20040325 Ver 2_Mitigation Plans_20091009

LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP INC.
Environmental Consultants
Mr. Mickey Sugg
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
October 2, 2009
RE: Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank - Wetland Mitigation Plan
Dear Mickey:
0-4 - 03 a5 va
OCT 9 2009
DENR - WATER QUAJI v
%VLANDS AND STDRMWATER BRANCH
Land Management Group, Inc. (LMG) is pleased to submit a copy of the Wetland Mitigation Plan for the Barra
Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank located in Cumberland County, North Carolina.
The proposed project will serve as a general-use wetland mitigation bank. LMG is submitting the attached
bank document on behalf of the Sponsor, Mr. Stewart Precythe. The mitigation plan provides specific
information regarding proposed restoration activities on the Barra II site. A draft banking instrument will be
submitted in the near future once the IRT has had an opportunity to review the attached mitigation plan.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the enclosed mitigation plan, please telephone me at 910-
452-0001 -or email me at ccpreziosi(a)Imgroup.net. Please notify us if you would like digital copies of the
enclosed document to facilitate distribution to IRT members. We look forward to working with you and the
other members of the IRT for the development of the Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank.
Sincerely,
r lctsi
"
Christian Preziosi
Section Manager
encl.
w,vvw.lmgroup.net • info(a7.1mgroup.net • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403 • P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
U4-o3as v a-
BARRA FARMS PHASE II WETLAND MITIGATION BANK
WETLAND MITIGATION PLAN
u§@1nW[9D0
0 C T 9 2009
DENR - WATER QUALIiy
VMETlANpS AID STORMYY?TER BRANCH
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CAPE FEAR RIVVER BASIN
Pr-cpar ed Tor.-
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Wilmington District.
and
Inter-Agency Review Teann (IRT)
Prepared BJ?-
Southern Produce Distributors, Inc.
Stewart. Precythe
111 West Center Street N
PO Box 130
Fasion, NC 28341
alld
Land Management Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 2522
Wilmington, NC 28402
w???w.lm?;rout?. nct
October 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
r EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. .1
1.0 SITE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION ................................................................ .2
2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION .......................................................................2
3.0 MITIGATION GOALS .....................................................................................................3
A. Target Functions .............................................................................................................3
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................5
A. Land Use and Vegetation .............................................................................................. ..5
B. Soils ...............................................................................................................................
C. Drainage Network ......................................................................................................... ..6
..7
D. Threatened and Endangered Species ............................................................................. ..8
' E. Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................... ..8
5.0 RESTORATION PLAN .................................................................................................. ..9
A. Overview .......................................................................................................................
B. Non-Riparian Wetland Restoration ............................................................................... ..9
..9
C. Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement and Preservation ................................................ 1 l
6.0 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE .............................................................................. 12
7.0 POST-CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT .......................... 13
A. Wetland Restoration Success Criteria ........................................................................... 14
B. Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement Success Criteria ................................................. 16
8.0 BANK OPERATION
A. Geographic Service Area .............................................................................................. 16
' B. Bank Sponsor ................................................................................................................ 17
C. Bank Credits and Financial Assurances ........................................................................ 18
9.0 SITE MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................... 20
A. Adaptive Management .................................................................................................. 20

10.0 B. Long-Term Management ...............................................................................................

................................................................................................................
CONCLUSION 21
21
10.0 SOURCES OF INFORMATION ................................................................................... 22

i
TABLES
1. PROPOSED PLANTING PLAN
2. ACREAGE TOTALS BY SECTION
3. EXCLUDED WATERSHEDS OF PROPOSED GEOGRAPHIC
SERVICE AREA (LISTED AS 14-DIGIT UNITS)
4. CREDIT TYPES AND AMOUNTS (BY SECTION)
FIGURES
1. VICINITY MAP
2. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
3. 1998 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY MAP
4. 2006 AERIAL WITH PARCEL BOUNDARIES
5. NRCS SOIL SURVEY MAP
6. EXISTING CONDITIONS
7. PC/CC STATUS
8. RESTORATION PLAN
9. GRADING PLAN
9A. GRADING PLAN, SECTION I DETAIL
9B. GRADING PLAN, SECTION I DETAIL
9C. GRADING PLAN, SECTION II DETAIL
10. RESTORATION HABITAT TYPE
11. PROPOSED GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA (GSA)
APPENDICES
A. SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
B. SOIL BORING LOGS
C. DRAINMOD STUDY
ii
I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The implementation of the proposed Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank (Barra II
)
will provide for the restoration of a large, ecologically significant headwater wetland complex of
the outer Coastal Plain. The Barra 11 site is comprised of 1,811 acres of a former contiguous
Carolina bay wetland located at the headwaters of Harrison Creek (a first-order tributary of the
lower Cape Fear River). The tract has been historically converted to agricultural and
silvicultural production via site ditching and clearing. As a result of these management practices,
vast acreage of wetland habitat has been either degraded or removed entirely.
' The objective of the Barra 11 mitigation bank is to provide suitable, high-quality wetland
mitigation for authorized impacts within the Cape Fear River Basin. Ecological uplift will be
achieved through the restoration of characteristic hydroperiods and vegetative communities. It is
' anticipated that a number of key wetland functions and values will be restored including
floodwater retention/abatement, sediment retention, nutrient transformation, and groundwater
recharge. In addition, given the scale of this project, habitat benefits will likely be realized on
both a watershed and regional level.
The proposed construction work will be conducted in two phases with planting tentatively
planned for January 2011. Based on current federal guidelines, each phase of the project will be
monitored for a period of seven (7) years. Following the monitoring phase of the project, the
' conservation easement will be conveyed to the Sandhills Area Land Trust (SALT) for long-term
management and protection of the site.
1
1
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
1

1.0 SITE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION

1

1

1
1
The 1,811-acre Barra 11 mitigation site is located approximately 15 miles southeast of
Fayetteville, NC, immediately south of the junction of NC Highway 210 and State Road 2003
(Figure 1). In association with the Barra I mitigation bank, it includes a majority of the
headwaters of Harrison Creek, a first order tributary of the Cape Fear River Basin (USGS 8-digit
Hydrologic Unit 03030005, NCDWQ Subbasin 03-06-16).
2.0 WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION
The project site is located within the Cape Fear River Basin (USGS 8-digit Hydrologic Unit
03030005; DWQ Subbasin 03-06-16) (Figures 2-4), a watershed experiencing relatively robust
population growth over the last thirty years. Much of the Subbasin consists of managed forestry
tracts and expansive cultivated cropland. Municipalities of the watershed include Fayetteville,
Hope Mills, Raeford, and Spring Lake. Of these, Fayetteville is the largest incorporated city
with approximately 170,000 residents. Population density for the subbasin is relatively high
(2,059 persons/mil as of 2000) resulting in waters that are susceptible to impairment from
nutrient loading, high fecal coliform counts, and low ambient dissolved oxygen (DO)
concentrations. Based upon the Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Plan (NC DWQ,
2000), Harrison Creek was considered "partially supporting" due to impairment from the
surrounding agricultural operations and naturally low pH levels. As a result of this degradation,
this section is currently listed on the North Carolina 303(d) database of impaired streams
(NCDWQ, 2008).
The surface water body classifications for Harrison Creek and the Cape Fear River are Class C
and WS-IV, respectively. Class C waters are defined as freshwater bodies protected for
L secondary recreation, fishing, and aquatic life including propagation, survival, and wildlife. WS-
IV waters are freshwater bodies protected as a water supply source for surrounding
municipalities. Due to the continuing growth in the surrounding area, the City of Fayetteville
has implemented a stringent stormwater plan which utilizes best management practices (BMPs),
' including riparian buffer setbacks, to help offset or minimize nutrient loading to susceptible
I Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
2
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 1111
waters. Utilization of similar practices within agriculture operations is also being encouraged by
NCDWQ due to continued declines in water quality.
Prior to conversion to cultivated cropland, the tract of land encompassing the limits of the
restoration project area consisted of headwater wetland habitats characteristic of the Coastal
Plain. In particular, a majority of the site consisted of Carolina bay and pine savannah wetlands
forming the headwater complex of Harrison Creek. These types of wetlands support a number of
functions/values including, but not limited to the following: groundwater recharge; flood water
t storage and attenuation; filtration and storage of nutrients, sediments, and/or toxic 'substances;
and refuge/feeding habitat for resident and migratory fauna. Since the 1960s, these functions
' have been compromised through the extensive conversion practices (clearing and prescribed
i drainage improvements) as well as silvicultural management of the site (ditching, bedding, clear-
cutting, etc.). The Cape Fear River and its tributaries, in particular, have exhibited significant
water quality impairments associated with low dissolved oxygen (DO), high total nitrogen (TN),
and high total phosphorus (TP). High nutrient concentrations originate from non-point source
loading associated with intensive agricultural and silvicultural practices common throughout the
watershed. These impairments are likely exacerbated by channelization of local streams and
ditching of headwater wetlands, resulting in diminished nutrient uptake and nutrient/sediment
loading to down-gradient waters. Furthermore, hypoxic/anoxic conditions and toxic algal
blooms have contributed to various fish kills reported in the Cape Fear River over the past two
decades.

