20110187 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20111219

RECEI
DEC 19 2011
NC ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
ANNUAL WETLAND MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 1 (2011)
SUMMIT SEEP NON - RIPARIAN WETLAND MITIGATION SITE
RFP # 16- 002835 Contract # 003244
Davidson County, North Carolina
Data Collected March 21St 2011— October 21St 2011
PREPARED FOR:
Y
�� °nceltT ent
raoGUwm
NC Department of Environment & Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
PREPARED BY:
Restoration Systems, LLC
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 211
Raleigh, NC 27604
November 2011
00

Table of Contents
Part I Executive Summary / Project Abstract
1.1 Project Goals & Objectives -----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.2 Background Summary----------------------------------------------------- -------------------- - - - - --
1.3
Vegetation Assessment
1.3.1
Vegetation Success Criteria ------------------------------------------------------
1.3.2
Vegetative Problem Areas --------------------------------------------------------
1.3.3
Vegetative Contingency Plan ----------------------------------------------------
1.4
Wetland Assessment
1.4.1
Wetland Success Criteria ----------------------------------------------------------
1.4.2
Wetland Contingency Plan -------------------------------------------------------
1.4.3
Wetland Problem Areas
1.5
Supporting Data------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - --
----------- - - - - -1
----------- - - - --1
-- --------------- ----------1
---------------------------
---------------------------
---------------------------
---------- ---------- - - - - -- 3
--------------------------
3
-------------------------- 3
-------------------- - - - - -- 3
---------------------------
Part II Methods
2.1 Hydrology--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -3
2.2 Vegetation--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -4
Part III Conclusions
3.1 Hydrology--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -4
3.2 Vegetation-------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- ----------------------------------------- - - - - -4
Part IV References 5
Appendix A: C
Figure 1.
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
eneral Figures and Tables
Vicinity Map & Directions
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Project Activity and Reporting History
Project Contacts
Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2. Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 7. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 8. Planted & Total Stem Counts
Figure 3. Vegetation Plot Photos
Appendix D: Hydrology Data
Table 9: Wetland Gauge Attainment Data
Figure 4: Summit Seep 30 -70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall - 2011
2011 Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site pg. 1
Year 1 (201 1) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Part 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY / PROJECT ABSTRACT
1.1 Project Goals & Objectives
The 2009 Yadkin Pee -Dee River Basin RBRP identified stormwater runoff and other development impacts
as likely contributors to turbidity and chlorophyll violations within the Sites TLW - 14 -Digit Cataloging
Unit 03040103020010. The Summit Seep Wetland Mitigation Project (hereby referred to as "Site ") was
identified as a non - riparian wetland restoration opportunity to improve water quality, enhance flood
attenuation, and to restore wildlife habitat within the TLW.
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following:
• Remove nonpoint sources of pollution associated with vegetation maintenance including:
a. the cessation of broadcasting fertilizer, pesticides, and other agricultural chemicals into and
adjacent to Site drainage ditches; and
b. providing a vegetated wetland to aid in the treatment of runoff.
• Restore wetland hydro - periods that satisfy wetland jurisdictional requirements and approximate
the Site's natural range and variation.
• Promote floodwater attenuation by filling ditches and enhancing groundwater storage capacity.
• Restore and reestablish natural community structure, habitat diversity, and functional continuity.
• Enhance and protect the Site's full potential of wetland functions and values in perpetuity.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Providing 4.0 Non - riparian Wetland Mitigation Units (WMUS), as calculated in accordance with
the requirements stipulated in RFP #16- 002835, by restoring 3.91 acres and enhancing 0.18 acres
of non - riparian wetland. This will be accomplished by filling ditches, removing spoil castings,
excluding livestock, redirecting hydrology from a spring across the Site, and planting with native
forest vegetation.
• Protecting the Site in perpetuity with a conservation easement.
1.2 Background Summary
Located in western Davidson County and within the 14 -Digit Cataloging Unit 03040103020010 the Site
is approximately five miles southwest of Lexington, NC (Figure 1, Appendix A). Within the Southern
Outer Piedmont physiographic province of NC, the regional physiography is characterized by dissected
irregular plains, some low rounded hills and ridges, and low to moderate gradient streams with mostly
cobble, gravel, and sandy substrates (Griffith et al. 2002). The Site is upslope from the western edge of
the floodplain of an unnamed tributary to North Potts Creek draining 35.6 acres. The 6.4 acre Site sits on
both sides of the unnamed tributary, of which 4.1 acres have been restored. The North Carolina
Ecosystem Enhancement Program currently holds the conservation easement for the Site, the property is
owned by Hillcrest Acres, LLC.
1.3 Vegetation Assessment
After planting was completed, six sample vegetation plots (10 -meter by 10- meter) were installed and
measured within the Site as per guidelines established in CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording vegetation,
Version 4.0 (Lee et al. 2006). Vegetation plots are permanently monumented with 5 -foot metal garden
posts at each corner. In each sample plot, vegetation parameters to be monitored include species
composition and species density. Visual observations of the percent cover of shrub and herbaceous
species will also be documented by photograph. Vegetation plot information can be found in Appendix C.
Year 1 (2011) stem count measurements indicate an average of 640 planted stems per acre across the Site.
In addition, each individual plot met success criteria.
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site pg. 2
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

