20141149 Ver 2_Year 3 Monitoring Report 2020_20201016

ID#* 20141149 Version* 2
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 10/19/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal - 10/16/2020
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:*
Worth Creech
Project Information
..................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20141149
Existing IDI#
Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Motes Creek
County: Alamance
Document Information
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*2
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: 2015-01696 Motes _2020MY3.pdf 28.72MB
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subnitted...
Signature
Print Name:* worth creech
Signature:*

YEAR 3 (2020)
ANNUAL MONITORING DOCUMENT REPORT
CAPE FEAR 02 UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
MOTES CREEK BANK SITE
Alamance County, North Carolina
PREPARED BY:
RESTORATION SYSTEMS, LLC
1101 HAYNES STREET, SUITE 211
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27604
AND
AXIOM ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
218 SNOW AVENUE
AA RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27603
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
October 2020

Motes Creek Year 3, 2020 Monitoring Summary
General Notes
• No encroachment was identified in Year 3
• No evidence of nuisance animal activity (i.e., beaver, heavy deer browsing, etc.) was observed.
• 09-2020 drone video: https://youtu.be/GjuCRvNDsDo
Streams
• Stream monitoring measurements indicate minimal changes in the cross sections as compared to as -
built data. The channel geometry compares favorably with the proposed conditions outlined in the
Detailed Restoration Plan and as constructed.
• Across the site, all in -stream structures are intact and functioning as designed. No stream areas of
concern were identified during Year 3 (2020) monitoring. Tables for Year 3 data and annual
quantitative assessments are included in Appendix B.
• Two bankfull events were documented during year 3 (2020) for a total of 8 bankfull events during
the monitoring period to -date, with events occurring during each of the 3 monitoring years (Table
10, Appendix D).
• Channel formation was evident in UT 1 in year 3 (2020). The two stream flow gauges and trail
cameras documented 100 and 101 consecutive days of stream flow during year 3 (2020). The
approximate locations of stream flow gauges are depicted on Figure 2 (Appendix A); a table
containing channel formation indicators as well as stream flow gauge data are included in Appendix
D.
Wetlands
• All of the four groundwater gauges were successful in year 3 (2020) (Appendix D).
Vegetation
• Year 3 (2020) stem count measurements were performed on September 15, 2020 and indicate an
average of 731 planted stems per acre (excluding livestakes) across the Site; therefore, the Site is
meeting vegetation success criteria. Additionally, all 17 individual vegetation plots met success
criteria based on planted stems alone. Year 3 (2020) vegetation plot information can be found in
Appendix C.
A summary of Site permitting/monitoring activity, reporting history, and Year 3 (2020) maintenance
activities, including invasive plant species treatment, is provided below.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Summary
Restoration Systems, LLC

Site Permitting/Monitoring Activity and Reporting History
Stream
Vegetation
Wetland
Data Analysis
Completion
Project Millstones
Monitoring
Monitoring
Monitoring (last
Complete
or Delivery
Complete
Complete
download)
MBI & Detailed
--
--
--
April 2016
Restoration Plan
Construction Earthwork
--
--
--
--
Feb 9, 2018
Planting
--
--
--
--
Feb 27, 2017
As -Built
Feb 2018
March 2018
Documentation
Year 1 Monitoring
August 29, 2018
Oct 3, 2018
Oct 15, 2018
Oct 2018
Oct. 2018
Year 2 Monitoring
March 14, 2019
Oct 3, 2019
Oct 3, 2019
Oct 2019
Oct. 2019
Year 3 Monitoring
Feb 12, 2020
Sept 15, 2020
Sept 24, 2020
Oct 2020
Oct 2020
Site Maintenance Report (2020)
Invasive Species Work
Maintenance work
May 6-7, 2020, June 4,23 and Sep 9, 2020
Multiflora Rose, Russian Olive, Honeysuckle,
NA
Privet, Sweetgum, Tree -of -Heaven, Callery
Pear, Japanese Stiltgrass
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Summary
Restoration Systems, LLC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES......................................................... I
1.1 Location and Setting.....................................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives........................................................................................................1
1.3 Project Approach..........................................................................................................................1
2.0 MONITORING PLAN..................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Streams..........................................................................................................................................3
2.1.1 Stream Success Criteria........................................................................................................ 3
2.1.2 Stream Results...................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Vegetation..................................................................................................................................... 5
2.2.1 Vegetation Success Criteria.................................................................................................. 5
2.2.2 Vegetation Results................................................................................................................ 5
2.3 Wetland Hydrology....................................................................................................................... 5
2.3.1 Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria....................................................................................6
2.3.2 Wetland Hydrology Results.................................................................................................. 7
2.4 Biotic Community Changes..........................................................................................................7
3.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................. 8
TABLES
Table 1. Project Goals and Objectives......................................................................................................... I
Table 2. Project Mitigation Types and Units............................................................................................... 2
Table3. Monitoring Schedule......................................................................................................................3
Table 4. Functional Goal/Objectives and Performance Standards...............................................................4
Table 5. Summary of Monitoring Period/Hydrology Success Criteria by Year .......................................... 6
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Appendix B. Stream Data
Tables 6A-6D. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Tables 7A-7H. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cross-section Plots
Substrate Plots
Appendix C. Vegetation Data
Table 8. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Appendix D. Hydrology Data
Table 9. UT1 Channel Evidence
Stream Gauge Graph
Table 10. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 11. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Appendix E. Benthic Data
Results
Field Habitat Forms
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Table of Contents page i
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

1.0 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND, AND ATTRIBUTES
1.1 Location and Setting
Restoration Systems, LLC has established the Motes Creek Bank Site (hereafter referred to as the "Site")
as part of the Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank. The Site is located approximately 8 miles southeast
of Burlington within the 14-digit Cataloging Unit and Targeted Local Watershed 03030002050040 of the
Cape Fear River Basin. The main hydrologic features include Motes Creek, three unnamed tributaries (UT)
to Motes Creek, and adjacent floodplains.
The Site encompasses 19 acres of land located south of Mount Willett Road, approximately 2300 feet east
of the intersection of Mount Willett Road and NC Highway 54. Prior to construction, the Site was
characterized by disturbed forest and agricultural land used for livestock grazing and hay production. Site
streams were accessible by livestock, cleared of forest vegetation, and received nonpoint source inputs
including agricultural chemicals and livestock waste. In addition, Site floodplains were characterized by
0.44 acre of disturbed wetland and 0.70 acre of drained hydric soil.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
Site activities included the restoration and enhancement of Site streams and riparian wetlands. The
following table summarizes the project goals/objectives and proposed functional uplift based on Site
restoration activities and observations of reference areas.
Table 1. Project Goals and Objectives
Project Goal/Objective How Goal/Objective will be Accomplished
Improve Hydrology
Flood lain Connectivity
Reconnect channels with historic floodplains
Flood lain Resistance
Plant woody riparian buffers; increase microtopography
Stream Stability & Sediment Transport
Reconstruct stream channels, sized to convey bankfull discharges and
watershed sediment supplies
Channels constructed or raised to historic floodplain elevations;
Surface and Subsurface Storage and Retention
increased floodplain hydraulic resistance by planting woody vegetation
and increasing microtopography
Im rove Water Quality
Remove Pollutant Sources
Cattle exclusion and/or cessation of agricultural practices
Upland Pollutant Filtration
Plant woody riparian buffers; construct marsh treatment features
intercepting overland flows
Floodplain Biogeochemical Processing
Increase floodplain connectivity; plant woody riparian buffers; increase
microto o a h ; construct marsh treatment areas
Thermal Regulation
Plant woody riparian buffers to provide shade
Restore Habitat
In -channel Habitat
Construct stable channels, geomorphology designed to increase hydraulic
and bedform habitat heterogeneity
Riparian Habitat and Structure
Plant native, woody riparian buffers providing foraging, nesting, and
cover for terrestrialspecies as well as refu is foraquatic species
1.3 Project Approach
Restoration and protection of aquatic resources with a conservation easement will result in net gains in
hydrology, water quality, and habitat functions at the Site and the Cape Fear 02 watershed. Site construction
was completed on December 4, 2017 to February 9, 2018 and Site planting was completed on February 27,
2018. A summary of mitigation activities is summarized as follows and in Table 2.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 1
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Providing 5345 SMUs by the following:
o Restoring approximately 4879 linear feet of perennial stream channels through construction of
stable stream channels in the historic floodplain location and elevation;
o Enhancing (level I) approximately 689 linear feet of stream channel by installing grade control
structures, adjusting channel dimension, and planting of riparian buffers with native woody
vegetation; and
o Enhancing (level II) approximately 397 linear feet of stream channel by fencing livestock from
the 50-foot vegetated buffer, supplemental planting of riparian buffers with native woody
vegetation, and controlling invasive species.
Providing 0.92 WMUs by the following:
• Restoring approximately 0.7 acres of riparian wetlands by reconstructing stream channels
within the historic floodplain, removing livestock and row crop production, rehydrating
floodplain soils, and planting with native woody vegetation; and
• Enhancing approximately 0.44 acres of riparian wetlands by supplemental planting areas
of disturbed forest, or removing livestock and planting with native forest vegetation.
Planting a native woody riparian buffer adjacent to all streams within the Site.
Protecting the Site in perpetuity with conservation easements.
Table 2. Project Mitigation Types and Units
Stream Miti ation Type
Linear Feet
Ratio
Stream Mitigation Units
Restoration
4879-152 = 4727*
1:1
4727
Enhancement LevelI
689
1.5:1
459
Enhancement Level II
397
2.5:1
159
Totals
5965
5345
Wetland Mitigation Type
Acreage
Ratio
Riparian Wetland
Mitigation Units
Riparian Restoration
0.70
1:1
0.70
Riparian Enhancement
0.44
2:1
0.22
Totals
1.14
0.92
* 152 linear feet is non -crediting generating because it is located within three breaks in the easement.
2.0 MONITORING PLAN
Monitoring requirements and success criteria outlined in this plan follow the October 24, 2016 NC
Interagency Review Team Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update.
Monitoring data collected at the Site should include reference photos, plant survival analysis, channel
stability analysis, and biological data.
Wetland hydrology is proposed to be monitored for a period of seven years (years 1-7). Riparian vegetation
and stream morphology is proposed to be monitored for a period of seven years with measurements
completed in years 1-3, year 5, and year 7. Macroinvertebrate sampling will be conducted in year 3, 5, and
7, although there are no performance standards tied to the results. Monitoring reports for years 4 and 6 will
include photo documentation of stream stability and wetland hydrology monitoring data. If monitoring
demonstrates the Site is successful by year 5 and no concerns have been identified, the Sponsor may propose
to terminate monitoring at the Site and forego monitoring requirements for years 6 and 7. Early closure
will only be provided through written approval from the USACE in consultation with the Interagency
Review Team (IRT). Monitoring will be conducted by Axiom Environmental, Inc. Annual monitoring
reports of the data collected will be submitted to the IRT by the Sponsor no later than December 31 of each
monitoring year data is collected. The following table provides a monitoring schedule.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 2
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Table 3. Monitoring Schedule
Resource
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Streams
Wetlands
Vegetation
Macroinvertebrates
Visual Assessment
Report Submittal
2.1 Streams
Ninety-seven permanent, monumented cross -sections were installed at an approximate frequency of one
per 50 bankfull-widths, measured along the thalweg, along every reach where Stream Restoration
mitigation activities were utilized. In general, cross-section locations were selected to equally represent
pool and riffle areas and include areas more likely to exhibit instability. Cross-section locations are detailed
in Figure 2 (Appendix A).
Wolman Pebble Counts shall be conducted annually at a representative subset of cross -sections for the Site,
spaced approximately 1000 linear feet apart, as measured along the thalweg, for longer Stream Restoration
reaches. For shorter Stream Restoration reaches, at a minimum, at least one Wolman Pebble Count shall
be conducted on each channel of at least 500 linear feet in length.
Longitudinal profiles of thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top -of -bank of each Stream Restoration reach
are provided in the Site as -built survey. Additional profile surveys during the Stream Monitoring Period
shall not be required, unless evidence of bed and/or bank instability is observed. In such cases, the USACE,
in consultation with the IRT, shall determine if remedial measures are necessary. If remedial measures are
necessary, remedial monitoring and reporting may include additional longitudinal profiles.
Two stream flow gauges were installed in the lower reaches of UT 1 (Figure 2, Appendix A).
Determinations regarding the occurrence of bankfull events shall be based on the observation of overbank
events utilizing a combination of staff gauges, automated trail cameras, as well as physical evidence of
overbank flooding. Physical indicators, which are easily observable, include floodplain scour, vegetation
flattening, sediment deposition on floodplains and wrack lines consisting of deposited debris associated
with stream discharges. The presence of physical indicators supporting bankfull event determinations shall
be photodocumented. Each bankfull monitoring event may be reported separately to the USACE from
annual monitoring reports.
2.1.1 Stream Success Criteria
Monitoring and success criteria for the Site should relate to project goals and objectives determined by NC
SAM and NC WAM functional assessment methods. From a mitigation perspective, several of the goals
and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated by restoration activities without direct measurement.
Other goals and objectives will be considered successful upon achieving stream, wetland, and/or vegetation
success criteria. The following table summarizes stream success criteria related to goals and objectives.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 3
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Table 4. Functional Goal/Objectives and Performance Standards
Functional Goals/Objectives
Performance Standards and Monitoring
(1) Hydrology
(4)Microtopography
Removal of cattle, and attaining Vegetation Success Criteria
(3) Stream Stability
Cross -sections, monitored annually, will be compared to as-
built measurements to document channel stability and
maintenance of channel geomorphology
(4) Channel Stability
(4) Sediment Transport
(2) Surface Storage and Retention
Four overbank events in separate monitoring years, and
attaining Wetland and Vegetation Success Criteria
(2) Subsurface Storage and Retention
(1) Water Quality
(2) Stream -side Area Vegetation
Attaining Wetland and Vegetation Success Criteria
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
(2) Indicators of Stressors
Removal of cattle, fencing intact, and easement encroachment
avoided.
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
Cross -sections, monitored annually, will be compared to as-
built measurements to document channel stability and
maintenance of channel geomorphology and attaining
Vegetation Success Criteria
(2) Pathogen Change
Removal of cattle, documentation of four overbank events in
separate monitoring years, and attaining Wetland and
Vegetation Success Criteria
(2) Particulate Change
(2) Soluble Change
(2) Physical Change
(1) Habitat
(2) In -stream Habitat
Cross -sections, monitored annually, will be compared to as-
built measurements to document channel stability and
maintenance of channel geomorphology and attaining
Vegetation Success Criteria
(3) Substrate
(3) Stream Stability
(3) In -stream Habitat
(2) Stream -side Habitat
Attaining Vegetation Success Criteria
(2) Physical Structure
Pebble counts documenting coarsening of bed material from
pre-existing conditions of sand and silt to post restoration
conditions of gravel and cobble, and attaining Vegetation
Success Criteria
(2) Landscape Patch Structure
Attaining Vegetation Success Criteria
(2) Vegetative Composition
Stream success will be documented with measurements of stream stability including bank -height -ratio and
entrenchment ratio. Specifically, bank -height -ratios shall not exceed 1.2 in regions of channel altered
through design. In addition, the entrenchment ratio shall be no less than 2.2 within E-type or C-type
channels and no less than 1.4 for B-type channels.
Project channels shall remain stable and all other performance standards shall be met through four separate
bankfull events, occurring in separate years, during the monitoring years 1 through 7.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 4
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Channels with intermittent, or questionable stream discharge (specifically UT 1) have stream flow gauges
installed to document flow in the channel. Automated trail cameras were mounted in conjunction with
stream flow gauges to document flow duration as well. Success of intermittent streams is expected to
include 30 consecutive days of flow, along with more than one indicator of an ordinary high water mark as
outlined in Regulatory Guidance Letter 05-05.
2.1.2 Stream Results
Year 3 (2020) stream measurements were performed on February 10 and 12, 2020. As a whole, monitoring
measurements indicate minimal changes in the cross -sections as compared to as -built data. The channel
geometry compares favorably with the proposed conditions as set forth in the detailed mitigation plan and
as constructed.
Across the site, all in -stream structures are intact and functioning as designed. No stream areas of concern
were identified during year 3 (2020) monitoring. Tables for year 3 (2020) data and annual quantitative
assessments are included in Appendix B.
Two bankfull events were documented during year 3 (2020) for a total of 8 bankfull events during the
monitoring period to -date, with events occurring during each of the 3 monitoring years (Table 10, Appendix
D).
Channel formation was evident in UT 1 in year 3 (2020). The two stream flow gauges and trail cameras
documented 100 and 101 consecutive days of stream flow during year 3 (2020). The approximate locations
of stream flow gauges are depicted on Figure 2 (Appendix A); a table containing channel formation
indicators as well as stream flow gauge data are included in Appendix D.
2.2 Vegetation
After planting was completed 17 vegetation sampling, sample plots (10-meter by 10-meter) were installed
and measured within the Site as per guidelines established in CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation,
Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008). In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species
composition and species density. Visual observations of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous species
will also be documented by photograph.
2.2.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
An average density of 320 planted stems per acre must be surviving in the first three monitoring years.
Subsequently, 290 planted stems per acre must be surviving in year 4, 260 planted stems per acre in year 5,
and 210 planted stems per acre in year 7. In addition, planted vegetation must average 10 feet in height in
each plot at year 7 since this Site is located in the Piedmont. Volunteer stems may be considered on a case -
by -case basis in determining overall vegetation success; however, volunteer stems should be counted
separately from planted stems.
2.2.2 Vegetation Results
Year 3 (2020) stem count measurements were performed on September 15, 2020 and indicate an average
of 731 planted stems per acre (excluding livestakes) across the Site; therefore, the Site is meeting vegetation
success criteria. Additionally, all 17 individual vegetation plots met success criteria based on planted stems
alone. Year 3 (2020) vegetation plot information can be found in Appendix C.
2.3 Wetland Hydrology
Four groundwater monitoring gauges were installed at the Site in locations depicted on Figure 2 (Appendix
A) to take measurements after hydrological modifications were performed. Hydrological sampling will
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 5
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

continue throughout the growing season at intervals necessary to satisfy jurisdictional hydrology success
criteria (USEPA 1990). In addition, rainfall data will be used for comparison of groundwater conditions
with extended drought conditions. Visual observations in addition to automated trail cameras will be
utilized to confirm overbank flooding events.
2.3.1 Wetland Hydrology Success Criteria
Monitoring and success criteria for wetland re-establishment should relate to project goals and objectives.
From a mitigation perspective, several of the goals and objectives are assumed to be functionally elevated
by restoration activities without direct measurement. Other goals and objectives will be considered
successful upon achieving vegetation success criteria. The following summarizes wetland success criteria
related to goals and objectives.
According to the Soil Survey of Alamance County, the growing season occurs from April 17 — October 22.
However, the start date for the growing season is not typical for the Piedmont region; therefore, for purposes
of this project gauge hydrologic success will be determined using data from March 1 - October 22 to more
accurately represent the period of biological activity. For wetland success criteria, March 1 shall be the
earliest a growing season may start. Confirmation of the growing season must be accompanied by evidence
of biological activity (bud burst and soil temperature). The growing season will not be considered to have
started on March 1 if bud burst and soil temperature data do not meet the criteria outlined below.
Based on growing season information outlined in the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers
Wetland Delineation Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (USACE 2012), this will be
confirmed annually by soil temperatures exceeding 41 degrees Fahrenheit at 12 inches depth and/or bud
burst. Bud burst is expected to follow the definition of "above ground growth" as outlined in the regional
supplement (USACE 2012) including the emergence of herbaceous plants from the ground, appearance of
new growth from vegetative crowns, sprouting seeds, green foliage visible between spreading bud scales,
emergence or elongation of leaves of woody plants, and/or emergence of flowers. Bud burst, or "above
ground growth" is expected to be observed on two, or more species of plant to satisfy this criteria.
Photographic evidence of bud burst and field logs of date and temperature will be included in the annual
monitoring reports.
Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for 10 percent of the monitored period
(March 1-October 22), during average climatic conditions. During years with atypical climatic conditions,
groundwater gauges in reference wetlands may be used to ascertain if hydrology data may be modified by
the IRT for that particular year. Reference gauge data is not proposed to alter growing season lengths, or
hydrology success criteria without consent for the IRT.
Table 5. Summary of Monitoring Period/Hydrology Success Criteria by Year
Year
Soil Temperatures/Date Bud
Monitoring Period Used for
10 Percent of
Burst Documented
Determining Success
Monitoring Period
2018 (Year 1)
March 6, 2018
March 6-October 22
23 days
(230 days)
2019 (Year 2)
March 1, 2019
March 1-October 22
24 days
(235 days)
2020 (Year 3)
March 2, 2020*
March 2-October 22
23 days
(234 days)
*Based on documented bud burst and data collected from a soil temperature data logger located on the Site.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 6
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

2.3.2 Wetland Hydrology Results
All of the four groundwater gauges were successful in year 3 (2020) (Appendix D).
2.4 Biotic Community Changes
Macroinvertebrate sampling will be conducted in accordance with the "Qual 4" method described in
Standard Operating Procedures for Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates, Version S. 0
(NCDWR 2016). In addition, sampling will occur during the "index period" referenced in Small Streams
Biocriteria Development (NCDWQ 2009). Results will be presented on a site -by -site basis and will include
a list of taxa collected, an enumeration of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera, and Tricopetera taxa, as well as
Biotic Index values. Post -construction macroinvertebrate sampling occurred during year 3 (2020), in
accordance with the monitoring schedule (Table 3). Samples were collected June 12, 2020 and were sent
to a qualified lab (Pennington and Associates Inc.) for processing; results and habitat data forms are
included in Appendix F.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 7
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

3.0 REFERENCES
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report
Y-87-1. United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Environmental Laboratory. 2012. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation
Manual: Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region (Version 2.0). United States Army Engineer
Research and Development Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.2. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2016. Standard Operating Procedures for
Collection and Analysis of Benthic Macroinvertebrates (Version 5.0). (online). Available:
https://file s.nc.gov/ncdeq/Water%2OQuality/Environmental%2OScience sBAU/NCDWRMacroin
vertebrate- SOP-February%202016_final.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2009. Small Streams Biocriteria Development.
Available: http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document_ library/get file?uuid=2d54ad23-0345-4d6e-82fd-
04005f48eaa7&groupld=3 8364
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP 2009). Cape Fear River Basin Restoration
Priorities 2009 (online). Available:
http://portal.ncdenr.org/c/document—library/get file?uuld=864e82e8-725c-415e-8ed9-
c72dfcb55012&groupld=60329
North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland
Compensatory Mitigation Update.
North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team. (NC SFAT 2015). N.C. Stream Assessment
Method (NC SAM) User Manual. Version 2.1.
North Carolina Wetland Functional Assessment Team. (NC WFAT 2010). N.C. Wetland Assessment
Method (NC WAM) User Manual. Version 4.1.
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 Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh,
North Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). 1960. Soil Survey of Alamance County, North
Carolina. Soil Conservation Service.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report page 8
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Appendix A.
Figures
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

