20091236 Ver 2_Mitigation Bank Information_20121213

LOWER CAPE FEAR
UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
Brunswick County, North Carolina
FINAL MITIGATION PLAN
Sponsor:
LCFUMB, LLC
Attn. Mr. Jon T. Vincent
1508 Military Cutoff Road, Suite 302
Wilmington NC 28403
Prepared by.
?11AMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP iNc.
Environmental Consultonts
P.O. Box 2522
Wilmington, N.C. 28402
December 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................ ...............................
I. SITE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION ...........
A. Project Overview ......................... ...............................
B. Site Location ............................... ...............................
II. WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION
A. Watershed Trends ..... ...............................
B. Surface Water Classifications ...................
C. Sub - Watershed Conditions .......................
III. MITIGATION GOALS ...............
A. Project Purpose .........................
1. Biogeochemical Cycling .........
2. Hydrologic ..............................
3. Biotic ....... ...............................
B. Geographic Service Area (GSA)
IV. SITE DESCRIPTION ..........................
A.
Community Types ...............................
B.
Vegetation ........... ...............................
C.
Soil Characteristics .............................
D.
Hydrology /Hydraulic Characteristics...
E.
Threatened and Endangered Species
F.
Cultural Resources .............................
G.
Jurisdictional Determinations ..............
V. RESTORATION PLAN - WHITE SPRINGS TRACT
A. First -Order Stream and Riparian Wetland Restoration ......
B. Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration ... ...............................
VI. RESTORATION PLAN - SNEEDEN TRACT
A. Stream Mitigation .................. ...............................
B. Riparian Wetland Mitigation .. ...............................
VII. BANK IMPLEMENTATION
VIII. MONITORING PLAN - WHITE SPRINGS TRACT
A. Overview ......................................... ...............................
B. First -Order Stream Restoration Success Criteria............
C. Wetland Success Criteria ................ ...............................
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
5
5
5
6
6
7
..7
..7
..8
..9
10
11
12
12
13
13
15
17
17
18
19
22
22
22
24

IX. MONITORING PLAN - SNEEDEN TRACT ........................................... .............................26
A. Riparian Wetland Restoration ....................................................................... .............................26
B. Stream Restoration and Wetland Enhancement .......................................... .............................27
X. SITE MANAGEMENT .................................................................................. .............................29
A. Adaptive Management .................................................................................. .............................29
B. Long -term Management ............................................................................... .............................30
XI. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................... .............................30
XII. SOURCES OF INFORMATION ................................................................. .............................31
ii

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDICES
Table 1 ....................................................................... ............................... White Springs Tract Planting Plan
Table 2 ............................................................................... ............................... Sneeden Tract Planting Plan
Table 3 ............................................................................... ............................... Mitigation Type and Quantity
Table 4 ............................................................... ............................... Summary of Credits by Mitigation Type
Table5 ................................................................................................... ............................... Project Timeline
Figure1 ................................................................................. ............................... Umbrella Bank Vicinity Map
Figure2 .................................................................................. ............................... White Springs Vicinity Map
Figure3 .......................................................................................... ............................... Sneeden Vicinity Map
Figure 4 ........................................................... ............................... USGS Topographic Map (White Springs)
Figure 5 .................................................................... ............................... USGS Topographic Map (Sneeden)
Figure 6 ....................................................... ............................... 2' LIDAR Topographic Map (White Springs)
Figure 7 ................................................................ ............................... 2' LIDAR Topographic Map (Sneeden)
Figure 8 ........................................... ............................... Brunswick County Soil Survey Map (White Springs)
Figure 9 .............................. ............................... ......................Brunswick County Soil Survey Map (Sneeden)
Figure 10 .................................................. ............................... 2004 Aerial Photography Map (White Springs)
Figure 11 .......................................................... ............................... 2004 Aerial Photography Map (Sneeden)
Figure 12 .............................................................. ............................... Geographic Service Area (GSA) Map
Figure 13A . ............................... Detailed Soil Survey Map — White Springs Tract (overlay on 1999 IR Aerial)
Figure 13B .......................... Detailed Soil Survey Map — White Springs Tract (overlay on 1972 B &W Aerial)
Figure 14A .......................... ............................... Restoration Plan Map over Infra -Red Aerial (White Springs)
Figure 14B ...................... ............................... Restoration Plan Map over White Background (White Springs)
Figure 15A .................................................................... ............................... Restoration Plan Map (Sneeden)
Figure 15B ........................ ............................... Restoration Plan Map and Close -Up of Mill Creek (Sneeden)
Figure 16 ................................................................ ............................... Monitoring Plan Map (White Springs)
Figure 17 ........................................................................ ............................... Monitoring Plan Map (Sneeden)
AppendixA ................................................................................................ ............................... Ecoregion Map
AppendixB ........................................................................................ ............................... NCWAM Evaluation
AppendixC ........................................................................................... ............................... Site Photographs
Appendix D ........................................................... ............................... Approved Wetland Boundary Surveys
Appendix E ......................... ............................... .....................Threatened and Endangered Species Findings
Appendix F .................................................... ............................... .......................Cultural Resources Findings
Appendix G ........................................................................... ............................... Historic Aerial Photographs
AppendixH ........................................................................................... ............................... Design Plan Sets
AppendixI ..................................................................................... ............................... DrainMod Assessment
AppendixJ ................................................................................................... ............................... Hydrographs
iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On behalf of the Bank Sponsor (LCFUMB LLC), Land Management Group, Inc. (LMG) is submitting the
following comprehensive mitigation plan to develop the Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank (LCFUMB).
The Bank is designed to provide compensatory mitigation for authorized stream and wetland impacts occurring
within the Lower Cape Fear River Basin (USGS 8 -digit hydrologic unit 03030005). The initial phase of the
bank will include two tracts located in Brunswick County, North Carolina. Approximately 495 acres of
restoration, enhancement, and preservation have been identified within these two non - adjacent parcels.
Together the two umbrella bank sites total 513 acres.
The White Springs Tract, located near Southport (NC), provides an opportunity to restore the headwaters of a
first order stream system impacted by prior ditching and channelization. The existing ditch network has
resulted in the removal of characteristic wetland hydrology and provides a direct conduit for contaminant
loading to downstream waters. The proposed project will restore approximately 1,334 linear feet of stream
habitat and the adjacent wetland communities. Construction at the site will involve the backfilling and /or
plugging of the existing drainage network and the re- establishment of natural contours associated with the
channelized section of White Springs Branch.
The Sneeden Tract, located near Navassa (NC), includes an expansive area of mature, tidal freshwater
cypress -gum swamp immediately adjacent to the Cape Fear River and the lower section of Mill Branch. The
proposed project will restore the flow regime of Mill Branch via the excavation and removal of an earthen dam.
The restoration of characteristic hydrology (i.e. removal of impounded waters and re- establishment of free -
flowing conditions) and planting of characteristic small stream swamp vegetation will enhance existing riparian
wetlands associated with the run of Mill Branch. In addition, over 400 acres of high quality, mature cypress -
gum swamp habitat (i.e. freshwater tidal swamp forest) will be protected in perpetuity. The preservation of
such is considered particularly important in light of the current construction of Interstate 140 (i.e. Wilmington
Bypass) through the Sneeden Tract, the imminent development of the adjacent lands, and the documented
vulnerability of this type of unique, tidal freshwater habitat.
The following restoration plan provides specific information regarding the technical approach for the proposed
stream and wetland restoration activities. Information regarding the proposed monitoring procedures and long-
term stewardship of the project are also provided.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 1
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

SITE IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION
A. Protect Overview
On behalf of the Bank Sponsor, Land Management Group, Inc. (LMG) has performed mitigation site
evaluations of two tracts of land (White Springs and Sneeden — see Figure 1) located within the Lower Cape
Fear River hydrologic unit (USGS 8 -digit hydrologic unit code 03030005). Existing and /or degraded wetland
and stream habitat on these properties are to be included within the proposed Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank ( LCFUMB). The LCFUMB is intended to provide high quality compensatory stream and
wetland mitigation to offset authorized impacts occurring within the Lower Cape Fear Basin.
The proposed wetland and stream mitigation bank, totaling 513 acres, consists of a variety of wetland habitats
that have been previously impacted due to intensive site management practices. The White Springs Tract
occupies the headwaters of White Springs Creek, north of Southport (NC), and includes a section of
channelized stream and hydrologically altered (i.e. drained) non - riparian wetland habitat. The Sneeden Tract
is located immediately adjacent to the Cape Fear River (near Navassa, NC) and includes a large section of
existing riverine swamp forest contiguous with tidally - influenced waters of the river and Indian Creek. This
tract also includes an impaired section of Mill Branch that is suitable for both stream restoration and wetland
enhancement. Based upon site investigations, approximately 88 acres of riparian and non - riparian wetland
restoration and enhancement is proposed between the two tracts. The Sneeden Tract will also provide 407
acres of high - quality wetland preservation. Approximately 3,775 linear feet (If) of streams will be restored on
the two properties. An additional 1,843 If of first -order stream and 366 If of zero -order headwater valley will be
preserved on the Sneeden Tract.
The following comprehensive mitigation plan identifies the proposed methods for accomplishing functional
uplift of wetlands and streams and provides more specific information related to the implementation and
operation of the umbrella bank.
B. Site Location
The White Springs Tract (totaling approximately 80 acres) is located east of NC Hwy 133 (River Road SE) and
immediately north of the Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny Point (MOTSU) Access Road approximately 4 miles
north of Southport, NC (Figure 2). The Sneeden Tract is located adjacent to Cedar Hill Road (SR 1430) and
approximately two miles north of Navassa, NC (Figure 3). The mitigation bank portion of the property includes
453 acres of riparian habitat situated adjacent to the Cape Fear River. The White Springs Tract contains the
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 2
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

headwaters of White Springs Branch, a first -order tributary of Walden Creek which flows east to the Cape Fear
River (approximately 3.8 miles from the mitigation site) (Figure 4). The Sneeden Tract is bordered on the north
and east by the Cape Fear River and includes the lower section of Mill Branch. The southern portion of the
site is bounded by Cartwheel Branch (Figure 5). In addition, Indian Creek (a fourth -order tributary of the Cape
Fear River) flows through the swamp forest preservation area of the bank site. Topographic information for
each site is depicted via LIDAR data in Figure 6 and Figure 7. The Brunswick County Soil Survey generalized
map units for both sites are depicted in Figure 8 and Figure 9. Aerial photography (2004) for both sites are
also provided for reference (refer to Figure 10 and Figure 11).
II. WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION
A. Watershed Trends
Both bank sites are located within the Cape Fear River watershed (DWQ Subbasin 03- 06 -17). The subbasin
consists of managed forestry tracts, low- density residential and high density commercial /industrial
developments along the HWY 74 and HWY 133 corridors. Population growth within the subbasin is primarily
focused in the areas around Wilmington, Leland, and Southport. Streams and waterbodies within the
watershed are susceptible to impairment from nutrient loading and low ambient dissolved oxygen (DO)
concentrations. According to the Cape Fear River Watershed Restoration Plan (NC DWQ, 2001), a majority of
the waterbodies within the subbasin are impaired due to nutrient enrichment and periodic fecal coliform
bacteria contamination. The White Springs Tract is also located in an NCDWQ Target Watershed (70010)
based on development pressure and declining water quality within the Cape Fear River estuary. Principal
stressors to water quality within the subbasin are habitat degradation and low dissolved oxygen. Hydrologic
alteration of streams is also recognized as a contributing factor to impairment by facilitating rapid delivery of
nutrients, sediments, and other contaminants to downstream waters.
B. Surface Water Classifications
Surface waters within the project areas drain to tributaries of the Cape Fear River. The NC DWQ surface
water body classification for White Spring Branch is SC -HQW and applies to the section directly downstream of
the project site (NCDWQ, 2000). "SC" waters are defined as estuarine waters protected for secondary
recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life (including propagation), survival and maintenance of
biological integrity, and agriculture. Secondary recreation includes wading, boating, and other uses involving
human body contact with water where such activities take place in an infrequent, unorganized, or incidental
manner. High Quality Waters (HQW) is a supplemental classification intended for waters that demonstrate
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 3
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

strong, diverse population of fishes and invertebrates with minimal anthropogenic impacts. Best management
practices (BMPs), including riparian buffer setbacks, and other protections are necessary to reduce nutrient
and sediment loading in these areas and are essential to help maintaining aquatic health throughout the
ecosystem.
The waters of Mill Branch are classified as C -Sw, denoting a freshwater swamp (Sw) that is protected for
secondary recreation. While the waterfront of the Cape River is heavily industrialized in this area, the
headwaters of Mill Branch remain relatively undisturbed. However, it is important to note that Interstate 140
(i.e. Wilmington Bypass) is being constructed through the Sneeden property. As a result, the larger tract of
land and adjacent areas are subject to increased development pressure resulting from the access the bypass
provides.
C. Sub - Watershed Conditions
White Springs: The White Springs site formerly consisted of relatively undisturbed non - riparian wetlands
situated at the headwaters of a small Coastal Plain stream. Pocosin and pine savanna wetlands, characteristic
of the outer Coastal Plain, occurred throughout expansive interstream areas extending west across NC Hwy
133. These type of wetlands support a number of functions /values including, but not limited to the following:
groundwater recharge; floodwater storage and attenuation; filtration and storage of nutrients, sediments,
and /or toxic substances; and refuge /feeding habitat for resident and migratory fauna. The Pine Savanna
community type has been identified as a Significant Natural Heritage Area by the North Carolina Natural
Heritage Program (NHP). Pine savannas have among the highest species diversity of any natural community
in temperate North America and contain several rare species (NC DWQ 2005).
Small, headwater streams work in concert with wetlands to attenuate flood velocities, provide aquatic habitat,
and elevate the surrounding water table. At the present time, these functions have been compromised or
removed as a result of the existing drainage network and channelization of the White Springs Branch. The
Cape Fear River and its tributaries have exhibited significant water quality declines associated with low D0,
high total nitrogen, and high total phosphorous. High nutrient concentrations originate from non -point source
loading associated with development and silvicultural /agricultural land uses prevalent throughout the upper
reaches of the watershed. These impairments tend to be exacerbated by channelization of streams and
ditching of adjacent headwater wetlands, resulting in diminished nutrient uptake and rapid delivery of
contaminants to down - gradient waters.
Sneeden: The large, contiguous cypress -gum swamps of the Sneeden Tract remain largely undisturbed and
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 4
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

serve as valuable habitat along the banks of Indian Creek and the Cape Fear River. The tidal freshwater
swamp forest habitat of the Cape Fear River is identified as a Significant Natural Heritage Area by the NHP
and is classified as vulnerable to extinction (due to its limited range of occurrence and threat to degradation).
Along the river, the principal impacts to this habitat type have been from logging and habitat conversion
resulting from increased salinities extending further upriver (attributable to sea -level rise and the continued
dredging and deepening of the federal navigation channel). Note that ambient water quality stations in
proximity to the Sneeden mitigation site have reported persistent low DO and low pH conditions. While this
portion of the river may naturally have low DO and pH associated with slow- moving blackwater environments,
it is believed that land -use practices in the area exacerbate these impairments.
Site - specific impacts to tidal swamp forest habitat type have resulted from prior logging activities and the
historic damming of Mill Branch. The presence of the mill dam /causeway has altered natural hydrologic
patterns (i.e. conversion to a lentic environment) with resultant impacts to physiochemical and biotic conditions
of the stream. The presence of the causeway also restricts tidal exchange between the upper and lower
reaches of Mill Branch and likely contributes to decreased dissolved oxygen (DO). More detailed information
regarding the functional benefits of removing the causeway is provided in Section III below.
III. MITIGATION GOALS
A. Protect Purpose
The goal of the proposed bank is to provide high - quality compensatory mitigation for permitted impacts within
the Cape Fear River Basin via the restoration, enhancement, and preservation of streams and wetlands. The
proposed activities will provide functional uplift of various wetland community types including: pocosin, pine
savanna, headwater forest, and riverine swamp forest. Based on the sites selected, the following categories of
functions will be beneficially affected as a result of the bank restoration work:
1. Biogeochemical Cycling
White Springs Tract. The restored stream /headwater wetland system will capture drainage from the
surrounding watershed, dissipating energy in the downstream environment. Restoration of groundwater
hydrology will promote wetland oxidation /reduction processes that contribute to increased nutrient retention,
transformation, and uptake. The removal of ditches and restoration of the low- gradient first -order stream will
also reduce sediment loading to downstream waters.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 5
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Sneeden Tract.
Removal of the existing causeway will reestablish characteristic stream flow throughout this affected section of
Mill Branch. Free - flowing conditions will allow for normalized sediment transport and will favor for increased
dissolved oxygen within surface waters draining into the Cape Fear River. This is particularly beneficial since
hypoxia is one of the principal surface water impairments identified within the Lower Cape Fear River. In
addition, reduction in the extent of impounded waters will allow for increased primary productivity and resultant
effects on nutrient uptake. Restoration of tidal exchange upstream of the causeway will also promote
increased export of organic matter for support of downstream food webs.
2. Hydrologic
White Springs Tract. Restoration of riparian and non - riparian wetlands will result in increase surface and
subsurface water storage. Increases in storage volume will reduce peak flood discharges and will provide
valuable baseflow to stream and riparian areas during drier conditions. Re- establishment of characteristic
hydroperiods will also promote oxidation /reduction processes necessary for nutrient transformation as
identified above.
Sneeden Tract. Removal of the causeway of Mill Branch will result in the re- establishment of free - flowing
conditions of the stream and its associated physical, chemical, and biologic benefits. The primary hydrologic
function will be the re- establishment of tidal exchange upstream of the existing dam /causeway. Hydrologic flux
resulting from semi - diurnal tides influence sediment deposition processes and nutrient cycling. Natural small
stream conditions (including riffle -pool sequences) will be restored in the upper reaches. Reduction in the
area of impounded waters will allow for characteristic tidal freshwater hydroperiods and nutrient exchange.
Upstream areas susceptible to flooding will benefit via unimpeded, slow discharge of surface waters through
vegetated riparian areas. Typical stream and floodplain processes will be re- established as a result of the
removal of the physical impediment to stream flow. Hydrology in other large preservation areas of the tract will
remain unaltered, and any future activities potentially adversely affecting wetland /stream hydrology will be
prohibited.
3. Biotic
White Springs Tract.
Re- establishment of characteristic hydrology will promote conditions suitable for plant and animal species that
typically inhabit small stream, pocosin, and /or wet pine savanna wetlands. Plantings of characteristic trees and
shrubs will also provide for increased foraging, nesting, and refuge habitat. When coupled with the variation in
topography, these areas provide valuable heterogeneity which supports a more diverse food web within the
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 6
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

ecosystem. This diversity provides a variety of food sources and refuge habitat for local and migratory
species.
Sneeden Tract.
Re- establishment of lotic conditions in Mill Branch will result in functional uplift to biota. Reducing the depth of
water within the stream system will increase light attenuation and result in recruitment of characteristic benthic
assemblages. In addition, removal of the causeway will allow for unimpeded migration of fish and
macroinvertebrates utilizing tidal waters of the Cape Fear River. Restoration of typical riffle -pool sequences
will increase habitat heterogeneity within the upper reaches of the stream (particularly in areas situated above
the tidal influence of the river). Restoration of natural hydroperiods (including increased tidal amplitude and
duration) will promote the recruitment of characteristic tidal freshwater macrophytes. Supplemental planting of
characteristic trees and shrubs within the Mill Branch system will also promote increased foraging, refuge, and
nesting habitat for resident and migratory fauna utilizing these riparian wetlands.
B. Geographic Service Area (GSA)
The two tracts are located within the Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain ( Ecoregion 63) as defined by Griffith et al.
(2002) "Ecoregions of North Carolina" (refer to Appendix A). This ecoregion encompasses the area defined as
the `Carolina Flatwoods' — a subregion occurring along nearly level, poorly drained areas in the outer Coastal
Plain including the Lower Cape Fear River Basin.
The proposed project will serve as a general use wetland and stream mitigation bank serving the Lower Cape
Fear River Basin (USGS 8 -digit hydrologic unit 03030005) as depicted in Figure 12. The purpose of the bank
is to compensate for those stream and wetland losses in the basin authorized by applicable federal and state
regulatory programs via the restoration, enhancement, and preservation of approximately 495 acres of
wetlands and 5,521 If of stream. It should be noted that use of the LCFUMB may be considered acceptable for
authorized impacts occurring outside of the identified GSA on a case -by -case basis and upon approval of
permitting agencies (i.e. the US Army Crops of Engineers and the NC Division of Water Quality).
IV. SITE DESCRIPTION
A. Community Types
Based on the North Carolina Wetland Assessment Method (NCWAM), the community types occurring on the
White Springs Tract are non - riparian pocosin, non - riparian pine savanna, and riparian headwater forest
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 7
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

wetlands. The tract has been historically affected by logging and drainage practices resulting in some
alteration to vegetation and hydrology. Effects of these activities are more pronounced in proximity to the
drainage features. In general, areas further from existing ditches continue to be dominated by characteristic
wetland vegetation (see discussion below). Refer to Appendix B for additional information regarding NCWAM
field assessments.
A majority of the wetlands within the Sneeden Tract would be classified as riverine swamp forest under the
NCWAM methodology. These areas include large areas of cypress -gum swamp habitat with isolated sections
of small stream swamp vegetation associated with the smaller tributaries. Note that for the purpose of
quantifying mitigation credit, the riparian wetlands associated with the cypress -gum swamp of the river are
classified as riparian (riverine) wetlands. The small stream swamp wetlands associated with the upper
reaches of Mill Creek are classified as riparian (non - riverine) wetlands. More specific information pertaining to
existing vegetation, soils, and hydrology is provided in the following sections.
Refer to Appendix C for photographs of existing conditions for both the White Springs Tract and the Sneeden
Tract.
B. Vegetation
As indicated above, prior site management practices (including ditching and logging) have influenced the
vegetative composition of the White Springs Tract. In general, areas to the north of the main canal tend to
consist of Leon soils occurring on slightly higher elevations. The dominant vegetation in these areas is loblolly
pine (Pinus taeda) and longleaf pine (Pinus palustris). The shrub layer consists of inkberry (Ilex glabra), blue
huckleberry (Gaylussacia frondosa), and highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum). Common herbs
include pineland threeawn (Aristida stricta) and creeping blueberry (Vaccinium crassifolium). Areas closer to
ditches have a higher occurrence of species adapted to more well- drained conditions such as horse sugar
(Symplocos tinctoria), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum), and winged sumac (Rhus copallinum).
Characteristic bay shrubs are still prevalent across much of the drained pocosin areas. These include red bay
(Persea palustris), loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus), fetterbush (Lyonia lucida) and inkberry. Canopy species
include loblolly pine and pond pine (Pinus serotina). Species commonly associated with drier conditions are
found throughout the previously cleared ditch corridors. These include sassafras (Sassafras albidum), water
oak (Quercus nigra), winged sumac, and bracken fern. Much of the previously occurring small stream swamp
vegetation associated with the run of the White Springs Branch tributary has been removed as a result of prior
site disturbance. The present vegetation along the channel consists of loblolly bay, horse sugar, sweet gum
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 8
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

(Liquidambarstyraciflua), loblolly pine, inkberry, and bracken fern.
The cypress -gum swamp community within the Sneeden Tract includes a relatively undisturbed canopy of bald
cypress (Taxodium distichum) and swamp tupelo (Nyssa aquatica) and tidal freshwater marsh habitat.
Additional species such as red bay, American ti -ti (Cyrilla racemiflora), and dwarf palmetto (Sabal minor) are
also present. While much of the riverine swamp forest along the river is undisturbed, some areas are subject
to impact from logging activities. Prior to the identification of the site for suitable mitigation (approximately 4 to
5 years ago), selective thinning and removal of vines and understory was conducted to enhance the views
from the uplands (along an approximate 3,600 If section from west of the natural gas line easement to Mill
Creek) in anticipation for residential site development. NCWAM forms were completed as part of the mitigation
site evaluation, and the overall wetland rating remained "High ". The selective thinning and removal of dense
vines and understory did not have any appreciable effect on the overall functional value of the riverine swamp
forest to be preserved. The mature canopy remains intact. The ability to clear -cut the mature cypress -gum
swamp and the pending construction of the Interstate 140 bypass is an example of the demonstrable threat to
these high - quality wetlands and contextualizes the importance of preservation via a perpetual conservation
easement.
Remnants of a cypress -gum community were also observed in the lower portions of Mill Branch. Herbaceous
species include lizard's tail (Saururus cernuus), pickerel weed (Potenderia cordata), and duck potato (Sagitaria
latifolia). This community grades into a small stream swamp community that includes species such as
chestnut oak (Quercus michauxii), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), water oak (Quercus nigra), green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and black gum (Nyssa sylvatica).
LMG conducted additional site evaluations of Cartwheel Branch and completed NCWAM forms in two locations
(one within the main run of Cartwheel Branch and the other within the riparian wetland /tributary on the eastern
P /L). Both areas have an overall wetland rating of "High ". These NCWAM forms and the updated NCWAM
location map for these assessment areas are included in Appendix B.
C. Soil Characteristics
The White Springs Tract (located within the headwaters of White Springs Creek) exhibits nearly level to gently
sloping topography. The site and surrounding area is primarily comprised of Murville and Leon soil units. These
soils are subject to rare to frequent flooding and are considered very poorly drained. Each of these soil units is
characterized by low chroma (black or dark gray), often mucky surfaces. The Murville series has a black fine
sandy surface layer to approximately 8" and is underlain by dark gray sand typically associated with a spodic
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 9
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

horizon (hardpan) which restricts drainage within the profile. The Leon series consists of dark gray to black
sand from the surface to approximately 6" and is underlain by a spodic horizon at depths between 14 -18 ".
Licensed soil scientists of LMG conducted a detailed soil mapping of the White Springs tract and confirmed the
predominance of the Murville and Leon soil series. However, inclusions of other series (typically found in
association with Murville and Leon soils) were identified. These series include Mandarin fine sand, Lynn
Haven fine sand, and Baymeade fine sand series. The location and extent of the identified soil series is
depicted in Figure 13A (overlay on 1998 IR aerial) and Figure 13B (overlay on 1972 black & white aerial). The
detailed soil mapping has been used to define the limits of wetland restoration and target wetland community
types.
The cypress -gum swamp within the Sneeden Tract is mapped as a Chowan silt loam unit. This series is
characterized by surficial deposits of silty clay loam that is underlain by several feet decomposed (sapric)
organic material. The section of Mill Branch is mapped a Muckalee loam which is common along floodplains in
the outer coastal plain of North Carolina. This series is characterized by dark loams within the upper 24"
underlain by sandy material to a depth of 48 ".
D. Hydrology /Hydraulic Characteristics
The White Springs Tract is located within a headwater area that has been historically managed for timber
production. An extensive drainage network, comprised of 6,000 linear feet of ditching, effectively drains most
of the former riparian and non - riparian wetlands occurring on the property. Installation and maintenance of this
network has also impacted the existing stream habitat through the channelization of White Springs Branch.
This section was excavated 6- to 7 -ft in depth and channelized from HWY 133 to the southeastern property
boundary. These modifications have removed a majority of the in- stream habitat and disconnected the stream
from the adjacent floodplain. In an undisturbed system, the small stream swamp areas would be intermittently
or seasonally flooded.
Relatively undisturbed pocosin and pine savanna wetlands tend to be seasonally saturated with brief periods
of inundation. However, the ditch network on the tract has resulted in the drainage of these wetlands by
lowering groundwater and intercepting surface water. Drained hydric soils (i.e. low - chroma, friable soils
exhibiting a relatively high percentage of uncoated sand grains) are evidenced by oxidation of surficial organic
matter along either side of existing ditches on the tract. Given the predominant soil type on the tract and relict
hydric soil indicators (e.g. uncoated sand grains), the lateral drainage effect of the ditches is estimated to be
approximately 200- to 300 -ft for many of the ditches occurring on the property. Beyond these distances,
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 10
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

drainage appears to be somewhat restricted. Estimates of lateral drainage distances are consistent with those
values observed in other drained sites with soil groups exhibiting similar hydraulic conductivity and drainable
porosity. The lateral extent of drainage was confirmed as part of a jurisdiction determination obtained for the
tract (Appendix D).
A relatively shallow (i.e. 2- to 3 -ft ditch) exists along an approximate 300 -ft length immediately north of the
northern property boundary. This ditch is contiguous with a collector ditch that ultimately ties to the main run of
White Springs Branch. The ditch originates in uplands and provides minimal drainage due to its position
upslope of the restorable wetlands on the mitigation property. Given its shallow depth and landscape position,
it does not appear to have an appreciable effect on the watershed of the receiving stream. Nonetheless, the
implications of the presence of this ditch on the wetland restoration effort are discussed in Section V (C) of this
plan.
Note that moderately well- drained to well- drained nonhydric soils were identified within convex landscape
positions near the lower extent of the channelized stream. Under natural conditions, these areas would likely
consist of upland long -leaf pine savanna and would not meet the criteria necessary to be considered
jurisdictional wetlands. As a result, these areas are outside the proposed limits of wetland restoration.
As indicated above, the Sneeden Tract consists of expansive riverine swamp forest associated with the tidally
influenced waters of the Cape Fear River as well as a first -order stream (Mill Branch) that has been historically
impounded by a mill dam. Stream flow and tidal exchange within the lower portion of Mill Branch has been
historically altered via the presence of the dam /causeway. As a result, the natural hydrologic regime within the
tributary (including tidal exchange at its lower reach) has been disrupted. Impounded waters create conditions
that reduce the delivery of organic material to downstream communities and the tributary's ability to attenuate
natural flood events.
E. Threatened and Endangered Species
A review of the North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database was conducted to determine if there are
any known occurrences of rare plant or animal species within or directly adjacent to the White Springs or the
Sneeden parcels. A population of Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula; FSC; SC) has been observed within the
powerline corridor that runs through the White Springs site. No rare species have been observed within the
Sneeden site.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 11
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Several state - listed and federally - listed species have been identified within a one -half mile radius of both sites.
Of particular note is the documented presence of red - cockaded woodpecker (RCW) (Picoides borealis) in the
vicinity of the White Springs Tract both on the adjacent federal Military Ocean Terminal at Sunny Point and
within the nearby community of Boiling Spring Lakes. The eastern portion of the White Springs tract includes
longleaf pine savanna habitat suitable for nesting and roosting RCW. Conservation of long -leaf pine habitat is
an essential component of the US Fish and Wildlife Service's RCW recovery program. The mitigation bank
project will result in the protection of longleaf pine savanna occurring on the property.
The Sneeden tract contains unique tidal freshwater swamp forest habitat listed as vulnerable to extinction in
North Carolina due to its relatively narrow range of occurrence and threat of disturbance. In particular, tidal
freshwater forest of the Cape Fear River downstream of the site has been significantly impacted as a result of
saltwater intrusion associated with the continued dredging and deepening of the federal navigation channel.
The tidal freshwater community type provides unique refuge, foraging, and nesting habitat to a range of
species. In particular, there are documented occurrences of the shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum)
(federally - listed as endangered) within this reach of the Cape Fear River. Adults and juveniles of the shortnose
sturgeon tend to occur in tidal freshwater areas near the freshwater /saltwater interface and seasonally forage
in shallower vegetated areas of the river (NMFS 1998). As a result, protected tidal freshwater wetlands of the
Sneeden tract may provide habitat benefits to this endangered species.
Refer to Appendix E for a comprehensive list of state and federally listed species and habitats by site.
F. Cultural Resources
Based upon information provided by the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources, State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO), there are no known archaeological sites within the proposed mitigation project
area. Files do indicate the presence of Reeves African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Zion Church located near
the northwest property boundary of the larger "Sneeden" parcel. This church has been considered to be
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. However, it is unlikely that the proposed project
will have any effect on resources that may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.
As a result, no archaeological investigations were recommended in connection with the mitigation bank project.
Please refer to the correspondence provided by the SHPO (Appendix F).
G. Jurisdictional Determinations
Ajurisdictional determination (USACE Action ID No. 200401088) previously issued for the White Springs Tract
(formerly 114 acres) verified that the 80 -acre mitigation bank site did not contain any jurisdictional wetlands.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 12
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

