20091294 Ver 1_As Built Report_20090521

cep 1 64
crve ` U,)Q * ?
SECTION I. MITIGATION REPORT
TERRIBLE CREEK BUFFER RESTORATION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(SCO Project Number 050667901) 0 9- 1 2 9 4
NEUSE RIVERBASIN
CATALOGING UNIT 03020201
Prepared for:
NCDENR

T - "3
CfMVI
North Carolina Department of Environmentand Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
EEP Project Manager: Jessica Kemp
June 2008
SECTION 1. MITIGATION REPORT'
TERRIBLE CREEK. BUFFER RESTORATION
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.
(SCO Project Number 050667901)
NEUSE RIVER BASIN
CA'T'ALOGING LIMIT 03020201
Prepared for:
FFIFA
..A.7A.
NCDENR
I?cYgstelll
4!
t
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resour-Ces
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
EEP Project Manager: Jessica Kemp
Prepared by:

Axiom Environmental, Inc.
2126 Rowland Pond Drive
Willow Springs, North Carolina 27592
[phone] (phone)
[phone] (fax)
Project'vlanager: Grant Lewis
June 2008
SECTION H. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This as-built mitigation plan describes the Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration Site (Site) and was
designed specifically to assist in fulfilling North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program restoration
goals. The Site is located approximately 1 mile northeast of Willow Springs and 4 miles northeast of
Fuquay-Varina, in Wake County. This portion of Wake County is located within Neuse River Basin
Cataloging Unit 03020201120010. This document details riparian buffer restoration procedures on the
47.84-acre Site, which resulted in a total of 45.6 acres of riparian buffer restoration.
Site drainage features provide water quality function to an approximately 13.0-square mile watershed.
The Site is located within a North Carolina Wetlands. Restoration Program targeted local watershed;
however, Site streams and the receiving stream (Middle Creek) have not been placed on the state's 303(d)
list by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. Terrible Creek has a Best Usage Classification of
C, NSW (Nutrient Sensitive Waters) and supports its designated uses.
Pre-construction Site land use consisted primarily of livestock pasture. Terrible Creek was characterized
by eroding stream banks and contained a riparian buffer dominated by fescue as well as other herbaceous
vegetation. Residential development is currently under construction north of the Site and will continue to
expand exacerbating runoff into the Site.
Restoration activities at the Site included
1) one herbicide treatment to control herbaceous species, primarily fescue,
2) bushhogging of the Site and allowing herbaceous vegetation to green up preparing the Site
for second herbicide treatment,
3) second herbicide treatment to ensure treatment of herbaceous vegetation that would have
otherwise been overtopped,
4) soil discing to prepare the soil bed prior to planting,
5) soil amendments based on NCDA&CS Agronomy Division recommendations from
preconstruction soil samples,
6) plant community restoration consisting of Piedmont/Mountain Levee Forest and
Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest communities, and
7) outer bend treatments within Terrible Creek.
This Site will serve as a pilot project for outer bend treatments. The erosion status of each outer bend on
Terrible Creek within the Site was evaluated and ranked on a qualitative scale. Three outer bend
treatments consisting of 1) erosion control matting and live stakes, 2) brush mattresses, and 3) a do
nothing alternative were incorporated on bends throughout the Site in order to monitor the progression of
each outer bend and compare treatments throughout the monitoring period. As-built the restoration plan
restored 45.6 acres of Neuse River Riparian Buffers within the Site boundaries for a total of 45.6 Buffer
Mitigation Units.
The primary goals of this buffer restoration project focused on reforestation of the floodplain with native
species to
1) improve water quality;
2) enhance flood attenuation;
3) reduce sedimentation/siltation;
4) increase channel bank stability;
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program Executive Summary
Terrible Creek Ruffer Restoration
5) filter and reduce pollutants prior to entering Terrible Creek;
6) serve as a wildlife corridor by providing connectivity to forested areas adjacent to the Site;
7) provide increased habitat for aquatic and terrestrial wildlife;
8) increase organic matter, carbon export, and woody debris in the stream corridor;
9) restore shade to Site open waters; and
10) enhance characteristic macroinvertebrate species populations in the channel.
Monitoring of restoration efforts will be performed until success criteria are fulfilled; the detailed
monitoring plan, success criteria, and contingency plan are outlined in Section 2.0 of this document.
Monitoring and success criteria for vegetation are based on the CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Level 1-2 Plot Sampling Only (Version 4.0) (Lee et at. 2006). In addition, the outer bend
treatments will be evaluated, photographed, and located with GPS as part of the monitoring effort.
Prior to Site construction, a beaver dam was located near the downstream end of the Site and resulted in
the mortality of mature hardwood trees in this area. During planting, beaver activity was extremely high
and was evidenced by beaver chewed stems and newly built dams. Proactive measures to remove beaver
from the Site have been initiated by EEP entering into a contract with APHIS in March 2008 to remove
existing beaver and remove any beaver throughout the monitoring period, as necessary.