3.0 MITIGATION GOALS
The goal of the Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank is to provide for the
establishment of a functioning non-riparian headwater wetland system via the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of self-sustaining wetland habitat. The entire site will be
protected via a perpetual conservation easement. The project goals and objectives will be
achieved on a multi-spatial scale, and include the following:
• To capture and store rainfall that is being currently carried off-site by a drainage system.
• To re-establish native vegetation communities.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
3
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 1111
• To improve watershed and regional water quality; and
1

1
1

1

• To provide wildlife habitat.
A. Target Functions
The proposed mitigation bank provides a unique opportunity to restore nearly the entire
headwater system of Harrison Creek. Given its landscape position, soil type, and degree of
degradation, the site is well suited for restoration. The mitigation effort will provide and/or
significantly uplift a number of wetland functions that have been either significantly impacted or
removed entirely through anthropogenic impacts. Specific functions beneficially affected by the
project include:
Nutrient Removal/Transformation - Large scale agricultural operations within the tract serve
as a source of elevated nutrients (principally nitrogen and phosphorous) to downstream
waters. Nutrient loading may manifest itself in a variety of water quality impairments
including hypoxia/anoxia, aquatic weed infestations, and toxic algal blooms. Water quality
impairments, in turn, can adversely affect resident macroinvertebrate and fish assemblages.
Transformation and removal of nitrogen and phosphorous will be enhanced through dense
restored vegetation and decreased runoff/drainage resulting from hydrologic restoration.
Flood Attenuation and Surface Water Storage - Restored wetlands will dissipate the current
rapid delivery of stormwater runoff via existing ditches and canals. Both surface and
subsurface water storage will be increased, ameliorating downstream runoff events and
associated adverse impacts.
Sediment/Pollutant Capture and Retention - Restoration of the site will reduce aerial
suspension of topsoil that often occurs with seasonal agricultural practices such as disking,
plowing, and cultivating of commodity crops. This will also reduce the erosive velocity of
runoff and channel flows. Restored wetlands will decrease sediment loading of downstream
waters. Removing the land from agricultural production will eliminate annual applications of
herbicide, pesticide, and fertilizer that commonly serve as a long-term contributor to water
quality impairments.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
4
Groundwater Discharge and Recharge - Restoration of typical hydroperiods will allow the
restored wetlands to increase infiltration and reduce surface runoff. Shallower and longer
H
1

1
1

H

hydroperiods will help prolong base flow in the headwater riparian areas down gradient of
the site.
Wildlife Habitat - The restoration of such a large functioning wetland will provide for
improved feeding and refuge habitat for a variety of resident and transient fauna. As stated
earlier, the site presents a unique opportunity to provide for the restoration of nearly the
entire headwater complex of Harrison Creek. Doing so will provide important habitat
connectivity from the upper watershed of the creek south toward the Cape Fear River
corridor and to the South River corridor.
These restored functions are likely to have discernible benefits to water quality and habitat on a
local and regional level. The filling of ditches has been shown to be essential to the recovery of
such ecosystems (De Steven and Toner, 2004). The lower Cape Fear River Basin is particularly
susceptible to the loss of wetland function and associated watershed impacts due to increased
development pressure in combination with existing intensive site management practices
associated with large-scale farming in this region of eastern North Carolina. The restoration of
an expansive non-riparian wetland system will help to replace the wetland functions critical to
water quality and wildlife habitat in the area.
4.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
A. Land Use and Vegetation
Former wetland habitats have been degraded or removed entirely via historical site agricultural
and silvicultural practices. Of the approximate 1,811-acre site, approximately 1027 acres of
prior Carolina bay and pine savannah habitat has been historically ditched and drained. Much of
this acreage was previously cleared and converted to cropland.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
5

t

The remaining areas consist of jurisdictional wetlands that have been affected by site drainage
practices and forestry management. Within remaining forested wetlands, natural vegetative
assemblages have shifted toward a loblolly-pine dominated community. Bay species such as
loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus) and red bay (Persea borbonia) are still prevalent in the
understory. However, characteristic canopy species such as pond pine (Pinus serotina), bald
cypress (Taxodium distichum), and Atlantic white cedar (Chaemycyparis thyoides) are sparse or
absent. Large areas of the existing jurisdictional wetlands to the north of the agricultural fields
have been previously logged. In these areas, volunteers of sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua),
red maple (Acer rubrum), fetterbush (Lyonia lucida), and gallberry (Ilex glabra) are common. In
general, areas that are influenced by drainage effect of ditches exhibit a drier-end species
assemblage. Species indicative of slightly drier conditions resulting from drainage (and not
typically found in Croatan muck soils) include sweet gum, winged sumac (Rhus copallinum),
loblolly pine (Pinus taeda), bracken fern (Pteridium aquililum), and dog fennel (Eupatorium
capillifolium). Refer to Appendix A for photographs documenting existing site conditions.
On-going silvicultural activities on the tract include ditching, construction of temporary forestry
roads, and logging. It should be noted that these activities are exempt from Clean Water Act
(CWA) Section 404 permitting with an approved forestry plan. Therefore, such practices
continue on Barra II even within jurisdictional 404 wetlands. Such land-use activities are
evidence that natural wetland functions continue to be compromised on the tract even within
jurisdictional areas and highlight the importance of the preservation component of the mitigation
site.
I B. Soils

The soils of the tract are mapped primarily as a Croatan muck series by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (MRCS; 1984; Figure 5). Site evaluations by licensed soil scientists of
Land Management Group, Inc. (LMG) confirmed this map unit over a majority of the site
(Appendix B). During these evaluations, extensive oxidation of surficial organics was also
observed throughout the site. This oxidation is likely a result of on-site drainage, which has
reduced the duration of anoxic events within the soil profile, allowing for an increase in
microbial decomposition. In its natural condition, Croatan muck consists of very poorly drained
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 6
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
organic soils. These soils typically have an organic surface and subsurface to depths of two to

1

I

1
three feet. These surface layers are underlain by loamy sand to sandy loam substrata.
Smaller perimeter areas of the tract are mapped as Torhunta and Leon soils. Site evaluations
confirmed the presence of these soil types in slightly higher landscape positions, generally
associated with the perimeters of the Carolina bays. The Torhunta series consists of very poorly
drained soils which occur in broad interstream areas. The Leon series consists of poorly drained
soils of broad interstream flats and depressions. Surface runoff for these soils is slow.
C. Drainage Network
Surface elevations of the tract range from 115-120 ft above mean sea level (MSL). The natural
flow gradient is to the south toward Harrison Creek. Initial clearing and ditching of the tract
began in the mid 1960's in order to convert Harrison Creek Bay into agricultural fields. A
system of lateral and collector ditches was installed throughout the farm in the 1970's (Figure 6).
The drainage network consists of two to four foot deep lateral (i.e. tertiary) open ditching on an
approximate 300-ft spacing, which connect to four to six foot deep collector (secondary) ditches,
ultimately draining off-site through large (six to eight feet deep) canals.
Long-term drainage of cultivated fields and managed pine stands has significantly impacted
wetland hydrology across much of the site. There are approximately 73,800 linear feet
(equivalent to 14.0 miles of lateral ditches on the tract. An additional 65,300 linear feet (-12.4
miles) of connector ditches and canals drain the property. All of the artificial drainage is in a
southwesterly direction to an outlet canal which drains to Harrison Creek through a water control
structure. Hydrology within managed forestry blocks has been modified to varying degrees
depending upon position relative to existing ditches. The on-site ditches impact the hydrology of
the site by intercepting surface flows and artificially lowering the groundwater table via lateral
drainage effect. The effect of each ditch is related to its size, depth, landscape position/elevation
and surrounding soil properties.
Based on site evaluations and DRAINMOD analysis (Appendix C), the lateral drainage effect of
the ditches within the active farm fields is estimated at 300 ft. The lateral effect of the larger
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 7
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
P