�v
.. o oq�3fn��G�IIIC�Aoo -o �L~9� I
Directions to the Bank from Raleigh: N
From Raleigh travel west on 1-40 for — 22 miles
" \ • �` • j > Take Exit 273A onto NC-54W towards Chapel Hill and follow for — 3.1 miles
! r
Merge onto US-15/501 S toward NC-54 W (Carrboro/Pittsboro) and follow for — 2 miles j
�411 .,ti_� ` > Stay straight onto NC-54 W (Fordham Blvd) and follow for — 16.5 miles
.600 Turn right onto Mt. Willen Road and follow for — 0.5 mile
-The Bank is located south of Mt. Willen Road
_ Latitude: 35.988974' N, Longitude: 79.283907' W
Axiom Environroeniall, mc.
Prepared for:
• /j.
�
• � �� :p _mot' RESTORATION
•� �.. � _ 1' l 1
.,
r iG {
• l � J {
r
AfIR*—�z Project:
MOTES CREEK
i. Fa Enard' 9h _ j •° = ` - MITIGATION BANK
al IT
o�-
54 '� ' �} t_q'\\\+er° n `{r� -¢ - -`�. Alamance County, NC
� �.• ���_ Title:
54 ,• _ Q �--�' SITE LOCATION
Ackards
FAountaln J — 54
Cane Creek
Notes:
linuntairs �. Daxnpahaw 1 f %' 7 Background Imagery Sources
F• ( — r�
.� i S7p J� f •. r. . r� -.Y�, -y (Provided by ESRI Data and
Maps):g; ch '+', I -- 1 V f r—� 6� I �¢ssS 1. Physical Map of the United
f r p 43a States (2009) Created by the
Ca rrb or & I ^~ t ': U.S. Park Service (Upper
�,owt Copyright:© 2014 DeLorme ' , $ / Inset)
2. DeLorme World Basemap
digital mapping (2010, lower
inset)
3. Saxapahaw, NC (1972)
and Mebane, NC (1969) 7.5-
{ f w Minute Topographic
Quadrangles provided by the
l :� `. r �— • ; �, _ 'I f U.S. Geological Survey
Drawn by: KRJ
Date: FEB 2018
��• 4 t,!„' '� p Scale: 1:20000
Project No.: 15-007.01
Legend r' ' -r.�' �� �I� ��' FIGURE
�1 ��
Motes Creek SiteT�
•� '� G I,1
County Lines (Inset)
1� 1
0 0.5 1 2'�
MilesCopyright:©_201-3-National eograp"hic Sgcie'ty, i-cubed

sP - -.,yam} _t ✓
In
f ry
Aram Environroenialr Inc.
Prepared for:
PT
- -
14 � F _fir :' �`'{a:; • • -�„?
i RESTORATION
vow.
i k •Y s 28.. •_ �5.
..' ` • ., _ - ;' S r' - ys.3° Project:
•.�.t•:,77,;.-«� XS.26 13 ..,.Mn,:...N. ..,_,.,.,
yam• .�' ... �. - - - ..n�l�:-='- - --� � 03 •r.,�r��'s �;r.ti...._a_
• . _ xsi • 7
25
�-
X4 _, fNs S2' MOTES CREEK
;•-.s '.;. �.x -4. +S2S MITIGATION
6 XS-24 BANK
07
Y,
12 Alamance Count NC
Title:
3 k
.. r 'c ��1.N .:v' •.k' XS.14 s - CURRENT
-75
CONDITIONS
x 5. PLAN VIEW
.. XS 11 .
:` Drawn by:
X3-9 KRJ
Legend XS xS.B Date:
- � Motes Creek Easement = 19.1 ac
OCT 2020
Stream Restoration = 4727 ft 1 Scale:
Stream Enhancement (Level 1) = 689 ft `= `- r s 1:2500
Stream Enhancement (Level 11) = 397 ft _ ., xS 4 Project No.:
XS-3
15-007.01
Wetland Restoration = 0.70 ac
Wetland Enhancement = 0.44 ac *_
Cross Sections
Xs FIGURE
CVS Plots Meeting Success Criteria During MY-3 (2020)
Groundwater GaugesISO in
, -
A Stream Gauge - .x-_ _ ;,�
�_.
Feet
_:�

Appendix B
Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Tables 6A-61). Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Tables 7A-7H. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cross-section Plots
Substrate Plots
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Table 6A. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Motes Creek
Parameter
USGS Gage Data
Pre -Existing
Condition
Project Reference
Cedarock Park
Project Reference
Causey Farm
Design
As -built
Dimension
Min I Max I Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
BF Width (ft)
USGS gage data is
unavailable for this
project
10.3
20.9
14.1
8
12.1
8.1
10.7
11.3
11
10.4
13.8
12.1
9.8
15.7
12.1
Floodprone Width ft
17
100
43
15
25
18
122
140
131
30
150
75
50
BF Cross Sectional Area (112)
9
11.9
10.5
8
14.7
9
11.9
10.5
6.1
16.0
9.4
BF Mean Depth ft
0.4
1.1
0.8
0.8
1
0.8
1.3
1.4
1.4
0.9
1
0.8
0.6
1.0
0.8
BF Max Depth (ft)
0.9
1 1.9
1 1.5
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.9
2
1 2
1
1.4
1.2
0.8
1.7
1 1.2
Width/Depth Ratio
10
52
23
8
15.1
10.1
8
9
9
12
1 16
14
1 12
22
16
Entrenchment Ratio
1.7
8.9
3.1
1.9
2.2
2.1
11
13
12
4.8
11.6
6.1
3.2
5.1
4.1
Bank Height Ratio
1.2
3.5
2
1
1.8
1
1.4
1
1.2
1.1
1.0
Wetted Perimeter(ft)
___
___
___
__=
10.2
16.1
12.5
Hydraulic radius fl
=__
___
___
__=
0.4
1 1.0
0.8
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth 00
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
20
38
22.8
17
36
29.8
22
65
36
22
65
36
Radius of Curvature (ft)
11
27
16.5
9
113
30.6
22
129
36
22
1 129
36
Meander Wavelength ft
44
68.4
10
91
62.9
67
155
103
67
155
103
Meander Width ratio
2.4E
E4.7
2.8
1.5
3.5
2.7
1 2
5
3
2
5
3
Profile
Riffle length (ft)
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
=__
___
__=
10
72
24
Riffle slope (ft/ft)
1.00%
5.76%
3.16%
0.20%
1.20%
0.98%
0.82%
2.14%
1.90%
0.00%
3.11 %
1.45%
Pool length ft
=__
___
__=
5
1 41
20
Pool spacing (ft)
25
69
37.2
2
7.4
4
34
103
49
34
1 103
49
Substrate
d50(mm)
d84(mm)
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length fl
=__
___
___
__=
1640
Channel Length (ft)
___
___
___
__=
1886
SinuosL
1.08
1.2
1.46
1.15
1.15
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
1.06%
2.58%
0.53%
0.68 -
1.19%
0.93%
BF slope ft/ft
=__
___
___
Rosgen Classification
C/F 5
E 4/5
E 4/5
E/C 3/4
E/C 3/4

Table 6B. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Motes Creek - UT 1
Parameter
USGS Gage Data
Pre -Existing
Condition
Project Reference
Cedarock Park
Project Reference
Causey Farm
Design
As -built
Dimension
Min I Max I Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
BF Width (ft)
USGS gage data is
unavailable for this
project
4.6
9.6
7.6
8
12.1
8.1
10.7
11.3
11
7.6
8.8
8.2
8.6
12.3
10.3
Floodprone Width ft
10
50
40
15
25
18
122
140
131
30
90
50
50
BF Cross Sectional Area (112)
5.3
8
14.7
4.8
3.0
8.6
5.3
BF Mean Depth ft
0.3
1.2
0.7
0.8
1
0.8
1.3
1.4
1.4
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.8
0.5
BF Max Depth (ft)
0.7
1 1.6
1 1.3
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.9
2
1 2
0.7
0.9
0.8
0.6
1.3
1 0.8
Width/Depth Ratio
4
32
16
8
15.1
10.1
8
9
9
12
1 16
14
1 13
29
19
Entrenchment Ratio
1.4
11
5.8
1.9
2.2
2.1
11
13
12
4.3
12.9
7.1
4.1
5.8
4.9
Bank Height Ratio
1.3
2.6
2
1
1.8
1
1.4
1
1.2
1.1
1.0
WettedPerimeter(ft)
___
___
___
__=
8.7
12.6
10.5
Hydraulic radius fl
=__
___
___
__=
0.3
1 0.8
0.5
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth 00
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
20
38
22.8
17
36
29.8
16
41
25
16
41
25
Radius of Curvature (ft)
11
27
16.5
9
113
30.6
16
82
25
16
1 82
25
Meander Wavelength ft
44
68.4
10
91
62.9
49
98
70
49
98
70
Meander Width ratio
2.4E
E4.7
2.8
1.5
3.5
2.7
1 2
5
3
2
5
3
Profile
Riffle length (ft)
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
=__
___
__=
4
60
16
Riffle slope (ft/ft)
1.00%
5.76%
3.16%
0.20%
1.20%
0.98%
1.73%
2.59%
2.30%
0.00%
3.89%
1.53%
Pool length ft
=__
___
===
4
30
14
Pool spacing (ft)
25
69
37.2
2
7.4
4
24
66
33
24
66
33
Substrate
d50(mm)
d84(mm)
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length fl
=__
___
___
__=
1204
Channel Length (ft)
___
___
___
__=
1385
SinuosL
1.11
1.2
1.46
1.15
1.15
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
1.72%
2.58%
0.53%
0.68 -
1.19%
1.39%
BF slope ft/ft
=__
___
___
Rosgen Classification
Cg5
E 4/5
E 4/5
E/C 3/4
E/C 3/4

Table 6C. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Motes Creek - UT 2
Parameter
USGS Gage Data
Pre -Existing
Condition
Project Reference
Cedarock Park
Project Reference
Causey Farm
Design
As -built
Dimension
Min I Max I Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
BF Width (ft)
USGS gage data is
unavailable for this
project
5.4
11.5
8.3
8
12.1
8.1
10.7
11.3
11
7.6
11
9.3
7.9
11.8
9.4
Floodprone Width ft
12
75
31
15
25
18
122
140
131
30
150
75
50
BF Cross Sectional Area (112)
4.8
7..6
6.2
8
14.7
4.8
7.6
6.2
2.8
12.2
6.0
BF Mean Depth ft
0.4
0.9
0.8
0.8
1
0.8
1.3
1.4
1.4
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.3
1.0
0.6
BF Max Depth (ft)
0.9
1 1.5
1 1.3
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.9
2
1 2
0.7
1.1
0.9
0.5
1.7
1 1.0
Width/Depth Ratio
6
29
12
8
15.1
10.1
8
9
9
12
1 16
14
1 11
26
15
Entrenchment Ratio
1.4
8.1
3.8
1.9
2.2
2.1
11
13
12
4.3
14.5
8.4
1.8
6.3
5.3
Bank Height Ratio
1.7
2.4
2
1
1.8
1
1.4
1
1.2
1.1
1.0
WettedPerimeter(ft)
___
___
___
__=
8.0
12.5
10.1
Hydraulic radius fl
=__
___
___
__=
0.3
1 1.0
0.6
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth 00
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
20
38
22.8
17
36
29.8
16
52
28
16
52
28
Radius of Curvature (ft)
11
27
16.5
9
113
30.6
16
103
28
16
1 103
28
Meander Wavelength ft
44
68.4
10
91
62.9
49
124
79
49
124
79
Meander Width ratio
2.4E
E4.7
2.8
1.5
3.5
2.7
1 2
5
3
2
5
3
Profile
Riffle length (ft)
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
=__
___
__=
3
80
15
Riffle slope (ft/ft)
1.00%
5.76%
3.16%
0.20%
1.20%
0.98%
1.73%
2.59%
2.02%
0.00%
4.87%
1.40%
Pool length ft
=__
___
__=
8
32
16
Pool spacing (ft)
25
69
37.2
2
7.4
4
24
83
37
24
66
33
Substrate
d50(mm)
d84(mm)
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length fl
=__
___
___
__=
1661
Channel Length (ft)
___
___
___
__=
1910
SinuosL
1.09
1.2
1.46
1.15
1.15
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
1.28 =-
1.54%
2.58%
0.53%
1.08 -
1.44%
1.28%
BF slope ft/ft
=__
___
___
Rosgen Classification
Eg5
E 4/5
E 4/5
E/C 3/4
E/C 3/4

Table 61). Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
Motes Creek - UT 3
Parameter
USGS Gage Data
Pre -Existing
Condition
Project Reference
Cedarock Park
Project Reference
Causey Farm
Design
As -built
Dimension
Min 1VIax I Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
BF Width (ft)
USGS gage data is
unavailable for this
project
4.3
5.3
4.8
8
12.1
8.1
10.7
11.3
11
7.6
8.8
8.2
7.3
9.6
8.4
Floodprone Width ft
50
15
25
18
122
140
131
30
90
50
50
BF Cross Sectional Area (112)
3.9
8
14.7
4.8
1.3
5.0
3.6
BF Mean Depth ft
0.7
0.9
0.8
0.8
1
0.8
1.3
1.4
1.4
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.1
0.6
0.5
BF Max Depth (ft)
1
1 1.3
1 1.2
1.1
1.4
1.4
1.9
2
1 2
0.7
0.9
0.8
0.3
1.1
1 0.8
Width/Depth Ratio
4.8
7.6
6.2
8
15.1
10.1
8
9
9
12
1 16
14
1 13
71
18
Entrenchment Ratio
9.4
11.6
10.5
1.9
2.2
2.1
11
13
12
4.3
12.9
7.1
3.1
6.8
6.0
Bank Height Ratio
1.7
1
1.8
1
1.4
1
1.2
1.1
1.0
WettedPerimeter(ft)
___
___
___
__=
7.6
9.7
8.7
Hydraulic radius ft
=__
___
___
__=
0.1
1 0.6
0.5
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth 00
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
20
38
22.8
17
36
29.8
16
41
25
16
41
25
Radius of Curvature (11)
11
27
16.5
9
113
30.6
16
82
25
16
1 82
25
Meander Wavelength ft
44
68.4
10
91
62.9
49
98
70
49
98
70
Meander Width ratio
2.4E
E4.7
2.8
1.5
3.5
2.7
1 2
5
3
2
5
3
Profile
Riffle length (ft)
No pattern of riffles
and pools due to
straightening activties
=__
___
__=
6
22
13
Riffle slope (ft/ft)
1.00%
5.76%
3.16%
0.20%
1.20%
0.98%
1.73%
2.59%
2.30%
0.23%
4.22%
1.73%
Pool length ft
=__
___
__=
7
18
11
Pool spacing (ft)
25
69
37.2
2
7.4
4
24
66
33
24
66
33
Substrate
d50(mm)
d84(mm)
Additional Reach Parameters
Valley Length ft
=__
___
___
__=
269
Channel Length (ft)
___
___
___
__=
309
SinuosL
1.13
1.2
1.46
1.15
1.15
Water Surface Slope (11/11)
1.49%
2.58%
0.53%
1.44%
1.46%
BF sloe (11/11)
Rosgen Classification
Ego
I
E 4/5
1
1
1 E 4/5
E/C 3/4
E/C 3/4

Table 7A. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek
Parameter
XS 1 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 2 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 3 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 4 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 5 Pool (Motes Creek)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BF Width (ft)
15.5
14.8
15.6
17
15
14
14
15.9
14.5
15.7
14.8
20.7
10.7
11.6
11.2
12.2
14.6
16.9
16.2
16.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
----
----
----
----
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
16
13.1
15.4
15.4
14.4
12.6
12.9
12.9
12.9
11.8
12.9
12.9
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
16
16
16
16
BE Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.1
0.9
1.0
1.0
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.3
1.1
1.4
1.2
1.1
1
1
0.9
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.3
1.1
1.4
1.2
1.1
1
1
0.9
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.3
Width/Depth Ratio
15.0
16.7
15.8
18.8
15.6
15.6
15.2
19.6
16.3
20.9
17.0
33.2
16.13
19.0
17.7
21.0
----
----
----
----
Entrenchment Ratio
3.2
3.4
3.2
2.9
3.3
3.6
3.6
3.1
3.4
3.2
3.4
2.4
4.7
4.3
4.5
4.1
----
----
----
----
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
16.1
15.2
16
17.5
15.5
14.5
14.4
19.6
14.9
16
15.1
21
11.1
11.8
11.5
12.5
15.3
17.7
17
17.7
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.9
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
L7
9
8.4
6.2
Z7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
d84 (mm)
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
Parameter
XS 6 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 7 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS S Pool (Motes Creek)
XS 9 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 10 Riffle (Motes Creek)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
1-"5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
14.2
18.4
16.5
17.9
13.8
14.1
14.1
16.4
11.7
12.8
12
12
11.5
12.2
12.3
13.2
11.4
11.8
11.3
12.3
Floodprone Width (ft)
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
----
----
----
----
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
10.5
10.5
10.5
10.5
11.9
11.9
11.9
11.9
13
13
13
13
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.5
9.3
8.3
9.3
9.3
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.7
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.1
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.8
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.3
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.8
1.7
1.9
1.9
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.1
1.3
1 1.3
Width/Depth Ratio
19.2
32.2
25.9
30.5
16.0
16.7
16.7
22.6
----
----
----
----
13.9
15.7
15.9
18.3
14.0
16.8
13.7
16.3
Entrenchment Ratio
3.5
2.7
3.0
2.8
3.6
3.5
3.5
3.0
----
----
----
----
4.3
4.1
4.1
3.8
4.4
4.2
4.4
4.1
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
14.6
18.7
16.8
18.2
14.4
14.6
14.7
16.9
12.5
13.6
12.7
12.7
11.9
12.6
12.7
13.6
11.8
12.1
11.7
12.7
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4�[J
d84 (mm)
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36

Table 7A continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek
Parameter
XS 11 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 12 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 13 Pool (Motes Creek)
XS 14 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 15 Riffle (Motes Creek)
Dimension
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MYS
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
12.7
11.8
12.9
13.4
11.6
12.8
14.4
12.2
12.1
13.1
10.1
9.5
13.5
13.8
13.0
15.6
11.0
12.0
12.0
11.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BE Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
9.0
7.7
9.0
9.0
6.5
6.5
6.5
6.5
13.0
13.0
13.0
13.0
8.4
7.7
8.1
8.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.1
1.0
1.3
1.4
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.1
0.8
0.8
0.7
1.3
1.9
1.9
2.1
1.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.1
0.8
0.8
0.7
1.3
1.9
1.9
2.5
2.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
Width/DepthRatio
17.9
18.1
18.5
20.0
20.7
25.2
31.9
22.9
----
----
----
----
21.7
24.7
20.9
30.0
19.8
23.6
23.6
21.7
Entrenchment Ratio
3.9
4.2
3.9
3.7
4.3
3.9
3.5
4.1
----
----
----
----
3.7
3.6
3.8
3.2
4.5
4.2
4.2
4.3
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
13.0
12.2
13.2
13.7
11.8
13.0
14.5
12.7
13.2
14.1
14.1
11.0
13.8
14.0
13.2
15.8
11.4
12.2
12.2
11.7
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.5
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.2
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
d84 (mm)
30
34
36
36
30
34
1 36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
301
34
36
1 36
Parameter
XS 16 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 17 Pool (Motes Creek)
XS 18 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 19 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 20 Pool (Motes Creek)
Dimension
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
11.3
11.8
10.5
11.2
8.9
9.1
6.4
6.3
9.8
10.1
10.3
12.0
14.6
17.0
17.1
18.8
11.2
12.0
11.2
18.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.7
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
12.6
12.6
12.6
12.6
13.3
13.3
13.3
13.3
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.0
1.1
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
1.2
1.1
1.2
0.7
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.4
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.6
0.9
0.8
1.1
1.0
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.1
2.1
2.2
2.0
1.4
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.0
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.7
1.7
1.9
1.6
0.9
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.1
1.2
1.1
2.1
2.2
1.8
0.7
Width/Depth Ratio
16.6
18.1
14.3
16.3
----
----
----
----
15.7
16.7
17.4
23.6
16.9
22.9
23.2
28.1
----
----
----
----
Entrenchment Ratio
4.4
4.2
4.8
4.5
----
----
----
----
5.1
5.0
4.9
4.2
3.4
2.9
2.9
2.7
----
----
----
----
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
11.7
12.2
11.1
11.9
9.6
10.2
7.6
7.5
10.2
10.3
10.6
12.3
15.1
17.3
17.4
19.1
12.5
12.9
12.6
18.7
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.9
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
1.1
1.0
1.1
0.7
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
d84(mm)
30
34
36
36
30
1 34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
1 36
36
30
34
36
36

Table 7A continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek
Parameter
XS 21 Pool (Motes Creek)
XS 22 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 23 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 24 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 25 Riffle (Motes Creek)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
1%"5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
9.0
14.5
10.9
15.3
10.0
9.9
9.2
9.3
14.7
16.6
14.6
14.3
10.6
10.2
9.9
9.3
12.0
11.1
10.1
9.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
11.4
11.2
11.2
11.2
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
12.6
12.6
12.6
12.6
7.1
7.1
7.1
7.1
8.6
8.2
8.2
8.2
BE Mean Depth (ft)
1.3
0.8
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.9
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.8
1.7
1.9
1.7
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.4
1.5
1.9
1.7
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.8
1.7
1.9
1.5
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.4
1.5
1.9
1.7
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.6
1.5
Width/Depth Ratio
----
----
----
----
15.2
14.9
12.8
13.1
17.2
21.9
16.9
16.2
15.8
14.7
13.8
12.2
16.7
15.0
12.4
9.9
Entrenchment Ratio
----
----
----
----
5.0
5.1
5.4
5.4
3.4
3.0
3.4
3.5
4.7
4.9
5.1
5.4
4.2
4.5
5.0
5.6
Bank Height Ratio
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
10.7
15.2
12.2
16.2
10.3
10.2
9.6
9.7
15.1
17.0
15.3
15.0
10.9
10.6
10.4
9.8
12.4
11.4
10.8
9.9
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.1
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
d84 (mm)
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
Parameter
XS 26 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 27 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 28 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 29 Pool (Motes Creek)
XS 30 Pool (Motes Creek)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
1-"2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
1-"7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
10.5
11.4
10.2
10.6
12.2
13.4
11.5
9.5
15.7
15.6
15.5
14.2
10.2
10.2
9.4
11.4
13.5
13.6
12.6
15.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
9.8
9.8
9.8
9.8
13.4
13.4
13.4
13.4
11.7
11.7
11.7
11.7
15.8
15.3
15.2
15.2
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.0
BE Max Depth (ft)
0.9
0.9
1.3
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
Low Bank Height (ft)
0.9
1 0.9
1.3
1.2
1
1.4
1 1.4
1.3
1.7
1
1
1.5
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.8
1.9
1.9
1 1.8
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
Width/Depth Ratio
15.3
18.1
14.5
15.6
15.2
18.3
13.5
9.2
18.4
1 18.2
17.9
15.0
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
I ----
Entrenchment Ratio
4.8
4.4
4.9
4.7
4.1
3.7
4.3
5.3
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.5
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
10.8
11.6
10.6
10.9
12.6
14.0
12.2
10.5
16.1
16.0
15.8
14.8
11.2
11.3
10.5
12.4
14.4
14.5
13.5
16.0
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.0
1.1
0.9
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.2
1 7.7
9
8.4
1 6.2
1-7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
d84 (mm)
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
34
36
36
30
1 34
36
36

