The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20060981 Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20111101RECjE1Ij =® N0 V - 1 2011 ENHANCE ECOSYSTEM MENTPROGRAM Modhn Property Wetland Mitigation Protect Martin County, NC 2011 Annual Monitoring Report Year 5 NCEEP Protect Number D050241 Roanoke River Basin Submitted to NCDENR/Ecosystem Enhancement Program 2728 Capital Blvd Raleigh, NC 27604 Date October, 2011 Monitoring Albemarle Restorations, LLC P O Box 176 Fairfield, NC 27826 Y EIlllal�tmeme It ��oa� 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 I Project Background 2 10 Project Objectives 2 20 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach 2 30 Location and Setting 3 40 Project History and Background 3 50 Monitoring Plan View 7 II Project Condition and Monitoring Results 10 10 Vegetation Assessment 10 1 1 Vegetation Discussion 11 12 Vegetation Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) 11 20 Wetland Assessment 11 21 Wetland Discussion 11 22 Wetland Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) 12 30 Project Success Discussion 12 III Methodology Section 12 List of Tables Table ES -1 Project Success Summary 1 Table I Project Restoration Components 3 Table II Project Activity and Reporting History 4 Table III Project Contacts 6 Table IV Project Background 6 Table V Species for Each Community Type 10 Table VI Hydrology and Vegetation Success by Plot 12 Table C -1 Hydrologic Monitoring Results Appendix C List of Figures Figure 1 Composite Vicinity Map 5 Figure 2 Monitoring Plan View Gauges and Vegetation Plots 8 Figure 3 Monitoring Plan View Soils, Contours and Plant Communities 9 Figure 4 Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) Appendix D Appendices Appendix A Vegetation Data and Site Photos Appendix B Geomorphologic Raw Data — N/A Appendix C Hydrologic Data Tables Appendix D Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) 11 Executive Summary The Modhn Property Wetland Mitigation Site is a riverine wetland project located on Poplar Chapel Road near Jamesville, in Martin County, North Carolina It was constructed by Albemarle Restorations, LLC, under contract with EEP to provide compensatory wetland Mitigation credits in the Roanoke River Basin Construction activities, in accordance with the approved restoration plan, began October 13, 2006, and were completed on March 12, 2007 Tree and shrub planting on the project site occurred between April 1 st and 4`h, 20071 In this, the fifth year of monitoring, hydrology has been successfully restored to the site, including the previously problematic area around Gauge 1 that was subsoiled Im 2010 The planted stems are well established and growing at an acceptable rate now that they have crowns above the heavy herbaceous layer Hydrologic monitoring began in 2007 with the installation of six water level monitoring gauges at varying elevations throughout the site to measure subsurface water elevations In 2010 it was determined that the soils around Gauge 1 were compacted and prohibiting successful hydrology so the area (approximately 5 acres) was subsoded and replanted Gauges 1 A and IIB were added to the area to determine the success of the treatment Evidence from those 3 gauges shows that subsoiling did correct the soil compaction and drastically improved hydrology All three gauges, 1, IA and 1B showed a successful 5% hydroperiod in 2010, but not until after that year's monitoring report was submitted The charts in this report have been updated to reflect the successful 2010 hydroperiods for those three gauges All 8 gauges recorded two successful hydroperiods during the 2011 growing season which indicates that the site's hydrology has been successfully restored Albemarle Restorations intends to monitor the hydrology for an additional year to confirm these results Four vegetative monitoring plots were installed and permanently monumented, one coincident with monitoring gauges 1 -4, such that both forested and shrub /scrub