Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190800 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_FINAL DRAFT_red_20210120ID#* 20190800 Version* 1 Select Reviewer:* Erin Davis Initial Review Completed Date 01/20/2021 Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/20/2021 Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No Type of Mitigation Project:* r Stream r Wetlands W Buffer r- Nutrient Offset (Select all that apply) Project Contact Information Contact Name:* Scott J. Frederick Project Information ............................................................................................................................................................................. ID#:* 20190800 Existing IDr Project Type: r DMS r Mitigation Bank Project Name: Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site County: Edgecombe Document Information Email Address:* sjfrederick@swegrp.com Version: *1 Existing Version Mitigation Document Type:* Mitigation Monitoring Report File Upload: Boseman Annual Monitoring Report_MY1 FINAL 4.02MB DRAFT_red.pdf Rease upload only one RDFof the corrplete file that needs to be subnitted... Signature Print Name:* Scott J. Frederick Signature:* Annual Monitoring Report (MY1) BOSEMAN BUFFER MITIGATION SITE Edgecombe County, NC NCDEQ Contract No. 7872 DMS ID No. 100119 DWR Project No. 2019-0800 RFP No. 16-007711 Prepared for: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 FINAL DRAFT January 4th, 2021 State of North Carolina | Environmental Quality | Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center | 217 W. Jones Street, Suite 3000 | Raleigh , NC 27609-1652 919 707 8976 T ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL REGAN Secretary December 7, 2020 Via email: Scott Frederick <sjfrederick@swegrp.com> Scott Frederick, Soil, Water & Environment Group (For Ecoterra) Subject: DMS Comments Boseman, Project ID #100110, DMS Contract #7872 Scott , After receiving the MY1 draft report, DMS offers the following comment s: • Update photos for clarity if possible. • The vegetation data presented shows that most plots are meeting success, besides one which is only one stem below success. Compared to MY0, there is a >80% plant survival and over 8 species in the vegetation plots which is considered positively. Please explain if/why a site -wide replant of 280 stems/acre is necessary at this point. Please provide a visual assessment of the site (planted stem vigor, etc.) in the narrative. • Table 3. Update Current Plot data header to show MY1. Provide MY0 annual summary data next to MY1 annual summary column (exporting Table 7 from CVS should do this for you). Digital Review- • The CVS table 7 export does not produce the same stems per acre as table 3 in the report for plots 2,3,6, and 9. There are also 14 plots in the table 7 export rather than 12. Please ensure that the CVS mdb supports the data presented in table 3 and resubmit the CVS mdb. • Please submit the veg plot and photo point monitoring features used in Fig. 3. • Please submit the photo point photos as JPEGs. Please call if you have any questions about these comments and inse rt the responses after your cover page to the report. Thanks for your work, Lindsay Crocker, DMS MEMO Mrs. Lindsay Crocker, DMS 1/4/21 Re: Boseman Annual Monitoring Report Comments (DMS Email Dated: 12/07/20) After receiving the MY1 draft report, DMS offers the following comments: • Update photos for clarity if possible. o The photos have been updated. • The vegetation data presented shows that most plots are meeting success, besides one which is only one stem below success. Compared to MY0, there is a >80% plant survival and over 8 species in the vegetation plots which is considered positively. Please explain if/why a site-wide replant of 280 stems/acre is necessary at this point. Please provide a visual assessment of the site (planted stem vigor, etc.) in the narrative. o Additional stems are proposed to ensure diversity of planted species is maintained throughout the site considering overall visual assessment of the site and noted impacts from predation, flooding, and site maintenance (mowing). o A visual assessment of the site including planted stem vigor and overall site success has been provided in the narrative. • Table 3. Update Current Plot data header to show MY1. Provide MY0 annual summary data next to MY1 annual summary column (exporting Table 7 from CVS should do this for you). o Table 3 has been updated. Digital Review- • The CVS table 7 export does not produce the same stems per acre as table 3 in the