Table 7A continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek
Parameter
XS 31 Riffle (Motes Creek)
XS 32 Riffle (Motes Creek)
Dimension
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
12.4
12.4
11.8
11.7
12.0
11.4
11.6
12.8
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BE Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
12.4
11.1
11.1
11.1
10.2
8.5
9.4
9.4
BE Mean Depth (fl)
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.7
BE Max Depth (fl)
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.2
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.2
Width/DepthRatio
12.4
13.9
12.5
12.3
14.1
15.3
14.3
17.4
Entrenchment Ratio
4.0
4.0
4.2
4.3
4.2
4.4
4.3
3.9
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
13.2
13.1
12.3
12.4
12.4
11.9
12.0
13.2
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
6.2
7.7
9
8.4
d84 (mm)I
30
1 34
1 36
1 36
1
1
1 30
1 34
1 36
1 36
Table 7B. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek
Parameter
MY-00 (2018)
MY-01 (2018)
MY-02 (2019)
MY-03 (2020)
MY-05 (2022)
MY-07 (2024)
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
IN tin
IN tax
Pled
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
22
65
36
Profile surveys during the stream monitoring period are not required, unless evidence of bed and/or bank
Profile
is observed and the data is requested by the IRT.
Radius of Curvature (ft)
22
129
36
Meander Wavelength (fit)
67
1��
103
Meander Width Ratio
2
-
3
Profile
Riffle Length (fl)
10
72
24
Riffle Slope (ft/11)
0.00%
3.11 %
1.45%
Pool Length (fl)
5
41
20
Pool Spacing (fl)
34
103
49
Additonal Reach Parameters
Valley Length (fl)
Channel Length (fl)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (fl/ft)
BE Slope (ft/fl)
Rosgen Classification
1,640
1,886
1.15
0.0093
------
C/E 3/4

Table 7C. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek - ITT 1
Parameter
XS 1 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 2 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 3 Pool (UT 1)
XS 4 Pool (UT 1)
XS 5 Riffle (UT 1)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
9.2
9.1
10.0
8.7
9.5
11.2
10.8
12.8
11.5
13.4
13.9
15.0
10.0
10.3
9.6
9.9
12.3
12.7
12.7
14.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.8
3.7
3.8
3.8
8.2
8.2
8.0
8.0
9.5
9.2
9.2
9.2
7.3
6.9
6.9
6.9
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
BE Max Depth (ft)
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.6
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
Width/Depth Ratio
21.2
20.7
25.0
18.9
23.8
33.9
30.7
43.1
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
20.7
23.4
23.4
28.8
Entrenchment Ratio
5.4
5.5
5.0
5.7
5.3
4.5
4.6
3.9
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
4.1
3.9
3.9
3.5
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.0
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.6
9.2
10.2
9.0
9.6
11.2
10.8
13.0
12.1
13.8
13.8
15.6
10.7
10.9
10.3
10.6
12.6
12.9
13.0
14.4
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.1
1 7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
d84 (mm)
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
Parameter
XS 6 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 7 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 8 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 9 Pool (UT 1)
XS 10 Riffle (UT 1)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
1-"3
1-"5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
9.5
12.2
9.9
10.7
10.6
9.2
8.8
12.5
10.2
9.5
8.8
9.5
10.1
10.6
10.2
9.8
10.3
10.2
9.2
12.0
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.1
3.2
3.4
3.4
5.9
4.2
4.2
4.2
8.7
8.7
8.7
8.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
1 0.5
0.3
0.4
0.3
1 0.6
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.1
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.6
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.7
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.0
1 0.9
1.0
1.1
0.8
1 0.5
0.7
0.6
1
1.0
1 0.7
0.7
0.8
1.5
1.5
1 1.6
1.7
1
0.6
0.6
1 0.6
1 0.6
Width/Depth Ratio
15.3
25.2
16.6
19.4
22.0
26.5
22.8
46.0
17.6
21.5
1 18.4
1 21.5
1
----
----
----
----
28.7
28.1
22.9
38.9
Entrenchment Ratio
5.3
4.1
5.1
4.7
4.7
5.4
5.7
4.0
4.9
5.3
5.7
5.3
----
----
----
----
4.9
4.9
5.4
4.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.9
12.4
10.2
11.1
10.9
9.3
8.9
12.6
10.4
9.6
9.0
9.7
10.7
11.2
10.8
10.5
10.5
10.3
9.3
12.1
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.1
1 7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
69
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
d84 (mm)
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
-
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
11
38
39.0
41
44

Table 7C continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek - UT 1
Parameter
XS 11 Pool (UT 1)
XS 12 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 13 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 14 Pool (UT 1)
XS 15 Riffle (UT 1)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
8.4
8.4
6.9
6.7
10.4
11.4
11.3
12.1
9.6
10.0
11.1
14.7
10.2
9.6
10.4
10.5
11.0
11.9
9.6
10.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BE Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.4
4.5
4.5
4.5
5.4
5.3
5.4
5.4
8.8
7.9
7.9
7.9
7.3
4.9
4.9
4.9
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.4
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.5
1.0
0.7
0.7
0.8
Width/Depth Ratio
----
----
----
----
20.0
28.9
28.4
32.5
17.1
18.9
22.81
40.0
----
----
----
----
16.6
28.9
18.8
24.2
Entrenchment Ratio
----
----
----
----
4.8
4.4
4.4
4.1
5.2
5.0
4.5
3.4
----
----
----
----
4.5
4.2
5.2
4.6
Bank Height Ratio
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
8.9
8.8
7.4
7.4
10.7
11.5
11.5
12.2
9.9
10.4
11.3
15.0
10.8
10.2
11.0
11.2
11.3
12.0
9.8
11.1
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.4
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
d84 (mm)
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
1 39.0
41
44
Parameter
XS 16 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 17 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 18 Pool (UT 1)
XS 19 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 20 Riffle (UT 1)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
9.2
10.6
9.9
9.7
9.0
9.4
9.3
12.4
8.6
9.3
9.1
10.9
12.2
11.7
10.1
9.5
11.0
11.6
10.7
10.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
4.4
3.2
3.2
3.2
6.5
5.9
6.5
6.5
6.2
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
BE Max Depth (ft)
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.7
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
1.1
Low Bank Height (ft)
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.7
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
1.1
Width/Depth Ratio
17.6
23.4
20.4
19.6
18.4
27.6
27.0
48.1
----
----
----
----
24.0
27.4
20.4
18.1
23.3
25.9
22.0
22.8
Entrenchment Ratio
5.4
4.7
5.1
5.2
5.6
5.3
5.4
4.0
----
----
----
----
4.1
4.3
5.0
5.3
4.5
4.3
4.7
4.6
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.5
10.8
10.2
9.9
9.4
9.7
9.5
12.5
9.1
9.6
9.5
11.3
12.5
11.8
10.4
9.7
11.2
11.7
10.9
11.4
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.1
7.3
1 6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
d84 (mm)
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44

Table 7C continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek- UT 1
Parameter
XS 21 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 22 Pool (UT 1)
XS 23 Riffle (UT 1)
XS 24 Pool (UT 1)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BF Width (a)
8.6
12.0
8.0
7.3
7.3
8.8
7.5
6.9
10.4
11.4
11.2
14.0
12.5
12.7
16.7
16.5
Floodprone Width (a)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
9.2
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.6
7.7
7.7
7.7
18.1
16.4
16.4
16.4
BF Mean Depth (ft)
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
1.3
0.9
1.1
1.2
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.5
1.4
1.3
1.0
1.0
BF Max Depth (ft)
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.8
11
1 1.8
1.5
1.6
1 1.7
1
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.2
1
1 2.5
1 2.1
2.1
2.1
Low Bank Height (ft)
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.8
1.8
1.5
1.6
1.9
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.2
2.5
2.1
2.0
2.0
Width/DepthRatio
24.7
48.0
21.3
17.8
----
----
----
----
12.6
16.9
16.3
28.0
----
----
----
----
Entrenchment Ratio
5.8
4.2
6.3
6.8
----
----
----
----
4.8
4.4
4.5
3.6
----
----
----
----
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
WettedPerimeter (ft)
8.7
12.0
8.1
7.5
9.3
9.6
8.7
8.3
10.8
13.9
11.5
14.5
14.1
13.9
17.8
17.7
Hydraulic Radius (a)
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
1.0
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.5
1.3
1.2
0.9
0.9
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
6.1
7.3
6.6
6.9
d84 (mm)
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
38
39.0
41
44
Table 7D. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek- UT 1
Parameter
MY-00 (2018)
MY-01 (2018)
MY-02 (2019)
MY-03 (2020)
MY-05 (2022)
MY-07 (2024)
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
16
41
25
Profile surveys during the stream monitoring period are not required, unless evidence of bed and/or bank
instability is observed and the data is requested by the IRT.
Radius of Curvature (a)
16
82
25
Meander Wavelength (ft)
49
98
70
Meander Width Ratio
2
5
3
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
4
60
16
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.00 %
3.89 %
1.53
Pool Length (ft)
4
30
14
Pool Spacing (a)
24
66
33
Additonal Reach Parameters
Valley Length (ft)
1,204
Channel Length (ft)
Sinuosity
1,385
1.15
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
0.0129
BF Slope (ft/ft)
------
Rosgen Classification
C/E 3/4

Table 7E. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek - UT 2
Parameter
XS 1 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 2 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 3 Pool (UT 2)
XS 4 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 5 Pool (UT 2)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
11.8
11.1
11.3
10.4
11.6
11.2
12.4
15.3
8.4
11.0
10.3
10.7
9.4
11.2
10.6
10.8
9.2
8.9
8.9
8.7
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
12.2
9.3
9.3
9.3
11.4
7.7
10.9
10.9
7.2
7.1
7.2
7.2
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
8.4
8.4
8.4
8.4
BE Mean Depth (ft)
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.9
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.9
0.9
1.0
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.7
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.7
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.6
1 1.1
1 1.1
1.4
1
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
Width/Depth Ratio
11.4
13.2
13.7
11.6
11.8
16.3
14.1
21.5
----
----
----
----
13.4
19.0
17.1017.7
----
----
----
----
Entrenchment Ratio
4.2
4.5
4.4
4.8
4.3
4.5
4.0
3.3
----
----
----
----
5.3
4.5
4.6
----
----
----
----
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.8
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
12.5
11.5
11.7
10.9
12.2
11.7
12.9
15.7
9.1
11.6
10.9
11.4
9.8
11.6
111.1
10.0
9.7
9.7
9.6
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.0
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.9
Substrate
d50 (mm)
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
d84 (mm)
36
33
34
24
36
33
1 34
1 24
1
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
Parameter
XS 6 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 7 Riffle (UT 2)
XS S Riffle (UT 2)
XS 9 Pool (UT 2)
XS 10 Riffle (UT 2)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
NW
NW
MY5
MY7
MY 0
NW
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
NW
NW
NW
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
10.9
11.8
11.8
11.3
10.3
10.4
10.3
11.6
8.9
10.9
9.8
13.4
10.5
11.0
9.9
10.5
9.4
9.6
9.5
12.1
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
9.1
7.8
7.8
7.8
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.9
7.0
5.7
5.7
5.7
9.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
7.1
6.6
6.6
6.6
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
1 0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.5
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.3
1.1
1.0
1.1
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.8
1.2
0.9
0.8
0.9
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.1
Low Bank Height (it)
1.3
1 1.1
1.0
1 1.1
0.8
1 0.8
0.9
1 0.8
1.2
0.9
0.8
0.9
1.9
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.1
Width/Depth Ratio
13.1
17.9
17.9
16.4
18.0
18.3
18.0
22.81
1
11.3
1 20.8
16.8
31.5
11
----
----
----
----
12.4
14.0
13.7
22.2
Entrenchment Ratio
4.6
4.2
4.2
4.4
4.9
4.8
4.9
4.3
5.6
4.6
5.1
3.7
----
----
----
----
1
1 5.3
5.2
5.3
4.1
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
11.5
12.2
12.2
11.6
10.7
10.7
10.5
11.8
9.5
11.2
10.0
13.6
11.7
11.9
10.9
11.4
10.1
9.9
9.9
12.5
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.4
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
Substrate
d50 (mm)
7.8
1 7.3
1 8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
d84 (.)1
36
1 33
1 34
i 24
36
33
1 34
1 24
36
1 33
1 34
1 24
11
36
33
34
24
36
33
134
24

Table 7E continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek - UT 2
Parameter
XS 11 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 12 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 13 Pool (UT 2)
XS 14 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 15 Riffle (UT 2)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
1-"5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MY
MY2
N1Y3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
11.5
12.2
11.8
11.0
9.9
10.3
11.7
11.1
14.7
11.6
11.6
12.5
9.3
9.4
9.3
10.6
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
Floodprone Width (1t)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BE Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
10.0
8.7
8.7
8.7
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
11.2
7.9
7.9
7.9
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.5
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
BE Mean Depth (a)
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
BE Max Depth (a)
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.2
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.3
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.3
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.3
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
Width/DepthRatio
13.2
17.1
16.0
13.9
20.0
21.7
27.9
25.1
----
I ----
----
----
19.2
19.6
19.2
25.0
19.3
19.8
20.3
20.8
Entrenchment Ratio
4.3
4.1
4.2
4.5
5.1
4.9
4.3
4.5
----
----
----
----
5.4
5.3
5.4
4.7
6.2
6.1
6.0
6.0
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
12.0
12.6
12.2
11.4
10.3
10.5
11.9
11.2
15.1
12.0
12.0
12.9
9.5
9.7
9.6
10.8
8.4
8.4
8.5
8.6
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
Substrate
d50 (mm)
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
1
6.7
d84 (mm)
36
33
34
24
36
33
1 34
24
36
33
34
24
36
1 33
34
24
36
33
34
24
Parameter
XS 16 Pool (UT 2)
XS 17 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 18 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 19 Pool (UT 2)
XS 20 Riffle (UT 2)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
Nf 7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
A"2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
9.1
9.1
9.2
9.2
9.2
10.4
10.2
12.3
10.0
11.6
9.4
10.1
11.3
11.7
11.4
10.2
8.5
11.9
9.0
11.9
Floodprone Width (ft)
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
4.9
4.5
4.5
4.5
6.1
6.1
6.1
6.1
10.2
9.7
9.7
9.7
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.4
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.3
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.0
1.0
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.1
0.9
1.0
0.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.0
1.0
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.1
0.9
1.0
0.9
Width/Depth Ratio
----
----
----
----
17.3
24.0
23.1
33.6
16.4
22.1
14.5
16.7
----
----
----
----
14.7
28.9
16.5
28.9
Entrenchment Ratio
----
----
----
----
5.4
4.8
4.9
4.1
5.0
4.3
5.3
5.0
----
----
----
----
5.9
4.2
5.6
4.2
Bank Height Ratio
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.6
9.6
9.8
9.7
9.5
10.6
10.4
12.5
10.4
11.8
10.4
10.7
11.9
11.6
12.1
10.9
9.0
12.1
9.2
12.1
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.8
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.9
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.4
Substrate
d50 (mm)
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
d84 (mm)
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
1 33
1 34
24

Table 7E continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek -ITT 2
Parameter
XS 21 Pool (UT 2)
XS 22 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 23 Pool (UT 2)
XS 24 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 25 Riffle (UT 2)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
8.8
9.4
10.1
11.2
7.9
8.0
7.7
8.2
9.2
10.8
10.3
11.7
8.6
7.8
8.1
9.7
8.2
12.7
10.5
11.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
10.3
8.9
9.3
9.3
2.8
2.8
2.8
2.8
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.3
3.9
2.6
2.6
2.6
4.6
4.6
4.6
4.6
BE Mean Depth (ft)
1.2
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.4
BE Max Depth (ft)
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
Low Bank Height (ft)
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.9
0.6
1 0.6
1 0.6
0.6
1
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.9
Width/Depth Ratio
----
----
----
----
22.3
22.9
21.2
24.0
----
----
----
----
19.0
23.4
25.2
36.2
14.6
35.1
24.0
28.8
Entrenchment Ratio
----
----
----
----
6.3
6.3
6.5
6.1
----
----
----
----
1
1
1.5
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.6
2.5
1 2.3
2.3
Bank Height Ratio
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
9.9
10.3
11.0
12.1
8.0
8.1
7.8
8.3
9.7
11.2
10.7
12.1
8.8
7.9
8.2
9.8
8.6
12.9
10.8
11.7
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.4
0.4
1 0.4
Substrate
d50 (mm)
7.8
7.3
1 8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
d84 (mm)
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
1 24
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
1 24
36
33
1 34
1 24
Parameter
XS 26 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 27 Pool (UT 2)
XS 28 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 29 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 30 Pool (UT 2)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
NW
NW
MY5
MY7
MY 0
NW
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
NW
NW
MY5
MY7
MY 0
NW
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
8.9
8.0
8.6
8.7
8.2
8.4
8.0
7.5
8.8
8.9
9.5
11.9
10.7
11.7
11.0
9.8
11.8
13.0
11.5
11.5
Floodprone Width (ft)
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
----
----
----
----
50.0
50.0
50.0
50.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
----
----
----
----
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
6.4
5.6
5.8
5.8
6.0
4.7
5.0
5.0
5.1
5.1
5.1
5.1
10.2
10.2
10.2
10.2
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.8
0.9
0.9
BE Max Depth (ft)
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.9
1.8
2.1
1.8
Low Bank Height (ft)
0.5
1 0.6
0.6
1 0.6
1
1.3
1 1.4
1.3
1 1.4
1.1
1.0
0.8
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.7
1.9
1.8
2.1
1.9
WidthMepth Ratio
26.4
21.3
24.7
25.2
----
----
----
----
1
12.9
1 16.9
18.1
28.3
11
22.4
26.8
23.7
18.8
----
----
----
----
Entrenchment Ratio
5.6
63
5.8
5.7
----
----
----
----
5.7
5.6
5.3
4.2
2.8
2.6
1 2.7
3.1
1
1
1 ----
----
----
----
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
Wetted Perimeter (it)
9.0
8 1
8.7
8.8
8.8
8.9
8.5
8.3
9.3
9.2
9.7
12.2
10.9
12.0
11.1
10.1
13.2
14.4
13.1
12.6
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.6
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.5
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.8
Substrate
d50 (mm)
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
d84 (.)
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
341
24

Table 7E continued. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek - UT 2
Parameter
XS 31 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 32 Pool (UT 2)
XS 33 Riffle (UT 2)
XS 34 Pool (UT 2)
XS 35 Riffle (UT 2)
Dimension
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
MY 0
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY5
MY7
BE Width (ft)
10.5
11.4
11.5
11.3
13.8
15.0
14.6
14.6
11.0
11.2
11.2
11.2
5.3
5.8
5.6
5.9
10.8
11.8
12.1
11.4
Floodprone Width (ft)
19.0
19.0
19.0
19.0
----
----
----
----
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
----
----
----
----
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
BE Cross Sectional Area (ft2)
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
9.5
7.7
7.7
7.7
7.2
6.7
7.2
7.2
9.1
7.4
7.4
7.4
BE Mean Depth (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.1
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.7
1.4
1.2
1.3
1.2
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
BE Max Depth (ft)
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.9
2.8
2.0
2.2
2.3
1.4
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.7
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.1
Low Bank Height (ft)
1.0
0.9
0.9
1.0
2.8
2.0
2.2
2.3
1.4
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.3
1.0
1.1
1.1
Width/DepthRatio
15.3
18.1
18.4
17.7
----
----
----
----
12.7
16.3
16.3
16.3
----
----
----
----
12.8
18.8
19.8
17.6
Entrenchment Ratio
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.7
----
----
----
----
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.7
----
----
----
----
2.8
2.5
2.5
2.6
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
----
----
----
----
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Wetted Perimeter (ft)
10.9
11.7
11.8
11.6
15.3
15.8
15.5
15.7
11.6
11.5
11.5
11.6
7.5
7.6
7.5
7.8
11.2
12.1
12.4
11.7
Hydraulic Radius (ft)
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.7
1.0
0.9
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.6
Substrate
d50 (.)1
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
7.8
7.3
8.2
6.7
d84 (mm)I
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
34
24
36
33
1 34
24
36
33
34
24
Table 7F. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek - UT 2
Parameter
MY-00 (2018)
MY-01 (2018)
MY-02 (2019)
MY-03 (2020)
MY-05 (2022)
MY-07 (2024)
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Pled
Alin
Alax
Pled
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Min
Max
Med
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
16
52
28
Profile surveys during the stream monitoring period are not required, unless evidence of bed and/or bank
instability is observed and the data is requested by the IRT.
Radius of Curvature (ft)
16
103
28
Meander Wavelength (ft)
49
124
79
Meander Width Ratio
2
5
3
Profile
I
Riffle Length (ft)
3
80
15
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0.00%
4.87%
1.40%
Pool Length (11)
8
32
16
Pool Spacing (ft)
24
66
33
Additonal Reach Parameters
Valley Length (ft)
Channel Length (ft)
Sinuosity
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
BE Slope (ft/ft)
Rosgen Classification
1,661
1,910
1.15
1.28
------
C/E 3/4

Table 7G. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary-
Motes Creek - UT 3
..�� .�� • �� �
::
t t
t t
t t
���
t t
t t
t t
��®®®®��
t t
t t
t t
t t
��®®®®��
Parameter
xS 6Riffle (UT 3)
Dimension
MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3
MYS
VIY7
BF Width (it)
9.6
8.7
5.6
10.2
Floodprone Width (it)
30.0
30.0
30.0
30.0
BF Cross Sectional Area (112)
1.3
0.7
1.3
1.3
BF Mean Depth (It)
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
BF Max Depth (It)
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.3
Low Bank Height (It)
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.3
Width/Depth Ratio
70.9
108.1
24.1
80.0
Entrenchment Ratio
3.1
3.4
5.4
2.9
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
Welted Perimeter (it)
9.7
8.7
5.7
10.3
Hydraulic Radius (it)
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
Substrate
d50 (mm)
6.3
9.6
10
6
184 (mm)
32
40
43
34
Table 711. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Motes Creek - UT 3
Parameter
MY 00 (2018)
MY 01 (2018)
MY 02 (2019)
MY
MY 03 (2020)
MY 05 (2022)
MY-07 (2024)
Mi.
Max
Med
Mio
Max
Med
Max
Med
Mi.
Max
Med
Mi.
Max
Med
Mi.
Fjax
Med
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (fi)
16
41
25
Profile surveys during the stream monitoring period are not required, unless evidence ofbed and/or book
instability is observed and the data is requested by the IRT.
Radius ofCurvahue (fi)
16
82
25
Meander Wavelength (it)
49
98
70
Meander Width Ratio
2
5
3
Profile
Rife Length (it)
6
22
13
Rife Slope Ht/ft)
0.23%
4.22%
1.73%
Pool Length(it)
7
18
11
Pool Spacing HI)
24
66
33
Additonal Reach Parameters
Valley Length(it)
Channel Length(it)
Siouosity
Water Smf ce Slope (Tfl)
BF Slope Ht/ft)
Rosgen Classification
269
309
1.15
0.0146
CIE 3/4

t.
a
Stream Type
C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 1, Riffle
95
-----------------------------------------------------
94
m
saoldvll
2 93
_____________________________
___� Flood Prone Area
MY-00 2/22/18
ti
r�
MY-Ol 8/27/18
92
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/10/20
91
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 1, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
93.29
1.6
93.24
3.0
9318
4.3
92.98
5.4
92.51
6.0
92.21
6.9
92.02
7.6
91.97
8.4
91.75
9.3
91.70
10.3
91.62
11.1
91.57
12.4
91.54
13.6
91.56
14.3
91.95
15.0
9213
161
92.52
17.1
92.81
18.3
93.02
19.3
93.20
20.2
93.19
21.6
931
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
93.2
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
15.4
Bflnkfull Width:
17.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
94.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.6
Low Bank Height:
1.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
18.8
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.9
-Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

f.
a
'tia
a d
a
Streflm Type
C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 2, Riffle
95
-----------------------------------------------------
94
Bmkfull
- Flood Pane Area
MY-00 2/22/18
MY-018/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
92
� MY-03 2/10/20
91
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 2, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
93.15
1.5
9314
2.9
92.99
4.2
92.93
5.1
92.71
6.0
92.38
6.8
92.23
7.5
91.93
8.4
91.92
91
91.81
9.9
91.72
10.8
91.56
11.6
91.64
12.4
91.77
13.2
91.90
14.5
92.00
15.2
92.04
15.8
92.17
16.8
92.49
17.8
92.92
19.0
9314
20.5
931
21.8
931
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
93.0
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
12.9
Bflnkfull Width:
15.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
94.5
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.5
Low Bank

a'
.. ( a
a
Y n
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 3, Riffle
95
---------------------------------------------------------
94
m
- - - _ sankfull
2 93
Flood Prone Area
MY-00 2/22/18
ti
r�
MY-Ol 8/27/18
92
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/10/20
91
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 3, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
93.13
1.5
9315
2.6
93.18
3.6
9313
4.2
92.99
5.2
92.70
6.1
92.50
7.1
92.16
8.0
9213
9.2
92.00
10.2
91.99
11.3
91.99
12.3
91.96
13.5
92.02
14.5
92.06
15.4
92.21
16.3
92.57
17.2
92.84
18.5
9318
201
93.28
21.5
93.17
23.2
93.2
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
93.2
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
12.9
Bflnkfull Width:
20.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
94.4
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkiull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
33.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.4
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

�y
a.
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 4, Riffle
95
----------------------------------------------------
94
m
m
Flood Prone Area
_________________________
>
______________
MY-00 2/22/18
ti
W 93
MY-o18/z�n8
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/10/20
92
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 4, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.3
93.45
1.6
93.40
3.7
93.29
4.9
93.23
5.9
92.88
6.6
92.62
7.5
92.46
8.6
92.49
91
92.39
10.0
92.40
11.0
92.37
11.8
92.52
12.6
92.50
13.8
92.86
14.8
93.06
15.8
93.45
16.4
93.66
17.6
93.62
18.9
93.61
19.9
93.57
21.3
93.46
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
93.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.1
Bankfull Width:
12.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
94.3
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
Low Bank Height:
0.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
21.0
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.1
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

i
Stream Type GE
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 5, Pool
95
w
Bmkfull
93
Mr-002/22/is
0
�-ot s/z�ns
tiMY-02
3/5/19
W 92
MY-03 2/10/20
91
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 5, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
94.0
1.5
93.8
2.8
93.9
4.2
941
5.5
93.8
6.7
93.5
7.9
93.3
8.6
93.0
9.5
92.5
10.4
91.9
11.8
91.7
12.7
91.7
13.8
91.8
14.8
92.3
15.7
92.9
16.6
93.4
17.8
93.8
18.8
94.0
20.1
941
21.4
94.1
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
94.0
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
16.0
Bflnkfull Width:
16.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
2.2
Low Bank Height:
2.3
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
-Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 6 Riffle
96
95
_-aaol�,u
--------------------------------
_____________
Flood Pane Area
0 94
z-00 2/22/18
0
z�-ol 8/z�n8
_
w
MY-02 3/5/19
93
� 1Y-03 2/10/20
92
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 6, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
93.74
1.4
93.90
3.0
9410
4.2
9415
5.3
94.01
6.2
93.70
7.3
93.62
8.2
93.53
91
93.55
10.5
93.28
11.4
93.22
12.7
92.99
13.9
92.91
15.4
93.01
16.6
93.35
17.4
93.61
18.4
93.98
19.3
9413
21.0
94.34
22.2
94.31
23.5
94.38
24.8
94.3
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
94.1
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
10.5
Bflnkfull Width:
17.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
95.3
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkiull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
30.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

y
,Y
u..
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 7 Riffle
98
------------------------------------------------------
97 Ih
2 96 ___________ ____________________________
--
- -
Flood Prone Area
hff-002/22/18
MY-018/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
95
� 1Y-03 2/10/20
94
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 7, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
97.02
1.7
96.81
2.7
96.66
3.6
96.48
4.7
96.26
5.8
95.77
6.7
95.50
7.8
95.12
8.6
94.89
9.3
94.69
101
94.50
11.0
94.49
11.8
94.57
12.6
94.55
13.5
94.65
14.5
94.63
15.2
9512
16.0
95.32
17.3
95.58
18.4
95.81
19.5
95.93
20.9
95.8
22.2
95.9
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
95.9
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
11.9
Bflnkfull Width:
16.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
97.3
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkiull:
1.4
Low Bank Height:
1.4
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
22.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.0
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 8, Pool
97
96
-
----------
m
__________________________---------
am�u
MY-oo z/zzns
z 95
0
MY-018/z7/18
O
\
MY-03 3/
ti
W
/
M5/19
Y-2/10/210/20
94
93
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 8, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.1
96.2
1.7
96.1
2.7
96.0
3.8
96.0
4.9
95.8
61
95.5
7.0
95.2
7.7
94.9
8.4
94.7
9.2
94.2
10.3
94.0
11.9
93.9
13.3
94.0
14.4
94.3
14.9
94.6
15.8
951
16.6
95.6
17.5
95.8
18.6
95.9
19.7
96.1
21.5
96.1
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
95.7
BflnkfUll Cross -Sectional Area:
13.0
Bflnkfull Width:
12.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.8
Low Bank Height:
1.9
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
11
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Wank Height Ratio:
1.0

.Ij
I
l
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 9 Riffle
98
__________________-
_-------------------------------
97
aaold;,u
Flood Prone Area
2 96
1Y-002/22/18
z�-ot s/z�ns
ti
[�
MY-02 3/5/19
95
� 1Y-03 2/to/2o
94
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 9, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
96.33
1.6
96.31
2.7
96.33
3.8
96.43
4.6
96.30
5.7
95.96
6.6
95.65
7.6
95.45
8.2
95.21
9.2
9510
101
95.22
10.9
9516
11.7
95.11
12.9
95.26
13.9
95.28
14.7
95.55
15.8
95.86
16.8
96.25
17.7
96.33
18.7
96.29
19.8
96.23
21.4
96.4
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
96.3
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.5
Bflnkfull Width:
12.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
97.4
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkiull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
15.8
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.1
-Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

w'
h
¢.
.yy
'
kF
�
n,..ON
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 10, Riffle
98
__________________-
------------------------------
97
_ _ _ Flood Prone Area
2
MY-00 2/22/18
tiMY-01
8/27/18
W 96
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/10/20
95
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 10, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
96.94
1.5
97.01
2.7
96.95
3.9
96.82
5.0
96.55
5.8
96.22
6.7
95.83
7.7
95.68
8.4
95.50
9.4
95.45
10.2
95.30
11.4
95.34
12.5
95.44
13.3
95.58
14.4
95.99
15.4
96.32
16.4
96.50
17.3
96.57
18.7
96.62
19.6
96.77
20.4
96.84
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
96.6
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.3
Bflnkfull Width:
12.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
97.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.3
Low Bank Height:
1.3
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
16.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.1
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 11, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
98.07
1.3
97.98
2.8
97.88
4.0
97.89
5.0
97.70
6.0
97.31
7.0
97.10
7.9
96.90
8.9
96.74
10.1
96.70
11.2
96.84
12.1
96.90
12.9
97.01
14.0
97.00
15.0
97.00
16.0
97.20
17.0
97.61
18.0
97.77
19.1
97.84
20.2
97.89
21.3
97.86
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
97.8
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.0
Bankfull Width:
13.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
98.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
19.9
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.7
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 11, Riffle
99
___________________ _-------------------------------
98
Flood Prone Area
O
CS
MY-00 2/22/11
tiMY-01
97
8/27/18
W
MY-02 3/5/19
+ MY-03 2/10/20
96
0 10 20
30
Station (feet)

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 12, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.2
98.32
1.9
98.17
3.2
98.26
4.4
98.50
5.2
98.23
6.0
98.07
7.2
97.72
7.8
97.76
8.7
97.55
9.6
97.52
10.4
97.45
11.2
97.42
12.1
97.20
12.8
96.93
13.7
96.70
14.6
97.06
15.2
97.60
16.1
97.76
17.2
97.99
18.2
98.01
19.2
98.16
20.1
98.1
21.2
98.2
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
98.0
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
6.5
Bankfull Width:
12.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
99.4
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.3
Low Bank Height:
1.3
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
23.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.1
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Stream Type I C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 12, Riffle
100
99
----------------------------------------------------
aaoldvu
Flood Prone Area
0
98
-
____________------------------------ - -
MY-00 2/22/11
000-0
tiMY-01
8/27n8
�i
MY-02 3/5/19
97
--4.- MY-03 2/10/20
96
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)

r.
i;
34
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 13, Pool
100
99
w
= ��\ter►
98
----am�u
MY-m 2/22/18
0
97
MY-018/27/18
ti
MY-02 3/5/19
W
MY-03 2/10/20
96
95
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 13, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
El lion
0.0
98.8
1.2
98.8
2.7
98.8
3.6
98.8
51
98.6
6.2
98.4
7.4
98.4
8.2
98.0
9.3
96.4
10.7
96.1
12.5
96.2
13.7
96.4
14.7
96.4
15.6
96.5
16.9
97.7
181
98.1
19.3
98.4
20.5
98.4
21.2
98.5
22.3
98.7
23.9
98.5
25.2
98.67
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
98.0
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
13.0
Bankfull Width:
9.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.9
Low Bank Height:
2.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.4
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
11

-� �,
►� fr
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 14, Riffle
101
100__________________________________________________.
m
saol�u
Flood Prone Area
CS
d
MY-00 2/22/18
______________________________
W 99
MY-018/27/18
i
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/10/20
98
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 14, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.2
99.20
1.3
99.22
2.4
9919
3.4
99.05
4.4
98.93
5.4
98.65
6.4
98.52
7.2
98.24
81
98.26
9.0
98.20
9.6
98.23
10.4
98.32
11.4
98.30
12.2
98.28
13.2
98.36
141
98.44
14.9
98.77
15.8
98.71
16.7
99.07
17.6
99.16
18.5
9914
19.6
99.0
20.7
99.1
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
991
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
81
Bankfull Width:
15.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
100.0
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
Low Bank Height:
0.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
30.0
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.2
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

n
k
r •.
i,
Stream Type
C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 15, Riffle
101
100
saoldvll
Z _
_ _ _ Flood Prone Area
MY-00 2/22/18
ti
MY-o18/z�n8
W 99
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/12/20
98
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 15, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.1
100.25
1.2
99.92
2.4
99.69
3.5
99.55
4.2
99.41
5.0
99.30
5.8
9911
6.7
98.98
7.8
98.80
9.0
98.73
101
98.81
11.4
98.71
12.3
98.83
13.3
98.91
141
99.01
15.0
99.46
15.9
99.63
17.0
99.56
18.0
99.57
19.1
99.67
19.9
99.56
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
99.5
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
61
Bankfull Width:
11.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
100.3
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
21.6
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.3
Bank Height Ratio:
11

y>
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 16, Riffle
102
101
m
Bmkfull
____________ _________________________
_____
___Flood Roue Area
2 100
CS
MY-00 2/22/18
tiMY-01
8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
99
MY-03 2/12/20
98
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 16, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
100.52
1.4
100.57
2.8
100.57
4.1
100.44
4.9
100.36
5.9
100.16
6.5
99.92
7.5
99.85
8.5
99.50
91
99.59
101
99.55
111
99.20
12.0
9918
12.6
98.86
13.4
98.78
14.2
98.91
15.2
99.88
161
100.08
17.3
100.30
18.3
10024
19.6
100.50
20.9
100.5
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
1002
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.7
Bankfull Width:
11.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
101.6
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.4
Low Bank Height:
1.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
16.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.5
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

iw�VxWdia,-s,
r<.
i�
d
Stream Type GE
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 17, Pool
102
101
w
m
------------
� 100
O
MY-00 2/22/18
tiMY-01
8/27/18
W 99
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/12,20
98
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 17, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.1
100.6
1.1
100.8
2.4
100.5
3.3
100.5
4.5
100.4
5.6
100.4
6.4
100.3
7.3
99.9
8.3
991
9.4
98.7
10.5
98.8
11.5
98.9
11.9
99.0
12.8
100.3
13.9
100.5
15.2
100.7
16.1
100.8
16.9
100.8
18.0
100.9
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
100.3
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
6.7
Bflnkfull Width:
6.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.6
Low Bank Height:
1.6
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
11
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

$$y'
hE
5
Stream Type C
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 18, Riffle
102
___________________________________________________________________
m 101
----- Bavkfull
O
__________________________________ __........
______ ����-Flood Rove Area
MY-00 2/22/18
d
MY-01 8/27/18
w 100
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1220
99
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 18, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
100.68
1.1
100.61
2.0
100.72
2.1
100.70
2.8
100.67
3.9
100.62
4.8
100.44
5.5
10025
61
99.91
7.1
99.65
8.3
99.67
91
99.63
101
99.86
10.9
99.89
11.7
10020
12.5
100.35
13.3
100.57
14.5
100.78
15.7
100.81
16.8
100.80
18.2
100.81
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
100.7
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
61
Bankfull Width:
12.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
101.7
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.0
Low Bank Height:
1.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
23.6
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.2
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

..
��
IN �1.
Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 19, Riffle
103
_______________.
_-------------------------------
102
Bavkfull
d
- - - - -
-Flood Rove Area
2 101 N
MY-00 2/22/18
MY-01 8/27/18
ti
r�.
MY-02 3/5/19
100
MY-03 2/1220
99
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 19, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
101.49
1.3
101.46
2.3
101.37
3.6
101.36
4.7
101.18
5.8
101.01
6.9
100.36
7.8
10027
8.9
10023
9.8
10024
10.7
10025
11.8
100.34
12.8
100.30
13.5
10028
15.0
100.34
16.0
100.62
17.0
100.84
17.7
101.02
18.6
101.11
19.7
10127
21.1
101.14
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
101.4
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
12.6
Bflnkfull Width:
18.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
102.5
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
28.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.7
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

;t
1
- Z
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 20, Pool
103
102
w
� 101
-----Bavkfull
MY-00 2/22/18
8/27/18
tiMY-01
W 100
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1220
99
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 20, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
101.6
2.9
101.6
4.3
101.4
5.2
1012
7.5
101.0
9.2
101.1
10.4
100.9
11.2
100.7
11.8
100.7
12.4
100.8
13.1
101.0
14.2
1012
14.9
101.5
16.0
101.7
17.4
102.0
18.5
102.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
102.0
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
13.3
Bflnkfull Width:
18.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.4
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
-Bank Height Ratio:
0.5

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 21, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
102.3
1.3
102.2
2.2
102.2
3.2
102.1
4.4
102.0
5.4
101.8
6.3
100.6
7.6
100.8
8.7
100.8
9.9
100.8
11.0
101.1
11.8
101.2
12.4
101.3
13.3
102.0
14.6
102.2
15.8
102.3
16.7
102.5
17.8
102.7
18.6
102.8
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
102.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
11.2
Bankfull Width:
15.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.7
Low Bank Height:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
0.9
104
103
100
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 21, Pool
wr--ft - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --
10
Station (feet)
MY-00 2/22/18
MY-01 8/27/18
MY-02 3/5/19
--- 4-- MY-03 2/1220
20

al
�.°
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 22, Riffle
104
__________________
_____________________________
w 1O3
-----savkfull
m
--- -- Flood Rove A-
-
�N
MY-00 2/22/18
MY-01 8/27/18
�?
W 102
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-03 2/1220
101
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 22, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.2
102.82
2.0
102.79
2.9
102.79
3.9
102.74
4.7
102.65
5.8
10225
6.5
101.99
7.7
101.78
8.9
101.71
9.6
101.59
10.4
101.58
11.4
101.56
12.4
101.68
13.2
102.18
14.0
102.56
15.5
102.93
16.7
102.89
18.0
102.91
19.0
103.05
19.9
103.05
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
102.6
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
6.6
Bflnkfull Width:
9.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
103.6
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.0
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
13.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.4
Bank Height Ratio:
11

a'
s
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 23 Riffle
106
105 ___________________
______________________________
104
�
- - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -� --------�
----- Bavkfull
��� -Flood Prove Area
41V
ti103
MY-002/22/18
w
MY-01 8/27/18
102
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1220
iol
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 23, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
103.53
1.2
103.59
2.2
103.53
3.1
103.36
4.2
10319
5.0
102.81
5.9
102.11
7.1
101.96
8.5
102.05
9.4
101.78
10.2
101.91
11.0
101.99
11.8
102.13
12.7
102.67
13.7
102.95
14.8
103.04
15.9
10329
16.8
103.41
18.1
103.67
19.3
103.87
20.4
103.79
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
103.5
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
12.6
Bflnkfull Width:
14.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
105.1
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.7
Low Bank Height:
1.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
16.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.5
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 24, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.3
104.2
1.1
104.3
1.2
104.3
2.1
1042
3.2
104.0
41
103.9
4.9
103.8
5.6
103.4
6.5
103.1
7.7
103.1
8.7
102.8
10.0
102.8
11.0
102.8
12.1
102.8
13.1
103.0
13.9
103.8
14.9
1042
16.0
104.3
17.0
104.4
18.0
104.6
18.9
104.6
�� .,
".Y
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 24, Pool
105
v
104
------------------------------------------- ----------------
-----B-kfull
O
MY-00 2/22/18
ti 103 _ MY-018/27/18
W MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1220
102
0 10 20
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
103.8
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
71
Bflnkfull Width:
9.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.0
Low Bank Height:
1.0
Mean Depth at Bflnkt'ull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 25, Riffle
106
105
m
2 104
-- Flood Rove Area
O
MY-0o z/zzns
ti
MY-01 8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
103
MY-03 2/1220
102
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 25, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
104.78
1.3
104.81
2.3
104.97
3.2
105.02
4.0
104.96
4.8
104.38
5.6
104.19
6.4
103.14
7.7
103.12
8.6
102.97
9.7
102.85
10.7
103.01
11.7
10321
12.9
104.04
14.3
104.35
15.5
104.59
16.4
104.58
17.2
104.74
18.2
104.89
19.5
104.95
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
104.3
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.2
Bflnkfull Width:
9.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
105.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.5
Low Bank Height:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
9.9
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 26, Riffle
107
106
m
--- -- Bavkfull
O 1O5 _______ _______________________
____________.
----- Flood Prove Area
MY-00 2/22/18
ti
MY-01 8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
104
� MY-03 2/1220
103
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 26, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
105.50
0.1
105.52
1.0
105.39
1.9
105.37
2.9
105.30
4.0
105.15
4.9
105.04
5.8
104.74
5.9
104.76
7.0
104.54
7.8
10429
9.2
10420
9.3
10420
10.2
10421
11.2
104.05
12.0
103.99
13.1
104.32
13.9
104.74
15.0
10529
15.9
105.45
17.0
105.65
18.3
105.8
19.2
105.7
20.3
105.7
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
105.1
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.2
Bflnkfull Width:
10.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
106.3
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkiull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
15.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.7
-Bank Height Ratio:
11

+i.
}
Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 27, Riffle
109
108
-----B-kfull
d
107
-----Fkwd P--A-
�
MY-00 2/22/18
-------------------
ti 106
---------�
MY-018/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1220
105
104
0
10 20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 27, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.2
106.36
1.4
106.71
2.5
106.55
3.2
106.48
4.2
106.48
4.8
106.13
5.8
104.93
7.0
104.74
8.4
104.76
9.7
105.01
10.7
105.07
11.6
10525
12.7
106.02
13.6
10623
14.8
106.45
15.9
106.53
17.0
106.74
18.0
106.59
19.3
106.58
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
106.3
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.8
Bflnkfull Width:
9.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
107.9
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.6
Low Bank Height:
1.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
9.3
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.2
Wank Height Ratio:
11

F,
ri
Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 28, Riffle
110
109
Y� 108
-----Bavkfull
----- Flood Rove Area
O
MY-00 2/22/18
107
MY-01 8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
106
MY-03 2/1220
105
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 28, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
107.99
1.0
108.01
2.2
107.71
3.1
107.80
3.9
107.56
4.9
10716
5.8
106.30
7.0
105.97
8.0
105.94
9.0
105.97
101
106.12
111
106.31
12.4
106.53
13.8
106.83
14.7
107.07
15.6
10713
16.5
10720
17.5
107.46
18.7
107.76
19.8
107.84
20.8
107.87
21.9
108.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
107.6
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
13.4
Bflnkfull Width:
14.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
1092
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkiull:
1.6
Low Bank Height:
1.6
Mean Depth at Bflnkiull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
15.0
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.5
Wank Height Ratio:
1.0

n,
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 29, Pool
109
108 ON
w
m
---------------
---- - B-kf.0
� 107
MY-002/22/18
O
MY-01 8/21/18
ti
MY-02 3/5/19
W 106
� MY-03 2/1220
105
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 29, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
108.0
1.2
108.0
2.2
107.9
3.3
107.9
4.4
107.7
5.1
1072
6.0
106.1
6.9
105.7
7.7
105.6
8.7
105.7
10.4
105.9
11.6
105.8
12.4
106.3
13.5
107.0
14.4
1071
15.5
107.3
16.5
107.4
17.6
107.4
18.7
107.5
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
107.4
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
11.7
Bflnkfull Width:
11.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.8
Low Bank Height:
1.8
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

.. ` .
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 30, Pool
109
------_____________________________________________
108
-
m
-----B-kf.0
p
MY-00 2/22/18
CS
MY-01 8/27/18
107
MY-02 3/5/19
W
� MY-03 2/1220
106
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 30, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.2
108.6
1.2
108.6
2.3
108.5
3.3
108.3
4.4
108.3
5.5
107.7
6.1
107.3
7.0
106.9
8.0
106.7
8.9
106.7
10.0
106.7
111
106.6
12.2
106.5
13.3
1071
14.2
107.8
15.3
1082
16.2
108.5
17.1
108.4
18.0
108.4
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
108.5
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
15.2
Bflnkfull Width:
15.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
2.0
Low Bank Height:
2.0
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 31, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
109.31
1.2
109.18
2.3
109.16
3.4
108.96
4.5
108.78
5.3
108.57
6.0
108.09
7.0
108.00
7.8
107.63
9.6
107.20
10.6
107.45
11.8
107.35
12.9
107.50
13.8
107.75
14.5
108.36
15.7
108.57
16.4
109.00
17.5
109.20
19.3
109.23
20.3
109.24
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
108.8
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
11.1
Bankfull Width:
11.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
110.4
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
Low Bank Height:
1.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
W / D Ratio:
7.3
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
za
L
Stream Type I C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 31, Riffle
111
110
________________ ------------------------------
m
----- Bavkfull
109
-----FkwdToveArea
0
CS
________ _ ________________________ ______-
MY-002/22/18
tiMY-01
8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
108
0
107
0 10 20
30
Station (feet)

