20071890 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20091120

61 -18��
Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project
Year 1 Monitoring Report
Polk County, North Carolina
Monitoring Firm: irm: Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Baker)
Monitoring Firm POC: Micky Clemmons O�
Prepared for: North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program ( NCEEP)
t"qhwstem
'ai' Cunent
PR0C.)4AJA
NCEEP Project Manager: Guy Pearce
Report Prepared By: Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
797 Haywood Road, Suite 201
Asheville, NC 28806
Contract Number: D06027 -A
Date Submitted: November 2009
FINAL
RECEIVED
NOV 2,0 2009
NC ENHANCEMENT ECOSYSTEM

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................... .............................IV
1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND .............................................................. ............................... 1
1.1
PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................. ..............................1
1.2
PROJECT STRUCTURE ...................................................................................................... ..............................1
1.3
PROJECT LOCATION ........................................................................................................ ..............................3
1.4
HISTORY AND BACKGROUND .......................................................................................... ..............................5
1.5
MONITORING PLAN VIEW ............................................................................................... ..............................8
2.0 YEAR 1 PROJECT CONDITION AND MONITORING RESULTS .......................
10
2.1
VEGETATION ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ .............................10
2.1.1
Description of Vegetative Monitoring ...................................................................... .............................10
2.1.2
Vegetative Success Criteria ...................................................................................... .............................10
2.1.3
Vegetation Observations and Results ....................................................................... .............................12
2.1.4
Vegetation Problem Areas ........................................................................................ .............................12
2.1.5
Vegetation Photographs ........................................................................................... .............................12
2.2
STREAM ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... .............................13
2.2.1
Description of Geomorphic Monitoring ................................................................... .............................13
2.2.2
Morphometric Success Criteria ................................................................................ .............................13
2.2.3
Morphometric Results ............................................................................................... .............................14
2.2.4
Hydrologic Criteria .................................................................................................. .............................15
2.2.5
Hydrologic Monitoring Results ................................................................................. .............................15
2.2.6
Stream Problem Areas .............................................................................................. .............................15
2.2.7
Stream Photographs ................................................................................................. .............................16
2.2.8
Stream Stability Assessment ...................................................................................... .............................17
2.2.9
Quantitative Measures Summary Tables .................................................................. .............................17
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT -FINAL

Figures
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Restoration Summary Map
Appendices
Tables
Table
1
Project Restoration Components
Table
2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table
3
Project Contacts Table
Table
4
Project Background Table
Table
5
Rooted Trees, Live Stakes and Seeding Planted in the Riparian Zone of Blockhouse Creek
Figures
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Restoration Summary Map
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. III
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT -FINAL
Appendices
Appendix A
Vegetation Data
1. Vegetation Survey Data Tables
2. Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Appendix B
Geomorphic Data
1. Qualitative Visual Stability Assessment
2. Baseline Morphology and Hydraulic Summary
3. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
4. Problem Areas Plan View
5. Annual Overlays of Longitudinal Plots _
6. Annual Overlays of Cross - section Plots
7. Annual Overlays of Pebble Count Frequency Distribution Plots
8. Reference Station Photo Log
Appendix C
Year 1 Monitoring Plan Sheets
Appendix D
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Site Review Comments - October 2009
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. III
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT -FINAL

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Annual Report details the monitoring activities during the 2009 growing season (Monitoring Year 1)
on the Blockhouse Creek Restoration Site ( "Site "). This Annual Monitoring Report presents data on
stream geometry, stem count data from vegetation monitoring stations, and discusses any observed
tendencies relating to stream stability and vegetation survival success. The Site is currently on track to
meet the hydrologic, vegetative, and stream success criteria specified in the Blockhouse Creek
Restoration Plan.
The Blockhouse Creek Site ( "Site ") was restored through a full delivery contract with the North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). Prior to restoration, stream and riparian functions on the
Site were impaired as a result of historic agricultural land use practices as well as culvert installations that
took place during the construction of the adjacent equestrian and nature center and Interstate 26. The
streams on the Site were channelized and riparian vegetation had been cleared. Blockhouse Creek also
exhibited instability as a result of improperly installed culverts. As -built surveys conducted in the
Summer of 2008 indicate that 5,875 linear feet of stream were restored on Blockhouse Creek and two
unnamed tributaries (UT1 and UT2), to Blockhouse Creek.
A total of ten vegetation monitoring plots 100 square meters (m2) (join x l Om) in size were used to
predict survivability of the woody vegetation planted on -site. The Year 1 vegetation monitoring indicated
an average survivability of 620 stems per acre. The data shows that the Site is on track for meeting the
minimum success interim criteria of 320 trees per acre by the end of Year 3 and the final success criteria
of 260 trees per acre by the end of Year 5.
With the exception of slight aggradation in isolated reaches, cross - section surveys indicate the stream
dimension of Blockhouse Creek and its tributaries remained stable during Year 1. Overall, in- stream
structures also remained stable during Year 1. However, the longitudinal profile for Reach 2 of
Blockhouse Creek above I -26 reflects the presence of a sandbag weir at station 14 +31 which has backed
up water for most of this reach. Baker has contacted FENCE regarding the removal of this weir. The
lower reach of Blockhouse Creek immediately downstream of the Interstate 26 and downstream of the
confluence with UT2 exhibited some aggradation, most likely from sand and gravel coming out of the I-
26 box culverts. UT did not exhibit any significant profile changes. As noted in the previous
monitoring report, UT2 did not contain flow during the As -built survey. However, UT2 did contain water
during Year 1 monitoring; the longitudinal profile survey reflects generally stable conditions along the
channel. Compared with the as -built survey, UT2 appears to have degraded slightly above and below a
wetland complex adjacent to the project area. However, it is likely that the "downcutting" is attributable
to the small tributary experiencing periodic flow sufficient to flush the tributary of excess siltation present
at the time of the as -built survey. The channel slope on UT2 was designed to be gradual in the vicinity of
the wetland as compared to other sections of UT2 to avoid impacts to the hydrology of the site. As a
consequence, there is little change in the profile in the vicinity of the wetland when compared to the As-
built survey. Visual observations and cross - sections confirm channel overflow in areas, although flow
was not sufficient to be recorded on a crest gauge located on UT2. Based on the overall stability of the
channel, no maintenance or repair work of channel profile is required beyond the removal of a downed
tree at cross - section 14.
Bank repair work was performed on one isolated section in Reach 4 of Blockhouse Creek where soil
subsidence had created a "sink hole" behind rootwads near cross - section 8. The unstable area, was
approximately 5 feet in length, and was the result of soil erosion beneath a rootwad that was previously
installed. Bank repairs were minor and consisted of placing rock in the base of the hole, covering this
with a geotextile, backfilling, re- seeding and matting the area.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT -FINAL

The on -site crest gauges did not record any bankfull flow events across the project area during Year 1 of
the post construction monitoring period. The site will continue to be periodically monitored for the
occurrence of bankfull events which will be included in future monitoring reports.
Table 1 summarizes site conditions before and after restoration as well as what was predicted in the
restoration plan. The stream mitigation units developed on the project exceed the number of units that
Baker contracted with the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) to provide. The
monitoring plan and Year 1 monitoring data are discussed in Sections 2.1 through 2.5 of this report. The
2009 stream cross section data presented in this Report were collected during April and May 2009.
Vegetation monitoring plots were assessed in June 2009.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC V
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT -FINAL

1.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The Blockhouse Creek restoration project involved restoration, enhancement or preservation of 6,305
linear feet (LF) of four on -site streams: Blockhouse Creek and three smaller unnamed tributaries (UTs)
identified in the project as UTI, UT2, and UT3. Blockhouse Creek is a "blue- line" stream, as shown on
the USGS topographic quadrangle for the site, and is considered to be perennial based on field
evaluations using NCDWQ stream assessment protocols. The three tributaries were all identified as
perennial during initial project scoping, although UT2 and UT3 have little or no flow during extreme
drought conditions as observed during previous summers. A total of 8.6 acres of stream and riparian
buffer are protected through a conservation easement.
1.1 Project Goals and Objectives
The goals for the restoration project are as follows:
• Create geomorphically stable conditions on Blockhouse Creek.
• Restore hydrologic connections between creek and floodplain.
• Improve the water quality of Blockhouse Creek.
• Improve aquatic and terrestrial habitat along the project corridor.
To achieve these goals, design objectives of the project included:
• Restoration or enhancement of channel dimension, pattern and profile;
• Improvements to water quality in the Blockhouse Creek watershed through nutrient removal, sediment
removal, improved recreational opportunities, streambank stability, and erosion control;
• Improved water quantity /flood attenuation through water storage and flood control, reduction in
downstream flooding due to the reconnection of stream and floodplain, improved ground water
recharge, and improved and restored hydrologic connections;
• Enhancement of aquatic and terrestrial habitats through improved substrate and instream cover, addition
of woody debris, reduction in water temperature due to shading, restoration of terrestrial habitat,
increase of spatial extent of natural area, and improved aesthetics.
1.2 Project Structure
Restoration of site hydrology involved the restoration of natural stream functions to impaired reaches on
the site. The streams in their pre - project condition were channelized and, as a result, were highly incised.
Because of the extent of the incision, a Rosgen Priority I restoration, which would connect the stream to
the abandoned floodplain (terrace), would not have been feasible without extending the project reach
several thousand feet upstream and significantly altering the channel profile. However, there was
sufficient space in areas within the project boundaries to implement a Rosgen Priority II restoration by
excavating the floodplain and creating a new meandering channel. With the exception of a small section
of UT2, the restored streams were designed as Rosgen "E" channels with design dimensions based on
those of reference parameters. The upper project reach on UT2 was designed as an "E" channel while the
lower section of the project reach (approximately 200 feet) was designed as a `B" channel. The preserved
reach on UT3 was determined to be a `B" channel that transitions to an "E" channel.
The design for restored sections of the streams involved the construction of new, meandering channels
across excavated floodplains. This new channel system was constructed through grassed fields. The
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

streams through the site were restored to a stable dimension, pattern, and profile. Total stream length
across the project was increased from approximately 6,191 LF to 6,305 LF. The design allows stream
flows larger than bankfull flows to spread onto the floodplain, dissipating flow energies and reducing
streambank stress. Instream structures were used to control streambed grade, reduce streambank stress,
and promote bedform sequences and habitat diversity. Rootwad and log vane structures will protect
streambanks and promote habitat diversity in pool sections. Constructed riffles were used to promote
both hydraulic and habitat heterogeneity to the channel. Where grade control was a design consideration,
constructed riffles were installed to provide long -term stability. Streambanks were stabilized using a
combination of erosion control matting, bare -root planting, transplants, and geolifts. Transplants
provided immediate living root mass to increase streambank stability and create shaded holding areas for
fish and other aquatic biota.' Native vegetation was planted across the site, and the entire restoration site
is protected through a permanent conservation easement. Table 1 summarizes project data for each reach
and restoration approaches used.
Table Pro,ect Restoration Components �
�F,�„
Blockhouse Greek:Restoratton_Pro
.a;a.: �
s_v r
d
.,�., _
�;;'�;, ^.,,•� >�E:
~�•t::
4,..,>...
sy„r
y.r. �;y'
�Q
�...s
�
-
�� ..� �_.
'�__ �:>4_:=
lmikigik?w:•,1
x:�g
�•: •-. -��
-, ��•�'i;- • -'-.
Stattoritri
iFF
` Comtrietit,� ,'; ;�.a:;
.Qr..�0
,.
Blockhouse Cr.
Meandering channel
Reach 1
887 LF
R
P2
1070 LF
1.0
1,070
0 +00 -10 +70
construction; excavation
of floodplain
Blockhouse Cr.
Meandering channel
Reach 2
340 LF
R
P2
340 LF
1.0
340
10 +70 -14 +14
construction; excavation
of floodplain
Constraints prevented
Blockhouse Cr.
restoration; bankfull
950 LF
E
I
950 LF
1.5
633
14 +34 -25 +44
benches established,
Reach 3
structures installed,
pattern stabilized.
Blockhouse Cr.
Meandering channel
1,821 LF
R
P2
1,780 LF
1.0
1,780
28 +37 -46 +15
construction; floodplain
Reach 4
excavation
Meandering channel
UT 1
523 LF
R
P2
580 LF
1.0
580
0 +00 -5 +80
construction; floodplain
excavation
Was incised at lower
end, upper 1000 LF
UT 2
1,240 LF
R
P2
1,155 LF
1.0
1,155
0 +00 -11 +74
realigned to a more
stable pattern with
only minor floodplain
grading
No channel alteration
UT 3
430 LF
P
-
430 LF
5.0
86
0 +004+30
(preservation)
�Mtttglon,Lllntummattons�,
t\
vJ
,
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Nonriparian
Total
(LF)
(Ac)
Wetland (Ac)
Wetland (Ac) Buffer (Ac)
Comment
5,644
NA
NA
NA 8.6
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, 'INC
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

1.3 Project Location
The Blockhouse Creek mitigation site is located on the Foothills Equestrian Nature Center (FENCE)
property approximately three miles east of Tryon, in Polk County, North Carolina. From Asheville take
I -26 South to South Carolina Exit #1 and turn right toward Landrum, S.C. Go 1.5 miles, and turn right
onto Bomar Road (look for the Land Mart on the corner). Go one short block and turn right onto Prince
Road. After 1.7 miles, turn left onto Hunting Country Road, just before the I -26 bridge. Go .5 mile to the
FENCE entrance on the left or another. I miles (going under 1 -26) to the second entrance on the right.
The Blockhouse Creek site starts at near the horse stables accessed through the first entrance and below
the first culvert under the steeplechase course. Figure 1 illustrates the physical location of the project site.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

401�
eVy
60
Polk Co.
108'
74
Tryon'
NO
RTH CAROLINA
... . ..... i
SOUTH CAROLINA -------
Secondary Roads
Counties
Municipal boundaries 1`a�iasi fist
N
0 1 2 Mi les Figure 1.1 Project Location Map
I I
Polk County, NC Blockhouse Creek
I Restoration Project
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT— FINAL

1.4 History and Background
The Blockhouse Creek Restoration site is located within the Foothills Equestrian Nature Center
(FENCE), approximately three miles east of Tryon, in Polk County, North Carolina. The project site is
situated in the Broad River Basin, within North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) sub -basin
03 -08 -06 and United States Geologic Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 03050105150020.
Since the late 1980s, the project area has been used as an equestrian/recreational complex. Surrounding
lands are currently used for pasture land, hay production and residential use. Prior to the establishment of
an equestrian and nature center, the FENCE property was used for agriculture activities and timber
production. At that time, riparian buffers were removed and streams were channelized which was a
common practice. There is also evidence on some tributaries of ephemeral gullies which most likely
resulted from clear cutting. More recent development in the watershed has resulted in additional changes
to Blockhouse Creek and its tributaries. Construction of the equestrian facility, nature trails and Interstate
26 required the installation of bridged and culverted stream crossings that have been detrimental to stream
stability. These structures have also impacted the flow pattern and velocity of the project streams,
resulting in changes to the cross - sectional area, and often facilitating the deepening of the channel. This
deepening of the channel resulted in the streams becoming incised and losing their connection to the
adjacent floodplain.
In accordance with the approved restoration plan for the site, construction activities began in January
2008. Project activity on Blockhouse Creek and UT1 and UT2 consisted of making adjustments to
channel dimension, pattern, and profile. A primary design consideration for this project was to allow
stream flows larger than bankfull to spread onto a floodplain, dissipating flow energies and reducing
streambank stress. The design for most of the restoration reaches involved a priority 11 approach with the
construction of new, meandering channels across a floodplain that was excavated to the bankfull elevation
of the creek. The lower part of reach 4 was not incised and did not require this approach. Along this
section the overly sinuous channel was realigned in a more stable pattern at the existing elevation. Total
stream length across the project increased from approximately 6,191 LF to 6,305 LF.
Rootwads, rock and log vanes and other structures were used to protect streambanks and promote habitat
diversity in pool sections. Streambanks were stabilized using a combination of erosion control matting,
bare -root planting, transplants, and geolifts. Transplants provided living root mass quickly to increase
streambank stability and create shaded holding areas for fish and aquatic biota. Native vegetation was
planted across the site, and the entire restoration site is protected through a permanent conservation
easement.
The chronology of the Blockhouse Creek restoration project is presented in Table 2. The contact
information for designers, contractors and plant material suppliers is presented in Table 3. Relevant
project background information is presented in Table 4. The total stream length on restoration and
enhancement reaches, surveyed during Year 1 monitoring was 5,875 LF.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project- #D06027 -A
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Categorical Exclusion Approved
- --
January 2007
Conservation Easement Signed
- --
September 2007
Restoration Plan Approved
- --
October 2007
Project Permit Approval
- --
December 2007/ January 2008
Final Design -90%
- --
October 2007
Construction
'Upstream of Interstate -26
January 2008
March 2008
Downstream of Interstate -26
March 2008
May 2008
Permanent seed mix and riparian vegetation applied to project site
Upstream of Interstate -26
January 2008
March 2008
Downstream of Interstate -26
March 2008
June 2008
Vegetation Plots , Crest Gauges and Photo Stations Established
July 2008
September 2008
Mitigation Plan / As -built (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline)
July 2008,
December 2008
Year 1 Monitoring
June 2009
November 2009
Year 2 Monitoring
June 2010
December 2010
Year 3 Monitoring
June 2011
December 2011
Year 4 Monitoring
June 2012
December 2012
Year 5 Monitoring
June 2013
December 2013
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Project County
Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project- #D06027 -A
Designer
Blockhouse Creek Reach 1
797 Haywood Rd Suite 201
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
1.97 mi-
Blockhouse Creek Reach 3
Asheville, NC 28806
Blockhouse Creek Reach 4
Contact: Micky Clemmons, Tel. [phone] x2002
Construction Contractor
211.2 Ac.
UT 2
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
River Works, Inc.
38.4 Ac.
Drainage impervious cover estimate ( %)
Cary, NC 27511
Stream Order
Contact: Will Pedersen, Tel. [phone]
Planting & Seeding Contractor
Piedmont Province. Borders Blue Ridge Escarpment
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 200
River Works, Inc.
Cary, NC 27511
Contact: George Morris, Tel. [phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resources
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arborgen and Hillis Nursery
Monitoring
797 Haywood Rd Suite 201
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
Asheville, NC 28806
Contact: Carmen McIntyre, Tel. [phone] x2010
Table 4. Project Background Table
Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project- #D06027 -A
Project County
Polk County, NC
Drainage Area (Square Miles or Acres)
Blockhouse Creek Reach 1
1.63 mi-
Blockhouse Creek Reach 2
1.97 mi-
Blockhouse Creek Reach 3
2.21 mi-
Blockhouse Creek Reach 4
2.44 mi-
UT 1
211.2 Ac.
UT 2
57.6 Ac.
UT 3
38.4 Ac.
Drainage impervious cover estimate ( %)
<1%
Stream Order
Second Order
Physiographic Region
Piedmont Province. Borders Blue Ridge Escarpment
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

Ecoregion
Southern Inner Piedmont
Rosgen Classification of As -built
Blockhouse Creek Reach 1
C4
Blockhouse Creek Reach 2
C4
Blockhouse Creek Reach 3
E4 /Bc4
Blockhouse Creek Reach 4
E4
UT 1
C4
UT 2
Bc5 (upper) /Cb (lower)
UT 3
B -E (lower)
Cowardin Classification
Riverine
Dominant Soil Types
Blockhouse Creek Reach 1
Chewacla Loam, Pacolet Sandy Clay Loam
Blockhouse Creek Reach 2
Chewacla Loam, Pacolet Sandy Clay Loam
Blockhouse Creek Reach 3
Chewacla Loam, Pacolet Sandy Clay Loam
Blockhouse Creek Reach 4
Chewacla Loam, Pacolet Sandy Clay Loam, Rion Sandy
Loam
UT 1
Chewacla Loam, Pacolet Sandy Clay Loam
UT 2
Pacolet Sandy Clay Loam,
UT 3
Chewacla Loam, Pacolet Sandy Clay Loam
Reference Site ID
Reference reach used for upper portion of project area
located 350 LF upstream of project. Big Branch, Surry
County was also identified in the NCDOT reference reach
database as a suitable reference for design ratios
USGS HUC for Project and Reference Sites
Blockhouse Creek HUC #: 03050105
Big Branch HUC #: 03040101
Any portion of project segment(s) on NC 303d List?
No
Any portion of project upstream of a 303d Listed Segment?
No
Reasons for 303d Listing or Stressor
N/A
% of Project Easement Fenced
0, area demarcated with rope and posts but not a
livestock fence.
1.5 Monitoring Plan View
The monitoring plan view for Blockhouse Creek and its tributaries is included in Appendix C. The plan
set provides a view of channel pattern as well as the location of structures designed to aid in dimension
and profile stability. Other features shown on the plan view include the location of crest gauges,
vegetation monitoring plots, cross - sections and reference photo stations. Figure 2 depicts the project
streams, easement boundaries and monitoring reference data.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

2.0 YEAR 1 PROJECT CONDITION AND MONITORING RESULTS
The five -year monitoring plan for the Blockhouse Creek Site includes criteria to evaluate the success of
the vegetative and geomorphic components of the project. The specific locations of vegetation plots,
permanent cross - sections, and crest gauges are shown on the Year 1 monitoring plan sheets (Appendix
Q. Photo points, located along the stream restoration project, are also shown.
2.1 Vegetation Assessment
2.1.1 Description of Vegetative Monitoring
As a final stage of construction, the stream margins and riparian area of the Site were planted with
bare root trees, live stakes, and an herbaceous seed mixture of temporary and permanent ground
cover vegetation. The woody vegetation was planted randomly ten to thirteen feet apart from the
top of the stream banks to the outer edge of the project's easement limits. Bare -root trees were
planted at a target density of 680 stems per acre and planting was completed in May 2008. Species
planted and as -built densities are summarized in Table 5.
The permanent seed mix of herbaceous species applied to the project's riparian area included soft
rush (Juncus effuses), creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolenifera), virginia wild rye (Elymus
virginicus),wild bergamot (Monarda fistulosa), smartweed (Polygonum pennsylvanicum), beggars
tick seed (Bidens frondosa), indian grass (Sorgastrum nutans), fox sedge (Carex vulpinoidea), deer
tongue (Dichanthelium clandestinum), big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii) and black eyed Susan
(Rudbeckia hirta).
Successful restoration of the vegetation on a site is dependent upon hydrologic restoration, active
planting of preferred canopy species, and volunteer regeneration of the native plant community. In
order to determine if the criteria are achieved, 10 vegetation monitoring quadrants were installed
across the restoration site to predict the survival rate of the bare - rooted trees. On a designated
corner within each of the ten vegetation quadrants, one herbaceous plot was also
delineated. Mortality will be determined from the difference between the previous year's living,
planted trees and the current year's living, planted trees. The size of individual quadrants is 100
square meters for woody tree species. The herbaceous plots measure 1 square meter in size
and are located within the larger vegetation quadrants established. Individual seedlings
within each plot were flagged to facilitate locating them during future monitoring events. Each
seedling was also marked with aluminum tags to ensure that the correct identification is made
during future monitoring of the vegetation plots. The plots were randomly located to represent the
different areas within the project. The locations of the ten vegetation plots are presented in
Appendix C.
2.1.2 Vegetative Success Criteria
The interim measure of vegetative success for the site will be the survival of at least 320, 3 -year
old, planted trees per acre at the end of year three of the monitoring period. The final vegetative
success criteria will be the survival of 260, 5 -year old, planted trees per acre at the end of year five
of the monitoring period. Herbaceous cover is photographed annually during the growing season to
provide a record of the density of ground cover derived from the riparian seed mix applied. If the
measurement of vegetative density proves to be inadequate for assessing plant community health,
additional plant community indices may be incorporated into the vegetation monitoring plan as
requested by the NCEEP. -
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

Table -5Rootedy trees; °li.estalces and'see ing plante8 in`tbe
oratiozi epariau oz ne ofBlockliouse =Ceele
BlackliouCr >eekRest Pro'ect 1 :. .... `
Toes ec es coin ° osi ionafor two;differei f aze , is sl awi ` with orie•::area i�eiri ;u 'stream:
=;pa P
and the seeondarea ,mg downstreamofI 26. _..
Planting Plan
Scientific name
Common name
Percent Planted by Species
•,n�_ ,,�:`,\�S"��.:.." . _ :. -144Ri ,oV.:,\
BlockhbuSe;Creeku `3trea°mo£I26anc1UTI`'4.0 °I° treesf60 %o sh>
'-s>A k•.,, .fir\ .,,
ub's ?A Ianted at 680 „stemslA
Trees - Planted 13'x13'
Acer rubrum
Red maple
13
Fraxenus pennsylvanica
Green ash
13
Ju lans ni ra
Black walnut
13
Liriodendron tulipfera
Tulip poplar
0.5
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
0.5
Understor Trees /Shrubs- Planted 10'x 10'
Alnus serrulata
Tag alder
9
Calicanthus oridus
Sweet shrub
10
Cornus orida
Flowering dogwood
12
Cercis Canadensis
Redbud
10
Car inus caroliniana
Ironwood
9
Asimena triloba
Paw paw
9
FBI'oekhouse Creekdoivnstreamaf I 26and'IIgT2'
6{ %01 roes/ 4,{} %o
shrubs lamed at.68f%stemslfl.
Trees - Planted 10'x10'
Acer rubrum
Red maple
4
Dios yros vtrginiana
Persimmon
6
Ju lans m ra
Black walnut
12
Liriodendron tulipfera
Tulip poplar
to
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
10
Prunus serotnta
Black cherry
6
Quercus hellos
Willow oak
6
Quercus rubra
Red oak
6
Understor Trees /Shrubs- Planted 13'x13'
Alnus serrulata
Tag alder
6
Calicanthusfloridus
Sweet shrub
6
Cornus orida
Flowering dogwood
9
Cercis Canadensis
Redbud
8
Car inus caroliniana
Ironwood
6
Asimina triloba
Paw paw
5
Wood nUe etataanor I xveStakesPlanted
33: onacenter:.: -..
....<: .. ....:.:.. ...N •:.==--= .m...:::::;
Salix sericea
Silky willow
30
Physocarpus opulifolius
Ninebark
25
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC 11
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

Sambucus Canadensis
Elderberry
15
Cornus amomum
Silky dogwood
30
Note: Species selection may change due to availability at the time of planting.
2.1.3 Vegetation Observations and Results
Temporary seeding applied to streambanks beneath the erosion matting sprouted within two weeks
of application and has generally provided good ground coverage. Live stake, bare root trees, and
live brush in the geolift structures have also flourished and are contributing to streambank stability.
Bare -root trees were planted throughout the conservation easement with the exception of the
preservation reach. A 30 -foot buffer was established along of the majority of the restored stream
and the width exceeds this minimum in most places. However at crossings the easement "pinches"
in, to meet the crossing structure and along one section of Reach 3 the easement on the left bank is
less than 30 feet due to existing constraints; however, the total width is greater than 60 feet.
Tables A.1. through A.6. in Appendix A present vegetation metadata, vegetation vigor,
vegetation damage and stem count data of the monitoring stations at the end of the Year 1
monitoring period. Data from the Year 1 monitoring event of the ten vegetation plots
showed a range of 480 to 840 stems per acre. The data showed that the plots had an average
of 620 stems per acre. Based on these results, this site is on track to meet the success
criteria of 320 stems per acre at the end of monitoring Year 3.
Trees within each monitoring plot are flagged regularly to prevent planted trees from losing their
identifying marks due to flag degradation. It is important for trees within the monitoring plots to
remain marked to ensure they are all accounted for during the annual stem counts and calculation of
tree survival. No significant volunteer woody species were observed in any of the vegetation plots.
The plots will also be assessed during Year 2 monitoring for volunteer species.
2.1.4 Vegetation Problem Areas
'No woody vegetation problem areas were identified during Year 1 monitoring. The project area
was at the end of a number of drought years at the time planting initially occurred. Mortality rates
for woody vegetation planted appear to be low though some sections of the project have
experienced higher rates of mortality as evidenced by the vegetative plot data listed in Appendix A.
Although the density of herbaceous cover varies across the site, conditions observed on -site during
the Year 1 monitoring surveys indicate an improvement in vegetative cover. Drought conditions
almost certainly contributed to some of the mortality observed among the woody vegetation
planted. However, survival rates of the established plots indicate that plantings across the easement
area are of sufficient density to meet regulatory requirements, as well as the site stabilization and
habitat enhancement goals originally set forth in the restoration plan. It is expected that site
vegetation will continue to improve given that we continue to experience good weather conditions
as the buffer matures during the next several years.
2.1.5 Vegetation Photographs
Photographs are used to visually document vegetation success in sample plots. A total of ten
sample sites were established to document tree conditions and herbaceous coverage at each
vegetation plot across the Site. Reference photos of tree and herbaceous condition within plots are
taken at least once per year. Photos of the plots are included in Appendix A of this report.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

