 0.50 6 11% 48% coarse sand 1.00 4 8% 56% very coarse sand 2.0 2 4% 60% Gravel very fine gravel 4.0 1 2% 68% fine gravel 5.7 2 4% 72% fine gravel 8.0 4 8% 80% medium gravel 11.3 5 9% 80% medium gravel 16.0 3 6% 84% 0 0 0 0. ti ti°o 00 o Panicle Size (mm) course gravel 22.3 2 4% 96% course gavel 32.0 1 2% 96% very coarse gravel 45 3 6% 96% -MY2-2013 �MY3-2014 �MY4 2015 -MYS-2016 very coarse gravel 64 1 2% 100% 4 Cobble small cobble 90 1 2% 100% Individual Class Percent 100% medium cobble 128 2 4% 100% large cobble 180 0 0% 100% very large cobble 256 0 0% 100% Boulder small boulder 362 0 0% 100% 90% small boulder 512 0 0% 100% 80% medium boulder 1024 0 0% 100% 70% large boulder 2048 0 0% 100% 0. 60% Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100% so% TOTAL % of whole count 53 100% 100% 40% Summary Data D50 1.2 DS4 20 D95 72 a 30% 20% C l0% 0% Opb'LO,,tiS o.15 oh 1 ti A 5^ g,�'.!� 1b �,L"� ,5'L b5 bb q0 1.1,4 ,$O ry5b �b'L b�'L 1O,yD.��6�Ogb Particle Size (mm) ■MY2-2013 EMY3-2014 ■MY4-2015 ■MY5-2016 Project Name: Herman Dairy UT2 D50 Cross -Section: 13 D84 38 Cumulative Percent l00% 51 Feature: Riffle 2016 Description Material Size (mm) Total # Item % Cum % Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 3 5% 68% 90% 80% 70% 60% a so � 40 g 30% v 20% 10% o% Sand very fine sand 0.125 4 7% 72% fine sand 0.250 2 3% 84% medium sand 0.50 0 0% 84% coarse sand 1.00 1 0 0% 88% very coarse sand 2.0 0 0% 92% Gravel very fine gravel 4.0 0 0% 100% fine gravel 5.7 2 3% 100% fine gravel 8.0 1 2% 100% medium gravel 11.3 3 5% 100% medium gravel 16.0 6 10% 100% Op o~ ti do ,00 �o Particle Size (mm) courseavel 22.3 9 15% 100% gr course gavel 32.0 14 24% 100% very coarse gravel 45 11 19% 100% 2-2013 —MY3-2014 —MY4-2015 —MYS-2016 very coarse gravel 64 3 5% 100% 4 Cobble small cobble 90 1 2% 100% Individual Class Percent medium cobble 128 0 0% 100% large cobble 180 0 0% 100% very large cobble 256 0 0% 100% Boulder small boulder 362 0 0% 100% l00% small boulder 512 0 0% 100% 90% medium boulder 1024 0 0% 100%80% 6 large boulder 2048 0 0% 100% 70% Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100% ,t 60 50% TOTAL % of whole count 59 100% 100% v 40% 30% b 20% 10% 0% IQ A oob'Lo,,yh oyh o5 'L A h1 9 �,�'7 tib ,L,ti� ,y'L ah b�` �o ,tib tigo ryhb hbti h�'1•�oy�`ryop4�oogb. Particle Size (mm) oMY2-2013 6MY3-2014 ■MY4-2015 ■MYS-2016 Summary Data D50 21.6 D84 38 D95 51 Project Name: Herman Dairy UT2 D50 Cross -Section: 15 D84 43 Cumulative Percent 100% 67 Feature: Riffle 2016 Description Material Size (mm) Total # Item % Cum % Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 3 6% 68% 90 80% 70%Ill 60% a � 40 g 30% v 20% 10% 0% I IV Sand very fine sand 0.125 2 4% 72% fine sand 0.250 1 2% 84% medium sand 0.50 0 0% 84% coarse sand 1.00 1 2 4% 88% very coarse sand 2.0 1 2% 92% Gravel very fine gravel 4.0 0 0% 100% fine gravel 5.7 1 2% 100% fine gravel 8.0 1 2% 100% medium gravel 11.3 1 2% 100% medium gravel 16.0 9 17% 100% Opti p} ti ti� 1po o°b Particle Size (mm) courseavel 22.3 8 15% 100% gr course gavel 32.0 6 11% 100% very coarse gravel 45 12 22% 100% 2-2013 -MY3-2014 -MY4-2015 -MYS-2016 very coarse gravel 64 4 7% 100% 4 Cobble small cobble 90 2 4% 100% Individual Class Percent medium cobble 128 1 2% 100% large cobble 180 0 0% 100% very large cobble 256 0 0% 100% Boulder small boulder 362 0 0% 100% 100% small boulder 512 0 0% 100% 90% medium boulder 1024 0 0% 100%80% 6 large boulder 2048 0 0% 100% 70% 2 Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100% Q, 60% 50% TOTAL % of whole count 54 100% 100% v 40 30% 20% b 10% 0% oob'LO,,yh oyh o5 'L a h1 9 '7 tib � ,y'L ah O� 'OP ,tib tiryhb hbti h�'1•��,y�`rypp4�Oogb. Particle Size (mm) oMY2-2013 6MY3-2014 ■MY4-2015 ■MYS-2016 Summary Data D50 20.3 D84 43 D95 67 Project Name: Herman Dairy UT3 D50 Cross -Section: 17 D84 46 Cumulative Percent 100% 59 Feature: Riffle 2016 Description Material Size (mm) Total # Item % Cum % Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 5 9% 68% 90% 80% 70% 60% a "�, 40 g 30% v 20% 10% 0% Sand very fine sand 0.125 3 6% 72% fine sand 0.250 4 7% 84% medium sand 0.50 2 4% 84% coarse sand 1.00 1 1 2% 88% very coarse sand 2.0 0 0% 92% Gravel very fine gravel 4.0 1 2% 100% fine gravel 5.7 1 2% 100% fine gravel 8.0 2 4% 100% medium gravel 11.3 1 2% 100% medium gravel 16.0 2 4% 100% Oo o~ ti do ,00 �o Particle Size (mm) courseavel 22.3 7 13% 100% gr course gavel 32.0 12 22% 100% very coarse gravel 45 4 7% 100% �MY2-2013 —MY3-2014 —MY4-2015 —MYS-2016 very coarse gravel 64 8 15% 100% 4 Cobble small cobble 90 1 2% 100% Individual Class Percent medium cobble 128 0 0% 100% large cobble 180 0 0% 100% very large cobble 256 0 0% 100% Boulder small boulder 362 0 0% 100% 100% small boulder 512 0 0% 100% 90% medium boulder 1024 0 0% 100%80% 6 large boulder 2048 0 0% 100% 70% 2 Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100% Q, 60% 50% TOTAL % of whole count 54 100% 100% U 40% 30% b 20% 10% 0% oob'Lo,,yh oyh o5 'L a h1 9 �,� tib ,�,ti 'y' ah O� 'otigo ryhb �bti h�'1•�oy�`ryop4�oogb. Particle Size (mm) oMY2-2013 6MY3-2014 ■MY4-2015 ■MYS-2016 Summary Data D50 20.1 D84 46 D95 59 Appendix E. Hydrology Data Table 12. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment 2016 Groundwater Gauge Graphs Figure E1. Annual Climatic Data vs. 30 -year Historic Data 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Appendices Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Table 12. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment *These gauges malfunctioned during the growing season, resulting in a loss of data. However, all three met success criteria prior to the malfunction. 