20150636 Ver 1_Year 4 Monitoring Report 2020_20201102

ID#* 20150636 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 11/02/2020
Mitigation Project Submittal - 11/2/2020
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream r Wetlands W Buffer V Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Michael Herrmann
Project Information
...................................................................................
ID#:* 20150636
Existing IDr
Project Type:
Project Name:
County:
Email Address:*
mherrmann@watershedinvestment
snc.net
Version:
*1
Existing Version
r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Neville Farms Buffer and Nutrient Offset
Mitigation Bank
Orange
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: NevilleCreek 2020_MY4.pdf 3.21 MB
Rease upload only one RDFof the corrplete file that needs to be subrritted...
Signature
Print Name:* Michael Herrmann
Signature:*
/ '&'e-W"t' �''?'r,V

YEAR 4 (2020) MONITORING REPORT
Neville Farms Buffer and Nutrient Offset Bank Parcel
(Phase 1 & Phase 2)
Jordan Lake Nutrient Strategy - Upper New Hope Subwatershed
Orange County, NC
DWR# 2015‐0636 

October 2020
Prepared by:  
Axiom Environmental, Inc. 
218 Snow Avenue 
Raleigh, NC 27603 
Phone:  [phone] 

Prepared for:  
Watershed Investments NC, LLC 
1630 Weatherford Circle 
Raleigh, NC  27604 
Phone:  [phone] 

Neville Farms Year 2 (2018) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
i 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Watershed Investments NC (Sponsor) is pleased to provide the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) this
Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report for the Neville Farms Bank Parcel (Site). The purpose of this
project is to generate Jordan Lake riparian buffer restoration and preservation mitigation credits as well as
nutrient offset credits. The Neville Farms Bank Parcel is included in the Neville Farms Mitigation Banking
Instrument (MBI) for Riparian Buffer Mitigation and Nutrient Offset Credits signed between Watershed
Investments NC, LLC and the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) and effective on January 29th, 2016.
The MBI is in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (Temporary Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule,
effective October 24, 2014) and 15A NCAC 02B .0240 (Nutrient Offset Payments Rule).
The Site is located approximately 3 miles southwest of Chapel Hill, NC and one mile upstream of University
Lake. Surface water drainage features at the Site feed into the Upper New Hope subwatershed of Jordan
Lake. The Site is located in the Cape Fear River Basin 14-digit United States Geological Survey (USGS)
Cataloging Unit 03030002060070 of the South Atlantic/Gulf Region (North Carolina Division of Water
Quality [NCDWQ] Sub-basin Number 03-06-06).
Project restoration activities and planting were completed in November-December 2016. Completed project
activities, reporting history, completion dates, project contacts, and project attributes are summarized in
Tables 1-4 (Appendix A).
The site encompasses 6.15 acres of land along Neville Creek, which is a tributary to University Lake south of
Chapel Hill in Orange County North Carolina. Site activities consisted of approximately 5.04 acres of
riparian restoration and approximately 0.94 acres of riparian preservation. An additional 0.17 acres of Tract 1
is included in the project easement area but is outside the rule-defined riparian buffer zone and, consequently,
not included for either riparian buffer mitigation or nutrient offset credit generation.
The Site is comprised of two separate tracts owned by two different landowners and is being mitigated in two
phases. Phase 1 is comprised of Tract I and Phase 2 is comprised of Tract 2. Each phase/tract has its own
credit release schedule for milestones met in accordance with the Neville Farms Mitigation Banking
Instrument (MBI). Though the tracts are adjacent, the division of the Site was necessary based on land use,
land planning, and project crediting. Moving forward; however, project activities for both Tracts are
proceeding on the same schedule. Tract information is as follows.
Tract Acreage Location
Tract 1 (Gambill/Neville Property) 4.31 ac. Main project area located on the north side of Neville
Creek and accessible from Old Greensboro Highway
Tract 2 (McGee Property) 1.84 ac. Area south of Neville Creek and accessible from
Stansbury Road