collector canals is estimated at 500 ft. Lateral effects within the forested blocks typically range
between 100 ft and 500 ft based on amount of freeboard and maintenance frequency. These
analyses indicate that 1,027 acres have been effectively drained within the project boundary.
Prior-converted (PC) and Commenced Conversion (CC) designations had been provided for
much of the tract. Based upon determinations by the Cumberland County Farm Service Agency
(FSA), approximately 440 acres of PC cropland and 260 acres of CC cropland occur within the
Phase II project area. Approximately 410 acres of approved CC cropland were not completed by
January 1, 1995 and remain forested at the present time (Figure 7).
D. Threatened and Endangered Species
A review of the NC Natural Heritage Program database was conducted to determine the presence
of any threatened or endangered species within the project boundary and adjacent parcels.
While several species have been observed within Cumberland County, appropriate habitat for
these individuals does not exist within a majority of the project boundary. Areas that may
provide suitable habitat (e.g. remaining wetlands) for Michauxi's sumac (Rhus michauxii) and
other rare wetland flora will not be disturbed during on-site construction activities. As a result,
no adverse impacts to rare or threatened species are anticipated in conjunction with this project.
E. Cultural Resources
The project will not have an effect on any structures/properties eligible or listed on the National
Register of Historic Places. Based upon a review of maps at the North Carolina Office of
Archives and History, there are no known significant archaeological resources on the restoration
site. The project area is of relatively low landscape position with numerous drainage canals. As
such, the Historic Preservation Office has determined the area to be of low probability in terms
of significant archeological resources.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
8
5.0 RESTORATION PLAN
A. Overview
The mitigation effort will consist of restoration, enhancement, and preservation of non-riparian
headwater wetlands (Carolina bay and wet pine savannah). The location and extent of these
areas is depicted in Figure 8. The entire mitigation bank will be preserved in perpetuity through
the conservation easement deed recorded for each section of the Phase II bank site. In general,
restoration activities will be achieved via the re-establishment of characteristic wetland
hydroperiods in areas acutely impacted by prior site ditching. The areas currently under
agricultural production will also be replanted with native species. Current wetland areas
influenced by site drainage will be enhanced via the effective removal of the drainage network.
Relatively undisturbed wetlands located further away from any drainage influence (i.e. forested
blocks in the northern areas of Section One) will be preserved via the conservation easement
deed. More specific information regarding the proposed methods of restoring, enhancing, and
preserving wetland habitats within the bank site are provided below.
B. Non-Riparian Wetland Restoration
A total of 1,027 acres have been targeted for non-riparian wetland restoration. A majority of this
acreage is currently managed for agricultural production. Additional restoration areas occur in
locations affected by prior silvicultural management. Restoration will include the plugging of
the outlet of the small lateral ditches within the fields and installing larger plugs within specific
locations within collector ditches and canals to eliminate outflow. The following types of non-
riparian wetland communities will restored as part of the comprehensive watershed restoration
project: (1) Pocosin and (2) Pine Savannah (NCWAM 2007). The location and extent of these
communities has been identified based upon the presence of suitable soils and landscape
position.
Grading and Hydrologic Restoration: The proposed mitigation bank includes the restoration of
wetland hydrology to 1,027 acres of former wetland habitat (Figure 8). The hydrology will be
restored via backfilling and/or plugging of ditches in strategic locations of the drainage network
(refer to Figure 9). Doing so will effectively remove drainage influences and allow for the re-
establishment of characteristic hydroperiods. Source material for ditch and canal plugs will be
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 9
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
principally derived from the existing road network. In larger canals, clay plugs will be used at
critical outlets. In existing forested blocks, ditches will be completely backfilled utilizing the
side-cast material that was used to build the forestry roads. The area of the existing road bed will
be returned to its original grade and re-planted (Figure 9).
Grading work will be initiated in the lateral ditches of the fields prior to installation of plugs
within the larger collector ditches and canals. Each terminal outlet of the lateral field ditches
will be plugged and stabilized. Fields will be disked to improve surface roughness and promote
surface water storage and infiltration (rather than surface run-off). Grading in the fields will be
limited due to the lack of significant field crowning. The existing road beds will be used for
source material of plugs. In the collector ditches and canals, larger plugs (50 to 100 ft in length)
will be installed utilizing clay material (Figure 9). These plugs will be reinforced with filter
fabric and riprap on both the up-gradient and down-gradient ends. Final fill elevations of all
plugs on site will be packed down and of the same elevation as the adjacent ground. Note that
the large western boundary ditch will be left open to prevent hydraulic trespass on adjacent
properties.
Vegetative Restoration: The project will restore characteristic vegetation communities of former
pocosin (i.e. Carolina bay) and wet pine savannah habitats (Figure 10). The boundaries of these
communities have been identified based upon differentiation of soil units and landscape position.
The Carolina bay wetlands occur within relatively lower landscape positions consisting
predominantly of Croatan muck soils. Near the perimeter of the bay, sandier spodisols (i.e. Leon
fine sand) occur in slightly higher topographic positions. These areas would in undisturbed
conditions support wet pine savannah communities. The pocosin habitat type will comprise
approximately 1,003 acres of the restored area. The species planted will include bald cypress
(Taxodium distichum); Atlantic white cedar (Juniperus virginiana); pond pine (Pinus serotina);
sweet bay (Magnolia virginiana); red bay (Persea palustris); and water tupelo (Nyssa aquatica).
The remaining 24 acres of the wet pine savannah habitat will be planted predominantly with long
leaf pine (Pinus palustris). Other characteristic wetland species are expected to recruit into the
restored wetlands. All tree seedlings will be planted on nine foot spacings (equivalent to a
density of 538 stems/acre). See Table 1 for specific planting information.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 10
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
Table 1. Proposed Planting Plan

Pocosin (Carolina Bay) 1,003 Non-Riparian Restoration

Common Name Scientific Name % Composition # Planted
Loblolly Bay Gordonia lasianthus 10 53,961
Red Bay Persea borbonia 10 53,961
Sweetbay Magnolia virginiana 10 53,961
Pond Pine Pinus serotina 30 161,884
Atlantic White Cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides 10 53,961
Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum 20 107,923
Black Gum Nyssa sylvatica 10 53,961

TOTAL 539,614

Wet Pine Savannah 24 Non-Ri parian Restoration

Common Name Scientific Name % Composition # Planted
Loblolly Bay Gordonia lasianthus 10 1,291
Red Bay Persea borbonia 10 1,291
Pond Pine Pinus serotina 10 1,291
Longleaf Pine Pinus palustris 50 6,456
Inkberry Ilex glabra 20 2,582

TOTAL 12,911

GRAND TOTAL 552,525
C. Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement and Preservation
Wetland enhancement is targeted for approximately 170 acres of the tract (Figure 8).
Enhancement areas consist of existing jurisdictional wetlands that have been affected by site
drainage improvements. Uncharacteristically drier conditions are evidenced through the
prevalence of facultative or drier volunteer species (such as horse-sugar, devils walking stick,
and bracken fern). Lack of primary indicators of hydrology is also evidence of drainage
influences. While these areas may meet jurisdictional criteria, they no longer exhibit
characteristic hydroperiods of peat-filled Carolina bay wetlands that would under normal (i.e.
undisturbed) conditions be seasonally saturated to the surface and/or flooded. Areas targeted for
restoration were based on a 150-ft lateral drainage effect from each ditch (in which wetland
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
11
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
hydrology is removed entirely). The enhancement areas extend an additional 150-ft from this

I

I

1
restoration perimeter and at no time are located beyond 300-ft from an existing ditch.
Two areas totaling 544 acres have been targeted for wetland preservation (Figure 8). The
preservation areas consist of relatively undisturbed jurisdictional wetlands occurring within the
northern and southern portions of the tract. Wetland hydrology of these areas remains unaltered
by drainage features as the areas are located greater than 300 ft from any drainage feature. The
preservation areas contain remnants of silvicutural species, primarily loblolly pine (Pinus taeda),
but are also populated by typical understory flora such as red bay, sweetbay, loblolly bay
(Gordonia lasianthus), and fetterbush (Ilex glabra). Wetland preservation areas will be
protected in perpetuity via the conservation easement deed recorded for the mitigation bank site.
6.0 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Given the size of the proposed project and the anticipated demand for credits, Barra II will be
divided into two sections (Figure 8). Section One comprises a total of 1,133 acres. Of this area,
approximately 1,077 acres consists of non-riparian wetland restoration, enhancement, and
preservation. The remaining 56 acres consists of drained wetlands adjoining the western
boundary canal (to be left in place). Section Two is approximately 667 acres (total), of which
approximately 664 acres will be restored as non-riparian wetlands (Table 2). Upon execution of
the banking instrument, the Sponsor will record a conservation easement on Section One.
Grading work in this section will be initiated upon receipt of appropriate Section 404/401
authorizations (via Nationwide Permit #27) and authorization from the NC Division of Land
Resources (via an Erosion and Sediment Control Permit). Planting of Section One will begin in
the dormant season following the grading, tentatively scheduled for January 2011. Initiation of
restoration activities within Section Two will depend upon market conditions. The projected
timeline for this project is subject to change based upon agency concurrence and receipt of
subsequent permit authorizations.
Staff environmental scientists from LMG will be present during project construction to ensure
that the work is consistent with the project design. An "as-built" survey will be prepared to
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 12
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
document site conditions immediately post-construction of each phase. Each phase will be
monitored annually for seven years or until deemed successful, whichever is longer (refer to
Section 7.0 below for more specific information regarding site monitoring).
Table 2. Acreage Totals by Section