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season Gauge (Percentage) Year 1 (2012) Year 2 (2013) Year 3 (2014) Year 4 (2015) Year 5 (2016) 1 Yes/38 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days (16.2 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) 2 Yes/101days Yes/235 days Yes/39 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days (43 percent) (100 percent) (16.6 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) 3 Yes/226 days Yes/235 days Yes/130 days Yes/89 days Yes/235 days (96.2 percent) (100 percent) (55.3 percent) (37.8 percent) (100 percent) 4 Yes/226 days Yes/46 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days (96.2 percent) (19.6 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) 5 Yes/87 days Yes/179 days Yes/108 days Yes/52 days Yes/70 days* (37.0 percent) (76.2 percent) (46 percent) (22 percent) (29.8 percent) 6 Yes/100 days Yes/235 days Yes/79 days Yes/49 days Yes/177 days (42.5 percent) (100 percent) (33.6 percent) (20.8 percent) (75.3 percent) 7 Yes/235 days Yes/235days Yes/117 days Yes/115 days Yes/162 days (100 percent) (100 percent) (49.8 percent) (48.9 percent) (68.9 percent) 8 Yes/178 days Yes/193 days Yes/119 days Yes/81 days Yes/163 days (75.7 percent) (82.1 percent) (50.6 percent) (34.4 percent) (69.4 percent) 9 Yes/29 days Yes/104 days Yes/ 100 days Yes/49 days Yes/168 days* (12.3 percent) (44.2 percent) (42.6 percent) (20.8 percent) (71.5 percent) 10 Yes/102 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days Yes/167 days Yes/235 days (43.4 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) (71 percent) (100 percent) Ref Yes/148 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days Yes/235 days Yes/208 days* (62.9 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) (100 percent) (88.5 percent) *These gauges malfunctioned during the growing season, resulting in a loss of data. However, all three met success criteria prior to the malfunction. 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 1 Year 5 (2016 Data) 122.0 10 March 20 8 6 Growing Season Start 1.8 4AAA 21.6 0 14 c 3 1.2 E November 9 End Growing Season End zr_2 , -4 >6 J -8 10 3 a 3 12 235 Das 14 cE 1.0 -16 -18 0.8 -20 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 0.4 -30 -32 -34 — 0.2 -36 — -38 -40lb W Ilk E— —low — W W -P,p.-P, Qn In Ln In M M M M M J J J J 00 Oo Oo 00 l0 ID 1.0 l0 N l0D a> \ \ a> W O \ � N 00 \ N 00 In \ \ In N W' 0.0 l0 1.0 Q> N N W Ol Ql Ol a> a> Ol a> a> a> Ol Ol a> Ol a> a> a> Ol Ql Ql Ol Ol a> N F-� F� Ol N Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 2 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 2.0 10 March 20 8 November 9 � Growing Season End Growing Season 1.8 6 Start 4 End 2 1.6 0 -2 v 4 1.4 ami -6 VWJ -8 7 3 -10 1.2 a v 12 — 3 14 235 Das 1.0 -16 -18 -20 0.8 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 -30 0.4 -32 I -34 0.2 -36 -38 41 -40 ' 0.0 W W W 4� � A -PI Un In Un In Ol at at at at J v v J 00 00 00 W tD 1.0 lD tD 1.0 I--� N W �I N N N Ui F� F-� N N lO F+ N W -,jF-� N N F-� F� N N W N N N \ \ \ \ \ \ V 4� 4� N 00 \ N lD M \ \ Q7 W O \ 4� W Ln \ \ Ln N l0 M N N N W F� 0) 0) 0) a) a) a) Ql Q7 Q7 Q7 Ol Q7 a> Q7 Q7 Q7 Ql Q7 Q7 Q7 a> Q7 Ql Q7 Q7 a> Ql Q70) a) a) Ql 0) a> at Ql a> Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 3 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 10 March 20 2.0 November 8 6 Growing Season Sta rt End Growing Season 1.8 4 21.6 _ 0 WT -2 1.4 -4 -6 c 3 10 1.2 £ 3 a 3 -i4 235 Days 0 1.0 z -16 I -18 0.8 -20 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 0.4 -30 I -32 -34 0.2 -36 -38 W N ,I ,J W W 4� -P, 4� 4�:- In In In In M M M M m J v v J W W W W tD lD 1.0 N W v N NN \vNNN\NN\NNN\\\\N N lnN N W N W W 4�:- W \ N 1.0 M \ \ M W O Un \ \ In — 0.0 tD tD \ -- N 1.0 M N N W F+ a> Ql Q7 Q7 Q7 a> Q7 a> a> Q7 Q7 Q7 a> Q7 Q7 a> a> Q7 Q7 Q7 a> Q7 N N I--� a> N at m � at 12 10 8 6 4 2 _ 0 2 v -4 a, -6 J -8 p d 3 10 -12 c -14 -16 -18 -20 -22 -24 -26 -28 -30 -32 -34 -36 -38 -40 W W W In In In In M M M M M J �I v J W W W W lD lD l0 lD lD N N W -,I N N N In N N lD N W -I N N N 4� N N N \ \ \ \ \ \ W \ N l0 M \ \ M W O \ 4� W \ W In \ \ In N 1.0 M N N W F-+ a> a> M Q7 61 N N M a> Ql Q7 Q7 a> a> a> a> a> Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 a> Ql M Ql Q7 Q7 Q7 al al al al Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 4 v., c /'2 n I c r%.%+ -%l 2.0 1.8 1.6 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 5 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 I 10 March 20 2.0 6 Growing Season November 9 1.8 Growing Season 4 2 ^c Start End 1.6 2 _4 > 6 Gauge Al 1.4 c 3 1.2 E 3 10 a -12 3 70 Das c -14 O 1.0 z t� -16 -18 0.8 -20 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 0.4 -30 I -32 -34 — 0.2 -36 -38 -40 W N UL low — W W 4� -P, -P, p. vn vn vl vl M M M M M � oo ao 00 00 io 1.0 N W V F\-� N N Un N N N N W I\-� N W v N N N I\-� N N I\-� 0\O N N 1.0 Q7 \ \ a> W O \ N 00 \ N 00 V1 \ \ V1 — 0.0 1.0 i0 N N r r N r N N \ \ \ \ \ \ N 1.0 M N N W F+ Ol Q7 Q7 Q7 Ol a> Ol a> a> Ql Q7 Q7 a> a> a> a> Ol Q7 Q7 Ol a> Q7 N N I--� Ol N at m m at Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 6 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 10 March 20 2.0 November 9 8 I 6 Growing Season End Growing Season 1.8 4 2 0 Start End 1.6 _ C -2 1.4 a 4 A c -6VII d V 3 -8 1.2 ° a 3 -10 �-12 — ' 177' Das 22 Das c 14 ° 1.0 z -16 -18 I 0.8 -20 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 0.4 -30 -32 -34 0.2 -36 -38 -40 ' W N — —. W W 4� 4�:- 4� 4�:- Ui Ul Ui Ui Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol �I J v v Oo Oo Oo Oo lD lO l0 N W V I\-� N N Ln N N N N W I\-� N W v N N N I\-� N N I\-� W N W \ N l0 M \ \ Ol W O \ � I--� W \ N W Un \ \ Un 1 1-0.0 lD l0 N N \ \ \ \ \ \ N l0 M F-� N N W F+ Ol Ol Q7 Q7 Q7 Ol Ol Ol a> Q7 Ol a) Ql Ol Ol Ol a> Ol Ol 0) Ol Q7 Ol Q7 Ol F) at m m at Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 7 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 10 2.0 November 9 8 6 End Growing Season End 1.8 4 2 1.6 a, _4A J j March 20 Growing Season Start 1.4 I _6 d 8 3 1.2 a 3 -10 3 162 Das 32 Das c 14 O 1.0 l7 -16 of6c -18 0.8 -20 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 0.4 -30 -32 -34 — 0.2 -36 -38 0.0 -40 W J W W Ul Ul Ul Ul M M M M M J J J J 00 W 00 00 lD 1.0 1.0 N Ln I'D N W J N N N W -P, W \ N l0 M \ \ Ol W O \ 4� W Ln \ \ Ln lD lO N N \ \ \ \ \ \ N l0 M N N W F+ Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Oa)l Ol Ol Ql Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol N N h-) Ol F) at m m at Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 8 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 10 March 20 2.0 November 8 6 Growing Season Start Growing Season 1.8 4 21.6 .