Orange County is the delegated authority by the NC Environmental Management Commission to conduct
determinations on whether drainage features in their jurisdiction are surface waters and subject to the buffer
rules of the State found in 15A NCAC 02B .0267 (Protection of Existing Riparian Buffers). Orange County
Neville Farms Year 2 (2018) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
ii 
Planning and Inspections assessed the Site and provided their determination on February 9th, 2015 that the
surface water features on the Site are subject to the Rule (Appendix C).
The project has restored and preserved forest adjacent to surface water features to reduce nutrients that flow
into Neville Creek, University Lake, and ultimately Jordan Lake. The project will have ancillary benefits that
include reducing sediment runoff, reducing nutrients to streams through agricultural runoff, and thus,
improving aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Any nutrient offset or riparian buffer mitigation generated from this
Bank Parcel may offset impacts from development, both existing and proposed, within the Upper New Hope
Subwatershed of Jordan Lake, as verified by DWR staff onsite and in a letter dated April 6, 2015 (Appendix
E).
At the request of NC DWR, one (1) additional permanent vegetation plot was installed in the Zone C
Restoration area of Tract 1 during year 1 annual monitoring for a total of five (5) permanent vegetation plots
in Tract 1 and two (2) permanent vegetation plots in Tract 2. During Year 1 (2017), mowing occurred to
reduce herbaceous competition of planted trees. Year 4 (2020) data was collected on October 11-12, 2020 by
Axiom Environmental and derived an average density of 445 planted stems per acre (excluding livestakes). In
addition, all seven vegetation plots were well above success criteria of 260 planted stems per acre with the
exception of Plot 7; however, when taking naturally recruited stems of green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) stems
into consideration, this plot was well-above success criteria. During data collection Axiom noted that several
trees in Plot 7 may have been lost to due herbicide treatments in this portion of the site.
While both tracts have met success criteria, after reviewing Year-3 (2019) monitoring data, NC Division of
Water Resources (DWR) staff raised concerns over limited plant growth. As a result, an adaptive
management plan was developed by WINC for the Site and approved by the Division (see Appendix C).
Implementation of this plan has commenced and is detailed in Section 3.0 of this report. 

Neville Farms Year 3 (2019) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... i 
1.0 PROJECT MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS .......................................................................... 1 
1.1 Project Monitoring Plan .................................................................................................................................. 1 
1.2 Success Criteria ................................................................................................................................................. 1 
2.0 MITIGATION POTENTIAL .................................................................................................................................... 2 
3.0  ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN ....................................................................................................................... 2 
4.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A. GENERAL FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Figure 3. Component and Asset Map
Table 1A. Phase 1/Tract 1 Neville Farms Buffer Credit Generation Summary
Table 1B. Phase 1/Tract 1 Neville Farms Nutrient Offset Credit Generation Summary
Table 1C. Phase 2/Tract 2 Neville Farms Buffer Credit Generation Summary
Table 1D. Phase 2/Tract 2 Neville Farms Nutrient Offset Credit Generation Summary
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
APPENDIX B. VEGETATION DATA
Table 5. Planting List
Table 6. Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals
Table 7. Planted and Total Stems by Plot and Species
Table 8. CVS Data Summary Table
Permanent Photo Points
Vegetation Plot Photographs
APPENDIX C. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN

 Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
1 
1.0 PROJECT MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
1.1 Project Monitoring Plan
Riparian vegetation monitoring for Phase 1 and Phase 2 will be based on the CVS Level 1-2 Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 (Lee et al. 2008). Annual vegetation monitoring will occur each year during the
fall season with the first year for each Phase occurring at least 5 months after initial planting of the Tract/s.
Vegetation monitoring plots measure 0.0247 acre in size and cover 2% of the planted area. Accordingly, four
(4) permanent vegetative plots will be used to monitor Tract 1 and two (2) permanent vegetative plots will be
used to monitor Tract 2. At the request of NC DWR, one (1) additional permanent vegetation plot was
installed in the Zone C Restoration area of Tract 1 during year 1 annual monitoring for a total of five (5)
permanent vegetation plots in Tract 1 and two (2) permanent vegetation plots in Tract 2 (Figure 2, Appendix
A).
A reference photo will be taken from the southwestern corner of each plot. All planted stems in the plots
will be marked with flagging tape and recorded. Data collected will include species, height, planting type
(planted stem or volunteer), and grid location. Year 4 (20120) CVS data was collected on October 12, 2020
by Axiom Environmental and derived an average density of 445 planted stems per acre (excluding livestakes)
(Table 7, Appendix B). Planted stems throughout the site had good vigor, in general, with an average planted
stem height of 3.1 feet (94.7cm).
The Sponsor shall submit to DWR an annual monitoring report for each phase, no later than December 31 of
each year for five consecutive years. Reports will document the success of the vegetation and any
maintenance, supplemental planting, or encroachment within the easement areas. As planting and the
monitoring for both Phase 1 and 2 occurred on the same schedule, WINC intends to submit one Monitoring
Report each year for at least 5 years to document the above requirements for both phases. All Monitoring
Reports shall reflect the Phase for which it is being submitted. Monitoring bonds shall be renewed with
confirmation of renewal provided to DWR with each annual monitoring report for each phase. DWR
reserves the right to alter the credit release schedule if monitoring reports are submitted without proof of
bond renewals.
Invasive and noxious species will be monitored annually and controlled as needed so that none become
dominant or alter the desired community structure of the site.
Year 2 maintenance activities at the Site included herbicide treatment on local areas of Japanese Stiltgrass
(Microstegium vimineum) and Autumn Olive (Eleagnus umbellata) at Tract 2. These treatments were conducted on
May 25, 2018 with a follow up on August 31, 2018. An aquatic-safe glyphosate (AquaNeat) herbicide was
applied by a licensed Pesticide Applicator to control the invasive vegetation. Additionally, the conservation
easement associated with the project was transferred to Unique Places to Save on July 26, 2018. This transfer
fulfilled the property disposition and long-term management requirements of the Neville Farms MBI.
Easement boundaries were checked at the time of CVS data collection, there were no signs of encroachment.
1.2 Success Criteria
Pursuant to criteria found in the Temporary Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 and
Neville Farms MBI, vegetative success for the Site will require the survival of at least 260 planted trees per
acre at the end of Year 5 based on monitoring data compiled for the site and site visits by the DWR. Natural
 Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
2 
recruits will not count towards annual achievement of performance standards; however, they may be taken
into account during review by the NC DWR. Recruitment of volunteer species in the floodplain is
anticipated due to adjacent forests that exist upstream and on the stream bank.
2.0 MITIGATION POTENTIAL
As noted in the Neville Farms MBI, buffer credit determination is subject to the Temporary Buffer Rule 15A
NCAC 02B .0295(h) and (i). Figure 3 (Appendix A) identifies the riparian areas and credit types for Phase 1
and Phase 2.
In accordance with Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295, the width of the buffer/nutrient credit generation area
begins at the most landward limit of the top of bank or the rooted herbaceous vegetation and extends
landward to a maximum distance of 200 feet. Nutrient offsets are not being generated within the areas
described as Preservation. Preservation areas meet the requirements described in .0295 (m)(2)(D) –
Preservation of Buffers on Subject Streams. Restoration areas meet the requirements of .0295(i) – Riparian
Restoration or Enhancement. Nutrient Offset credits are consistent with rules 15A NCAC 02B .024.
The following is a summary of the Jordan Lake riparian buffer credits and nutrient offset credit calculations
for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Site. Detailed credit calculations are included in Tables 1A-1D (Appendix A).
Phase 1 (Tract 1)
 0.40 acres Riparian Buffer Preservation = 1742.4 square feet of credit
 3.74 acres Nutrient Offset = 7220.59 lbs-N delivered and 424.90 lbs-P delivered)
Phase 2 (Tract 2)
 1.30 acres Riparian Buffer Restoration = 55,321.2 square feet (ft2) of credit
 0.54 acres Riparian Buffer Preservation = 2330.50 square feet (ft2) of credit
As indicated in the Site’s MBI, credits generated from riparian buffer restoration activities can be converted
and transferred from buffer credits to nutrient offset credits with Division approval and from nutrient offset
credits to buffer credits. However, when converting from nutrient offsets to buffer, all applicable ratios and
percentages of full credit will apply according to 15A NCAC 02B .0295.
Neville Farms’ Nutrient Offset and Riparian Buffer credits will not be debited within the same area (not
stacked). The Neville Farms Bank will service impacts within the Upper New Hope Subwatershed of Jordan
Lake.
3.0 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
An Adaptive Management plan has been implemented due to DWR’s concerns over poor plant growth.
Work on this plan was initiated in August of 2020 with herbicide treatment of dense fescue in the vicinity of
Plot-7, spray logs are included in Appendix C. Additional implementation activities are planned for late 2020
and early 2021 as detailed in plan.

 Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
3 
4.0 REFERENCES
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation, Level 1-2 Plot Version 4.2. Ecosystem Enhancement Program, North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

Shafale, M. P., and Weakley, A.S. 1990. Classification of the natural communities of North Carolina, third
approximation. NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program.
Raleigh, NC.

Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 3 (2019) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 

APPENDIX A
GENERAL FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1. Site Location
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View
Figure 3. Component and Asset Map
Table 1A. Phase 1/Tract 1 Neville Farms Buffer Credit Generation Summary
Table 1B. Phase 1/Tract 1 Neville Farms Nutrient Offset Credit Generation Summary
Table 1C. Phase 2/Tract 2 Neville Farms Buffer Credit Generation Summary
Table 1D. Phase 2/Tract 2 Neville Farms Nutrient Offset Credit Generation Summary
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes

Appendices Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2)      Watershed Investments NC  Table 1A. Phase 1/Tract 1 Neville Farms Buffer Credit Generation Summary Buffer Zone Mitigation Type Ratio Phase 1 Area (ac) Credit Per Acre Total Buffer Credit Zone A (0-50 ft) Buffer Preservation 10:1 0.40 4356 1742.4 Total Riparian Buffer Credit 0.40 n/a 1742.4  Table 1B. Phase 1/Tract 1 Neville Farms Nutrient Offset Credit Generation Summary Buffer Zone Mitigation Type Phase 1 area (ac) Generated Nutrient Offset Credit Yield (lb/30yr/ac) Generated Offset Credit Delivery Factor for Offsets Delivered Offset Credit N lbs/ac P lbs/ac N lbs P lbs %N %P N lbs P lbs Zone A (0-50 ft) Buffer Restoration 0.94 2169.26 143.81 2039.10 135.18 89 79 1814.80 106.79 Zone B (51-100 ft) Buffer Restoration 1.27 2754.96 182.64 2451.91 144.29 Zone C (101-200 ft) Buffer Restoration 1.53 3318.97 220.03 2953.88 173.82 Total Nutrient Offset Credit 3.74 8113.03 537.85 7220.59 424.90    
Appendices Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2)      Watershed Investments NC Table 1C. Phase 2/Tract 2 Neville Farms Buffer Credit Generation Summary Buffer Zone Mitigation Type Ratio Phase 2 Area (ac) Credit Per Acre Total Buffer Credit Zone A (0-50 ft) Buffer Restoration 1:1 0.71 43,560 30,927.6 Zone B (51-100 ft) Buffer Restoration 1:1 0.53 43,560 23,086.8 Zone C (101-200) Buffer Restoration 1:1 & 50% 0.06 21,780 1306.8 Total Riparian Buffer Restoration Credit 1.30 n/a 55,321.20 Zone A (0-50 ft) Buffer Preservation 10:1 0.46 4356 2003.8 Zone B (51-100 ft) Buffer Preservation 10:1 0.07 4356 304.9 Zone C (101-200) Buffer Preservation 10:1 & 50% 0.01 2178 21.8 Total Riparian Buffer Preservation Credit 0.54 n/a 2330.50 Total Riparian Buffer Credit 1.84 n/a 57,651.70  Table 1D. Phase 2/Tract 2 Neville Farms Nutrient Offset Credit Generation Summary Buffer Zone Mitigation Type Phase 2 area (ac) Generated Nutrient Offset Credit Yield (lb/30yr/ac) * Generated Offset Credit Delivery Factor for Offsets * Delivered Offset Credit N P N lbs P lbs %N %P N lbs P lbs Zone A (0-50 ft) Buffer Restoration 0.71 814.15 182.77 578.05 129.77 89 79 514.46 102.52 Zone B (51-100 ft) Buffer Restoration 0.53 431.50 96.87 384.03 76.53 Zone C (101-200) Buffer Restoration 0.06 48.85 10.96 43.48 8.66 Total Nutrient Offset Credit 1.30 1058.40 237.60 941.97 187.71 *Note: In the BPDP, WINC requested buffer mitigation from Phase 2 and is providing this information for supporting documentation in case a request is made to transfer credit from buffer to nutrient offset. Any transfer of credit from buffer to nutrient must be reviewed and approved by the Division prior to transfer. In addition, credit calculations changed since submittal of the BPDP; documentation and approval from planning for credit calculations are included in Appendix G.   
Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Activity or Report Data Collection Completion or Delivery
Neville Farms Bank Parcel Mitigation Banking Instrument Signed - January 29, 2016
Orange County Planning & Inspection Determination - February 9, 2015
DWR Staff Site Visit for Project Viability & Service Area Approval - April 6, 2015
Revised BPDP Submitted - June 1, 2016
Revised BPDP Approved - June 9, 2016
Site Preparation & Invasive Controls - November 16-18, 2016
Site Planting - December 21-22, 2016
Restoration work verification site visit with DWR Staff - January 31, 2017
Draft As-Built & Baseline Monitoring Document January 5, 2017 March 20, 2017
Year 1 (2017) Annual Monitoring Report October 11, 2017 October 30, 2017
Year 2 (2018) Annual Monitoring Report October 09, 2018 October 30, 2018
Year 3 (2019) Annual Monitoring Report October 11, 2019 October 30, 2019
Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report October 12, 2020 October 30, 2020