vegetative communities are represented Each plot is a 10m X 10m square, as recommended by the CVS -EEP Protocol for recording vegetation sampling All four plots met the year 5 success criterion o 260 living planted stems per acre this year, a success rate of 100% Table ES -1 shows the levels of success attained by each of the water level monitoring gauges and the vegetation plots since monitoring began Success criterion for hydrology is 8% of the growing season (21 days) Table C -1 in Appendix C has the actual number of days of hydrologic success Success criterion for the vegetation plots is 260 live stems per acre (the year 5 level of survival) Table ES 1 Project Success Summary I Gauge lon est h dro period as a pmercen t of the growi n g season Percent Success Veg I Plot Percent Success 1 1A 111 2 3 1 4 5 1 6 1 7 REF 1 2 1 3 4 Yr 1 (2007) Success 12 2 4 0 2 0 1 N/A 0% Y N N N 25% Yr 2 2008 Success 2 4 38 5 9 63 239 7 1 14 -n 33% Y Y Y Y 100% Yr 3 2009 Success 3 6 47 204 l8 8 9 8 19 6 18 8 239 71% Y Y Y Y 100% Yr 4 2010 Success 6 7 5 5 161 106 4 7 122 137 153 57% Y Y Y Y 100% Yr 5 2011) Success 8 6 7 5 82 24 153 8 6 18 l6 1 24 88% Y Y Y Y 100% Percentage of the growing season gauge showed continuous hydrology Green met 8% Red met 5% * Gauge 7 is a reference gauge and vs not included in the Percent Success Modltn Property Wetland Mitigation Project 1 Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Monitoring Year 5 of 5 I Protect Background 10 Protect Objectives The goal of the Modhn Property Mitigation Project was to create a riverine wetland system typically found in the middle to upper reaches of first or zero order tributary systems The project is to serve as compensation for wetland loss in the Roanoke River Basin The mitigation plan was developed and implemented to eliminate pattern drainage and restore topography and hydrology that more closely resembled that of similar undisturbed land Construction resulted in the development of a broad, frequently flooded swamp run following the historical path as evidenced by aerial photographs and signature topography Subsequent planting was designed to restore a wetland forest ecosystem that is typically found in the immediate area characteristic of similar soils, topography and hydrology The specific project goals and objectives include 1) Provide floodflow attenuation 2) Water quality improvement through sediment, toxicant and nutrient retention and reduction 3) Slow over bank flow rates and provide storage and desynchromzation of flood waters 4) Alleviate downstream flooding issues by lessening the effect of pulse or flashy flows 5) Provide shading through forest cover to reduce algae growth and associated low dissolved oxygen levels in surface water moving through the site 6) The production and export of food sources 7) The creation of wildlife habitat and recreational opportunities 20 Project Structure, Restoration Type, and Approach Table I lists the estimated wetland acreage to be restored on the Modhn Property The mitigation plan provides for the restoration of 40 0 acres of riverine wetlands Prior to construction, the 40 0 acre easement area was used entirely for row crop agriculture, primarily soy beans and cotton A drainage ditch, built in the 1970's, divided the project area and provided drainage of the seasonally high water table to allow the agricultural uses Construction activities, in accordance with the approved restoration plan, began in October, 2006 with the removal of existing hedgerows from within the project area Some of the whole trees found in the hedgerows were placed along the length of the restored swamp run to facilitate water retention and to provide wildlife habitat Also included as part of the water retention strategy is a low berm, approximately three quarters of the way down the swamp run that functions like a natural ridge within a swamp by creating a "pinch- point ", which helps create back - flooding across the restored floodplain In its