20150636 Ver 1_Year 4 MR Addendum - AP Implementation Status_20210216

ID#* 20150636 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:*
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 02/17/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 2/16/2021
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream r Wetlands W Buffer V Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Michael Herrmann
Project Information
...................................................................................
ID#:* 20150636
Existing IDY
Project Type:
Project Name:
County:
Email Address:*
mherrmann@watershedinvestment
snc.net
Version:
*1
Existing Version
r DMS r Mitigation Bank
Neville Farms Buffer and Nutrient Offset
Mitigation Bank
Orange
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Addendum to Yr. 4 Monitoring Report - AdaptivePlan
6.52MB
Implementation Status.pdf
Rease upload only one RDFcf the conplete file that needs to be subr itted...
Signature
Print Name:* Michael Herrmann
Signature:*
rsdrrre'�' ��f. f�+trPde'�a

Year 4 Monitoring Report Addendum - Adaptive Management Implementation Status
Neville Farms Phases 1 & 2
DWR #2015-0636
February 15, 2021
This document summarizes implementation of the Adaptive Management Plan for Neville Farms
submitted by Watershed Investments NC, LLC and approved by the NC Division of Water Resources in a
letter dated July 14, 2020. For your convenience, the approved Adaptive Plan is included as Attachment
1 to this Addendum.
Tract 1
Year 3 Monitoring Observation: In the vicinity of Plot 7, planted stems were exhibiting stunted growth
when compared with surrounding plots. Based on observations, the likely cause for diminished growth
was competition with dense fescue in the area.
Year 4 Adaptive Implementation Measures: The following adaptive management measures have been
implemented on Tract 1:
1. A licensed pesticide applicator from Ripple EcoSolutions applied an aquatic safe herbicide on an
approximate 0.4 acres in the vicinity of Plot 7 on 8/7/2020. Spray logs are included in
Attachment 2. While spraying, care was taken to avoid existing plant stock, however, during the
monitoring assessment of the area on October 1P and 12'h of 2020, Axiom noted that several
trees in Plot 7 may have been lost to herbicide treatment.
2. Soil tests of this area were taken on 7/9/2020 to check whether soil amendment was needed to
aid tree growth and to compare the area with the neighboring Tract 1 soils. The soil test results
are included in Attachment 3 as Site N1. Several areas around plot 7 were taken at a depth of
approximately 6 inches to create a composite soil of the area. As indicated in the soil test
results, the emergent hardwood community in and around Plot 7 (i.e., Site N1) was not
recommended for lime treatment. Due to concerns over the lack of growth in the originally
planted trees around Plot 7, each tree was planted with one 21-gram Scotts Agriform Fertilizer
20N:10P:5K tablet. The slow -release tablets provide consistent plant -available micronutrients
for consistent growth across the planting area with minimal leaching and should aid plant
growth.
3. Follow-up planting of the sprayed area was completed 10/29/20 (See Table 1 for the planting
list). Fifty containerized plants (one -gallon) were planted at a spacing of 20ft x 20ft and the
newly planted stock were flagged. Photos of the new plant stock in the planted area are
included as Attachment 4.

Table 1. One -gallon tree species and planting numbers used on 10/29/20.
Species
Common Name
Number
Acer negundo
Box Elder
25
Betula nigra
River Birch
50
Acer rubrum
Red Maple (Only on Tract 2)
25
Quercusphellos
Willow Oak
25
Liriodcndron tuipilala
Tulip Poplar
50
Querc Is michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
25
Total
200
Tract 2
Year 3 Monitoring Observation: Lack of vigorous planted stem growth in the majority of the site
outside of Plot 2 with potential causes being herbivory or poor soil conditions. Unlike the Plot 7 area of
Tract 1, fescue density and growth was not vigorous and did not seem to be a likely cause for low
growth in planted stems in Tract 2.
Year 4 Adaptive Implementation Measures: The following adaptive management measures have been
implemented on Tract 2:
• Soil tests were taken at the site on 7/9/20 and the results are included in Attachment 3. To
better diagnose the site, Tract 2 was divided into Side A (south side) listed as N2A in the soils
report and Side B (north side) listed as N213 in the soils report. Several soil samples were taken at
a depth of approximately 6 inches to create a composite soil of each side. Like Tract 1, lime soil
amendment was not recommended in the soils results for the emergent hardwood plants. The
same Scotts Agriform fertilizer tablet described for Tract 1 was utilized for new tree plantings in
Tract 2 to help improve plant growth.
• Follow-up tree planting of the tract was completed 10/29/20 (See Table 1 for the planting list).
One -hundred -fifty (150) containerized plants (one -gallon) were planted at a spacing of 20ft x 20ft
and the newly planted stock were flagged. Photos of the new plant stock in the planted area are
included as Attachment 4.
Remaining Implementation Measures
In the early Spring of 2021, a non -toxic deer repellent will be applied at least once to the plants on Tract
2 to discourage herbivory. A non -toxic repellent safe for wildlife will be used and timed to coincide with
the early budding stage of the newly planted trees.

