20200016 Ver 1_Field notes- site visit January 13, 2020_20200127

E�
0
Q
N

Cross Creek Ranch Field notes- site visit January 13, 2020
D W R # 20200016
(be warned ... doing notes from memory on January 27, 2020)
1. Started walk on Big Branch trib. -proposed as R, buffer was generally good and had decent
bedform, rock appeared to be slate -like, not quite able to get out on floodplain, BHR 1.3-1.5???
Was going back and forth as to whether full R needed, at end of reach thought ok to move
forward with R.
2. Then walked into wetland (3)- did have some hydric characteristics. Was difficult to see lay of
land with high herbaceous, appeared to be a lot of microtopography, not sure whether natural
or from timbering?
3. Then walked along Clark Creek- large drainage area, mostly Enh activities, 4:1, thought the
buffer should be significantly wider. A lot of privet. In the future, any work, especially
enhancement only should require wider riparian buffers.
4. Tribs UT16 and UT1- proposed as R, approach seemed fine. Although some questions regarding
removing pond for wetland credit. Certainly would like to see the pond go, however, Todd
seemed to think it may be a different ratio or different type, not re-establishment or rehab.
Really depends on what the underlying soils were, probably will not know that, so I would
recommend taking pond out, and have WEI document there proposal in the mit plan.
S. UT3- was listed as enhancement- the reach was an mixture of no work, R, and some -in-between.
Most of the R type work seemed to be in the upper reach. Also, this part of the reach could be
susceptible to low or no flows. There were a series of headcuts throughout the middle portion,
so this area was the mixed approach reach, the lower reach seemed to not need much work at
all. The result is that WEI was going to send a revised map for this reach- UT3