entirety, the project functions as a broad hardwood flat that is subject to seasonal periodic flooding The lower end of the swamp run retains water for longer periods which contributes to the vegetation diversity, as does the increase in site elevation moving laterally away from the run Other topographical features include irregular depressions that remain flooded or wet for most of the year Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 2 Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Monitoring Year 5 of 5 Table I Protect Restoration Components Modlm Pro pert Wetland NLti ation Site/EEP #D050241 Post Wetland Restoration Pre Existing Construction Credit Ratio Mitigation Type Acreage Acreage WMU Units Riverme Wetland 00 400 1 1 400 Total 1 400 30 Location and Settmg The Modhn Property Mitigation Site is located in Martin County, approximately 4 5 miles southeast of Jamesville NC on Poplar Chapel Road The easement area is situated in the middle of the Modhn property, also known locally as the Cooper Swamp Farm and hes along the mid and upper reaches of an unnamed tributary to Cooper Swamp Downstream from this site, the tributary flows almost exclusively through wooded areas containing extensive wetland communities before emptying into the main run of Cooper Swamp The surrounding area is primarily forest and agricultural land with residential properties as a minor component Figure I is a location map for the project site Directions to the site are as follows travel east from Jamesville on US Hwy 64 approximately 3 8 miles and turn right (south) on Poplar Chapel Rd Access to the site is approximately 15 mules south of US Hwy 64, on the left via a farm path 40 Protect History and Background Table II provides the history of data collection and actual completion of various milestones of the Modhn Property Wetland Mitigation Site Modlm Property Wetland Mitigation Project 3 Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Momtonng Year 5 of 5 Table H Protect Activity and Reporting History Modlm Property Wetland Mitigation Pro eWEEP D050241 Activity or Report Data Collection Complete Actual Completion or Delivery Restoration Plan Feb 2006 June 2006 Final Design 90% Feb 2006 June 2006 Construction N/A March 2007 Temporary S & E mix applied to entire project area N/A April 2007 Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area N/A A n12007 Containerized and Bare Root Planting N/A A n12007 Mitigation Plan/As built (Year 1 monitoring baseline) Oct 2007 December 2007 Year 2 monitoring September 2008 December 2008 Year 3 monitoring September 2009 December 2009 Year 4 monitoring September 2010 October 2010 Year 5 monitoring September 2011 October 2011 Modlm Property Wetland Mitigation Project Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Monitoring Year 5 of 5 i � 111] .� ......o�..,...,..�... ..... � �� ...o.e .JNj 3NO1OJ3 X71 'snouraolsaa 37XVw1003eTV f vyss _ s¢ •Ii v ' w N s� ZEN s mot j • 1 `i•� L `�Yk' -ter q j E 1 � �S r� •• / it� 44 a G ��j u L t r, » 'r Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Project 5 Albemarle Restorations, L.LC 2011 Monitoring - Year 5 of 5 Pomts of contact for the various phases of the MPWMS are provided in Table III Table III Protect Contacts Modlin Property Wetland Nhti ahon Site/EEP #D050241 Designer Ecotone Inc Primary Project design POC 1204 Baldwin Mill Road 0 Jarrettsville MD 21804 Coastal Plain Scott McGill (410 692 -7500) Construction Contractor Armstrong Inc Construction contractor POC P O Box 96 PEM PSS PFO 25852 US Hwy 64 Bethera loam Lenoir loam Pantego NC 27860 Cooper Sw mp, Martin County NC Tmk Armstrong (252 943 2082) Planting Contractor Williams Forestry Service Inc Planting contractor POC P O Box 189 C Millville PA 17846 No Christian Du (570 458 0766) Seeding Contractor Carolina Silvics Inc Seed planting contractor POC 908 Indian Trail Road Gate at access path Edenton NC 27932 Mary Margaret McKinney (252 482 8491) Seed mix sources Earnst Conservation Seeds LLP Meadville