HomeMy WebLinkAbout19960470 Ver 1_Mitigation Reports_20081201YEAR 3 MONITORING and CLOSEOUT REPORT
for the
BARNHILL MITIGATION SITE
LITTLE IVY CREEK,
MADISON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
EEP PROJECT NUMBER 92651
Prepared in Partnership with the
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-1652
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Watershed Enhancement Group
December 2008
1.0 Executive Summary
The Barnhill mitigation site, North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP)
Project Number 92651, Little Ivy Creek, Madison County, North Carolina, was constructed in
June 2000. The as-built report was completed in November 2000. It was originally constructed
as mitigation for the North Carolina Department of Transportation's (NCDOT) Transportation
Improvement Project Number A-10 C& D (A-10) road project. Monitoring year 1 (MY1) and
monitoring year 2 (MY2) survey data were collected in 2003 and 2004. This report summarizes
stream survey activities associated with monitoring year 3 (MY3), 2007, the seventh year
following project construction, and will serve as the closeout report for the Barnhill mitigation
site.
Morphometric parameters of the channel are within the range of values expected, based on
design values and the values recorded during MY1 and MY2. The project reach is classified as a
C3 stream type. Although the project reach is characterized by having a low slope and a low
sinuosity, the width/depth ratio (mean = 18.9) and entrenchment ratio (>2.2) are the main factors
for the reach being a C stream type. Based on surrogate USGS flow gage hydrograph data from
the Ivy River, 20 possible project site bankfull events occurred between September 2000 and
September 2007.
Average density of woody stems (348 stems/acre) in the larger tree plots exceeded the
minimum success criterion for woody stems/acre. A total of 16 woody stems (9 species) were
counted during the MY3 survey, four more than the MY2 survey. Stem density for the larger
tree plots would have been higher if not for roadside mowing that occurred to tree plot A during
the fall of 2007. Green ash stems (5) made up approximately 31 % of the total stems (16) in the
two tree plots. However, no other species comprised more than 13% of the total. Woody stems
were observed throughout the conservation easement and performing as would be desired seven
years after planting. Planted vegetation is not only contributing to channel bank stability, but
also helping buffer solar warming of surface water.
Overall, the site has benefited from reshaping of the right channel bank, installation of rock
toe protection (2 areas), and the establishment of the conservation easement. The Barnhill
mitigation site is performing as proposed and should be recommended for closeout by NCEEP to
the regulatory agencies.
2.0 Introduction
This monitoring report is submitted as partial fulfillment of the off-site stream mitigation
requirements for the NCDOT A-10 road project (I-26) in Madison County. From 1999 to 2004
all reports associated with this mitigation site were prepared for the NCDOT stream mitigation
program. In 2005, responsibility for this site was transferred from NCDOT to the NCEEP. This
document was prepared using the framework developed by Mulkey, Inc. for the MY1 and MY2
reports (Mulkey 2003, 2004). This was done to maintain consistency with methods used in
earlier field collections and reports and to facilitate the comparison of the 2007 data with
previous years' data.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
2
2.1 Project Description
The Barnhill mitigation site (2.77 acres) is located on Little Ivy Creek, immediately adjacent
to Beech Glen Road (SR 1540), in the southeastern portion of Madison County, approximately
2.0 miles south-southeast of Mars Hill and 14.1 miles northeast of Asheville (Figure 1). The
project reach is 1,200 linear feet, has a 46.5 mil watershed, and is located in the French Broad
River basin.
2.2 Purpose
The purpose of the project was to improve water quality, riparian habitat quality, channel
bank stability, and to enhance aquatic habitat of Little Ivy Creek (NCWRC 2000a). According
to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) stream restoration guidelines, the activities
associated with these improvements would be considered enhancement level II (USACE 2003).
Specific objectives were as follows:
1) to reshape sections of the right channel bank in a meander bend to a stable slope;
2) to install J-hook vanes on the right bank in a meander bend to reduce near bank stress and
to enhance aquatic habitat;
3) to stabilize eroding, vertical channel banks by installing rock toe protection;
4) to re-vegetate the disturbed areas with native flora and;
5) to establish a conservation easement on the left and right banks of the Barnhill property.
2.3 Project History
The effort to provide mitigation for the A-10 road construction project began in 1996 when a
Memorandum of Agreement between the NCDOT and the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission (NCWRC) was signed. Under the Memorandum of Agreement, the NCWRC was
to provide stream mitigation on NCDOT's behalf for jurisdictional stream impacts. The original
USACE section 404 permit and amendments called for providing 25,912 linear feet of mitigation
for unavoidable impacts to trout streams.
The NCDOT also worked with representatives from the USACE, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service
(MRCS), North Carolina Division of Water Quality, and the Madison County Soil and Water
Conservation District to form the mitigation review team (MRT). The purpose of the MRT was
to develop criteria and policies for selecting stream reaches for mitigation. Members of the MRT
also collaborated on project monitoring components, success parameters, and assessed mitigation
credits to be awarded.
The Barnhill site was selected by the MRT to provide compensatory mitigation for the A-10
road project. The project site and conceptual mitigation plan were approved by the MRT in 1998
(Exhibit Table l; NCWRC 1998). The construction plan was completed in February of 2000
(NCWRC 2000a). Project construction began in June 2000 and the as-built report was
completed in November of 2000 (NC WRC 2000b).
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Comtnission
3
Although it has been seven years since construction was completed, the 2007 site survey
reflects only the third monitoring year (MY3). The first monitoring year (MY I) morphometric
and vegetative surveys were completed in March 2003 (Mulkey 2003), whereas MY2 surveys
were conducted in May 2004 (Mulkey 2004).
