20050377b Ver 1_Year 5 Monitoring Report_20120823

Camp Branch Stream Restoration
EEP Project No. 92350
2011 Final Monitoring Report: Year 5 of 5
Submitted to:
RECEIVED
MAR 3 0 2012
NC ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
Construction Completed: February 2007
Submission Date: March 2012
NCDENR -EEP
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
rY
1',11.1al e ent
PRUGItAM
o
AUG 2 " 2012
,,�:, lr -f tii u1;W1TY
1NEILk%)s "40 SS xi!11{"ATER
QWA
.A
1�EhR

Table of Contents
SECTION 1 — EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1 1 Goals and Objectives 1 -1
1 2 Vegetation Assessment 1 -2
1 3 Stream Assessment 1 -2
1 4 Annual Monitoring Summary 1 -3
SECTION 2 — METHODOLOGY
2 1 Methodology 2 -1
SECTION 3 — REFERENCES
SECTION 4 — APPENDICES
List of Appendices
Appendix A — Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Map and Directions
Table 1
Project Restoration Components
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contacts Table
Table 4
Project Attribute Table
Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data
Figure 2 Current Condition Plan View (CPV)
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Photos Stream Station Photos
Photos Vegetation Plot Photos
Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7 Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
Table 8 CVS Vegetation Metadata Table
Table 9 CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Table of Contents
Appendix D — Stream Survey Data
Figures 3a -h
Cross - sections with annual overlays
Figures 4a,b
Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
Figures 5a -h
Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Table 10a
Baseline — Stream Data Summary
Table 10b
Baseline — Stream Data Summary
Table 11 a
Monitoring — Cross - Section Morphology Data Table
Table 11b
Monitoring — Stream Reach Morphology Data Table
Appendix E — Hydrologic Data
Table 12 Verification of Bankfull Events
Figure 6 Monthly Rainfall Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

N,
SECTION 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

W__
SECTION 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project (Site) is located in Anson County, North
Carolina within the Piedmont Eco- Region of the Yadkin River Basin (USGS Subbasin
HUC 03040105) The Site is one of three separate Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(EEP) projects located on the 200 -acre Bishop Property, each confined within a North
Carolina Department of Transportation owned conservation easement The stream
preservation /enhancement/restoration plan was designed by EcoScience Corporation
and constructed by Vaughn Construction, Inc Construction and planting activities were
completed in February 2007 As -built surveys for the Site were performed in May 2007
The first annual monitoring activities were conducted in October 2007
This report serves as the fifth year of the five year monitoring plan for the Site
1 1 Goals and Objectives
Prior to restoration, the Site was predominantly utilized for row cropping and
recreational activities, such as hunting and wildlife viewing Historically, drainage
features and wetland areas within the Site were dredged, straightened, and filled for
conversion into agriculturally developed land These activities are thought to have
impacted stream channel stability, therefore, producing an incised, eroded stream and
degraded water quality The primary goal for the site was to improve water quality by
reducing erosion through reconnection of the stream with a flood prone area, riparian
buffer filtering, and reconfiguring the stream to better attenuate flow velocities
Secondary Site restoration goals included increased stream biology through
enhancement activities and protection of functional areas via preservation The goals
were achieved by incorporating the following objectives
Priority II stream restoration (including all attendant benefits outlined in Rosgen
1996) via excavation of approximately 1,767 linear feet (If) of a designed E/C -type
stream of the main Camp Branch channel on new location (creating 1810 If),
including adjacent floodplain excavation to achieve an entrenchment ratio
characteristic of E/C -type streams
2 Priority I stream restoration (including all attendant benefits outlined in Rosgen 1996)
of approximately 403 If and Priority II restoration of approximately 143 If of a
designed E/C -type stream of a unnamed tributary (UT) to Camp Branch, including
floodplain excavation along the UT upstream of Camp Branch to achieve a stable
confluence
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 ' Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Page 1 -2
Executive Summary
3 Level II stream enhancement of approximately 945 If of Camp Branch upstream of its
confluence with the UT via riparian plantings adjacent to the Camp Branch stream
banks
4 Re- establishment of the characteristic, pre - disturbance Piedmont Bottomland Forest
(Schafale and Weakley 1990) community adjacent to restoration reaches using bare
root seedling plantings
The main reach of Camp Branch was restored by relocating approximately 1,767 If of
the existing channel (Restoration, Priority II), increasing total stream length to 1810 If
Restoration of approximately 403 If (Restoration, Priority 1) and 143 If (Restoration,
Priority II) was conducted along the UT Camp Branch (Reach 1) and its tributary
(Reach 4) were designed as E/C -type streams Bankfull benches were created along
Reach 1 and 4 to re- establish floodplain connection at the existing streambed elevation
Along Reach 3, the tributary's streambed was raised to re- connect the channel with its
floodplain at a higher elevation The Site's riparian areas were planted to improve
habitat and stabilize streambanks via planting bare root seedlings to recreate pre -
disturbance vegetation communities within their appropriate landscape contexts
Appendix A provides more detailed project activity, history, contact information, and
watershed /site background information for this project
1.2 Vegetation Assessment
JJG conducted the 2011 (year 5 of 5) vegetation assessment and vegetation plot
analysis in August 2011 per the 2006 CVS -EEP Level 2 protocol (Lee et al , 2006) The
seven vegetation plots previously established in the design phase were selected
randomly and represent the riparian buffer zone Vegetation monitoring success criteria
as stated in the 2007 mitigation plan requires an average number of planted stems per
acre exceeding 320 stems /acre after the third year of monitoring, 288 stems /acre after
the fourth year of monitoring, and 260 stems /acre after the fifth and final year of project
monitoring
The 2011 vegetation monitoring results indicate that the Site is meeting vegetative
success criteria Average site density is approximately 742 planted stems per acre with
an average of 25 live planted stems per plot A review of the total stem count, including
natural recruits, indicated an increase in the average site density when compared to the
2010 monitoring data Average site density was approximately 2,065 stems per acre
with an average of 42 total stems per plot The number of native woody species per plot
ranged from two (2) to twelve (12) with an average of eight (8) woody species per plot,
indicating desirable species diversity
Individually, all plots met the success criteria excluding Plot 1 (162 stems /acre) Plot 1
is located along the enhancement reach, within an existing hardwood forest riparian
area Limited survivability of planted species within Plot 1 is likely due to shading and
competition from adjacent mature trees Site -wide, the vigor of the live planted stems
appears to have been affected by wildlife activity and drought conditions over the
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Page 1 -3
Executive Summary
previous monitoring years Planted stems exhibiting poor growth in previous years have
continued to improve in vigor, with the exception of those in Plot 1 as discussed above
In conclusion, the vegetation throughout the stream and riparian restoration project
meets the success requirements Although some loss of vegetation has occurred, the
overall growth of the riparian buffer is meeting the survivability requirements Please
refer to Appendix C for more information regarding 2011 vegetation assessment data
1.3 Stream Assessment
Results from the 2011 stream monitoring effort indicate that Camp Branch and its
tributary are maintaining vertical and lateral stability with minimal bank erosion
Although some areas are illustrating minor erosion, visual assessments along the
channel indicated that there are no mayor advancements toward instability within the
reach Please refer to Appendix D for more information regarding 2011 stream survey
data
Two crest gauges are located on the Camp Branch Site One is located on the main
channel upstream of cross - section 1 and the second is located on the UT upstream of
cross - section 5 At least one bankfull event occurred within the 2011 monitoring year,
which was verified through field indicators such as wrack lines and other visual
observations
Main Channel
Overall, the main channel is maintaining both lateral and vertical stability The average
bankfull width (21 2 ft) and average cross - sectional area (32 0 ft) of the surveyed
cross - sections are consistent with proposed design ranges Variation between individual
cross sections is minimal, signifying consistent stability throughout site maturity The
thalweg profile appears to be stable, and is characterized by well - defined riffle and pool
features The average water surface slope and the average bankfull slope were very
similar for the surveyed reach, 0 0038 ft/ft and 0 0034 ft/ft, respectively Although
parameters such as riffle length, pool length, and pool -to -pool spacing have fluctuated
throughout the monitoring period, they remain relatively consistent and indicate the
streambed is not significantly aegrading or degrading
Substrate assessment indicates the streambed is transforming to a finer bed material
However, erosive conditions at the site are localized and not significant enough to
suggest stream -wide aggradation or siltation Similarly, except for localized low- growth
areas, riparian zones are vegetating as expected and providing adequate soil
stabilization and protection The drastic shift in substrate size compared to stable
channel morphology indicates a discrepancy in substrate analysis data This
discrepancy may be due to latent sediment from a recent rain event, recent watershed
inputs, and /or variation in substrate sampling technique and methodology
Tributary
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Page 1-4
Executive Summary
Based on current monitoring data and the visual inspection, the channel's dimension
appears to be functioning properly and maintaining stability No erosional failure was
observed along this reach The average bankfull width (6 6 ft) of the surveyed cross -
sections is similar to the proposed design width of 6 4 ft Compared to previous data,
the thalweg profile appears to have shifted from well - defined riffle and pool features to a
near continuous run with unconsolidated fine soil material There are few areas of
diverse stream bed variation The channel is stable and the immediate riparian zone is
well established and appears to be offering adequate stabilization Therefore, it seems
that the up gradient watershed is contributing a sediment load that is being captured
within the stream and causing reduced bed variability Erosional ruts were evident along
the dirt/gravel road that crosses the tributary, which are likely contributing to the
sediment load Additionally, the large area of agricultural activity up gradient is also
likely contributing silt to the channel The average water surface slope and the average
bankfull slope were very similar for the surveyed reach, 0 0102 ft/ft and 0 0092 ft/ft,
respectively
Pebble counts within the tributary indicate a trend toward finer sediment composition
compared to previous monitoring years This decrease in bedform distribution diversity
may indicate contributing watershed sediment input issues
Two crest gauges are located on the Site One is located on the main channel upstream
of cross - section 1 and the second is located on the UT upstream of cross - section 5 At
least one bankfull event occurred within the 2011 monitoring year, which was verified
through field indicators such as wrack lines, sediment deposition, and other visual
observations
1.5 Annual Monitoring Summary
In summary, the portions of the Site that have been surveyed to date have met the
stream and vegetation mitigation goals for monitoring year five The pattern, profile, and
dimension of the restored main Camp Branch channel appear to be maintaining vertical
and lateral stability with minimal bank erosion The profile of the UT has experienced a
relatively significant change from MY3 as indicated in the MY4 report and this MY5
report The UT appears to be experiencing increased sediment load from the
contributing watershed The 2011 vegetation plot monitoring results indicate that the
planted and naturally recruited vegetation is doing well at the site, aside from some
canopy tree shading within Plot 1 The minor vegetation problems noted in previous
reports due to herbivory from deer and drought appear to be improving
As in previous years, a few problem areas were observed, such as moderate bank
erosion, moderate to poor streambank cover, patches of in- stream vegetation, and
aggradation These areas of stream instability do not appear to have advanced from
the previous monitoring years and in many cases have healed naturally Heavy
sediment deposition is occurring on the downstream end of the main channel where the
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Page 1 -5
Executive Summary
restoration reach converges with the preservation reach, but is not causing stream
instability at this time
The background information provided in this report is referenced from the mitigation
plan and previous monitoring reports prepared by EcoScience (2007) 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 mitigation
and 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
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

R's,
SECTION 2
METHODOLOGY

SECTION 2
METHODOLOGY
21 Methodology
Methods employed for the Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project were a
combination of those established by standard regulatory guidance and procedures
documents as well as previous monitoring reports completed by EcoScience
Geomorphic and stream assessments were performed following guidelines outlined in
the Stream Channel Reference Sites An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques
(Harrelson et al , 1994) and in the Stream Restoration a Natural Channel Design
Handbook (Doll et al, 2003) Vegetation assessments were performed following the
Carolina Vegetation Survey -NCEEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al , 2006) JJG used the
Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and surrounding areas by Alan S Weakley as
the taxonomic standard for vegetation nomenclature for this report
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

r
SECTION 3
REFERENCES

SECTION 3
REFERENCES
Doll, B A, Grabow, G L, Hall, K A, Halley, J, Harman, W A, Jennings, G D, and
Wise, D E, 2003 Stream Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook
EcoScience Corporation 2007 Bishop Site Stream and Wetland Restoration 2007
Annual Monitoring Report (Year 1) Raleigh, NC
Harrelson, Cheryl C, Rawlins, C L, Potyondy, John P 1994 Stream Channel
Reference Sites An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique Gen Tech Rep RM -245
Fort Collins, CO U S Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain
Forest and Range Experiment Station 61 p
Lee, Michael T, R K Peet, S D Roberts, and T R Wentworth 2006 CVS -EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4 0 (http Hcvs bio unc edu /methods htm)
Rosgen, D L 1996 Applied River Morphology Wildland Hydrology Books, Pagosa
Springs,
CO
Weakley, A S 2008 Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Northern Flonda, and
Surrounding Areas (Draft April 2008) University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel
Hill, NC
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