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program Executive Summary
Terrihle Creek Buffer Restoration
SECTION III. Table of Contents
SECTION IV. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... I
SECTION IV.I Restoration Summary ................................................................................................ I
SECTION IV.2 Directions to Site ....................................................................................................... 3
SECTION VI MONITORING PLAN ..................................................................................................... 3
SECTION VI.1 Vegetation Monitoring .............................................................................................. 3
SECTION VI.1.1 Vegetation Success Criteria ................................................................................ 3
SECTION VI.2 Outer Bend Treatment Monitoring ............................................................................. 5
SECTION VI.3 Beaver Management .................................................................................................. 6
SECTION VII VEGETATION CONTINGENCY .................................................................................. 6
SECTION VIII REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 7
Appendices
Appendix A. SECTION V Figures
Appendix B. Preconstruction Photographs
Appendix C. Preconstruction Outer Bend Erosion Photographs
Appendix D. During Construction Photographs
Appendix E. Baseline As-built Vegetation Data
List of Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Project Map and Restoration Activities
Figure 3. Outer Bend Treatment Details
Figure 4. Monitoring Plan
List of Tables
Table 1. Planted Species (Bare Root Seedlings) ........................................................
Table 2. Planted Species (1 Gallon Containerized Seedlings) ....................................
Table 3. Reference Forest Ecosystem ........................................................................
Table 4. Outer Bend Treatments ...............................................................................
............................ 4
............................ 4
............................ 4
............................ 5
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program Table of Contents page i
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
TERRIBLE CREEK
AS-BUILT MITIGATION PLAN
SECTION IV. INTRODUCTION
The North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) completed riparian buffer restoration at
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration Site (Site) located approximately 1 mile northeast of Willow Spring
and 4 miles northeast of Fuquay-Varina, in Wake County (Figure 1, Appendix A). The Site is located in
United States Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit (HU) 03020201120010 (North Carolina
Division of Water Quality [NCDWQ] Subbasin 03-04-03) of the Neuse River Basin and will service the
USGS 8-digit HU 03020201 (Figure 1, Appendix A) (USGS 1974).
The Site encompasses the left bank of Terrible Creek, several unnamed tributaries to Terrible Creek,
floodplains, and jurisdictional wetlands. The Site drains an approximately 13.0-square mile watershed at
the Site outfall. Terrible Creek is a fourth-order or greater, bank-to-bank stream system, which had been
impacted by vegetative clearing, hoof shear from cattle and horses, and erosive flows. The upstream
drainage basin is characterized mainly by agricultural and forest land with interspersed low-density
residential development; impervious surfaces appear to account for less than 10 percent of the drainage
basin area. Residential development becomes more concentrated southwest of the watershed in the City
of Fuquay-Varina and northeast of the watershed in the City of Raleigh. The Site was historically
characterized by hardwood forest several decades ago; however, under preconstruction conditions forest
vegetation had been cleared and the property was characterized by livestock pasture. The Site contained
an abundance of complex microtopography ranging to one foot in vertical symmetry across the landscape
most likely remnant from logging operations. A beaver dam is located near the downstream end of the
Site and has resulted in the mortality of mature hardwood trees in this area. Several residential
developments are currently being constructed immediately north/upslope of the Site.
SECTION IV.1 Restoration Summary
The primary goals of this buffer restoration project focused on reforestation of the Site with native species
to 1) improve water quality; 2) enhance flood attenuation; 3) reduce sedimentation/siltation; 4) increase
channel bank stability; 5) filter and reduce pollutants prior to entering Terrible Creek; 6) serve as a
wildlife corridor by providing connectivity to forested areas adjacent to the Site; 7) provide increased
habitat for aquatic and terrestrial wildlife; 8) increase organic matter, carbon export, and woody debris in
the stream corridor; 9) restore shade to Site open waters; and 10) enhance characteristic macroinvertebrate
species populations in the channel.
The objectives of this project included the following.
• Classify on-Site streams as perennial, intermittent, or ephemeral.
• Identify jurisdictional wetlands within Site boundaries.
• Identify a suitable reference forest to model Site restoration attributes.
• Establish a baseline photographic record of each outer bend of Terrible Creek within the Site.
• Develop a detailed plan of buffer restoration activities within the approximately 47.84-acre
conservation easement boundary.
• Establish success criteria and a method of monitoring the Site upon completion of restoration
