20070156 Ver 4_Year 3 and 4 Monitoring Report_20120117

Strickland, Bev
From: Scarbraugh, Anthony
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 5:10 PM
To: Kulz, Eric
Cc: Strickland, Bev
Subject: Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project
Attachments: Mussel Run Restoration Mon Report Year 3.pdf; Mussel Run Restoration Mon Report Year
4.pdf; Mussel Run Correspondence. pdf
Here are the monitoring reports for years 3 and 4 of DWQ project 2007 -0156 Ver. 4.
Anthony

January 11, 2012
T0: Ms. Emily Jernigan
US Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
PO Box 1000
Washington, NC 27889
RE: Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project (Greene County) — Year 4 Monitoring Report
Cutter Creek Plantation; Greene County, NC; Action ID# 200702828; DWQ#200- 7.0156
Mill Run Development Group, LLC
Dear Emily:
On behalf of Mill Run Development Group, LLC, we are providing a copy of the Year 4 monitoring
report for the Mussel Run Restoration Project. As you know, this project was implemented as site
specific mitigation for the Cutter Creek Development outside of Kinston. On -site construction was
completed in April 2008. An average of 1106 stems /acre (planted and volunteer) were observed during
the Year 4 monitoring event, indicating that the site is progressing well toward the target community.
Successful restoration of wetland hydrology throughout the site has also been achieved.
Ms. Amy Adams informed us recently that neither the ACOE nor DWQ received the Year 3 monitoring
report. Enclosed is that report as well.
Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
VL_�
Kim Williams
Environmental Scientist
Encl.
Cc: Amy Adams, NC DWQ
Buzz Shackelford, Mill Run Development Group, LLC
RECEIVED
JAN 12 2012
DWQ -WARO
www.lmgroup.net • info @lmgroup.net • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403 • P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project
Site Specific Mitigation for Cutter Creek (Greene County, NC)
Annual Monitoring Report — Year 4
Action IN SAW - 2007 -02828
Prepared for;
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
NC DENR; Division of Water Quality �/
���� {`� �D
!
Washington, NC
Prepared by:
LMG
LAMP MANA6EMENTGROUP:cc.
fnrironmentol Corriulmrrrs
Wilmington, NC
January 2012
JA N 12 2012
DWQ.W RO

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction............................................................................. ..............................1
11. On -Site Construction ............................................................ ............................... 1
III. Site Planting ............................................................................ ..............................2
IV. Monitoring Equipment Installation ........................................... ..............................3
V. Annual Monitoring ................................................................... ..............................3
VI. Conclusion .............................................................................. ..............................5
r i -T3WIi
1. Plant List and Corresponding Restoration Zone
2. Summary of Vegetative Monitoring Data — Year 4
3. Summary of Hydrologic Monitoring Data — Year 4
FIGURES
1. Vicinity Map
2. USGS Topographic Map
3. Soils Map
4. Aerial Photograph
5. Restoration Plan
6. Monitoring Plot/Well Location Map
APPENDICES
A. Year 4 Monitoring Plot Data
B. 2011 Site Photographs
C. 2011 Hydrographs
Wells 1-3

Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project
Site Specific Mitigation for Cutter Creek (Greene County, NC)
Annual Monitoring Report —Year 4
Introduction
Construction of the Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project, the off -site mitigation project for
the Cutter Creek development, was completed on April 18, 2008. This project, totaling 26.4 acres,
was designed to provide mitigation for buffer and stream impacts associated with the construction
of Lake Nina within the Cutter Creek development. The mitigation project is located off of
Ormondsville Road near the town of Fourway, NC approximately five miles from the impact area
(Figures 1 -4).
This project was reviewed and approved by regulatory staff and the proper permits were obtained
(Action ID# SAW - 2007 -02828; DWQ Project# 07- 0156). Following initial construction, the site will
be monitored for a period of five years. Success will be based on demonstration of appropriate
survivorship and hydrology consistent with wetlands in this landscape position. Following each
monitoring event, a report documenting these aspects will be submitted to regulatory staff.
II. On-site Construction
The first phase of construction involved the removal of the existing road bed, Material from this
road bed was used to fill in two irrigation ponds, totaling 1.2 acres. Finished grades within these
ponds provide a gradual decrease in elevation from the surrounding fields. The second phase
involved the filling of approximately 1,100 linear feet of drainage ditch and removal of a large road
bed present throughout the site. In areas where ditch filling was not appropriate due to hydrologic
trespass concerns, grading was conducted to reduce the amount of channel incision.
The third phase involved the construction of a new 600' channel to provide drainage from the
eastern pond (Pond 1). Grading in this area was configured to mimic a natural "riffle- pool"
sequence found in Coastal Plain streams. A slope of 0.002 was maintained throughout this
portion, The fourth phase involved the construction of a 150' channel to provide drainage from the

western pond (Pond 2) into the existing ditch adjacent to Mussel Run. Similar slopes were
maintained for this section. The final phase involved grading and fill work along the northern
portions of the existing stream /ditch network. Grading this area was configured to direct drainage
from the existing fields into Pond 2 and the restored channels (Figure 5).
III. Site Planting
Prior to planting, the entire project area was disked to enhance microtopography and reduce soil
compaction. Following the disking, 16,000 bare -root seedlings were planted throughout the 26.4
acre project area. Each seedling was planted on 8' centers, with an average density of 600 stems
per acre. A total of six species were planted in one of three different zones: Neuse Buffer,
Cypress -Gum Pond, and Coastal Plain Headwater wetland (Table 1). These zones will correspond
to a frequency of inundation and elevation relative to the reestablished stream channels. A
wetland seed mix was also applied to minimize erosion during the first growing season.
Table 1. Plant list and corresponding restoration zone
Cutter Creek Mitigation
Planting
Species
Zone*
Number
River Birch (Betula nigra)
HW /NB
2,000
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
HWINB
2,000
Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecy aris thyoides)
HWINB
2,000
Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
P /NB
3,000
Tulip Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera)
NB
4,000
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica v. biflora )
PINB
3000
Planting Zones
Total
Acreage
16,000
Density
NB - Neuse Buffer Restoration
HW - Headwater Wetland Restoration
P - Cypress/Gum Pond
5.8
19.4
1.2
600
600
600
2

IV. Monitoring Equipment Installation
A total of six 0.10 -acre permanent monitoring plots, representing 2% of the project area, were
established (Figure 6). These plots were randomly spaced throughout each of the three main
restoration zones. The vegetative success criterion for these areas is survivorship totals that meet
or exceed 320 woody stems per acre at the end of the five year monitoring period. Hydrology
within the site is being monitored using shallow groundwater monitoring wells. A total of three 40-
inch wells were installed throughout the project area. Each well records the static water depth on a
daily basis. Well data and rainfall data (obtained from the Kinston airport) are graphically depicted
in Appendix C. In order to meet the appropriate success criteria, these areas must demonstrate a
water table within 12 inches of the soil surface for a minimum of 12 consecutive days (equal to or
greater than 5% of the growing season).
V. Annual Monitoring
Year 4 annual monitoring was conducted in October 2011. A total of 664 woody stems were
counted throughout the six monitoring plots, corresponding to an average of 1106 stems per acre
for the project area (Table 2). Of the 664 stems, 400 stems were of planted species,
corresponding to an average of 667 stems per acre. As in previous years, river birch (Betula nigra)
seedlings were the most abundant planted species. In 2011, 287 individuals were observed within
the plots. This is an increase from 180 individuals observed in 2010 and shows that this species is
volunteering throughout the site. Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) was the second most
abundant species, with 85 individuals observed (Appendix A). This is a slight decrease from the 90
individuals observed in 2010. Overall, vigorous growth was observed throughout the site (see
Appendix 8 for site photographs).
Hydrologic monitoring was initiated in May 2008 with the installation of three WM -40 groundwater
monitoring wells. Data collected during 2011 documented periods of saturation and surface
ponding throughout the site during the early growing season despite below normal antecedent
rainfall totals. While these below normal rainfall totals persisted for a couple of months, each of
three wells exceeded the minimum success for the fourth year of monitoring (Table 3).

Table 2. Summary of Vegetative Monitoring Data — Year 4
SPECIES
PLOT 1
PLOT 2
PLOT 3
PLOT 4
PLOT 5
PLOT 6
TOTAL
River Birch
7
39
35
19
19
168
287
Green Ash
Well 1
March 15 - May 18
45
45
Atlantic White
Cedar
Well 2
March 15 — May 18
65
27
Y
Well 3
0
Bald Cypress
36
8
39
2
85
Tulip Poplar
1
22
47
70
Black Gum
10
3
20
33
Black Willow
25
25
Sycamore
1
31
32
Sassafras
1
1
Wax Myrtle
2
1
3
Pond Pine
4
1
10
15
Baccharis
40
25
3
68
TOTAL
47
62
97
118
69
271
664
Planted Species
Volunteer Species
Table 3. Summary of Hydrologic Monitoring Data -- Year 4
Based on the observed hydroperiods, the site has responded favorably to the prescribed
hydrologic modifications. These modifications have resulted in extended periods of surface
ponding and saturation during the early growing season, which is typical of headwater systems in
the Coastal Plain. As a result, the nutrient and sediment removal functions within the wetland have
been restored, improving water quality and reducing downstream flooding. Appendix C provides
specific data collected during 2011.
4
Consecutive Dates
Number of Consecutive
% of Growing
5% Success
Well
Meeting Wetland
Days Meeting Wetland
Season Meeting
Criterion {12
Number
Hydrology Criteria within
Hydrology Criteria
Wetland Hydrology
days} Met?
2011 Growing Season
Well 1
March 15 - May 18
65
27
Y
Well 2
March 15 — May 18
65
27
Y
Well 3
March 15 -- May 22
69
29
Y
Based on the observed hydroperiods, the site has responded favorably to the prescribed
hydrologic modifications. These modifications have resulted in extended periods of surface
ponding and saturation during the early growing season, which is typical of headwater systems in
the Coastal Plain. As a result, the nutrient and sediment removal functions within the wetland have
been restored, improving water quality and reducing downstream flooding. Appendix C provides
specific data collected during 2011.
4

VI. Conclusion
Restoration activities have been demonstrated to be successful at the project site through the four
years of annual monitoring. The observed density (1106 stems/acre) indicates that planted
individuals are doing well and desirable species of native vegetation from adjacent areas are
volunteering in the site. The site is greatly surpassing the vegetative success criterion of a maturity
density of 320 stems/acre. The 2011 hydrologic monitoring data met the hydrologic success
criteria despite a few months of below normal precipitation levels.
Reversion of agricuitural land to wooded riparian buffer and wetland habitat will decrease source
nutrient loading and concurrently increase nutrient removal capacity. In addition, the project will
provide ancillary benefits to aquatic and wildlife habitat via enhanced niche habitat, microclimate
modification and shade, and increased food -web support. By doing so, the proposed project is
helping to effectively mitigate for authorized loss of riparian buffers, streams and wetlands
associated with the Cutter Creek development.
5

RitE?S
Po cos: rs
�rM RQ
�f
yW
o�
�G
A M0`4S P4 Y
303 =
Cr
5
HARDY RD
v
C�
9 ( 1
t„
LOOP RD
y, o: cc
cc
C)
Sew WOOD RD -W_ —
~' Disp r
(� lookertnn t
CC,
.<
a py . Cy�CH qQ d , J C'( �•
+ { l ovnfam
P47- S K 091
S OD {7p ppZ
� o
c:
or
123
'Pt RD VIUq
p 143.3 A N -MUC,O ;Jo Q
LU
m
E
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: North Carolina Atlas & Gazetteer. Pg 65.2003 SCALE 1 = 1 Mile
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site L.MG Figure 1
Greene County, NC 1.A ID MANAGEMENT GROUP
inc_ Vicinity Map
40- 06 -303P Environmenzal Consulranrs

b
Corn '� r
Cerra
awe
a � .•L� 1 ���� �, ri;� ~ter =�R� �� 'r --ry._ �I �} � �.
" Com
SITE
fe1 fir. em
NEW zim
• Cer' i
Ant loch
r
t f+j ry _ �ti. _ •
� f �� f/ �t � J��y ' 13.5 ��►:t�. y � � �-
t
H es are approximate and are ' ra
to be absolute. ce: Hookerton Quadrangle 7.5 minute (topographic) 1990. SCALE V = 1500'
un Developg ent Group LMG Figure 2
el Run Miti atior Site reene County, NC LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP— USGS Topgraphic Map
40- 06 -303P r Environmental Con3Ullants

KaA
KeA
Pa
h
,ate
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: NRCS Soil Survey. SCALE 1" = 400'
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site LMG Figure 3
Greene County, NC t..�vi�r�tnr.ncE:MaTrrcxoun,� Soils Map
40- 06 -303P EnOronmenral Consultants

�t
lk
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1998 NAPP aerial photography
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site
Greene County, NC
40- 06 -303P
LMG
LANE) MANAGEMENT GROUP iN,
Environmental Consulfanrs
l
rA'
SCALE 1" = 400' 1
Figure 4
Aerial Photograph

Legend
Property Boundary
Coastal Plain Headwater Strearn Restoration (19.4 ac.)
Cypress Pond (1.2 ac.)
CREP Planting (- 10ac.)
Existing Roads
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1998 NAPP aerial photography
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site
Greene County, NC
40-06-303P
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
Environmental ConSvftoim
4
SCALE 1" = 400'
Figure 5
Restoration Plan

• Monitoring Well
Property Boundary
Channel Alignment (-3,050 If)
50' Neuse Buffer Mitigation (5.8 ac.)
Coastal Plain Headwater Stream Restoration (19.4 ac.)
Cypress Pond (1.2 ac.)
CREP Planting (- 10ac.)
Existing Roads
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1998 NAPP aerial photography
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site
Greene County, NC
40- 06 -303P
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP inc.
Environmental Consultants
SCALE 1" = 400'
Figure 6
Monitoring Plot/Well
Location Map

APPENDIX A
YEAR 4 MONITORING PLOT DATA

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
7, SA, or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
1
3 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
3
4 ft
Planted
3
River Birch
SA
1
5 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
1
7 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
1
8 ft
Planted
1
Bald Cypress
SA
3
2 ft
Planted
3
Bald Cypress
SA
8
3 ft
Planted
S
Bald Cypress
SA
5
4 it
Planted
5
Bald Cypress
SA
5
5 it
Planted
5
Bald Cypress
SA
6
6 ft
Planted
6
Bald Cypress
SA
3
7 it
Planted
3
Bald Cypress
SA
4
Sit
Planted
4
Bald Cypress
SA
2
10 it
Planted
2
Sycamore
SA
1
8 ft
Volunteer
1
Sassafras
SA
1
5 ft
Volunteer
1
Wax Myrtle
SA
2
6 ft
Volunteer
2
TOTAL SHRUBS
0
OBSERVED DENSITY
PER PLOT
47
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
4
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
470
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
43
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
47 -J

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GRE ENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA, or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
1
5 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
2
6 ft
Planted
2
River Birch
SA
10
10 ft
Planted
10
River Birch
SA
21
15 ft
Planted
21
River Birch
SA
5
20 ft
Planted
5
Bald Cypress
SA
2
2 ft
Planted
2
Bald Cypress
SA
2
4 ft
Planted
2
Bald Cypress
SA
1
5 ft
Planted
1
Bald Cypress
SA
2
8 ft
Planted
2
Bald Cypress
SA
1
loft
Planted
1
Tulip Poplar
SA
1
2 ft
Planted
1
Black Gum
SA
7
2 ft
Planted
7
Black Gum
SA
3
3 ft
Planted
3
Pond Pine
SA
2
2 ft
Volunteer
2
Pond Pine
SA
1
5 ft
Volunteer
1
Pond Pine
SA
1
6 ft
Volunteer
1
TOTAL SHRUBS
p
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER PLOT)
62
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
4
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
620
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
58
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
62

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE- - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL 1MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA, or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
4
4 ft
Planted
4
River Birch
SA
6
5 ft
Planted
6
River Birch
SA
2
6 ft
Planted
2
River Birch
SA
2
7 ft
Planted
2
River Birch
SA
3
8 ft
Planted
3
River Birch
SA
14
10 ft
Planted
14
River Birch
SA
4
15 ft
Planted
4
Tulip Poplar
SA
3
1 ft
Planted
3
Tulip Poplar
SA
8
2 ft
Planted
8
Tulip Poplar
SA
7
3 ft
Planted
7
Tulip Poplar
SA
4
5 ft
Planted
4
Baccharis
SH
10
2 ft
Volunteer
10
Baccharis
SH
20
5 ft
Volunteer
20
Baccharis
SH
10
7 ft
Volunteer
10
TOTAL SHRUBS
4D
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER PLOT)
97
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
4D
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
970
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
57
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
97

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA: or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
Bald Cypress
SA
2
2 ft
P €anted
2
Bald Cypress
SA
3
3 ft
Punted
3
Bald Cypress
SA
15
4 ft
Planted
15
Bald Cypress
SA
6
5 ft
Planted
6
Bald Cypress
SA
10
5 ft
Planted
10
Bald Cypress
SA
3
7 ft
Planted
3
River Birtch
SA
1
1 ft
Planted
1
River Birtch
SA
3
2 ft
Planted
3
River Birtch
SA
5
3 ft
Planted
5
River Birtch
SA
5
4 ff
Planted
5
River Birtch
SA
2
5 ft
Planted
2
River Birtch
SA
1
6 ft
Planted
1
River Birtch
SA
1
7 ft
Planted
1
River Birtch
SA
1
8 ft
Planted
1
Black Gum
SA
3
2 ft
Planted
3
Sycamore
SA
7
1 ft
Volunteer
7
Sycamore
SA
4
2 ft
Volunteer
4
Sycamore
SA
8
3 ft
Volunteer
8
Sycamore
SA
7
4 ft
Volunteer
7
Sycamore
SA
5
5 tt
Volunteer
5
Pond Pine
SA
1
1 ft
Volunteer
1
Baccharis
SH
10
3 ft
Volunteer
10
Baccharis
SH
8
4 ft
Volunteer
8

Baccharis
SH
7
6 ft
Volunteer
7
OBSERVED DENSITY
TOTAL SHRUBS
25
118
(PER PLOT)
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
OBSERVED DENSITY
57
11so
SPECIES
(PER ACRE)
TOTAL TREES OF
61
PLANTED SPECIES
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
118

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNT'
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, 5A, or 5H
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
13
left
Planted
13
River Birch
SA
6
15 ft
Planted
6
Tulip Poplar
SA
3
2 ft
Planted
3
Tulip Poplar
SA
9
3 ft
Planted
9
Tulip Poplar
SA
11
4 ft
Planted
11
Tulip Poplar
SA
12
5 ft
Planted
12
Tulip Poplar
SA
4
6 ft
Planted
4
Tulip Poplar
SA
5
7 ft
Planted
5
Tulip Poplar
SA
2
8 ff
Pianfed
2
Tulip Poplar
SA
1
10 ft
Planted
1
3accharis
SH
3
5 ft
Volunteer
3
TOTAL SHRUBS
3
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER PLOT)
69
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
3
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
690
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
66
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
69

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA, or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
60
1 ft
Volunteer
60
River Birch
SA
60
2 ft
Volunteer
60
River Birch
SA
2
1 ft
Planted
2
River Birch
SA
16
2 ft
Planted
16
River Birch
SA
21
3 ft
Planted
21
River Birch
SA
5
4 ft
Planted
5
River Birch
SA
2
5 ft
Planted
2
River Birch
SA
1
6 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
1
8 ft
Planted
1
Green Ash
SA
21
2 ft
Planted
21
Green Ash
SA
9
3 ft
Planted
9
Green Ash
SA
4
4 ft
Planted
4
Green Ash
Green Ash
SA
SA
4
3
6 ft
7 ft
Planted
Planted
4
3
Green Ash
SA
3
10 ft
Planted
3
Green Ash
SA
1
11 ft
Planted
1
Bald Cypress
SA
1
4 ft
Planted
1
Bald Cypress
SA
1
6 ft
Planted
1
Black Gum
SA
5
1 ft
Planted
5
Black Gum
SA
13
2 ft
Planted
13
Black Gum
SA
2
4 ft
Planted
2
Black Willow
SA
5
3 ft
Volunteer
5
Black Willow
SA
7
7 It
Volunteer
7

Black Willow
SA
8
10 ft
Volunteer
8
Black Willow
SA
5
15 ft
Volunteer
5
Pond Pine
SA
5
1 �
Volunteer
5
Pond Pine
SA
5
2 ft
Volunteer
5
Wax mole
SH
1
4 It
Volunteer
1
TOTAL SHRUBS
1
OBSERVED DENSITY
271
(PER PLOT)
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
OBSERVED DENSITY
SPECIES
156
(PER ACRE)
2710
TOTAL TREES OF
115
PLANTED SPECIES
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
271

APPENDIX B
2011 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

A view of a bald cypress seedling observed in Plot 1.
Thick vegetation within Plot 2.
Mussel Run LMG Site Documentation
Headwater Restoration Project LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
�rc Photos
October 20'11 Faviiorimenta, Co-sufranrs
Wilmington, N.C.

Several river birches observed in Plot 3.
Bald cypress trees observed within Plot 4.
Mussel Run Site Documentation
Headwater Restoration Project LMG GROUPc.c Photos
October 2011 Fnvi +onmentaf Conivirants
Wilmington, N.C.

Ponded conditions within Plot 6.
Mussel Run Site Documentation
Headwater Restoration Project L?�?G ENTGROUP
cc Photos
October 20'11 Fnw,.anmentaf Consultants
Wilmington, N. C.

APPENDIX C
2011 HYDROGRAPHS
WELLS 1 -3

r
r-
O
N
V
L
m
2
T
♦♦W�
Vl
a
0
0
I I I I I I I
I I { I I I I
! I I I I I
I I I I ! I I
I I I I J I I
I I I I I I I
I I 1 t I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I ! I I
I I I I I I I 1
1 I I 1 I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I ! I I I I I
1 I I I I I ! I I
I I I I I r I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I r I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I 1 I J
I I I I I I I
I I { I r I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I ! I
r r i I I I I I
I I i I I I I r
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I r I I I I I
I I I I I 3 I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I I I ! I I I I
I I I r I I I I I
I I I I I I ! I I
I I I I I I l I 1
I I I r I I
I 1 I I I I
I I I I I I f
I I I 1 I I I I
1 I I 1 I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I l I I I
1 I I I I I i I
I I I I I I I I
! I I I I I I
I I I I I I ! I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I h I I
I I 1 I I I I !
I I I I I I I I
I I I I 3 I I
{ {J
A�
{{
{J I
0
y
a
1 yam a
{9 0
a �
s
9a °1
\>b
{{
9y �
S
rim
{{ G
{�
{� G
An
9{
{ {G
Af
{G
An!'f
,9
O m CO n CO lL7 �' m N r O Gtjn
{
(sayauI) u01IL -1 10OAd
Precipitation (in)
0
Oi m f-I CO LO V m N +— p
C
I
I
I I I
I I I
I I
1
vI
I
I
r
°'
o N
rn
0
N
w F-
C i=Z
,:or O
CO
z
mo 0) a
EE
(D LL CO
N �
c
D N
LO
cc
v
Z N
U
Q O
aom�
N U
o �Z�
4.�N
Z
CD
CO oY
,
Precipitation (in)
0
Oi m f-I CO LO V m N +— p
c0 D c0 N cp V O
[h M
N
(sayaul) iana-1 .falem a3minSiounoin
a
L
C
Q
CD
CD
O
0
m
C
I
I
I I I
I I I
I I
1
vI
I
I
r
I I I
I I I I
II I II
I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
?J
I I I
I I
I I i I
I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I II
1 I I
I
I I I
I I I
,
I I II i
I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I i I
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I
I I I
I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I
c0 D c0 N cp V O
[h M
N
(sayaul) iana-1 .falem a3minSiounoin
a
L
C
Q
CD
CD
O
0
m
{ {JA z
A
JA�
{ C
A
{{ 9
y
S
yQ
{{ 9 C'
a
y
s
a
\'o
{` L
Ate,
{` Z ors
A�
{,G z
An
{
An
{4
�n
{� G
A9
{ {G
°r;
N
T
a
A
m
LI. lii
m �
w 0)
C\J W
W CO
o LL
u) rn
ago U
CO
CO
J J
J J
LLI !_L.I N
l�
T
ci
C
Q
M
C7 Q.
p
N �
tl1 _E
tO
J
C
U
Z
,
M
CL
3
oZS
N
CV
�t]CUCL
c
MCM
r.=;s
E
0
0
M
r
>+
i
M
[�
t4
W
%1 C
Cfl
0
--tr
CO
a)
O
r
C
U
(�d°r��
-320
~
a
♦
♦ •
•
♦
♦
♦
4
♦
A
`
{ {JA z
A
JA�
{ C
A
{{ 9
y
S
yQ
{{ 9 C'
a
y
s
a
\'o
{` L
Ate,
{` Z ors
A�
{,G z
An
{
An
{4
�n
{� G
A9
{ {G
°r;
N
T
a
A
m
LI. lii
m �
w 0)
C\J W
W CO
o LL
u) rn
ago U
CO
CO
J J
J J
LLI !_L.I N
l�
T
ci
C
Q
M
C7 Q.
p
N �
tl1 _E
tO
J

T-
r-
0
N
AN
W
N
0
0
O M CO ti c.0 Lo V m N r p
(satin) UOFIB J00,Jd
�
�.
Cal o
�
y
O
_0 m
RS G1
cc
0
:
in
O
Cn 00
Z
v
;6 LU j
U
W
QW 0
z Cm
M = C
-0 0) o
ate.
ca
0
(D CO
C �
C2 CO N
.c
Q N
V
0
w 3
rC
U
O Z
CLti
M
� p
.Q- o
�
9t4 .�
L O
O ~" Z 0
!! G
0
�n
! S�
On,
0
n�
!
! O!
o
n, o
S �
!! 1
TA o
o
CO
!! C, o
T m
! !!
9 U)
!!T Y
A
ay
19L
ad
9
ad
!!
!!v
rye 9
..a6,
!
Precipitation (in)
0
[p O CO N V o cb
N C7 I?
(sa43uI) )ana-1 aateM eami mpunom
.a
0
Q
O
N
tm
0
O
OEi
!!G
�n
0
s
O
ns'
!
n0
7^
! s,
!! �ZIP
!!� cs
A
A
!! �9!
!! �9
a�
�a 9
a6,
!!
!!
!!
!
M
T
a
a
OD
LL CD
r
(b `d
LLI
c
CAE cc
CC
J (n
W Z
0)
ono U
Q
ce)
J J
W LU C,
1 � f
v
C
Q
o
as
0 a
O
E CD
O E
t
W
J
C
0
a
A
U
M
t3?
Z
L
CL
x
Q
=
VM
N
O
CV
U
o
_.
_
M
Ca
W
r
CO
d
O
0(n
CO
fA
Ci
�'
a�
=
►�
U2
C�
�°r��a
-3
o
0
m
♦
A
A
♦
•
♦
♦
A
!!G
�n
0
s
O
ns'
!
n0
7^
! s,
!! �ZIP
!!� cs
A
A
!! �9!
!! �9
a�
�a 9
a6,
!!
!!
!!
!
M
T
a
a
OD
LL CD
r
(b `d
LLI
c
CAE cc
CC
J (n
W Z
0)
ono U
Q
ce)
J J
W LU C,
1 � f
v
C
Q
o
as
0 a
O
E CD
O E
t
W
J

V-1
r
O
N
L
E
O
Q
0
Cn
N
Vi
a
0
0
L
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I
I t I I I I r
I ! I I I I I
t I r I I
1 I I I I I
I i I I I I I
1 1 I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I
i I I I I i I I I
1 I I I I
I I I I I I 1
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I I
I I I I 1
I I I I I I I
I I 1 I I I I
I I I t I I I I
I I I ! I
I I I I I I
1 I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I
I l I I I I i
I I I I I I I I
II I I I I I I
I I I I I I i
I I I I I I I I
t I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I J
I I I I I I I r
I I 1 I I I I r
I I I I I I I
I I i I r I I
I I I i I I I I I
1 I I I I I I I
I I I I I 1 I I
I I I ! I I I I
I I I I I I I 1
I I I I I ! I I I
I I I I I J I I 1
O aO t D V N O OO W � N
N r r r r r
(say3ur) uorlelldl3aad
� C
rte-. O
L
� fa
N
� m :j CO
N co
o�Z� Lvo
»� Y Z am
is
a O M LL
C E a0 fA
'2 O C .2 = a � Lr) �
C fn U .f.
"4U r m ZO
`7 O Sti O .n
CL .,�. Cn 2 0 �hC
!` a
ash'
as
a
!{ a c'
Cy
aas
00, �
0
`s
od �
! scs o
! z;
f7 Q
r {, CO
m
! {6 ! c
�S Z
fin, A
n9
t!!�n •
�4{ s
!!
�Z9
o fin,
Precipitation (in)
O
r 0-' w 1- CO LL 1 �t C7 N — 0
m o T N c0 co
N I? C]
(sauaul) lanai aateM aasjjng /punoj!D
L
O
U
W
D7
C
C
O
r-t
``o0
as,
s
asp
°'S,
E
!! a !
as
ash,
O
�6
!! S G]
! 6,
�S
!� 66
7�
7^
i9
! `a
�9
i
n9
1 {i
!
RT
T
m
c0
ED C)
LL fm
U �
W °
c
� �ro
J Cn
wE Z
T
Y �
CO 0
Q CO
r c�
J J
J ---1
W W N
U
C
Q
= 4 -
G1
O C
� a
C O
ER, a'
W E
CD
tG
m
C
m
J
C
O
*«
U
Y
as
tm
Z
o
N
L
+
M
c
N=
O
M�
T
O
C
iCCUoN
�
a
E
fA
O
t9
fA
r
r
d
0
m
A
A
RT
T
m
c0
ED C)
LL fm
U �
W °
c
� �ro
J Cn
wE Z
T
Y �
CO 0
Q CO
r c�
J J
J ---1
W W N
U
C
Q
= 4 -
G1
O C
� a
C O
ER, a'
W E
CD
tG
m
C
m
J

Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project
Site Specific Mitigation for Cutter Creek (Greene County, NC)
Annual Monitoring Report —Year 3
Action IN SAW - 2007 -02828
Prepared for:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
NC DENR; Division of Water Quality
Washington, NC
Prepared by:
LMG
1.ASdD A4ANAGEMLNT GIIOVP mc.
C nvironmenta7 CaniUliPlliS
Wilmington, NC
November 2010
RECEIVED
JA N 12 2012
D ii v Q— " " ` 'R®