JJG
SECTION 4
APPENDICES
Appendix A — Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data
Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Appendix D — Stream Survey Data
Appendix E — Hydrologic Data

APPENDIX A
PROJECT VICINITY MAP AND BACKGROUND TABLES
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map and Directions
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contacts Table
Table 4 Project Attribute Table
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

r 1-1-1119
a I
_3 -.-t ,,,,•���
- Stream Restoration (Priority 1)
E t 'y'1 •a �• �`' � �T iC� . - Stream Restoration (Priority Z)
�J ~
� � , t� � ,�� �;` •: -� � � ��� - � ��; �r• � Stream Enhancement (Level 2)
•t _ �\ j4� \ ti � Stream Preservation ti
Wetland Preservation
Pond
�`yf
�` '�`�t �}���s'�;- "�s��i Jaw': � t..- -•,�, � V/
�-
�
_ �tr''��tr .z'��-L�-• —,�� \y�y"� V _,/ '_1% -`�-I �i ry �� � �� �� / r'l.:' � TSB
{ `'1 � �a,..y y� r�.✓�J� rG f�/ �"` < � � ` � � ' �iQ n y;. ��,i l r.
•� R ? \- lam.. %s ' j •tr1 -�! ,1�Y = -..f,
ti!� ., \ . r i-' .Ir f ti- \ J yo-�i6 �•f � \^ �� a':ss \ \ii ' ^H
JAIWNN;I 'k
•J '( ,J��� --'i �j - it ll k
Directions to the Site:
The Site is located north of Wadesboro in Anson County, NC, just upstream of the b % f + Legend
confluence of the Rocky and Yadkin Rivers. From Charlotte, take US Highway 74
Fast to Wadesboro, then take US 52 north. Approximately 1.3 miles south of USGS So:erce: NCDOT GIS t Conservation Easement
US 52's crossing over the Rocky River, turn east onto Carpenter Road (a gravel road). -.mot y -..- County Boundary
Follow Carpenter Road to the east. Gated access points to the Site (one for Camp
2
Branch, one for Dula Thoroughfare and UT to Dula Thoroughfare) abut Carpenter l r!i ,000 i,000
0 2000
Road from the east. 1 ` t t Feet
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Anson County, NC
l ;l� TaT glen gal Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Submittal Date: March 2012

Appendix A Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Table I Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project 92350
Monitonng Year 5 of 5
Mitigation Credits
Stream
Ripanan
Wetland
Non - npanan
W tland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient Offset
Phosphorous
Nutrient Offset
Type
R, Ell P
P
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
9 794 SMU
5 2 WMU
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
Project Component/Reach ID
Stationing (ft)
Ensting
Footage/
Acreage
Approach
Restoration or
Restoration
Equivalent
Restoration
Footage or
Acres
Mitigation Ratio
Reach 1 Camp Branch
0+00 -17+94
1 500 If
P2
Restoration
l 767 If
1 1
Reach 2 Camp Branch
N/A*
9451f
N/A
Enhancement Level 2
9451f
2 5 1
Reach 3 UT Camp Branch
0+00 -4+33
220 If (total)
PI
Restoration
4031f
1 1
Reach 4 UT Camp Branch
4 +33 -5+76
Included in
Reach 3 total
P2
Restoration
1431f
1 1
Stream Preservation**
N /A'
6 563 if
N/A
Preservation
6 563 If
5 1
Wetland Preservation
N/A
5 2 ac
N/A
Preservation
5 2 ac
5 1
Component Summations
Restoration level
Stream (Ilnear
feet)
Ripanan Wetland (acres)
Non - riparian
Wetland (acres)
Buffer (square
feet)
Upland (acres)
Riverme
Non- Rivenne
Restoration (R)
2 313
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Enhancement (E)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Enahncement I (E)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Enhancement (E)
945
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Creation (C)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Preservation (P)
6 563
52
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
HQ Preservation (P)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Totals
9,821
52
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
BMP Elements
Element
location
Purpose/Function
Notes
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
BMP Elements
BR = Bioretention Cell SF = Sand Filter SW = Stormwater Wetland WDP = Wet Detention Pond DDP Dry Detention Pond FS = Filter Stnp S = Grassed Swale LS =
Level Spreader N1= Natural Infiltration Area FB = Forested Buffer
SMU = Stream Mitigation Unit WMU = Wetland Mitigation Unit
'Enhancement and Preservation reaches were not stationed
Appendix A - Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Monitoring Report
Year 5 of 5

Appendix A Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete 5 yrs 2 months
Elapsed Time Since Planting Complete 5 yrs 2 months
Number of Reporting Years 5
Activity or Report
Data Collection Completed
Actual Completion or Delivery
Restoration Plan
Aug-04
Se 04
Final Design (901/6)
Mar-05
Jun -05
Construction
N/A
Feb-07
Temporary S &E rrux applied to entire project
area *
N/A
Throughout construction
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments
N/A
Oct -06
Bare Root Seedling Installation
N/A
Feb -07
Mitigation Plan
Jun -07
Oct -07
Final Report
Jun -07
Oct -07
Year I Monitoring
Oct -07 /Dec -07
Oct -07 /Dec -08
Year 2 Monitoring
May-08/Sept-08
Nov -08
Year 3 Monitoring
Jul -09 /Jan -10
Jan -10
Year 4 Monitoring
Jun -]0 /Jan -11
Feb- I
Year 5 Monitoring **
July- I I/March -12
Mar-12
*Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed
** Morphological surveying not yet complete along UT to Camp Branch
Appendix A - Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Camp Branch
Monitoring Report
Year 5 of 5

Table 3 Project Contacts Table
Camp Branch Stream Restorahon/EEP Project 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Appendix A - Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Camp Branch
Monitoring Report
Year 5 of 5
EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Designer
Raleigh, NC 27604
919- 828 -3433
Vaughn Contruction, Inc
Tommy Vaughn and Spencer Walker
Construction
(Foremen)
P O Box 796
Wadesboro, NC 28170
704 -694 -6450
Kiker Forestry and Realty
Planting Contractor
P O Box 933
Wadesboro, NC 28170
704- 694 -6436
Seedin Contractor
N/A
Monitoring Performers
EcoScience Corporation
1101 Haynes Street, Suite 101
Year 1
Raleigh, NC 27604
919 - 828 -3433
Jordan, Jones & Goulding Inc
Year 2- present
6801 Governor's Lake Pkwy
Norcross GA 30071
Stream Monitoring, POC
Alison Nichols, 770455 -8555
Ve etation Monitoring, POC
Appendix A - Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Camp Branch
Monitoring Report
Year 5 of 5

Appendix A Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Table 4 Project Attribute Table
Camp Branch Stream Restoration[EEP Project 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Information
Project Name
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Pro ect County
Anson County, North Carolina
Pro ect Area acres
94 9 acres
Project Coordinates
35° 9 37 38 N 80 5 46 94 W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Region
Piedmont
River Basin
Yadkin
USGS HUC for Pro ect 8 digit)
03040105
USGS HUC for Pro ect 14 di pt)
03040105081060
DWO Sub basin
03 07 14
Pro ect Drainage Area acres
1,856
Protect Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area*
< 1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
2 01
Reach Summa Information
Parameters
Reach 1
Reach 2
Reach 3
Reach 4
Length of reach (linear feet)
1,767
945
403
143
Valley classification
U
U
U
U
Drains area acres
U
U
U
U
NCDWQ stream identification score
U
U
U
U
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
MorDholoRical Description stream
Perennial
Perennial
Perem I
Perennial
Evolutiorialy trend
G4 to C4
G4 to C4
G to C4/5
G to C4/5
Underlying rte ed soils
�n8 t pp
Badm Channery Silt Loam (BaB BaC) Badm Goldston Complex (BgD) McQueen (MrB) Shellbluff (ShA)
Tetotum (ToA) Chewacla (ChA)
Drainage Class
U
I U
I U
L U
Soil H dnc status
N/A
N/A
/A N
N/A
Sloe
0 0041
0 0041
N/A
N/A
FEMA classification
100 year Fl lam
100 year flood lam
1 100 year Flood lam
100 year flood lam
Native vegetation community
Mesic mixed ine/hardwood forest, land sloe forest, bottomland hardwood
forest
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation
U
U U
U
Wetland
Summary Information—
Parameters
Wetland 1
Wetland 2
Wetland 3
Size of Wetland acres
52
Wetland Type (non riparian riparian nvenne or riparian non
nvenne )
Riparian Rivenne
Mapped Soil Series
BRD MrB ToA
Drainage class
WD WD MWD
Soil H dnc Status
N/A N/A H dnc
Source of Hydrology
Slope & Overbank
H drolo c impairment
N/A
Native ve elation community
bottomland hardwood
Percent comDosition of exotic invasive vegetation
U
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
A
Supportinp Documentation
Waters of the United States Section 404
Z N
N/A
N/A
Waters of the United States Section 401
No
N/A
N/A
Endangered Species Act
No
N/A
N/A
Historic Preservation Act
No
N/A
N/A
Costal Zone Mana emem Act CZMA Costal Area
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Flood lam Compliance
Yes
U
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
-At the tone of pm)w corm Lk n
• Wedmtd mmption was trot occluded for tbu restotntron ptojecl
"N /A items do mt appty/ items nm unendnble /'W aeon me known
Appendix A - Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Monitoring Report
Year 5 of 5

JJG
APPENDIX B
VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA
Figure 2 Current Condition Plan View (CPV)
Table 6a -d Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 7 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Photos Stream Station Photos
Photos Vegetation Plot Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

66 6 1�0(y �\

o
NOTES: PROJECT NO. 92350 NC ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM DATE: JANUARY 2012
1. GENERAL SITE DATAARE PROVIDED BY NCEEP. ANSON COUNTY CAMP BRANCH STREAM RESTORATION SCALE: 1.1 = 60'
2. ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE NORTH CAROLINA JOB NO.: JJX31100
a— it MONITORING YEAR 5 OF 5 CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
FIGURE 2 OF 12
LEGEND
=
Conservation Easement
Wetland Preservation
--
Terrace Crest
Pond
-•--
Extent of Bankfull Bench
2011 -Bank Scour
- - --
Channel Bottom
2011 -In- Stream Vegetation
Channel Top
2011 -Poor Vegetative Cover
Stream Centerline
Crest Gauge
Cross - Section
Nkg Plot
Success Criteria
0
Meets
Stationing (100' Interval)
Stream Enhancement (Level 2)
Does Not Meet
�' ; •
Stream Preservation
t
�
L
w
0
t
r
6
`
y
♦
REACH 4
,.
REACH 3
1
.a!
'
o
NOTES: PROJECT NO. 92350 NC ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM DATE: JANUARY 2012
1. GENERAL SITE DATAARE PROVIDED BY NCEEP. ANSON COUNTY CAMP BRANCH STREAM RESTORATION SCALE: 1.1 = 60'
2. ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE NORTH CAROLINA JOB NO.: JJX31100
a— it MONITORING YEAR 5 OF 5 CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
FIGURE 2 OF 12