PA Nursery stock suppliers Williams Forestry Service Inc International Paper Inc Monitoring Consultants Woods Water and Wildlife Inc Wetland and Vegetation POC P O Box 176 Fairfield NC 27826 Ashby Brown (800 509 -0190) Project background information for the MPWMS is provided m Table IV Table IV Project Background Modhn Property Wetland NLti ation Site/EEP #D050241 Project County Martin Count Drainage Area 40 0 acres within easement boundary Drainage impervious cover estimate ( %) 0 Physiographic Region Coastal Plain Ecoregion 8 5 1 Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain Ros en Classification of As built N/A Cowardm Classification PEM PSS PFO Dominant Soil Types Bethera loam Lenoir loam Reference site ID Cooper Sw mp, Martin County NC USGS IIUC for Project and Reference 03010107 NCDWQ Sub basin for Project and Reference 03 02 09 NCDWQ classification for Project and Reference C Any portion of any project segment 303d listed? No Any portion of any project segment upstream of a 303d listed segment? No Reasons for 303d listing or stressor? N/A % of project easement fenced Gate at access path Modlm Property Wetland Mitigation Project 6 Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Monitoring Year 5 of 5 50 Monitoring Plan View This year there were are eight water level monitors (gauges) installed at key locations across the property These loggers are suspended in two -inch pvc pipe that is set approximately two to four feet vertically into the ground The loggers have been located to assess the groundwater levels throughout the year at various elevations and topographies within the site In addition, there is a rain gauge on site to capture and record onsite precipitation Vegetation monitoring is accomplished by resurveying the four permanent sampling plots Each plot is referenced by a monitoring gauge (1 through 4) which serves as the plot origin and as a photo station for that plot The plots are ten meters square and are situated to give an accurate sample of the planted and natural woody vegetation For each site, the data recorded matches that required of the CVS -EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation v 4 0 2006 level 1 -2 Figures 2 and 3 provide plan views of the site showing all monitoring features including gauges, sampling plots and the rain gauge Modlm Property Wetland Mitigation Project % Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Monitoring Year 5 of 5 � •v r Imo!' � -� / • ': • :• •: r4i4sk ON MONrO O`r MONfOMN6 W # 6 IJ Uf #4 PAIN M MOVOMN6 Mg # 4--/ C) 45 I&, rl MA, MONfOMN6 M # IA C MONIIOON6 M # 16 r 1 ��jf,�r�.r. 45. PROKM LM WKWOUr -45 -45 PROP05W A5--DUV •�'r PAN M . . MONITM ' .. . .. .. I I • I II Protect Condition and Monitoring Results 10 Vegetation Assessment The vegetation success criterion was developed in accordance with the CVS -EEP protocol. The Modhn project was planned to include various plant communities The Palustrine emergent (PEM) wetland zone immediately adjacent to the drainage course and other isolated depressions are populated by vegetation consisting primarily of herbaceous material, grasses, sedges and other hydrophytic plants Beyond the emergent zone is the Palustrine shrub /scrub (PSS) community consisting of a mixture of woody shrubs interspersed with trees The emphasis in this zone is on the shorter, scrubby vegetation typical of lower areas of native branch bottoms and poorly dramed, broad hardwood flats The outer, largest Palustrine forested (PFO) zone was planted to a mixture of trees and shrubs, but with the emphasis on trees The species mix was based on the vegetation noted at the two reference sites and all species are classified from FAC to OBL (Table V) The site was planted at a rate of 350 stems per acre in the spring of 2007 Due to poor survival attributed to the drought conditions experienced during the first growing season, replacement planting and supplemental planting took place in the winter of 2008 The species used were