20160980 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20200121

ID#* 20160980 Version* 2
Select Reviewer:*
Mac Haupt
Initial Review Completed Date 01/21/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/21/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
V Stream Pr Wetlands r- Buffer r` Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Jamey McEachran
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20160980
Existing IDY
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Meadow Spring
County: Johnston
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*2
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Meadow Spring Year 1 Monitoring Report.pdf 15.55MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Ryan Medric
Signature:*

302 Jefferson St. Suite 110
res Raleigh, NC 27605
Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South, Suite 300
Bellaire, TX 77401
Main: 713.520.5400
January 21, 2020
Samantha Dailey
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Division
3331 Heritage Trade Drive, Suite 105
Wake Forest, NC 27587
RE: Meadow Spring Year 1 Monitoring Report (SAW-2016-01989)
Ms. Dailey,
Please find attached the Meadow Spring Year 1 Monitoring Report. In Year 1, 16 of the 18 fixed
vegetation plots met the 320 stems per acre success criteria. The three random vegetation plots
also met the 320 stems per acre success criteria. Bankfull events were recorded on the stage
recorder on S11. Due to the groundwater wells missing the first three months of the growing
season, only two of the 11 met the 12 percent hydroperiod success criteria. The one vegetation
problem area onsite is the 0.75-acre low stem density area in and around Vegetation Plot 9 and
16, which will be replanted in early 2020. Three stream problem areas were also reported in Year
1. The first was a series of bank erosion on S2 and S6A which will be repaired in early 2020 with
the installation of brush mattresses. The second was a rill that formed off of a filled ditch that will
be repaired in early 2020 with wattles and Iivestakes. And the third was an eroded point bar on
S6A that will be regraded, matted, and Iivestaked in early 2020.
RES is requesting a 10% stream credit release (544.00 SMUs) and a 10% wetland credit release
(1.44 WMUs) for the completion of the Year 1 monitoring report. Please see enclosed the credit
release timeline and an updated credit ledger.
Thank you,
Ryan Medric I Ecologist

MEADOW SPRING MITIGATION SITE
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
SA W-2016-01989
YEAR I MONITORING REPORT
Provided by:
fires
Bank Sponsor: EBX-Neuse I, LLC,
An entity of Resource Environmental Solutions
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
919-209-1056
January 2020

Table of Contents
1.0 Project Summary .................................................
1.1 Project Location and Description ..........
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives ................
1.3 Pro_ject Success Criteria .........................
Stream Success Criteria ...............................
Wetland Success Criteria .............................
Vegetation Success Criteria .........................
1.4 Project Components ..............................
1.5 Design/Approach...................................
Stream..........................................................
Wetland........................................................
1.6 Construction and As -Built Conditions..
1.7 Year 1 Monitoring Performance (MY1)
Vegetation....................................................
Stream Geomorphology ...............................
StreamHydrology ........................................
Wetland Hydrology ......................................
2.0 Methods..............................................................
3.0 References...........................................................
Appendix A: Background Tables
Table 1: Project Mitigation Components
Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3: Project Contacts Table
Table 4: Project Background Information Table
Figure 1: Site Location Map
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2: Current Conditions Plan View
Vegetation Plot Photos
Stream and Vegetation Problem Areas
ADUendix C: VeLyetation Plot Data
Table 5: Planted Species Summary
Table 6: Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 7a. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Table 7b. Random Vegetation Monitoring Plot Data
Annendix D: Stream Measurement and GeomornholoLyv Data
MY1 Cross -Section Overlay Plots
Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Table 10. Stream Reach Morphology Data Table
Annendix E: HvdroloLyv Data
Table 11. 2019 Rainfall Data
Table 12. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Table 13. 2019 Max Hydroperiod
Table 14. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
MY1 Groundwater Hydrographs
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
6
6
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
.... 10
Meadow Spring 1 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

1.0 Proiect Summary
L I Project Location and Description
The Meadow Spring Mitigation Site (the "Site) is located within a watershed dominated by agricultural
land use in Johnston County, North Carolina, approximately three miles north of Smithfield. The project
streams and wetlands were significantly impacted by channelization, impoundment, and cattle access. The
project involves the restoration and protection of streams in the Neuse River watershed and the restoration,
enhancement, and preservation of adjacent riparian wetlands. The purpose of this mitigation site is to
restore, enhance and preserve a stream/wetland complex located within the Neuse River Basin.
The Site lies within USGS Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03020201100050. The 2010 Neuse River Basin
Plan (RBRP) identified the Neuse River watershed (HUC 03020201100050) as a Targeted Local Watershed
(TLW), a watershed that exhibits both the need and opportunity for wetland, stream, and riparian buffer
restoration.
The total easement area is 60.93 acres. The wooded areas along the easement corridor designated for
restoration activities are classified as mixed hardwoods. Invasive species were present throughout the
wooded areas. Restored channels were both laterally and vertically unstable, impacted by cattle, have
disturbed riparian buffers, and did not fully support aquatic life. Previous stream conditions along the
restoration reaches exhibited habitat degradation because of impacts from livestock and impoundment to
promote agricultural activities.
The Meadow Spring Site includes Priority I/II restoration, Enhancement Levels III and III, Preservation
and wetland re -habilitation, re-establishment, enhancement and preservation. Priority I restoration reaches
incorporate the construction of a single -thread meandering channel, with parameters based on data taken
from the reference site described above, published empirical relationships, NC Coastal Plain Regional
Curves, and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses.
Wetland re-establishment occur adjacent to Priority I stream restoration reaches. The restoration approach
was to reconnect the floodplain wetlands to the stream, fill existing ditches, rough the floodplain surface,
and plant native tree and shrub species commonly found in small stream swamp ecosystems. The wetland
enhancement treatment includes livestock exclusion, improving hydrology via pond removal and ditch
plugging, and planting native tree and shrub species.
The Site will be monitored on a regular basis and a physical inspection of the Site will be conducted at a
minimum of twice per year throughout the seven-year post -construction monitoring period, or until
performance standards are met. These site inspections will identify site components and features that require
routine maintenance. The measure of stream restoration success will be documented by bankfull flows and
no change in stream channel classification. Sand bed channels are dynamic and minor adjustments to
dimension and profile are expected. The measure of vegetative success for the Site will be the survival of
at least 210 seven-year old planted trees per acre with an average height of 10 feet at the end of year seven
of the monitoring period.
Upon approval for closeout by the Interagency Review Team (IRT), the site will be transferred to the North
Carolina Wildlife Habitat Foundation (NCWHF). The NCWHF will be responsible for periodic inspection
of the Site to ensure that restrictions required in the Conservation Easement or the deed restriction
document(s) are upheld. Endowment funds required to uphold easement and deed restrictions will be
negotiated prior to site transfer to the responsible party.
Meadow Spring 2 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) identified several restoration needs for the
entire Neuse River Basin, as well as for HUC 03020201, specifically. The Site is in HUC 03020201100050
(Meuse River), a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) that exhibits both the need and opportunity for wetland,
stream, and riparian buffer restoration. The watershed includes 52 square miles of area, with 31 percent of
the 106 stream miles lacking wooded buffers. Thirty-seven percent of the watershed is used for agricultural
purposes with 13 animal operations occurring in the watershed. Impervious surface near the town of
Smithfield is increasing and set to surpass the critical seven percent benchmark (NCDMS 2010).
The Site was identified as a stream and buffer restoration opportunity to improve water quality, habitat, and
hydrology within the Neuse River Basin. This project is intended to provide Stream Mitigation Units to be
applied as compensatory mitigation for unavoidable authorized impacts to waters of the US under Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and support the overall goal of "no net loss" of aquatic
resources in the United States. The Site is located within the downstream end of HUC 03020201 and
includes an unnamed tributary that directly discharges into the Neuse River. Many of the project design
goals and objectives, including restoration of riparian buffers to filter runoff from agricultural operations
and improve terrestrial habitat, and construction of in -stream structures to improve habitat diversity, will
address the degraded water quality and nutrient input from farming that were identified as major watershed
stressors in the 2010 Neuse RBRP.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Design and construct stable stream channels with appropriate pattern, dimension, and profile based
on reference reach conditions.
• Exclude livestock permanently from streams and their associated buffers as well as surrounding
wetlands.
• Reduce bank height ratios to less than 1.2 and increase entrenchment ratio to greater than 2.2 in
accordance to the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update
Guidance.
• Increase forested riparian buffers to at least fifty feet on both sides of the channel along the project
reaches with an appropriate riparian plant community.
• Re-establish, rehabilitate, and enhance riparian wetlands by raising stream bed elevations, plugging
surface ditches, and planting native wetland plant species in order to maintain appropriate soil series
saturation/hydroperiod thresholds during the growing season.
• Preserve and enhance of hydrology in existing riparian wetland seeps.
• Establish a permanent conservation easement on the Site.
• Remove invasive species from the riparian buffer and wetland areas to support the colonization and
survival of native riparian buffer species.
1.3 Project Success Criteria
The Site follows the USACE 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines and the "Wilmington District Stream and
Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update" dated October 24, 2016. Cross section and vegetation plot data
will be collected in Years 0, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. Stream and wetland hydrology data and visual monitoring
will be reported annually.
Meadow Spring 3 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

Stream Success Criteria
Four bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The bankfull
events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until four bankfull
events have been documented in separate years.
There should be little change in as -built cross -sections. If changes do take place, they should be evaluated
to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down -cutting or
erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling, vegetative
changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross sections shall be classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross -sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type. Bank height ratio shall not exceed
1.2, and the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within restored reaches.
Digital images will be used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images should
not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth.
Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A
series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
Wetland Success Criteria
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS) has a current WETS table for Johnston County upon
which to base a normal rainfall amount and average growing season. The closest comparable data station
was determined to be the WETS station for Smithfield, NC. The growing season for Johnston County is
233 days long, extending from March 18 to November 6, and is based on a daily minimum temperature
greater than 28 degrees Fahrenheit occurring in five of ten years.
Based upon field observation across the site, the NRCS mapping units show a good correlation to actual
site conditions in areas of the site. Mitigation guidance for soils in the Coastal Plain suggests a hydroperiod
for the Bibb soil of 12-16 percent of the growing season. The hydrology success criterion for the Site is to
restore the water table so that it will remain continuously within 12 inches of the soil surface for at least 12
percent of the growing season (approximately 27 days) at each groundwater gauge location. Based on the
extensive management history of the Site and soil compaction, RES expects a slighty reduced hydroperiod
in the monitoring years 1 and 2.
Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the riparian buffers on the site follow
IRT Guidance. Vegetation monitoring plots are a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum of
two percent of the planted area. Vegetation monitoring shall occur annually between July 15 and leaf drop.
The interim measures of vegetative success for the site are the survival of at least 320 planted three-year
old trees per acre at the end of Year 3, 260 five-year old trees that are at least 7 feet tall at the end of Year
5, and the final vegetative success criteria is 210 trees per acre with an average height of ten feet at the
end of Year 7. Volunteer trees are to be counted, identified to species, and included in the yearly
monitoring reports, but do not count towards the success criteria of total planted stems.
Meadow Spring 4 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