k•'��'y'+"��`�y� � � T �.� '° :rrd''�' !!►„� � '�'� ':�,} .r,
'1 l - r • „ J4.
„` �,�wi,,rt:..t ..` +;r; a, LEGEND
- z _ -'�'- '1�iLIs"• 'r '!r'!4. >'1 rK ,.L �!+. ..��,...y c�"t �•, - - °�'w+_ `a - -
�.;.� A",,.�'+ w.':? -'i ,�- `x t. w^ 3 :�•'`.w.r4 +ti.,4�:.�' *9 •.'1t.'�i` y3;i.-��
e
. ; ` b _ - y+r.. R• ?� < y . ' ri ey + ... _ y . F . }� y - Conservation Easement Wetland Preservation
+� �,.� :.'�..' i �.'?�_ - C.. •y' �s .�' ih ' '�.�^H � � � r G.k i �} "�i s +
JI ti': {= r Terrace Crest ® Pond
REACH 1 , r' :�I►�.
-- -. Extent of Bankfull Bench 2011 -Bank Scour
t ,;*
";c x.14 ,+ Channel Bottom 2011 -In- Stream Vegetation
2011 -Poor Vegetative Cover
Channel Top
L. Crest Gauge
Stream Centerline
r i w ° ' '� Cross - Section Veg Plot Success Criteria
.. y
�k f - 4 Q Meets
R 5 - Stationing (100' Interval)
N► c ' 4 w ° Stream Enhancement (Level 2) Does Not Meet
re
St ream P rva Se tl on
r� pit-
#Y� } .ts.9 4 ; ,4}.1iT v.`: e• 'I i��f �rf
/,F •� F _ ':6 r
�� � 4L�,�s,�.i � ~,.. ,� •.,�4, ¢1 S ` } ^r J�M .tea *: .;u�w' k`.'`7�
{„ 1.
7
1
Y i i 'r f 'r ;�� r,. � t ►� x - ��r A rte. - R 't
�w
ti v_
J i
• 1 1 1 • 1
r- �­ 1 NOTES:
1. GENERAL SITE DATAARE PROVIDED BY NCEEP
Eli2. ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE
El lal r meat
PROJECT NO. 92350
ANSON COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
MONITORING YEAR 5 OF 5
INC ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
CAMP BRANCH STREAM RESTORATION
C� CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
DATE: JANUARY 2012 I
SCALE: V= 60'
JOB NO.: JJX31100
FIGURE 3 OF 12

T �'` - - ?. 3 t - as •r� P I;)y to ' y I ♦ 5 -21! '�: •'t `�
.io x;$S'i �! ,yt1 try
,
.,may '. 1 'lL � L . 4V k � .�'• .�
•... ♦/� iE•& T'tl r M - t1t�A:. ' t• A „.
-� .. _ ..
x„ �., {;4- t. F.�: � .. � fj . [ _ J �� ''�- �r •� _ Y � j 9_ _ 1 rf• ., � �. T t
' 47i 7 ;
't -'`f. r +e l... Y ; v, > t e ,•
, _ c � _� ry 'sf ,. *' T .yi rr,, 'r Y' �� . . L 4�.t. - _.f - - _ • y .,-';.
'. r:w �_ , 11. -..�' 'E T �� ,. 'x. '� �.; -t• 'I, t'1' '�' �•f i -'�F. (.. 4. t - 4'..1 - w ,�. 4. ea-
t
° !� box rYld +tYj +a'4a. :f,.
`2. V� -.2.- it i' •'.,i T..� _VS fi Y - 4 '1 `Y: R.r� - ,f' �' - - t
y� � .'b. .:i 1. ,r - ti ? ,a • vL1 '�� e' -i ` - t :1' � ~' � .s
[- - ,” . �. TU . ;�" .a i � �a I , i .,j i� `� j,s1� I � ,`^. y�'-.. >�`• j � .a4 ,
.ir � '� -♦ 3 r: M; .�. >;� - '. isv `� in'� '•y, .6�-. ,- - mt ,�.�. —. .:a AR'I. T •',� ".r •l:
3x -
1. ^ t. .it. . . � f - R a,[, � \ . _ tr, -. � -` • 'Vec -a M1 - �•-- 1 i- , r' � � � '
•
yj �4 y1� 1�. �.�h -�• r. ^r +s -r S - -
- ,'1 - '7�1. •y q4" YS' f � ` - a. R. rt�� � ° -4 4�.' -
Y y i
n r
,rM. ..,; ,:, gyp. , : � ` -� i -. F_. ♦. '� •.:.: ._ ._a...� � �:: _ � '♦ `'.� .. -. �-'� N � , :. ,'�`.'', � . i - .y4 - t.
IT _ 1. a•' t: ! ^r yy..
r
,
5
1
k,�r
_ _ f'. ,e_ .�� . "��'1 #` .. .}''. 7 "'fit �t; y R �.�s �:, s„ ,:� .y f' ��,• �
h 1. +aY'• 1 ��-- !� �. %`�,�t Y } �f.��
.ir+ - `1 _.1 r�-y4r �•� 5- i [) 'i y�, - r �. ,. r ,r
Ti;.
LEGEND
` Conservation Easement Wetland Preservation
r
Terrace Crest Pond
Extent of Bankfull Bench 2011 -Bank Scour
Channel Bottom 2011 -In- Stream Vegetation
Channel Top 2011 -Poor Vegetative Cover
Stream Centerl i ne 0 Crest Gauge
� Cross - Section
Veg Plot Success Criteria
Stationing (100' Interval) Meets
Stream Enhancement (Level 2) 0 Does Not Meet
60 30 0 60
Feet Stream Preservation
NOTES: PROJECT NO. 92350 NC ECOSYSTEM ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM DATE: JANUARY 2012
1. GENERAL SITE DATAARE PROVIDED BY NCEEP. ANSON COUNTY CAMP BRANCH STREAM RESTORATION SCALE: 1 "= 60'
tern 2. ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE NORTH CAROLINA JOB NO.: JJX31100
,II lat ;.meIlt MONITORING YEAR 5 OF 5 pet CURRENT CONDITION PLAN VIEW
FIGURE 6 OF 12

k.
Yt
fi
Ilk A.
kv-�k
41.
=117
LEGEND
Conservation Easement VktIand Preservation
Terrace Crest Pon •
.... Extent of Ba nkful I Bench 2011-Bank Scour
rwe I -T V4
zi WA-p ; .,� ?�V �; 1�, C , t I
MI
fill'
-�:Jk
•
•
IF
Y-I
.6,
V.
*7

'r. • • Vii' k. t __ '
_
a
� lY'
tr
,
, k
r
y
r
r
a
i
a �
.'
, ev
f t
i M'wr Y
vrz'l
l 4-,
LEGEND
—�-.� t _�. c r )v� "` � J� t •* 3f � .q�`,•P' �-rl�� �� ;�' M1t4���ld.= J�.YG74 *� ". � � •� +Yk � �-+a��t
Conservation Easement VNktland Preservation
Terrace Crest Pond
�'e -•fiiy +iN FIsr i�}I h a 4 y� ti _1R • ankful I Bench 2011
P hrF a+ • f"j `.A *4• Y Fl
AYR. Bottom 21 Vegetation
Y t. '.p vS47F . '� • yi �t .#" 1 ♦ 53 . -Poor Vegetative
Crest Gauge
:
7 I; 6 i �' •i /q` » 7' ,r• 1•yf •. t Stream Centerline Q
Veg Plot Success Criteria
Meets,, _ as -. q• Q". . •a -
r 2'i�A.'.+";r ' °•i.. ..�a4. W tY' E �0,3a W.y: . • • 11
yam*

Appendix B Visual Assessment Data
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project Number 92350
Main Channel Camp Branch (1810 linear feet)
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Appendix B - Visual Assessment Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5
Number
Footage
Number
Number
Amount
with
with
Adjust % for
Stable,
Total
of
of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Major Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Channel Sub-Category
Metric
as Intended
As -Built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
I Bed
1 Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units)
Aggradation
9
204
90%
Degradation
1 0
1 0
80%
2 Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate
20
24
3 Meander Pool Condition*
Depth Sufficient
23
24
Length Appropriate
20
24
4 Thslweg Positron
Thalwe centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
N/A
N/A
Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide)
N/A
N/A
2 Bank
1 Scouretl/Eroded
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
7
431
o
76/0
0
0
0
76/0
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely
2 Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
providing habitat
3 Mass Wasting
Bank slumping calving or collapse
0
0
1000/a
0
0
100%
Totals
7
431
29%
0
0
1000/.
3 Engineered
Structures
I Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs
9
9
100%
2 Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
9
9
100%
2a Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
9
9
100%
3 Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
15%
9
9
100%
4 Habitat*
Pool forming structures maintaining —Max Pool Depth Bankfull Depth?:
1 6 Rootwads/logs providing sonic cover at baseflow
9
9
100%
Appendix B - Visual Assessment Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5

Appendix B Visual Assessment Data
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project Number 92350
Unnamed Tributary to Camp Branch (556 linear feet)
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Appendix B - Visual Assessment Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5
Number
Footage
Number
Number
Amount
with
with
Adjust % for
Stable,
Total
of
of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Major Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Channel Sub-Category
Metric
as Intended
As -Built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
I Bed
1 Vertical Stability (Riffle and Run units)
Aggradauon
1
0
0
100%
Degradation
0
1 0
100%
2 Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate
16
16
100%
3 Meander Pool Condition*
th Sufficient
17
17
100%
Length Appropriate
17
17
100%
4 Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering et upstream of meander bend (Run)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide)
N/A
N/A
N/A
2 Bank
1 Scoured/Eroded
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
0
0
o
100%
0
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely
2 Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest appear sustainable and are
0
0
1000/6
0
0
1000/0
providing habitat
3 Mass Wasting
Bank slumping calving or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
1000%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
1000/0
3 Engineered
Structures
1 Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs
I
1
100%
2 Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
I
1
100%
2a Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
1
1
100%
3 Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%
1
1
100%
4 Habitat*
Pool forming structures maintaining —Max Pool Depth Bankfull Depth ?
1 6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at baseflow
N/A
Appendix B - Visual Assessment Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5

Appendix B
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Planted Arraaoa 42
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
acres
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material
0 1
7
0 106
025%
Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3 4 or 5 stem count criteria
0 1
0
0
0° /U
Total
0
0
025%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year
0
0
0
0%
F—mrnt Aereaae 95
— o
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
S
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
1000
0
0
0° /U
Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
none
0
0
00/0
Appendix B - Visual Assessment Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5

Appendix B
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
UT to Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Protect 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Planted Acreage 42
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
acres
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material
0 1
7
0 106
025%
Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on Nff3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria
01
0
0
0%
Total
0
0
1 025%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year
I
1 0
1 0
1 0%
Easement Acreage 95
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
S
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
1000
0
0
00/0
Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
none
0
0
0%
Appendix B - Visual Assessment Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5

Cross Section 1: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 1: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 1: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 2: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Stream Station & Cross Section Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
F ,anent Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Cross Section 2: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 2: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 2: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 2: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Stream Station & Cross Section Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
Ii>> i e lent Monitoring Year 5 of 5 ;R

Cross Section 3: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 3: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 3: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 3: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared Fay:
Stream Station & Cross Section Photos
Fr�� Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
�`iiFiRem nt Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Cross Section 4: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 4: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 4: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 4: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Stream Station & Cross Section Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
An a ment Monitoring Year 5 of 5 0

Cross Section 5: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 5: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 5: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 5: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Stream Station & Cross Section Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
ient Monitoring Year 5 of 5 iffi

Cross Section 6: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 6: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 6: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 6: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
�`- Stream Station & Cross Section Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
E jent Monitoring Year 5 of 5 pie

Cross Section 7: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 7: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 7: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 7: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
UnmieStream Station & Cross Section Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
nt Monitoring Year 5 of 5 im

Cross Section 8: View Upstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 8: View Downstream
(MY 1 - 11/2006)
Cross Section 8: View Upstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Cross Section 8: View Downstream
(MY 5 - 7/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared Fay:
Stream Station & Cross Section Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
lent Monitoring Year 5 of 5 iffl

Vegetation Plot 1
(MY 1 - 4/2006)
Vegetation Plot 1
(MY 5 - 8/2011)
Vegetation Plot 1
(MY 5 - 8/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Vegetation Plot Photos
�� Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
Fai i ment Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Vegetation Plot 2
(MY 1 - 4/2006)
Vegetation Plot 2
(MY 5 - 8/2011)
Vegetation Plot 2
(MY 5 - 8/2011)
Vegetation Plot 2
(MY 5 - 8/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Vegetation Plot Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
N
MI, „c'nt Monitoring Year 5 of 5 ;pt