� End _ 0 _ 2 1.4 = v -4 > CU J -6 c 3 -8 1.2 ° a 3 10 12 - 163 Da s 39 Days = 0 14 1.0 z c� -16 -18 1 0.8 -20 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 0.4 -30 -32 -34 0.2 -36 -38 -40 i W N _ _ I� W W 4� -P, 4� � U, In Ul In M M M Ol Ol J J J J 00 00 00 00 lD l0 lD N W v N N N l\J'i N N N N W I\-� N W v N N NNW N W \ N l0 M \ \ Ol W O \ N W \ I--� 00 Vn \ \ In A - -- 0.0 lD lD N N \ \ \ \ \ \ N 1.0 M N N W F-+ Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 9 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 November 9 2.0 10 March 20 Growing Season 8 U Growing Season End 1.8 6 Sta rt 4 2 0 Gauge 1.6 2 2 Malfunction IF 4 H 1.4 d 6 c J 3 v -8 N 1.2 ° 3 10 � -12 0 14 168 Das 39 Das 1.0 c c7 -16 I I oc -18 -20 0.8 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 -30 I 0.4 -32 -34 0.2 -36 -38 -40 - - low_ 0.0 W W W p. .91 Un In In In all 0) Ol 01 0) V V V V 00 00 W W lD lD 1.0 lD lD N N W V F� N N In N N lD N W V N N N W N N \ \ \ \ \ \ V 4� N \ 4� W \ N lD M \ \ Ol W O \ � I--' W \ N W Ln \ \ In N 1.0 M NN W N W O V \ O Ol Ql Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 a> a> Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 a> Ol Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 N N I--� a> N at m � at Herman Dairy Groundwater Gauge 10 Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 2.0 10 8 NP 1.8 6 4 March 20 2 1.6 Growing Season p Growing November Season 9 F -2 Sta rt 1.4 4 J 6 -g End 1.2 a 3 -10 ¢£ -12 ' 235 = -14 I 1.0 -16 o�c -18 0.8 -20 -22 -24 0.6 -26 -28 0 -30 .4 -32 -34 — 0.2 -36 — 11 L -38 - low0.0 -40 W W W A -P, In Vn In In O M M M M J v J v 00 CO CO CO lD 1.0 lD lD lD F� N W �I N N N In F-� H+ N N l0 F+ N W �I F-� N N 00 N N N \ \ \ \ \ \ 00 \ N lD Ol \ \ pl W O \ F-' CO \ N CO Ln \ \ In N l0 al N N N W N O Ol O Ql 5 5 01 QN al ai aN> 01 QNl al QIil QN 5 alai Ql a> Q7 a> at Ql at Herman Dairy Reference Groundwater Gauge Year 5 (2016 Data) 12 3.0 November 10 March 20 8 Growing Season End Growing Season 6 Start 4 2 End 2.5 0 Gauge = 2 Malfunction -4 J 2.0 -6 a -8 00 a 3 10 _ -12 0 208 Q iys1.5 m = 0 -14 z -16 I -18 -20 -22 1.0 -24 -26 -28 -30 ( 0.5 -32 -34 -36 -38 IVtT , 0.0 -40 W W W -P, ul to to to rn 0) rn am 0) V V V V 00 00 00 00 kD tD �D kD kD N N r N r r N N W J N N N W N N N N W N N W V N N N N N N I\-� 0000 F\-� N N \ \ \ \ \ \ V 4� 00 \ N 1.0 01 \ \ 01 W O \ -P� N 00 \ N 00 Un N 1.0 0) N W N O N V W \ F+ O a> Q7 a> Q7 Q7 Q7 a> Q7 Ol a> Q7 Q7 Q7 Ol Q7 Ol a> Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 Q7 N Ol F� Ol F-� Ql a> F-� Q1 18 16 14 12 ,^ *Hickory Regional Airport, NC 30 -year historic data 4U **Onsite rain gauge ^Hickory Airport Station KHKY (Weatherunderground 2015) ._. 10 C Q �v AL aV a a Figure E1. Annual Climatic Data vs. 30 -year Historic Data Month 30th %* 70th %* 2012** 2013^ 2014 2015" 2016** Jan 2.77 5.09 5.99 2.67^ 2.72 2.78 Feb 2.48 4.65 3.25 2.37^ 1.64 4.33 Mar 3.43 5.85 3.6 4.41** 2.59 0.3 Apr 2.02 4.52 5.21 4.05** 4.93 2.68 May 3.08 5.31 1.22 5.29 3.36** 1.52 3.61 June 2.89 5.74 1.03 9.74 3.71 ** 4 3.4 July 2.41 5.07 4.38 15.77 2.17** 0.92 4.54 Aug 2.43 4.64 4.68 4.45 8.95** 3.36 1.98 Sept 1.98 5.17 4.33 2.06 3.55** 7.15 0.87 Oct 1.69 4.4 2.05 2.09 3.09** 4.94 1.55 Nov 2.49 4.34 0.49^ 3.94 3.54^ 7.9 Dec 2.25 4.34 5.01 ^ 5.78 2.46^ 7.38 6 4 0r 0 c-0 `m L NNN I � Aidif CD00 4� t 'o ¢ Q w 0 z ---12012** L'2013^ i 2014 �i2015^ 6 - .1.2016** 30th %* -70th %* 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Appendices Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site �i 0 Appendix F. Benthic Data 2016 Benthic Data Lab Results 2016 Habitat Assessment Field Datasheets 2016 Annual Monitoring Report (Year 5 of 7) Herman Dairy Stream and Wetland Restoration Site Appendices AXIOM, HERMAN DAIRY, BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES, ALEXANDER COUNTY, NC, 6/23/16. SPECIES T.V. F.F.G. PA48768 PA48769 UT -1 UT -2 MOLLUSCA Bivalvia Veneroida Sphaeriidae FC Pisidium sp. 6.6 FC 1 ANNELIDA Clitellata Oligochaeta CG Tubificida Naididae Tubificinae w.h.c. CG 1 ARTHROPODA Arachnoidea Acariformes 1 Crustacea Ostracoda 5 Insecta Collembola 1 Odonata Gomphidae P Gomphus (Gomphus) sp. 5.9 P 1 Megaloptera Corydalidae P Chauliodes sp. P 1 Sialidae P Sialis sp. 7 P 2 Coleoptera Dryopidae Helichus sp. 4.1 SC 1 Dytiscidae P Prodaticus bimarginatus 1 Hydrophilidae P Helocombus sp. 5 Noteridae Hydrocanthus sp. 1 Scirtidae SC Scirtes sp. 1 27 Diptera Chironomidae Chironomus sp. 9.3 CG 10 Conchapelopia sp. 8.4 P 5 Polypedilum aviceps 3.6 SH 1 Polypedilum illinoense gp. 8.7 SH 6 Stictochironomus devinctus 5.4 CG 7 PAI, Inc. Page 1 of 2 AXIOM herman dairycl AXIOM, HERMAN DAIRY, BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES, ALEXANDER COUNTY, NC, 6/23/16. SPECIES T.V. F.F.G. PA48768 PA48769 UT -1 UT -2 Tanytarsus sp. 6.6 FC 5 Culicidae FC 10 Ptychopteridae Bittacomorpha clavipes 77 Ptychoptera sp. 1 Simuliidae FC Simulium venustum complex 7.3 1 Simulium vittatum 9.1 4 Tipulidae SH 3 TOTAL NO. OF ORGANISMS 52 127 TOTAL NO. OF TAXA 14 12 EPT TAXA 0 0 NCBI-Assigned Values 7.85 6.60 PAI, Inc. Page 2 of 2 AXIOM herman dairycl 3106 Revision G k1oe 'N 4T --o( !{ Ery Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet Mountain/ Piedmont Streams Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ UTAL SCURF Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an upstream direction starting, above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the description which best tits the observed habitats and then circle the score. if the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions, select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different me trics. �+ �t� r - Loca[iaivroad: (Road Name ]County `4/ 'Streamo AJJ4 !-du Date CC 01 j-Basin(-a+4Zwb141 Subbasin 03 - 05 `0_ Obscrver(s) Type of Study: ❑ Dish Z81 thos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe) V[p4i1g,0 Latitude 315, q 316 I-ongitude AN1+ Ecoregion: ❑ MT 2 P ❑ Slate Belt ❑ Triassic Basin Water Quality: Temperature °C Da mgll Conductivity (corr.) µSlc n pH Physical Characterization. Visible land use refers to Immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use. Visible land Use: %Forest %oResidential 14 D %oActive Pasture qQ % Active Crops %oFallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial 2() %Other - Describe: _ Watershed land use: &Wrest agriculture ❑Urban Skknianal operations upstream Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank) Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max ❑ Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide [lank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first Flat surface you stand on): (m) Funk Angle: a or ❑ NA (Vertical is 90°, horizontal is 0. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards mid -channel, = 90" indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.) ❑ Channelized Ditch CIDeeply incised -steep, straight banks Moth banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment ❑ Rccent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures C1 Exposed bedrock ❑ Excessive periphyton growth ❑ Heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell Manmade Stabilization. ON ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sedimentlgrade-control structure ❑Bernillevee Flow conditions : ❑high lural ❑Low Turbidity: OClear ❑ Slightly `turbid urbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? ❑ YES ONO Details Channel Flow Status Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions. A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................ L7 B. Water fills >75%u of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑ C. Water Fills 25-75% of available channel, many iogsl'snags exposed........... .................................. ❑ D. Root mats out of water... ........... ........ I ..... . ........... . ...... ............. .................... ............... 0 E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ❑ Weather Conditions, Photos: ON ❑Y ❑ Digital 035mm Remarks: 39 �j) CAT -01 I. Channel Modification Score Av A. channel natural, frequent bends..............................................................................._.................... B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be ofd)......... ............................................. C. some channelization present ......... ................ ............................................ ........ ._............................... 3 D. more extensive channelization, 740% of stream disrupted............................................................... 2 E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc.. ................................... _ ......... __ 0 ❑ Evidence of dredging ❑Evide cc of desnagging�o large woody debris in stream 0Banks of uniform shapelheight Remarks _ - Q�,�, f [�,{ ,_ Subtotal 11. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If 70%® of the reach is rocks, l type is present, circle the score of IT Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare, Common or .Abundant. Rocks acrophytes Sticks and leafpacks _j,,L-Snags and lags _tfUndercut banks or root mats AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER Scare >70% 40-70% 20-40% <20% 3. embeddedness 40-80% ... ,......... ............................................................................................ Score Score Score Score 4 or 5 types present ................. 20 14 12 8 3 types present........ ................. 19 4. embeddedness X80%......................................................,.................................................._._ 11 7 2 types present......... ................ 18 14 10 6 1 type present .......................,., 17 13 9 5 No types present ....................... {A I Subtotal ❑ Net woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks_ 111:. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach fiar substrate scoring, but only look at riffle for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks. A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders Scare 1. embeddedness <20%u (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders) ......................... 15 2. embeddedness 20-40%......................................................................................................... 12 3. embeddedness 40-80% ... ,......... ............................................................................................ 8 4. embeddedness >RO% ............ ......... ................ ................................... ............. a., .... ................ 3 B. substrate gravel and cobble I. embeddedness<20%................ ........... .,. ,.......... ............................... ................. ................ 14 2. embeddedness 20-40%a...........,,. .................... ...................................................................... 11 3, embeddedness 40-80%" 1-1 1....................................••................................. 6 4. embeddedness X80%......................................................,.................................................._._ 2 C. substrate mostly gravel 1. embeddedness<50%.. ................. . ..................... ... . ................. ....................... .................. 8 2. embeddedness >50%... ..................... ............................................. ...... ....................... 4 D. substrate homogeneous 1. substrate nearly all bedrock ................... ....................................................................•.......... 2. substrate nearly all sand............................................._...---•--•--_..,....................,.................•... 3 0 3. substrate nearly all detritus.................................................................................................... 2 4. substrate nearly all silty clay ........... ....................... ............................................. ,................... I Remarks Subtotal— IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in large high gradient streams, or side eddies. A. Pools present Score I. Pools Frequent (>30% of200m area surveyed) a. variety of pool sixes............................................................................................................... b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in).........................................................<.. 8 2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed) a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 6 b. pools about the same size...................................................................................................... 4 B. Pools absent.............................................................. ................................................................ .,......... 0 to Subtotal. Pool bottom boulder-cobble=hard 0 Bottom sandy -sink as you walk Q Silt bottom Q Some pools over wader depth Remarks Page T'otal� RP- (hT O� V. Riffle Habitats Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration -can be debris darn, or narrow channel arca. Riffles Frequent Riffles Infrequent Score Score A. well defined riffle and nun, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream,.. i C 12 B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width . ................................... 