The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20060288 Ver 1_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20110513t� x-on �' MONITORING YEAR 3 AND YEAR 4 REPORT PLEMMONS /KIRKPATRICK MITIGATION SITE SPRING CREEK Madison County, North Carolina FINAL EEP Project Number: 92607 Contract Number: D06082; Task Order: 06FB05 -1 Period Covered: January 2009 --December 2010 Submitted: 13 May 2011 Prepared by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission in Partnership with the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652 it r Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................... ............................... 1 2 Project Background .................................................................................... ............................... 2 2.1 Project Objectives ............................................................................ ............................... 2 2.2 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach ........................ ............................... 2 2.3 Location and Setting ........................................................................ ............................... 3 2.4 Project History and Background ...................................................... ............................... 3 2.5 Monitoring Plan View ...................................................................... ............................... 6 3 Methods ....................................................................................................... ..............................6 4 Project Conditions and Monitoring Results ............................................... ............................... 6 4.1 Vegetation Assessment .................................................................... ............................... 6 4. 1.1 Vegetation Problem Areas Table Summary .............................. ............................... 8 4.1.2 Vegetative Problem Areas Plan View ........................................ ............................... 8 4.1.3 Vegetative Problem Areas Photographs .................................... ............................... 8 4.1.4 Vegetative Monitoring Plot Photographs ................................... ............................... 8 4.2 Stream Assessment .......................................................................... ............................... 8 4.2.1 Procedural Items ........................................................................ ............................... 8 4.2.1.1 Morphometric Criteria ................................................... ............................... 8 4.2.1.2 Hydrologic Criteria ........................................................ ............................... 9 4.2.1.3 Bank Stability Assessment ............................................ ............................... 9 4.2.2 Stream Problem Areas Table Summary ..................................... ............................... 9 4.2.3 Stream Problem Areas Plan View .............................................. ............................... 9 4.2.4 Numbered Issue Photographs .................................................. ............................... 10 4.2.5 Fixed Station Photographs .... .................................................... ............................... 10 4.2.6 Stability Assessment ................................................................ ............................... 10 4.2.7 Quantitative Measures Summary ............................................. ............................... 10 4.2.8 Summary of Results ................................................................. ............................... 13 5 Acknowledgements .................................................................................... .............................19 6 References .................................................................................................. .............................19 AppendixA. — Vegetation Data ..................................................................... ............................... 24 A.1 Vegetation Data Tables .................................................................. ............................... 24 Table A.1.1. — Vegetation Metadata ................................................... ............................... 24 Table A.1.2. — Vegetation Vigor by Species ...................................... ............................... 25 Table A.1.3. — Vegetation Damage by Species .................................. ............................... 28 Table A.1.4. — Vegetation Damage by Plot ........................................ ............................... 31 Table A.1.5. — Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species .................... ............................... 32 Table A.1.6. —All Stems Counted by Plot and Species ...................... ............................... 35 A.2 Vegetation Problem Areas Plan View ........................................... ............................... 38 A.3 Vegetation Problem Areas Table ................................................... ............................... 38 Table A.3.1. — Vegetation Problem Areas .......................................... ............................... 38 A.4 Vegetation Problem Areas Photographs ........................................ ............................... 39 A.5 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs ...................................... ............................... 40 Table A.5.1. — Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs .................. ............................... 40 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site i EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 F i 1 AppendixB. — Stream Data ........................................................................... ............................... 46 B.1 Stream Problem Areas Table ......................................................... ............................... 46 Table B.1.1. — Stream Problem Areas ................................................ ............................... 46 B.2 Stream Problem Areas Plan View .................................................. ............................... 46 B.3 Representative Stream Problem Area Photographs ....................... ............................... 46 B.4 Stream Photographic Stations ........................................................ ............................... 47 B.5 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment Table ........................ ............................... 60 B.6 Annual Overlays of Cross - Section Plots. Solid red line in photograph represents location where surveyed transect crossed the stream channel ....... ............................... 61 B.7 Annual Overlays of Longitudinal Profile Plots ............................. ............................... 71 B.8 Pebble Count Cumulative Frequency Plots ................................... ............................... 72 B.9 Bankfull Event Verification Photographs ...................................... ............................... 76 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 11 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Executive Summary This report summarizes the monitoring year 3 (MY3) and monitoring year 4 (MY4) conditions of the Spring Creek stream mitigation project, in Madison County, North Carolina. A 50 foot wide permanent conservation easement was acquired on both sides of the stream channel; total project area consists of 2.10 acres, including the stream channel. The riparian buffer as measured from the bankfull elevation to the conservation easement boundary encompasses. 1.43 acres. A total of 680 ft of stream channel is contained within the easement. The right bank riparian area was protected by fencing installed along the entire easement boundary. The left bank riparian area was demarcated by a low berm extending the entire length of the easement boundary. Project objectives to establish a conservation easement, remove all foreign materials from the easement area, and re- vegetate the area with native herbaceous and woody plants were accomplished. Project objectives to reduce bank erosion by reshaping both channel banks to a stable slope and restoring one large meander bend to a stable radius of curvature were achieved. Following construction in August 2006, the project site was revegetated with native plants. Herbaceous plants were established using a perennial seed mixture; whereas, woody vegetation was established by installing livestakes and containerized shrubs and trees. Three vegetation survey plots were established and surveyed utilizing the CVS protocol to identify and enumerate planted stems. The average density of planted woody stems for all plots combined was found to be 648 stems per acre in the as -built (MYO) survey, 364 stems per acre in the MY survey, 297 stems per acre in the MY2 survey, 270 stems per acre in the MY3 survey, and 256 stems per acre in the MY4 survey. Planted woody stem density in MY4 is slightly below the year -4 success criteria of 288 stems per acre. However, during the MY4 survey natural recruitment of woody stems were observed in all three vegetation monitoring plots. The addition of the recruited stems resulted in a total stem density of 540 stems per acre. Channel geomorphology data were collected at pre - established locations during the MY3 and MY4 surveys. Riffle bankfull widths ranged from 45 to 56 ft in MY3 and 43 to 57 ft in MY4. These values closely approximated the 46 to 55 ft range found in the as -built survey. Riffle cross - sectional areas ranged from 152 to 183 ft2 during the MYO survey; riffle cross - sectional areas fell approximated this same rage during the MY3 (151 to 172 ft2) and MY4 (151 to 171 ft2) surveys. Riffle mean and maximum depths at bankfull ranged from 2.8 to 3.8 ft and 4.5 to 5.4 ft during the MYO survey, 2.7 to 3.5 ft and 4.6 to 5.3 ft for the MY3 survey, and 2.7 to 3.5 and 4.9 to 5.3 ft for the MY4 survey. The bank height ratio continues to be 1.0. The water surface slope of 0.010 ft /ft has remained unchanged since MYO. Over the course of monitoring, the D50 particle size of the reach -wide pebble count has ranged from 19.3 mm to 77.0 mm. The D50 for the riffle pebble count at cross - section 8 has been in to the small cobble category each monitoring year except MY3 and MY4, when it was in the coarse and very coarse gravel categories. The MY3 and MY4 geomorphic, vegetative, and visual assessment surveys of the mitigation site were found to be within the design criteria for this C4 stream channel. With little to no apparent aggradation or degradation of the channel bed or channel bank instability observed, the Spring Creek mitigation site is meeting all morphometric success criteria four years removed from project construction. While planted woody material is doing well, planted stem density for all plots combined is slightly below the established year -4 success criteria. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 2 Project Background 2.1 Project Objectives Project objectives for the Spring Creek mitigation site, as stated in the restoration design plan document (NCWRC 2005), were as follows: • Establish a conservation easement on both stream banks for the entire length of the restoration project; • Remove the existing invasive exotic vegetation; • Remove an abandoned barn, automobile bodies, school bus, and other foreign materials from the stream banks and riparian area; • Remove the berm from the top of the left bank; • Remove the channel constrictions at stations 3 +50 and 4 +75; • Reduce stream bank erosion on the right bank of the meander bend by establishing a stable radius of curvature and installing in- stream structures and bank protection; • Install two additional in- stream structures to enhance aquatic habitat features; • Shape banks to a stable slope, create a bankfull bench, and inner berm features; • Re- establish native vegetation within the riparian zone; and • Design and construct a livestock corral and feed /waste structure, watering system, and install fencing (Plemmons property, right bank) to exclude livestock from the conservation easement and stream. 2.2 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach Channel morphology was modified by implementing restoration component activities (USAGE 2003; Table 1). Restoration involved removing; nonnative invasive vegetation and lowering the existing stream banks to create a bench that will allow bankfull or greater flows to access the floodplain. Also, two rock vanes (left bank) and a J -hook log vane (right bank) were installed. Using a Priority III approach (NSCRI 2003), restoration activities to repair bank sloughing and lateral channel migration involved constructing a meander bend to the desired channel dimension, pattern, and profile. J -hook structures were installed at the point -of- curvature and point -of- tangency of the constructed meander. Root -wad structures were placed along the near bank of the restored meander bend to provide added bank protection and aquatic habitat diversity. Overall, the project included 680 ft of stream channel restoration (Table 1). Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 2 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table 1.— Project Restoration Components. 2.3 Location and Setting The Spring Creek stream mitigation project is a 2.1 acre site in the west - central portion of Madison County, N.C. (Figure 1). The site is located just off of NC 209, beginning at the downstream side of the Baltimore Branch Road bridge (SR 1151), approximately 3.5 miles north of Trust and 11.5 miles south of Hot Springs, N.C. The Spring Creek project site is located in the U.S. Geological Survey 14 digit hydrologic unit 06010105120010, has a 29.3 mi2 drainage area, is a fourth order stream at the project location, and is on a tributary to the French Broad River. The project site is in a rural setting of pasture, farmland, and low density dwellings. 2.4 Project History and Background Prior to the project, the stream had been destabilized through channelizing, berming (left bank), and livestock hoof -shear (right bank). Landowners had tried to stabilize sloughing vertical banks using buses and automobile bodies, but this approach was unsightly and in most areas created additional problems. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) performed the initial site assessment; designed the restoration plans, and provided construction oversight (NCWRC 2005). The North Carolina Department of Transportation acquired the site from two landowners (Von and Linda G. Plemmons and Hazel Kirkpatrick) under a previous agreement with the NCWRC. Responsibility for the project was transferred to the N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) in 2005. Construction of the Spring Creek project took place 1 -25 Aug 2006. Stream and riparian impacts were addressed using natural channel design techniques, eliminating livestock access to the creek, and removing all foreign materials (automobile bodies, storage shed, etc.) from within the project footprint. The as -built survey was completed in September 2006. Vegetation planting was completed in December 2006; the baseline vegetation survey was completed in January 2007. Additional project details regarding project history, timeline, background, contact information, and general physical and water quality characteristics can be found in Tables 2 -4. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site EEP Pr4lcct 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) u c 0 e a W u Riparian Project Segment or x a Buffer Reach ID w Q CC Stationing Acres Comment Reach I 680 R P3 680 0 +00 to 6 +80 1.4 R = Restoration EII = Enhancement II C = Creation P I =Priority I El = Enhancement I S = Stabilization P = Preservation P2 = Priority Ii Source: USACE 2003 nSource: Rosgen 2006 P3 = Priority III 2.3 Location and Setting The Spring Creek stream mitigation project is a 2.1 acre site in the west - central portion of Madison County, N.C. (Figure 1). The site is located just off of NC 209, beginning at the downstream side of the Baltimore Branch Road bridge (SR 1151), approximately 3.5 miles north of Trust and 11.5 miles south of Hot Springs, N.C. The Spring Creek project site is located in the U.S. Geological Survey 14 digit hydrologic unit 06010105120010, has a 29.3 mi2 drainage area, is a fourth order stream at the project location, and is on a tributary to the French Broad River. The project site is in a rural setting of pasture, farmland, and low density dwellings. 2.4 Project History and Background Prior to the project, the stream had been destabilized through channelizing, berming (left bank), and livestock hoof -shear (right bank). Landowners had tried to stabilize sloughing vertical banks using buses and automobile bodies, but this approach was unsightly and in most areas created additional problems. The North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) performed the initial site assessment; designed the restoration plans, and provided construction oversight (NCWRC 2005). The North Carolina Department of Transportation acquired the site from two landowners (Von and Linda G. Plemmons and Hazel Kirkpatrick) under a previous agreement with the NCWRC. Responsibility for the project was transferred to the N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) in 2005. Construction of the Spring Creek project took place 1 -25 Aug 2006. Stream and riparian impacts were addressed using natural channel design techniques, eliminating livestock access to the creek, and removing all foreign materials (automobile bodies, storage shed, etc.) from within the project footprint. The as -built survey was completed in September 2006. Vegetation planting was completed in December 2006; the baseline vegetation survey was completed in January 2007. Additional project details regarding project history, timeline, background, contact information, and general physical and water quality characteristics can be found in Tables 2 -4. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site EEP Pr4lcct 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table 2.— Project Activity and Reporting History. Spring Creek EEP ro'ect number 92607 Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Actual Completion or Deliver Conservation easement acquired (by N.C. Department of Trans ortation) North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission October 2005 Restoration Plan July 2005 December 2005 Final Design - 90% NA December 2005 Construction Todd Hodges August 2006 Temporary S &E seed mix applied to entire project area P.O. Box 537 August 2006 Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area Planting Contractor: August 2006 As -built physical survey September 2006 September 2008 Containerized plantings installed over entire project area December 2006 As -built vegetation survey March 2007 July 2007 Mitigation Plan /As -built (Year 0 Monitoring - baseline) September 2006 February 2009 Year 1 Monitoring December 2007 June 2009 Year 2 Monitoring October 2008 June 2009 Year 3 Monitoring December 2009 February 2011 Year 4 Monitoring December 2010 February 2011 Year 5+ Monitoring Bolded items represent those events or deliverables that are variable Non - bolded items represent events that arc standard components over the course of a typical project Table 3.— Project Contact Table. Table 3. Project Contacts Table Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) Designer(s): Firm Information /Address: Jeff Ferguson North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission Scott Loftis 1751 Varsity Drive NCSU Centennial Campus Raleigh, NC 2.7695 Construction Contractor: Firm Information /Address: Todd Hodges Constructioneering, LLC P.O. Box 537 Patterson, NC 28661 Planting Contractor: Company Information/Address: Chad Bradley Construction and Landscape Services, Inc. 77 Paradise Ridge Marshall, NC 28753 Seeding Contractor: Company Information /Address: Todd Hodges and NCWRC Same as above Seed Mix Sources Company and Contact Phone: Ernst Conservation Seeds, LLP 1- 800 - 873 -3321 Nursery Stock Suppliers Company and Contact Phone: Carolina Native Nurse 828 - 682 -1471 Monitoring Performers: Firm Information /Address: Stream Monitoring POC Scott Loftis, NCWRC, same as above Vegetation Monitoring POC Scott Loftis, NCWRC, same as above Wetland Monitoring POC Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 201 Table 4.— Project Background Table. Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) Project County Madison Physiographrc Region Blue Ridge Mountains Ecoregion (Reference USACE 2003) Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains Project River Basin French Broad River USGS HUC for Project (14 digit) 06010105120010 NCDWQ Sub -basin for Project Lower French Broad 04 -03 -04 Within extent of EEP Watershed Plan? No NCWRC Class (Wane, Cool, Cold) Cold Percent of project easement fenced or demarcated 100% (left bank = berm, right bank = fence) Beaver activity observed during design phase? No Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 Tract 5 Drainage Area (mi'-) 293 Stream Order 4 Restored length (R) 680 Perennial or Interindtent Perennial Watershed type (Rural, Urban, Developing, etc.) Rural Watershed LULC Distribution (e.g.) (percent) Residential Ag -Row Crop Ag- Livestock Forested Etc. 10 5 10 75 Watershed impervious cover (percent) <5 NCDWQ AU /Index number 61218 —(1) NCDWQ Classification C, Tr 303d listed? No Upstream 303d listed segment? No Reasons for 303d listing or stressor NA NCDWQ 404 Water Quality Certification Number 06 -0288 Mad Co USACE 401 Action ID Number 200630639 Total acreage of conservation easement (including stream channel) 2.1 Total (undisturbed) vegetated acreage within casement <0.1 Total riparian buffer acreage as part of the restoration 1.4 Rosgen stream classification of pre - existing C4 Rosgen stream classification of as -built C4 Valley Type VIII, alluvial Valley Slope 00115 Valley side slope range (e.g. 2 -3 %) <10 % Valley toe slope range (e.g. 2 -3 %) <5 % Cowardin classification (Reference: Cowardm 1979) Trout waters designation ( NCWRC) Yes Species of concern, endangered, etc ? (Y/N) No Dominant soil series and characteristics Series Reddics Depth (in) 30 -40 Clay ( %) 25 K T Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 2.5 Monitoring Plan View The as -built survey data revealed the baseline condition of the project reach's geomorphology, stability, and vegetation following construction (Figure 2). The eight original cross - sections (3 riffles, 1 run, 2 pools, and 2 glides) were not all resurveyed per the NCEEP written comments following the MY2 report review. Only the riffle (XS2, XS3, and XS8) and pool (XS4 and XS6) cross sections were repeated in MY3 and MY4 to compare channel morphology over time. The longitudinal profile of the entire project reach has been resurveyed each year. The MY3 and MY4 combined plan view drawing shows the current condition of the channel and adjacent topography within the project, reach (Figure 3). 3 Methods Post - construction conditions for the Spring Creek mitigation site were determined during December 2007 (MY I), October 2008 (MY2), December 2009 (MY3), and December 2010 (MY4). Representative cross - sectional dimensions and longitudinal profile data were collected using standard stream channel survey techniques (Harrelson et al. 1994; NCSR12003). The geomorphology of the stream was classified using the Rosgen (1996) stream classification system. Project site, reference reach, and as -built conditions were analyzed and the project design developed using RIVERMorph stream assessment and restoration software, Version 4.3 (RSARS 2010) and AutoCAD (2004) Version 2004.0.0. U.S. Geological Survey 1:24,000 topographical maps were used to determine stream drainage area. Mountain and piedmont regional hydraulic geometry curve data were used as a field guide and in the design plan (Harman et al. 1999, 2000; Doll et al. 2002). Bed material composition and mobility was assessed by doing one reach -wide and one riffle cross- section pebble count during MY and one reach -wide and three riffles during MY2 -MY4 (NCSRI 2003). Vegetation surveys and data reduction were completed following established protocols (Lee et al. 2006). References to the left and right channel banks in this document are oriented when viewing the channel in the downstream direction. 4 Project Conditions and Monitoring Results 4.1 Vegetation Assessment The Spring Creek mitigation site was revegetated during December 2006 with a variety of plant types including annual and perennial native seed mixes, livestakes, and containerized woody species. For additional information regarding the revegetation of the project site following construction and location of vegetation monitoring plots refer to the as -built report (NCWRC 2008). A number of mature trees representing; a variety of species were not disturbed during construction. Most of these trees were located along the rim of the floodplain at the bankfull elevation (Figure 2). They were retained because they were contributing to bank stability, providing shade to the stream, and would be a seed source that would contribute to natural revegetation of the project area. The woody plants installed in December 2006 appeared to be performing well following installation and were beginning to bud by late March 2007. Subsequently, a severe freeze occurred in April 2007, damaging many of the tender stems. Baseline vegetation monitoring had Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 6 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 taken place just prior to the late freeze; therefore, the MY vegetation assessment provides insight into to the extent of damage the late freeze had on the planted stems. The three established 10 m x 10 in vegetation assessment plots have been resurveyed in each of the four consecutive monitoring years. Stem counts, plant vigor, and plant damage was assessed for each plot (Appendix A, Tables A.1.1.- A.1.6.). Vegetation Plot L -Six planted stems (243 stems per acre) were documented in vegetation plot 1 during the MYO survey. The same six woody stems were found in MY I, suggesting that the planted stems were not affected by the April 2007 freeze. Four planted stems were recorded during the MY2 -MY4 surveys (162 stems per acre; Appendix Table A.1.5.). One red maple Acer rubrum and one witch hazel Hamamelis virginiana were determined to be dead. However, six previously undocumented non - planted woody stems were present in MY2 and increased to nine in MY4, indicating natural regeneration was occurring. Recruited stems included two dogwood Cornus forida, a sumac Rhus typhina, and six black cherry Prunus serotina. The woody stem density increased from 162 to 526 stems per acre when the nine non - planted stems were included (Appendix Table A.1.6.). Vegetation Plot 2. -Nine planted stems were found in vegetation plot 2 (364 stems per acre) in MYO. Of the 9 planted stems counted in MYO, only 8 were recounted in MY 1. A possum haw Ilex decidua was apparently overlooked during the MY 1 survey, as it was again present and counted in the MY2 survey. However, during MY2 two planted serviceberry Amelanchier laevis were determined to be dead or missing, resulting in a planted stem density of 283 stems per acre. Five planted stems were counted in MY3 and MY4; one spicebush Lindera benzoin and one sourwood Oxydendrum arboreum were dead (202 stems per acre; Appendix Table A.1.5.). Nine non - planted woody stems representing two species were present in MY4 survey, increasing the total woody stem density from 202 to 567 stems per acre (Appendix Table A.1.6.). Vegetation Plot 3. -In vegetation plot 3, 33 planted stems were recorded (1,336 stems per acre) in MYO. Approximately 40% (13) of the woody stems counted in vegetation plot 3 were planted as live stakes. Live stakes in vegetation plot 3 consisted of silky dogwood Cornus amomum, ninebark Physocarpus opulifolius, and silky willow Salix sericea. Twenty fewer stems were counted in MY I, and 22 fewer stems were counted in MY2 when compared to the MYO data. Twelve of the 22 dead or missing stems were installed as livestakes. The MY2 density of the 11 remaining stems in vegetation plot 3 was 445 stems per acre. In MY3 eleven planted stems were again counted; ten stems were present in MY4 representing a density of 405 stems per acre (Appendix Table A.1.5.). Three non - planted woody stems were found in MY4 increasing the total woody stem density from 405 to 526 stems per acre (Appendix Table A.1.6.). The average woody stem density in MY4 was 256 stems per acre for planted stems and 540 stems per acre when naturally recruited stems were included (Appendix Tables A.1.5. and A.1.6.). Two of the three monitored plots have not met the year -4 success criteria for planted woody stem density; vegetation plot 3 exceeded the success criteria for MYI -MY4. Twelve of the 29 total dead or missing stems were planted as livestakes. Natural regeneration (21 stems) has helped to offset the loss of the 29 planted stems. The late freeze in 2007 likely resulted in some mortality of the planted stems, but two growing seasons of severe drought following plant installation also is a likely a large contributor to planted stem mortality. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 7 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 4.1.1 Vegetation Problem Areas Table Summary Small isolated areas of multiflora rose Rosa multiflora and Chinese privet Ligustrum sinense were observed during the MY3 and MY4 site assessments (Appendix Table A.3.1.). The observed non - native vegetation most likely regenerated from root stock remaining in the soil following ground clearing. The lower most portion of the right bank (Sta. 5 +75) has the highest density of Chinese privet and multiflora rose of which some mature stems were not removed during construction. 4.1.2 Vegetative Problem Areas Plan View A vegetation problem areas plan view was not generated for MY3 or MY4 because ground cover vegetation and planted stems have performed satisfactorily since installation; there were no areas of the conservation easement that were devoid of vegetation. However, the location of non - native vegetation was noted on the plan view for M 'Y'3 -MY4 (Figure 3). 4.1.3 Vegetative Problem Areas Photographs Vegetative problem area photographs were not taken in MYO and MY because of the isolated occurrence of very few invasive plant stems. However, pictures were taken during the MY2 -MY4 surveys to provide visual record of the occurrence, size, and dispersal of non - native vegetation (Appendix A.4). No significant problems with the planted vegetation were observed in MY3 or MY4. 4.1.4 Vegetative Monitoring Plot Photographs Vegetative monitoring plot photographs were taken during each of the vegetation monitoring surveys to record the performance of the vegetation plots over time (Appendix A.5). Location, orientation, and dimension information for each of the vegetation monitoring plots is located in Appendix Table A.5.1. 4.2 Stream Assessment 4.2.1 Procedural Items 4.2.1.1 Morphometric Criteria Channel cross - sectional dimensions, pattern, and longitudinal profile were surveyed in December 2009 and again in December 2010 to document morphological characteristics of the active channel for MY3 and MY4. In addition, the locations of all constructed stream features (i.e., rock vanes, log vane, and J -hook vanes) were assessed for stability and structural integrity. Because this report documents survey findings from both MY3 and MY4, both monitoring years are reflected on the plan view drawing (Figure 3). Moreover, no deviation has occurred between established survey stations nor has any channel instability been observed between MYO and MY4. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site g EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 4.2.1.2 Hydrologic Criteria One bankfull event was documented between the end of construction and completion of the as -built survey (Table 5). A wrack line above the bankfull elevation was observed and photographed for verification on 5 Sep 2006 (Appendix B.9). To monitor additional bankfull events, a simple crest gauge was installed on the left bank (sta. 2 ±30) downstream of cross - section 2 and adjacent to a large sycamore tree. The crest gage was dislodged in July 2008 during a flow event that approached three - quarters of the bankfull elevation. The crest gage was relocated adjacent to the root wad structures in the large meander bend (Sta. 4 +00). With the widespread drought conditions experienced during the 2007 and 2008 monitoring years, no bankfull events were documented. A second bankfull event was observed on 9 Dec 2009 and verified by the rivers crest elevation on the gage. Photograph documentation of the 9 Dec 2009 bankfull event is provided in Appendix B.9. Table 5.— Verification of Bankfull Events. Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) Date of Data Collection Date of Occurrence Method Photo Number if available) 5 Sep 2006 1 Sep 2006 Wrack line observation Appendix B.9 9 Dec 2009 9 Dec 2009 Crest gage and wrack line Appendix B.9 4.2.1.3 Bank Stability Assessment Bank erosion hazard index (BEHI) and near bank stress (NBS) assessments are only conducted in monitoring year 5. Table 6 below is a place holder and not populated with data. Table 6. —BEHI and Sediment Export Estimates. Spring Creek EEP ro'ect number 92607 Linear Time Point Segment/Reach F °otra a g Acreage w > x > � j FT % FT % FT % FT % FT % FT % Ton/ ear 4.2.2 Stream Problem Areas Table Summary No stream problem areas were observed during the MY1 -MY4 surveys (Appendix Table B.1.). Appendix Table B.1.1, Stream Problem Areas, is used as a place holder for future monitoring reports. 4.2.3 Stream Problem Areas Plan View No problem areas with regards to channel morphology or stability were observed during the MY1 -MY4 surveys (Appendix B.2). As such, a problem area plan view was not generated. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 9 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 4.2.4 Numbered Issue Photographs No stream channel problem areas were observed during the MY1 -MY4 surveys; therefore, issue or problem area photos are not included in this monitoring report (Appendix B.3). 4.2.5 Fixed Station Photographs Fixed station photographs document pre- and post - construction channel conditions and provide a time series view of the mitigation site floodplain and channel through MY4 (Appendix B.4). 4.2.6 Stability Assessment A visual assessment of the project reach was performed to inspect the morphological stability of the channel and to serve as a basis for comparison with future channel stability monitoring (Appendix B.5). Channel features, including meanders, stream bed, stream banks, and in- stream structures were examined and enumerated (Appendix Table B.5.1.). Based on the morphological data, all stream features were found to be stable (Table 7). Table 7.— Categorical Stream Feature Visual Stability Assessment. Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607 Entire Reach sta. 0 +00 to 6 +80 Features As -built 2006 MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 A. Riffles 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% B. Pools 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% C.Thalwe 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% D. Meanders 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% E. Bed General 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% F. Bank Condition 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% G. Vanes /J Hooks etc. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% F. Wads and Boulders 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 4.2.7 Quantitative Measures Summary Monitoring year 3 and MY4 morphological data obtained from established survey stations were compared with pre- existing, reference, design, as- built, and past monitoring years data (Tables 8 and 9). Morphology and hydraulic data presented in Table 8 are from riffle cross - sections 2, 3, and 8. Morphological data presented in Table 9 reflect past and current dimensions for each of the eight individual cross - sections initially monitored along the project reach. These data are included in this report because they were collected before NCEEP requested that the NCWRC reduce the number of cross - sections monitored as a cost savings measure. As such, cross - sections 1 (run), 5 (glide), and 7 (glide) were excluded from the MY3 and MY4 surveys. All future monitoring will only include the three riffle cross- sections and two pool cross - sections (numbers 4 and 6). Cross - sectional dimension, longitudinal profile, and pebble count survey data plots were used to evaluate the degree of departure of the channel from the as -built condition (Appendices 13.6 -13.8). Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 10 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Dimension.- Channel dimensions data from five of the eight original cross - sections were collected along the project reach and plotted for visual comparison (Appendix B.6). Channel dimensions from riffle cross - sections (n = 3) resurveyed during MY3 and MY4 were compared with the range of values for the design and as -built conditions for each parameter (Table 8). Design values for riffle bankfull width ranged from 49 to 53 ft; values from the as -built survey ranged from 46 to 55 ft. Bankfull widths for MY3 and MY4 ranged from45 to 56 ft and 43 to 57 ft (Table 8). Riffle cross - section 2 has had the most variation in bankfull width ( >5 ft; MY2) and has been slightly wider than the design bankfull width each of the four monitoring years (Table 9). Although this deviation has been noted in the cross - sectional survey data, cross - section 2 appears to be stable. The increase in bankfull width is likely a result of a small elevation change in the floodplain near the bankfull elevation on the right bank that developed following construction. Bankfull width at cross - section 3 (43 to 46 ft) has been slightly narrower than the design width, but shows no sign of instability through MY4. Design values for riffle cross - sectional area ranged from 173 to 200 ft2. Bankfull cross - sectional area ranged from 152 to 184 ft2 for the as -built channel. Each of the three riffle cross - sections surveyed during MY3 (151 to 172 ft2) and MY4 (151 to 171 ft2) were similar to the as- built values and approximated the range of design values for cross - sectional area (Table 8). Mean depth at bankfull for as -built riffle cross - sections ranged from 2.8 to 3.8 ft (Table 8). Mean depth at bankfull for MY3 and MY4 riffle cross - sections ranged from 2.7 to 3.5 ft. Cross - section 2 mean depth (2.6 to 2.8 ft) has been slightly lower than the design mean depth (3.3 to 3.8 ft) in each monitoring year; whereas, cross - sections 3 and 8 have been within the design range for mean depth during MYO -MY4 (Table 9). Riffle bankfull maximum depth design values ranged from 4.6 to 5.4 ft (Table 8). Bankfull maximum depths for the three surveyed riffle cross- sections ranged from 4.5 to 5.8 ft during MYO through MY4. Cross - section 2 had a maximum bankfull depth of 4.5 ft in MYO, slightly below the range of design values. Cross - section 2 fell within the design range for riffle maximums depths from MY 1 to MY4 (Table 9). The maximum bankfull depths at cross - section 3 (4.9 to 5.1 ft) have been within the design values each of the monitoring years. The maximum depth at bankfull for cross - section 8 was 5.4 ft during MYO and MY 1. The maximum depth at this cross - section increased in MY2 to 5.8 ft, likely from a misread high rod during the survey. Cross - section 8 (5.3 ft) fell within the design range again for riffle maximum depth during MY3 and MY4 Bank height ratio (BHR), a measure of channel bank vertical stability improved from a moderately unstable and unstable condition (BHR = 1.2 -1.5) before construction to a stable condition (BHR = 1.0) post - construction (Tables 8 and 9). Bank height ratios for MYO -MY4 remained unchanged, indicating continued channel bank stability and maintenance of the desired elevation at which flows are accessing the floodplain. The channel's entrenchment condition was improved by removing a three to four foot high berm from the top of the left bank. The resulting entrenchment ratio, a measure of vertical containment, increased from it pre - construction value of 3.2. Mean entrenchment ratios taken from measurements at riffle cross - sections were found to be 14.9 and 15.1 for MY 1 through MY4 (Table 8). Table 9 provides entrenchment ratios for each individual cross - sections. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 11 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 Pattern.- Minimal to no observed change in pattern geometry has occurred at the project site over the four years post- construction. Channel sinuosity (1.13) is low due to only a single meander bend located within the project reach. The channel belt width, radius of curvature, and meander wavelength has remained close to the values obtained from the MYO baseline survey (Table 8). Pattern geometry data for MY was not generated nor included in Table 8. Profile. -The entire length (680 ft) of the longitudinal profile was surveyed during MYO -MY4 (Figure 3; Appendix B.7). Feature lengths, slopes, depths, and spacing were calculated following each monitoring survey (Table 8). From post - construction through MY4, riffle lengths have ranged from 14 to 77 ft, which approximate the design values (25 to 75 ft) for riffle length. Riffle slopes have ranged from 0.002 ft /ft to 0.024 ft /ft over the course of all monitoring surveys. With the exception of three riffle slope calculation (MYO = 0.002; MY1 = 0.005; MY2 = 0.024), all riffle slopes have been maintained within the design range of values (0.008 to 0.023 ft/ft). Pool lengths have closely approximated design values across in each of the monitoring years, ranging from 16 to 67 ft. Pool -to -pool spacing decreased following construction and has ranged from 61 to 194 ft over all monitoring years. Construction of five in- stream structures (J -hooks and rock vanes) increased the number pool features within the project reach and is the reason pool -to -pool spacing is lower than pre- existing, reference, or design values. The thalweg alignment and edge of water survey points that define the location of the active channel indicate only minimal changes (thalweg movement) over the 4 years post - construction. Substrate Data.- Reach -wide substrate particle analysis revealed that the D50 and D84 for the existing channel were 43.4 mm and 128.0 mm (Table 8). These values fall within the very coarse gravel and small cobble particle size categories. ;light changes were noted in the reach - wide analysis for the as -built channel where the D50 was 31.2 mm, coarse gravel, and the D84 was 115.7 mm, small cobble. The D50 particles sizes ranged from 19.3 to 77.0 mm and the D84 particles sizes ranged from 82.9 to 175.9 mm during MY 1 -MY4. Overall, the D50 substrate particle size has been within the coarse to very coarse gravel categories each monitoring year except MY2 (65.6 mm) and MY4 (77.0 mm) when the D50 fell within the small coble category. Plots of the MYO -MY4 cumulative percent of particles finer than a specific particle size for the reach -wide pebble counts are summarized in Appendix 13.8. Riffle substrate particle analyses at cross - section 8 revealed that the D50 was 90.0 mm in MYO, 78.4 mm in MY], 65.7 mm in MY2, 27.3 mm in MY3, and 52.6 mm in MY4 (Table 9). The D50 at cross - section 8 decreased in particle size each of the first three monitoring years but remained in the small cobble range (65.7 -90.0 mm). The D50 at riffle cross - section 8 during MY3 and MY4 was within the coarse to very coarse gravel categories. Beginning in MY2, riffle pebble data have been collected from two additional riffles (cross- sections 2 and 3) to obtain statistical values for this parameter (Table 8). The D50 particle sizes for cross - sections 2 and 3 have raged from 16.0 to 40.9 mm, coarse to very coarse gravel particle size categories. Riffle substrate data along with field observations suggests the project site stream channel is made up of a gravel and cobble matrix. Plots of the cumulative percent of particles finer than a specific particle size for the three riffle pebble counts are summarized in Appendix B.B. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 12 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 4.2.8 Summary of Results Monitoring surveys in each of the four years post - construction reveal that the Spring Creek mitigation site is performing as designed with minimal to no change in any of the major morphological components. Dimension, pattern, and profile parameters suggest the stream channel has remained stable since construction and after experiencing two documented bankfull events. Although substrate particle size,has fluctuated slightly since construction, the bed material has remained in the gravel and cobble categories with no observed aggradation, degradation, or accumulation of fine particle sizes. Constructed stream structures remain stable and performing as desired. Planted vegetation performance has been marginal with just one of three vegetation monitoring plots meeting the success criteria. The average density for all three plots combined is just under the year -4 minimum success criteria. With the addition of natural stem contributions, the three vegetation plots exceed the minimum success criteria. Overall, the project reach continues to perform as desired with little to no change observed in form or function. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 13 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 14 i-r b C� O O dq O O i-I c� N Cd I c� H NI7 ro NIO O.' _� 0 V�3 � C > O � C � i 0 Q nq Z � I U a Y� � v O 'b e d N v U U oq L V C U o 'o �a n, c 0 M O o V O M t o ff— 7 M V 7 7 0 O` O 'b 7 W N M v) �D Vl •--� V1 M M °� � N �n o r <n r O - M p O Vt o 00 oo V 7 vl O— ID V M V ^- '� c� w— O O U N �D V' "t (p ctl N 00 M O c\ r 7 M <f 7 M N T tI N r ' N M oow N M -4 oo O -i M ^ _ %D �n ^ N O O 00 O N 7 �/1 c r o lD 00 M V �n rri o �7 M I I p O M 0 0 U 'D O oo ct O N O N o0 O r O M N O °C lo� O O U • bG = X N o0 o M vi V' O^ M - � vl v1 r C, r �D N 7 - 0 0 y ce �n ^ v O N - O n 0 N N M 'D o V 0 M M N r O oo r 'n = cl V lD M M r M 7 V c, M c, �D V1 N1 h N O O N N 'n - c L N ^ O d N O NM o N M h r .-. M p M :� u O\ N p C R ` a U N II N O O °` M 0 O O 7 U ry 0 �n N M M N M N— �n O+ O M o N r T u R O- N n a y M M r M N O V M o u v y • A v1 O O� 0 0 7 0 N �D O B O O oo 0\ — M >o h O It N M M 7 •-- (V 7 h •,., a0 — \O �/1 7 C, N n L D u O N u F o0 r oo M V `D N 7 r tC3 N �D r M V1 Vl M G M ry�� a � - ^ o M ° u•° °N o ° ^oo� C H I= ~ o°O o O° cD N M 7 0, M �n V N O N oo 00 r C O O\ o CL n CL ^ oo V M V M O N O O O O O ^ r^ D 0 7 0 oo O M �n V1 M 7 M N N W 7 r cl O vl N 0 o p m 7 W N O b0 b oo p M d •L y y R y X R a b o 0 ° �cc o y G w R o b0 R x V � � c c c OL o c O - 7 m U 4. o 3 V D o O o; t .� O cL m O v � a O r o I °°� "� o a C O U 2, r� U C °° E m n a a` i Q >U3mxx � NI7 ro NIO O.' _� 0 V�3 � C > O � C � i 0 Q nq Z � I U a Y� � v O 'b e d N v U U oq L V C U o 'o �a n, c 0 b O �J 00 N Yr'1 o Q z w 2 0 U O � U Y � o b •- h d N y V U 0q U F U o 0 �a 0 cLQ n a C ----- M M M M M M - TT V1 l0 M V' V V' O D\ M h Vl N h 00 0 D O O M^ O 4 O r O\ 00 O— v _ — O — V F N ^ 10 N O h 0 0 V O 0� "D 7 0^ "0 - M } N 00 00 Vl M 01 W ^O O h 10 : 00 N 0� wh M lD M M M MC� 0\ N c G• �/1 vl V1 N N to t- 00 l0 O r V'f M 7 O, O M Vl N O 00 ^ vl M Vl O Vl .� r M W N r h .- O M V r �D 00 wl O a r W V Q\ N M 0\ 00 F O O M 10 O "0 �D IO W F � h �D r 0 0 �/1 N O �D O �/1 ^ � m O N � V CC N O� G M O O M O� "D — O O� N O h V h V 00 O r c0 0o y N O . L, d 00 ^ M C� Vl �D M M V) O M �/'1 M M N M 00 N w'�+ �0 1-i o a L r n o — 00 C � � C N O v1 �O Do h— O— 7 h (71 7 O 7 O, O M `D ^ M'D O O y u ca N 00 10 — N O O O L CL � V O M �D O -- O N N r N 00 V 00 'D Vl W O � u y L � � �J C M M M M M M M M M M— V1 V1 � V1 V1 H d0 C F 7 'y, G O V V � 00 7 0 0 7 D\ V1 DD h^ v� �D a O a\ CL V O N ^ .d 3 7 O\ O 00 — N V V r 00 N 'It M Vl \D 7 M O 07 Vl 00 Vl 'D h �p ^ o } 4% r �D O^ 1D 0. 9 M h vl h^ M M Vl 7 h ^ r O O W M 00 �n 00 0 v F v) M r Vl 00 N V OO N M M O M a0 h N 7 => M 0\ O v1 V' 7 r o Id > O I C �-' V V ate• C r V b F V C V U 3 L C L c vo33¢G�O o �v x 3> a 3 d 4 C tGd b y ._ CL Ci 00 C c i 7 c u F A O F O L v - °O A y y � Im L E° Yr'1 o Q z w 2 0 U O � U Y � o b •- h d N y V U 0q U F U o 0 �a 0 cLQ n a b 0 Le 00 H O N _y T Q z I Y � R. U a � Y 7 o b U U h0 � V C U o 0 �u o .- °- a C L 0 V) u ]7- q CIO _ E _ 0 0 q cn w o L N � y O� L 0 � � O •o A � o � (•J C M (n •L O � U U c CD q 10 10 O O O 7 — O %C O co 00 O' N U p U V1 �O Vl Vl M N M 7 � y N O N O O O Vl 1� C G vl V' 1� V1 vl V N O N �O 00 M V1 C OL W b 10 10 7 L U .d M F F v Z E ``.. " S E W w .2 F F is �e id � J --• .�- ro o ,b s °a t °o o cC* - U° i O N _y T Q z I Y � R. U a � Y 7 o b U U h0 � V C U o 0 �u o .- °- a C L 0 V) u ]7- Q U CIO C, U I s.. a� c�3 IILO a S1 Ti O O i-i x Sr" tz _O O�--I 5Q F-� 01 a� r r — Y G C O O L �. 't �IMIO IoOIOIM �D r V1 M V1 N I j v � r ^ CC V N 7 O M C O � G N L O\ U .� ^ O W 10 M M O a � G r 7 �O O M O N 00 V1 V 00 O Cti V 00 N N V 01 M— V — O � — 4 m y � � L Y � C � a'M OI� r — L U ^ V 00 M V r V1 m tt �str1K� ya+,ss �yss�� ` 033¢00„° °d33¢oo�Lb R � c c � � � S — � ❑ c � ca � S � _. 'b L � Y C V .� — � �• cOC N �m o v �w3WOa �w o NwY3Wm 3 Y �-�- p ❑ td 43 —O 4+ O G ctl �.., j 4. O O a Umm cY c c Ump c-Y c i Y Y c � 9 i C d L R x O O O O 9 9 � v v r — 7 O O � aM oo�o�noN�n —o N C G r -- O N h C Vl � DD ...• L G U Vl �o 7 M 0 0 o � b y� V MM � � G M C O � •� N DD h O D\ 01 M O O O L m1M M Vl \O M ^ N- ^ C h r W O .G 0 4. M O 00 i N M V1 r �D O �- r- 00 W M' r N^ O o M 0 L 'D op r O j. roo�nr- i�o�c�i- vt N D\ r y — 00 `✓ id is m `✓, ro is is `. a s CL o33¢QO 0) E u c c n q S = m c x p s °' ❑ �m °o ywY3�� °am o hwY3�m 3 c Y C U m m C Y c L c6 r O O ._. m G O y0„ �] m ro Y > Y C L d ro 9 r O 9 � u e e U O O C � 9 d E � R D CC 0� O N o Q z LL U O YV A r M _N O N U Op O O C U O �a o 0 cd O N c O z w U O O C E � NO M E: ro bD N y N � � � C U O p O V] W C M u y U N � m 00 O r 0 C M • OA O f� N M M �D O v rq M N r C O •U M O h M 00 �D O r N r 10 � N y L M O— M V r ao Cl U u y W Y' - N V 1N E 7 10 v� O r V d' M N O O O y V Ct+ R m W M O W o � d v L y ro a r � C O � �. --� 00 .--• M V �O M ^ O L N oo M O N O ^ 00 V M ul o M ---• mV7 � l0 N cC cV - i3 "C - E 'b b 2 L C r 7 b 'b F L F O 033¢00;^ O aai d33¢QO„��bo N F k T+ — r. v 4. C O F O cC O td y U C Y 7 4. F O C O cd O c3 r U C Y N F a� F a U 2 'O tn Y C U 2 L cFd N 113 m o R^ ;3 =m ° 47 m o N^ ,7 ^ a O y W Y .--� W �. v Y _O w p A W w C W cFtl m w O cFC w 3 U m C Y C O > O m G m b � C C � O b v O b u R C W cC 0.1 O N c O z w U O O C E � NO M E: ro bD N y N � � � C U O p O V] W 5 Acknowledgements Scott Loftis, Jeff Ferguson, and Brent Burgess with the NCWRC watershed enhancement group collected and analyzed the field data. Scott Loftis and Jeff Ferguson prepared this report. Jim Borawa with the NCWRC provided comments for improving this report. 6 References AutoCAD. 2004. Version 2004.0.0. Copyright 2004, AutoDesk, Inc., San Rafael, California. Doll, B. A., D. E. Wise, C. M. Buckner, S. D. Wilkerson, W. A. Harman, R. E. Smith, and J. Spooner. 2002. Hydraulic geometry relationships for urban streams throughout the piedmont of North Carolina. Journal of American Water Resources Association, 38(3):641- 651. Harman, W. A., G. D. Jennings, J. M. Patterson, D. R. Clinton, L. O. Slate, A G. Jessup, J. R. Everhart, and R. E. Smith. 1999. Bankfull hydraulic geometry relationships for North Carolina streams. Pages 401 -408 in D. S. Olsen and J. P. Potyondy, editors. American Water Resources Association, Wildland Hydrology Symposium Proceedings. American Water Resources Association, Middleburg, Virginia. Harman, W. A, D. E. Wise, M. A. Walker, R. Morris, M. A. Cantrell, M. Clemmons, G. D. Jennings, D. Clinton, and J. Patterson. 2000. Bankfull regional curves for North Carolina mountain streams. Pages 185 -190 in D. L. Kane; editor. Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association Conference: Water Resources in Extreme Environments. American Water Resources Association, Middleburg, Virginia. Harrelson, C. C., J. P. Potyondy, and C. L. Rawlins. 1994. Stream channel reference sites: an illustrated guide to field technique. General Technical Report RM -245, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Fort Collins, Colorado. Lee, M. T., R. K. Peet, R. D. Steven, T. R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS /EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation Version 4.0. Available' www.nceep. net / business /monitoring /veg /datasheets.htm (October 2006). NCSRI (North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute). 2003. Stream restoration: a natural channel design handbook. North Carolina Stream Restoration Institute and North Carolina Sea Grant, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. Available: www. bae .ncsu.edu/programs /extension/wq /g sri/. (July 2007). NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission). 2005. Stream and riparian restoration plan, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick mitigation site, Spring Creek, Madison County, North Carolina. Watershed Enhancement Group. Raleigh. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 19 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 NCWRC (North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission). 2008. As -built report for the Plemmons /Kirkpatrick mitigation site, Spring Creek, Madison County. North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement project number 92607. Watershed Enhancement Group. Raleigh. Rosgen, D. L. 1996. Applied river morphology. Printed Media Companies, Minneapolis, Minnesota. RSARS (RIVERMorph Stream Assessment and Restoration Software). 2010. Version 4.3 Professional edition. Copyright 2002 -2006, RIVERVIorph LLC, Louisville, Kentucky. Available: www.rivermolph.com. (July 2007). USACE (United States Army Corps of Engineers). 2003. Stream Mitigation Guidelines. Prepared with cooperation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, and the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, Wilmington, North Carolina. Available: www.sw.usace. army. mil /wetlands /mitigation/stream mitigation.html (June 2009). Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 20 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 t `�' �. r is `• ti\ 'w..'t �� 'i`- tA6,e Ch - ri tit i k t �k A, - — �a .,` t - •� 1 •i• off`' r{ NC 209 so 14 +- Baltimore Branch Road (SRI 151) E Legend Restoration Jr act -t � ti t A + I ,�I1 •�i . ,i � � 9, t �ti ti Name: SPRING CREEK T Location: 035° 47' 31.13" N 082-51-37.45-W r� Date: 1/10/2008 �( p$VSCelll Scale: 1 inch equals 800 feet 1'tt t.lt f ntctit Figure 1.— Spring Creek mitigation site, French Broad River basin, Madison County, N.C. EEP project number 92607. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 21 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 N n n + n O) t0 CD + co I + + XN W O O I N (O (O X N N X + m 00 � m n � o Z leg \ X M O \ ` u) 'D \ \` \ QO Y ° m o c OS +S . 1 \ ` +y N ci M m LL \ ♦ N Y ♦ ` 1 m ® m mm m ♦♦ \ X � ♦ m c �M M min °v UN ..\�� co ♦ I m c°DN i°oo�M,c°n W a M m I (n V rin rnvaDODO I J Lr) � •' M N M C07 N N N Lo C. % I ® 1' U mm a.mcgO)gm o wa 1 w J NNNNoo oo oo OD OD aD aO oo LL♦ \ - \ m\ \\ O n 1 2 LO chi m(Omm(mDo° 1 1 1 LO r O) 0) O) N p - 1 r0 ap M DNO N N N N 0) > \` I O)m oOO) O) m O) 1 \ J ?� rm) Cl) m cl)) cl)) ccl) (mn cmh ccl) 1 1 0 > 1 \ 1 \ N \ ( a N 1 \\ 1 c A Q) C \ Z m c >> z rn \ 1 N \ N O O N C t (n V7 In N (n In $ \ \\ 1 J J a a, o.aaaaaa it 0) m N \ O € (D (O 0) N O O u C W N m W r (D V M (O O) M r O O) M V C) I \ O wO) mMr Q)N O��{{ V r M,A Oo UOl!7O 10 CO M ,O O) 0. Q1 O)(D CO MM(O�OO) (OO NOOmNO W MO m W O(OMO N \ 1 'O rM V o(O W �r MOO m r W r0 OR0mu7 W (n M(DMr 1 w r M N V M O Q) O f O V u) V N u) V � V M O V O d N M N M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N mJ LLL I d p) UJ (D (O (O (O w w (D O cO co (O (D w (O w O w w w O O CO (O O o O N Y \ 1 , c U w oo m aD m co m w aD w oo ao ao ao ao m ao ao aD ao ® m 0 (N N N N N N V (V N N N N N (V p N N N N N N N N N N N (V N (� J OD ao co aD OD OO 00 00 OD OD OO W OD OD OD OD W 0000 m m m ao cn co mm 1 y e e 1 \ _ Q)O)N NMN O OO)O(0ry W W N W MMNN' - M m \ 1` u)rN NM W MO M 0) CO �N M O U) �OMO)C W r-- \ 1 Z P.- Lo M W 00)M 0)rr rNN_ (D (0 LO 0)O 0)u7 NO) W CM� ao N(D S N O OD (2 N M m r r u]POrM N N OO \ .O N r N O) _O u) O O r N MMN O M M M M N v v M O) O) o w N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (V N N N N N N 0) 0) 0) O) m m O) 0) 0) O O) O) C) 01 0) 0) 0) 0 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 1 \ m cn ui m m vi m m m m m m ui m Lr) ui m m m ui ui cn m ui m m ui \ i1 J M Cl) M M Cl) M M M M co M M M Cl) M Cl) M M co M M Cl) Cl) M M Cl) M M Cl) > ui C N 0 Y m LL LL LL LL LL LL LL m 1� \ Y a «I'aaa ammImmWD- DmIXmmofamIr- jCOWJ°mW -1mW ® m\ \ > c 0 a. >> � r > n w t— o — cn t— o N N Ln N A to M to M Ln v to V cn c7 n ucn 5 (cn n L6 uD � cn D to D r4. Lr n r ct� O t(o o c(n o Op. \ 0 mNNN 2C)oUU: i0U(..%(.JL)L)u0UU(..1CJIjCJCJU Vii U ♦ ` �♦ CD J > O) 0) 0) U (n (n (1) U) (n (n (1) !n (n (n (n U) (n N U) U) (n (n (n (n (n Ln Ln U) '� ♦♦ \ - iYll/ n n + v I N (n X iW U LL w 1- N " O N Qp 3•° � � ; cZ E >, oL cc r. O y) O N p p C -) (n y a .co O t o O m Z Z o u) E E 0 c C y °?— o y N 0 0 N yO) � y aw - C O C NL:C C o ,, N._ p c 0 - 0 o = p N u) L N W - - U O N° o U w N 0 O, J p w O w ~ O O C Oy+. O � C O 0 O c aci� ca)p 2ac)c 3 v a p c ° o�� o o 0:9 :3 m•c U.tn-. 7Q 3 U C > �•3 ao)v d oa°-j o)a o o a 2 lo z U) n tO ro + O O Cn I (n X 0 00 W w LL Cn O O N .. rIT A. W I 1 rnW i C) W O O (D O O U) Q Q Q 0 0 0 r� } r;..1 0 6 r C/� 1� 3 LL � U t, LL co U U n cn � 0 m � W Z O w J Q LL 2 0- 0 Q 0 Q (n U O N I..L. Qi U) Y U d Y = Y vi C O E E ^� (' LL i U) ni L- C) C v J O U C O Ln 0 fC� G W 1 N Q Z w O LL LL C/) Xq WIL rn � r OD r U 04N U) .0.0 W U ry D O U) d W ::) W of LL J Z a 0 w 3 J U) Ww a (� () a Q Z W N Z Q Z Q = <J J Z �°a O w 2C) Q O - U 2 2° �w 2 a� LLi LU W > �w Q my O aO N 3 3 c m a Ga Q r C) N U N .o W W N w m C d C N N `o r -° A A Q ® U QO ~ ~ o 0 00 O E E 3 c Q +� C O C -p L U 3Y c� dYY W A ()) p• T H o m .-� O = C +, �U �, o 41 Q) (n c d o I C N v c 0 O LV)(nmmm T T A io m (DV m aLLmm T O w O rnJ C U CC O Q C Q. C O O+� ` 7 i 0 > LV N a 0 N co L O O O MN N N N F N V 3 N Y — U c N N C C N N —0 0 •-' -Y Q! Q m Q C S T C (n :3 L Q Ol (n O Q LO -0 O O U O O U On O U C JO 'N(+) V muiraO - - - - - - -�- Q 0 3 x N O O N N O Q N O �. Q) I- W F M W LL- W m W U > W d J IY � J p (> F 10 a a J 0 o 0 0 0 0 - I F—I I w I a a '� w mac o E E E E E L L W T T A) �3m(nNNN(n (n N N N( V r N M 4 6 h m Q) N n n + n O) t0 CD + co I + + XN W O O I N (O (O X N N X + m 00 � m n � o Z leg \ X M O \ ` u) 'D \ \` \ QO Y ° m o c OS +S . 1 \ ` +y N ci M m LL \ ♦ N Y ♦ ` 1 m ® m mm m ♦♦ \ X � ♦ m c �M M min °v UN ..\�� co ♦ I m c°DN i°oo�M,c°n W a M m I (n V rin rnvaDODO I J Lr) � •' M N M C07 N N N Lo C. % I ® 1' U mm a.mcgO)gm o wa 1 w J NNNNoo oo oo OD OD aD aO oo LL♦ \ - \ m\ \\ O n 1 2 LO chi m(Omm(mDo° 1 1 1 LO r O) 0) O) N p - 1 r0 ap M DNO N N N N 0) > \` I O)m oOO) O) m O) 1 \ J ?� rm) Cl) m cl)) cl)) ccl) (mn cmh ccl) 1 1 0 > 1 \ 1 \ N \ ( a N 1 \\ 1 c A Q) C \ Z m c >> z rn \ 1 N \ N O O N C t (n V7 In N (n In $ \ \\ 1 J J a a, o.aaaaaa it 0) m N \ O € (D (O 0) N O O u C W N m W r (D V M (O O) M r O O) M V C) I \ O wO) mMr Q)N O��{{ V r M,A Oo UOl!7O 10 CO M ,O O) 0. Q1 O)(D CO MM(O�OO) (OO NOOmNO W MO m W O(OMO N \ 1 'O rM V o(O W �r MOO m r W r0 OR0mu7 W (n M(DMr 1 w r M N V M O Q) O f O V u) V N u) V � V M O V O d N M N M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N mJ LLL I d p) UJ (D (O (O (O w w (D O cO co (O (D w (O w O w w w O O CO (O O o O N Y \ 1 , c U w oo m aD m co m w aD w oo ao ao ao ao m ao ao aD ao ® m 0 (N N N N N N V (V N N N N N (V p N N N N N N N N N N N (V N (� J OD ao co aD OD OO 00 00 OD OD OO W OD OD OD OD W 0000 m m m ao cn co mm 1 y e e 1 \ _ Q)O)N NMN O OO)O(0ry W W N W MMNN' - M m \ 1` u)rN NM W MO M 0) CO �N M O U) �OMO)C W r-- \ 1 Z P.- Lo M W 00)M 0)rr rNN_ (D (0 LO 0)O 0)u7 NO) W CM� ao N(D S N O OD (2 N M m r r u]POrM N N OO \ .O N r N O) _O u) O O r N MMN O M M M M N v v M O) O) o w N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (V N N N N N N 0) 0) 0) O) m m O) 0) 0) O O) O) C) 01 0) 0) 0) 0 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 1 \ m cn ui m m vi m m m m m m ui m Lr) ui m m m ui ui cn m ui m m ui \ i1 J M Cl) M M Cl) M M M M co M M M Cl) M Cl) M M co M M Cl) Cl) M M Cl) M M Cl) > ui C N 0 Y m LL LL LL LL LL LL LL m 1� \ Y a «I'aaa ammImmWD- DmIXmmofamIr- jCOWJ°mW -1mW ® m\ \ > c 0 a. >> � r > n w t— o — cn t— o N N Ln N A to M to M Ln v to V cn c7 n ucn 5 (cn n L6 uD � cn D to D r4. Lr n r ct� O t(o o c(n o Op. \ 0 mNNN 2C)oUU: i0U(..%(.JL)L)u0UU(..1CJIjCJCJU Vii U ♦ ` �♦ CD J > O) 0) 0) U (n (n (1) U) (n (n (1) !n (n (n (n U) (n N U) U) (n (n (n (n (n Ln Ln U) '� ♦♦ \ - iYll/ n n + v I N (n X iW U LL w 1- N " O N Qp 3•° � � ; cZ E >, oL cc r. O y) O N p p C -) (n y a .co O t o O m Z Z o u) E E 0 c C y °?— o y N 0 0 N yO) � y aw - C O C NL:C C o ,, N._ p c 0 - 0 o = p N u) L N W - - U O N° o U w N 0 O, J p w O w ~ O O C Oy+. O � C O 0 O c aci� ca)p 2ac)c 3 v a p c ° o�� o o 0:9 :3 m•c U.tn-. 7Q 3 U C > �•3 ao)v d oa°-j o)a o o a 2 lo z U) n tO ro + O O Cn I (n X 0 00 W w LL Cn O O N .. rIT A. W I 1 rnW i C) W O O (D O O U) Q Q Q 0 0 0 r� } r;..1 0 6 r C/� 1� 3 LL � U t, LL co U U n cn � 0 m � W Z O w J Q LL 2 0- 0 Q 0 Q (n U O N I..L. Qi U) Y U d Y = Y vi C O E E ^� (' LL i U) ni L- C) C v J O U C O Ln 0 fC� G W 1 N Q Z w O LL LL C/) Xq WIL rn � r OD r U 04N U) .0.0 W U ry D O U) d W ::) W of LL J Z a 0 w 3 J U) Ww a (� () a Q Z W N Z Q Z Q = <J J Z �°a O w 2C) Q O - U 2 2° �w 2 a� LLi LU W > �w Q my O aO N 3 3 c m a Ga Q r C) N U N .o W W N w N (o N n r- d + + (O I d M w a ul X + LO + M I O d No Xfn W .. d N I o n N c � x I m O x 0 O � Y 0 ® .2 O C _ C O -«� O C pi O Qi O m ++ = OC �J O 0 U) �, O U) C O C N 3 .. a) N 3 r. a� r7 O w � 0 N � U E-0 a) c O E cn E a) O- . O L 0 Q� O O)} O O)>- d C s .T) C u) D 0 pi (n O U L -0:2 = -0:2 O O 3 x 0 O O N L Q) O L O N W� F- W� F- M LU L- LU m dU > W dJ af CD J II �I z4tz I a Q w ®� N (o N n r- d + + (O I d M w a ul X + LO + M I O d No Xfn W N d N I o n N V) x I m x o IL a M Y m (L m m m J m m m M m II wN m as a O W N IUD m d 0 0 0 N M OD M M O t0 (D O N N N N M (O O m m N p ZD > ° W O nO O � � M d 00 OD 0 o m 0 7 m O O n O O d O O d w M ` co M N N N N M M C a C O co . 00 O M M M M M m 0 > O N N N N N N N N N N E J 00 00 OD O O 00 co co co co C N N m E W N aD 2 N M m C) io co ° .m N .0 N M M d v v rl- m = o M Oo M O N m N N N N m M M M M M M M M � C Q i> m (n LO (n O O Ln vi 0 ui O U J o d M M M M M M M M M M za O m O o. vi �co W > 3 J c �Zm mac (I CD c w o- N I? o ` m m m E 0aac aaa (L a a a U) U) ~~ OO OD NOO° ° O° N O OD I� O d M UO M M LO OM O d d I) m ccoi(OOco MM Uro M(NO MO ON 000000(0OD MMOM ONOOO N_ 000 M(o 00 00 (0 MO •O t- MR OOM �M W MI- MhO OMMO00OM(o MIS Y f` M N d M O M O O d O d N U n d CV d M O d O M N M N co N M M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N p� O O O Uo (O (0 co (o to (O (O (o O (o (o Uo (o O (o to (o (o (o O O (o (p C Oo OR OR CO OD Oo co 00 W W co OD 00 co W aD co O M O M a0 O M O CO 00 O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N J 00 00 co co co OD co 00 00 Co O 00 00 00 OD Co co 00 co 00 OD 00 co co co M 00 0 O U S O O U O O Of (Z' N C O O C 1 0 Y U O� O U Of J 3/ M M N N M N V O O M O O I X ;0 ;0 N 0 O M M N N.- M V O (o f-- N NM co lA MMMM 0o NMOO dOMMd ODr- M M O M M M m n r N N O O O M O M O N M d d m O N w w 00 0 N M O 1� h O� O E M N N O (o � N f� N M MOO O f` N M M N O M M M M N d dMM M M 3 N N N N N N N N N N M M M N N N N N N N N N N N M m M M O> M M M M M M M M M M M Om M M M M M M nl.� r��r�nl�nnl .n�r�nr�r�r�r�nnnr�r�r�nn m Lo Lo vi o Ui o o N N o O o N N N N u) o Ili o (ci O N In ui ui o J M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M H c Y m Y m LL LL LL LL LL LL y�NM Um m m Ym-p Ym aYmmYmmY m -j c a a a J m J m J m J m 2 J m J m J m J m� p Oiia5 (on — - -NNNM(`7 (hd�dln Un NtO (O (Dh f�I�OD OD 00 m O O O N X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O .7NNN �ci�Uii(�UUUUUUi..)(�(i Ui..)ci :i (i ciUUUU J ow H m O 4) 0 �� =o o y aN = o Z ; U O p p C> o o N o �Z E> c� w co -C 0 0 L O N C `7 m 0 E NO _O -E o y O N U 0) O O— 4 o O ), — O a p j C N y 0 0 O N C 4 N — U O O O N 7 7 c a=im c o o 0 o c D o o. p t o o� D� o 0.2 0 O .L-. h .` O .wN.. 7 a O; U C> _ D O O L N U d 0 1] J 0-0 O U a« a� (U a N U ~ ~ a (/7 to (n U D :3 C O O N N U w > � .0 :3 U C O U N O > U 0 U -So d N M o N � I M \ N X m X to I I � r w I O \ N I \ 1 X 1 \ \ 1 OD \ o x o V \1 EL 04 \ \ NX CD L�L \ \V\ / Y I Vtn Z _ v .o n W W r U- (n O o N o Q o o iLi w Lij U F-- F � � 0 0 J i G/J Q1 3 LL M U } LL. fn Y U U a r ° m °— CO w w } af J_ > w g2 a D 0 < cA U U) Y U (Q Q O C.015 0 > CD o k E (y a- I °� co N U .o W W \•) W U C � U Cc G 'b Z W O LL '' ^^ IL vJ O C� W lL Om r (� a a `^ ao V 000 m ) NW LL D O U) d W ::) 0 W LL H Z a M W J U) W L o U D_ Q Z X w r+ _Z =z< <z J Z Z� OW �L) 0' 'T Qw 0WO U 2 2z U) w U) FJ 2 i3f <� LLJ w; �w Q O °i 00 < O N > M C7 w (o N d 6 n N N I I _ w a ul X + M 0 m I d N X M M N N M N V O O M O O I X ;0 ;0 N 0 O M M N N.- M V O (o f-- N NM co lA MMMM 0o NMOO dOMMd ODr- M M O M M M m n r N N O O O M O M O N M d d m O N w w 00 0 N M O 1� h O� O E M N N O (o � N f� N M MOO O f` N M M N O M M M M N d dMM M M 3 N N N N N N N N N N M M M N N N N N N N N N N N M m M M O> M M M M M M M M M M M Om M M M M M M nl.� r��r�nl�nnl .n�r�nr�r�r�r�nnnr�r�r�nn m Lo Lo vi o Ui o o N N o O o N N N N u) o Ili o (ci O N In ui ui o J M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M H c Y m Y m LL LL LL LL LL LL y�NM Um m m Ym-p Ym aYmmYmmY m -j c a a a J m J m J m J m 2 J m J m J m J m� p Oiia5 (on — - -NNNM(`7 (hd�dln Un NtO (O (Dh f�I�OD OD 00 m O O O N X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X O .7NNN �ci�Uii(�UUUUUUi..)(�(i Ui..)ci :i (i ciUUUU J ow H m O 4) 0 �� =o o y aN = o Z ; U O p p C> o o N o �Z E> c� w co -C 0 0 L O N C `7 m 0 E NO _O -E o y O N U 0) O O— 4 o O ), — O a p j C N y 0 0 O N C 4 N — U O O O N 7 7 c a=im c o o 0 o c D o o. p t o o� D� o 0.2 0 O .L-. h .` O .wN.. 7 a O; U C> _ D O O L N U d 0 1] J 0-0 O U a« a� (U a N U ~ ~ a (/7 to (n U D :3 C O O N N U w > � .0 :3 U C O U N O > U 0 U -So d N M o N � I M \ N X m X to I I � r w I O \ N I \ 1 X 1 \ \ 1 OD \ o x o V \1 EL 04 \ \ NX CD L�L \ \V\ / Y I Vtn Z _ v .o n W W r U- (n O o N o Q o o iLi w Lij U F-- F � � 0 0 J i G/J Q1 3 LL M U } LL. fn Y U U a r ° m °— CO w w } af J_ > w g2 a D 0 < cA U U) Y U (Q Q O C.015 0 > CD o k E (y a- I °� co N U .o W W \•) W U C � U Cc G 'b Z W O LL '' ^^ IL vJ O C� W lL Om r (� a a `^ ao V 000 m ) NW LL D O U) d W ::) 0 W LL H Z a M W J U) W L o U D_ Q Z X w r+ _Z =z< <z J Z Z� OW �L) 0' 'T Qw 0WO U 2 2z U) w U) FJ 2 i3f <� LLJ w; �w Q O °i 00 < O N > M C7 w Appendix A.— Vegetation Data A.1 Vegetation Data Tables Table A.1.1.— Vegetation Metadata. MY4 Vegetation Metadata Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) Report Prepared By C. Scott Loftis, A. Brent Burgess Date Prepared 4 Jan 2011 16:35 Database Name NCWRCBalsam- 07 -A.mdb Database Location C:\Documents and Settings\Micky Clemmons\My Documents\ My Data \Restoration Projects \CVS -EEP veg data DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT Metadata This worksheet, which is a summary of the project and the project data. Plots List of plots surveyed. Vigor Frequency distribution of vigor classes. Vigor b Spp Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species. Damage List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percen t of total stems impacted by each. Damage by Spp. Dama a values tallied by e for each species. Damage by Plot Damage values tallied by e for each plot. Stem Count by Plot and Spp. Count of living steins of each species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded. PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code/Number 92607 Project Name Spring Creek Description Von and Linda G. Plemmons/Hazel Kirkpatrick properties, Madison County, N.C. Length ft 680 Stream-to-Edge Width (ft) 50 Area (m2/acres 8,498.4/2.1 acres Required Plots (calculated) 3 Sampled Plots 3 Spring Creek, Plcmmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 24 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.2.— Vegetation Vigor by Species. MYO Vegetation Vigor by Species Spring Creek (EEP pro oect number 92607 Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing Acer rubrum 1 1 Aesculusfifava 1 1 Alnus serrulata 1 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 5 1 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 4 2 2 Cornus amomum (Live stake) 6 6 Halesia carolina 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 Oxydendrum arboreum 2 1 1 uercus coccinea 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 1 Salix sericea Live stake 3 2 Sambucus canadensis 2 1 Sorbus americana 2 1 Viburnum dentatum 2 1 Ilex decidua 2 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 3 1 Lindera benzoin 3 2 1 Ph socar us o uli olius Live stake) 4 2 TOT: 20 47 1 1 20 MYl Vegetation Vigor by Species Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607 Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing Acer rubnrm 1 Aesculus ava 1 Alnus serrulata 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 4 1 Aronia arbuti olia 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 2 Cornus amomum (Live stake) 6 Halesia carolina 1 N ssa a uatica 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 1 1 Quercus coccinea 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 Salix sericea (Live stake) 1 2 Sambucus canadensis 1 1 Sorbus americana 1 1 Viburnum dentatzrm 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 Hamamelis vir- iniana 2 1 Lindera benzoin 2 1 Ph socar us o ulifolius (Live stake 2 2 TOT: 20 1 14 13 1 20 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 25 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.2. Continued. MY2 Vegetation Vigor by Species Spring Creek (EEP pr o'ect number 92607 Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing Unknown Acer ruby um 1 1 Aesculus ava 1 1 Alnus serrulata 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 1 1 1 2 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 1 2 Cornus amomum 6 Halesia caroling 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 1 1 uercus coccinea 2 1 1 1 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 1 Salix sericea 3 1 Sambucus canadensis 1 1 1 Sorbus americana 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 1 1 1 Lindera benzoin 2 1 Ph socar us o uli olius 1 3 TOT: 20 2 18 1 1 24 2 MY3 Vegetation Vigor by Species S r ng Creek (EEP prqject number 92607 Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing Unknown Acer rubrum 1 Aesculus ava 1 1 Alnus serrulata 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 2 1 2 Aronia arbzrti olia 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 1 1 2 Cornus amomum 6 Halesia carolina 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 Lindera benzoin 1 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 1 1 Ph socar us o uli olius 1 3 Quercus coccinea 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 Salix sericea 3 Sambucus canadensis 1 1 Sorbus americana 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 1 TOT: 20 13 6 1 22 7 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 26 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.2. Continued. MY4 Vegetation Vigor by Species Spring Creek EEP pr o'ect number 92607 Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missing Unknown Acer rubrum 1 Aesculus ava 1 1 Alnus serrulata 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 2 3 Aronia arbuti olia 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 1 1 3 Cornus amomum 6 Halesia carolina 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 2 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 Lindera benzoin 1 2 N ssa a uatica 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 2 Phvsocar us o uli olius 1 3 uercus coccinea 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 Salix sericea 3 Sambucus canadensis 2 Sorbus americana 1 1 Viburnum den_tatum 1 1 TOT: 20 2 4 11 32 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 27 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.3.— Vegetation Damage by Species. MYO Vegetation Damage by Species Spring Creek EEP project number 92607 Species All Damage Categories No Damage Acer rubrtzm 1 1 Aesculus ava 1 1 Alnus serrulata 2 2 Amelanchier laevis 5 5 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 4 4 Cornus amomum 6 6 Halesia carolina 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 3 3 Ilex decidua 2 2 Lindera benzoin 3 3 N ssa a uatica 1 1 Oxydendrum arboreum 2 2 Ph socar us o uli olius 4 4 zrercus coccinea 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 1 Salix sericea 3 3 Sambucus canadensis 2 2 Sorbus americana 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 2 2 TOT: 20 48 48 MY1 Vegetation Damage by Species S ring Creek (EEP projec t number 92607 Species All Damage Categories No Damage Enter other damage Human Trampled Storm Unknown Acer rzzbrzrm 1 1 Aesculus ava 1 1 Alnus serrulata 2 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 5 4 1 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 4 2 2 Cornus amomum 6 6 Halesia carolina I 1 Hamamelis vzr iniana 3 3 Ilex decidua 2 1 1 Lindera benzoin 3 1 1 1 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 2 1 1 Ph socar us o uli olius 4 2 2 zzercus coccinea 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 1 Salix sericea 3 1 2 Sambucus canadensis 2 1 1 Sorbus americana 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 2 1 1 TOT: 20 48 27 1 11 1 1 18 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 28 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.3. Continued. MY2 Vegetation Damage by Species Spring Creek EEP project number 92607) Species All Damage Categories No Damage Enter other damage Human Trampled Storm Unknown Acer nrbn +m 1 Aesculus lava 2 1 1 1 Aesculus lava 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 5 2 I Almrs serrulata 2 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 4 1 Amelanchier laevis 5 2 I 6 1 2 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 3 1 2 Ilex decidua Ce halanthus occidentalis 4 2 Lindera benzoin 3 2 2 Corn:rs amomum 6 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 2 6 Halesia Carolina 1 1 3 l uercus coccinea 2 Hamamelis vir iniana 3 1 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 2 1 Sambucus canadensis 2 1 1 Lindera benzoin 3 2 1 2 l N ssa a uatica l 1 23 26 Oxydendrum arboreum 2 1 1 Phvsocarpus o uli olius 4 3 1 uercus coccmea 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense l 1 Salix sericea 3 3 Sambucus canadensis 2 l 1 Sorbus americana 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 2 1 1 TOT: 20 48 22 2 1 23 MY3 Vegetation Damage by Species Spring Creek (EEP proj ect number 92607 Species All Damage Categories No Damage Unknown Acer nrbnrm 1 1 Aesculus lava 2 1 1 Alnus serrulata 2 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 5 2 3 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 4 2 2 Cornus amomum 6 6 Halesia Carolina 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 3 1 2 Ilex decidua 2 1 1 Lindera benzoin 3 2 1 Nyssa a uatica 1 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 2 1 1 Ph socar us o uli ohus 4 3 l uercus coccinea 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 1 Salix sericea 3 3 Sambucus canadensis 2 1 1 Sorbus americana 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 2 l 1 TOT: 20 49 23 26 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 29 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.3. Continued. MY4 Vegetation Damage by Species Spring Creek EEP ro'ect number 92607) Species All Damage Categories No Damage Unknown Vine Acer rrrbrum I 1 Aesculus (lava 2 1 1 Alnus serrulata 2 1 1 Amelanchier- laevis 5 1 3 1 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 4 2 2 Cornus amomum 6 6 Halesia earolina 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 3 1 2 Ilex decidua 2 1 1 Lindera benzoin 3 2 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 2 1 1 Ph socar us o uli olius 4 3 1 uercus coccinea 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 1 I Salix sericea 3 3 Sambucus canadensis 2 1 1 Sorbus americana 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 2 1 1 TOT: 20 49 22 27 1 Spring Creek, Pleininons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 30 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.4.— Vegetation Damage by Plot. MYO Vegetation Damage by Plot Spring Creek EEP project number 92607 Plot All Damage Categories No Damage 92607 - SLBB -VP 1 6 6 92607 - SLBB -VP2 9 9 92607- SLBB -VP3 33 33 TOT: 3 48 48 MY1 Vegetation Damage by Plot Spring Creek EEP project number 92607) Plot All Damage Categories No Damage Other Damage Human Trampled Storm Unknown 92607 - SLBB -VP 1 6 6 92607 - Balsam -VP2- ear:3 9 5 2 92607 - SLBB -VP2 9 8 11 22 1 92607 - SLBB -VP3 33 13 1 1 19 TOT:3 48 1 27 1 1 1 1 20 MY2 Vegetation Damage by Plot Spring Creek EEP prqject number 92607) Plot All Damage Categories No Damage Other Dama a Human Trampled Storm Unknown 92607 - SLBB -VP 1 6 4 92607 - Balsam -VP2- ear:3 9 5 2 92607 - SLBB -VP2 9 7 11 22 2 92607 - SLBB -VP3 33 11 1 1 22 TOT:3 48 22 1 26 MY3 Vegetation Damage by Plot Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) Plot All Damage Categories No Damage Unknown Vine 92607 - Balsam -VP 1-year: 3 7 4 3 92607 - Balsam -VP2- ear:3 9 5 4 1 92607 - Balsam -VP3- ear:3 33 11 22 TOT: 3 49 20 29 1 MY4 Vegetation Damage by Plot Spring Creek EEP proJect number 92607) Plot All Damage Categories No Damage Unknown Vine 92607 -SL /ABB -VP1- ear:4 7 4 3 92607 -SL /ABB -VP2- ear:4 9 3 5 1 92607 -SL /ABB -VP3- ear:4 33 10 23 TOT:' 3 49 17 31 1 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 31 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.5.— Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species. MYO Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607 Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems Plot 92607 VP1 Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Acer rubnim 1 I 1 I Aesculus. lava I I l 1 Alnus serrulata 2 1 2 2 Amelanchier laevis 5 2 2.5 4 1 Aronia arbutifolia 1 1 1 I Ce halanthus occtdentalts 4 1 4 4 Cornus amomum 6 1 6 6 Halesia carolina I I I I Hamamelis vir iniana 3 3 1 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 2 2 1 1 1 Lindera benzoin 3 2 1.5 1 2 N ssa a uatica 1 1 l 1 Oxydendrum arboreum 2 2 1 1 1 Ph socar us o tdifolius 4 1 4 4 :rercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Rhododendron calawbiense 1 I 1 I Salix sericea 3 1 3 3 Sambucus canadensis 2 1 2 2 Sorbus americana 2 1 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 2 2 1 1 1 TOT: 20 48 6 9 33 Density stems /acre 648 243 364 1,336 MYl Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species Spring Creek EEP project number 92607) Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems Plot 92607 VP1 Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Acer nibrum 1 1 1 1 Aesculus ava 1 1 1 I Alnus serrulata 1 1 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 4 1 4 4 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 2 2 Corms amomum Halesia carolina 1 I 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 3 3 1 1 1 1 flex decidua Lindera benzoin 2 2 1 1 1 N ssa aquatica I 1 1 I Ox dendnrm arboreum 1 1 I 1 Ph ysocar us o idi olius 2 1 2 2 Quercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense Salix sericea 1 1 1 I Sambucus canadensis 1 1 I I Sorbus americana 2 1 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 1 1 1 TOT: 20 27 6 8 13 Density (stems /acre) 364 243 323 526 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 32 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.5. Continued. MY2 Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607 Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems Plot 92607 VP1 Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Acer rubrum 1 I 1 1 Aesculus lava 1 I I I I Alnus serrulata 1 1 1 2 1 Amelanchier laevis 2 1 2 2 I Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 I I Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 2 1 2 Cornus amomum 2 2 1 1 1 Halesia carolina 1 1 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 2 2 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 1 1 1 Lindera benzoin 2 2 1 1 1 N ssa a uatica I 1 1 2 1 OxvdendrWn arboreum I I 1 1 I Physocarpus o uli olius 1 1 1 1 uercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense 20 4 5 11 Salix sericea 270 162 283 445 Sambucus canadensis 1 1 1 1 Sorbus americana 2 1 2 1 1 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 1 I 1 TOT: 20 1 22 4 7 11 Density (stems /acre) 1 297 162 283 445 MY3 Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species Spring Creek (EEP praiect number 92607 Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems Plot 92607 VPl Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Aesculus ava 1 I 1 1 Alnus serrulata 1 I 1 I Amelanchier laevis 2 1 2 2 Aronia arbziti olio 1 1 I I Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 2 2 Halesia carolina I 1 I 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 2 2 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 1 1 Lindera benzoin 1 1 1 1 Nyssa a uatica 1 1 1 1 Ph socar us o uli olizrs 1 1 1 1 uercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Sambucus canadensis 1 I I I Sorbus americana 2 1, 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 1 1 I TOT: 15 20 4 5 11 Density stems /acre 270 162 283 445 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 33 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.5. Continued. MY4 Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species Spring Creek EEP ro'ect number 92607 Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems plot 92607 VP1 Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Aesculus ava 1 1 1 1 Alnus serrulata 1 1 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 2 1 2 2 Aronia arbutifolia 1 1 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 1 2 Halesia Carolina 1 1 1 1 Hamanielis vir iniana 2 2 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 1 1 Lindera benzoin 1 1 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 1 1 Ph socar us o uli olius 1 1 1 1 uercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Sorbus americana 2 1 1 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 1 1 1 TOT: 14 19 4 5 10 Density stems /acre) 256 162 283 405 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 34 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.6. —All Stems Counted by Plot and Species. MY2 All Stems Counted by Plot and Species Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems Plot 92607 VP1 Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Acer rubrum Aesculus ava 1 1 I 1 Alnus serrulata 1 I 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 2 2 1 2 Aronia arbuti olia 1 I 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 2 2 Cornus amomum Cornus orida (non-planted) 1 1 1 1 Halesia carolina 1 1 I 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 2 1 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 1 1 Ju lans ni ra (non-planted) 2 2 1 1 1 Lindera benzoin 2 2 1 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 I 1 Ox dendrum arboreum 1 1 I 1 Ph socar us o uli blius 1 1 I 1 Prunus serotina (non-planted) 4 1 4 4 uercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense Salix sericea Sambucus canadensis 1 1 1 1 Sorbus americana 2 1 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 1 1 1 TOT: 23 29 10 8 11 Density (stems /acre) (including non- planted stems 391 405 (6) 324(l) 445 (0) Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 35 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.6. Continued. MV3 All Stems Counted by Plot and Species Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607 Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems Plot 92607 VP1 Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Aesculus lava 1 1 1 1 Alnus serrulato 1 1 2 1 Amelanchier laevis 2 1 1.5 2 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 I I Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 2 2 Cornits amomum 1 1 1 1 Cornus orida (non-planted) 1 1 1 1 Halesia carolina 1 1 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 2 2 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 1 1 1 Lindera benzoin 1 I 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 1 1 Ox dendrum arboreum Ph socar us o uli olius 1 1 1 1 Prunus serotina (non-planted) 7 1 7 7 uercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense Rhus typhina (non-planted) 2 2 1 1 1 Salix sericea Sambucus canadensis (non-planted) 8 2 4.5 7 1 Sorbus americana 2 1 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 2 1 1 TOT: 22 38 14 13 11 Density (stems /acre) (including non- planted stems 513 567 (10) 526 (8) 445 (0) Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 36 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Table A.1.6. Continued. MY4 All Stems Counted by Plot and Species Spring Creek EEP ro'ect number 92607 Species Total Stems Number of Plots Average Number of Stems Plot 92607 VP1 Plot 92607 VP2 Plot 92607 VP3 Acer rubrum Aesculus lava 1 1 2 1 Alnus serrulata 1 1 1 1 Amelanchier laevis 2 1 2 2 Aronia arbuti olia 1 1 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 2 2 Cornus antomunt 1 1 1 1 Cornus orida(non-planted) 2 1 2 2 Halesia carolina 1 1 1 1 Hamamelis vir iniana 2 2 1 1 1 Ilex decidua 1 2 1 1 Lindera benzoin 1 1 1 1 N ssa a uatica 1 1 1 1 Oxydendrum arboreum Ph socar us o uli olius 1 1 1 1 Prunus serotina (non-planted) 8 2 3.5 6 2 Quercus coccinea 2 1 2 2 Rhododendron catawbiense Rhus typhina (non-planted) 2 2 1 1 1 Salix sericea Sambucus canadensis (non-planted) 8 1 8 8 Sorbus americana 2 1 2 2 Viburnum dentatum 1 2 1 1 TOT: 22 40 13 14 13 Density (stems /acre) (including non- planted stems 540 526 (9) 567 (9) 526 (3) Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 37 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 A.2 Vegetation Problem Areas Plan View The non - native vegetation observed at the site remains at a relatively low density overall with the most concentrated portion of invasive vegetation located on the right bank at the lower end of the project site. The locations Vegetation problem areas or invasive species occurrences were noted on the MY3 -MY4 plan view (Figure 3). A.3 Vegetation Problem Areas Table Table A.3.1.— Vegetation Problem Areas. MYO Vegetation Problem Areas S rin g Creek EEP project number 92607 Feature/Issue Station Number/Range Probable Cause Photo Number Chinese privet present — sprouting 3 +00, left bank Root stock NA Multi -flora rose present - sprouting 5 +75, right bank Parent Stock 1 Multi -flora rose, Chinese privet, honeysuckle - clumps 5 +75, right bank Parent Stock 2 MY1 Vegetation Problem Areas S rin g Creek EEP project number 92607 Feature/issue Station Number/Range Probable Cause Photo Number Chinese privet present — sprouting 3 +00, left bank Root stock NA Multi -flora rose, Privet present - s routing 5 +75, right bank Parent Stock 1 Multi -flora rose, Chinese privet, honeysuckle - clumps 5 +75, right bank Parent Stock 2 MY2 Vegetation Problem Areas S rin g Creek EEP project number 92607 Feature/lssue Station Number/Range Probable Cause Photo Number Chinese privet - sparse 3 +00, left bank Root stock NA Multi -flora rose - clump 4 +75, left bank Root stock 1 Multi -flora rose, Chinese privet, honeysuckle - clumps 5 +75, right bank Parent Stock 2 MY3 Vegetation Problem Areas S rin g Creek (EEP project number 92607) Feature/issue Station Number/Range Probable Cause Photo Number Chinese privet - sparse 3 +00, left bank Root stock NA Multi -flora rose - clump 4 +75, left bank Root stock 1 Multi -flora rose, Chinese privet, hone suckle - clumps 5 +75, right bank Parent Stock 2 Chinese privet — single stem 3 +25, right bank Seed 3 MY4 Vegetation Problem Areas S rin g Creek EEP project number 92607) Feature/lssue Station Number/Range Probable Cause Photo Number Chinese privet - sparse 3 +00, left bank Root stock NA Multi -flora rose - clump 4 +75, left bank Root stock 1 Multi -flora rose, Chinese privet, honeys ckle - clumps 5 +75, right bank Parent Stock 2 Chinese privet — single stem 3 +25, right bank Seed 3 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 38 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 A.4 Vegetation Problem Areas Photographs Vegetation problem area photo 1, 13 Feb 2009. Vegetation problem area photo 3, 9 Dec 2009. Vegetation problem area photo 2, 13 Feb 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 39 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 A.5 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs Table A.5.1.— Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photographs Vegetation Monitoring Plots Photographs Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607 Stream Location Bearing (Degrees from North Plot Dimensions m Spring Creek Plot 1 left bank sta. 3 +00 Plot origin (x,y) 180° Plot origin (x,y) 190° Plot origin (x,y) 200° lox 10 lox 10 lox 10 Spring Creek Plot 2 right bank sta. 0 +50 Spring Creek Plot 3 right bank sta. 4 +50 Vegetation plot 1, facing downstream (0,0), 19 Jun 2007. Vegetation plot 1, facing upstream (10,10), 19 Jun 2007. Vegetation plot 1, facing downstream, (0,0) 16 Jan 2008. Vegetation plot 1, facing upstream, (10,0) 16 Jan 2008. Spring Creek, Plcmmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 40 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 A.S. Continued. Vegetation plot 1, facing downstream, (0,0) 19 Aug 2008. Vegetation plot 1, facing upstream, (0,10) 19 Aug 2008. Vegetation plot 1, facing downstream, (0,0) 18 Nov 2009. Vegetation plot 1, facing upstream, (10,10) 18 Nov 2009. Vegetation plot 1, facing downstream, (0,0) 10 Oct 2010. Vegetation plot 1, facing upstream, (0,10) 10 Oct 2010. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 41 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 A.5. Continued. Vegetation plot 2, facing downstream (0,0) 19 Jun 2007. No photo available for vegetation plot 2, facing upstream, (10,0), January 2007. Vegetation plot 2, facing downstream, (0,0) 16 Jan 2008. Vegetation plot 2, facing upstream, (10,0) 16 Jan 2008. Vegetation plot 2, facing downstream, (0,0) 19 Aug 2008. Vegetation plot 2, facing upstream, (10,0) 19 Aug 2008. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 42 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 A.S. Continued. Vegetation plot 2, facing downstream (0,0) 18 Nov 2009. Vegetation plot 2, facing upstream, (10,10) 18 Nov 2009. Vegetation plot 2, facing downstream (0,0) 10 Oct 2010. Vegetation plot 2, facing upstream, (10,10) 10 Oct 2010. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 43 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 A.5. Continued. Vegetation plot 3, facing downstream (0,0) 19 Jun 2007. Vegetation plot 3, facing upstream (10,10) 19 Jun 2007. Vegetation plot 3, facing downstream, (0,0) 16 Jan 2008. Vegetation plot 3, facing upstream, (10,0) 16 Jan 2008. Vegetation plot 3, facing downstream, (0,0) 19 Aug 2008. Vegetation plot 3, facing upstream, (10,0) 19 Aug 2008. Spring Creek, Plemmons/Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 44 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 A.S. Continued. Vegetation plot 3, facing downstream, (0,0) 18 Nov 2009. Vegetation plot 3, facing upstream (10,10) 18 Nov 2009. Vegetation plot 3, facing downstream, (0,0) 10 Oct 2010. Vegetation plot 3, facing upstream (10,10) 10 Oct 2010. Spring Creek, Plcmmons/Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 45 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 Appendix &--Stream Data B.1 Stream Problem Areas Table No problem areas were observed during the MY3 and MY4 surveys. Appendix Table B.1.1, Stream Problem Areas, is used as a place holder for future monitoring reports. Table B.1.1.— Stream Problem Areas Stream Problem Areas Spring Creek (EEP project number 9260 Feature /Issue Station numbers Suspected Cause Photo number Aggradation/Bar Formation Bank Scour Engineered structures - back or arm scour, Etc. 13.2 Stream Problem Areas Plan View No stream problem areas were observed during the MY3 or MY4 surveys; therefore no problem area plan view was prepared. 13.3 Representative Stream Problem Area Photographs No problem areas were observed during MY3 or MY4 surveys; therefore, issue or problem photos are not provided. Spring Creek, Plcmmons/Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 46 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4 Stream Photographic Stations Photo station 1, left bank facing downstream, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 1, left bank facing downstream, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 1, left bank facing downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 1, left bank facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 1, left bank facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Picinmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 47 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 2, left bank facing downstream, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 2, left bank facing downstream, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 2, left bank facing downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 2, left bank facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 2, left bank facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plcmmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 48 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo Station 2, left to right bank, 5 Sep 2006. Photo Station 2, left to right bank, 5 Dec 2007. Photo Station 2, left to right bank, 3 Oct 2008. Photo Station 2, left to right bank, 13 Oct 2010. Photo Station 2, left to right bank, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 49 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 3, left bank facing downstream, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 3, left bank facing downstream, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 3, left bank facing downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 3, left bank facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 3, left bank facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 50 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 3, left to right bank, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 3, left to right bank, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 3, left to right bank, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 3, left to right bank, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 3, left to right bank, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 51 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 4, left bank facing downstream, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 4, left bank facing downstream, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 4, left bank facing downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 4, left bank facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 4, left bank facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 52 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 4, left to right bank, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 4, left to right bank, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 4, left to right bank, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 4, left to right bank, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 4, left to right bank, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 53 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 5, right bank facing downstream, 5 Sep 2006. No photo available for station 4, left to right bank, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 5, right bank facing downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 5, right bank facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 54 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 5, right to left bank, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 5, right to left bank, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 5, right to left bank, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 5, right to left bank, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 5, right to left bank, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 55 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 6, right bank facing downstream, 5 Sep 2006. No photo available for station 6, left to right bank, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 6, right bank facing downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 6, right bank facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Photo station 6, right bank facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 56 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 6, right to left bank, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 6, right to left bank, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 6, right to left bank, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 6, right to left bank, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 6, right to left bank, 9Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 57 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 7, right bank facing downstream, 6 Jan 2004. Photo station 7, right bank facing downstream, 5 Jan 2007. Photo station 7, right bank facing downstream, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 7, right bank facing downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 7, right bank facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Photo station 7, right bank facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 58 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.4. Continued. Photo station 8, SR 1151 bridge downstream, 5 Sep 2006. Photo station 8, SR 1151 bridge downstream, 5 Dec 2007. Photo station 8, SR 1151 bridge downstream, 3 Oct 2008. Photo station 8, SR 1151 bridge downstream, 13 Oct 2010. Photo station 8, SR 1151 bridge downstream, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 59 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 13.5 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment Table MY4 Visual Morphological Stability Assessment Spring Creek (EEP project number 92607) Sta. 0+00 to 6 +80 (680 feet) Feature Category Metric (per As -built and reference baselines) (Number Stable) Number Performing as Intended Total Number per As -built Total Number /feet in unstable state % Perform in Stable Condition Feature Perform Mean or Total A. Riffles I. Present? 5 5 NA 100 5 2. Armor stable (e.g. no displacement)? 5 5 NA 100 5 3. Facet grade appears stable? 5 5 NA 100 5 4. Minimal evidence of embedding/fining? 5 5 NA 100 5 5. Length appropriate? 5 5 NA 100 5 B. Pools 1. Present? (e.g. not subject to severe aggrad. Or migrat.)? 5 5 NA 100 5 2. Sufficiently deep (Max Pool D:Mean Bkf >1.6)? 5 5 NA 100 5 3. Length appropriate? 5 5 NA 100 5 C. Thalweg . Upstream of meander bend (run/inflection) centering? 1 1 NA 100 1 P221. Downstream of meander (glide /inflection) centering? 1 1 NA 100 1 D. Meanders 1. Outer bend in state of limited/controlled erosion? 1 1 NA 100 1 2. Of those eroding, number w /concomitant point bar fonmation? 1 1 NA 100 1 3. Apparent Rc within specifications? 1 1 NA 100 1 4. Sufficient floodplain access and relief? 1 1 NA 100 1 E. Bed 1. General channel bed aggradation areas (bar formation)? NA NA 0/0 100 NA General 2. Channel bed degradation - areas of increasing down cutting or head cutting? NA NA 0/0 100 NA F. Bank 1. Actively eroding, wasting, or slumping bank? NA NA 0/0 100 NA G. Vanes 1. Free of back or arm scour? 5 5 NA 100 5 2. Height appropriate? 5 5 NA 100 5 3. Angle and geometry appear appropriate? 5 5 NA too 5 4. Free of piping or other structural failures? 5 5 NA 100 5 H. Wads/ 1. Free of scour? 6 6 NA 100 6 Boulders 2. Footing stable? 6 6 NA 100 6 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 60 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.6 Annual Overlays of Cross - Section Plots. Solid red line in photograph represents location where surveyed transect crossed the stream channel. Spring Creek, Pie mmons/Kiricpatrick Site Cross - section 2, Riffle 2120 2115 c 0 W 2110 2105 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Distance (feet) - As- builtMY0 =° °MYI MY2 -MY3 tMY4 -Watersurface -Bankfull Cross - section 2, facing downstream, 5 Dec 07, MY 1. Cross - section 2, facing downstream, 3 Oct 08, MY2 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 61 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.6. Continued. Cross - section 2, facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009, MY3 No photograph for Cross - section 2 in MY4. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 62 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 E e 0 d W B.6. Continued. 2120 2115 2110 2105 Spring Creek, Pie mmons/Kirkpatrick Site Cross - section 3, Riffle 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Distance (feet) —As -built MYO MYl MY2 —MY3 —0--MY4 — Water surface —Bankfull Cross - section 3, facing downstream, 3 Oct 08. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 63 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.6. Continued. Cross - section 3, facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009, MY3 Cross - section 3, facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010, MY4. Spring Creek, Plcmmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 64 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.6. Continued. c 0 d W 2120 2115 2110 2105 Spring Creek, Plemmons/Kirkpatrick Site Cross - section 4, Pool 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Distance (feet) BAs-built MYO —MYl MY2 —MY3 --S—MY4 —Water surface —Bankfill Cross - section 4, facing downstream, 5 Dec 07. Cross - section 4, facing downstream, 3 Oct 08. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 65 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.6. Continued. Cross - section 4, facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009, MY3 Cross - section 4, facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010, W4. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 66 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.6. Continued. 2120 2115 a c a 2110 d W Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Site Cross - section 6, Pool 2105 2100 20 30 40 50 BAs -built MYO - -- MYI 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Distance (feet) MY2 -MY3 +MY4 -Watersurface -Bankfull Cross - section 6, facing downstream, 5 Dec 07. Cross - section 6, facing downstream, 3 Oct 08 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 67 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.6. Continued. Cross - section 6, facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009, MY3 Cross - section 6, facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010, MY4. Spring Creek, Plemmons/Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 68 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 c 0 w as W B.6. Continued. 2120 2115 2110 2105 Spring Creek, Plemmons/Kirkpatrick Site Cross - section 8, Riffle 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Distance (feet) BAs -built MYO MYI MY2 -MY3 +MY4 -Watersurface -Bankfull Cross - section 8, facing downstream, 5 Dec 07. Cross- section -8, facing downstream, 3 Oct 08. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 69 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — FINAL, May 2011 B.6. Continued. Cross - section 8, facing downstream, 9 Dec 2009, MY3 Cross - section 8, facing downstream, 13 Oct 2010, MY4. Spring Creek, Plcmmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 70 EEP Project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 vi a N a cd i-r w 0 C� O C� I I O N ro V1 O Q m z v a Y V C O 'fl � O � ao C U o 'y Co o. LLJ 'o cnm2 O r r o - yep N m r O � O h r �O g UOg33S -SSO13 O u V1 � N � v . m O 3 goo ° � o v� . C4 N a00i h m CD GC - L uouaas -sso a 9 u01133s -SSOi3 o u v S uouaas -SS013 I O ov G F q uouaas -sswD C d O vi U � E N v E uou33s -ssoj3 '^ a � U � f 'C N � o N � N 3 o r O F.. N j- r Z uouaas -ssoio O kn o � o r F . $ p j uouaas -sso z) i O N N 0 kn O_ _O N N N N N (g) aoUunala O N ro V1 O Q m z v a Y V C O 'fl � O � ao C U o 'y Co o. LLJ 'o cnm2 13.8 Pebble Count Cumulative Frequency Plots. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Site Reach Wide Pebble Count 100% Silt/Clav Sands Gravels Cobbl uld s Bedrock 90% 80% Z 70% e 0 60% 50% 40% 0 U 30% 20% 10% 0% 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 Particle Size (mm) -41- -As -built MY] MY2 -4-MY3 -0--MY4 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 72 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Reach -Wide Pebble Data Particle Size by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 D16 (mm) 5.8 12.0 0.3 0.1 39.7 D35 (mm) 18.1 35.7 15.6 1.7 63.3 D50 (mm) 31.2 65.6 56.2 19.3 77.0 D84 (mm) 115.7 175.9 115.0 82.9 119.0 D95 (mm) 172.2 275.0 162.2 115.8 153.7 Percent Bed Material by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Silt/Clay 3.0% 0.0% 11.0% 14.0% 0.0% Sand 6.0% 11.0% 11.0% 24.0% 5.0% Gravel 58.0% 38.0% 32.0% 34.0% 31.0% Cobble 31.0% 45.0% 44.0% 28.0% 64.0% Boulder 2.0% 6.0% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0% Bedrock 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 72 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.8. Continued. 100% 90% 80% M 70% 60% e 50% 40% 0 U 30% 20% 10% 0% Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Site Cross Section 2 Pebble Count Silt/Clay Sands Gravels Cobbles B ulde s Bedrock 0.01 0.1 1 10 loo Particle Size (mm) MY2 -0-MY3 MY4 1000 10000 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 73 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Cross Section 2 Pebble Data Particle Size by Category Category WO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 D 16 (mm) No Data No Data 0.7 1.7 5.9 D35 (mm) 7.8 15.7 9.9 D50 (mm) 18.4 38.5 16.0 D84 (mm) 117.7 112.4 102.7 D95 (mm) 244.7 228.1 212.6 Percent Bed Material by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Silt/Clay No Data No Data 4.0% 4.0% 0.0% Sand 18.0% 13.0% 14.0% Gravel 50.0% 46.0% 57.0% Cobble 24.0% 33.0% 28.0% Boulder 5.0% 4.0% 1.0% Bedrock 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 73 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.8. Continued. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 74 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Cross Section 3 Pebble Data Spring Creek, Plemmons/Kirkpatrick Site Particle Size by Category Cross Section 3 Pebble Count Category 100% Silt/Clav Sands Gravels Cobbles MY3 90% D16(mm) No Data 80% 1.2 Z 70% g 9.6 19.9 D50 (mm) 60% 25.0 e 40.9 D84 (mm) 50% 151.8 140.0 D95 (mm) 341.0 427.8 221.8 40% Percent Bed Material by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 U 30% Silt/Clay No Data 20% 3.0% 0.0% 10% 15.0% 16.0% 14.0% Gravel 0% 52.0% 47.0% 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 25.0% Particle Size (mm) 38.0% Boulder MY2 -0--MY3 MY4 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 74 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Cross Section 3 Pebble Data Particle Size by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 D16(mm) No Data No Data 0.8 1.2 8.5 D35 (mm) 9.6 9.6 19.9 D50 (mm) 25.0 23.8 40.9 D84 (mm) 156.3 151.8 140.0 D95 (mm) 341.0 427.8 221.8 Percent Bed Material by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Silt/Clay No Data No Data 2.0% 3.0% 0.0% Sand 15.0% 16.0% 14.0% Gravel 52.0% 47.0% 48.0% Cobble 25.0% 27.0% 38.0% Boulder 6.0% 8.0% 1.0% Bedrock 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 74 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 B.8. Continued. Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 75 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Cross Section 3 Pebble Data Spring Creek, Plemmons/Kirkpatrick Site Particle Size by Category Category Cross Section 8 Pebble Count MYl 100% Silt/Clay Sands Gravels Cobbles uld s ck D16 (mm) 90% 14.6 1.3 6.3 80% D35 (mm) 62.4 S 70% 11.4 22.6 c_ 90.0 78.4 65.7 k" 60% D84 (mm) 154.6 e 193.1 113.9 154.0 > 50% 201.6 408.3 446.8 234.3 Percent Bed Material by Category 40% MYO MYl 0 MY3 MY4 MY5 Silt/Clay U 30% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 20% 10.0% 1.0% 20.0% 10% 12.0% Gravel 26.0% 0% 28.0% 59.0% 44.0% 0.01 59.0% 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 38.0% 18.0% 41.0% Particle Size (mm) 5.0% 3.0% 14.0% MY2 -41-MY3 MY4 Spring Creek, Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 75 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report - FINAL, May 2011 Plemmons /Kirkpatrick Cross Section 3 Pebble Data Particle Size by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 D16 (mm) 27.1 14.6 1.3 6.3 5.7 D35 (mm) 62.4 55.4 13.7 11.4 22.6 D50 (mm) 90.0 78.4 65.7 27.3 52.6 D84 (mm) 154.6 127.3 193.1 113.9 154.0 D95 (mm) 253.4 201.6 408.3 446.8 234.3 Percent Bed Material by Category Category MYO MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 Silt/Clay 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Sand 10.0% 1.0% 20.0% 12.0% 12.0% Gravel 26.0% 39.0% 28.0% 59.0% 44.0% Cobble 59.0% 57.0% 38.0% 18.0% 41.0% Boulder 5.0% 3.0% 14.0% 10.0% 3.0% Bedrock 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% B.9 Bankfull Event Verification Photographs Wrack line following bankfull event on 1 Sep 2006. Bankfull verification on crest gage, 9 Dec 2009. Spring Creek, Plemmons/Kirkpatrick Mitigation Site 76 EEP project 92607 Monitoring Year 3 and Year 4 Report — F1NAL, May 2011 Wrack line following bankfull event, 9 Dec 2009.