Vegetation Plot 3
(MY 1 - 4/2006)
Vegetation Plot 3
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Vegetation Plot 3
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Vegetation Plot Photos
Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
F.csystcm ; Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Vegetation Plot 4
No available photograph (MY 1 - 11/2010)
Vegetation Plot 4
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Vegetation Plot 4
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B – Visual Assessment Data
Vegetation Plot Photos
�— Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
ha i ment Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Prepared By:
;pe

Vegetation Plot 5
(MY 1 - 4/2006)
Vegetation Plot 5
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Vegetation Plot 5
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B — Visual Assessment Data Prepared fay:
Vegetation Plot Photos
� Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
k
v u "f— t Monitoring Year 5 of 5 PC

Vegetation Plot 6
(MY 1 - 4/2006)
Vegetation Plot 6
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Vegetation Plot 6
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B – Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Vegetation Plot Photos
�— Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
gal �n�ienl Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Vegetation Plot 7
(MY 3 - 6/2009)
Vegetation Plot 7
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Vegetation Plot 7
(MY 5 - 5/2011)
Prepared For: Appendix B – Visual Assessment Data Prepared By:
Vegetation Plot Photos
�— Camp Branch Stream Restoration Project EEP Project No. 92350
,31 ia1 -ment Monitoring Year 5 of 5 Fir

APPENDIX C
VEGETATION PLOT DATA
Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary Table
CVS Vegetation Metadata Table
CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plat and Species
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
EEP Project No 92350
March 2012
Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Appendix C
Table 7 Vegetation Plot Nhttgation Success
UT to Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Protect 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Vegetation Plot ID
Vegetation Survival Threshold
Met
(Y/N)
Plot 1
N
Plot 2
Y
Plot 3
Y
Plot 4
Y
Plot 5
Y
Plot 6
Y
Plot 7
Y
Appendix C - Vegetation Plot Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5

Appendix C
Table 8 CVS Vegetation Metadata Table
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Protect 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Report Prepared By
Heath Caldwell
Date Prepared
9/7/2011 15 20
database name
Database mdb
database location
J UJX31100\M5 -Field Monitoring Data\MY 201 I\VEGETATION\Bishop Sites
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN
THIS DOCUMENT
Metadata
Description of database file thereport worksheets and a summary of project(s) and project data
Pro planted
Each vroiect is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre for each year This excludes live stakes
Proj, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre for each year This includes live stakes all planted stems and all natural/volunteer stems
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data live stems dead stems missing, etc
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots
Vi or bv SPP
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by e for each species
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot, dead and missing stems are excluded
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
1A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species lanted and natural volunteers combined for each plot, dead and missing stems are excluded
PROJECT SUMMARY
Project Code
D05010S
Bishop Site Stream and Wetland Restoration
Stream and wetland restoration/enhancement in Anson County
project Name
Description
length(ft)
stream-to-edge width ft
area m
100
[RRijuired Plots calculated
7
Sampled Plots
7
Appendix C - Vegetation Plot Data
Camp Branch Restoration
Year 5 of 5

Appendix C
Table 9 CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Camp Branch Stream Restorahon/EEP Project 92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
1 ype =annlD or 1 ree
P = Planted
T = Total
Appendix C - Vegetation Plot Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5
Current Data (MY5 -2011)
Annual Means
Species
Common Name
Type
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
Plot 5
Plot 6
Plot 7
Current Mean
MYI - 2007
MY2 - 2008
MY3 - 2009
MY4 - 2010
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
Acerne undo
box elder
T
5
55
2
5
29
N/A
N/A
N/A
20
N/A
N/A
N/A
13
Acerrubra
red maple
T
17
8
N/A
13
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
S
2
1
N/A
2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
8
Astmtna trtloba
pawpaw
T
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
4
N/A
N/A
Baccharts harrid0ha
groundsel tree
S
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7
Betula ntgra
river birch
T
6
28
30
14
6
16
30
13
7
8
8
16
6
6
9
9
9
8
9
13
Celtts loevtgato
sugarberry
T
i
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
2
Ce halanthus occtdentahs
common buttonbush
S
1
3
2
3
5
5
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
5
4
5
Corpus amomum
silky dogwood
T
11
11
5
12
8
8
10
10
9
10
9
9
8
8
9
9
8
8
Froxtnus pens lvantca
green ash
T
2
3
3
6
2
5
2
5
9
9
8
8
N/A
N/A
2
3
untperus vtrgtntona
eastern red cedar
S
1
1
1
1
1
l
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Ltqutdamborstyraci lua
sweet gum
T
11
2
N/A
7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
N/A
12
Nysso btf/ora
swamp tupelo
T
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
Ptnustoeda
loblolly pine
T
39
N/A
39
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
25
Platanus occtdentalts
American sycamore
T
2
6
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
2
N/A
2
Quercus mtchouxtt
swamp chestnut oak
T
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
Quercus ntgra
water oak
T
2
1
1
l
2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
T
3
3
2
2
11
1
1 1
3
31
3
1 2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Quercus phellos
willow oak
T
2
2
4
4
2
3
1
1
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
Saltx ntgra
black willow
T
2
N/A
2
N/A
LIN/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1
Ulmus amencono
American elm
T
5
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
2
3
2
2
Plot Area (acres)
Species Count
Stem Count
Stems MLAC4
00247
2
2
6
12
1 5
1 7
1 7
1 9
1 5
1 8
1 9
1 11
7
7
15
20
12 12
12 13
1 11
12
10 17
&=6=Q
20
167
1 14
1 27
1 29
1 41
1 15
1 38
1 27
1 39
1 28
29
42
143
44 1 44
45 1 67
1 35
41
34 110
162
1 162
810
167611
567
1 10931
1174
1 1660
1 607
11538
11093
1 1579
1 1134
1174
1 742
2065
1087 1 1087
1 995 112151
989
1 1001
931 2296
1 ype =annlD or 1 ree
P = Planted
T = Total
Appendix C - Vegetation Plot Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5

JJG
APPENDIX D
STREAM SURVEY DATA
Figures 3a -h
Cross - sections with Annual Overlays
Figures 4a,b
Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
Figures 5a -h
Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Tables 10a,b
Baseline —Stream Data Summary Tables
Table I I a Monitoring — Cross - Section Morphology Data Table
Table I I Monitoring — Stream Reach Morphology Data Table
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 3a: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name
Camp Branch
EEP Project Number
92350
Cross - Section ID
XS -1, Riffle, 02+50
Survey Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
97.85
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
6.39
Bankfull Width ft
12.38
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
98.93
Flood Prone Width ft
55.67
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.52
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.08
W/D Ratio
23.81
Entrenchment Ratio
4.50
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
0
97.49
xsl -I t
0.15
97.38
xsl
2.73
97.61
xsl
5.34
97.66
Xs]
8.44
97.71
xs 1
11.81
97.59
xsl
14.91
97.79
xsl
18.03
97.83
xs I
20.77
97.88
xsl
25.29
97.75
xsl
25.63
97.21
xs1
26.71
96.87
xsl
28.6
96.88
xsl
30.25
96.77
xsl
31.86
97.44
xsl
34.71
97.94
xsl
37.24
97.93
xsl
40.52
97.99
xsl
44.22
98.06
xsl
47.66
98.1
xsl
51.38
98.17
xsl
55.35
98.21
xsl
55.67
98.3
xs I -rpt
XS -1: View Upstream
XS -1: View Downstream
Camp Branch (Tributary) - MY5
Cross - Section 1- Riffle
98.6
98.4
98.2
98
97.8
... ............................... ... ................. ............ ........... ...............................
97.6
97.4
a
0
97.2
pj 97
96.8
96.6
96.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
--*--MY1- 10/2007 +MY2- 5/2008 - -MY3- 1/2010 --0-AM- 2/2011 - M--- MY541/2011 .......... BankfWI .......... water Surface

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 3b: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name
Camp Branch
EEP Project Number
92350
Cross - Section ID
XS -2, Pool, 02 +77
Survey Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
97.60
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
5.96
Bankfull Width ft
10.25
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
98.89
Flood Prone Width ft
66.00
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.58
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.29
W/D Ratio
17.67
Entrenchment Ratio
6.44
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
0
97.49
xs2 -I t
2.83
97.59
xs2
6.49
97.69
xs2
8.94
97.7
xs2
11.89
97.54
xs2
14.4
97.05
xs2
18.23
97.06
xs2
21.65
97.53
xs2
24.63
97.59
xs2
27.38
97.69
xs2
30.5
97.71
xs2
33.49
97.59
xs2
34.17
97.08
xs2
35.31
96.43
xs2
36.74
96.31
xs2
37.67
96.42
xs2
38.63
96.74
xs2
39.89
97.44
xs2
44.61
97.65
xs2
47.05
97.71
xs2
50.06
97.71
xs2
53.33
97.67
xs2
56.06
97.67
xs2
59.26
97.58
xs2
61.57
97.34
xs2
65.09
97.38
xs2
65.47
97.42
xs2
66
97.46
xs2- t
XS -2: View Upstream
XS -2: View Downstream
Camp Branch (Tributary) - MY5
Cross - Section 2- Pool
98.2
98
97.8
97.6
_
97.4
-
972
97
96.8
w 96.6
96.4
....................................... ............................... ................................. ...............................
96.2
96
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
--ib-MY140/2007 +MY2- 5/2008 ---*-MY3- 1/2010 MY4- 2/2011 -- ai -MY5- 8/2011 .......... Bankfull •••••••WaterSurface

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 3c: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name
Camp Branch
EEP Project Number
92350
Cross- Section ID
XS -3, Riffle, 04 +68
Survey Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
94.79
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area (ft)
1.63
Bankfull Width ft
6.55
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
95.23
Flood Prone Width ft
32.55
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.25
Bankfull Max Depth ft
0.44
W/D Ratio
26.20
Entrenchment Ratio
4.97
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
2.29
97.47
xs3-1 pt
-1.83
97.4
xs3
0.92
96.69
xs3
5.51
95.24
xs3
8.65
94.93
xs3
12.36
94.84
xs3
15.42
94.96
xs3
18.45
95.01
xs3
23.44
94.35
xs3
25.19
94.45
xs3
26.38
94.77
xs3
30.77
95.08
xs3
33.2
95.11
xs3
36.4
95.16
xs3
39.42
95.28
xs3
42.53
95.51
xs3
44.57
96.31
xs3
46.28
96.84
xs3
47.6
96.83
xs3
47.72
96.88
xs3 -r t
- t -MYI- 10/2007 --- 0-MY2- 5/2008
MY3- 1/2010 MY4- 2/2011 -->M- MY5. 8/2011 .... Bankfull -• Water Surface
XS -3: View Upstream
XS -3: View Downstream
Camp Branch (Tributary) - MY5
Cross - Section 3- Riffle
9X
-
97
-
A
p
c
0
95
- - -
- -
'2
94
w
93
92
0 l0
20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
- t -MYI- 10/2007 --- 0-MY2- 5/2008
MY3- 1/2010 MY4- 2/2011 -->M- MY5. 8/2011 .... Bankfull -• Water Surface

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 3d: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name
Camp Branch
EEP Project Number
92350
Cross- Section ID
XS -4, Pool, 04 +84
Survey Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
94.76
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
4.27
Bankfull Width ft
13.70
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
95.58
Flood Prone Width ft
36.08
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
0.31
Bankfull Max Depth ft
0.82
W/D Ratio
44.19
Entrenchment Ratio
2.63
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
0
97.32
xs4 -I t
0.52
97.25
xs4
2.77
96.08
xs4
8.39
94.6
xs4
11.71
94.66
xs4
15.43
94.71
xs4
18.24
94.76
xs4
24.46
94.54
xs4
26.29
94.46
xs4
28.27
93.99
xs4
29.56
93.94
xs4
30.39
94.18
xs4
31.58
94.63
xs4
32.38
94.92
xs4
35.45
95.09
xs4
38.44
95.08
xs4
40.51
95.46
xs4
43.55
97.01
xs4
46.14
97.05
xs4
48.76
97.01
xs4
48.9
97.08
xs4 -r t
XS -4: View Upstream
XS -4: View Downstream
Camp Branch (Tributary) - MY5
Cross - Section 4- Pool
98
97.5
97
96.5
96
ar 95.5
b
95
d
............... ....... ................ ...............................
w 94.5
94
................................................. ............................... ............ ...............................
93.5
93
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Station (ft)
- --&-MY1- 10/2007 --*-MY2 -52008 --"-MY3 -12010 --4-MY4- 2/2011 -M- MY5 - 8/2011 - ° °° °• Bankfull ••••• ^••• Water Surface