chosen from Table V Approximately 5 acres around Gauges 1, IA and 1B were replanted in the winter of 2011 after subsoding that area to improve hydrology Table V Species by Commumty Type Modlin Property Wetland Mitigation Pro ect/EEP #D050241 Forested Wetland 18 5 Acres Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status Bald Cypress Taxodium distichum OBL Red Maple Acer rubrum FACW Water tupelo N ssa a uatica OBL Swamp Black Gum N ssa biflora FAC Willow Oak Quercus phellos FACW Swamp White Oak Quercus bicolor FACW+ Water Oak Quercus nigra FAC M hbush Blueberry Vaccinmm corymbosurn FACW Swamp Cyrilla Cyrilla racemiflora FACW Sweet Pepperbush Clethra almfolia FACW Virginia Sweets ire Itea vtr mica FACW+ Button Bush Ce halanthus occidentalis OBL Shrub /Scrub 1185 Acres Common Name Scientific Name Wetland Indicator Status Button Bush Ce halanthus occidentalis OBL Tag Alder Alnus serrulata FACW Wax Myrtle Myrica cenfera FAC+ Black Willow Salix nigra OBL Gallbeffy Ilex glabra FACW Swamp Cyrilla Cyrilla racemiflora FACW Mghbush Blueberry Vaccmium corymbosum FACW Sweetbay I Ma olia vtr mtana FACW+ Modhn Property Wetland Mitigation Project 10 Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Monitoring Year 5 of 5 11 Vegetation Discussion All four plots met the Year 5 success criterion of a minimum of 260 stems per acre Over the entire project, the survival rate averaged 516 live stems per acre A total of 8 different species were tallied in September of 2011 Willow oak (Q phellos) and bald cypress (T distichum) are the most frequently found species Rainfall data collected on site show total precipitation for January through the middle of October 2011 to be very close to normal with a 2 87" cumulative surplus The growth data will indicate what the photos in Appendix C attempt to show in that the planted stems are well developed and growing at a faster rate now that they have larger, taller tops Many of the shrubs are bearing fruit and some of the trees are showing substantial gams in height 12 Vegetation Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) Figure 4 in Appendix D illustrates an area of the site where the hydrology was causing some concern The problem was corrected with subsoihng and that area was replanted in the winter of 2011 20 Wetland Assessment The hydrologic success criterion is to achieve a nummum of 21 consecutive days where the groundwater level is within 12 inches of the soil surface during the growing season The growing season for this site is from March 10 to November 20, a period of 255 days (WETS Table for Wdlnamston, Martin County, NC) Success for any particular monitoring location is to show sort saturation to within 12 inches of the surface for 21 consecutive days during that period There are eight continuous water level monitoring devices deployed across the site (Gauges 1 -6, IA and 1B) to monitor fluctuations in the water table within the project area A rain gauge is also kept onsite and its data are compared to that collected at the NOAA cooperator site in Willimaston, NC To further gauge the affect of seasonal and annual variations in precipitation in restored wetlands, hydrologic success of the site was assessed in relation to the reference wetland site (Gauge 7) 21 Wetland Discussion Rainfall patterns in 2011 were close to normal in total from January through October, but as of the end of May, there was a slightly larger rainfall deficit in 2011 than in previous years of monitoring Yet hydrology patterns this year indicate much better penetration and recharge rates than in previous years which might indicate that soil porosity is steadily improving Evidence of this might be inferred from the greatly improved hydrology around Gauges 1, IA and 1B after subsoihng in 2010 Of particular interest is the fact that all 8 gauges showed two successful hydroperiods during the 2011 growing season Only Gauge 1A failed to show a hydroperiod of 21 days or more (8% of Modlm Property Wetland Mitigation Project 11 Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Monitoring Year 5 of 5 the growing season) Its longest hydroperiod was 19 days (7 5% of the growing season) Gauge 1 had a 22 -day hydroperiod in 2011 Prior to the corrective subsoiling, its longest hydroperiod was 9 days It is clear that wetland hydrology has been restored and will continue to improve as the soil structure improves with vegetation growth and root development As such, AR will monitor the hydrology for an additional year in order to confirm the success 22 Wetland Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) Figure 4 in Appendix D provides an overview of the site The area shaded in green on the plan view indicates where subsoiling took place in the fall of 2010 Hydrologic problems in that area have been corrected and it is functioning as well as the remainder of the site Table VI shows that at the 5% level, hydrology across the site was entirely successful Table VI Hydrology and Vegetation Criteria Success by Plot Modlin Property Wetland Nbttgatio n Pro ect/EEP #D050241 Gauge 8% Hydrology Success Met Hydrology Success @ 8% level Hydrology Success @ 5% level Vegetation Plot Vegetation Success Met Vegetation Mean 1 Y (8 6 %) 88% 100% 1 Y 100% IA N (7 5 %) No Plot 113 Y (8 2 %) No Plot 2 Y (23 9 %) 2 Y 3 Y (15 3 %) 3 Y 4 Y (8 6 %) 4 Y 5 Y (18 0 %) No Plot N/A 6 Y (16 1%) No Plot N/A 7 Y (23 9 %) No Plot N/A 3 0 Project Success Discussion In this, the fifth year of monitoring, the Modhn project has shown its best hydrologic record to date Cumulative rainfall from January through October was very close to normal with a 2 87" surplus and the entire project area showed two successful hydroperiods The swamp run held water for most of the year and there was some evidence of flow across the internal berm near the outfall of the project The planted stems appear to be well established and developing well, with many of the herbaceous plants bearing fruit Growth should continue to accelerate now that many of the stems have crowns above the highly competitive herbaceous layer III Methodology Section Year 5 monitoring for the Modhn project occurred in 2011 Monitoring and vegetation sampling procedures were established in the mitigation plan for this project and no deviations were made Modlm Property Wetland Mitigation Project 12 Albemarle Restorations LLC 2011 Momtonng Year 5 of 5 Appendix A Vegetation Data Tables Site Photos I Vegetation Data Tables Table 1 Project Metadata Report Prepared By Ashby B Brown Date Prepared 10/14/2011 11 31 DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT Metadata This worksheet which is a summary of the project and the project data Vigor b Spp Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species Damage by Spp Damage values tallied by type for each species Damage by Plot Damage values tallied by type for each plot ALL Stems by Plot and spp Count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot dead and mussing stems are excluded PROJECT SUMMARY Project Code D050241 Project Name Modlm Rivenne Desch hon Modim property Rivernne Wetland mitigation project Martin county NC River Basin Roanoke Sampled Plots 4 Table 2 Veeetation vieor by Species Table 3 Veeetation Damaee by Snecies Species 4 3 2 1 0 Missm Alnus serrulata 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 1 2 TOT Cyrilla racemiflora 1 1 Clethra almfoha 3 1 Magnolia vir miana 6 6 Cyrilla racemlflora 3 3 N ssa biflora 1 1 Ilex glabra 6 6 Quercus phellos 21 3 N ssa biflora 24 24 Vaccimum corymbosum 6 1 TOT Quercus bicolor 1 1 - 4 Quercus phellos 4 8 9 Taxodium dishchum 2 17 2 3 Vaccmium corymbosum 5 1 Magnolia vir miana 1 4 2 Acer rubrum 3 Myrica cenfera 3 TOT 13 10 38 2 28 Table 3 Veeetation Damaee by Snecies Table 4 Veeetation Daman by Plot Species All Damage Categories (no damage) Acer rubrum 3 3 Alnus serrulata 1 1 Ce halanthus occidentalis 2 2 Clethra alnifolia 1 1 TOT Cyrilla racemiflora 1 1 Ilex glabra 3 3 Magnolia vir miana 6 6 Myrica cenfera 3 3 N ssa