1.4 Project Components
The project area is comprised of an easement area along an unnamed tributary to the Neuse River. The
easement is separated by an existing power easement and three agricultural crossings. The project is divided
into northern and southern portions by the existing power easement. The northern portion of the project
includes Reaches S1, S2, S5, S6A and S613. The southern portion of the project includes Reaches S7, S9,
S11, S12 and S13. The stream and wetland mitigation components are summarized below.
Mitigation Plan Stream Credits
Stream Mitigation
Reach
Mitigation Type
Stationing
Existing
Length
(LF)
Design
Length
(LF)
Mitigation
Ratio
Base
SMUs
S 1
Enhancement II
3+50 to 6+00
250
250
2.5:1
100
S2
Enhancement I
6+00 to 11+00
500
500
1.5:1
333
S5
P1 / P2 Restoration
0+76 to 3+07
215
231
1:1
231
S6A
P1 Restoration
11+00 to 24+50
1,220
1,350
1:1
1,350
S613
P1 Restoration
24+50 to 36+26
1,150
1,176
1:1
1,176
S613
Enhancement I
36+26 to 37+93
165
167
1.5:1
111
S7
Enhancement I
38+80 to 48+70
1,035
990
1.5:1
660
S7
Enhancement I
49+40 to 53+80
452
440
1.5:1
293
S9
Enhancement III
53+80 to 60+55
665
675
7.5:1
90
S11
P1 Restoration
60+55 to 71+00
906
1,045
1:1
1,045
S12
Preservation
71+00 to 74+80
380
380
10:1
38
S13
Preservation
9+69 to 14+23
454
454
10:1
45
Total
1 7,392
1 7,658
5,473
Non -Standard
Buffer Width Adjustment*
50
Grand Total Adjusted SMUs
5,523
*The non-standard buffer width adjustment was only performed for reaches S7, S9, S12, S13
Mitigation Plan Wetland Credits
Wetland Mitigation
Wetland
Mitigation Type
Total Acres
Mitigation Ratio
WMUs
WB
Rehabilitation
0.95
1.5:1
0.63
WD
Preservation
0.03
No Credit
No Credit
WE
Preservation
0.09
No Credit
No Credit
WF-A
Preservation
2.00
No Credit
No Credit
WF-B
Enhancement
2.02
3:1
0.67
WG-A
Enhancement
3.68
3:1
1.23
WG-B
Enhancement
18.03
5:1
3.61
WH
Re-establishment
6.84
1:1
6.84
WI
Re-establishment
2.87
2:1
1.44
Total
36.51
14.41
Meadow Spring 5 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

1. S Design/Approach
Stream
The Meadow Spring Site includes Priority I/Priority II Restoration, Enhancement Level I, Enhancement
Level II, Enhancement Level IIL Priority I Restoration reaches incorporate the design of a single -thread
meandering channel, with parameters based on data taken from the reference site described above,
published empirical relationships, NC Coastal Plain Regional Curves, and hydrologic and hydraulic
analyses. As a result of the restoration of planform and dimension, frequent overbank flows and a restored
riparian buffer will provide the appropriate hydrology and sediment transport throughout this coastal plain
watershed. All non -vegetated areas within the easement were planted with native vegetation and any areas
of invasive species were removed and/or treated.
• Reach S1 (STA 03+50 to STA 06+00) — Reach beginning at northwestern limits of the project
flowing southeast to Reach S2 totaling 250 linear feet of Enhancement Level II. Row crops and
active pasture were located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement involved revegetating the buffer
with native vegetation.
• Reach S2 (STA 06+00 to STA 11+00) — Reach begins at the downstream end of Reach S1 and
flows southeast through what was active pasture to Reach S6A. Reach S2 totals 500 linear feet of
Enhancement Level L Active pasture and row crops used to surround this reach. Enhancement
involved revegetating the buffer and stream stabilization of localized erosion with the installation
of log cross vanes and sills.
• Reach S5 (STA 00+76 to STA 03+07) — Reach begins north of Reach S6A and flows south through
active pasture to a confluence with Reach S6A totaling 231 linear feet of Priority I and II
Restoration. Active pasture and maintained lawn used to surround this reach. Restoration included
meandering the channel within the valley, backfilling the old stream, reconnecting to its floodplain,
and restoring hydrology to drained wetlands.
• Reach S6A (STA 11+00 to STA 24+50) — Reach begins at the downstream end of Reach S2 and
flows east through what was active pasture, flows adjacent to a farm pond and ends at a confluence
with Reach S5. Reach S6A totals 1,350 linear feet of Priority I Restoration. Restoration included
meandering channel though the natural valley, backfilling the old channel, reconnecting to its
floodplain, removing the old dam, and restoring hydrology to drained wetlands.
• Reach S6B — Section 1 (STA 24+50 to STA 36+26) — Reach begins at the confluence of Reach
S5 and S6A flowing east to the second section of Reach S613. Reach S613-Section 1 totals 1,176
linear feet of Priority I Restoration. Restoration included meandering the channel within the valley,
backfilling the old stream, reconnecting to its floodplain, and restoring hydrology to drained
wetlands.
• Reach S6B — Section 2 (STA 36+26 to STA 37+93) — Reach begins at the downstream end of
Reach 613-Section 1 and flows east to the Duke Energy right-of-way. Reach S613-Section 2 totals
167 linear feet of Enhancement Level I. Enhancement included stabilization of localized erosion
by installing log sills, increasing radius of curvature, regrading point bars, removal of invasive
vegetation, and revegetating the buffer.
• Reach S7 (STA 38+80 to STA 53+80) — Reach beginning downstream of the Duke Energy right-
of-way and flows south to Reach S9 totaling 1,430 linear feet of Enhancement Level L A 70-linear
foot easement break is located in this reach to accommodate a proposed farm crossing. Hardwood
forests and active pasture are located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement included stabilization of
localized erosion by installing log vanes, log sills, brush toes, and regrading point bars. As well as
removing dense areas of invasive vegetation and supplementing planting in its place.
Meadow Spring 6 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

• Reach S9 (STA 53+80 to STA 60+55) — Reach beginning at the downstream end of Reach S7 and
flowing south to Reach SI I totaling 675 linear feet of Enhancement Level III. Hardwood forests
and active hog lagoons are located adjacent to the reach. Enhancement included invasive treatment
and supplemental planting.
• Reach S11 (STA 60+55 to STA 71+00) — Reach beginning at the downstream end of Reach S9
and flows southeast to Reach S12 totaling 1,045 linear feet of Priority I Restoration. Hardwood
forests and grassed fields were located adjacent to the reach. Restoration included meandering the
channel within the valley, backfilling the old channel, reconnecting to its floodplain, and improving
hydrology to drained wetlands.
• Reach S12 (STA 71+00 to STA 74+80) —Reach beginning at the downstream end of Reach S11
and flows southeast toward the Neuse River floodway totaling 380 linear feet of Preservation.
Hardwood forests are located adjacent to the reach. Preservation included invasive treatment and
buffer/stream protection.
• Reach S13 (STA 9+69 to STA 14+23) - Reach beginning downstream of the large wetland slough
along the Neuse River floodplain totaling 454 linear feet of Preservation. Preservation included
invasive treatment and buffer/stream protection.
Wetland
The Meadow Spring Site offers a total ecosystem restoration opportunity. As such, the wetland restoration
and enhancement are closely tied to the stream restoration. The Site provides 14.41 WMUs through a
combination of wetland re-establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement.
Because of the sites observed soil characteristics and landscape position, a combination of wetland re-
establishment, rehabilitation, and enhancement was incorporated. In wetlands WH, the non jurisdictional
area, hydrologic restoration, at a credit ratio of 1:1, was accomplished by plugging the existing incised
channel to restrict drainage and allowing a natural hydroperiod to return. In addition, re -constructing a
stream channel at a higher bed elevation in the natural valley, backfilling to create shallow depressions
within the old channel, and the removal of spoil from pond excavation along the floodplains aids in the
restoration of a natural floodplain surface relative to the surrounding landscape. Due to compaction and
long-term agricultural use, a shallow ripping of the surface along the contour to a depth of eight to ten
inches creates adequate porosity for infiltration and storage, provides microtopographic relief, and should
improve vegetative survival and growth.
As part of the wetland re-establishment in wetland WI, at a credit ratio of 2:1, the pond was removed. The
construction of a farm pond has altered surface drainage and placed spoil across the floodplain. The stream
was reconnected to the floodplain and in addition to out of bank events the large perennial spring serves as
a source for hydrology for the re-established wetlands. Retention and storage within the floodplain has
returned to a natural state having an increased hydroperiod.
In wetland WF-B, a credit ratio of 3:1 was implemented for wetland enhancement. This wetland has been
impacted by channel incision and active management for agriculture in the past. The wetland mitigation
treatment consisted of reconnecting the stream to the floodplain and replanting disturbed areas. These
activities result in a much healthier, better functioning wetland.
In wetland WG, the large disturbed Neuse River floodplain area, a credit ratio of 3:1 was implemented for
wetland enhancement in the areas that are planted (WG-A) and an enhancement credit ratio of 5:1 in the
areas not planted (WG-B). This wetland has been actively managed for agriculture and waterfowl through
drainage manipulations and tree clearing. The wetland mitigation treatment was primarily re -planting the
disturbed areas, plugging the main ditch, and removing existing berms within the wetland. These activities
result in a large floodplain slough with a diversity of microhabitats.
Meadow Spring 7 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