14 7 C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10 3 D. riffles absent................................................................................................................... 0 Channel Slope: []Typical for area ❑Steep -fast flow []Low=like a coastal stream Subtotal 1 (0 Vl. Bank Stability and Vegetation FACE UPSTREAM Left Bank Rt. Bank Score Score A. Banks stable 1, little evidence of erosion or bank failure except outside of bends), little potential tar erosion.. B. Erosion areas present 1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with goad root systems ..................................... 6 6 2, few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy.....,... ........ . ........ 5 5 3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding... ............. 3 3 4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2 2 5, little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident ........................................... 0 0 Tota li�_ Remarks V1L Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out sunlight when the sun is directly overhead, Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric. Score A. Stream with good canopy with some 'breaks for light penetration.-,, ......................... 10 B, Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ...... ......... .,.................. .,............... C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal .................................... 7 D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas............. ...............................,........_ 2 E. No canopy and no shading,......................................i..................................................................... U Remarks __ Subtotal IU VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any place on the stream batiks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc. FACE UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank Dominant vegetation: Frees ®'Shrubs ❑ Grasses © Weeds/old Field DExotics (kudzu, etc) 'Score Score A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks) 1. width > 18 meters.................................................................................. 2. width 12-18 meters................................................................................... 4 4 3. width 6-12 meters ......................... ....................................................... 3 3 4. width e 6 meters ... ................................ ....................................... ....... ..... 2 2 13. Riparian zone not intact (breaks) 1. breaks rare a. width > 18 meters-. .... .............................................................. 4 4 b. width 12-18 meters ................. ......... ....... ......... I............................ 3 3 c. width 6-12 meters...............................................,.,....,............... 2 3 d. width < 6 meters.. ............. . ................ ............... 1 1 2_ breaks common a. width > 18 meters......................................................................... 3 3 b. width 12-18 meters... .......................... ..................................... — 2 2 c. width 6-12 meters ........... ....................................................... I 1 d. width c 6 meters......................................................................... 4 U Remarks Total 10 Page Total *5'Q Disc la mer -farm filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion -atypical stream. TOTAL SCORE l e 41 3105 Revision 6 Ilabitot Assessment Field Data Sheet Mountain/ Piedmont Streams Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ OTAL SCORE Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and die road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average strearn conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions, select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determi ed by adding the results from the different metrics. 11 r— 1 r-'tt stream r t 1 Location/road: r [Road Name )County Date �3 01& CC#G3j0M_4U4NftCta.sin C,,Q itV k Subbasin f Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish enthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe) sh Latitude Longitude -51- Ecoregion: ❑ MT ❑ P ❑ Slate Belt ❑ Triassic Basin Water Quality: Temperature °C DO -mg/l Conductivity (carr.) N5/cm pH Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use. Visible Land Use: %Forest %Residential %Active Pasture 60 % Activc Crops %Fallow Fields % Commercial %industrial 1 °1aOther -Describe: i q.4-, 4" 644 ¢,+ nom 1 ��.✓ Watershed land use : ❑Forest ❑AgrictLlturc ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream Width: (meters) Stream i Channel (at top of bank)1�_ _^ Stream Depth: (m) Avg4 Max ❑ Width variable ❑ Lange river >25m wide Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m)_�__ Bank Angle: " or ❑ NA (Vertical is 9W, horizontal is 0*. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards rnid-channel, a 90" indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.) ❑ Channelized Ditch ❑Deeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment ❑ Recent overbank deposits Mar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock ❑ Excessive periphyton growth ❑ 1 ieavy filamentous algae ,growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell Manmade Stabilization: ON ❑Y: ORip-rap, cement, gab+ons ❑ Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Berm/levee Flow conditions: ❑Hiigh ormal K1,1--aw Turbidity: ❑Clear a -Alightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky Motored (from dyes) Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?': ❑ YES ONO Details Channel Flow Status Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions. A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................ ❑ B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or X25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑ C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed...,. ........ ....... ...... .............. ❑ D. Root mats out of water ........... .................................... ......... ............. .......................... I—— ....... -....... 0 E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools.. ................................... ............... 17 Weather Conditions: Remarks: t~ O .- 00 rl. Photos: ON ❑Y O Digital 035mm 39 n- L(r'�,- 1. Channel Modification scare A. channel natural, frequent bends ................... .............. .............................. 