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 3e: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Main Channel
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name Cam Branch
EEP Project Number 92350
Cross - Section ID XS -5, Riffle, 08 +95
Survey
Bankfull Elevation ft
93.92
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ftZ)
♦
XS -5: View Upstream
w+ ai
XS -5: View Downstream
Date
7/2011
96.39
Flood Prone Width ft
98.74
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.64
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.47
W/D Ratio
12.16
Entrenchment Ratio
Station
Elevation
Notes
0
97.98
xs5 -1 t
95
0.18
97.94
xs5
1.74
97.73
xs5
5.35
96.89
xs5
92
8.84
95.96
xs5
11.19
95.41
xs5
90
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (ft)
�� -MY1- 10/2007 -�MY2- 5/2008 - ��MY3 -1 /2010 •- n- MY4- 2/2011 � -MYS- 8/2011 .......... Baaktull •••••••••• Water Surface
15.47
95.03
xs5
18.37
94.91
xs5
21.22
94.84
xs5
26.75
94.67
xs5
31.33
94.71
xs5
34.02
94.82
xs5
36.85
94.7
xs5
40.21
94.49
xs5
42.19
94.2
xs5
43.5
93.64
xs5
44.8
93.39
xs5
46.99
92.56
lew
47.5
92.01
xs5
49.01
91.65
xs5
51.23
91.62
xs5
Station Elevation Notes Station Elevation Notes
66.2 94.3 rb 89.39 95.29 xs5
69.54 94.25 x85 92.52 95.35 xs5
72.3 94.09 xs5 94.97 95.3 xs5
76.17 94.11 xs5 97.93 95.57 xs5
79.21 94.21 xs5 101.02 95.79 xs5
82.92 94.31 xs5 104.94 96.17 xs5
86.05 94.78 xs5 107.68 96.76 xs5
Station Elevation Notes
111.35 97.32 t
53.41
91.69
xs5
54.03
91.58
xs5
55.25
91.55
xs5
56.18
91.46
xs5
57.38
91.45
xs5
60.27
92.65
rew
60.66
93.27
xs5
63.02
93.99
xs5
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
93.92
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ftZ)
32.65
Bankfull Width ft
Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
93.92
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ftZ)
32.65
Bankfull Width ft
19.95
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
96.39
Flood Prone Width ft
98.74
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.64
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.47
W/D Ratio
12.16
Entrenchment Ratio
4.95
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Camp Branch (Main Channel) -MYS
Cross - Section 5- Riffle
99
98
-
-
97
96
95
0
>
93
92
91
90
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station (ft)
�� -MY1- 10/2007 -�MY2- 5/2008 - ��MY3 -1 /2010 •- n- MY4- 2/2011 � -MYS- 8/2011 .......... Baaktull •••••••••• Water Surface

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 3f: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Main Channel
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name Cam Branch
Bankfull Elevation ft
94.12
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area (ftZ)
21.74
Bankfull Width ft
Date
7/2011
EEP Project Number 92350
Flood Prone Width ft
100.13
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.17
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.78
W/D Ratio
15.90
Cross - Section ID XS -6, Pool
5.38
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
98
Survey
97
b96
p
�
95
G
°
94
W
93
92
91
0 20
40
60 RO 100 120
XS -6:
View Upstream
XS -6: View Downstream
F_ MYI -10 %?007
- �- MY'- 5 "_OOR
- N -MY3- 1/2010 +MY4 -22011 -�- MYS -R /2011 .......... Bankfull ���- ��•�Water Surface
Station
Elevation
Notes
0
97.84
xs6 -I t
0.43
97.83
xs -6
5.77
97.06
xs -6
9.22
96.23
xs -6
12.03
95.39
xs -6
14.53
95.2
xs -6
18.62
94.77
xs -6
22.67
94.71
xs -6
26.11
94.69
xs -6
29.97
94.64
xs -6
34.01
94.58
xs -6
36.93
94.6
xs -6
40.31
94.59
xs -6
44.6
94.66
xs -6
47.94
94.5
xs -6
50.91
94.17
xs -6
54.36
94.05
xs -6
56.34
93.33
xs -6
56.88
92.68
lew
58.94
92.58
xs -6
59.97
92.34
xs -6
62.06
92.41
xs -6
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station Elevation Notes
63.4
92.7
xs -6
69.42
92.87
xs -6
86.73
94.14
xs -6
112.96 96.27 xs -6
64.1
92.62
xs -6
70.15
93.57
xs -6
90.2
94.31
xs -6
116.68 96.61 xs -6
65.18
92.52
xs -6
71.2
94.11
xs -6
93.89
94.87
xs -6
121.22 97.32 t
66.27
92.73
xs -6
73.14
94.46
rb
96.98
95.25
xs -6
67.02
92.74
xs -6
76
94.32
xs -6
100.55
95.48
xs -6
67.7
92.69
xs -6
80.36
94.2
xs -6
103.88
95.49
xs -6
68.9
92.68
rew
84.1
94.16
xs-6
108.36
95.59
xs -6
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
94.12
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area (ftZ)
21.74
Bankfull Width ft
Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
94.12
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area (ftZ)
21.74
Bankfull Width ft
18.60
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
95.90
Flood Prone Width ft
100.13
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.17
Bankfull Max Depth ft
1.78
W/D Ratio
15.90
Entrenchment Ratio
5.38
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Camp Branch (Main Channel) -MYS
Cross - Section 6- Pool
99
98
97
b96
p
�
95
G
°
94
W
93
92
91
0 20
40
60 RO 100 120
Station (ft)
F_ MYI -10 %?007
- �- MY'- 5 "_OOR
- N -MY3- 1/2010 +MY4 -22011 -�- MYS -R /2011 .......... Bankfull ���- ��•�Water Surface

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 3g: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Main Channel
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name
Camp Branch
EEP Project Number
92350
Cross - Section ID
XS -7, Riffle
Survey Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
92.86
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
45.51
Bankfull Width ft
23.41
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
96.22
Flood Prone Width ft
99.56
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.94
Bankfull Max Depth ft
3.36
W/D Ratio
12.07
Entrenchment Ratio
4.25
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
3.77
96.29
xs7 -1 t
5.19
96.15
xs -7
8.22
94.76
xs -7
12.11
93.89
xs -7
14.57
93.46
xs -7
17.93
93.2
xs -7
20.43
93.08
xs -7
24.05
93.11
xs -7
26.08
93.23
xs -7
27.28
92.67
xs -7
28.48
91.99
xs -7
29.37
91.34
xs -7
30.01
90.81
lew
32.06
89.74
xs -7
33.75
89.5
xs -7
35.28
89.66
xs -7
36.68
90.13
xs -7
38.49
90.38
xs -7
40
90.64
xs -7
41.86
90.73
rew
44.06
91.11
xs -7
45.5
91.47
xs -7
47.42
91.84
xs -7
49.6
92.57
xs -7
50.26
92.84
rb
53.7
92.89
xs -7
56.71
92.9
xs -7
60.09
92.85
xs -7
63.3
1 92.82
xs -7
XS -7: View Upstream
XS -7: View Downstream
Station
Elevation
Camp Branch (Main Channel) - MY4
Station
Elevation
Cross - Section 7- Riffle
67.2
92.67
xs -7
94.14
97
xs -7
71.61
92.76
xs -7
98.78
95.48
xs -7
96
92.68
xs -7
100.93
95.86
xs -7
79.73
92.75
95
101.66
95.91
Xs -7
83.47
92.79
xs -7
103.22
94
xs -7
87.3
P
1 xs -7
1 104.04
1 96.03
xs7- t
93
1 94.09
1 xs -7
°
92
W91
............................... ..... ................................ ...............................
90
89
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station ft
- i-MY]- 10/2007 tMY2 -5/ 2008 - N-MY3- 1/2010 ­40- MY4 - 2/2011 MY5- 7/2011 ..........MAUI .......•..17.' S face
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
67.2
92.67
xs -7
94.14
94.91
xs -7
71.61
92.76
xs -7
98.78
95.48
xs -7
76.06
92.68
xs -7
100.93
95.86
xs -7
79.73
92.75
xs -7
101.66
95.91
Xs -7
83.47
92.79
xs -7
103.22
95.95
xs -7
87.3
1 93.14
1 xs -7
1 104.04
1 96.03
xs7- t
90.26
1 94.09
1 xs -7

Appendix D. Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data Tables
Figure 3h: Cross - Section Plots and Raw Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Main Channel
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name
Camp Branch
EEP Project Number
92350
Cross - Section ID
XS -8, Pool
Survey Date
7/2011
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation ft
92.48
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
27.92
Bankfull Width ft
23.02
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
94.51
Flood Prone Width ft
90.89
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
1.21
Bankfull Max Depth ft
2.03
W/D Ratio
19.02
Entrenchment Ratio
3.95
Bank Height Ratio
1.00
Station
Elevation
Notes
-4.6
96.77
xs8 -1 t
4.04
96.75
xs -8
-1.8
96.66
xs -8
1.18
96.42
xs -8
4.49
96.07
xs -8
7.14
95.62
xs -8
10.01
94.97
xs -8
13.45
94.16
xs -8
17.19
93.5
xs -8
21.13
93.15
xs -8
24.8
92.81
xs -8
28.29
92.64
xs -8
31.4
92.74
xs -8
34.26
92.74
xs -8
38.06
92.77
xs -8
43.86
92.71
xs -8
46.1
92.22
xs -8
47.21
92.08
xs -8
48.92
91.63
xs -8
50.67
90.69
lew
52.37
90.45
xs -8
53.95
90.67
xs -8
55.42
90.46
xs -8
56.58
90.64
rew
57.49
90.73
xs -8
58.93
90.91
xs -8
60.22
90.98
xs -8
61.97
91.28
xs -8
64.13
91.4
xs-8
XS -8: View Upstream
XS -8: View Downstream
Station
Elevation
Camp Branch (Main Channel) - MY5
Station
Elevation
Cross - Section 8- Pool
Station
Elevation
Notes
65.23
98
XS-8
90.62
92.57
97
114.53
95.94
xs -8
67.48
92.46
rb
94.21
96
xs -8
115.07
95.99
xs8-rpt
71.52
92.64
xs -8
95
93.41
xs -8
p
74.89
92.66
94
101.25
94.12
c
°-
78.64
93
xs -8
104.91
v.............................
ua
xs -8
................. ... ...............................
92
92.52
xs -8
1 108.561
95.38
xs -8
91
87.36
92.49
1 xs-8
1 111.67
1 95.82
xs-8
90
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Station
�r- MYl -10/ 2007 - 0-MY24=08 --"-MY3- 12010 - y- MY42/2011 - MY5 - 7/2011 Baekfull .......... Water Surface
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
65.23
91.74
XS-8
90.62
92.57
xs -8
114.53
95.94
xs -8
67.48
92.46
rb
94.21
92.76
xs -8
115.07
95.99
xs8-rpt
71.52
92.64
xs -8
98.02
93.41
xs -8
74.89
92.66
xs -8
101.25
94.12
xs -8
78.64
92.53
xs -8
104.91
95.01
xs -8
83.21
92.52
xs -8
1 108.561
95.38
xs -8
87.36
92.49
1 xs-8
1 111.67
1 95.82
xs-8

100
98
96
a 94
c
° 92
a
W
90
88
86
Appendix D
Figure 4a. Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch -Main Channel
Longitudinal Profile
2011 Monitoring Year
MY5of5
♦ ♦
1 ♦
♦
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Station (ft)
TW- 10/2007 TW- 5/2008 - TW- 1/2010 TW- 2/2011 TW- 7/2011 ......••• WS- 7/2011 ♦ BKF- 7/2011
I g11
� �v

Appendix 4.5 Longitudinal Plots and Raw Data Tables
Camp Branch Stream Restoration /EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
100
99
98
97
L
Cd
L
96
w
0 95
a
W 94
93
92
91
Figure 4.2b. Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch - Tributary
Longitudinal Profile
2011 Monitoring Year
MY5of5
♦♦
ti\
♦ ♦�
*`
♦
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Station (ft)
TW- 10/2007 TW- 5/2008 - TW- 1/2010 TW- 2/2011
TW- 10/2011 ♦ BKF- 10/2011 • Cross- Section -- - -- -- WS- 3/2012