construction.
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 1
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
Restoration activities at the Site included (Figure 2, Appendix A)
1) one herbicide treatment to control herbaceous species, primarily fescue,
2) bushhogging of the Site and allowing herbaceous vegetation to green up preparing the Site
for second herbicide treatment,
3) second herbicide treatment to ensure treatment of herbaceous vegetation that would have
otherwise been overtopped,
4) soil discing to prepare the soil bed prior to planting,
5) soil amendments based on NCDA&CS Agronomy Division recommendations from
preconstruction soil samples,
6) plant community restoration consisting of Piedmont/Mountain Levee Forest and
Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest communities, and
7) outer bend treatments within Terrible Creek.
Site restoration efforts resulted in the following.
• Restoration of 45.6 acres of riparian buffer within the Site; therefore, providing 45.6 Buffer
Mitigation Units.
• Reforestation within 45.6 acres of the Site with native forest vegetation.
• Installation of outer bend treatments on Terrible Creek.
The primary goals of this buffer restoration project focused on improving water quality, enhancing flood
attenuation, and restoring aquatic and riparian habitat and were accomplished by
• Removing nonpoint sources of pollution by providing a vegetative -buffer adjacent to streams
and wetlands to treat surface runoff.
• Reducing sedimentation within onsite and downstream receiving waters by a) reducing bank
erosion associated with vegetation maintenance and agricultural activities to Site streams, b)
filtering surface runoff from adjacent developments and reduce particulate matter deposition
into area waterways, and c) providing a forested vegetative buffer adjacent to Site streams
and wetlands.
• Promoting floodwater attenuation and improving stream stability by a) enhancing
depressional floodplain wetlands and the storage capacity for floodwaters within the Site and
b) revegetating Site floodplains to reduce floodwater velocities and increase frictional
resistance on floodwaters crossing Site floodplains.
• Providing wildlife habitat including a forested riparian corridor within a region of the state
increasingly dissected by residential land use.
An additional goal of this riparian buffer restoration project is to study the effects of three different outer
bend treatments installed on outer meander bends throughout the Site. The treatments being studied
consist of 1) erosion control matting and livestakes, 2) brush mattresses, and 3) do nothing.
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 2
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
SECTION IV.2 Directions to Site
Directions to the Site from Raleigh, North Carolina:
• Take Highway 401 South for approximately 10 miles
• Make a left on Air Park Road
• Travel approximately 0.5 mile to a right into the Stonewall Subdivision
• Take the first right onto Laura Ashley Court and follow to the end of the road
• The Site is at the bottom of the slope
SECTION VI MONITORING PLAN
Monitoring of Site restoration efforts will be performed for vegetation components of the Site until
success criteria are fulfilled. In addition, the outer bends will be evaluated, photographed, and located
with GPS as part of the monitoring effort. Vegetation monitoring and success criteria are discussed in
more detail below. The establishment, collection, and summarization of monitoring data shall be
conducted in accordance with the most current version of the EEP document entitled Content, Format,
and Data Requirements for EEP Monitoring Reports.
SECTION VI.1 Vegetation Monitoring
Restoration monitoring procedures for vegetation are designed in accordance with CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation Level 1-2 Plot Sampling Only (Version 4.0) (Lee et al. 2006). In February 2008
sixteen vegetation plots (10 meters by 10 meters) were installed within the Site after planting was
completed (Figure 4, Appendix A). Baseline vegetation measurements were conducted within each of the
sixteen vegetation plots in accordance with the CVS-EEP Protocols; baseline vegetation data can be
found in Appendix E.
Quantitative sampling of vegetation will be performed each fall, until vegetation success criteria are
achieved. A photographic record of plant growth should be included in each annual monitoring report.
SECTION VI.1.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
Success criteria have been established to verify that the vegetation component supports community
elements necessary for forest development. Success criteria are dependent upon the density and growth
of characteristic forest species. Additional success criteria are dependent upon density and growth of
"Character Tree Species." Character Tree Species include planted species, species identified through
visual inventory of an approved reference (relatively undisturbed) forest community used to orient the
Site design, and appropriate community descriptions from Classification of the Natural Communities of
North Carolina (Schafale and Weakley 1990) including Piedmont/Mountain Bottomland Forest and
Piedmont/Mountain Levee Forest. All canopy tree species planted and identified in the reference forest
will be utilized to define "Character Tree Species" as termed in the success criteria. Tables 1 and 2 below
outline planted species and numbers of each species planted within the Site and Table 3 lists reference
forest species.
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 3
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
Table 1. Planted Suecies (Bare Root SeedlinLys)