Exhibit Table 1. Project History
Completion Date Activity
May 1995 USACE issued permit for A-10 project - 199505135
July 1998 NCWRC Conceptual Site Plan Completed
October 5, 1999 Conservation Easement Acquired
February 2000 NCWRC Construction Plan Completed
June 2000 Site Construction Commenced
June 2000 Site Planted with Temporary and Native Perennial Seed Mix
November 2000 NCWRC As-built Report Completed
January 2001 Site Planted with Live Stakes and Bare Rooted Trees
March 2003 Stream Channel Monitoring (MY I)
March 2003 Vegetation Monitoring (MY1)
May 2004 Stream Channel Monitoring (MY2)
May 2004 Vegetation Monitoring (MY2)
October 2007 Stream Channel Monitoring (MY3)
October 2007 Vegetation Monitoring (MY3)
May 2008 NCWRC Monitoring Year 3 and Closeout Report Completed
2.4 Debit Ledger
The MRT anticipated that the Barnhill project would generate 1,200 linear feet of stream
mitigation credits. This was based on a ratio of one mitigation credit for every foot of channel
placed in a conservation easement.
2.5 Success Criteria
The MRT developed the framework of success criteria used to evaluate the A-10 mitigation
projects (Exhibit Table 2). These criteria, developed by the MRT with input from the USACE,
were the early framework of monitoring success criteria and were later adopted by USACE and
placed in their stream mitigation guidelines document (USACE 2003). Included in these criteria
was a combination of the following parameters: two bankfull events over a five year monitoring
period, reference photos, channel stability, riparian vegetation survival, and response of fish and
invertebrate populations, if specifically required by permit conditions. Overall success or failure
of the A-10 mitigation project sites was to be based on a combination of three of these four
parameters.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
4
Exhibit Table 2. Earl Framework of Mitigation Monitoring Success Criteria
Parameter Success' Failure' Action
(requires no action
Photo Reference
Sites
When significant
Longitudinal Photos No significant aggradation, Significant aggradation, aggradation,
Lateral Photos degradation, or erosion degradation or erosion degradation or erosion
occurs, remedial actions
will be undertaken
Channel Stability
Cross-Sections Minimal evidence of When significant
Longitudinal instability (down-cutting, Significant evidence of evidence of instability
Profiles deposition, erosion, decrease instability occurs, remedial actions
Pebble Counts in article size will be undertaken
Plant Survival
>75% coverage in Photo <75% coverage in Photo Areas <75% coverage
Survival Plots Plots Plots will be re-seeded and/or
Stake Counts >80% survival of stakes 4/mz <80% survival of stakes fertilized. Live stakes
Tree Counts
>80% survival of bare rooted
4/m2 and bare-rooted trees
trees <80% survival of bare- will be re-planted to
rooted trees achieve >80% survival
Biological indicators only used for projects with potential to make watershed level changes)
Reasons for failure will
Invertebrate
Po
ulation
Population measures remain
Population measures be evaluated and
di
l
i
l
p
c ish Population
the same or improve
indicate a negative trend reme
a
act
on p
ans
developed and
implemented
Subjective determinations of success or failure were to be determined by majority decision of the MRT.
3.0 Stream Assessment
3.0.1 Pre-Construction Conditions
The project reach was classified as a B3c stream type using the Rosgen (1996) classification
system (NCWRC 2000a). During the initial site assessment, it was found to have an
entrenchment ratio of 2.0, width/depth ratio of 18.9, and a sinuosity of 1.1. Bankfull width was
58.7 ft, mean depth 3.1 ft, and cross-sectional area 190.9 ft2. The existing left channel bank and
riparian area were in good condition. The property owner had maintained a well vegetated
buffer between the stream channel and his residence; many mature woody stem species were
present within the left bank riparian area. The upper section (2400 ft) of the right bank, between
the stream channel and SR 1540, was stable and well vegetated. Near bank stress on the right
bank within a meander bend had caused vertical sloughing and instability to portions of the right
bank. The low terrace adjacent to the meander bend was vegetated with small and large trees
and a dense stand of non-native golden bamboo Phyllostachys aurea. Approximately 400 ft of
the right bank below the meander bend (lower third of the project) consisted of 10-12 ft vertical
faces, portions of which were actively sloughing. In fact, a section of decommissioned state road
was in jeopardy of sloughing into the channel. Because of the degraded condition of the stream
banks and proximity of the old road bed, sections of the right stream bank in this area contained
minimal vegetation.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSR W) Intl, DeceP Fer 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
3.0.2 Post-Construction Conditions
The right channel bank along upper portion of the project reach was wooded and stable;
therefore, no work was needed on this section (above and below the Barnhill driveway bridge).
I ther sections of the project required reshaping of the right channel bank to correct sloughing
problems. Three J-hook rock vanes were installed on the right bank in the meander bend
between stations 6+00 and 7+50. The high vertical right bank on the lower third of the project
was protected with a rock toe revetment (sta. 10+50 to 11+75). The rock toe structure was
backfilled up to the bankfull elevation and a narrow bench created. Right bank areas that were
reshaped were replanted with native herbaceous and woody vegetation.
The existing left channel bank and riparian area were in good condition and minimal work
was necessary. e owever, a cross-vane was constructed just downstream of the location where
the small side channel rejoins the main stem of Little Ivy Creek (sta. 9+00). This structure was
an enhancement to an existing natural grade control feature. It resulted in additional protection
of the left bank and grade control below the confluence of the side channel and main channel.
Additionally, the sloughing left bank portion of the side channel was repaired. A rock toe
revetment was used to stabilize the base of the vertical bank. The revetment was then backfilled
with soil up to the bankfull elevation.
Because the current landowner (Barnhill) had no intentions of managing livestock on his
property, a farm management plan was not developed for the site. e owever, there is a condition
in the conservation easement agreement that allows a fence to be installed on the left bank to
exclude livestock from the easement area should the landowner decide to utilize the area for
livestock.
3.1 Stream Assessment Results
This report contains the MY3 survey data and serves as a closeout report summarizing project
conditions since construction was completed. The report compares changes in channel
dimension and profile, pebble counts, hydrologic events documentation, vegetative condition,
and site photographs for the Barnhill mitigation site. Locations of all fixed survey stations,
established for the purpose of post-construction monitoring are presented in the plan view
drawing (c igure 2).
