20011750 Ver 1_Monitoring Report_20091005 (2)

C pc."?;ai rc??
ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2003
White Oak Creek
Johnston County
Project No. 6.408014T
TIP No. R-2000 WM
Prepared By:
Office of Natural Environment & Roadside Environmental Unit
North Carolina Department of Transportation
December 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 2
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ......................................................................... 2
1.2 PURPOSE ................................................................................................. 2
1.3 PROJECT HISTORY ................................................................................. 2
1.4 DEBIT LEDGER ........................................................................................ 4
2.0 HYDROLOGY ...................................................................................................... 4
2.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA ................................................................................ 4
2.2 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION ................................................................. 4
2.3 RESULTS OF HYDROLOGIC MONITORING ........................................... 6
2.3.1 Site Data ......................................................................................... 6
2.3.2 Climatic Data ................................................................................. 10
2.4 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 10
3.0 VEGETATION: WHITE OAK CREEK MITIGATION SITE ................................12
3.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA .............................................................................. 12
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES .................................................................. 12
3.3 RESULTS OF VEGETATION MONITORING .......................................... 14
3.4 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 14
4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS .........................................15
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. 2003 White Oak Creek Hydrologic Monitoring Results .............................. 7
Table 2. Vegetation Monitoring Statistics ............................................................... 14
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Site Location Map ...................................................................................... 3
Figure 2. Monitoring Gauge Location Map ................................................................ 5
Figure 3 . Monitoring Gauge Hydrologic Results ........................................................ 9
Figure 4. White Oak Creek 30-70 Graph ................................................................ 11
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - GAUGE DATA GRAPHS?
APPENDIX B - SITE PHOTOS & PLANTING PLAN
SUMMARY
The following report summarizes the monitoring activities that have occurred in the past
year on the White Oak Creek Mitigation Site. Site construction began in January 2002
and was completed in March 2002. The site was planted in late March 2002. In
December 2002, the site was replanted; therefore, vegetation monitoring was restarted
for year 1. Hydrology monitoring in 2003 represents the second year of monitoring at
the site. The site must demonstrate both hydrologic and vegetation success for a
minimum of five consecutive years or until the site is deemed successful. The site is
monitored with thirty-eight groundwater monitoring gauges and eight vegetation plots.
The 2003-year represents the second year for hydrology monitoring. Overall, twenty-
three of the thirty-six (non-reference) monitoring gauges indicate saturation within 12" of
the surface for greater than 12.5% of the growing season. The two reference gauges,
REF-37 and REF-38, also met the saturation criteria. Thirteen of the thirty-six gauges
did not meet the jurisdictional success criteria for the 2003-monitoring year.
The 2003 vegetation monitoring of the site revealed an average density of 532 trees per
acre. This average is well above the minimum success criteria of 320 trees per acre.
Based on the monitoring results from the 2003-growing season, NCDOT recommends
that both hydrologic and vegetation monitoring continue at the White Oak Creek
Mitigation Site.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The White Oak Creek Site is located adjacent to the west bank of White Oak Creek,
immediately south of Winston Road (SR 1550) and north of Austin Pond, approximately
2.5 miles west of Clayton, NC in Johnston County.
The site, totaling 50.69 acres in size, was mostly in open pastureland that was used to
support horses in the past. Currently, the site has been returned to its natural condition.
Construction started in January 2002 and was completed in March 2002. Planting was
completed in March 2002.
1.2 PURPOSE
In order to demonstrate successful mitigation, hydrologic and vegetative monitoring
must be conducted for a minimum of five consecutive years. Success criteria are based
on federal guidelines for wetland mitigation. These guidelines stipulate criteria for both
hydrologic conditions and vegetation survival. The following report details the results of
hydrologic and vegetative monitoring during the 2003-growing season at the White Oak
Creek Mitigation Site.
Activities in 2003 reflect the second year of hydrology monitoring and the restart first
year for vegetation monitoring, following the restoration efforts. Included in this report
are analyses of both hydrologic and vegetative monitoring results, as well as local
climate conditions throughout the growing season, and site photographs.
1.3 PROJECT HISTORY
January 2002- March 2002
March 2002
August 2002
March - November 2002
December 2002
June 2003
March - November 2003
Site Construction
Site Planted
Vegetation Monitoring (1 yr.)
Hydrologic Monitoring (1 yr.)
Site Replanted
Vegetation Monitoring (Restart Year 1)
Hydrologic Monitoring (Restart Year 1)
2
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
(C606
;9
C9D
.
m