Vegetation Association Piedmont/Mountain
Bottomland Forest Piedmont/Mountain
Levee Forest Stream-side
Assemblage
TOTAL
Area acres 35.5 8.1 2.0 45.6

Species Number
planted* % of
total Number
planted* % of
total Number
planted" % of
total Number
planted
Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii) 6000 24.9 -- - -- -- 6000
Cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda) 5900 24.5 1300 23.2 -- - 7200
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 2500 10.4 600 10.7 -- -- 3100
Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata) 2400 10.0 -- - -- -- 2400
Hackbeny (Celtis laevigata) 2500 10.4 600 10.7 -- -- 3100
Painted buckeye (Asimina triloba) 4800 19.9 1200 21.4 -- - 6000
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis) - -- 1300 23.2 -- -- 1300
River birch (Betula nigra) - -- 300 5.4 -- -- 300
Black walnut (Juglans nigra) -- -- 300 5.4 -- -- 300
Buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) -- -- -- -- 4400 80.0 4400
Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) -- -- - -- 1100 20.0 1100
TOTAL 24,100 100 5600 100 5500 100 35,200
riameu at a uensny or oau stems/acre.
** Planted at a density of 2720 stems/acre.
Table 2. Planted Suecies (1 Gallon Containerized Seedlinus)
Species Number planted
Swam chestnut oak ( uercus michauxii) 25
Che bark oak uercus pagoda) 70
Green ash Fraxinus enns Ivanica 55
TOTAL 150
Table 3. Reference Forest Ecosvstem
Reference Forest Ecosystem/Character Tree Species
Red maple (Ater rubrum)
River birch (Betula nigra)
Ironwood (Carpinus caroliniana)
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
Sweetgum (Liquidambarstyraciua)
Cherrybark oak (Quercus pagoda)
Winged elm (Ulmus alata)
American elm (Ulmus americana)
An average density of 320 stems per acre of Character Tree Species must be surviving after five
monitoring years in accordance with North Carolina Division of Water Quality Administrative Code 15A
NCAC 02B.0242 (Meuse River Basin, Mitigation Program for Protection and Maintenance of Existing
Riparian Buffers) (NCDWQ 2007).
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 4
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
SECTION VI.2 Outer Bend Treatment Monitoring
A baseline photographic record of each Site outer bend of Terrible Creek was compiled and included
within the May 2007 Terrible Creek Detailed Buffer Restoration Plan. In addition, the apex of each outer
bend was located using GPS technology with reported submeter accuracy (Figures 2 and 4, Appendix A).
In some cases up to three locations on the same outer bend were located with the GPS due to the
length/overall size of the meander. The GPS points will serve as a baseline to monitor if erosion
continues post outer bend treatment installation throughout the monitoring period.
Preconstruction the erosion status of each outer bend on Terrible Creek within the Site was evaluated and
ranked on a qualitative scale with four erosion categories starting with the lowest extent of erosion
consisting of 1) low erosion, 2) moderate erosion, 3) severe erosion, and 4) extreme erosion. Three outer
bend treatments consisting of 1) erosion control matting and livestakes, 2) brush mattresses, and 3) do
nothing were installed on bends throughout the Site. Outer bend treatments were assigned at random
within each of the four erosion categories. The outer bend treatments are depicted in Figures 2 and 4
(Appendix A), and detailed in Figure 3 (Appendix A), and outlined in the following table. Please note
that Outer Bends 1 through 3 are not located within the conservation easement and therefore, no
treatments were implemented.
Table 4. Outer Bend Treatments
Outer
Bend
Extent of Erosion Preconstruction
Treatment to be Installed
1 Low Outside of easement, no treatment recommended
2 Low Outside of easement, no treatment recommended
3 Low Outside of easement, no treatment recommended
4 Moderate Leave as is
5 Low Leave as is
6 Moderate Live stake with erosion control matting
7 Moderate Brush mattress
8 Severe Live stake with erosion control matting
9 Moderate Brush mattress
10 Moderate Leave as is
11 Severe Brush mattress
12 Severe Live stake with erosion control matting
13 Severe Brush mattress
14 Severe Leave as is
15 Moderate Live stake with erosion control matting
16 Moderate Brush mattress
17 Severe Brush mattress
18 Extreme Live stake with erosion control matting
19 Severe Leave as is
20 Extreme Brush mattress
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 5
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
't'able 4 continued)
Outer
Bend Extent of Erosion Preconstruction Treatment to be Installed
21 Extreme Leave as is
22 Severe Live stake with erosion control matting
23 Severe Brush mattress
24 Severe Leave as is
25 Extreme Brush mattress
26 Extreme Leave as is
27 Severe Brush mattress
28 Severe Live stake with erosion control matting
29 Severe Leave as is
30 Extreme Live stake with erosion control matting
SECTION VI.3 Beaver Management
Prior to Site construction, a beaver dam was located near the downstream end of the Site and resulted in
the mortality of mature hardwood trees in this area. During planting, beaver activity was extremely high
and was evidenced by beaver chewed stems and newly built dams. Proactive measures to remove beaver
from the Site have been initiated by EEP entering into a contract with APHIS in March 2008 to remove
existing beaver and remove any beaver throughout the monitoring period, as necessary.
SECTION VII VEGETATION CONTINGENCY
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved based on average density calculations from combined plots
over the entire restoration area, supplemental planting may be performed with tree species in the approved
Restoration Plan. Supplemental planting will be performed as needed until achievement of vegetation
success criteria.
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 6
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
SECTION VIII REFERENCES
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation. Version 4.0. North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2007. Redbook, Surface Waters and Wetlands
Standards. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of
Water Quality. Raleigh, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, North Ccarolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources.
Raleigh, North Carolina.
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 1974. Hydrologic Unit Map - 1974. State of North Carolina.
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program page 7
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
Appendix A.
Section V Figures
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program Appendices
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
0 1 mi. 4 mi _
X41
%
I
A tf
1 X 150.000 r• • : ,? ?k.
Source: 1977 North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer, p. 40 & 62. f { ti "
Garnirt
E ?« x
{ ?x
pp)) nkt#O?Nr ? j
f
%
A' w . ' 11r 3 ?
k? i aha? a ?' C ?` m fi ?
3 a,
? ? s' wwrJ wtw,, , t k I t'uttu «. ?.,
Y -7
IMr rxM ^? w J? °a? ^?`
r e , ?
' e yi?r t i o, t?
x4
AA t
?p zt.
f
L P^vrnetl
/t Ji:P ter eyl t?.
' \ g1e*? 1t C-CM ,
__? t?.rr?•.'_, x O? ?.
x ? t?,?y f` SP?Re
J
Nel.lse- \\ F T
?? ?: J ? ? C? nra Terrible Cree
In
Site LocatioNeuse River Bas14-digit Targeted Local WandRALEGN USGS Hydrologic 0302020112001NCDWQ Subbasin 03f r' 35.6130 N, 78.7136 W
41,
}} w ^ rt J2
T ?a.y 3 ..•\. !
?
P_ *1141a'
(ttC>,,
? 44',1 s+Y` M " 5 rtel 0 S nfi 55 r*rl
.J
{ Y per rwt?r. ,r ?A, ?j 1625,000
'? 7t Raw3s 1 ar { i So:,rc, Hydrologic Uri:t Map - 1974 State of North Caruhn;
SITE LOCATION C, _r
TERRIBLE CREEK
' AS-BUILT MITIGATION PLAN
Wake Count', North Carolina o?.?; z
LL
O