2.2 Stream Assessment
2.2.1 Description of Geomorphic Monitoring
Geomorphic monitoring of restored stream reaches is being conducted over a five year period to
evaluate the effectiveness of the restoration. Monitored stream parameters include channel
dimension (cross- sections), profile (longitudinal survey), bed composition, bank stability, bankfull
flows and stability of reference sites documented by photographs. Crest gauges, as well as high
flow marks, will be used to document the occurrence of bankfull events. The methods used and any
related success criteria are described below for each parameter. The location of permanent cross -
sections and crest gauges is shown on the Year 1 monitoring plan sheets in Appendix C.
2.2.2 Morphometric Success Criteria
2.2.2.1 Cross - Sections
Sixteen permanent cross - sections selected for monitoring were located in representative riffle
and pool reaches on Blockhouse Creek, UTI and UT2. Each cross - section was marked on
both banks with permanent pins to establish the exact transect used. A common benchmark
is used for cross - sections and consistently referenced to facilitate comparison of year -to -year
data. The cross - sectional surveys includes points measured at all breaks in slope, including
top of bank, bankfull, inner berm, edge of water, and thalweg, if the features are present.
Riffle cross - sections are classified using the Rosgen Stream Classification System.
There should be little change in the Year 1 monitoring cross - sections between years. If
changes do take place, they will be evaluated to determine if they represent a movement
toward a more unstable condition (e.g., down - cutting or erosion) or a movement toward
increased stability (e.g., settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease
in width /depth ratio).
2.2.2.2 Longitudinal Profile
A longitudinal profile was completed for the restored streams to provide a baseline for
evaluating changes in channel bed condition over time. A longitudinal profile was conducted
for the entire project length of UT1 and UT2. An additional 3,396 linear feet of stream
channel was surveyed on Blockhouse Creek, including the upper 1,500 feet above I -26 and
the entire length below 1 -26. Longitudinal profiles will be replicated annually during the five
year monitoring period.
Measurements taken during longitudinal profiles include thalweg, water surface, inner berm,
bankfull, and top of low bank, if the features were present. Each of these measurements was
taken at the head of each feature (e.g., riffle, or pool) and the maximum pool depth.
Elevations of grade control structures will also be included in longitudinal profiles surveyed.
All surveys were tied to a permanent benchmark of know elevation.' Cross - section and
longitudinal profile data are provided in Appendix B.
The longitudinal profiles should show that the bed features are remaining stable and are not
aggrading or degrading. The pools should remain deep with flat water surface slopes, and the
riffles should remain steeper and shallower than the pools. Bed form observations should be
consistent with those observed for channels of the stream type that the design was based on.
2.2.2.3 Bed Material Analyses
Bed material analyses will include pebble counts taken during each geomorphic survey.
Pebble counts will provide data on the particle size distribution of the stream bed. These
samples may reveal changes in sediment gradation that can occur over time as the stream
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

adjusts to the constructed channel and to its sediment load. Significant changes in the particle
size distribution will be evaluated with respect to stream stability and watershed changes.
2.2.3 Morphometric Results
2.2.3.1 Cross - Sections
Year 1 cross - section monitoring data for stream stability was collected during May and June
2008.
The sixteen permanent cross - sections along the restored channels were re- surveyed to
document stream dimension at the end of monitoring Year 1. Cross - sectional data is
presented in Appendix B and the location of cross- sections is shown on the plan sheets in
Appendix C.
The cross - sections show that there has been little to no adjustment to stream dimension since
construction. Cross - sections 1, 7, and 8 on Blockhouse Creek and cross - sections 12 and 14
on UT1 and UT2 respectively, exhibited slight signs of aggradation and adjustment of
channel dimension, but are otherwise stable. Cross - sections 1 and 7 were both located at
riffles which were originally slightly steeper than what was surveyed in 2009. Cross - sections
8, 12 and 14 were taken at pools which have experienced slight aggradation since the As -built
survey was completed. A tree was down at cross - section 14 as well, contributing to local
aggradation along this subreach of UT2. Changes at cross - section 8 and 5 may in part be
attributable to the fact that the cross - section pin was disturbed and had to be relocated. At
cross - section 5, the original right bank pin could not be found. The left bank pin of cross -
section 8 was lost as a result of minor repairs made to the left bank behind a rootwad.
As noted in the vegetation monitoring section, the Blockhouse Creek restoration site
experienced drought conditions for several years leading up to the construction of the project.
However, 2009 has been a wetter year; some cross - section and profile data collected reflect
the development of low bankfull benches as well the development of point bar features on the
inside bank of meander bends. The remaining cross - sections did not indicate any changes in
dimension compared to as -built conditions and appeared to be stable with the help of in-
stream structures, adequate bank sloping and developing vegetation.
2.2.3.2 Longitudinal Profile
Longitudinal profiles for Year 1 were surveyed in May and June 2009 and are compared to
the data collected during the as -built condition survey. Profiles of the various project reaches
are presented in Appendix B.
The longitudinal profile for Blockhouse Creek upstream of Interstate 26 remains stable and
has not changed significantly since the as -built survey was completed in 2008. The
longitudinal profile for Reach 2 of Blockhouse Creek reflects the presence of a sandbag weir
at station 14 +3lwhich has backed up water within the channel. This was done temporarily by
the landowner in order to pump water from the creek to wet down equestrian riding rings.
The lower reach of Blockhouse Creek immediately downstream of the Interstate 26 culvert
and downstream of the confluence with UT2 exhibited some aggradation. UT 1 did not
exhibit any considerable profile changes. UT2 did not contain flow during the As -built
survey but at the time of the Year 1 survey had a bold flow. Compared with the as -built
survey, UT2 appears to have degraded slightly above and below a wetland complex adjacent
to the project area. However, it is likely that the "downcutting" is attributable to the small
tributary experiencing periodic flow sufficient to flush the tributary of excess siltation.
Visual observations and cross - sections confirm channel overflow in areas, although flow was
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

not sufficient to be recorded on a crest gauge located on UT2. Channel slope on UT2 was
designed to be gradual in the vicinity of the wetland as compared to other sections of UT2 to
avoid impacts to the hydrology of the site. As a consequence, there is little change in the
profile in this area when compared to the As -built survey.
In- stream structures installed within the restored stream included constructed riffles, log
vanes, boulder steps, and root wads. Visual observations of these structures through the first
year indicate that structures are functioning as designed and holding their elevation and
grade. Log vanes placed in meander pool areas have provided scour to keep pools deep and
provide cover for fish. Boulder steps maintained step -pool spacing and facilitated transitions
in channel slope at the confluence of UT2 to Blockhouse Creek. In addition to providing
grade control, the boulder steps also provided bedform diversity, improving in- stream habitat.
Rootwads placed on the outside of meander bends have provided bank stability and in- stream
cover for fish and other aquatic organisms.
2.2.3.3 Bed Material Analyses
Pebble count data collected in several project reaches indicate Blockhouse Creek and its
tributaries continue to transport particles roughly the same size or larger as those found
during as -built surveys (Table B2., Appendix B). A pebble count was not performed on UT2
due to the dominance of silt and sand as the bed material in this channel. Visual observation
of Blockhouse Creek and its tributaries and a review of pebble count data collected did not
yield any signs that sediment transport functions have been hampered by the restoration
project.
2.2.4 Hydrologic Criteria
The occurrence of bankfull events within the monitoring period will be documented by the use of
crest gauges and photographs of high flow lines. Three crest gauges were installed on the
floodplain within 10 feet of the restored channels and with the bottom of the gage at approximately
bankf ill. One crest gauge was placed on UT 2, while 2 gauges were set up on Blockhouse Creek
(upstream and downstream of I -26). The first gauge on the main channel was set up on the right
bank below the confluence of UT I and Blockhouse Creek. The second crest gauge was set up, at
the downstream end of the project, just upstream of the confluence of UT3 and Blockhouse Creek
on the right bank. The crest gauge on UT2 was placed above the vehicle crossing at the lower end
of the tributary. The crest gauges will record the highest watermark between site visits and will-be
checked at each site visit to determine if a bankfull event has occurred. Photographs will be used to
document the occurrence of debris lines and sediment deposition on the floodplain during site
visits.
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the 5 -year monitoring period. The two
bankfull events must occur in separate years; otherwise, the stream monitoring may have to be
continued until two bankfull events have been documented in separate years.
2.2.5 Hydrologic Monitoring Results
No bankf ill events were recorded during the Year 1 monitoring period. We will be evaluating the
site selection of these gages and may be lowering them. At present the bottom of the gage is
approximately at the bankfull elevation, so flows at bankfull may not register. If we place them at a
position lower than bankf ill we should be better able to detect a stage that is at bankfull.
2.2.6 Stream Problem Areas
A few areas of concern were noted at the project site, some of which are not related to a specific
point on the channel. The rate of overland flow that the site experiences above Interstate 26
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. 15
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

continues to be somewhat of a concern. Due to the buildings on this site and the high compaction
of the soil from heavy use by horse show participants, the runoff from the land adjoining the stream
is high. This has not affected the channel proper but is the source of some minor rutting along
terrace slopes leading down to the floodplain. In October 2008, Baker and FENCE submitted a
grant funding application to the N.C. Clean Water Management Trust Fund for a project that would
address this issue, but the grant was not funded. Although the threat overland flow poses to stream
quality will be mitigated as the riparian buffer matures, the implementation of additional measures
that would reduce the rate and intensity of stormwater would provide many benefits to FENCE and
this project stream.
The second concern is that two of the three box culverts under Interstate 26 are two thirds full of
sand. As noted in the As -built Report, during high flow events this sand mobilizes into the channel
downstream of the interstate. This is causing some pools to fill with sand and the loss of pool
depth. The channel is moving this material and it will eventually correct the problem but it will
affect the lower end of the project over the next several years. The NCDOT has been contacted
about this issue but they do not appear able to address the problem.
A concern that was located at a specific point is at cross - section 8 in Reach 4 of Blockhouse Creek.
The bank behind a rootwad located in one of the last meanders of the project area required some
minor repair work due to soil subsidence. The loss of bank occurred due to stream flow under the
rootwad eroding soil from around the trunk of the rootwad creating a "sinkhole" in an area of
approximately 5 feet by 5 feet. Loss of soil at the base of the rootwad and overland flow resulted in
a small "sinkhole" being created behind the rootwad. To remedy the problem, 10 to 14 inch rock
was placed at the base of the hole and this was covered with a geotextile, backfilled, re- seeded and
the area was mated.
Lastly, the small sandbag weir located at Station 14 +31 has resulted in an alteration of riffle -pool
dimensions and sequencing in Reach 2 of Blockhouse Creek. While no structures have been
adversely impacted by the dam, much of Reach 2 is now a pool. If a breach were to occur, it is
possible that high flow could damage some of the woody vegetation present on both downstream
banks. Although this weir is located within an easement break, Baker has been in communication
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the weir. Please see Appendix D for comments
received by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from a site visit conducted in October 2009. We
have submitted a letter to the Director of FENCE requesting that the dam be removed and will
continue to monitor the situation. It is possible that we will lieed to modify a cross -vane just above
this location to provide greater convergence and greater pool scour. This will provide the depth
needed for the landowner to do their temporary irrigation pumping during horse shows.
Based on the data collected, riffles, pools and other constructed features along the restored channel
are stable and are functioning as designed. Structures installed to enhance pool habitat are stable
and functioning. However, the full functioning of some structures is being impaired by slight
aggradation, particularly downstream of the box culvert under Interstate 26 and areas of UT2 where
channel slope modification was limited due to the presence of a nearby wetland. Beyond the issues
noted above, no areas of concern have been identified during the first year following completion of
the project. Overall, the site is on track to achieve the stream morphology success criteria specified
in the Restoration Plan for the Site.
2.2.7 Stream Photographs
Photographs are used to document restoration success qualitatively. Reference stations were
photographed during the as -built survey and will be monitored for five years following
construction. Reference photos are taken once a year, from a height of approximately five to six
feet. Permanent markers installed will ensure that the same locations (and view directions) are
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

utilized during each monitoring period. Reference photographs of the project streams are shown in
Appendix B.
2.2.7.1 Lateral Reference Photos
Reference photo transects were taken of the right and left banks at each permanent cross -
section. For each stream bank photograph, a survey tape was centered in the frame which
represents the cross - section line located perpendicular to the channel flow. The water line
was located in the lower edge of the frame in order to document bank and riparian conditions.
Photographers will make an effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over
time.
2.2.7.2 Structure Photos
Photographs of primary grade control structures (i.e. vanes and weirs), along the restored
stream are included within the photographs taken at reference photo stations. Photographers
will make every effort to consistently maintain the same area in each photo over time.
Lateral and structure photographs are used to evaluate channel aggradation or degradation,
bank erosion, success of riparian vegetation, structure function and stability, and
effectiveness of erosion control measures. Lateral photos should not indicate excessive
erosion or degradation of the banks. A series of photos over time should indicate successive
maturation of riparian vegetation and consistent structure function.
Photographs of the restoration project were taken in May and June 2009. The photographs
illustrate generally stable conditions across the project site. Vegetative growth along the
streambanks and riparian buffers has improved since construction was completed in 2008.
Structures are functioning as designed; to date, no structures have had to be repaired.
2.2.8 Stream Stability Assessment
To aid the NCEEP in evaluating the risk of erosion from changes in channel and bank stability and
subsequent sediment yield from the project area, Baker will assign numeric values to streambank
and channel features. This will occur during Year 5 of the monitoring period. These numeric
scores will be derived using the Bank Erosion Hazard Index (BEHI) and Near Bank Stress (NBS)
evaluation methods. The scores will then be used to evaluate channel stability and project sediment
export. Results from an annual visual stability assessment are provided in Appendix B.
2.2.9 Quantitative Measures Summary Tables
The quantitative pre - construction, reference reach, and design data used to determine restoration
approach, as well as the As -built baseline data used during the project's post - construction
monitoring period are summarized in Appendix B.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK RESTORATION PROJECT
YEAR 1 MONITORING REPORT- FINAL

I�
U
f�
0
r
r�
r�
1
APPENDIX A. Vegetation Data

0
u
u
n
0
0
0
0
n
r�
0

o
5
x
°
°
O N
m
N
@ V
c
�
� J
�
N x G
i
V
y_ j cX—d N y F
O
°D 73
X
.� i N O Vi" �
O
❑
N S G N V r
O
F �
-a
U
U
a y
O U
y F II. 7 N
" V O
N y
O C
O C
° n
O C c
CL Z
Lu
�.
M
V n
F F y o 0 0
O
O�
� pA .p
%• � .0 .i L > > fd � i 0.
ip �
M
Cl
G
V N
N
> G'
U -O 'D� •� G C
U A H T 7 0 a� __
K O
C,
0
F
v�0i
y
r0
DA Z.
0 ti rn h y ``• V N Y
•p N w t
` y-' T
U
O
>,
7 7
^
O
p id
'c U
O >> O
F s E
N
a
N O LW
z ' n a bo tw
U ° °
9
F E
D U
v J Q
W fi .j u. U. ._7 D Q
0] C R
m
'o^
a
eta i
Y �
a �
9
3
3
u � ea u
E a �
CL
� .fl a C. �
� d u
�
� to
•fl _ o
CL.
E E
•L
R
1 11 R
G a a
a L u
c n aG
C L y CJ
C H a a v

Table A2. Vegetation Vigor by Species
Rlnrkhnnce Creek Rectnrntinn Prniect- ftDn6n?7 -A
Table A3. Vegetation Damage by Species
Blockhouse Creek Restoration Proiect- #DO6027 -A
Species
CommonName
4
3
2
1
0
Missing
Unknown
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
6
G�
e,
�4O
Asimina triloba
pawpaw
1
1
Betula nigra
river birch
5
4
1
1
` �� J
Acer rubrum
red maple
Corpus amomum
silky dogwood
5
1
1
6
1
pawpaw
1
1 1
Cornus florida
flowering dogwood
1
l
Calycanthus floridus
eastern sweetshrub
1
3 3
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
10
6
0
8
1
1
1
1 I
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
26
17 1
Fraxinus permsylvanica
green ash
0
26
Halesia Carolina
Carolina silverbell
Halesia caroling
Carolina silverbell
2
black walnut
3
6 3
Liriodendron tuli ifera
tuli tree
7
12 7
Juglans nigra
black walnut
4
1
Quercus phellos
1
3
6 4
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Quercus phellos
willow oak
6
16
35
159 1 34
4
Cal canthus floridus
eastern sweetshrub
2
1
3
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
2
3
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
8
2
1
4
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
10
9
Platanus occidentalis
Americansycamore
25
15
4
Acer rubrum
red maple
6
1
1
2
1
TOT:
16
116
118
32
1 3
1 2
1 37
1 2
Table A3. Vegetation Damage by Species
Blockhouse Creek Restoration Proiect- #DO6027 -A
�5
t�
ko
G�
e,
�4O
a,
` �� J
Acer rubrum
red maple
4
7 1 3
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
0
6
Asimina triloba
pawpaw
1
1 1
Betula nigra
river birch
1
10 1
Calycanthus floridus
eastern sweetshrub
3
3 3
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
3
2 3
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
0
8
Comus florida
flowering dogwood
1
1 I
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
1
17 1
Fraxinus permsylvanica
green ash
0
26
Halesia Carolina
Carolina silverbell
0
2
Juglans nigra
black walnut
3
6 3
Liriodendron tuli ifera
tuli tree
7
12 7
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
3
41 3
Quercus phellos
willow oak
4
6 4
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
4
11 4
TOT: 116
16
35
159 1 34

0
a
u
ro
ro
O
0
.y
d
7
a
a
F
VM
y
JO
O
4)
—
sa,�O�a
�eJ
MvM�o�000MOO�n
a�
e
OJO�4
nOJ
Q
r
xt
C
0
Cn 0 0 .o r o0 C+ o
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0000000000
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
xxxxxxxxxx
X
b 10
y
N N N N N N N fV N N
41 Q• D\ O+
u
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
r
u
O
0]
F
u
C
e
O
w
a
c
U
E
v�
Q
a
F
1.4'. 13
�'0
ea4: �yJ.
6000 LV 9�Z60t
t. 80001V
J96O/ I
M � N OM l
9'14 01,q
Z. 000lzt
.rea k,60l,
..
N N N M^ N
l.�e S000
yea f 9j. 60 Jo M v t ^
t.jea�� o0`j �J 9`t6ot j
l:�ea� 000�V �J 9`Z601 �O/ —
N r 7 C
t 000�j 90601
�Z60.,
S
ViaJS
ale D N — - M N � N - - - M r
N M •-- N
N N M N
s s�o
e
o — o
c
� o "
Q
No E c D °� E c o �e v o s
o
x
U
0
E S o° E c .c_
o c> O o ° v .r D
c a E c u `E° oo o v 'c' G o 2
U QQQmUUUUOc� T-' 1300'-
o
v
o
v F
0
0] F

10
CD
"t
-1
H
H-
't
00
M
00
C>
Cl
N
00
00
-
Cl Oo
k'I
10
00
I
kl
O
10.
r-
m
10
w
t3
IZ
,
3
fi
lz
11
u
zs
51
t
—1—i
zs
zs
S
E
Q
I
E-1
-
I
(Z�
Z�
cn
cZ
ni
�:

Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project
Photo Log - Vegetation Plot Photo Points
Notes:
I. Photo point locations are shown on the plan views in the actual location the picture was taken.
2. All points are marked with a wooden stake and pink flagging tape.
3. Herbaceous plot located in foreground of each photo.
6/26/2009 6/262009
Photo Point I: Veg Plot I Photo Point 2: Veg Plot 2
6262009
Photo Point 3: Veg Plot 3
626 /2009
Photo Point 4: Veg Plot 4
6 /262009
Photo Point 5: Veg Plot 5
6262009
Photo Point 6: Veg Plot 6

6262009 6262009
Photo Point 7: Veg Plot 7 Photo Point 9: Veg Plot S
6262009
Photo Point 9: Veg Plot 9
6262009
Photo Point 10: Veg Plot 10

m
APPENDIX B. Geomorphic Data

x
M
LO
.1
c�'
I)
o
o
Lo
00
C:)
N
r__:
0,
1'-
LI)
0)
C:l
10
4
c)
F-_
OD
C-4
�3
cis
C_'
C
-,t
0)
Ci
Lo
t--
r-
CN
Lo
(D
-
'o
00 In
Cl)
a)
Lo
00
LO
In
M
CD
0
rl-
C�
C�
C�
:�
c
"
co
-,t
V�
4�
,
0
CR
0
11
_t
0
-
0
,
M
C,�
co
t__
Cl)
m
6
'CIO,
C
0
,t
0)
m
C6
Lo
0
�2
"T
Lo
Mw
co
CD
0
CD
M
O
Lo
C4
r-
0
C�
Cl)
0)
(D
-:
0
0�
M
U�
o
C)
C)
CD
C)
r-
(D
cq
co
r*-:
a)
r-,
C,
00
CN!
"t
0)
Lo
0
C:)
CM
C'i
M
c6
'0
M
M
M
M
'I-
0
CR
0
0)
C
00
cl
C)
00
00
(D
U�
o
C�
C,
r
c)
C)
.
0
C)
a
Lo
OD
w
.
.
.
.
.
.
0
ZT
-
Cl)
-
4
4
M
r
C,
.
.
(D
0)
I
I
cq
cp
C')
0)
LO
r*.:
()o
S?
r-
U�
LO
LO
(D
c)
Lr?
p
C)
O
C,
C)
Cj
(f)
(m
C)
ci
C,�
(D
C)
co
C)
CO
CO
0
M
­t
C')
LI)
im
0
C'4
1:1
w
C9
w
(P
co
0
(q
o
(3)
o
00
w
OC)
co
I­
'o
cq
w
00
C'
O
04
OC)
C)
C;
Ci
0
04
04
04
04
UM,
Cl)
C,,
Cl)
O
MR
X
+
c)
C)
o
0
0
0
0
(D
t-
0
0
0
C�'
LO
cl)
I
I
.
.
.
1
0
0
C14
o
01)
C4
O
lgg
C)
00
04
r'_
C)
r-
O+
C)
Lf
LO
0
0
LF)
C)
U�
0
Lr)
"
0
q
m
00
U�
c
)
C.
.
L
C4
C�
Iq
0
Cl)
Cl
0
CN
Cj
6
C,4
A
r-
LO
LO
L6
.
IN 0
0
Lo
,,
C)
C14
6
00
C)
0
Cl)
LO
6
.16
LO
Cl)
0
C\!
(vj
•
C�
0
0
C)
0
o
to
CD
C�
0
ON
C:,
c,
C,
to
C+
D
Cl)
i
.
i
.
.
.
CY)
f) L
0
C6
0
'IT
co
Ul
x
CD
LO
0
CO
Lo 0
It
0)
t
r-
C)
00
I'M
o
CD
O
8
'o
CD
O
0
cq
I
CD
4
LD
6
V5
CD
co
C�
0)
C'j
't
C4
E
A
'C
15
, jo
Oq
C)
M
o
M
LO
q
Lq
C:)
I
in
Lo
CN
LO
04
C�l
r-
C�l
1.0
Co
'W"
CD
C�
0
0�
$D
0
0
I
C4
"
Cy'
P�
'It
C)
(6
4
r-
M
C4
LO
C)
co
co
C,)
Cl)
-
17
C�
co
4)
COO
C:)
oq
CZ)
Lq
LO
9
C,
U-)
to
0
c?
0
0
0
Ln
C)
(2
LO
04
C6
CN
m
co
c)
C)
C4
-4
U)
12
:
C',
C'S
0)
M
r
X M
C)
10
U-)
t
04
(D
c'q
r' -
Lo
r—
'*:
C14
q
0
C�
C?
0
cli
Cl)
Cl)
0
Lr)
o
LU c
,43>
C6
co
04
(0�
c6
_0
04
C)
cli
0)
',0
C:)
CO
NOW
M
0
Lo.
0
A
M
L) 2
o
m
00
co
o
c 3
0 a
�6
0
Cl)
W
m
Pik
.2
.2
2
C
5
­0
.0
-2
3:
cl
.
.
co
2
<
�F
a
1:_�
,
2
Z3
0,
a-)
_0
s
0-
r.
om
00
r
a)
ca
a)
a
0
X
o
0
1
7-
2-1
a)
7�
U)
a
,
-,
L)
C
c
2
m
a)
m
2
7-0
o
>
i
>
M
a)
FE
a)
0
a)
4"',"
Q)
c:
cr,
Ln
LL
co
E
CU
-0
—
r
CU
-0.
do
jE
7
E
cll
cu
C:
0
mpp"
m
0
0)
U)
3:
ca
C:
(n
0)
0
En
=3
U)
0
LL
c
ca
fn
U)
w
U)
OL
(n
4,
E
0
U)
02
m
co
a)
0
'o
c
m
:to
-0
U)
(D
0
CL
�66
C,
a)
co
iE
I
I
I
I
ILA
a.
z
.
,
I
I
.

i
1
!
;
I
1
1
:1
C:),
0)
(q
co
C,
r- r--
C"i
;t
M
c�
CD
0)
Q
F
A
,Ca�
I
04
C)
ll�
LO
cc
(0
C)
r-
c)
'T
Ci
C)
Lr)
'T
Lq
C)
C')
C:)
, •co
kl,
C�
q
C3�
Lrl
C)
c)
0)
C�
LO
W
�-)
C:)
C�
04
CR
C14
M
00
q
Lf)
M
r--
CD
(D
U)
ON
LO
C�
0
C,
C)
C)
0)
co
w
CD
co
00
C)
in
At�l
g
04
C)
0
C�
0)
p
04
C:)
C-)
C:)
m
C14
04
M,
Lo
LO
C,
LQ
C:)
0
C14
C)
C)
C>
4
C,
C5
ID
Lo
O'
Lq
t
Lr)
C)
m
0)
C:)
C:)
Cl)
c,
C)
Lo
C:>
C)
C�
0)
C)
U)
o
C)
CD
-
04
co
0)
04
w
M
04
m
N
C')
Cl)
r--
c)
C,
6
oi
C'�'
Lr)
c.
co
C')
6
C)
0)
CD
I-
C:)
r.-
C)
C)
Il-
C:,
C)
C14
S
04.
C;
NT
04
C=)
C)
C,
C)
(D
C:�
C,
(D
(0
C)
(Z)
Q
C:)
C)
",Z:l
(6
LO
OD
C6
C=;
LO
CD
L6
cli
CD
+
C)
C)
C)
C)
C�
a
c)
C)
U)
C,
u)
C>
LO
LO
F
C)
CD
co
U)
CD
L,
C)
OC)
CD
C)
C3)
CD
co
0)
0
O
C)
r-:
Lf)
r--
CD
q�q
Lo
C�!
04
A
(R
CN
A
(I
'D
oll
0,
.
w
c)
6
F-
a
C�
Lr)
C)
C)
w
�2
C4
c�
co
C,
0)
CD
c
C-5
:�
CD
.
q
"
:�
`4
MR
LO
cu
?
co
co
CN
I
Cli
i
i
i
cl)
E
C)
Lq
00
0
U�
't
IT
C)
C>,
C)
C>
C�
CD
CD
CIF1
o
o
cq
4
C)
co
cn
(D
C6
C�l
10
cl�
0)
E 2-
U
m
CN
CD
in
Lo
--;k
CD
E o
(D
w
C)
C�
CD
co
C)
c)
LO
C,
LO
CD
LO
04
U�l
C14
C)
r—
Lo
C)
C)
a,
C�
C�
co
F
CO 0)
0
�(D
M,
(D
C,4
C,�
(,i
r--
6
.4
r—
Cl)
Cj
LO
Cj
00
C�)
c,
cn
co
C\l
co
1
C:)
LO
0
cq
C)
u
C:)
U.)
0
c.
C)
0
Lo
C)
C)
LCO>
C)
LO
CD
Ln
CD
E
m
CL
12
CL
0)
m
C6
1�
co
C)
C%4
LO
2
in
m,
CY)
co
N
I
i
Cl)
N
LO
+p 0
co
E
CD
co
cp
CD
CD
co
CD
m
C)
CD
0
co
-q-
&
M
Lo
LO
Im
rD
-q
co
Cl)
C>
m
C:>I-1
r-
D
2�
6
6
a
oi
-5
C�
C6
C\l
'T
c)
INN"
C)
T
LO
o
C,
CO
RE
(6
C:
co
0)
m C
C
.2
WS
co
'o
kA
0
U)
C>
1*
CN
0
>
es
a)
-0
'8.
Z5
-2
Z6
S?
-Z6
g
LO
U
c\1
E
F
r-
co
C
12
0)
cts
:IC5
15L
C�
E
(D
a)
Li
<
Ca.
E
a)
C:
a)
c
cu
CL
-2
U)
r-
w
_j
Co
CL
00
�o
P,
r
(n
�6
j-
U)
o
—
(n
0
0
E
a)
p
a)
X
co
2
1,7
C
Q
1-
_
r
J:
CD
>
CO
C)
>
(D
-6
0
U)
0
,�I.v
0.
cu
cjgN
C
a
Ln
co
co
c
cl
2
0
:5
:
m
(1)
r
—
0
5
-0
V,
o
,,
!E
Lo
-a
E
cc
0
c
m
ca
0
cl
E
I'D
I
6
=
!�
t
CD
3:
15
cc
CO
-
C:
(1
� ,
r-
ca
40
%
�;
0
R
v-
INI.
-
10,
-r-
L)
'cu
cm
cn
75
U)
c
0
zg"
LL
r:
m
U)
0
w
cu
_r_
L)
-0
a)
M
(n
(n
0
CL
S
0
U)
(D
m
Co
U)
0
C',
of
C',
(D
p
'n
c:
IE,
cc
00
d'
-0
c
(n
P)
Lo
0
co
0
04
N
E
fE
E.
.2
lu