5 B. channel natural, infrequent bends (chanmelization could be old) ............................... C. some channelization present.......................................................................................................... D. more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted............................................................... 2 E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0 ❑ Evidence of dredging OEvidence of desnagging=-no large woody debris in stream ❑Banks of uniform shapelheight Remarks — Subtota1t Il. Instrearn Habitats Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >70% of the reach is rocks, 1 type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare, Common, or Abundant. L/ Rocks Macrophytes "ticks and leafpacks Snags and logs Undercut banks or root mats AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER >70% 40-70% 20-40% <20% Score Score Score Score 4 or 5 types present ................. 20 16 12 8 3 types present ......................... 19 15 11 7 2 types present........... .............. 18 P 10 ti L type present ........................... 17 4 9 5 No types present...... ................. 0 3 2. substrate nearly all sand........................................................................................................ 3 ❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks—-- 2 4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay .................................... .......... ................................ ,.................... Subtotal Remarks Subtotal—L Ill. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks. A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders Score 1, embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders)........ I ................ is 2. embeddedness 2040% ...... ............... ....... .............,................................................................ 12 3. embeddedness 40-80%.......................................................................................................... 8 4. embeddedness>80%...................................................................".........,.,..,..............I.......... 3 B. substrate gravel and cobble 1. embeddedness<20%.................................. ;........... .......... ,...................... ..,...,.,....,.............. 14 2. embeddedness 20-40% ............. ......... ...._........................... ..... ..... ........................................ 11 3. embeddedness 40-80% ......... ............................................... ......•-.............,..,....................... fs 4. embeddedness>80%..... .................... I ...... ..... ,................................................................. C. substrate mostly gravel 1. embeddedness X50%............................................................................................................ 8 2. embeddedness>50%............. ..".................. ......................................................................... . 4 D. substrate homogeneous 1. substrate nearly all bedrock..,... ...... ............................................................. 3 2. substrate nearly all sand........................................................................................................ 3 3. substrate nearly all detritus .... ..................................................... ....................... ..,................. 2 4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay .................................... .......... ................................ ,.................... I Remarks Subtotal—L IV, Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in large high gradient streams, or side eddies. A. Pools present Score 1, Pools Frequent (>30% of 200m area surveyed) a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... ! (1 b. pools about the saute size (indicates pools filling in)............................................................ 2. fools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed) a. variety of pool sizes ....... ..................................... ................. ................ ............................. b b, pools about the same size..... ..................... ....................... ............. .......... —, ... I .. ............. .. 4 B. Pools absent... ................................................... ......... ............... .......... ................................. 0 Subtotal ❑ Pool bottom boulder-cobble=hard ❑ Bottom sandy -sink as you walk B --S t bottom ❑ Some pools over wader depth Remarks I t� f} - — Page Total_ 40 Kra —u..T- , V. Riffle Habitats Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration -can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent Riffles Infrequent Score Score A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream.... 12 B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width .................................... 4 7 C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width......... .............. __ 10 3 D. riffles absent................................................................................................................... 0 Channel Slope: ❑Typical for area ❑Steep=fast flow ❑Low -like a coastal stream Subtotal 1 VI.. Bank Stability and Vegetation FACE UPSTREAM Left Bank Rt. Bank Score Score A. Banks stable 1. little evidence of erosion or bank faihtre(except outside of bends), little potential for erosion.. U7 B. Erosion areas present 1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems ...... .................. ...•--....... 6 6 2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ........................... 5 5 3, sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding ................. 3 3 4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2 2 5, little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident,. ........... ........ .................... 0 0/a Total Remarks VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric. Score Remarks A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration ............................................. C�';1 B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ..................................................... 8 C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal. ................................... 7 D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ....................................................... 2 E. No canopy and no shading.................................................................................... . 0 5ubtotall VIII. Riparian Vegetative 'Lane Width Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc. �/ FACE UPSTREAM Lfl;. Bank Rt. Bank Dominant vegeta[ion: l�^1'rces Lf Shrubs 0 Grasses 0 Weeds/old field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score A, Riparian zone intact (no breaks) 1. width > 18 meters .............................................. A ........... ...,................... 2. width 12-18 meters....................................4............................................ 3. width 6-12 meters ........... _...................................................................... 4. width < 6 meters .............................. ..................... ................................... 13. Riparian zone not intact (breaks) 1. breaks rare a. width > 18 meters...............................................................>,,........ b. width 12-18 meters ........................................ I.......................... c. width 6-12 meters....................................................................... d. width < b meters .. .............. .............. ....... ........... ........ ................ 2_ breaks common a. width > 18 meters......................................................................... b. width 12-18 meters ............ ___ ...................... .................. ....... .. c. width 6-12 meters ...................................................... .......... ...... d. width < 6 meters ............ ............................................................. Remarks ❑ Disclaimer -form tilled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion -atypical stream. 41 Q 6 4 3 3 2 2 40 (4) 3 3 2 1 2 1 3 3 2 2 1 U l lotal0 1 Ci Page Total_JA TOTAL SCORE (4-r- 3/06 Revision G u 1 3 tlabitat Assessment Field Data Sheet i1'lountainl Piedmont Streams Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ 'OTAL SCt7RE Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and due road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the description which best tits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions, select an intermediate scare A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics. Stream -� Location/road: r [I.+a (Road Name County Date CC [assn( tJt_ Subbasin 03-0 Observers} Type of Stlydy: ❑ Fish Wilenthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe) Latitude`Longitude- Ch Ecoregion: ❑ MT ❑ P ❑ State Belt ❑ Triassic Basin Water Quality: Temperature °C DD mgll Conductivity (corr.) _µS/em pH Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use. Visible Land Use: %Forest %Residential qa %Active Pasture 7 % Active raps %oFallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial � %Other - Describe:— P "k Watershed land use : ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank) Stream Depth: (m) Avg Max Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide Bank Height (from deepest ,part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m) Bank Angle: ° or ❑ NA (Vertical is 90', horizontal is G*. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards mid -channel, < 9(Y" indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.) Channelized Ditch ❑Deeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment ❑ Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock ❑ Excessive periphyton growth ❑ heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell Manmade Stabilization: ON ❑Y: ❑Rip -rap cement, gabions ❑ Sedimentlgrade-control structure ❑Bermllevee Flow conditions: C�biigh ❑Normal l Turbidity: ❑Clear ❑ Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes) Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? ❑ YES ONO Details Channel Flow Status Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions. A. Water reaches base of bout bower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................ El B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or c25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ 11 C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed ............................................. El D. boot mats out of water....... ...... '.....' ........................ '. ..... . ... I .............. E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ❑ Weather Conditions: Remarks: Photos. ON ❑Y ❑ Digital 035mm �lOT_ 5J7I'VJ C�o l (o 3 LCr-� 1. Channel rdodifieation Score A. channel natural, frequent bends ............... ......... ........................................... .._... ...................... ......... 5 B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old) ...................................................... 4 C. some channelization present .............. D. more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted.,....... ................................. ............ ....... 2 E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0 ❑ Evidence of dredging []Evidence of desnagging=no large woody debris in stream ©Banks of uniform shape/height Remarks Subtotal 11. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If X70% of the reach is rocks, I type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common, or Abundant. Rocks Macrophytes Stints and leafpacks Snags and logs Undercut banks or root mats AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks. A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders ?70% 40-70% 20-40% <20% 12 Score Score Score _ Scare 4 or 5 types present. ..... .......... 20 16 12 8 3 types present ......................... 19 15 11 7 2 types present. ........................ 18 14 10 6 t type present........... ................ 11 13 9 5 No types present....... ................ 0 3 3. substrate nearly all detritus.................................................................................................... ` ❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks 1 %-1 Remarks Subtotal Subtotal III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks. A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders Score 1, embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders) ......................... 15 2. embeddedness 20-40% ... ........................... i................,.............................,........,.........._....... 