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
Motes, XS - 32, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.2
109.33
1.2
109.30
2.3
109.20
3.3
109.03
4.2
108.88
5.2
108.71
6.1
108.35
7.1
107.88
7.6
107.69
8.9
107.68
9.7
107.84
10.6
107.82
11.6
107.85
12.5
108.03
13.3
108.20
14.2
108.40
15.4
108.56
16.4
108.83
17.4
109.13
18.6
109.30
19.8
109.53
20.6
109.5
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
108.9
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.4
Bankfull Width:
12.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
110.1
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
17.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.9
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Stream Type I C/E
Motes Creek, Motes, XS - 32, Riffle
111
110
--------------------------------------------------
m
----- Bavkfull
- - - - - Flood Pone Area
O 109
_______ _______________________ _________ MY-002/22/18
tiMY-01
8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
108
MY-03 2/12/20
107
0 10 20 30
Station (feet)

Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 1, Riffle
102
________________________________________________________________
101
_
-----sou
- - - - - Flood Prom Area
Oti ______________�
________________________ _______
- ---
M-002/22/18
�
MY-O] 8Y2]/I8
ti
[� 100
MY-023/5/19
t MY 3 2/1=0
99
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 1, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.2
100.62
1.0
100.62
1.9
100.73
2.8
100.79
2.9
100.79
3.9
100.59
4.9
10026
5.9
100.05
6.6
100.19
7.0
99.92
8.1
99.75
9.0
99.86
9.7
99.86
10.3
99.75
10.9
99.82
11.3
99.90
121
10026
13.2
100.52
14.5
100.53
15.5
100.57
16.4
100.69
17.5
100.6
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
100.5
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.0
Bankfull Width:
8.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
1012
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
19.0
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.2

a �g1�iy�{:y�pp
Y'?
"k,y
1
a`4tlpa
a
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 2, Riffle
102
___________________J__________________________________________-
- aa�u
--- -Flood Prone Area
O 101
-1 8Y2'1/I8
ti
W
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-03 2/12Y20
100
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 2, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
100.98
1.0
101.05
1.9
101.09
2.8
101.03
3.7
101.02
4.5
100.86
5.4
100.78
6.5
100.67
7.1
100.51
8.0
100.53
8.6
100.49
9.3
100.65
10.2
100.53
11.0
100.60
11.7
100.65
12.4
100.78
13.3
100.95
14.2
10115
15.2
10115
16.3
101.19
17.0
10123
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
101.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
3.8
Bankfull Width:
12.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
101.7
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
Low Bank Height:
0.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.3
W / D Ratio:
42.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.9
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

i
t..
:r
Stream Type
C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 3, Pool
103
102
m-----a�,u
MY-002Y22/18
MY-01 8Y2]/18
MY-023/5/19
ti 101
W
M-032/12/20
100
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 3, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
102.3
1.1
1022
2.2
102.4
2.9
102.1
4.0
102.1
4.7
101.9
5.4
1012
6.2
100.8
7.4
100.8
9.2
1012
101
101.6
10.7
101.9
11.7
102.112.8
102.1
14.0
102.3
15.2
102.3
16.0
102.3
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
102.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.0
Bankfull Width:
15.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
Low Bank Height:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

a
i
Stream Type GE
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 4, Pool
106
105 -------------------------------
------ -
m
--- sou
2
O
MY-002Y22/H
O
MY I 8Y2'1/18
A
104
MY-023/5/19
W
t MY 3 2/12Y20
103
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 4, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
105.3
1.4
1052
2.7
105.1
3.8
104.8
4.8
104.6
5.5
104.1
6.7
103.6
7.9
103.4
9.1
103.4
10.1
103.7
10.9
1042
11.8
104.8
12.6
105.1
13.6
1052
14.6
105.115.6
105.1
16.5
105.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
105.1
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.2
Bflnkfull Width:
9.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.7
Low Bank Height:
1.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkt'ull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
-Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

n✓
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 5, Riffle
107
106
2
------------------------------------------
----- Flood Prone Area
M-002/22/18
ti---------
W 105
MY-01 8Y2]/I8
MY-02 3/5/19
M
104
-032/12Y20
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 5, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
105.32
1.5
105.33
2.8
10521
4.2
104.96
5.1
104.72
6.3
104.47
7.3
104.47
8.2
104.54
9.2
104.55
10.0
104.42
11.1
104.47
12.2
104.63
13.0
104.36
14.0
104.69
15.0
104.93
16.0
105.19
16.9
10524
17.9
10518
18.8
105.11
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
1052
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
6.9
Bflnkfull Width:
14.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
106.0
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
28.8
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.5
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

�..;
i
{ ,
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 6, Riffle
108
---------------------------------------------------------------
107
- - - - - Flood Prone Area
0 106 ����������� -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n-oo znz ]s
?
MY-01 8Y2]/18
ti
105
MY-03 2/12Y20
104
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 6, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
106.25
1.6
106.39
2.9
10629
3.7
105.99
4.4
105.83
5.4
105.61
6.7
104.97
7.5
10526
8.3
10527
8.8
105.15
9.3
105.16
101
105.36
11.0
105.48
11.9
105.58
12.8
105.99
13.9
106.04
14.7
10619
15.7
10621
17.1
10620
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
106.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.9
Bankfull Width:
10.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
1072
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
19.3
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.7
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

�¢ {
tR
w
�a}h i fin,
a
e A
'g "1
A y�3 4
&(
/ kll�li i
�I�{
/f1
• �, :i
Stream Type
C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 7, Riffle
107
-----------------------------------------------------
m
O 106
---- - Flood Prone Area
MY-002Y22/18
MY-01 8Y2]/18
ti
W
MY 23/5/19
MY 32/12/20
105
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 7, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
106.05
1.2
10620
2.3
10620
3.2
106.18
4.1
106.02
4.9
105.90
5.6
105.90
6.7
105.76
7.6
105.76
8.6
105.58
9.9
105.71
10.7
105.87
11.8
106.08
12.8
10626
13.6
106.42
14.5
106.51
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
1062
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
3.3
Bankfull Width:
11.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
106.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
Low Bank Height:
0.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.3
W / D Ratio:
38.9
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.4
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

yr
Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 8, Riffle
109
-----a�,u
m
--- -Flood Bone Area
2 108
T -0° 2/22/18
ti
W
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-03 2/12Y20
107
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 8, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.1
108.25
1.2
108.18
2.4
108.16
3.5
108.15
4.4
107.97
5.1
107.68
5.9
107.53
6.8
107.45
7.4
107.41
8.2
10723
8.9
10722
9.7
107.31
10.7
10724
11.1
107.45
12.0
107.56
12.6
107.64
13.4
107.85
14.2
107.96
15.1
108.03
16.3
108.01
17.5
108.04
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
107.9
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.2
Bflnkfull Width:
9.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
108.6
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
21.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

> 4
6l�Y
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 9, Pool
109
108 ___________________________________
------ -- low-
-----sou
MY-002Y22/18
MY-O] 8Y2]/18
MY-02 3/5/19
r� 107
W
� MY-03 2/12Y20
106
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 9, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.2
108.4
1.6
108.4
2.7
108.4
3.8
1082
4.7
108.0
5.7
107.7
6.6
107.5
7.5
107.1
8.5
106.7
9.7
106.5
11.0
106.7
11.9
107.0
12.9
107.9
14.0
1082
14.9
1082
15.9
108.3
16.8
1082
17.9
1082
18.6
1082
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
108.1
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.7
Bflnkfull Width:
9.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.7
Low Bank Height:
1.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
TO

Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 10, Riffle
109
sou
- Flood Prone Area
2 108
Maovzvl8
�$
MY I:Y7/18
ti
W
MY-02 /5/19
M -032/ MO
107
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 10, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
108.38
1.1
108.19
2.2
10820
3.0
108.38
3.9
108.18
4.8
108.14
5.3
108.10
6.1
107.87
7.2
107.66
8.4
107.62
9.3
107.70
10.2
107.70
11.2
107.80
12.4
107.94
13.5
108.14
14.4
10828
15.4
10828
16.5
108.38
17.9
108.55
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
1082
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
3.7
Bankfull Width:
10.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
108.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
Low Bank Height:
0.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
29.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Stream Type C7
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 11, Pool
110
109
m
----'sou
O-----------------�
-----------------�-�
�� ����
M-002/22/18
MY I8Y2]/18
ti 108
M-023/5/19
W
M-032Al2/20
107
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 11, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.1
108.8
1.0
108.8
2.1
108.8
3.1
109.0
4.2
108.9
5.0
108.7
5.9
108.4
6.6
107.7
7.7
107.4
8.6
107.4
9.7
107.5
10.8
107.8
11.4
1082
12.2
108.6
131
108.6
13.9
108.7
151
108.6
16.4
108.6
17.5
108.5
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
108.6
BflnkfUll Cross -Sectional Area:
5.2
Bflnkfull Width:
6.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
-Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

/f
:.
y,r
p92� € R
A'
't R1 '1 WOE
is •L..r�' ..i:'w4�� ., ...
'�
Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 12, Riffle
110
________________
----------------------------------------
m 109
_
O
----- Flood Rohe Area
N
MY-002Y22/18
MY-01 82]/18
W 108-023/5/19
MY 32/1220
107
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 12, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.1
109.22
1.1
109.16
2.1
109.09
3.2
10915
4.1
109.01
5.0
108.74
5.9
108.42
6.8
108.36
7.7
10821
8.7
10823
9.5
108.15
10.4
108.15
11.1
108.14
121
108.56
13.1
108.55
14.1
108.74
14.8
108.74
15.9
108.73
16.8
108.83
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
108.8
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.5
Bflnkfull Width:
12.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
109.5
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
32.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.1
Wank Height Ratio:
1.0

„�'
t 6 'mid►aq'�i.,.
.... �,_
y
t
µµ�g
1 4.
,
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 13, Riffle
111
________________.
___________-------------------------------
110
-----a�u
- Flood Prone Area
2
MY-002/22/18
N
MY I 8Y2'1/18
W 109
MY-023/5/19
MY 32/12Y20
108
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 13, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
109.76
0.8
109.68
1.8
109.80
2.8
109.77
3.7
109.78
4.3
109.64
5.2
10926
6.0
10917
6.9
109.19
7.7
109.08
8.6
10917
9.6
109.18
10.6
10920
11.4
10926
12.2
109.61
13.0
109.82
14.5
109.84
15.6
109.87
16.9
109.88
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
109.9
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.4
Bankfull Width:
14.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
110.7
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
40.0
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.4
Bank Height Ratio:
0.9

Stream Type GE
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 14, Pool
111
110
-
Ord -- a�u
O
MY 2/'22/18
MY-01 8Y2]/18
109
MY-02 3/5/19
W
� MY-03 2/12Y10
108
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 14, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.1
110.8
1.3
110.7
2.8
110.7
3.7
110.6
4.7
1102
5.4
109.8
6.7
109.0
8.0
109.0
9.0
109.1
9.9
109.3
10.7
109.6
11.7
110.2
12.6
110.4
12.7
110.4
13.6
110.4
14.6
110.5
15.6
110.6
16.6
110.6
17.9
110.6
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
110.5
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.9
Bflnkfull Width:
10.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.5
Low Bank Height:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bflnkt'ull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

�.._,... ,...,. ,.r,....
1
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 15, Riffle
112
--------------------------------------------------------
111
-- a�u
O
-----Flood Prone Area
MY-002Y22/18
�
MY-01 BY2]/18
W 110
M -02 3/5/19
M-032/12Y20
109
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 15, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
110.58
1.1
110.79
2.2
110.77
3.0
110.67
3.9
11028
4.9
110.38
5.6
11020
6.5
110.06
7.4
110.04
8.1
109.97
8.8
110.01
9.6
110.00
10.3
109.93
11.2
11029
12.2
110.58
13.2
110.78
14.2
110.79
15.3
110.67
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
110.7
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.9
Bankfull Width:
10.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
111.5
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
24.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

AL
d
1
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 16, Riffle
112
------------------------------------------------------.
-- a�u
O 111 ____________
__________________________________ ___
����-Flood Prone Area
MY-002Y22/18
?
MY-O] 8Y2]/18
ti
[�
MY-02 3/5/19
M-032/12/20
110
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 16, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
111.34
1.2
111.14
2.1
111.35
3.2
111.32
4.0
111.06
5.0
110.55
6.0
110.33
6.8
110.31
7.6
110.31
8.6
110.34
9.7
110.42
10.7
110.47
11.7
110.73
12.6
110.88
13.8
111.05
14.9
11123
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
111.0
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.8
Bankfull Width:
9.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
111.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
19.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.1
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

V
h+.s�
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 17, Riffle
113
________________________________________________________________
112
m
-
-- --- -
-----Flood Ron. Area
N
MY 2/'22/18
MY-01 8Y2]/I8
W 111
MY-02 3/5/19
MY 32/12Y20
110
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 17, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.2
111.70
1.4
111.42
2.4
111.42
3.4
111.41
4.4
11122
5.3
110.92
5.8
110.84
7.0
110.83
7.9
111.09
8.8
111.32
9.7
111.32
10.7
111.36
11.7
111.36
12.7
111.36
13.6
111.55
14.9
111.58
15.0
111.58
16.3
111.84
17.4
111.96
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
111.5
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
3.2
Bankfull Width:
12.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
1122
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.3
W / D Ratio:
48.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.0
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Stream Type GE
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 18, Pool
113
_______________________
------
m
-----sou
112
O
M-002/22/18
MY 1817/18
ti
MY-023/5/19
W
� MY-03 2/12Y20
111
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 18, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
112.4
0.1
112.4
1.6
112.5
2.9
112.3
3.6
112.4
4.2
112.1
5.0
111.8
5.5
111.6
6.5
111.5
7.3
111.5
8.4
111.4
9.2
111.3
10.0
111.3
10.6
111.6
11.4
112.1
12.3
112.1
13.3
112.4
14.4
112.4
15.3
112.6
16.2
112.6
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
112.4
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
6.5
Bankfull Width:
10.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 19, Riffle
103
102
----- a�u
- - - - - Flood Prone Area
2 - --
-- --
- M-002Y22/18
MY 1817/18
ti
W 101
MY-023/5/19
MY 32/1=0
100
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 19, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
101.78
1.3
101.71
2.3
101.70
3.6
101.70
4.8
101.54
5.5
101.32
6.4
101.08
7.0
101.01
7.6
100.76
9.9
100.81
10.8
100.75
12.1
100.97
13.0
101.36
14.2
101.57
15.2
101.57
16.3
101.67
17.1
101.70
17.8
101.83
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
101.6
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.0
Bankfull Width:
9.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
102.4
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
18.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

t
i
-
w�
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 20, Riffle
116
115
�
-----sou
- - - - - Flood Prone Area
O114
M-002/22/18
N
MY-018Y2]/18
WM
-02 3/5/19
113
M -03.1.
112
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 20, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
114.04
1.4
113.96
2.6
113.96
3.6
113.96
4.5
113.85
5.2
113.62
5.9
112.93
6.7
112.71
7.6
112.94
8.7
113.02
9.6
113.19
10.8
113.39
11.5
113.70
12.9
113.64
14.0
113.76
15.2
113.83
16.3
113.95
17.3
114.06
18.2
114.09
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
113.9
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.2
Bankfull Width:
10.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
115.0
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
22.9
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 21, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
114.69
1.3
114.58
1.4
114.59
2.4
114.57
3.4
114.53
4.2
114.52
5.0
114.06
6.0
113.97
6.5
113.97
7.6
113.80
8.5
113.49
9.9
113.70
10.9
113.83
11.9
114.25
13.3
114.40
14.5
114.35
15.7
114.32
17.0
114.37
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
114.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
3.0
Bankfull Width:
7.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
115.0
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
17.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
6.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 21, Riffle
116
115
______________________________________________________________
.�
----- a-kfu
______________________ _ _ _ __ -----Flood Prone Area
- - _ _ _
�
114
MY-00 2/22/18
W
MY-01 BY27/18
MY-02 3/5/19
M-032/12Y20
113
0 10 20
Station (feet)

fir-y'
�r
l�
Ltd
1 ;r
�
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 22, Pool
116
115
m
----- sou
0 114
MY-0° vzz ]s
ti
MY I:Y7/18
MY-02 /5/19
W
113
� MY-03 2/12Y20
112
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 22, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.1
115.0
1.3
1152
2.3
115.1
3.6
115.1
4.6
115.0
5.5
114.8
6.1
114.7
6.5
114.0
7.5
113.7
8.6
113.4
10.0
113.0
10.9
1132
11.7
113.3
12.8
114.9
13.8
114.9
15.0
115.1
15.8
115.1
16.7
115.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
114.8
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.1
Bankfull Width:
6.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.7
Low Bank Height:
1.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.2
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
11

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 23, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
117.39
1.2
117.62
2.5
117.61
3.9
117.60
5.0
11720
5.9
116.95
6.8
116.85
7.4
116.61
8.3
116.59
9.3
116.50
101
116.45
10.7
116.56
11.8
116.60
12.6
11717
13.8
117.57
14.9
117.63
16.1
117.62
17.3
117.51
18.3
117.49
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
117.6
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.7
Bflnkfull Width:
14.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
118.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
25.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
,>
�@e�
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 23, Riffle
119
______________`-----________________-------------------------------
118
-- a�u
_______________________ -----Flood Prone Area
MY-002/22/18
ti MY-01 8Y2]/I8
W 117 MP 23/5/19
MY 32/1=0
116
0 10 20
Station (feet)

i
ti-
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 1, XS - 24, Pool
119
m
----'sou
1
IO 11'/
M-002/22/18
M _01 8Y'm
ti
/ MY-023/5/19
w 116
'- 1 � MY-03 2/12Y20
115
0
10 20 30
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 1, XS - 24, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/12/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
118.1
1.2
1182
2.2
1182
3.2
117.9
4.3
117.8
5.1
117.4
6.1
117.0
6.9
116.6
7.9
116.4
9.0
116.1
10.2
116.0
11.6
115.9
12.6
115.9
13.4
1172
14.3
117.6
15.2
117.8
16.2
117.9
17.3
117.9
18.4
117.9
19.3
118.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
1181
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
16.4
Bflnkfull Width:
16.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
2.1
Low Bank Height:
2.0
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

i
1�
IVA
v
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 1, Riffle
95
_________________________________________________________________
94
m
Y� 93
-----Bavkfull
_
O
_____________________________ _______
-----Flood Rove Area
MY-00 2/22/18
ti92'
MY-018/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
91
MY-03 2/1020
90
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 1, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.2
92.76
0.8
92.83
1.9
92.84
2.6
92.76
3.4
92.68
4.2
92.30
51
9210
5.8
91.81
6.5
91.72
7.2
91.63
8.0
91.51
8.8
91.27
9.7
91.20
10.8
91.22
11.4
91.57
12.3
91.97
13.2
92.35
14.0
92.79
14.9
92.88
15.9
92.96
16.8
92.99
17.7
93.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
92.7
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
9.3
Bflnkfull Width:
10.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
94.2
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.5
Low Bank Height:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
11.6
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

v y
Stream Type C
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 2, Riffle
95
__________________________________________________________________.
94
----- Bavkfull
p�
-- Flood Rove Area
2 93
MY-002/22/18
MY-01 8/27/18
ti
r�.
MY-02 3/5/19
92
f MY-03 2/1020
91
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 2, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.2
93.35
1.1
93.26
2.4
93.29
3.5
93.04
4.4
92.86
5.3
92.40
6.2
92.07
6.9
92.04
8.2
91.93
9.4
92.04
10.5
92.09
11.4
92.08
12.5
92.33
13.7
92.87
14.9
93.30
16.2
93.33
17.1
93.29
181
93.30
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
93.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
10.9
Bankfull Width:
15.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
94.7
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.4
Low Bank Height:
1.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
21.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

sis
4 4 %
r
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 3, Pool
94
.�., 93
_____$-kf.11
m
MY-0o z/zzns
�
MY-01 8/27/18
MY-02 3/5/19
ti 92
W
6- MY-03 2/l0/20
91
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 3, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
93.5
1.4
93.4
2.2
93.4
3.4
93.3
4.6
931
5.6
92.9
6.3
92.6
6.8
92.2
8.2
91.8
91
91.8
9.8
921
10.6
92.7
11.6
931
12.8
93.4
13.8
93.5
14.7
93.3
15.5
93.4
16.3
93.3
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
93.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.2
Bankfull Width:
10.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.6
Low Bank Height:
1.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

r
�y
,.
a'
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 4, Riffle
96
95 ---------------------------------------------------------------
----- Bavkfull
d
-- Flood Rove Area
O94
MY-002/22/18
������
d
-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -�
MY-018/27/18
MY-02 3/5/19
w
/
MY-03 2/1020
93
92
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 4, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
94.06
1.2
94.00
2.4
93.91
3.3
93.89
4.3
93.78
5.3
93.51
6.2
93.30
6.8
93.07
7.6
92.84
8.7
92.91
10.1
92.79
111
92.89
11.8
93.20
12.7
93.50
13.7
93.80
14.6
93.88
15.6
93.95
16.4
93.90
17.1
93.88
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
93.9
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
6.6
Bankfull Width:
10.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
95.0
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
17.7
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

"*, w
a
y
2s;sf14y 1-t
7
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 5, Pool
96
95
-----B-kf.11
d
-------------------�
----------
MY-00 2/22/18
O
MY-01 8/27/18
� MY-.2 3/5/19
ti 94
W
6- MY-03 2/1020
93
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 5, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
94.9
1.1
95.0
2.3
94.9
3.3
94.9
41
94.8
4.8
94.4
5.5
94.0
6.6
93.4
81
93.3
9.4
93.3
101
93.6
111
94.4
12.0
94.8
131
95.0
14.0
95.2
15.1
95.2
16.1
95.3
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
94.9
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.4
Bflnkfull Width:
8.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.6
Low Bank Height:
1.6
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

I
a'
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 6, Riffle
97
_______________________________________________________________-
96
m
m
_____________________________
-----B-kfull
0 95
-----Pkwd RuueArea
MY-0o z/zzns
ti
w
MY-01 8/27/18
94
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1020
93
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 6, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
95.36
1.1
95.23
2.4
95.34
3.3
9519
4.1
94.82
51
94.51
7.3
94.44
81
94.25
9.0
94.26
10.2
94.17
11.2
94.33
12.2
94.46
13.3
94.93
14.1
95.28
15.2
95.25
16.2
95.31
17.3
95.40
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
95.2
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.8
Bankfull Width:
11.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
96.3
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
16.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.4
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

w,.
Stream Type C
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 7, Riffle
97
---------------------------------------------------------------
96
m
----- Bavkfull
O
----- Flood Rove Area
MY-002/22/18
CS __________
d
MY-01 8/27/18
w 95
MY-023/5/19
f MY-03 2/1020
94
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 7, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
95.69
1.5
95.62
2.8
95.50
3.9
95.28
4.8
95.04
5.6
94.91
6.5
94.63
7.6
94.54
9.0
94.55
9.9
94.69
10.7
94.74
11.7
94.64
12.5
94.77
13.2
94.96
14.2
95.37
15.2
95.36
16.2
95.33
17.3
95.47
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
95.4
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.9
Bankfull Width:
11.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
96.2
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
22.8
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

r
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 8, Riffle
97
__________________________________________________________________
96
--- -- Bavkfull
__ _ _________
_____________________________ ............
-----Flood Rove Area
_
MY-00 2/22/18
8/27/18
tiMY-01
w 95
MY-023/5/19
MY-03 2/1020
94
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 8, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
95.51
1.0
95.54
1.8
95.55
2.8
95.52
3.6
95.47
4.5
95.39
5.4
95.02
6.4
94.90
7.5
94.74
8.6
94.68
9.5
94.80
10.6
94.97
11.8
94.95
12.7
95.35
13.7
95.66
14.7
95.76
15.7
95.88
16.5
95.79
17.2
95.77
181
95.82
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
95.6
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.7
Bankfull Width:
13.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
96.5
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
Low Bank Height:
0.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
31.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.7
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