00
0j
N
r-
LO
C4
C)
04
of
C)
cv)
CY)
M
co
O�
0
ID
C)
C�
0)
U�
-zl-
Lq
C4
0�
C-0
C.,
-
.t
L"
-
S,
2.
00
Cl)
n
(D
C4
N
m
4
Cl)
U')
C14
C,
C6
• Rl
6
C;
L6
6
04
C)
"'
C)
6
C)
C)
C�
C4
O
01)
N
C)
c)
C's
Cj
I
I
I
I
I
I
C)
c
C:)
C)
M
cq
Lo
25
Cl
rl-
q
L6
U)
CA
0
(D
Cl)
M
Cl)
0)
C)
M
Lf)
zr
CD
C)
m
CN
C)
04
C>
LO
.q
-U)
CA
(D
"'t
C;
CC)
C)�
C,
Lq
'I"
q
C,
q
C)
Lq
C,
C>
L'i
0
CD
Cl)
U)
04
C;
04
cl�
C;
04
Ci
It
L')
C14
m
0)
0
"T
L,
—
Ci
C:,.
C)
C,4
ci
00
04
N
, lk
00
4
cn
C)
L6
Cl)
q
0
vi
C)
CO
04
C)
C)
0
C4
CD
C)
c)
0
(0
LID
L6
a
C3)
L6
C)
1",
-6
CD
CD
C)
+
(D
r
C)
C>
C)
C)
C)
C�
O
C)
g
'.0
C)
LI)
0)
r--
1
C)
cD
0
Lo
LO
P'�
9
Lr)
—
C)
C,
m
CD
C,
CD
t
04
ce)
(N
�;
o
r--
Lr)
Cl
LrS
C)
04
A
C-4
'IT
L6
C,
'D
m
U-)
C)
c)
CD
C"N
04
—
6
CD
CD
M
C�
T6
LO
LO
Lo
Lf
CL
E
U)
a)
C)
q
00
R
NO
:
0
C',
Lo
C)
C)
L6
C,
04
1
Cl)
C)
C>
C�
C)
C�
C:)
q
C�
U)
C)
04
LO
U)
CD
'W"
LO
A
LO
0
C�
C14
m
M Q)
(D
0
—
CD
a
CD
CD
O
CO
Of
i
6
o
i
co
LO
i
N
la
P-
Q)
C,
Zv
cl
-
C)
�;
C:)
(D
CD
C*?
C)
C)
00
C14
'T
Lf)
00
CO
(D
-
(C)
-
IT,
0
C�
Lo
0)
C)
.
Lo
w
-
C,
,t
1
0
X
,
0,
U)
0
M�
(6
04
C14
6
6
Cyj
D
-S
C�
j
I
CZ)
C:)
AA
0.
Cl)
co
0
.
.
.
.
.
...
LO
-0
co
CD
CD
0
0
' a
"4v,
OD
't
(0
r-
-�t
0
CL)
LO
LO
E
N
0 C,
CD
B
W
CD
c:
'OL
:G
0)
cu
0
cc
WE
:6
a)
D-
a)
-,
-Z!
,
.2�
,
:2
.2
C,
a
c
:E
, -
,,z�", ,
'3'
c
a)
a)
a
51
c
CL)
-
CU
CO
C,
L)
=1
U)
0
0
a)
=3
X
j
-2
C,-
U)
U)
co:
oc
>
p
M
U>
>
m
m
a)
-
75
0
0"
-
0
CD
CL
M
cm:
C)
0)
LL
M
o
.0
m
6
0
E
0
m
c.0
i5
0
0
0
75
J-1
W
UJ
c
cl,
.2
0)
-0
m
Q)
a
, Al
0,
Lo
0
:3
U)
U-
M
U)
-
-.
cu
-
m
cn
-0
CL
0
ca
-0
U)
lC
be
U)
0
A
0
cli
C�
0
Q)
7a
.2
m
F4z I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ZO

C')
c:
t5
2
0
0
o
2i
Iq
N
(D
LO
co
M
C:l
0
m
n
"1
0
4
m
Ci
CO
n
C'�
.4
(D
01*
Lo
LO
co
C'i
'T
(D
to
co
-:
j
CO
C'�
Lo
0
m
*
Lo
"
M
"
110
0
US
"1
1p
co
m
Ln
Cl)
;D-
C)
OO
Lo
M
0
Ln
o
co
LI)
Cj
LO
A
C�
FillLW,
I
I
v1*2,
I vok
00
A
Ln
M
(n
m
co
co
>
Ge
rz
(D
cn
co
O
O
C)
LO
CD
Cl
C,
co
co
0
w
C,
m
m
m
m
U�
C,
m
00
lO
q
C,
co
CN
m
�2
c,
co
O
cq
U-)
ol
0)
M
cq
CO
U,
CD
co
r--
13
Cl
C)
r--
c:>
C�i
A
—1,51VI
C�jm
—1
1
1
IM
M
A
't
CV
A
C,
M
U)
04
co
C
0
Cl)
c
0
m
a) 0
U)
0
0
cj
C'4
0
C\j
V
0
N
11
'o
co
OR
co
CN
cm
co
t,
co
Cq
2
co
Ln
c,5
vlcll"W'l
A
I
I
I
I
LO
co
C,
-:Ic,
00
CD
�2
CD
co
CD
U)
00
co
m
C�
C)
U,
C)
C)
M
04
A
Cl)
A
LO
Cl)
r--
LO
>
Cn
m
E
E
0 a)
.0
Z w
(n
cn
0
0
C,
Ln
-ri-il
N
r-
0
0
Ull
�2
0
CD
(D
0
�q
ui
r,-
CN
r
C',
C'4
cj
Cl)
06
—
m
m
m
t;
75
I-lq
in
(0
M
CD
N
Ln
11
CO
co
LO
4
0
0
6
"
(DIMp
ol
CO
co
m
A
6
04
04
'o
04
Ci
CO
co
04
<
A
M
co
v)
V
C�
'CT,
I.J. I
S
04
S
E
E
0
E
m
E
=
0
m
CD
LO
co
36
cc
<
0
a)
E
0-0
4)
cl
0
a)
E
E
r
LL
a)
C
Fu
(a
x
M
0
E-
a)
LL
M
r-
c
ca
x
Cc
0
0
2
r
a)
.0
O
c
0
.2
0
cl
-0
C)
U
LL
ED
C
.0
a)
-0
0
-0
-6
LL
LL
ca
-0
CL
E
0
a)
a)
0
a)
0
-2
LL
(n
L,
LL
0
0
I
U)
p
CL
I
y o
C-i =
0
c
0
C)
U
-lie
. .....
c
LL
co
LL
co
0
0
0

�Qm
w Q,
NOW
K,
X
co
m
11
ooimm
Fam"
911�
0-1
IN
- ------
-o
C)
7-ilWMlll'l. llllwA4 MY
N
n
x
"k
C
-- --------- ----- -
"A,
0"
al go
"immis "s
2
-o
a,
X
"�321
n,
c) x
co
N
M,
M,
WIN
(L)
2
c)
cl)
g
o
cD
oo
Lf)
co
rl
co
c rl
to
CV)
cD
�omm. am"i,
X
co
C)
C4
c
cl
C)
Lr)
oo
T
S
C)
OD
04
c�
C4
a)
LO
'T
04
c�
Ln
cc) 74
(D
oo F3
C)
04
"
o)
4
cl)
6 Lo
L,
cf)
(3)
C-4
'It
c5
(D
C)
15:1
lc:,
I",
Lo
c:,Ic:,I-1
"t
cm
1:;:1-1-1-
cD co
1
a
1
',T�
LO
�;
cN
cD m
't
C)
o
o
A
M
Q)
I
I
I
W,
u)
in
clj
>-
-o
N
C)
o
C)
-
')
u
C)
-o--
04
C)
C)
T
F3
2
C)
:2
2
cj
cc)
o
co
.
c)
cy)
r-
It
cD
r-
cc
r-
04
I—
0
cq
r-
oo
m
c�
cc�
'IT
CD
cl�
x.
8)
o
c)
,t
cl
o
o
cD
M
C4
It
04
cl)
Cq
C)
M
o
C,
rl
2
'Lol)
cj
O)
m
cq
v,
c\j
o
�-D
2
N
c)
M
(m
oo
cD
C,
04
C14
co
ce)
m
cq
1-
17
—
oo_
.
o
.
cD
—
—
<
Lmo
-co
-m
clqn
2)
It
c.,
co
r-:
Ln
"t
o
25
c:,
9
o
a
W
:u
0
A
U)
co
cj
co
r4
N
�*
cq
I.s
6
112
om
c:
'
a)
-c
cr,
o.
go
R
Fx
5.
o
F=
cl
cl
<
OS
oa)
Q)
E
E
co
[If
Lc:)
o
-o-o
oo
a)
a)
_j
M
Lo
-a
co
-o
-j
w
-j
U)
o
o
w
LL
a)
a
c
xm
(D
=5
C)
>
3:
(D
a)
—
o
E
M
>,
-5
a)
LL
c l
.0
LL
o
m
co
N
O
(D
LL
CZ
>
E
co
-o
CL
>
a)
LL
W
C)
ca
a)
En
o
IL
(n
2
m
IL
m
Cf
a)
a)
.2
02

W
-A
DOX"40—MR,
x
RN
4
LO
O
X
ca
c
0
0
V1 d
N
lb
In
C> 0
COIN
(0
r-
m
0
m
O
U?
I -
in
X
ca
N
CD 00
11
0
—
N
N
C,
C,
In
M
-
CO') '*
C,
OC)
.0
0
CO
U?
-1;:1
04
A
c
g
RMIF
I'd
S
cu
00
N
c
0
CD
N
cn
'n
0
ME
m C,
U?
"T
1p
IZO
V4
�vl
m
�2
co
N
*,�:�;
n
m
m
w
(D
10
w
-D
w
0
co co
10
co
C)
co
CD
C:)
m
ID
CD
0
CD
A O
O
04
Ci
co
CD
04
C,
0
CD
0
C;)
O
Cl)
CY)
06
C)
C�
Ln
C'4
C)
q
0
03
LO
x
N
CO
(D
04 04
(D
C�
C,
C4
ll�
"
CD
0
0)
0
LO
ce)
4
a)
LO
CI
r--
Lr;
Coll
Lr)
1 cDloolcDl,,
co
r—
* co
r-,
N
CD
co
04
co
m
m
c;
c6
CD
cn o'
0)
N
0
-
co co
*
'It
- �2
ul
C)
CD
"I
v
N
C,
N
q
2
C)
00
04
't
CO
cc
C>
(0
Cl)
—00
C)
C)
U�
C,
cv
0 0
0�
(D
1--
Vi
10
C,�
00
"I
C9
m
0)
—
10
a
0,
N
'D
LO
CD
C,
Iq
C,
0
q
0
0
Cl)
C7
�2
.0
'IT
C>
w
U�
co
In
C,
TA
-1,01corl"l-
co
F-
!I
co
co CD
m
co
w
0
m
CD
a
0
CD
C,
Div
Q
N_
C_,
m
CD
I
I'D
m
co
ICD
EIR
E.2
—
—
—
s
—
s
E
E
45
m
E
E
L
j-�
E
E
j-_
0
igi�
ig
C)
'T
Z)
on
c
cr,
c
a)
a
C:
c
C5
rn
C
:1
a)
Cl
a)
CL
a
w
E
LO
00
a)
it
(n
m
LO
00
a)
a)
En
0
Fn
0
Fn
U)
LL
(D
c 'FU
C:
C
m
a)
x
M
co
C) co
>
a)
a)
—
0
cn
E
a)
LL
L)
2 0
Q. .
2
LL
c
3:
-,
no
0
c
c
0 a)
U-
co
m
a)
-0
E
c
11
S a)
'o
CL
m
>
(0
J_-
a)
0)
(n
0 C/)
w
_,
L)
.-
'a
a)
C:
0
U)
0
of
m
N
c0 CL
o
th
r-
4)
w
10.
E
m
ter,
UO)

I
C �
U
O �-
N
Ol
N _ _
E
O
O
y
G
� I
E
CD `
U � �
� { I
G
O
U
I I
O
C `
O
D
O
CD
O
v
n
b {
n
O +I+
� 1
E l
a.
v
E �
o
E
h
O r
_I
3
D
N
O L__
N
D
U �
b
c
d �
I
v I '
o I
z
}
a7
M
x
°
O
}
co
N
}
0
"���`��.\
}
O
M
CIO
CO
CIO
W
r
CD
\\
C.'..'•�`�E�,`F,n;
m
f�n0
W
N
m
r
LnMOmm
O
W
CA
N
Ln
"O
(U
Q
CD
A
V
O
m
M
W
0
N
c+
}
X
cu
C_
(n E
N
U
N
O
U
N
_
M
CM
LO
CD
to
M
W
W
It
W
CD
X
C6
W
Ln
O
V
m
0
M
ITN
L
N
N
O
O
O
V
r
1
W
A
Ln
O
CO
m
0
LO
lis
gq
}
!V
tA,
V
co
}
N
C
O
N
r
O
N
N
Cn d
O
cli
NO
m
N
N
O
LO
N
n
V
N
m
LO
0
V
LO
CD
m
LO
"O
N
O
M
O
A
n
N
M
N
M
M
O�
C'
Lo
N
M
O
N
O
(D
A
O
W
M
C-
O
M
W
Ln
O
co
N
0
0
m
O
o
O
Ln
W
•
LO
}
0
N
x
m
O
W
m
co
N
n
W
O
n
LO
f�
M
O
CD
O
LO
to
W
N
7
O
M
O
N
c6
O
O
co
N
V
O
O
U
U
m
}
C
V
co
O
W
r
W
Ln
O
W
O
W
O
7
0
N
0
N
V
r--
O
V
0
0
CO
w"W-1
'41,40100
Ami
O-'
-O
O
O
f�
Cl)
O
V
O
O
N N
Im
N
}
y
M
r
N
n
O
O
O
O
N
O O
'
O
rL
LO
W
W
d'
N
O
m
N
0 0
U
W
o
a
}
M
LO
CD
N
C-
N
V
Cl)
CD
N
LO
X
Co
C�
o
O
W
00
Ln
O
00
C)
W
N
M M
O O
0
N
o
co C
o
W
LO
U
Ln
tO
N
M
O
r
W
V
W
O
o
2
LN
M
W
V'
O
Cl)
0 0
m
Q
m
N
r
O
O
W
In
W
M
W
O
W
O
co
co
V'
V
M
C_
a
co
O
CD
r
co
W
N
O
0
M
0
O
0
O
0
V
N
0 0
Q
fD
N
00
N
C`
O
N
M
LOO
M
0 0
o
s
s
s
t
E
E
r
p
r
r
r
E
E
r
r
w
o
:Ei
C
`
�
�
7
U
Q
O
O
c
p
E
LOW
m
�
O
"O_
(U
O
O
CX
LO
"O
W
-p
d
J
)
Cn
O _O
N
-,.
LL
m
N
C
X
0
L
U
(U
m
O
j
N
fn
a)
J
U)
O
C
O
N
L
U
a
'=
M
U
C >>6
.D
0
d
0
0
N
C
C
COj U-
m
U
C
+'
O
2
LL
LL
m
"O
N
c`
d
C
C
p>
to
C
2'
d
R
d
N
L
N
�
LLN
U
c
cu
aR
o
a
g
p
p
U
d
d
io
C
1
LL
m
E
d
c
p
E
o
a
v
I
C �
U
O �-
N
Ol
N _ _
E
O
O
y
G
� I
E
CD `
U � �
� { I
G
O
U
I I
O
C `
O
D
O
CD
O
v
n
b {
n
O +I+
� 1
E l
a.
v
E �
o
E
h
O r
_I
3
D
N
O L__
N
D
U �
b
c
d �
I
v I '
o I
z