biflora 1 1 Quercus bicolor 6 6 Quercus phellos 21 21 Taxodium disthchum 24 24 Vaccimum corymbosum 6 6 TOT 13 1 78 78 Table 4 Veeetation Daman by Plot lot All Damage Categories (no damage) D050241 ABET -0001 year 5 24 D050241 ABET -0002 year 5 14 D050241 ABET 0003 year 5 19 D050241 ABET 0004 year 5 21 TOT 4 78 Table 5 Planted Stem Count by Plot and Species Species Total Planted Stems # plots avg# stems plot 1 year 5 plot 2 year 5 plot 3 year 5 plot 4 year 5 Cephalanthus occidentalis 2 1 2 2 Clethra almfolia 1 1 1 1 Magnolia vir imana 4 2 2 1 3 Myrica cenfera 3 1 3 3 Quercus bicolor 2 2 1 1 1 Quercus phellos 12 3 4 1 6 5 Taxodium distichum 21 4 525 5 7 4 5 Vaccimum corymbosum 5 4 125 1 1 1 2 TOT 8 50 8 10 11 14 15 Stems Per Acre 412 454 577 619 Average SPA for the site 516 2. Site Photos Swamp run in March, 2011 Pinch point at downstream end of swamp run shows evidence of flow in March, 2011 Button bush (C. occidentalis) in July, 2011. Many plants are bearing fruit. Large Gallberry Q. glabra) in October, 2011 bearing fruit. r-N, A Cypress (T. distichum) doing well near standing water Cypress (T. distichum) growing in frequently flooded area Appendix B Geomorphologic Raw Data Not used in this report Appendix C Hydrologic Data Tables Note: Gauge 1B was installed after subsoiling in September of 2010 and its location is shown in Figures 2 and 4 of this report. The addition of this gauge was to more accurately determine the potential problem or success of the area adjacent to Gauge 1. Go T- oo Im W W 0 T d tm m 0 tm C .L O C O C V O (sayoul) sluan3 Ile;ulea U� Lq LO LO � ri Cl) N N r O O r O 7 N (tool) aoeIjng punoa) 01 GAIJBIaa lana-1 JOIBM 10/12/2011 9/28/201 1 9/14/2011 8/31/2011 8/17/2011 8/3/2011 7/20/2011 7/6/2011 6/22/2011 6/8/2011 5/25/2011 5/11/2011 4/27/2011 4/13/2011 m 3/30/2011 p 3/16/2011 3/2/2011 2/16/2011 2/2/2011 1/19/2011 1/5/2011 12/22/2010 12/8/2010 11/24/2010 11/10/2010 10/27/2010 10/13/2010 9/29/2010 9/15/2010 M M .c O I 0 w Q 0 w a� U) O u7 w N RT M N Q O 7 m 0 01 C O O C O 2 (soyoul) sluon3 Ilelulea LI? U� LO LO C co co N N r O O r O N (tool) ooul.ing punoaE) 01 onlleloa lono-I Jale/N 10/12/2011 9/28/2011 9/14/2011 8/31/2011 8/17/2011 8/3/2011 7/20/2011 7/6/2011 6/2212011 6/8/2011 5/25/2011 5/11/2011 4/27/2011 4/13/2011 3/30/2011 p 3/1612011 3/2/2011 2/16/2011 2/2/2011 1/19/2011 1/5/2011 12/22/2010 12/8/2010 11/24/2010 11/10/2010 10/27/2010 10/13/2010 9/29/2010 9/15/2010 (h N O I 0 w v m C 0 w LO oo m cc o) m d 7 O cm O .c O C V O 2 (sayoul) sluan3 Ile;ulea LO LO LO Ln co c`') N N r r O O 10/12/2011 9/28/2011 'I 9/14/2011 cv 8/31/2011 8/17/2011 N 8/3/2011 c _ v 7/20/2011 7/6/2011 6/22/201 1 I � 6/8/2011 5/25/2011 O d N 5/11/2011 O � 7 y egg= 4/27/2011 ku U) 4/13/2011 y v m ep N 3/30/2011 3/16/2011 3/2/2011 0 co 2/16/2011 ku CD 2/2/2011 c 1/19/2011 o 1/5/2011 CD ` 12/22/2010 N }, _ 3 12/8/2010 c N 11/24/2010 O U 11/10/2010 10/27/2010 10/13/2010 9/29/2010 ;- 9115/2010 r O N M (Iasi) aaejjnS punoj!D o; anllelaa lanai aa1eM co .c 0 0 .' w cr a� I 0 .j m w 0) U co co M LO �O ca N r r N d tm 7 cc a tm O O C .0 O 2 (s9yOul) siu9n3 IlelulOU LO LO LO V co CO N N r O O O 7 N (1991) 9oepng punaE) o; 9nlielOU 19n9-1 a91eM 10/8/2011 9/24/2011 9/10/2011 8/27/2011 8/13/2011 7/30/2011 7/16/2011 7/2/2011 6/18/2011 6/4/2011 m 5/21/2011 5/7/2011 4/23/2011 4/9/2011 3/26/2011 3/12/2011 2/26/2011 2/12/2011 1/29/2011 1/15/2011 1/1/2011 C? C ir m N 0 1 m w v I 0 a� w m s Lin w to N r r M U d cm O C13 0 i O r.+ O C_ V O 2 (so43uJ stuon3 11elu1e8 LI? U� LD LO �t C7 Cf! N N r r O O O N (tool) 000ling punoaE) of on11e18a Jono-j Ja ;eM 10/8/2011 9/24/2011 9/10/2011 8/27/2011 8/13/2011 7/30/2011 7/16/2011 7/2/2011 6/18/2011 6/4/2011 m 0 5/21/2011 5/7/2011 4/23/2011 4/9/2011 3/2612011 3/12/2011 2/26/2011 2/12/2011 1/29/2011 1/15/2011 1/1/2011 M Er .y 0 1 0 d w Q a) I 0 .6 w d O LO co tD N r r O cm cc L C CO C O 2 (sapid) sluan3 Ilelulea Ln Ln LO LO co co CV N O O O 7 N C? (loot) eoejing punoa!D of 8nllelaa lanai aaleM 10/812011 9/24/2011 9/10/201 1 8/27/2011 8/13/2011 7/30/2011 7/1612011 7/2/2011 6/18/2011 6/4/2011 W 5/21/2011 5/7/2011 4/23/2011 4/9/2011 3/26/2011 3/12/2011 2/26/2011 2/12/2011 1/29/2011 15/2011 1/1/2011 N 0 I 0 w m 3 Q Ir 0 m w U I sir J- I� J - G �r O 7 N C? (loot) eoejing punoa!D of 8nllelaa lanai aaleM 10/812011 9/24/2011 9/10/201 1 8/27/2011 8/13/2011 7/30/2011 7/1612011 7/2/2011 6/18/2011 6/4/2011 W 5/21/2011 5/7/2011 4/23/2011 4/9/2011 3/26/2011 3/12/2011 2/26/2011 2/12/2011 1/29/2011 15/2011 1/1/2011 N 0 I 0 w m 3 Q Ir 0 m w U n o 0 o� o r Ln O cv C) C O r.