20180196 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_2020 (Buffer)_20210203

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20180196 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 02/03/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal -2/3/2021
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream r Wetlands rJ Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Jeremiah Dow [e-mail]
Project Information
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20180196 Version:*1
Existing ID## Existing Version
Project Type: C' DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
County: Durham
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: CatfishPond_100039_BufferMY1_2020.pdf 7.68MB
Rease upload only one R7Fof the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature:*

p.
i.
�x� r ,...„' Y < ., i ; .v sE 1 .'1 `� _ P: *Wf'i wFa,, E 4.. ..-".w.
e3 ate:. F , .� , �,.� ''�' 4SSt ,*�74 ., y �,7�•�-
.7 r. t f:l ��� u. ' 1 1447 k >40; - -"'te r`.
W.'i ' W:i'':.. '. ';'*''''. ,''A:i',.4.' '' , ',1.: t'' *;" ' A ,4t:<,..` , : .'4 e '..3-1,t,„ _.::11.4.i,.:.-1-.--,:o46FN::JAN::., k4.,-:.",1 ...t,
K.
r... ., , ,..., ..., ... . i _.. ..... ,..,„..„ . „:„.. , . ...,,,, 4. : -,, .,,.
.. ,y - L
t " . 'k 4 € x
a Y . - yC 1" J! } N
1. ,
C Z i�_ o
t �s� " 9 z n . A,3u4w ` t,
6. i"- tiY a „ arkn n, ' a -, ��
„_ ..
.
' y ,, ,
/ dr . ?-11-t'pfY rt' x ' ie s at x Z, 44t ,.1. ,- . A,-A.
4ft‘
lit ,., „..4*,,....;,,,,,r.....„,..
,,,$ k -
,,,etl..,..- e :,..._,f., :,„, m. ,...
--,l,,_,,e_
, R h j 4 p* yr" ,6 K14
4 1
e
MONITORING YEAR 1 CATFISH POND MITIGATION SITE
Durham County, NC
ANNUAL BUFFER REPORT NCDEQ Contract No. 007424
FINAL DMS Project No. 100039
NCDWR Project No. 2018-0196
RFP No. 16-007279
Neuse River Basin
HUC 03020201
Data Collection Period: October 2020
Draft Submission Date: December 2020
Final Submission Date: February 2021
PREPARED FOR:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

PREPARED BY:
W
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
Jason Lorch
[e-mail]
Phone: [phone]

CATFISH POND MITIGATION SITE
Monitoring Year 1 Buffer Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW 1
1.1 Project Summary 1
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives 1
1.3 Monitoring Year 1 Data Assessment 2
1.3.1 Vegetative Assessment 2
1.3.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern 3
1.4 Monitoring Year 1 Summary 3
Section 2: METHODOLOGY 3
Section 3: REFERENCES 4
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 General Figures and Tables
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Service Area Map
Figure 3 Project Component/Asset Map
Figure 4 Catfish Pond II Mitigation Bank Parcel Site Map
Table 1 Buffer Project Areas and Assets
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contact Table
Table 4 Project Information and Attributes
Table 5 Adjacent Forested Areas Existing Tree and Shrub Species
Table 6 Planted Tree Species
Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Figure 5-5b Monitoring Plan View Maps
Table 7 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Vegetation Plot Photographs
Overview Photographs
Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8 Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment Table
Table 9 CVS Vegetation Tables - Metadata
Table 10 Planted and Total Stem Counts
lieve Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Buffer Report- Final i

Section 1: PROJECT OVERVIEW
1.1 Project Summary
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. (Wildlands) implemented a full delivery project at the Catfish Pond
Mitigation Site (Site) for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality Division of Mitigation
Services (DMS). A total of 7,140 linear feet of perennial and intermittent streams were restored and
enhanced in Durham County, NC. A conservation easement comprised of 20.73 acres along Catfish Creek
and three unnamed tributaries in the Neuse River Basin are included in the project. A total of 18.22
acres (793,207 ft2) of riparian buffer have been restored or enhanced and are expected to generate
523,358.865 riparian buffer credits, with potential to convert some buffer credits to nutrient offset
credits dependent on the need.The Site is located approximately 12 miles north of the City of Durham
and approximately 3 miles east of the Orange County/Durham County border(Figure 1).The project
resides within Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201020040 and North Carolina Department of Water
Resources (NCDWR) Sub-basin 03-04-01.Two unnamed tributaries (UT1 and UT2) drain to Catfish Creek,
which drains to Mountain Creek, and one unnamed tributary(Mountain Tributary) drains directly to
Mountain Creek. Mountain Creek flows into Little River, the Eno River, and then Falls Lake. Falls Lake is
classified as Water Supply Waters(WS-IV) and Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW).
Work at the Site was planned, designed, and constructed per the Catfish Pond Mitigation Site—Riparian
Buffer Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2019) and the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B
.0295 (effective November 1, 2015). The purpose of the riparian buffer restoration is to provide riparian
buffer credits to compensate for buffer impacts within the Hydrologic Unit Code 03020201 and the Falls
Lake Watershed.The service area for the riparian buffer credits is depicted in Figure 2.The mitigation
credits generated from the Site are included in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 3 located in Appendix 1.
With the addition of Catfish Pond II Mitigation Bank Parcel (Catfish Pond II, DWR Project Number 2018-
0196v2), it is not necessary to deduct credits for lack of diffuse flow where Ditch D enters the DMS
conservation easement.The Catfish Pond II conservation easement completely encompasses Ditch D
allowing for diffuse flow through the riparian buffer. Fencing has been installed around Catfish Pond II
(Appendix 1, Figure 4).
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
Prior to construction, the primary degradation of Catfish Creek was the creation of Catfish Pond
sometime between 1940 and 1955. Within the same period, extensive logging and farm road
construction took place. Aerial photographs from 1972 suggest that UT1 had been straightened for
agricultural purposes. Catfish Creek above and below the pond, UT2, and Mountain Tributary, showed
few signs of channel manipulation.
The major goals of the riparian restoration project are to provide ecological and water quality
enhancements to the Neuse River Watershed within the Falls Lake Water Supply Watershed by creating
a functional riparian corridor and restoring the riparian area.The project supports specific goals
identified in the 2010 Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) for the Neuse River Targeted Local
Watershed, which highlights the importance of riparian buffers for stream restoration projects
(Breeding, 2010). Forested riparian areas immobilize and retain nutrients and suspended sediment.The
RBRP also supports the Falls Lake Nutrient Management Strategy (NCDWR, 2011). Falls Lake is the
receiving water supply water body downstream of the Site and is classified as WS-IV and NSW. Specific
enhancements to water quality and ecological processes are outlined below:
• Exclude cattle from project streams— Fencing has been installed around project areas adjacent
to cattle pastures.
vivo Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Buffer Report- Final 1