1.3.1 Vegetation Success Criteria
Characteristic Tree Species include woody tree and shrub species planted at the Site, observed within a
reference forest, or outlined for the appropriate plant community in Schafale and Weakley (1990). An
average density of 320 stems per acre of Characteristic Tree Species must be surviving in the first three
monitoring years. Subsequently, 260 Characteristic Tree Species per acre must be surviving by the end of
year 5 and 210 Characteristic Tree Species per acre by the end of year 7. The IRT may allow counting of
acceptable volunteer species toward the 210 -tree per acre density upon review and evaluation of the
annual monitoring data.
No single volunteer species (most notably red maple, loblolly pine, and sweet gum) will comprise more
than 20 percent of the total composition at years 3, 5, or 7. If this occurs, remedial procedures /protocols
outlined in the contingency plan will be implemented. During years 3, 5, and 7, no single volunteer
species, comprising over 20 percent of the total composition, may be more than twice the height of the
planted trees. If this occurs, remedial procedures outlined in the contingency plan will be implemented.
If, within the first 3 years, any species exhibits greater than 50 percent mortality, the species will either be
replanted or an acceptable replacement species will be planted in its place as specified in the contingency
plan.
1.3.2 Vegetative Problem Areas
Dense pockets of Arthraxon hispidus, (common name: small carpet grass or joint -head grass) was found
during visual assessments made throughout the growing season. Although not listed on the USDA's list
of North Carolina State noxious weeds or by the Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health the
species is known to be an exotic, introduced from Asia. Although, not considered to be a long term issue
the species did affect the planted bare root saplings in vegetation monitoring plot number six, and in other
areas of the Site.
Additional field observations yielded small pockets of juvenile Ligustrum sinense (Chinese privet)
scattered along the perimeter of the Site. Affected areas are mapped in Figure 2: Current Condition Plan
View (CCPV) of Appendix B.
1.3.3 Vegetative Contingency Plan
The presence of Arthraxon hispidus has not affected the vegetation success of the Site. At this time it is
recommended that no chemical or physical means be used to remove Arthraxon hispidus from the Site.
As the removal and or treatment process could have an adverse impact on planted desirable species. The
impact of Arthraxon hispidus will be monitored by through visual assessment throughout the growing
season in years to come.
Before the start of the growing season, a basal bark or cut stump and spray method will be used to treat
any Ligustrum sinense within the boundaries of the Site. Following the US Army Corps protocol the
treatment will be made by a NCDA &CS certified pesticide applicator that is licensed in wetland and
aquatic applications. Only systemic aquatic certified chemicals will be used.
If vegetation success criteria are not achieved based on average density calculations from combined plots
over the entire restoration area, supplemental planting may be performed with tree species approved by
regulatory agencies. Supplemental planting will be performed as needed until achievement of vegetation
success criteria.
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site pg. 3
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