1.6 Construction and As Built Conditions
Stream construction and planting was completed in June 2019. The Meadow Spring Mitigation Site was
built to design plans and guidelines. A redline version of the as -built survey is included with the sealed plat
in the As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report. Project credits are based on design centerline, but as -built
stream lengths are shown on Table 1.
1.7 Year I Monitoring Performance (MY])
The Meadow Spring Year 1 Monitoring activities were performed in December 2019. All MY1 data is
present below and in the appendices. The Site is on track to meeting vegetation, stream, and wetland interim
success criteria.
Vegetation _
Monitoring of the 18 permanent vegetation plots and three random vegetation plots was completed during
December 2019. Vegetation data are in Appendix C, associated photos are in Appendix B, and plot
locations are in Appendix B. MY1 monitoring data indicates that 16 of the 18 plots are exceeding the
interim success criteria of 320 planted stems per acre. Planted stem densities ranged from 121 to 1,052
planted stems per acre with a mean of 571 planted stems per acre across the permanent plots. Vegetation
Plot 9 and 16 did not meet the success criteria with 121 and 283 stems per acre respectively. A total of 18
species were documented within the plots. Volunteer stems were noted in one plot. The average planted
stem height in the permanent plots was 1.8 feet. Data from the three random vegetation plots showed 769
stems/acre in Random Plot 1, 688 stems/acre in Random Plot 2, and 324 stems/acre in Random Plot 3. The
average height in the random vegetation plots was 2.0 feet.
Visual assessment of vegetation outside of the monitoring plots indicates that the herbaceous vegetation is
becoming well established throughout the project. The areas in and around VP9 and VP 16 (0.75 acres) will
be replanted in early 2020. These areas are shown as VPA1 and VPA2 in Appendix B. RES also plans to
supplemental plant a few other areas onsite where plots still met success but only marginally.
Stream Geomorphology
Geomorphology data for MY was collected during December 2019. Summary tables and cross section
plots are in Appendix D. Overall, the MY1 cross sections relatively match the as -built conditions. Minor
adjustments are expected during the first few years after construction. Cross Sections 2, 4, 7, and 18
experienced about one foot of change in dimension in MYL These areas will remain under close watch
during the subsequent monitoring years. Bank height ratios remain less than 1.2 and entrenchment ratios
greater than 2.2 on restoration reaches.
Visual assessment of the stream channel was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding
banks, structural instability, or excessive sedimentation. The channel is transporting sediment as designed
and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation. Three stream problem areas were noted
in MY1. The first, SPA1, is a series of eroded banks on S2 and S6A. One of eroded bank areas can be seen
on Cross Section 4. These banks will be hand graded back, repaired with brush mattresses, and the livestakes
will be replanted. The second, SPA2, is a rill that formed off of the plugged ditch in WL This area will be
repaired by installing a few wattles and planting of livestakes, to slow down the flow and acclimate
sediment. The last, SPA3, is an eroded point bar that was caused by heavy flows from the pond outfall
channel that confluences with S6A on the opposite bank. RES will grade the eroded point bar to a 3:1 slope
Meadow Spring 8 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

and add matting and livestakes to protect it from future heavy flows. These areas are shown on Figure 2
and in Appendix B.
Stream Hydrology
Two stage recorders were installed in June 2019 to document bankfull events. One stage recorder on Reach
S613 and one stage recorder on Reach 511. The stage recorder on Reach S613 recorded zero bankfull events
in MY1. The stage recorder on Reach S11 recorded two bankfull events with the highest being 0.77 feet
above top of bank. Recorder locations can be found on Figure 2 and associated data is in Appendix E.
Wetland Hydrology
Eleven groundwater wells were installed in June 2019, including one reference well, to monitoring wetland
hydrology. MY1 data showed 2 of the 11 groundwater wells met the 12 percent hydroperiod success criteria.
Hydroperiods ranged from 2 to 19 percent with the reference well documenting a 2 percent hydroperiod.
MY1 groundwater data represented July through the end of the growing season for all wells with the
exception of GW11 which was installed in August. RES expects the hydroperiods to increase when the
early growing season data is included in subsequent years. Groundwater well locations can be found on
Figure 2 and the data will be included subsequent monitoring reports.
2.0 Methods
Stream monitoring was conducted using a Topcon GTS-312 Total Station. Three-dimensional coordinates
associated with cross-section data were collected in the field (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200).
Morphological data were collected at 24 cross -sections. Survey data were imported into CAD, ArcGIS®,
and Microsoft Excel® for data processing and analysis. The stage recorders include an automatic pressure
transducer set in PVC piping in the channel. The elevation of the bed and top of bank at each stage recorder
location was recorded to be able to document presence of water in the channel and out of bank events.
Visual observations (i.e. wrack or debris lines) will also be used to document out of bank events.
Vegetation success is being monitored at 18 permanent monitoring plots and three random monitoring plots.
Vegetation plot monitoring follows the CVS-EEP Level 2 Protocol for Recording Vegetation, version 4.2
(Lee et al. 2008) and includes analysis of species composition and density of planted species. Data are
processed using the CVS data entry tool. In the field, the four corners of each plot were permanently marked
with PVC at the origin and metal conduit at the other corners. Photos of each plot are to be taken from the
origin each monitoring year. The random plots are to be collected in locations where there are no permanent
vegetation plots. Random plots will most likely be collected in the form of 100 square meter belt transects
with variable dimensions. Tree species and height will be recorded for each planted stem and the transects
will be mapped and new locations will be monitored in subsequent years.
Wetland hydrology is monitored to document success in wetland restoration and enhancement areas where
hydrology was affected. This is accomplished with 11 automatic pressure transducer gauges (located in
groundwater wells) that record daily groundwater levels. Ten have been installed within the wetland
crediting area and one within reference wetland areas. One automatic pressure transducer is installed above
ground for use as a barometric reference. Gauges are downloaded quarterly and wetland hydroperiods are
calculated during the growing season. Gauge installation followed current regulatory guidance. Visual
observations of primary and secondary wetland hydrology indicators are also recorded during quarterly site
visits.
Meadow Spring 9 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

3.0 References
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual,
Technical Report Y-87-1. U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Harman, W., R. Starr, M. Carter, K. Tweedy, M. Clemmons, K. Suggs, C. Miller. 2012. A Function -
Based Framework for Stream Assessment and Restoration Projects. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Washington, DC EPA 843-K-12-006.
Lee Michael T., Peet Robert K., Roberts Steven D., and Wentworth Thomas R., 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Level. Version 4.2
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). "Meuse River Basin Restoration Priorities
2010." (Amended 2018).
Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.S., and White, P.S. (1998), A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274
Resource Environmental Solutions (2018). Meadow Spring Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site Final
Mitigation Plan.
Rosgen, D. (1996), Applied River Morphology, 2nd edition, Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Schafale, M.P.. 2012. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Third Approximation.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003. April 2003 NC Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Atlantic
and Gulf Coastal Plain Region (Version 2.0), ed. J. S. Wakeley, R. W. Lichvar, and C. V. Noble.
ERDC/EL TR-10-20. Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
USACE, 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
Meadow Spring 10 Year 1 Monitoring Report
Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site January 2020

Appendix A
Background Tables

Table 1. Meadow Spring - Mitigation Assets and Components
Existing
Mitigation
Footage
Plan
Mitigation
As -Built
or
Footage or
Mitigation
Restoration
Priority
Mitigation
Plan
Footage or
Project Segment
Acreage
Acreage
Category
Level
Level
Ratio (X:1)
Credits
Acreage
Comments
S1
250
250
Warm
Enhancement II
N/A
2.50000
100.0
250
Native Planting
S2
500
500
Warm
Enhancement I
NA
1.50000
333.3
500
Structure Installation, Native Planting
S5
215
231
Warm
Restoration
1 & 2
1.00000
231.0
231
Full Channel Restoration, Native Planting
S6A
1,220
1,350
Warm
Restoration
1
1.00000
1350.0
1350
Full Channel Restoration, Native Planting
S613-1
1,150
1,176
Warm
Restoration
1
1.00000
1176.0
1176
Full Channel Restoration, Native Planting
S613-2
165
167
Warm
Enhancement I
NA
1.50000
111.3
167
Structure Installation, Point Bar Grading, Inaysive Removal, Native Planting
S7
1,035
990
Warm
Enhancement I
NA
1.50000
660.0
1430
Structure Installation, Point Bar Grading, Inaysive Removal, Native Planting
S7
452
440
Warm
Enhancement I
NA
1.50000
293.3
Structure Installation, Point Bar Grading, Inaysive Removal, Native Planting
S9
665
675
Warm
Enhancement III
N/A
7.50000
90.0
675
Invasive Removal, Supplemental Planting
S11
906
1,045
Warm
Restoration
1
1.00000
1045.0
1045
Full Channel Restoration, Native Planting
S12
380
380
Warm
Preservation
N/A
10.00000
38.0
380
Invasive Removal
S13
454
454
Warm
Preservation
N/A
10
45.4
454
Invasive Removal
WB
N/A
0.95
RR
Rehabilitation
NA
1.5
0.63
0.95
Plugging Ditches, Native Planting
WD
N/A
0.03
RR
Preservation
N/A
No Credit
No Credit
0.03
Permanent Conservation Easement
WE
N/A
0.09
RR
Preservation
N/A
No Credit
No Credit
0.09
Permanent Conservation Easement
WF-A
N/A
2
RR
Preservation
N/A
No Credit
No Credit
2
Permanent Conservation Easement
WF-B
N/A
2.02
RR
Enhancement
N/A
3
0.67
2.02
Floodplain Reconnection, Native Planting
WG-A
N/A
3.68
RR
Enhancement
N/A
3
1.23
3.68
Plugging Ditches, Removing Berms, Native Planting
WG-B
N/A
18.03
RR
Enhancement
N/A
5
3.61
18.03
Plugging Ditches, Removing Berms
WH
N/A
6.84
RR
Re-establishment
N/A
1
6.84
6.84
Plugging Old Channel, Floodplain Reconnection, Ripping, Native Planting
WI
N/A
2.87
RR
Re-establishment
N/A
2
1.44
2.85
Pond Removal, Floodplain Reconnection, Native Planting
Project Credits
Restoration Level
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non -Rip
Wetland
Coastal
Marsh
Warm
Cool Cold
Riverine
Non-Riv
Restoration
3802.0
Re-establishment
8.28
Rehabilitation
0.63
Enhancement
5.51
Enhancement 1
1398.0
Enhancement 11
100.0
Enhancement 111
90.0
Creation
Preservation
83.4
Total
5473.4
0 14.41
NSBW Adjustment
1 50
Total Adjusted SMUs
1 5523.0