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5a: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Name: Camp Branch-
Cross- Section: 1
Feature: Riffle
Summary Data
D50
MY5- 8/2011
D84
Description
Material
Size
mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
74
74%
74%
Sand
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
74%
fine sand
0.250
0
0%
74%
medium sand
0.50
0
0%
74%
coarse sand
1.00
0
0%
74%
very coarse sand
2.0
0
0%
74%
Gravel
very fine gravel
4.0
0 1
0%
74%
fine gravel
5.7
0
0%
74%
fine gravel
8.0
0
0%
74%
medium gravel
11.3
0
0%
74%
medium gravel
16.0
0
0%
74%
course gravel
22.3
0
1 0%
74%
course gravel
32.0
0
0%
74%
very coarse gravel
45
2
2%
76%
very coarse gravel
64
7
7%
83%
Cobble
small cobble
90
7
7%
90%
medium cobble
128
2
2%
92%
large cobble
180
5
5%
97%
very large cobble
256
3
3%
100%
Boulder
small boulder
362
0
0%
100%
small boulder
512
0
0%
100%
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
Bedrock
bedrock
40096
0
1 0%
100%
TOTAL % of whole count
100
1 100%
100%
Summary Data
D50
0.04
D84
67.71
D95
159.2
Cumulative Percent
100%
90%
80%
c 70%
V 60%
w
a 50%
d
Z 40%
4..
3 30%
3 20%
u 10%
0%
ooti oti ti do 01
Particle Size (mm)
MY1(10 /2007) —MY2 (5/2008) —MY3 (1/2010) MY4 (2/2011) — MY5 - 8/2011
Individual Class Percent
—
100%
90%
80%
— --
=
d
70%
- - -- —
--
y
60%
a
N
50%
-
u
40%
30%
20%
2
10%
___.___._._
c
0%
0�It, o t, 4P ti ti
A h1 16 y?� 1y ,3 .5L h k Co y�
y� �
'LR�����o
O0�
Particle Size (mm)
■ MY1 (10 /2007)
■ MY2 (5/2008) �11Y3 (1 /2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011)
■ MY5 - 8/2011

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5b: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Summary Data
Project Name: Camp Branch - Tributary
0.03
D84
0.05
D95
0.06
Cross - Section: 2
Feature:
Pool
Cumulative Percent
MY5- 8/2011
Description
Material
Size
Total #
Item %
Cum %
100%
(mm)
90%
1
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
100
100%
100%
80% —
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
100%
70% I '
11 1
60%
fine sand
0.250
0
1 0%
100%
a
50%
Sand
medium sand
0.50
0
0%
100%
>
40% o
j
coarse sand
1.00
0
0%
100%
4-
3
very coarse sand
2.0
0
0%
100%
30%
-
very fine gravel
4.0
0
0%
100%
20%
fine gavel
5.7
0
0%
100%
10%
fine gravel
8.0
0
0%
100%
0%
medium gravel
11.3
0
0%
100%
Oti
ti do ,goo
Gravel
medium gravel
16.0
0
0%
100%
Doti
Particle size (mm)
course gravel
22.3
0
0%
100%
MY1 (10/2007)
MY2 (5/2008) --MY3 (1/2010) MY4 (2/2011) —MY5- 8/2011
course gravel
32.0
0
1 0%
100%
very coarse gravel
45
0
0%
100%
very coarse gravel
64
0
0%
100%
small cobble
90
0
0%
100%
Individual Class Percent
medium cobble
128
0
0%
100%
Cobble
large cobble
180
0
1 0%
100%
100%
very large cobble
256
0
0%
100%
90%
small boulder
362
0
0%
100%
80%
-
small boulder
512
0
0%
1000
70%
Boulder
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
d
60%
large boulder
2048
0
1 0%
100%
N
50%
t
Bedrock
bedrock 1
40096
0
1 0%
100%
40%
m
30%
TOTAL % of whole count
100
100%
100%
-0
20%
10%
c
0%
o�ti y.1h oh
hA 'b ti0 3ti Rh �` �O ,�y� ��O �h� ��ti h,�,yOti
o.Lh
O O
�,L3
�:y- 10��o'P
t
Particle Size (mm)
■ MY1 (10/2007) ■ MY2 (5/2008) ■ MY3 (1/2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011) ■ MY5 - 8/2011
Summary Data
D50
0.03
D84
0.05
D95
0.06

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5c: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name: Camp Branch - Tributary
Cross - Section: 3
Feature:
Riffle
MY5- 8/2011
Cumulative Percent
Description Material
Size
Total #
Item %
Cum %
mm
100%
-
Silt/Clay silt/clay
0.062
79
79%
79%
90%
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
79%
80%
fine sand
Sand medium sand
coarse sand
very coarse sand
very fine gravel
fine gravel
fine gravel
medium gravel
Gravel medium gravel
course gravel
0.250
0.50
1.00
2.0
4.0
5.7
8.0
11.3
16.0
22.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
°
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1 0%
°
79 /o
79%
79%
79%
79%
79%
79%
79%
79%
79%
o°
c 7 �
i
I:
60%
50%
40%
I
i
5 30%
u 20%
I
I
10%
—.1E
i
�
0%
oQy Oti '� do tioo
Particle Size (mm)
course gravel
32.0
0
0%
79%
MY1 (10/2007)
MY2 (5/2008) —MY3 (1 /2010) MY4 (2/2011)
MY5 - 8/2011
very coarse gravel
45
0
0%
79%
very coarse gravel
64
2
2%
81%
small cobble
90
4
4%
85%
Cobble medium cobble
large cobble
128
180
2
3
1 2%
3%
87%
90%
Individual Class Percent
very large cobble
small boulder
small boulder
Boulder medium boulder
large boulder
256
362
512
1024
2048
7
3
0
0
0
7%
3%
0%
0%
0%
97%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
– —
80%
70%
d 60%
N
50%
--
Bedrock bedrock
TOTAL % of whole count
Summary Data
D50 0.04
40096
0
100
0%
100%
100%
1000/.
40%
30%
20%
Z
=a
10%
E
0%
D84 83.5
D95 234.29
Ofoti �ti, o ti) Oy 11 'L
O O
13 ti� �ti? .5'L b� toy �i0 ti�� tig0 �h� 5ta'1 h,'LyOti �Op�OOo��
A h1 'b yy
Particle Size (mm)
■ MY1 (10/2007) ■ MY2 (5/2008) ■ MY3 (1/2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011) ■ MY5 - 8/2011

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5d: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name: Camp Branch- Tributary
D50
0.03
D84
Cross - Section: 4
D95
0.06
Feature: Pool
MY5- 8/2011
Cumulative Percent
Description Material Size Total # Item % Cum %
mm
100%
Hill I 11: ill
Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 100 100% 100%
90%
very fine sand 0.125 0 0% 100%
I
80%
I
Lo
fine sand 0.250 0 1 0% 100%
Sand medium sand 0.50 0 0% 100%
coarse sand 1.00 0 0% 100%
very coarse sand 2.0 0 0% 100%
very fine gravel 4.0 0 0% 100%
fine gravel 5.7 0 0% 100%
�, 70%
60%
i
50%
i
0 40%
°
E 30%
20%
i
!
10%
'
0% =_-4H 9--]
fine gravel 8.0 0 0% 100%
medium gravel 11.3 0 0% 100%
Gravel medium gravel 16.0 0 0% 100%
course gravel 22.3 0 0% 100%
ti ti ti o
o� o
Particle5ize(mm)
course avel 32.0 0 0% 100%
— MY1 (10/2007) MY2 (5/2008) ° MY3 (1/2010) —MY4 (2/2011) MY5- 8/2011
very coarse gravel 45 0 0% 100%
very coarse gravel 64 0 0% 100%
small cobble 90 0 0% 100%
Cobble medium cobble 128 0 1 0% loo %
large cobble 180 0 0% 100%
very large cobble 256 0 0% 100%
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
--
small boulder 362 0 0% 100%
80%
70%
Boulder small boulder 512 0 0% 100%
medium boulder 1024 0 1 0% 100%
large boulder 2048 0 0% 100%
60%
N 50%
- - - --
Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100%
40%
- - - --
TOTAL % of whole count 100 100% 100%
Summary Data
3 30%
20%
10%
c
0%
O�ti yti� 0.1� Oh ti ti R h1 hy?� y�o �L'? ,�L p� �� AO 1ti� y�0 �h� �ta'1 hti�tioti oOco
O O Particle Size (mm) P
■ MY1(10/2007) ■ MY2 (5/2008) ■ MY3 (1/2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011) ■ MY5 - 8/2011
D50
0.03
D84
0.05
D95
0.06

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5e: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name: Camp Branch -Main Channel
Cross - Section: 5
D95
54.5
Feature: Riffle
MY5- 8/2011
Cumulative Percent
Description Material Size Total # Item % Cum %
mm
100%
Silt/Clay silt/clay 0.062 19 19% 19%
900/0
very fine sand 0.125 8 8% 27%
80%
fine sand 0.250 6 1 6% 33%
Sand medium sand 0.50 6 6% 39%
-
I
70%
60%
50%
coarse sand 1.00 3 3% 42%
very coarse sand 2.0 7 7% 49%
very fine gravel 4.0 5 5% 54%
fine gravel 5.7 6 6% 60%
fine gravel 8.0 4 4% 64%
' 40%
M 0
30%
= 20%
10%
0%
77
medium gravel 11.3 7 7% 71%
Gravel medium gravel 16.0 6 6% 77%
course gravel 22.3 8 8% 85%
Doti p, ti do 4P
Particle Size (mm)
course gravel 32.0 5 5% 90%
—MY1 (10/2007) MY2 (5/2008) —MY3 (1/2010) MY4 (2/2011) — MY5 - 8/2011
very coarse gravel 45 3 3% 93%
very coarse - gravel 64 4 4% 97%
small cobble 90 1 1% 98%
Cobble medium cobble 128 1 1 1% 99%
large cobble 180 0 0% 99%
Individual Class Percent
very large cobble 256 1 1% 100%
0
100%
small boulder 362 0 0% 100%
90%
- - - - -- - - - -
small boulder 512 0 0% 100%
Boulder medium boulder 1024 0 0% 100%
large boulder 2048 0 0% 100%
c 80%
70%
60%
--
a
N 50%
M
Bedrock bedrock 40096 0 0% 100%
TOTAL % of whole count 100 100% 1 100%
Summary Data
D50 2.4
40%
-U�
30%
--------- - - - - -- -- -
:2 20%
Z
10%
- 0%
- --
- -
D84 21.78
O�ti �.ti� o tih O� ti R h� % yy-? ti� -V Jti 3'L b, �P �O y.L� O �y� ti yy'Ly�.yb�0�4����0
O O Particle Size (mm)
■ MY1 (10/2007) ■ MY2 (5/2008) ■ MY3 (1/2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011) ■ MY5 - 8/2011
D95
54.5

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5f: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Project Name: Camp Branch -Main Channel
0.04
D84
0.06
D95
180
Cross- Section: 6
Feature:
Pool
MY5- 8/2011
Cumulative Percent
Description
Material
Size
Total #
Item %
Cum %
100%
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
very fine sand
fine sand
mm
0.062
0.125
0.250
87
4
0
87%
4%
0%
87%
91%
91%
90%
ao%
c 70%
°; °
60%
I
Sand
medium sand
coarse sand
0.50
1.00
0
0
0%
0%
91%
91%
a
��'-,
50%
40%
very coarse sand
very fine gravel
fine gavel
2.0
4.0
5.7
0
0
0
0%
0%
0%
91%
91%
91%
2
30%
20%
U
10%
fine gravel
8.0
0
0%
91%
0%
medium gavel
11.3
0
0%
91 %
oy
ti do 4o
Gravel
medium gravel
16.0
0
0%
91%
OOy
Particle Size (mm)
course gravel
22.3
0
0%
91%
MY1 (10/2007)
MY2 (5/2008) MY3 (1/2010) MY4 (2/2011)
MY5 - 8/2011
course gravel
32.0
0
0%
91%
very coarse gravel
45
0
0%
91%
very coarse gravel 64 0 0% 91%
Cobble
small cobble
medium cobble
large cobble
90
128
180
0
1
3
0%
1%
3%
91%
92%
95%
Individual Class Percent
100%
very large cobble
256
2
1 2%
97%
90%
small boulder
362
2
2%
99%
80%
Boulder
small boulder
medium boulder
large boulder
512
1024
2048
1
0
0
1 %
0%
0%
100%
100%
100%
; 70%
60%
a
N
10
50%
40%
Bedrock bedrock
TOTAL % of whole count
Summary Data
40096
0
100
1 0%
100%
1000/,
100%
%
3020%
-- —
10%
c
0%
b
LL
ooti ytih 0,1h O`•' ti
O O
ti o h� R> yti� ,y0 ��3 3ti �� �� 00 tiy� ycb0 �h� ��ti
particle Size (mm)
hy'Ly0.1,4�Op'bOO�50
■ MY1 (10/2007)
■ MY2 (5/2008) ■ MY3 (1/2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011)
■ MY5 - 8/2011
D50
0.04
D84
0.06
D95
180