1.4 Wetland Assessment
Initially four groundwater monitoring gauges were installed at the Site on March 21s` 2011. After the
completion of the Baseline Monitoring Report, the NC EEP requested that one additional monitoring well
be installed on site, Figure 2, Appendix B. The additional gauge was installed June 8`'', 2011.
Hydrological sampling was conducted throughout the growing season at intervals no greater than thirty
days, and was done so to satisfy the determination of jurisdictional hydrology success within the Site
(USEPA 1990). In addition, rainfall data will be used for comparison of groundwater conditions with
extended drought conditions. Graphs of groundwater hydrology and precipitation from an on Site rain
gauge are included in Appendix D.
1.4.1 Wetland Success Criteria
Target hydrological characteristics include saturation or inundation for 7.5 percent of the growing season,
which during average climatic conditions is from March 28"' — November 3rd, 220 days (2002 NRCS
WETS Data). Restored / enhanced wetland areas are expected to support hydrophytic vegetation; if
wetland parameters are marginal as indicated by vegetation and/or hydrology monitoring, a jurisdictional
determination will be performed.
1.4.2 Wetland Contingency Plan
Hydrologic contingency may include floodplain surface modifications such as construction of ephemeral
pools, deep ripping of the soil profile, and installation of berms to retard surface water flows.
Recommendations for contingency to establish wetland hydrology may be implemented and monitored
until hydrology success criteria are achieved.
1.4.3 Wetland Problem Areas
No wetland problem areas were identified within the Site during Year 1 (2011) monitoring.
1.5 Supporting Data
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment and
statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables and
figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting information formerly found in
these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report (formerly Mitigation Plan) and in the
Mitigation Plan (formerly the Restoration Plan) documents available on EEP's website. All raw data
supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from EEP upon request
Part 2: METHODS
2.1 Hydrology
Measurement of wetland hydrology was performed in accordance with traditional methods as per the
April 2003 USACE Wilmington District Stream Mitigation Guidelines. Five (5) continuously recording,
surficial monitoring gauges were installed in accordance with specifications in Installing Monitoring
Wells /Piezometers in Wetlands (NCWRP 1993). The fifth monitoring gauge was installed on June, 8`"
2011 per EEP recommendations received on May 31" 2011. Monitoring gauges were set to a depth of
approximately 24 inches below the soil surface. Screened portions of each gauge were surrounded by
filter fabric, buried in screened well sand, and sealed with a bentonite cap to prevent siltation and surface
flow infiltration during floods. Data will be downloaded at least every 30 days during the growing season.
Additionally, an electronic rain water recording gauge was installed at the site.
Summit Seep Non - Ripanan Wetland Mitigation Site pg. 4
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

2.2 Vegetation
The monitoring of planted vegetation precisely followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation (Lee et al. 2006). Six, 10 by 10 -meter vegetation plots have been
placed within the 4.1 acres of restored / enhanced wetlands (Figure 2, Appendix B). Vegetation received a
visual evaluation at least once every thirty days and CVS data collection took place on September 27,
2011.
Part 3: CONCLUSIONS
3.1 Hydrology
Four of the monitored gauges within restoration areas were inundated / saturated within 12 Inches of the
surface for greater than 7.5 percent of the growing season, which extends from March 28th to November
3rd (220 days). An additional gauge (Gauge 5) was installed in June 2011; therefore, data from the
beginning of the growing season is not available. Based on data from other gauges, it is reasonable to
assume that success criteria would have been met by gauge 5 if the gauge had been online the entire
growing season.
Summary of Groundwater Gauge Results
*Data has been collected through October 21, 2011 fro the year 1 (2011) monitoring season, data wil l continue to be collected and wil l be available upon request