Table B4. Stream Problem Areas- Year 1 Monitoring
Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project #D06027 -A
Feature Issue
Station Number
Suspected Cause
Minor rutting from overland flow
n/a
Exposed earth from equestrian activities, runoff from buildings
Aggradation
28 +21
Sediment laden triple box culvert under I -26
Sandbag Weir
1 14 +31
l Irrigated water used for dust control and green/landscaped areas
Bank erosion/soil subsidence
1 42 +07
JToeslope erosion

o
--
o0
I
0
o
I
O
Q
N
i
O
(n
CD
O
I
,
0
C)
00
O
N
N
O
'
O
m
L
U
t
r
�.
CO
Q
O
C7
O
o
_O
O
CO
c
v
m
LL
U)
O
O
o
L
I
1
O
W
� '
D
v
I '
1
W
O
J
'
N
C)
CO
lq- N O 00 CO 'q N O
CO CO
�-
w
co co co ti ti ti ti ti
O O
co
00 w co w m w w 00
O 0
(11) uOIjeA813

O
O
O
Foo
O
O
N
O
LL
UU)
N
'
'
O
O
O
N
co
O
++
_ O
CD
O
N
O
�
'
�
Q
�C
4)
• '�
O
O
00
M
F-
,
L
U,
i
�
a�
O
p °
O :p
C'') -
m
V
,
O
m
J
O
CD
O
N
co
t0
LL
co
O
O
M
J
p
O
�
0 't N O o0 O d' N O m
0 0 0 0 U') LO U') U') LO It
M M 00 w M M M M 00 M
00
0
00
0
N
(}4) U01jeAa13

O
O
00
O
O
N
O
Q
I
O
LO
LL
>L
I '
O
00
O
I
�
N
.Q
cn
Q
�
L
C) C
M O
i
C/)
O
1
C)
0
J
j
N
�I
i
m
J
O
LL
0
O
00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
(4) u01jen813

C)
0
N
00
O
O
N
O
cn
O
O
Q
'
O
O
00
m
N
�
H
._
o c
O
C O
D
L
�
(n
m
�
J
i
t+
O
O
d'
Q
LL
J
�
CD
CD
N
,
O
0')
00 00 I— Or- CO CD LO
00
00 00 00 00 00 00 00
(11) U011BAO13

Feature
Stream
I , N!r e
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
C4
27.4
21.24
1.29
2.33
1 16.45
0.9
2.5
876.97
876.81
Cross - Section 1 - Riffle
Sta. 2 +27
879
878
877 '
c _
0
cc 876 t Monitoring Year 1
d
LU - - - - • Asbuilt 2008
875 o -- Bankfull
0 - -- Floodprone
874
100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Station (ft)
Photo 1: XS -1 facing right bank
Photo 2: XS -I facing left bank
Photo 3: XS -I facing left bank
Photo 4: XS -1 facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Tvpe
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
C4
31.2
23.72
1.32
3.16
18.01
1.1
2.3
876
876.41
Cross - Section 2 - Pool
Sta. 2 +82
884
882
$ 880
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
878
_m
Lu 876
----------------------------------------- — 4 Monitoring Yearl
- - - - - Asbuilt2008
874
©--- Bankfull
- © - -- Floodprone
872
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Station (ft)
Photo 5: XS -2 facing right bank Photo 6: XS -2 facing left bank
Photo 7: XS -2 facing right bank

Feature
Stream
Tv e
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
Bc
1 35
22.05
1 1.59
3.66
13.89
1
2.2
871.9
1 871.89
Cross - Section 3 - Pool
Sta.10 +98
877
876
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
875
874 -- --
c
p 873 1 _
> 872 -- ---- ---- ------------ ---- - -- -j
d �
W 871
870 ` I Monitoring Year 1
869 ----- Asbuilt 2008
- • -o - -- Bankfull
868
- - -© - -- Floodprone
867 __ ._ .....
100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Station (ft)
Photo 8: XS -3 facing right bank
Photo 9: XS -3 facing left bank
Photo 10: XS -3 upstream view of right bank
Photo 11: XS -3 facing left bank

Feature
Stream
Tv e
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
C4
1 32.2
19.69
1 1.64
2.85
12.03
1
2.9
872.4
1 872.37
Cross - Section 4 - Riffle
Sta.11 +41
877 —
876
875 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
874
0
4a 873
- - ---------------------------------
W 872 Monitoring Year 1
871 ----- Asbuilt 2008
870 - 0 - -- Bankfull
-'
-­9 - -- Floodprone
869
100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170
Station (ft)
Photo 12: XS -4 facing right bank Photo 13: XS -4 facing left bank
Photo 14: XS -4 facing right bank Photo 15: XS -4 facing left bank

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
Bc
31.7
18.16
1.75
113
10.4
0.9
1.7
870.3
870.01
Cross - Section 5 - Riffle
Sta.16 +38
876 - -- —
875
874
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
873
c 872
0
871
------------- ---- --- ----- - - - - --
870 ` —* — Monitoring Year 1
W 869
�. - - -- Asbuilt2008
868
- - -o - -- Bankfull
867 - "
© - -- Floodprone
866
100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Station (ft)
Photo 16: XS -5 facing right bank Photo 17: XS -5 facing left bank

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BFl Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Eev
Pool
C4
28.1
1233
1 42
2.72
13.99
0.9
1.8
860.9
860.73
Cross - Section 6 -Pool
870
Sta. 32 +61
868
866
c 864 -
0
m 862 Monitoring Year 1
y------------------------------------
W 860 - - - - Asbuilt 2008
- -o- - -• Bankfull
858
-o- - -• Floodprone
856
100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Station (ft)
Photo 18: XS -6 facing right bank Photo 19: XS -6 facing left bank
Photo 20: XS -6 facing upstream Photo 21: XS -6 facing downstream

Feature
Stream i
Type 11
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
hoax BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
E4
37.2
20.37
1.83
3.55
11.14
1
2.6
861.5
1 861.42
Photo 22: XS -7 facing right bank Photo 23: XS -7 facing left bank
Photo 24: XS -7 facing upstream
Photo 25: XS -7 facing downstream
Cross - Section 7 - Riffle
Sta. 33 +10
870
868
- —
866
,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- - - - --
=
864
—� Monitoring Year 1
862
- - _ _ _ _ _ - -
860
- - -- Asbuilt2008
W
- - -o - -- Bankfull
858
- - -o - -- Floodprone
856
100 110 120 130 140
150 160 170
Station (ft)
Photo 22: XS -7 facing right bank Photo 23: XS -7 facing left bank
Photo 24: XS -7 facing upstream
Photo 25: XS -7 facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Areal
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
13KF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
E4
35.3
1 24.39
1.45
3.06
16.85
1
2.5
1 856.4
856.41
Photo 26: XS -8 facing right bank
Photo 28: XS -8 left bank facing downstream
Photo 27: XS -8 facing left bank
Cross - Section 8 - Pool
Sta. 42 +07
860
859
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- - - - -o
858
- - --- - - - -
--
�-.
857
- -
856
--'
C
4)
855
854
853
'
'
—�— Monitoring Year 1
s
- - - - - Asbuilt2008
iu
852
;
© - -- Bankfull
851
© - -- Floodprone
850
100 110
120 130 140
150 160 170
Station (ft)
Photo 26: XS -8 facing right bank
Photo 28: XS -8 left bank facing downstream
Photo 27: XS -8 facing left bank

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
E4
1 42.1
21.72
1.94
3.28
11.21
1
2.7
87.3
1 87.27
Photo 29: XS -9 facing right bank Photo 30: XS -9 facing left bank
Photo 31: XS -9 facing upstream Photo 32: XS -9 facing downstream
861
Cross - Section 9 - Riffle
Sta. 42 +56
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- - - - -o
860
859
$
858
_
0
857
-- - -- - -- - "'-
:r
>
m
W
856
855
t Monitoring Year 1
----- Asbuiltzool3
o - -- Bankfull
854
-
o - -- Floodprone
853
100 110 120 130 140
150 160 170
Station (ft)
Photo 29: XS -9 facing right bank Photo 30: XS -9 facing left bank
Photo 31: XS -9 facing upstream Photo 32: XS -9 facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Tye
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
C4
10.9
1 11.72
0.93
1.76
12.63
1
3.3
880.5
880.47
Cross - Section 10 - Riffle
Sta. 0 +74
882.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -o
882
881.5 -
881 '
O -
M
880.5 - - -- - _
d 880 —0 Monitoring Year 1
W
879 5 - - - - - Asbuilt zoos
© - -- Bankfull
879
- - - © - -- Floodprone
878.5
100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140
Station (ft)
Photo 33: XS -10 facing right bank Photo 34: XS -10 facing left bank from right bank pin
Photo 35: XS -10 facing left bank
Photo 36: XS -10 facing downstream

Feature
Stream `
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
C4
11
11.76
0.94
1.81
1 12.53
1
3.4
1 874.76
874.73
Cross - Section 11 - Riffle
Sta. 4 +68
877
876.5 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -0
876 - -
875.5
c
0 875
<o --------- ---- -- ---- --- - - - - -- - -
ID 874.5 t Monitoring Year 1
W 874
� ----- Asbuilt 2008
873.5
- - -o - -- Bankfull
873 © - -- Floodprone
872.5
100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145
Station (ft)
Photo 37: XS -11 facing right bank Photo 38: XS -1 I facing left bank
Photo 39: view of XS -11 from bridge, facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
C4
1 8.3
13.3
0.63
1.72
21.23
1
2.3
873
1 873.07
Cross - Section 12- Pool
Sta 4 +99
877 -
876
$ 875
c---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
c 874
mMonitoring Year 1
W873 ---------------------------
- - - - - Asbuilt 2008
872 © - -- Bankfull
- - - -o - -- Floodprone
871
100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140 145
Station (ft)
Photo 40: XS -12 facing right bank Photo 41: XS -12 facing left bank
Photo 42: XS -12 facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH'Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
Bc
3.5
5.34
0.65
1.21
8.27
1
4.3
878.54
878.53
Cross - Section 13 - Riffle
Sta. 1 +46
881
880.5
880
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$ 879.5
c
0
M 879 _ ,'� t Monitoring Year 1
m
878.5
_ , ----- Asbuilt2008
W 878 © - -- Bankfull
877.5 ©- -- Floodprone
877
100 105 110 115 120 125 130
Station (ft)
Photo 43: XS -13 facing right bank
Photo 44: XS -13 facing left bank
Photo 45: XS -13 facing upstream
Photo 46: XS -13 facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
WID
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
E5
2.8
1 5.03
0.56
0.93
8.94
1
4
876.36
876.36
878.5
878
877.5
$ 877
c
0 876.5
> 876
d
W 875.5
875
874.5
Cross - Section 14 - Pool
Sta. 3 +58
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -o
- - - - - ------------------------
t Monitoring Yearl
- - - - - Asbuilt 2008
© - -- Bankfull
- - - © - -- Floodprone
100 105 110 115 120
Station (ft)
125
Photo 47: XS -14 facing right bank Photo 48: XS -14 facing left bank
Photo 49: XS -14 facing upstream Photo 50: XS -14 facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Riffle
Cb5
5.4 1
8.24
0.65
1.36
12.64
1.2
4.2
1 865
865.29
Cross - Section 15 - Riffle
Sta.10 +60
867
866.5 -
866
$ 865.5 _ -
C
C 865
•' t Monitoring Year 1
> 864.5
_0 ----- Asbuilt 2008
W 864
- - - - © - -- Bankfull
863.5 © - -- Floodprone
863
100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 140
Station (ft)
Photo 51: XS -15 facing right bank
Photo 52: XS -15 facing left bank
Photo 53: XS -15 facing upstream Photo 54: XS -15 facing downstream

Feature
Stream
Tv e
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
TOB Elev
Pool
Cb5
4.3
5.02
0.86
1.3
5.85
2
2.8
859.7
860.97
Cross - Section 16 - Pool
Sta.11 +53
864
863
$_ 862
C
0 861
r
-- ------
a�i 860 ----------- - - - - -- ,
LV
859
858
100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135
Station (ft)
t Monitoring Year 1
- - -- Asbuilt2008
o - -- Bankfull
© --- Floodprone
140 145 150
Photo 55: XS -16 facing right bank Photo 56: XS -16 facing left bank
Photo 57: XS -16 facing downstream

C
O
7
�L
C
N
O
U EU
d � �
NN
O a�
t � �
0O O
�U
m � O
d �
O
O
a
a�
w
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OO CD C) O CD O O
O O O LO m
r
IUGDJad sselO
00
041
64,
of
s
C9
O
941,
c'
00
99
00
-69
s� E
N
U
'9� N
m
09( �
a
00
941
o�
sc
Off,
O'�
0410
s`�o
s
0
900
N m
} Q
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OO CD C) O CD O O
O O O LO m
r
IUGDJad sselO
00
041
64,
of
s
C9
O
941,
c'
00
99
00
-69
s� E
N
U
'9� N
m
09( �
a
00
941
o�
sc
Off,
O'�
0410
s`�o
s
0
900

C
O
N
Y CD N
N N
U 3U
N N_
Y .0 :3
v
O m O U
m � �
B
d
a
a�
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0) co r (D O O� O N O O
r
;u03Jad sselO
Oo
os
66c)
o!
s
C.9
O
19
k,
00
8CI
06,
�9
N
�tn
U
9� N
C� N
d
09! �
t
O�
`9S
o�
a�l
Off,
O�1
0s0
s
0
900
m
�
a
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 0) co r (D O O� O N O O
r
;u03Jad sselO
Oo
os
66c)
o!
s
C.9
O
19
k,
00
8CI
06,
�9
N
�tn
U
9� N
C� N
d
09! �
t
O�
`9S
o�
a�l
Off,
O�1
0s0
s
0
900

Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project
Photo Log - Photo Points
Notes:
I. Photo point locations are shown on the plan views in the actual location the picture was taken.
2. All points are marked with a wooden stake and pink flagging tape.
Photo Point 2: facing downstream Photo Point 3: facing upstream

Photo Point 3: facing downstream Photo Point 4: facing downstream
Photo Point 7: facing downstream Photo Point 8: facing downstream

Photo Point 13: facing downstream Photo Point 14: facing downstream

Photo Point 18: facing downstream Photo Point 19: facing downstream

Photo Point 20: facing upstream Photo Point 20: facing downstream
Photo Point 21: facing upstream Photo Point 21: facing downstream
Photo Point 22: facing upstream Photo Point 22: facing downstream

Photo Point 25: facing downstream Photo Point 26: facing upstream

Photo Point 29: facing downstream Photo Point 30: facing downstream

Photo Point 32: facing downstream
Photo Point 32: facing upstream

Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project: UT I
Photo Log - Photo Points
Notes:
I. Photo point locations are shown on the plan views in the actual location the picture was taken with the
exception of the first photo for Point S. Due to thick vegetation, photo taken at bridge facing downstream to
provide a better view of the riffle.
2. All points are marked with a wooden stake and pink flagging tape.
Photo Point 2: facing downstream Photo Point 3: facing upstream

Photo Point 4: facing downstream
Photo Point 6: facing upstream Photo Point 6: facing downstream

Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project: UT2
Photo Log - Photo Points
Notes:
I. Photo point locations are shown on the plan views in the actual location the picture was taken.
2. All points are marked with a wooden stake and pink flagging tape.
Photo Point 3: facing downstream Photo Point 4: facing upstream

Photo Point 7: facing upstream Photo Point7: facing downstream

Photo Point I Ofacing upstream Photo Point I Ofacing downstream

Photo Point 11: facing downstream

Blockhouse Creek Restoration Project: UT3
Photo Log - Photo Points
Notes:
I. Photo point locations are shown on the plan views in the actual location the picture was taken.
2. All points are marked with a wooden stake and pink flagging tape.
Photo Point 3: facing upstream Photo Point 4: facing downstream

i
�` �' is i;
��_ � ..
��....
���
fM6
C; •;_
,� ~�
. , „�
��
1 �
'�.
.,
'� { .
',
/� r
:;.
�M
.1.
� ��tl � .
--
_ x: `� ,
:-.
> —? ...
.rx`: �.yj0.