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Meadow Spring Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 7 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 7 months
Number of reporting Years :
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Restoration Plan
NA
Sep-18
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
Mar-19
Stream Construction
NA
Jun-19
Containerized, bare root and B&B plantings for reach/segments 1 &2
NA
Jun-19
As -built (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline)
May-19
Jun-19
Year 1 Monitoring
Dec-19
Jan-20
Year 2 Monitoring
Year 3 Monitoring
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring
= The number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Meadow Spring Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
Designer
WK Dickson and Co., Inc. / 720 Corporate Center Dr., Raleigh,
NC 27607
Primary project design POC
David Perry
Construction Contractor
Wright Contracting, LLC / 453 Silk Hope Liberty Rd, Siler City,
NC 27344
Construction contractor POC
[phone]
Survey Contractor
Matrix East, PLLC / 906 N. Queen St., Suite A, Kinston, NC
28501
Survey contractor POC
James Watson, PLS
Planting Contractor
H&J Forestry
Planting contractor POC
Matt Hitch
Seeding Contractor
Wright Contracting
Contractor point of contact
[phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource [phone]
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arborgen [phone]
Monitoring Performers
RES / 302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110, Raleigh, NC 27605
Stream Monitoring POC
Ryan Medric [phone]
Wetland Monitoring POC
Ryan Medric [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC
Ryan Medric [phone]

Table 4. Project Background Information
Project Name
Meadow Spring
County
Johnston
Project Area (acres)
60.9
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
Latitude: 35.5437 N Longitude:-78.3303 W
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)
22.8
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Rolling Coastal Plain
River Basin
Neuse
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
03020201
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
03020201100050
DWR Sub -basin
03-04-02
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)
379 ac (0.592 sqmi)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
<1 %
CGIA Land Use Classification
Forest (45%) Agriculture (37%)
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
S1
S2
S5
S6A
S613-1
S6B-2
S7
S9
I S11
S12
S13
Length of reach (linear feet)
250
500
231
1,350
1,176
165
1,430
675
1,045
38
45
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)
36ac,
0.06sgmi
46ac,
0.07sgmi
36ac,
0.06sgmi
97ac,
0.15sgmi
171ac,
0.27sgmi
171ac,
0.27sgmi
278ac,
0.43sgmi
337ac,
O.53sgmi
379ac,
O.59sgmi
410ac,
0.64sgmi
31ac,
0.05sgmi
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
I
I
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Stream Classification (existing)
F5
C
F4
F4
F4-E4
F4-E4
E4
E5
E5
F5
F5
Stream Classification (proposed)
E5
E4/5
E4/5
E4/5
E4/5
E5
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
FEMA classification
---
AE
AE
AE
AE
AE
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Docs?
Water of the United States - Section 404
Yes
Yes
SAW-2016-
01989
Water of the United States - Section 401
Yes
Yes
DWR # 16-
0980
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Mit Plan
Appendix B
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Mit Plan
Appendix B
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
N/A
N/A
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A

ywnakla Rd
p rw'aafo
1R
m
4
�5A
L'a
ry
m, p` ��
Lalrraf Or
Z-a
le
Al
or°
Legend
Conservation Easement
Buefaln Rd
Oly y Ot Q,a I
ti
A S Leo �J
a
Booker Oamobife "I
Or
lry - .
1 = fn
n
Shady Lane t* y
m A
rn NarflaY Dr S4nys
a e4" Q Harry Rd Ext
rn = Beaker Dairy Rd
4 S4rfse7Q Va z, ry _
[ancli s[ �
v
✓'aces[ � _� SmAnrwld Rxairap y°O� •
Whillay D,Y Ekara�Ln Aran
sSY OO
Sinckfand Rr � West CasNtr❑r Parkway p, �
en[[ St Smithfield
�a
[fouand Or
ry 4r
� o
:Pr P�
��. 04Wa°dqt
RI Bayhin 0'
01
,31r a 4
vI Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGSinap ,JhfeF, INCREMENT P, NRCan, Esri
nrA�[aLn Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong),'-'Esri Korea, Esri (Thailand), NGCC,
OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community
N
Date: 7/3/2019
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
w e Drawn by: RTM res
Meadow Spring Mitigation Site
n s Checked by: BPB
0 1,000 2.000
Johnston County, North Carolina
1 inch = 2,000 feet
Feet

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

ALM
n.
S5
PI
7
SPA3 GW4
GW2
q)sP sA 6 _N fP60P C8
VGWI- V9i Ln 61 SPAI WOO
O V U) 0
5
77117WT 100 e
k 4
—.1 Wit
S6A
F4—,GW3
,,,� ire:
2
2-
# 0
GW6
_1 2 14
2
S6B
/V
W
S
0 100 200
Feet
Figure 2
ti Current Conditions
1
MY1 2019
Meadow Spring
Mitigation Site
Johnston County, NC
Date 1/20/2020 Drawn by: RTM
Lat 35.381042 Long: -78.420862
LEGEND
=Conservation Easement
Design Centerline
Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement 11
—Enhancement III
Preservation
Cross Section
Plugged Ditch
Structure
—Stream Problem Area
o As -Built Top of Bank
As -Built Wetland
= Rehabilitation (1.51)
= Re-establishment (1:1)
= Re-establishment (2:1)
= Enhancement (3:1)
= Enhancement (5:1)
Preservation (No Credit)
Vegetation Plot
= >320 stems/acre
= <320 stems/acre
0 Stage Recorder
= Random VP MY1
@ Rain Gauge
Wetland Hydroperiod
>12%
5-11%
<5%

•
� .� �`i�
a ., ,�' ..ram', � �, titi
��tt��
.;,
S11
rv..o.'
GW11_W* m �Y•
REF1 3 rGW8
13
22
S9
. ar ter_
Vegetation Condition Assessment
I =
H Target Community
w Present Mar inal Absent S1'2
U
Q Absent No Fill
v
Present
N
f6
� 4
r10
;; ire:
E
1 �
S
IJ
0 100 200
Feet
1 Figure 2
1 Current Conditions
1
1 2
1 MY1 2019
1
' Meadow Spring
1 Mitigation Site
1 1
1 �I Johnston County, NC
1 Date: 1/20/2020 Drawn by: RTM
1 1 % Lat: 35.381042 Long:-78.420862
1 s
1 LEGEND
=Conservation Easement
1 — Design Centerline
1 — Restoration
15 Enhancement I
Enhancement 11
1 - —Enhancement III
1 Preservation
1 Cross Section
Plugged Ditch
— Structure
—Stream Problem Area
As -Built Top of Bank
As -Built Wetland
o Rehabilitation (1.5:1)
Im Re-establishment (1:1)
o Re-establishment (2:1)
o Enhancement (3:1)
S o Enhancement (5:1)
Preservation (No Credit)
Vegetation Plot
o >320 stems/acre
o <320 stems/acre
® Stage Recorder
o Random VP MY1
0° Rain Gauge
Wetland Hydroperiod
>12%
5-11 %
<5%

- � • � aX�-c.de .. .. ,� . If n `� % fg Yr f ,C � i�t �� ;-•� �� a�
iR
k , r �,
Sil
G i. '� s i F f.m s •5 { s313
1 F�•a ` ,
If lj'w, 'ice i ,�yf.h.� a 1 _.',, .•r.
1 GW8
NN.
GW10
0
l9rhuA
r
s
Vegetation Condition Assessment
U) Target Community
R
Present Margina Absent
0. Absent®IIIIII
Present
6 I: _.
ire:
0 100 200
Feet
Figure 2
Current Conditions
3
MY1 2019
Meadow Spring
Mitigation Site
Johnston County, NC
Date: 1/20/2020 Drawn by: RTM
Lat:35.381042 Long:-78.420862
LEGEND
=Conservation Easement
Design Centerline
Restoration
Enhancement I
Enhancement 11
—Enhancement III
Preservation
Cross Section
Plugged Ditch
Structure
—Stream Problem Area
o As -Built Top of Bank
As -Built Wetland
o Rehabilitation (1.5:1)
= Re-establishment (1:1)
o Re-establishment (2:1)
o Enhancement (3:1)
o Enhancement (5:1)
Preservation (No Credit)
Vegetation Plot
o >320 stems/acre
o <320 stems/acre
® Stage Recorder
o Random VP MY1
@° Rain Gauge
Wetland Hydroperiod
® >12%
5-11 %
<5%

Meadow Spring MY1 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Vegetation Plot 1
Vegetation Plot 3
Vegetation Plot 5
Vegetation Plot 2
Vegetation Plot 4
Vegetation Plot 6

Vegetation Plot 7
Vegetation Plot 9
Vegetation Plot 11
Vegetation Plot 8
Vegetation Plot 10
Vegetation Plot 12

Vegetation Plot 13
Vegetation Plot 15
Vegetation Plot 17
Vegetation Plot 14
Vegetation Plot 16
Vegetation Plot 18

Random Plot 1
Random Plot 3
'phgp.�
9
4
1
Random Plot 2

Stream Problem Areas
Meadow Spring
I Map Label / Feature Issue / Location / Repair I Photo I
SPAI / Bank Erosion / S2 & S6A / Brush Mattresses
SPA2 / Wetland Draining Rill / WI / Livestakes and
SPA3 / Point Bar Erosion / S6A / Regrade then Matt and
Livestakes
Vegetation Problem Areas
Meadow Spring
Map Label / Feature Category / Location / Size
Photo
s
i
VPA1 / Low Stem Density / S5 / 0.36 acres
-
�i. ^'yam•'
VPA2 / Low Stem Density / WG-A / 0.39 acres

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 5. Planted Species Summary
Common Name
Scientific Name
Total Stems Planted
Water Oak
Quercus nigra
3,500
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Quercus michauxii
2,700
Sycamore
Platanus occidentalis
2,300
Baldcypress
Taxodium distichum
21000
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2,000
Overcup Oak
Quercus lyrata
2,000
Willow Oak
Quercus phellos
2,000
Persimmon
Diospyros virginiana
2,000
Swamp Tupelo
Nyssa bi ora
2,000
Water Tupelo
Nyssa aquatica
1,700
Yellow Poplar
Liriodendron tuli i era
1,600
Crab Apple
Malus angustifolia
800
S Dogwood
Cornus amomum
800
Flowering Dogwood
Cornus florida
800
Buttonbush
Ce halanthus occidentalis
700
Blackgum
Nyssa sylvatica
600
American Plum
Prunus americana
500
American Hazelnut
Corylus americana
400
River Birch
Betula nigra
400
Elderberry
Sambucus nigra
100
Total
28,900
Planted Area
31.39
As -built Planted Stems/Acre
921
* Includes 8.6 acres of supplemental planting

Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Plot #
Planted
Stems/Acre
Volunteer
Stems/Acre
Total
Stems/Acre
Success
Criteria
Met?
Average
Stem
Height (ft)
1
890
0
890
Yes
1.7
2
607
0
607
Yes
1.3
3
445
0
445
Yes
1.8
4
486
0
486
Yes
2.0
5
526
0
526
Yes
1.7
6
850
0
850
Yes
1.8
7
647
0
647
Yes
1.7
8
445
0
445
Yes
1.3
9
121
0
121
No
1.3
10
769
0
769
Yes
1.8
11
1052
0
1052
Yes
1.7
12
850
0
850
Yes
2.0
13
526
0
526
Yes
1.8
14
364
0
364
Yes
1.7
15
445
40
486
Yes
2.2
16
283
0
283
No
2.1
17
607
0
607
Yes
2.3
18
364
0
364
Yes
2.2
Project Avg
571
2
573
Yes
1.8

Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7a. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot Species
Meadow Spring
Current Plot Data (MY12019)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
06122019-01-0001
06122019-01-0002
06122019-01-0003
06122019-01-0004
06122019-01-0005
06122019-01-0006
06122019-01-0007
06122019-01-0008
06122019-01-0009
MY1(2019)
MYO(2019)
PnoLS
FP-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
41
4
4
7
7
7
1
1
1
22
22
22
52
52
52
Cephalanthus occidentali
common buttonbus
Shrub
6
6
6
12
12
13
14
14
14
Corpus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
4
4
4
7
7
7
12
12
12
Corpus Florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
Coryl us americana
American hazelnut
Shrub
11
1
1
3
3
3
2
2
2
7
7
7
4
4
4
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
7
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
2
2
2
6
6
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
20
20
20
34
34
34
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
6
6
10
10
10
Malus angustifolia
southern crabapple
Tree
2
2
2
Nyssa aquatica
watertupelo
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
Nyssa biflora
swamp tupelo
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
7
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
1
1
1
14
14
14
Platanusoccidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
2
2
2
4
4
4
1
1
1
6
6
6
3
3
3
52
52
52
72
72
72
Prunus americana
American plum
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus
oak
Tree
1
1
1
7
7
7
111
111
111
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
4
4
4
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
1
1
1
33
33
33
21
21
21
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
2
2
2
3
3
3
15
15
15
10
10
10
Quercus nigra
wateroak
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
2
2
2
20
20
20
17
17
17
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
5
5
5
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
42
42
42
35
35
35
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
StemsperACREJ
22
22
22
15
15
15
11
11
11
12
12
12
13
13
13
21
21
21
16
16
16
11
11
11
3
3
3
254
254
255
432
4321
432
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
18
18
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.44
0.44
81
81
81
61
61
61
71
71
71
41
41
41
51
51
51
81
81
81
61
61
61
51
5
21
21
21
191
191
191
201
201
20
8901
8901
8901
6071
6071
6071
4451
4451
4451
4861
4861
4861
5261
5261
5261
8501
8501
8501
6471
6471
6471
4451
4451
445
1211
1211
1211
5711
5711
5731
9711
9711
971
Meadow Spring
Current Plot Data (MY12019)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
06122019-01-0010
06122019-01-0011
06122019-01-0012
06122019-01-0013
06122019-01-0014
06122019-01-0015
06122019-01-0016
06122019-01-0017
06122019-01-0018
MY1(2019)
MYO(2019)
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Pnol-S
P-all
T
Betulanigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
4
4
4
5
5
5
22
22
22
52
1
52
52
Cephalanthus occidentali
common buttonbus
Shrub
2
2
3
4
4
4
12
12
13
14
14
14
Corpus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
1
1
2
2
2
7
7
7
12
12
12
Corpus Florida
flowering dogwood
Tree
2
2
2
3
3
3
Corylus americana
American hazelnut
Shrub
11
1
11
1
7
7
7
4
4
4
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
1
1
1
7
7
7
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
20
20
20
34
34
34
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
6
6
6
10
10
10
Malus angustifolia
southern crabapple
Tree
2
2
2
Nyssa aquatica
watertupelo
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
Nyssa biflora
swamp tupelo
Tree
1
1
1
1
7
7
7
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
14
14
14
Platanusoccidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
4
4
4
10
10
10
4
4
4
1
1
1
2
2
2
6
6
6
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
52
52
52
72
72
72
Prunus americana
American plum
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus
oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
7
7
111
111
111
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
1
1
1
9
9
9
7
7
7
33
33
33
21
21
21
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
4
4
4
1
1
1
15
15
15
10
10
10
Quercus nigra
wateroak
Tree
4
4
4
4
4
4
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
20
20
20
17
17
17
Taxodium distichum
bald cypress
Tree
4
4
4
g77
7
3
3
3
2
2
2
4
4
4
8
8
8
3
3
3
42
42
42
35
35
35
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems perACRE
19
19
19
26
26
26
2
21
13
13
13
9
9
9
11
11
12
7
7
7
15
15
15
9
9
9
254
254
255
432
4321
432
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
18
18
0.02
1 0.02
1 0.02
1 0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
1 0.02
1 0.02
1 0.44
0.44
91
91
91
71
71
71
51
51
51
3
3
3
4
41
4
31
31
31
31
31
31
41
41
41
191
191
191
201
2131
20
7691
7691
7691
10521
10521
10521
8501
8501
8501
526
526
526
3641
3641
364
4451
4451
486
2831
2831
2831
6071
6071
6071
3641
3641
3641
5711
5711
5731
9711
971
971

Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7b. Random Vegetation Monitoring Plot Data
Random Plot 1
#
Spe cie s
Height (cm)
1
Betula nigra
100
2
Taxodium distichum
72
3
Taxodium distichum
70
4
Quercus lyrata
51
5
Betula nigra
91
6
Quercus phellos
55
7
Platanus occidentalis
90
8
Quercus phellos
40
9
Quercus lyrata
38
10
Quercus lyrata
62
11
Quercus lyrata
30
12
Quercus lyrata
40
13
Quercus lyrata
48
14
Quercus lyrata
62
15
Quercus phellos
74
16
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
60
17
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
60
18
Taxodium distichum
95
19
Taxodium distichum
90
Stems/Acre
769
Average Height (cm)
65
Average Height (ft)
2.1
Plot Size (m)
25 x 4
Random Plot 2
#
Spe cie s
Height (cm)
1
Cornus amomum
53
2
Cornus amomum
58
3
Quercus phellos
38
4
Platanus occidentalis
20
5
Platanus occidentalis
76
6
Platanus occidentalis
69
7
Quercus spp.
58
8
Platanus occidentalis
34
9
Platanus occidentalis
75
10
Platanus occidentalis
75
11
Platanus occidentalis
50
12
Quercus phellos
30
13
Platanus occidentalis
60
14
Quercus lyrata
58
15
Quercus lyrata
56
16
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
56
17
Betula nigra
55
Stems/Acre
688
Average Height (cm)
54
Average Height (ft)
1.8
Plot Size (m)
25 x 4
Random Plot 3
#
Spe cie s
Height (cm)
1
Quercus lyrata
50
2
Betula nigra
70
3
Betula nigra
55
4
Taxodium distichum
72
5
Quercus lyrata
60
6
Quercus phellos
50
7
Betula nigra
60
8
Taxodium distichum
52
Stems/Acre
324
Average Height (cm)
59
Average Height (ft)
1.9
Plot Size (m)
50 x 2

Appendix D
Stream Measurement and
Geomorphology Data

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S2 - Cross Section 1 - Riffle - Enhancement 1
166
165
164
°
163
d
w
162
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
-
-
- -
-
- -
-
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- - -
161
160
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 1
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on ABASA'
161.35
161.4
Bankfull Width ft'
5.2
5.8
Floodprone Width ft'
11.2
11.5
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.0
1.0
Low Bank Height ft
2.7
3.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
3.2
3.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
2.2
2.0
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
2.6
2.9
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S2 - Cross Section 2 - Riffle - Enhancement 1
161
160
159
° 158
>
d
w
157
156
155
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019 MY1-2019 — — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area 3X Vertical Exaggeration
6mm
Cross Section 2
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA1
156.99
156.6
Bankfull Width ft t
6.4
4.8
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>31.9
>32.8
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.1
1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.1
1.8
Bankfull Cro s s Sectional Area (ft 2 ) 2
4.0
4.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratios
>5.0
>6.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
1.0
1.1
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S6A - Cross Section 3 - Riffle
157
156
155
0 154
0
CG
153
w
152
151
150
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019 MY1-2019 — — • Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 3
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on AB-XSA1
152.52
152.4
Bankfull Width (ft)'
7.5
6.6
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (11)2
1.3
0.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2 ) 2
5.5
6.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
>6.7
>7.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
1.0
1.1
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

� P
Upstream
Downstream
156
Meadow Spring - Reach S6A - Cross Section 4 - Pool
155
154
153
° 152
— —
— —
—
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
—
CU
w 151
150
149
148
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 4
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
152.23
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)t
7.6
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.7
2.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.0
Bankfull Coss Sectional Area (ft 2)2
6.5
16.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S6A - Cross Section 5 - Riffle
153
152
151
150
w
149
148
147
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019 MY1-2019 — — — Approx. Bankfull — Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 5
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Flevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
149.54
149.5
Bankfull Width (ft)1
7.0
6.8
Floodprone Width (ft)1
>50
>50
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft)2
1.2
1.3
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.2
1.3
Bankfull Cro s s Sectional Area (ft 2 ) 2
4.3
4.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
>7.1
>7.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
1.0
1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S6A - Cross Section 6 - Pool
153
152
151
° 150
P
w 149
148
N it
147
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 6
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA1
149.62
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)t
8.2
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.7
1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.6
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
6.6
6.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio tI
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
a 'ff• '.Il i��i L e.�' .
k s - dl,— '
-.l.s
-�^.. .�.. .. ems• '
J.y: ..
:=.-:
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S6A - Cross Section 7 - Riffle
150
149
148
0 147
0
> 146
d
----
--
----
—
--
w
145
144
143
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019 MY1-2019 — — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 7
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft-BasedonAB-XSA1
146.13
145.9
Bankfull Width (ft)1
9.3
8.6
Floodprone Width (11)1
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (11)2
1.4
1.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
1.8
Bankfull Cros s Sectional Area (ft2)2
6.2
5.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 1
>5.4
>5.8
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1
1.0
<1
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S6A - Cross Section 8- Pool
149
148
147
° 146
— — — —
d
w 145
144
143
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 8
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on AB-XSAI
145.92
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)t
8.3
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.3
1.5
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.5
Bankfull Cro s s Sectional Area (ft 2)2
4.2
5.3
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