3.1.1 Cross-Section Surveys
Three cross-sections were established on Little Ivy Creek following construction and have
been surveyed during each of the three monitoring years (Mulkey 2003, 2004; c igure 2). The
morphological characteristics summary of all cross-sections combined provides a comparison of
mean values of channel dimensions (Exhibit Table 3). 1 f particular interest, is the MY3
width/depth ratio (mean = 18.9) and the entrenchment ratio (mean = 2.3). These values drive the
broad level channel classification and are the reasons for the overall C stream type classification.
A noticeable difference in cross-sectional area was observed between the pre-construction survey
data and the three subsequent monitoring survey data. It is not clear as to why there is such a
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSRrW) InD, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
6
discrepancy; possibly the bankfull field calls were at higher elevations before construction as
compared to post-construction surveys.
Morphological characteristics for the three cross-sections surveyed during each of the
monitoring years, cross-section plot overlays, and representative cross-section photos are
presented for comparative purposes (Appendix A.1.). As-built data for each of the cross-sections
were not provided in the MY1 or MY2 reports (Mulkey 2003, 2004). The as-built project reach
survey data resides in NC WRC office files, Balsam, N.C.
Stream type changed from a 133c type found in the 2002 pre-project assessment to a C3
stream type in 2007. The increase in the entrenchment ratio from 1.4 - 2.2 to >2.2 is attributed to
the sloping and reshaping of the right channel bank. This created a slightly wider flood prone
width and influenced the change in stream type. The project reach has maintained a width/depth
ratio >12.0 (mean = 18.9, MY3).
Cross-section 1, Glide (Appendix Table A.]. 1).-There has been little change in this cross-
section since construction in 2000. This cross-section has remained stable with no lateral
movement (bank erosion) observed along either streambank. The right bank has aggraded
slightly between the constructed rock arm of the J-hook structure and the toe of the right bank
terrace.
Cross-section 2, Pool (Appendix Table A.]. 2).-The left and right banks of this cross-section
have remained stable during the seven years following construction. The vegetation on the left
bank is well established; the riparian buffer on the right bank is well established with mature
trees and a dense stand of non-native bamboo. The thalweg has experienced little to no change.
Values presented in Appendix Table A.1.2. from Mulkey (2003) for MY1 do not come close to
approximating values derived from the MY2 or MY3 survey data. It is suspected that the values
for MY1 were derived from a bankfull estimation that was 2-3 ft lower than the actual bankfull
elevation. This would have defined bankfull elevation as being at the toe of the constructed rock
vane arm; whereas, the bankfull elevation at this cross-section is actually on top of the rocks that
form the vane arm.
Cross-section 3, Riffle (Appendix Table A. ].3.).-The thalweg at cross-section 3 has shown no
evidence of change over the seven years since project construction. Planted vegetation has
helped to stabilize the right bank above the constructed rock toe revetment. The left bank is
stable and well vegetated.
3.1.2 Longitudinal Survey
The longitudinal profile survey included the entire project reach (sta. 0+00 to sta. 13+38;
Appendix A.2.). Elevations of the stream bed, water surface, bankfull indicators, and top of the
low banks were recorded. Channel sinuosity was 1.1 and the average water surface slope was
0.009 ft/ft. Any change in thalweg depth or location of stream features when comparing the
longitudinal profiles among monitoring years is likely due to natural year-to-year variation in
stream bed movement and formation. The MY3 longitudinal profile survey found that the
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
7
thalweg was stable with minimal aggradation, degradation, or lateral movement occurring along
the entire reach.
Stream structures.-Six stream structures (3 J-hook vanes, 1 cross vane, and 2 rock toe
revetments) were installed during construction. Three J-hook rock vane structures were installed
on the right bank on the inside of the large meander bend in the middle portion of the project
reach (sta. 6+00 to 7+50). Seven years following construction these structures are largely intact
and functioning as designed. The cross vane (sta. 9+00) that was incorporated into an existing
natural grade control feature is stable and performing as designed. The rock toe revetment
installed on the left bank at the middle portion of the small side channel is protecting the toe of a
vertical bank. The second rock toe revetment (sta. 10+50 to 11+75) has helped improve right
bank stability along the lower portion of the project reach. The narrow floodplain bench created
during installation of the rock toe is vegetated, and the once sloughing bank up-slope of the
revetment has stabilized.
3.1.3 Pebble Counts
Pebble counts were taken at each cross-section to determine the extent of change, if any, in
bed material composition (Appendix A.3.). Mean particle size for each of the particle size
classes generally increased during the monitoring surveys (Exhibit Table 3). The largest mean
D16 particle size, 7.4 mm, was observed in MY3. Mean particle size for the D50 size class was
72.0 mm and 64.7 mm, small cobble, for the pre-construction assessment and the MY3 survey.
Mean particle size for the D50 size class was 19.5 mm and 18.8 mm, coarse gravel, for the MY1
and MY2 surveys. The D84 mean particle size ranged from 168.0 mm to 236.0 mm, large
cobble, for MY1 through MY3. The D84 mean particle size was slightly larger (260.0 mm),
small boulder, for the pre-construction assessment.
Exhibit Table 3. Morphological Characteristi cs Summary of all Cross-Sections
Variable Pre-
construction 2000
As-built 2003
MY1 2004
MY2) 2007
MY3
Drainage Area (miZ) 46.5 46.5 46.5 46.5 46.5
Bankfull Width (ft) (mean) 58.7 48.7 37.6 41.2 41.4
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) (mean) 3.1 3.3 2.1 2.2 2.2
Width/Depth Ratio (mean) 18.9 14.7 18.2 18.6 18.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft) (mean) 190.9 162.5 77.5 91.4 91.0
Maximum Bankfull Depth (ft) (mean) 5.6 5.3 3.0 3.3 3.5
Width of cloodprone Area (ft) (mean) >100 ?100 63.0 63.0 >100
Entrenchment Ratio (mean) 2.0 2.4 1.7 1.5 2.3
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft) 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009
Particle Size Class (mean) a
D 16 (mm) 0.2 0.1 0.1 7.4
D35 (mm) 25.0 1.6 4.2 32.4
D50 (mm) 72.0 19.5 18.8 64.7
D84 (mm) 260.0 168.0 236.0 195.8
D95 (mm) 512.0 368.0 317.0 411.7
aParticle size class data were not collected during the as-built survey.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSPrW) InD, DeceP Fer 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
8
3.2 Hydrologic Data and Bankfull Verification
In the absence of a stream gage in the project drainage, the Ivy River stream gage was used
as a surrogate (Appendix A.4.). The Ivy River gage, USGS Hydrologic Unit 06010105, is
located at 1,700 ft above mean sea level and has a drainage area of 158 miz. Based on the N.C.