=,
Stream Type GE
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 9, Pool
97
96
m
0
MY-00 2/22/18
r �? 95
MY-01 8/27/18
MY-02 3/5/19
W
MY-03 2/1020
94
0
10 20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 9, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.1
96.2
1.0
96.2
2.1
96.1
3.1
96.14.1
96.0
4.7
95.7
5.7
95.0
7.0
94.5
81
94.2
9.3
951
10.3
95.2
11.2
95.8
12.4
96.2
13.6
96.3
14.7
96.4
16.0
96.4
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
96.1
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.3
Bflnkfull Width:
10.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.9
Low Bank Height:
1.9
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Stream Type C
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 10, Riffle
100
----------------------------------------------------------
99
m
����
------------------------�
����-Bavkfull
�
O
-----Flood Rove Area
MY-00 2/22/18
d
MY-01 8/27/18
w 98
MY-023/5/11
f MY-03 2/1020
97
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 10, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
98.66
1.3
98.73
2.6
98.74
3.7
98.57
4.4
9818
5.4
97.96
6.8
97.74
7.5
97.69
8.8
97.60
9.7
97.74
10.8
9812
11.8
98.64
13.2
99.08
14.2
99.07
15.0
9919
15.9
99.21
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
98.7
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
6.6
Bankfull Width:
121
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
99.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
22.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.1
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Ir 4
'u
a ilu jl PA�N'�
Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 11, Riffle
101
---------------------------------------------------------------
100
m
-- Bavkfull
2 99
-----Fkwd P--Area
MY-00 2/22/18
ti
r�.
MY-01 8/27/18
98
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1020
97
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 11, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
99.37
1.2
99.38
2.3
99.35
2.9
99.43
3.5
99.28
4.1
99.06
4.9
98.73
5.8
98.53
6.7
98.40
7.6
98.15
8.8
98.21
9.6
98.30
10.8
98.25
11.6
98.27
12.6
98.63
13.8
9915
14.5
99.42
15.3
99.48
16.2
99.45
17.2
99.40
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
99.3
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
8.7
Bflnkfull Width:
11.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
100.5
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.2
Low Bank Height:
1.3
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
13.9
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.5
Bank Height Ratio:
11

Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 12, Riffle
101
_________________________________________________________________
m
O 100
----- Flood Rove Area
MY-00 2/22/18
tiMY-01
8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-03 2/1020
99
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 12, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
100.38
1.5
10025
2.4
100.16
3.5
100.15
4.4
99.89
5.3
99.75
6.1
99.67
7.0
99.61
8.7
99.46
9.6
99.41
10.8
99.52
12.0
99.67
13.1
99.98
14.0
100.30
14.9
100.31
15.8
100.37
16.7
10026
17.8
100.16
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
1002
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.9
Bankfull Width:
111
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
100.9
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
25.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.5
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

y
n
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 13, Pool
101
______________________________________
w
_
m
-----B-kf.0
100
2
MY-. 2/22/18
CS
MY-01 8/2 .
ti
MY- 3/5/19
W
� MY-03 2/10/20
99
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 13, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
100.8
1.1
100.8
2.2
100.7
3.2
100.4
4.2
100.3
5.0
100.1
5.6
100.0
6.6
99.8
7.7
99.3
91
99.3
10.3
99.4
111
99.8
12.0
1002
12.8
100.5
13.8
100.6
14.6
100.5
15.6
100.7
16.7
100.8
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
100.E
BflnkfUll Cross -Sectional Area:
7.9
Bflnkfull Width:
12.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.3
Low Bank Height:
1.3
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Wank Height Ratio:
1.0

Stream Type
C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 14, Riffle
102
--------------------------------------------------------------
101
m
____________________________
__________ ����-Bavkfull
O
----- Flood Rove Area
�
MY-00 2/22/18
MY-01 8/27/18
W 100
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-03 2/1020
99
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 14, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
-0.3
100.67
1.5
100.78
2.6
100.88
3.8
100.93
4.7
100.56
5.7
100.36
6.5
100.32
7.5
100.30
8.3
100.02
8.9
99.98
9.9
99.95
11.0
100.12
11.7
10013
12.5
100.47
13.7
100.73
14.4
101.01
15.5
101.01
16.9
101.11
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
100.7
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.5
Bflnkfull Width:
10.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
101.5
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.8
Low Bank Height:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
25.0
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.7
Wank Height Ratio:
1.0

e
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 15, Riffle
103
------------------------------------------------------------
102
m
----- Bavkfull
__________
O
__________________________
_ -----Flood Rove Area
d
MY-00 2/22/18
MY-01 8/27/18
W 101
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-03 2/10/20
100
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 15, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
101.93
1.5
101.89
3.8
101.73
4.5
10125
5.3
10125
6.2
10121
7.4
101.13
8.2
101.05
9.0
101.06
9.8
101.19
10.6
10117
11.6
10121
12.4
101.64
13.7
101.71
14.9
101.67
16.2
101.66
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
101.6
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
3.4
Bankfull Width:
8.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
1022
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
Low Bank Height:
0.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
20.8
Entrenchment Ratio:
6.0
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

r;
1
..., _�
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 16, Pool
103
102
-------- ____________________________
-----
--- -- Bavkfull
�
MY-00 2/22/18
MY-01 W27/H
ti 101
MY-02 3/5/19
W
� MY-03 2/1020
100
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 16, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
102.0
1.2
102.0
2.5
102.1
3.5
101.8
4.3
101.5
5.1
101.3
6.0
101.0
7.2
100.6
9.9
100.5
11.1
1012
11.9
101.7
12.9
101.9
14.0
101.9
15.1
102.0
16.2
102.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
101.8
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
7.3
Bflnkfull Width:
9.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
1.3
Low Bank Height:
1.4
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
11

1
L
�
s
d�P
?^
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 2, XS - 17, Riffle
103
-----------------------------------------------------------
m
----- Bavkfull
O 102
----- Flood Prove Area
MY-01
\
8/27/18
MY-01 8/27/18
ti
w \
MY-02 3/5/19
f MY-03 2/1020
101
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 2, XS - 17, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
101.89
1.6
102.13
2.8
102.12
3.5
102.01
4.2
101.69
4.9
101.51
5.6
101.47
6.5
101.46
7.0
10128
8.2
10127
91
101.35
9.7
101.41
10.5
101.62
11.7
101.69
13.0
101.93
14.0
102.04
15.3
101.91
161
101.89
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
102.0
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.5
Bankfull Width:
12.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
102.7
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
33.6
Entrenchment Ratio:
41
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 3, XS - 1, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.1
104.10
1.7
104.08
2.9
103.97
3.4
103.81
4.5
103.46
5.4
103.43
6.2
103.41
7.2
103.51
8.1
103.49
9.2
103.49
10.4
103.92
11.7
104.22
12.5
104.21
13.6
104.16
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
104.1
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.1
Bankfull Width:
10.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
104.8
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
Low Bank Height:
0.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
27.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.7
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
I
w'-T air �j�114
{wr
�:s' j�p�?{+� (l��.Or��e' ,xl.,$v��o��r� a •=aa }br:
3 �� �xa.'a�'a:Oe�d�,�l�►'Nr\�\�'h"iyjl�4.aN"4!4'3Tw 8 l� u; �,:Fjy,'
Stream Type I C/E
Motes Creek, UT 3, XS - 1, Riffle
105
.................-----------------------------
----- B-kfull
0 104
-----Fkwd P--A-
MY-002/22/1
tiMY-01
8/27/18
w
MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1-0
103
0 10 20
Station (feet)

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 3, XS - 2, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Stflt10II
Elevation
0.0
104.46
1.3
104.41
2.8
104.35
4.0
104.34
4.6
104.01
5.8
103.77
6.7
103.70
7.6
103.56
8.8
103.65
9.8
103.75
10.6
103.78
11.7
104.31
12.8
104.57
13.8
104.69
14.6
104.66
15.5
104.69
16.6
104.79
�,,.. .
1r, I
riiJ ylUR _� .S
Streflm Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 3, XS - 2, Riffle
106
-------------------------------------------------------------
m
105
----- Bavkfull
----- Flood Rove Area
Oti __________________________ _____________
� MY-00 2/22/18
N MY-01 8/'m
W 104
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-02 2/10/20
103
0 10 20
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
104.4
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
5.0
Bflnkfull Width:
11.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
105.3
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.9
Low Bank Height:
0.9
Mean Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
26.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 3, XS - 3, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
104.8
1.7
104.8
2.8
104.6
4.2
104.5
5.1
104.5
6.0
1042
6.8
103.9
7.8
103.8
91
104.1
10.0
104.6
10.9
105.0
12.1
1052
13.3
105.3
14.6
105.3
G,
i
y
{g�
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 3, XS - 3, Pool
106
m
105
- Bavkfull
� MY-00 2/22/18
MY-01 8/27/18
ti 104 MY-02 3/5/19
W a- MY-03 2/1020
103
0 10 20
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
104.8
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.0
Bankfull Width:
8.3
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.0
Low Bank Height:
1.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

" `
a
A
' �ry
z
M1
�pM
✓`?v
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 3, XS - 4, Riffle
107
---------------------------------------------------------
----- Bavkfull
O 106
----- Flood Prove Area
MY-00 2/22/18
N
w
t.
MY-01 8/27/18
MY-02 3/5/19
� MY-03 2/10/20
105
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 3, XS - 4, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.4
106.43
1.7
106.43
2.9
106.44
4.0
10625
4.8
106.09
5.7
105.73
7.0
105.93
8.4
105.77
9.3
105.92
10.3
106.02
11.2
106.02
12.2
10622
13.3
106.30
14.5
106.30
15.6
10626
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
106.3
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
31
Bankfull Width:
12.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
106.9
Flood Prone Width:
50.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
Low Bank Height:
0.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.3
W / D Ratio:
46.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.2
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

"7:
E
is
6..
�'x
St,r fUb i a'.01f
Stream Type
GE
Motes Creek, UT 3, XS - 5, Pool
107
106
-----B-kfull
MY-00 2/22/18
O
MY-01 8/27/18
MY-02 3/5/19
ti 105
W
� MY-03 2/1020
104
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 3, XS - 5, Pool
Feature
Pool
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
106.6
1.1
106.5
2.2
106.5
3.1
106.5
3.6
106.4
4.3
106.0
5.4
105.4
6.7
1051
8.0
105.1
9.2
105.5
10.2
106.0
11.3
1062
12.5
1062
14.0
106.1
15.0
106.1
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
1062
Bankfull Cross -Sectional Area:
4.9
Bankfull Width:
10.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
NA
Flood Prone Width:
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
Low Bank Height:
1.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
NA
Entrenchment Ratio:
NA
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0

Site
Motes Creek
Watershed:
Cape Fear, 0303002
XS ID
UT 3, XS - 6, Riffle
Feature
Riffle
Date:
2/10/2020
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Radecki
Station
Elevation
0.0
106.24
1.6
10625
2.6
106.30
3.9
106.13
4.8
105.87
5.7
105.75
7.2
105.96
7.9
105.83
8.8
105.82
9.8
105.90
10.8
106.10
11.4
105.97
12.4
105.97
13.5
105.89
14.4
106.09
15.7
105.83
SUMMARY DATA
Bflnkfull Elevation:
106.0
Bflnkfull Cross -Sectional Area:
1.3
Bflnkfull Width:
10.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
106.3
Flood Prone Width:
30.0
Max Depth at Bflnkfull:
0.3
Low Bank
-k
ya
r
i�
IV
wa
Stream Type C/E
Motes Creek, UT 3, XS - 6, Riffle
107
_ ---------------------------------------------- ---
-- Bavkfull
----- Flood Rove Area
2 106 _____________-_________________ MY-002/22/18
2
� MY-01 8/27/18
w MY-02 3/5/19
MY-03 2/1020
105
0 10 20
Station (feet)
Height:

Project Name: Motes Creek
Motes Creek Reachwide
All Features
2020
Cumulative Percent
100%
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
Si]VClay
silt/clay
0.062
15
15%
36%
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
44%
90 %
fine sand
0.250
3
3%
48%
80%
Sand
medium sand
0.50
4
4%
48%
70%
coarse sand
1.00
1 5
5%
56%
very coarse sand
2.0
2
2%
60%
50%
very fine gravel
fine gravel
4.0
5.7
10
2
10%
2%
68%
72%
40 %
v 30%
fine gravel
8.0
9
9%
84%
20%
medium gravel
11.3
7
7%
92%
10%
Gravel
medium gravel
course gravel
16.0
22.3
15
5
15%
5%
92%
96%
0%
1u1 o\�
course gravel
32.0
6
6%
96%
Particle Size (mm)
-MYO-2018 -MY1-2018 -MY2-2019 -MY3-2020 -MY4-2021 -MY5-2022
very coarse gravel
45
6
6%
96%
very coarse gravel
64
5
5%
100%
small cobble
90
4
4%
100%
Individual Class Percent
Cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
128
180
3
0
3%
0%
100%
100%
very large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
100%
small boulder
362
0
0%
100%
90%
Boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
512
1024
0
0
0%
0%
100%
100%
80%
70%
a
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
60%
Bedrock bedrock
4096
0
0%
100%
50%
U 40%
TOTAL % of whole count
101
100%
100%
a 30%
�a
Summary Data
20%
D50
9 10%
0%
Particle Size (mm)
OMYO-2018 ■MY1-2018 OMY2-2019 oMY3-2020 ■MY4-2021 ■MY5-2022
8.4
D84 36
D95 76

Project Name: Motes Creek
UT Reachwide
All Features
2020
Cumulative Percent
100%
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
Si]VClay
silt/clay
0.062
15
15%
36%
very fine sand
0.125
5
5%
44%
90%
fine sand
0.250
6
6%
48%
80%
Sand
medium sand
0.50
5
5%
48%
70%
coarse sand
1.00
1 5
5%
56%
o 60%
very coarse sand
2.0
2
2%
60%
50%
very fine gravel
line gravel
4.0
5.7
4
6
4%
6%
68%
72%
40 %
v 30%
fine gravel
8.0
1
1%
84%
20%
medium gravel
11.3
9
9%
92%
10%
Gravel
medium gravel
course gravel
16.0
22.3
4
2
4%
2%
92%
96%
0%
1u1 o\�
course gravel
32.0
8
8%
96%
Particle Size (mm)
-MYO-2018 -MY1-2018 -MY2-2019 -MY3-2020 -MY4-2o21 �MY5-2022
very coarse gravel
45
10
10%
96%
very coarse gravel
64
8
8%
100%
small cobble
90
5
5%
100%
Individual Class Percent
Cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
128
180
1
1
1%
1%
100%
100%
very large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
100%
small boulder
362
0
0%
100%
90%
Boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
512
1024
0
0
0%
0%
100%
100%
80%
70%
a
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
60%
Bedrock bedrock
4096
0
0%
100%
50%
U 40%
TOTAL % of whole count
97
100%
100%
a 30%
Summary
�a
Data
20%
D50 9
9 10%
0%
Particle Size (mm)
OMYO-2018 ■MY1-2018 OMY2-2019 OMY3-2020 ■MY4-2021 ■MY5-2022
6.
D84 44
D95 74

Project Name: Motes Creek
UT2 Reachwide
All Features
2020
Cumulative Percent
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
Si]VClay
silt/clay
0.062
10
10%
36%
100
very fine sand
0.125
3
3%
44%
90%
fine sand
0.250
7
7%
48%
80%
Sand
medium sand
0.50
7
7%
48%
70%
coarse sand
1.00
1 3
3%
56%
very coarse sand
2.0
4
4%
60%
50%
very fine gravel
fine gravel
4.0
5.7
5
5
5%
5%
68%
72%
40 %
v 30%
fine gravel
8.0
10
10%
84%
20%
FA
medium gravel
11.3
8
8%
92%
10%
Gravel
medium gravel
course gravel
16.0
22.3
10
7
10%
7%
92%
96%
0%
1u1 o\�
course gravel
32.0
7
7%
96%
Particle Size (mm)
-MYO-2018-MY1-2018 _MY2-2019 -MY3-2020 -MY4-2021 -MY5-2022
very coarse gravel
45
8
8%
96%
very coarse gravel
64
2
2%
100%
small cobble
90
0
0%
100%
Individual Class Percent
Cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
128
180
0
0
0%
0%
100%
100%
very large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
100%
small boulder
362
0
0%
100%
90%
Boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
512
1024
0
0
0%
0%
100%
100%
80%
70%
a
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
60%
Bedrock bedrock
4096
0
0%
100%
50%
U 40%
TOTAL % of whole count
96
100%
100%
a 30%
Summary
�a
Data
20%
'9 10%
0%
Particle Size (mm)
OMYO-2018 ■MY1-2018 OMY2-2019 oMY3-2020 ■MY4-2021 ■MY5-2022
D50 6.7
D84 24
D95 40

Project Name: Motes Creek
UT3 Reachwide
All Features
2020
Cumulative Percent
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
Si]VClay
silt/clay
0.062
26
27%
36%
100
90 %
very fine sand
0.125
6
6%
44%
fine sand
0.250
0
0%
48%
80%
:10
Sand
medium sand
0.50
1
1%
48%
70%
coarse sand
1.00
1 0
0%
56%
very coarse sand
2.0
6
6%
60%
50%
very fine gravel
fine gravel
4.0
5.7
4
6
4%
6%
68%
72%
40 %
v 30%
fine gravel
8.0
5
5%
84%
20%
medium gravel
11.3
7
7%
92%
10%
Gravel
medium gravel
course gravel
16.0
22.3
8
7
8%
7%
92%
96%
0%
1u1 o\�
course gravel
32.0
5
5%
96%
Particle Size (mm)
—MYO-2018—MY1-2018 —MY2-2019 —MY3-2020 —MY4-2o21 �MY5-2022
very coarse gravel
45
8
8%
96%
very coarse gravel
64
7
7%
100%
small cobble
90
2
2%
100%
Individual Class Percent
Cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
128
180
0
0
0%
0%
100%
100%
very large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
100%
small boulder
362
0
0%
100%
90%
Boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
512
1024
0
0
0%
0%
100%
100%
80%
70%
a
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
60%
Bedrock bedrock
4096
0
0%
100%
50%
U 40%
TOTAL % of whole count
98
100%
100%
a 30%
20%
Summary Data
D50 6
a
19 10%
D84
34

Appendix C.
Vegetation Data
Table 8. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Table S. Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Project Code 1500701. Project Name: Motes Creek
Current Plot Data (MY3 2020)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
1500701-01-0001
1500701-01-0002
1500701-01-0003
1500701-01-0004
1500701-01-0005
1500701-01-0006
1500701-01-0007
1500701-01-0008
1500701-01-0009
1500701-01-0010
1500701-01-0011
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
3
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
10
10
10
11
11
11
3
3
3
7
7
7
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
Celtis occidentalis
common hackberry
Tree
1
1
1
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
1
1
1
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
2
2
2
6
6
6
2
2
2
11
11
11
12
12
12
4
4
4
1
1
1
4
4
4
11
11
11
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
3
3
5
1
4
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
6
4
4
7
7
7
7
3
3
3
1
1
1
3
3
3
8
8
8
6
6
6
5
5
5
7
7
7
4
4
7
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
6
61
12
15
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
10
1
1
1
1
11
1
31
3
31
21
2
21
2
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
1
1
Quercus
oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
2
2
2
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
21
2
2
2
2
2
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
2
2
2
2
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
31
4
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
21
211
30
21
21
30
16
16
24
221
221
201
201
20
17
17
22
15
15
15
131
13
13
121
121
35
201
201
24
211
211
26
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
51
51
7
3
3
4
5
5
8
4
4
6
4
4
4
4
4
6
4
4
4
5
5
5
4
4
7
8
8
10
6
6
7
849.8
849.8
1214
849.8
849.8
1214
647.51
647.51
971.21890.31
890.31
14571809.41
809.41
809.41
6881
6881
890.31
6071
6071
6071526.11
526.11
526.11485.61
485.61
14161809.41
809.41
971.21849.81
849.81
1052
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
P-all = Planted including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes
T includes natural recruits

Table S. Planted Stems by Plot and Species (continued)
Project Code 1500701. Project Name: Motes Creek
Current Plot Data (MY3 2020)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
1500701-01-0012
1500701-01-0013
1500701-01-0014
1500701-01-0015
1500701-01-0016
1500701-01-0017
MY3(2020)
MY2(2019)
MY1(2018)
MYO(2018)
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
3
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
2
2
2
7
7
7
2
2
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
69
69
69
71
71
71
73
73
73
100
100
100
Celtis occidentalis
common hackberry
Tree
1
1
1
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
6
6
6
11
11
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
2
2
2
5
5
5
1
1
1
2
2
2
63
63
63
63
63
63
68
68
68
63
63
63
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
4
4
11
3
3
8
3
3
7
2
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
4
2
2
3
1
1
4
2
2
2
2
2
2
63
63
75
64
64
69
66
66
75
72
72
72
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
2
2
43
28
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
21
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
7
71
7
15
151
15
141
14
14
36
36
361
37
371
37
391
39
39
35
35
35
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
4
4
4
5
5
8
3
3
3
29
29
41
29
29
31
31
31
36
36
36
36
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
2
Quercus
oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
7
7
7
26
26
26
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
Quercus nigra
water oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
11
12
12
12
121
12
121
13
13
13
11
11
11
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
11
1
1
2
2
2
21
2
2
7
7
7
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
1
5
5
5
10
10
10
14
14
14
13
13
13
1
1
1
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
2
2
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
11
1
1
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
7
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
8
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
6
6
6
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
81
81
171
17
20
141
141
24
141
141
14
32
32
32
241
241
24
3071
307
397
316
316
328
334
334
390
366
366
366
1
1
1
1
1
1
17
17
17
17
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.42
0.42
0.42
0.42
3
3
3
7
7
8
5
5
7
5
5
5
8
8
8
3
3
3
15
15
19
15
15
15
14
14
16
15
15
15
323.7
323.7
323.7
688
688
809.4
566.6
566.6
971.2
566.6
566.6
566.6
1295
1295
1295
971.2
971.2
971.2
730.8
730.8
945.1
752.2
752.2
780.8
795.1
795.1
928.4
871.3
871.3
871.3
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Pnol-S = Planted excluding livestakes
P-all = Planted including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakes
T includes natural recruits

Motes Creek
MY-03 (2020) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken September 2020
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Appendices
Restoration Systems, LLC

Motes Creek
MY-03 (2020) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Continued)
Taken September 2020
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Appendices
Restoration Systems, LLC

Motes Creek
MY-03 (2020) Vegetation Monitoring Photographs (Continued)
Taken September 2020
Plot 16
L
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank
Appendices
Restoration Systems, LLC