y?I_Itt? )7.t

t

t
i

//??pyy l
CQD
wr.?
A
_.....,... -.
e
L
i r a
Q6 a6

Q2DQ2 Yahoo! bw (D 2002 GDT hic
3
1.4 DEBIT LEDGER
The White Oak Creek Mitigation Site was constructed as an "up-front" effort for use by
the Department for compensatory mitigation requirements involving roadway impacts to
wetlands in the Neuse River Basin. Currently, no credits have been debited from this
mitigation site. Certain portions of the site are available for credit. Regulatory agencies
have stipulated that no credits shall be released until success is shown in certain
restoration and creation areas.
2.0 HYDROLOGY
2.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA
In accordance with federal guidelines for wetland mitigation, the success criteria for
hydrology states that the area must be inundated or saturated (within 12" of the surface)
by surface or groundwater for at least a consecutive 12.5% of the growing season
during a normal precipitation year. Areas inundated for less than 5% of the growing
season are always classified as non-wetlands.
A site may be found to meet the hydrology performance criteria on the basis of
comparison of monitoring data taken from the site with monitoring data taken from an
established reference site approved by the Corps. The Corps retains the discretion to
find that the hydrology criteria are met if such monitoring data from the mitigation site
and the reference site are similar.
The growing season in Johnston County begins March 26 and ends November 10.
These dates correspond to a 50% probability that temperatures will not drop to 280F or
lower after March 26 and before November 10.' The growing season is 229 days;
therefore, optimum hydrology requires 12.5% of this season, or at least 29 consecutive
days. Local climate must also represent average conditions for the area.
2.2 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION
In March of 2002, thirty-eight monitoring gauges were installed across the site (Figure
2). The automatic monitoring gauges record daily readings of groundwater depth. This
represents the second full growing season that the monitoring gauges have been in
place.
The White Oak Creek Site was designed to receive hydrologic input from rainfall and
surface water accessing the floodplain. The hydrologic monitoring should show the
reaction of the groundwater level to specific rainfall events.
Natural Resources Conservation Service,.Soil Survey of Wake County, North Carolina, p. 79.
4

l„
I ?

\./
1 ?
?l
1_
J•r ? r
/
2...

Z

? i ¢
b I
i
Ct ° l e i I (

t
?
o
J
? I o
2
I a
p z
? "1
x
i 2
o
o ?. ?
Li z o o w zi
w
?,j O W 41 L' ll J
W
W
Q W J W E1 Q J
N W `

nL'
eCt
V Z,
IJ
L
V o
W a SS
V
C W W
3 LU
N
3 W
.. Q L 2 ? hy 2 j
? 0 0 0 o L 3 ct o
O t , 4l l.J ll W W W ? liJ
Q O U U U Q) O O Q
F O
O o "J 40 U J U
O 1J
Q
Q- 2 R
c
z
Q- cc
Q. Cl-
Q- R
(L R 2'
c LU Vl
Q-

2.3 RESULTS OF HYDROLOGIC MONITORING
2.3.1 Site Data
The maximum number of consecutive .days that the groundwater was within twelve
inches of the surface was determined for each well. This number was converted into a
percentage of the 229-day growing season (March 26 - November 10). The results are
presented in Table 1.
Appendix A contains a plot of the groundwater depth for each monitoring well. If the
gauge shows saturation for greater than 12.5% of the growing season, the maximum
number of consecutive days is noted on each graph. The individual precipitation events
are shown on the monitoring well graphs as bars.
Figure 3 provides a graphical representation of the hydrologic results. Gauges
highlighted in blue indicate wetland hydrology for more than 12.5% of the growing
season. Gauges highlighted in red show hydrology between 8% and 12.5% of the
growing season, while those in green indicate hydrology between 5% and 8%. Gauges
highlighted in black indicate no wetland hydrology (less than 5% of the growing season).
Table 1. 2003 White Oak Creek Hydrologic Monitoring Results
Monitoring
Well <6% 5-8% 8-12.5% >12.5% Actual % Dates Meeting
Success
GW-1* X 4.8
GW-2* X 16.1 March 26-May 1
GW-3 X 5.2
GW-4+ X 100 March 26-Nov 10
GW-5+ X 17.4 March 26-May 24
GW-6* X 4.8
GW-7* X 8.3
GW-8* X 6.1
GW-9*+ X 60.9 March 26-Aug 12
GW-10*+ X 31.3 March 26-May 24
May 19-Jul 29
GW-11+ X 100 March 26-Nov 10
GW-12* X 4.8
GW-13* X 9.1

GW-14*+
X
20.4 March 26-May 11
May 16-June 27
June 29-Au 12
GW-15 X 0
GW-16+ X 100 March 26-Nov 10
GW-17+ X 100 March 26-Nov 10
GW-18+ X 46.1 March 26-May 4
May 19-Sept 1
GW-19 X 8.7
GW-20*+ X 53.9 March 26-July 27
GW-21 * X 10
GW-22* X 17 March 26-May 3
GW-23*+ X 25.2 March 26-April 28
June 16-Au 12
Monitoring
Well `5/0 a 5o
-8/0 8-12.5/o o ]12a
.5/o Actual /o o Dates Meeting
Success
GW-24* X 16.5 March 26-May 2
GW-25*+ X 24.8 March 26-May 13
May 16-Jul 11
GW-26* X 9.1
GW-27*+ X 60.9 March 26-Aug 12
GW-28*+ X 60.9 March 26-Aug 12
GW-29*+ X 60.9 March 26-Aug 12
GW-30 X 2.2
GW-31+ X 87.8 March 26-Oct 13
GW-32+ X 43 March 26-July 2
GW-33+ X 100 March 26-Nov 10
GW-34+ X 53.9 May 16-June 25
Jul 10-Nov 10
GW-35+ X 92.6 May 16-Oct 24
GW-36* X 0
REF-37*+ X 20.4 March 26-May 11
REF-38*+ X 47 March 26-July 11
* Gauge was not downloaded at the end of the growing season and may affect the
results (saturation percentage).
+Gauge met the success criterion during an average rainfall month (May, June,
September, and October).
Specific Gauge Problems:
Gauges GW-13, GW-15 and G-26 either experienced malfunctions or were not
downloaded throughout the growing season.
• The onsite rain gauge experienced a malfunction during the growing season.
Rainfall data from the State Climate Office Clayton Station was used for the
following dates: January 1 - May 4 and July 9 - November 26.

r?
ate.
?J
?.J
?T
r)
\?TT

rq ',z
V (? iG IC, CJ U) (T
r r 1 U
I ? ? CI Q
cc I I !
b Zt ( I ' I
4J i ! o
Ll ? a ? 2 J ? I
l O ?. O ? ? ?? ? i CW]
lj r o c u- i ;
C? w °
---J ti o- n l ? ? W 4J w 2;
n ?, vi `r w d ? II 4,
a 2 cL r_.
J 41 ;i d O(`> j
7 N In (? 4 N 3
O O
V Q V U
u W U 1, I„ U I? 41 Q ti J
a U In In a Zj vSi 3 WI ?j
(
O O Q O G (? U ?? 2 O
O 4J IaJ 4J lu 4J W 4J W r IaJ
Q O U O U O O O F j? O
F_ O O O O O (J O:-+ U
lY R; R: R; 2. R R: I? k Z Y.
Q, R, R. R. R- Q. 4 J 41 I , (L.

2.3.2 Climatic Data
Figure 4 represents an evaluation of the local climate in comparison with historical data
in order to determine whether 2003 was "average" in terms of rainfall. The two lines
represent the 30th and 70th percentiles of monthly precipitation for Clayton. The bars
are the monthly rainfall totals for parts of 2002 and 2003. The onsite rain gauge
experienced a gauge malfunction, therefore the rain gauge from the Clayton weather
station was used for the following dates:' January 1 - May 4 and July 9 - November 26.
The State Climate Office collected the historical and monthly rainfall data.
For the 2003-year, the month of November recorded below average rainfall. The
months of November (02'), January, May, June, September, and October all recorded
average rainfall for the site. December (02'), February, March, April, July, and August
all recorded above average rainfall. Overall, 2003 experienced average to above
average rainfall.
2.4 CONCLUSIONS
Twenty-three of the thirty-six (non-reference) monitoring gauges indicated saturation
within 12" of the surface for greater than 12.5% of the growing season. Five gauges
resulted in saturation between 8% and 12.5% and two gauges showed saturation levels
between 5% and 8%. Six of the thirty-six gauges had saturation levels less than 5% of
the growing season. Both reference gauges (REF-37 and REF-38) met the jurisdiction
criteria in 2003.
NCDOT will continue to monitor the White Oak Creek Mitigation Site for hydrology.
10
.C
Q -
ca
Q)
U
i
m
a-
0
O
M
L
t
d
l`0
d
c
d
ILd U
Z
0
M
Y ?
m U
U
Y
m
O
d
t
1