^
LO

c
t e'
.C g. -v v
4
•a i '
a
w? ice.
E; CG.?a
c i G
l?
I
Y
E
C c
3s
O y
E
5
O
d i N
n
?
ti
G N
? '? a ?
fi 2
r f7 2

? .i?S35 =? ?

Fj •J
c W `. a 4; C N N
J u `°
a __ `a ° i
u z m Q

'
? a7
C
?m O O ? O c d ? N
N
• O C v U
'
U ? ?
v 1 11 li
m l
b

?
O
`c
O
a c
a
A
w
Y '.
W
S N
LL
u
N
`W H
O
U W c
a ? -
Z Z O
00M
aas
0
Z
W ..W
otS w O
d V CU
< CD
_j./? m
W
W
o W
CL
r
? a
,s
Brush Mattress

Pl- vim.
aknka ? " ? ?
L.iveFascine
_ o
\
\
y \
i
100?
U
Dead Stout Stakes
Control Matting
OUTER BEND TREATMENT DETAILS cLF FIGU9E
r 3
TERRIBLE CREEK MITIGATION REPORT February 2008
Wake County, North Carolina
Dmg-.? -"".'J d
Live Stake Embankment with
-A -Ail
"I
?._. ..?.. ?. r. .? {... ? .... ...... ....
I 1 i t I I I ? ? I
?-
I i I I ? I n s
E', Ig t I C? IS
? 3 ss& JJ gg ? ?., A IJ " 8
: ? ie I ? I I ? ? ? I ??3
m S O(

177 t 6 ?' 3 S O • O O
?T r

n 8 Y' Y
Q R
'4 _ fD Q_ w
N
fn n 1/ r
3 y
o' m m' x
e Q
3 frD
0 M Z
m a
'
!n z N
N 7

X O
c 3
o d d
g
Z
Z 4
N k

m Q N
G
^ C)
Y>
? m d
r
? D
n
o
i
o zZ
m
lu
O
T
i
4::>2!