Appendix D.
Hydrology Data
Table 9A. UT1 Upstream Channel Evidence
Table 913. UT1 Downstream Channel Evidence
Stream Gauge Graphs
Table 10. Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 11. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Table 9A. UT1 Upstream Channel Evidence
UTl Upstream Channel Evidence
Year 1(2018)
Year 2 (2019)
Year 3 (2020)
Max consecutive days channel flow
75
147
100
Presence of litter and debris(wracking)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away
Yes
Yes
Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment trans ort
Yes
Yes
Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water
Yes
Yes
Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks
Yes
Yes
Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow
Yes
Yes
Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks
Yes
Yes
Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial
vegetation and/or transition to species adapted for flow or
inundation for a long duration, including h dro h tes)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel
braiding) at natural topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or
plant roots stems
Yes
Yes
Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow
No
No
No
Other:
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Motes Creek Stream Flow Gauge UT1 Upstream
Year 3 (2020 Data)
20
18
16
—
14
c
a, 12
cu
v 10
m
v 8
0 6
4
2
0
100
Days
Days
.
-2 --
i
1
1
I
Ul Ul
M
Ol
V
V
V
00
00
l0
lD
\
\
\
\
\
NJI--`
\
\
NJ
\
00
\
NJ
\ \
NJ
\
\
I--�
\
I-+
\
F-�
\
N
\
I--�
\
N
\
l0
\
N
CD
CD
\ \
\
N
Ul
\
l0
\
N
\
M
\
I--`
\
Ln
\
\
N
N
\
\ O
N \
\
N
V
\
\
N
Ul
\
l0
\
N
\
M
\
\
N
W
\
V
\
N
F-+
\ 00
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
O
N
O N
O
N
O
N
N
N
N
O
N
N
\
N --
CD
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O N
O
O
4.0
3.5
3.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
c

Table 913. UT1 Downstream Channel Evidence
UTl Downstream Channel Evidence
Year 1 (2018)
Year 2 (2019)
Year 3 (2020)
Max consecutive days channel flow
80
135
101
Presence of litter and debris(wracking)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Leaf litter disturbed or washed away
Yes
Yes
Yes
Matted, bent, or absence of vegetation (herbaceous or otherwise)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Sediment deposition and/or scour indicating sediment trans ort
Yes
Yes
Yes
Water staining due to continual presence of water
Yes
Yes
Yes
Formation of channel bed and banks
Yes
Yes
Yes
Sediment sorting within the primary path of flow
Yes
Yes
Yes
Sediment shelving or a natural line impressed on the banks
Yes
Yes
Yes
Change in plant community (absence or destruction of terrestrial
vegetation and/or transition to species adapted for flow or
inundation for a long duration, including h dro h tes)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Development of channel pattern (meander bends and/or channel
braiding) at natural topographic breaks, woody debris piles, or
plant roots stems
Yes
Yes
Yes
Exposure of woody plant roots within the primary path of flow
No
No
No
Other:
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

16
14
12
2 10
0 4
2
0
-2
-4
Ki
Motes Creek Stream Flow Gauge UT1 Downstream
Year 3 (2020 Data)
N N W W A A U'i U'i 61 cy) V V V 00 00 lD lD I� N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O O
NJ00 N Q1 N W I� N N N N N lD N \ \
\ U1 lD N 01 Ul \ N \ O \ V \ Ln lD N 61 \ W V N
N \ \ \ \ \ \ N \ N \ N \ N \ \ \ \ N \ \ N
O N N N N N N O N O N O N O N N N N O N N \
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N
0
4.0
3.5
3.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
\ 0000
N \
O NO
c

Table 10. Verification of Bankfull Events
Date of Data
Date of Occurrence
Method
Photo
Collection
(if available)
Stream gauges and trail cameras captured a bankfull
March 3, 2019
January 13, 2019
event after 1.03 inches of rain was documented between
1
Janu 12 and 13, 2019 at an onsite rain gauge
Stream gauges and trail cameras captured a bankfull
March 3, 2019
February 23, 2019
event after 3.27 inches of rain was documented between
2
Feb 21-23, 2019 at an onsite rain gauge
Stream gauges and trail cameras captured a bankfull
May 2, 2019
March 21, 2019
event after 2.18 inches of rain was documented between
3
March 20 and 21, 2019 at an onsite rain gauge
Stream gauges and trail cameras captured a bankfull
May 2, 2019
April 8, 2019
event after 1.8 inches of rain was documented between
4
April 5 and 9, 2019 at an onsite rain gauge
Stream gauges and trail cameras captured a bankfull
May 2, 2019
April 13, 2019
event after 4.59 inches of rain was documented between
5
April 12 and 13, 2019 at an onsite rain gauge
Stream gauges and trail cameras captured a bankfull
May 2, 2019
April 19, 2019
event after 2.03 inches of rain was documented between
6
April 19 and 20, 2019 at an onsite rain gauge
Motes Creek cross-section photos capture wrack and
laid-back vegetation in the floodplain after 3.44 inches
February 10, 2020
February 6, 2020
of rain was documented on February 6, 2020 at an onsite
7
rain gauge.
Wrack and laid-back vegetation were observed in the
June 12, 2020
June 11, 2020
floodplain after 2.61 inches of rain was documented on
8
June 11, 2020 at an onsite rain gauge.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

OW
Photo 1: UT1 at bankfull stage
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

IF±riF �
41
1!
29.35inHg f 39`F 03,'21 201 9 07: 45AM MOTESD5
Y _.__.7.i F'
• . y. mot' ^ -
ell
i
- • ti 5 I'
JjQ S � 5
tI�} 777777 ^� i i. 3
lip I
29.35inHg f 52`F 04108 1201 9 07 :20PM MOTESDS

Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Table 11. Groundwater Hydrology Data
Success Criteria Achieved/Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)
Gauge
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
(2018)
(2019)
(2020)
(2021)
(2022)
(2023)
(2024)
1
Yes/64 days
Yes/79 days
Yes/71 days
(27.8 percent)
(33.6 percent)
(30.3 percent)
2
Yes/93 days
Yes/71 days
Yes/35 days
(40.4 percent)
(30.2 percent)
(15.0 percent)
3
No*/13 days
Yes/60 days
Yes/33 days
(5.6 percent)
(25.5 percent)
(14.1 percent)
4
Yes/120 days
Yes/136 days
Yes/136 days
(52.2 percent)
1 (57.9 percent)
1 (53.8 percent)
* Gauge 3 malfunctioned during the beginning of the year 1 growing season.
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

Motes Creek Groundwater Gauge 1
11�I�RIi�lll�li6�I�li I■
wm�i■�o�m�u
uus�inn■i��
mill
111111111111111111101
J W W A A Ln Ln m cn V V V 00 00 lD lD N N
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
N 00 N Ol N W r1i N lD N CD CD
(f1 \ N \ CD \ 'i V \ Ul lD Ol \ W V N
\ \ N \ N \ N \ N \ \ \ \ N \ \ N
J N N O N O N O N O N N N N O N N \
D O O O O O O O O O O O N
O
4.0
3.5
3.0
c
2.5 3
0
E
Q
2.0
m
Qc
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0

6
4
2
0
-2
v
-4
v
3 -6
v
0
-8
c�
-10
-12
-14
-16
-18
-20
-22
\ (Jl
N \
O N
O
Motes Creek Groundwater Gauge 2
Year 3 (2020 Data)
F-+ N N W W A A U'i Cn Ol Ol V v v 00 00 l0 l0
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ O O
N W N Q1 N W C
l0 N Ql F� !1 \ N \ CD l0 \ V \ (./'I Ql \ W V N
\ \ \ \ \ N \ N \ N \ N \ \ \ \ N \ \
N N N N N O N O N O N O N N N N O N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O NO
4.0
3.5
3.0
c
2.5
0
E
2.0
z
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0

6
4
2
0
-2
° -4
v
3 -6
v
c
-8
l7
-10
-12
-14
-16
-18
-20
-22
Motes Creek Groundwater Gauge 3
Year 3 (2020 Data)
October 21
Growing Season
End
I�►Ilil'iI�JI11i�1�1�1�II�L�1�lll�l�1�■11'I� �
lllll����1
I��II�11111��1�1
I�■���I■��
I ■III
IIIII ■ICI11111111IVIIIIMI�
I�■�l�1■1■I■�
�IIIIII
■ICI
11111101111
11111101111
IL
i
al
I
L
U
ml
r1mm
A
Qn
Qn
m
m
V
V
V
00
00
l0
l0
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
N
\
00
\
N
\
Ql
\
N
\
W
\
I�
\
N
\
N
\
N
\
\
N
\
l0
\
N
\
\
\
N
Qn
U'i
\
lD
\
N NJ
\
6�
\
N
\
U'i
\
\
N
N
\
\
N
O
\
\
N
V
\
\
N
U 'i
\
lD
\
r1j N
\
Ql
\
\
N
W
V
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
N
O
O
N
O
N
O
\
N
0
4.0
3.5
3.0
c
2.5 c
E
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0

6
4
2
0
c
-2
v
°
J -4
v
Y
3 6
v
c
0 -8
l7
-10
-12
-14
-16
-18
-20
-22
JL
N \
\
O N
N
O
O
Motes Creek Groundwater Gauge 4
Year 3 (2020 Data)
N N W \ W A A U, U, 6� 6� V V V m 2 W W O O
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
N 00 N Ql N W N Ili N l0 NJ\ \
N Ol I� U"I \ NJ \ O \ V \ Ln U'i lD 01 \ W V N
\ \ \ \ N \ N \ N \ N \ \ \ \ N
N N N N O N O N O N O N N N N O N N \
O O O O O O O O O O O O O N
0
4.0
3.5
3.0
c
c
2.5 0
E
m
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0

Appendix E.
Benthic Data
Results
Field Habitat Forms
Motes Creek Bank Site Year 3 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report Appendices
Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Mitigation Bank Restoration Systems, LLC

AXIOM, MOTES CREEK, ALAMANCE COUTNY, NC, BENTHIC MACRO INVERTEBRATES COLLECTED 6/122/2020.
PAIID NO
53944
53945
53946
53947
53948
STATION
MC
UT-1 US
UT-1 DS
UT-2
UT-3
DATE
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
SPECIES
T.V.
F.F.G.
PLATYHELMINTHES
Turbellaria
P
Tricladida
P
Planariidae
O
Girardia (Dugesia) tigrina
7.1
P
2
1
1
MOLLUSCA
Bivalvia
Veneroida
Sphaeriidae
FC
Pisidium sp.
6.6
FC
1
3
Gastropoda
Basommatophora
Physidae
Physella sp.
8.7
CG
1
4
ANNELIDA
Clitellata
Oligochaeta
CG
Tubificida
Naididae
CG
Tubificinae w.h.c.
CG
1
Tubificinae w.o.h.c.
CG
3
Lumbriculida
Lumbriculidae
CG
3
1
1
Lumbriculus sp.
CG
2
ARTHROPODA
Arachnoidea
Acariformes
Oribatida
1
Crustacea
Isopoda
Asellidae
SH
Caecidotea sp.
8.4
CG
13
17
34
8
Amphipoda
CG
Crangonyctidae
Crangonyx sp.
7.2
CG
9
Insecta
Ephemeroptera
Baetidae
CG
5
2
Neocloeon triangulifer
9
Caenidae
CG
Caenis sp.
6.8
CG
1
PAI, Inc. Page 1 of 3 Axiom Motes Creek 6 20cl

AXIOM, MOTES CREEK, ALAMANCE COUTNY, NC, BENTHIC MACRO I NVE RTE HATES COLLECTED 6/122/2020.
PAIID NO
53944
53945
53946
53947
53948
STATION
MC
UT-1 US
UT-1 DS
UT-2
UT-3
DATE
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
SPECIES
T.V.
F.F.G.
Heptageniidae
SC
Maccaffertium modestum
5.7
SC
4
Maccaffertium sp.
SC
1
Stenonema femoratum
6.9
SC
2
1
Odonata
1
Aeshnidae
P
1
Aeshna sp.
P
1
Boyeria vinosa
5.8
P
1
1
Coenagrionidae
P
Argia sp.
8.3
P
1
Ischnura sp.
9.5
2
2
1
Corduliidae
Neurocordulia sp.
5.3
3
Hemiptera
Belostomatidae
Belostoma sp.
9.5
P
1
Corixidae
PI
1
Notonectidae
1
Megaloptera
Corydalidae
P
Nigronia fasciatus
6.1
P
1
Trichoptera
Hydropsychidae
FC
Cheumatopsyche sp.
6.6
FC
1
1
Coleoptera
Dryopidae
Helichus basa/is
0.5
SC
1
Dytiscidae
P
Neoporus sp.
5
3
1
Elmidae
CG
Stenelmis sp.
5.6
SC
3
Haliplidae
Peltodytes sp.
8.4
SH
1
1
Hydrophilidae
P
Helophorus sp.
1
Paracymus sp.
CG
1
Tropisternus sp.
9.3
P
1
3
1
Diptera
Chironomidae
Chironomus sp.
9.3
CG
5
Conchapelopia sp.
8.4
P
2
1
1
11
3
PAI, Inc. Page 2 of 3 Axiom Motes Creek 6 20cl

AXIOM, MOTES CREEK, ALAMANCE COUTNY, NC, BENTHIC MACRO I NVE RTE BRATES COLLECTED 6/122/2020.
PAIID NO
53944
53945
53946
53947
53948
STATION
MC
UT-1 US
UT-1 DS
UT-2
UT-3
DATE
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
6/12/2020
SPECIES
T.V.
F.F.G.
Cricotopus bicinctus
8.7
CG
1
Dicrotendipes neomodestus
7.9
CG
1
Microtendipes pedellus gp.
3.9
CG
1
1
1
1
Natarsia sp.
9.6
P
1
1
Parametriocnemus sp.
3.9
CG
1
Phaenopsectra punctipes gp.
7.1
SC
1
1
Polypedilum illinoense gp.
8.7
SH
2
4
Procladius sp.
8.8
P
1
12
Psectrotanypus sp.
1
Rheotanytarsus exiguus gp.
6.5
FC
1
Tanytarsus sp.
6.6
FC
1
2
Zavrelimyia sp.
8.6
P
2
2
Culicidae
FC
Anopheles sp.
8.6
FC
2
Dolichopodidae
P
2
Empididae
P
Hemerodromia sp.
P
2
Sciomyzidae
1
Tipulidae
SH
Pseudolimnophila sp.
6.2
P
1
Tipula sp.
7.5
SH
1
1
TOTAL NO. OF ORGANISMS
58
35
55
60
32
TOTAL NO. OF TAXA
26
12
16
23
11
EPT INDEX
4
0
2
3
1
BIOTIC INDEX ASSIGNED VALUES
7.22
7.95
8.23
7.53
8.04
PAI, Inc. Page 3 of 3 Axiom Motes Creek 6 20cl

vet. 0 +e 5 C ee (� C WC
3/06 Revision 6
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Mountain/ Piedmont Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ TOTAL SCORE
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream Ge @ K Location/road: - W1c _ i ,.i(Road Name )County wt Le'
Date } -.- ii Q CC# Q N 11,E Basin $ d 60o Subbasin 0. 03, (BO. 0 Of
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish OBenthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe)
Latitude �5 �°(t9 iV Longitude Ecoregion: ❑ MT ❑ P Slate Belt ❑ Triassic Basin
Water Quality: Temperature o °C DOS / 10 mg/1 Conductivity (corn) i� %� µS/cm pH
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what
you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: _t4D 0/.Forest y %Residential to O %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields% Commercial 0 %Industrial (5­11/oOther - Describe:
Watershed land use : ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream ;�, Channel (at top of bank) Stream Depth: (m) Avg MMax - J�
❑ Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m)
Bank Angle: 1 3 -7 ° or ❑ NA (Vertical is 900, horizontal is 0°. Angles > 900 indicate slope is towards mid -channel, < 900
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
❑ Channelized Ditch
❑Deeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑ Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock
❑ Excessive periphyton growth ❑ Heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell
Manmade Stabilization: ON VY: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Berm/levee
Flow conditions: ❑High JZNormal ❑Low
Turbidity: ❑Clear J0 Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes)
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? ❑ YES FNO Details
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................ ❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed ............................................. ❑
D. Root mats out of water................................................................................................................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ❑
Weather Conditions: f, Y Photos: ON $Y ❑ Digital 035rnm
Remarks: Q 011 �-
1 If 04 00
,Jr~
WE
�f o',- , (CA -, e --t' ✓

u (0k,Ps C-ee
I. Channel Modification SpbLe
A. channel natural, frequent bends........................................................................................................
B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old) ...................................................... 4
C. some channelization present.............................................................................................................. 3
D. more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted............................................................... 2
E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0
❑ Evidence of dredging ❑Evidence of desnagging=no large woody debris in stream ❑Banks of uniform shape/height
Remarks ., ,-P. ,r, -P a d - . cJ Subtotal
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >70% of the
reach is rocks, 1 type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have
begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common. or Abundant.
Rocks Macrophytes __ Sticks and leafpacks Snags and logs Undercut banks or root mats
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
>70%
40-70%
20-40%
<20%
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present .................
20
16
12
8
3 types present .........................
19
19
11
7
2 types present .........................
18
14
10
6
1 type present ...........................
17
13
9
5
No types present .......................
0
1
`s--
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle
for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks.
A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders
Score
1. embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders) .........................
15
2. embeddedness 20-40%..........................................................................................................
LIP
3. embeddedness 40-80%..........................................................................................................
8
4. embeddedness>80%.............................................................................................................
3
B. substrate gravel and cobble
1. embeddedness<20%............................................................................................................
14
2. embeddedness 20-40%.........................................................................................................
11
3. embeddedness 40-80%........................................................................................................
6
4. embeddedness>80%............................................................................................................
2
C. substrate mostly gravel
1. embeddedness<50%............................................................................................................
8
2. embeddedness>50%............................................................................................................
4
D. substrate homogeneous
1. substrate nearly all bedrock..................................................................................................
3
2. substrate nearly all sand........................................................................................................
3
3. substrate nearly all detritus....................................................................................................
2
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay...................................................................................................
1
Remarks
Subtotal
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in
large high gradient streams, or side eddies.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 20(m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes...............................................................................................................
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in)............................................................ 8
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 6
b. pools about the same size...................................................................................................... 4
B. Pools absent............................................................................................................................................ 0 if)
Pool bottom boulder-cobble--hardR marks
❑ Bottom sandy -sink as you walk ❑ Silt bottom
40
Subtotal
❑ Some pools over wader depth
Page Total

04 U4�1 C—cc
V. Riffle Habitats
Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration-can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent
Riffles Infrequent
C
Score
A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream....
12
B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width .................................... 4
7
C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10
3
D. riffles absent................................................................................................................... 0
1(0
Channel Slope: ❑Typical for area ❑Steep=fast flow ❑Low=like a coastal stream
Subtotal
VI. Bank Stability and Vegetation
FACE UPSTREAM Left Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Banks stable
1. little evidence of erosion or bank failure(except outside of bends), little potential for erosion.. 7 7
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems .....................................
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ...........................
j 5�
3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding .................
3
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow..
2 2
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident ...........................................
0 0
Total
Remarks
VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric.
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration .............................................
10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ..................................................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal .................................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas .......................................................
E. No canopy and no shading............................................................................................................
0
Remarks / I#- < ....tee A� v� '' ` �� , r ^'°,�, ' '
Subtotal_O
VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zane Width
Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A break
in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths
down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc.
FACE UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Dominant vegetation: ❑ Trees ❑ Shrubs 1216rasses ❑ Weeds/old field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. width > 18 meters.....................................................................................
2. width 12-18 meters...................................................................................
3. width 6-12 meters.....................................................................................
4. width < 6 meters......................................................................................
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
b. width 12-18 meters.......................................................................
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
2. breaks common
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
b. width 12-18 meters......................................................................
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
Remarks
❑ Disclaimer -form filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion -atypical stream.
41
6) n_-1
4 4
3 3
2 2
4
3
2
1
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 Total
Page Total 3 5
TOTAL SCORE

Supplement for Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Diagram to determine bank angle:
4*
900 450
Site Sketch:
Other comments:
Tvnical Stream Cross-section
Extreme High Water
'1
Normal High Water
Normal Flow
Ave. :W�P4 r'4 - nm& Lower
Bsnk
Stream Width M
42
1350
This side is 45' bank angle.

3/06 Revision 6
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Mountain/ Piedmont Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ OTAL SCORE
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream_ Q5
Location/road:
M-4, �% (Road Name`
_)County � � � "lu,w/G
Date �
CC# ()3 060J.-
Basin61'pe �P, 03000ubbasin d 3 d 3 Didd(%�O&
Observer(s) I' x— — Type of Study: ❑ Fish PlBenthos ❑ Basinwide
Latitude Wi Longitude 71,a � 3S Ecoregion: ❑ MT jJ
❑Special Study (Describe)
P 4ate Belt D (Triassic Basin
Water Quality: Temperature �3 a °C DO 7 mg/l Conductivity (corr.)` a 7,3 µ5/cm
pH C, Cl 7
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what
you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: tJ 0 %Forest %Residential W %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields �- % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe: _
Watershed land use : Forest VAgriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream +
Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank) Stream Depth: (m) Avg % t Max
❑ Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m)
Bank Angle: ° or ❑ NA (Vertical is 90°, horizontal is 0°. Angles > 90' indicate slope is towards mid -channel, < 90'
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
❑ Channelized Ditch
❑Deeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
)Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock
❑ Excessive periphyton growth ❑ Heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell
Manmade Stabilization: ON VY: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Berm/ievee
Flow conditions: ❑High RNormal ❑Low
Turbidity: ❑Clear P Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes)
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? V YES ONO Details_
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed ............................................. ❑
D. Root mats out of water................................................................................................................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ❑
Weather Conditions: a , � 1-6 , ,, Photos: ❑N �Y ❑ Digital 035mm
Remarks: +14-ef { ra - o Id 14 -&-"'
39

Ml- (kT(_ �f
I. Channel Modification &ore
A. channel natural, frequent bends........................................................................................................ OF-
B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old) ...................................................... 4
C. some channelization present............................................................................................................. 3
D. more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted............................................................... 2
E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0
❑ Evidence of dredging ❑Evidence of desnagging--no large woody debris in stream ❑Banks of uniform shape/height
Remarks Subtotal
H. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >70% of the
reach is rocks, 1 type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have
begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common. or Abundant.
RocksMacrophytes Sticks and leafpatks Snags and logs Undercut banks or root mats
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
>70%
40-70%
20-40%
< 20%
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present .................
20
16
12
8
3 types present .........................
19
11
7
2 types present .........................
18
`la
10
6
1 type present ...........................
17
13
9
5
No types present .......................
0
C
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle
for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks.
A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders
Score
1. embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders) .........................
1
2. embeddedness 20-40%..........................................................................................................
1
3. embeddedness 40-80%........................................................................................................
4. embeddedness>80%.............................................................................................................
3
B. substrate gravel and cobble
1. embeddedness<20%............................................................................................................
14
2. embeddedness 20-40%.........................................................................................................
11
3. embeddedness 40-80%........................................................................................................
6
4. embeddedness>80%............................................................................................................
2
C. substrate mostly gravel
1. embeddedness<501/o ............................................................................................................
8
2. embeddedness>501/o ............... ..............................................................................................
4
D. substrate homogeneous
1. substrate nearly all bedrock...................................................................................................
3
2. substrate nearly all sand........................................................................................................
3
3. substrate nearly all detritus....................................................................................................
2
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay...................................................................................................
1
Remarks
_ _Subtotal
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in
large high gradient streams, or side eddies.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... (1 ,
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in)............................................................ $�
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 6
b. pools about the same size...................................................................................................... 4
B. Pools absent............................................................................................................................................ 110
Subtotal
❑ Pool bottom boulder-cobble=hard ❑ Bottom sandy -sink as you walk ❑ Silt bottom ❑ Some pools over wader depth
Remarks
Page Total
40

p4C -14TI 115
V. Riffle Habitats
Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration-can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent Riffles Infrequent
Score Score
A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream.... (1 fj! 12
B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width .................................. 4 7
C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10 3
D. riffles absent................................................................................................................... 0
Channel Slope: ❑Typical for area ❑Steep=fast flow ❑Low=like a coastal stream Subtotal
VI. Bank Stability and Vegetation
FACE UPSTREAM
A. Banks stable
Left Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
1. little evidence of erosion or bank failure(except outside of bends), little potential for erosion.. 7 7
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems........... ........................... �6 V
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ........................... 5 5
3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding ................. 3 3
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2 2
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident ........................................... 0 0 11
Total d�
Remarks
VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric.
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration ............................................. �0
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent .....................................................
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal .................................... 7
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ....................................................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading............................................................................................................ 0
Remarks— _ Subtotal
VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A break
in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths
down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc.
FACE UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Dominant vegetation: �rees Shrubs Grasses ❑ Weeds/old field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks) /►`) �]
1. width > 18 meters..................................................................................... v V
2. width 12-18 meters................................................................................... 4 4
3. width 6-12 meters..................................................................................... 3 3
4. width < 6 meters...................................................................................... 2 2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
b. width 12-18 meters.......................................................................
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
2. breaks common
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
b. width 12-18 meters......................................................................
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
Remarks
❑ Disclaimer -form filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion -atypical stream.
41
4
3
2
1
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
Total_
Page Total
TOTAL SCORE-