1
1
t
t
1

t
t
11
Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank - Phase II
Section One - North Acreage
Non-Riparian Wetland Restoration 328
Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement 140
Non-Riparian Wetland Preservation 306
Uplands/Non-Restored Areas 60
Sub-Total 834
Section One - South
Non-Riparian Wetland Restoration 35
Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement 30
Non-Riparian Wetland Preservation 238
Uplands/Non-Restored Areas 1
Sub-Total 304
Section Two
Non-riparian Wetland Restoration 664
Uplands/Non-Restored Areas 9
Sub-Total 673
GRAND TOTAL 1,811
7.0 POST-CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT
An annual monitoring report (AMR) will be submitted to the IRT documenting site conditions
and progress. All AMRs will provide quantitative data of vegetative success and shallow
groundwater hydrology, qualitative observations, and conclusions pertaining to mitigation site
development. Additionally, comparative hydrographs for the restoration areas will be provided.
Monitoring will be initiated upon completion of each phase of the project. Vegetative
monitoring will be conducted near the end of each growing season subsequent to site planting.
AMRs will be submitted by February 1St of each year subsequent to the fall monitoring.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 13
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
As part of an adaptive management approach, the AMR will identify any contingency measures
that may be deemed necessary to remedy any site deficiencies. Prior to any site modifications,
t any specific contingency measure will be identified and submitted to the USACE for their review
and concurrence prior to any action being taken. All AMRs will be in compliance with RGL 08-
03.
I A. Wetland Restoration Success Criteria
The wetland restoration effort will be evaluated based upon performance criteria related to
vegetative density and wetland hydrology. Please note that individuals of non-planted
characteristic wetland species may volunteer into the restored area. Suitable volunteers serve as
indicators of appropriate hydrologic regimes and provide increased diversity. This diversity in
plant species is essential to restoring the microhabitats and varied food sources present in natural
wetland systems. Therefore, suitable volunteers will be counted towards the established success
criteria.
The proposed success criteria for the restored areas of Barra II are:
1. Demonstrated density of planted species and acceptable volunteers to meet or exceed 320
trees per acre at the end of three years, and 210 trees per acre at the end of seven years
(post planting).1
2. The hydrologic criterion is premised on the specific community to be restore&
a. for the pocosin community, the hydrologic criterion will be the establishment of a
static water table at, or within, 12 " of the soil surface for 10% of the growing
season (equivalent to 25 days based upon a growing season between March 15`h
and November 20`h)2 during periods of normal precipitation conditions.
1 Preferred volunteer species can be counted toward the success criteria upon evaluation of site-specific conditions
and concurrence by IRT members.
z Growing season identified per long-term climatological data for WETS Fayetteville (NC) station (NC3017).
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 14
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
b. for the wet pine savannah community, the hydrologic criterion will be the
establishment of a static water table at or within 12 " of the soil surface for 6% of
the growing season (equivalent to 15 days based upon a growing season between
March 15th and November 201h)2 during periods of normal precipitation
conditions.
Vegetation Monitoring: The vegetation monitoring protocol is based on previously accepted
methods used for other mitigation banks of North Carolina. Specifically, one percent of the
planted areas will be monitored via the establishment of permanent 0.10 acre plots. Given the
proposed acreage, 103 sample plots will be established. Thirty-six (36) plots will be established
in Section One and 67 plots in Section Two. GPS coordinates will be established for the center
of each plot and will be identified in the "as built" survey and subsequent AMRs. During
monitoring, surviving planted individuals and volunteer individuals will be identified and
enumerated within each plot.
ydroloQy Monitoring Shallow groundwater hydrology will be monitored via fifty-one (51)
automated groundwater monitoring wells (RDS Inc. WM-20s) located within the restoration
areas. These wells will be installed in accordance with installation methodology outlined in the
Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program (WRAP) Technical Note 00-02 (Sprecher, 2000).
Water levels will be recorded once daily and the data downloaded quarterly. Data from well
downloads will be compiled and graphically displayed to demonstrate the hydroperiod of
monitored areas.
Reference Sites: Hydrologic monitoring will also be conducted within the two preservation areas
of the property. A total of six (6) wells will be installed prior to the initiation of construction
activities. Water table data downloaded from these wells will be used to establish baseline
conditions in the event of abnormal precipitation conditions within the monitoring period. Data
will also be included in the AMR to allow for additional comparative analysis.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 15
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
B. Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement Success Criteria
A total of 170 ac of pocosin habitat has been targeted for wetland enhancement. These areas are
located directly adjacent to those targeted for restoration in forested sections of the tract. As
these areas currently maintain a suitable density of appropriate vegetative species, enhancement
will occur by re-establishing the characteristic groundwater hydrology. Natural hydroperiods
have been compromised by the presence of forestry and roadside ditches in the vicinity of these
forested blocks. Upon completion of the identified earthwork (e.g. removal of roadbeds and
plugging of outlet ditches), these areas will exhibit hydroperiods more characteristic of relatively
undisturbed pocosin habitat. As a result, the hydrologic success criterion for these areas will be
identical to the pocosin wetland restoration portion of the project:
The hydrologic criterion for the non-riparian bay forest enhancement will be the establishment of
a static water table at, or within, 12 " of the soil surface for 10% of the growing season
(equivalent to 25 days based upon a growing season from March 15`h and November 20th)
during periods of normal rainfall.
In order to document the hydrologic enhancement, nine (9) shallow automated wells (RDS, Inc.
WM-20s) will be installed within the 170-acre enhancement area. These wells will be installed
in accordance with installation methods outlined in the Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program
(WRAP) Technical Note 00-02 (Sprecher, 2000). Water levels will be recorded once daily.
Data will be downloaded from the wells every three months (i.e. once quarterly). Data from well
downloads will be compiled and graphically displayed to demonstrate hydroperiods of monitored
areas.
8.0 BANK OPERATION
A. Geographic Service Area
The Geographic Service Area (GSA) is the designated area within which a bank can be
reasonably expected to provide appropriate compensation for impacts to wetlands or streams
providing similar functions of that as the restored wetlands and/or streams. The restored
wetlands of Barra II will provide for the re-establishment of functions typical for non-riparian
wetlands of the Coastal Plain of North Carolina. These functions include: (1) nutrient
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 16
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
removal/transformation; (2) surface water storage/floodflow attenuation; (3) sediment/pollutant
capture and retention; (4) groundwater discharge and recharge; and (5) wildlife habitat. Note
that each of these functions is described in more detail in Section 3.0 of this document. Use of
the Barra II wetland mitigation site will not be suitable for riparian wetlands. The Barra II
mitigation site will, however, provide for suitable replacement of functions of headwater
wetlands (either streamhead or interstream landscape positions). These types of wetlands
commonly occur throughout the Coastal Plain.
Based upon the direction of the IRT, the GSA includes portions of the Cape Fear River Basin
delineated by the 8 digit hydrologic units 03030004 and 03030005, excluding the 14 digit
hydrologic units as identified in Table 3. The limits of the GSA are graphically depicted in
Figure 11. Pocosin and wet pine savannah habitats commonly occur throughout the proposed
GSA. Thus, permitted impacts to non-riparian wetlands occurring within the GSA will be
appropriately offset via the use of Barra II. It should be noted that pocosin wetlands, wet pine
savannahs, and Carolina bays also occur throughout the adjoining hydrologic units (including the
remaining watersheds of the lower Cape Fear River Basin). These systems are found in one of
four geologic settings which characterize a majority of the wetland systems in the Coastal Plain
of North Carolina. These settings include: (1) interstream flats lacking discernable draining
patterns; (2) Carolina bays; (3) areas of ridge/swale topography that developed from relict dune
systems; and (4) streamhead drainages that form the headwaters of first order streams in the
upper Coastal Plain (Otte, 1981). Based upon the documented presence of similarly occurring
wetland habitats outside of the designated GSA, the use of the Barra II bank site for
compensatory mitigation of impacts occurring beyond the defined limits of the GSA may be
considered and approved provided it is deemed preferable to other mitigation alternatives
identified during Section 404/401 permitting.
B. Bank Sponsor
The Bank Sponsor (Mr. Stewart Precythe) owns fee simple title for the entire bank site. The
Sponsor has control of all ditches affecting groundwater hydrology of the site. Since the
restoration is premised on re-establishment of groundwater hydrology via removal of ditches, all
water rights necessary for sustainability of the bank are secured through the fee simple
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 17
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
Table 3. Excluded Watersheds of Proposed GSA (listed as 14-digit units)
Excluded Watersheds of
03030004 Excluded Watersheds of
03030005
03030004010010 03030005030020
03030004010020 03030005030030
03030004010030 03030005030040
03030004020010 03030005030050
03030004020020
03030004030010
03030004040010
03030004050010
03030004050030
ownership. The Sponsor will be submitting a banking instrument under separate cover. The
instrument will provide detailed information regarding bank operation. Once the final mitigation
plan is approved and the accompanying instrument executed by members of the Interagency
1 Review Team (IRT), the Sponsor will record a conservation easement for Section One of the
bank site.
C. Bank Credits and Financial Assurances
j Use of credits from the Bank to offset wetland and stream impacts authorized by federal permits
or state water quality certifications must be in compliance with the Clean Water Act, Section 404
` (b)(1) guidelines and other applicable federal and state legislation, regulations, and policies.
Prior to release of bank credits, the following requirements will be met: (1) approval of the final
mitigation plan and execution of the instrument; (2) recordation of the conservation easement;
and (3) establishment of appropriate financial assurances. Mitigation bank credits will be
calculated using the following standard:
I
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2111
18
Mitigation Type Ratio
(1) Wetland Restoration 1:1
(2) Wetland Enhancement 2:1
(3) Wetland Preservation 5:1
Given the identified ratios for wetland restoration, enhancement, and preservation it is estimated
that 1,220 non-riparian wetland credits will be derived from the establishment of the Barra II
Wetland Mitigation Bank. Credit types and amounts are specified within Table 4 (by section).
Debiting and accounting procedures for the bank credits will be specified within the banking
instrument to be executed by the Sponsor and IRT representatives.
Table 4. Credit Types and Amounts (By Section)
Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank - Phase 11
Section One - North Acreage Credits
Non-Riparian Wetland Restoration 328 328
Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement 140 70
Non-Riparian Wetland Preservation 306 61
Uplands/Non-Restored Areas 60 N/A
Section One - South
Non-Riparian Wetland Restoration 35 35
Non-Riparian Wetland Enhancement 30 15
Non-Riparian Wetland Preservation 238 47
Uplands/Non-Restored Areas 1 N/A
Section One Sub-Total 1,138 556
Section Two
Non-riparian Wetland Restoration 664 664
Uplands/Non-Restored Areas 9 N/A
Section Two Sub-Total 673 664