12 3, embeddedness 40-80% ......... ..4........................................................................................... 8 4, embeddedness>80%.......... ..................................................... --..................... .......... ...-------- 3 B. substrate gravel and cobble 1, embeddedness<20%.......................................................................................................... 14 2, embeddedness 20-40%............................................-----.................................................... 11 3. embeddedness 40-80% ............. ................................................... ........................................ 6 4. embeddedness>80%... ............................... ..... . ..... .................................................. C. substrate mostly gravel 1. embeddedness<50%. .... ---- ............ .......................................................................... 8 2. embeddedness>50% ........................... I...J,....................................,.........,........................ 4 D. substrate homogeneous 1, substrate nearly all bedrock. ....... ............ I ......... I ................ I-- ............. 3 2. substrate nearly all sand........................................................................................................ 3 3. substrate nearly all detritus.................................................................................................... 2 4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay.. ...... ............ .4........................................................................I-- 1 %-1 Remarks Subtotal 1V. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in large high gradient streams, or side eddies. A. Pools present Score 1. Pools Frequent (730% of 200m area surveyed) a. variety of pool sizes. ... --- ........... .......... ................................................................... 10 b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in)............................................................ 8 2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed) a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 6 b. pools about the same size...................................................................................................... 4 B. Pools absent.............................................................................................................................. Subtotal ® Pool bottom boulder-cobble=hard ❑ Bottom sandy -sink as you walk ❑ Silt bottom ❑ Some pools over wader depth Remarks Page Total R1) V. Riffle Habitats Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration -can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. piffles Frequent Riffles Infrequent Score Score A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream.... 16 12 B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width .................................... 14 7 C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10 3 D. riffles absent ..................................... ......................... ........... .......................................... 0 Channel Slope, OTypical for area OSteep=fast flow ❑Low= like a coastal stream Subtotal V1. flank Stability and Vegetation FACE UPSTREAM Left Bank Rt. Bank Score Score A. Banks stable 1. little evidence of erosion or bank failure(except outside of bends), little potential for erosion._ 7 7 B. Erosion areas present 1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems ..................................... 6 6 2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy.— ....................... 5 5 3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding.... ............. 3 3 4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2 2 5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident....,., .................................... 0 0 Total Remarks VII.. fight Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Vote shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric. Score A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration ............................................. 10 B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ..................................................... 8 C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal.......... ...............,.......... 7 D. Stream with minimal canopy - full surf in all but a few areas.... ..... __ .... _._ .... ... ........ _ ........... 2 E. No canopy and no shading..-, ... ...... ....... ...... ................................................. 0 Remarks Subtotal VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zane Width Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain), Definition: A break in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc. FACE UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank Dominant vegetation: ❑ Trees ❑ Shrubs ❑ Grasses ❑ Weedslold field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks) 1. width > 18 meters .................. .............. ...,...,...,,.,.,....... I...... I..................... 2. width 12-18 meters..........................................,...................................... 3. width 6-12 meters..................................................................................... 4. width < G meters .................. ........ ....... ........ ......:.................................. .... B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks) 1. breaks rare a. width > 18 meters......................................................................... b. width 12-18 meters........... ................ ........... ,. .............. c. width 6-12 meters........................................................................ d. width < 6 meters ................. ............... .......... .......,.,............ ,...,., 2, breaks common a. width > 18 meters,. ...... ................... .........,..._.........,.,.....,...,.,. b. width 12-18 meters.... .. . ..... . ......... ___ ... ........................ ......... c. width 6-12 meters .................................................................. d. width r 6 meters ... ...................................................................... Remarks ❑ Disclaimer -form filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion -atypical stream. 41 5 4 3 2 4 3 2 1 3 2 1 0 Total - Page Total` OT 5QO�dl