W
A

a,„

4 Vt

CIl
V'

:? r{
ryT? .?
9

Z
?. O
& i
£ «M r
N
N
0

X
C)
d
a
ca
d
a

416 T
m
a
Y
0
n
0
0
a
d
N
Appendix B.
Preconstruction Photographs
';Mitigation Repon Ecosystem Enhancement Program Appendices
t-crrible Creek Buff r Restot-atiou
Preconstruction Photographs
July 2006
looking across the floodplain
at the fallow pasture
Appendix C.
Preconstruction Outer Bend Erosion Photographs
Mitigation Relwt Eco. yysfem Enhancement Program eps,trndkcs
TerribleC:rLeh Buffer Restoration
Outer Bend #2 - looking upstream
approximately 150 feet upstream from beaver dam.
(Low Erosion)
Outer Bend #4 - Looking Upstream
approximately 500 ft upstream from beaver dam,
still in impounded reach.
(Moderate Erosion)
Outer Bend #1 - Looking Upstream
at beaver dam.
(Low Erosion)
Outer Bend #3 - Looking Upstream
approximately 400 ft upstream from beaver dam,
still in impounded reach.
(Low Erosion)
Outer Bend #6 - Looking Upstream
in a double outer bend.
(Moderate Erosion)
Outer Bend #5 - Looking Upstream
a bend with a larger radius.
(Low Erosion)
Outer Bend #9 - Looking Upstream Outer Bend #10 - Looking Upstream
at outer bend in a straight, immediately at tight radius below a large river birch.
upstream from a tight radius. Moderate Erosion)
(Moderate Erosion)
Outer Bend #7 - Looking Upstream
Privet on opposite bank may causing
erosion on Site bank.
(Moderate Erosion)
Outer Bend #8 - Looking Upstream
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #13 - Looking Upstream
A fallen tree may be causing erosion
on Site stream banks.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #12 - Looking Upstream
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #11 - Looking Upstream
at tight radius. A fallen tree has cause
a hole in the bank.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #11 -Looking Downstream
at fallen tree causing a hole in the bank.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #13 - Looking Upstream
A fallen tree may be causing erosion
on Site stream banks.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #12 - Looking Upstream
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #16 - Looking Upstream Outer Bend #16 - Looking Upstream
at tight bends. This is not a good reach for at tight bends. This is not a good reach for
bank stabilization comparisons. bank stabilization comparisons.
(Moderate Erosion) (Moderate Erosion)
Outer Bend #15 - Looking Upstream
at a long bend with two stumps extending
into the stream.
(Moderate Erosion)
Outer Bend #14 - Looking Upstream
at tight radius caused by point bar and
transverse bar.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #17 - Looking Downstream
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #17 - Looking Upstream
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #18 - Looking Upstream
(Extreme Erosion)
Outer Bend #19 - Looking Upstream
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #20 - Looking Upstream
at a long bend with a tight radius in the
middle of the bend.
(Extreme Erosion)
Outer Bend #20 - Looking Downstream
at a long bend with a tight radius in the
middle of the bend.
(Extreme Erosion)
Outer Bend #21 - Looking Upstream
at bank sloughing
(Extreme Erosion)

8 3a;,
Outer Bend #23 - Looking Upstream
at root balls in channel and bank sloughing
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #22 - Looking Upstream
at lateral migration of outer bend with
point bar extension into the stream bed.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #25 - Looking Upstream
at transverse bar and tight radius at upper
reach of the bend.
(Extreme Erosion)
Outer Bend #24 - Looking Upstream
at a short reach of erosion.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #26 - Looking Upstream
at migrating outer bend and extension of
point barltransverse bar at lower
reach of bend.
(Extreme Erosion)
Outer Bend #27 - Looking Upstream
at erosion on low slope reach.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #28 - Looking Upstream
at potential shoot cutoff development.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #28 - Looking Downstream
at potential shoot cutoff development.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #29 - Looking Upstream
at shoot cutoff. Not a good bank erosion
treatment comparison area.
(Severe Erosion)
Outer Bend #30 - Looking Upstream
at lateral migration of out bend with extension
of point bar into the stream bed.
(Extreme Erosion)
Appendix D.
During Construction Photographs
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Terrible CYeck Huffer Rcstoratkm
During Construction
After Discing
(Live state with erosion control matting)
(Live stake with erosion control matting)
Outer Bend 8
Outer Bends 6 (Live stakte with erosion control matting)
and 7 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend tt (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend 9 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend t2
During Construction
(continued)
(Live stake with erosion control matting)
(Live stake with erosion control matting)
Outer Bend 15
Outer Bend 13 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend 17 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend 16 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend 18
Outer Bend 19 (No Treatment)

During Construction
(continued)
(Live stalze with erosion control matting)
(Live stake with erosion control matting)
Outer Bend 22
Outer Bend 20 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend 23 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend 25 (Brush Mattress)
Outer Bend 28
Outer Bend 27
(Brush Mattress)
During Construction
(continued)
(Live stake with erosion control matting)
Outer Bend 30
Evidence of Bankfull Event in January 2008
Appendix E.
Baseline As-built Vegetation Data
Mitigation Report Ecosystem Enhancement Program Appendices
Terrible Creek Buffer Restoration
Report Prepared By Corri Faquin
Date Prepared 3/30/2008 19:10
database name Axiom _2008-CVS_EEP_ EntryTool_v220.mdb
database location C:\Business\Projects\06\06-013 Terrible Creek\as-built mitigation plan\CVS
computer name AXIOM-OA9116A70
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT--------
Metadata This worksheet, which is a summary of the project and the project data.
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems, for each year. This excludes live
Proj, planted stakes and lists stems per acre.
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems, for each year. This includes live
Proj, total stems stakes, all planted stems, and all natural/volunteer stems. Listed in stems per acre.
Plots List of plots surveyed.
Vigor Frequency distribution of vigor classes.
Vigor by Spp Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of
Damage total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers
ALL Stems by Plot and spp combined) for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY----------
Project Code 50667901
project Name Terrible Creek
Description Buffer Restoration Site
River Basin
length(ft)
stream-to-edge width (ft)
area (sq m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots 16
H 6S
i+
C Ly
w
? H
o d
y d
? O
0.
C i.
.9 C
V y
G p
s
y
h
N C
d
c v
[r C
C
d
•
?
m V M N N V M N O M - - N - M

?
S? O W

3 y 5 v? a ?
O
,.. ?
N
V? a+
O
00 o
?n
00 00
00
?O ?n
O
`d' r
R
?O a
?O
r oo
o0
?O ?o
N
?n r
O
?O oo
N
n ?o
N
Yl r
O
?O o
h
00 r
C
?O
o ? U ? W

C
y
e a a
W
'S .N..
N U
° O 00 vt n T w b
N n o0 ?O
N h O
? n
m
U
o
a o v
i o
o w b o $ ? b v
i ? ? v
i ? ^o
o
+Q
F;,jvi -
?a
??aW
?
a? p V o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

U W
d y? U
Q o o rn
0 o
? w ?n
o Vn m oo ?o
N nO
O w ?o
N n
C
O o why
et
C a m N o
0 0
0 10 v 10 v
, r v
i
4? W r16.

a v' N $ '^ f
o N $ ?' N n
Q
0. a o
o v
, o
o r v
i v
i o
o
Z
u
C
1
eF
_ N N N n O ?O O? n M V1 0p M Vl N ?O
U t:
W ?
F
C7

O S? N N r O ?O O. h M vl 00 M vt N b
F J ? N
L
4 ?' y
m V O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
p VJ
z
?
W N
m y 6 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
E
Q?
?
pL `7 ?
a
U N M N rJ n O
- ?O Q• n M V1 00 M h N b
-
s
>

9 pp
p '? d
N M N N ? O ?O O? r m vl 00 _M ?h -+
N ?D
C..7 V1
.? o0
0 00
0 00
o 0o
S ao
o 00
0 00
8 00
0 0o
0 ao
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
0 00
pp 00
o
W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
? E ao vi .n ?n .n v, .n .n ? o0 0o ao 00 00 0? o0

M M M M M M M M M i+1 M M ?
+
1 M
W 00 ? ? W 00 0?0 W ? O ? W 00 e
}
d' t
r
'V
E V C7 C7 V C7 U C7 v U V V V V C7 C7 C7
X 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
R
? M
DD M
DD M
0p0 M
DD M
a0 r%1
00 ?+1
00 ?
0q0 '+i
QW M
0q0 M
0[0? M
W ?+l
W
q M
00 i+t
0q0 M
00
z z 7 z z z Q a z 4 z
z z z z z

CN ?O
vl ?D
? h
O M
N oo
N N? N
00 N
vl
er V
n y
V? vt
O
? N
n
O?