m
c
m
L
CL
r
C) -
n ?
a?
`
d
M
O O W n 0 U7 't M N ? O
(sapui) uoilelidiaaJd
Cl)
O
U
d
Cl)
O
0
O
z
ih
O
U
0
Cl)
O
m
d
N
ih
O
O)
iM
O
7
M
0
c
t
c
0
o ?
T
ih
0
Q
ih
0
cc
in
0
a
d
Cl)
O
c
N
O
U
d
N
O
N
N
U
N
a
L
O
ti
N
CI
N'
U
L
N
a-
L
O
M
f9
V-
C
co
0
0
N
(9
w
C
N
0
O
N
H
r
LL
3.0 VEGETATION: WHITE OAK CREEK MITIGATION SITE
(YEAR 1 MONITORING)
3.1 SUCCESS CRITERIA
Success criteria state that at least 320 stems per acre must survive after the completion
of the third growing season. The required survival criterion will decrease by 10% per
year after the third year of vegetation monitoring (i.e., for an expected 290 stems per
acre for year 4 and 260 stems per acre for year 5.)
3.2 DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES
The following tree species were planted in the Wetland Areas:
Zone 1: Wetland Restoration Area (10.03 acres)
Quercus lyrata, Overcup Oak
Quercus michauxii, Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus phellos, Willow Oak
Quercus nigra, Water Oak
Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora, Swamp Blackgum
Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Green Ash
Corpus amomum, Silky Dogwood
Sambucus canadensis, Elderberry
Cephalanthus occidentalis, Buttonbush
Zone 2: Wetland Enhancement Area (1.58 acres)
Quercus lyrata, Overcup Oak
Quercus michauxii, Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus phellos, Willow Oak
Quercus nigra, Water Oak
Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora, Swamp Blackgum
Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Green Ash
Corpus amomum, Silky Dogwood
Sambucus canadensis, Elderberry
Cephalanthus occidentalis, Buttonbush
12
Zone 3: Wetland Creation Area (6.59 acres)
Quercus lyrata, Overcup Oak
Quercus michauxii, Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus phellos, Willow Oak
Quercus nigra, Water Oak
Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora, Swamp Blackgum
Fraxinus pennsylvanica, Green Ash
13
3.3 RESULTS OF VEGETATION MONITORING
Table 2. Vegetation Monitoring Statistics
?c
o

Y 0 0
C9

Q 0)

c 0
)
Q
H

Q V
Q ? .w V m
CL
a
0
cc

2
-
w L cc 0 _
4)

M o
>4

d C

M -

c 1
1

C _
LL
>
O

Cn

7

S?

N

V
?.
V

W

co r
.r

0
1 8 3 1 1 6 9 1 1 30 40 510
2 3 7 2 2 2 7 3 2 28 38 501
3 2 5 1 2 6 7 7 3 7 40 45 604
4 2 3 5 2 2 3 17 24 482
5 8 1 8 6 4 4 1 37 570
6 3 5 1 1 9 1 1 21 31 461
7 1 2 3 8 3 2 9 4
8 4 2 1 1 5 3 2 1 3 22 32 468
Total Densi ty A v e r a a 532
Site Notes: Other species noted: ragweed, broomsedge, Scirpus sp., black willow,
Juncus sp., trumpet creeper, briars, bitter sneezeweed, fennel, smartweed, and various
grasses.
3.4 CONCLUSIONS
Of the 50.7 acres on this site, approximately 18.2 acres involved tree planting.
Supplemental tree planting was completed in December 2002. An upland buffer area
that consisted of 12.04 acres was also planted. There were eight vegetation-monitoring
plots established throughout the planting areas. The 2003 vegetation monitoring of the
site revealed an average density of 532 trees per acre. This average is well above the
minimum success criteria of 320 trees per acre.
NCDOT will continue vegetation monitoring at the White Oak Creek Mitigation Site
r
14
4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS
The second year for hydrologic monitoring resulted in twenty-three of the thirty-six (non-
reference) monitoring gauges showing saturation within 12" of the surface for greater
than 12.5% of the growing season. The two reference gauges, REF-37 and REF-38,
also exceeded the optimum saturation period. Thirteen of the thirty-six gauges did not
meet the jurisdictional success criteria for the 2003-monitoring year.
Due to the low stem counts after year one, the site was replanted in December 2002.
The site has improved with an average density of 532 trees per acre, which is above the
minimum success of 320 trees pre acre.
NCDOT proposes to continue both hydrologic and vegetation monitoring at the White
Oak Creek Mitigation Site.
15

-- --- -------- --_....
s_
r.
??
y ! ?a
ak
O g N?
t _
' a cp `?
m
co C\j
CO O O
ro ?
I
O ? F? ti
_ ttt ti
I? l I `t!i
W
cc LO
Z o ? ti o° o? o
.tom z a a n„ ti
4 z Q a w b ti
ELI o LLJ
" W LQ a:
w
J Q v s w W
Cz: oO a LL
?? w a v o Q w o m
o o
w io w
V) Ll
° i-n co 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ?o 0
, v`u, vwi v
\ ° vWi vWi vWi vWi vW W W
i
Q.9 ?k
O
----- ---- ---- -
Photo 1
Photo 3

Photo 5
White Oak Creek

e
$'? .r3?'f ??4 ¢
i
x
a

4 k ??
t **88

M
Photo 2

Photo 4
V.;
Photo 6
2003