rural mountain regional hydraulic geometry curves, a discharge at the Ivy River gage of 450-500
cfs correlates to the bankfull flow at the project location (Harman et al. 2000; Mulkey 2003). A
review of the USGS data for the period between the end of construction (September 2000) and
September 2007 revealed there were >50 flow events at the Ivy River gage >500 cfs (USGS
2008). Twenty of those events exceeded 1,000 cfs (Appendix Table A.4.1.).
Two of the bankfull events at the project site (June 29, 2000 and July 30, 2001) were
photographically documented (Appendix A.5.). High flow discharges >500 cfs recorded on
consecutive days were counted as a single bankfull event.
3.3 Fixed Station Photos
Seven fixed station photo locations document project site conditions from 1999 (before
construction) through 2007 (Appendix A.6.). The planted vegetation along the right bank has
become well established over the seven years since installation. Planted woody vegetation is
>10 ft in height and has enhanced channel bank stability. With the riparian buffer on each
channel bank well established, channel banks are stable and tree foliage is blocking direct
sunlight to the channel, which should help reduce daytime water temperature increases.
3.4 Problem Areas
Problem areas, such as scour and erosion or failing stream structures, were not observed
during the MY3 survey. Consequently, a problem area figure was not prepared. The project
area has well established vegetation, and the channel banks are stable with no apparent signs of
recent erosion.
4.0 Vegetation Assessment
During construction, disturbed areas were seeded with a temporary seed mix (brown top
millet Panicum ramosum and winter wheat Triticum sp.) and a perennial native seed mix
consisting of herbaceous and woody species (Exhibit Table 4). Following construction, winter
2001, the left and right bank conservation easement areas adjacent to Little Ivy Creek were
planted with a large quantity (no numbers available) of live stakes and bare-rooted shrubs and
trees (NCWRC 2000; Exhibit Table 4).
Although woody seed species (11) were sown with herbaceous seed species (14), it is
unknown as to the contribution of woody seeds to restoration of the site. Giving the keen
competition for light and water, it is most likely the woody stems planted as live stakes and bare
rooted specimens are the primary source of woody stems. The herbaceous layer of sown native
seed and wild recruited varieties likely out-competed the woody seed species during the first few
years of riparian vegetation re-establishment.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Exhibit Table 4. Native Seed Mix and Woo d Vegetation Planted
Type Scientific Name Common Name
Native Seed Mix
Acer rubrum Red maple
Acer saccharinum Silver maple
Aronia arbuti olia Red chokeberry
Ascle ias incarnata Swam milkweed
Carex lu ilina e o sedge
Ce halanthus occidentalis Button bush
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood
Eleocharis alustris Creeping s ikerush
El mus vir inicus s it inia wild e
Eu atorium rstulosa Joe P ye weed
Fraxinus enns Ivanica Green ash
flex verticillata Winterberry
Juncus e usus Soft rush
Leersia o :oides Rice cut grass
N ssa s lvatica Black um
Onoclea sensibilis Sensitive fern
Panicum clandestinum Deerton ue
Prunus serotina Black cherry
uercus alustris Pin oak
Sambucus canadensis Elderberry
Scir us americanus Threesquare s ikerush
Scir us atrovirens Green bulrush
Scir us c erinus Wool grass
Scir us validus Softstem bulrush
Tri ascum dac loides Eastern ama rass
Live Stakes
Cornus amomum Silky dogwood
Salix ni ra Black willow
Salix sericea Silk willow
Bare-Rooted Trees
Acer rubrum Red maple
Betula ni a River birch
Cornus stoloni era Red-osier dogwood
Dios ros vir iniana Persimmon
Fraxinus enns lvanica Green ash
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore
Salix ni ra Black willow
4.1 Vegetation Plot Descriptions, Photographs, and Sampling
In 2003, two large (1,000 ft2; plots A and B) tree plots and six smaller (10.8 fe; plots 1-6)
vegetation monitoring plots were established (Mulkey 2003). All plots were used to provide
photo reference points of vegetation performance (Appendix B.1.). In both the tree plots and all
six vegetation plots, woody stems were tagged, identified to species, and enumerated. All tree
and vegetation plots were resurveyed in 2007 (MY3), with the exception of vegetation plot 3,
which could not be relocated. Stem counts taken during MY3 included those from both planted
and naturally recruited sources.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSRrW) InD, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
10
Tree plot A is situated on the right bank adjacent to the intersection of SR 1540 and the
private drive crossing Big Branch (sta. 6+00). Tree plot B is located on the right bank upstream
of the driveway bridge crossing Little Ivy Creek (sta. 0+75) (c igure 2). s egetation plot 1 (sta.
0+75) is located within tree plot B. s egetation plot 2 (sta. 2+50) is located on the right bank,
downstream of the Barnhill driveway crossing. s egetation plot 4 (sta. 7+00) is located on the
right bank downstream of tree plot A, but above the confluence of Little Ivy Creek and Big
Branch. s egetation plot 5 (sta. 7+75) is located on the right bank, just downstream of the
confluence of Little Ivy Creek and Big Branch. s egetation plot 6 (sta. 10+75) is located on the
left bank downstream of cross-section 3. The six smaller vegetation plots also were used to
assess woody stem density (both planted and naturally recruited).
4.2 Vegetation Monitoring Results
Tree Plot A.-The number of woody stems present in tree plot A decreased from 7 to 4
between MY2 and MY3 (Exhibit Table 5). Some of this decrease can be attributed to NCDI T
roadside mowing during the fall of 2007. Tree plot A is adjacent to SR 1540; therefore, the plot
is susceptible to right-of-way maintenance mowing. The mowed stems included two green ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica trees and a red maple Acer rubra. Moreover, of the three river birch
Betula nigra stems noted in the MY1 survey, only one stem was found in MY2, whereas none
was found in MY3. It is uncertain if the river birch stems succumbed to natural mortality or if
mowing was the cause for their loss. Eastern gamagrass Tripascum dactyloides, goldenrod
Solidago sp., and blackberry Rubus sp. also were observed in tree plot A.
Tree Plot B.-The number of woody stems present in tree plot B increased from 5 to 12
between MY2 and MY3 (Exhibit Table 5). This is likely due to recruitment of new stems. In
addition to the recruitment noted in the MY2 report (black walnut Juglans nigra and black
cherry Prunus serotina), woody stems of staghorn sumac Rhus typhina (2) and persimmon
Diospyros virginiana (1) were noted during the MY3 vegetation survey. The addition of
recruited stems has helped to offset the loss of green ash stems. Seven green ash stems were
noted in MY1; only three stems were noted in MY3. e erbaceous species included goldenrod,
muscadine Vitis rotundifolia, and greenbrier Smilax sp.
Vegetation Plot 1. No woody stems were observed in vegetation plot 1, representing no
change from past monitoring years. Eastern gamagrass was observed in the herbaceous layer,
mixed in with tall fescue Festuca sp. Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica also was present.
Vegetation Plot 2. No woody stems have been observed in vegetation plot 2 during any of
the three monitoring surveys. A mix of Eastern gamagrass and tall fescue was observed in the
herbaceous layer. A small amount of Japanese honeysuckle was present.
Vegetation Plot 3.-s egetation plot 3 could not be relocated in MY3
Vegetation Plot 4. No woody stems have been observed in vegetation plot 4 during any of
the three vegetation monitoring surveys. Tall fescue was the dominant species in the herbaceous
layer, which also included wild onion Allium canadense, henbit deadnettle Lamium
amplexicaule, and black berry.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSPrW) InD, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
II
Vegetation Plot 5.-1 ne silky dogwood Cornus amomum stem has been observed in
vegetation plot 5 during each of the three vegetation monitoring surveys. Tall fescue was the
dominant ground cover. Sparse sprigs of Japanese honeysuckle were present.
Vegetation Plot 6-A single willow oak Quercus phellos stem was observed in MY3. A
single woody stem also was noted during the MY1 and MY2 surveys, but the stem was identified
as a cherrybark oak Quercus pagoda in MY2 and a willow oak in MY1. Tall fescue was the
dominant herbaceous species; goldenrod and Japanese honeysuckle were observed, but less
prevalent.
A density criterion of 260 stems per acre for planted woody stems is used to determine
vegetation success after five growing seasons following plant installation at mitigation sites
(r SACE 2003). After seven growing seasons, the density of woody stems at the Barnhill site
was 348 stems per acre (Exhibit Table 5). Stem density for the tree plots would have been
higher if not for roadside mowing that occurred within tree plot A during the fall 2007. Green
ash stems (5) made up 31% of the counted stems (16) in the two tree plots. e owever, no other
species comprised more than 13%. c our woody species recruited into the tree plots since MY2;
black cherry (2), black walnut (2), staghorn sumac (2), and persimmon (1) were observed.
Woody stem counts for the larger tree plots are of most significance. Although the smaller
vegetation plots were used to count woody stems, the 10.8 ft2 plots covered such a small area
that only a single stem was needed in the plot to meet the minimum criteria.
Exhibit Table 5. Ve etat ion M onitoring Results
3 0
°o
O
Total Total Total Density
Plots 3 0 ¢ 3 ?i O c Stem Stem Stem (Stems/
x
U
U
U
o
x
Count
Count
Count
Acre)
? AQ U U
3
2003
2004
2007
2007
L) MY1) (MY2) (MY3 MY3)
Tree Plots MY3 Woody Stem Counts
Plot A (1,000 ft) 1 2 1 10 7 4 174
Plot B (1,000 ft) 1 1 2 3 2 1
t 1
2
8
5
12
523
Average Density 348
Vegetation Plots MY3 Woody Stem Counts
Plot 1 (10.8 ft)
Plot 2 10.8 ft2
Plot 3 (10.8 ft2)
Plot 4 10.8 ft)
Plot 5 10.8 ft) 1 ] 1 1 4,033
Plot 6 10.8 ft) 1 1 1 1 4,033
Average Density 1,344
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSPrW) InD, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
12
4.3 Invasive Exotic Vegetation Occurrence
Exotic species were present within the project area, with tall fescue and Japanese
honeysuckle the most prevalent. Other invasive exotic species present included multiflora rose
Rosa multiflora, oriental bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus, and golden bamboo. Multiflora rose
and oriental bittersweet were most obvious in the outside portion of the large meander bend (sta.
6+25 to 7+25). Golden bamboo was most prevalent on the right bank from sta. 8+00 to 9+25
and has formed a dense monotypic stand in this portion of the project area. The multiflora rose,
Japanese honeysuckle, and oriental bittersweet could likely be controlled with herbicides, but the
tall fescue and golden bamboo would require a more aggressive and long term approach to
control their presence within the easement.
5.0 Biological Indicators
As a condition of the USACE section 404 permit for the A-10 project, NCDOT was to
develop a biological monitoring plan for the mitigation sites. To the best of our knowledge, no
fish or aquatic insect sampling was completed.
6.0 Closeout Summary
The Barnhill mitigation site on Little Ivy Creek in Madison County, N.C. was monitored for
the third time in October 2007, seven years since project completion (June 2000). Monitoring of
the project reach occurred in 2003 and 2004 (Mulkey 2003, 2004). Initial project objectives to
enhance and protect water and riparian quality, channel bank stability, and aquatic habitat have
been achieved.
Channel Cross-Sections.-Morphometric parameters for MY3 approximate the range of
values expected for the site based on the values recorded during MY1 and MY2. Moreover,
minimal to no evidence of instability was revealed during the MY3 physical survey of the three
individual cross-sections. Although the values for some bankfull parameters have had a wide
range over the course of monitoring, this is most likely indicative of variation in survey crews
and with the identification of bankfull features in the field and does not represent instability of
the project reach.