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5g: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Summary Data
Project Name: Camp Branch -Main Channel
0.12
D84
2
D95
109
Cross - Section:
7
Feature: Riffle
MY5- 8/2011
Cumulative Percent
Size
Description
Material
Total #
Item %
Cum %
mm
100%
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
16
16%
16%
90%
very fine sand
0.125
40
40%
56%
80%
fine sand
0.250
4
1 4%
60%
70%
Sand
medium sand
0.50
8
8%
68%
2
60%
—
coarse sand
1.00
12
12%
80%
-
50%
very coarse sand
2.0
4
4%
84%
40%
very fine gravel
4.0
1
1%
85%
5
30%
fine gravel
5.7
0
0%
85%
u'
20°
�°
j
fine gravel
8.0
0
0%
85%
10%
medium gravel
11.3
0
0%
85%
0%
Gravel
medium gravel
16.0
0
0%
85%
Doti
oti
ti do ti�
course gravel
22.3
0
0%
85%
Particle Size (mm)
course gravel
32.0
0
0%
85%
MY1 (10/2007)
MY2 (5/2008) MY3 (1/2010) MY4 (2/2011)
MY5 - 8/2011
very coarse gravel
45
1
1%
86%
very coarse gravel
64
3
3%
89%
small cobble
90
3
1 3%
92%
medium cobble
128
6
6%
98%
Individual Class Percent
Cobble
large cobble
180
1
1%
99%
very large cobble
256
0
0%
99%
100%
small boulder
362
1
1%
100%
90%
small boulder
512
0
1 0%
100%
C
80%
Boulder
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
60%
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
a
50%
Bedrock
bedrock
40096
0
0%
100% 1
u
40%
TOTAL
% of whole count
1
100
100%
100%
�, 30%
V
=0
20%
10%
c
0%
o1p o`' ti
ti ��
oo�
op
yti3
Particle Size (mm)
■ MY1 (10/2007)
■ MY2 (5/2008) ■ MY3 (1/2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011)
■ MY5 - 8/2011
Summary Data
D50
0.12
D84
2
D95
109

Appendix D. Stream Survey Data
Figure 5h: Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No. 92350
Camp Branch Tributary
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Name: Camp Branch -Main Channel
Cross - Section: 8
Feature: Pool
Summary Data
D50
MY5- 8/2011
D84
Description
Material
Size mm
Total #
Item %
Cum %
Silt/Clay
silt/clay
0.062
79
79%
79%
Sand
very fine sand
0.125
0
0%
79%
fine sand
0.250
0
0%
79%
medium sand
0.50
0
0%
79%
coarse sand
1.00
0
0%
79%
very coarse sand
2.0
0
0%
79%
Gravel
very fine gravel
4.0
0
0% 1
79%
fine gravel
5.7
0
0%
79%
fine gravel
8.0
0
0%
79%
medium gravel
11.3
0
0%
79%
medium gravel
16.0
0
0%
79%
course gravel
22.3
0
0%
79%
course gravel
32.0
0
0%
79%
very coarse gravel
45
0
0%
79%
very coarse gravel
64
0
0%
79%
Cobble
small cobble
90
0
0%
79%
medium cobble
128
3
3%
82%
large cobble
180
7
7%
89%
very large cobble
256
9
9%
98%
Boulder
small boulder
362
2
2%
100%
small boulder
512
0
0%
1 100%
medium boulder
1024
0
0%
100%
large boulder
2048
0
0%
100%
Bedrock
bedrock
40096
0
0%
100%
TOTAL % of whole count
100
100%
100%
Summary Data
D50
0.04
D84
143
D95
362
Cumulative Percent
100%
90%
80%
c 70%
d
d
60%
a 50%
40%
30%
20%
u
10%
0%
ooti oti ti do tioo
Particle Size (mm)
MY1 (10/2007) -MY2 (5/2008) -MY3 (1/2010) -MY4 (2/2011) MY5 - 8/2011
Individual Class Percent
100%
90%
80%
70%
d
60%
a 50%
N
N
a 40%
30%
20%
'M 10%
c
0%
o• ti ti ti ti o
Particle Size (mm)
■ MY1 (10/2007) ■ MY2 (5/2008) ■ MY3 (1/2010) ■ MY4 (2/2011) ■ MY5 - 8/2011

Table 10a Baseline Stream Data Summary
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project Number 92350
Mam Channel Camp Branch (1810 linear feet)
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre - Existing Condition
Reference Reach Data
Design
Momtonng Baseline
Dimension an t ate - Riffle
LL
UL
En
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Mm
Med
Max
Mm
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankf ill Width ft
-
-
-
188
16
178
178
195
-
21 3
213
21 3
213
16
19
22
181
205
204
228
Flood prone Width ft
172
208
208
243
NA
NA
NA
NA
-
-
70
90
300
91 3
956
952
999
-
-
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
-
-
-
2 1
22
24
24
26
-
18
18
1 8
1 8
-
-
14
1 6
19
1 3
14
14
14
-
-
Bankfull Max D th ft
-
25
28
28
3
27
27
27
27
-
18
2
23
18
19
19
2
-
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
-
-
-
442
42
1 420 1
42
42
-
-
387
387
387 1
387 1
-
-
30
30
30 1
24
278
278
316
-
-
Wldth/D th Ratio
-
62
76
76
89
-
-
118
118
118
-
10
119
138
136
150
149
163
-
Entrenchment Ratio
-
1 1
12
11
1 2
-
-
NA
NA
tNA
NA
-
3 7
4 7
15 8
4 5
4 7
4 7
4 9
-
Bank Hey ht Ratio
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth ft
19
490
37
1 79
-
-
-
-
45
62
77
45
625
62
80
-
-
Radius of Curvature ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
40
51 1
76
40
580
51 1
76
-
Rc Bankfull width ft/ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Meander Wavelength ft
-
-
-
-
-
102
1378
171
102
1365
1378
171
-
Meander Width Ratio
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
24
3 3
41
22
3 1
3
39
-
-
Profile
Riffle Length ft - - - - - - - - - - 9 219 37 10 2 8 234 433 - -
Riffle Slope ft/ft 0 001 003 001 006 - 0 008 - 002 - - 0 003 0 005 000,9 0 000 10 0 010 0 020
Pool Length ft - - - - - - - - - - - 23 295 38 11 6 3 23 37
Pool Max D th ft - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
L
Pool S acm ft - - - - 48 72 5 122 44 8 9 1 865 1734
Transport Parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) lb1fe
-
-
-
031
-
-
-
-
-
081
-
-
-
-
029
-
-
-
-
-
-
Max part size mm mobilized at bankfal
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stream Power (transport capacity) W /m2
-
-
-
3040
-
-
-
-
-
30 48
-
-
-
-
3250
-
-
-
-
-
-
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
G4
E/C4
C4
C4
Bankful Velocity s
35
Bankful Discharge cfs
-
-
-
38
-
-
Valley Len ft
1640
-
1640
1640
Channel Thalweg Length ft
1722
1807
1810
Smuosi ft
105
118
11
11
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
-
00041
00029
N/A
N/A
BF slope ft/ft
00029
0 004 0 0035 -0 0055
00034
Bankful Flood lam Area acres
-
-
-
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
-
-
-
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
-
-
Biological or Other
-

Table 10a Baseline Stream Data Summary
Camp Branch Stream Restoralaon/EEP Project Number 92350
Unnamed Tnbutary to Camp Branch (556 linear feet)
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre- Existmg Condition
Reference Reach Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
LL
UL
Ea
Mm
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Mm
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Mm
Med
Max
Mm
Mean
Med
Max
SD
n
Bankfull Width ft
-
-
600
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
6
7
68
-
79
8
-
Flood prone Width ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
35
200
500
35
-
200
500
-
-
Bankfull Mean Depth ft
-
090
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
05
06
07
04
-
06
07
-
-
Bankf ill Max Devth ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
07
08
1
06
-
08
1
-
-
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2 )
-
-
-
720
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
64 1
64
64
3
-
44 1
5 8 1
-
-
Width/De th Ratio
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
86
10
12
112
-
131
198
-
-
Entrenchment Ratio
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
58
33
83
44
253
633
-
Bank Height Ratio
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
32
37
42
32
37
42
-
Radius of Curvature ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
14
18
30
14
-
18
30
-
-
Rc Bankfull width ft/ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Meander Wavelength ft
-
-
-
-
-
-
59
606
62
59
-
606
62
-
-
Meander Width Ratio
-
-
-
-
53
62
7
41
-
47
53
-
-
Profile
Riffle Len ft - - - - - - - - - - - 7 113 18 - - - -
Riffle Slope ft/ft - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 007 001 002 - - - - - -
Pool Length ft - - - - - - - - - - - 8 148 24 - - - - - -
Pool Max Depth (ft)- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Pool Spacing ft 21 37 2 46 8 -
Transport Parameters
Reach Shear Stress (competency) lb /62
-
-
-
031
-
-
-
-
-
081
-
-
-
-
029
-
-
-
-
-
095
Max pan size mm mobilized at bankfull
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Stream Power (transport capacity) W /m2
-
-
-
3040
-
-
-
-
-
3048
-
-
-
-
3250
-
-
-
-
-
-
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
G
E4/5
C4/5
Bankful Velocity s
Bankful Discharge cfs
-
-
-
Valley Len ft
-
-
749
667
Channel Thalweg Length ft
-
-
624
556
Sinuosity ft
-
-
12
12
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
-
-
-
-
-
BF slope ft/ft
-
-
-
0 01 0 004 -0 013
001
Bankful Flood lam Area acres
-
-
-
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
I
-
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
-
Biological or Other
-

Appendix D Stream Survey Data
Table 10b Baseline Stream Data Summary (Substrate, Bed, Bank and Hydrologic Containment Parameter Distributions)
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Project No 370
Main Channel Camp Branch (1810 linear feet)
Parameter I Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach Data Design r As- budt/Basehne
Ri %/Ru %/P %/G %/S%
-
-
-
-
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
-
-
-
24 5/35 75/36 75/3 25/0/0
d16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm)
0 12/0 83/2 36/1103/22 6
-
-
145/5 85/8 29/25 06/47 52
Entrenchment Class <1 511 5 -1 99/2 0-4 9/5 0-
9 9h10
100% <1 5 (1 13)
100 %> 10 (15 66)
100 %> 10 (16 67)
5 0 < 100% < 9 9 (5 35, 6 30)
Incision Class <1 2/12-149/1 5 -1 99/>2 0
(2 53) 100 %> 2 0
1 2=(1 2) 100% <1 49
(1 0) 100 %< 1 2
(1 0) 100 %< 12

Appendix D Stream Survey Data
Table lOb Baseline Stream Data Summary (Substrate, Bed, Bank and Hydrologic Containment Parameter Distributions)
Camp Branch Stream Restorahon/EEP Project No 370
Unnamed Tributary to Camp Branch (556 linear feet)
Parameter I Pre - Existing Condition Reference Reach Data Design As- budtBaselme
Ri %/Ru %/P° /o/G %/S%
-
-
-
-
SC % / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%o
-
-
-
-
d 16 / d35 / d50 / d84 / d95 (mm)
-
-
-
-
Entrenchment Class <l 5/1 5-199/2 0-4 9/5 0-
9 9h10
_
Incision Class <1 2/1 2 -1 49/1 5 -1 99h2 0
-
-
-
-