** This gauge was installed in early June 2011; therefore, data from the beginning of the growing season is not available Based on the data form other gauges, it rs likely that this gauge
would have met criteria
3.2 Vegetation
Vegetation sampling across the Site was above the required average density with 640 planted stems per
acre surviving. In addition, each individual plot was above success criteria.
Summary of Planted Vegetation Plot Results
Plot
Success Criteria Achieved / Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)
Gauge
Year 1 (2011)
Year 2 (2012)
Year 3 (2013)
Year 5 (2015)
Year 7 (2017)
1
Year 1 (2011)*
Year 2 (2012)
Year 3 (2013)
Year 4 (2014)
Year 5 (2015)
1
Yes / 37 days
3
(16.81 percent)
2
Yes / 73 days
5
(33.18 percent)
3
Yes / 23 days
Average of All
Plots (1 -6)
(10.45 percent)
4
Yes / 67 days
(30.45 percent)
5
NA ** / 4 days
(1.8 percent)
*Data has been collected through October 21, 2011 fro the year 1 (2011) monitoring season, data wil l continue to be collected and wil l be available upon request
** This gauge was installed in early June 2011; therefore, data from the beginning of the growing season is not available Based on the data form other gauges, it rs likely that this gauge
would have met criteria
3.2 Vegetation
Vegetation sampling across the Site was above the required average density with 640 planted stems per
acre surviving. In addition, each individual plot was above success criteria.
Summary of Planted Vegetation Plot Results
Plot
Planted Stems / Acre Counting Towards Success Criteria
Year 1 (2011)
Year 2 (2012)
Year 3 (2013)
Year 5 (2015)
Year 7 (2017)
1
404
2
485
3
687
4
526
5
1133
6
607
Average of All
Plots (1 -6)
640.33
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site pg 5
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Part 4: REFERENCES
Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem Health. 2011. North Carolina Noxious Weeds (online).
http: / /www. invasive .org /species /list.cfm ?id =21 [November 22, 2011]. North Carolina
Department of Agriculture. 2003.
Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omemik, J.A. Comstock, M.P. Schafale, W.H. McNab, D.R. Lenat, T.F. MacPherson,
J.B. Glover, and V.B. Shelbourne. 2002. Ecoregions of North Carolina and South Carolina.
U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2006. CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation. Version 4.0.North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program. Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina Wetlands Restoration Program (NCWRP). 1993. Installing Monitoring
Wells /Piezometers in Wetlands (WRP Technical Note HY- IA -3.1). North Carolina Department
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2009. Yadkin -Pee Dee River Basin
Restoration Priorities (online). Available:
http: / /www.nceep. net / services /restplans/ Yadkin_ Pee_ Dee_RBRP_2009_Final.pdf [February 19,
2010].North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North
Carolina.
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP). 2011. Procedural Guidance and Content
Requirements for EEP Monitoring Reports (online). Available:
http: / /portal.ncdenr.org/c/ document _library/get file ?p_l_id = 1169848 &folderld = 2288101 &name
= DLFE- 39268.pdf [November 07, 2011].North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina.
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2002. WETS Data Davidson County, Lexington NC —
4970 (online) Available: http: / /www.wec.nres .usda.gov /ftpref /support/climate /wetlands /nc /37057.txt
[November 07, 2011 ]
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina:
Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, N.C. Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North
Carolina.
United States Department of Agriculture. 2011. North Carolina State - listed Noxious Weeds (online).
Available http: / /plants.usda.gov /java/ noxious ?rptType = State &statefips =37 [November 22, 2011].
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site pg. 6
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Appendix A: General Figures and Tables
Figure 1. Vicinity Map & Directions
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Summit Seep Non- Ripanan Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix A
Year 1 (201 l) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

t.
185
s
RFSTO�', A-]ON
SYS I L.% IS I I(,
— ja

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Contract # 003244
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix A
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011
Mitigation Credits
Riparian
Non - riparian
Nitrogen
Phosphorous
Stream
Wetland
Wetland
Buffer
Nutrient Offset
Nutrient Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Totals
3.91
0.18
Project Components
Existing
Restoration —
Restoration
Project Component
Stationing /
Footage /Acre
Approach
or- Restoration
Footage or
Mitigation Ratio
-or- Reach ID
Location
age
(PI,PII etc.)
Equivalent
Acreage
Non - riparian
NA
3.91
NA
Restoration
3.91
1.0
restoration
Non - riparian
NA
0.18
NA
Enhancement
0.18
0.5
enhancement
Component Summation
Non -
Restoration
Stream
Riparian Wetland
riparian Buffer (square Upland (acres)
Level
(linear feet)
(acres)
Wetland feet)
acres
Riverine Non- Riverine
Restoration
0
0 .0
3.91 0
0
Enhancement
0 0
0.18 0
0
Enhancement 1
0
Enhancement II
0
Creation
0 0
0
Preservation
0
0 0
0
0
High Quality
0
0 0
0
0
Preservation
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix A
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Table 2: Project Activity and Reporting History
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete: 7 Months
Elapsed Time Since Planting Complete: 7 Months
Number of Reporting Years: lyr
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Contract # 003244
Activity or Report
Data Collection Complete
Completion or Delivery
CE Document
NA
Oct -2010
Conservation Easement
Apr -2011
Apr -2011
Mitigation Plan
NA
Nov -2010
Construction
NA
Apr -2011
Bare Root Planting
NA
Apr -2011
Baseline Monitoring Document
Apr -2011
June -2011
Year 1 (2011) Monitoring
Sep -2011
Nov -2011
Table 3: Project Contacts
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Contract # 003244
Firm
POC & Address
Axiom Environmental,
Grant Lewis; 919.215.1693
Designer:
Inc.
218 Snow Ave. Raleigh, NC 27603
Lloyd Glover; 919.422.3392
Construction Contractor:
Land Mechanics, Inc.
780 Landmark Road
Willow Spring, NC 27592 -7756
Planting Contractor:
Restoration Systems, LLC
Worth Creech; 919.334.9114 1101
Haynes St. Suite 211 Raleigh, NC 2604
Lloyd Glover; 919.422.3392
Seeding Contractor:
Land Mechanics, Inc.
780 Landmark Road
Willow Spring, NC 27592 -7756
Nursery Stock Suppliers:
ArborGen
1.888.888.7158
Axiom Environmental,
Grant Lewis; 919.215.1693
Baseline Data Collection
Inc.
218 Snow Ave. Raleigh, NC 27603
Vegetation Monitoring:
Restoration Systems, LLC
Ray Holz; 919.604.9314
Wetland Monitoring:
Restoration S stems, LLC
Ray Holz; 919.604.9314
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix A
Year 1 (201 1) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Table 4: Project Baseline Information & Attributes
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Contract # 003244
Project Information
Project Name
Summit Seep
County
Davidson
Project Area (acres)
6.4
Project Coordinates (latitude and
longitude)
35.76130, 80.33430
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Southern Outer Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS Hydrologic Unit
8 -digit
3040103
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14 -digit
3040103020010
DWQ Sub -basin
3/7/2004
Project Drainage Area, Total Outfall (acres)
51.5
Groundwater Treated by Site (acres)
35.6
Project Drainage Area Percentage of
Impervious Area
< 3%
CGIA Land Use Classification
Cropland and Pasture
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters
Wetland 1
Size of Wetland (acres)
4.1
Wetland Type (non- riparian, riparian riverine or
riparian non riverine)
Non - riparian
Mapped Soil Series
Armenia silt loam
Drainage class
Class A
Soil Hydric Status
Hydric
Source of Hydrology
Natural Seep
Hydrologic Impairment
Ditches
Native vegetation community
Low Elevation Seep
Percent composition of exotic invasive
vegetation
0%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United States — Section 404
Yes
Yes
Yes, Appendix A
Waters of the United States — Section 401
Yes
Yes
Yes, Appendix A
Endangered Species Act
No
Historic Preservation Act
No
Coastal Zone Management Act [CZMA/Coastal
Area Management Act CAMA
No
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix A
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Appendix B: Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2. Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix B
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

- QI OM —ROM WM u'lt S, LLC SCALE:9 inch =125 feet
1101 HAYNES ST, SUfTE 219
ROME 2.-
RALEiGH, NC 275 DATE: NOVEMBER -2091
PHONE: [phone] ORREH' OOHIM70 V ZU"Man. WENT
T
PROJECT: S. SEEP
FAX: [phone]
Thb ma mdAlCasa conb.'neC xnNm mewwNeCrbwitl, rn wenb. Re.tvetlon Sy.Pmme. LLC m�reealy OVERALL SITE FIGURE SHOWING CURRENT AERIAL SOURCE: ESRI, kcubed, USDA ESA,
Chile 'W—bllny fa Camages a 1-d1ty f m my C 91x1 may arbe wt d the use a rtYSUSe d 91b
mau II � ha w- loo berr d Ine —!. aetatmbs y 9n Cab - 91b m b C-1.1- th a. —. CONDITIONS AND YEAR ONE (2011) USGS, AE%, G®oEye, Getmepping, Aerogrid, &
neemTwe m. owffinol—... w, Ve yCau,l,ar�nwenee�eea:..1m1.9bt. ses,l..yla MONITORING VISUAL ASSESSMENT. IGP
mw. race .wveyema I w� by•Keae —W.wb.raMu9 bybw. COORDINATE SYSTEM: 14AD 1963 SPNC FT

Table 5: Vegetation Condition Assessment
Planted Acreage - 6.9
acres Entire Easement
Mapped
CCPV
Number of
% of planted
Vegetation Category
Acrea e
S mbol
Polygons
Acreage
Areas of Concern
Planted areas that are visually
affected by wetland
vegetation succession,
acre
Gray
2
6%
specifically by the non - native
.41
Hatch
species Arthraxon hispidus *,
or joint -head grass
Exotic Invasive Species
Areas of Ligustrum sinense
.23
Pattern
5
3.33%
Acre
/ Color
*Arthraxon htspidus not listed on the USDA's list of North Carolina State noxious weeds or by the Center for Invasive Species and Ecosystem
Health the species is known to be an exotic, introduced from Asia.
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix B
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Appendix C: Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6.
Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 7.
CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 8.
Planted & Total Stem Counts
Figure 3.
Vegetation Plot Photos
Summit Seep Non- Ripanan Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix C
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Table 6: Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Plot
Planted Stems / Acre Counting Towards Success Criteria
Year l
2011
Year 2 (2012)
Year 3 (2013)
Year 5 (2015)
Year 7 (2017)
1
404
Monitoring
computer name
SPARE
rile size
2
485
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT --- --------
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a
Metadata
3
687
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for
Proj, planted
each year. This excludes live stakes.
4
526
year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural /volunteer stems.
5
1133
stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
6
607
List of most frequent damage classes with number of
Damage
occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Average of All Plots
(1 -6)
640.33
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
Table 7. C'VS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Report Prepared By:
Raymond Holz
Date Prepared
10/6/2011 15:12
database name
cvs -eep- entrytool- v2.2.7.mdb
S:\Projects \Projects (Existing) \Summit Seep \Task 7-
database location
Monitoring
computer name
SPARE
rile size
37326848
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT --- --------
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a
Metadata
summary of project(s) and project data.
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for
Proj, planted
each year. This excludes live stakes.
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each
Proj, total stems
year. This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural /volunteer stems.
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live
Plots
stems, dead stems, missing, etc.).
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species.
List of most frequent damage classes with number of
Damage
occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
species for each plot; dead and missing stems are excluded.
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
(planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead
and missing stems are excluded.
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix C
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Table 7. CVS Veeetation Plot Metadata Continued
PROJECT SUMMARY---______________ -
Common Name
Project Code
Summit
project Name
Summit See
Description
Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site
River Basin
Yadkin -Pee Dee
areas m
16,592
Required Plots (calculated)
6
Sampled Plots
6
Table 8. Planted & Total Strem /Acre Counts
Species
Common Name
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
Plot 5
Plot 6
Asimina triloba
pawpaw
1
2
2
2
2
Betula nigra
river birch
3
1
2
2
1
1
Carpinus caroliniana
American hornbeam
4
2
1
10
2
Diospyros virginiana
common persimmon
1
3
5
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
1
2
2
1
5
Quercus miehauxii
swamp chestnut oak
3
4
2
3
1
2
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
2
2
1
2
Quercus phellos
willow oak
2
1
3
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
1
2
1
4
Total Planted Stems
10
12
17
13
28
15
Total Planted Stems /Acre
405
486
688
526
1133
607
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix C
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Figure 3. Vegetation Plot Photos
Vegetation Photo: Plot 1
Vegetation Photo: Plot 2
Vegetation Photo: Plot 3
Vegetation Photo: Plot 4
Vegetation Photo: Plot 5
Vegetation Photo: Plot 6
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix C
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Appendix D: Hydrology Data
Table 9: Wetland Gauge - Attainment Data
Figure 4: Summit Seep 30 -70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall - 2011
2011 Groundwater Gauge Graphs
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix D
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

Tahle 9: Ground Gauge Attainment Data
• Data has been collected through October 21, 2011 fro the year 1 (201 1) monitoring season; data will continue to be collected and will be available upon request
"
This gauge was installed in early June 2011 ; therefore, data from the beginning of the growing season is not available. Based on data for the remainder of the growing season & other monitoring
gauges, it is likely that this gauge would have met criteria.
Figure 4: Summit Seep 30 -70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall in 2011
Data from WETS Station: LEXINGTON, NC4970
6
5
to
4
v —
C
C
G
3
w
2
0
ti� tiN ti� 1ti
4
ti
�o
A a�
S� _�° ��
�i On Site Rainfall
Sum
30th Percentile
70th Percentile
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix D
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011
Success Criteria Achieved / Max Consecutive Days During Growing Season (Percentage)
Gauge
Year 1 (2011)*
Year 2 (2012)
Year 3 (2013)
Year 4 (2014)
Year 5 (2015)
1
Yes / 37 days
(16.81 percent)
2
Yes / 73 days
(33.18 percent)
3
Yes / 23 days
(10.45 percent)
4
Yes / 67 days
(30.45 percent)
5
NA ** / 4 days
(1.8 percent)
• Data has been collected through October 21, 2011 fro the year 1 (201 1) monitoring season; data will continue to be collected and will be available upon request
"
This gauge was installed in early June 2011 ; therefore, data from the beginning of the growing season is not available. Based on data for the remainder of the growing season & other monitoring
gauges, it is likely that this gauge would have met criteria.
Figure 4: Summit Seep 30 -70 Percentile Graph for Rainfall in 2011
Data from WETS Station: LEXINGTON, NC4970
6
5
to
4
v —
C
C
G
3
w
2
0
ti� tiN ti� 1ti
4
ti
�o
A a�
S� _�° ��
�i On Site Rainfall
Sum
30th Percentile
70th Percentile
Summit Seep Non - Riparian Wetland Mitigation Site Appendix D
Year 1 (2011) Annual Monitoring Document
November 2011

bD
C�
b�
� O
L �
� L
t�
(uJ s ;unotuV llu3uiug
vi o In o wn q O
11/14/11
1 in/11
10/31/11
10/24/11
10/17/11
10 /10 /l l
10/3/11
9/26/11
9/19/11
9/12/11
9/5/11
8/29/11
8/22/11
8/15/11
8/8/11
8/1/11
7/25/11 y
7/18/11 A
7/11/11
7/4/1:
6/27/ l
6/20/11
6/13/11
6/6/1 I
5/30/11
5/23/11
5/16/11
5/9/11
5/2/11
4/25/11
4/18/11
4/11/11
4/4/11
3/28/11
3/21/11
3/14/11
3/7/ 11
O N? 'D w O N t 'D w O
N N N N N f�1 t�1 N1 �1 r1
(ul) 13Aa7 ja ;umpunoag
ad
MINE
MONSOON
INIMMONK
op
a;
11/14/11
1 in/11
10/31/11
10/24/11
10/17/11
10 /10 /l l
10/3/11
9/26/11
9/19/11
9/12/11
9/5/11
8/29/11
8/22/11
8/15/11
8/8/11
8/1/11
7/25/11 y
7/18/11 A
7/11/11
7/4/1:
6/27/ l
6/20/11
6/13/11
6/6/1 I
5/30/11
5/23/11
5/16/11
5/9/11
5/2/11
4/25/11
4/18/11
4/11/11
4/4/11
3/28/11
3/21/11
3/14/11
3/7/ 11
O N? 'D w O N t 'D w O
N N N N N f�1 t�1 N1 �1 r1
(ul) 13Aa7 ja ;umpunoag

(ul) s ;unotuv IINJU113H
vi O In
ll /14/11
l Inn l
-
- -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
10/31/11
s�
10/24/: 1
10 /17 /l l
3
2
10/10/11
10/3/11
9/26/11
9/19/11
9/12/11
9/5/11
8/29/1 l
N
G�
8/22/11
CA
8/15/11
8/8/11
8/1/11
C� Cd
3 Q
7/25/11 y
C
7/18/11 A
0 0
0
7/11/11
.N.�
7/4/11
s,
6/27/11
CA
6/20/11
6/13/11
E
6/6/11
5/30/11
5/23/11
5/16/11
5/9/11
vO
5/2/11
4/25/11
4/18/11
L r
r.
g
4/4/11
-
- - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3/28/11
3/21/11
T--3/7/11
3/14/:1
y O 00 �0 •t N O N 'O 00 O N
i N N N N N t it of A
(uI) Ianarl japampunoag

M
D
�S
VA
COD�o
c�
a�
(ui) s ;unou>V Iiquisg
In O O o n o
M Ni fV N
11/14/11
11/7 /l ►
10/31/11
10/24111
10/17/11
10 /10 /11
10/3/11
9/26/11
9/19/11
9/12/11
9/5/11
8/29/11
8/22/1 l
8/15/11
8/8/ ►1
8/1/11
7/25/11 y
7/18/11 A
7/11/11
7/4/11
6/27/11
6/20/11
6/13/11
61611:
5/30/1
5/23/11
5/16/11
5/9/11
5/2/11
4/25/11
4/18/11
4 /11 /1l
4/4/11
3/28/11
3/21/1 l
3/14/11
3/7/11
N000 �O V NONe��D aONa�O GOON a.000ON V `G..l b
o
-- NN fV NN to en T T T qq I
(ui) iana -i Jajt'MpunOJ9
ANN
Ar�won
_..ice
mill
11/14/11
11/7 /l ►
10/31/11
10/24111
10/17/11
10 /10 /11
10/3/11
9/26/11
9/19/11
9/12/11
9/5/11
8/29/11
8/22/1 l
8/15/11
8/8/ ►1
8/1/11
7/25/11 y
7/18/11 A
7/11/11
7/4/11
6/27/11
6/20/11
6/13/11
61611:
5/30/1
5/23/11
5/16/11
5/9/11
5/2/11
4/25/11
4/18/11
4 /11 /1l
4/4/11
3/28/11
3/21/1 l
3/14/11
3/7/11
N000 �O V NONe��D aONa�O GOON a.000ON V `G..l b
o
-- NN fV NN to en T T T qq I
(ui) iana -i Jajt'MpunOJ9

rl'
CA
D
C�
3A
O N
04
(ui) s;unotuv 11e3utum
11/14/11
u n/11
10 /31/11
10/24/11
10/17/11
10/10/11
10 /3/11
9/26/11
9/19/11
9/12/11
9/5/11
8/29/11
8/22/11
8/15/11
8/8/11
8/1 /1I
7/25/11 y
7/18/11 q
7/11111
7/4/11
6127/:1
6/20/1 I
6/13/11
6/6/11
5/30/11
5/23/11
5/16/11
5/9/11
5/2/11
4/25/11
4/18/11
4 /11 /1l
4/4/11
3/28/11
3/21 /::
3/14/11
3/7/11
N O M 10 R N O N I lG GO O N 7 2( O N 7 'O w O N R 'O o O
-- i . n N N N N N T rT M M T I
(uJ lana'j aajvmpunoiD
END
op
Jim
11/14/11
u n/11
10 /31/11
10/24/11
10/17/11
10/10/11
10 /3/11
9/26/11
9/19/11
9/12/11
9/5/11
8/29/11
8/22/11
8/15/11
8/8/11
8/1 /1I
7/25/11 y
7/18/11 q
7/11111
7/4/11
6127/:1
6/20/1 I
6/13/11
6/6/11
5/30/11
5/23/11
5/16/11
5/9/11
5/2/11
4/25/11
4/18/11
4 /11 /1l
4/4/11
3/28/11
3/21 /::
3/14/11
3/7/11
N O M 10 R N O N I lG GO O N 7 2( O N 7 'O w O N R 'O o O
-- i . n N N N N N T rT M M T I
(uJ lana'j aajvmpunoiD

Ix
V
s�
a
ro
V l#
� A
it
un
(m) qunouly nujulug
v, O In O
t+1 t+1 N N O O
11 /l4 /1 l
1 i/7 /11
10 /3l /11 p
.ti
10/24/11 y
10/17/11
ai
lotto /ll
10/3/11
cd
19/26/11
C
9/19/11
9/12/11 p
W
9/5/11 y
8/29/11
8/22/11
8/15/11 �y
8 /a/l1 .
8/1/11
7/25/11 N
'R
7/18/11 A ,n
Z
7/11/11 i
a�
7/4/11 p
6/27/11 c
6/20/11 d
6/13/11 w 3
616/11 a�i aD
5/30/11
5/23/11 0
5/16/11 p
5/9/11
5/2/11 y --
4/25/11
b0
4/11/11 OVA
Wj
4/4/11 3 Cd
3/28/11 O
by
3/21/11
3/14/11
3/7/tl �r
y O 00 �D R N O N Y b 0o O N i �e m O N r
�
(ut) iana7 aapmpunoa f)
s
"MZF
�F1■
1�
■�iwwp
�II
11 /l4 /1 l
1 i/7 /11
10 /3l /11 p
.ti
10/24/11 y
10/17/11
ai
lotto /ll
10/3/11
cd
19/26/11
C
9/19/11
9/12/11 p
W
9/5/11 y
8/29/11
8/22/11
8/15/11 �y
8 /a/l1 .
8/1/11
7/25/11 N
'R
7/18/11 A ,n
Z
7/11/11 i
a�
7/4/11 p
6/27/11 c
6/20/11 d
6/13/11 w 3
616/11 a�i aD
5/30/11
5/23/11 0
5/16/11 p
5/9/11
5/2/11 y --
4/25/11
b0
4/11/11 OVA
Wj
4/4/11 3 Cd
3/28/11 O
by
3/21/11
3/14/11
3/7/tl �r
y O 00 �D R N O N Y b 0o O N i �e m O N r
�
(ut) iana7 aapmpunoa f)