94
r cif. �
� ": 'L�] • � ��� ��
Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S6B - Cross Section 9 - Riffle
145
144
143
°
142
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— — —
d
w 141
140
139
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019 MY1-2019 — — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 9
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Basedon AB-XSA1
141.89
141.9
Bankfull Width (ft)t
9.0
10.9
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.4
1.3
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
1.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2 ) 2
6.4
4.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
>5.5
>4.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
1.0
<1
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S613 - Cross Section 10 - Pool
145
144
143
°
142
w 141
140
- - - -
139
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 10
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on ABASA1
141.57
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)t
7.8
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
NA
BankfullMaxDepth (ft)2
1.7
1.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.9
Bankfull Cos s Sectional Area (ft 2)2
6.0
6.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio tI
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S613 - Cross Section 11 - Pool
142
141
140
0 139
0
138
w
137
136
135
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull FloodproneArea
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 11
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on AB-XSA1
138.01
NA
Bankfull Width ft 1
8.9
NA
Floodprone Width ft 1
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft) 2
1.7
2.0
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
2.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
7.9
9.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 1
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring- Reach S6B - Cross Section 12 - Riffle
142
141
140
°
139
d
w
—
— —
— —
—
— —
— —
— —
— —
— —
— — —
—
— —
—
138
137
136
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019 MY1-2019 — — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 12
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on ABASA1
138.07
138.1
Bankfull Width (ft)t
9.4
9.4
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.3
1.5
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.5
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft2 2
6.6
8.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
>5.3
>5.3
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t1
1.0
1.2
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S613 - Cross Section 13 - Pool
139
138
137
°
136
d
w 135
134
133
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 13
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
136.00
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)t
10.2
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
2.2
2.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.2
2.2
BankfullCross Sectional Area (ft 2 ) 2
10.7
10.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S6B - Cross Section 14 - Riffle
139
138
137
0
°
136
CU
d
w
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
— — —
135
134
133
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 14
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on ABASA1
135.88
135.9
Bankfull Width (ft)t
9.9
8.9
Floodprone Width (ft)t
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.4
1.7
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
1.7
Bankfull Coss Sectional Area ft2 2
7.5
7.5
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
>5.1
>5.6
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t1
1.0
1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
_ ifr21�.ir .
Downstream
Meadow Spring - Reach S7 - Cross Section 15 - Riffle - Enhancement 1
129
128
127
° 126
w 125
124
123
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019 — — —Approx. Bankfull FloodproneArea
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 15
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on ABASA1
125.52
125.6
Bankfull Width (ft)t
10.6
10.2
Floodprone Width (ft)t
40.6
>31
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.4
1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.2
2.4
Bankfull Coss Sectional Area (ft 2 ) 2
10.2
10.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
>3.8
>3
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
1.6
1.5
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

q
I'"
Upstream
Downstream
126
Meadow Spring - Reach S7 - Cross Section 16 - Riffle - Enhancement 1
125
124
123
0
122
— —
— — — — —
— — — — —
—
—
— —
—
— — — — —
— — —
— —
— —
— —
— —
—
w
121
120
119
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 16
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
121.88
121.7
Bankfull Width (ft)1
9.3
9.5
Floodprone Width (ft)1
>39.7
>30.7
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.6
1.4
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.2
2.3
Bankfull Cro s s Sectional Area (ft 2 ) 2
10.2
10.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 1
>4.3
>3.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio 1
1.3
1.6
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
S'
1
.p
J
„fir.,
Downstream
Meadow Spring- Reach S11 - Cross Section 17 - Riffle
120
119
118
0
°
CU 117
>
116
-
- - -
- - - -
-
-
- /777
-
-
115
114
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull — Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 17
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Flevation It - Based on ABASAI
116.34
116.4
Bankfull Width (ft)'
8.8
9.2
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.3
1.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
5.8
5.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
>5.6
>5.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.0
<1
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
119
Meadow Spring - Reach S11 - Cross Section 18 - Pool
118
117
:
° 116
- -
- - - - -
- - - - -
-
-
-
- -
- - -
- - - -
- -
- -
- -
- -
-
d
w 115
114
113
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 18
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation ft - Based on ABASA'
116.29
NA
Bankf fl Width (ft)'
9.5
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>50
NA
BankfullMaxDepth(ft)2
2.8
1.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.8
1.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
12.7
9.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
�`.V'-ilia-�•!'"..
Downstream
117
Meadow Spring- Reach S11 - Cross Section 19 - Riffle
116
115
° 114
>
w 113
112
111
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 19
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
113.46
113.5
Bankfull Width (ft)1
9.6
9.7
Floodprone Width (ft)1
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.7
1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
9.6
9.0
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio I
>5.2
I >5.1
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
116
Meadow Spring - Reach S11 - Cross Section 20 - Pool
115
114
° 113
CU
d
w 112
—
— — —
— — — —
—
— —
—90,
- - -
- - - -
111
110
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 20
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSAi
112.89
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)'
6.9
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.8
1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.8
1.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
6.0
5.8
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
I NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

.' i n
' — ".i" _' :1� .ref -I. ' •r. 'i i !�
obi,+ :•�.: r 7
.:.
nt nr:s.
�S� I•
Upstream
• i�':�_-r .1y'i � 3t - . : � cam?
i'
Downstream
116
Meadow Spring - Reach S11 - Cross Section 21 - Pool
115
114
0 113
0
112
—
w
— —
— — — — —
— — — — —
—
—
— —
— —
— — — — —
—
— —
—
111
110
109
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 21
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
111.69
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)1
10.0
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)1
>50
NA
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft) 2
2.1
2.1
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.1
2.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
9.9
9.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