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Site Prep and Planting Contractor
Bruton Natural Systems
PO Box 1197
Fremont, NC 27830
[e-mail]
919-242-6555
Surveying
K2 Design Group
5688 US Hwy 70 East
Goldsboro, NC 27534
[e-mail]
919-751-0075
Conservation Easement Preparation
Harriss & Marion, PLLC
3326 Durham-Chapel Hill Blvd
P.O Box 51009
Durham, NC 27717
[e-mail]
919-493-8421
Banking Documents and Reports Preparation
Watershed Investments NC
1630 Weatherford Circle
Raleigh, NC 27604
[e-mail]
919-559-6264
Nursery/Seedling Supplier
Dykes and Son Nursery
825 Maude Etter Road
McMinnville, TN 37110
931-668-8833
Monitoring Services
Axiom Environmental Inc
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
919-215-1693
[e-mail]
Adaptive Management Plan Contractor
Ripple EcoSolutions
215 Moonridge Road
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 

Table 4. Project Baseline Information & Attributes Table
Project Information
Project Name Neville Farms
County Orange
Project Area (acres) Tract 1 = 4.31 acres, Tract 2 = 1.84 acres
Project Coordinates (latitude and
longitude)
Tract 1 - Latitude: 35.8917° , Longitude: -79.1281°
Tract 1 - Latitude: 35.8926° , Longitude: -79.1262°
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Piedmont
River Basin Cape Fear
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03030002 USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-
digit 03030002060070
DWQ Sub-basin 03-06-06
Jordan Lake Subwatershed Upper New Hope
Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 

APPENDIX B
VEGETATION DATA

Table 5. Planting List
Table 6. Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals
Table 7. Planted and Total Stems by Plot and Species
Table 8. CVS Data Summary
Permanent Photo Points
Vegetation Plot Photographs

Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
Table 5. Planting List
Piedmont Alluvial Forest
Acreage Planted 5.04 acres
Species Total Stems
Planted
River Birch (Betula nigra)535
Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)240
Tulip poplar (Liriodendron tulipifera)535
American Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)535
Swamp Chestnut Oak (Quercus michauxii)535
Cherrybark Oak (Quercus pagoda)535
TOTAL 2915
Table 6. 2020 Riparian Buffer Vegetation Totals
Plot # Riparian Buffer Stems1
(per acre) Success Criteria Met?
1 850 Yes
2 405 Yes
3 364 Yes
4 486 Yes
5 405 Yes
6 364 Yes
7 283 No
Project Avg 451 Yes
1 Buffer Stems=Native planted hardwood trees. Does NOT include shrubs. No pines. No vines.
neither Project Code 16.027.  Project Name: Neville Creek BufferPnoLS 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 PnoLS P‐all TAcer negundo boxelder Tree17 17 11 7Betula nigra river birch Tree 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 14 14 15 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 15Diospyros virginiana common persimmon Tree 3 2544Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 15 1 1 17 2 2 16 1 1 6 5 14 14 66 13 13 63 14 14 60 14 14 14 14 14 14Juglans nigra black walnut Tree3Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Tree12Liriodendron tulipifera tuliptree Tree 3 3 4 2 2 2 2 2 11 1 1 5 4 4 4 1 1 1 13 13 27 15 15 37 14 14 23 18 18 18 17 17 17Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 6 6 6 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 17 17 17Prunus serotina black cherry Tree1Quercus oak Tree111 111222444999131313Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 10 10 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 13 13 13 7 7 7Quercus pagoda cherrybark oak Tree 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5555555666666Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree444 111555444555222Quercus shumardii Shumard's oak Tree 1 1 111111111111111122 22 26 9 9 9 10 10 33 11 11 32 10 10 41 9 9 14 6 6 11 77 77 166 78 78 166 83 83 154 93 93 94 90 90 907784445566665566663349911991299139910888890.3 890.3 1052 364.2 364.2 364.2 404.7 404.7 1335 445.2 445.2 1295 404.7 404.7 1659 364.2 364.2 566.6 242.8 242.8 445.2 445.2 445.2 959.7 450.9 450.9 959.7 479.8 479.8 890.3 537.7 537.7 543.4 607 607 607Color for DensityPnoLS = Planted excluding livestakesExceeds requirements by 10% P‐all = Planting including livestakesExceeds requirements, but by less than 10% T = All planted and natural recruits including livestakesFails to meet requirements, by less than 10% T includes natural recruitsFails to meet requirements by more than 10%70.1760.1570.1770.1770.1710.0210.0210.020.0210.0210.02Stem countsize (ares)size (ACRES)Species countStems per ACRE16.027‐01‐000210.0216.027‐01‐0007Annual MeansMY4 (2020) MY3 (2019) MY2 (2018) MY1 (2017) MY0 (2017)Current Plot Data (MY4 2020)16.027‐01‐0003 16.027‐01‐0004 16.027‐01‐0005 16.027‐01‐00061Table 7.  Planted Stems by Plot and SpeciesScientific Name Common Name Species Type16.027‐01‐0001
Table 8.  Planted Stems Summary
Plot SCIENTIFIC_NAME X Y Height (CM) DBH Vigor
1 Quercus pagoda 0.9 0.2 50 3
1 Platanus occidentalis 0.8 3.0 137 0.5 4
1 Liriodendron tulipifera 0.7 4.3 40 3
1 Liriodendron tulipifera 3.5 3.8 30 3
1 Platanus occidentalis 3.4 2.2 181 0.5 4
1 Betula nigra 5.7 0.0 60 3
1 Betula nigra 5.6 3.5 45 3
1 Betula nigra 5.0 5.0 50 3
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 7.2 3.4 45 3
1 Platanus occidentalis 8.2 1.3 250 1.5 4
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10.9 0.8 72 3
1 Betula nigra 10.9 2.1 30 3
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10.6 3.7 61 3
1 Liriodendron tulipifera 10.0 5.0 61 3
1 Platanus occidentalis 12.7 3.6 185 0.5 4
1 Quercus michauxii 12.8 2.1 28 2
1 Quercus pagoda 13.0 0.9 20 2
1 Quercus shumardii 15.8 3.9 39 4
1 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 15.7 5.0 80 3
1 Quercus pagoda 17.8 3.6 10 3
1 Platanus occidentalis 17.8 0.7 142 0.3 4
1 Platanus occidentalis 17.8 1.7 145 0.2 4
2 Liriodendron tulipifera 0.7 1.2 52 1
2 Liriodendron tulipifera 4.0 1.4 83 3
2 Platanus occidentalis 7.7 3.3 265 1.9 4
2 Platanus occidentalis 8.8 0.4 201 0.8 4
2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 10.0 3.9 161 0.8 3
2 Quercus michauxii 6.4 5.5 85 3
2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 8.8 6.6 100 3
2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 7.8 9.3 155 0.2 4
2 Quercus michauxii 5.2 8.3 75 4
2 Liriodendron tulipifera 1.6 6.6 0 0
3 Betula nigra 2.2 2.2 109 3
3 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5.2 3.2 145 0.2 4
3 Quercus pagoda 9.4 1.3 69 3
3 Betula nigra 7.7 4.2 62 3
3 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.9 7.2 20 2
3 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5.2 9.4 102 3
3 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 2.5 8.1 120 3
3 Betula nigra 4.1 6.3 93 3
3 Quercus michauxii 0.9 5.9 43 3
3 Liriodendron tulipifera 1.2 0.1 70 3
Table 8.  Planted Stems Summary (continued)
Plot SCIENTIFIC_NAME X Y Height (CM) DBH Vigor
4 Quercus michauxii 0.5 0.2 41 3
4 Quercus rubra 1.5 2.5 44 3
4 Quercus rubra 4.6 2.3 45 3
4 Quercus rubra 2.9 4.7 51 3
4 Quercus 7.1 1.0 44 3
4 Liriodendron tulipifera 9.0 3.5 52 3
4 Betula nigra 9.2 0.2 62 3
4 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5.4 4.9 78 3
4 Betula nigra 8.9 6.9 50 3
4 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.2 7.6 0 0
4 Betula nigra 9.9 9.1 44 3
4 Quercus 1.1 9.6 0 0
4 Quercus rubra 7.1 9.9 50 4
5 Platanus occidentalis 2.9 2.5 458 3.5 4
5 Liriodendron tulipifera 5.5 0.7 44 3
5 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.1 3.4 52 3
5 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 8.6 0.3 100 3
5 Platanus occidentalis 8.7 3.0 461 3.7 4
5 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.2 6.2 60 3
5 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 8.8 5.9 97 3
5 Quercus 9.1 9.3 0 Missing
5 Liriodendron tulipifera 6.1 8.8 80 3
5 Betula nigra 3.1 3.9 69 3
5 Quercus michauxii 0.2 8.8 50 3
6 Platanus occidentalis 3.6 3.3 361 3 4
6 Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5.5 1.1 293 2.1 4
6 Platanus occidentalis 7.2 3.6 355 2.7 4
6 Platanus occidentalis 5.2 5.1 388 3.5 4
6 Quercus pagoda 7.7 7.1 30 3
6 Quercus michauxii 6.0 9.8 28 3
6 Platanus occidentalis 3.9 7.1 310 1.8 4
6 Betula nigra 1.1 5.5 52 3
6 Liriodendron tulipifera 9.4 1.0 88 3
7 Quercus michauxii 0.8 0.0 0 Missing
7 Quercus michauxii 4.2 3.2 0 0
7 Quercus michauxii 0.4 3.4 40 2
7 Betula nigra 7.2 7.4 51 3
7 Betula nigra 9.5 2.7 24 3
7 Quercus rubra 8.9 6.4 0 0
7 Quercus michauxii 6.9 8.7 41 3
7 Quercus michauxii 1.9 8.5 44 3
7 Betula nigra 7.4 1.1 50 3
7 Quercus michauxii 8.9 9 50 3
Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
Neville Farms
Permanent Photo Points
Taken October 12, 2020