7 O
N
? yer
O V1
vl ?O
N pp
O? r
O V1
r n
n V1
7 N
R .N. M
O CT
?
-
C o0 N r n oo
c U vi M h O O ?h M M O

C W O?
G n
? h
b N
h ?D
00 '
t
Q? ?D
ON ?
N 00
O
O N
O
? a V?
? oo
? T
?
n h h n h n h h n h h h h n h h
00 DD 00 W 0o W DO o0 00 00 00 00 00 DD 00 00
n n h r- h r n n n r; h n r n t? n
o+
O v?
O r v
M o n a oo .n o ?c ?o a
N o

`y
m
n
^
M
O. er
N oo
40 n
O M
b N ?n
N
? oo
h ?n
N
b C n ?D m vl 00 ?O O
+ 00 ?D ^? M
? r" O ? V ? b P b O ? ? p
O V N M - ono

az° .a. .V 1. ^ Vl vl
"R Vl
Z V?
"R N M ? V ?
%
M m m M m m m M m m r
i m "" M
C
L
a
}
(`J
a
C
Q
u.
d
.n
F
4
0
a
NI ?
a+
a
F

.21

o --
?+ N d 00
N N w 'D M 7

M M h W M d' -+ O
N
? N N ?p

A ?' ao
V? u ? =g
.p ti d ?
Q ? U U c ti
•

w

F
Z
d.
a
t
F
d
? O+ V M
u
L M ? ? N
O n
a

C W ? O \O
U N

0
O N M V

L
b
a
t
L ?
6a O

.Oi ed
b

l
l
a
a
v
O ed
C M M M ?O M v1 -+ ?O M r r 0 ?D ? ?
.
i ? N N N N

b
d
u r
a?? N r M ? DD M V) N ? ? N N r 0 ?C D\ N
ed ?+
A?
U
-+ N M ?r en `O r W C? O - N M et V1 ?D
S S O O S S S S S 0 0 _ 0 0 0
O O O O O O Q O O S 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q O O
O ?O
a O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ^
O?
r
0 D\
r
0 rn
r
0 rn
r
0 rn
r
?o O\
r
1o a
r
?o CS
r
?o Q.
r
`D 0?
r
%D ON
r
?o a
r
?o a,
r
\o C`
r

? D\
r c,
r
0 b 0
Co
0
0
0
0
0 \0
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
0 Vl V1 h h h CD ?n 0 0 kn W)
0
0
0
0
0 0
0 0 (o
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
R
O
F
L ?
u
? ?
M
M
? O
'b
a

L
Q
d
.C.i ?„' d' N r V1 OM N N
A
.fl
00 y
?
O
ed w
N
r r-
h
M
?D
N
A
co
QU
O
Q
Cd
co
0
U

O
•
O
G
R. y

y
O C
co C y
co ,
>
X

y O

ao

? ^!
C s`d o a Q
U :3
u CL

0
F
y
N
7
G
Co
F
A
O ?O
a^ ? M O?
^
O to
a^ O b
^
Q^ N N h
r+
O M
?
r
R. ^ V1 ? N
O .?
G1 ^ 00 O
N
a v1
N M
?y
Ch %0 kn kn

O 00 ?o N O M
0.
Q r ON ?o ^

O O N N ?D en
a
atn ?o N N

O N r r
0. ^
O p M N N
0.
zm y
Q h ? N M ? pp 1-•
v.
7t O
01
N
M
vi
O
M
?
?
00
V
C y
a
"I,
N
r
00
Vi
M
?c
N

H
Y
co

U
U

•

O
>O
N
C>

""

? y

V
y

O

0
q
E A .--.
.4 w G
t? U N -'
U
ed
0
H
i
O ?O
?
M
O\
o in
«
A+ ^
N
N
to
O M
Q..r P
rr
«
CL ~
N
«
O ?+

00
O
N
«
«
O O?
vl
?n
?
0.
00 N O M N
0.

«
a b
N
?D
?

«
O Vi
`7
<7'
N
N
0.
«

4 M V ?f V' ?

«
O N
?
?

y
O ..i
a
V,
`O
M
N
N

? H
y N M Op
h
O
N
M
Vn
M
V'
O,
.d
0
N
CE
On N r W V' 1- V1 M ?O N

cn
«
0
F
Yd lV ? y V ?
A 151
O 0 ? F .O > C
?
v ,? ; o N
.O X
?
? "
? p O?
?
U 4 0. ? ?
U U ° 4)

«
0
F
C
R
C
a

a