Table lla Morphologic and Hydraulic Monitonng Summary
Camp Branch Stream Restoration/EEP Pro ect Number'92350
Main Channel Camp Branch 1810 linear feet
PARAMETER
Cross - Section 5
Riffle
Cross - Section 6
Pool
DIMENSION
MYl -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
MYl -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
Bankfull Width ft
21 0
200
204
205
200
181
227
21 0
207
186
Flood prone Width ft
972
1017
1017
985
987
999
1005
1005
1004
1001
Bankf ill Mean Depth
1 8
1 9
1 8
16
1 6
1 3
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
Bankfull Max Depth ft
25 1
28
28
24
25
18 1
20
19
19
18
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area ftZ
378
373
362
329
327
240
270
242
243
21 7
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
116
108
115
128
122
136
191
181
175
159
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
46
5 1
50
48
50
5 5
44
47
49
54
Bankfull Bankhei ht Ratio
*
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
*
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Cross Sectional Area between end ins ft2
410 6
4109
3989
3985
3680
3956
3973
4074
4133
3664
d50 mm
310
1 1
105
105
24
04
11
01
01
01
PARAMETER
Cross - Section 7
Riffle
Cross
- Section 8
Pool
DIMENSION
MYl -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
MYl -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
Bankfull Width ft
239
236
225
244
234
228
23 8
195
244
230
Flood prone Width ft
852
979
976
989
996
91 3
893
850
91 3
909
Bankfull Mean Depth
20
20
20
1 9
1 9
14
1 2
1 1
1 2
1 2
Bankfull Max Depth ft
33
33
33
34
34
20
19
18
21
20
Bankf ill Cross - sectional Area ftZ
474
467
439
457
45 5
31 6
285
21 5
287
279
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
120
119
116
13 1
121
163
198
177
207
190
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
3 6
42
43
41
43
40
3 8
44
37
40
Bankfull Bankhei ht Ratio
*
1 0
10
10
1 0
*
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Cross Sectional Area between end ins ft 2
3264
3383
3272
3275
3332
3759
4205
377 1
381 8
413 1
d50 mm
04
1 1
122
122
01
270
1 1
06
06
01
* Data was not provided

Table lla MorpholoLqc and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Camp Branch Stream Restorahon/EEP Project Number 92350
Unnamed Tributary to Camp Branch 556 hnear feet
PARAMETER
Cross - Section 1
e
Cross - Section 2
ool
DIMENSION
MYI -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
MYl -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
Bankfull Width ft
80
90
82
78
895
680
680
563
614
596
Flood rove Width ft
>55
552
550
548
5567
>66
6572
6591
6571
6600
Bankfull Mean Depth
07
07
07
07
069
090
084
086
081
058
Bankfull Max Depth ft
10
1 3
13
12
1 08
140
135
1 35
1 25
129
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area ft2
58
63
55
55
622
590
568
486
497
596
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
114
126
125
112
1297
760
8 10
655
758
1767
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
>6 9
62
67
70
622
>9 7
97
117
1071
644
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio
*
10
10
10
10
*
10
10
10
10
Cross Sectional Area between end ins ft2
317
320
309
279
263
266
239
23 8
2640
186
d50 (mm )
690
004
22 1
57
004
04
004
005
004
004
PARAMETER
Cross - Section 3 ool
Cross - Section 4
file
DIMENSION
MYl -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
MYl -2007
MY2 -2008
MY3 -2009
MY4 -2010
MY5 -2011
Bankfull Width ft
790
544
731
658
655
590
614
590
603
574
Flood prone Width ft
3500
3952
3825
3958
3255
3800
3748
3655
3550
3642
Bankfull Mean Depth
040
042
037
048
025
060
048
050
053
057
Bankfull Max Depth ft
060
065
063
064
044
1 10
1 10
102
089
--085
Bankfull Cross - sectional Area ft2
300
2 16
267
3 17
1 63
350
294
294
3 19
329
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
*
122
198
137
2620
*
128
118
1138
1007
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
*
77
52
60
497
*
61
62
589
634
Bankfull Bankheight Ratio
*
10
10
10
1 0
*
10
10
t 0
10
Cross Sectional Area between end pins (ft)
999
723
1048
746
103 1
963
975
1000
10100
985
d50 mm)
150
004
007
006
004
04
004
140
003
0 03

Appmdl: D Stram Survey Data
TaW I Ih. Maaitain9 Dan Stream Reaeb Dais %mrmry Main Channd Camp Bmnch (1810 Bnmr fat)
Camp Bnaeh Stream Rmmr d-lEEP Pmj It Na 770
Main Channel Camp B..h (1810 8nmr fM)
•1�19�tatl ante m clmrntl to estumte m apprmuuote wlue
'�
- •
m�mm��m�mm�o��
®moo
. • -•
m�mm���m
®m�o�m�mma
WED
,i
d16 d35 /d5O dK4 d95
_
,• _
' '-
©�momamomomammo
®ma
' ' -
mmmmmommmmmommmmmo
`";
�"
�: t�a�fc��rs
t�����
.,.���rra���a���a■u�a�r3•�s:a��
:
•1�19�tatl ante m clmrntl to estumte m apprmuuote wlue

Appendix D Stream Survey Data
Table I lb Mootlorbq Dam Stmm Reach Data Stmtmary Unnamed Tributary to Camp Branch (556 Bnear feet)
Cant' Branch Stream Reatontbo/EEP Pmjeer No 370
Unnamed Tributary to Camp Bnach (556 Linear feet)
Parameter
B—ime
MY 12007
MY 2 2008
DIMENSION
Mtn
Meon
Med
M.
SD
n
Mtn
Mean
Med
Mu
SD
n
Mm
Mm
Med
Mac
SD
n
Bankftdl Width fl
680
740
79
B
085
2
590
715
775
800
099
4
544
684
647
897
153
4
toioe Width fl
3500
26750
200
500
2
3500
36 50
3650
7800
2 12
4
3749
4948
4736
6572
1341
4
Bankfdl Mean ft
040
OSS
06
07
2
040
065
065
090
021
4
042
061
060
084
020
4
Bankftdl Max Depth ft
060
080
08
1
2
060
103
105
140
033
4
065
109
1 18
1 35
031
4
B.kfldl Cross Smt—1 Aia R2
300
440
44
58
2
700
455
465
590
152
4
216
428
431
633
204
4
WidtW Rata
1120
1550
131
198
2
760
950
950
11 40
269
4
8 10
1142
1240
1279
223
4
Elam chmem Ratio
440 1
33 65
257
63.3
2
1
6 10
741
694
966
1 68
4
Bmk Haght Rrmo
100
100
1 00
100
2 1
100
100
100 i
1 00
100
4
100
1 100
1 100
1 00
000
4
Bmdtfldl V
2
PROFILE
Riffle fl
2
516 2710 946
Riffle ft/R
2
000602
010026
002148
Paul Len ft
2 1
11 18
2925
21 08
m ox h
2
105
171
1 87
223
0 42
to
Pool ian R
2
784
72 26
36 13
PATTERN
Chmtrci BehWtdtli R
7200
7700
4200
2
Redtm of .ram R
1400
1B 00
JO00
2
M toiler Wavelen
5900
6060
6200
2
Meotoder Wul Ratio
4 10
470
530
2
DDITIONAL REACH PARAMETERS
m lanifi®tton
C4/5
C4
C4
iorc1 Irn h fl
556
556
556
Sogmt
120
1 20
120
Wam Surf) m Slope (Channel) (fl/fl)
00114
BFv fVfl
001
001
00103
RiY✓Rd/JW/JG.USY
.SIG.YC'/1B%dBeY
16 /d35 /d50 /ai84 d95
oI mrh woh erode bmda
I Stabd or Habun Memc
Bql o Other
Parameter
MY 3 2009
MY 4 2010
MY 5 2011
DIMENSION
Min
Mena
Mai
Mo.
SD
n
Mm
Mean
Mad
Mu
SO
n
Mm
Mean
Mod
Max
SD
n
B.&Rdl Width ft
563
6 77
661
822
1 22
4
603
665
6 36
793
092
4
574
680
626
6 95
147
4
F Width fl
3655
4i93
4664
6591
1406
4
3550
4891
47 21
6571
1395
4
3255
4766
4605
66 00
1587
4
ern h fl
037
060
058
086
021
4
048
063
062
081
015
4
025
052
058
069
019
4
B 1 Max fl
063
106
1 14
1 75
032
4
064
100
1 06
125
029
4
044
092
097
1 29
036
4
Bankftdl Cross oioel rn f12
267
398
390
546
139
4
317
421
409
550
1 21
4
1 63
428
463
622
221
4
W Retq
655
1264
1213
1976
543
4
758
1097
1129
1371
253
4
1007
1673
1532
2620
705
4
Fldratdurvii Reno
523
746
645
1171
290
4
589
741
6 51
1071
226
4
497
599
6 28
644
069
4
Btmk Ha t Reno
100
100
100
100
000
4
100
100
100
100
000
4
100
100
100
100
1 00
4
Bankfldl Veloo
PROFlLE
Rtffte ft
642
1
1 1797
11 13
6 42
1166
11 13
1797
3 32
16
sit
1615
13 33
2782
745
11
t SI fUft
000432
0 0389
0 01931
000432
0 0241
0 01971
0 0589
002
16
0 0043
0 0191
00119
00648
002
11
Pool R
15 41
34 24
24 39
1541
2326
2439
3,424
608
11
795
1646
1249
43 is
1 122
9
Pool d h
110
1 74
170
1 92
014
17
120
161
153
200
025
16
106
129
1 29
168
0 21
9
Pml S ft
1926
81 74
72 10
1926
4034 32 10 it 74 1960
1 I
28 96
4622
45 99
7325
12 63
10
PATTERN
Chtmrel fl
Radim of fl
Meander Wevrlen h R
Meader Width Ratio
ADDITIONAL REACH PARAMETERS
R. Clessifk,
C4
C4
C4
Th.I ten h fl
536
556
556
Simim R
120
120
120
Water Surfim Slope ft/fl
00114
00111
00102
BFI fl/ft
00103
00110
00116
RiSNR.VdPYJG%IS A
'.NC/JB NBeY
16 /d35 /d50 /d84 /d95
book.
mb H .bdet Metric
Bq Ior Other

APPENDIX E
HYDROLOGIC DATA
Tables 12 Verification of Bankfull Events
Figure 6 Monthly Rainfall Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration March 2012
EEP Project No 92350 Monitoring Year 5 of 5

Appendix E. Hydrologic Data
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Camp Branch Stream Restorahon/EEP Protect No. 92350
Main Channel
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
Date of Collection
Date of
Occurrence
Method
Photo # (if available)
Mar -12
Unknown
Crest Gauge
N/A
am Channel and Tnbut
Jul -I 1
Unknown
Crest Gauge
N/A
(Main Channel and Tributary)
Jun -11
Unknown
Crest Gauge
N/A
(Main Channel and Tributary)
Apr -1 I
Unknown
Crest Gauge
N/A
(Main Channel and Tributary)
Feb -11
2010
Visual
N/A
Jan -10
2009
Visual Assessment -wrack lines
N/A
Aug -08
Unknown
Crest Gauge
N/A
(Main Channel and Tributary)
Dec -07
N /A*
Crest Gauge
N/A
(Main Channel and Tributary)
*Note from previous monitoring report No bankfull events were observed to have occurred during the Year -1 (2007)
monitoring period
Appendix E Hydrologic Data
Camp Branch Stream Restoration
Year 5 of 5

Appendix E. Hydrologic Data
Figure 6: Monthly Rainfall Data
Camp Branch /EEP Project No.92350
Monitoring Year 5 of 5
6
5
a� 4
s
u
c
Monthly Precipitation (Site)
c
0 3
}, 30th Percentile (Region)
n 70th Percentile (Region)
'u
L
2
d
1
0
titi titi titi titi titi titi titi NI titi titi titi titi
�aJ P��
*Regional rainfall data referenced from NC Cronos Database Divisonal Data for the Southern Piedmont of North Carolina - Data Period January 2011 through December 2011.
Monthly precipitation referenced from the USGS 351218080331345 CRN -29 rain gage Real -Time daily data, January 2011 through December 2011.
Appendix E - Hydrologic Data
Camp Branch
Year 5 of 5
r