20100099 Ver 3_Area of Concern Maintenance Plan_20180723

Strickland, Bev
From: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2018 3:11 PM
To: Merritt, Katie; Ray Holz
Cc: Tiffani Bylow; Higgins, Karen
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey
Katie, since the area is primarily sand, we will unlikely ever have an organic layer until we get some warm season grasses
established like are present in the areas of unforested sandy uplands surrounding the site. The hope with the rye is to
get something on the areas where there isn't much else growing and to give the ground some cover before the warm
season grass establishment.
We think we have a good plan.
Worth Creech I Restoration Systems LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 2111 Raleigh, NC 27604
office: 919-334-9114 1 mobile: [phone]
web: www.restorationsVstems.com
From: Merritt, Katie <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2018 1:58 PM
To: Ray Holz <[e-mail]>
Cc: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>; Tiffani Bylow <[e-mail]>; Higgins, Karen
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey
Hey Raymond,
Thank you for suggesting a plan that RS thinks will likely succeed in establishing ground cover. My main concern, is that
RS intends to "hand rake bare soil areas" prior to seeding. I just want to note, that during our As -Built walk through I
observed the ground to be extremely hard, lacking in top soil, and lacking in organic matter. Please acknowledge those
site conditions in your remediation planning. My concern is that your seed may not flourish without some other soil
amendment or aeration technique. Other than that, everything else seems reasonable.
Thank you,
Katie
From: Ray Holz[maiIto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2018 11:04 AM
To: Merritt, Katie <[e-mail]>
Cc: Worth Creech <worth@restoratio nsystems.com>; Tiffani Bylow <tbylow@restoratio nsystems.com>; Higgins, Karen
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey

Katie —
Following up on our call a few weeks ago, the answer to your first questions is yes. With RS transferring/assigning the
Pancho Conservation Easement to the NCWHF they are now responsible for long-term management and protection of
the easement.
About the Area of Concern, Worth and I have been discussing some options and believe that we have come up with the
least intrusive and most likely to succeed plan. In late September/early October, RS will hand rake bare soil areas within
the Area of Concern and seed the area with perennial ryegrass and rye grain. RS will also seed the area with Bermuda
grass for summertime coverage in 2019 and beyond. RS will then place straw over the entire area to help stabilize the
seed.
We see this as the best option to establish a permanent ground cover while minimizing impact to existing trees. Please
let us know if you are in agreement with this approach and we will schedule the work accordingly.
Sincerely,
Raymond H.
Raymond J. Holz I Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 1 Raleigh, NC 27604
tel: [phone] cell: 919.604.9314 1 fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]
From: Merritt, Katie[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 3:03 PM
To: Ray Holz <[e-mail]>
Cc: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>; Tiffani Bylow<tbylow@restoratio nsystems.com>; Higgins, Karen
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey
Hey Raymond,
Thanks for the update regarding the assignment of the Conservation Easement (CE). Does this also mean that all of the
responsibilities of the CE, including all maintenance in the nutrient offset & buffer credited areas, have been transferred
to NCWHF?
Additionally, thank you for submitting the supplemental vegetation survey work with transect data by Axiom back on
April 23, 2018. The stem density provided in the data shows that the required 320 stems (trees) per acre is being
achieved. I have also attached the pictures I took on the date we visited the Pancho Bank in March. The pictures
represent the areas of concern near plots 11 & 12 noted in your email below earlier today. This area is almost entirely
dedicated to nutrient offset credit. You mentioned that you may be back out at Pancho in the near future. If possible, it
would be great to see how the vegetation looks in these same areas compared to what they looked like in March prior
to spring growth. If possible, can you please take some pictures at these same locations/angles and send them to me
after your visit?
As discussed on the phone, based on the site visit in March, DWR would like RS to propose some level of intervention in
the areas of concern where herbaceous cover is minimal or absent. For nutrient offset credited areas, overland flow can
be controlled by the vegetation that is present from restoration efforts. Since restoration efforts in this area have
resulted in trees with relatively low vigor and no tree canopy, the presence of a dense herbaceous cover is even more