Addendum Attachment 1.
Adaptive Management Plan (end Submission - 7/12/2020)
Neville Farms Phases 1&2
DWR #2015-0636
Site Overview and History
This Adaptive Management Plan is provided to address concerns over planted stem success at the Neville Farms
Mitigation Bank Parcel (Site). Watershed Investments NC (WINC), the sponsor, originally planted the site in
November -December 2016. The site encompasses 6.15 acres of land along Neville Creek in Orange County
North Carolina and is broken into two tracts separated by Neville Creek (See Figure 1 for a map of the site).
Site activities consisted of approximately 5.04 acres of riparian restoration and approximately 0.94 acres of
riparian preservation. An additional 0.17 acres of Tract 1 is included in the project easement area but is outside
the rule -defined riparian buffer zone and, consequently, is not included for either riparian buffer mitigation or
nutrient offset credit generation.
Year 3 (2019) monitoring data was collected on October 11, 2019 by Axiom Environmental (See Attachmentl).
While average density of planted stems per acre were above success criteria of 260 planted stems, in their review
of the report, NC Division of Water Resources (DWR) staff raised concerns over limited plant growth at both
tracts of the Site (See NC DWR Email in Attachment 2) and prompted a visit to review the site.
Staff from Watershed Investments (Mike Herrmann), Axiom Environmental (Phillip Perkinson) accompanied
Katie Merritt (DWR) on a visit to the Site on June 111h, 2020 to review plant growth and discuss options for
corrective measures. In their visit, deer browsing, competition from existing fescue, and poor soils were all sited
as potential causes for limited tree growth in some areas of both tracts. The prevalence of these causes varied
between Tract 1 and Tract 2 but raised concerns over planting success at some areas within the Site. No signs of
easement encroachment were observed during the visit.
The following is a brief summary of observations made of the two tracts during the site visit.
Tract 1- Planted stem growth was observed to be meeting success criteria throughout the majority of
the mitigation area and numerous natural volunteer plants were observed. Limited plant growth was
observed, however, both within Plot 7 and its immediate surrounding area (See Figure 1). In the Plot 7
area dense fescue was established. Additionally, the plot's planted stem viability was the lowest of all the
plots (283 stems/acre). Based on field observation, the area of suppressed growth is estimated to be 0.30
acres.
Tract 2 — Both plant diversity and growth were limited in most of the easement area except for the area
within monitoring Plot #2. Potentially causes for these problems were suggested to be poor soil and
plant herbivory. The area affected is shown in Figure 1 and is approximately 1.20 acres.
In response to concerns found in the annual monitoring reports and observed during the visit, the following
adaptive measures are proposed to, increase planted tree density, provide plant diversity, and address
competition from herbaceous plants.