The ditches (including the channelized tributary of White Springs Branch) have been identified as "Waters of
the US.
A formal wetland delineation of the entire Sneeden Tract was conducted in January 2010. The delineation was
subsequently approved during a site visit with USACE staff on August 17, 2010. Based on the boundaries of
the approved delineation, a total 446 acres of jurisdictional wetlands exist within the larger property (note that
this includes acreage within deeded easements and right -of- ways). Wetlands associated with Mill Branch and
the Cape Fear River that can be preserved via a conservation easement (approximately 453 acres) will be
included within the proposed Bank project.
The wetland boundary surveys for both tracts are provided in Appendix D.
V. RESTORATION PLAN - WHITE SPRINGS TRACT
A. First -Order Stream and Riparian Wetland Restoration
Like other small, blackwater streams of the Coastal Plain, White Springs Branch is susceptible to water quality
impairment resulting from non -point source discharges of contaminants — including nitrogen, phosphorous, and
sediment. Ditches, channelized tributaries, and canals drain an approximately one square mile of area within
the watershed. These surface waters serve as direct conduits for sediment, nutrients, and other pollutants
entering both White Springs Branch and the Cape Fear River estuary. The channelization of streams
contributes to channel instability and reduced attenuation on -site. This, in turn, results in increased flooding
and bank erosion for down - gradient areas. The natural replenishment of fine sediments and nutrients from
floodwaters onto the floodplain wetlands within the site has been virtually eliminated so that sediment
accumulation is occurring along the stream bed and nutrients are being shunted downstream. The physical
alteration of the stream bed adversely affects biological communities through direct mortality, habitat loss, and
shifts in species composition.
Prior to the installation of the drainage improvements, the natural watershed of White Springs Branch included
a natural pocosin - Carolina bay wetland complex of approximately 150 acres (refer to historic aerials provided
in Appendix G). Diffuse flow conditions (with increased retention) likely persisted before collecting into a single
thread channel on the lower portion of the site (Figure 4). Surface water is now carried directly into the upper
reach of the branch via a reinforced concrete pipe culvert across NC HWY 133. The restoration layout for both
the stream and adjacent wetlands is depicted in Figure 14A and Figure 14B. The mitigation work will include
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 13
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Priority II restoration of the single- thread channel beginning approximately 1,250 ft from the culverts at NC
HWY 133. Work within the existing channel between NC 133 and the start of the single- thread stream will
include the construction of a channel bench and adjustment to the channel bed elevation (refer to the attached
Construction Plan Set in Appendix H). While channel hydraulics will be sufficient to support an intermittent
stream between Station 10 +00 and Station 22 +50, stream credit is not proposed for the work performed in this
segment of channel (since it is unlikely that a stream channel existed historically in this portion of the site). All
existing lateral ditches that flow into the channel will be effectively removed via backfilling. Based upon HEC-
RAS modeling and research of other small Coastal Plain streams, the contributing watershed will readily
support the restoration of an intermittent stream channel below Station 22 +50. Riparian restoration will be
limited to the floodplain of the restored stream channel.
Hydraulic /Hydrologic Restoration:
Removal of the lateral drainage ditches will promote increased residency times within adjacent wetlands and
help re- establish characteristic baseflow to the restored channel. The invert of the stream channel will be
raised to a depth of 33.00 ft MSL (Bkf = 34.00 ft MSL) at its upstream origin to 27.00 ft (Bkf = 28.00 ft) at its
downstream terminus. Note that the existing elevations along the channel profile are 29.5 ft (origin) and 27.0 ft
(terminus). The average depth of the channel will be 1.0 ft (riffle section) to 1.33 ft (pool section). The
adjacent floodplain will range in elevation from 34 ft (upstream) to 31.5 ft (downstream). The restored channel
will be characteristic of low -order streams of the outer Coastal Plain. Restoration will result in the re- coupling
of the channel with its adjacent floodplain — thereby reducing episodic discharge to downstream waters. The
design slope 0.11 %, and the design bankfull width is 8.00 ft. The design stream type is E5 (Rosgen 1994).
The maximum width of the riparian floodplain corridor will be 100 -ft. The total length of the restored channel
will be 1,334 If. Additional buffer will be protected on both sides of the stream channel for its entire length.
Application of the stream buffer effectiveness correction factor (SBCF), and protection of buffer with a minimum
width of 151 If results in a 13% increase in stream credit.
Lateral ditches that tie into the main stream channel will be plugged using impervious clay material. Existing
spoil piles will be removed and the existing channel will re- graded to form a gently sloping valley. Material
generated from the excavation of the floodplain bench and the removal of prior spoil piles will be used to
backfill lateral ditches. Ditches north of the existing channel will be backfilled first. As construction continues
downstream, the balance of the earthwork will be used to fill in the lateral ditches on the south side of the
channel to the maximum extent practicable. The removal of the incised, straightened channel and shaping of
the natural valley will result in the reconnection of a diffuse flowing stream with adjacent riparian wetlands.
More detailed information is provided as part of the design plan set included in Appendix H.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 14
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Hydrologic restoration of the riparian corridor will be achieved via the removal of the incised channel and
plugging of lateral ditches that drain to the channel. Valley contours will be re- established within the identified
riparian corridor. This corridor has remnant spoil piles on both sides of the channel. Deepening and
channelization of the valley has resulted in the functional disconnection of stream flow and adjacent flood -
prone areas. Upon completion of final grades, the restored valley will mimic the gentle sloping gradient that
existed prior to site drainage impacts. Restored riparian wetland areas will be subject to periodic inundation
resulting from diffuse surface flow within the valley. Hydrologic restoration will also be achieved via removal of
lateral ditches and raising the bed elevation of the valley floor (resulting in elevated groundwater elevations
within the riparian areas).
Vegetative Restoration: Vegetation of the stream banks and riparian wetlands will be restored to more closely
resemble characteristic small stream swamp communities of the Coastal Plain. Specifically, the restored valley
corridor will be replanted with bald cypress (Taxodium distichum), swamp tupelo ( Nyssa biflora), American titi
(Cyrilla racemiflora), loblolly bay (Gordonia lasianthus), and American holly (Ilex opaca). Seedlings will be
planted on 9 -ft spacings, corresponding to 538 trees per acre. It is expected that other characteristic species
will recruit naturally into these restored areas upon successful hydrologic restoration. Live - stakes of coastal
species will also be installed to promote bank stabilization and provide for more rapid cover and shade for the
restored channel. See Table 1 for specific planting information.
Table 1. White Springs Planting Plan
Small Stream Swamp
2.0 acres planted
Riparian Restoration
Rio
Common Name
Scientific Name
Composition # Planted
Bald Cypress
Taxodium distichum
40 430
Swamp Tupelo
Nyssa biflora
25 269
American Holly
Ilex opaca
15 161
Sweet Bay
Magnolia virginiana
10 108
Loblolly Bay
Gordonia lasianthus
5 54
American titi
Cyrilla racemiflora
5 54
TOTAL 1,076
B. Non - Riparian Wetland Restoration
Project activities will result in the restoration of 66.1 acres of non - riparian pocosin and pine savanna wetlands.
These areas form the headwaters of White Springs Branch. Re- establishment of characteristic hydroperiods
will be achieved via the removal of the ditch network draining the property. Given that the entire extent of the
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 15
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

proposed restoration area is vegetated, work will focus on restoration of characteristic hydrology. No plantings
will be necessary since the predominant shrub and tree species are typical of the target wetland communities.
The following is a description of the proposed hydrologic restoration.
Hydrologic Restoration. Precipitation serves as the primary hydrologic input for wetlands in this landscape
position. By removing the groundwater outflows (via ditches) and increasing surface water retention, natural
hydroperiods of pocosin and wet pine savanna will be achieved. Impervious clay plugs will be installed at
prescribed locations within the existing ditch network (refer to Appendix H). Plug material will be obtained from
an off -site source and transported to the site for installation. Plugs will range in length from 50 ft to 100 ft and
will be constructed in a manner to reduce the risk of down - cutting or by- passing. Specifically, the material will
be compacted utilizing excavator equipment and will extend beyond the widths of the ditches. In addition,
areas up- gradient from the plugs will be backfilled utilizing material resulting from the construction of the first -
order stream channel.
In order to ensure that the proposed work will result in the re- establishment of characteristic wetland hydrology,
LMG performed detailed soil mapping of the site and performed hydrologic modeling utilizing specific design
inputs. DrainMod utilizes Reference Wetland Simulation and is an approved hydrologic modeling application.
It is particularly useful for performing water budget modeling for wetland flats or interstream depressions
(including pocosins and Carolina bays) in which the principal hydrologic input is precipitation. The model has
been further calibrated using site - specific data (including hydraulic conductivity and hydrologic data). Note that
non- hydric areas have been identified on the tract and will be excluded for consideration of wetland restoration.
DrainMod incorporates long -term climatological data in concert with site - specific model inputs. The White
Springs project was modeled using climate data over a 30 -year period between 1965 and 1995. Final design
dimensions of the main channel (non- stream portion) and the down - gradient first -order stream were utilized to
perform the model runs. Since channel depths varied between stations, several runs were performed.
Modeling indicated that wetland hydrology would not be achieved within an approximate 390 -ft to 454 -ft
corridor of the upper channel (non- stream portion). This is equivalent to an effective lateral drainage distance
of 195 ft to 227 ft for each side of the channel. Based upon these findings, the Sponsor will be installing a clay
liner along both sides of this section of channel to prevent lateral drainage effects — thus promoting
groundwater retention in the adjacent pocosin wetland areas.
Note that an existing, relatively shallow (approximately 3 -ft deep) ditch originates in uplands north of the
northern property boundary and eventually ties into a collector ditch within the mitigation site. The ditch is
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 16
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

situated on a slightly higher elevation from the wetlands of the restoration site and appears to have minimal
effect on the adjacent hydrology. DrainMod simulations using existing ditch geometry and mapped soils
suggest a lateral drainage influence of 150 ft. Even though this ditch appears to have negligible effect on
adjacent groundwater, the Sponsor will install a plug near the property boundary such that any outflow will be
restricted.
VI. RESTORATION PLAN - SNEEDEN TRACT
The mitigation bank area on the Sneeden Tract consists of a total of 441 acres of riparian wetland and stream
mitigation (Figure 15). Note that the total acreage also includes an additional 25 -ft upland boundary around all
riparian wetlands. The additional buffer is viewed as particularly beneficial in light of the approved planned unit
development (PUD) of the larger parcel. Note that a future 60 -ft right -of -way has been excluded from the
conservation easement along the upper segment of Mill Creek to reserve access to the northwestern portion of
the site. The crossing within this excluded right -of -way will consist of a future bridge (span). Approximately
407 acres of high - quality tidal freshwater swamp forest (classified as vulnerable to extinction by the NC Natural
Heritage Program) will also be preserved as part of the mitigation bank. The following is more specific
information related to stream restoration and riparian wetland restoration and enhancement on the property.
A. Stream Mitigation
A majority of the stream channel within the lower reach of Mill Branch has been converted to open water via
the presence of a mill dam that has historically impounded water and removed any tidal influence at this
location. Impounded waters have been documented by hydrologic data demonstrating nearly static water
levels ranging from 18- to 24- inches above the soil surface (Appendix J). As stated earlier, the impediment to
flow results in adverse impacts to sediment transport, nutrient exchange, and dissolved oxygen concentrations.
Impounded waters also submerge in- stream structures, reducing habitat heterogeneity necessary for
invertebrate and fish communities. The limits of stream restoration have been defined based upon the extent
of long -term ponded conditions. Physical indicators of inundation (including water marks on trees, changes in
vegetation, and the presence of adventitious roots) in conjunction with stream profile and LIDAR data were
used to assist in this determination.
Natural hydroperiods and flow regimes will be achieved via the removal of the entire causeway and grading of
a natural channel connection. The work will result in the reconnection of the lower reach to the upstream
watershed. As a result, in- stream fauna will benefit from an increase in pH, oxygen, and habitat diversity as
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 17
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

the system readjusts to the natural flooding regime of a tidally - influenced, first -order Coastal Plain stream.
Grading work will require the construction of a temporary diversion ditch that will allow for removal of the road
to be conducted under drier conditions. A temporary rock check dam will be installed at the down - stream side
of the existing causeway. The road bed will be removed and the channel will be graded to 3:1 side slopes to
tie to existing grades both on the upstream and down - stream limits of disturbance. The existing corrugated
metal pipe will be removed. Refer to design plan set provided in Appendix H for more detailed information
regarding grading and erosion control measures.
The proposed work will result in the restoration of approximately 2,441 If of stream restoration. In addition to
the stream restoration, approximately 1,843 If of first -order stream and 366 If of high - quality, undisturbed zero -
order stream valley will be preserved. Refer to Figure 15A for the extent of proposed stream restoration and
preservation.
B. Riparian Wetland Mitiaation
Removal of the causeway will result in the direct restoration of riparian wetlands within its former footprint and
the enhancement of wetlands up- gradient from the structure. The grading work will allow for re- establishment
of characteristic riparian wetland hydroperiods and tidal exchange via the re- connection of the stream to tidally -
influenced waters of the Cape Fear River. Areas within the restored and enhanced riparian wetland areas will
be planted with characteristic cypress -gum swamp species. Target species will include swamp tupelo, green
ash, and bald cypress. Sub - canopy species will consist of ironwood and American holly. Revegetation within
the floodplain will provide additional shading for the stream channel and refuge habitat for fauna. Refer to
Table 2 for specific planting information.
i apse z. sneeaen i race rlaniing clan
Cypress-Gum Swamp
5 acres +/-
(includes supplemental planting in
enhancement areas)
Riparian Wetland
Restoration /Enhancement
Rio
Common Name
Scientific Name
Composition # Planted
Bald Cypress
Taxodium distichum
30 807
Swamp Tupelo
Nyssa biflora
20 538
Green Ash
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
20 538
American Holly
Ilex opaca
10 269
River Birch
Betula nigra
10 269
Ironwood
Carpinus caroliniana
10 269
TOTAL 2,690
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 18
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

The extent of the riparian wetland restoration will be confined to the footprint of the causeway to be removed
(approximately 0.5 acres). Based upon the upstream influence of the causeway (documented through
observations of physical indicators of ponding), approximately 20 acres of riparian (riverine) wetlands will be
enahanced. An additional 403 acres of riparian (riverine) and 4 acres of riparian (non - riverine) wetlands will be
preserved via the conservation easement deed.
VII. BANK IMPLEMENTATION
Use of credits from the Bank to offset wetland and stream impacts authorized by federal permits or state water
quality certifications must be in compliance with the Clean Water Act, Section 404 (b)(1) guidelines and other
applicable federal and state legislation, regulations, and policies. Prior to release of bank credits, the following
requirements will be met: (1) approval of the final mitigation plan and execution of the instrument; (2)
recordation of the conservation easement; and (3) establishment of appropriate financial assurances.
Mitigation bank credits will be calculated using the following standard:
Mitigation Type Ratio
(1)
Stream Restoration
1:1
(2)
Stream Enhancement
1.5:1
(3)
Stream Preservation
2.5:1
(4)
Wetland Restoration
1:1
(5)
Wetland Enhancement
2:1
(6)
Wetland Preservation
5:1
Given the identified ratios for wetland restoration, enhancement, and preservation, it is estimated that 159.8
wetland credits will be derived from the establishment of the Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank. An
additional 4,681 stream credits will result from the mitigation effort. Credit types and amounts are specified
within Table 2 and Table 3. Debiting and accounting procedures for the bank credits will be specified within
the banking instrument to be executed by the Sponsor and IRT representatives.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 19
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Table 2. Mitigation Type and Quantity
Community Type
Mitigation Type
Tract
Quantity (ac. /If)
Credits
First -Order Stream
Restoration
White Springs
1,334
1,334
First -Order SBCF
Restoration
White Springs
N/A
174
First -Order Stream
Restoration
Sneeden
2,441
2,441
First -Order Stream
Preservation
Sneeden
1,843
737
Zero -Order Stream
Preservation
Sneeden
366
146
Riparian Wetlands
(Non - Riverine
Restoration
White Springs
1.8
1.8r
Small Stream Swamp)
Riparian Wetlands
Restoration
Sneeden
(Riverine Cypress -Gum Swamp)
.5
.5r
Riparian Wetlands
Enhancement
Sneeden
20
10re
(Riverine Cypress -Gum Swamp)
Riparian Wetlands
Preservation
Sneeden
403
80.6
(Riverine Cypress -Gum Swamp)
Riparian Wetlands
(Non - Riverine
Preservation
Sneeden
4
0.8
Small Stream Swamp)
Non - Riparian Wetlands
Restoration
White Springs
66.1
66.1
(Pcosin /Wet Pine Savanna)
Total Stream Credits
4,832
Total Riparian Wetland Credits
93.7
Total Non - Riparian Wetland Credits
66.1
*r = restoration credit; re = resto ratio n=eq uiva lent credit (refer to page 16 for ratios)
Table 3. Summary of Credits by Mitigation Type
Mitigation Type
Credits
Stream*
4,832
Riparian (Non - Riverine) Wetland
2.6
Riparian (Riverine) Wetland
91.1
Non - Riparian Wetland
66.1
*Includes credits derived from SBCF
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 20
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

The Sponsor is submitting a banking instrument under separate cover. The instrument provides detailed
information regarding bank operation. Prior to execution of the banking instrument, the Sponsor will secure
insurance policies in amounts sufficient to assure completion of all mitigation work, required monitoring and
reporting, and any remedial actions necessary for site success. Once the final mitigation plan is approved and
the accompanying instrument executed by members of the IRT, the Sponsor will record a conservation
easement for the bank site. Implementation of earthwork will be initiated upon receipt of applicable state and
federal authorizations. The tentative start date for construction is June 2013. Construction at both sites will
occur in one phase and is anticipated to be completed during the winter of 2013. Site planting will be initiated
in January 2014. Upon completion of construction, a survey of the project site will be conducted and an "as-
built" report will be submitted (anticipated Spring 2014). Based upon this schedule of events, the first year of
annual monitoring will be conducted in September 2014 and continue until 2021 (Table 4).
Table 4. Project Timeline
Task
Project Milestone
Projected Completion
1
Approval of Mitigation Plan and Execution of MBI
January 2013
2
Recordation of Conservation Easement Deed
January 2013
3
Initiation of Site Earthwork
June 2013
4
Mitigation Site Earthwork Completed
September 2013
5
Mitigation Site Planting and Installation of Monitoring
Devices
January /February 2014
6
Submittal of As -Built Report
May 2014
7
First Year Annual Monitoring
September 2014
8
Submittal of Monitoring Report #1 to IRT
December 31, 2015
9
Submittal of Monitoring Report #2 to IRT
December 31, 2016
10
Submittal of Monitoring Report #3 to IRT
December 31, 2017
11
Submittal of Monitoring Report #4 to IRT
December 31, 2018
12
Submittal of Monitoring Report #5 to IRT
December 31, 2019
13
Submittal of Monitoring Report #6 to IRT
December 31, 2020
14
Submittal of Monitoring Report #7 to IRT
December 31, 2021
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 21
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

VIII. MONITORING PLAN - WHITE SPRINGS TRACT
A. Overview
Upon agency concurrence of the final wetland mitigation plan, mitigation site activities will be initiated. Staff
environmental scientists will be present during project construction to ensure that the work is consistent with
the proposed design. An `as- built' survey will be prepared to document site conditions immediately post -
construction. Each phase of the site will be monitored annually for a period of 7 years (or until such time
deemed successful) whichever is longer, to document site development over time. Each annual monitoring
report will contain monitoring information which documents the progress of each site to date. Based upon the
current timetable, it is anticipated that construction will be completed in September 2013 and planting
completed in February 2014. Thus, the corresponding as -built report is anticipated to be submitted in May
2014.
Monitoring reports (submitted annually to reviewing agencies) will include results of hydrologic and vegetative
monitoring in addition to photographic documentation of site conditions. All monitoring reports will be
submitted to the IRT by February 1 of each year. As part of an adaptive management approach, monitoring
reports will identify any contingency measures that may need to be employed to remedy any site deficiencies.
Prior to any site modifications, the specific contingency measure will be identified and submitted to the USACE
for their review and concurrence. Reports will be in compliance with RGL 06 -03 and RGL 08 -03. More specific
information related to adaptive management and long -term site management is provided in Section X.
B. First -Order Stream Success Criteria
The primary success criteria for the First Order Stream will be:
Documentation of 2 bankfull events using techniques discussed below within a normal rainfall year in
3 of the 5 years of monitoring. Additional monitoring may be necessary in the event of abnormal
climatic conditions.
Level 1 Monitoring will be employed as detailed in the Stream Mitigation Guidelines, April 2003. Monitoring will
occur every year for the five year monitoring period. Monitoring reports will be prepared each monitoring year
and will include completed Channel Mitigation Monitoring Sheets with current data, a discussion of any
deviations, and whether they are indicative of a stabilizing or destabilizing situation.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 22
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Level 1 Monitoring includes the following:
(1) Photo - Documentation
Extensive photo documentation is proposed for the stream monitoring phase of this project. Photos will be
taken at all permanent cross - sections on a bi- annual basis (winter and summer) in addition to any problem
areas that may develop after construction is completed. Photos will be georeferenced to the corresponding
cross - section and /or problem area as part of the submitted report. Photo documentation will also be used to
document the health of the riparian area plantings and the effectiveness of any erosion control measures.
(2) Ecological Function
The health of the riparian vegetation will be documented as part of the wetland restoration monitoring efforts.
Three 0.05 -acre permanent monitoring plots will be established throughout the riparian wetland restoration
including areas directly adjacent to the restored channel. The success criteria for wetland restoration are
provided in Section VIII. (C) below.
(3) Channel Stability /Survey Procedures
a. Cross - Sections (First Order Channel)
The White Springs tract includes the restoration of 1,334 If of first order Coastal Plain stream. The restoration
will mimic low gradient, low velocity stream reaches characteristic of the outer Coastal Plain. No hardened
materials (i.e. rock structures) will be used. Rather, natural materials (such as root wads and log vanes) will
assist with channel stabilization and grade control. Given the size, uniform design, and gentle slope (0.11 %) of
the proposed project, four permanent cross - sections will be established on approximate 330 -ft intervals of
stream length. Placement of these stations will be designed to assess the performance of potential problem
areas (e.g. severe erosion, structural failure, etc.). These stations will also be distributed between riffles and
pools (two in riffles and two in pools) throughout the project. Refer to Figure 16 depicting the approximate
location of the proposed cross - sections.
b. Longitudinal Profiles (First Order Channel)
Given the length of the restored channel (1,334 If), a longitudinal profile of the entire restored reach will be
performed. Data presented in the annual monitoring reports will be shown in comparison to as -built conditions.
c. Stream Flow Monitoring (First Order Channel)
Documentation of stream flow within the project will also be conducted. Following stream construction
activities, two (2) stream gauges will be installed (Figure 16). These gauges will measure the elevation of
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 23
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

water in the channel on an hourly basis and will be used to determine the cross - sectional area of the channel
under a variety of flow conditions.
In addition to these data, velocity measurements will be collected after varying rain events at each gauge
location during Year 1 monitoring. Measurements will be collected at 1 -foot intervals across the restored
channel at depths of 0.5 ft. above the bottom. This information will be used to compute a total discharge
measured in cubic feet per second for each reach for the duration of the monitoring activities. All data will then
be used to develop a regression analysis which will define the relationship between rainfall events and total
stream discharge. These data will be presented in graphical format with individual bankfull and high flow
events highlighted.
C. Wetland Success Criteria
The wetland restoration effort will be evaluated based upon performance criteria related to vegetative density
and wetland hydrology. Vegetative data will include information on specific species and height within
individuals monitoring plots located throughout the project area. Wetland hydrology data will be collected
using automated groundwater monitoring wells which will be installed in each of the three restored habitats.
Each of these habitats will have a separate target for duration of water table depths within 12" of the soil
surface during the growing season.
The primary success criteria for the White Springs Tract will be:
(1) Demonstrated density of planted species to meet or exceed 210 trees per acres at the end of 7
years (post planting).
(2) No single volunteer species (most notably, red maple, loblolly pine, and sweet gum) will comprise
more than 50% of the total composition at year 2 or 3. If this occurs, remedial procedures will be
implemented. During years 4 &5, no single volunteer species, comprising over 50% of the total
composition, may be more than half the height of the planted trees. If this occurs, remedial
procedures will be implemented.
(3) The hydrologic criterion is premised on the specific community type to be restored.
(a) For the riparian small stream swamp community, the hydrologic criterion will be the
establishment of a static water table at, or within, 12" of the soil surface for 12% of the
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 24
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

growing season (equivalent to 36 days based upon a growing season between February 1st
and November 3011)' during periods of normal precipitation conditions.
(b) For the non - riparian pocosin community, the hydrologic criterion will be the establishment
of a static water table at, or within, 12" of the soil surface for 10% of the growing season
(equivalent to 30 days based upon a growing season between February 1st and November
301h) 1 during periods of normal precipitation conditions.
(c) For the non - riparian pine savanna community, the hydrologic criterion will be the
establishment of a static water table at, or within, 12" of the soil surface for 7% of the
growing season (equivalent to 21 days based upon a growing season between February 1st
and November 301h)' during periods of normal precipitation conditions.
Vegetation Monitorinq: Planted wetland areas of the riparian headwater forest (1.8 acres) will be monitored via
the establishment of permanent 0.05 -acre plots (20 meter x 10 meter). Two (2) permanent plots will be
established in this restored community type (equivalent to 6% of the planted area). GPS coordinates for the
corners of each sampling plot will be recorded and included with the `as- built' survey and subsequent annual
monitoring reports. During monitoring, surviving planted individuals and volunteer individuals will be
enumerated within each plot.
Since the pocosin and wet pine savanna portions of the restoration project are vegetated with target species
and since there will be a limited area of disturbance associated with the hydrologic restoration, no additional
site planting is proposed outside of the riparian wetland corridor. It is anticipated that natural recruitment of
bay shrubs will readily occur and contribute to the overall target species composition. Qualitative information
related to vegetation (e.g. species type and relative abundance) for each community type will be provided
within the annual monitoring reports.
Hydrologic Monitoring: Shallow groundwater hydrology in the restored wetlands will be monitored via eleven
(11) automated wells (RDS, Inc. WM -20s) located within riparian and non - riparian wetlands. Two (2) wells will
be sited within the riparian wetland corridor. Of the remaining nine (9) wells, seven (7) will be installed in
representative locations within the restored pocosin and two (2) will be installed within the restored pine
savanna. Refer to Figure 16 depicting the approximate locations of the groundwater level monitoring wells.
' Growing season based upon direction of IRT.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 25
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Wells will be installed in accordance with installation methods outlined in the Wetlands Regulatory Assistance
Program (WRAP) Technical Note 00 -02 (Sprecher, 2000). Water levels will be recorded once daily. Data will
be downloaded from the wells every three months (i.e. once quarterly). Data from well downloads will be
compiled and graphically displayed to demonstrate hydroperiods of monitored areas.
Reference Sites: A total of three (3) wells have been installed within reference wetland areas on the adjacent
442 -acre Brunswick County site located to the east and northeast of the Bank site The location of these
reference wells are depicted on Figure 16. Water table data downloaded from these wells will be used to
establish baseline conditions in the event of abnormal precipitation conditions within the monitoring period.
Data will also be included in the AMR to allow for additional comparative analysis.
IX. MONITORING PLAN - SNEEDEN TRACT
A. Riparian Wetland Restoration
Given the size of the causeway to be removed and the relatively small area of planting, no permanent
vegetation plots will be established. Rather than employing typical performance criteria, the area will be
monitored for the presence of invasive species. Percent coverage of any invasive species will be reported
relative to the relative abundance of other species (either planted or volunteers) within the area of the former
causeway. Note that invasive species include, but are not limited to: (1) Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense);
(2) mimosa tree (Albizia julibrissin); (3) tallowtree (Triadica sebifera); (4) kudzu (Pueraria montana); and (5)
morning glory (Ipomoea spp.).
Hydrology will be monitored via the installation and operation of two (2) shallow - groundwater monitoring wells.
The location of the proposed monitoring wells are depicted in Figure 17. An as -built topographic survey will
confirm removal of the road and suitable elevations.
The success criteria of the restored riparian wetland will be:
(1) Invasive species not to exceed 20% relative abundance compared to other planted or volunteer
noninvasive shrubs/trees. Note that red maple (Acer rubrum) and sweet gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) are not
to be considered invasive for the purpose and intent of this success criterion. If invasive species exceed 20%
relative abundance, then adaptive management measures (through coordination with the IR7) will be
implemented.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 26
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