important to controlling the velocity of overland flow which can reduce sediment accumulation and reduce delivery of
nutrients to the streams. Therefore, the ability of this area to provide sufficient means of stormwater infiltration and
treatment appear to be low.
Once you have visited the site again, please follow up with me regarding the additional photos and whether RS feels it
necessary to provide any further management to the areas of concern.
Thank you,
Katie
From: Ray Holz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2018 1:05 PM
To: Merritt, Katie <[e-mail]>
Cc: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>; Tiffani Bylow <tbvlow@restoratio nsystems. com>
Subject: [External] RE: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey
Katie —
I wanted to let you know that RS recorded the Pancho conservation easement assignment this week to the benefit of
the NCWHF. Please find attached a .pdf copy from the Wayne County Register of Deeds. We are still waiting for clarity
from the Division regarding the area around Plots 11 and 12.
Sincerely,
Raymond H.
Raymond J. Holz I Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 1 Raleigh, NC 27604
tel: [phone] cell: 919.604.9314 1 fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]
From: Merritt, Katie [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2018 10:16 AM
To: Ray Holz <[e-mail]>
Cc: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>; Tiffani Bylow <tbvlow@restoratio nsystems. com>
Subject: RE: [External] RE: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey
Hey Raymond,
Thank you for providing the information below. I will get back to you soon.
Thank You,
Katie
From: Ray Holz [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2018 11:12 AM
To: Merritt, Katie <[e-mail]>
Cc: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>; Tiffani Bylow <tbvlow@restoratio nsystems. com>
Subject: [External] RE: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey

Katie —
Axiom completed the supplemental vegetation survey work at Pancho last week. They performed five survey transects
(4m x 25m) within the area of vegetation plots 11 and 12 (see attached map for specific locations). I asked Axiom to
compare the results of their survey work to the original planting list to determine which species were planted and which
were natural recruits. Axiom flagged planted stems with white flagging, and natural recruits with orange flagging.
When totaled, all vegetation transects met success criteria based on planted species and the natural recruit of planted
species, averaging 566 stems per acre. Diospyros virginiana (common persimmon) and Juglans nigra (black walnut) are
two high desirable species that were not on the planting list but have naturally colonized the area. When these species
are added to the total, the area averages a density of 834 stems per acre. During the site visits, we also observed pine
and sweetgum recruits, when these two species are included, the stems per acre density is above 1,500 per acre.
I have attached the data for your review. With this additional survey data and the information I provided in my e-mail on
April 4t" (below), I think it is clear that the area is meeting success. Diffused flow is being accomplished, sediment is
nowhere close to reaching the receiving waters, and the buffer is naturally regenerating with primary and secondary
successional species.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you would like to discuss the data presented.
Sincerely,
Raymond H.
Raymond J. Holz I Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 1 Raleigh, INC 27604
tel: [phone] cell: 919.604.9314 1 fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]
From: Ray Holz
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2018 4:27 PM
To: Merritt, Katie ([e-mail]) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Worth Creech <[e-mail]>; Tiffani Bylow <tbylow@restoratio nsystems. com>
Subject: Pancho Area of Concern - Supplemental Veg Survey
Katie —
I wanted to share with you the attached figure detailing the area of concern at Pancho using the 2017 NAIP imagery. The
area measures 1.0482 acres or 6.341% of buffer & nutrient generating acreage. You will note that I did not detail out the
individual open areas and was broad with my delineation.
Credit Area
Acres
Buffer
5.2
Nutrient
11.33
Area of
No. of Sup.
Sup.
Concern
AOC in Sq. M
Veg. Plots (100
Area
Sup. Survey Arei
(AOC)
(4,046.86 sq.
Sq. Meters
Veg.
% of Area of
(Acres)
m per. ac.)
ea)
Survey
Concern)
Area
1.0482
4242.0279
5
500
11.787%

SUM - 16.53 AOC as a % of Buffer & 6.341%
Nutrient Credit Area
The attached figure also details where I have asked Axiom to perform supplemental monitoring. When we do
supplemental monitoring, we typically do plots that equal 100 sq. m. (same as a CVS veg. plot). Axiom will be performing
five transects within the area of concern covering 11.78 % of the area in question.
I have asked Axiom to follow the typical CVS protocol when performing the survey work. We will try our best to identify
planted vs. natural recruits and will use the original planting list as a guide.
Feel free to give me a call if you have any questions.
Thanks,
RH
----- ------ ------
Raymond J. Holz I Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes St. Suite 211 1 Raleigh, NIC 27604
tel: [phone] cell: 919.604.9314 1 fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]