• Decrease nutrient levels—Filtering runoff from the agricultural fields through restored native
riparian zones.The off-site nutrient input is absorbed on-site by filtering flood flows through
restored floodplain areas,where flood flows can disperse through native vegetation.
• Decrease water temperature and increase dissolved oxygen concentrations—Riparian areas will
create additional long-term shading of the channel flow to reduce thermal pollution.
• Restore and enhance native floodplain vegetation—Planted native tree species in riparian zone
where tree growth was insufficient.
• Permanently protect the project Site from harmful uses—Established a conservation easement
on the site.
The 20.73-acre Site is protected with a permanent conservation easement. Of the 20.73 acres, Neuse
riparian buffer credits were generated by restoring 5.92 acres and enhancing 12.30 acres. No buffer
credit will be generated from the remaining 2.51 acres. In general, riparian buffer restoration area
widths on streams extend out to 50 feet from top of bank on each side of the stream channel. Figure 3
and Table 1 in Appendix 1 detail the buffer credit generation.
1.3 Monitoring Year 1 Data Assessment
The Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2019) was submitted and accepted by DMS in July 2019. Construction
activities by Main Stream Earthwork, Inc. and tree planting by Bruton Natural Systems, Inc. were both
completed in March 2020.The baseline as-built survey was completed by Kee Mapping and Surveying in
April 2020. Refer to Appendix 1 for detailed project activity, history, contact information, and
watershed/site background information.
Vegetative performance for buffer restoration areas will be in accordance with 15A NCAC 02B
.0295(n)(2)(B), and (n)(4) (effective November 1, 2015).To meet success criteria, areas generating buffer
mitigation credits shall include a minimum of four native hardwood tree species, where no one species
is greater than 50 percent of stems, and shall have a survival of at least 260 planted stems per acre at
the end of the required five-year monitoring period. For monitoring to be completed and buffer credit
to be awarded, NCDWR must provide written approval of successful revegetation of buffer restoration
areas. Year 1 monitoring (MY1) was conducted to assess the condition of the vegetation in October
2020.
1.3.1 Vegetative Assessment
The quantity of monitoring vegetation plots was determined in accordance with the Carolina Vegetative
Sampling Protocol (Lee et al., 2008)) such that at least 2 percent of the Site is encompassed in
monitoring plots. A total of 7 vegetation plots (each 100 square meters)were established within the
conservation easement boundaries.The plot corners have been marked and are recoverable either
through field identification or with the use of a GPS unit. Reference photographs are taken at the origin
looking diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner on an annual basis.Trees will be marked
annually with flagging tape. Species composition, vigor, height, density, and survival rates will be
evaluated by plot on an annual basis.The extent of invasive species coverage will also be monitored and
controlled as necessary.
The 2020 annual vegetation monitoring resulted in an average survival of 555 planted stems per acre,
which exceeds the final requirement of 260 stems per acre, but is approximately 1% less than the
baseline density recorded (561 planted stems per acre) in March 2020.The average number of stems
per plot remained the same from MVO to MY1 at 13 stems per plot.The Site is on track to meet the final
success criteria. Refer to Appendix 2 for the vegetation condition assessment table, monitoring plan
view maps, vegetation plot and overview photographs. Appendix 3 contains vegetation plot criteria
attainment data, CVS vegetation plot metadata, and vegetation summary tables.
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Buffer Report- Final 2

1.3.2 Vegetation Areas of Concern
Before construction,the Site had sporadic areas of multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), and Japanese honeysuckle(Lonicera japonica).There were also areas of sporadic
princess tree (Paulownia tomentosa) and tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima). Multiflora rose was
treated across the Site in May 2020 using a foliar application of triclopyr.The scattered princess tree and
tree of heaven individuals were treated in September 2020 using a stem injection of imazapyr.The
remaining Chinese privet on the Site will be treated during the winter of 2020/2021 using a combination
of methods including foliar and cut stump applications. While invasive species have been greatly
reduced, Wildlands recognizes that multiple treatments are typically needed for effective invasive plant
control and will follow up on these treatments in subsequent monitoring years as necessary. Herbicide
application for Japanese honeysuckle is also scheduled for MY2.
Areas along the edge of the livestock pastures were dominated by pasture grasses such as tall fescue
(Festuca arundinacea). Some areas with dense tall fescue received a broadcast application of glyphosate
and were seeded with the permanent native seed mix prior to planting. Wildlands completed ring sprays
around the bases of trees in most of the remaining areas dominated by tall fescue.These ring sprays
were completed soon after tree planting and significantly reduced tall fescue cover in an 18"-30" radius
around each tree.A few small areas were left untreated by ring sprays for comparison.
1.4 Monitoring Year 1 Summary
Overall,the Site has met the required vegetation success criteria for MY1. Sporadic invasive vegetation
was treated in May and September 2020 and follow up treatments are scheduled for winter 2020/2021.
Wildlands will continue to monitor areas where invasive species have been removed. Stems planted in
areas of competition with tall fescue are being observed closely. No additional treatment is necessary at
this time.
Summary information/data related to the performance of various project and monitoring elements can
be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting
information, formerly found in these reports, can be found in the Mitigation Plan (Wildlands, 2019)
available on DMS's website. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are
available from DMS upon request.
Section 2: METHODOLOGY
Planted woody vegetation was monitored in accordance with the guidelines and procedures developed
by the Carolina Vegetation Survey-EEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al., 2008). A total of six standard 10-
meter by 10-meter vegetation plots and one 5-meter by 20-meter vegetation plot were established
within the Site conservation easement area.
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Buffer Report- Final 3

Section 3: REFERENCES
Breeding, R. 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement
Program. Accessed at:
https://fi les.nc.gov/ncdeq/M itigation%20Services/Watershed_Pla n n i ng/Neuse_River_Basi n/FINAL%2
ORBRP%20Neuse%202010_%2020111207%2000RRECTED.pdf
Lee, M.T., Peet, R.K., Roberts, S.D., & Wentworth,T.R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation
Version 4.2. Accessed at: http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf
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 Accessed at:
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Library/Guidance%
20and%20Tem plate%20Documents/RB_NO_Base_Mon_Tem plate_2.0_2017_5.pdf
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2000. 15A
NCAC 02B .0233 Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy: Protection and
Maintenance of Existing Riparian Buffers. Accessed at:
http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-
%20envi ro nmenta l%20qua l ity/cha pter%2002%20-
%20envi ronmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0233.pdf
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2011. Falls
Lake Nutrient Management Strategy. Accessed at: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/water-planning/nonpoint-source-planning/falls-lake-nutrient-strategy
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2015. 15A
NCAC 02B .0295 Mitigation Program Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian
Buffers. Accessed at: http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-
%20envi ro nmenta l%20qua 1 ity/chapter%2002%20-
%20envi ronmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0295.pdf
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Resources (NCDWR). 2011.
Surface Water Classifications. Accessed at: https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-
resources/planning/classification-standards/classifications#DWRPrimaryClassification
Wildlands Engineering, Inc. 2019. Catfish Pond Mitigation Site— Riparian Buffer Mitigation Plan. North
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS), Raleigh, NC.
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Buffer Report- Final 4

APPENDIX 1. General Figures and Tables

N
Directions: From Raleigh, NC,take 1-40 West towards Durham. re >u
Take exit 279B for NC-147 N towards Durham/Downtown. d°0 Project Location
Travel approximately 8 miles and exit onto Duke Street. rag ----
Merge onto South Duke Street and continue 4.3 miles until I__ _J Conservation Easement
South Duke Street merges with US-501 N/N Roxboro Street. Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Travel north on US-501 N/N Roxboro Street for 7.5 miles.
Make a U-turn and travel south on N Roxboro Street for 0.2
miles,turn right on the first gravel road. Drive approximately
0.2 miles and take the first right onto another gravel road. Slate �o+est Rd �.
The Site is located at the end of the gravel road.
Pa
1 5 LC
1
SS I- E
f 3 Bahama r z \\`
r Rkrrrs 13d - n o e Hapklns Rd p ,cva
! o
1 I ,...'Pry - ' C
i C
f ,,tea
1 'r �e qf
a 500 f! e-
(nil
LhtIe a mta
Rives Park
f * e
f
I a
1 c
3
1 z
f .04•�6+
f GctsS r
John fo S Rif 'Pa
�d o /
.1
w1� o Y
ir
Q1q = I '1•
01 L1
1 . %.% / r'
... • )00/1
t . ' '-
.,
•
1 . V- --•
1 A • '
•, - '•----_• '• ;
•
r- __.., rip
dokili • ik
1. ,
' K_ _ I I
1' v - • I I 1`
i
•
Cr pbj ,QI I 1 4••
S4 N a - I /I
q
C.0 .
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
VV I L D L A N D S 0 0.5 1 Miles Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
/ Monitoring Year 1—2020
\� ENGINEERING I I I I
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Durham County, NC

r ii !
U I H:rl:nn, I1, r.._.1
i j._.._: County Boundary
i i Service Area-Riparian Buffer Credits(HUC 03020201)
i • i
j I Service Area-Nutrient Offset Credits(Falls Lake Watershed) 1
-
i * Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
�nt5a 114 Falls Lake I ! I• .— % ";:i\p,
f /
j Watershed j * I ,•-•,r'
t it rtr r m or �/ /,
lab I. Louisburg /•
i'I Hlil;t.,x.,u.it r : /
I "�. I /•
i I 1 4' AM Lower-•..; %.
i — .V y Falls Lake '�-,.
�'"'t1°"r Watershed '�.
j dA i a .r„r ,.l '�. j 1,,
rvPti. . .N
I I /
l� 1 / /
l j . =,,'`
\ /
tlulont o
.4, .�.
/ Cary Raleigh Knightdale ';Je.„,_„•.. II; "..~
G Ape �•
I ur l,oro ��' ,�••�
B Everett iv -.,r'1 I .�� 'I
Jordan ', '�" 1.
Lake I± '
iP
Ewd,^ Holly / / '
. " springs • - .. I.3itan \
1 4..1 •`.�_ // .....
'.... Selma /
' •``/ Smithfield /
fr
/ Ra an
J r 1iI Fleck 3 /
1 -data Park so,,
$ I-.4nr ..3ks /
f
/ Limes r /
^
Creek Coats •
/ Lilhngton � I
NI, n ) 1st,
/' - S1
•• 969 ft Ervin ) �•�''
•�' bran .,�♦ �•
1 Walkertown• �f
r i " •.`• rr
eCohan •f•..T•++'y�.� — ••� •
IN
'.". u 4
4 )
Figure 2. Service Area Map
‘401111p:/W I L D L A N D S 0 5 10 Miles Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING I I I Monitoring Year 1-2020
N
Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Durham County, NC

m. i
A ir
. . . _ ,.., . _.,
iiiii
, 4,...
• — Project Location
s 6) -"'
. ..,• 41/44411,111:'' - 111140.
L_ _Conservation Easement
4i •
'x — x _ x / r Internal Crossing
x + , LS
1 . / . , I Project Features
+ t, /
+'♦ •♦♦♦ ♦ ,��D Project Stream
a, ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦• i♦ i♦ / �� . t Project Ditch
- f 4 ~t; y y♦4'7±••♦i♦♦♦♦i♦i�� i♦J♦♦ /+�� Project Ephemeral Channel
J1� �" - .� ♦♦ 4 Non Project Stream/Channel
Y r
♦ ` ,(4, u Mitigation Approach
r't IC i r
_ - k
, ` r 5r t
r .lir nir y ,• t'�„ ai s r + � j Buffer Restoration (TOB 49')
ti4101
r" v _
'1r 0 �- , L, is - � fl``• �' s;„ � 4 i i♦i♦i♦ Buffer Restoration (TOB 50')
`` `�� -.+. _ � .'♦,�, - :%w,* Vitk Buffer Restoration (51'-100')
ei,
j.t' J.r'♦ �' 1 * . # ^.x - Buffer Restoration (101' 200')
• • . ,. ...,.
•rid' • y\-4444 Poott'e•lp e•4,.17,; •••••P lt x x� ..♦A.,..,.......„...„............A- Af -„,-,r
♦♦ •♦♦4.♦��♦•♦♦♦♦♦t♦ '' ♦♦♦ " Buffer Enhancement Via Cattle Exclusion (TOB 50')
# r ,Ax ♦. 6b :::::::::: ::
ion♦♦.° ♦i♦♦ ♦♦.• ♦♦...� 'F + x�'` ion 101 200)
A",' f r yse _n _ - it ♦♦♦♦- ♦. ,: _ ,41110 .L, � No Credit
•
1 i _ X x —+ V♦♦, ~ tt tt Fence
1 - • k x X— ••♦♦ Rio ,� • .
y E = L X \kx XX XX XX X • 64� :',--'• ��ed
111 cc.
, ,,
_
J
. ..
r W
., ,,,..,,,
.. II, . :are. .. ,. • /
� * if ct.
*,,,,,,i
♦ �
•
,,+ ,.
.....„.
. -4-
• 2' \ ,
k,'It'' r 1 i .07,C,..,, ? '' • -.4(4 _
. , . ,
®
. _ .' , .
_ . ♦ �.._....... / ?it - , ,
. +._ . .
•
•• .
..... .. ,
. ..
I , _.
.. -.,_,,, ., -„. 4.
\ _ ,.ir'IF' •
•
2017Aerial Photography ';�' .: . % * ` �.� r r-• ;' �r� , - _
Figure 3. Project Component/Asset Map
W I L D L A N D S Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING 0 400 800 Feet
Monitoring Year 1—2020
I i I i Ilt' Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Durham County, NC

x. .
_ Project Location
6 c Catfish Pond Conservation Easement
Li _ _1 Catfish Pond II Conservation Easement
o ' Internal Crossing
Project Features
<; " Project Stream
Project Ditch
x — x — x
064,7 , I Project Ephemeral Channel
x
j + a��'" " Non-Project Stream/Channel
_,,, , ,4. < * U =U Fence
ok
z w fi -
'C-/,., .>: „. „ i iht , .
N dimY 'J
iv
1: _ ,,,.==.,, +, :,,,,i -- - e (),,c,_Y )) .3 „
".4 ,.,...,„,,,,,o` . ..4, \/' ' -<"-
a _A ' S<)\;(YVCce . \
�
1
,:iiif 1 F 16--;
41 44,*Afii; 44 •
4 ,..A.4,,,i x A s , e' 0 ,,i_ , a, -'5- ,''..1
/14N ,/ ,
/, ." /r Vie:
rik. , ' rid IMF
a
�c F41
"r - • -!la 1
Figure 4. Catfish Pond II Mitigation Bank Parcel Site Map
(4WILDLANDS Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING 0 250 500 Feet Monitoring Year 1-2020
I I I I I Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Durham County, NC

Table 1. Buffer Project Areas and Assets
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
_ Neuse 03020201-Upper Falls Lake Project Area
19.16394 N Credit Conversion Ratio(ft2/pound)
297.54099 P Credit Conversion Ratio(ft2/pound)
Subject?(enter Total
Convertible Convertible to Delivered Delivered
NO if Min-Max Buffer (Creditable) Initial Credit Final Credit Riparian Buffer
Credit Type Location Area of Buffer Ratio(x:l)ephemeral or Feature Type Mitigation Activity
Width(ft) Feature Name Total Area(ft�) %Full Credit
Ratio(x:1) to Riparian
Credits Nutrient Nutrient Offset: Nutrient
Buffer? Offset? N(Ibs) Offset:P(Ibs)
ditch') Mitigation(ft)
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Restoration 0-50 Catfish Creek,UT1 4,369 4,369 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 4,369.000 No — —
•
Catfish Creek,UT1,UT2,
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Restoration 51-100 252,086 252,086 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 252,086.000 Yes 13,154.184 847.231
Mountain Trib
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Restoration 101-200 UT1 1,063 1,063 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 350.790 Yes 55.469 3.573
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Enhancement via 0-100 Catfish Creek,UT1,UT2, 531,834 531,834 2 100% 2.00000 Yes 265,917.000 No — —
Cattle Exclusion Mountain Trib
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Enhancement via 101-200 UT1 3,855 3,855 2 33% 6.06061 Yes I 636.075 No — —
Cattle Exclusion
Totals: 793,207 793,207
Enter Preservation Credits Below Eligible for Preservation(ftu): 264,402
Total
Min-Max Buffer (Creditable) Initial Credit Final Credit Riparian
Credit Type Location Subject? Feature Type Mitigation Activity Feature Name Total Area(0)Width(ft) Area for Buffer Ratio(x:l) %Full Credit
Ratio(.1) Buffer Credits
Mitigation Ift)
Buffer Preservation —
Preservation Area Subtotal(ft°): 0
Preservation as%Total Area of Buffer Mitigation: 0.0% TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION(TABM)
Ephemeral Reaches as%Total Area of Buffer Mitigation: 0.0% Mitigation Totals Square Feet Credits
Restoration: 257,518 256,805.790
Enhancement: 535,689 266,553.075
Preservation: 0 0.000
Total Riparian Buffer: 793,207 523,358.865
TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATION
Mitigation Totals Square Feet Credits
Nutrient Nitrogen: 0 0.000
last updated 01/17/2020 Offset: Phosphorus: 0.000

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Activity or Report Data Collection Complete I Completion or Scheduled Delivery
Mitigation Plan July 2019 July 2019
Final Design-Construction Plans August 2019 August 2019
Construction February-March 2020 March 2020
Temporary S&E mix applied to entire project areal March 2020 March 2020
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments' April 2020 April 2020
Bare root and live stake plantings for reach/segments March 2020 March 2020
Baseline Monitoring Document(Year 0) March 2020 June 2020
Competitive Vegetation Treatment2 April-May 2020
Invasive Vegetation Treatment May&September 2020
Year 1 Monitoring October 2020 December 2020
Year 2 Monitoring December 2021
Year 3 Monitoring December 2022
Year 4 Monitoring December 2023
Year 5 Monitoring December 2024
'Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed.
'Herbicide ring sprays around the base of planted stems.
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Wildlands Engineering,Inc.
Designer 497 Bramson Ct,Suite 104
Daniel Johnson,PE Mt.Pleasant,SC 29464
843.277.6221
Main Stream Earthwork,Inc.
Construction Crew 631 Camp Dan Valley Rd
Reidsville,NC 27320
Bruton Natural Systems,Inc
Planting Contractor P.O.Box 1197
Fremont,NC 27830
Canady's Landscaping&Erosion
Seeding Contractor 256 Fairview Acres Rd
Lexington,NC 27295
Seed Mix Sources Garrett Wildflower Seed Farm
1591 Cleveland Rd
Smithfield,NC 27577
Ernst Conservation Seeds,Inc.
8884 Mercer Pike
Meadville,PA 16335
Nursery Stock Suppliers Dykes and Sons Nursery and Greenhouse
Bare Roots 825 Maude Etter Rd
McMinnville,TN 37110
Live Stakes Bruton Natural Systems,Inc
Foggy Mountain Nursery
797 Helton Creek Rd
Lansing,NC 28643
Monitoring Performers Wildlands Engineering,Inc.
Monitoring,POC Jason Lorch
919.851.9986

Table 4. Project Information and Attributes
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
County Durham County
Project Coordinates(latitude and longitude) 36°9'48.03"N,78°54'37.66"W
Project Area(acres) 20.73
Planted Acreage(acres of woody stems planted) 8.00
PROJECT WATERSHED SUMMARY INFORMATION
Physiographic Province Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont Physiographic Province
River Basin Neuse River
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit 03020201
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit 03020201020040
DWR Sub-basin 03-04-01
Project Drainiage Area(acres) 227(Catfish Creek-197,Mountain Tributary-30)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 0.0%
CGIA Land Use Classification 45.6%forested,54.2%cultivated,0.2%wetland
Table 5. Adjacent Forested Areas Existing Tree and Shrub Species
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Wetland
AIM
Common Name Scientific Name Indicator
Status
Black Willow Salix nigra OBL
Eastern Red Cedar Juniperus virginiana FACU
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica FACW
Hazel Alder Alnus serrulata OBL
Paw Paw Asimina triloba FAC
Red Maple Acer rubrum FAC
Sweet Gum Liquidambarstyraciflua FAC
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis FACW
White Oak Quercus alba FACU
Yellow Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera FACU
Table 6. Planted Tree Species
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Arrowwood Viburnum Viburnum dentatum 55 1.0%
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 646 11.5%
Overcup Oak Quercus lyrata 365 6.5%
River Birch Betula nigra 927 16.5%
Shumard Oak Quercus shumardii 646 11.5%
Smooth Serviceberry Amelanchier laevis 55 1.0%
Swamp Chestnut Oak Quercus michauxii 646 11.5%
Sycamore Platanus occidentalis 1,207 21.5%
White Oak Quercus alba 365 6.5%
Willow Oak Quercus phellos 646 11.5%
Yellow Buckeye Aesculus flava 55 1.0%

APPENDIX 2. Visual Assessment Data

i
x
i i, - Project Location
r-'--- --_--'---_--'---_--_--'--_- -- ---_--'---_-_--'--_--'---_- --'- £ u—-J Conservation Easement
1 Figure 5a X _ X _ x - _
is/ ii
I Internal Crossing
k k 1
I / I a Project Features
I �+ k I a.
+\ 1 +/J��` E o' Project Stream
1 \ x —x —x _k .p .Ir
+ ,/`C� I Project Ditch
i �+•, � a� I Project Ephemeral Channel
+I - + + - 4. Non-Project Stream/Channel
_ __ _ i x
1 Mitigation Approach
y _ '0 `1
W ; - M1�1.,}, + +� 111" I Buffer Restoration (TOB 49')
�'� + k UT2 .' . % +
' e,J \ + + •♦.♦�♦ Buffer Restoration (TOB-50')
k � Buffer Restoration (51 100)
r 1 + +
/; e-•. X ...6.f ;;, +\� -v.�♦".,a&_�. k k k k� k 1 rt - Buffer Restoration (101' 200')
r..,
�- .• .
Y,:- ..- �' I ;� -'-��` \ -r •♦� ♦♦ k cd/,s k� I i♦i♦i Buffer Enhancement Via Cattle Exclusion (TOB-50')
re
F; Y� ' - ,-1- _ x -i_ +\ - --- i004 ` k - ---' - ---' I Buffer Enhancement Via Cattle Exclusion (51'-100')
• ,• ,a I I + \ 11 /k \ x 1 I +
�._I.,I� 4 } xx if k k x x o v :: : cement
Via Cattle Exclusion (101-200)
_x ` s�. . tt bt
;I {j it
'1 x k _ •'fix — +'a C� I I / dgr
, Vegetation Plot- MY1
r. 1 1 k 1x x x�" ,. co > .
k I i x kx s x xx + cor :I - — Criteria Met -5.�
. i. _L-�---'---�---.-r-'---�---'---.- '---�---- -.x-'---�--4-'�-.---�---'---�---�-- '-r • .f
, .1 ,, , + + 4`c f • ? � Fence i"
•' I \ h0 x �k -x �x —x 1
I+ � ' UT1 f
/4c I
� ,� 1 I i 0 0 i
Z ir ,:,
i vr, . v ...,
Ifiiivv, I .....r4.-7„44414 7,,_,..,. , " 11
,I" _ _A 'c'.- / ., .
i •: '
ii
I \
A, + . . Figure 5b _..
2017Aerial Photography ' t It r )1 . '
wf . I f t�-- 4, .... -
. ..,.ik it
. . „_
. .__ 4._....._.....
Figure 5. Monitoring Plan View Map Key
ktWILDLANDS Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING 0 400 800 Feet
Monitoring Year 1—2020
I I I I Ilt' Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Durham County, NC

tip1114,„ .
;-_ - # r - � .. •- a :. •','i
r. }
.*1 y �S •l ' x x. x —'x x — Project Location
. _ •� *pi; t•V •♦e♦• —
-
.♦i♦i♦i• �� • _ ' Conservation Easement
11
MA
'. .. _ .,♦♦•e• ♦•v . 44 .,
Internal Crossing
_ /♦arc-0 ♦♦♦i0♦ k C _ Project Features
. ♦♦4.♦ ♦♦♦♦♦
t ,♦♦♦••♦♦• ♦•♦♦♦♦- Project Stream
.f • ♦, •♦♦♦ ••♦♦♦♦♦♦,
/•♦♦♦♦ �a♦a�1 ♦♦♦♦�.'�♦ ♦♦♦�,� -_ / Project Ditch
•. f:♦♦♦♦•♦♦ ♦••♦♦•s ♦♦♦ •♦♦♦•4'' •
•
-
.,, , - \�i♦•♦♦ ♦♦•♦♦••.
— x -'V . --.- x — x�*:• ♦:..• ; /} �a� Project Ephemeral Channel .
•♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ •••♦•♦♦♦♦Oe. ,♦♦♦♦♦. ••♦♦•i♦♦ ' ' v.v..• !♦••♦♦ •• •,•` / t�Q
♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦♦ •
+ Non Project Stream/Channel
♦♦♦•♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ .♦♦♦♦ ♦ \'C
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦®♦ ..,,, ♦♦ ♦♦', / a
♦4t4,O�♦i♦e ♦•♦:♦i♦•• .�♦♦- - ' ,C`,\ Mitigation Approach r
r ♦♦♦�e♦♦�♦♦♦ •e♦��♦�♦•♦� , �♦♦ /+ 4) - Buffer Restoration (TO B-49')
.• ♦♦♦ ♦ • ♦ • •`.c .:
�'♦♦♦♦�'♦♦♦ ••
♦♦♦♦♦fie♦♦♦♦•
'e �� Buffer Restoration (TO B 50')
• . *SS 4,4♦ ♦♦♦ •♦•♦ .• y/
♦•♦•
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ••♦♦•♦♦�> .
>.Oi���•V++40.e!;<. Buffer Restoration (51'-100')
e 'max,
•.+ , -Buffer Restoration (101' 200')
.1• r .
_ F _, • ♦i♦i♦ii Buffer Enhancement Via Cattle Exclusion (TOB 50')
+ram :: : am1t
ffer nhncee Via Cattle Exclusion (51' 100')
k r
lir ~ _ it
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦•♦♦♦•��� LLT2 7
04.. 1 ` Vegetation Plot MY1
♦♦♦� .00
MB s. r?•♦♦♦♦. ♦♦•i♦i'i • - .
. •
� _ — Criteria Met
T� ♦♦•ii♦\•
_ � `• - 4' ' vs �s Fence
f ♦P♦
\ . ' fi.'-' V•"••• •• .. lite IP . _.1 %;4- ....— — 4_ ,,,
• A 'x — x —x , ♦ �♦♦♦• ...♦�♦• ♦ a/
/ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ivy t P♦� � :. 4/
it ,
/ � ` sw
,
X
P.• ♦*4 •h, f+'' ♦ •♦♦o ` s►♦♦♦ ♦♦e *♦ • ♦♦♦♦♦♦eel
'• ♦ °s,seo. !6�♦e♦♦♦ - As♦♦4•4 k ` �-
♦♦.t. ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦
A P tr n �I: ♦♦ ♦• ♦♦�♦♦▪ ♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦ ♦♦s3 s
it � s �♦P.. / �E**♦4. ♦ '4♦♦ � A ♦♦ ♦♦
♦♦♦�... r ▪♦le. �_" .� � � . +. ♦♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦ d' LI ` i , ,•_ r i♦♦� ♦e 4♦►�►�♦�� �
/S a _' x— x` x— x � 4
- r . ♦ e...... e�
• ♦ ♦ • O•♦♦ $ •♦••♦♦.. ae •
!4.c`•♦•••♦®tis��.��•►•♦♦ ••♦i•0•'♦•
♦♦ ♦.♦ ♦♦♦i♦i♦ii•♦ 'Da
'.•;•'.474 . r *
I -
1 r l ♦�4. ♦• ♦ •♦ a 0 ' -- •••♦♦♦♦♦♦e%
Ditch D s _ 441••
x ♦♦ . e ��♦�••*i � �♦�."e'o
2017Aerial Photography x t - ♦♦�♦�♦�1
Figure 5a. Monitoring Plan View Map
014W I L D L A N D S Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING 0 ZOO 400 Feet
Monitoring Year 1—2020
I I I I IIt' Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Durham County, NC

Sf '�, r\ •. 1 " °♦♦♦<e�°�°x• _ i'•°i'•••♦,.. i 1. - „ -
+ 4t .� X'�°° ♦i♦ .iii ♦♦i
�� ♦ y�C ♦i•�ii•i'i •:'i•ii♦ .,
r x'"0i 'e♦O.'i�i'i'.O'i• '.O" i'.'i°i. x I
+ I hf.. ♦i♦•Pi ♦♦•♦♦♦ ••• ♦ i•♦ x I
,. s 0i♦ '♦.♦'♦♦♦♦'� .♦♦♦♦. I .
a' x ♦♦i♦ "♦♦. •♦'♦♦a •♦'•♦♦•OeO♦♦'.♦.♦e°i°i ♦i♦i♦i♦i`. C' x
r1� x x f G �' i♦♦♦ ♦i e , i e♦ i°i♦i!.�' '�°♦ ♦♦i ♦♦♦♦°♦i,dl .
F rry
X ..,..'',.."-•-.: x x •O� • ! '♦•ii'♦•• N.••% ,N.• . , 2
I; k `k x �+ *+ai'i�'i♦ � ��c'f`r° ♦� m /. i♦♦♦♦e♦♦i
i♦♦ . - . ♦♦ 2 A kit ♦♦'°♦ .� A,,... 0
r k �ie♦♦e t" i♦ e�
ik
• ► ` k k _ l fi ••4&•••ii♦i♦i°i♦i♦i i i♦i♦i°iii♦i°i•i�iir♦2♦�.
_ - • 1 k �, — X`— x. z — x — x —.X ..•. III■ -.i�♦♦i♦i♦i♦iiiii°♦♦•♦i♦i♦i♦iiii♦i♦i•. - ,,
x i 4 x —x _x 4-
. jitv ,
1 .p� •
i ♦ g ; Ilk a d 'r , •
a - -= - ♦ '
nib- ♦ii' .' dili,�♦� .i♦. f
O •*P•�♦•♦"•..•♦•♦' +/ s .1 — Project Location
1�i'• ♦••••"1 UT1 • ,.x÷ ' L_ _�Conservation Easement
% • • iii
ri- ♦�Ae♦♦ •iii♦i4
c, ...'"- -•♦•�•; //I, Internal Crossing
1 .r_ .e�..,” ,.
- • 'i♦® "` /� �" Project Features
/+ �u n;- �,; ♦♦•♦i� +
e�♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ / r Project Stream
--
} ,� .iii♦i• ♦♦ . / Project Ditch
.♦iii♦ ♦i♦
�• ♦♦ii ♦iii / �-
�, ♦♦-
♦,•♦4•��i� .� Project Ephemeral Channel
ii iiiii/ Non-Project Stream Channel
-°ii i♦
•
M f,� •••ii••�•_ ♦+• .' t • . i Mitigation Approach
_. •,v-.: _.,..,..,*;.0,„
�,.0.44.4,,4.
�s♦• -. Buffer Restoration (TOB-49')
x' �w` ®i••••t•♦ ','. 1, 0 '•'• 'i'i'i' Buffer Restoration (TOB-50')
ad
���°��.� Ill -Buffer Restoration (51'-100')
f ► ' _ V ii��♦*V. /
♦•.. j a I i IL , '1.i* . ,�E,'.+s'i IM Buffer Restoration (101-200)
Si°O.•'r""�e*•% ♦iii' Buffer Enhancement Via Cattle Exclusion (TOB-50')
1111
Oi'i°�O .°Aa / ,e,„,,,,
.4 ' ;i MI Buffer Enhancement Via Cattle Exclusion (51' 100')
viimilliillio
•
- 1 + ::f : 1ment Via Cattle Exclusion (101-200)
•
it
.- 4
Vegetation Plot- MY1
it — Criteria Met
III33 =U Fence
2017Aerial Photography ,•
ifiF
Figure 5b. Monitoring Plan View Map
114VV I L D L A N D S Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
ENGINEERING 0 200 400 Feet
Monitoring Year 1—2020
I I I I Ilt' Neuse River Basin (03020201)
Durham County, NC

Table 7. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Catfish Pond Mitigation Project
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Planted Acreage 8.00
Mapping of
Number of Combined
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Planted
(Ac) Polygons Acreage Acreage
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous
Bare Areas 0.1 0 0 0%
material.
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels
Low Stem Density Areas 0.1 0 0 0%
based on MY3,4,or 5 stem count criteria.
Total 0 0 0%
Areas of Poor Growth Areas with woody stems of a size class that are 0.25 Ac 0 0 0%
Rates or Vigor obviously small given the monitoring year.
Cumulative Total 0 0.0 0%
Easement Acreage 20.73
Mapping %of
Number of Combined
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Easement
(SF) Polygons Acreage Acreage
Areas of points(if too small to render as polygons at
Invasive Areas of Concern 1,000 0 0 0%
map scale).
Areas of points(if too small to render as polygons at
Easement Encroachment Areas none 0 0 0%
map scale).

VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS

ys 441111111111
fie. r ��`*,',, ,w},( �� . 7 7 , a• „,, + 3, ` r t �•s 7 M1 x
a ai( '�, k" a xk �a i'� "*,} *.� ti- ftl-ei_ *' r 'i `�`10 `bert1 'i
r i.' -/p � 3' .�4 ��'` ; , 4- `',' '; A' ,S� y y7 7%.3�� ' „ <4 '' a r 2
4.
iikl j .V.r.,:- .,:r'tV4,...""4-. '''I' .4. -4'''V''-'1! --:-:
m soh .4'NA 3 8; 4 � r a34 ", " c \ w [,
�,. 7::p.% 7i ° I erg -,$ ��"
fi� `
lit 4AvIls '
V ,y� ��y y,,, y _4-'
VEG PLOT 1(10/06/2020) VEG PLOT 2(10/06/2020J
e {w t 'i-7, a Yllesi
q t a " y
L ): 'iY}y - vim. ,4. `�S t Ik J !
�. I r
:- ...::,.._.4.,, ,,4„::;1
R:27 "Y' M i R' 'T3` }.++, ., '' yy aA 10 1 k�� r ,
...Atn: #b.*
,11 s c = iAte� � I,_ .
*��' �w,wa�^" '`ter' .,;,
VEG PLOT 3(10/06/2020J VEG PLOT 4(10/06/2020J
i
,wig ,`.r, 1
e
'' ''''-.714t-'4.4trap„,",,,,a447-.0,0-' . Ide*,..,
'VI', s Slzjrqr
•
VEG PLOT 5(10/06/2020J VEG PLOT 6(10/06/2020J
1A Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
�' Appendix 2:Visual Assessment Data—Vegetation Plot Photographs

.., ,. ',:#, '- tior.4,-,
' X `
VEG PLOT 7(10/06/2020)
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Appendix 2:Visual Assessment Data-Vegetation Plot Photographs

OVERVIEW PHOTOGRAPHS

� _ +'d' ° r 'Y Y '�, F6 ,.+,. - Ii f `�i+p+ 4i•'1 y--° q
7.4
4 ,z s s '� 'a yr , ' t A` ' as - x6 .A A 4,•• }
lir
4_ .F d F hk .. ti :y ' Ilp i'y� Kb .6Y�3,_ 3�^ h ,
�J _ f,._ �+ fir .�r > S, .w 4i .. y-f. } X
3.i� si, .�k '.@fr S` �� rCp � EjY'�.k Md#� " � � # f� z 7` as�` d�� e� ��'� �"4. ` :vR�° :
3. • wf 1 .gar •
...` , P a
.!._.*4,.....40,.....,..1....40 ;
ti _ Hwy '
x J l j r - I,i -, ,. Q4 _ tom,,,;:,,,,,:.;4•,,,,, i„.1t1 _,:.„,,,,, iip.,,- ,. ri-„,-..;*-,..,_,:r..,........_ . - '
� I/ r
fird ' � t -
04101$30‘ 4
„,. ,,msr', `,-;-:7,''..:!ii,..,'c-,:c. -;.1,--N 4'.''.'3'.%'r'''" ,:,..t "'"'-'
$ J
/ ti.44#0,.
.y i -,� _J ,�' r A ,i 6* L.,'x,, ttkty,1# i a :, f i"_.,L Y ,t fit' �'�,5•:. �i"1 ?
II
•
,lY } yk,�'W y it' 4d W�y.�i ' . j iP y '? . -. 'd`r4P i A
i ,k t�� ���L.}�i �n°� a� bra�- _ *,.� :" §r � �;!' �.,y,� ;...; �. � ,� ��
,� k &e ;E is .I=' -r- 4�. g' :t,,.s.x �'�� .t—,i' G.t -e . >: ,i� ',,'. s -
¥: h} - 5., _� �^: [' r is i q', v ,1;,r6 .t .3 t Y { K
��� e-rt i � �� r3i f 3k 1w., � 3' � + �z� x F.� E' ih� a �F4" dW`c§+ i it�� a = 4 Y �� �`e
- ! ik�3•,A >.� �E3 t � :-N.'�: r< Y� 4r ,� � N � 'r. � � .�9 � = `�. r �� ��f..
�Fa,gpy - !. t 1
r4-
-�"a 4 F -fir ' , a .r t t .a p' a. v } gx,' . �' F
� �i^''� 9 r�.- ry „� - t� ,e � at .i' �' � ate;,d( woa r�r ),' ! rr
' '„��r e;�� '�,.� �a�: �.� '`�: sad � ,�� •� ��F ^�!' �'
4.7., p, a rya y ' . _ _ _ _ `_
11
mat o-t '• i J t r` _
k'714- •t',:•'...i"-:',-,5-1V<-''''''''-;t4..'.:.1'',--..i' .',.",•Tii.'t'.•:.':
S$ • '' DER .
X. r � ��� r>� $�,v� ��, Ae'�� Pr .1, �� �}� ,' ��� �4 r � ,s�� -
} •
_ T' ',. ,}` ..-P `letr +;rey '1 ." ' - e ' Y'P: ;y. 'a , 1. „ ' i
,2. � ''' t � ""� ���. �'i,�*�, �� '••.a.,E.; � :: � � = ice �, �� "a-
a 3"'} " x x } 4 , z ,t ' a _ t`-' ! `
"'Si k f s ag . i �y
i '�.}� , 2r'-= . - 41 t - ! r t"' Fs may, - •k •r,-_ -tea 's.
k'` � 4 '�W 'R n1 - Y 4.
K Y,, A, ckt
-Y Sy t4 .4,'� wc�F.�' ��K�u ?.�� '.,ry � � f )}r�• #'^�1 k r 5} w'/c
5 '' . .,C=s S v t ' 'a =. - y r"'i ?p NSF y .
%
'Iff�rt. -&'x��� "p r k k ka '�y • v xv.
g
1k
9 $ A-r- w ` r .,.!! "',:,'". �y>za e7:." J. X xa -"�
i t E ';� a' � 4" a�^.,.�� Z 4, °rA`.1. ,: '. t - .' ,I `'. „ £ .'''
';`,k,''''':-:—:";' ''''''',-,%4N.:',31..";4:;,itAttirat,0.4 't i gs aj - "ta., i', =r '' '''' q ; x 'W.' +P"` }>
3 ` w'� ^l
I.
•
+c , Ei rid
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Appendix 2:Visual Assessment Data—Overview Photographs

c )r
�i
1 .
R
- .Y ^i ,- of 14
to
-
xb'r - • "' q' � o- �;u+� y—
w �
.. , .%Re.. 1.,�ry,I ..
Catfish
IllOr Appendix 2:Pond VisualMitigation AssessSitement Data—Overview Photographs

. 'I'�ji"r g.� yy��i 1 k
b F 5 „, .
k Sri, + z "
' '
S r:, !k
x
* * - ',,,n� , k ,. ''
N. r
st res N
a
L,.
{ I t z
" .1
`� �',ryp t 'h r
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Appendix 2:Visual Assessment Data—Overview Photographs

-�-
----4 ".• ,..' '''? .'• _ -, 174b. ,1..- 4 - ,. it
i
hsA gd ,, y�' �,+ �yytvf.
Ri J
',1*.ikell,'. .""' ..K .. • 4 if;.ri i7,47.,-* :-4- .'" ''
4114
a3
_
‘A, '''' '' ' , 4.77.---,',,-, ..--y, 4-.: .7,)„,- --tril
t. -3-10, ittt ..... ,..1,
E
f.` ,
r<L
A;C
•
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
44, Appendix 2:Visual Assessment Data—Overview Photographs

APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data

Table 8. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment Table
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Plot Success Criteria Met* Tract Mean
1 Yes
2 Yes
3 Yes
4 Yes 100%
5 Yes
6 Yes
7 Yes
*Based on the target stem density for MY5 of 260 planted stems per acre.

Table 9. CVS Vegetation Tables-Metadata
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Report Prepared By Tasha King
Date Prepared 10/30/2020 9:37
Database Name CatfishPond_MY1_cvs-v2.5.0.mdb
Database Location F:\Monitoring\Catfish Pond\MY1-2020
Computer Name CHARLOTTEINTERN
File Size 84144128
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT
Metadata Description of database file,the report worksheets,and a summary of project(s)and project data.
Project Planted Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre,for each year. This excludes live stakes.
Project Total Stems Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre,for each year. This includes live stakes,all planted stems,and all natural/volunteer stems.
Plots List of plots surveyed with location and summary data(live stems,dead stems,missing,etc.).
Vigor Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
Damage List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot;dead and missing stems are excluded.
ALL Stems by Plot and Spp A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species(planted and natural volunteers combined)for each plot;dead and missing stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code 100039
Project Name Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
Description Stream and Buffer Restoration Project
Sampled Plots 7

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Current Plot Data(MY1 2020)
VP 1 VP 2 VP 3 VP 4 VP 5
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Aesculus flava Yellow Buckeye Shrub Tree 1 1 1
Betula nigra River Birch Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1
Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree 12
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Tree 2 2 2 1 3 3 3
Liquidambarstyraciflua Sweet Gum Tree
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree 4 4 4 7 7 7 3 3 3 8 8 8 2 2 2
Quercus alba White Oak Tree 2 2 2
Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1
Quercus michauxii Swamp Chestnut Oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3
Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree 5 5 5 3 3 3 1 1 1 3 3 3
Quercusshumardii Shumard Oak Tree 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
Unknown Species Tree
Stem count 14 14 14 15 15 15 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13
size(ares) 1 1 1 1 1
size(ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Species count 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 5 5 6 5 5 5
Stems per ACRE 567 567 567 607 607 607 486 486 486 486 486 486 526 526 526
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements,but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements,by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS-Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes
P-all-All Planted Stems
T-All Woody Stems

Table 10. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Catfish Pond Mitigation Site
DMS Project No.100039
Monitoring Year 1-2020
Current Plot Data(MY1 2020) Annual Means
VP 6 VP 7 MY1(2020) MVO(2020)
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Aesculus flava Yellow Buckeye Shrub Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1
Betula nigra River Birch Tree 7 7 7 9 9 9 9 9 9
Diospyros virginiana American Persimmon Tree 1 13
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 8 7 7 7
Liquidambarstyraciflua Sweet Gum Tree 2 2
Platanus occidentalis Sycamore Tree 6 6 6 6 6 6 36 36 36 36 36 36
Quercus alba White Oak Tree 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3
Quercus lyrata Overcup Oak Tree 3 3 3 3 3 3
Quercus michauxii Swamp Chestnut Oak Tree 2 2 2 11 11 11 11 11 11
Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree 3 3 3 15 15 15 15 15 15
Quercusshumardii Shumard Oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 11 11 11 11 11 11
Unknown Species Tree 1 1 1
Stem count 14 14 14 16 16 16 96 96 96 97 97 97
size(ares) 1 1 7 7
size(ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.17 0.17
Species count 5 5 5 5 5 7 9 9 11 10 10 10
Stems per ACRE 567 567 567 647 647 647 555 555 555 561 561 561
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements,but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements,by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS-Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes
P-all-All Planted Stems
T-All Woody Stems