Longitudinal Profile.-Although sinuosity is on the low end for a C type channel (1. 1), the
water surface slope (0.009 ft/ft) is typical for a C stream type. Evidence of the channel
attempting to increase its sinuosity (laterally extend) has not been observed. It is unlikely that
lateral extension will occur given that the left and right bank vegetation is well established.
Overall, the channel thalweg has and is expected to remain stable with little aggradation,
degradation, or lateral movement under typical hydrologic conditions.
Pebble Counts.-Mean particle size generally increased during each of the three monitoring
surveys for the D16-1350 particle size class categories, while remaining fairly consistent for the
D84 and D95 size class categories. Evidence of mid channel or transverse bars was lacking and
overall the channel bed appeared stable with minimal to no aggradation or degradation observed
during the MY3 survey.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
13
Hydrologic Data and Bankfull Verification.-The drainage of Little Ivy Creek has
experienced well over the minimum of two required bankfull events. Given the large number of
surrogate stream gage flows suggesting project reach bankfull or higher events, little to no signs
of adverse high water effects such as bank scour or erosion were evident.
Fixed Station Photos.-Fixed station photographs document the overall condition and
performance of the site seven years post-construction. Field observation and photo
documentation of planted woody vegetation revealed that woody riparian vegetation is >10 ft in
height and has enhanced stability of the channel banks. Mature trees adjacent to the channel are
providing shade to the stream corridor. Channel photos revealed stable banks with little to no
lateral migration of the thalweg and no appreciable aggradation or degradation of the channel.
Problem Areas.-Observation of the riparian floodplain and the stream channel revealed a
stable project area that is performing as desired seven years after construction. No problem areas
were present.
Vegetation.-Average density of woody stems for the tree plots was 348 stems/acre, which
exceeds the minimum required criterion of 260 stems/acre for mitigation sites five or more years
post-construction. In addition to the woody vegetation present within the survey plots, planted
woody stems were well established throughout the site. Woody species have established
extensive root systems that have contributed to stabilizing the stream banks. While not a
significant problem, several exotic invasive species are present on the site and should be
monitored.
Overall, the project site has benefited from the described prescription of channel and riparian
enhancement practices set forth in the construction plan. Establishment of the conservation
easement, installation of in-stream structures, and reestablishment of native woody riparian
vegetation has contributed to improved channel stability and function. The Barnhill mitigation
site is performing as purposed under the mitigation guidance in place at the time. Given the facts
presented in this report, the Barnhill site is performing as desired and should be presented to the
regulatory agencies for closeout consideration.
7.0 Acknowledgements
Scott Loftis, Jeff Ferguson, Brent Burgess, and Todd Ewing of the NCWRC watershed
enhancement group collected and analyzed the field data. Scott Loftis, Jeff Ferguson, and Todd
Ewing prepared this report. Jim Borawa with the NCWRC provided comments for improving
this report. Mulkey, Inc. collected and analyzed the data and prepared the reports for MY1
(2003) and MY2 (2004).
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
14
7.0 References
Harman, W. A, D. E. Wise, M. A. Walker, R. Morris, M. A. Cantrell, M. Clemmons, G. D.
Jennings, D. Clinton, and J. Patterson. 2000. Bankfull regional curves for North Carolina
mountain streams. Pages 185-190 in D. L. Kane, editor. Proceedings of the American Water
Resources Association Conference: Water Resources in Extreme Environments. American
Water Resources Association, Middleburg, Virginia.
Mulkey (Mulkey, Inc.). 2003. Annual Report for 2003. Little Ivy Creek Stream Mitigation Site
(Barnhill Site) Madison County, N.C. WBS Element 32573.4.1. TIP No. A-IOWM.
Mulkey, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina.
Mulkey (Mulkey, Inc.). 2004. Annual Report for 2004. Little Ivy Creek Stream Mitigation Site
(Barnhill Site) Madison County, N.C. WBS Element 32573.4.1. TIP No. A-IOWM.
Mulkey, Inc., Raleigh, North Carolina.
NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission). 1998. Conceptual Restoration
Plan, Barnhill Site, Little Ivy Creek, Madison County, N.C. North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, Raleigh.
NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission). 2000a. Construction Plan for the
Taylor Barnhill Mitigation Site, Little Ivy Creek, Madison County, N.C. North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission, Raleigh.
NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission). 2000b. As-built Report for the
Barnhill Mitigation Site, Little Ivy Creek, Madison County, N.C. North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission, Raleigh.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs,
Colorado. Printed Media Companies, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
USACE (United States Army Corps of Engineers). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines.
Prepared with cooperation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, N.C. Wildlife
Resources Commission, and the N.C. Division of Water Quality. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Wilmington District, North Carolina. Available:
www.sw.usace.army.miI/wetlands/mitigation/stream mitigation.html.
USGS (United States Geological Survey). 2008. Real-time Data for USGS 03453000 Ivy River
near Marshall, North Carolina. Available. http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nc/nwis.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
15
I')
N
1 Start of Project
End of Project
SR 1540
1''_ w y4-
Nary ''1AAa N'?i 3 n -c i h U"T 7 -=-5 'A
-
Gat "" 11 LC2
S, ale: 1 .e equals 800 met
Figure 1.-Barnhill mitigation site, Little Ivy Creek, French Broad River basin, Madison
County, North Carolina; EEP Project Number 92651.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Legend
Project reach
?
*?
i i' ,
< O F
o
mN D
??
O Cl)
="
OAi
A mmD i
o?p m o
j
o y
>= Z r
D z
zD !
f//
mx
mm m?
U
N
N K F
Z ?
T
x
m /
Z1 I /
o .
C: M
CO
O
C
/;.
0 /
o
CL j,j
Il 1
o r '
1 ?
/
I
(D I 1 , ?, ? I _ m
no
I I ; I
1 G Try Pk! A ? ?o
0
It
I
N
N j \ I r.
\\\
1
j
I ?
li \;1
+ li I ?1 E
I ? i 1
I `; ,? i l rr
`G I I oo
\ I 1 1
W ? I 1 I i l? I \ 1i ? ? ? I
? 1. /; I I ? 1•I i
(D I 1 W I ' 11
I I l i A it 1
?
I i I
m I
L22 . t
<
CID n I I§il m
;
: I
I I ? i t
? I
,
x
An
Aa l i l u I I 11 0
3 I I I
I
n I
CD 2
i i t m
!
i
°c"o I i
I i I + ? li
l
WUl x
l
?
p
1
? •
'
7 1
, I I
l i ?•
j I
-
a
, ! I 11
m {
w o { I I t
T T
? ? @If O
m
m
0
A?
0 0
?ma
mm m ? d??z I I I..I,
o m O? n
V m
? a
,V I I F it G F' ? £ ??
0
O = 3
m ?
"- ?
I I
;u X < ? v m m -0 m m?
?
° o m l N m m -0 ° S
-
0
X- t
°
m m °
°
m
1 3
U
? 3 a o f
N
O
O
m I O
O r
N
O 3 O 7
N
co ?
?O
S
o m
C rt ,
°
F
o c n m 21 °
- < F
< co o o C) m
m o a
3 CD o m
O? °
N
m
a
17
APPENDIX A
Appendix A.1. Cross-Sections Plots and Photographs.
Appendix Table A.U. Cross-Section 1 Abbreviated Morphological Characteristic Summary
Year
Characteristic 2003
MY1 2004
MY2 2007
MY3
Station (ft) 7+66
Feature Glide
Stream Type C
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ft2) 43.4 83.5 96.9
Maximum Bankfull Depth (ft) 2.3 3.5 3.6
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 1.5 2.3 2.3
Width/Depth Ratio 18.9 16.0 18.7
Entrenchment Ratio 2.4
Bankfull Width (ft) 28.3 36.8 42.6
Little Ivy Creek
Cross-section 1
100
99
98
97
96
95
94 '-
c 93 •
92 •
91 •
w 90
89 ?.. •?
88
87 _ r
86
85
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Horizontal Distance (ft)
-As-built2000 MY12003 MY22004-+-MY32007 Bankfull FPA
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report - Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- FInaODeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife oesources Commission
18
Appendix A.I. Continued.
Cross-section 1, right to left bank, March 2003. Cross-section 1, facing upstream, May 2004.
Cross-section 1, right to left bank, October 2007. Cross-section 1, facing downstream, October 2007.
19
Appendix A.1. Continued.
Appendix Table A.1.2. Cross-Section 2 Abbreviated Morphological Characteristic Summary
Year
Characteristic 2003
MY 1 2004
MY2 2007
MY3
Station (ft) 9+15
Feature Pool
Stream Type C
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (ftZ) 15.2 74.5 91.1
Maximum Bankfull Depth (ft) 1.3 3.4 3.7
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 0.7 2.0 2.2
Width/Depth Ratio 33.3 19.1 18.8
Entrenchment Ratio 2.4
Bankfull Width (ft) 23.3 38.2 18.8
Little Ivy Creek
Cross-section 2
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
0 88
a 87
86
w 85
84
83
82 • ??
81
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Horizontal Distance (ft)
As-built 2000 MYI 2003 MY2 2004 -o -MY3 2007 Bankfull FPA
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Appendix A.I. Continued.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- FInaQDeceP Fer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
20
Cross-section 2, right bank to left bank, September 2000.
Cross-section 2, facing upstream, March 2003. Cross-section 2, facing upstream, May 2004.
Cross-section 2, left bank to right bank, October 2007. Cross-section 2, facing downstream, October 2007.
21
Appendix A.1. Continued.
Appendix Table A.1.3. Cross-Section 3 Abbreviated Morphological Characteristic Summary
Year
Characteristic 2003
MY 1 2004
MY2 2007
MY3
Station (ft) 11+33
Feature Riffle
Stream Type C
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area (112) 77.5 91.4 84.9
Maximum Bankfull Depth (ft) 3.0 3.3 3.3
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft) 2.1 2.2 2.1
Width/Depth Ratio 18.2 18.6 19.1
Entrenchment Ratio 1.7 1.5 2.2
Bankfull Width (ft) 37.6 41.2 40.3
Little Ivy Creek
Cross-section 3
100
98
96
.. 94
92
a
° 90
ro
88
w ?.
86
84 _
82
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Horizontal Distance (ft)
BAs-built 2000 MY12003 MY2 2004 -MY3 2007 Banlfull--FPA
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Appendix A.I. Continued.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- FInCDDeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
22
Cross-section 3, left bank to right bank, September 2000.
Cross-section 3, right bank to left bank, March 2003. Cross-section 3, left bank to right bank, May 2004.
Cross-section 3, pre-construction, December 1999.
Cross-section 3, left bank to right bank, October 2007. Cross-section 3, facing downstream, October 2007.
23
0
a
0
?I
a_
CC
C
bA
0
N
^O
s;
Qr
°
W
0
o ?
o
y
0
N ?
Olga S-SS .13 ~
O I
kn
O
W
M
M
z
01IJ
S-SS
L) °
.
rl W N
N U
2d
of;a
s-sso
3 O y ?
a
?
3
.. kn
? A
? ? ce T
V 3
? ?
H
M
FBI O
M ?
3
o ?
N
N
N
O co
kn N
cc
M
0
k
O n O
O W
0 O
1 C vi O
1 00 0 W
0 t ) O
- r v
- ? ? O
o ?
o
(13) aol;U n3121
a?
cd
N
C
c?
N
U
«3
N
U
N
O
Q
N
4.
0
c
0
o .°
u,
G? U
Cd .-r
to
-0 t:
N ?
O r ?
? N
t+., cd o E
V] N pa„ v o
W
7r ?'
Q v? k. o
., U?.. o x y
i-I Q +y-Ki ?
ow
O cd CO ? ^
3
U Lm
adz
I
Appendix A.3. Pebble Count Cumulative Frequency Distributions Plots
Little Ivy Creek Particle Size Distribution (March 25, 2003)
100%
90%
60%
c
s 70%
F
p 60%
50%
40%
E
0
U 30%
e 20%
10%
0%
/
,
t ?
•
10
s -'
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Particle Size (mm)
Combined - -Cross-section I - - 'Cross-section2 - - 'Cross-section3
Little Ivy Creek Particle Size Distribution (May 20, 2004)
100%
90%
80%
70%
H
L
60%
'w
50%
40%
U
30%
0
20%
10%
0%
0.01
? s •
O ?
•
I I
I
0 - -
I I
0.1 1 10 100 1000 1
Particle Size (mm)
Combined - - ' Cross-section 1 - - ' Cross-section 2 - - ' Cross-section 3
24
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
25
Appendix A.3. Continued.
Little Ivy Creek Particle Size Distribution (October 23, 2007)
100%
90% -
80%
cCe 70%
r
F
L
? so°ro
'w
50%
40%
0
U
30% -
e
20%
10%
0%
0.01
I •
•
i
I
.000 ,
A
,
0.1 1 10 100 1000 1
Particle Size (mm)
Combined s . Cross-section 1 - - -Cross-section 2 Cross-section 3
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report - Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
26
Appendix A.4. Surrogate gage hydrograph data table and graphs.
Appendix Table AAL USGS gage 034 53000, Iv River, near Marshall, N.C.
Date Flow ft3/s sb Gage height ft a Comments
6/29/2000 N/A' N/A' Photo verification
7/29-30/2001 1,135 5.44 Bankfull event;
photo verification
3/17-18/2002 1,580 6.40 Bankfull event
3/18/2002 1,400 6.22 Bankfull event
2/15/2003 1,120 5.62 Bankfull event
2/22-23/2003 1,535 6.37 Bankfull event
4/10-11/2003 1,435 6.19 Bankfull event
5/06-07/2003 2,195 7.83 Bankfull event
5/07/2003 1,780 7.00 Bankfull event
4/13/2003 1,050 5.29 Bankfull event
11/19/2003 1,500 5.81 Bankfull event
9/08/2004 2,330 7.59 Bankfull event
9/17-18/2004 31030 8.12 Bankfull event
1/14/2005 1,200 5.68 Bankfull event
1/18/2006 1,290 5.82 Bankfull event
4/22/2006 1,160 5.60 Bankfull event
1/01/2007 1,150 5.51 Bankfull event
-1, low and gage height were averaged for high flow events occurring on consecutive days and counted as one event.
bDaily mean discharge recordings from surrogate gage were used to estimate potential bankfull events at site.
'Mean daily discharge at surrogate gage did not exceed 1.000 cfs.
"a 3000
2000
N
L 1000
0
a
m
u
v
0
v
100
L
A
L
V
N
O
}
J
N
c 10
USGS 03453000 IVY RIVER NEAR MARSHALL, NC
Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2001 2001 2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004
- Daily mean discharge - Period of approved data
- Estimated daily mean discharge
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
27
Annendix A.4. Continued.
IM I
USGS 03453000 IVY RIVER NEAR MARSHALL, NC
U 3996.9
y 2666.6
L 1666.6
CL
166.9
v
d
tu --
O
J
~¢ 1.9
Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul Jan Jul
2004 2005 2005 2086 2666 2007 2907
- Daily naxinun discharge - Estimated daily mean discharge
- Daily minimum discharge Period of approved data
Daily mean discharge
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout Report- Final, December 2008
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
28
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal, DeceP Err 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Appendix A.5. Bankfull Event Verification Photos.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal, DeceP Fer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
29
Photo sta. 1, facing downstream, September 2000.
Photo sta. 1, facing downstream, March 2007.
30
Appendix A.6. Continued.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Photo sta. 2, facing downstream, September 2000.
Photo sta. 2, facing upstream, I ctober 2007. Photo sta. 2, facing downstream, I ctober 2007.
31
Appendix A.6. Continued.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Foal, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Photo sta. 3, facing upstream, July 2001.
Photo sta. 3, facing upstream, I ctober 2007.
32
Little Ivy Creek. Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flual, DeceP Per 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Photo sta. 4, facing downstream, July 2001.
Photo sta. 4, facing downstream, 1 ctober 2007.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
33
Appendix A.6. Continued.
Photo sta. 5, facing downstream, May 2004.
Photo sta. 5 facing downstream, 1 ctober 2007.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site. EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
34
Photo sta. 6, facing upstream, September 2000. Photo sta. 6, facing upstream, August 2001.
Photo sta. 6, looking upstream, I ctober 2007.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Final, DeceP Fer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
35
Photo sta. 7, facing downstream, August 2001. Photo sta. 7, facing downstream, a ecember 2001.
Photo sta. 7, facing downstream, l ctober 2007.
Photo sta. 7, facing downstream, May 2004.
36
APPENDIX B
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Appendix B.I. Vegetation Plot Photographs.
37
Little Ivy Creek. Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Kral, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Tree plot B, right bank, facing upstream, January 2008.
Tree plot B, right bank, facing downstream, May 2004.
38
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal. DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Vegetation plot 1, right bank, March 2003.
Vegetation plot 1, right bank, May 2004.
Vegetation plot 2, left bank, May 2004. Vegetation plot 2, left bank, January 2008.
No 2008 photo available for vegetation plot 3 as it could
not be relocated.
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Mitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Plnal, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
39
Vegetation plot 3, left bank, March 2003.
Vegetation plot 3, left bank, May 2004.
Vegetation plot 4, left bank, March 2003.
Vegetation plot 4, left bank, May 2004. Vegetation plot 4, left bank, January 2008.
40
Little Ivy Creek, Barnhill Nlitigation Site, EEP Project 92651
Monitoring Year 3/Closeout 5 eSort- Flnal, DeceP Eer 2008
North Carolina t ildlife o esources Commission
Vegetation plot 5, left bank, May 2004.
Appendix BA. Continued.
Vegetation plot 6, left bank, March 2003. Vegetation plot 6, left bank, January 2008.