report for plots 2,3,6, and 9. There are also 14 plots in the table 7 export rather than 12. Please ensure that the CVS mdb supports the data presented in table 3 and resubmit the CVS mdb. o Table 7 has been updated to match Table 3. • Please submit the veg plot and photo point monitoring features used in Fig. 3. o Veg plot, photo points, and monitoring feature .shp files have been provided. • Please submit the photo point photos as JPEGs. o Vegetation photos in .jpeg format have been provided. Please let us know if you have any further comments or questions. We look forward to ensuring a successful project moving forward. Regards, Ted Griffith ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT (MY1) BOSEMAN BUFFER MITIGATION SITE Edgecombe County, NC NCDEQ Contract No. 7872 DMS ID No. 100119 Tar-Pamlico River Basin HUC 03020101 Prepared For: NC Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation Services 1652 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1652 Prepared By: 1117 Peachtree Walk NE, Suite 126 Atlanta, GA 30309 404.840.2697 This Annual Monitoring Report has been written in conformance with the requirements of the following: • 15A NCAC 02B.0295 Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers. These documents govern DMS operations and procedures for the delivery of compensatory mitigation. Contributing Staff Ted Griffith, Principal in Charge Michael Bienenson, Quality Assurance Lead Jamey O’Shaughnessey, Quality Assurance and Construction Oversight Norton Webster, Landowner Laison Scott Frederick, Construction and Monitoring Lead, SWE David Cooper, QA/QC, VHB Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report MY1 DMS ID No. 100119 Page i December 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Mitigation Project Summary .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Project Goals .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Existing Conditions and Parcel Viability ............................................................................... 2 2.0 Determination of Credits ........................................................................................................ 2 3.0 Vegetation Condition Summary ............................................................................................. 3 3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities ..................................................................................... 3 4.0 Annual Monitoring and Performance Criteria .................................................................... 4 4.1 Vegetation .............................................................................................................................. 4 4.2 Photo Reference Stations ....................................................................................................... 4 4.3 Visual Assessments ............................................................................................................... 4 4.4 Annual Reporting Performance Criteria ................................................................................ 4 4.5 Maintenance and Contingency Plans ..................................................................................... 4 5.0 References ................................................................................................................................. 5 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Project Data Figure 1: Vicinity Map Figure 2: Project Component/Asset Map Figure 3: Monitoring Plan View Table 1: Buffer Project Attributes Table 2: Buffer Project Areas and Assets Appendix 2 Site Photo Points Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data Table 3: Planted and Total Stem Counts Vegetation Plot Photographs Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report MY1 DMS ID No. 100119 Page 1 December 2020 1.0 Mitigation Project Summary The Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site (Site) is a riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas restoration project located approximately 2.5 miles southeast of the Town of Rocky Mount in Edgecombe County, NC (Appendix 1: Figure 1). The Site is approximately 14.91 acres (649,889 ft2) of a total 276 ac tract situated along two unnamed tributaries to the Tar River (Appendix 1: Figure 2). The project is located in a targeted local watershed (TLW) within the Tar-Pamlico River basin hydrologic unit code (HUC) 03020101120030 and Subasin 03-03-02. The unnamed tributaries flow into the Tar River approximately one and half miles downstream of the project. According to the as-built survey and most recent DWR Buffer Mitigation Calculation Tool V.2 (Updated 1/17/20), the Site is expected to generate 617,518.702 riparian buffer mitigation units (BMU). The Boseman Buffer Mitgation Site will help to reduce future sediment and nutrient loading into the unnamed tributaries and downstream Tar River. It will also improve terrestrial habitats along this stream by establishing a riparian corridor and allowing the land to convert to forested communities. The surrounding area is primarily agricultural fields. The project restored forested riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas to a maximum of approximately 115 feet from the top of bank of the streams and removed rotating crops and fertilizer inputs. The restored Tar-Pamlico riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas will filter runoff from the surrounding farm fields and provide shading to improve stream temperatures and aquatic habitat. Invasive vegetation will be treated as needed within the project area to promote native vegetation. 1.1 Project Goals According to the N.C. Division of Mitigation Services’ (DMS) 2010 Tar-Pamlico River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) document, amended 2018, the project will support the identified goals for the TLW, as well as the overall HUC. As stated in the RBRP, restoration of riparian buffers and adjacent riparian areas to address agricultural runoff is a high priority for this 14-digit TLW HUC. The major goals of the proposed buffer restoration project are to address agricultural runoff, including nutrients and sediment, protect the project site in perpetuity, and restore terrestrial habitat. The detailed goals and objectives are: Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report MY1 DMS ID No. 100119 Page 2 December 2020 Reduce Nutrient Levels – Nutrient inputs will be decreased by filtering runoff and sequestering nutrients dispersed from stormwater flows from agricultural fields. These nutrients will be absorbed through the 30-115 ft wide riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas restored with native woody vegetation. This goal is supported by both the TLW and RBRP for reducing nutrient inputs to the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Reduce Sediment Levels – Sediment inputs will be decreased by filtering runoff and attenuating flood flows from agricultural fields through 30-115 ft wide riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas restored with native woody vegetation. This goal is supported by both the TLW and RBRP for reducing sediment inputs to the Tar-Pamlico River Basin. Project Protection in Perpetuity – Implement a project in a TLW and record a conservation easement. This goal is supported by the RBRP to protect aquatic habitat and surface waters. Restore Terrestrial Habitat – Riparian buffer and adjacent riparian areas will be restored with native vegation and invasive vegetation will be managed. This goal is supported by the RBRP and is a DMS Programmatic Goal (NCGS 143-214.10). 1.2 Existing Site Conditions The buffer restoration project contains approximately 14.9 acres of former agricultural fields along two unnamed tributaries (hereinafter referred to as UT 1, and UT 2). UT 1 enters the project site along the western property boundary and flows in an eastward direction. UT 1 meets the definition of at least intermittent per the NCDWR On-Site Determination for Applicability to the Tar-Pamlico Buffer Rules Letter dated July 9, 2019 (Appendix 1). UT 2 originates within the property boundary as an ephemeral channel (Reach 2a) and transitions to an intermittent channel (Reach 2b) prior to it’s confluence with UT 1. The project was successfully planted with appropriate trees and herbaceouse vegetation and is now at the end of the first full growing season and early stages of successful buffer restoration. 2.0 Determination of Credits Riparian buffer and adjacent riparian area restoration was accomplished in accordance with the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) including the alternative Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report MY1 DMS ID No. 100119 Page 3 December 2020 mitigation option of restoration activities along ephemeral streams. Restoration was accomplished specifically by: Buffer Restoraiton on Ephemeral Channels (15A NCAC 02B .0295(o)(7)): a.) NCDWR conducted an on-site stream determination of subject streams and ephemeral channels on the property b.) Ephemeral channels are directly connected to intermittent or perennial stream channels c.) Total mitigation area of ephemeral channels is less than 25% of the total buffer mitigation area (Table 2, Appendix 1). All areas within 115 ft of the top of bank of subject streams as measured from the top of bank landward, will be devoted to generating riparian buffer mitigation credits. Total mitigation area on ephemeral channels is 12.7% of total buffer mitigation area. Mitigaiton credits generated are found in Table 2 and Figure 2 in Appendix 1 and are based upon the most recent DWR Buffer Mitigation Calculation Tool v 2 (Updated 1/17/20). 3.0 Project Construction Summary The project construction was completed in early March 2020, following mitigation plan approval. Eco Terra and supporting team members successfully planted and restored the proposed areas dedicated for riparian buffer and adjacent riparian area restoration with high quality native trees, shrubs, and herbaceous vegetation. 3.1 Riparian Area Restoration Activities Restoration of the riparian areas involved planting bare root one to two-year-old trees and shrubs in designated planting zones based on soil wetness and in accordance with the mitigation plan. In addition, five to six-year-old trees were planted at representatively selected areas designated for plots to aid in identifying plot locations. These trees are not included in any individual plot tree count. However, they are an overall beneficial component of stem diversity and age-class in the restored forest ecology and serve as important components in restored habitat, nutrient sequestration, leaf litter for trapping sediment, and soil health. A combination of machine and manual planting techniques were used depending on site conditions. Older trees were planted by a combination of hand and machine. Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report MY1 DMS ID No. 100119 Page 4 December 2020 Species planted within the riparian areas included: overcup oak (Quercus laurifolia) 2,500 stems, laurel oak (Quercus lyrata) 1,000 stems, water oak (Quercus nigra) 3,000 stems, willow oak (Quercus phellos) 3,000 stems, green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) 500 stems, silky dogwood (Cornus amomum) 1,000 stems, button bush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) 500 stems, and swamp blackgum (Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora) 300 stems. Approximately 12,300 stems (825 stems/ac) were planted within the riparian areas designated for restoration. Differences in stem density and quantities occurred relative to the proposed planting list in the mitigation plan due to plant availability at the time. Temporary and permanent seed mix was installed in any disturbed soil areas following debris removal and planted with native trees to secure sediment from entering surface waters. Temporary and permanent seed mixtures planted included Foxtail millet (Setaria italica) and Indiangrass (Sorgastrum nutans), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), and big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), respectively. In accordance with 15A NCAC 02B .0295, a sufficient density of stems was planted to achieve 260 trees/ac at the end of a minimum five-year project monitoring period whereby no one tree species planted was greater than 50% of the planted stems, and a minimum of four native hardwood tree and native shrub species were planted. In total, eight species were selected and planted in specific areas depending on soil type, landscape position, soil wetness, community type, and reference forest stands nearby. Initial vegetation management post planting included specific preemergent herbicide band application over planted trees for herbaceous competition that may compete with planted stems, conducted by a North Carolina licensed applicator. 4.0 Annual Monitoring and Performance Criteria The Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers (15A NCAC 02B .0295) and RFP 16-007711 set forth specific performance criteria for the successful development and close-out of the Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site. Performance criteria monitoring includes standardized vegetation plot establishment and annual monitoring for planted stems including individual plot photo documentation, overall site photo documentation, biannual visual assessments for project status and easement integrity including herbaceous and/or invasive species competition, stem mortality, stand health, incidental damage from agricultural equipment, and stem loss or damage from natural causes such as fire, disease, or animal predation. Figure 3 (Appendix 1) illustrates the location of project easement, permanent vegetation plots/photo points, as well as overall site photo points. 4.1 Vegetation Twelve permanent vegetation plots were established according to the most recent Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) protocol within the restored buffer area. Representative vegetation plots were established at a minimum density of 2% of the planted area. Specifically, vegetation monitoring was obtained for all plots according to Level 1-2 protocols from the CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation V4.2 (2008) manual. Monitoring year one (MY1) vegetation stem data is included in Appendix 5, Table 3. All vegetation plots meet criteria for stem densities and overall site density is 533 stems/ac. Some plots showed stem diversity and distribution disproportionate to the overall project stem diversity and distribution. In addition, two site wide flooding events, mowing activities to control herbaceouse competition, as well as herbivores Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report MY1 DMS ID No. 100119 Page 5 December 2020 above and below ground damaged some trees in the project area. Additional tree species (Qty: 4,200, n=3) will be planted during the upcoming dormant season to accommodate these inconsistencies in stem diversity, distribution, and density observed and noted in plot data. Planting additional stems will also ensure project success with anticipated predation and flooding likely to occur again based on first year observations. 4.2 Photo Reference Stations Individual plot photos taken at the southwest corner (origin) of each plot are included in this annual monitoring report. Additional Site reference photos were taken at designated points along the conservation easement boundary providing an overall view of the project success (Appendix 1: Figure 3). All photo points were located by survey and georeferenced for map production to provide a consistent means for photo replication annually and in the event a plot or photo location must be reestablished during the monitoirng period. Photo orientation (direction and bearing) were recorded as well as approximate vertical position for consistency in photo logging. 4.3 Visual Assessments Additional observations were made of site conditions and vegetation conditions outside of monitoring plots. This biannual effort was made in order to appropriately monitor changing site conditions and address any issues to ensure Site success and performance criteria are met after the monitoring period. As dicussed supplemental planting will occur during the upcoming dormant season to bring up tree stocking and diversity across the project area and ensure success in areas damaged by flooding and predation. Overall tree vigor across the site is adequate for first year survival and project success averaging 3.3 No other encroachments were identified during the two site visits in June and September. Any future Site problems will be noted and discussed in the annual reports and monitored biannually to ensure performance criteria are met following any remedial action. 4.4 Annual Reporting Performance Criteria All monitoring reports, including this annual report, will be compiled and submitted to DMS annually in accordance with the Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer Baseline and Annual Monitoring Report Template Ver. 2.0 (May 2017). Annual monitoring will occur for a minum of five years or until performance criteria are met. 4.5 Maintenance and Contingency Plans Any Site observations identified through vegetation plots or visual assessments, whereby the performance criteria is not met, will be noted and discussed in the annual reports and addressed with a contingency plan as necessary. DMS/NCDWR will be notified, and if necessary, collaborate with Eco Terra to develop a contingency plan with remedial action steps to correct the performance criteria deficiency. Any contingency plan and remedial actions will occur within an agreed timeframe and monitoring adjusted accordingly, if necessary. Site problem areas will be monitored biannually to ensure performance criteria are met following any remedial action. As noted above, supplemental planting will occur in the upcoming dormant season to remediate stem density and diversity consistencies as well as damage attributed to mowing and herbivores. Upon completion of this remedial action, DMS/NCDWR will be notified. Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report MY1 DMS ID No. 100119 Page 6 December 2020 5.0 References 15 NCAC 02B .0295 Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers. 2015. Lee, Michael T. Peet, Robert K., Steven D. Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.2. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1- 2.pdf Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Web Soil Survey of Edgecombe County. http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2017. Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer Baseline and Annual Monitoring Report Template Version 2.0. North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2018. Tar-Pamlico River Basin Restoration Priorities. APPENDIX 1 FIGURES AND TABLES Vicinity MapBoseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report (MY1) Tar-Pamlico 03020101 Edgecombe County, North Carolina December 2020³2013 Hartsease USGS Quadrangle1,20001,200600FeetLegendParcel BoundaryConservation Easement 14.9 acresFigure1 Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityProject Component/Asset Map Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report (MY1) Tar-Pamlico 03020101 Edgecombe County, North Carolina December 2020³2017 Aerial from NCOneMap2000200100FeetLegendBuffer Restoration (0-100') UT 1Buffer Restoration (101-200') UT 1Buffer Restoration (0-100') UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)Buffer Restoration (101-200') UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)Buffer Restoration (0-100') UT 2 Reach 2bBuffer Restoration (101-200') UT 2 Reach 2bUT 1 (At Least Intermittent)UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)UT 2 Reach 2b (At Least Intermittent)Figure2 EEEEEEEEEEEE")")")")")")")")")")")")Pp 9Pp 8Pp 7Pp 6Pp 5Pp 4Pp 3Pp 2Pp 1Pp 12Pp 11Pp 10193674258111210NC Center for Geographic Information & AnaylsisMonitoring Plan View Map Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Annual Monitoring Report (MY1) Tar-Pamlico 03020101 Edgecombe County, North Carolina December 2020³2017 Aerial from NCOneMap2000200100FeetLegend")Vegetation Plot (N=12)EPhoto PointsConservation Easement 14.9 acresUT 1 (At Least Intermittent)UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)UT 2 Reach 2b (At Least Intermittent)Buffer Restoration (0-100') UT 1Buffer Restoration (101-200') UT 1Buffer Restoration (0-100') UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)Buffer Restoration (101-200') UT 2 Reach 2a (Ephemeral)Buffer Restoration (0-100') UT 2 Reach 2bBuffer Restoration (101-200') UT 2 Reach 2bFigure3Note: Vegetation Plot photos are from the originof the vegetation plot. The origin is located in thesouthwest corner of each plot.Plot Number Y Coordinate X Coordinate1 35.96294899 -77.700735912 35.96341822 -77.701479063 35.96396443 -77.702430134 35.964284 -77.704334615 35.96448024 -77.705444986 35.96394198 -77.706707937 35.96322236 -77.70703978 35.96440173 -77.706646439 35.96480553 -77.7052838510 35.96433174 -77.7027120511 35.96408549 -77.7019154412 35.9635377 -77.70111746Origin Latitude/Longitude (Decimal Degrees) Table 1: Buffer Project Attributes Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site DMS ID No. 100119 DWR Project No. 2019-0800 Monitoring Year 1 – 2020 Project Name Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site Hydrologic Unit Code 03020101 River Basin Tar-Pamlico Geographic Location (decimal degrees) 35.96451, -77.705926 Site Protection Instrument (BK, PG) 1707/675 Total Credits (BMU) 617,518.702 Types of Credits Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan Date January 2020 Initial Planting Date March 2020 Baseline Report Date May 2020 MY1 Report Date December 2020 MY2 Report Date December 2021 MY3 Report Date December 2022 MY 4 Report Date December 2023 MY 5 Report Date December 2024 Close out Report Date/Visit May 2025 Table 2: Buffer Project Components and Assets Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site DMS ID No. 100119 DWR Project No. 2019-0800 Monitoring Year 1 – 2020 BOSEMAN BUFFER MITIGATION SITE, PROJECT NO. 2019-0800, 617,518.702 CREDITS Project Area N Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound) P Credit Conversion Ratio (ft2/pound) Credit Type Location Subject? (enter NO if ephemeral or ditch 1 ) Feature Type Mitigation Activity Min-Max Buffer Width (ft)Feature Name Total Area (ft 2) Total (Creditable) Area of Buffer Mitigation (ft2) Initial Credit Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit Ratio (x:1) Convertible to Riparian Buffer? Riparian Buffer Credits Convertible to Nutrient Offset? Delivered Nutrient Offset: N (lbs) Delivered Nutrient Offset: P (lbs) Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0-100 UT1 484,072 484,072 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 484,072.000 N/A 0.000 0.000 Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101-200 UT1 6,496 6,496 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 2,143.682 N/A 0.000 0.000 Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 0-100 UT2 (Reach 2a)78,631 78,631 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 78,631.000 N/A 0.000 0.000 Buffer Rural No Ephemeral Restoration 101-200 UT2 (Reach 2a)82 82 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 27.060 N/A 0.000 0.000 Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 0-100 UT2 (Reach 2b)52,641 52,641 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 52,641.000 N/A 0.000 0.000 Buffer Rural Yes I / P Restoration 101-200 UT2 (Reach 2b)12 12 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 3.960 N/A 0.000 0.000 Totals:621,934 621,934 Enter Preservation Credits Below Eligible for Preservation (ft2):207,311 Credit Type Location Subject?Feature Type Mitigation Activity Min-Max Buffer Width (ft)Feature Name Total Area (sf) Total (Creditable) Area for Buffer Mitigation (ft2) Initial Credit Ratio (x:1)% Full Credit Final Credit Ratio (x:1) Riparian Buffer Credits Buffer Preservation — Buffer — Preservation Area Subtotal (ft 2):0 Preservation as % Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:0.0% Ephemeral Reaches as % Total Area of Buffer Mitigation:12.7%Square Feet Credits 621,934 617,518.702 0 0.000 0 0.000 78713 621934 621,934 617,518.702 621934 Square Feet Credits Nitrogen:0.000 1. The Randleman Lake buffer rules allow some ditches to be classified as subject according to 15A NCAC 02B .0250 (5)(a).Phosphorus:0.000 last updated 01/17/2020 Nutrient Offset:0 Tar-Pamlico 03020101 19.16394 297.54099 TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM) Mitigation Totals Restoration: Enhancement: Preservation: Total Riparian Buffer: TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATION Mitigation Totals APPENDIX 2 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Photo-Points Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site DMS ID No. 100119 DWR Project No. 2019-0800 Photo Location Baseline 2020 MY1 2020 Pp1 Pp2 Pp3 Pp4 Photo Location Baseline 2020 MY1 2020 Pp5 Pp6 Pp7 Pp8 Photo Location Baseline 2020 MY1 2020 Pp9 Pp10 Pp11 Pp12 APPENDIX 3 VEGETATION PLOT DATA VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS Monitoring Plots Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site DMS ID No. 100119 DWR Project No. 2019-0800 Photo Location Baseline 2020 MY1 2020 MP1 MP2 MP3 MP4 Photo Location Baseline 2020 MY1 2020 MP5 MP6 MP7 MP8 Photo Location Baseline 2020 MY1 2020 MP9 MP10 MP11 MP12 Table 3: Planted and Total Stems Boseman Buffer Mitigation Site DMS ID No. 100119 DWR Project No. 2019-0800 Monitoring Year 1 – 2020 Scientific Name Common Name Species Type MP1 MP2 MP3 MP4 MP5 MP6 MP7 MP8 MP9 MP10 MP11 MP12 MY1 MY0 Cephalanthus occidentalis butonbush Shrub Cornus amomum silky dogwood Tree 7 4 2 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 2 2 Nyssa sylvatica var. aquaticaswamp blackgum Tree 1 5 Quercus laurifolia laurel oak Tree 3 1 2 2 5 2 1 1 Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree 4 9 4 6 4 1 Quercus nigra water oak Tree 2 7 1 4 1 2 4 2 1 Quercus pagoda cherry bark oak Tree 11 1 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 3 2 1 9 5 4 5 6 8 11 Stem Count 16 16 10 11 9 15 18 12 14 12 12 13 13 16 Species #3 5 3 3 2 3 5 4 4 3 4 3 Vigor 3.5 2 2.7 3.7 3.8 3.3 3.6 3.3 3 3.7 3.3 3.2 3.3 3.8 Stems/ac 647 647 405 445 364 607 728 486 567 486 486 526 533 647 Annual Summary Scientific Name Common Name Species Type Total Quercus laurifolia laurel oak Tree 24 Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree 20 Quercus nigra water oak Tree 27 Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 61 1 / 0.0247 Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 4 Cornus amomum silky dogwood Tree 16 Cephalanthus occidentalis butonbush Shrub 0 Nyssa sylvatica var. biflora swamp blackgum Tree 5 Quercus pagoda cherry bark oak Tree 1 Total Stems 158 Species #8 Avg Vigor 3.3 Total Stems/ac 533 Annual Means Plot Size (ares/ac): Current Plot Data (MY-1 2020) - Total Stems Fails to meet criteria (260 stems/ac), by less than 10% Fails to meet criteria (260 stems/ac) by more than 10% Exceeds criteria (260 stems/ac), but by less than 10% Exceeds criteria (260 stems/ac) by 10% Site - MY1 Aerial (October, 2020) West Project Side East Project Side