y fi
Upstream
Downstream
116
Meadow Spring - Reach S11 - Cross Section 22 - Riffle
115
114
113
0
0
112
w—
—
— — — — —
— — — — —
—
— — — —
— — — —
— —
—
— —
—
111
110
109
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 22
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
111.53
111.5
Bankfull Width (ft)1
9.8
8.0
Floodprone Width (ft)1
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.5
1.7
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.5
1.7
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
7.1
7.4
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 1
>5.1
>6.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
1.0
1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
147
Meadow Spring - Reach S5 - Cross Section 23 - Riffle
146
145
0
°144
CU
d
-
w 143
- -
- - - - -
- - - - -
-
-
- -
-
- -
- - - -
- -
- -
- -
- -
-
142
141
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 23
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
143.29
143.3
Bankfull Width (ft)1
5.3
5.0
Floodprone Width (ft)1
>38.3
>50
Bankfull MaxDepth (ft) 2
0.9
1.1
Low Bank Height (ft)
0.9
1.1
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
2.2
2.6
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio 1
>7.3
>10
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
1.0
1.0
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Upstream
Downstream
147
Meadow Spring - Reach S5 - Cross Section 24 - Pool
146
145
° 144
>
143
142
141
0 3 6 9 12 15
18 21
24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45 48
Distance (ft)
MYO-2019
MY1-2019
— — —Approx. Bankfull Floodprone Area
3X Vertical Exaggeration
Cross Section 24
Base
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA1
143.16
NA
Bankfull Width (ft)1
5.8
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)1
>48.4
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.3
1.0
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2)2
3.6
2.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio t
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio t
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Meadow Spring Mitigation Site - Reach S5 (XS23)
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
4.6
---
---
1
---
---
9.9
---
---
---
---
4.8
---
---
---
5.3
---
---
---
Floodprone Width (ft)
---
---
6.0
---
---
1
---
---
50.0
---
---
---
---
>11
---
---
>38.3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
--
---
0.4
---
---
1
---
---
1.1
---
---
---
---
0.5
---
---
0.4
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
---
---
0.7
---
---
1
---
---
1.7
---
---
---
---
0.8
---
---
---
0.9
---
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ft
---
I ---
I ---
---
1.8
1
1
11.2
2.6
---
---
2.2
Width/Depth Ratio
11.6
1
8.7
9.0
---
---
---
12.6
Entrenchment Ratio
1.4
1
>2.2
>2.2
---
---
>7.3
Bank Height Rati
3.4
1
1.3
1.0
1.0
Profile
Shallow Length (ft)
2
---
9
---
---
4
---
---
19.9
---
---
2
---
10
4.3
6.7
5.7
10.4
2.3
8
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.0001
0.02096
0.0236
0.0484
0.01561
8
Pool Length (ft)
3
---
---
28
---
---
6.9
---
---
21.6
---
---
3
---
10
2.8
10.3
11.3
13.5
3.5
9
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
15
---
---
53
---
---
40.3
---
---
109.8
---
---
20
---
53
12.9
28.2
30.0
37.6
7.4
8
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
41.2
---
---
43.5
---
---
16
---
28
16
---
---
28
---
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
13.11
---
---
24.6
---
---
--
14
9
---
---
14
---
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
1.2
---
---
2.3
---
---
1.9
---
2.9
1.9
---
2.9
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
49.5
---
---
64.9
---
---
21
--
40
21
---
---
40
---
---
Meander Width Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
---
3.8
4
---
---
3.3
---
5.8
3.3
---
---
5.8
---
---
I ransport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/f2
---
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
---
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
F4
E5
E4/5
E5
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
Valley length (ft)
185
285
185
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
215
375
231
---
Sinuosity (ft)
1.16
1.32
1.25
---
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.013
0.0023
---
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.013
0.0025
0.002
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Bank 21---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Othe
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 - The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top ofbank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 - Proportion ofreach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Meadow Spring Mitigation Site - Reach S6A (XS3,5,7)
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
8.6
---
---
9.4
---
2
---
---
9.9
---
---
---
---
7.0
---
7.0
7.9
7.5
9.3
1.2
3
Floodprone Width (ft)
13.0
---
---
14.0
---
2
---
---
50.0
---
---
---
---
>15
---
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
---
0.6
---
---
0.8
---
2
---
---
1.1
---
---
---
---
0.8
---
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.1
3
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.7
---
---
2.2
---
2
---
---
1.7
---
---
---
---
1.1
---
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.4
0.1
3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
--
--
--
11.2
1
11.8
2
11.2
5.3
---
4.3
15.3
15.5
6.2
1.0
3
Width/Depth Ratio
6.2
8.7
2
8.7
9.3
11.5
21.8
13.7
40.3
16.0
3
Ratio
EntrenEHeh
>2.2
>2.2
2
>2.2
>2.2
5.4
6.4
6.7
7.1
0.9
3
'Bank Rati
1.2
1.3
2
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
3
Profile
Shallow Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
4
---
---
19.9
---
---
3
---
14
2.9
10.4
8.4
24.0
5.6
30
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.0001
0.01094
0.0004
0.0829
0.01991
30
Pool Length (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
6.9
---
---
21.6
---
---
5
---
15
1.9
11.4
10.6
32.4
7.6
37
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
40.3
---
---
109.8
---
---
28
---
78
12.8
36.8
37.3
116.4
17.5
36
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
16
---
---
74
---
---
41.2
---
---
43.5
---
---
23
---
40
23
---
---
40
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
11
---
---
35
---
---
13.11
---
---
24.6
---
---
14
---
19
14
---
---
19
---
---
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
1
---
---
4
---
1.2
---
---
2.3
---
---
2
---
2.7
2
---
---
2.7
---
---
Meander Wavelength (ft)
65
---
---
130
---
---
49.5
---
---
64.9
---
---
35
---
78
35
---
---
78
---
---
Meander Width Ratio
2
---
---
8
---
---
3.8
---
---
4
---
---
3.3
---
5.7
3.3
---
---
5.7
---
---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/fZ
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
F4
E5
E5
E5
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
Valley length (ft)
1041
285
416
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1220
375
490
---
Sinuosity (ft)
1.17
1.32
1.18
---
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
-
0.0023
---
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.0039
0.0025
0.0035
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Bank
---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Othe
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 - The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top ofbank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 - Proportion ofreach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Meadow Spring Mitigation Site - Reach S6B (XS9,12,14)
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
7.2
---
---
9.1
---
2
---
---
9.9
---
---
---
---
8.4
---
9.0
9.4
9.4
9.9
0.5
3
Floodprone Width (ft)
11.0
---
---
15.0
---
2
---
---
50.0
---
---
---
---
>18
---
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
---
0.7
---
---
0.9
---
2
---
---
1.1
---
---
---
---
0.9
---
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.1
3
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.1
---
---
1.1
---
2
---
---
1.7
---
---
---
---
1.4
---
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
0.1
3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
--
--
---
6.3
1 6.8
1
1 2
11.2
1 ---
I ---
7.8
---
6.4
16.8
16.6
7.5
0.6
3
Width/Depth Ratio
8.1
12.2
2
8.7
9.0
12.8
13.1
13.1
13.3
0.3
3
Ratio
EntrenEHeh
1.1
2.0
2
>2.2
>2.2
5.1
5.3
5.3
5.5
0.2
3
'Bank Rati
1.9
3.1
2
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.0
3
Profile
Shallow Length (ft)
2
11
---
---
4
---
---
19.9
---
---
3
---
17
3.8
12.6
13.1
26.5
6.2
27
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.0001
0.00791
0.0050
0.0318
0.00959
27
Pool Length (ft)
4
---
---
30
---
---
6.9
---
---
21.6
---
---
6
---
18
2.3
10.3
8.6
26.3
6.2
29
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
10
---
---
48
---
---
40.3
---
---
109.8
---
---
34
---
93
10.2
38.6
41.7
72.6
16.0
28
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
22
---
---
48
---
---
41.2
---
---
43.5
---
---
22
--
37
22
---
---
37
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
8
---
---
26
---
---
13.11
---
---
24.6
---
---
16
---
23
16
---
---
23
---
---
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
1
---
---
3
---
1.2
---
---
2.3
---
---
1.9
---
2.7
1.9
---
---
2.7
---
---
Meander Wavelength (ft)
32
---
---
90
---
---
49.5
---
---
64.9
---
---
42
--
81
42
---
---
81
---
---
Meander Width Ratio
3
---
---
6
---
---
3.8
---
---
4
---
---
2.6
---
4.4
2.6
---
---
4.4
---
---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/fZ
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
F4-E4
E4/5
E4/5
E5
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
--
Valley length (ft)
1147
285
1147
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
1315
375
1340
---
Sinuosity (ft)
1.15
1.32
1.17
---
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0057
0.0023
---
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.006
0.0025
0.003
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Bank
---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Othe
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 - The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top ofbank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 - Proportion ofreach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Table 8. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Meadow Spring Mitigation Site - Reach S11 (XS17,19,22)
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre -Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Only
LL
UL
Eq.
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Med
Max
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
---
---
---
5.9
---
---
10.0
---
2
---
---
9.9
---
---
---
---
9.6
---
8.8
9.4
9.6
9.8
0.5
3
Floodprone Width (ft)
>30
---
---
>30
---
2
---
---
50.0
---
---
---
---
>21
---
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
0.0
3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
---
---
---
1.1
---
---
1.6
---
2
---
---
1.1
---
---
---
---
1.1
---
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.0
0.2
3
'Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.7
---
---
2.6
---
2
---
---
1.7
---
---
---
---
1.6
---
1.3
1.5
1.5
1.7
0.2
3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area ftZ
--
--
---
6.3
1 15.8
1
2
11.2
10.2
---
5.8
17.5
17.1
9.6
1.9
3
Width/Depth Ratio
6.4
9.2
2
8.7
9.0
9.6
12.1
13.2
13.4
2.1
3
Entrenchment Ratio
>2.2
>2.2
2
>2.2
>2.2
5.1
5.3
5.2
5.6
0.3
3
'Bank Height Rati1
1.0
1 ---
I ---
1 1.1
1 ---
1 2
1 ---
I ---
1 1.3
1 ---
I ---
I ---
I ---
1 1.0
1 ---
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 1.0
1 0.0
3
Profile
Shallow Length (ft)
5
---
---
23
---
---
4
---
---
19.9
---
---
4
---
19
3.6
14.7
15.1
28.7
7.5
21
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
0.0001
0.00728
0.0001
0.0958
0.02084
21
Pool Length (ft)
5
---
---
28
---
---
6.9
---
---
21.6
---
---
7
---
21
1.5
13.8
11.9
32.1
8.9
23
Pool Max depth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
--
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Pool Spacing (ft)
21
---
---
113
---
---
40.3
---
---
109.8
---
---
39
---
106
8.4
44.5
39.6
153.9
30.6
22
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
41.2
---
---
43.5
---
---
15
---
56
15
---
---
56
---
---
Radius of Curvature (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
13.11
---
---
24.6
---
---
17
---
23
17
---
---
23
---
Rc:Bankfull width (ft/ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
1.2
---
---
2.3
---
---
1.8
---
2.4
1.8
---
2.4
Meander Wavelength (ft)
---
---
---
---
---
---
49.5
---
---
64.9
---
---
43
---
82
43
---
---
82
---
---
Meander Width Ratio
---
---
---
---
---
---
3.8
---
---
4
---
---
1.6
---
5.8
1.6
---
---
5.8
---
---
Transport parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) Ib/fZ
---
---
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankfull
--
Stream Power (transport capacity) W/mZ
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
E5
E5
E5
E5
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
---
---
Bankfull Discharge (cfs)
---
---
--
Valley length (ft)
844
285
844
---
Channel Thalweg length (ft)
898
375
1036
---
Sinuosity (ft)
1.06
1.32
1.23
---
Water Surface Slope (Channel) (ft/ft)
0.0041
0.0023
---
---
Channel slope (ft/ft)
0.0041
0.0025
0.003
---
3 Bankfull Flood lain Area acres
---
---
---
---
4% of Reach with Eroding Bank
---
---
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Othe
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 - The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile. 2=For projects with a proximal USGS gauge in -line with the project reach (added bankfull verification - rare).
3. Utilizing XS measurement data produce an estimate of the bankfull floodplain area in acres, which should be the area from the top ofbank to the toe of the terrace riser/slope.
4 - Proportion ofreach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey for comparison to monitoring data; 5. Ofvalue/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Table 9. Cross Section Morphology Data Table
Meadow Spring
Cross Section 1 (Riffle)
Enhancement I
Cross Section 2 (Riffle)
Enhancement I
Cross Section 3 (Riffle)
Cross Section 4 (Pool)
Cross Section 6 (Riffle)
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSAI
161.4
161.4
157.0
156.6
152.5
152.4
152.2
NA
149.5
149.5
Bankfull Width (ft)'
5.2
5.8
6.4
4.8
7.5
6.6
7.6
NA
7.0
6.8
Floodprone Width (ft)'
11.2
11.5
>31.9
>32.8
1 >50
>50
1 >50
NA
>50
>50
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.0
1 1.0
1
1
1 1.1
1.6
1
1.3
0.9
1.7
2.9
1 1.2
1.3
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.7
3.0
1.1
1.8
1.3
1.7
1.7
1.0
1.2
1.3
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
3.2
3.2
4.0
4.0
5.5
6.4
6.5
1 16.0
1
1
1
4.3
4.7
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
2.2
2.0
>5.0
>6.8
>6.7
>7.6
NA
I NA
4-1.0
>7.1
>7.4
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
2.6
2.9
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.1
NA-1
NA
1.0
Cross Section 6 (Pool)
Cross Section 7 (Riffle)
ICross Section 8 (Pool)
ICross Section 9 (Riffle)
Cross Section 10 (Pool)
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSAI
149.6
NA
146.1
145.9
145.9
NA
141.9
141.9
141.6
NA
Bankfull Width ft'
8.2
NA
9.3
8.6
8.3
NA
9.0
10.9
7.8
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>50
NA
>50
>50
>50
NA
>50
>50
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.7
1 1.6
1
1
1
1 1.4
1.8
1.3
1.5
1
1 1.4
1.3
1.7
1 1.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.8
1.3
1.5
1.4
1.3
1.7
1.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
6.6
6.3
6.2
5.4
4.2
5.3
1
1
6.4
4.6
6.0
6.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
NA
NA
>5.4
>5.8
NA
NA
4->5.5
>4.6
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
NA
NA
1.0
<1
NA
NA
1.0
<1
NA
NA
Cross Section 11 (Pool)
Cross Section 12 (Riffle)
Cross Section 13 (Pool)
Cross Section 14 (Riffle)
Cross Section 16 (Riffle) Enhancement I
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSA'
138.0
NA
138.1
138.1
136.0
NA
135.9
135.9
125.5
125.6
Bankfull Width (ft)'
8.9
NA
9.4
9.4
10.2
NA
9.9
8.9
10.6
10.2
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>50
NA
>50
>50
>50
NA
>50
>50
40.6
>31
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.7
1 2.0
1.3
1.5
2.2
2.2
1.4
1.7
1.4
1 1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
2.0
1.3
1.5
2.2
2.2
1.4
1.7
2.2
2.4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
7.9
9.7
6.6
8.7
10.7
10.7
7.5
7.5
10.2
10.2
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
NA
NA
>5.3
>5.3
NA
NA
>5.1
>5.6
>3.8
>3
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
NA
NA
1.0
1.2
NA
NA
1.0
1.0
1.6
1.5
Cross Section 16 (Riffle) Enhancement I
Cross Section 17 (Riffle)
Cross Section 18 (Pool)
Cross Section 19 (Riffle)
Cross Section 20 (Pool)
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSAI
121.9
121.7
116.3
116.4
116.3
NA
113.5
113.5
112.9
NA
Bankfull Wdth (ft)'
9.3
9.5
8.8
9.2
9.5
NA
9.6
9.7
6.9
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>39.7
>30.7
>50
>50
>50
NA
>50
>50
>50
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
1.6
1 1.4
1.3
1.2
2.8
1.8
1.7
1.6
1 1.8
1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.2L2.3
1.3
1.2
2.8
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.8
1.6
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft 2210.2
5.8
5.0
12.7
9.4
9.6
9.0
6.0
5.8Bankfull
Entrenchment Ratio'
>4.3
>5.6
>5.4
NA
NA
>5.2
>5.1
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
1.3
1.0
<1
NA
NA
1.0
1.0
NA
NA
Cross
Section
21 (Pool)
Cross
Section
22
(Riffle)
Cross
Section
23
(Riffle)
Cross
Section
24 (Pool)
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY+
Bankfull Elevation (ft) - Based on AB-XSAI
111.7
NA
111.5
111.5
143.3
143.3
143.2
NA
Bankfull Wdth (ft)'
10.0
NA
9.8
8.0
5.3
5.0
5.8
NA
Floodprone Width (ft)'
>50
NA
>50
>50
>38.3
>50
>48.4
NA
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)2
2.1
2.1
1.5
1.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.0
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.1
2.1
1.5
1.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.0
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2)2
9.9
9.4
7.1
7.4
2.2
2.6
3.6
2.9
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio'
NA
NA
>5.1
>6.2
>7.3
>10
NA
NA
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio'
NA
NA
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
NA
NA
1 - Uses the as -built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation
2 - Uses the current years low top of bank as the basis for adjusting each subsequent years bankfull elevation

MeadowTable 10. Stream Reach Data Summary
.. .
and Substrate - Riffle only
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
'Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Low Bank Height (ft)
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
Bank Height Ratio==MMMMMM=MMMMMMMMMMMMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Meander Width Ratio
AdditionalDimension
Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
Channel Thalweg length
(ft)
WaterSinuosity
- Slope
Channel ..-
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel2 Habitat Metric
Biological . Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3

MeadowTable 10. Stream Reach Data Summary
.. .A
and Substrate - Riffle only
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
'Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Low Bank Height (ft)
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
BankHeight Ratio
Shallow Length (ft)
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
Pool Length (ft)
Pool Spacing (ft)
widthDimension
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Width Ratio
AdditionalMeander
Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
Channel Thalweg-.
(ft)
WaterSinuosity
- Slope
Channel ..-
%
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel2 Habitat Metric
Biological . Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3

MeadowTable 10. Stream Reach Data Summary
.. .
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle only
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
'Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Low Bank Height (ft)
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft)
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
BankHeight
Shallow Length (ft)
Shallow Slope (ft/ft)
Pool Length'®�
m
Spacing (ft)
widthPool
®®®®®
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Width Ratio
AdditionalMeander
Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
Channel Thalweg-.
(ft)
WaterSinuosity
- Slope
Channel ..-
%
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
Channel2 Habitat Metric
Biological . Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3

MeadowTable 10. Stream Reach Data Summary
..
and Substrate - Riffle only
WidthDimension
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
'Bank -full Max Depth
Low Bank Height
Bank -full Cross Sectional Area (ft)
Width/Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
'Bank Height Ratis
Shallow Length
ShallowSlope
Pool Length
Pool Maxclepth
Pool Spacing
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
of Curvature (ft)
widthRadius
Meander Wavelength (ft)
Width Ratio
AdditionalMeander
Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification
Channel Thalweg length
(ft)
WaterSinuosity
- Slope
Channel ..-
of Reach with Eroding Bankn
Channel2%
Habitat -
Biological Other
Shaded cells indicate that these will typically not be filled in.
1 = The distributions for these parameters can include information from both the cross-section measurements and the longitudinal profile.
2 = Proportion of reach exhibiting banks that are eroding based on the visual survey from visual assessment table
3 = Riffle, Run, Pool, Glide, Step; Silt/Clay, Sand, Gravel, Cobble, Boulder, Bedrock; dip = max pave, disp = max subpave
4. = Of value/needed only if the n exceeds 3

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

Table 11. 2019 Rainfall Summary
Month
Average
Normal Limits
Clayton Station
Precipitation
On -Site Rain
Gauge
30 Percent
70 Percent
January
4.24
3.24
4.93
4.74
---
February
3.64
2.51
4.34
5.11
---
March
4.57
3.44
5.33
3.84
---
April
3.24
1.99
3.92
8.47
---
May
4.17
2.91
4.96
0.92
---
June
4.14
2.70
4.97
6.08
---
July
5.43
3.48
6.53
6.35
---
August
4.58
3.05
5.49
2.23
5.36
September
4.54
2.26
5.55
2.94
0.02
October
3.16
1.89
3.81
5.18
4.67
November
2.95
1.86
3.55
3.56
2.26
December
3.05
2.02
3.65
0.80
1.02
Total
47.71
31.35
57.03
50.22
13.33
Table 12. Documentation of Geomorphically Significant Flow Events
Year
Number of Bankfull
Events
Maximum Bankfull
Height (ft)
Date of Maximum Bankfull
Event
Stage Recorder S6B
MYl 2019
1 0
0.00
N/A
Stage Recorder S11
MY12019
1 2
0.77
9/5/2019

Table 13.
2019 Max Hydroperiod (Growing Season 18-Mar through 6-Nov, 233 days)
Success Criterion 12%
Well ID
Wetland
ID
Wetland
Treatment
Consecutive
Cumulative
Occurrences
ys
Hydroperiod
Hydroperiod
GW1
WI
E (3:1)
20
9
41
18
8
GW2
WI
E (3:1)
40
17
98
42
3
GW3
WB
RH (1.5:1)
17
7
38
16
7
GW4
WH
RE (1:1)
4
2
7
3
4
GW5
WH
RE (1:1)
4
2
22
9
13
GW6
WH
RE (1:1)
18
8
67
29
5
GW7
WH
RE (1:1)
4
2
12
5
6
GW8
WF-B
E (3:1)
18
8
59
25
7
GW9
WG-A
E (3:1)
44
19
95
41
4
GW10
WG-B
E (5:1)
20
8
68
29
7
GW11
WF-A
p
24
1 10
24
1 10
4
RGW1
WF-A
p
6
1 2
26
1 11
11
*Year 1 data was collected from 7/3/2019-11/6/2019 for all wells with the eNception of GW 11 which began data collection on 8/ 1/2019
0 5-11% >12%
Table 14.
Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Results
Meadow Spring
Well ID
Wetland
ID
Wetland
Treatment
Hydroperiod % ; Success Criteron 12%
Year 1
2019
Year 2
2020
Year 3
2021
Year 4
2022
Year 5
2023
Year 6
2024
Year 7
2025
GW1
WI
E
9
GW2
WI
E
17
GW3
WB
RH
7
GW4
WH
RE
2
GW5
WH
RE
2
GW6
WH
RE
8
GW7
WH
RE
2
GW8
WF-B
E
8
GW9
WGA
E
19
GW10
WGB
E (5:1)
8
GW11
WF-A
p
10
RGW1
WF-A
p
2

2019 Meadow Spring GW1
10 6.0
Grow
ng Season
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
.-.
�i
O
W
v
v
d
3.0 p
-20
W
L
++
�
•Q
•L
2.0 a
-30
0
C9
1.0
-40
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
Clayton Daily Rainfall GW1

2019 Meadow Spring GW2
10 6.0
Grow'ng
Seaso
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
0
as
v
d -20
3.0 00
W
'++
�
L
Q
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
,L^
V
1.0
-40
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall -GW2

2019 Meadow Spring GW3
10 6.0
Growing Season
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
O
as
v
v
d -20
3.0 p
W
'++
�
L
Q
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
C9
1.0
-40
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall -GW3

2019 Meadow Spring GW4
10 6.0
Growing Season
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
O
as
v
d -20
3.0 p
W
'++
�
L
Q
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
C9
1.0
-40
-50L-0.0
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall -GW4

2019 Meadow Spring GW6
10 6.0
Growing Season
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
0
as
v
d -20
3.0 00
W
'++
�
L
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
,L^
V
m1.0
-40
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall GW1

2019 Meadow Spring GW7
10 6.0
Growing Season
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
O
as
v
d -20
3.0 p
W
'++
�
L
Q
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
C9
1.0
-40
U
i L
L
-
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall -GW7

2019 Meadow Spring GW8
10 6.0
Grow'ng
Seaso
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
0
as
d -20
3.0 00
W
'++
�
L
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
,L^
V
1.0
-40
0.0
-50&IA-
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall -GW8

2019 Meadow Spring GW9
10 6.0
Grow'ng
Seaso
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
O
as
v
d -20
3.0 p
W
'++
�
L
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
C9
1.0
-40
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall -GW9

2019 Meadow Spring GW11
10 6.0
Growing Season
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
0
as
v
v
d -20
3.0 00
W
'++
�
L
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
,L^
V
1.0
-40
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall GW11

2019 Meadow Spring REF GW1
10 6.0
Growing Season
0
5.0
N
d
4.0
-10
t�
�►
as
O
v
E
d -20
3.0 p
W
L
'++
�
Q
•L
0
2.0 a
-30
0
C9
1.0
-40
0.0
-50
J F M A M J J A S O N D
Months
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllClayton Daily Rainfall -REF GW1