Adpative Management Plan
Herbaceous competition from fescue was observed to be a likely cause of stunted plant growth on Tract 1. On
this tract, herbicide will be used to control fescue. Chemicals labeled safe for use in riparian zones and in aquatic
environments will be mixed and applied at rates labeled for treatment of fescue. Precautions will be taken to
avoid collateral damage to desirable vegetation (both planted and volunteer). Pesticide application will be
conducted by a licensed application specialist and logs will be available upon request. Fescue application will be
scheduled soon after approval of this adaptive management plan.
Soil testing of Tract 2 is being undertaken to determine whether the site needs soil amendments prior to the
container planting. Soil amendment will occur as needed based on soil testing. Possible amendments to the soil
include the use of lime to lower acidity and/or fertilization to improve low soil nutrients (e.g., phosphorus, or
potassium) while being careful not to over fertilize. Fertility in Tract 1 was not observed to be a problem.
To increase planted stem density, planting one -gallon container plants will occur on both tracts 1 and 2. On
Tract 2, 150 native hardwood species listed in Table 1 will be planted at a density of approximately 100 stems per
acre to fillin areas with low planted stem growth or stunted growth. This density, when combined with existing
successful plants, should solidify the likelihood that plantings at the site will meet success criteria defined in the
Mitigation Banking Instrument at the site close-out.
To assess planting needs, Tract 2 is separated into 2 sides based on topography and existing tree growth. Results
from soil tests and existing tree locations on each side will be used to determine where container plants are
needed to supplement sparse areas of existing tree growth. Soil amendments will be based on soil test findings.
For Tract 1, where the area is smaller, approximately 50 trees will be planted using a more uniform 16-foot
spacing. Of the Table 1 species, Acer rubrum (Red Maple) will not be planted on Tract 1 and only used on Tract
2. Planting of both tracts will occur in the Fall/Winter of 2020/2021 and observed over Year 5 of the
monitoring period.
Due to their more developed root system, the
container plants will be better enabled to
overcome herbivory that is suspected to be
affecting the site. In addition, to discourage
herbivory, a deer repellent will be applied at
least once to the plants on Tract 2 in the spring
of 2021 when trees are in the early budding
stage. A non -toxic repellent safe for wildlife will
be used.
Table 1. Proposed one -gallon tree species (Note:
Species availability may result in the substitution of
regionally appropriate native species.)
Species
Common Name
Acer negundo
Box Elder
Diospyms virginiana
Persimmon
Acer rubruru
Red Maple (Only on
Tract 2)
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
Celas ocadentalis
Hackberry
Quercus falcata
Southern red oak

Addendum Attachment 2.
Ripple EcoSolutions
Vegetation Managment Report
Site: Firs
Crew Leader
Crew Members
c
Chemicals sprayed Rate
21, 1
e,j,,i
Areas Completed
Target species
Date: y
Applicators Lice se # C[
Weather conditions
i
.I

Addendum Attachment 3.
NCDA&CS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone]
Website: www.ncagr.gov/agronomi/
Report No.
FY21-SL000554
¢Ski
Client:
Michael Herrmann
Advisor:
4j
Predictive
1630 Weatherford Cir.
Raleigh, NC 27604
�-
Soil Report
Mehlich-3 Extraction
Sampled County : Orange
_
Links to Helpful Information
Client ID: 386971
Advisor
ID:
Sampled:07/09/2020 Received: 07/13/2020 Completed: 07/21/2020
Farm:
Sample ID: N1
Recommendations:
Lime
Nutrients (lb/acre)
More
Crop
(tons/acre)
N P2O5
K2O
Mg S Mn
Zn
Cu
B
Information
Lime History:
1 - Hardwood, E
0.0
0 40
80
0
0
0
0
Note: 11
2 - Hardwood, M
0.0
80-120 40
60
0
0
0
0
Note: 11
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm3; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm3; NO3-N in mg/dm3]:
Soil Class: Mineral
HM% W/V
CEC BS% Ac pH
P-1 K-1
Ca% Mg%
S-1
Mn-I
Mn-All Mn-Al2 Zn-I
Zn-AI
Cu-I
Na
ESP
SS-1 NO3-N
0.22 0.88
7.6 92 0.6 6.7
19 11
61 29
19
912
136
136
60
0.1
1
Sample ID: N2A
Recommendations:
Lime
Nutrients (lb/acre)
More
Crop
(tons/acre)
N P2O5
K2O
Mg S Mn
Zn
Cu
B
Information
Lime History:
1 - Hardwood, E
0.0
0 60
30
0
0
0
0
Note: 11
2- Hardwood, M
0.0
80-120 60
0
0
0
0
0
Note: 11
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm3; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm3; NO3-N in mg/dm3]:
Soil Class: Mineral
HM% W/V
CEC BS% Ac pH
P-1 K-1
Ca% Mg%
S-1
Mn-I
Mn-All Mn-AI2 Zn-I
Zn-AI
Cu-I
Na
ESP
SS-1 NO3-N
0.32 0.82
7.9 80 1.6 5.7
7 52
53 24
24
592
78
78
101
0.1
1
Sample ID: N2B
Recommendations:
Lime
Nutrients (lb/acre)
More
Crop
(tons/acre)
N P2O5
K2O
Mg S Mn
Zn
Cu
B
Information
Lime History:
1 - Hardwood, E
0.0
0 70
70
0
0
0
0
Note: 11
2 - Hardwood, M
0.0
80-120 70
30
0
0
0
0
Note: 11
Test Results [units - W/V in g/cm3; CEC and Na in meq/100 cm3; NO3-N in mg/dm3]:
Soil Class: Mineral
HM% W/V
CEC BS% Ac pH
P-1 K-1
Ca% Mg%
S-1
Mn-I
Mn-All Mn-AI2 Zn-I
Zn-AI
Cu-I
Na
ESP
SS-1 NO3-N
0.36 0.85
5.4 76 1.3 5.7
6 23
54 20
18
898
91
91
49
0.1
2
Noah Carolina
i
I Awl'
Futacii frum fuWCixrlml5skm
Reprogramming of the laboratory -information -management system that makes this report possible is being funded
through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
Thank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
- Steve Troxler, Commissioner of Apricultyre

NCDA&CS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Website: www.ncagr.gov/agronomi/
Report No. FY21-SL000554
Michael Herrmann
Page 3 of 3
Understanding the Soil Report: explanation of measurements, abbreviations and units
Recommendations
Report Abbreviations
Lime
Ac
exchangeable acidity
If testing finds that soil pH is too low for the crop(s) indicated, a lime recommendation will be given in units of either
B
boron
ton/acre or Ib/1000 sq ft. For best results, mix the lime into the top 6 to 8 inches of soil several months before planting.
BS%
% CEC occupied by basic cations
For no -till or established plantings where this is not possible, apply no more than 1 to 1.5 ton/acre (50 Ib/1000 sq ft) at onE
Ca%
% CEC occupied by calcium
time, even if the report recommends more. You can apply the rest in similar increments every six months until the full rate
CEC
cation exchange capacity
is applied. If MG is recommended and lime is needed, use dolomitric lime.
Cu-I
copper index
ESP
exchangeable sodium percent
Fertilizer
HM%
percent humic matter
Recommendations for field crops or other large areas are listed separately for each nutrient to be added (in units of
K-1
potassium index
lb/acre unless otherwise specified). Recommendations for N (and sometimes for B) are based on research/field studies
K20
potash
for the crop being grown, not on soil test results. K-1 and P-1 values are based on test results and should be > 50. If they
Mg%
% CEC occupied by magnesium
are not, follow the fertilizer recommendations given. If Mg is needed and no lime is recommended, 0-0-22 (11.5% Mg) is
MIN
mineral soil class
an excellent source; 175 to 250 lb per acre alone or in a fertilizer blend will usually satisfy crop needs, SS-1 levels appear
Mn
manganese
only on reports for greenhouse soil or problem samples.
Mn-All
Mn-availability index for crop 1
Mn-Al2
Mn-availability index for crop 2
Mn-I
manganese index
Farmers and other commercial producers should pay special attention to micronutrient levels. If $, pH$, $pH, C or Z
Mn-
mineral -organic soil class
notations appear on the soil report, refer to $Note: Secondary Nutrients and Micronutrients_ In general, homeowners do not
N
nitrogen
need to be concerned about micronutrients. Various crop notes also address lime fertilizer needs; visit
Na
sodium
ncagr.gov/agronomi/pubs.htm.
NO3-N
nitrate nitrogen
ORG
organic soil class
Recommendations for small areas, such as home lawns/gardens, are listed in units of Ib/1000 sq ft. If you cannot find
pH
current soil pH
the exact fertilizer grade recommended on the report, visit www.ncagr.pov/apronomi/obpart4.htrntfsfind information that
P-1
phosphorus index
may help you choose a comparable alternate. For more information, read A Homeowner's Guide to Fertilizer.
P205
phosphate
S-1
sulfur index
Test Results
SS-1
soluble salt index
W/V
weight per volume
The first seven values [soil class, HM%, W/V, CEC, BS%, Ac and pH] describe the soil and its degree of acidity. The
Zn-AI
zinc availability index
Zn-I
zinc index
remaining 16 [P-I, K-I, Ca%, Mg%, Mn-I, Mn-All, Mn-AI2, Zn-I, Zn-AI, Cu-I, S-I, SS -I, Na, ESP, SS -I, NO3-N (not routinel
available)] indicate levels of plant nutrients or other fertility measurement. Visit www.ncagr.pov/agronomi/uyrst.htm

Addendum Attachment 4. Site Photos and Photo Point Locations.
Figure 1. Photo Point Locations.

yy #} T ri`s 44•l °°�tii
Ail
x t
i
5A
'�" t� � " � s • ass" r '' � k� °
" ,;�' � n•s3- 1 is k 3 � A 'r �'" `h � �1+ s .:
�.
Tract 2. Side A - Photo 3 near Plot 2.
F4.• ;
YkIl
i
r
r
Tract 2. Side B - Photo 4 near Plot 1.
Is

`N: