The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20070833 Ver 1_Mitigation Evaluation_20090403Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Date of Office Review: ?3 2009 Evaluator's Name(s):-- Date of Report: _'-) -? - 2nn? C r'rr'CA 3Ijwjpq)Report for Monitoring Year: 3 $' Date of Field Review: Evaluator's Name(s): Other Individuals/Agencies Present: Weather Conditions (today & recent): Directions to Site: N of Jacksonville, adjacent to White Oak Pocosin, at intersection of Quaker Bridge & Sopp Hollow Rds.North Carolina Forestry Foundation, Inc. (.Office Review Information: Project Number: 20070833 Project Name: Hofmann Forest Wetland Mitigation Bank County(ies) Onslow Basin & subbasin: White Oak Service Area Nearest Stream: Water Quality Class of Nearest Stream: Mitigator Type: Mitigation Ba DOT Status: non-DOT Total Mitigation on Site Wetland: 330 acres Stream: 0 Buffer: 0 Project History Event Event Date Planting - Initial (blocks 1 & 2) 1/1/1999 Construction (wells, planting) 1/1/2001 MBI approval/credit release 7/14/2004 Planting & Herbicide (blocks 3,4,5) 11/1/2005 MBI modification 11/1/2006 Report Review - Wetlands 12/3/2007 Site Visit - Wetlands 2/27/2008 Report Review - Wetlands 3/3/2008 Credit Release Schedule updated 5/28/2008 Report Review - Wetlands 6/4/2008 monitoring reports available? g No Mitigation required on site: `Add significant project-related events: reports, Associated impacts (if known): received, construction, planting, repairs, etc. J L - - - - - During office review, note success criteria and evaluate each component based on monitoring report results. Record relevant data in Sections II and III. On back of sheet, note other information found during office review and/or to be obtained during site visit II. Summary of Results: Monitoring Success Success Mitigation Component Year (report) (field) Resolved i F__ 20070833-1 132 acres Wetland (Non-riparian, drier) Restoration 4 20070833-2 198 acres Wetland (Non-riparian, drier) Restoration 4 j Approved mitigation plan available? No Problem areas identified in reports? No Problem areas addressed on site? No Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 2 1 Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality MITIGATION SUCCESS: Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this project is: successful partially successful unsuccessful List specific reasons for lack of success for this project: Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.): Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 2 Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Component: 132 acres Wetland (Non-riparian, drier) Restoration Component ID: 20070833-1 Description: Blocks 1 & 2, mix of longleaf pine savannah forest, nonriverine cypress swamp & wet HW fores Location within project: 111. Success Criteria Evaluation: HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Saturation Win top 12" for at least 12% of GS (I.e. minim 29 Inundated consecutive days) in a normal growing season ?NC3? Saturated in upper 12 inches Monitoring report indicates success ?No Drift lines Observational field data agrees? Yes No Drainage patterns in wetlands based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches excessive water, etc.): l l 2 S 12°1? ,?:iY. d-u-A, AD o- nr - c e,n . CJ\1v LA-) 2oolp + L%*, 0K. - - -- - - SOILS - Approved Success Criteria: NA, but goal to restore hydrol to prior converted ag soils; block 1 is P Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No List indicators of hydric soils: List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, upland areas, etc.): VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: Dominant Plant Species 260 planted TPA surviving at end of yr 5; no single vol Species Story TPA/'1o cover species (esp red maple, loblolly, sweetgum) >50& of total I veg composition or avg >2X height of planted trees Monitoring report indicates success? Q No j Average TPA for entire site (per report): at Observational field data agrees? Yes No based on community composition? Yes No based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No Vegetation planted on site? No Date of last planting: Vegetation growing successfully? e No Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation: 10 X00 (A&-Ved -PA ( 910_WA O/VO?S) Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas:G( 2_1 c? l $v 4-21v l7 Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover): ?? ?+ U-a---s ? I `g0 CY?3 List nY remaining vegetation issues to address (e. g. g. plant survival, concerns, etc c pl,o1 S 2_U o Lour ?--cd -WA -a o-a > 'E,00 a-rPA W/ v o is ?fyc-Q U_ I r+U, 6OLCCIr?.ris, wtr , ar?n f? -?h i o,? - ?uL1,m.S GeC Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 1 of 4 Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality NCWAM - Approved Success Criteria or Evaluative Techniques: NCWAM Type on Site: NA Coastal Riverine Monitoring report indicates success? Yes No Riparian Observational field data agrees? Yes No Non-riparian (wetter) Attach NCWAM analysis results to this report. Non-riparian (drier) List any remaining NCWAM issues to address (e.g. functionality, developing wetland type, etc.): MITIGATION SUCCESS: Compared to the approved mitigation plan, this component is: successful partially successful unsuccessful List specific reasons for lack of success for this component: Additional comments (e.g. DWQ follow-up actions, recommendations, etc.): During site visit, document representative conditions and areas of concern. Observe preservation and enhancement areas that may not have specific success criteria. Label and attach photos to this report. Attach maps showing photo locations, areas of concern, and important field observations. Additional notes related to evaluation of this component: Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 2 of 4 Wetland Mitigation Project Evaluations: Information Table NC Division of Water Quality Component: 198 acres Wetland (Non-riparian, drier) Restoration Component ID: 20070833-2 Description: Blocks 3, 4 & 5; same veg mix Location within project: III. Success Criteria Evaluation: HYDROLOGY - Approved Success Criteria: Saturation Win top 12" for at least 12% of GS (I.e. minim 29 consecutive days) in a normal growing season Monitoring report indicates success Fes No Observational field data agrees? No Wetland Hydrology Indicators: Inundated Saturated in upper 12 inches Drift lines Drainage patterns in wetlands based on mitigation plan? Yes No Sediment deposits based on wetland type? Yes No Water marks List any remaining hydrology issues to address (e.g. remaining ditches, excessive water, etc.): vim; U S "AO A- ?,k d NO7 - nyO- 12?l ire Zoc??T ? J 1\k+ SOILS - Approved Success Criteria: NA, but goal to restore hydro) to prior converted ag soils; block 1 is P Are soils hydric or becoming hydric? Yes No List indicators of hydric soils: List any remaining soil issues to address (e.g. erosion, VEGETATION - Approved Success Criteria: at end of yr 5, minim 90% of surviving stems or aerial coverage per acre will be pocosin spec either found at Sopp Hollow reference or listed as pocosin spec; existing planted trees (at time of 2006 restor plan modif) not ind i Ic of Monitoring report indicates success? es No Average TPA for entire site (per repo Observational field data agrees? Yes No upland areas, etc.): Dominant Plant Species Species Story TPA/'* cover i based on community composition? Yes No based on TPA and/or % cover? Yes No i Vegetation planted on site? Yes No Date of last planting: Vegetation growing successfully? es No 1 Specific vegetation plots or site locations with little to no vegetation: Estimated acreage or site percentage of unvegetated areas: Invasive species on site (species, location(s), and % cover): List any remaining vegetation issues to address (e.g. plant survival, concerns, etc.): Version 1.0 (August 22, 2007) Page 3 of 4 t, 10 q 96ed (LOO,, `ZZ lsnBn y) 0, 6 uoisioA :Iuauodwoo siul jo uollenlena 01 paIelaJ S91OU leuolIlppd -suoi;eniasgo plal3 lue:podwi pue 'ujaouoo jo seaie 'suol;eool oloud 6uimoys sdew goejjy -:podai sly; o; so;ogd goe;le pue lagej -eualuo ssaoons oilioads anew ;ou Aew jeyj sewe juawaoueyua pue uol;enuasajd anuasgo -uaaouoo to seaJe pue suolIlpuoo anileluesaadaa luawnoop ';!sin a;ls 6uuna (-ola 'suoilepuawwooei 'suogoe dn-mollol DMa -6-a) sluawwoo leuoglppy :Iuauodwoo slut jol ssaoons jo ?oei jol suoseai oilloads;sl-1 lnjssaoonsun In}ssaoons Alleped lnjssaoons :si luauodwoo sl4l 'ueld uolje6glw panoidde ay; of paJedwoO :SS33OnS NOllt/J IM :(-oja 'edAj puellem 6uldol9n9p 'Ajlleuol;ounj -6-9) ssaippe of sanssi nVM?N 6ululewaJ Aue ?sll _ i (jaa p) N ann ueuedu-uo ON sGA ?oda? s!u}isaoi6e a;epiplail l uo;enjosgo ueuedl?l ON s8A Lssooons se;eoipul :podai 6ulao;luoW aulaanly leIseoO `dN :o;lS uo odAl WVMDN :sonbiuyoal and;enlen3 ao epo;l.io ssooonS pano.iddy - WVM3N Al!lenp jaleM;o uolslnla ON elgel uoi}emolul :suoi;enlen3 }oafojd uolleBil!V4 puelleM