Supplement for Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Diagram to deternvne bank angle:
O
1 �
900 450
Site Sketch:
Other
Typical Stream Cross-section
42
1350
This side is 45' bank angle.

l0q,-t (-red -47' f 03-
3/06 Revision 6 LAJ t (J5
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Mountain/ Piedmont Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ 'l OTAL SCORE 1
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream Y^l4 . GlT l/ PS Locationlroad: i11'1• � 114 -(Road Name _)County
n � tn'
Date d D 1p CC# 0 d(ov Basin_ f © 190Fa ti Subbasin_v ?jd DD O S D
Observer(s)'A. ! , Type of Study: ❑ yF�ish l�Benthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe)
Latitude �-_ q%(-5-1 Longitude 71-'A�71 coregion: ❑ MT P ❑ Slate Belt Triassic Basin
Water Quality: Temperature 31, (, °C DO � mg/1 Conductivity (corr.) _AS/cm pH
—13,6-
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what
you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: _&Q_%Forest O %Residential , %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields __§:�_210 Commercial __5--%Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use : ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank) r Stream Depth: (m) Avg�Max
❑ Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m)
Bank Angle: 1 3 d ° or ❑ NA (Vertical is 90°, horizontal is 01. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards mid -channel, < 90°
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
❑ Channelized Ditch
❑Deeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑ Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock
❑ Excessive periphyton growth ❑ Heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell
Manmade Stabilization: ON : ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Berm/levee
Flow conditions: ❑High ormal ❑Low
Turbidity: ❑Clear .®Slightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes)
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? Cl YES ONO Details
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................ ❑
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed ............................................. ❑
D. Root mats out of water................................................................................................................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ❑
Weather Conditions: � -( (l! :14G, Photos: ON (-Y4'�9*-
❑ Digital ❑35mmRemarks: k-e ea - al` 4)4 "Pu m ✓-ee
39

I. Channel Modification �Sco—re
A: channel natural, frequent bends........................................................................................................ V
B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old) ...................................................... 4
C. some channelization present.............................................................................................................. 3
D. more extensive channelization, >401/o of stream disrupted............................................................... 2
E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0
❑ Evidence of dredging ❑Evidence of desnagging=no large woody debris in stream ❑Banks of uniform shape/height
Remarks Subtotal
H. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >70% of the
reach is rocks, 1 type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have
begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare. Common, or Abundant.
Rocks MacrophytesSticks and leafpacks Snags and logs Undercut banks or root mats
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
>70%
40-70%
2040%
<20%
Score
Score
Score
Score
4 or 5 types present .................
20
1
12
8
3 types present .........................
19
11
7
2 types present .........................
18
4
10
6
1 type present ...........................
17
13
9
5
No types present .......................
0
��
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks_
Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle
for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks.
A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders
Score
1. embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders) .........................
15
2. embeddedness 2040%..........................................................................................................
12
3. embeddedness 40-80%..........................................................................................................
8
4. embeddedness>801/o .............................................................................................................
3
B. substrate gravel and cobble
1. embeddedness<201/o ............................................................................................................
Q14
2. embeddedness 2040%.........................................................................................................
3. embeddedness 40-80%........................................................................................................
6
4. embeddedness>80%............................................................................................................
2
C. substrate mostly gravel
1. embeddedness<50%............................................................................................................
8
2. embeddedness>50%............................................................................................................
4
D. substrate homogeneous
1. substrate nearly all bedrock...................................................................................................
3
2. substrate nearly all sand.......................................................................................
3. substrate nearly all detritus....................................................................................................
2
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay...................................................................................................
Remarks — — -- --- -- -
1
Subtotal
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in
large high gradient streams, or side eddies.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in)............................................................
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 6
b. pools about the same size...................................................................................................... 4 MM
B. Pools absent............................................................................................................................................ 0 V
Subtotal
❑ Pool bottom boulder -cobble --hard ❑ Bottom sandy -sink as you walk ❑ Silt bottom ❑ Some pools over wader depth
Remarks _ _ _ _ C�
Page Total uL�
40

C- T _ P
V. Riffle Habitats
Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration-can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent
Score� A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream...
B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width .................................... 14
C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10
D. riffles absent ............................................. :..................................................................... 0
Channel Slope: ❑Typical for area ❑Steep=fast flow Mow --like a coastal stream
VI. Bank Stability and Vegetation
FACE UPSTREAM
Riffles Infrequent
Score
12
7
3 J
Subtotal `
Left Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Banks stable
1. little evidence of erosion or bank failure(except outside of bends), little potential for erosion..
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems ..................................... 6
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ........................... 5
3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding ................. 3
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident ........................................... 0
Remarks —
or
6
5
3
2
01
l�
VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric.
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration ............................................. ,�0
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent .....................................................
C. Stream with partial canopy sunlight and shading are essentially equal ....................................
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas ....................................................... 2
E. No canopy and no shading............................................................................................................. 0
Remarks Subtotal
VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A break
in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths
down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc.
FACE UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Dominant vegetation: b Trees Shrubs T Grasses O Weeds/old field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. width > 18 meters.....................................................................................
2. width 12-18 meters...................................................................................
3. width 6-12 meters.....................................................................................
4. width < 6 meters......................................................................................
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
b. width 12-18 meters.......................................................................
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
2. breaks common
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
b. width 12-18 meters......................................................................
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
Remarks
❑ Disclaimer -form filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion -atypical stream.
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
Total
Page Total L4
TOTAL SCORE G
41

Supplement for Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Diagram to determine bank angle:
L2
---
��--
90° 450
Site Sketch:
Other comments:
Typical Stream Cross-section
1350
This side is 45° bank angle.
!j

VqO f e, C--eet( U/J—�- CML _ W
3/06 Revisio
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Mountain/ Piedmont Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ ri'OTAL SCORE
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferabtv in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream os4i3 L(Location/road: 04• V �✓ _(Road Name County �G G't u wl
Date #% V 061), CC# -0 6 `Ua- Basin ci u Subbasin
Observer(s) Type of Study: ❑ Fish /Benthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe)
Latitude3S« R$ TLongitude`] I 3Ecoregion: ❑ MT ❑ P ❑ Slate Belt ❑ Triassic Basin
Water Quality: TemperatureVyO°C DO 4411119/1 Conductivity (corr.) µS/cm pH �
•;S.G •
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what
you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: 0 %Forest - lk-%Residential ;r 0 %Active Pasturey % Active Crops
—ja%Fallow Fields ___(L_% Commercial _ 0 %Industrial ___Q_%Other -Describe:
Watershed land use : ftorest /Agriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank)_ Stream Depth: (m) Avg. -Max •
100,
❑ Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m)
Bank Angle: �V ° or ❑ NA (Vertical is 9(r, horizontal is 09. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards mid -channel, < 90°
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
❑ Channelized Ditch
❑Deeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
A;LZecent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock
❑ Excessive periphyton growth ❑ Heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell
Manmade Stabilization: ❑N 8Y: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Berm/levee
Flow conditions: Wigh ❑Normal ❑Low
Turbidity: ❑Clear Z;66 ightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes)
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? AYES ONO Details _
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions.
A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed ............................................. ❑
D. Root mats out of water................................................................................................................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ❑
Weather Conditions: O f(, Photos: ❑N �Y ❑ Digital 035mm
Remarks: 1. 6t 11 �, . I r .. 4 ow-5
�-0 ON `14-eq%*T% - -C • • &,WL.s■✓
kgILyA 0-0►e., p*tit. Zq 1%•S
39

HC ✓ �XTC),
I. Channel Modification Scare
.*A: channel natural, frequent bends........................................................................................................
67
B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old) ...................................................... 4
C. some channelization present.............................................................................................................. 3
D. more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted............................................................... 2
E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0
❑ Evidence of dredging ❑Evidence of desnagging=no large woody debris in stream OBanks of uniform shape/height
Remarks Subtotal 1
II. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fiF&QUver. If >70% of the
reach is rocks, 1 type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that aacAc¢ tend have
beg decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare Cot on or Abundant. "'
��
Rocks Macrophytes Sticks and Ieafpacks Sn :: and logs Undercut banks or r #a t� t�
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLO CATION OR COVER
>70% 40-70% 20-40% <20%
Score Score Score Score
'y. or 5 types prejqqA ............ 20 i� {� 8
types present ......................... 19 7
2 types present ......................... 18 14 ` 6
1 type present ........................... 17 13 9 5
No types present ....................... 0
15—
❑ No woody vegetation in ripe i zone Remarks � n y Subtotal
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobbll?, boulder) Look at Are reach for substrate Aring, but only look Affle
for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for "mud line" or difficulty extractiA rocks. -
A. subk1rate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders '" 1 Score
`aW Vibeddedn s <20% (very little sand, usually o$ly behind large boulders) ........................ 15
2. embeddedne s 20-40%........................................................................................................ 2
3. embeddednesif4Q-80%.......................................................................................................... 8
4. embeddednes>80%............................................................................................................. 3
B. substrate gravel and cobble
1. embeddedness<20%............................................................................................................ &
2. embeddedness 2040%......................................................................................................... 11
3. embeddedness 40-80%........................................................................................................ 6
4. embeddedness>80%............................................................................................................ 2
C. substrate mostly gravel
1. embeddedness<50%.............................................................................................. 8
2. embeddedness >50%.......................... .....+................ 4
D. substrate homogeneous
1. substrate nearly all bedrock .................... .......
2. substrate nearly all sand.......................................n........................................................ 3
3. substrate nearly all detritus.................................................................................................... 2
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay................................................................................................... 1 l
Remarks Subtotal q►�
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in
large high gradient streams, or side eddies.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in)............................................................
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes ............................................... ..
... ......... . I
b. pools about the same size.... L .......
B. Pools absent .................... '. i�.. ilk......... ��:� .. ........... '� �
Subtotal � U
❑ Pool bottom boulder-cobble=hard ❑ Bottom sandy -sink as yo�ajii [) f bo,*gome �o s r w"Md
Remarks _ _ _
Page Total
"t)
Or 40

K _urn
V. Riffle Habitats
Definition: Riffle is area of reaeration-can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent Riffles Infrequent
Score Score
A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream.... 16 12
B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width .................................... 7
C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10 3
D. riffles absent................................................................................................................... 0
Channel Slope: Typical for area ❑Steep=fast flow ❑Low=like a coastal stream Subtotal
VI. Bank Stability and Vegetation
FACE UPSTREAM Left Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Banks stable
1. little evidence of erosion or bank failure(except outside of bends), little potential for erosiort 0
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems ..................................... 6 6
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ........................... 5 5
3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding ................. 3 3
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at high flow.. 2 2
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident ........................................... 0 0 �rf
Total T
Remarks
VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric.
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration ............................................. 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ..................................................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy -sunlight and shading are essentially equal::::::::::::
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas .......................................................
E. No canopy and no shading ................................
Remarks_ Subtotal
VIH. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A break
in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths
down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc.
' FA E UPSTREAM Lft. Bank Rt. Bank
Dominant vegetation: ❑ Trees 0'-Shrubs brasses ❑ Weeds/old field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc) Score Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. width > 18 meters.....................................................................................
5
155
2. width 12-18 meters...................................................................................
L4
4
3. width 6-12 meters.....................................................................................
3
3
4. width < 6 meters......................................................................................
2
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks) .
1. breaks rare
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
4
4
b. width 12-18 meters.......................................................................
3
3
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
2
2
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
1
1
2. breaks common
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
3
3
b. width 12-18 meters......................................................................
2
2
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
1
1
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
0
0 10
Remarks_
Total
Page
Total
l7 Disclaimer=form filled out, but score doesWt match subjective opinion -atypical stream.
TOTAL SCORE i
l
41

Supplement for Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Diagram to determine bank angle:
900 450
Typical Stream Cross-section
LStream Width
Site Sketch:
Other comments:
o
CA
1350
This side is 45° bank angle.
42

3/06 Revision 6 Ae5 C-e e A[ 4 13)
Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Mountain/ Piedmont Streams
Biological Assessment Unit, DWQ]TOTAL SCORE
Directions for use: The observer is to survey a minimum of 100 meters with 200 meters preferred of stream, preferably in an
upstream direction starting above the bridge pool and the road right-of-way. The segment which is assessed should represent average
stream conditions. To perform a proper habitat evaluation the observer needs to get into the stream. To complete the form, select the
description which best fits the observed habitats and then circle the score. If the observed habitat falls in between two descriptions,
select an intermediate score. A final habitat score is determined by adding the results from the different metrics.
Stream I"1 Location/road: (Road Name )County A-(u,m U {�
Date ?)0 ���� CC# 0�-1 -�a Basin CT 0 1 030"WISubbasin 0303000�
Observer(s) _ _ Type of Study: ❑/Fish 0Benthos ❑ Basinwide ❑Special Study (Describe) _
Latitude �5 1 l Longitude - 1, p `J 6 __ Ecoregion: ❑ MT XfP XSlate Belt ❑ Triassic Basin
Water Quality: Temperaturepiq-0C
DO �•J mg/1 Conductivity (corr.) V4101Slcm pH / • 6
Physical Characterization: Visible land use refers to immediate area that you can see from sampling location - include what
you estimate driving thru the watershed in watershed land use.
Visible Land Use: 60 %Forest %Residential 90 %Active Pasture % Active Crops
%Fallow Fields % Commercial %Industrial %Other - Describe:
Watershed land use : Forest PAgriculture ❑Urban ❑ Animal operations upstream
Width: (meters) Stream Channel (at top of bank) Stream Depth: (m) Avg_Max
❑ Width variable ❑ Large river >25m wide
Bank Height (from deepest part of riffle to top of bank -first flat surface you stand on): (m)
Bank Angle: a ° or ❑ NA (Vertical is 90°, horizontal is 00. Angles > 90° indicate slope is towards mid -channel, < 90°
indicate slope is away from channel. NA if bank is too low for bank angle to matter.)
❑ Channelized Ditch
❑Deeply incised -steep, straight banks ❑Both banks undercut at bend ❑Channel filled in with sediment
❑ Recent overbank deposits ❑Bar development ❑Buried structures ❑Exposed bedrock
0 Excessive periphyton growth ❑ Heavy filamentous algae growth ❑Green tinge ❑ Sewage smell
Manmade Stabilization: ❑N -21: ❑Rip -rap, cement, gabions ❑ Sediment/grade-control structure ❑Berm/levee
Flow conditions: J&iigh ❑Normal ❑Low
Turbidity: ❑Clear 5kSlightly Turbid ❑Turbid ❑Tannic ❑Milky ❑Colored (from dyes)
Good potential for Wetlands Restoration Project?? J,YES ❑NO Details
Channel Flow Status
Useful especially under abnormal or low flow conditions. A. Water reaches base of both lower banks, minimal channel substrate exposed ............................
B. Water fills >75% of available channel, or <25% of channel substrate is exposed ........................ ❑
C. Water fills 25-75% of available channel, many logs/snags exposed ............................................. ❑
D. Root mats out of water................................................................................................................... ❑
E. Very little water in channel, mostly present as standing pools ..................................................... ❑
Weather Conditions: OPUS COJ _ Photos: ❑N ❑Y ❑ Digital 1335mm
Remarks: `• Oct) ui {, l.� 4 .1� (� �Q(rc�(.1-c �`C(Cc
— '; ff"- "rJ h�--.ea-, "r;S"-adTGti
39

I. Channel Modification Score
A. channel natural, frequent bends .................................................
B. channel natural, infrequent bends (channelization could be old) ......................................................
C. some channelization present.............................................................................................................. 3
D. more extensive channelization, >40% of stream disrupted............................................................... 2
E. no bends, completely channelized or rip rapped or gabioned, etc ..................................................... 0
❑ Evidence of dredging ❑Evidence of desnagging=no large woody debris in stream ❑Banks of uniform shape/height
Remarks Subtotal 5
H. Instream Habitat: Consider the percentage of the reach that is favorable for benthos colonization or fish cover. If >70% of the
reach is rocks, I type is present, circle the score of 17. Definition: leafpacks consist of older leaves that are packed together and have
begun to decay (not piles of leaves in pool areas). Mark as Rare Common. or Abundant.
Rocks Macrophytes . Sticks and leafpacks 5nsfgs and logs Undercut banks or root mats
AMOUNT OF REACH FAVORABLE FOR COLONIZATION OR COVER
>70% 40-70% 20-40%
<20%
Score Score Score
Score
{� 4 or 5 types pjr-Z._...........
3 types prese..................
20 "C.i
19 11�
8
7
2 types present .........................
18 14 10
6
1 type present ...........................
17 13 9
5
No types present .......................
0
Subtotal
❑ No woody vegetation in riparian zone Remarks
III. Bottom Substrate (silt, sand, detritus, gravel, cobble, boulder) Look at entire reach for substrate scoring, but only look at riffle
for embeddedness, and use rocks from all parts of riffle -look for `mud line" or difficulty extracting rocks.
A. substrate with good mix of gravel, cobble and boulders
Score
1. embeddedness <20% (very little sand, usually only behind large boulders) .........................
15
2. embeddedness 20-40%..........................................................................................................
12
3. embeddedness 40-80%..........................................................................................................
8
4. embeddedness>80%.............................................................................................................
3
B. substrate gravel and cobble
1. embeddedness<201/o ............................................................................................................
1
2. embeddedness 20-40%.........................................................................................................
4
3. embeddedness 40-801/o
4. embeddedness>80%............................................................................................................
2
C. substrate mostly gravel
1. embeddedness<50%............................................................................................................
8
2. embeddedness>50%............................................................................................................
4
D. substrate homogeneous
1. substrate nearly all bedrock...................................................................................................
3
2. substrate nearly all sand........................................................................................................
3
3. substrate nearly all detritus....................................................................................................
2
4. substrate nearly all silt/ clay.................................................................................................
1 j
Remarks
Subtotal l
IV. Pool Variety Pools are areas of deeper than average maximum depths with little or no surface turbulence. Water velocities
associated with pools are always slow. Pools may take the form of "pocket water", small pools behind boulders or obstructions, in
large high gradient streams, or side eddies.
A. Pools present Score
1. Pools Frequent (>30% of 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 10
b. pools about the same size (indicates pools filling in)............................................................
2. Pools Infrequent (<30% of the 200m area surveyed)
a. variety of pool sizes............................................................................................................... 6
b. pools about the same size...................................................................................................... 4
B. Pools absent............................................................................................................................................ 0
Pool bottom boulder-cobble=hard ❑ Bottom sandy -sink as you walk
Remarks _
Subtotal i V
❑ Silt bottom ❑ Some pools over wader depth
Page Total

vqc��e3 C—eek �T'� ( Ott Cc V)
V. Riffle Habitats
Definition: Riffle is area of reacration-can be debris dam, or narrow channel area. Riffles Frequent
Sore
A. well defined riffle and run, riffle as wide as stream and extends 2X width of stream.... ,�6J
B. riffle as wide as stream but riffle length is not 2X stream width ..................................
C. riffle not as wide as stream and riffle length is not 2X stream width ............................. 10
D. riffles absent................................................................................................................... 0
Channel Slope: ❑Typical for area ❑Steep=fast flow ❑Low=like a coastal stream
VI. Bank Stability and Vegetation
FACE UPSTREAM
Riffles Infrequent
Score
12
7
3 r
Subtotal
Left Bank Rt. Bank
Score Score
A. Banks stable ��
1. little evidence of erosion or bank failure(except outside of bends), little potential for erosiontJ
B. Erosion areas present
1. diverse trees, shrubs, grass; plants healthy with good root systems ..................................... 6 6
2. few trees or small trees and shrubs; vegetation appears generally healthy ........................... 5 5
3. sparse mixed vegetation; plant types and conditions suggest poorer soil binding ................. 3 3
4. mostly grasses, few if any trees and shrubs, high erosion and failure potential at. high flow.. 2 2
5. little or no bank vegetation, mass erosion and bank failure evident ........................................... 0 0
Total 6 i
Remarks
VII. Light Penetration Canopy is defined as tree or vegetative cover directly above the stream's surface. Canopy would block out
sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. Note shading from mountains, but not use to score this metric.
Score
A. Stream with good canopy with some breaks for light penetration ............................................. 10
B. Stream with full canopy - breaks for light penetration absent ..................................................... 8
C. Stream with partial canopy - sunlight and shading are essentially equal ....................................
D. Stream with minimal canopy - full sun in all but a few areas .......................................................
E. No canopy and no shading............................................................................................................. 0
Remarks Subtotall-
VIII. Riparian Vegetative Zone Width
Definition: Riparian zone for this form is area of natural vegetation adjacent to stream (can go beyond floodplain). Definition: A break
in the riparian zone is any place on the stream banks which allows sediment or pollutants to directly enter the stream, such as paths
down to stream, storm drains, uprooted trees, otter slides, etc.
FA UPSTREAM
Lft. Bank
Rt. Bank
Dominant vegetation: ❑ Trees ❑ Shrubs Grasses ❑ Weeds/old field ❑Exotics (kudzu, etc)
Score
Score
A. Riparian zone intact (no breaks)
1. width > 18 meters.....................................................................................
n,
5
2. width 12-18 meters...................................................................................
4
4
3. width 6-12 meters.....................................................................................
3
3
4. width < 6 meters......................................................................................
2
2
B. Riparian zone not intact (breaks)
1. breaks rare
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
4
4
b. width 12-18 meters.......................................................................
3
3
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
2
2
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
i
1
2. breaks common
a. width > 18 meters.........................................................................
b. width 12-18 meters......................................................................
c. width 6-12 meters.......................................................................
d. width < 6 meters.........................................................................
Remarks
❑ Disclaimer -form filled out, but score doesn't match subjective opinion -atypical stream.
3 3
2 2
1 1
0 0
Total`_0
Page Total
TOTAL SCORE_
41

Supplement for Habitat Assessment Field Data Sheet
Diagram to determine bank angle:
I
� I
900 450
Site Sketch:
Other comments:
Tvnical Stream Cross-section
rExtreme High Water -
n
\ Normal High Water
Normal Flow
1350
MIOMV!!�[ Upper Bask r�
Laver
Bank
Stream Wldth AThis side is 45' bank angle.
42