GRAND TOTAL 1,811 1,220
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank 19
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
9.0 SITE MANAGEMENT
A. Adaptive Management
The Barra II Mitigation Bank is planned and designed to be self-sustaining over time, but some
active management or maintenance may be necessary to ensure the long term sustainability of
the mitigation efforts. The adaptive management approach involves analysis of monitoring
results to identify potential problems occurring on the site and the identification and
implementation of measures to rectify those problems. Remedial actions may include, but are
not limited to, mechanized earth work (e.g. adjustment to the invert elevations of earthen plugs)
or supplemental planting in the event areas do not meet vegetative success criteria. Prior to
initiating any remedial actions the proposed measures will be submitted to the USACE for
review and approval.
Performance and functioning of the mitigation site may be affected by various causative factors,
both natural and anthropogenic. Natural hazards may include invasive species and/or excessive
herbivory. Human errors may include design flaws, construction deviation, and/or inadequate
planting coverage. To minimize these potential problems, the following strategies may be
employed:
1. If herbivory appears to be jeopardizing the survivorship of planted species,
discussions with appropriate agencies will be initiated to determine an appropriate
course of action.
2. Beavers will be trapped from the tract if significant damage appears to be caused by
beaver activity.
3. Construction errors will be identified as early as possible via the as-built report. If it
appears as those potential errors jeopardize the integrity of the project, appropriate
remedial action will be identified and submitted to the USACE for concurrence prior
to implementation.
4. Planting errors in spacing density or coverage will be minimized by careful
coordination with planting crews. An account of planted stems will be provided with
the as-built report.
5. If monitoring indicated a potential design flaw, remediation options will be reviewed.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland
Mitigation Bank 20
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2111
' 6. In the event groundwater monitoring wells are damaged by bears, barb-wire fencing
and/or other acceptable deterrents may be used to protect wells from further damage.
B. Lon Term Management
Land use and property boundaries along with the proposed mitigation plan were designed to
minimize long term management conflicts. For example, the western boundary canal will be left
open to avoid hydraulic trespass on adjacent properties (Figure 8). As a result, the potential for
hydrologic and boundary conflicts have been minimized.
' The current property owners will retain title to the property though the monitoring period. The
Sandhills Area Land Trust (SALT) will hold the permanent conservation easement. The
' recorded conservation easement deed will ensure the protection of the project in perpetuity.
10.0 CONCLUSION
The Barra Farm property has been intensively managed for silvicultural and agricultural for
several decades. Land use practices over this period of time have resulted in the loss or
degradation of wetland habitats and the functions these systems provide. The proposed project
seeks to reverse these trends by restoring the remaining acreage of the Barra II property to the
' pocosin/Carolina Bay ecosystem that existed prior to the 1970's. This would result in the
restoration of nearly the entire headwater wetland complex of Harrison Creek. Once completed,
' the restoration activities will improve water quality in the surrounding area by reducing point
source pollution currently generated by the agricultural and forestry operations. Additional
benefits such as groundwater recharge, floodwater storage, and valuable wildlife habitat will also
be realized in conjunction with the project. In light of its unique landscape position and size, the
Barra II restoration project will likely generate benefits at a watershed level. This is particularly
important given the increased development pressure of the area (i.e. Fort Bragg and Fayetteville)
as well as the long-term intensive land uses associated with farming and timber management.
Barra Farms Phase 11 Wetland Mitigation Bank 21
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 1111
10.1 SOURCES OF INFORMATION
Code of Federal Regulations. 2008. Part 332 - Compensatory Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic
Resources. Vol.73, No. 70. pp. 19670-19705.
Cowardin, L.M., et al. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deep Water Habitats of the United
States. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 47 pp.
De Steven, D. and M.M. Toner. 2004. Vegetation of upper coastal plain depression wetlands:
Environmental templates and wetland dynamics within a landscape framework.
WETLANDS: 24. PP. 23-42

1

1

Griffith, G.E., et al. 2002. Ecoregions of North and South Carolina. Reston, VA. United States
Geological Survey.
Otte, L.J. 1981. Origin, development and maintenance of pocosin wetland of North Carolina.
Unpublished Report to the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. North Carolina
Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Raleigh. 51 pp.
Mitsch, W.J. and J.G. Gosselink. 1993. Wetlands (Second Edition). Van Nostrand. Reinhold,
New York.
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. 2007. North Carolina
Wetland Assessment Method, Draft Version 5.0. 183 pp.
N.C. Division of Water Quality. 2000. Watershed Restoration Plan for the Cape Fear River
Basin. Raleigh, N.C. 129 pp.
N.C. Division of Water Quality. 2001. Basinwide Water Quality Plan - Cape Fear River Basin.
Raleigh, N.C. 251 pp.
N.C. Division of Water Quality. 2008. http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/bims/re oip -ts/reportsWB.html
Rheinhardt, R.D., Brinson, M.M., and Farley, P.M. 1997. Applying Wetland Reference Data to
Functional Assessment, Mitigation, and Restoration. Wetlands 17:195-215.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakely. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Division of
Parks and Recreation. N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
325 pp.
Sprecher, S. W. 2000. "Installing Monitoring Wells/Piezometers in Wetlands," ERDC TN-
WRAP-00-02, U.S. Army Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2008. Regulatory Guidance Letter (RGL) 08-03.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 2009
22
Minimum Monitoring Requirements for Compensatory Mitigation Projects Involving the
Creation, Restoration, and/or Enhancement of Aquatic Resources. 6pp.
USDA-SCS. 1984. Soil Survey of Cumberland and Hoke Counties, North Carolina. 155 pp.
Barra Farms Phase II Wetland Mitigation Bank
Wetland Restoration Plan - October 1111
23
FIGURES

H

N
0 2.4 4.8
Mi.
F, (.A! F 1 A mih-
SITE
1
Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank
Phase II
Cumberland Countv
Figure 1.
Vicinity map.
LMG
i.nun ?invn?sNSnicsnvv ?::?

s,

0 3,000 6,000
Feet
Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank Figure 2.
Phase II USGS Topographic Map
Autryville Quandrangle
Cumberland Countv
r 1L?M

0 3,000 6,000
Feet
Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank
Phase II
Cumberland Countv
Figure 3
1998 Aerial Photography Map
_,:,,,,.

n?

pl"
_a
t .7j G
y ?Y vl?}k ? e y' y,L3 A Re ?'
? i

o

U
O
_E
U
a

n
C?
A
C
7
O
U

a
oz
C
2
N
>
N
D 00
LO

90
E V
7
Z
-0

N

3

ii0

a cu

>

U) E
rn
o
a =3
U ° o LL

E _
n U)
0
O T
C LL m

N
N C

LU
6 N
C U) CI
a c
O 0
Z pp
N ?
N ` N
`
H a m
ui LU =

O O m m
z z
a
N ?
a
E
`r cu

m
m ?
a
0

N
o
-
c

?_
_ Z N
., x m V
? VmUo
Z?

J
J
cO
?y o 0 o a
LL F-I r a m

Z
W
CD
LL]
m
ryO
W
00 co
III:.

Legend
Project Boundary
Barra Fauns I Mitigation Bank
N
0 3,000 6,000
ONE_ ? Feet
Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank
Phase II
Cumberland Countv
Figure 5.
NRCS Soil Survey Map

w4

cwt 5
1 r
t o M •? ?' 1 ? ?j'
zN

PAWN,

A q .t

yrp i „ i

V
\\ ff1
ci)
c
.3
m
o

U

L

Q

C

0

U

Q

QZ
C
2
N
1
(D

0
lr)

mC?
Eq

Z

L

o

N
3

i
o ?
c
T
N
i (6

N
7
fn Q
O
O
\\
rll I a
N U °
? o
N U)
U)
0
m

0)
W
U-
U) c
Q
Cf)

o
c
\
\ O

Z 3
O
m

?m
Ul n
L
V
f0
- T-- W W
H =
N
1 F-
?O O N
n c
O
z z
a -
=o
? U
?
L
W rn
c
-

\ \ c0 W
?o
/ Z -?In
N L W
J ??L
0 o a
LU r-
i
z

W

f0

O

?
4-

Fn

L

C) u
0
O

O

A-
U
cu

fQ
co m

(a
co

O
U
a)
(6
J
cn
X
W

o
IL

¦
m
N
C
C7 3 " C R
Q
F N O
z
V p N Y
5_mUo
C
C
Vq N 0 W
C _U
z v�Z C
J
¢ E C o
00
A oaf°
�
N Q
m
�
r
eo
in
�z
NO
U �
C
L �
E V
O T
O
L C
N
Z
N
` O
>
7
ON
2)
Q C>
w
O
LL
O "6
C
O(B
> N
7 �
CD
O
O
m
T
O
C LL
m
C
m
r
U
Q �
O :3
Z �p
N
L 2
+ L N
F a
w Iii
=
O O
N
Z Z
@
L
kkA
1
to
t. �.. _ ,.. .. O
Mi"IM"IF,
NN
\
'V
\ +Ill ; 7•
K,
U) U) °
O
_ _
N I CO
ML m
1 L
U cy') 1 �
m U U U a
N m �p O(B (� CII m Ua
+s _ O o0 3
'a N M 'D Loco M c co
7 c i
co m
� � L
p N p O V C N
�D O f! p .�
O N O C d
co m O L O O m
C N (n L V r
N
m W Ri W a_ to
et -a 70 o
M C C O C C C (a ?
00 (B c6 (B t") m m R3 �j (� mLU
O p t O N N L O N O O
m m 0 3: 3: ti
= OZ c c O c c c�D c m w
mm m m m
O s
c c C a a a = a a a a
O O i L i C L L L
v v v C C v C C C v I m Q
O (1) a) O OJ O (1) O OJ OJ '0) OJ m l>L
C/)
C/)
7
^ ^ 7 Z Z v/ Z L L VJ L m >_
J
N
LL
C7 3 " C R
Q
F N O
z
V p N Y
5_mUo
C
C
Vq N 0 W
C _U
z v�Z C
J
¢ E C o
LliL
A oaf°
1
to
t. �.. _ ,.. .. O
Mi"IM"IF,
NN
\
'V
\ +Ill ; 7•
K,
U) U) °
O
_ _
N I CO
ML m
1 L
U cy') 1 �
m U U U a
N m �p O(B (� CII m Ua
+s _ O o0 3
'a N M 'D Loco M c co
7 c i
co m
� � L
p N p O V C N
�D O f! p .�
O N O C d
co m O L O O m
C N (n L V r
N
m W Ri W a_ to
et -a 70 o
M C C O C C C (a ?
00 (B c6 (B t") m m R3 �j (� mLU
O p t O N N L O N O O
m m 0 3: 3: ti
= OZ c c O c c c�D c m w
mm m m m
O s
c c C a a a = a a a a
O O i L i C L L L
v v v C C v C C C v I m Q
O (1) a) O OJ O (1) O OJ OJ '0) OJ m l>L
C/)
C/)
7
^ ^ 7 Z Z v/ Z L L VJ L m >_
J

3
m °
o
QZ ?o rn
O = o
C N Z 7
Q O (1) o m
C) Q? LL
o
m
(u
L
` m
U) E rn o
o C) ° °o U)
N N
N II CD
O rn = ?T
C LL
C
N N N
w m
c Q
o =
Z C°
N ?
N i
W W -
O O N
Z Z C
a a
N ?
m
tL m ?
co
m
U
N
fl
N
• V
O ? r
- N O
N N ? ?
-1 ? X N V
Z "mUo
C z N z m
G U ?
no
7j 7V)
_aor?
w O O
3
LL
m
m
LL
Q
U
a
¦ N
3
{a =
o?
Q O E
O ?
Z V m
W ? ? m
O7 70 -
_ C C
J O O-0 O O °
70 L N n- M
> co
U U U N
L O ±• L N O o W
(1) N N
O N 0 F-
° Q
co W L L - L
O LL _ a 2
O _ U a
U U O M N f4 O O
fB (6 N m N u v m +• ° LL]
m 00
m m U UI0 w wl0 U
(1) U
0
Z
Q
J
W
J
m
J-8 --- V` i-LU-UM\ id 111 SUNV LLztIV\ LwcWUrvv U7'Vll I
SIJ Ajuno0 puelaagwn0 woad salaepunog lao1ed 31ON
6uimeat] lean;oa}igojy ao ' (anans 'paaaaui6u9 uV )ON sl slgl 31ON
A.:IVNIWIEI?ld
• 6nld PI!4 Pale]
6nld gol!a a81091109
panouaa as of
peon }j!(] u!js!x?]
peon li!Q 6u!}s!xzl
GN999-1
PIK] Pale]
pall!d 99 of
gol!o a91001109
gol!o aa1091100
(PON) Aiepuno8 aup uo!joaS
S1N
uoiloaS ssojo II!j laoldAi
S1N
MaIA uald II!j uol!a lao!dAi
1!=l uol!a

y:
WJaB (del)
('del)
uay?Je? V
WJ98 uaglied
S1N
uoljoes-ssojo bnld IeoldAi
00 T-L 005 I
5nld Aelo . ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,I
(dea du 005
}o ,Og,0- pm paddol) 'b i
Aelo jo dol uo ougel aa}lii
09 OT 0 50 uoi}enala
BUIISIxd I
0 ?.+0
00±0
9??
oz?
zz?
d
JJUH _- V95-/U-UV\Sd III SUNV Il=]M LUUL\5UNV IlyN\b I
oOZI 09 00 0
SIJ Ajunoo puelaagwno woad sapepuno8 laoJed 310N
6uimeaa lean}oaligoaV Jo `A9AjnS `pajaaui6u3 uy ION sl s!ql 310N
AHVNlnMHd
¦ bnld PIl4 leaale?
panouaa a8 01
peon IJl4)ullslx3
PIl4 leaalel
peon{ pc] 5ullslxD (ylnoS) AGepuno8 aup uoi}oaS
I!l uoWa

.

wjaB I (dAi)
19'Z ('del)
uaylJe3 ,7
S1N
uol}oes-ssoao bnld IeoldAi
L
6nld Aelo , 00? 005--jI-
-(dea du
;o ,0g-0- ulinn paddol) `bnld
Aelo;o dol uo oiage? aalp j
os OT 00'
0
uollenaIa punoa6 bullslx3
m m m m m m m m m m r m r m m r m m m
51N
Main uald II!J gOI!a lao!dAi
m
C
3
00
o Lo
3 mz mo rn
= O
U L
N > O =3
L C N z
Q O a') LO Q)
U E LL
}? O O
L ^? N ?
W ` N
Wm
n, a?i U ° 00 U)
00 U)
W E N 0
Nc O 0)
co
LL
p
m U) N ? 3
co L)
r n ,,, C f6 0 cn
O p
_? V! a
C ^ Z m
N LL I..L
~ N
Z
-r- a
bi 6i
z z m
a
o
?w
m
U
N
O ?
a`
0
N
r' c N o
O
y ._ N O N
C X f0 V
Z
CC C'?.y)J " ?r ?
ZO
a EO o
J ??1 r
W _.r?" ? m o o a
1
¦
V/
- 0 _0 2 V/
m M-0
LL Ld_ >
O•
U
a 0 Li a Q
i - - ---- - U ca
4.1
^^++ ^L^,,
T (/) W W
- -- - W W? U J
0
ou o Z
W
V- o U'
o z W
Q J
O t
0-0
(1)
U
L Q CA
7
O ^^
?H ? Q LL
L O
a? ° m O O
y..r
LL
C)
? m
o N
o
? t6 fa
U C!) __ 70 II
O c c 3
0 0
C:D ? z co co O O m
o - (a ~ ° LL
O O U m
m
Q
- U U N
o >.. O N O
~ -- - - CO (n U J o
0
a
co
> cuo
N o
N LL
z
Z
Q
O W
O
Q
X z
W
Li
J
t.

m

3
co co
o
?
:?Q o
uj pZ r
a q
3 -0 0
U C E
O T 3 3

L
N
Z N
7
O a>
Q
U LL
o a
22
>
°>

N
LL

o
C\j U)

E

N ?n
V
O
C
? r

O1 C
N N U ?
W

Q 0 u) 0

O
Z m
N CD
N
L CU

W W
H H N
p p N
Z Z t N
a a
T
F
N
C (6
LL
L =
(6
CD
U
N
O
a
sT"?,???000"3
S?.
AM6
q
V ','0'00
".

i

?k
r
Ilp? ?
?Gerr.s.
4
• N
x N
?
C
p 0
Z
cc
G L O
?}
U Z m
Z

J c
-?cL

W a
r- o°
am?
>
`
~
0-
,

' U
N
U
C) m U
CO O
O ti d' O U
lLO N
4- L O ^
C O U
C: a) c t>3
O_ O ?
N O
+, r ?
m m to a) > C
-a _ p C _r_ m cn
C: C a) M
O O O C C p M
m m W a- > Q
a) 0 >N >1
M M M c)
O m m m
c c C c c c
O O 0 0 c? M M
U U O O O E
N
U) c°n' a_ a ° a_ m Of

Iph Chatham
q'O
Johnston
03020201
Harnett
0 30004
Ddntgomer e
Cumb erlanj
is oke
e
Scotland
03040204
03040203
Robeson
P'
Wilson
030202 3
03,02 202
Lenoir
030202 4
Sampson Jon
O Duplin
03030006
03030007
Bladen
Pender
5
Columbus fit k Han y,?r/
b-l
03040206 l
i3 Q01
O Barra Farms Mitigation Site
® Proposed Geographic Service Area
8-Digit HUC
County Boundary
03030004
03030005
?runswick
03040207
SCALE: 1" = 15 miles
Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank
Phase II
Cumberland County
Figure 11.
Proposed GSA
(Geographic Service Area)
LMG
Appendix A.
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
A view of dormant agricultural fields in central portion of the property.
Barra Farms Phase II
Wetland Mitigation Plan
J L-MG, «
www.lmgroup.net

4
Appendix A.
Site Photographs
A view of a typical collector ditch along the main access road.
A view of a typical lateral drainage ditch within existing agricultural fields.
Ati.
?+- A_ i _
Y 4 . S

Barra Farms Phase II
Wetland Mitigation Plan
LL M , G
www.lmgroup.net
MEMNON
Appendix A.
Site Photographs
S _ ti . - .. .,..des } ! fiK r ?4' :.fC a "!± i`i 0? .w r 3??` ''
A view of area targeted for wet pine savannah restoration.
View of fores
?r
lanted.

View facing southeast of farmed field (Barra 1 in background)

Barra Farms Phase 11 LMG Appendix A.
Wetland Mitigation Plan - Site Photographs
www.lmgroup.net
View
of enhancement and preservation areas.

Barra Farms Phase II
Wetland Mitigation Plan
nLMG
www.lmgroup.net
Appendix A.
Site Photographs
View of farm fields of Barra II (Barra I lands adjacent on left).
Appendix B.
SOIL BORING LOGS
0
N Barra Farms Regional Mitigation Bank Figure 1.
Phase II Soil Boring Location Map
Cumberland County LMG
3,000 6,000 atru .tntrnremxn? o, uvr .,.
Feel
Barra Farms
Detailed Soil Profile Descriptions
Wetland Mitigation Study
December 18, 2008
B I Micro Ridoe 0-1 ",% Leon/Kureb Cconplex
A - 0-3" Loamy Sand, granular very fi-iable non sticky non plastic, 1 QYR 3/ 1.
E - 3 10" Sand, granular very friable non sticky non plastic, I OYR 71`1.
Bh - 10-20" Loamy Sand, %veak medium subangular blocky friable non sticky non
plastic, I OYR 2/1.
C/Bh - 20-32" Sand, single gained, loose non sticky non plastic, I OYR 3/=1 with i ORY
2/1 Loamy Sand Bh bodies.
Cg- 32-48 Sand, single grained, loose non sticky non plastic, 10YR 4/2.
Physical Water: 31"
SHWT: 32"
B2 Micro Low 0-1"'o Croatan
OAp - 0-17'' Mucky Loam, Granular griable slightly sticky non plastic, I OYR 2/1.
OA - 17-31" Nluckv Sandy Loam, massive friable slightly sticky non plastic, I OYR 2/1.
Physical Water: (ii. Surface
SHWT: Surface
133 Micro Ridge 0-11'0' Pactolus
A - 0-9" Loamy Sand, granular very fi-iable non sticky 11011 plastic, 10YR 4'/4.
Cl - 9-14" Sand, granular very friable non sticky non plastic, 1 OYR 5/3.
C2 - 14-21" Loamy Sand weal: nnedium suban(ular blocky very friable non sticky non
plastic 10YR 6/8_
Cpl - 21-3=1" Sand, Single rained, loose non sticky non plastic. TORY 6l2.
Cg2 - 3=1-48"+ Loamy Sand massive friable non sticky non plastic 2.5Y 5%1.
Physical Water: 21"
S1-IWT: 21"
B4 Micro Lour O°o Croatan
OAp - O-9" Muck, granular friable slightly sticky non plastic. IOYR 2/1.
Oat - 9-18" IVluck with fete roots and organic debris, massive, friable slightly sticky non
plastic, 10YR 3/1.
Oa2 - 18-29" Muck. Massive. friable slightly sticky non plastic, 1 OYR 3/3.
C - 29-=15"-?- Loamy Sand, massive firm non sticky non plastic, 1 OYR 5!3.
Physical Water 25-29" Perched on top of compacted sand horizon.
SHWT: kkr Surface.
BS Micro Low 0% Croatan
Oal - 0-13" Muck with few fine roots and organic debris, granular fiial3le slightly sticky
non plastic, I OYR 2/1.
Oa2 -- 13-27 Muck, massive friable slightly sticky non plastic, I OYR 30
.
Physical Water: @4' Surface
SI WT: (cc Surface
B6 Micro Low 0°-o Croatan
Oi - 0-4" Fiberous roots and debris.
Oe - 4-16" Muck with many roots and organic debris mostly rubbed fibers.
Oa - 16-36" Muck with few roots and debris, uranular friable, slightly sticky non plastic,
IOYR 2/1.
Physical Water : 18„
SHWT: -i3 Surface
B7 Micro Ridge 0-1") Lynn HaN,en
.A - 0-3" Loamy Sand. granular very friable non sticky non plastic, 10YR 2/1.
E - 3-10" Sand, granular very friable non sticky non plastic, 2.5Y 7/1.
Bh - 10-20" Loamy Sand, weak medium subangular blocky friable 11011 sticky non
plastic. I OYR 3/1.
Physical Water : 6"
SHWT: <l2"
138 Micro Low 0% Croatan
Oal - 0-8" Muck, granular friable, slightly sticky non plastic, 1 OYR 2T
Oat - 8-30" Muck, massive, friable slightly sticky non plastic, I OYR 311.
C - 30-36" Sand, single grained, loose non sticky non plastic, 10YR 4!3_
Physical Water: 6
SHWT: +tjrbSurface.

L
Appendix C.
DRAINMOD STUDY
BARRA FARMS PHASE II WETLAND MITIGATION BANK
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, NC
DRAINMOD ASSESSMENT
1. Introduction
' On behalf of the bank sponsor, Mr. Stewart Precythe, Land Management Group, Inc. has prepared
the following DRAINMOD assessment for the Barra Farms Phase II Mitigation Bank. The Barra II
property is located to the north and south of the existing Barra I lands (south of the intersection of
NC 210 and SR 2033 near Fayetteville, N.C.). Approximately 800 acres within the Barra II project
boundary is managed for agricultural production, while the remaining acreage is maintained in
various stages of silvicultural management. Site-specific soils information, current drainage
' conditions, and geomorphological data were used to perform DRAINMOD computer modeling.
The results of these evaluations were used to identify the lateral drainage effects of ditches
occurring within the Barra II property.

II. Site Conditions
' The Barra II site is located entirely within the Harrison Creek watershed. Harrison Creek is a first-
order tributary of the lower Cape Fear River. The area is comprised of nearly level to slightly
depressional, organic soils (i.e., Croatan muck) which are bounded by narrow ridges of mineral
' soils commonly mapped as a Leon or Torhunta soil units (see Appendix B of the Mitigation Plan for
site-specific soil data). Drainage improvements, associated with the agricultural and forestry
operations, direct flow to southwest through a network of lateral ditches and collector canals.
Lateral drainage ditches occur to a depth of 3-4 ft below the surface on a uniform spacing of 300 ft.
The larger collector canals are 4-7 ft deep and are located adjacent to the existing road network. A
review of historic aerial photography and NRCS records show that this network was installed
during the late 1960s and early 1970s.

' III. Drainage Modeling
DRAINMOD software, an approved hydrologic modeling tool (USACE, 2008), was utilized to
determine the extent of drainage throughout the site. This software models the cumulative effects
' of parallel drainage features using long-term climate data and user supplied inputs. The user
supplied inputs allow for site-specific drainage spacings, ditch depths, and soil conductivity rates to
be modeled over multiple decades. This long-term approach provides information on the hydrology
of the site in a variety of climatic conditions, which can aid in the determination of the effective
lateral drainage distance of a ditch.
' The calibration of the model utilized published data from the NRCS Soil Survey (Cumberland
County) for soil horizon depths and conductivity rates. In order to obtain conservative results,
lower conductivity rates were used when ranges were provided (see below). All inputs, with the
exception of the drainage depth and drain spacing, remained constant throughout the calibrations.
The growing season was set at 240 days, extending from March 17th to November 12th. Climate
data from Wilmington, N.C. was used as similar data were not available in DRAINMOD format for

' Fayetteville, N.C. The temperatures, rainfall amounts, and rates of evapotranspiration between the
two counties are very similar and are not likely to adversely affect the model results.

1
1

1
r
Table 1. Inputs for Barra II DRAINMOD Study
Input Win. cm
Depth to Drain 3 91.44
4 121.92
5 152.4
6 182.88
Drain Spacing 300 9144
500 15240
Effective Radius of Drains 10
Distance to Impermeable
layer 10 300
Drainage Coefficient 5
Kirkhams Coefficient variable
Initial Depth to Water Table 1 30
Max. Surface Storage 1.2 3
Depth of flow to drains 1.2 3
Wilmington,
Climate Data NC
Time Period 1950-1990
Critical Water Table Depth 30.5 cm
Critical Duration 12 days
Threshold settings for each of different configurations were based on the number of consecutive
days necessary to meet the wetland hydrology criteria. This criteria states that a site must exhibit
water table depths within 12 inches of the surface for a consecutive number of days equal to a
minimum of 5% of the growing season (12 days for Cumberland County). When these conditions
are met for >50% of the years during a given study, the site is considered to be jurisdictional
wetlands.
The results from the different configurations are presented below. Based upon these results, a 3-ft
ditch effectively lowers the water table for a total distance of 300-ft in a Croatan soil. These
conditions mimic the existing network of lateral drainage ditches found throughout the existing farm
fields. Model results for the existing collector canals depths show a potential lateral drainage effect
of up to 500 ft.
Based on the combination of field observations, soil borings, and DRAINMOD results
approximately 1,027 acres of the remaining tract appear to have been effectively drained and are
considered suitable for wetland restoration (see Figure 8 of the Wetland Mitigation Plan). Note that
these investigations also provide evidence of hydrologic modifications outside of the 300' and 500'
2

Table 2. Results from Barra II DRAINMOD stud
Number of Years
Ditch Meeting Wetland
Ditch Depth Spacing Hydrology Length of Study Percentage
2 300 28 40 70%
3 300 16 40 40%
4 300 6 40 15%
4 500 24 40 60%
5 500 20 40 50%
6 500 15 40 38%
offsets, although these areas may still maintain water table depths sufficient to meet the wetland
hydrology criteria. As such, these areas may be considered suitable for wetland enhancement via
the removal of adjacent ditches. Please refer to the attached model runs for more specific
information regarding long-term responses to site drainage.

1
1
1
1
1
1
1

' 2ft Ditch - 300ft Spacing
5% of Growing Season -12 days
BarraCRO-LT.WET
-----------------------------------------------------
' * DRAINMOD version 5.1
* Copyright 1980-04 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
Barra II Mitigation Bank
Croatan Soils No Well Data, Fayetteville, NC
********************************************************************************
---RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 9/ 8/2009 @ 12:38
input file: C:\Drainmod\INPUTS\Barra Farms\BarraCRO-LT.PR7
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculated
drain spacing = 9144. cm drain depth = 61.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.50 cm
for at least 12 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
' YEAR Number of Periods Longest consecutive
of 12 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
1 ------------------ cm --------------------
1950 2. 32.
1951 0. 8.
1952 1. 17.
1953 0. 3.
1954 0. 6.
1955 2. 26.
1956 0. 10.
1957 0. 11.
1958 3. 38.
1959 2. 16.
1960 4. 14.
1961 2. 23.
1962 3. 14.
1963 1. 18.
1964 1. 19.
' 1965 3. 18.
1966 4. 26.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
' 1969 4. 27.
1970 2. 27.
1971 2. 24.
1972 0. 0.
1973 2. 16.
' 1974 1. 43.
1975 0. 9.
1976 3. 12.
1977 0. 9.
1978 0. 3.
1979 2. 37.
Page 1

BarraCRO-LT.WET
1980 1. 23.
1981 1. 12.
' 1982 1. 14.
1983 1. 28.
1984 3. 35.
1985 0. 0.
1986 1. 14.
1987 1. 16.
1988 3. 27.
1989 3. 26.
Number of Years with at least one period = 28. out of 40 years.
Page 2
3ft Ditch - 300ft Spacing
5% of Growing Season -12 days
BarraCRO-LT.WET
-----------------------------------------------------
' * DRAINMOD version 5.1
* Copyright 1980-04 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
Barra II Mitigation Bank
Croatan Soils No Well Data, Fayetteville, NC
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 9/ 8/2009 @ 12:39
input file: C:\Drainmod\INPUTS\Barra Farms\BarraCRO-LT.PRJ
' parameters: free drainage and yields not calculated
---------------drain spacing9144cm drain depth = 91.0 cm
---------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
' Number of periods with water table closer than 30.50 cm
for at least 12 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
' YEAR Number of Periods Longest consecutive
of 12 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
--30_50 cm
------ -------- --------------------
1950 1. 30.
1951 0. 7.
1952 0. 6.
1953 0. 2.
1954 0. 0.
1955 2. 25.
' 1956 0. 3.
1957 0. 9.
1958 2. 30.
1959 0. 6.
' 1960 2. 13.
1961 1. 14.
1962 1. 12.
1963 0. 7.
' 1964 0. 9.
1965 3. 16.
1966 1. 12.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
1969 2. 26.
1970 1. 20.
1971 1. 16.
1972 0. 0.
1973 0. 5.
1974 2. 24.
1975 0. 3.
1976 0. 11.
1977 0. 7.
1978 0. 0.
1979 1. 32.
Page 1
'
BarracRO-LT.wET
1980 0. 8.
1981 0. 11.
1982 0. 2.
1983 1. 21.
1984 0. 10.
1985 0. 0.
' 1986 0. 8.
1987 0. 7.
1988 1. 15.
1989 2. 16.
Number of Years with at least one period = 16. out of 40 years.
Page 2
4ft Ditch - 300ft Spacing
' 5% of Growing Season -12 days
BarraCRO-LT.WET
-----------------------------------------------------
' * DRAINMOD version 5.1
* Copyright 1980-04 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
Barra II Mitigation Bank
Croatan Soils No Well Data, Fayetteville, NC
********************************************************************************
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 9/ 8/2009 @ 12:40
input file: C:\Drainmod\INPUTS\Barra Farms\BarraCRO-LT.PRJ
' parameters: free drainage and yields not calculated
---------------drain spacing = 9144. cm drain depth = 121.0 cm
--------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.50 cm
for at least 12 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods Longest consecutive
of 12 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
' < 30.50 cm
------------------ --------------------
1950 0. 10.
1951 0. 0.
1952 0. 0.
1953 0. 0.
1954 0. 0.
1955 2. 14.
' 1956 0. 0.
1957 0. 8.
1958 0. 10.
1959 0. 0.
' 1960 1. 12.
1961 0. 6.
1962 0. 3.
1963 0. 0.
' 1964 0. 0.
1965 1. 13.
1966 0. 7.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
1969 1. 16.
1970 0. 8.
1971 0. 7.
1972 0. 0.
' 1973 0. 0.
1974 1. 16.
1975 0. 0.
1976 0. 6.
1977 0. 1.
1978 0. 0.
1979 0. 3.
Page 1
BarraCRO-LT.WET
1980 0. 0.
1981 0. 9.
1982 0. 0.
1983 1. 19.
1984 0. 9.
1985 0. 0.
1986 0. 6.
1987 0. 0.
1988 0. 6.
1989 1. 12.
Number of Years with at least one period = 7. out of 40 years.
Page 2
1
4ft Ditch - 500ft Spacing
5% of Growing Season -12 days
BarraCRO-LT.WET
-----------------------------------------------------
' * DRAINMOD version 5.1
* Copyright 1980-04 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
Barra II Mitigation Bank
Croatan Soils No well Data, Fayetteville, NC
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 9/ 8/2009 @ 12:23
input file: C:\Drainmod\INPUTS\Barra Farms\BarraCRO-LT.PR7
' parameters: free drainage and yields not calculated
--------------drain spacing = 15240. cm drain depth = 122.0 cm
- --------------------------------------------------------
D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
' Number of periods with water table closer than 30.50 cm
for at least 12 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
1 YEAR Number of Periods Longest consecutive
of 12 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
< 30_50 cm
------- ------ --------------------
1950 2. 34.
1951 0. 7.
' 1952 1. 25.
1953 0. 4.
1954 0. 3.
1955 2. 27.
' 1956 0. 4.
1957 1. 13.
1958 3. 39.
1959 0. 10.
' 1960 1. 29.
1961 2. 20.
1962 3. 17.
1963 0. 8.
1964 0. 8.
1965 3. 19.
1966 4. 31.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0.
1969 4. 29.
9.
1970 2. 30.
1971 3. 35.
1972 0. 0.
' 1973 2. 24.
1974 1. 41.
1975 0. 10.
1976 3. 14.
' 1977 0. 11.
1978 0. 4.
1979 2. 37.
Page 1
BarraCRO-LT.WET
1980 1. 24.
1981 1. 13.
1982 0. 5.
1983 1. 40.
1984 3. 36.
1985 0. 0.
1986 0. 11.
1987 1. 17.
1988 3. 28.
1989 4. 25.
Number of Years with at least one period = 24. out of 40 years.
Page 2
5ft Ditch - 500ft Spacing
1 5% of Growing Season -12 days
BarraCRO-LT.WET
-----------------------------------------------------
1 * DRAINMOD version 5.1
* Copyright 1980-04 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
Barra II Mitigation Bank
Croatan Soils No Well Data, Fayetteville, NC
----------RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 9/ 8/2009 @ 12:25
input file: C:\Drainmod\INPUTS\Barra Farms\BarraCRO-LT.PRJ
' parameters: free drainage and yields not calculated
-------------- drain spacing = 15240. cm drain depth = 152.0 cm
--------------------------------------------------------
' D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
Number of periods with water table closer than 30.50 cm
' for at least 12 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
' YEAR Number of Periods Longest consecutive
of 12 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
' --30_50 cm
------ -------- --------------------
1950 1. 26.
1951 0. 0.
1952 1. 17.
1953 0. 4.
1954 0. 0.
1955 2. 26.
1956 0. 0.
1957 0. 10.
1958 3. 38.
1959 0. 8.
1960 1. 28.
' 1961 2. 20.
1962 0. 11.
1963 0. 2.
1964 0. 0.
I 1965 2. 18.
1966 3. 26.
1967 0. 0.
1968 0. 0.
I 1969 2. 28.
1970 1. 27.
1971 1. 35.
1972 0. 0.
1973 0. 8.
1974 1. 40.
1975 0. 8.
1976 2. 12.
1977 0. 9.
' 1978 0. 2.
1979 2. 36.
Page 1
1
1
1
1
BarraCRO-LT.WET
1980 1. 20.
1981 1. 12.
1982 0. 0.
1983 1. 31.
1984 3. 15.
1985 0. 0.
1986 0. 8.
1987 0. 3.
1988 3. 23.
1989 2. 18.
Number of Years with at least one period = 20. out of 40 years.
Page 2
6ft Ditch - 500ft Spacing
5% of Growing Season -12 days
BarraCRO-LT.WET
-----------------------------------------------------
' * DRAINMOD version 5.1
* Copyright 1980-04 North Carolina State University
-----------------------------------------------------
Barra II Mitigation Bank
Croatan Soils No Well Data, Fayetteville, NC
********************************************************************************
1 ---------- RUN STATISTICS ---------- time: 9/ 8/2009 @ 12:27
input file: C:\Drainmod\INPUTS\Barra Farms\BarraCRO-LT.PRJ
parameters: free drainage and yields not calculated
drain spacing = 15240. cm drain depth = 183.0 cm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
' D R A I N M 0 D--- HYDROLOGY EVALUATION
****** INTERIM EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE ******
' Number of periods with water table closer than 30.50 cm
for at least 12 days. Counting starts on day
76 and ends on day 316 of each year
YEAR Number of Periods. Longest Consecutive
of 12 days or Period in Days
more with WTD
' --30_50 cm
------ -------- --------------------
1950 1. 16.
1951 0. 0.
1952 0. 2.
1953 0. 3.
1954 0. 0.
1955 1. 26.
' 1956 0. 0.
1957 0. 0.
1958 2. 38.
1959 0. 7.
1960 2. 14.
1961 0. 9.
1962 0. 3.
1963 0. 0.
1964 0. 0.
1965 2. 17.
1966 2. 16.
1967 0. 0.
' 1968 0.
1969 2. 28.
8.
1970 1. 13.
1971 1. 13.
1972 0. 0.
' 1973 0. 3.
1974 1. 38.
1975 0. 5.
1976 0. 9.
' 1977 0. 8.
1978 0. 0.
1979 2. 18.
Page 1
BarraCRO-LT.WET
1980 0. 0.
1981 0. 11.
1982 0. 0.
1983 1. 28.
1984 1. 12.
1985 0. 0.
1986 0. 3.
1987 0. - 1.
1988 2. 20.
1989 1. 17.
Number of Years with at least one period = 15. out of 40 years.
Page 2