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ............................................................................. ..............................1
Il. On -Site Construction ............................................................ ............................... 1
111. Site Planting .......................................................................... ............................... 2
IV. Monitoring Equipment Installation ........................................... ..............................3
V. Annual Monitoring ................................................................... ..............................3
VI. Conclusion ............................................................................. ............................... 5
TABLES
1. Plant List and Corresponding Restoration Zone
2. Summary of Vegetative Monitoring Data — Year 3
3. Summary of Hydrologic Monitoring Data -- Year 3
FIGURES
1. Vicinity Map
2. USGS Topographic Map
3. Soils Map
4. Aerial Photograph
5. Restoration Plan
6. Monitoring Plot/Well Location Map
APPENDICES
A. Year 3 Monitoring Plot Data
B. 2010 Site Photographs
C. 2010 Hydrographs
Wells 1 -3
i

Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project
Site Specific Mitigation for Cutter Creek (Greene County, NC)
Annual Monitoring Report — Year 3
I. Introduction
Construction of the Mussel Run Headwater Restoration Project, the off -site mitigation project for
the Cutter Creek development, was completed on April 18, 2008. This project, totaling 26.4 acres,
was designed to provide mitigation for buffer and stream impacts associated with the construction
of Lake Nina within the Cutter Creek development. The mitigation project is located off of
Ormondsville Road near the town of Fourway, NC approximately five miles from the impact area
(Figures 1 -4).
This project was reviewed and approved by regulatory staff and the proper permits were obtained
(Action ID# SAW -2007 -02828; DWO Project# 07- 0156). Fallowing initial construction, the site will
be monitored for a period of five years. Success will be based on demonstration of appropriate
survivorship and hydrology consistent with wetlands in this landscape position. Following each
monitoring event, a report documenting these aspects will be submitted to regulatory staff.
II. On -site Construction
The first phase of construction involved the removal of the existing road bed. Material from this
road bed was used to fill in two irrigation ponds, totaling 1.2 acres. Finished grades within these
ponds provide a gradual decrease in elevation from the surrounding fields. The second phase
involved the filling of approximately 1,100 linear feet of drainage ditch and removal of a large road
bed present throughout the site. In areas where ditch filling was not appropriate due to hydrologic
trespass concerns, grading was conducted to reduce the amount of channel incision.
The third phase involved the construction of a new 600' channel to provide drainage from the
eastern pond (Pond 1). Grading in this area was configured to mimic a natural "riffle- pool"
sequence found in Coastal Plain streams. A slope of 0.002 was maintained throughout this
portion. The fourth phase involved the construction of a 150' channel to provide drainage from the

western pond (Pond 2) into the existing ditch adjacent to Mussel Run, Similar slopes were
maintained for this section. The final phase involved grading and fill work along the northern
portions of the existing stream /ditch network. Grading this area was configured to direct drainage
from the existing fields into Pond 2 and the restored channels (Figure 5).
111. Site Planting
Prior to planting, the entire project area was disked to enhance microtopography and reduce soil
compaction. Following the disking, a five man crew was dispatched to plant 16,000 seedlings
throughout the 26.4 acre project area. Each seedling was planted on &' centers, with an average
density of 600 stems per acre. A total of six species were planted in one of three different zones,
Neuse Buffer, Cypress -Gum Pond, and Coastal Plain Headwater wetland (Table 1). These zones
will correspond to a frequency of inundation and elevation relative to the reestablished stream
channels. A wetland seed mix was also applied to minimize erosion during the first growing
season.
Table 1. Plant list and corresoondina restoration zone
Cutter Creek Miti
ation Planting
Species
zone"
Number
River Birch (Betula nigra)
HW /NB
2,000
Green Ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
HW /NB
2,000
Atlantic White Cedar (Chamaecy aris thyoides)
HW /NB
2,000
Bald Cypress (Taxodium distichum)
PINB
3,000
Tulip Po lar (briodendron tulipifera)
NB
4,000
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica v. biflora)
PINB
3000
" Planting Zones
Total
Acreage
16,000
Density
NB - Neuse Buffer Restoration
HW - Headwater Wetland Restoration
P - Cypress/Gum Pond
5.8
19.4
1.2
600
600
600
2

IV. Monitoring Equipment Installation
A total of six 0.10 -acre permanent monitoring plots, representing 2% of the project area, were
established (Figure 6). These plots were randomly spaced throughout each of the three main
restoration zones. The success criteria for these areas will be based on survivorship totals which
meet or exceed 320 woody stems per acre at the end of the five year monitoring period. Hydrology
within the site will be monitored using shallow groundwater monitoring wells. A total of three 40-
inch wells were installed throughout the project area. Each well records the static water depth on a
daily basis. Well data will then be graphed in addition to rainfall totals from the Kinston airport and
is presented in Appendix C. In order to meet the appropriate success criteria, these areas must
demonstrate a water table within 12 inches of the soil surface for a minimum of 12 consecutive
days equal to or greater than 5% of the growing season.
V. Annual Monitoring
Year 3 annual monitoring was conducted in September 2010. A total of 522 woody stems were
enumerated throughout the six monitoring plots, corresponding to an average of 870 stems per
acre for the project area (Table 2), Of the planted species, river birch (Befula nigra) seedlings were
the most abundant, totaling 180 individuals throughout the plots. Bald cypress (Taxodium
disfichum) was the second most abundant species, with 90 individuals observed (Appendix A).
Overall, vigorous growth was observed throughout the site despite abnormally dry to moderate
drought conditions throughout the summer months (see Appendix B for site photographs).
Hydrologic monitoring was initiated in May 2008 with the installation of three WM -40 groundwater
monitoring wells. Data collected during 2010 documented periods of saturation and surface
ponding throughout the site during the early growing season despite below normal antecedent
rainfall totals. While these below normal rainfall totals persisted for a couple of months, each of
three wells exceeded the minimum success for the third year of monitoring (Table 3).
3

Table 2. Summary of Vegetative Monitoring Data — Year 3
SPECIES
PLOT 1
PLOT 2
PLOT 3
PLOT 4
PLOT 5
PLOT 6
TOTAL
River Birch
3
37
28
8
20
84
180
Green Ash
Season
Hydrology Criteria
Well 1
March 15 - April 28
42
42
Atlantic White Cedar
March 15 - April 29
45
12
Well 3
March 15 — April 29
45
0
Bald Cypress
44
6
38
2
90
Tulip Poplar
1
30
1
50
82
Black Gum
12
5
27
44
Black Willow
26
26
Sycamore
1
14
15
Elderberry
1
1
Winged Sumac
1
1
Sassafras
2
2
Persimmon
1
1
Wax Myrtle
1
1
Baccharis
15
20
2
37
TOTAL
52
57
73
86
72
182
522
Planted Species
Volunteer Species
Table 3. Summary of Hydrologic Monitoring Data — Year 3
Based on the observed hydroperiods, the site has responded favorably to the prescribed
hydrologic modifications. These modifications have resulted in extended periods of surface
ponding and saturation during the early growing season, which is typical of headwater systems in
the Coastal Plain. As a result, the nutrient and sediment removal functions within the wetland have
been restored, improving water quality and reducing downstream flooding. Appendix C provides
specific data collected during 2010.
4
Consecutive Dates
Well
Meeting Wetland
o
5 /o Success
Number
Hydrology Criteria
Number of Consecutive Days Meeting
Criteria
within 2010 Growing
Wetland
Season
Hydrology Criteria
Well 1
March 15 - April 28
44
12
Well 2
March 15 - April 29
45
12
Well 3
March 15 — April 29
45
12
Based on the observed hydroperiods, the site has responded favorably to the prescribed
hydrologic modifications. These modifications have resulted in extended periods of surface
ponding and saturation during the early growing season, which is typical of headwater systems in
the Coastal Plain. As a result, the nutrient and sediment removal functions within the wetland have
been restored, improving water quality and reducing downstream flooding. Appendix C provides
specific data collected during 2010.
4

VI. Conclusion
Restoration activities have been demonstrated to be successful at the project site through the two
years of annual monitoring. The observed density (870 stems/acre) indicates that the site is
surpassing a maturity density of 320 stems/acre. The 2010 hydrologic monitoring data met the
hydrologic success criteria despite a few months of below normal precipitation levels. It is
anticipated that normal rainfall conditions throughout the winter and early spring will continue to
restore appropriate hydrologic conditions throughout the headwater wetland system.
Reversion of agricultural land to wooded riparian buffer and wetland habitat will decrease source
nutrient loading and concurrently increase nutrient removal capacity. In addition, the project will
provide ancillary benefits to aquatic and wildlife habitat via enhanced niche habitat, microclimate
modification and shade, and increased food -web support. By doing so, the proposed project will
help to effectively mitigate for authorized loss of riparian buffers, streams and wetlands associated
with the Cutter Creek development.
5

FIGURES

Rice
poco", In
a�
F:.
? sew
DISP
H FAR" f"
-t
ANT Dvol-i" ARM
4
f tit
4 \
„"J u_
QC5 �
LD
S�_.
a
kKs RD
r
7
{
9
c
si r
F,
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: North Carolina Atlas & Gazetteer. Pg 65.2003 SCALE 1” = 1 Mile
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site A�LMG Figure 1
Greene County, NC LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP "c Vicinity Map
40- 06 -303P Eaviroairewvl consu /tants
'w I
tI

r
s w-.
c
r
` 1
WA
4 I 1 t- A
3 10S
I SfTE
4
1
Lem
Pik
New Zia+
Ch t._...
n .Cem
` r Anilwh
NI
RJR 3
*Boundaries are approximate and are ' �
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: Hookerton Quadrangle 7.5 minute (topographic) 1990. SCALE 1" = 1500'
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site LMG Figure 2
Greene County, NC LAND MANAGEME'r GROUP —. USGS Topgraphic Map
40- 06 -3O3P

W. -
KeA
KaA
IM
k es are approximate and are to be absolute. rce: NRCS Soil Survey. SCALE 1" = 400'
un Development Group
el Run Mitigation Site ?O�LMG Figure 3
reene County, NC LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP Soils Map
40- 06 -303P � EavirunmenralConsultants

994SLAW
5�
W
qM
ad
F es are approximate and are ' ru
to be absolute.
rce: 1998 NAPP aerial photography SCALE 1" = 400'
un Development Group el Run Mitigation Site LMG Figure 4
reene County, NC LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP Aerial Photograph
40- 06 -303P Environmental Consultants

Legend
Property Boundary
Coastal Plain Headwater Stream Restoration (19.4 ac.)
Cypress Pond (1.2 ac.)
CREP Planting (-- 16ac.)
Existing Roads
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1998 NAPP aerial photography
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site
Greene County, NC
40- 06 -303P
A�LMG
LAND MANAGEMPNT GROUP —
Env7ronmeraal Cansulrasrts
SCALE 1" = 400'
Figure 5
Restoration Plan

Property Boundary
Coastal Plain Headwater Stream Restoration (19.4 ac.)
Cypress Pond (1.2 ac.)
CREP Planting (-- 10ac.)
Existing Roads
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1998 NAPP aerial photography
Mill Run Development Group
Mussel Run Mitigation Site
Greene County, NC
40- 06 -303P
?0&\LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP eeK
EnVTPOnmentaf Coils ctftants
SCALE 1" = 400'
Figure 6
Monitoring PlotlWell
Location Map

APPENDIX A
YEAR 3 MONITORING PLOT DATA

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
7. SA or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
2
2 ft
Planted
2
River Birch
SA
1
4 ft
Planted
1
Bald Cypress
SA
4
1 ft
Planted
4
Baid Cypress
SA
6
2 ft
Planted
6
Bald Cypress
SA
10
3 ft
Planted
10
Bald Cypress
SA
12
4 ft
Planted
12
Bald Cypress
SA
9
5 ft
Planted
9
Bald Cypress
SA
3
7 ft
Planted
3
Sycamore
SA
1
2 ft
Volunteer
1
Sassafras
SA
1
2 ft
Volunteer
1
Sassafras
SA
1
4 ft
Volunteer
1
Sumac
SA
1
6 ft
Volunteer
1
Elderberry
SA
1
4 ft
Volunteer
1
TOTAL SHRUBS
p
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER PLOT)
52
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
5
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
520
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
47
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
52

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA, or SFI
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
3
3 ft
Planted
3
River Birch
SA
1
511
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
3
7 ft
Planted
3
River Birch
SA
6
8 ft
Planted
6
River Birch
SA
1
9 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
6
10 f;
Planted
6
River Birch
SA
7
12 ft
Planted
River Birch
SA
10
15 ft
Planted
10
Bald Cypress
SA
2
1 ft
Planted
2
Bald Cypress
SA
1
3 fl
Planted
Bald Cypress
SA
1
4 ft
Planted
Bald Cypress
SA
2
5 fl
Planted
2
Tulip Poplar
SA
1
2 ft
Planted
1
Black Gum
SA
12
2 f4
Planted
12
Persimmon
SA
1
2 ft
Volunteer
1
TOTAL SHRUBS
p
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER PLOT)
57
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
1
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
57Q
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
56
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
57

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA, or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Numberof Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
1
2 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
1
3 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
9
4 ft
Planted
9
River Birch
SA
1
5 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
9
6 ft
Planted
9
River Birch
SA
4
7 ft
Planted
4
River Birch
SA
2
8 ft
Punted
River Birch
SA
1
loft
Planted
Tulip Poplar
SA
12
1 ft
Planted
2
Tulip Poplar
SA
10
2 ft
Planted
10
Tulip Poplar
SA
5
3 ft
Planted
5
Tulip Poplar
SA
3
4 ft
Planted
3
Baccharis
SH
1
1 ft
Volunteer
i
Baccharis
SH
6
2 ft
Volunteer
o
Baccharis
SH
7
3 ft
Volunteer
7
Baccharis
SH
1
4 ft
Volunteer
1
TOTAL SHRUBS
p
OBSERVED DEENSITY
(PER PLOT)
73
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
15
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
730
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
58
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
73

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA or 5H
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
Baid Cypress
SA
11
3 ft
Planted
11
Bald Cypress
SA
21
4 ft
Planted
21
Bald Cypress
SA
4
5 ft
Planted
4
Bald Cypress
SA
2
6 ft
Planted
2
River Birtch
SA
1
1 ft
Planted
'
River Birich
SA
4
2 ft
Planted
4
River Birtch
SA
3
4 ft
Planted
3
Black Gum
SA
3
2 ft
Planted
3
Black Gum
SA
2
3 ft
Planted
2
Tulip Poplar
SA
1
4 ft
Planted
1
Sycamore
SA
_5
1 f1
Volunteer
6
Sycamore
SA
5
2 ft
Volunteer
5
Sycamore
SA
3
3 ft
Volunteer
3
Baccharis
SH
5
2 ft
Volunteer
5
Baccharis
SH
10
3 ft
Volunteer
10
Baccharis
SH
4
4 ft
Volunteer
4
Baccharis
SH
1
5 ft
Volunteer
1
TOTAL SHRUBS
0
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER PLOT)
86
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
34
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
860
TOTAL TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
52
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
86

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T, SA, or SH
Number of Individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
1
4 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
1
6 ft
Planted
1
River Birch
SA
9
8 ft
Planted
9
River Birch
SA
5
10 ft
Planted
5
River Birch
SA
4
12 ft
Planted
4
Tulip Poplar
SA
2
1 ft
Planted
2
Tuiip Poplar
SA
12
2 ft
Planted
12
Tulip Poplar
SA
17
3 ft
Planted
17
Tulip Poplar
SA
8
4 ft
Planted
8
Tulip Poplar
SA
8
5 ft
Planted
8
Tulip Poplar
SA
3
8 ft
Planted
3
Baccharis
SH
1
3 ft
Volunteer
1
Baccharis
SH
1
4 ft
Volunteer
1
TOTALSHRUBS
0
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER PLOT)
72
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
SPECIES
2
OBSERVED DENSITY
(PER ACRE)
720
TOTAL. TREES OF
PLANTED SPECIES
70
TOTAL INDMDUALS
72

MUSSEL RUN MITIGATION SITE - GREENE COUNTY
ANNUAL MONITORING DATA SHEET - VEGETATION PLOTS
PLOT NUMBER
SPECIES
STRATUM
T SA, or SH
Number of individuals
HEIGHT
Planted vs. Volunteer
Species
Number of Individuals
Counted toward
Success Criteria
River Birch
SA
10
1 ft
Volunteer
10
River Birch
SA
45
2 It
Volunteer
45
River Birch
SA
18
3ft
Planted
18
River Birch
SA
7
4 ft
Planted
7
River Birch
SA
4
5 ft
Planted
4
Green Ash
5.4
1
1 ft
Planted
1
Green Ash
SA
16
2 ft
Planted
19-
Green Ash
SA
10
3ft
Planted
10
Green Ash
SA
7
4 ft
Planted
-
Green Ash
SA
1
5 ft
Planted
1
Green Ash
SA
1
6 ft
Planted
1
Green Ash
SA
1
7 ft
Planted
1
Green Ash
SA
5
8 ft
Planted
5
Bald Cypress
S
1
3 ft
Planted
1
Bald Cypress
SA
1
4 ft
Planted
1
Black Gum
SA
2
1 ft
Planted
2
Black Gum
SA
17
2 ft
Planted
17
Black Gum
SA
8
3 ft
Planted
8
Black Willow
SA
9
2 ft
Volunteer
9
Black Willow
SA
12
3 ft
Volunteer
12
Black Willow
SA
2
5 ft
Volunteer
2
Black Willow
SA
3
6 ft
Volunteer
3
Wax Myrtle
SH
1
2 ft
Volunteer
1

OBSERVED DENSITY
TOTAL SHRUBS
1
182
(PER PLOT)
TOTAL VOLUNTEER
OBSERVED DENSITY
61
1624
SPECIES
(PER ACRE)
TOTAL TREES OF
140
PLANTED SPECIES
TOTAL INDIVIDUALS
182

APPENDIX B
2010 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

A view of a bald cypress seedling observed in Plot 1.
A view of a river birch seedling observed at Plot 2.
Mussel Run Site Documentation
Headwater Restoration Project L MFNTGROUPWC Photos
September 2010 4LF Environmental `on5ultants
Wilmington, N.C.

A view of plantings at Plot 3.
A view of a tulip poplar seedling observed at Plot 5.
Mussel Run Site Documentation
Headwater Restoration Project LMN ENT GROUPwc Photos
September 2010 twoft £nv "o °me�`Q` `o"5"'r° °i5
Wilmington, N.C.

A view of plantings at Plot 4..
Mussel Run
Headwater Restoration Project
September 2010
A view of plantings at Plot 6.
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP iNc
c'n ri�onrnental Cons uitants
Iminaton, N.C.
Site Documentation
Photos

APPENDIX C
2010 HYDROGRAPHS
WELLS 1 -3

0
r
O
N
V
L
/E
V♦
N
N
a
0
Illlllllllllllr
0
O!�
A�
c�
o!�
A�
c�
�2
D �{
0
A
G� o
c °
0 1
0
O o
!,9 CO
a
yS
�o CO
ys }
o{ �
9y CE5
O D{ CY)
9y �
S �
O! GA
01C
An
D 9c'
{G
An!
c'
OZG
n�9
O! G
A{,
!!
O! G
A„
�9
O! G
T !
(sayoul) uoilelidlOOM
G
O
N O N
.. m m Cl) 00
0°c Z V wLU
C v 13::U a
Z Cm
ii a1 O to L O
C. . E a. cn
N
O C o L O
:. r.
aVo
(D0
Q. CO m 0 �C
Precipitation (in)
0
r-- 6) CO f• cO M -11 M N r O
I I I I
I I I
I I I I
I 1 I I
I ! I 1 I
I I I I I
I E I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I f I
I I I I I
I I I
I I I
! I I I I
I I I I
I I 1 I I
I I I I I
I I 3 I I
I I I E I
I I I I I
I I I 1
I 3 I I I
I I I I I
I I I I !
1 I I I
I I I I
I I I i
I I II r I
I I E I I
I I I I I
I I I I
I II I I I
I E I 1 I
I I I I I
I I I I I
I I I 1 I
I I I I I
I I I I
I I V I
I I I
I I I I
I I
I I I I
I I I I I
I I ! I I
I I I I
! I I I
I I I I I
I ! 1 I I
I I l I
1 I l I
I I I
I I
1 I I I
I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I
I If I i
I I l I I
I I I I
c4 O (D N 00 N C) C CO
(sayoui) iana-I aaleM 93etans/punoaE)
D
Cs
d
`i
0
c
0
O{ J
D {A <Cc
O!
A�
o <<
{J
O /��
1
y
S
y
0
o! 9 0'
y's
!
O!-91
yo
D! 9 !
O! 4
A�
A!,
9�
O! G
D{ G �'
A9
O! G
An,
O {!
{�
n:9
O{ G
A!,
00
0
vi
CO 0
LL CD
U 75
CO n5
u1
N
w Z
co �
LD
� U
Q CO
r CO
J J
J J
W W N
►
f
CL
M
O �
r- 0
CD
E
c 3
� 3
V 3
c
ca
J
C
O
Z
V
_
W,
C
M
O
L
W
rL
C
=
di
N
CD
N
CM
c
L
V
U
CO
M
N
r
L
Cl
Ca
CO
O
N
C
CD
r
m 'Cr
V
L-
Cm
O
02
a
*
:� :
n
2
0
m
` ♦
♦
♦
•
A •
•
•
00
0
vi
CO 0
LL CD
U 75
CO n5
u1
N
w Z
co �
LD
� U
Q CO
r CO
J J
J J
W W N
►
f
CL
M
O �
r- 0
CD
E
c 3
� 3
V 3
c
ca
J

CD
r
O
N
U
G
N
N
Y+
a
a
O
I I O!,
I I I I I I I I GO
I I I I 1 I I I I n
1 1 I I O On
1 I I I I I I I I !. [:
I I I I I I I I I G,y
I I I I I I I I O!
I I I I I f I I I G
I I I I I hJ]
O{
4An
i I I I r I I I S
Ot t
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
O Gin
I I I I I I Ot
I I I I I I {'G o
I E I /�n
`n
I 1 I O V 1
I I I I I I I I !, 1
I I I I I I I I TA 60
I i I O tO C'S
E
I I I I Ot c
I I I I I 1 I I 1 TA ?
1 O{ !�
TA
Cr
I It I f I I I I I O
I I I !,
I I I [ I
I I I ! Ot 9 Z
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I O {,
I I I �V
9
O
I I I I I I I I
I 1 I I I i I I I d6
I 1 ! O{
I I I O!
I I I I I I I I la
I I I i I I I I 6
! I I I I I I O
O!
o rn ti w Ln v m N
(sauaul) uoijajidIO8Jd
Precipitation (in)
0
Cn CO I- cD LD d' CO N — O
C
a C
o
Ca
l�
I
CT
m N
0 Z
v
0
J
R�:
w 7
Z
C's C
M=
a tm o
CO
ui CO
e
}'
ccZ
U
O C
N
U
O L
�
w Q i
0
N U
�0c�
a U)
Q�Z2
Cl 0 1
Precipitation (in)
0
Cn CO I- cD LD d' CO N — O
CO O Cfl N 2 d' n CO
N o7 T
(sayoui) iana'l aa;eM aoejjnSjpunoa!D
0
U
d
d
0
C
0
2
O {G
n0
4n
o{ �
�o
O! G
nS
O{
{
On
Ot o G
/7 s
Ot T
Ai/pt
D! O
�6
A�9
O {� c'
A
O! � c'
A�
O!? 9 t
Ot� !
O{ A�t
J�6:9
c'
O!�
a�
c'
ay�
t
O a6 {
!�
aye
O {_
mad
C
"a
r
i
l�
I
�
r;
E:
J
R�:
CO O Cfl N 2 d' n CO
N o7 T
(sayoui) iana'l aa;eM aoejjnSjpunoa!D
0
U
d
d
0
C
0
2
O {G
n0
4n
o{ �
�o
O! G
nS
O{
{
On
Ot o G
/7 s
Ot T
Ai/pt
D! O
�6
A�9
O {� c'
A
O! � c'
A�
O!? 9 t
Ot� !
O{ A�t
J�6:9
c'
O!�
a�
c'
ay�
t
O a6 {
!�
aye
O {_
mad
O
W
V!
i
00
M
LL 0)
0 -,
CD cd
W C
N �
1w
T
LL
LO m
CO
Q Q
CO
J J
T
U
O.
v �
0 Q
C 0
a7
E
C
� 3
c
:a
J
C
o
}'
ccZ
U
�
CD
CD
+�
CO)
p CL
r-
:3
CL
05
T--
O Z7)
UcCUM
c°�o
w
as
++
N
d
0
N
C
h
02
c����a
-5 o
W'
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
O
W
V!
i
00
M
LL 0)
0 -,
CD cd
W C
N �
1w
T
LL
LO m
CO
Q Q
CO
J J
T
U
O.
v �
0 Q
C 0
a7
E
C
� 3
c
:a
J

0
T
0
N
i
E
O
m
r.
CD
E
N
cwn,
rW
V n
N
a
cm
0
0
S.n
D{ O
s
O{ a
6
O{ Q' {
19
°1, a
a �
° {6
�d
O
S
7d
O
S
D�
°
O {O {
O {`D
n
-10
D {,
{n�
c'
O {.
{fin,
!61
7n
�9{
n,
{{
D{
D {%
L2 ! C2 N 0 m m I- t0 L 7 V m N — O
r r� r r r ,(
(sayoul) uoi3e3!dl39Jd
U
O
G N
�
�(n�
:� d) C/)
3
NCO
0�Z
V
+�_.Uzt 7
E —
r-
Uo
a= c
-0 a o
:±
m
��Z cm
d W
a_ z
E
N
q [n
Q
aV
o
c 0 U
as
o
0)
Z
L
�
o ++ Z o
J
Precipitation (in)
b
M M n CD 45 V C] N r O
r
�i
T
_r
.4u
(o O Co " N CD t O CO
N Ch C�
(sayoul) lanai aa;eM aae}anS /punoaq
L
O
V
O
.O
O
G
0/, a
as
s
O! as'sc'
as
6
as
as
�{ a
O{ G
o{ � F
S
O D
O S'
O{ 6 {
D
hs
OZ,
n
O { {O
n
O{,
/ �9
{
O {%
On
{{
O{
fO i9
O{
{fin,
{
O
T
O
M
Al
co
co
CO a
U �
m
c
N �
-j U)
+
n
co �
Lo M
co
aO U
�Q
J J
W W N
N
Q
s.. O
(� Q
� O
t0
T
...
U
o
0)
Z
o
a
N L
d
"r
C9
Q.
CO cn
d
U
N
N
Q 16
E
o
d
U1
Co
N
A
Y
G? L-
O
(D
2
h
♦
A
♦
♦
♦
♦ ♦
A
A♦
0/, a
as
s
O! as'sc'
as
6
as
as
�{ a
O{ G
o{ � F
S
O D
O S'
O{ 6 {
D
hs
OZ,
n
O { {O
n
O{,
/ �9
{
O {%
On
{{
O{
fO i9
O{
{fin,
{
O
T
O
M
Al
co
co
CO a
U �
m
c
N �
-j U)
+
n
co �
Lo M
co
aO U
�Q
J J
W W N
N
Q
s.. O
(� Q
� O
t0

G
r
0
N
E
U
ds
W
rV
Y
r�
V♦
a
0
0
L
OZ "DO
O
Ij ap
S
O/ J c'
ap
0
D� U c'
aC>'s
O, v
ap
0
D{ J {
a�S
Off?
°�O
O,
o�
9
0�0
O,' z
O{ °�O{
O{ 1
°O,
l�
O {%
J�
O 9c'
o0,
c'
O-�
O {•r
J
O�v
J ()9
O {,
T V T T O m cO ti '-0 In CO N r C} JO!
(sayaul) uojlelidl39ad
0
0
r`
1
0
CO
ro
0
n
CO
1
Z
Y
■
Precipitation (in)
0
r m CO �- M [n It CO N — O
r
I
E
E
I
f
[
I
C
+. O
U
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
� i=
N
07
CO
U) CO
E
qr
wva
CO
I
Z Cm
za a� o
E
w
�.
O C
Q.ECn N
a Q Ln
3�y
I
I
O
N
W
L
.i
0
C
cn
� w
2,
'm 0
a ; cn
r
M
S2
0
0
r`
1
0
CO
ro
0
n
CO
1
Z
Y
■
Precipitation (in)
0
r m CO �- M [n It CO N — O
r
I
E
E
I
f
[
I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
i I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
f I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I I I I
I I I
I I ] I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I E I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I i i II
I I I I
I I
I I
I
I �
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
• ._
I I I I
U
Z
I
I I I
•
I
I I I I
I
I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I
I I I
I I I I
I I 3 I
iD O [D N Q0 N O w
(sayaul) lana-1 jateM aoe}anS /punoaq
>L
O
U
a�
0y
0
C
O
2
D/ "096
O
DY O C'
ap
s
O�J c'
ap
O" v a O c'
O�
a
O.
O O
{ J �
a�: 4
O{ �
O
0 00
o�
7
o{ o�s�
O{ 0�0!
O/
B�
O
JO
O 9�
JO
O �c'
J
OZ91
o {V
Off{
D��
O {�
T
T
m
m
CO as
LL 0)
U 71
no
LU
C\l Cd
Lu Z
�p LL
CO U
a a �
rm
J J
J J
7W W N
i I
C1
CL
0
O O
Ecn
E
cap a�
w 3
C
m
J
C
Q
U
Z
�
o
T
O
N
W
C
C
:Z
06
O
N
r
M
U
OC
U
IL
o
N
L
c
:5
E
M
r
CU
Cc
(a
U)
a)
(D
Cfl
N
0
O
O
U
d
...
♦
♦
♦
♦
•
D/ "096
O
DY O C'
ap
s
O�J c'
ap
O" v a O c'
O�
a
O.
O O
{ J �
a�: 4
O{ �
O
0 00
o�
7
o{ o�s�
O{ 0�0!
O/
B�
O
JO
O 9�
JO
O �c'
J
OZ91
o {V
Off{
D��
O {�
T
T
m
m
CO as
LL 0)
U 71
no
LU
C\l Cd
Lu Z
�p LL
CO U
a a �
rm
J J
J J
7W W N
i I
C1
CL
0
O O
Ecn
E
cap a�
w 3
C
m
J