PP1
PP4 PP3
PP2
Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 
Neville Farms
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken October 12, 2020

Plot 1
Plot 4 Plot 3
Plot 5 Plot 6
Plot 7
Plot 2
Appendices 
Neville Farms Year 4 (2020) Annual Monitoring Report (Phases 1 &2) Watershed Investments NC 

APPENDIX C
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
Adaptive Management Plan (2nd Submission - 7/12/2020)
Neville Farms Phases 1&2
DWR #2015-0636
Site Overview and History
This Adaptive Management Plan is provided to address concerns over planted stem success at the Neville Farms
Mitigation Bank Parcel (Site). Watershed Investments NC (WINC), the sponsor, originally planted the site in
November-December 2016. The site encompasses 6.15 acres of land along Neville Creek in Orange County
North Carolina and is broken into two tracts separated by Neville Creek (See Figure 1 for a map of the site).
Site activities consisted of approximately 5.04 acres of riparian restoration and approximately 0.94 acres of
riparian preservation. An additional 0.17 acres of Tract 1 is included in the project easement area but is outside
the rule-defined riparian buffer zone and, consequently, is not included for either riparian buffer mitigation or
nutrient offset credit generation.
Year 3 (2019) monitoring data was collected on October 11, 2019 by Axiom Environmental (See Attachment1).
While average density of planted stems per acre were above success criteria of 260 planted stems, in their review
of the report, NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) staff raised concerns over limited plant growth at both
tracts of the Site (See NC DWR Email in Attachment 2) and prompted a visit to review the site.
Staff from Watershed Investments (Mike Herrmann), Axiom Environmental (Phillip Perkinson) accompanied
Katie Merritt (DWR) on a visit to the Site on June 11th, 2020 to review plant growth and discuss options for
corrective measures. In their visit, deer browsing, competition from existing fescue, and poor soils were all sited
as potential causes for limited tree growth in some areas of both tracts. The prevalence of these causes varied
between Tract 1 and Tract 2 but raised concerns over planting success at some areas within the Site. No signs of
easement encroachment were observed during the visit.
The following is a brief summary of observations made of the two tracts during the site visit.
Tract 1 - Planted stem growth was observed to be meeting success criteria throughout the majority of
the mitigation area and numerous natural volunteer plants were observed. Limited plant growth was
observed, however, both within Plot 7 and its immediate surrounding area (See Figure 1). In the Plot 7
area dense fescue was established. Additionally, the plot’s planted stem viability was the lowest of all the
plots (283 stems/acre). Based on field observation, the area of suppressed growth is estimated to be 0.30
acres.
Tract 2 – Both plant diversity and growth were limited in most of the easement area except for the area
within monitoring Plot #2. Potentially causes for these problems were suggested to be poor soil and
plant herbivory. The area affected is shown in Figure 1 and is approximately 1.20 acres.
In response to concerns found in the annual monitoring reports and observed during the visit, the following
adaptive measures are proposed to, increase planted tree density, provide plant diversity, and address
competition from herbaceous plants.
Adpative Management Plan
Herbaceous competition from fescue was observed to be a likely cause of stunted plant growth on Tract 1. On
this tract, herbicide will be used to control fescue. Chemicals labeled safe for use in riparian zones and in aquatic
environments will be mixed and applied at rates labeled for treatment of fescue. Precautions will be taken to
avoid collateral damage to desirable vegetation (both planted and volunteer). Pesticide application will be
conducted by a licensed application specialist and logs will be available upon request. Fescue application will be
scheduled soon after approval of this adaptive management plan.

Soil testing of Tract 2 is being undertaken to determine whether the site needs soil amendments prior to the
container planting. Soil amendment will occur as needed based on soil testing. Possible amendments to the soil
include the use of lime to lower acidity and/or fertilization to improve low soil nutrients (e.g., phosphorus, or
potassium) while being careful not to over fertilize. Fertility in Tract 1 was not observed to be a problem.

To increase planted stem density, planting one-gallon container plants will occur on both tracts 1 and 2. On
Tract 2, 150 native hardwood species listed in Table 1 will be planted at a density of approximately 100 stems per
acre to fill in areas with low planted stem growth or stunted growth. This density, when combined with existing
successful plants, should solidify the likelihood that plantings at the site will meet success criteria defined in the
Mitigation Banking Instrument at the site close-out.

To assess planting needs, Tract 2 is separated into 2 sides based on topography and existing tree growth. Results
from soil tests and existing tree locations on each side will be used to determine where container plants are
needed to supplement sparse areas of existing tree growth. Soil amendments will be based on soil test findings.

For Tract 1, where the area is smaller, approximately 50 trees will be planted using a more uniform 16-foot
spacing. Of the Table 1 species, Acer rubrum (Red Maple) will not be planted on Tract 1 and only used on Tract
2. Planting of both tracts will occur in the Fall/Winter of 2020/2021 and observed over Year 5 of the
monitoring period.

Due to their more developed root system, the
container plants will be better enabled to
overcome herbivory that is suspected to be
affecting the site. In addition, to discourage
herbivory, a deer repellent will be applied at
least once to the plants on Tract 2 in the spring
of 2021 when trees are in the early budding
stage. A non-toxic repellent safe for wildlife will
be used.
Table 1. Proposed one-gallon tree species (Note:
Species availability may result in the substitution of
regionally appropriate native species.)
Species Common Name
Acer negundo Box Elder
Diospyros virginiana Persimmon
Acer rubrum Red Maple (Only on
Tract 2)
Quercus phellos Willow Oak
Celtis occidentalis Hackberry
Quercus falcata Southern red oak
Adpative Management Plan
Herbaceous competition from fescue was observed to be a likely cause of stunted plant growth on Tract 1. On
this tract, herbicide will be used to control fescue. Chemicals labeled safe for use in riparian zones and in aquatic
environments will be mixed and applied at rates labeled for treatment of fescue. Precautions will be taken to
avoid collateral damage to desirable vegetation (both planted and volunteer). Pesticide application will be
conducted by a licensed application specialist and logs will be available upon request. Fescue application will be
scheduled soon after approval of this adaptive management plan.

Soil testing of Tract 2 is being undertaken to determine whether the site needs soil amendments prior to the
container planting. Soil amendment will occur as needed based on soil testing. Possible amendments to the soil
include the use of lime to lower acidity and/or fertilization to improve low soil nutrients (e.g., phosphorus, or
potassium) while being careful not to over fertilize. Fertility in Tract 1 was not observed to be a problem.

To increase planted stem density, planting one-gallon container plants will occur on both tracts 1 and 2. On
Tract 2, 150 native hardwood species listed in Table 1 will be planted at a density of approximately 100 stems per
acre to fill in areas with low planted stem growth or stunted growth. This density, when combined with existing
successful plants, should solidify the likelihood that plantings at the site will meet success criteria defined in the
Mitigation Banking Instrument at the site close-out.

To assess planting needs, Tract 2 is separated into 2 sides based on topography and existing tree growth. Results
from soil tests and existing tree locations on each side will be used to determine where container plants are
needed to supplement sparse areas of existing tree growth. Soil amendments will be based on soil test findings.

For Tract 1, where the area is smaller, approximately 50 trees will be planted using a more uniform 16-foot
spacing. Of the Table 1 species, Acer rubrum (Red Maple) will not be planted on Tract 1 and only used on Tract
2. Planting of both tracts will occur in the Fall/Winter of 2020/2021 and observed over Year 5 of the
monitoring period.

Due to their more developed root system, the
container plants will be better enabled to
overcome herbivory that is suspected to be
affecting the site. In addition, to discourage
herbivory, a deer repellent will be applied at
least once to the plants on Tract 2 in the spring
of 2021 when trees are in the early budding
stage. A non-toxic repellent safe for wildlife will
be used.
Table 1. Proposed one-gallon tree species (Note:
Species availability may result in the substitution of
regionally appropriate native species.)
Species Common Name
Acer negundo Box Elder
Diospyros virginiana Persimmon
Acer rubrum Red Maple (Only on
Tract 2)
Quercus phellos Willow Oak
Celtis occidentalis Hackberry
Quercus falcata Southern red oak

Vegetation Managment Report
Srte I\L Has
Crew Leader
Crew Members
Chemicals sprayed Rale
z-zAql
D -L-,tx*-
L_
Weather conditions
9.B l F^'l
Applicators Ja L)
Date .L)
l\/etliod of removal
U4,-L-^.L
I
Areas Completed
(:) \'c A
Target species
(:"s"n
Ripple EcoSolutions
=
I
I
Ii-
Vl'
I