(2) For the riparian (riverine) swamp community, the hydrologic criterion will be the establishment of a
static water table at, or within, 12" of the soil surface for 25% of the growing season (equivalent to 76
days based upon a growing season between February 1st and November 301h)2 during periods of
normal precipitation conditions".
B. Stream Restoration and Wetland Enhancement Success Criteria
Monitoring of the restoration and enhancement areas will focus on documentation of free - flowing conditions
within the system. Hydrology data has been collected in the stream channel and adjacent riparian wetlands
targeted for enhancement. This information will provide the baseline data from which to evaluate post -
construction results.
The primary success criteria for the Stream Restoration are:
(1) Demonstration of tidal signature (increased amplitude with semi - diurnal frequency) upstream of
causeway to be removed (anticipated signature up to 1000 ft beyond causeway);
(2) Documentation of free - flowing conditions (relative to pre- construction data and reference stream
data) and documentation of removal of impounded waters;
(3) Demonstration of stable channel geometry; and
(4) Establishment of characteristic geomorphologic heterogeneity (riffle, pool, and run) beyond the
limits of the restored tidal influence as identified via physical monitoring.
Criteria #1 will be evaluated through the use of automated gauges configured to read surface water levels on
an interval of at least once hourly. An existing gauge located immediately downstream of the causeway will be
left in place to document the tidal signature at the point immediately below the stream restoration reach. Three
(3) additional gauges will be installed upstream to document the extent of tidal influence post- construction.
These gauges (in conjunction with riparian wetland wells) will document the reduction of impounded waters
and restoration of characteristic hydroperiods. A fourth gauge will be installed near the upstream extent of the
proposed restoration to document free - flowing conditions and periodic overbank flooding. Refer to Figure 17
for a depiction of the proposed monitoring of the Mill Creek restoration.
2 Growing season based upon direction of IRT.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 27
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Criteria #2 will be evaluated through a combination of stream gauges (as described above), stream flow
meters, and video documentation. Free - flowing conditions and reduction of impounded waters will be
documented throughout the reach. In addition, channel velocity measurements (collected beyond the limits of
the restored tidal signature) will be collected within 24 hours of varying rain events. Data will be used to
calculate total discharge measured in cubic feet per second near the upstream limit of the restored reach. A
regression analysis will be performed to determine the relationship between rainfall events and total stream
discharge.
As indicated above, physical monitoring (cross- sections and longitudinal profile) will be used to determine if
Criteria #3 and #4 are met. Three (3) permanent cross - sections will be installed (alternating riffle /pool
sections) to document channel stability. A longitudinal survey of the entire restoration reach will be performed
on an annual basis to document riffle -pool sequences and to document any bed aggradation or erosion.
The primary success criterion for the Riparian Wetland Enhancement will be:
(1) The hydrologic criterion will be the establishment of a static water table at, or within, 12" of the soil
surface for 25% of the growing season (equivalent to 76 days based upon a growing season between
February Is' and November 301")3 during periods of normal precipitation conditions and the duration of
surface ponding (in excess of 2 inches above soil surface) not to exceed 10% of the growing season
(equivalent to 30 days based upon a growing season between February Is' and November 301h)
during periods of normal precipitation.
Shallow groundwater hydrology will be monitored via six (6) automated wells (RDS, Inc. WM -40s) located
within the enhancement areas (refer to Figure 17). Wells will be installed in accordance with installation
methods outlined in the Wetlands Regulatory Assistance Program (WRAP) Technical Note 00 -02 (Sprecher,
2000). Water levels will be recorded once daily. Data will be downloaded from the wells every three months
(i.e. once quarterly). Data from well downloads will be compiled and graphically displayed to demonstrate
hydroperiods of monitored areas. A reference riparian wetland area will also be monitored to provide
comparative data on the performance of the wetland enhancement.
s Growing season based upon direction of IRT.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 28
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

X. SITE MANAGEMENT
A. Adaptive Management
The Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank is planned and designed to be self- sustaining over time, but
some active management or maintenance may be necessary to ensure the long term sustainability of the
mitigation efforts. The adaptive management approach involves analysis of monitoring results to identify
potential problems occurring on the site and the identification and implementation of measures to rectify those
problems. Remedial actions may include, but are not limited to, mechanized earth work (e.g. adjustment to the
invert elevations of earthen plugs) or supplemental planting in the event areas do not meet vegetative success
criteria. Prior to initiating any remedial actions the proposed measures will be submitted to the USACE for
review and approval.
Performance and functioning of the mitigation site may be affected by various causative factors, both natural
and anthropogenic. Natural hazards may include invasive species and /or excessive herbivory. Human errors
may include design flaws, construction deviation, and /or inadequate planting coverage. To minimize these
potential problems, the following strategies may be employed:
1. If herbivory appears to be jeopardizing the survivorship of planted species, discussions with
appropriate agencies will be initiated to determine an appropriate course of action.
2. Beavers will be trapped from the tract if significant damage appears to be caused by beaver
activity.
3. Construction errors will be identified as early as possible via the as -built report. If it appears as
those potential errors jeopardize the integrity of the project, appropriate remedial action will be
identified and submitted to the USACE for concurrence prior to implementation.
4. Planting errors in spacing density or coverage will be minimized by careful coordination with
planting crews. An account of planted stems will be provided with the as -built report.
5. If monitoring indicated a potential design flaw, remediation options will be reviewed.
6. In the event groundwater monitoring wells are damaged by bears, barb -wire fencing and /or other
acceptable deterrents may be used to protect wells from further damage.
7. If invasive species exceed the identified percent coverage, then the Sponsor or its agent will
coordinate with the IRT for appropriate invasive species control (including physical removal
and /or application of herbicide approved for use in wetlands or aquatic sites).
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 29
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

B. Long -Term Management
Land use and property boundaries along with the proposed mitigation plan were designed to minimize long
term management conflicts. As a result, the potential for hydrologic and boundary conflicts have been
minimized. The Sponsor has identified the Land Trust for America (formerly known as Audubon Environmental
Land Trust) as the grantee of the conservation easement deed. The recorded conservation easement deed
will ensure the protection of the project in perpetuity.
XI. CONCLUSION
Detailed site assessments of the two tracts have confirmed the presence of conditions suitable for wetland and
stream mitigation. Based on these investigations and subsequent mitigation design, a total of 495 acres of
riparian and non - riparian wetlands will be restored, enhanced, and preserved as part of the mitigation bank
project. Re- establishment of characteristic hydroperiods will result in water quality benefits (e.g. increased
sediment retention, enhanced nutrient transformation and uptake, increased dissolved oxygen) within a rapidly
urbanizing watershed. Additional benefits will also be realized through increases in flood water retention and
groundwater recharge rates. Preservation of the expansive area of tidal riverine swamp forest within the
Sneeden Tract will also provide for the long -term protection and management of a Significant Natural Heritage
Area classified as "Vulnerable to Extinction ". This is particularly beneficial in light of its proximity to the
Interstate 140 corridor and the resultant secondary effects of such (i.e. increased industrial and residential
development).
By providing wetland and stream restoration credits prior to authorized impacts, overall disturbance and loss of
function within the watershed are minimized. Furthermore, the Bank will provide for the restoration and
preservation of a variety of stream and wetland habitats unique to the outer Coastal Plain and within a
watershed particularly susceptible to impairments from increased development pressure.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 30
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

XII. SOURCES OF INFORMATION
American Rivers. 2002. The Ecology of Dam Removal. A Summary of Benefits and Impacts. Washington,
DC. 15 pp.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deepwater
habitats of the United States. U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington,
D.0
Hackney, C.T., S.M. Adams, and W.H. Martin (editors). 1992. Biodiversity of the Southeastern United States:
Aquatic Communities. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. New York. 779 pp.
Land Management Group, Inc. 2009. A Chronological Inventory of Eagles Island. Unpublished Report for the
New Hanover County Soil and Water Conservation District. 64 pp.
National Marine Fisheries Service. 1998. Final Recovery Plan for the Shortnose Sturgeon (Acipenser
brevirostrum). Prepared by the Shortnose Sturgeon Recovery Team for NMFS, Silver Springs,
Maryland. 104 pp.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality. 2005. Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan.
Raleigh, NC. 330 pp.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality. 2001. Cape Fear River Watershed Restoration Plan. Raleigh, NC.
129 pp.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality. 2000. Classifications and Water Quality Standards Applicable to
Surface Water and Wetlands of North Carolina. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 2006. List of Rare Animal Species of North Carolina. Compiled by
Harry E. LeGrand, Stephen P. Hall, and Sarah E McRae. 124 pp.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 2006. List of Rare Plant Species of North Carolina. Compiled by
Misty A. Franklin and John T. Finnegan. 125 pp.
North Carolina Natural Heritage Program. 1995. An Inventory of the Significant Natural Areas of Brunswick
County, North Carolina.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakely. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North Carolina. Third
approximation. N.C. Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, N.C.
Sprecher, S. W. (2000). "Installing Monitoring Wells /Piezometers in Wetlands," ERDC TN- WRAP- 00 -02, U.S.
Army Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Division of Water Quality. 2007. Information Regarding Stream Restoration with Emphasis on the
Outer Coastal Plain, Version 2 - DRAFT (April 4, 2007). 10pp.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 31
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

U.S. Department of Agriculture. 1986. Soil Survey of Brunswick County, North Carolina. Soil Conservation
Service. 120 pp.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank 32
Mitigation Plan — December 2012

Arell S

p /
P - \\ - /. - Fia One HOLLYHEk1EP P
J /
GO �,-y
1 �
r 7 ,tp
- �
y� = A J
7 Hy�< 132
I i'„15 c ht� Pf
I I '. � � I. 421 \ wo.
i� °j
S neeNa; d e,n .,L. , T° tr�aFs cl� °t
M � 3
sLorv\ kk ° 7 . trow G
su
GHMELIND
l
1 y`
�\ •'J- 'ice -I� I II' , %�
Mn I CY'1' I p Y9 S "on I EPP P
too, +y. 1 v I l r Lake \
CedLr HILL t k �_ s -\ � - QM010 Aq Wrrghtsbnro / 40
. _ _ �, - p y I c ✓ ,�
E n .k
M NE
z I
STI �1 SIneS
$ 1 y -
I u
-A MILL Hn NE 9hts „al
_ r � 4
� OR
nal 11 p a ' =N
•wr
� H i
lE csx 5 �• I la �a o
__ 1 132 wil
I I
U.S.S. Nonh 'lr?l
,� I v Battleship Me e Ql
74
87 r _ _ IN Ilna.H
/1 ad T—Or - /Cal ¢ FR, Q! r Wrm ng i
133 U/> Winter Park
I
p
1 3
I Atl NEm SP-1 H,
7 ,/133!
yFLL'PMprPJ
Tgwe
mlrf �]I 9(�]F-�
U BE 5
A li Z -
i \�„� _ s -
2 -' Euml.a - ,�.•.'p - G 11 - _ Ivry .
KIII
3 r
- _0
I ___�{_ {'\ I f� � �•;, i � -', I .io�wer :it R.;en
".� RYA t
�r Fi
A6 Act
T -:- •� . `^ f Carolina B
H
.� �Slate Par
oxcnw m m� "':.. .,' a
`�' 3 all - \ Bolling Sprtny Lakes T �� J� - Brunsw
.`N 5
01 = Y r I 1 4
-�E White Springs Tract r� 425
133 - I1 Cerner Piel
Q \ µjE„µa sraAr AO 5>" 1 11 1 Va mi gion
�• J WrydE Y r 1
�el - UTA CC
1-13 8
.. ......� ..... —_ —_ -sld Kure each
A
/A vea f$ A Fishing Pier
Kure Beach
4I�'`�._ 4 Pte' 1jfr'C,LNirs 'f�Lgh[�A)
TORT Ell
Aai FORCE REC AREA
- - Smrt
`' Lgh, Kai
_ - all 49 SnTW y
a
Ft.he
�E � . � £ 421
3211_ ly 1 - - - -- - -. �} � Fort Fisher
>'� � TP;rnr FOrt Fsher 5RA
R°AF !,';r ;� 1 ' Price'sCreek
��,` _ - _ Lighthouse f xIM
8 p ( oar FtsHEn
b" I . TEAECREATIONARFA
87 l
-' . -,.• _. _ '6±!7 wicJ Suuthpon to
�y erv�e i'r r 211 3 ' QFart Fisher FeLrr f¢$,
GMrMy At '1W J _ Q P W.-
AL p/ I �
- -a¢ 133 -
- SniFlnp 'i
.d
oaJF Island e'A"rl'
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: DeLorme: North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer., 1997 p. 83, 84 & 87.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
(White Springs Tract/Sneeden Tract)
0 2.4 4.8 Brunswick County
Miles
MasOnt
Islantl
a Beach
Pier
Figure 1.
Vicinity Map
LMG
I ANP MANAiiFMSNT CrROUP nr
T
—Y., m en rnl Consullpn [s
7- /fig 0
0 a
am 5V VP0.0 OLVO y
,
' 1
10 g6. Y -
_ -
Ir`nk-F
1
OAF R �
_ _
•:�� �-J �
-
dab I �
- _
� �
\
W� Ywq Cr k
—` I
d 1p. -
10ti _, l
,
. X32 a�
17 \ _� 1
lea .
J1 8
\ JNE E2'N RILL HON WinrJ¢IVoW �
�nt �. _ I `�` 1
sE
1 L f
f,p3y ww \PO J rn HINOfN VALL�
/ L
L
Cre, k
SWAMP Ncl Swamp I
/
9Jd Tawn
h'� Myirtl¢ f
-h.Gr - SnuMc'Idr c
cR� / Pind�ret
421
1
._ _
_.
4
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: DeLorme: North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer., 1997 p. 83, 84 & 87.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
(White Springs Tract/Sneeden Tract)
0 2.4 4.8 Brunswick County
Miles
MasOnt
Islantl
a Beach
Pier
Figure 1.
Vicinity Map
LMG
I ANP MANAiiFMSNT CrROUP nr
T
—Y., m en rnl Consullpn [s

I_() kout L �
AN t
Ila Bruns
y
133
i k
f6T
CST OCEAA, ER
^�yOrr
. -.
r 87 r -
I f - SITE jIJMW Y .
or 4
r — � ! SnnwS v
Pr
'
, 5
Price's Creek
Lighthouse
an+ f • SE
Q 77
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: DeLorme: North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer., 1997 p. 87.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank Figure 2.
(White Springs Tract) White Springs Vicinity Map
0 1 2 Brunswick County LMG
Miles

Waste
ICE ., � ��� � �•.
._r TaTtks
421 r
{
r
1C r + J
17 rim!
�I Fn
SUTTON
I DE Sdmj3its
LAXL
LAKE.
GAME '
SITE
LAID
SUTTON
a sutto(l -
Cigar I- ffll -' >_
�Ise
S+�
maw
1�1
Fasthm k
' �--+
0
ST
ST D4 X
f
CSX
b MILL RD
b
4
4ti 1
•
� �•1 r ,
1 3 i -
�� !! Q
k ,4Ii?
l 1, a
-.
U.S.S. North Ca 11 n
14 ,, -711
Batoeship Me or
f -- 74�:�
' 17 74 76 133 -i
�- 76
f r f
C ai n
:—P -
*Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: DeLorme: North Carolina Atlas and Gazetteer., 1997 p. 83 & 84.
Figure 3.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank Sneeden Tract Vicinity Map
( Sneeden Tract)
Brunswick County LMG
0 1 2 I. ANPMANACFNI•�T';R"l:P ,,
Miles onmen«Io, r >o<<

`.. =
-
.r f � r--'• � I � y • i �{
Trailer -r6-
�F?-�rk �•
_ A Ok
ro
WhIf
BM
1
T
�J
1
Legend
Mitigation Bank Boundary
4b - Adjacent Brunswick County Mitigation Site
'eounaaries are approximate ana are not meant to oe aosoiute.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
(White Springs Tract)
0 1,000 2,000 Brunswick County
Feet
Figure 4.
USGS Topographic Map
(Southport Quad)
LMG
._ tilANgr�PMbTT tRnUP
. yen rnl Co��tenrF

;,' � .` _� -� ��'. � � �- � iCa }�' ;,f;� :jr'; R I++ . },.� 4 T�'' .n1;,:Yt�i��:•C ���;
- n ` "rY i� .x � .�. � ^' +.r r � –� _ ..Fy.'�r,,1���ikiTi �, .i , •.
SUTTON
arMst 411 • ;— —� _ = ,. _ — _ ,� — �; 1 '
41 ._r P,::'�''_` ,`,. . h,• t, _ ., -
-.. 4LIJ -41 -- P� _
��`r -14 •�a ra
r.T
T�,el LE 1 •. •ice .
� ;fJr ,•_
ANEW
r Hair
411 6.5 '"y { �... — ---�_ ,
1
T,
• i Geder Fill _ w -
. cem
7WAL FLAr
CA r E`
T � �
..i7
BIL:& F'
srA
Legend
•��' • • -• Mt Calyer –
rt 4. D'.1% 4C. � • • Mitigation Bank Boundary
+ Trai4 _
•r Park Navassa
1 +�+ Parcel Boundary
'Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
(Sneeden Tract)
0 2,000 4,000 Brunswick County
Feet
Figure 5.
USGS Topographic Map
(Leland /Castle Hayne Quad)
LMG
.1tif� YIANA�:F Nf.�'i ixtiL'V
T w—"'rar C— urrcnr,

'Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank Figure 6.
(White Springs Tract) LIDAR Topographic Map
Tk2' Contour)
Brunswick County LMG
1,000 2,006 \j S1ANgC:FH:.'rt k, pi.
Feet onmen«<<o�, rlo�l,

'Boundal 3s are approximate and are not meant to be absolute. Figure 7.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank LIDAR Topographic Map
(Sneeden Tract) (2' Contour)
[� Brunswick County LMG
�,voo �,20o I A q) MANnCFMENTfrRav?.,
Feet _ „ ,oRme�,A �or,u+ art,

�Mu
Lo
S 7 ►,
r
Mu
Lo
Lo
Ma
Lo
i
Mu
3
KrB
�J
Lo
Lo 1
40
Mu
1
Mu
Ma
1u
1�Ifhite �S -in9 u
Ponds
i
MU
LO
Mu
Mu
1�
K rB
'�. Legend
Zz) Mitigation Bank Boundary
Adjacent Brunswick County Mitigation Site
'Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute. Figure 8.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank SCS Brunswick County
(White Springs Tract) Soil Survey
Brunswick County LMG
g 1,000 2,000 A.n MANA[.FMF.AT GRpuY.
.nviron men rat fenurfgnn
Feet

z�
DO
LrCL pL
Pt -'"} Legend
� Mitigation Bank Boundary
Parcel Boundary
} Lo BnB DD
BOB
CH
BOB
� C f CH � r
1aa
BnB \
[o '-
LY CH Ra F,
Cedar 1 / A PE �
68a BDc
Lo N� J3rcr,rrl,
Na /
Mu \ �,oA ��//
M a �� _ y� CH
Kr6
BOB
I PaA Ma Lo NoB 1
BnB
To r
L Ra
CH
Mu �%'�.
BD.
Lo R a
Ma NEW HA1V0VER
To �
BaB. Roys ,
Ur
PEA R
P-7 Pt
L CH
BnB �rPe r'�r/�
DO CH CG IBC
F Mk` �� .�' CH
r
To Ma Pl Ba6
M La Do
a
R Mu Mu Ur
BnB BnB
LY Lo 1C3p
MH\ �
I
Mu
B rB
BDC Ma
I L o Ma
Lo 14N _
s
NoB Mu Tin 8rB rB c Ur
BOB s C Nh
]432
i4
1932 Ma' • On Lo av gr6 .
l
NoB CoA Navasse
BDC Bn8 L° Lo B i
BnB
y BaB a 435
BaB BDC C' cfr F�
s43" f Mk NoB t BaB 1
'Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute. Figure 9. '
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank SCS Brunswick County
(Sneeden Tract) Soil Survey
0 2,000 4,000 Brunswick County LMG
I.ASP MANAC:F M f.�� T iiµntlp ,
Feet z ...4 nm —r C.—h-h

'Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
0 500 1,000
ft
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
(White Springs Tract)
Brunswick County
Figure 10.
Aerial Photography (2004)
LMG
LAND MANAG£MBNT GROUP.uc
Frtvlronm en w! Consultants

'Boundaries are approximate and are not meant to be absolute.
0 2,000 4,000
ft
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
(Sneeden Tract)
Brunswick County
Figure 11.
Aerial Photography (2004)
LMG
LAND MANAG£MBNT GROUP.uc
Frtvlronm en w! Consultants

E f 4;111 J.
Runni 0 E, 0 14-N 242 Grange
210 50 i. t
Dudley
Ion G I en
t
01.. Mum Airport S rind
+
Wourill Olive
on I -- LENOIR
Pope A 41 Spring Lake ly d :-
RT BRhG Calypso Deep
Si
V i ni fil ot '
F a! son Alll�ertlo
�
CUM tRtAND
24
'z 403 pink Hill
e
l
le
q 1) 1 S Ud n Sallernburg
Cumb Pla in FPI Au tryville TRW
HOPE I'AfgLS 4- c( SAMPSPN
I —., •3 %N
Rosehc,i Sampson Cc
Airport DUPLIN
Lumh— Parkton
BI i4g.? .2
411 421 4
lnqc,ld
Saint Paul % Hill El 1i A
210 Gailand
it W ll ite 42 Teac
T Heel J ,ells
f, IL
—1i I
41 tiSil1. f4anle
Du 15H n
41
LUM non
141 - Airport
Hill
it
1111 u
Hang
.L. I
Isville Beal
Calabash ores 3C 1 WHITE SPRINGS
Sunset TRACT
y orry 1-1111fe Ri B I
.i
port,
11
00 N,xonvfl a Air r1 MYRTLE BEACH
XII.nbcBqacll
A
'A
a d
7�O
Atkinson PENDER
5• 44
17
M E BEACH
cent
1 0 1
li)tl Airport
srville
dell
F, wells
let
242
ncil
Baynesvilf Evergreen
SNEEDEN TRACT
04 Certo
76 =7 Lake
4— 740
I-q.. od
n
Hallsboto
efunsmck Lake
ington
waccama".
ell
Lela"
1; T r114
r
fr-b oi City
(iteen
Y' °.,.:i {;c•a
` A
I
Nakina
Sea
L/blis
A sh
BRUNSWICK
aFrIfina Beach
410
IN
LongwoLd
ure Beach
IC
a
°'r Way
Brun, w
22
Longs
7_
r
pol I
1
Oak Island
Hang
.L. I
Isville Beal
Calabash ores 3C 1 WHITE SPRINGS
Sunset TRACT
y orry 1-1111fe Ri B I
.i
port,
AC
LMGLAND %TANAGFM NT (;RoUP 1w
Fn viroRm en fat ConsVltunis
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
Legend
8-digit H U C 03030005
12 Digit HUCs
CountyBoundary
LCFMB Sites
0 2.5 5 10 15 20
Miles
Figure 12.
Geographic Service Area (GSA)
11
00 N,xonvfl a Air r1 MYRTLE BEACH
XII.nbcBqacll
A
'A
Windy Hill Beach
5• 44
17
M E BEACH
Myrtle Beach
+
li)tl Airport
707
GA FN CITY
F, wells
let
AC
LMGLAND %TANAGFM NT (;RoUP 1w
Fn viroRm en fat ConsVltunis
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
Legend
8-digit H U C 03030005
12 Digit HUCs
CountyBoundary
LCFMB Sites
0 2.5 5 10 15 20
Miles
Figure 12.
Geographic Service Area (GSA)

i
�.r Y
A
i
i
k
= c
T
V:.
Ln
MW
if Bm
' � w
T � �
qe
f
Bm
Sg
� s
141,
1
J
�. r' too
LEGEND:
Bm - Baymeade - Arenic Hapludults
Sg — Seagate — Typic Haplohumods
Ma — Mandarin — Oxyaquic Alorthods
St — Stallings — Aeric Paleaqults
Wo — Woodington — Typic Paleaqults
Ln — Leon — Aeric Alaquods
Ly — Lynn Haven — Typic Alaquods
Mu — Murville — Umbric Endoaquods
1" =300'
LMG
T ND%TA\AGEMENT GROUP , ec
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Figure 13A.
Detailed Soil Survey Map - White Springs
Brunswick County, NC
(1998 IR Aerial)

1 � 4
Ale
LEGEND:
Bm — Baymeade — Arenic Hapludults
Sg — Seagate — Typic Haplohumods
Ma — Mandarin — Oxyaquic Alorthods
St — Stallings — Aeric Paleaqults
Wo — Woodington — Typic Paleaqults
Ln — Leon — Aeric Alaquods
Ly — Lynn Haven — Typic Alaquods
Mu — Murville — Umbric Endoaquods
N
1" =300'
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Figure 13B.
LMG Mitigation Bank Detailed Soil Survey Map - White Springs
I nx❑ �%T,AAGE V FNT GROUP me
Brunswick County, NC (1972 B &W Aerial)

k'Im -
II =1
• �!%4 •
LI. a - „ �,
\ dA
k�
i
V
Z
� \ , I/
Tax Parcel Boundary
Adjacent Tax Parcels
Stream Restoration 1,334 -Ift
Adjusted SCBF Credit 1,508 -Ift
Riparian Buffer Restoration Limit
Clay Curtain
Riparian Wetland Restoration
Non Riparian Wetland Restoration
Pine Savannah
Non Riparian Wetland Restoration
Pocosin
Non Restorable Areas
Total Mitigation Bank Site
(Conservation Easement)
1 — \`
-Ak _
1
�.
PRELIMINARY
NOTE: This Is Not An Engineered, Survey, or Architectural Drawing.
Linear Measurements and Area Calculations are Approximate.
NOTE: Parcel Boundaries From Brunswich County GIS.
1998 Aerial From NC DOT.
1.8 ac
7.3 ac
o °o °o °o°
58.8 ac
4.1 ac
0 150
300 800
72 ac
Project:
Date:
Revision Date:
GG
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank
11/14/11
10110/12
� LMNAGEMENTGROIIP
White Springs Tract
Scale:
Job Number:
INC.
Title:
��_
V =300
01 -09 -117
Environmental Consultants
Post once Box 2522
Wilmington, North Cwdlne2MM
Restoration Plan
Drawn By: GSF
Figure. 14A
Telephone: 9104M -M1

r
i
m
z
tzi 'Tr
Nl� '' T•
r,o N ?1 TI C W r. �, ,�- yy,.7.:Y w
ID CD
CD 0
(n Q Q w Q
a r Q f LL
Ar
tj CD CD
f
3 fn fn CD CD ,
0
CD
0 CD O " '^
ID
n :3
ZY 0) S Cb
ID
CD
•
5
5
�\ r
d �. 1 •
N ` N N N ' • 1' r y \ \ \ \ \\ ' \�
ID
7 J \
CL Sv
+ cc
ID ID o
ID
ID CD v m
IF °
Q) C) rr-
Q) CD 5 0 3 V \\
CD
ID
v\ y
'¢ \ \ \ \ zl
-
OM- \ \\ \\
Z Z \ \ \ \
vofona O
• \- \. \ \�\ \\
57 - �' \ : \
ONN 0 Z
ao a C3 CD \p \ \ \\ \
o
d C � • \ A ; �� \ "V AV �� � \A r
A
�+ o \.
m
UT o \ \ \ \ \\
C1 'm \ \ \\ \ \
v� m
a n
CD
CD
0 CD
DOi o N t< \; \\
v = _
rt7 N
O CD d m w , 1t
CD •
r CND ' • , g� -_Y �'Cff,
CL CS
m' � m Co � • C r
N CD !
v
N
v cn v °
v N
CD
W
O
G7 j
Cl) o O
T O zt
O
0
0
0
_T!
C-
0 CD
(O CS
C _.
n o C rn v
D ° N
Cl
0

r
i
r£i
r
z
e I R
i '
N ?1 ?1 C co T } ► �.
o N N CD O r '► ~ •
� O .•f .•f � .-r � � .' n �. y+ 1. � r e •' /
M O O
tzj @ CD CD qy/ J r•" %
M • f * e. ► .
P 3 v s1
lip
cn
ID CD
CD
0 CD
ID
'_� ��r� w�7i� •
ow
3 `. d �
q - �Rtir
s O W \� .♦ x r ..�
♦
\/ L-h -h `�' •
IF CD i
`,.
n s Oi l
ID
5 ♦ rr �w,w• • 1 R. ■ 0 f l a
D
tzj
■ !
:5 r
ID
ID 0
ID O `" • • !
:3 :3, :3 :3
ID O r•f r•f r•f \ t ��` .
ID
jo
ID O -u MI L --
�i
o fA r•f y \. i�r���� ������� ��.�.� ♦�.�.� ♦�.O j
o CD O �'�r \ ^.!�.�' :� `__ - .lr.. ` ♦ ♦i ♦ >�i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii`.. ' . '
♦+- 14 ♦♦.♦♦.♦♦.♦♦
w .O!+ . �` ♦ . ♦'i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i�i�i { " : ■ fir,
.•f • ■ `O•i�i�i�i�i ♦i�i�i .�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i +
o 3 O f ♦. ♦. ♦.�. ♦. ♦.�. ♦.♦ ♦ ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦� ♦.� �.., �`� ` a
5 + ■ 1 y♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦..
i� r-r •�� ♦iii` r r
N �� ' ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦� a
� • ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii �i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦iii`. � iii'
f W O O ......... .............. _
CD
JID op
PO o
UD
.� r .�. . ♦. ♦. ♦.♦ .•. ♦. - ♦.•. ♦. r
\0 ^-- ` \� i �• \ ♦ /i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦iii �i ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦i�i�i♦ fOi ♦ :�i�i ♦iii � � ��
�0 L ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i♦ . ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i... �4���.� ♦� ♦�.� ♦� ♦�.� ♦� ♦� ♦w ♦�O
* \��\ ` � ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦iii ♦i�i� .�i ♦i ♦i�i�i♦ iii ♦i♦ iii ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦iii ri�i� ��
rp,�
joo
♦ i�i�i�i�i♦ i�i�i♦ i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i�iei�i ♦a i. ♦i�i�i�i�i�i ♦ • �i�i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i R T � �
y�i�i ♦i♦ iii ♦i♦ iii ♦i�i�i ♦i♦ iii ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦iii ♦iii•. ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦O. '
t � !.�i ♦i♦ iii ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ iii ♦i♦ iii ♦i♦ iii ♦i♦ iii ♦i♦ iii ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i ♦i �i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i ■ *+�
• / - ► Oi�i�i�i�i�i�i�i♦ i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i ♦i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i ♦i�i�i�i�i�i .�i�i�i�i�
+' •♦• ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦ ♦♦♦.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦ ♦♦♦♦ it
- A..♦.♦♦.♦♦.♦ ♦.♦♦.♦♦.♦♦.♦♦.♦♦..♦.♦♦.♦♦♦.♦..♦ ♦.♦♦ ■
� 3 5� r r Y 7 � r♦ i�i�i♦ i�i�i♦ i�i�i♦ i�i�i♦ i�i�i♦ i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i�i�i�i %w' ♦i ♦i�i�i�i�i�i ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦i � ♦
m o _ o Z Z ' y r �� ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ii ♦i ♦ii ♦i ♦ii ♦i ♦ii ♦: �Q.!.!O.!' ��.� ♦i�.�% �' I ri
O O , � � ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i ♦i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i�i � t � Oi�i ♦i�i�i�i�i�i Oi�i ♦
0- 03 a R Oi ♦iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i0 ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦; 'a �i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦v O♦ i
z ro z RI I ♦i�i
■ ■ : .0' ♦i ♦iii ♦iO�i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦iii F ' \ ♦iii ♦iii ♦i ♦i�i�i ♦i �i�. ��i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii
� O� ��i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iO♦ Oi ♦i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i � �• iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i _ \ \�
0 CD
vt a N „ � OD N N ♦ V Y Oi ♦i�i�i ♦iii ♦i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦ ♦.i' ��♦�♦�.�. ♦.� .�.�.�.���0♦ ��
gN Cl D l 1 r� .♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦..♦♦♦.♦♦♦.♦♦ ♦�.� ♦ ♦♦�.� ♦ ♦ ♦�.� ♦ ♦ ♦�.� ♦ ♦ ♦�.� ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦� .
m N ^ x CD W � Z • �A" ,•• . �i ♦i ♦i♦ iii ♦i ♦i•. ♦i♦ iii ♦i♦ iii♦ i♦ i•.♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦. ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦. ♦i \ 7
to Fe
n p i♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦..♦♦.� �:�,
3 tpn 40000 ♦.•.00;.• 000000000000;.'.w :. \o \` �=�
> j / f O ♦i0 ♦i ♦i�i!.�' O i : !OOi ♦i ^Oi ♦i4. ♦' \
R Q� dd Y 4 9 a
7 > in _.' �■ ��•
C fC N C , ■ �. J.f
CD
a) 0 Z _ ■ f 3 !.
R
m� m Y y� � ��� 1 ��;
� 3 r CD c •
>
O m Z p v
♦-
r'
m'
fl; `° �� )p
W
w
x
co
W
II ° o
C) o
O N
G)
0
0
_T! C- �1
f° v <
c
Z Cl)
c
03
_ �6-
°p -I
cn c obi
0

Lm-- k -&. .
Tax Parcel Boundary
Adjacent Tax Parcels
Stream Restoration 1,334 -Ift
Adjusted SCBF Credit 1,508 -Ift
Riparian Buffer Restoration Limit
Clay Curtain
Riparian Wetland Restoration
Non Riparian Wetland Restoration
Pine Savannah
Non Riparian Wetland Restoration
Pocosin
Non Restorable Areas
Total Mitigation Bank Site
(Conservation Easement)
PRELIMINARY
NOTE: This Is Not An Engineered, Survey, or Architectural Drawing.
Linear Measurements and Area Calculations are Approximate.
NOTE: Parcel Boundaries From Brunswich County GIS.
1998 Aerial From NC DOT.
Cross - Section Profile (3)
Stream Gauge (2)
20m x 10m Vegetation Plot (2) 0
1.8 ac Monitoring Well (11)
7.3 ac ° ° ° ° ° Reference Well (3)
F0°0°020
(Note: Longitudinal Profile to be conducted for
58.8 ac entire length of restored stream channel.)
4.1 ac 0 200 400 800
72 ac

m
F_
F_
ey n
Cl)
Or-
:c
F_
z -L a a Q � f � � — �i • , j ry �' f ■
c� c� ,
m
CD
3 3'
-7
v 1 1 r i
O <D O `•, •
ID
m
s O ♦o`� ,
p O `� t�f
rD
o — W 00 ./ >
h
._� r
rh ' '«
,. �. r `•
<
3 ♦ Y i)
N !r !� w� r '� r ♦ i . ✓, Sri
D ,
rD
rD
4
01 * .-
- Q C
A
jfCD 3 r� _ �T i }. t
rD
rD
rD
m � � ♦ Oi ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦♦ ♦i 4 � \ T T � .
s
CD
II N �♦ ♦ ♦' ♦' ♦' ♦' ♦ ♦ ♦Oi ♦' ♦' ♦' ♦' r ,
O ..♦.♦. .♦♦♦♦.
♦ '� � ��i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦iii ♦i ♦i
O O �♦+.•� - A�..�: 1!♦ • �i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i'i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ � , i +N
ti ♦ ♦.♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ r
1� iii �D ' « ♦.♦ ♦ ♦ ♦.♦.♦.♦♦ i ,' / y _ ��
o rrt 3 p O�♦Oi ♦ �♦�♦�♦�.�♦�♦�O , + r of
1:5 or
0 CD
ID
N P�h . f• ♦'� ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦
10, ♦D•i ♦i ♦i♦ i i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ - - y r
�� �� �� r� ♦ Oi ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ Oi ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i 4r
f w Q 0 (T r r Oi ♦i ♦i ♦� ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦♦ ♦ ♦i i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦� ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦~ s
° ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦Oi ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦
rip
Rill
;7 (7 `� � � iiii: ♦ iii ♦♦ ♦iii � 1
°� �:`«, � � �� ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i �«
\ ♦i _ s_ � Oi ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ Oi ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ ♦ Oi ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ r ♦O • �1
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦
♦ I ♦ ri ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦♦ ♦ ♦i ♦� s
♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ ♦♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ ♦ ♦i
............ ............................. ......
............ .......................... ......
. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦.♦ ♦ ....♦..♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦.♦ . ♦.p ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦.♦ r
.. ............ .....................
s ♦ ♦ ♦ �♦ �♦ �♦ �♦ �♦ � ♦� ♦. ♦� ♦� ♦� ♦t ♦� ♦.ea4.�i-. ♦i'Oi ♦i i�.r,.,n,♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦ Oi ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦ ♦
@ z Z Z Ih ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦. ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦ Oi ♦. ♦Oi ♦00♦ ♦ Oi
Et
m d ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦ ♦♦
° ' � a m m ♦ . ♦. ♦o. ♦. ♦. ♦.0000 ♦.0000 ♦.o ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦. ♦.o . ♦. ♦. >.o ♦. ♦.
L
�i�� ? z OD � y to ... � `i ii♦♦♦♦iiii♦ ♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦i ♦.♦.♦
{� � e D — r• •� a r•' ♦♦ � ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
8 m ♦ ♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ i♦♦♦♦♦ i♦♦♦ i♦ i ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦ ♦ ♦1
o z CD 9 Z rte` ♦♦♦ ♦.♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
� ° 4 y ,. • ! ♦ ♦i ♦i ♦♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i♦ i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i« ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i ♦i
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
m 7 D .� w . I'r ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦♦ . ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦!�♦
z -n n c r ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦.♦♦♦♦♦ ♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ ♦:♦
w . op ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ri ♦♦♦♦%
v N ti i • r ♦.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦�♦
•- 1
A '_ �+A•
�-u na ` _ •�
m r cl n c �' • .'♦
a m 1 R ,�
n M
OF t
7 C=D (MD X w d.
<l
o m( AL °
3 a g� At D
co -I i Z v v ., o
u L
m
pr 7 C 0 ( a
v CO) v e C .. =r (a O in
f m ©
alcF. m CD
O O
II Q o CD C m O
CD CD
O
CA) M v
CD
0
rc v m v � v
Z w,
°a 0
�
:z " CD ® O
4

Ecoregions of North Carolina
84' 83° 82o Boo 790 78o 77o 76o
,�`sio
66 = ° -i-�
1660 � 66c
n __- -6'T 7 — 63 —�---
/ v n 63d
L, ^
5 % 63b
�
36°
67 � � ,, 6; .Boon � - �- '��'�---- - 4-- -
65
�
+ oxville� �.-•( 66, - -- - -t45e s y��. --
66
-F- -
- - - -- - -��- T � � / - - -.� 65m p - - -63e �
�" 45f - - RLFSODUO
O Green boro Dur V� !' gy$EMA ti 63g
i
36°
66 bb --
' 66i �� i� - (1� -661
I� a '� i ` --� /�� ��
G Rock
- - --� � L 45$ L Mount)65p
- - - -- i QRaleigh,y �� 63e G 63c
r� Cl 66'
i bb. �661 661 45b
s evi
45c ' ` e, fi 13b
��
�`, ` / Greenville
- --
45e L
Y
45a
> i,,py
-- -- r" _
4 3 3e x
- —`
".��a
35°
_�
66 66d/ i �,/.1;. ... 45i_-
_�
66 , �6d � �� a e (tea /t
6 , J,I `6 _ 66 �i —
I� 9 �D
165m C -( ---J.J l . 3n 1 63 rnmcrco 0
�_ J, e
a 65c, 5 ` 63b 63g
Fa ell i e A '_ %�
35°
�i
43
— '
651 ` �� - 63c1�
65 � I gPY
63c a
y
/ 4 -65 " `�
i
6550 \1;31 �', :� ATLANTIC
A �s`y �4Wiillmkngton 0 C E A N
._
.\ 63h3,
34°
�_ A, ens
V � �
63
34°
� umbia
e Beach
84° 83° 82° 81° so°
45 Piedmont 65 Southeastern Plains
79° 78° 77° 76°
Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in
D 45a Southern Inner Piedmont 0 65c Sand Hills
D 45b Southern Outer Piedmont M 651 Atlantic Southern Loam Plains
the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They
are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research,
Level III ecoregion assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and
D 45c Carolina Slate Belt 65m Rolling Coastal Plain
D 45e Northern Inner Piedmont M 65p Southeastern Floodplains and Low Terraces
Level IV ecoregion ecosystem components. The approach used to compile this map is
County boundary based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified
0 45f Northern Outer Piedmont 66 Blue Ridge
0 45g Triassic Basins O 66c New River Plateau
- - - -- State boundary through the analysis of the patterns of biotic and abiotic
phenomena that reflect differences in ecosystem quality and
0 45i Kings Mountain 66d Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains
integrity. These phenomena include geology, physiography,
vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The
63 Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain 66e Southern Sedimentary Ridges
relative importance of each characteristic varies from one
D 63b Chesapeake - Pamlico Lowlands and Tidal Marshes 66g Southern Metasedimentary Mountains
D 63c Nonriverine Swamps and Peatlands 66i High Mountains
ecological region to another regardless of the hierarchical level.
o s o o m; The Ecoregions of North Carolina map was compiled at a scale of
D 63d Virginian Barrier Islands and Coastal Marshes 66j Broad Basins
1:250,000. Compilation of this map is part of a collaborative
30 20 10 o 60 120 project primarily between the US EPA, USDA -NRCS, NC DENR,
D 63e Mid - Atlantic Flatwoods 66k Amphibolite Mountains
63g Carolinian Barrier Islands and Coastal Marshes 661 Eastern Blue Ridge Foothills
A16e s Equal Area Proje fion as well as with other state and federal agencies. Comments and
suggestions regarding this map should be addressed to Glenn
D 63h Carolina Flatwoods 66m Sauratown Mountains
D 63n Mid - Atlantic Floodplains and Low Terraces
Griffith, USDA -NRCS, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis, OR 97333,
(541) 754 -4465, email: griffith.glenn @epa.gov, or to James
Omernik, U.S. EPA - NHEERL, 200 SW 35th Street, Corvallis,
OR97333, (541)754 -4458, email: omernik.james @epa.gov.

Legend
Tax Parcel Boundary
Approximate Wetlands
0 NC WAM Form Locations
Map Source: 2008 NAPP Aerial Photography.
LAWETLANDS\2009 \01 -09- 117 0ata Sheets \NCWAM \Sneeden WAM Locations.cdr
SCALE 1" = 1000'

Legend
Approximate Project Boundary
Approximate Ditch Locations
0 NC WAM Form Locations
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
LMG
%.%D a ANALLE Ea GROUT
n.- ni -r r< 1,
www.LMGroup.net
February 2012 Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
SCALE 1" = 500'
White Springs Tract
NC WAM Locations

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 3.0
c:aicuiator version ;s.0
Wetland Site Name
Sneeden Tract
Date
12/13/2009
Wetland Type
Riverine Swamp Forest
Assessor Name /Organization
Brent Manning /LMG
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Cape Fear River
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
F— Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude /Lonaitude (deci- dearees)
34.28167. - 78.008956
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note below if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past
(for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear- cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Describe effects of stressors that are present.
Regulatory Considerations
Select all that apply to the assessment area.
® Anadromous fish
® Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
® Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
® N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (Check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
® Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ® Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in
the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the
assessment area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], artificial hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and duration
(Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for North Carolina
hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered
to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub - surface water. Consider tidal flooding
regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
®A ®A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
®A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
❑A Sandy soil
❑B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoxymorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoxymorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
®E Histosol or histic epipedon
❑A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B
Soil ribbon ? 1 inch
❑A
No peat or muck presence
®B
A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check
all that apply (at
least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment
area (5M), and within 2 miles
and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
From 80 to < 100 feet
®A
®A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
®B
< 10% impervious surfaces
❑C
❑C
❑C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑D
❑D
❑D
? 20% coverage of pasture
❑E
❑E
❑E
? 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑F
❑F
❑F
? 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
❑G
❑G
❑G
? 20% coverage of silvicultural land characterized by a clear -cut < 5 years old
❑H
❑H
❑H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
®A ? 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width.
❑ <_ 15 -feet wide ®> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑ Exposed — adjacent open water with width ? 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area —wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the appropriate width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland
complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
®A
®A
>_ 100 feet
❑B
❑B
From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D
❑D
From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E
❑E
From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F
❑F
From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G
❑G
From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H
❑H
< 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
®C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
®A ®A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (? 90 %) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, urban landscapes, maintained
fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
®A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D From 10 to < 50 acres
❑ E ❑ E < 10 acres
❑F ❑F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
permanent features such as fields, development, two -lane or larger roads (? 40 feet wide), utility line corridors wider than a two -lane road,
and clear -cuts < 10 years old. Consider the eight main points of the compass.
®A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
❑B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
❑C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
®A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected strata are unnaturally absent or dominated by exotic
species or composed of planted stands of non - characteristic species or inappropriately composed of a single species.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
®A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
®A ? 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid - story/sapling layer
❑B
R
Moderate density mid - story/sapling layer
®C
®C
Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
R
Moderate density shrub layer
®C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense herb layer
®B
®B
Moderate density herb layer
El
El
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
®A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
❑B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
®A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris.
®A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
❑B Not
21. Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegeta
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric
tion and open water in the growing season. Patterned
❑D
Evaluate for riverine wetlands only. Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill,
sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 3.0
Rating Calculator Version 3.0
Wetland Site Name Sneeden Tract
Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest
Date of Assessment 12/13/2009
oicin
Assessor Name /Organization Manning /LMG
Presence of stressor affecting assessment area (Y /N) NO
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
HIGH
Sub - surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Vegetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 3.0
c:aicuiator version ;s.0
Wetland Site Name
Sneeden - lower Mill Creek
Date
3/25/10
Wetland Type
Riverine Swamp Forest
Assessor Name /Organization
CN,DB /LMG
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Mill Creek
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
F— Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude /Lonaitude (deci- dearees)
34.285184. - 78.014966
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note below if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past
(for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear- cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Describe effects of stressors that are present.
Beaverdam has interrupted tidal exchange, increased inundation, and altered vegetation.
Regulatory Considerations
Select all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (Check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
® Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ® Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ® Yes ❑ No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in
the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the
assessment area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ❑A Not severely altered
❑B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], artificial hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and duration
(Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for North Carolina
hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered
to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub - surface water. Consider tidal flooding
regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
®A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
®B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
®A Sandy soil
❑B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoxymorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoxymorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
®A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B
Soil ribbon ? 1 inch
®A
No peat or muck presence
❑B
A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check
all that apply (at
least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment
area (5M), and within 2 miles
and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
From 80 to < 100 feet
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
®B
®B
®B
< 10% impervious surfaces
❑C
❑C
❑C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑D
❑D
❑D
? 20% coverage of pasture
❑E
❑E
❑E
? 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑F
❑F
❑F
? 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
❑G
❑G
❑G
? 20% coverage of silvicultural land characterized by a clear -cut < 5 years old
❑H
❑H
❑H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
®A ? 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width.
❑ <_ 15 -feet wide ®> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑ Exposed — adjacent open water with width ? 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area —wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the appropriate width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland
complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
®A
®A
>_ 100 feet
❑B
❑B
From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D
❑D
From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E
❑E
From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F
❑F
From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G
❑G
From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H
❑H
< 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
®C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
®A ®A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (? 90 %) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, urban landscapes, maintained
fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D From 10 to < 50 acres
❑ E ❑ E < 10 acres
❑F ❑F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
®Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
permanent features such as fields, development, two -lane or larger roads (? 40 feet wide), utility line corridors wider than a two -lane road,
and clear -cuts < 10 years old. Consider the eight main points of the compass.
®A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
❑B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
❑C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected strata are unnaturally absent or dominated by exotic
species or composed of planted stands of non - characteristic species or inappropriately composed of a single species.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
®A ? 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
❑A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
®B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid - story/sapling layer
❑B
®B
Moderate density mid - story/sapling layer
®C
❑C
Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
❑B
®B
Moderate density shrub layer
®C
❑C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense herb layer
®B
®B
Moderate density herb layer
❑C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
®A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
❑B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegeta
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric
tion and open water in the growing season. Patterned
❑D
Evaluate for riverine wetlands only. Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill,
sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
®D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 3.0
Rating Calculator Version 3.0
Wetland Site Name Sneeden - lower Mill Creek Date of Assessment 3/25/10
Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name /Organization CN,DB /LMG
Presence of stressor affecting assessment area (Y /N) YES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) YES
Sub - function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
LOW
Sub - surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Veqetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating MEDIUM

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 3.0
c:aicuiator version ;s.0
Wetland Site Name
Sneeden - upper Mill Creek
Date
3/25/10
Wetland Type
Riverine Swamp Forest
Assessor Name /Organization
CN,DB /LMG
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Mill Creek
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
F— Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude /Lonaitude (deci- dearees)
34.28156. - 78.01986
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note below if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past
(for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear- cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Describe effects of stressors that are present.
Hydrologic modification from beaver dams and a dyke has resulted in transformation of the vegetative community.
Regulatory Considerations
Select all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (Check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ® Yes ❑ No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in
the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the
assessment area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ❑A Not severely altered
❑B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], artificial hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and duration
(Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for North Carolina
hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered
to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub - surface water. Consider tidal flooding
regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
®B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
®A Sandy soil
❑B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoxymorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoxymorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
❑A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B
Soil ribbon ? 1 inch
❑A
No peat or muck presence
®B
A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check
all that apply (at
least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment
area (5M), and within 2 miles
and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
From 80 to < 100 feet
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
®B
®B
®B
< 10% impervious surfaces
❑C
❑C
❑C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑D
❑D
❑D
? 20% coverage of pasture
❑E
❑E
❑E
? 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑F
❑F
❑F
? 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
❑G
❑G
❑G
? 20% coverage of silvicultural land characterized by a clear -cut < 5 years old
❑H
❑H
❑H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
®A ? 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width.
❑ <_ 15 -feet wide ®> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑ Exposed — adjacent open water with width ? 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
8. Wetland Width at the Assessment Area —wetland type/wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the appropriate width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland
complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
®A
®A
>_ 100 feet
❑B
❑B
From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D
❑D
From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E
❑E
From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F
❑F
From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G
❑G
From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H
❑H
< 5 feet

9. Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
®C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
®A ®A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (? 90 %) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a. Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, urban landscapes, maintained
fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D From 10 to < 50 acres
❑ E ❑ E < 10 acres
❑F ❑F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
permanent features such as fields, development, two -lane or larger roads (? 40 feet wide), utility line corridors wider than a two -lane road,
and clear -cuts < 10 years old. Consider the eight main points of the compass.
®A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
❑B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
❑C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected strata are unnaturally absent or dominated by exotic
species or composed of planted stands of non - characteristic species or inappropriately composed of a single species.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A ? 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
❑A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
®B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense mid - story/sapling layer
®B
®B
Moderate density mid - story/sapling layer
❑C
❑C
Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense shrub layer
®B
❑B
Moderate density shrub layer
❑C
®C
Shrub layer sparse or absent
❑A
❑A
Dense herb layer
❑B
®B
Moderate density herb layer
®C
❑C
Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegeta
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C
22. Hydrologic Connectivity— assessment area condition metric
tion and open water in the growing season. Patterned
❑D
Evaluate for riverine wetlands only. Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill,
sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
®D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 3.0
Rating Calculator Version 3.0
Wetland Site Name Sneeden - upper Mill Creek Date of Assessment 3/25/10
Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest Assessor Name /Organization CN,DB /LMG
Presence of stressor affecting assessment area (Y /N) YES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) YES
Sub - function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
LOW
Sub - surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Veqetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Ratina Summar
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
MEDIUM
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
VERSION 1.5 (November 2, 2009)
KA I GNU (:AL(:ULA I UK vtKbIUN 'I AU ( November
Wetland Site Name
White Springs
Date
3/25/2010
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name /Organization
Corey Novak/LMG
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
White Spring Branch
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
F- Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude /Lonaitude (deci- dearees)
33.98689 / - 78.02579
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note below if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past
(for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear- cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Describe effects of stressors that are present.
Channelization of the stream, in addition to numerous ditches, have removed the hydrology from this area. The removal of hydrology has
resulted in vegetation uncharacteristic of this riparian wetland.
Regulatory Considerations
Select all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (Check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in
the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the
assessment area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ❑A Not severely altered
®B ®B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], artificial hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and duration
(Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for North Carolina
hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered
to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub - surface water. Consider tidal flooding
regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
Check
a box in
each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA
WT
❑A
❑A
Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B
❑B
Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C
®C
Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D
❑D
Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet

EC Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
®A Sandy soil
❑B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoxymorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoxymorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
®A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B
Soil ribbon ? 1 inch
®A
No peat or muck presence
❑B
A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check
all that apply (at
least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment
area (5M), and within 2 miles
and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
®B
®B
®B
< 10% impervious surfaces
❑C
❑C
❑C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑D
❑D
❑D
? 20% coverage of pasture
❑E
❑E
❑E
? 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑F
❑F
❑F
? 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
❑G
❑G
❑G
? 20% coverage of silvicultural land characterized by a clear -cut < 5 years old
❑H
❑H
❑H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic modifications
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area condition metric
Is assessment area within 50 feet of a stream or other open water? (open water does not typically include man -made ditches or canals)
®Yes ❑No If No, Skip to next metric
Stream width (Stream width is normal flow width [ordinary high water to ordinary high water]). If the stream is anastomosed, combine
widths of channels /braids for a total stream width.
® <_ 15 -feet wide ❑> 15 -feet wide ❑ Not applicable (no stream associated with assessment area)
Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the adjacent stream /open water?
®Yes ❑No
Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width ? 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland /Riparian Buffer Width — assessment area/wetland type/wetland complex metric
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the appropriate width for the wetland type at the assessment area
(WT), the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC), and the riparian buffer at the assessment area (RB) (if applicable). See User
Manual for WT and WC boundaries. Riparian buffer -need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on
the dominant landscape feature. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. Descriptor E should be selected
if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
WT WC RB (applicable if assessment area is within 50 feet of a tributary)
❑A ®A >_ 100 feet ❑A ? 50 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet ®B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet ❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet ❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
®E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet ❑E < 5 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet
9. Inundation Duration —assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
®B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)

10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the contiguous wetland complex (WC), and the size of the contiguous, forested wetland (FW) (if
applicable, see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K"
for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A ? 500 acres
❑B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ®C ®C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
®G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (? 90 %) of its natural landscape size.
❑B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates
whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous naturally
vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture
and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A ❑A ? 500 acres
®B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E < 10 acres
❑F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands. (evaluate for marshes
only)
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
permanent features such as fields, development, two -lane or larger roads (? 40 feet wide), utility line corridors wider than a two -lane road,
and clear -cuts < 10 years old. Consider the eight main points of the compass.
❑A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
®B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
❑C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
®C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected strata are unnaturally absent or dominated by exotic
species or composed of planted stands of non - characteristic species or inappropriately composed of a single species.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
® Vegetation present
Evaluate percent coverage of vegetation for marshes only
❑A ? 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
❑B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
®C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense mid - story/sapling layer
❑B ®B Moderate density mid - story/sapling layer
®C ❑C Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
®A ❑A Dense shrub layer
❑B ®B Moderate density shrub layer
❑C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense herb layer
❑B ®B Moderate density herb layer
®C ❑C Herb layer sparse or absent
❑ Vegetation absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric
Evaluate for riverine wetlands only. Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill,
sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Wetland Site Name White Sprinqs
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
Date of Assessment 3/25/2010
Assessor Name /Organization Novak/LMG
Presence of stressor affecting assessment area (Y /N) YES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) YES
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) YES
Wetland may be a high - quality riverine wetland (Y /N) NA
Assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
HIGH
Sub - surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition /Opportunity
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Veaetation Composition
Condition
LOW
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
VERSION 1.5 (November 2, 2009)
KA I GNU (:AL(:ULA I UK vtKbIUN 'I AU ( November
Wetland Site Name
White Springs
Date
3/25/2010
Wetland Type
Pocosin
Assessor Name /Organization
Corey Novak/LMG
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
White Spring Branch
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
F- Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude /Lonaitude (deci- dearees)
33.98733 / - 78.02906
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note below if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in recent past
(for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear- cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ® Yes ❑ No
Describe effects of stressors that are present.
Tulloch ditching throughout entire parcel. Channelized section of zero stream.
Regulatory Considerations
Select all that apply to the assessment area.
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
® Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (Check all that apply)
❑ Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in
the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the
assessment area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
❑A ®A Not severely altered
®B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], artificial hydrologic alteration)
Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and duration
(Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for North Carolina
hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered
to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub - surface water. Consider tidal flooding
regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
❑A ❑A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
®C ®C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
®A Sandy soil
❑B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoxymorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoxymorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
®A
Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B
Soil ribbon ? 1 inch
❑A
No peat or muck presence
®B
A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check
all that apply (at
least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment
area (5M), and within 2 miles
and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
®A
®A
®A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
< 10% impervious surfaces
❑C
❑C
❑C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑D
❑D
❑D
? 20% coverage of pasture
❑E
❑E
❑E
? 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑F
❑F
❑F
? 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
❑G
❑G
❑G
? 20% coverage of silvicultural land characterized by a clear -cut < 5 years old
❑H
❑H
❑H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic modifications
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area condition metric
Is assessment area within 50 feet of a stream or other open water? (open water does not typically include man -made ditches or canals)
❑Yes ®No If No, Skip to next metric
Stream width (Stream width is normal flow width [ordinary high water to ordinary high water]). If the stream is anastomosed, combine
widths of channels /braids for a total stream width.
❑ <_ 15 -feet wide ❑> 15 -feet wide ❑ Not applicable (no stream associated with assessment area)
Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the adjacent stream /open water?
❑Yes ❑No
Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
❑Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑Exposed — adjacent open water with width ? 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland /Riparian Buffer Width — assessment area/wetland type/wetland complex metric
Check a box in each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the appropriate width for the wetland type at the assessment area
(WT), the wetland complex at the assessment area (WC), and the riparian buffer at the assessment area (RB) (if applicable). See User
Manual for WT and WC boundaries. Riparian buffer -need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on
the dominant landscape feature. Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed. Descriptor E should be selected
if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
WT WC RB (applicable if assessment area is within 50 feet of a tributary)
®A ®A >_ 100 feet ❑A ? 50 feet
❑B ❑B From 80 to < 100 feet ❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 80 feet ❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D ❑D From 40 to < 50 feet ❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E ❑E From 30 to < 40 feet ❑E < 5 feet
❑F ❑F From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G ❑G From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H ❑H < 5 feet
9. Inundation Duration —assessment area condition metric
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑A Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
®B Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑C Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)

10. Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
®A Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11. Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the contiguous wetland complex (WC), and the size of the contiguous, forested wetland (FW) (if
applicable, see User Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K"
for the FW column.
WT WC FW (if applicable)
❑A ❑A ❑A ? 500 acres
®B ❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C ®C ®C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F ❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G ❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H ❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I ❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J ❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K ❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12. Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A Pocosin is the full extent (? 90 %) of its natural landscape size.
®B Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13. Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates
whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous naturally
vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture
and agriculture), or open water > 300 feet wide.
Well Loosely
❑A ❑A ? 500 acres
❑B ®B From 100 to < 500 acres
®C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D ❑D From 10 to < 50 acres
❑E ❑E < 10 acres
❑F Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands. (evaluate for marshes
only)
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
permanent features such as fields, development, two -lane or larger roads (? 40 feet wide), utility line corridors wider than a two -lane road,
and clear -cuts < 10 years old. Consider the eight main points of the compass.
®A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
❑B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
❑C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected strata are unnaturally absent or dominated by exotic
species or composed of planted stands of non - characteristic species or inappropriately composed of a single species.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
® Vegetation present
Evaluate percent coverage of vegetation for marshes only
❑A ? 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
®C ®C Canopy sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense mid - story/sapling layer
®B ®B Moderate density mid - story/sapling layer
❑C ❑C Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
®A ®A Dense shrub layer
❑B ❑B Moderate density shrub layer
❑C ❑C Shrub layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense herb layer
®B ®B Moderate density herb layer
❑C ❑C Herb layer sparse or absent
❑ Vegetation absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
❑B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
®C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric
Evaluate for riverine wetlands only. Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill,
sedimentation, channelization, diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
❑A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes

Wetland Site Name White Sprinqs
Wetland Type Pocosin
NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Date of Assessment 3/25/2010
Assessor Name /Organization Novak/LMG
Presence of stressor affecting assessment area (Y /N) YES
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) NO
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) YES
Wetland may be a high - quality riverine wetland (Y /N) NA
Assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Rating Summary
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
LOW
Sub - surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
NA
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Particulate Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Physical Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Pollution Change
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
MEDIUM
Veaetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Condition
LOW
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating LOW

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Gaicuiator version 4.1
Wetland Site Name
Cartwheel Branch AA1
Date
3/6/12
Wetland Type
Riverine Swamp Forest
Assessor Name /Organization
Corey Novak / LMG Inc.
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Cartwheel Branch
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
F- Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude /Lonaitude (deci- dearees)
34.268255 / - 78.009178
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear- cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area.)
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
® Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ® Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ® Yes ❑ No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in
the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the
assessment area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and duration
(Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for North Carolina
hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered
to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub - surface water. Consider tidal flooding
regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ®B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
®C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
❑D ❑D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ®A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
❑C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ❑A Sandy soil
❑B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
®E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ❑A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
®B Soil ribbon ? 1 inch
4c. ❑A No peat or muck presence
®B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check
all that apply (at
least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment
area (5M), and within 2 miles
and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
>_ 100 feet
❑A
❑A
❑A
> 10% impervious surfaces
®B
®B
®B
< 10% impervious surfaces
❑C
❑C
❑C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑D
❑D
❑D
? 20% coverage of pasture
❑E
❑E
❑E
? 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑F
❑F
❑F
? 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
❑G
❑G
❑G
? 20% coverage of clear -cut land
❑H
❑H
❑H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
®A ? 50 feet
❑B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width.
❑ <_ 15 -feet wide ®> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑ Exposed — adjacent open water with width ? 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check
a box in
each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland
complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
®A
®A
>_ 100 feet
❑B
❑B
From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D
❑D
From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E
❑E
From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F
❑F
From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G
❑G
From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H
❑H
< 5 feet

9.
Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
? 500 acres
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑B
❑A
Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑C
❑B
Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑D
®C
Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10.
Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
❑F
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
®A
Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B
Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C
Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11.
Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT
WC FW (if applicable)
®A
®A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B
❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F
❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
❑G
❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H
❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I
❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J
❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K
❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12.
Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A
Pocosin is the full extent (? 90 %) of its natural landscape size.
❑B
Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13.
Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a.
Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
®A
❑A
? 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑ E
❑ E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non - forested areas ? 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass.
❑A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
®B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
❑C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
®A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
❑B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C
Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic
species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant in at least one
stratu m.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A ? 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ®A ®A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
❑B ❑B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U El El Canopy sparse or absent
®A ®A Dense mid - story/sapling layer
U? ❑B R Moderate density mid - story/sapling layer
El El Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
❑A ®A Dense shrub layer
®B ❑B Moderate density shrub layer
U) El El Shrub layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense herb layer
_ ❑B R Moderate density herb layer
®C ®C Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
A wastewater treatment plant is just east of site but downstream so does not affect assessment area. The entire upstream watershed appears
to be within 2 miles. Impervious surface is close to 10% but appears to be less. The wetland type and wetland complex are much larger than
the project and assessment area boundaries. Much woody debris was noted but was less than 12 inches diameter.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland Site Name Cartwheel Branch AA1 Date of Assessment 3/6/12
Wetland Type Riverine Swamp Forest
y , .., '-
Assessor Name /Organization LMG Inc.
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
HIGH
Sub - surface Storage and Retention
Condition
LOW
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
LOW
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Soluble Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Veqetation Composition
Condition
HIGH
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NO
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

NC WAM FIELD ASSESSMENT FORM
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Gaicuiator version 4.1
Wetland Site Name
UT to Cartwheel Branch AA2
Date
3/6/12
Wetland Type
Headwater Forest
Assessor Name /Organization
Corey Novak / LMG Inc.
Level III Ecoregion
Middle Atlantic Coastal Plain
Nearest Named Water Body
Cartwheel Branch
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS 8 -Digit Catalogue Unit
03030005
F- Yes M No
Precipitation within 48 hrs?
Latitude /Lonaitude (deci- dearees)
34.269548 / - 78.004368
Evidence of stressors affecting the assessment area (may not be within the assessment area)
Please circle and /or make note on the last page if evidence of stressors is apparent. Consider departure from reference, if appropriate, in
recent past (for instance, within 10 years). Noteworthy stressors include, but are not limited to the following.
• Hydrological modifications (examples: ditches, dams, beaver dams, dikes, berms, ponds, etc.)
• Surface and sub - surface discharges into the wetland (examples: discharges containing obvious pollutants, presence of nearby
septic tanks, underground storage tanks (USTs), hog lagoons, etc.)
• Signs of vegetation stress (examples: vegetation mortality, insect damage, disease, storm damage, salt intrusion, etc.)
• Habitat/plant community alteration (examples: mowing, clear- cutting, exotics, etc.)
Is the assessment area intensively managed? ❑ Yes ® No
Regulatory Considerations (select all that apply to the assessment area.)
❑ Anadromous fish
❑ Federally protected species or State endangered or threatened species
❑ NCDWQ riparian buffer rule in effect
❑ Abuts a Primary Nursery Area (PNA)
❑ Publicly owned property
❑ N.C. Division of Coastal Management Area of Environmental Concern (AEC) (including buffer)
❑ Abuts a stream with a NCDWQ classification of SA or supplemental classifications of HQW, ORW, or Trout
❑ Designated NCNHP reference community
❑ Abuts a 303(d)- listed stream or a tributary to a 303(d)- listed stream
What type of natural stream is associated with the wetland, if any? (check all that apply)
® Blackwater
❑ Brownwater
❑ Tidal (if tidal, check one of the following boxes) ❑ Lunar ❑ Wind ❑ Both
Is the assessment area on a coastal island? ❑ Yes ® No
Is the assessment area's surface water storage capacity or duration substantially altered by beaver? ❑ Yes ® No
Does the assessment area experience overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions? ❑ Yes ® No
1. Ground Surface Condition/Vegetation Condition — assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider alteration to the ground surface (GS) in the assessment area and vegetation structure (VS) in
the assessment area. Compare to reference wetland if applicable (see User Manual). If a reference is not applicable, then rate the
assessment area based on evidence an effect.
GS VS
®A ®A Not severely altered
❑B ❑B Severely altered over a majority of the assessment area (ground surface alteration examples: vehicle tracks, excessive
sedimentation, fire -plow lanes, skidder tracks, bedding, fill, soil compaction, obvious pollutants) (vegetation structure
alteration examples: mechanical disturbance, herbicides, salt intrusion [where appropriate], exotic species, grazing,
less diversity [if appropriate], hydrologic alteration)
2. Surface and Sub - Surface Storage Capacity and Duration —assessment area condition metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface storage capacity and duration (Surf) and sub - surface storage capacity and duration
(Sub). Consider both increase and decrease in hydrology. Refer to the current NRCS lateral effect of ditching guidance for North Carolina
hydric soils (see USACE Wilmington District website) for the zone of influence of ditches in hydric soils. A ditch <_ 1 foot deep is considered
to affect surface water only, while a ditch > 1 foot deep is expected to affect both surface and sub - surface water. Consider tidal flooding
regime, if applicable.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Water storage capacity and duration are not altered.
❑B ❑B Water storage capacity or duration are altered, but not substantially (typically, not sufficient to change vegetation).
❑C ❑C Water storage capacity or duration are substantially altered (typically, alteration sufficient to result in vegetation
change) (examples: draining, flooding, soil compaction, filling, excessive sedimentation, underground utility lines).
Water Storage /Surface Relief — assessment area/wetland type condition metric (answer for non -marsh wetlands only)
Check a box in each column. Select the appropriate storage for the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT).
AA WT
3a. ❑A ❑A Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water > 1 deep
❑B ❑B Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 6 inches to 1 foot deep
❑C ❑C Majority of wetland with depressions able to pond water 3 to 6 inches deep
®D ®D Depressions able to pond water < 3 inches deep
3b. ❑A Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is greater than 2 feet
❑B Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is between 1 and 2 feet
®C Evidence that maximum depth of inundation is less than 1 foot

4. Soil Texture /Structure — assessment area condition metric
Check a box from each of the three soil property groups below. Dig soil profile in the dominant assessment area landscape feature.
Make soil observations within the top 12 inches. Use most recent National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils guidance for regional
indicators.
4a. ®A Sandy soil
❑B Loamy or clayey soils exhibiting redoximorphic features (concentrations, depletions, or rhizospheres)
❑C Loamy or clayey soils not exhibiting redoximorphic features
❑D Loamy or clayey gleyed soil
❑E Histosol or histic epipedon
4b. ®A Soil ribbon < 1 inch
❑B Soil ribbon ? 1 inch
4c. ®A No peat or muck presence
❑B A peat or muck presence
5. Discharge into Wetland — opportunity metric
Check a box in each column. Consider surface pollutants or discharges (Surf) and sub - surface pollutants or discharges (Sub)
Examples of sub - surface discharges include presence of nearby septic tank, underground storage tank (UST), etc.
Surf Sub
®A ®A Little or no evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the assessment area
❑B ❑B Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges entering the wetland and stressing, but not overwhelming the
treatment capacity of the assessment area
❑C ❑C Noticeable evidence of pollutants or discharges (pathogen, particulate, or soluble) entering the assessment area and
potentially overwhelming the treatment capacity of the wetland (water discoloration, dead vegetation, excessive
sedimentation, odor)
Land Use — opportunity metric
Check
all that apply (at
least one box in each column). Evaluation involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. Consider sources
draining
to assessment area within entire upstream watershed (WS), within 5 miles and within the watershed draining to the assessment
area (5M), and within 2 miles
and within the watershed draining to the assessment area (2M).
WS
5M
2M
>_ 100 feet
®A
®A
®A
> 10% impervious surfaces
❑B
❑B
❑B
< 10% impervious surfaces
®C
®C
®C
Confined animal operations (or other local, concentrated source of pollutants
❑D
❑D
❑D
? 20% coverage of pasture
❑E
❑E
❑E
? 20% coverage of agricultural land (regularly plowed land)
❑F
❑F
❑F
? 20% coverage of maintained grass /herb
❑G
❑G
❑G
? 20% coverage of clear -cut land
❑H
❑H
❑H
Little or no opportunity to improve water quality. Lack of opportunity may result from hydrologic alterations
that prevent drainage or overbank flow from affecting the assessment area.
7. Wetland Acting as Vegetated Buffer— assessment area/wetland complex condition metric
7a. Is assessment area within 50 feet of a tributary or other open water?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 7b. If No, skip to Metric 8.
Wetland buffer need only be present on one side of the water body. Make buffer judgment based on the average width of wetland.
Record a note if a portion of the buffer has been removed or disturbed.
7b. How much of the first 50 feet from the bank is wetland? Descriptor E should be selected if ditches effectively bypass the buffer.
❑A ? 50 feet
®B From 30 to < 50 feet
❑C From 15 to < 30 feet
❑D From 5 to < 15 feet
❑E < 5 feet or buffer bypassed by ditches
7c. Tributary width. If the tributary is anastomosed, combine widths of channels /braids for a total width.
® <_ 15 -feet wide ❑> 15 -feet wide ❑ Other open water (no tributary present)
7d. Do roots of assessment area vegetation extend into the bank of the tributary/open water?
®Yes ❑No
7e. Is stream or other open water sheltered or exposed?
®Sheltered — adjacent open water with width < 2500 feet and no regular boat traffic.
❑ Exposed — adjacent open water with width ? 2500 feet or regular boat traffic.
Wetland Width at the Assessment Area — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Check
a box in
each column for riverine wetlands only. Select the average width for the wetland type at the assessment area (WT)
and the wetland
complex at the assessment area (WC). See User Manual for WT and WC boundaries.
WT
WC
❑A
❑A
>_ 100 feet
®B
®B
From 80 to < 100 feet
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 80 feet
❑D
❑D
From 40 to < 50 feet
❑E
❑E
From 30 to < 40 feet
❑F
❑F
From 15 to < 30 feet
❑G
❑G
From 5 to < 15 feet
❑H
❑H
< 5 feet

9.
Inundation Duration — assessment area condition metric
? 500 acres
Answer for assessment area dominant landform.
❑B
❑A
Evidence of short- duration inundation (< 7 consecutive days)
❑C
®B
Evidence of saturation, without evidence of inundation
❑D
❑C
Evidence of long- duration inundation or very long- duration inundation (7 to 30 consecutive days or more)
10.
Indicators of Deposition — assessment area condition metric
❑F
Consider recent deposition only (no plant growth since deposition).
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
®A
Sediment deposition is not excessive, but at approximately natural levels.
❑B
Sediment deposition is excessive, but not overwhelming the wetland.
❑C
Sediment deposition is excessive and is overwhelming the wetland.
11.
Wetland Size — wetland type /wetland complex condition metric
Check a box in each column. Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric evaluates three aspects of the wetland area: the
size of the wetland type (WT), the size of the wetland complex (WC), and the size of the forested wetland (FW) (if applicable, see User
Manual). See the User Manual for boundaries of these evaluation areas. If assessment area is clear -cut, select "K" for the FW column.
WT
WC FW (if applicable)
❑A
®A ®A ? 500 acres
❑B
❑B ❑B From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C ❑C From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D ❑D From 25 to < 50 acres
❑E
❑E ❑E From 10 to < 25 acres
❑F
❑F ❑F From 5 to < 10 acres
®G
❑G ❑G From 1 to < 5 acres
❑H
❑H ❑H From 0.5 to < 1 acre
❑I
❑I ❑I From 0.1 to < 0.5 acre
❑J
❑J ❑J From 0.01 to < 0.1 acre
❑K
❑K ❑K < 0.01 acre or assessment area is clear -cut
12.
Wetland Intactness — wetland type condition metric (evaluate for Pocosins only)
❑A
Pocosin is the full extent (? 90 %) of its natural landscape size.
❑B
Pocosin type is < 90% of the full extent of its natural landscape size.
13.
Connectivity to Other Natural Areas — landscape condition metric
13a.
Check appropriate box(es) (a box may be checked in each column). Involves a GIS effort with field adjustment. This metric
evaluates whether the wetland is well connected (Well) and /or loosely connected (Loosely) to the landscape patch, the contiguous
naturally vegetated area and open water (if appropriate). Boundaries are formed by four -lane roads, regularly maintained utility line
corridors the width of a four -lane road or wider, urban landscapes, maintained fields (pasture and agriculture), or open water > 300
feet wide.
Well Loosely
®A
❑A
? 500 acres
❑B
❑B
From 100 to < 500 acres
❑C
❑C
From 50 to < 100 acres
❑D
❑D
From 10 to < 50 acres
❑ E
❑ E
< 10 acres
❑F
❑F
Wetland type has a poor or no connection to other natural habitats
13b. Evaluate for marshes only.
❑Yes ❑No Wetland type has a surface hydrology connection to open waters /stream or tidal wetlands.
14. Edge Effect — wetland type condition metric (skip for all marshes)
May involve a GIS effort with field adjustment. Estimate distance from wetland type boundary to artificial edges. Artificial edges include
non - forested areas ? 40 feet wide such as fields, development, roads, regularly maintained utility line corridors, and clear -cuts. Consider
the eight main points of the compass.
❑A No artificial edge within 150 feet in all directions
❑B No artificial edge within 150 feet in four (4) to seven (7) directions
®C An artificial edge occurs within 150 feet in more than four (4) directions or assessment area is clear -cut
15. Vegetative Composition — assessment area condition metric (skip for all marshes and Pine Flat)
❑A Vegetation is close to reference condition in species present and their proportions. Lower strata composed of appropriate
species, with exotic plants absent or sparse within the assessment area.
®B Vegetation is different from reference condition in species diversity or proportions, but still largely composed of native species
characteristic of the wetland type. This may include communities of weedy native species that develop after clearcutting or
clearing. It also includes communities with exotics present, but not dominant, over a large portion of the expected strata.
❑C
Vegetation severely altered from reference in composition. Expected species are unnaturally absent (planted stands of non - characteristic
species or at least one stratum inappropriately composed of a single species). Exotic species are dominant in at least one
stratu m.
16. Vegetative Diversity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for Non -tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
❑A Vegetation diversity is high and is composed primarily of native species (< 10% cover of exotics).
❑B Vegetation diversity is low or has > 10% to 50% cover of exotics.
❑C Vegetation is dominated by exotic species (> 50 % cover of exotics).

17. Vegetative Structure —assessment area/wetland type condition metric
17a. Is vegetation present?
®Yes ❑No If Yes, continue to 17b. If No, skip to Metric 18.
17b. Evaluate percent coverage of assessment area vegetation for all marshes only. Skip to 17c for non -marsh wetlands.
❑A ? 25% coverage of vegetation
❑B < 25% coverage of vegetation
17c. Check a box in each column for each stratum. Evaluate this portion of the metric for non -marsh wetlands. Consider
structure in airspace above the assessment area (AA) and the wetland type (WT) separately.
AA WT
o ❑A ❑A Canopy closed, or nearly closed, with natural gaps associated with natural processes
®B ®B Canopy present, but opened more than natural gaps
U ❑C ❑C Canopy sparse or absent
®A ®A Dense mid - story/sapling layer
U? ❑B R Moderate density mid - story/sapling layer
❑C ❑C Mid - story/sapling layer sparse or absent
®A ®A Dense shrub layer
❑B R Moderate density shrub layer
U) El El Shrub layer sparse or absent
❑A ❑A Dense herb layer
_ ®B ®B Moderate density herb layer
El El Herb layer sparse or absent
18. Snags — wetland type condition metric
❑A Large snags (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches DBH, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
19. Diameter Class Distribution — wetland type condition metric
❑A Majority of canopy trees have stems > 6 inches in diameter at breast height (DBH); many large trees (> 12 inches DBH) are
present.
®B Majority of canopy trees have stems between 6 and 12 inches DBH, few are > 12 inch DBH.
❑C Majority of canopy trees are < 6 inches DBH or no trees.
20. Large Woody Debris — wetland type condition metric
Include both natural debris and man - placed natural debris.
❑A Large logs (more than one) are visible (> 12 inches in diameter, or large relative to species present and landscape stability).
®B Not
21. Vegetation /Open Water Dispersion — wetland type /open water condition metric (evaluate for Non -Tidal Freshwater Marsh only)
Select the figure that best describes the amount of interspersion between vegetation and open water in the growing season. Patterned
areas indicate vegetated areas, while solid white areas indicate open water.
❑A ❑B ❑C ❑D
22. Hydrologic Connectivity — assessment area condition metric (evaluate for riparian wetlands only)
Examples of activities that may severely alter hydrologic connectivity include intensive ditching, fill, sedimentation, channelization,
diversion, man -made berms, beaver dams, and stream incision.
®A Overbank and overland flow are not severely altered in the assessment area.
❑B Overbank flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑C Overland flow is severely altered in the assessment area.
❑D Both overbank and overland flow are severely altered in the assessment area.
Notes
Assessment area appears to receive overbank flooding during above normal rainfall. The entire upstream watershed draining to the
assessment area appears to be within 2 miles. A wastewater treatment plant accounts for a large portion of the upstream watershed. On the
eastern side of the tributary, the WWTP has removed the buffer. The size of this assessment area is equal to the size of the wetland type. The
AA and WT are part of a much larger wetland complex, but the width of the WC at the AA is equal to the width of the AA perpendicular to the
topographic contours at the AA. This assessment area appears to have been logged in the recent past (abundant saplings and shrubs but few
large canopy trees). There are many snags, but they are <12 inches DBH.

NC WAM Wetland Rating Sheet
Accompanies User Manual Version 4.1
Rating Calculator Version 4.1
Wetland Site Name UT to Cartwheel Branch AA2 Date of Assessment 3/6/12
Wetland Type Headwater Forest
y , .., '-
Assessor Name /Organization LMG Inc.
Notes on Field Assessment Form (Y /N) YES
Presence of regulatory considerations (Y /N) NO
Wetland is intensively managed (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is located within 50 feet of a natural tributary or other open water (Y /N) YES
Assessment area is substantially altered by beaver (Y /N) NO
Assessment area experiences overbank flooding during normal rainfall conditions (Y /N) NO
Assessment area is on a coastal island (Y /N) NO
Sub - function Ratina Summar
Function
Sub - function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
HIGH
Sub - surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Pathogen Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Physical Change
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
Condition /Opportunity
NA
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
NA
Habitat
Physical Structure
Condition
HIGH
Landscape Patch Structure
Condition
HIGH
Veqetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
Function Rating Summary
Function
Metrics
Rating
Hydrology
Condition
HIGH
Water Quality
Condition
HIGH
Condition /Opportunity
HIGH
Opportunity Presence (Y /N)
YES
Habitat
Condition
HIGH
Overall Wetland Rating HIGH

(1) Channelized section of White Springs Branch (looking downstream)
(2) View of typical lateral ditch with adjacent vegetation
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella LM GkOUP .
Mitigation Bank i`r_on wrfl rot COP tuorPmi Site Photographs
Brunswick County, NC www.LMGroup.net (White Springs Tract)
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

(3) View of existing vegetation adjacent to ditch
IF
r
1 a.Y h7f. �.ikti•• r:.
(4) View of remnant spoil area on southern side of White Springs Branch
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella LM GkOUP .
Mitigation Bank ''r_unmrrrrorCnntuOrpmi% Site Photographs
Brunswick County, NC www.LMGroup.net (White Springs Tract)
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

A.
r 't
1fir ,
(5) Oblique aerial of Indian Creek and Cape Fear River looking north
(6) Oblique aerial of tidal riverine swamp fores with industrial land use to south
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella LM GX0UF
Mitigation Bank l::v—n— trrorCOPILIorpmi, Site Photographs
g www.LMGroup.net I (Sneeden Tract)
Brunswick County, NC Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

(7) View of Mill Branch down - gradient from dam breast (during growing season)
r
(8) View of tidal area of Mill Branch downstream of causeway
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella LM GkOUP
Mitigation Bank !:'v—n— trrorCOPILIorpmi, Site Photographs
g www.LMGroup.net (Sneeden Tract)
Brunswick County, NC Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

(9) View of existing causeway to be removed
(10) View of impounded waters of Mill Branch (upstream of causeway)
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella LM GkOUP
Mitigation Bank !:'v—n— trrorCOPILIorpmi, Site Photographs
g www.LMGroup.net (Sneeden Tract)
Brunswick County, NC Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

(11) View of impounded run of Mill Branch
(12) View of tidal riverine swamp forest to be preserved
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella I'Mi'
i .inn aunAc�MExYCAaun ,.
Mitigation Bank — Site Photographs
Miti
g www.LMGroup.net (Sneeden Tract)
Brunswick County, NC Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WILMINGTON DISTRICT
Action Id. SAW- 2010 -01378 County: Brunswick U.S.G.S. Quad: Leland
NOTIFICATION OF JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION
Property Owner: Wilmington River Club, LLC. Agent: Land Management Group
Attn: Jon T. Vincent attu: Rob Moul
Address: 1508 Military Cutoff Road, Suite 302_ 3805 Wrightsville Ave, Suite 15
Wilmington, NC 28403 Wilmington NC, 28403
Telephone No.: (910) 452 -0001
Property description:
Size (acres) 900 Nearest Town Navassa
Nearest Waterway Cape Fear River River Basin Cape Fear River
USGS LIUC 03040207 Coordinates N34.2808 W-78.0118
Location description The project area is located at the first dirt road on Royster Road in Navassa, Brunswick
County, North Carolina. Parcel ID is 0240000102.
Indicate Which of the Following Apply:
A. Preliminary Determination
Based on preliminary information, there maybe wetlands on the above described property. We strongly suggest you have
this property inspected to determine the extent of Department of the Army (DA) jurisdiction. To be considered final, a
jurisdictional determination must be verified by the Corps. This preliminary determination is not an appealable action
under the Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process ( Reference 33 11—FR Part 331).
B. Approved Determination
There are Navigable Waters of the United States within the above described property subject to the permit requirements of
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Unless there is a change in the law or
our published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
X There are waters of the U.S. including wetlands on the above described project area subject to the permit requirements of
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)(33 USC § 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our published
regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this notification.
We strongly suggest you have the wetlands on your property delineated. Due to the size of your property and /or our
present workload, the Corps may not be able to accomplish this wetland delineation in a timely manner. For a more timely
delineation, you may wish to obtain a consultant. To be considered final, any delineation must be verified by the Corps.
The waters of the U.S. including wetland on your property have been delineated and the delineation has been verified by the
Corps. We strongly suggest you have this delineation surveyed. Upon completion, this survey should be reviewed and
verified by the Corps. Once verified, this survey will provide an acctu•ate depiction of all areas subject to CWA
jurisdiction on your property which, provided there is no change in the law or our published regulations, may be relied
upon for a period not to exceed. five years.
X The waters of the U.S. including wetlands have been delineated and surveyed and are accurately depicted on the plat
signed by the Corps Regulatory Official identified below on 10/20/2010. Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.
There are no waters of the U.S., to include wetlands, present on the above described property which are subject to the
pen -nit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344). Unless there is a change in the law or our
published regulations, this determination may be relied upon for a period not to exceed five years from the date of this
notification.

X The property is located in one of the 20 Coastal Counties subject to regulation under the Coastal Area Management Act
(LAMA). You should contact the Division of Coastal Management in Wilmington, NC at (910) 796 -7215 to determine
their requirements.
Placement of dredged or fill material within waters of the US and /or wetlands without a Department of the Army permit may
constitute a violation of Section 301 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC § 1311). If you have any questions regarding this
determination and/or the Corps regulatory program, please contact Christy Wicker at 910 - 251 -4637.
C. Basis For Determination
The site is subject to ebb and flow of the tide and exhibits wetland criteria as defined in the 1987 wetland delineation
manual which is abutting the Cape Fear River, a Section 10 Navigable Water. This determination is based on a site
visit conducted by Christy Wicker on 8/17/2010.
D. Remarks
E. Attention USDA Program Participants
This delineation/determination has been conducted to identify the limits of Corps' Clean Water Act jurisdiction for the
particular site identified in this request. The delineation/determination may not be valid for the wetland conservation
provisions of the Food Security Act of 1985. If you or your tenant are USDA Program participants, or anticipate participation
in USDA programs, you should request a certified wetland determination from the local office of the Natural Resources
Conservation Service, prior to starting work.
F. Appeals Information (This information applies only to approved jurisdictional determinations as indicated in
B. above)
This correspondence constitutes an approved jurisdictional determination for the above described site. If you object to this
determination, you may request an administrative appeal under Corps regulations at 33 CFR part 331. Enclosed you will find a
Notification of Appeal Process (NAP) fact sheet and request for appeal (RFA) form. If you request to appeal this
determination you must submit a completed RFA form to the following address:
District Engineer, Wilmington Regulatory Division
Attn: Ms. Christy Wicker, Regulatory Specialist,
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
69 Darlington Ave
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
In order for an RFA to be accepted by the Corps, the Corps must determine that it is complete, that it meets the criteria for
appeal under 33 CFR part 331.5, and that it has been received by the District Office within 60 days of the date of the NAP.
Should you decide to submit an RFA form, it must be received at the above address by December 20, 2010.
"It is not necessary to submit an RFA form to the District Office if you do not object to the determination in this
correspondence. * * ??
Corps Regulatory Official:
Date 10/20/2010 Expiration Date 10/20/2015
The Wilmington District is committed to providing the highest level of support to the public. To help us ensure we continue to
do so, please complete the Customer Satisfaction Survey located at our website at ]iLtp://Iregulatory.usacesurvey.com/ to
complete the survey online.
Copy Furnish: Chad Coburn, NCDENR -DWQ, 127 Cardinal Drive, Wilmington, NC 28405
Michael Underwood and Associates, PA; 102 Cinema Drive, Suite C; Wilmington; NC; 28403

ffAF RIVER
e,
CAPEFEAR MYERe_
�° w4y � /., pR�'�� ti ..�' — _ _ / / , '\ \. _ '`" '� _ � t L t � � � : ; • j : 'Np P / j// / f t /
INDIAN LRE!'K
VICINITY MAP NO SCALE
/ \''•^....�, \,.,� r \ �� : J - WFaiNRUe3ss - ; ; \.\ , \:� �� �I t l.€'. °^d/ a'�,l' . - - • // I / \
`\ ...1 1 t l WER -ANC AREA $'
\ .� ✓ t / ' - WEILANLf AREA "C'
=Lf ACRES •/• - { I l .µ //,�,a/ ^ / I:
.. •¢;. \ WF c 0 7NRU C737 - • D� V'"' pMP , \ I / - �// /. • /
,\ F „� Y: � � - \' • ssero7soT - Ag5A1� "\ l /.. // � /
SpP , xr cna '.N ' . TEl\
qy Pam( - 'xv e. - - - - \ f / - • yr - • ,/ •i. /,,
e 020
R - Wr F1. M . .\ WP dB1 �...,�' / // �• / � /..
w
NF C5D7NRUAC/f • �" Wa >—>
0.031 ADPES Wf nl ra
°flg'ERp$ BB
�W,,y�pF. mOk ppfk
f,NB�
Apo
NJN•M
REF[ r
BD(W zR PAID' l!r(
i\
Xf CIS f>JZ0
wE rs Wr ABJ
A 'A'
SS pF AB WFAI
A53
w
h
`2' gP A4J
WP Ala
NF AJJ
)N9 SJBYB79'E IA'
roJ,Be'i nU
�,ff((PR t° gclfioE°
fY0p5f9N01 A
t
10.0
NF Hr] � JPI�V
NNg40 / NF JJ
UYv /•. wr.m9
Nf H35 1
sit g WETLAND AREA 'J'
Q',\2 !387tH S
MA S ACREE
ci 3 N4- Jt
W= HB9 \
. (Y81 W�AtiP /' ., V•".8 aAP NF ..0
rr Hrse WF Hros _ •/.
• L16 4 J �'�B
"55y1S p
NBf Z1AN c OpL
�<
•
0 9 LI] i r K ' WF JIJ Nf J55
w' MBr tJf a xDW �Upj eN� 1 g � �I
(REJ 0 z Br�c
�-'.,\ � (BD'• �_ [TI `` _ ''''�^••••��10 111 LI
/ of
�,11��+
W 'af :fi 141 U &Aim C tBVmurn
f F . rh t li opY f rh' PI IY deplen dletrovadmv of dle
j 'd I i iC9 ofW 1 .t under the proem lna and
g l on' d nvmed b3' b d 'g dvv tksdetc.UNaes tine iseehmge
nthe lnw mwx pvb:iehed regvlmvm, Mis dnvmivetim of aectvm 40A
wtsdlenon may be rched an for 'adnntmercrod flue 5 cea; f This
1 W P ()5
dare 'flna dmmvmannrl wes W I'.'nR da )9A�Amiy ClmV %ofE 8 ms
wetlends de+ veehor mmvual
F �y
Fr f /,1v l
0 F( PLf! fd✓�
i rmY - xMa R ap x.mma Daln
lf.,. fbv ineaa ve
L)'IL M1J' P p ed 'NA-HM '.
2) A W f bl h psaputY ODES - 'tbi Spe iel Plood HvzaN Ame es tlebned by the 9x y�' tl'
Zb. I Y gen Y Ntu sc 4ge . Na'a d smbed propery i' to F,de Eb, n= a M.,.g
Za Designadov l�I,(NL ] /EL 81 d %(Ner flood eceas)by the feddel Cmcrgmcy Mwregmmt
Afj_2'20 A on Plood L19111allee0219918(rPmel ` fo 2t99K end 3109K. wish eeffectnrc dam ofidmrficanon\
oflvve2.20W gar MOp NVmber !]202199 —bf Bsvns,vck bfNb, °vnvf Navasaa. and Map Nmnber "I�
] ]0310900K WN H Cmnnp T [N 9m f N 6C 1' 1 ch 1 PI. 11n nrloe�
_
R Mepf .h 0. I d dry 1
3 14 vey tl Fl bJ y f d f 1 Id b d W wl b t H pw
ve d
)llFl H 5. t1u de 8 IJ I sl h L 1 A W P fl ,k] n savicc or \
T yt W: B ee Ou h '14 4l 1 h , h h fl' 4e p
1 d ty 2 y 11 Ju h d wl Hl fi h h 1 d elW elthavghbe
JJ• G'di d1b 1 des ec.u_uce,Ympossid] frm'm nnsp.na oilable, lee survey henatgF., slcall3laearl
unolczwa Pase olaa
Map Cebivct 4 f., 37
Mao of d Bye far, BmnD On l.. P1v3
Perrenved BS': Shmwin D. CribL, P.f..S
Dmd:dvlY.4. 1996
Cmat Revin;mr Dahri: Nnr. M, 2G°I
Grenldc acal<: I" =300'
3dn G don wA 900
I.ad Sarvev pPoC: gM1eell af:
NAVASSA
9ML ACRES(TOTAL)
'J Bmna,.ICh Gn.vry
mel;ne
ea.. rvr tsaot to
EY
SJDate.f� y: JULY 2010
area•
'le 11
,Dr�pN�
.11
' P✓N°
N0 NF /1 7NRD 115 \1��
APP �� 1ff.
111
/%/ NF
��
Boav IoBJ PncE eee
q5
rvvvwvwrn ]'rcclinc \
\ \\
B - J',yL
P.I. P, c ' lra b NP
LP.s. hn PP Sa Connate Area
O ropm3C a •_...�...�
POB. P OfB
P.O.C. P OfC I ✓
Rrw Bpfl
6Gp'� X19 WFIt�-
r5�5/ c
u B"/ vf0• W£7LAND AREA C b'
0.713 ACRES
GI tHRU D23
4
If
/
`E X
/ (� /
/ /
NOW OR FlwnrFRCY
E55£A4 NOPaFR r
K 819 PACE 831 V
/
�
AfAP CAaIHFT V PACE 13 U
TLAMI AREA 7Y'
RDft' ACRES D D12
_ JC'EA'GKI
/ /
WF 0.9 N 0341
°I w n fir.
' �-...
h
Np /
A'OW CR fOAkERLY
NEH HOl1/BAY
'W
4
.P \
—I PACE
CABINET
? i4E7U/J0 AREA r 7x' TO4
•W"PAOE 248
Boav IoBJ PncE eee
q5
rvvvwvwrn ]'rcclinc \
\ \\
B - J',yL
P.I. P, c ' lra b NP
LP.s. hn PP Sa Connate Area
O ropm3C a •_...�...�
POB. P OfB
P.O.C. P OfC I ✓
Rrw Bpfl
6Gp'� X19 WFIt�-
r5�5/ c
u B"/ vf0• W£7LAND AREA C b'
0.713 ACRES
GI tHRU D23
4
If
2 ® �l
P0F' �ooe 1 / wig(. 7W1fEII. BRANCYf
Bel'° N F5 ,�l NOW OR atuERtY
•WF A]O, LINCOLN OEYEL pPMpJT 6
PACF IY
IK A N)> l '9R
- BIXW
/� F R
Nosth Carotlu
/ / \�h \ \ *' •/ V "�ARO�•o, Ncwt3mo_ cub"
�,I
Mlchnel N Undmvood, ccn ry
6 \ }= SEAL my mpernsian 9vm m auvs de J Y
.1,J, g L2962p pf dvsmpnon as shoxnon tM fe 6;' pls fp
a 5 \ \\ \ \WV WE 7LAND AREA "A' nOp,� �? :.nlalnrea by Computer is !!10000 b d.la
L��` Yna ho
by b A f pl d5 Info
N \ /a �' WP A7 IHRIJ A 109 d N, LNC nI I .m frna vd h E ar . N h I
w\ C rfi Md ds [p f. I I y 6' N hC I
sh� rh ry' £ g 1 Imd'.nad a - Yardlnaf gm I'ram.In obel lfseal.6's ILday of
scree mchsna g he .. V berAU 201C
•¢ - -.-
\\ BWNDARY CURVE TABLE SR No. IA3D Mlfiecl N.L dc,oaa.P[,.9. L1. ' D, N4' Fm)N tbdL vddJ�r -..
G'VRIF DIRE077ON CHORD . ARC RADIVS LL RDA�••�� FIw� Seel mcStmp
POgU
®2010 Troche lu dmrooa eld Aroc'nax.PA
TLAMI AREA 7Y'
RDft' ACRES D D12
WF 0.9 N 0341
°I w n fir.
' �-...
•Iyw
...
/
/'
w = z9.e1'
4174.18'
W
RE NB4lJ'4I'W � �JI1.1Y'(�TAU
? i4E7U/J0 AREA r 7x' TO4
VF Fie _400�
614
2 ® �l
P0F' �ooe 1 / wig(. 7W1fEII. BRANCYf
Bel'° N F5 ,�l NOW OR atuERtY
•WF A]O, LINCOLN OEYEL pPMpJT 6
PACF IY
IK A N)> l '9R
- BIXW
/� F R
Nosth Carotlu
/ / \�h \ \ *' •/ V "�ARO�•o, Ncwt3mo_ cub"
�,I
Mlchnel N Undmvood, ccn ry
6 \ }= SEAL my mpernsian 9vm m auvs de J Y
.1,J, g L2962p pf dvsmpnon as shoxnon tM fe 6;' pls fp
a 5 \ \\ \ \WV WE 7LAND AREA "A' nOp,� �? :.nlalnrea by Computer is !!10000 b d.la
L��` Yna ho
by b A f pl d5 Info
N \ /a �' WP A7 IHRIJ A 109 d N, LNC nI I .m frna vd h E ar . N h I
w\ C rfi Md ds [p f. I I y 6' N hC I
sh� rh ry' £ g 1 Imd'.nad a - Yardlnaf gm I'ram.In obel lfseal.6's ILday of
scree mchsna g he .. V berAU 201C
•¢ - -.-
\\ BWNDARY CURVE TABLE SR No. IA3D Mlfiecl N.L dc,oaa.P[,.9. L1. ' D, N4' Fm)N tbdL vddJ�r -..
G'VRIF DIRE077ON CHORD . ARC RADIVS LL RDA�••�� FIw� Seel mcStmp
POgU
®2010 Troche lu dmrooa eld Aroc'nax.PA

NAVASSA
900± ACRES(TOTAL.)

- q �.'. r•
e -
`d
1
i
,'Y
>M
T °:
g -
fj x
l¢93
k.�K4,
f1 6� � �.
f�t R _ .1.
v+�
`+3a
rtti k .
d �
f
- ;: ir" -
m IN
3 tw 7s� Ate{ f�a # ##
'DITCH 'J' LItt4 3I i '
r % at
1 -33a# a4t1�Z4 1104- ki9` W i f'4ft isC.$`
9`5'E"' 41 {I4 74
r i e Im tfx Ltb t{ a {ate w k a3 #i(Tii# "w-
53, �t at ±ti {_at trt
{it'S3'25° ` } iT El 8 9'9Y' W_ {e 51 Lk {t ..t is .fi ' "1dIT01 'A' i :30' WIDE
z�
OLD MIC {t LiR N QI J37 -tit. 19' .04' j� �
`� { 79 4a ii7 ��, 44 r' 1 k� r �3 �_sa nrtc{t 'a °�'trr
} D clt c c"4 WlM
BITCH •6' 2.0' WuT
BITCH 'fit'
I? I CH `F'
RAT OF SIMVE Y FOR
WVI.TE SPRUNG 5, LLB,
9Ft4r'I4tt`t THE LM -4TK% 48 TE ICKS 19-4
Pt3FERTY HEAR 7W. tt IERSES:UM CTT
R%. {i4T' MI'D {1C. a3T
S1411VIt LE TIT04.54irA -1.11SVIIX emit' #T7
fi mut COO.
Sod. €. i` 9 330' Ai3 UST t6th, mg
.f€ hEM 99077s F`1 o'v famr, DL' - {02
6' 'Vo "i
DRA4' 8Y1 aRyA { f sl'u4i;LR E3lIi >'99
2 4f" Cttl.`APIS
I V
t{C. IIiGI WAl 1:33
fy� MICH 9
/!�D
f1F t Ptdf.
PP44P£R { Y �j n
m rcpt 'N'
It! {t t' 111,
i {tb 4b fst'e4 w 13345
i YIT �S �3964c �1�5 3_ -_
1.110 ]1'25 W 2' I IS 3 aal'
1 d Ifilli Ill
E xfIIhk> t 11 it
CM RA I_RUAD SPUR
CPRi mi�dER i ifIr
3U0' i Go l EI{
4 s
;ye te�J N/E SLt
Ddidt 'E' --
tit #rPl R
t l
7{ �3 k4 fS E
112313
12
�T7_27 al 5r F
?'3c5'
I PI
- 2.5' Wilit
111111)1 llt iHi� inIIH 713t I l i \\ tl Ili it 1('1 I I'4I� }'' \ \'1
pm,II HeN Iltl \I.I\; t it, I II I ISI 11111 \l14\I 11 kill
Ii4 {t: {i K'
43.65 --
1
1{ 3T L7f ti E
ldl �0
1 b
II 4Q 56 t-0 E
!(19.74'
Iii
_
N�6 i33a E
X9.9 ��_
I0
04 0 5 E
e64.hT'.
di7TESi'
�
McHE p SURVEYING
L CP&L POWERLIM R/W AND RAILRDAD R/W L3ACATI194S
taPi�.Pt 'c'
SHOWN HERE1314 ARE APPPC"XIMATE•
116
_F1
P. O. PCIX 433 - 105 S. E:, 46th STREET
L11
it 15 29 c0 F
r9 r'
7'f LI 910 °273 -1974
fl
309.14'
-_iG2,so
ai 53'ss'a9� [-
L!G_
I!
I.!7
_-
42YI2'04' E
6537' J.
I? I CH `F'
RAT OF SIMVE Y FOR
WVI.TE SPRUNG 5, LLB,
9Ft4r'I4tt`t THE LM -4TK% 48 TE ICKS 19-4
Pt3FERTY HEAR 7W. tt IERSES:UM CTT
R%. {i4T' MI'D {1C. a3T
S1411VIt LE TIT04.54irA -1.11SVIIX emit' #T7
fi mut COO.
Sod. €. i` 9 330' Ai3 UST t6th, mg
.f€ hEM 99077s F`1 o'v famr, DL' - {02
6' 'Vo "i
DRA4' 8Y1 aRyA { f sl'u4i;LR E3lIi >'99
2 4f" Cttl.`APIS
I V
t{C. IIiGI WAl 1:33
fy� MICH 9
/!�D
f1F t Ptdf.
PP44P£R { Y �j n
m rcpt 'N'
It! {t t' 111,
i {tb 4b fst'e4 w 13345
i YIT �S �3964c �1�5 3_ -_
1.110 ]1'25 W 2' I IS 3 aal'
1 d Ifilli Ill
E xfIIhk> t 11 it
CM RA I_RUAD SPUR
CPRi mi�dER i ifIr
3U0' i Go l EI{
4 s
;ye te�J N/E SLt
Ddidt 'E' --
43iPti `Ti'
L19
IT44 ?E E
a-P
I
11I1c4{ 'D`
3.0' W;ff
I PI
- 2.5' Wilit
111111)1 llt iHi� inIIH 713t I l i \\ tl Ili it 1('1 I I'4I� }'' \ \'1
pm,II HeN Iltl \I.I\; t it, I II I ISI 11111 \l14\I 11 kill
Ii4 {t: {i K'
ca trbif
L�3,...
1{ 3T L7f ti E
ldl �0
V:) I I %Ff sOff "I 4 it.Ii1 1N \ i iii, "} i (li i 6)pf'ti .N i2 Y,416Pf }14:\ it 111
1HlrJi 'f i'
?01 +IK
4_E�s
f! 4f'66'44 E.
ir3dl'� �
P 7 `. Ifit
1001
Pol WME
di7TESi'
�
McHE p SURVEYING
L CP&L POWERLIM R/W AND RAILRDAD R/W L3ACATI194S
SHOWN HERE1314 ARE APPPC"XIMATE•
PRaFESSIOIYAL LAND SURVEYOR
2. ALL DUCH BOTTOMS SI-UW14 KREON ARE 404 WETLAR" AREAS,
I? I CH `F'
RAT OF SIMVE Y FOR
WVI.TE SPRUNG 5, LLB,
9Ft4r'I4tt`t THE LM -4TK% 48 TE ICKS 19-4
Pt3FERTY HEAR 7W. tt IERSES:UM CTT
R%. {i4T' MI'D {1C. a3T
S1411VIt LE TIT04.54irA -1.11SVIIX emit' #T7
fi mut COO.
Sod. €. i` 9 330' Ai3 UST t6th, mg
.f€ hEM 99077s F`1 o'v famr, DL' - {02
6' 'Vo "i
DRA4' 8Y1 aRyA { f sl'u4i;LR E3lIi >'99
2 4f" Cttl.`APIS
I V
t{C. IIiGI WAl 1:33
fy� MICH 9
/!�D
f1F t Ptdf.
PP44P£R { Y �j n
m rcpt 'N'
It! {t t' 111,
i {tb 4b fst'e4 w 13345
i YIT �S �3964c �1�5 3_ -_
1.110 ]1'25 W 2' I IS 3 aal'
1 d Ifilli Ill
E xfIIhk> t 11 it
CM RA I_RUAD SPUR
CPRi mi�dER i ifIr
3U0' i Go l EI{
4 s
;ye te�J N/E SLt
Ddidt 'E' --
2.0 W lE
fit BCII
.0' W77?£
Df if {i °fig
- 2.0' Wiiw
11I1c4{ 'D`
3.0' W;ff
D77Ci4 •i°
- 2.5' Wilit
111111)1 llt iHi� inIIH 713t I l i \\ tl Ili it 1('1 I I'4I� }'' \ \'1
pm,II HeN Iltl \I.I\; t it, I II I ISI 11111 \l14\I 11 kill
Ii4 {t: {i K'
ca trbif
P3ii[_'3i 8'
- 0 �nIl3E
\
V:) I I %Ff sOff "I 4 it.Ii1 1N \ i iii, "} i (li i 6)pf'ti .N i2 Y,416Pf }14:\ it 111
1HlrJi 'f i'
?01 +IK
DlTrll 'i I'
P.01 BIDE*
Iilif"H
P 7 `. Ifit
1001
Pol WME
I4 E Sdr',m
PRfif'ERIY LNZ
/'j n A r/
DI101
11I1c4{ 'D`
^�
If II \1911 {91 lid 1}1\1 IItPS i't �! 1i} I iI
1! 119 111 1'14 1, Ila NIi} ♦ wi% In 7117 it fi t\I9 {I
111111)1 llt iHi� inIIH 713t I l i \\ tl Ili it 1('1 I I'4I� }'' \ \'1
pm,II HeN Iltl \I.I\; t it, I II I ISI 11111 \l14\I 11 kill
-
{�
II 1011 lIi
1
111 7171 iifib 111.11. I \! I tiff Iiii Hl Id t l 11411;1 iV }fit
! itl ttfl
�,/�
.itlIII
ID'J
liI dt l l li11'.13k iI 1411�I i 4til}1i. 011l"<ta4 I! k?fl� d}!( >S tt i! 418:
it 11- 11\ 1IIN II't' laill, 0I 111151 INS, I Ilml i III }311I.1,°.11}liI { s
\
V:) I I %Ff sOff "I 4 it.Ii1 1N \ i iii, "} i (li i 6)pf'ti .N i2 Y,416Pf }14:\ it 111
II} 11 { 1411 I t k!i NI D11 5.
\ii:\1 {III i w ti71 {i PINii'1i 1911 \f: }1t l,Hti t)ffka' it INfI is �If
_/ SUM PUMT
-
ES {f RANi:E MAD
t 4! "}17117Ci: ik111. 131 III f t \1: ti 1t 31': �� �" GJ
11141: 91 Ig719i3:�UJ!
di7TESi'
�
McHE p SURVEYING
L CP&L POWERLIM R/W AND RAILRDAD R/W L3ACATI194S
SHOWN HERE1314 ARE APPPC"XIMATE•
PRaFESSIOIYAL LAND SURVEYOR
2. ALL DUCH BOTTOMS SI-UW14 KREON ARE 404 WETLAR" AREAS,
P. O. PCIX 433 - 105 S. E:, 46th STREET
ACCURDTt4Ci TO US ARMY CUWS C1r E146 NEERS. -
LIN45 BEACH, N, C, 28465
7'f LI 910 °273 -1974
FAX, 9113-c70-3799
/'j n A r/

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, White Springs Tract:
01 -09 -117
Protection
EO ID
Common Name
Recorded Notes
Status
Date Last
Accuracy
Scientific Name
Observed
Rating
NC US
Plants: Blue
18859
Savanna Milkweed
30 -40 STEMS OVER 1/4 ACRE, VEGETATIVE AND FLOWERING ON
SR -P
N/A
1994 -06 -21
Medium
Asclepias pedicellata
21 JUNE 1994 (LEBLOND 1994).
Estimated 100 -500 plants observed by Shew in the summer of 2002
1807
Venus Flytrap
(Shew 2002). 500 ROSETTES OVER 1 ACRE, FRUITING AND
SR -L, SC
FSC
2002 -Sum
Medium
Dionaea muscipula
VEGETATIVE, MANY BLACKENED (INCLUDING LEAVES) ON 21 JUNE
1994 LEBLOND 1994).
APPARENTLY EXTIRPATED; UNSUCCESSFUL SEARCH ON 22 JUNE
1036
Savanna Indigo -bush
1993; VICINITY MUCH ALTERED BY DEVELOPMENT, AGRICULTURE,
T
FSC
1957 -06 -12
Low
Amorpha confusa
INTENSIVE SILVICULTURE (WEAKLEY & MURDOCK 1993);
"INFREQUENT.- WILBUR 1957).
14413
Loose Water- milfoil
Myriophyllum laxum
SIZEABLE POPULATION IN POND.
T
FSC
1980
Low
15636
Savanna Nutrush
Scleria verticillata
NO INFORMATION.
SR -P
N/A
1933 -10 -08
Very Low
Venus Flytrap
About 10 stems observed in approximately 1 acre on 26 September
24541
Dionaea muscipula
2005 by O'Loughlin, Smith, Thomas, Davis, and Scherrer
SR -L, SC
FSC
2005 -09 -26
High
(O'Loughlin 2005).
2422
Threadleaf Sundew
NOT FOUND ON 26 APRIL 1994, POSSIBLY EXTIRPATED (LEBLOND
SR -P
N/A
1975 -06
Very Low
Drosera filiformis
1994).
Venus Flytrap
No plants found by Shew during an inventory of this species in the
10181
Dionaea muscipula
summer of 2002; site overgrown but will be developed soon (Shew
SR -L, SC
FSC
1981
Low
2002). PRESENT (SUTTER & MAY 1981). Present (1947).
POND 1 =46 PLANTS (15 MALE, 30 FEMALE, 1 VEGETATIVE) OVER
ABOUT 150X100 FEET AROUND WEST BASIN AND ON PENINSULA
12626
Pondspice
BETWEEN THE WEST AND EAST POND BASINS; POND 2 =2 PLANTS
SR -T
FSC
1993 -04 -02
Medium
Litsea aestivalis
(1 MALE, 1 FEMALE) OVER ABOUT 30X20 FEET OF SMALL
PALUSTRINE BASIN ZONE, FLOWERING (98 %) & VEGETATIVE (2 %)
ON 2 APRIL 1993 LEBLOND 1993).
1998: Specimen collected, 12 August 1998 (Wilbur, Horn & Williams
629
Brown Bogbutton
1998). 1993: 4500 clumps: subpopulation A (pond 11, centroid)
SR -P
N/A
1998 -08 -12
Medium
Lachnocaulon minus
2000, subpopulation B (pond 10) 2000, subpopulation C (pond 1)
500, 25 September 1993 (LeBlond 1993).
5255
Shrubby Seedbox
2 PLANTS OVER 1X1 -FOOT AREA, FRUITING ON 25 SEPTEMBER
SR -P
N/A
1993 -09 -25
Medium
Ludwigia suffruticosa
1993 (LEBLOND 1993).

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, White Springs Tract:
01 -09 -117
Species present in margin of high quality Small Depression pond
23493
Horned Bladderwort
( #5) (LeBlond 1997). 50 individual plants in pond #9, and 50 (20%
SR -P
N/A
1997 -06 -10
High
Utricularia cornuta
flowering and 80% senescent) individual plants in pond #11
LeBlond 1992).
PONDS 5 & 8= IMMATURE PLANTS IN PATCHES, 10 JUNE 1997
(LEBLOND 1997). POND 9 =PATCH DOMINANT OVER 15X5 FEET;
17216
Coastal Beaksedge
POND 10= DOMINANT OVER 180X30 FEET; POND 11 =PATCH
T
FSC
1997 -06 -10
Medium
Rhynchospora pleiantha
DOMINANT OVER 250X10 FEET; POND 12 =PATCH DOMINANT OVER
30X10 FEET; POND 14= DOMINANT OVER 20X10 FEET; PLANTS
FRUITING ON 25 SEPTEMBER 1993 (LEBLOND 1993).
7243
Savanna Indigo -bush
Amorpha confusa
"SEVERAL INDIVIDUALS" (BARICK & DUMOND 1992).
T
FSC
1992 -09
Medium
Spoonflower
"FIVE OR MORE INDIVIDUALS... WERE SEEN ... ALONG PORTIONS OF
6661
Peltandra sagittifolia
WHITE SPRINGS CREEK THAT WERE BEING FILLED" (BARICK &
SR -P
N/A
1992 -09
Medium
DUMOND 1992).
Animals: Red
19832
Red - cockaded
Woodpecker
TWO CAVITY TREES, ONE CAVITY IN EACH TREE, AND SEVERAL
E
E
1977
Low
Picoides borealis
START HOLES. NO BIRDS REPORTED SEEN.
12822
Glossy Crayfish Snake
Regina rigida
SPECIMEN, NCSM 1747, AUGUST 1963.
SR
N/A
1963 -08
Low
12429
Black Swamp Snake
Seminatrix pygaea
SPECIMEN -- NCSM 33350, COLLECTED IN AUGUST 1968.
SR
N/A
1968 -08
Low
14420
Mimic Glass Lizard
Ophisaurus mimicus
SPECIMEN NCSM 2616, FEMALE; JUNE 1964.
SC
FSC
1964 -06
Low
American Alligator
4 -FOOT LONG JUVENILE /YOUNG ADULT IN SMALL POOL (60X30
20032
Alligator mississippiensis
FEET) IN POWERLINE CORRIDOR; HIDE RIDGING WELL- DEVELOPED
T
T(S /A)
1994 -07 -14
Low
LEBLOND 1994. REPORTED LIVING IN THE CREEK (1978).
ONE COLLECTED NEAR LIMESINK POND BY MEMBERS OF NCSU
HERPETOLOGY FIELD TRIP, APPARENTLY IN MARCH 1978.
SPECIMENS NCSM 18985, 31462. ALVIN BRASWELL HAS FOUND
11096
Carolina Gopher Frog
THE SPECIES PRESENT AS RECENTLY AS APRIL 25, 1991. "THE
T
FSC
1991 -04 -25
Medium
Rana capito
ORIGINAL POND A FROG WAS COLLECTED IN WAS NOT
IDENTIFIED, ONLY AN AREA SPECIFIED. GOPHER FROG TADPOLES
WERE FOUND IN A SINKHOLE POND NEAR THE ORIGINAL
COLLECTION SITE" BRASWELL 1993).

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, White Springs Tract:
01 -09 -117
Natural Communities: Orange
Mucky mineral soils in a low ridge- and -swale system and shallow
Carolina bays, in a mosaic with Wet Pine Flatwoods, Pine Savanna,
High Pocosin, and sandhills. Open canopy of Pinus serotina.
Gordonia lasianthus is present in the canopy in some areas.
Magnolia virginiana and Persea palustris occur in the understory.
12390
Pond pine woodland
Dense shrub layer dominated by Lyonia lucida and Ilex glabra, with
N/A
N/A
2006 -04 -25
Medium
Cyrilla racemiflora, Clethra alnifolia, Ilex coriacea, Vaccinium
corymbosum, and Smilax laurifolia common. All of the area appears
intact in 1998 and 2005 aerial photos. The community center block
was surveyed in 2006, other portions were visited in 2002, and
previous extensive survey was done in 1987.
Fairly deep peat deposits in a complex of Carolina bays. The pines
are somewhat patchy but sparse overall. Plot 1 -1201 had 14 trees
in a 10x10 meter area. Plot 1 -1200 had only 8. The shrub layer is
very dense, 6 -8 feet tall. Lyonia lucida is strongly dominant. There
is a little Ilex coriacea and a few Ilex glabra, Cyrilla racemiflora, and
Persea palustris. Dead twigs are extremely abundant, and some of
the major branches had died. The shrubs were tall and spindly, and
clearly grew up as an even -aged stand after an intense fire. It is
10208
High pocosin
likely that most or all of the pines date from the same fire. The
N/A
N/A
2008 -05 -30
High
ground is hummocky, with thick litter (Schafale 2008). Earlier
general surveys found similarly sparse Pinus serotina with a few
Gordonia lasianthus and Magnolia virginiana. Ilex glabra, Cyrilla
racemiflora, and Zenobia pulverulenta are more abundant
elsewhere, though Lyonia lucida still dominates. Woodwardia
virginica and Smilax laurifolia are abundant. Some of the bay
interiors appear on aerial photos to be Low Pocosin, but this has not
been verified.
APPEARS INTACT ON 1998 DOQQ. FAIRLY EXTENSIVE OCCURRENCE
IN GOOD CONDITION. CANOPY GENERALLY UNEVEN -AGED,
DOMINATED BY MIDDLE -AGED TREES BUT WITH SCATTERED OLD
6726
Coastal fringe sandhill
TREES AND PATCHES OF REGENERATION. GRADES TO SOMEWHAT
N/A
N/A
1998
Low
POORER WET PINE FLATWOODS AND COASTAL FRINGE EVERGREEN
FOREST. CONTAINS NUMEROUS LIMESINKS WITH SMALL
DEPRESSION POND COMMUNITIES.
KEYS
Federal: US Fish and Wildlife Service

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, White Springs Tract:
01 -09 -117
Federally listed Endangered and Threatened species are protected under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended.
Status
Definition
Endangered
A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened
A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range."
T(S /A)
Threatened due to similarity of appearance - a species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance
with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
Candidate
"Taxa for which the [Fish and Wildlife] Service has on file enough substantial information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened. Proposed rules
have not yet been issued because this action is precluded at present by other listing activity.
Development and publication of proposed rules on these taxa are anticipated. The Service encourages
State and other Federal agencies as well as other affected parties to give consideration to these taxa in
environmental planning." Taxa formerly considered and 'Category 1' are now considered as 'Candidate'.
Federal Species
Of Concern
"....the Service is discontinuing the designation of Category 2 species as candidates in this notice. The
Service remains concerned about these species but further biological research and field study are needed
to resolve the conservation status of these taxa. Many species of concern will be found not to warrant
listing, either because they are not threatened or endangered or because they do not qualify as species
under the definition in the [Endangered Species] Act. Others may be found to be in greater danger of
extinction than some present candidate taxa. The Service is working with the States and other private
and public interests to assess their need for protection under the Act. Such species are the pool from
which future candidates for listing will be drawn."
Proposed
"Taxa already proposed to be listed as "endangered or threatened. Taxa formally proposed as
endangered or threatened receive some legal protection. Species listed as proposed candidates are
species which are in the process of being added to the federal candidate list.
State: NC Plant Conservation Program
Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern species have legally protected status in North Carolina through NC PCP.

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, White Springs Tract:
01 -09 -117
Status Definition
Endangered "Any species or higher taxon of plant whose continued existence as a viable component of the State's flora
is determined to be in jeopardy" (GS 19B 106:202.12).
Threatened "Any resident species of plant which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (GS 19B 106:202.12).
Special Concern "Any species of plant in NC which requires monitoring but which may be collected and sold under
regulations adopted under the provisions of the Plant Protection and Conservation Act ". (GS 19B
106:202.12).
Candidate Species which are very rare in NC, generally with 1 -20 populations in the state, generally substantially
reduced in numbers by habitat destruction (and sometimes also by direct exploitation or disease).
Significantly Rare Species which are very rare in NC, generally within 1 -20 populations in the state, generally substantially
reduced in numbers by habitat destruction (and sometimes also by direct exploitation or disease). These
species are generally more common somewhere else in their ranges occurring in NC peripherally to their
main ranges, mostly in habitats which are unusual in NC. Also included are some species with 20 -100
populations in NC, if they also have only 50 -100 populations rangewide and are declining.
Watch List Any other species believed to be rare and of conservation concern in the state but not warranting active
monitoring at this time.
Proposed A species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered, Threatened, or Special
Concern, but has not yet completed the legally mandated listing process.
State: NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Status Definition
Endangered "Any native or once - native species of wild animal whose continued existence as a viable component of the
State's fauna is determined by the Wildlife Resources Commission to be in jeopardy or any species of wild
animal determined to be an 'endangered species' pursuant to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of
Chapter 113 of the General Statutes: 1987).
Threatened "Any native or once - native species of wild animal which is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, White Springs Tract:
01 -09 -117
threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General
Statutes: 1987).
Special Concern "Any species of wild animal native or once - native to North Carolina which is determined by the Wildlife
Resources Commission to require monitoring but which may be taken under regulations adopted under the
provisions of this Article." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes: 1987).
Proposed Species has been proposed by a Scientific Council as a status (E, T, SC, Watch List, or for Delisting) that is
different from the current status, but the status has not yet been adopted by the WRC and by the General
Assembly as law.
Significantly Rare Any species which has not been listed by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission as an Endangered,
Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in small numbers and has been
determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program to need monitoring. Significantly Rare species include
"peripheral" species, whereby NC lies at the periphery of the species' range (such as Hermit Thrush). The
designation also includes marine and estuarine fishes identified as "Vulnerable" by the NC State museum of
Biological Sciences.
Extirpated A species which is no longer believed to occur in the state.
Watch List Any other species believed to be of conservation concern in the state because of scarcity, declining
populations, threats to populations, or inadequacy of information to assess its rarity.

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, Sneeden Tract: 01 -09 -117
Common Name
Protection
Date Last
Accuracy
EO ID
Scientific Name
Recorded Notes
Status
Observed
Rating
NC US
Plants: Blue
62 stems counted, fewer than 50% flowering on 20 June
21842
Savanna Milkweed
(Wichmann, Beauregard, and NC DOT staff 2005). 5 flowering
SR -P
N/A
2005 -06 -20
Very High
Asclepias pedicellata
and 3 vegetative stems seen on 7 June (Franklin, LeBlond,
Wichmann and Progress Energy Staff 2005).
Two subpopulations: Subpopulation A: 25 -30 plants seen
flowering on 07 June 2005 by M. Franklin, R. LeBlond, B.
Wichmann, and Progress Energy Staff (NHP 2005). About 30
robust fruiting plants seen 10 June 2004 by Richard LeBlond
(NHP 2004). 25 flowering plants seen 30 May 2002 (LeBlond
Florida Scrub Frostweed
2003). Subpopulation B: approximately 7 individuals found
13436
Crocanthemum nashii
along railroad right of way, 3 of those within GPS footprint, and
E
N/A
2005 -06 -20
Very High
approximately 3 individuals found outside of right -of -way and
perhaps outside footprint, seen by B. Wichmann, Beauregard,
and NCDOT staff on 20 June 2005 (Wichmann 2005). 9 plants
counted (most in bud) on 07 June 2005 by M. Franklin, R.
LeBlond, B. Wichmann, and Progress Energy Staff (NHP 2005).
About 10 plants fruiting 12 September 2002 (LeBlond 2003).
Fruits ripe and falling from plants, leaves also beginning to fall
on 5 October 2005, observed by Franklin, Wichmann, Mason,
Randall, & Frazer (Franklin 2005). Boundaries of the population
were recorded with a GPS by NC Dept of Transportation staff
and Wichmann on 20 June 2005; individuals not counted,
seemingly thousands of plants, most with several flowers, very
few beginning to set seed (Wichmann 2005). Hundreds of plants
Pickering's Dawnflower
seen, with only a few just beginning to flower on 07 June
2521
Stylisma pickeringii var.
(Franklin, LeBlond, Wichmann, and Progress Energy Staff
E
FSC
2005 -10 -05
High
pickeringii
2005). 100 -S OF PLANTS, SOME WITH ERECT BRANCHES AND
RESEMBLING EUTHAMIA, FRUITING 12 SEPTEMBER 2002
(LEBLOND 2002). HUNDREDS OF PLANTS SEEN SCATTERED
OVER 20 ACRES, IN BUD AND FLOWER ON 19 JUNE (RUSH &
JACKSON 2002). ABOUT 1000 PLANTS, SENESCING on 12
OCTOBER, NUMEROUS SEEDS APPARENT ON SAND, IN
NATURAL WHITE -SAND SANDHILL SITE (WEAKLEY ET AL.
1993).
Spoonflower
Fruiting plants observed 25 October 2006 in several places on
24757
Peltandra sagittifolia
hummocks in wetland (numerous individuals) (Bowling pers.
SR -P
N/A
2006 -10 -25
Medium
comm. to Franklin 2006).

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, Sneeden Tract: 01 -09 -117
19822
Sandhills Milk -vetch
Astragalus michauxii
IN FLOWER ON 18 MAY 1946 (BELL 1946).
T
FSC
1946 -05 -18
Low
Animals: Red
464
American Alligator Alligator
NO INFORMATION.
T
T(S /A)
1978 -06
Low
mississippiensis
5838
Coachwhip
Masticophis flagellum
SPECIMEN -- NCSM 7256, SEPT. 1968.
SR
N/A
1968 -09
Very Low
3506
Chicken Turtle Deirochelys
SPECIMEN, NCSM 5435, COLLECTED JULY 1967.
SR
N/A
1967 -07
Low
reticularia
Northern Pine Snake
19176
Pituophis melanoleucus
REPORTED FROM THIS SITE IN BRIMLEY (1927)
SC
FSC
1927 -PRE
Very Low
melanoleucus
1912
Ornate Chorus Frog
SPECIMENS -- NCSM 4291 -96, FEB. 1966.
SR
N/A
1966 -02
Very Low
Pseudacris ornata
17189
Carolina Gopher Frog Rana
SPECIMEN, NCSM 4309; FEB. 1966.
T
FSC
1966 -02
Very Low
capito
Length of occupied habitat: 100+ km Number of survey sites:
12176
Shortnose Sturgeon
14 Number of sampling events: 16 Range of CPUE: Multiple size
E
E
1993
Medium
Acipenser brevirostrum
classes: Impoundments: Lock and Dam 1 Predominant adjacent
land use: natural silviculture agriculture, urban
American Alligator Alligator
GILBERT GRANT NOTED INDIVIDUALS IN THE BRUNSWICK
16832
RIVER AND A NEW HANOVER COUNTY CREEK ON JULY 1, 2002.
T
T(S /A)
2002 -07 -01
Medium
mississippiensis
REPORTED LIVING IN RIVER.
KEITH FARMER FOUND 1) ONE DOR ADULT (PRESUMABLY ON
US 421) ABOUT 3.9 MILES NNW WILMINGTON ON MAY 12,
2001; 2) FOUND ANOTHER DOR LESS THAN 500 METERS FROM
Southern Hognose Snake
#1 ON MAY 14, 2001; 3) FOUND AN ADULT UNDER DEBRIS,
13589
Heterodon simus
AND RELEASED, ON MAY 21, 2002 NEAR CEMETERY; 4) FOUND
SC
FSC
2002 -09 -29
Low
A LIVE ADULT MALE FORAGING ON THE SURFACE ON MAY 25,
2002 NEAR THE CEMETERY; AND 5) EXCAVATED AN ADULT
AND RELEASED IT FROM A BURROW NEAR THE CEMETERY ON
SEPT. 29 2002.
STEVE HALL AND OTHER NC NATURAL HERITAGE PROGRAM
Eastern Fox Squirrel
BIOLOGISTS OBSERVED NUMEROUS TRACKS, AS WELL AS
3407
Sciurus niger
MANY LONGLEAF PINE CONES GNAWED BY SQUIRRELS, ON 12
SR
N/A
1993 -10 -12
Medium
OCTOBER 1993. NO SQUIRRELS SEEN, BUT EVIDENCE OF
S UIRRELS IS VERY RECENT.
17196
Chicken Turtle Deirochelys
ALICIA JACKSON AND TRACY RUSH FOUND A SHELL IN
SR
N/A
2002 -06 -19
Medium
reticularia
UPLANDS NEAR BORROW POND, ON JUNE 19, 2002.

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, Sneeden Tract: 01 -09 -117
Coachwhip
KEITH FARMER CAPTURED ONE, AND PHOTOGRAPHED IT,
6998
Masticophis flagellum
FROM UNDER DEBRIS ON JUNE 9, 2002. OVERALL LENGTH
SR
N/A
2002 -06 -09
Low
1908 MM.
13292
Greenfield Rams -horn
THIS IS THE ONLY KNOWN OCCURRENCE FOR THIS ANIMAL,
E
FSC
1908
Very Low
Helisoma eucosmium
TAKEN FROM A 1908 ACCOUNT BY BARTSCH.
Natural Communities: Orange
TIDAL FLATS, REGULARLY FLOODED BY FRESHWATER LUNAR
TIDES. PATCH VEGETATION. LARGE AREAS ARE DOMINATED BY
TYPHA ANGUSTIFOLIA AND SCIRPUS VALIDUS. OTHER AREAS
12990
Tidal freshwater marsh
ARE DOMINATED BY TYPHA LATIFOLIA, BY SPARTINA
N/A
N/A
2002 -06 -13
High
CYNOSUROIDES, OR BY A COMBINATION OF SPECIES SUCH AS
POLYGONUM ARIFOLIUM, SIUM SUAVE, SAGITTARIA FALCATA,
AND PONTEDERIA CORDATA. PATCHES OF ZIZANIA AQUATICA
OCCUR NEAR CHANNELS.
CANOPY TREES AVERAGE 8 -10" DBH. MANY OF THE TREES ARE
OPEN - GROWN, AND IT IS LIKELY THAT THE SPARSE CANOPY IS
19258
Xeric sandhill scrub
THE NATURAL STRUCTURE. NO FIRE HAS OCCURRED IN MANY
N/A
N/A
1993 -10 -12
Low
YEARS. THE COMMUNITY HAS STAYED OPEN BECAUSE OF
DRYNESS. A LARGE POPULATION OF FOX SQUIRRELS IS
PRESENT.
CANOPY TREES AVERAGE 8 -10" DBH. MANY OF THE TREES ARE
OPEN - GROWN, AND IT IS LIKELY THAT THE SPARSE CANOPY IS
15952
Coastal fringe sandhill
THE NATURAL STRUCTURE. NO FIRE HAS OCCURRED IN MANY
N/A
N/A
1993 -10 -12
Low
YEARS. THE COMMUNITY HAS STAYED OPEN BECAUSE OF
DRYNESS. A LARGE POPULATION OF FOX SQUIRRELS IS
PRESENT.
APPARENTLY TYPICAL EXAMPLE, RATHER IMMATURE.
SCATTERED SMALL PINUS PALUSTRIS, FAIRLY DENSE
6582
Xeric sandhill scrub
QUERCUS LAEVIS. ARISTIDA FAIRLY SPARSE IN MOST AREAS
N/A
N/A
1985 -03
Low
DUE TO HEAVY LITTER AND OAK DENSITY. SOME OPUNTIA,
YUCCA EPIGAEA REPENS SELAGINELLA ARENI.
In xeric low profile sandhill habitat with an open to patchy
canopy of Pinus palustris over a moderately dense to moderate
understory dominated by Quercus laevis with Q. geminata and
4755
Xeric sandhill scrub
Q. hemisphaerica. Schizachyrium scoparium, Cladina lochen,
N/A
N/A
2002 -09 -12
Medium
and Rhynchospora megalocarpa are prominent in the open to
sparse ground layer. Occurs in a matrix with the Sand Barren
community.

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, Sneeden Tract: 01 -09 -117
KEYS
Federal: US Fish and Wildlife Service
Federally listed Endangered and Threatened species are protected under the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended.
Status
Definition
Endangered
A taxon "in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range."
Threatened
A taxon "likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion
of its range."
T(S /A)
Threatened due to similarity of appearance - a species that is threatened due to similarity of appearance
with other rare species and is listed for its protection.
Candidate
"Taxa for which the [Fish and Wildlife] Service has on file enough substantial information on biological
vulnerability and threat(s) to support proposals to list them as endangered or threatened. Proposed rules
have not yet been issued because this action is precluded at present by other listing activity.
Development and publication of proposed rules on these taxa are anticipated. The Service encourages
State and other Federal agencies as well as other affected parties to give consideration to these taxa in
environmental planning." Taxa formerly considered and 'Category 1' are now considered as 'Candidate'.
Federal Species
Of Concern
"....the Service is discontinuing the designation of Category 2 species as candidates in this notice. The
Service remains concerned about these species but further biological research and field study are needed
to resolve the conservation status of these taxa. Many species of concern will be found not to warrant
listing, either because they are not threatened or endangered or because they do not qualify as species
under the definition in the [Endangered Species] Act. Others may be found to be in greater danger of
extinction than some present candidate taxa. The Service is working with the States and other private
and public interests to assess their need for protection under the Act. Such species are the pool from
which future candidates for listing will be drawn."
Proposed
"Taxa already proposed to be listed as "endangered or threatened. Taxa formally proposed as
endangered or threatened receive some legal protection. Species listed as proposed candidates are
species which are in the process of being added to the federal candidate list.
State: NC Plant Conservation Program

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, Sneeden Tract: 01 -09 -117
Endangered, Threatened, and Special Concern species have legally protected status in North Carolina through NC PCP.
Status
Definition
Endangered
"Any species or higher taxon of plant whose continued existence as a viable component of the State's flora
is determined to be in jeopardy" (GS 19B 106:202.12).
Threatened
"Any resident species of plant which is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable
future throughout all or a significant portion of its range" (GS 19B 106:202.12).
Special Concern
"Any species of plant in NC which requires monitoring but which may be collected and sold under
regulations adopted under the provisions of the Plant Protection and Conservation Act ". (GS 19B
106:202.12).
Candidate
Species which are very rare in NC, generally with 1 -20 populations in the state, generally substantially
reduced in numbers by habitat destruction (and sometimes also by direct exploitation or disease).
Significantly Rare
Species which are very rare in NC, generally within 1 -20 populations in the state, generally substantially
reduced in numbers by habitat destruction (and sometimes also by direct exploitation or disease). These
species are generally more common somewhere else in their ranges occurring in NC peripherally to their
main ranges, mostly in habitats which are unusual in NC. Also included are some species with 20 -100
populations in NC, if they also have only 50 -100 populations rangewide and are declining.
Watch List Any other species believed to be rare and of conservation concern in the state but not warranting active
monitoring at this time.
Proposed A species which has been formally proposed for listing as Endangered, Threatened, or Special
Concern, but has not yet completed the legally mandated listing process.
State: NC Wildlife Resources Commission
Status Definition
Endangered "Any native or once - native species of wild animal whose continued existence as a viable component of the
State's fauna is determined by the Wildlife Resources Commission to be in jeopardy or any species of wild
animal determined to be an 'endangered species' pursuant to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of
Chapter 113 of the General Statutes: 1987).

Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank, Sneeden Tract: 01 -09 -117
Threatened "Any native or once - native species of wild animal which is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range, or one that is designated as a
threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General
Statutes: 1987).
Special Concern "Any species of wild animal native or once - native to North Carolina which is determined by the Wildlife
Resources Commission to require monitoring but which may be taken under regulations adopted under the
provisions of this Article." (Article 25 of Chapter 113 of the General Statutes: 1987).
Proposed Species has been proposed by a Scientific Council as a status (E, T, SC, Watch List, or for Delisting) that is
different from the current status, but the status has not yet been adopted by the WRC and by the General
Assembly as law.
Significantly Rare Any species which has not been listed by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission as an Endangered,
Threatened, or Special Concern species, but which exists in the state in small numbers and has been
determined by the NC Natural Heritage Program to need monitoring. Significantly Rare species include
"peripheral" species, whereby NC lies at the periphery of the species' range (such as Hermit Thrush). The
designation also includes marine and estuarine fishes identified as "Vulnerable" by the NC State museum of
Biological Sciences.
Extirpated A species which is no longer believed to occur in the state.
Watch List Any other species believed to be of conservation concern in the state because of scarcity, declining
populations, threats to populations, or inadequacy of information to assess its rarity.

*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 2004 NAPP Aerial Photography
Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank LMG
Sneeden Tract mAmAuEKtuft v_
Brunswick County, NC ! i "r- — `"'° " "
°"'''°"" Aerial Photography w/
01 -09 -117 1 www.LMGroup.net Threatened & Endangered
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone] Species Overlay
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402 SCALE 1" = 1200'

*Boundaries are approximate and arE
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 2004 NAPP Aerial Photo
Lower Cape Fear Mitigation Bank
White Springs Tract
Brunswick County, NC
01 -09 -117
2008
LMG
LAND MANAGEMEHY GX0UP
t- °voonmrRfnf COP nifrpmi%
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
4
SCALE 1" = 1000'
Aerial Photography w/
Threatened & Endangered
Species Overlay

North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources
State Historic Preservation Office
Peter B. Sandbeck, Administrator
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Linda A. Carlisle, Secretary
Jeffrey J. Crow, Deputy Secretary
September 1, 2010
Ashley Futral
Land Management Group, Inc.
PO Box 2522
Wilmington, NC 28402
Re: White Springs and Sneeden Tracts, Brunswick County, ER 10 -1493
Dear Ms. Futral:
Office of Archives and History
Division of Historical Resources
David Brook, Director
Thank you for your email of August 9, 2010, requesting historic information on two tracts of land in Brunswick
County.
Our files indicate that Reeves African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Zion Church (BW 257) is located on the
northwestern edge of the " Sneeden" tract (see enclosed map). This church has been determined eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic Places.
Due to this property's eligibility, we need more information about the project which you are planning. Please
provide the following:
♦ Specific details about the plans for this property.
♦ Any site and architectural drawings for the tract.
There are no known archaeological sites within the proposed project area. Based on our knowledge of the
area, it is unlikely that any archaeological resources that may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places will be affected by the project. We, therefore, recommend that no archaeological investigation
be conducted in connection with this project.
The above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the
above comments are made pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation's Regulations for Compliance with Section 106 codified at 36 CFR Part 800.
Thank you for your cooperation and consideration. If you have questions concerning the above comment,
please contact Renee Gledhill- Earley, environmental review coordinator, at 919 -807 -6579. In all future
communication concerning this project, please cite the above - referenced tracking number.
Sincerely,
60�'Veter Sandbeck
Enclosure
Location 109 East Jones Street, Raleigh NC 27601 Mailing Address: 4617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh NC 27699 -4617 Telephone /Fax: (919) 807 - 6570/807 -6599

1a y
Fi! V i t W, ke
SUTTON
g 1 1
Ing
r
_ _
y((
T 1 viii
« c� tii
Hill*
f Cedar
com
�
j 1� t ;
LAVE
s ,
% _" � °�'— .CAPE - --.._
1 •:C,T 47 _
LIM
wA
tt t_ _
_
am
•
f (( 5.4, L Mr Gtvarg
r'y • } Tt I Davle Clap! C; - Legend
:J
_ Pax Navassa
?aaa' a Proposed Bank Site
N Fiure 4.
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella Mitigation Bank USGS Topographic Map
(Sneeden Tract) (Leland /Castle Hayne Quad)
0 2,000 4,000 Brunswick County LMG
Feet Lns,i.WNAr.v s uer, nnn '

,
iG
w, 4
J f4• • �!
Y
� j'affY l '1t L• t ~ I�.� +V,y' -4,' �3113�,,y�� '.
ig s +v
0
� '/' •� i 7 n ff pat _ _ Y�-:,
� ! 7
•4
t f
r1 �4'_�.3f•� tick:, �3', �a ~,,`1h
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1938 NAPP Aerial Photography
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
September 2009
r L M C>
�www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
N
SCALE 1" = 1600' I
Sneeden Tract
1938 NAPP Aerial Photo

_4 .. i
I � I
I4
W.
!i ..`r =mil, -T e��•� r. ' ' i r , ,
— oz:
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1949 NAPP Aerial Photography
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella r LM C�
Mitigation Bank Sneeden Tract
1949 NAPP Aerial Photo
Brunswick County, NC �www.LMGroup.net
September 2009 Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

'-r 1�
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1956 NAPP Aerial Photography
'r
,.i
i
7-7
SCALE 1" = 1600'
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella r LM G
Mitigation Bank Sneeden Tract
Brunswick County, NC �www.LMGroup.net 1956 NAPP Aerial Photo
September 2009 Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1966 NAPP Aerial Photography
SCALE 1" = 1600'
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella LMG
Mitigation Bank I Sneeden Tract
Brunswick County, NC www.LMGroup.net 1966 NAPP Aerial Photo
September 2009 Phone: [phone].LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

�j�� -rte- `M _ � L � ,n"'t�f►I4`f c..�.
e� r, �• _
sk r
-
•
V V4
��
��F" E, '..r. ,r I � is -. .., _ f +, `' �• ?� %i.t!.
rvr f?,;_i .. !`. _•f .Gi�1 �' - `i4�'h ' �l+r �w�v�e ' .r
Jill
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1972 NAPP Aerial Photography
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
September 2009
r LMG
�www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
SCALE 1" = 1600'
Sneeden Tract
1972 NAPP Aerial Photo

*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1981 NAPP Aerial Photography
Flo*i
SCALE 1" = 1600'
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella r LM G
Mitigation Bank Sneeden Tract
Brunswick County, NC �www.LMGroup.net 1981 NAPP Aerial Photo
September 2009 Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

rk 4
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1938 NAPP Aerial Photography
f, ,�} �y _
6d 0
Ir
L•
4IJ
IL
941 �_ • ; -
'r V1.1 •'ti
+ 1 f ` • * • IL
4
SCALE 1" = 500'
r�
w
• � 5
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella r LM G
Mitigation Bank White Springs Tract
Brunswick County, NC �www.LMGroup.net 1938 NAPP Aerial Photo
September 2009 Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

r vt
�•
- *•�
#•
I "
Rp Wit.
'fin �j j * � • . � � F� �' i �'• .
i37, ■ � a r7Ry • _ M � S
i ■ • * , ��
L yr
L
PA IL
-e-
dP
f', ■ dD
F 414
P. . • # *' i
■ t , r • . �L'} r + �} # } Lys * �■
rl
�. • 3 ■ 4
zJ, '� r ,
1
d6i rti sLy �ji T• # * �,,•'■ ■•ii
4L FILA � )+ + _ W '•�� � r 7+;�R - fix- '���•'��. - ■��, �I - _ � {.
P. " ' • r +
.� + =Jd.'� .mow• _ x
4 yI +
a
1 r
�� ' � {��yL t� •If 'yam
hi a
yr r y
�* ' ?'� •y �' � is � fit. 'i ■ � Y '".r
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1949 NAPP Aerial Photography
+ Alh ■ #.
ILL 4
a
i+ *'
{li* Y • v Y r
yF +■jam,+ k, M
''q + _
dj � �.,'
- . -• -.'yam i k r _ �*j r
1p
AIN
�a { •+
a '.s
2' #
i • f _ ■
y' —+•{ -
a" .* • P.
IL
_. r_ _ �• r w F , r
4
SCALE 1" = 500'
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella r LM G
Mitigation Bank White Springs Tract
Brunswick County, NC �www.LMGroup.net 1949 NAPP Aerial Photo
September 2009 Phone: [phone] +1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

.Y
• _ t r
r
T
w '
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1956 NAPP Aerial Photography
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
September 2009
i� -tiJ-
LMG
LAND MANAk:EASCNII,I•-
www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
F
SCALE 1" = 500'
White Springs Tract I
1956 NAPP Aerial Photo

.16
1 M-
Noma"-
,CNr
Nil VAN"". i0o
-
L ir =
L 'PV'rr--K—
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1966 NAPP Aerial Photography SCALE 1" = 500'
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella LMG
Mitigation Bank I I White Springs Tract
Brunswick County, NC www.LMGroup.net 1966 NAPP Aerial Photo
September 2009 Phone: [phone].LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
P W 147
I -h d'L
ww!P
7"
AZAA

1ti.•.� "
L■
� 7
� 4
T{.
r �
•r � � � r
4
dF
1 +
var
r -
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1972 NAPP Aerial Photography
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
September 2009
w
t
r LMG
�www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
t
+ r
Y J,
4- 0-W J.
4 �
r
�bh 6,
=i
, b
11 IMJJIF 'rY
t'
r
4
SCALE 1" = 500'
White Springs Tract
1972 NAPP Aerial Photo

}
F f
e i y
y -
* YL ti -
1 11 Y z
Ly �i
Y �
4M �
7
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 1981 NAPP Aerial Photography
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella
Mitigation Bank
Brunswick County, NC
September 2009
7PPP
r LMG
�www.LMGroup.net
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
li
4
SCALE 1" = 500'
White Springs Tract
1981 NAPP Aerial Photo

CTI
03
CTI
O
O
a
L
0
0
0
E
/
EL
E
O
�U
U O
L�
0
00
/U
0�
L_
EL
E
D0
000
�L�
�0L
O
Ln LL
N.C.
BO
Lu
/ �-'j �\ / °sue`'
4EK
/ �j �� �� \� II ��\ 1 �� >,% 1
I � � I �i ( /�I✓ —�j�/ �� \ �� \\ � \ / /)� \ \ \� � )�11 /I 1-
//
� \ /Il I \ 1 ` / y
� ( /�I�I l
-- r � r�✓> /��%
/ / �1r UPLAND
(; / /
LOW LAN D,� ) / / // / �� J 7 � _ � it ( m
MARSMWAM-P CJ /( ' IL AD \ \ J i� — �� J( I i �I �II �- I , , ✓ ,
QZ
V).
\3
�
%�\��
1
jl / ��/ r \ S r
?0 ) 1 � �� „ LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE p
w W
,. / ��
, /may/ I l l / l \ \ � \ \\ � \�tZ
UPLAND �� r / /� Ir�l� I I11�1��(���I( // / � IIII��
/ /
� �� ( � //% ��� -,.� \� �\ =, �� /i �, \ I % � ,L u�io° ,,•% --. � /// � 1111 � � � /����ll�)l / � �� � %J / / S-\/
WCKPILE CNG &
—� Q �
Ill I\ \� f •. / . ��) // I i IIIII �� % -�� \�� _) �,, O u ,� // / LIMITS OF J /
DISTURBANCE ���
/ /
/ j // / i _)�lr I l�� \ \� <
�� I 1 1111 �� \ \� \ \` 11 LOW LAND < / �/
�/ % y /�ll I /�� \� `Lb \ LAN D� �`��� \ I �c - \ / ,, \ �� / c_i-- I ► I ��
UPLAND ll / llIJIII %/ \� MAR AMP ~�) )) )Ni l 11`�� MARS H�SWAMP � r l 11( l %
�•; I I / �� I //) \ Ste, //
/��,/ { \ \1 ► /��I I �II =_ �— ` \ l/ / � \ l / l - X11 /��
) I)J
II \ll�
�� III 1� ►► ,� l I
QV I/
�/ �,�
A 7;b
� \ \\ooi /III
x
(� =_ --- i o i \ �� `► \'II (� III \� \ll�1ll �,�� QP� r ( / / I I )/ L��
���
1 ► /
ti � �� I I II / t TEMPORAR� 1 �\ I I I �/ /j / - - - - -- ��1 /� / // // / / / /// / ✓ �� —\\ 1 �'\
l CONSTRICTION
ENTRANCE / � J C � ✓� //� /� `_" � / /�/ / /// j / � \�
Soya / �� 5�<<��� \ \� ��� I / —J l j)�
IIII \1
zz
\ I� I \ _ SR 143 / �/ / , ` = / /
, 1-1111 RD f / / / % / / /�; \ J) �i 1 // / / �1��11/
CEDAR /�/
�� / ,� / �/ \ \� \�� / / / T �
. / J J \ J _� \� \((/ r r I CEDAR HILL J , I I IIII \l S� J i
�i 11 / �( \�\1\,L
GRAPHIC SCALES INDEX OF SHEETS LEGEND PARCEL BOUNDARY ______________ _______________________________ PREPARED IN THE OFFICE OF:
TITLE SHEET .......................... ..............................I GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLANS PROP LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION ----------------------------- Florence of Hutcheson
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE F� STREAM OR BODY OF WATER ---------------------------------
................................................................................................ ...............................
DETAILS .................................... ..............................2 LOWER CAPE FEAR UMBRELLA CONSULTING ENGINEERS
300 0 300 600 GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PIPE CULVERT_____________________ ____________________ ___________
5121 KINGDOM WAY, SUITE 100
PLAN SHEET ......................... ..............................3 MITIGATION BANK - SNEEDEN TRACT PROPERTY LINE
------------------------------------------- - - - - -- RALEIGH, N.C. 27607
EXISTING EASEMENT LINE ______ ___________ __________________ __ E (919) 851 -6066
TITLE SHEET DISTURBED AREA
EXISTING WETLANDS LINE------------------------------- - - - - -- -WLB - -- License No: F -0258
= 5.32 AC.
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE--------------------------------- - - - - -- -X-
50 0 50 100 LOCATION: BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA TEMPORARY SILT FENCE---------------------------------- - - - - -- �r
TEMPORARY DIVERSION DITCH ------------------------- - - - - -- �D_fTD_ CHRISTOPHER OENGINEER
SMITH
INCOMPLETE ][CLANS LAP 34017-7.31" LONG: 78'00'54.34" W. EVAN CO RBI N
PLANS TYPE OF WORK: GRADING & EROSION CONTROL TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ PROJECT DESIGNER
]ED]E�IEIL�Ni[�NA][$� ]�1L�1�TS
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION R. KEVIN WILLIAMS
TEMPORARY ROCK SILT
CHECK - TYPE A------------------------------------------ - - - - -- PROJECT MANAGER

C
O
cOi
O
O
O
O
L
C
O
O
O
C
Lo
c0
C
O
EL
C
O
O
L
co
L
O
O
L
o-
i
O
o�
C\j�
L
r0 �'
c0 °
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
The Contractor is responsible for the following sequence
of construction in accordance with the construction plans
and the Special Provisions.
I. Initial Site Preparation
1. Stake and mark sensitive areas with boundary marking material
to the limits as indicated on the construction plans.
2. Install construction entrances.
3. Prepare staging and stockpiling areas in areas located on the
construction plans.
4. Stake limits of construction as shown on the construction
plans.
5. Install sediment and erosion control devices.
6. Install and maintain an onsite rain gauge and log book to
record rainfall amounts and dates.
II. Earthen Dam and Pine Culvert Removal
1. Remove and dispose existing pipe culvert. Construct the stream
channel banks to the proposed grade specified in the construction
plans.
2. Remove existing earthen dam. Stockpile all soil in the area
indicated on the construction plans.
3. Seed (with appropriate seed mix) and straw mulch all disturbed
areas at the end of each work day.
III. Repair all disturbed areas.
IV. Remove sediment and erosion control devices, any temporary fencing,
staking, sensitive area marking material, trash, etc. from the site.
V. Seed and mulch staging, stockpiling, and any bare areas with
temporary and permanent seed mixture.
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS
1. CONSTRUCT SEDIMENT FENCE ON LOW SIDE
OF TOPSOIL STOCKPILE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT
FROM BEING WASHED INTO THE DRAINAGE
SYSTEM. FENCE TO EXTEND AROUND
APPROXIMATELY 70% OF THE PERIMETER OF THE
STOCKPILE.
2. LOCATE POSTS DOWNSLOPE OF FABRIC TO HELP
SUPPORT FENCING.
3. BURY TOE OF FENCE APPROXIMATELY B" DEEP
TO PREVENT UNDERCUTTING.
4. WHEN JOINTS ARE NECESSARY, SECURELY FASTEN
THE FABRIC AT A SUPPORT POST WITH OVERLAP TO
THE NEXT POST.
5. FILTER FABRIC TO BE ON NYLON, PLOYESTER,
PROPYLENE OR ETHYLENE YARN WITH EXTRA
STRENGTH -50LB/ LIN. IN. (MINIMUM) AND WITH
A FLOW RATE OF AT LEAST 0.3 GAL. /FT / MINUTE.
FABRIC SHOULD CONTAIN ULTRAVIOLET RAY
INHIBITORS AND STABLIZERS.
6. IF USING WOOD, POST IS TO BE 4" DIAMETER PINE
WITH A MINIMUM LENGTH OF 4'.
STEEL POSTS
TEMPORARY SEEDING
SCHEDULE
March 1 - October 31
DATE TYPE PLANTING RATE
Common
Unit
(LBS /ACRE)
% of
lbs per
JAN 1 - MAY 1 RYE GRAIN 120
V
Name
ANNUAL KOBE LESPEDEZA 50
Total
GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE 2,000
Z
Caret
10 -10 -10 FERTILIZER 750
S
Herb
STRAW MULCH 4,000
35
11
MAY 1 - AUG 15 GERMAN MILLET 40
sedge
�C
V
GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE 2,000
3
10 -10 -10 FERTILIZER 750
Andropoggon
Big
STRAW MULCH 4,000
Herb
15
AUG 15 - DEC 30 RYE GRAIN 120
11
gerardii
GROUND AGRICULTURAL LIMESTONE 2,000
10 -10 -10 FERTILIZER 1,000
STRAW MULCH 4,000
Vuuggmmia
S
STANDARD TEMPORARY SILT FENCE
(WIRE MESH OPTIONAL)
SCALE: N.T.S.
NOTE:
BOTTOM OF FILTER MUST BE PLACED
IN TRENCH AND SECURED BY BACK -
FILLING WITH SOIL MATERIAL AND
TAMPING TO A HEIGHT OF A HEIGHT
OF 6" ABOVE GROUND LEVEL.
ULTRAVIOLET RESISTANT
HEIGHT: BLACK) MIRIFI FILTER FABRIC
3, MAX R EQUAL
2' MIN. BOTTOM OF WIRE FENCE AND
FILTER
EXCAVATION FABRIC 8" IN
STEP 1:
DRIVE STEEL POSTS 18IN. INTO
GROUND AND EXCAVATE A 6IN.x BIN.
TRENCH UPHILL ALONG THE LINE
OF POSTS. WOOD POSTS 4IN.
IN DIAMETER MAY BE USED.
MAX. 8'
BETWEEN
POSTS
STEP 3:
ATTACH THE FILTER FABRIC TO
THE POST (WIRE MESH OPTION)
AND EXTEND THE BOTTOM OF THE
FABRIC BIN. INTO THE TRENCH.
STEEL POST DRIVEN
18" INTO GROUND
PERMANENT SEEDING SCHEDULE
Permanent Seeding Acres 2
March 1 - October 31
Species
Common
Unit
Stratum
% of
lbs per
Total lbs
V
Name
Type
Total
Acre
Z
Caret
Fox
S
Herb
15
35
11
vulpinoiden
sedge
�C
V
0
3
Andropoggon
Big
S
Herb
15
35
11
gerardii
bluestem
Elymus
Vuuggmmia
S
Herb
15
35
11
virgatum
wildrye
Panicum
Switchgrass
S
Herb
15
35
11
virgatum
Juncus
Soft
S
Herb
20
35
14
effusus
rush
Dichanthelium
Deetrongue
S
Herb
20
35
14
clandestinum
Total
100
72
November 1- February 28
Species
Common
Unit
Stratum
% of
lbs per
Total lbs
Name
Type
Total
Acre
Elymus
Virginia
virgatum
wildrye
S
Herb
10
35
7
clandestine m
clandestinum
Deetrongue
S
Herb
10
35
7
Carex
Fox
vulpinoidea
sedge
S
Herb
5
35
4
Agrostis
Ticklegrass
S
Herb
15
35
11
hyemalis
Agrostis
Autumn
S
Herb
10
35
7
perennans
Bentgrass
Juncus
effusus
Soft
rush
S
Herb
15
35
11
Tripsacum
Eastern
S
Herb
15
35
11
dactyloides
Gamma Grass
Eragrostis
Weeping
S
Herb
10
35
7
curvula
Lovegrass
Panicum amarum
Atlantic Coastal
j S
Herb
10
35
7
var. amarulum
Panicgrass
Total
100
72
TEMPORARY GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SCALE:NTS
NOTES:
1. TURNING RADIUS SUFFICIENT TO ACCOMMODATE LARGE
TRUCKS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
2.ENTRANCE(S) SHOULD BE LOCATED TO PROVIDE FOR UTILIZATION
BY ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES.
3.MUST BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT
TRACKING OR DIRECT FLOW OF MUD ONTO STREETS.
PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH STONE WILL BE NECESSARY.
4.ANY MATERIAL TRACKED ONTO THE ROADWAY MUST BE
CLEANED UP IMMEDIATELY.
5.GRAVEL CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE SHALL BE LOCATED AT
ALL POINTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS UNTIL SITE IS STABILIZED.
FREQUENT CHECKS OF THE DEVICE AND TIMELY MAINTENANCE
MUST BE PROVIDED.
6.FILTER FABRIC TO BE PLACED BENEATH STONE.
SECTION CLASS "A" STONE
8 IN. MIN. DEPTH
\
N.
STEP2: (OPTIONAL WIRE MESH)
ATTACH WIRE FENCE TO POSTS
AND EXTEND THE BOTTOM OF
THE FENCE BIN. INTO THE
EXCAVATED TRENCH.
STEP 4:
BACKFILL THE TRENCH AND COMPACT THE
SOIL FIRMLY TO ANCHOR THE BOTTOM OF
THE SILT FENCE SO THAT RUNOFF IS FORCED
TO GO THROUGH THE FENCE AND CANNOT
GO UNDER IT.
NOTES:
1.) CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE GROUND COVER ON EXPOSED
SLOPES AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.
2.) CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT DISTURB ANY MORE AREA THAN
WHAT CAN BE STABILIZED (MATTING OR SEED AND STRAW)
AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY.
3.) CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A RAIN GUAGE AND LOG BOOK
AT THE PROJECT SITE AND SHALL READ AND RECORD RAIN
AMOUNTS AT THE SAME TIME EACH DAY.
TEMPORARY ROCK SILT CHECK, TYPE A
SCALE: NTS
NOTE:
STRUCTURAL STONE SHALL BE STONE FOR
EROSION CONTROL (CLASS IN.BIN.) AND SHALL BE
PAID FOR AT THE CONTRACT UNIT PRICE PER
TON IN.STONE FOR EROSION (CLASS IN.BIN.),IN.
SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE SHALL BE NO. 5
OR NO. 57 STONE AND SHALL BE PAID
FOR AT THE CONTRACT UNIT PRICE PER
TON IN.SEDIMENT CONTROL STONE.IN.
22' MIN
0 12IN.
*T H
2°0
X90
oOO oOO oOo
SECTION B -B
*T = 12IN. MIN., 18IN. MAX.
L
SEDIMENT
FLOW CONTROL
STONE
I
w
o cp
-41
L =3xH
moo° �o
p o00 p o0
BF
PLAN VIEW
SECTION A -A
A
NOTES
COMPACTED SOIL
INCLEMENT WEATHER PREPARATION:
1.) PROJECT PERSONNEL WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING
WEATHER PATTERNS THAT MAY AFFECT THE SITE OR ITS WATERSHED.
2.) THE CREW WILL STOP CURRENT WORK TO ENSURE THE SITE IS
PREPARED FOR INCLEMENT WEATHER. SITE PREPARATION
INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
a.) ENSURE ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES ARE IN
PLACE AND MEET ADEQUATE STANDARDS PRIOR TO WEATHER
IMPACTS.
b.) IDENTIFY VULNERABLE WORK IN PROGRESS AND DETERMINE
HOW TO BEST PROTECT IT FROM DAMAGE.
c.) ENSURE ENOUGH MATERIALS ARE IN PLACE TO STABILIZE
THE SITE (eg. COIR MATTING, STONE, MULCH, SILT FENCE,
ETC.)
d.) ENSURE THAT ALL TOOLS, SHEDS, PROJECT MATERIALS (STRAW,
LOGS, COIR MATTING) AND SMALL EQUIPMENT THAT CAN BE
DAMAGED BY RISING WATER ARE REMOVED FROM EXCAVATIONS
AND LOW AREAS PRONE TO FLOODING.
e.) ENSURE THAT ALL LOOSE MATERIALS ARE NEATLY STACKED
AND BANDED.
f.) ENSURE DEWATERING OF SITE IS FEASIBLE (DIVERSION CHANNELS,
MORE PUMPS, ETC). STANDBY AND DIESEL POWERED EQUIPMENT
IS READY TO OPERATE. OPERATE THIS EQUIPMENT AS CONDITIONS
WARRANT.
g.) REMOVE ANY TEMPORARY DIKES AND SHUT DOWN PUMPS IF
THEY ARE INADEQUATE TO DEWATER THE SITE.
h.) EQUIPMENT IS TO BE RELOCATED TO A SAFE LOCATION.
i.) ENSURE THAT THE PROJECT SITE IS OUTFITTED WITH
A PORTABLE, BATTERY OPERATED WEATHER BAND RADIO
AND EXTRA BATTERIES.
TEMPORARY DIVERISON
SCALE: NTS
2' MINIMUM
6' TYPICAL
CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW
INCOMPLETE PLANS
]P1LR E]LIMINAIRY PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
2:1 OR FLATTER
r 'I SIDE SLOPES
FLOW
MINIMUM
FILTER FABRIC
O
O
,0v�
�/� P�o
Yl W w
u (��Ne-0
Z b
W �Ue w
� z :34^ 00 �t
d
47 a W o, •::
u �D q1-4`.N
(U
� O x
0 U
�I N
ti
W
J
Q
V
V)
O
O
z
DATE: 05 -10 -11
CONSTRUCTION
SEQUENCE
& DETAILS
SHEET
2
OF
Z
J
0
W
V
�zV
F-
O
�m�
F-
Z
LU
LL 0Z
LU
LU
C Q LU
Q t_' LU
V ~Z
O
W
2
V
LU
3
�C
V
0
3
z
m
W
J
Q
V
V)
O
O
z
DATE: 05 -10 -11
CONSTRUCTION
SEQUENCE
& DETAILS
SHEET
2
OF

EXISTING GROUND LINE
/
c
0
cn
Q
0
o
L
L
0
0
0
C
0
o
EL
L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
L
E
oro
C\\] a)
ro �'
EXISTING 8' CMP
3.1
EL 6'
i
4' BASE
@ EL = -4'
SECTION A —A
EL=I'
GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN
- — — — — — — NOTE: ELEVATIONS ON THESE PLANS ARE REFERENCE
— — TO THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD 88).
LOW LAND
PROPOSED GROUND LINE MARSWSWAMP
UPLAND
TEMPORARY SILT FENCE/
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE TEMPORARY
DIVERSION / / / / I TIE IN GRADED \SLOPE
TEMPORARY DITCH /� TO EXISTINg GROUND
ROCK SILT CHECK (TYPE A)
LIMITS OF CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
------------
\ ---- - - - - -- -SOIL ROAD - - - - --
SOIL
ROAD A
(n
TA
\
/
/
W
Lu
c -
C/0
� 1
TEMPORARY
ROCK SILT
CHECK (TYPE Ay
UPLAND
l � I
I TEMPORARY
\ \ SILT FENCE
\ Est. —_ - --
\\
I
TEMPORARY !LIMITS OF CO ISTRUCTION�
- - -_ CHECK A
REMOVE $� DISPOSE— 0)1 )
/_OF EXITING 8'CMP
MILL
CH
RAN
1 _10
LIMITS OF DISTURBAkd:�\
STAGING &
STOCKPILE
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE
/
i
1 i �
/
/0/
Sp_ RpAD —
/ ' I
' 1
\
1
INCOMPLETE PLANS
PRELIMINARY PLANS
DO NOT USE FOR CONSTRUCTION
LEGEND
5
=E=
PROPOSED
CONTOURS
EXISTING
CONTOURS
EXISTING
WETLANDS
LIMITS OF
CONSTRUCTION
LIMITS OF
DISTURBANCE
TEMPORARY
SILT FENCE
STD —fTD— TEMPORARY
DIVERSION
DITCH
RD EN TER
NCE
TEMPORARY ROCK
SILT CHECK 'TYPE A'
FOR DETAILS SEE SHEET 2
FOR GRADING & EROSION CONTROL PLAN SEE SHEET 3
O
O
t fl W w
��ztio
W ,:IiUe w
xc� 3z� o
_ m
O 2 X
47a Wa•�
U �D A.4
(u
� O x
0 U
�I N
ti
Lu
J
Q
V
t/1
U
2
a
C7
C•�
Z
CL
DA d & 05 -10 -11
PROPOSED
GRADING &
EROSION
- ONTROL PLAN
SHEET
3
®1F
Q
Z
J
0
Q
J
L
V
�ZV
O
�
Z
Lu
LL QZ
SQL Lu
Q W
V ~Z
O
c�N
V
W
3
V
0
3
m
Lu
J
Q
V
t/1
U
2
a
C7
C•�
Z
CL
DA d & 05 -10 -11
PROPOSED
GRADING &
EROSION
- ONTROL PLAN
SHEET
3
®1F

Multiple files are bound together in this PDF Package.
Adobe recommends using Adobe Reader or Adobe Acrobat version 8 or later to work with
documents contained within a PDF Package. By updating to the latest version, you'll enjoy
the following benefits:
• Efficient, integrated PDF viewing
• Easy printing
• Quick searches
Don't have the latest version of Adobe Reader?
Click here to download the latest version of Adobe Reader
If you already have Adobe Reader 8,
click a file in this PDF Package to view it.

LOWER CAPE FEAR UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANK
WHITE SPRINGS TRACT
BRUNSWICK COUNTY, NC
DRAINMOD ASSESSMENT
I. Introduction
On behalf of the bank sponsor, Tri -Coast Properties, LLC, Land Management Group, Inc.
(LMG) has prepared the following DrainMod assessment for the Lower Cape Fear
Umbrella Mitigation. The White Springs Tract property is located immediately northeast
of the intersection of NC Hwy 87 and 130 Highway (Brunswick County), NC. The site is
bounded to the east by Sunny Point Terminal. The site has been historically managed
for silvicultural production since the early 1970's. Intensive site management practices
(including the ditching and conversion to loblolly pine plantation) has resulted in the
loss and /or degradation of wetland functions on the site.
Site - specific soils information, current drainage conditions, and geomorphological data
were used to perform DrainMod computer modeling. DrainMod is a field -scale
hydrologic model originally developed for the design of subsurface drainage systems.
Its application is now widely used for the purposes of evaluating lateral drainage effects
of existing ditches and modeling for wetland restoration purposes. The model
incorporates long -term climatological data in conjunction with site - specific model
inputs. For the White Springs Tract site, the model has been run utilizing field- measured
conductivity rates for various soil series identified by licensed soil scientists of LMG. In
order to determine the drainage response relative to existing ditch size, multiple
DrainMod analyses were conducted utilizing various input parameters. These models
incorporated typical channel geometry observed for the large collector canals and
smaller, lateral ditches. DrainMod utilizes Reference Wetland Simulation (RWS) in
which typical reference soil and drainage inputs are used to determine minimum
hydrology requirements satisfying 404 wetland jurisdictional criteria. Separate runs are
then analyzed to determine current drainage alterations.
The results of these evaluations were used to identify the lateral drainage effects of
ditches occurring within the White Springs Tract property.
II. Site Conditions
The White Springs Tract site (approximately 84 acres) consists predominantly of former
headwater wetland flats that drain to the Cape Fear River. These non - riparian wetlands
have been historically ditched as part of a prescribed silvicultural management plan
implemented by International Paper Company during the 1970s. The network of
1

drainage ditches serve to lower groundwater tables and intercept surface water — thus
compromising the ecological functions (i.e. nutrient /sediment retention, flood
attenuation, etc.) characteristic of headwater wetlands. The major outlet diverts flow to
the southeast into the Cape Fear River.
The site consists predominantly of drained hydric soils characteristic of broad
interstream flats of the outer Coastal Plain. Representative mapped soil units include
Murville fine sand, Leon sand, and Foreston fine sand. These series are poorly drained
to very poorly drained soils characteristic of non - riparian wetlands. Areas of unmapped,
very poorly drained organic soils occur within wetlands onsite. These soils most closely
resemble the Croatan soil series. Approximately 6,000 linear feet of open ditching
currently exists throughout the site. Areas located within deeper depressions within the
landscape still retain wetland hydrology.
III. Drainage Modeling
DrainMod software, an approved hydrologic modeling tool (USACE, 2008), was utilized
to determine the extent of drainage throughout the site. This software models the
cumulative effects of parallel drainage features using long -term climate data and user
supplied inputs. The user supplied inputs allow for site - specific drainage spacings, ditch
depths, and soil conductivity rates to be modeled over multiple decades. This long -term
approach provides information on the hydrology of the site in a variety of climatic
conditions, which can aid in the determination of the effective lateral drainage distance
of a ditch.
The calibration process consisted of adjusting soil property inputs so that model
predictions match, as closely as possible, the measured water table fluctuations in
response to measured rainfall and calculated evapotranspiration (ET). Soil properties
vary between soil series, and from point to point within a given soil series. Calibration
provides a method of determining the field effective soil property values for each
observation well. The DRAINMOD model was calibrated separately for each transect
location using a short -term record of observed weather data and water table
measurements recorded across a 4 -month period from January 1, 2010 until April 31,
2010. This period was chosen because the precipitation record began above normal,
declined through normal conditions for several weeks and then dropped below the
normal range. The full range of rainfall totals during this period is provides the
calibration procedure its greatest accuracy when fitting the model to a wide range of
soil moisture levels.
The calibration of the model utilized site - specific data for soil horizon depths and
conductivity rates. In order to obtain conservative results, lower conductivity rates
were used when ranges were provided (see below). All inputs, with the exception of the
drain spacing, remained constant throughout the calibrations and are shown in Table 1.
The growing season is considered year -round and the critical period was set at 14 days.
2

Climate data from Wilmington, N.C. were used for modeling input based upon proximity
of this weather station to the mitigation site.
Table 1. Inputs for White Springs Tract DrainMod Study
Input ft cm
Depth to Drain 0.5 15
4 122
Drain Spacing 75 2250
131 4000
Effective Radius of Drains
10
Distance to Impermeable
layer
10 300
Drainage Coefficient
5
Kirkhams Coefficient
variable
Initial Depth to Water
Table
1 30
Max. Surface Storage
1.2 3
Depth of flow to drains
1.2 3
Wilmington,
Climate Data NC
Time Period 1965 -1995
Critical Water Table Depth 30.5 cm
Critical Duration 12 days
DrainMod utilizes Reference Wetland Simulation (RWS) in which typical reference soil
and drainage inputs are used to determine minimum hydrology requirements satisfying
404 wetland jurisdictional criteria. Separate runs are then analyzed to determine
current drainage alterations. Threshold settings for each of different configurations
were based on the number of consecutive days necessary to meet the wetland
hydrology criteria. This criteria states that a site must exhibit water table depths within
12 inches of the surface for a 14 consecutive number of days of the growing season.
When these conditions are met for >50% of the years during a given study, the site is
considered to be jurisdictional wetlands.
The results from the different configurations are presented in Table 2. Based upon
these results, a 4 -ft ditch effectively lowers the water table for a total distance of 130 -ft
3

in a Murville soil. These conditions mimic the existing network of lateral drainage
ditches found throughout the existing silvicultural stands. Model results for the existing
collector canals depths show a potential lateral drainage effect of up to 130 ft.
Based on the combination of field observations, soil borings, and DrainMod results
approximately 63 acres (CP TO PROVIDE SPECIFIC ACREAGE BASED UPON JD) of the
remaining tract appear to have been effectively drained and are considered suitable for
wetland restoration (see Figure 13 of the Wetland Mitigation Plan). Note that these
investigations also provide evidence of hydrologic modifications outside of the 1400'
offsets, although these areas may still maintain water table depths sufficient to meet
the wetland hydrology criteria. As such, these areas may be considered suitable for
wetland enhancement via the removal of adjacent ditches. Please refer to the attached
model runs for more specific information regarding long -term responses to site
drainage.
Table 2. Results from White Springs Tract DrainMod Study
Number of Years
Ditch Meeting Wetland
Ditch Depth Spacing Hydrology Length of Study Percentage
0.5
75
24
30
80%
0.5
131
21
30
70%
4
75
0
30
0%
4
131
2
30
6.7%
in

•�+3 ' '� ;k' �,�,1 f+ � -�.. o- y :bra t, _� r�• s v�.M
C', J • •I 'i'"y�4t' ES 7JIi's �ry '`^ f�� + r' J F
'
I y i&
Prr
.Wiry
�y A* -
1, :•' q,, + ''�k�: s �i�,+'I j I I �•'
"T.
ov
{ �s. -mss I r• � =y
.rear -�" 1+,� r }'' + 1•�i�.- � +'�' '.} � 1. - -
'rte
tp .P�•...�t,.'ri .��r•.'+
' F
Y r h I A
ir
Ys
W.
rX
%.'44
�•IV
f a Q' i
r
'• 4 � f - 1 'L 1� ..� -P 's .
Le$.`
~I.}i - fib P I. `i .11�'� tIS� ~ •- i%
*Element locations are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 2010 NAPP Aerial Photography SCALE 1' = 300'
Jon Vincent
Sneeden Tract LMG
Lower Cape Fear Umbrella I. A NDA7ANAGEGJENTGROUP—
..v:ranlPPr RIOP i—Wr-if
Sneeden Tract
Litigation Bank �www.LMGroup.net
Brunswick County, NC Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Well Locations
November 2012 Fax: [phone]
01 -09 -117 P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► January 1, 2010 -
► January 15, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
V
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
MKILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
January 2010
-*-Well 1 - 9BECO57 -*-Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge Slide A -1
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
�D
n
0:
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► January 16, 2010 -
► January 31, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
7
�G
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
January 2010
C_
FKILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
�I
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
N(O NV NA NA "Z� NI� N` N` 25Y '15Y 22 22 2v 2v '1 '1 't 't) 2� 2A
-Well 1 - 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge Slide A -2
(D
n
M
M

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► February 1, 2010 -
► February 15, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
V
i
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
February 2010
MKILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
No No No No NO No No No No
Qr
-Well 1 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge Slide A -3
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
(D
n
R
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
�► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► February 16, 2010 -
► February 28, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
V
G
d
d
J
as
d
V
7
�G
Land Management Group, Inc.
www.lmgroup.net
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
n
WD
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
February 2010
No No No No
FKILM Raingauge 30 day total 30% —70%
illillill U11 ffi, mli i 11111 "111111111ifilifilili
xZ
xZ
ti° ti° q� tiff tiff IV IV tip` tip` It It 1` 5 11Y 2iA, 2iA, IV IV
-Well 1 - 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
—Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
WKILM Raingauge Slide A -4
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
(D
n
0:
M
M

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► March 1, 2010 -
► March 15, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
3
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
March 2010
No No No No No No No No No No No No No No �o
11' ti C5 v 1�5 v 1\ w cbr Nlz N11' N Nb
MKILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-*-Well 1 9BECO57 -*-Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface Slide A -5
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge
�D
n
0:
O
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► March 16, 2010 -
► March 31, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
3
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
FKILM Raingauge —30 day total —30% —70%
March 2010
o� o����� w�w�o�o�o� o� .� ��ti�ti�o�o�
ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti o 0 0 0
+Well 1 - 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net IMKILM Raingauge Slide A -6
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
(D
n
0:
O
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► April 1, 2010 -
► April 15, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
3
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
April 2010
No No No No No No
11P 2P C5 v 1�5P v P Q�rP cbrP oP ,�P 2P �P V 5
iKILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q�
�P �P 2P 2P C5 C5 v v �P �P v vP ,� P ,� P (P (P CP cb oP oP N� N� 2P 2P �P �P kP kP �P 5
-Well 1 - 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge Slide A -7
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
�D
n
0:
O
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► April 16, 2010 -
► April 30, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
3
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
� � � � ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti o
KILM Raingauge -30 day total —30% —70%
April 2010
Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q� Q�
V VP NA' V P lb lb �P �P oP oP �P �P 2P P PP PP k k t �P oP oP
�������� ti ti ti ti ti 'q; ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti ti o 0
-Well 1 - 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge Slide A -8
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
�D
n
0:
O
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► May 1, 2010 -
► May 15, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
MKILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
7 ;
4
May 2010
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-*-Well 1 9BECO57 -*-Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface Slide A -9
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge
(D
n
0:
O
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► May 16, 2010 -
► May 31, 2010
► One reading per half hour
10
9
8
N
N 7
5 6
c
0 5
Q 4
3
a
2
1
0
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
3
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
FKILM Raingauge —30 day total —30% —70%
May 2010
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
NV
-Well 1 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net IMKILM Raingauge Slide A -10
(D
n
0:
O
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► June 1, 2010 -
► June 15, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
3
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
June 2010
{ -------------------------- __*1 — ----------
■
MKILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
S�' S�' S�' ' X11 X11 X11 X11 ��' ��' ��' �� �� ��' ��' ��' ��' ��' ��' ��' S�' cb�
-*-Well 1 9BECO57 -*-Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge Slide A -11
�D
n
0:
O
M
M

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 1 & 2
► Ecotone - WM 40
► June 16, 2010 -
► June 30, 2010
► One reading per half hour
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
d
t
G
d
d
J
d
d
V
3
N
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
66
63
60
57
54
51
48
45
42
39
36
33
30
27
24
21
18
15
12
9
6
3
0
-3
Hydrology Assessment
June 2010
------------ ----------- - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - --
�o No �o
FKILM Raingauge -30 day total —30% —70%
Iff
I Hii 1i 1i 1,11' 11 Hili nii Kai ffliW4
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
S�' S�' S�' S�' X11 S�' S� S� S�' S�' S�' S�' S� S� S�' S�' S�' S�' S�' S�' S�' S�' S�' S�'
NV
-Well 1 - 9BECO57 -Well 2 - A28A7136
Land Management Group, Inc. —Well 1 Soil Surface Well 2 Soil Surface
www.lmgroup.net WKILM Raingauge Slide A -12
(D
n
0:
O
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
�► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 3, 4, & 5
► Ecotone - WM 40
► January 1, 2010 -
► March 31, 2010
► One reading per day
► at 7:00am
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
N
as
t
as
as
J
as
as
V
cC
i
3
ZE
Land Management Group, Inc.
www.lmgroup.net
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Hydrology Assessment
March 2010
------------------- v --------------------------- - - - - -- - - -
-- - - -7 --
------ - - - - -- i ------------'------------------------------------- - - - - --
,�o ,�o
MKILM Raingauge —30 day total —30% —70%
54
48 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
42 --------- - - - - -- - -------------------------------------
36 -- --
30 - - -- ------- - - - - --
24
18
12
6
0
-6
x "k ,�O N11:' No NIZ;
-Well 3 - EBD6BF7 -+-Well 4 - A289BBB
Well 5 - A28A7C4 —Soil Surface
I KILM Raingauge I Slide B -1
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
m
R
0:
0
M
2

Precipitation data obtained
from: Wilmington International
Airport (KILM)
(www.nc- cIimate.ncsu.edu)
30% & 70% precipitation data
obtained from WETS Station
WILMINGTON WSO AP, NC9457
1979 -2008
(ftp: / /ftp.wcc.nres.usda.gov)
Monitoring Well Record
�► LCF Umbrella Mitigation
► Brunswick County, NC
► 01 -09 -117
► Wells 3, 4, & 5
► Ecotone - WM 40
► April 1, 2010 -
► June 30, 2010
► One reading per day
► at 7:00am
N
N
c
0
.Q
d
a
N
as
t
as
as
J
as
as
V
cC
i
3
ZE
Land Management Group, Inc.
www.lmgroup.net
Hydrology Assessment
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
June 2010
o' J J o� o� o�
�P �P NN No 2�P 2�P ,� o� �,� Nod 2,� 20� o,� h5 Nod 45 ' 0v 2c;� ooh
KILM Raingauge 30 day total —30% —70%
54
48
42
36 - - - -- -----------------------------------------------------
30 - - ------------ - - - - - - -
--- - - - - --
18 ------------------------------------------------------------------
12 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
6
0
-6
No
0" P�� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ���
-*-Well 3 - EBD6BF7 -+-Well 4 - A289BBB
Well 5 - A28A7C4 —Soil Surface
KILM Raingauge Slide B -2
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
m
R
0:
0
M
2