APPENDIX C. Monitoring Year 1 Plan Set

woodjoweNegw-mmm
a
1��HS ��lll
6oz- SlL -M
O
�
W
O
>
60b L'09£'8Z8 :xeA
8017V09£'8Z8 •
'a��inaysy
2JV3 l E N I2M I NOW
9L40- SlL- 6L6:auo4d
v09LZ ON '4Slei8a
N
o
o
c
CD
90882 eu!lae� y3�oN
60Z al!nS
ON 'NOAdi
E0G H4 o;InS '•pM8 IoNdao BZLZ
g °
°
2 &
z
peob poonnJ(eH L6L
00
'fit
O
wa�Bo� }uaweaua4u3 wa3sAeoog
d
O
Cl
Z
3
N
aul `BuNaaulBu3 �s�es 188431W
W
133rMJd NOUVt IO 8 A3380 KnOHA0018
:jo+ pejadaid
O
0
O
LL
ti a
o o
19
I'M
�O
N
U
W
`Iv
v
W
m °
c
LU O
N
O
Z
�cVl
�V1
W
O
.O
ry
e�
O
W
•
1V
O
O
V
O
caa
W
2�
t0
N
�l
V
v�v
I t
6
co m m
Z�CO
CO t
a
Q o m m
o CL
a °� m
°ao c
N � U 03 O
U
7 N 4 O O
C.)
L O
W � 0 N
W d E
0) a
w
1� r N M
c
Q
•�
00
N
(0
I�
O
�
W
O
>
co
W
co
c
M
m
u7
co
C
V
I-
00
'fit
O
C
Q
N
(6
O
Cl
O
O
O
N
N
n
W
0O
O
O
0
O
Ir
0
(O
V
�
�
O
L
M
0
O
Z
'IT
'd'
V
U7
u7
V-
to
(p
0
N
(Q
f-
a
CL
M
a
�°
C7
CO
U
CO
6
co m m
Z�CO
CO t
a
Q o m m
o CL
a °� m
°ao c
N � U 03 O
U
7 N 4 O O
C.)
L O
W � 0 N
W d E
0) a
w
1� r N M
I
b
MnW?!r_Si
i e M•�gan R9. _a ,,,�,
U
Ir
t -
i•�„ 52.5���ia -�
,
�q*
` •"
``� icy i
�,
I

woo*d)oaaNegw•mmm
xeJ
I I V)
W
60b6'09E'8Z8
80t7V09£9Z9:9U04d
'a!!!naysy
2]Vll ON NOiI NOW
9Lti0- SlL -6l6 suoyd
vo9LZ ON '4BleIHa
N
o
W
s
-
90882 ew!ae0 WPON
el!nS
aim
'NOJ�2i1
£OL Ht eAnS "PM8 lolidgo 8ZLZ
e c
M
O
W
w
z °
lOZ
Pent! POOmAEH LU
ON
UmJ6°Jd luaweaus4u3 W918"003
�-
L.L.
r
2 3 ¢
g N
ouL'BupeoulBu3 ie )(es LaeyaLpy
103M0 fd N0IIV i01SMJ X133210 KnOHN0018
:jol pojsdajd
o o
z
o~
cm Go
' U
to ° .° o a? ° _: `" 3 .= a) o = ° � A., .5 -0 >, v � � cd �.
s U a O a) 3 L, y ++ z N N � . 0 0 c?
v� U
AMU) W
-. 0 N Ci. p ~ 00 p U cd iC -0 °' .� w 3 bA o bA �; D rn O ,p
4:4 cd W o• 0 � cd ° r o '� Cd I~ ° °' o 0 z m cd 0 on 3 -' 0
O .fl "" ° a..sti 0 r L7 r 0 O b0 4� cd 0 cd O cad c, i— • U • 'O 'd a> a) rn
W a) U 0 0 cd O ^C ', x ^a C O �0 O ti � U 0
° _ sU.. OU (n In O. V = 40r O ��. ^��". O . 0 . ��"+ 1�. N W 3 U
W p N O cnd 3 ~ ° m �d -0 0 — 10 >> Abp C1
00 �- a" O U O V UC �^ �„ m� O Q� O Q N 3, 4" > y
o-° '� �'" U bn U o � d ¢ 0 cd C's ° 0 bn co o ° �, _ bn 0 o °
3 a) .� O > UC a) . � bo . O � .: cd = V o � � a� bn 'C � ° a`di 3 6q � y '� � � �� � a�i � 0' d y C r. t--� > >, w U to H '�+ U O brn c W � cC 0 G, cd c �" b N '+ o Q. C y -0 to ��• U n
o ° >~ o o x ' S. ' ° 0 � ° cd 0 cd cd 0 cd o
-� 0 o U C7 - o bn 4. 0 0 � �
L) 0 tl O 0 „o x � cd � W 4~ 3 n cd ° C cd � � � 3 � 0 d: x, � U � 0 3 � R7 4• � � y
U 'O n O F U x =d o .rU. ^fl OU 0 O ° b�A Ll 0 V Q= bA 0
w• V -0 -0 0 ° p >~ W cd p p U 0 .o bA 4 > 'r U N y C 'v�
C--� o 0 4� a ° 0 s�. ¢. "D 0 � rw '� 0 � � � o � � v� >~ � � .� � � 3 U .c � � aUi `d ty .� o cd ° c
a) -o 0 0. �. 3 3 a,
o � o �. 'b cd b �-^ •.. cd "o . p cn o cd 3 ° 0. �, s� 'b ° >~ o
+, s.. o ° a) cd cd an .o s -v �, a) o ° bn
cd 0 .� �' �p 0 U p 0 N i. 0 a) R 0° CA o ° .. O .. to
o ,b ti N Q O �, �; a ,ti ,p by a y cd a) c� cn ° E' 5 ti p 0
cqj O bb cn :� O -= 3 0 r0 0 o o L. .O 0 vUi O 'd 0 0 0 TJ
T 1 V 0 cd U o o Q N 0 4•a .a U cd �, � 3 � cd a ., ; y �, �0 o �" o y o
\J a ..o � 5 i. ,� F=+ o O 0 -",, U, -� '�q y �, 0 L. cd `o v, btin ' o y ai +
o >, o a) a cd o �' E " - 3 o E p a) �, -o °w' bA G -c o ° ° �. > U o �+ „ w .... O.
U O 0 .b a) cd «i m G. cd 'C �+ '. 0 s. O m s.. > 4-i � N s..
h—i a) Q• 0 U U y 0 c. 0 m U 0 In O N cd 0 _0 y .:. N 4-4 ,S." w ... O p 3 C Q'
.0 O 0 y cd co ~ 0 >~ 0 Uj °' 0 0 cd 0 t. G cd a) �-1." 0 b O U .� ti 4. O O
O cd rte- cd N 0 b m U cd a) a) > - -0 W .•r .0 a) 0 0 0 0 +=
bA Q" cd = +' >~ O 4 U .cad 0 V 0 b U �' ° .b 0 a . y a) `n 3 3 a) 'N cd s.
0 .0 w 0 U b m a) bA i� cd 0 ;+ m a+ 0 r a)
rJ rn O y � O. 3 0 cd cd 0 4- ¢• O bA >~ �. ti ° 4~ �. �+ 0
N ) : 0 N 0 O cn 0. cd O 0 bA a) a) SC cd 0 0 4, O 'C cd U 0 0 .0 -0 bo
ti 0 0 a) ti 0 O U i. U O v1 I~ 4.' a) O by O N 4. ° N i~
cd s. O .. U .. 0 Q cd a) p w p 0 U cd 4- �, U t�. a) cn p cd O +- ti
0 0. n 0 0 3 �' y 0 cn 0 +- >~ V O 0 O O 'n t, U !�. O 0 w .. U 0 'o y O ^ >>
O .tea cd 0 0 cd a) �, > U '� t�. Cs bA w bA v) 0
° �.... a) v ° °' _ 3 cd >, O at w 3 U o o a) . Co .. cd ° cd . 5 o
O O W > 0 0 c. r+ s~ C s. b 0 n N ~ a) s� �.1 p 0 0 a) 0 «i 4� '�' .0 .p s a) a) 0 0 0 C: "�
4- U o 0 U c S 1. U Co 0 m O Q 0 .0 0 O by ' �. m t, s~ 4 r cd r
�. 0 8 w w o ti 0 O a) ° cd ..� +- id 0 'O '� M ° cd + N o p �. -� 4. s= 'in Q
U y U O c. "O 0 ..� 0._ O x O cn 'C L. ~ v, U s~ a) 0^ 0 4r U a) w 0 O p cd n U p: 'C
O Z 0 x`d >, U O ^o cd M. p +' 0 0 w N U b.A c0 'o ° O .� y E L> Eli O'A
o • ° ° _ cd a) 3 ' ° .o ° ° O ; > b ' a) En �. ~ bq Co >
a) o ° o �. cd ^o .° v ..' . °_? -o >~ x cn b o
a .. t. E- a cd a) L• 0 O 3 cd cn s. b4 O i n cn 3 0
cd O 04 � .0 -o � O U U U U >~
a � � o x•a . � @) 0 3 �°o.v;. o o o a.-O O ° 0.� o � �.c ° � ° 0 � cd
s~ o s~ >~ ° �• o .� U o° o v o E o s~ >~ zs -� >~ cd o 0 3° cd U° o
~oo ��o ° U obn°0�s3p cdaa) :ti bA a)U 3� °" °0�
o = o o �, ~ o' ... U �, o ° ° a) °' a a) o p o �, a) ° >~ cd o
W [-� U W U Q... 3 W 3¢ +, cd.fl d "� Q• H a. �, s. U.fl H Ln cd t H'n cn o h 0 w (� •O ^o W W o O
cli U
06
� U
W
z
J
W W
Y
Of W ¢
Z W U m
W Z �aa WO
N U V]
IL
~
CL O a V O
W w N a z m U C]
J Z Z Z O N U U
O U g a
Z ¢
O O N W V) Z N N
O O X � W 0 w O O
m M W F- > U O U U
DID
Q
F,--1 u fw r
` 0
'rry'
d Q
Q Q
� 7 �4
l d d d
1q
O
J
W �
Ir
J
O O 7
W FW- O
O LIj U
LLI Z W O
Y v) W > W
U O Z
> m °
I : I
I I V)
W
tz
>
W
z
Z
Q
O
�
L.L.
W
p
z
z
z
Lo
O
O
Q
i t
o
o
N
�n
co
N
O
U
N
U)
0
N
Of
U
z
Lo
O
o
o
N
�n
co
N
00
N
•Md'
N
m
�
N
N
:A
't
m
O)
.N--
O
z
QO
N
J_
CO
U
O
Z
O
Z
o
Q
U
uj
U
o
mrj
J
Q
Q:
a
2
W
z
o
F=
z
0
W
z
0
W
°
U
w
Z
U
u.
a
a
0
U
,ri
w
N
p
z
0¢
~
z
czj
L-
c°�
I
I
a:
N w
o
w"
z>-
w
U
g
c`
z
z
O
c�
c�
¢
m¢
a¢
a
W
cn
cr
Z
Q
!n
N
N
O W
on
<
0
U
w
O
J
OO
N
p>
O
w
w
O
o0:
C
V
F-
N
N
W
V
(7
C7
U
V
U
m Li
O
m
J
J
�
a
H
m
S
W
F-
¢
m
U
O
W
W
U
2
—HY
JHZ
O
a
0
Q:
N
+H

woo,daoaa�egw,mmm
Xej
N V
60b6'04£'SZ8
80b1 05£'8Z8 auoyd
euilae0 '9111naysy
�y�� JNI�IOlINOW
9Lb0- StL -sl6 auoyd
b091Z ON 'AGIBLI
W
N
o
o
�o
90882 y}JON
apS
CM HL QWG 'PN8 1o8d80 SZLZ
c
c
o
W
g o
60Z
peon pooh (eH L6L
�N NO�l2il
ws.�Bo.W }ueweoueyu3 we�a� Ooa
g
IM
€
d
.
2 3 °�
out `BuNeaulBu3 Ja)1e8 leeyolyy
103M0 ld NOliVdO1SMJ A3380 3S(IOHN3019
:joj peuedeud
a
j
0
b 133HS 3NI�HO1dW �
o0
z
o�
�o
w
w�
c�
e�
z
x
X
1 N
1 L7
X
�IJ �
r� ti
s �
00 ��
\ x�
1 \
2 / - r7
i
N U)
I X
i
o \
o
+
� ttt
L
ry
w
C)
w O
_ v) Ln
U D O+
°o un O
O
y z
w U
\ cn m O
J
0
,r
i 1 t
O
M
w
J
Q
O U
. �l V)

/ 6
OW
wOIZQ
V)
cnt— w=
zQLz<
d Z Z
0><z
Z J O
0<< V)
/
ozcm
/ lb .
I I
1 I
I I
I QI� I
W n!�\
� I
I
I 1 i
L
O 1
� 1
(\ 1
1
1
1
\ \\
00
k
r
I �00'
/
0
�o
os .c
s\
3
TCHUNEL SHEET
MA
0 f
Kol

w
ti
't
V)
x
0 M: C)
r- L) N
+ L� . -j-
Q� (A
z x
00
LLI
Z LLJ 0
U) M (n +
X
LO
Lc)
o-'c

L lIIIHS IN71H:D1bW
n
+
W
U �z
m U
� W
o V) m
N
+ UQ.
d- W
F- z
I-
1 bW
/
/
+� 1
I
o•
0
0I
(D I
r� o
. I
0 I.
0
0
d-
I
TV
z
O d
{Q�
LiI ~
O
U
w a
O
woo-djowa�equmnnnn
:xe�
� �.
N` Id
6= -S�c -M
J
U
6041'09E'SZ8
8046'09£'8Z9 auoyd
9088Z ew!ae0 ylJoN 'apinaysy
N
�
�d�� � N 12� Ol I N O W
9L09LZ N '4BI uoyd
ti09LZ ON `46leIB!!
o
o
@
COL Hl GVQ 'PAIR IOMdvO BUZ
o
w
z
lOZ al!nS
peon{ poomAeH L6L
ON NO�l�ll
wauBojd }ueweousyu3 waisAsoo3
°
co
aul'BuNasulBu3 -la )leg IasyalW
103fNd NOUV IOMS TOMSf A33210 3snOHNOOIG
:.iol pendeid
0 IL
L lIIIHS IN71H:D1bW
n
+
W
U �z
m U
� W
o V) m
N
+ UQ.
d- W
F- z
I-
1 bW
/
/
+� 1
I
o•
0
0I
(D I
r� o
. I
0 I.
0
0
d-
I
TV
z
O d
{Q�
LiI ~
O
U
w a
O
W
J
U
o
N
10

N
8 l]]HS INI�H :DIVA
o l
o�
CD /
v
Off\
k X
OC-4 \
00
(,VO
O
1 � I
rn
C
9 E��S 3NI�H:D1dW
IBM
oI
t "D l ON _" C]d02J )�liNnoo ONE
4
:xezl
� , "
N V I d
6LSZ- SIL -6{8 �d
60171'09£'SZ8
80VL09£ "2 'auoyd
eupOe3 'apinaysV
2Jd3/k O N N Ol I N 0 W
9/-SL -M :euoyd
v09LZ ON 48els
co
N
o
o
OD
90992 yUoN
LOZ apS
ON 'NOAH Ji
COL K egns 'FM6 lolldso 8ZLZ
g o
o
o
peon pooMdeH L6L
!d NOUV801S38
wsj6oJ4 ;ueweousyu3 we}s�tsoo3
r
�
1
=
CL
c o
oul 'BupooulBU3 sexes 108LIDI y
iDNO0 >133210 KnOHN0018
:joj pejsdeid
�
� �
N
8 l]]HS INI�H :DIVA
o l
o�
CD /
v
Off\
k X
OC-4 \
00
(,VO
O
1 � I
rn
C
9 E��S 3NI�H:D1dW
IBM
oI
t "D l ON _" C]d02J )�liNnoo ONE
4

woo'djowa� aqw,Nmm
60K 096'M :XeA
80K'09C'8N -9uO4d
9088Z eullOJBD 41JON '911!Ag4SV
6OZ 9;!nS
PeOH POOmAeH L6L
Out 'BulJ8GulBu3 J83188 1004*1W
6 i3IIHS INI-lHOIVVI
r
0 LL)
Z 0
m
0
z 0
p:
V)
T-
X LLJ tR
Z- 133HS 3NI�HOiVn
,ell', -
C4
/��
x
00
0
0
cwt
owl' 00A 0-
LO
0
C'VO('J ALJINn
.,NliNnH
NVId
�JV3A 9NNOiINON
9LIFO-sv--" -Guo4d
V09/0 ON 'LPIGIBU
co
CN
0
60
OD
46
OWNOA�Ji
COL Ht GVnS 'pAle lopclvo gal
CD
S
WBIBO.Ij jueweoust4ug tuGIBABOOB
—
z
z z 0
OD
133M�Jd NOUV IOB3Z1)433�10 3snOHN0018
col peisdoici
m
2
2 �
M
0 0
r
0 LL)
Z 0
m
0
z 0
p:
V)
T-
X LLJ tR
Z- 133HS 3NI�HOiVn
,ell', -
C4
/��
x
00
0
0
cwt
owl' 00A 0-
LO
0
C'VO('J ALJINn
.,NliNnH
C4
/��
x
00
0
0
cwt
owl' 00A 0-
LO
0
C'VO('J ALJINn
.,NliNnH

woo-d.iooja�egw•mmm
k .'` t "':
t" # Nd�d
N
x
W4*09£'8Z8:xeJ
80tiL'09£'8Z8 :auoyd
90882 euilaeO 41+oN 'l
2 ]Vlk O N N Oi I N O W
9L40 -S1L- 616 =auoyd
V09/0 ON '451019a
o
N �
OD
OZ al �S
ON `N011
601 K GRnS V148 100e0 SUZ
o
Z
M
o W
$ o
peon poomAeH L6L
tuBj5ojj y3 l(3
&
F °'
oul'Bul}ieeulBu3je)le9leeyolW
133MO ld NOIIV JOS f A33W 3snOHNOOI9
moo +pemdeid
d
CL
MATCHLINE SHEET
cr
w
J
U
m
U(D
� N
W
Q
X N
ry
2 �
� Z
W
J W
Q_ p
(Y Z
� p
2 133HS 3NIIHOiVN
Y !
W
W
Of
U
0
W
O
O
O 1
J
m
O
f
N
RGSS�NG
z
0Lf)
0
i
W
N
x
0
N �
r�
I
Y !
W
W
Of
U
0
W
O
O
O 1
J
m
O
f
N
RGSS�NG
z
0Lf)
0
i
W

woo•djooja�egw*mmm
:XeJ
f
^X
z
NV ]d
N ]d
O
I
�o
:D
O
0 J
W Q
S
U
O
09C W9
80V1'04£828:auoyd
eugaeO 'aIIinagSV
d
�ffi
Y
�d3,k O I2MI NOW
9L4o- SIL- " :Guoyd
vo9LZ �N '46lelsa
°
N
o
0
90882 glJON
app
eon Ht euns `PNe lo3. 0 SUZ
c
�
Ei
W
g 0
lOZ
Peoa Pooh (eH L6L
�N NO�l2il
wsjBoid }ueweous4u3 we}edsooa
0
°
Z —
°
Z z �
.0
au�'BuNeau�Bu3 �a�e8 �eeya�y�
lONObd NOI VWiS31d »332 0 3snOH>1OO18
:jo; pejsdejd
o
MATCHLINE SHEET_11
1 I
I
z a� I
goo
0 a �
w
+5 S
10 +0
1�
1
W
f
^X
z
O
I
�o
:D
O
0 J
W Q
S
z a� I
goo
0 a �
w
+5 S
10 +0
1�
1
W
f
LLJ
(
L L
U
I /
�
:D
O
i
S
U
O
J
�
O
un
-1-
rn '
M
r
M
N
d.
CYX
I
O
X �
MDR
r-
V)
X
I
oCD
0
M
u
W
J
Q
0 U
LO

woo-djooja�egw-mmm
N`d1 d
6ly- 9lL-w
60b109£'9Z9.xezl
SObI'OSE9Z9•auoyd
euilaeO 'ap!naysy
r a,.
JN12�OlINOW
9L0- 91L- 6:auoyd
ti 61�y��
b09LZ �N 4Blelgb
o
"
0)
°
N
G0
0
90992 yuoN
lOZ al!nS
�N ' NO�l2�l
EOl Hl eying 'PM8 loildH� 8ZLZ
a �
z o
M
o
o
W ,,
0 0
z
peon poom (eH L6L
�Qb
wa�Bo�d yueweousyua wepAsooa
il
—
r
; 3
g°
aul `BuNaaulBu3 �e�eg lesyalyy
103rO8d NOIIVdOiS38 >133W 3snOH>10018
:joy pejudejd
.
a
Z L 13]HS 3NI-IHOldW
w
00
z 0
J m af
O
00
z
v~i =
wa
PERMANENT STR--
_nc_ — —
O
i
x00
z
om
QF-
/O
O
O
d-
CROSSING
N
0Z
0
w
J
Q
U
V)
k
Q?
X
N
/ XO
�Qb
CROSSING
N
0Z
0
w
J
Q
U
V)

woo-djoojeAegw,mmm
604 L'09£'9Z8 :xed
9017L 09£'8Z8 :auOgd
9089Z euiIae0 WON 'apinaysy
LOZ epS
peon pooanrleH L6L
oul 'BuliaaulBu3 .1a3le9 Iae40IW
N VI d
�Jb'�Jl O N 12 011 NO W sc09/0 N ' :auoyd co
ti09LZ �N 461elsld
ON 'NOJ�2il M HL eB�S `pN6 IoAduo 8ZLZ c �� W _ °
uisjBold luawa°us4u3 waledsoo3 g ° d n' Z z & ?
103f0'id NOIIV/ JOMH A33210 3snOH>10019 moo; pajsdajd o a
.=W f2
N
FL 13�NS �N /�N,�1
/
\
O°
x /
z
0
V)
0
O
w X
z
m / Lo
I x
1 I 000
0 o x
cn
X �
O \
O
o
+T
a-
7 /
OX
k1�
M
LL)
/
J
z
x
--O o
Q0
Lo
(� J
W IZ
H
In
W W
Qf 0
\
O°
x /
z
0
V)
0
O
w X
z
m / Lo
I x
1 I 000
0 o x
cn
X �
O \
O
o
+T
a-
7 /
OX
k1�
M
L0 It
+_
(D C)
d�
Va
z
w
LL)
J
Q
U
N
L0 It
+_
(D C)
d�
Va
z
w

woo,djoaa %eqw*mmm
6017 L "09C 9Z8 'xe:l
8017L'04£'8Z8 auoyd
9089Z euilae0 ylJoN 'apinaysy
LOZ apS
p80U POOmAeH LU
oul'BuliaaulBu3.1a3leg laeyalW
rl-
Nb'Idz
-SIL-
�J V3 A O N N Ol I N O W
9Lti0- SLL- 6L6:auo4d
v09LZ �N 4Blelsa
co
N
o
o
w
,=W
�N `NOJ�2il
COL HL e}ing ''PNe loLlduo 8ZLZ
z o
o
G
we�Boud }uewaousyu3 we }sAsoa3
W
3 of
103PObd NOUVt IOMH N3380 3snOHN0019
:ao; pa.isdaid
a.
o a a
tis .
y
low
z
O
BLOCKHOUSE CREEK
�r
;A
r•
15
NO"
tim- I 1.
r� It
U
�w
Q�
�o
�z
-w

woo,djoaaXegw,mNvA
6017 V OS£'SZ9 :xed
9014'09£'9Z9 'auoUd
9099Z eullae0 WON 'apinaysy
LOZ apS
pe0H POOm SeH LU
au1 'BuNeeulBu3 J9488 108401W
5 L 133HS 3NI�HOiVA
N
k
O
cn
X
O
GO
X
os o
x
0
0
0
� o
- - I
/ M
W
J
Q
U
(n
1n
NVId din
mm ®
�JV3A ONX011NOW
c QU04,1
V091Z ON ' 4BGl8ld
r
CM
0)
c
co
,.,
ON 'NOl��il
Sol Hl GUnS `pM8 Io�o SzZz
O
p
z
o
cs
o v
103rMld NOUVb TOMS l >13380 3snOH)40018
Wviftid }ueWeou84u3 wGWABooa
�
�
z
a.
CL
:jol peaedesd
�'-
�
o o
5 L 133HS 3NI�HOiVA
N
k
O
cn
X
O
GO
X
os o
x
0
0
0
� o
- - I
/ M
W
J
Q
U
(n
1n

rm m M mpg ®R p -1
I/
61
10+50
-7 COO X,
j � � i cp
-bL 133HS 3NI�HOiVH
— . N -4 -N 0
0 -110
+
LL,
C-)
L--J
�2

i�
LL 133HS -�NI�H:D1
-bx
J�
i
L�
cf)
x
.y
U)
�t [
t t1 VVV
IF
S.I
E tit,
a
woo•djooja�egw-mmm
M xej
NdId nn
z-��- :XB�
$
6ov�'o9E
80b1'09E'8Z8!auoyd
9088Z eui�aeO UlJON 'ap!naysy
�y�� JNI�IOlINOW
9L09LZ ON
b09LZ �N 46lelBk!
^
c
c
lOZ a}!�S
ON `NO�l2i1
eo} H} QVnS 'PM8 IOVdvO 8ZLZ
a
; c
Z
M
°
o
$ ,
peon{ poomAeH L6L
oul'BuNeeulBu3 Je )IBB leeyo1w
�,
103M' Jd NOUVdO1SMI >133210 3snOHA0018
wa�BoQ }ueweauHyu3 we}B�ieoo2
:uo} pea8deid
g
°
r
v 3
o o
iP
i�
LL 133HS -�NI�H:D1
-bx
J�
i
L�
cf)
x
.y
U)
�t [
t t1 VVV
IF
S.I
E tit,
a

woo-djooaaN eq w'mNvA
60K'09£'8Z8 'xed
80K 09£'828 auoyd
9088Z eu!!oa80 y )PoN 'ai!!naysy
60Z 9;!nS
peon poonn, 8H L6L
Oul 'BulieeulBu3 Je)l8S 188401W
8 � 133HS = 3NI�H :DiVh
n
9�
yS
P
c0
I�jx
O
o
/ o r
1�
m
t
0/
O ! "/
M
W
J
Q
f U
l U7
LD
6LZZ -SI&M )(Bd
1
.11
UtIO- SIZ-616 auoyd
'4slelqu
co
0
4Y
4O9LZ ON
N
c
COL Hl e7InS "pM6 Wildeo SZLZ
0
..
g o
WHJBOJd iU6W6OUHllUg W8i8ASOO-3
:Jo; poisdoid
� —
e
A
�;
o o
m
t
0/
O ! "/
M
W
J
Q
f U
l U7
LD

V 5}
LO
O
-
X °..
Z 4 LO
O x
� X
O
(� d O �.
LLI
.� >
O
o O
f
\ rn
O
O
A-
0')
N
I—
O \ \
s �
k
co
cn w rr� I
w0 rx
00
\
O
4 k
4 4 \
4
-4 4
4 4
L L 1ll_�HS: INI�HOiM
O
�( 44 4 I
0
r�
V
L
J
Q
U
N

C�
C�
D
0
0
n
APPENDIX D. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Site
0 Review Comments - October 2009
n
0
0
0
0
e

Clemmons, Micky
From: Brown, David W SAW [David.W.Brown @usace.army.mil)
Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 11:33 AM
To: Clemmons, Micky
Cc: Hair, Sarah E SAW
Subject: Compliance Inspection at Blockhouse Creek Stream Restoration Project Site
02- Nov -09
Baker Engineering NY, Inc.
797 Haywood Road, Suite 201
Asheville, North Carolina 28806
Micky Clemmons,
This e -mail is a follow -up to our conversation this morning pertaining to my compliance inspection on 29 -Oct
at the Blockhouse Creek Stream Restoration Project site in Polk County. Overall the project site & your work
looks good. As mentioned during our conservation, the following items need to be addressed with the
property owner (Foothills Equestrian Nature Center):
• Stall shavings & muck from the barns were noted inside the project /easement area. No placement or
dumping of debris of any type inside easement area is allowed.
• Several small beaver dams were found in streams near the Barn Office to areas near Show Rings B &
A2. It is advised to remove these dams & the beaver(s) during the monitoring period of this project in
order to minimize adverse effects(s) this may have on the project.
• There is a small sand bag style dam in the main branch of Blockhouse Creek at the bridge to the show
rings. This structure can impair the stream restoration. Though the dam may be outside the
easement /project area, the USACE can consider this structure to be an unauthorized activity. The
USACE request that the dam be removed.
The USACE looks forward to receiving the 1st year monitoring report in the very near future. If need any
additional information or have any questions please contact Liz Hair or me.
David Brown
Regulatory Specialist
Asheville Regulatory Field Office
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - Wilmington District
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, NC 28801 -5006
828 - 271 -7980 ext. 231
david.w.brown @usace.army.mil