+ �C O O 2 (so40u I )Stu on3 I I elu I ea U� U� LO LO d Cl) CO N N r- r O O r O 7 N M (tool) e3ojjnS punoa) 01 oniteloa lono-1 aoteM 10/8/2011 9/24/2011 9/10/2011 8/27/2011 8/13/2011 7/30/2011 7/16/2011 7/2/2011 6/18/2011 6/4/2011 d eo 5/21/2011 5/7/2011 4/23/2011 4/9/2011 3/2612011 3/1212011 2/26/2011 2/12/2011 1/29/2011 1/1512011 1/1/2011 'i co :y 0 0 w cr Ir 0 m w m 5 rn rn O Go r r co O tm 7 R (!) Im L O .0 O C_ O 2 (sayOul) sluen3 Ile;ulea Ll� U� LO LO Ch M N N r O O O N C? (lea;) aaepng punoaE) of anllelaa lanai aaleM 10/8/2011 9/24/2011 9/10/2011 8/27/2011 8/13/2011 7/30/2011 7/1612011 7/2/2011 6/18/2011 6/4/2011 m 5/21/2011 5/7/2011 4/23/2011 4/9/2011 3/26/2011 3/1212011 2/26/2011 2/12/2011 1/29/2011 1/15/2011 1/l/2011 C cc .N 0 I 0 m w m cr a) I C 0 m w d cc 3 cc 3 o� o) O r r � � 3 d cc 0 3 N �CD C V o = (D C 0 2� C 0 2 (sayaul) sluon3 118JUIOU Ln Ln LO LO co. cn N N r r O O r O 7 N (tool) 000ling punoaE) 01 GAIJBIoa lanai JOIBM 10/8/2011 9/24/2011 9/10/2011 8/27/2011 8/13/2011 -- 7/30/2011 -- 7/16/2011 7/2/2011 6/18/2011 6/4/2011 d 5/21/2011 5/7/2011 4/23/2011 4/9/2011 3/26/2011 3/12/2011 -2/26/2011 2/12/2011 1/29/2011 1/15/2011 1/1 /2011 ('7 .y o` 0 w 0 m w V 7 Growing season is 255 days. 5% is 13 days, 8% is 21 days. Days for Gauges 1, 1 A and 1 B in Year 4 were revised after submission of the 2010 monitoring report 2011 Precipitation January 1 thru October 17 Normal Precip = 41.84 inches, Actual Precip = 44.71 inches Cumulative for the year: 2.87 inch surplus 20 — -- - -- 15 10 s V C 5 Average Preciptiation c - Actual Precipitation anuary March May July September Cumulative Deficit 'u -5 °v -10 Maximum cumulative rainfall deficit was in June: 6.75" below average Table C -1 Longest consecutive successful hydrologic period in days (and % of Growing Season) and success at 5% and 8% of the growing season Living Stems Per Acre at the end of the growing season for lots 1-4 Gauge Year 1 2007 Year 2 2008 Year 3 2009) Year 4 2010 Current Year (201 1) Plot Days % 5% 8% SPA Day % 5% 8% SPA Da s T71 5% 8% SPA Da s % 5% 8% SPA Days % 5% 8% SPA 1 4 1 N N 324 6 2 N N 607 9 4 N N 567 17 2 Y Y 486 22 9 Y Y 412 IA N/A N/A 12 5 N N 13 7 Y N 19 7 Y N 1B 13 7 Y N 21 8 Y Y 2 7 2 N N 81 97 38 Y Y 607 52 20 Y Y 526 41 16 Y Y 445 61 24 Y Y 454 3 1 0 N N 283 15 6 Y N 607 48 19 Y Y 607 27 11 Y Y 607 39 15 Y Y 577 4 4 2 N N 283 16 6 Y N 607 25 10 Y Y 567 12 5 N N 405 22 9 Y Y 619 5 2 0 N N 61 24 Y Y 59 20 Y Y 31 12 Y Y 46 18 Y Y 6 2 1 N N 18 7 Y Y 48 19 Y Y 35 14 Y Y 41 16 Y Y 7(Re N/A 6 15 Y Y 1 61 24 Y Y 39 15 Y Y 61 24 Y Y Growing season is 255 days. 5% is 13 days, 8% is 21 days. Days for Gauges 1, 1 A and 1 B in Year 4 were revised after submission of the 2010 monitoring report 2011 Precipitation January 1 thru October 17 Normal Precip = 41.84 inches, Actual Precip = 44.71 inches Cumulative for the year: 2.87 inch surplus 20 — -- - -- 15 10 s V C 5 Average Preciptiation c - Actual Precipitation anuary March May July September Cumulative Deficit 'u -5 °v -10 Maximum cumulative rainfall deficit was in June: 6.75" below average Appendix D Monitoring Plan View (Integrated) C) AIR \� During 2011, the�� hydrology in this area •��V . PERMARLE 4E� BRA' "':4'� TONE, N l.. showed patterns that mirrored the rest of the site. The hydrology in this area is now considered successful. w Den I f}F2rt :f.�.NJ: vtjl�?iV4�'ei,•, x '; -.[: �: •��V . PERMARLE 4E� BRA' "':4'� TONE, N l.. f}F2rt :f.�.NJ: vtjl�?iV4�'ei,•, x '; -.[: �: