20081540 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20101202

d �150
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 5 (2010)
Contract D05015 -1
LITTLE BUFFALO BUFFER MITIGATION SITE
JOHNSTON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Prepared for:
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA
r�
A os stem
ar�ement
PROGRAM
Prepared by:
Natural Resource
Restoration & Conservation
October 2010
r

Executive Summary
Restoration Systems, LLC (Restoration Systems) has completed riparian buffer restoration at the
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site (hereafter referred to as the Site) to assist the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) in fulfilling restoration goals in the region.
The Site is located in the southeastern portion of the Neuse River Basin Cataloging Unit
03020201 and within Johnston County, one of the fastest growing counties in the state of North
Carolina.
The Site consists of a total of approximately 23 acres located on the west side of Bay Valley
Road (SR 2159). On -site ditches drain to Little Buffalo Creek which connects with the Little
River approximately 2 miles downstream of the Site near the town of Kenly. A total of 17.78
Buffer Mitigation Units, resulting from 19.5 acres of buffer restoration, were completed in April
2006.
Prior to restoration, Site land use consisted of agricultural fields utilized for row crop production.
On -Site agricultural ditches were characterized by little or no vegetation and unstable banks.
Site reforestation encompasses 17.78 acres of riparian buffer. The primary goals of this buffer
restoration project focused on reforestation with native species in order to 1) convert active
cropland into riparian forest to reestablish forest functions; 2) intercept and assimilate nutrient,
pesticide, and sediment runoff from agricultural and development operations before reaching the
UT of Little Buffalo Creek and ultimately the Neuse River; 3) improve wildlife quantity and
quality; and 4) reduce residential development in an area where existing water, sewer, and
electric utilities make the Site a likely candidate for development.
Overall, the densities of the five vegetation plots across the Site were above the required 320
stems /acre with an average of 1208 tree stems per acre in the Fifth Monitoring Year (2010). All
individual vegetation plots met success criteria and had good species diversity with 5 to 11
Character Tree Species present within each plot.
f
0

Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................ ..............................1
2.0 VEGETATION MONITORING PROGRAM ......................... ..............................3
2.1 Vegetation Success Criteria ..................................... ..............................4
2.2 Vegetation Sampling Results and Comparison to Success Criteria .....................5
3.0 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................... ..............................5
4.0 LITERATURE CITED ................................................... ..............................8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Character Tree Species ................................................ ..............................4
Table 2. Vegetation Monitoring Data ....................................... ..............................7
Table 3. Summary of Vegetation Plot Results .............................. ..............................8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Project Location Map .............................................. ..............................2
Figure 2. Monitoring Plan ..................................................... ..............................6
APPENDICES
Appendix A. Vegetation Plot Photographs

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Restoration Systems, LLC (Restoration Systems) has completed riparian buffer restoration at the
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site (hereafter referred to as the Site)- to assist the North
Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP) in fulfilling restoration goals in the region.
The Site is located in Johnston County, approximately one mile northwest of downtown Kenly
and Exit 107 of I -95, north of U.S. Hwy 301, and west of N.C. Hwy 222 (Figure 1).
The Site conservation easement encompasses 18.5 acres within NCDWQ sub -basin 03 -04 -06 and
Hydrologic Unit #03020201180070, which includes Buffalo Creek, Little Buffalo Creek, and the
Little River, a drainage area that encompasses a total of 317 square miles. On -site ditches drain
to Little Buffalo Creek which connects with the Little River approximately 2 miles downstream
of the Site near the town of Kenly.
A Buffer Restoration Plan was completed for the Site in July 2006. The plan outlined methods
designed to reforest the entire 19.5 -acre Site with native species in order to help improve water
quality within the Neuse River Basin. Prior to implementation of the Restoration Plan, the entire
Site was utilized for agricultural practices. The following activities provide 17.78 Buffer
Mitigation Units:
• Restoration of approximately 17.78 acres of riparian buffer through planting with
native forest species
• Protection of the Site in perpetuity with a conservation easement which is held by the
State of North Carolina
The primary goals of this buffer restoration project focused on reforestation with native species
in order to 1) convert active cropland into riparian forest to reestablish forest functions; 2)
intercept and assimilate nutrient, pesticide, and sediment runoff from agricultural and
development operations before reaching the UT of Little Buffalo Creek and ultimately the Neuse
River; 3) improve wildlife quantity and quality; and 4) reduce residential development in an area
where existing water, sewer, and electric utilities make the Site a likely candidate for
development.
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site page 1
Annual Monitoring Report October 2010
Year 5 (2010) Restoration Systems, LLC

+ n;R
m
� \� ■!`
/ tz \k 0
( / k LL ® \ k% } 7 § ® 2 § |
) z
J
- \ m
\ �
! �
5 ƒ
> ` ,N&V31d� r _'" aA60
0)A
yw * \
� *«~
k
& � a
�® *�
\\ ¢gam §
, *a
J §
\
® £ (
ee _ amw -
� { -
!
Bttle Buffalo Buffer ReA m Site page
Annual Monitoring Remrt October mm
Year 5 (0210) Restoration Systems, LLc

The primary goals were accomplished by:
1. Establishing a forested system between the agricultural fields and the receiving waters.
By doing this, nutrients, pesticides and sediment inputs into surface waters of the Neuse
River Basin were drastically reduced.
2. Eliminating non -point sources of pollution, such as fertilizers, pesticides, and other
agricultural materials and providing a vegetated buffer adjacent to on -Site ditches to treat
any surface runoff.
3. Improving wildlife habitat by creating a forested riparian corridor.
A Buffer Restoration Plan was completed for the project in March 2006 (submitted in July
2006). Upon completion of the detailed plan, Bruton Nurseries and Landscapes planted the Site
in April 2006. ESP Associates, P.A. completed an as -built Mitigation Report in August 2006.
Information on project managers, owners, and contractors follows:
Designer Information
ESP Associates, P.A.
Adam McIntyre
14001 Weston Parkway
Suite 100
Cary, North Carolina 27513
(919) 678 -1070
Owner Information
Restoration Systems, L.L.C.
George Howard and John Preyer
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 107
Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
(919) 755 -9490
Planting Contractor and Monitoring Performer Information
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
(Previously Bruton Nurseries & Landscapes)
Charlie Bruton
P.O. Box 1197
Fremont, North Carolina 27830
2.0 VEGETATION MONITORING PROGRAM
Monitoring procedures for vegetation were designed in accordance with Stream Mitigation
Guidelines (USACE et al. 2003) and the Draft Internal Guidance for Vegetation Monitoring
Plans for NCWRP Riparian Buffer and Wetland Restoration Projects (undated). A general
discussion of the plant community restoration monitoring program is provided. Monitoring of
restoration efforts have been performed for 5 years to ensure success criteria are fulfilled. The
locations of monitoring plots are shown in Figure 2.
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site page 3
Annual Monitoring Report October 2010
Year 5 (2010) Restoration Systems, LLC

During the first five years, vegetation received visual evaluation on a periodic basis to determine
the degree of overtopping of planted species by nuisance species. Quantitative sampling was
conducted in the early fall. Subsequently, quantitative sampling of vegetation has been
performed between September 15 and November 1 of each monitoring year for five years to
ensure the vegetation success criteria are achieved.
Five sample transects were installed within planted areas of the Site shortly after planting.
Efforts were made to ensure that locations of sample plots would not unfairly favor any portion
of the buffer site (Figure 2). Each transect is 200 feet in length and 12 feet in width (0.055 acre).
Vegetation parameters that were monitored include species composition and species density.
Photographs of the vegetation plots are included in Appendix A.
2.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
Success criteria have been established to verify that the vegetation component is dependent upon
density and growth of "Character Tree Species" (Table 1), as well as recruited seedlings from
adjacent forested communities. Character tree species include planted species as well as those
observed in forest stands near the Site.
Table 1. Character Tree Species
Character Tree Species
American elm (Ulmus americana)
Willow oak (Quercus phellos)
Cherrybark Oak (Quercus falcata var.
pagodifolia)
Chickasaw plum (Prunus angustifolia)
Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica)
Paw paw (Asimina triloba)
River birch (Betula nigra)
Red twig dogwood (Cornus sericea)
Black gum (Nyssa sylvatica)
Silky dogwood (Cornus amomum)
Swamp chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii)
Southern crabapple (Malus angustifolia)
Sycamore (Platanus occidentalis)
Sweetbay (Magnolia virginiana)
Water hickory(Carya aquatica)
Vegetation success criteria for the Site will be the existence of an overall density of at least 320
stems per acre five years after the initial planting. Additional seedlings are expected to be
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site page 4
Annual Monitoring Report October 2010
Year 5 (2010) Restoration Systems, LLC

recruited to the Site from adjacent forested communities. These individuals may also be counted
in the overall success rate for the Site provided they are native hardwood tree species.
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved based on average density calculations from
combined plots over the entire restoration area, supplemental planting may be performed with
Character Tree Species. Supplemental planting will be performed as needed until vegetation
success criteria are achieved.
No quantitative sampling requirements are proposed for herb assemblages as part of the
vegetation success criteria. Visual estimates of the percent cover of herbaceous species will be
noted and documented through periodic photographs. Photographs of the vegetation plots are
included in Appendix A.
2.2 Vegetation Sampling Results and Comparison to Success Criteria
Quantitative sampling of vegetation was conducted in October 2010. Results are provided in
Table 2. Vegetation success criteria for Year 5 (320 stems per acre) were exceeded for the 2010
annual monitoring year with 1208 tree stems per acre across the Site. All individual vegetation
plots met success criteria and had good species diversity with 5 to 1I Character Tree Species
present within each plot.
3.0 CONCLUSIONS
In summary, vegetation plots across the Site were above the required 320 stems per acre with an
average of 1208 tree stems per acre in the Fifth Monitoring Year (Year 2010). All individual
vegetation plots met success criteria and had good species diversity with 5 to 1 I Character Tree
Species present within each plot.
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site page 5
Annual Monitoring Report October 2010
Year 5 (20 10) - Restoration Systems, LLC

TABLE 2
2010 VEGETATION MONITORING DATA AND RESULTS
Note: Each plot totals 0.055 acre in size
Species*
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
Plot 5
Total
Stems
for
Plots 1-
5
Total
Stems/Acre
Character Tree Species (count toward success)
uercus alcata (cherr bark oak)
4
1
4
2
1 0
11
200
Fraxinus pennsylvanica (green ash)
2
3
2
4
0
11
200
Betula ni ra (river birch)
0
0
0
2
0
2
36
N ssa s lvatica (swamp black um )
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
uercus michauxii (swamp chestnut oak)
1
0
0
2
0
3
55
Ca rya s uatica (water hickory)
0
2
0
0
0
2
36
uercus phellos (willow oak)
10
6
7
1
3
27
491
Cornus sericea (Red Twig dogwood)
0
2
0
0
0
2
36
Prunus an usti olia (chickasaw plum)
1
2
1 0
0
1
1 4
73
Cornus amomum (silky dogwood)
0
0
0
1
0
1
18
Ulmus americana (American elm)
3
0
1
1
1
5
91
Celtis laevi ata (su arberr)
2
0
1
0
0
2
36
Platanus occidentalis (sycamore)
7
5
2
0
2
16
291
Liriodendron tuli i era fellow poplar)
2
3
7
2
3
17
309
Asimina triloba (paw paw)
2
0
3
0
0
5
91
Malus an usti ora (southern crabapple)
1
2
0
1
0
4
73
Magnolia vir iniana (sweetba)
6
1 3
7
1
4
1 21
382
Acer rubrum (red maple)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Li uidambar styraciflua (sweet um)
57
32
49
31
30
199
3622
TOTAL STEMS/PLOT
98
61
82
47
44
332
TOTAL STEMS /ACRE
1784
1110
1492
855
801
6042
AVERAGE TOTAL STEMS /ACRE (PLOTS
1 -5)
1208
*Planted species are in bold
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site page 7
Annual Monitoring Report October 2010
Year 5 (20 10) Restoration Systems, LLC

Table 3. Summary of Vegetation Plot Results
Plot
Stems/Acre Cou ing Towards Success Criteria
Year 1
(2006)
Year 2
(2007)
Year 3
(2008)
Year 4
(2009)
Year 5
(2010)
1
1238
1401
1329
1547
1784
2
801
801
910
1019
1110
3
1055
1092
1292
1292
1492
4
1074
710
673
728
855
5
637
874
673
746
801
Average (Plots 1 -5)
961
976
975
1066
1208
4.0 LITERATURE CITED
North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program ( NCWRP). Undated. Draft Internal Guidance for
Vegetation Monitoring Plans for NCWRP Riparian Buffer and Wetland Restoration
Projects. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh,
North Carolina.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission ( NCWRC), Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS), and North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ). 2003.
Stream Mitigation Guidelines. State of North Carolina.
Little Buffalo Buffer Restoration Site page 8
Annual Monitoring Report October 2010
Year 5 (2010) Restoration Systems, LLC

APPENDIX A
VEGETATION PLOT PHOTOGRAPHS

A
6 �
or
aw
o i . Al
i 4

r.
/ Y
M
A y'f 1
,h, 1
. 1
r
..J`

Plot 4

r.
� t