20200010 Ver 2_ePCN Application_20210510

DWR
Division of Water Resources
Initial Review
Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
April 4, 2021 Ver 4
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
6 Yes
✓ No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
CYesr No
Change only if needed.
BIMS # Assigned* Version#*
20200010 2
Is a payment required for this project?*
✓ No payment required
✓ Fee received
6 Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office *
Asheville Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
la. Name of project:
Bishop Streambank and Shoreline Protection
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Savannah Starnes Sartin
What amout is owed?*
F $240.00
r $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Amy Annino:eads\amannino
lb. Primary Contact Email:* lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[e-mail] [phone]
Date Submitted
5/10/2021
Nearest Body of Water
Yadkin River
Basin
Yadkin-PeeDee
Water Classification
Class C, TR
Site Coordinates
Latitude: Longitude:
36.060833 -81.43527
LA. Processing Information
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Caldwell
Is this a NCDMS Project
✓ Yes G No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
✓ Yes G No
Pre -Filing Meeting Information
Is this a courtesy copy notification?*
✓ Yes f• No

ID# Version
Pre -fling Meeting or Request Date
4/1/2021
Attach documentation of Pre -Filing Meeting Request here:
Click the upbad button or drag and drop files here to attach document
DWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form.pdf
Fie type rust be FCF
la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
fJ Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
I— Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
✓ Yes
✓ No
Please provide the date of the previous submission.*
12/11/2019
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
17 Nationwide Permit (NWP)
I Regional General Permit (RGP)
I— Standard (IP)
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
✓ Yes f No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number: 13 - Bank Stabilization
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
Id. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
I7 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
I Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
I Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
lf. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
✓ Yes 6 No
57.13KB
1401 Water Quality Certification - Express
r Riparian Buffer Authorization
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
✓ Yes 6' No
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
✓ Yes rNo
Acceptance Letter Attachment
1 h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
✓ Yes ( No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
✓ Yes r No
✓ Yes r No
✓ Yes r No
B. Applicant Information
Id. Who is applying for the permit?
r Owner rJ Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
6 Yes r No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
Bishop, Eliza F. & Husband Tyrone R. Bishop & Nancy F. Anderson

2b. Deed book and page no.:
Book 30 Page 79
2c. Contact Person:
2d. Address
Street Address
5335 Grandin Road
Address Line 2
Oty State / Province / legion
Lenoir NC
Postal / Zip Code Country
28645 US
2e. Telephone Number: 2f. Fax Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
3. Applicant Information (if different from owner)
3a. Name:
Savannah Starnes Sartin
3b. Business Name:
Caldwell Soil and Water Conservation District
3c.Address
Street Address
120 Hospital Avenue
Address Line 2
atY
Lenoir
Fbstal / Zip Code
28645
3d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
3f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Rachel E. Smith, PE
4b. Business Name:
NCDA&CS, Division of Soil and Water Conservation
4c.Address
Street Address
1301 Fanning Bridge Road
Address Line 2
aty
Fletcher
Postal / ZZp Code
28732
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Agent Authorization Letter*
Bishop Agent Authorization Form.pdf
State / Rovince / Region
NC
Country
US
3e. Fax Number:
State / Province / legion
NC
Country
US
4e. Fax Number:
45.45KB
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
1. Project Information

1b. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
lc. Nearest municipality/ town:
Lenoir
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
2874975637
2b. Property size:
246.48
2c. Project Address
Street Address
5335 Grandin Road
Address Line 2
City State / Bovine / FOgion
Lenoir NC
Fbstal / Zip Code Country
28645 US
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project:*
Yadkin River
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water:*
Class C, TR
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
Yadkin-PeeDee
3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030401010105
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application:*
The Yadkin River passes through the property and is bordered by river -bottom farmland that is currently planted in wheat. The site is located in a bend in the river where turbulent
waters have eroded in excess of 15 feet of the shoreline.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
6 Yes r No r Unknown
If yes, please give the DWR Certification number or the Corps Action ID (exp. SAW-0000-00000).
SAW 2019-01943
Project History Upload
Signed Permit MFR SAW 2019-01943 Bishop Streambank Stabilization.pdf 137.93KB
DWR Approval.pdf 1.26MB
Andrea Leslie NC Wildlife.pdf 35KB
Letter from USFWS.pdf 335.66KB
4d. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the USGS topographic map indicating the location of the project site. (for DWR)
Topo Map.pdf 368.3KB
4e. Attach an 8 1/2 X 11 excerpt from the most recent version of the published County NRCS Soil Survey map depicting the project site. (for DWR)
Bishop Soil Report.pdf 1.04MB
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
15,794.4
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
The project will extend an existing bank stabilization project. The banks immediately downstream of the original stabilization site were impacted by a large debris jam. The debris jam
caused mass failure of the banks downstream of the woody toe installed in 2020.The purpose of the project is to build up and stabilize the remaining shoreline to prevent further loss.
This project will improve water quality in the Yadkin River by stabilizing eroding banks and reestablishing aquatic habitat along the bank.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used:*
This project is designed using a woody toe stabilization technique that utilizes logs with root wads, laps and limps to stabilize the streambank. This type of stabilization utilizes heavy
equipment including excavators, dump trucks, and skid steer loaders. The project is approximately XX linear feet and will include the installation of a woody toe, bankfull bench, and fill
material to re -build the eroded bank.
4j. Please upload project drawings for the proposed project.
BISHOP_ REPAIR_ PRELIM_3-18-21.pdf 3.61 MB
5. Jurisdictional Determinations

5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas?*
C Yes
f• No C Unknown
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made?*
C Preliminary f Approved 6' Not Verified C Unknown r N/A
Corps AID Number:
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?
Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
5d1. Jurisdictional determination upload
6. Future Project Plans
6a. Is this a phased project?*
C Yes f No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
n Wetlands
n Open Waters
3. Stream Impacts
fJ Streams -tributaries
F Pond Construction
n Buffers
3a. Reason for impact (?)
3b.Impact type*
3c. Type of impact*
3d. S. name *
3e. Stream Type*
(?)
3f. Type of
Jurisdiction*
3g. S. width *
3h. Impact
length*
S1
Bank Stabilization
Permanent
Bank Stabilization
Yadkin
Perennial
Corps
90
Average (feet)
100
(linear feet)
32
Crossing
Temporary
Other
UT to Yadkin
Perennial
DWR
5
Average (feet)
15
(linear feet)
3i. Total jurisdictional ditch impact in square feet:
0
3i. Total permanent stream impacts:
100
3i. Total stream and ditch impacts:
115
3j. Comments:
E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
3i. Total temporary stream impacts:
15
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
The design utilizes the same techniques installed on the previous permit. In order to stabilize the banks, some impact is necessary, but it will be
terminated at the first stable location.
1b. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
The trajectory of the active flow will be diverted from the bank using waste blocks to allow for still water directly adjacent to the bank. The work will be
done such that no new bank grading will be started that cannot be finished in the same work day. In addition, temporary stabilization measures will be
installed at the end of each work day.

2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
✓ Yes ( No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR) U
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
la. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
✓ Yes r Na
If no, explain why:
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250?*
✓ Yes t: No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
6 Yes r No
Comments:
Project does not increase impervious area and has no structures or other types of built -upon area
G. Supplementary Information
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land? *
6 Yes
No
1b. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPAISEPA)?*
✓ Yes f No
Comments:*
Project will utilize Agriculture Cost Share program funds provided by the Caldwell Soil and Water Conservation District.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)
2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
✓ Yes a No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
✓ Yes f No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
There is no infrastructure improvements to the property being made and the project will increase the required buffer width.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
✓ Yes 6' No r N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
✓ Yes r No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
6 Yes rNo
5c. If yes, indicate the USFWS Field Office you have contacted.
Asheville
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*

✓ Yes
F No r Unknown
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
✓ Yes f No
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
✓ Yes r No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
✓ Yes 6*No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
✓ Yes 6' No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
✓ Yes G No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
Species determination was completed for permit #SAW 2019-01943 by Byron Hamstead USFWS Biologist
Consultation Documentation Upload
Letter from USFWS.pdf 335.66KB
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
✓ Yes 6' No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
https://saw-reg. u sace.army.mil/trout/Ca ldwe l l_Trout_Watersheds. pdf
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
✓ Yes rNo
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
Jim Errante Cultural Resources Specialist with NRCS visited the site in person and did a shovel test evaluation along with routine historical map
assessments.
7c. Historic or Prehistoric Information Upload
CRR.pdf
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-yearfloodplain?*
6 Yes r No
144.46KB
8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMArequirements:
Project re-establishes the top of bank location at approximately the same elevation and location utilized for current effective flood maps
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
https://fris.nc.gov/fris/Home.aspx?ST=NC (Panel 2864)
Miscellaneous
Comments
Miscellaneous attachments not previously requested.
Signature
*
rJ By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knoWedge and belief; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
• I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
• I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
• I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Savannah Starnes Sartin
Signature

Date
5/10/2021

SAMPLE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. PLAN NO. PARCEL ID: L7 5 14 I S
STREET ADDRESS: 5335 Qvcoutin 12d. Link Y , N C. 29co45
Please print:
Property Owner:
Property Owner:
!_ �i24 f2flZ1eZ— l5s�e0
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
SOU/&& nQ... Shur✓1LS , of Ccddwell Coi artA Wditr
(Contractor / Agent) (Name of consulting firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
this permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Property Owner's Address (if different than property above):
Telephone: $2..6 - 443 - 10 2.5
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
Authb zed Signature
Dater--- 107 . 1 (
Authorized Signature
Date:

DWR Pre -Filing Meeting Request Form
ID#*
Regional Office *
Reviewer List*
20200010
Version*
2
Asheville Regional Office - [phone]
Amy Annino
Pre -Filing Meeting Request submitted 4/1/2021
Contact Name * Rachel Smith
Contact Email Address* [e-mail]
Project Name * Bishop Streambank and Shoreline Protection
Project Owner* Eliza Bishop
Project County* Caldwell
Owner Address: Street Address
5335 Grandin Rd
Address Line 2
City State / Rovince / Region
Lenoir NC
Fbstal / Zip Code Country
28645 United States
Is this a transportation project?* C Yes r No
Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
l 401 Water Quality Certification - I— 401 Water Quality Certification -
Reg ula r Express
I— Individual Permit l Modification
I— Shoreline Stabilization
Does this project have an existing project ID#?*
r Yes C No
Please list all existing project ID's associated with this projects.*
DWR# 20-0010
Do you know the name of the staff member you would like to request a meeting with?
Amy Annino
Please give a brief project description below and include location information.*
The Bishop's would like to add 100 linear feet to the original project
to address bank failure immediately adjacent and adjoining to the
original project. The proposed stabilization will be the same as the
method used in the original 401 approval.

Please give a couple of dates you are available for a meeting.
4/6/2021
4/7/2021
4/12/2021
4/13/2021
4/14/2021
Please attach the documentation you would like to have the meeting about.
BISHOP_REPAIR PRELIM_3-18-21.pdf 3.61 MB
pdf only
By digitally signing below, I certify that I have read and understood that per the Federal Clean Water Act Section
401 Certification Rule the following statements:
• This form completes the requirement of the Pre -Filing Meeting Request in the Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification
Rule.
• I understand by signing this form that I cannot submit my application until 30 calendar days after this pre -filing
meeting request.
• !also understand that DWR is not required to respond or grant the meeting request.
Your project's thirty -day clock started upon receipt of this application. You will receive notification regarding meeting location
and time if a meeting is necessary. You will receive notification when the thirty -day clock has expired, and you can submit an
application.
Signature
Submittal Date 4/1/2021

CR Review Map
Customer(s): ELIZA F BISHOP
District: CALDWELL COUNTY SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Approximate Acres: 208.2
Legend
Streambank and Shoreline Protection
Consplan
❑ USA Topo Maps
USDA
Date: 7/11/2017
Field Office: LENOIR PROGRAM DELIVERY PO
Agency: Caldwell Soil and Water
Assisted By: Carter Edgerton
Streambank and Shoreline Protection
JGMc USDrA;,NRCS, Copyright O.201'3 National G,eograp it' • ofciety,
Prepared with assistance from USDA -Natural Resources Conservation Service
2,000 0 2,000 4,000

Scale In Feet
EARTH FILL TO BANKFULL STAGE @ EL = 1096'
INSTALL BANKFUL BENCH.
SLOPE AT 2:1 TO TOP OF BANK
(SEE CROSS SECTION AND MATTING DETAILS)
STAGE TO BE VERIFIED BY THE ENGINEER
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732
PHONE: [phone]
TOE WOOD PER DETAILS SHT 5-9 OR
ALT. 5'X3'X2' BOULDERS
TO 3 BANKFULL STAGE
2007
1101.32
NAIL PILE
NO EQUIPMENT IS TO BE
STORED, FUELED, OR
OTHERWISE REPAIRED IN THE
25' FROM THE TOP OF THE
EXISTING STREAMBANK.
0+00.00
0+1,0.00
i
0+40.00
0+50 00
+60.00
,5301101. 0 \
�i 2.5
BENCHMARK NLS REPAIR
0+80.00
0+90.00
0+95.71
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
1 - BISHOP REPAIR - SITE PLAN
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NO
2
3
4
5
BY
DATE
ENCHMAR LS REPAIR 2
STREAMBANK
STABILIZATI• APPROX.
100 LINEAR EET
3008
0 1100.81
BENCHMARK NLS EA EW
NDISTURBED NATIVE
VEGETATION PLANTED
1' BEYOND FILL
MATERIAL PLACED.
MIN. WIDTH IS 25'
HORIZONTALLY FROM
BANKFULL ELEVATION
(SEE DETAIL)
REVISIONS
DESCRIPTION
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: 1 INCH = 20 FEET
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO. 1
OF 8
FILENAME: BIHSOP_REPAIR-3-18-21.dwg

PLANTING MIXTURE CONTENT
*Apply seed mixture at a rate of 20 pounds per acre. Seed content ratio may
vary WITH APPROVAL but is limited to grasses listed below with a minimum
of 2 species of herbaceous FLOWERING PLANTS.
GRASSES
Sorghastrum nutans (Indian Grass): 25% Hordeum spp. (Baney): 22%
Panicum clandestium (Deer Tongue): 12%
Panicum virgatum (Switchgrass): 12%
Elymus virginicus (Virginia Wild Rye): 22%
FLOWERING HERBACEOUS PLANTS (7%):
Rudbeckia laciniata (Cutleaf Coneflower) Lobelia siphilitica (Great Blue
Lobelia)
Helianthus angustifolius (Swamp Sunflower) Lobelia cardinalis (Cardinal
Flower)
Asclepias incarnata (Swamp Milkweed) Asclepias syriaca (Common
Milkweed)
LIME AND FERTILIZER.
Lime: 2,000 pounds / acre of finely ground, dolomitic limestone Fertilizer: 400
pounds/ acre of 10-10-10 or equivalent
*These rates also apply when hydroseeding MULCHING
Six (6) feet width of 700 g/m^2 coir matting shall be installed from the stream's
edge to beyond TOP OF BANK AT LEAST 5' UPSTREAM AND
DOWNSTREAM OF TIE IN PONTS. Blankets shall be anchored with wood
stakes in accordance with the MATTING DETAIL.
Remaining surfaces may be mulched with dry, unchopped, unweathered small
grain straw or hay free of seeds of competing plants. Spread at the rate of 1-2
tons per acre depending upon the season. Evenly spread mulch over the area
by hand or mechanical equipment. Apply mulch uniformly so that 25% of the
ground surface is visible.
Temporary Seed shall be applied to establish ground cover based upon the
following planting frame: Rye Grain
Aug 15 - May 15
Browntop Millet Urochloa ramosa 10 Ibs/ac May 15-Aug 15
Secale cereale 25 Ibs/ac
GENERAL VEGETATION PLAN NOTES
A. GROUND COVER, SOIL PREP, TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT
VEGETATION SHALL BE INSTALLED ON ALL AREAS DISTURBED
DURING STABILIZATION, GRADING AND STRUCTURAL WORK.
B. LIVE STAKES, TRANSPLANTS AND / OR CONTAINERIZED PLANTS
SHALL BE LOCATED WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN. A VEGETATED BUFFER
SHALL EXTEND A MINIMUM OF 35 FT FROM THE WATERS EDGE OR AS
SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
C. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE VEGETATION PLAN SHALL BE MADE ONLY IF
APPROVED BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
LIVE STAKES AND CUTTINGS
D. CUTTINGS SHOULD BE INSTALLED THE SAME DAY THEY ARE CUT.
THE STAKE SHOULD BE ORIENTED WITH THE BUDS POINTED UP, AND
THE BOTTOM SHOULD BE CUT AT AN ANGLE FOR EASY INSERTION
INTO THE GROUND.
E. ABOUT 3/4 OF THE LENGTH OF THE STAKE SHOULD BE BELOW
GROUND AND ANGLED DOWNSTREAM. AN IRON BAR CAN BE USED TO
MAKE A PILOT HOLE TO PREVENT BARK FROM BEING DAMAGED
DURING INSTALLATION.
1" = 10'
Scale In Feet
10'
0
10'
20'
TRANSPLANTS AND CONTAINER STOCK
F. STOCK SHALL HAVE BEEN GROWN IN A CONTAINER LONG ENOUGH
FOR THE ROOT SYSTEM TO HAVE DEVELOPED SUFFICIENTLY TO
HOLD ITS SOIL TOGETHER ONCE REMOVED FROM THE CONTAINER.
G. CONTAINER PLANTS WILL NEED TO BE WATERED REGULARLY AND
PLACED IN SHADY CONDITIONS UNTIL PLANTING OCCURS.CREATE
PLANTING AREA FOR EACH PLANT AND EXCAVATE PIT.
H. THE DIAMETER OF THE PLANTING HOLES (PITS) FOR EACH PLANT
SHOULD BE AT LEAST THREE TIMES THE DIAMETER OF THE ROOT
MASS. SCARIFY THE PLANTING PIT PRIOR TO EACH PLANT
INSTALLATION.
I. SET PLANTS UPRIGHT IN THE CENTER OF THE PIT. THE BOTTOM OF
THE ROOT MASS SHOULD BE RESTING ON UNDISTURBED SOIL.
J. PLACE BACKFILL AROUND BASE AND SIDES OF ROOT MASS, AND
WORK EACH LAYER TO SETTLE BACKFILL AND TO ELIMINATE VOIDS
AND AIR POCKETS. WHEN PIT IS APPROXIMATELY 2/3 FULL, WATER
THOROUGHLY BEFORE PLACING REMAINDER OF THE BACKFILL.
WATER AGAIN AFTER PLACING FINAL LAYER OF BACKFILL.
ELEVATION
1120.00
1118 00
1116 00
1114 00
111200
1110.00
1108 00
1106 00
110400
110200
1100.00
1098 00
1096 00
1094 00
1092 00
1090.00
1088 00
1086 00
1084 00
108200
1080.00
1078 00
1076 00
1074 00
107200
1070.00
0
1
0
Stream:
Basin:
Drainage Area:
Location:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Date:
Valley Type:
Bankfull Width (Wbkf):
Bankfull Depth (Dbkf):
Bankfull X-Section Area (Abkf):
Width/Depth Ratio (Wbkf/Dbkf):
Maximum Depth (Dmax):
Width of Flood -Prone Area (Wfpa):
Entrenchment Ratio (ER):
Channel Materials (D50):
Water Surface Slope (S):
Channel Sinuosity (k):
STREAM CHANNEL CLASSIFICATION:
TYPICAL SECTION
Yadkin River
69.6 square miles
Caldwell County, North Carolina
36.05954
-81.43790
September9, 2017
VIII
97 feet
3.1 feet
305 feet
23
6 feet
1000 feet
10
6 mm
0.0039 feet/feet
1.4
C4
42'
OF UNDISTURBED
WOODED
BUFFER
(MIN. OF 25' FROM
BANKFULL
ELEVATION)
••••••
LIVESTAKES 2'
TO 3' ON
TREES
AND
SHRUBS
CENTER - 5 ROWS
�'
4
ROWS
INSTALL FIRST ROW AT
AIL
A
��
BOULDER - EARTH FILL
w
v
��R
INTERFACE
1
700 COIR
MATIT TIN
III
II
PRIOR TO PLACING
FILLII
r'".�// ��//1::1/%%
%//_I -:_"//r
1=11d11C11C=111M111=111C1111=I11euen=
"
sfji.�i!'i%�T
�__�
�,1
I 1=—=—III
I I I=1
11=1
EN
I I
ip
11=1
11=1
I I,
:ANKF
LL -,TAB
�•^'
�����iri��%
/.��!
����
=III—
_
=I
_
x i
A
�������
��������..Alan
n
I_�
-i
i i
_
�I
me
=I
I I
I I
O :E
FIELD
VERIFI
D
DUR
•
ST"UCTION
�����//
�r
/�////%v--
_
2
—
III —III
—III
I I
I I I
I
=_
_
I
I I
1I
_II
I I1-1I1-1I
—III
—I
—I
I
r
In
1-1I-1
_
_
_—__—_"all!
11-111E11-111
__��
11
=
3
BANKFULL
1 11=1
I I I I
I I
.IYii
—
=III I I
I I I�
—I
�I I
—I
—I
I�
—III
I
11-111�
II
11
I I III
I
I I ICI I I
III
I
III
I I
_
I1=III=+
-III=III1I
I
III=III=III=1I
I
_-111
III=�
_
-
=NON WOVEN COIR MATTING =III=III=1
111E11
=
1111,1111,
IIGi11E 111
=
IIGi11G�111
11
181
_
_
=
_
_
—
_
_
_
—I I
I I= I I III=
WITHOUT NETTING TO=1I1
CREATE A GEO-LIFT :III=I
11=1
_
I I
�
�
I I1=11I„I
I
II,I I—,III
I —II
I
I 1
I I„
—111—I
I
I
III
I
1 —1
I I„III,
1=
I1=
I I
I„
TOE WOOD STRUCTURE PER DETA LS SHT 5-9—"—
—,I
;III=,1
(
III
11 Approx 8-10 rootwads depending on width of root fan, with
II footer and header logs, laps and limbs
fit►
p
.O
OR ALT 1. using 5'x3'X2' Boulders,
,
Approx 60 boulders placed on non -woven geotextile
t II
, %q -��`
I'
' i..
Top of footer boulder to be placed at existing bed elevation.
•
,,
I I I I I
I.
��
STATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732
PHONE: [phone]
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
2 - BISHOP REPAIR - TYPICAL SECTION
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
NO
2
3
4
REVISIONS
BY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: 1 INCH = 10 FEET
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO. 2
OF 8
FILENAME: BIHSOP_REPAIR-3-18-21.dwg
1120.00
1118 00
1116 00
1114 00
111200
1110.00
1108 00
1106 00
110400
110200
1100.00
1098 00
1096 00
1094 00
1092 00
1090.00
1088.00
1086.00
10
D0
1080.00

MATTING, TYPICAL
(SEE NOTE 1)
TOP OF BANK ANCHOR
(SEE DETAIL)
DEAD STOUT STAKE,
TYPICAL (SEE DETAIL)
MATTING OVERLAP
(SEE DETAIL)
TOP OF BANK
/ /\/
\/ /\\/\
\/\/ /\
MATTING STAKE, TYPICAL (SEE NOTE 6)
TOE OF BANK ANCHOR (SEE DETAIL)
MATTING WRAP
(SEE NOTE 2)
TOE OF BANK
DEAD STOUT STAKE, TYPICAL
(SEE DETAIL)
TOE OF BANK
MATTING ANCHOR DETAIL
6"
BACKFILL
(SEE NOTE 2)
TOP OF BANK
TOP OF BANK
MATTING, TYPICAL
(SEE NOTE 1)
/
CROSS-SECTION
6"
APPROXIMATE BASE
FLOW WATER LEVEL
TOE OF BANK
24"
24"
12"
DIRECTION
10OR 02
MATTING OVERLAP
(SEE NOTE 5)
DIRECTION OF STREAM FLOW
02 DIRECTION DOWN THE BANK SLOPE
MATTING OVERLAP DETAIL
6"
I I
L
TOE OF BANK ANCHOR
(SEE DETAIL)
0 0
PLA
(SEE
1
FLOW
v
12"
MATTING, TYPICAL.
(SEE NOTE 1)
1
0 0
r r
0 0
NOTES:
1. EROSION CONTROL MATTING SHALL CONSIST OF 700 GRAM COIR FIBER EROSION CONTROL MATTING. MATTING
SHALL BE INSTALLED FLAT AND STAKED AGAINST A SLOPE AND/OR A STREAM BANK.
2. MATTING SHALL BE ANCHORED IN A TRENCH AT BOTH THE TOE AND TOP OF THE STREAM BANK. DEAD STOUT
STAKES AND CLEAN SOIL BACKFILL SHALL BE USED TO SECURE THE MATTING INTO THE TOE AND TOP OF BANK
TRENCHES. TO PREVENT EROSION OR "WASHING OUT" OF BACKFILL IN THE TOE OF BANK ANCHOR TRENCH,
MATTING SHALL BE INSTALLED SO THAT IT WRAPS OVER THE DEAD STOUT STAKE AND BACKFILL, THUS POSITIONING
THE REMAINING MATTING FOR INSTALLATION UP THE STREAM BANK.
3. THE SLOPE AND/OR STREAM BANK SHALL BE PREPARED (GRADED, TILLED, SMOOTHED, ETC.) AND SEEDED AND
MULCHED AS SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT OF THE MATTING.
4. THE MATTING SHALL BE INSTALLED SO AS TO NOT BE IN TENSION, BUT BE PLACED NEATLY, FLUSH AGAINST THE
SOIL, AND WITH NO GAPS OR WRINKLES. ADDITIONAL STAKING SHALL BE INSTALLED BY THE CONTRACTOR AS
NEEDED ENSURE CONTACT WITH THE SOIL.
5. ANY MATTING OVERLAPS NECESSARY SHALL BE OF A LENGTH SPECIFIED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR AS
OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER. ALSO, OVERLAPS SHALL BE ORIENTED IN A DOWN -SLOPE DIRECTION,
DOWNSTREAM DIRECTION, OR OTHERWISE "SHINGLE -STYLE" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE
DOMINANT EROSIVE ACTION SO THAT THE MATTING END IS PROTECTED AGAINST MOVEMENT.
6. THE FIELD OF THE MATTING OVER THE SURFACE OF THE SLOPE AND/OR STREAM BANK SHALL BE SECURED WITH
MATTING STAKES OF A SIZE AND TYPE, IN A PATTERN, AND WITH SPACING DIMENSIONS AS SPECIFIED BY THE
MANUFACTURER OR AS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY THE DESIGNER.
7. MATTING SHALL BE NEATLY SECURED AROUND ANY PROJECT STRUCTURES, STRUCTURE ARMS, AND/OR SILLS TO
PREVENT ANY LOOSE OR FRAYED EDGES.
8. THERE SHALL BE NO LOOSE ENDS OR UNSECURED MATTING ON THE COMPLETED WORK.
9. THE PLAN VIEW ILLUSTRATES A PERPENDICULAR PERSPECTIVE OF EACH SURFACE DEPICTED IN THE CROSS
SECTION. THERE IS NO FORESHORTENING OF THE STREAM BANK (OR ANY OTHER SLOPED SURFACE) IN THE PLAN
VIEW.
MATTING OVERLAP
(SEE DETAIL)
0 0
0 0 0
u 0 0 0 0
a
6"
iz—TOP OF BANK
MATTING, TYPICAL
(SEE NOTE 1)
MATTING STAKE TYPICAL
(SEE NOTE 6)
APPROXIMATE BASE
FLOW WATER LEVEL
iz—
iz—TOE OF BANK
DEAD STOUT
STAKE TYPICAL
(SEE DETAIL)
NOT TO SCALE
4"
UNTREATED
2" X 4" (NOMINAL)
_itBOARD
12"
0" - 1/2"
OO
CtJIAIII►IIIII
=offFEss�o /
Pcs„C"E �
NO` V //1111111111��
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732
PHONE: [phone]
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
3 - BISHOP REPAIR MATTING DETAIL
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REVISIONS
NO
BY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
2
3
4
5
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: N/A
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO.
3 OF 8
FILENAME: BIHSOP REPAIR-3-18-21 MA
NG.dwg

January 24, 2020
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
BISHOP FARM
CONSTRUCTION NOTES AND SEQUENCE
1. Obtain plan approval and other applicable permits.
2. Delineate property boundaries within project area, buffer limits, and limits of construction.
3. All equipment is to be stored and fueled in a protected area outside the designated buffer
4. Hold preconstruction conference at least one week prior to starting construction.
5. Install temporary gravel construction entrance as the first construction activity.
6. Improve crossing of UT to Yadkin River to allow for equipment and truck access.
7. Remove trees designated during preconstruction meeting to allow access to channel.
8. Begin installation of rip rap toe at the upstream location of the tie into existing bank.
9. Place non -woven geotextile as indicated in the typical section leaving enough width to wrap the fabric on the back of the rip rap.
10. Place the rip rap as indicated on the plans and as directed by the engineer or her delegate.
11. When the equipment can no longer reach from the top of the bank, install access ramp on bank behind the installed rip rap so no
active flow can reach the disturbed material. In lieu of building the ramp, a long reach excavator may be used.
12. Continue the rip rap toe to the tie at the downstream end of the project.
13. Wrap geotextile around back of rock toe.
14. Place fill material such that all new material is placed, compacted, seeded, mulched, and matted within the same day it is placed.
15. Begin to place fill material behind the rock toe which will act as a berm to protect newly placed fill from active flow.
16. When fill material reaches the elevation of the top of the rip rap toe, place woven coir matting backed by non -woven coir to create
a lift on top of the rock toe, as indicated on the plans.
17. Continue to place fill material to bankfull elevation.
18. Lime, fertilize, seed (temporary and permanent) and straw mulch all disturbed areas along channel as specified in construction
documents.
19.Secure matting with stakes as indicated on the plans.
20.Install remaining fill to existing grade at no more than 2:1 slope.
21.Lime, fertilize, seed (temporary and permanent) and straw mulch all disturbed areas along channel as specified in construction
documents.
22.Install matting to a minimum of 2' beyond the top of the bank.
23.Plant woody vegetation if soil and plant conditions permit.
24.AII erosion and sediment control practices will be inspected weekly and after each rainfall event. Needed repairs and
maintenance will be conducted immediately.
25.After site is stabilized, remove all temporary measures and install permanent vegetation on the road and staging area.
26.Estimated time before final stabilization shall be approximately 2 weeks.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732 PHONE: [phone]
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
4 - BISHOP REPAIR - CONSTRUCTION NOTES
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REVISIONS
NO
BY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
2
3
4
5
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: N/A
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO. 4
OF 8
FILENAME: BIHSOP_REPAIR-3-18-21.dwg

DIVERT FLOW FROM BANK
PRE DIG CHANNEL BED
FOR TOE WOOD
ANGLE OF FOUNDATION LOGS
15° TO 25°
MEASURED FROM THE CONVERGENCE
OF THE BANK TANGENT TO THE
INSIDE OF THE LOG TANGENT
FLOW
L
LOG 1
INSIDE OF LOG
TANGENT
❑❑p❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑
16' LOG
as
as
CUT OFF SILL r
2 LOG WRAPPED WITH
GEO-TEXTILE FABRIC
PER ENGINEERS
ON -SITE INSTRUCTIONS
FOUNDATION LOGS
TOE WOOD STRUCTURE
BUILD IN 20 FT TO 30 FT SECTIONS
LOGS SHOULD BE NO
HIGHER THAN 50 %
OF WATER
80 % OF THE LOGS SHOULD
BE BEDDED BEHIND CHANNEL
PLACE ROOT WAD LOGS
CANTILEVERED OVER
FOUNDATION LOGS.
FOR 8 FT CHANNELS ROOT WADS
SHOULD EXTEND INTO THE
CHANNEL 2 FT
3 FT FOR 12 FT CHANNELS
DESIGN DETAILS ARE CREDITED TO
DR. DAVE ROSGEN WITH
WILDLAND HYDROLOGY
ROOT WAD LOGS
IF THERE ARE LOGS
WITHOUT ROOT WADS
PLACE THEM CLOSER TO
THE BANK.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732
PHONE: [phone]
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
5 - BISHOP REPAIR TOE WOOD - DETAIL
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REVISIONS
NO
BY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
2
3
a
5
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: N/A
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO. 5
OF 8
FILENAME: ToeWood.dwg

PLACE FILLER MATERIAL
(SMALL LOGS, LIMBS,
TREE TOPS AND BRUSH)
PARALLEL TO ROOT WADS
FILLER MATERIAL
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732
PHONE: [phone]
TOE WOOD STRUCTURE
BUILD IN 20 FT TO 30 FT SECTIONS
ADD TEMPORARY COUNTER
WEIGHT (I -BEAM ETC...)
TO SUBMERGE LOGS
DESIGN DETAILS ARE CREDITED TO
DR. DAVE ROSGEN WITH
WILDLAND HYDROLOGY
COUNTER WEIGHT
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
6 - BISHOP REPAIR TOE WOOD - DETAIL
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REVISIONS
NO
BY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
2
3
a
5
`4 O
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: N/A
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO. 6
OF 8
FILENAME: ToeWood.dwg

ADD SHALLOW BACKFILL FROM
DRAINAGE MATERIAL CLEANED
OUT FROM THE CHANNEL
SHALLOW BACK FILL
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732
PHONE: [phone]
TOE WOOD STRUCTURE
BUILD IN 20 FT TO 30 FT SECTIONS
REMOVE TEMPORARY WEIGHTS
AND PLACE CUTTINGS
DESIGN DETAILS ARE CREDITED TO
DR. DAVE ROSGEN WITH
WILDLAND HYDROLOGY
LAYER CUTTINGS
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
7 - BISHOP REPAIR TOE WOOD - DETAIL
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
REVISIONS
NO
BY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
2
3
a
5
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: N/A
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO. 7
OF 8
FILENAME: ToeWood.dwg

TOE WOOD STRUCTURE
BUILD IN 20 FT TO 30 FT SECTIONS
PLACE A SHALLOW
BACKFILL LAYER
OVER CUTTINGS
ANOTHER LAYER OF BACK FILL
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES
DIVISION OF SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION
WESTERN HEADQUARTERS
1301 FANNING BRIDGE ROAD, FLETCHER, NC 28732
PHONE: [phone]
INSTALL SOIL LIFTS UP TO
BANKFULL STAGE
WITH LAYERS OF CUTTINGS PLACED
BETWEEN THE SOIL LIFTS
II -II :II :II —II_
1=11=11=11=11=1
II-11-11-11-11-1-
1=11=11=11=11=1=11- .
11�11�11�11�11�7�11.,
PROPOSED 111
i.
CHANNEL =t1:
11.1
1=11=II=11=11-11-11-11'
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11-11-11
1=11=11=11=11=11=1=11=11=11=11=11
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11
I=II=II=II=II=11=1=II=II=II=II=II=11=1.
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=.1,
1=11=11=11=11=11=1=II=11=11=11=11=11=11=11-
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11-
1=11=11=11=11=11=1=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11 '" 11-11—II=11
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11 _ _-,1=11=11=11=11=II=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
1=11=11=11=11=11=1=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11-11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
1=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
1=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
I.=II.=II.=II.=II.=II=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11.=11.=11.=11.=11,=,.11,=,.11,=,11,=,11,=,.11.=,11=,11.=,11.=,1i 1i 1i 1i 1i
DESIGN DETAILS ARE CREDITED TO
DR. DAVE ROSGEN WITH
WILDLAND HYDROLOGY
n==1r
,11=11=n11=
ri==n=1r
d 41III
11n1111=
=11
,'" .' ,-1f11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11.
g/ =11=1f 1f 1f
� i1=n=n=.n=.n=n=1r
1111711-11-11.-11._-.11._-.11-
11111=IL I1
11__1 COIR II=
11= 11=11=11'WOODEN 11=11=I#II#II11=
„"II=11=:
r , .11-71-71-11-4—u—a—u—it
=11 1,11=11—II-11=11=11-11=11-11 .
1== -1-7I-7I—T-7I-11-1T71-d=11=11.=1=11-IIII=1 FABRIC 11=
11=11=11.
11=11=11:II
11=1I STAKES .11=11=
11=11= 11=11=11
11=11-11-11—II-11-1—11-11—
-:d=II=II=II=II=II=II=II=II=11=
1111=11—r,=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
„-11=11=11=11=11=11=11#11#11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=1f
11=11=1L"—""—"—"="="""=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
" •11=11=11=11=11=11=11=110
1=11=11=11=11=11=11=11=
BANKFULL STAGE
CUTTINGS
II.
11= If-,. LOW FLOW Z�
1�11=11
—11—II-11 lT
STREAMBANK STABILIZATION - YADKIN RIVER
8 - BISHOP REPAIR TOE WOOD - DETAIL
CALDWELL COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ROOT WAD LOG
BURRITO SOIL LIFTS
REVISIONS
NO
BY
DATE
DESCRIPTION
2
3
a
5
4.0
PROJECT #:
bishop, ty
SCALE: N/A
DRAWN BY:
RACHEL E. SMITH, PE
DATE: March 18, 2021
CHECKED BY:
DATE:
SHEET NO. 8
OF 8
FILENAME: ToeWood.dwg

USDA United States
Department of
Agr culture
RCS
Natural
Resources
Conservation
Service
A product of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey,
a joint effort of the United
States Department of
Agriculture and other
Federal agencies, State
agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment
Stations, and local
participants
Custom Soil Resource
Report for
Caldwell County,
North Carolina
May 10, 2021

Preface
Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas.
They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information
about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for
many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban
planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers.
Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste
disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand,
protect, or enhance the environment.
Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose
special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil
properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions.
The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of
soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for
identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations.
Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area
planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some
cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/
portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering
applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center
(https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil
Scientist (http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/?
cid=nres142p2_053951).
Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are
seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a
foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as
septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to
basements or underground installations.
The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States
Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the
Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National
Cooperative Soil Survey.
Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available
through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its
programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability,
and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion,
sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a
part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not
all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require
2

alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print,
audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at [phone] (voice
and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of
Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or
call [phone] (voice) or [phone] (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity
provider and employer.
3

Contents
Preface 2
How Soil Surveys Are Made 5
Soil Map 8
Soil Map (Bishop Stream Stabilization) 9
Legend 10
Map Unit Legend (Bishop Stream Stabilization) 11
Map Unit Descriptions (Bishop Stream Stabilization) 11
Caldwell County, North Carolina 14
AcF—Ashe-Chestnut complex, escarpment, 50 to 95 percent slopes,
very rocky 14
BcB—Banister fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, rarely flooded 16
CnA—Codorus loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded 18
DaB2—Danripple sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately
eroded 20
DaC2—Danripple sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately
eroded 21
DoA—Dan River and Comus soils, 0 to 4 percent slopes, occasionally
flooded 23
FaD2—Fairview sandy clay loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes, moderately
eroded 25
HeD—Hayesville loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes 26
PaB—Pfafflown loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, rarely flooded 28
RhE—Rhodhiss sandy loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes 29
RoB—Ronda loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes, occasionally flooded 31
W—Water 33
References 34
4

How Soil Surveys Are Made
Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous
areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous
areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and
limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length,
and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and
native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil
profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The
profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the
soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is
devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other
biological activity.
Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource
areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that
share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water
resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey
areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA.
The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that
is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the
area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind
of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and
miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific
segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they
were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict
with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a
specific location on the landscape.
Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their
characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil
scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only
a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented
by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to
verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries.
Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They
noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock
fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them
to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their
properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units).
Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil
characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for
comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic
classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character
of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil
5

Custom Soil Resource Report
scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the
individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that
they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and
research.
The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the
objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that
have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a
unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable
proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components
of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way
diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such
landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite
investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas.
Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map.
The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of
mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape,
and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the
soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at
specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller
number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded.
These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color,
depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for
content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil
typically vary from one point to another across the landscape.
Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of
characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct
measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit
component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other
properties.
While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally
are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists
interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed
characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the
soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through
observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management.
Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new
interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other
sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of
specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management
are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same
kinds of soil.
Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on
such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over
long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example,
soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will
have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict
that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date.
After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the
survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and
6

Custom Soil Resource Report
identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings,
fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately.
7

Soil Map
The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of
soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols
displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to
produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit.
8

08
36° 3' 51" N
36° 3' 18" N
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map (Bishop Stream Stabilization )
Oct] Gawp may woit amOQ°
459900 460000 460100 460200 460300 460400 4605500 460030
Map Scale: 1:7,330 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet.
0 100 200
400
Meters
600
Feet
0 353 700 1400 2100
Mapprojedion: Web Mercator Conerwordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84
9
403700
460800 460900 461000 461100 461200 461300 461400
a
1-4
36° 3' 51" N
36° 3' 18" N

Custom Soil Resource Report
MAP LEGEND
Area of Interest (AOI)
n Area of Interest (AOI)
Soils
El Soil Map Unit Polygons
Soil Map Unit Lines
Soil Map Unit Points
Special Point Features
• Blowout
Borrow Pit
Clay Spot
Closed Depression
• Gravel Pit
Gravelly Spot
▪ Landfill
A. Lava Flow
46 Marsh or swamp
Mine or Quarry
CO Miscellaneous Water
Perennial Water
Rock Outcrop
• Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
• Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
oa Sodic Spot
r=
Spoil Area
6 Stony Spot
Very Stony Spot
Wet Spot
▪ Other
Special Line Features
Water Features
Streams and Canals
Transportation
Rails
Interstate Highways
US Routes
Major Roads
Local Roads
Background
cis Aerial Photography
MAP INFORMATION
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at
1:12,000.
Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey URL:
Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator
projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more
accurate calculations of distance or area are required.
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as
of the version date(s) listed below.
Soil Survey Area: Caldwell County, North Carolina
Survey Area Data: Version 20, Jun 2, 2020
Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Oct 29, 2011—Nov
28, 2017
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident.
10

Custom Soil Resource Report
Map Unit Legend (Bishop Stream
Stabilization )
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name
Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
AcF
Ashe-Chestnut complex,
escarpment, 50 to 95 percent
slopes, very rocky
3.4
1.3%
BcB
Banister fine sandy loam, 2 to 6
percent slopes, rarely flooded
11.4
4.3%
CnA
Codorus loam, 0 to 2 percent
slopes, frequently flooded
37.9
14.4%
DaB2
Danripple sandy clay loam, 2 to
8 percent slopes, moderately
eroded
16.5
6.3%
DaC2
Danripple sandy clay loam, 8 to
15 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
6.9
2.6%
DoA
Dan River and Comus soils, 0
to 4 percent slopes,
occasionally flooded
53.7
20.4%
FaD2
Fairview sandy clay loam, 15 to
25 percent slopes,
moderately eroded
20.4
7.8%
HeD
Hayesville loam, 15 to 30
percent slopes
0.3
0.1 %
PaB
Pfafftown loam, 2 to 6 percent
slopes, rarely flooded
13.0
4.9%
RhE
Rhodhiss sandy loam, 25 to 45
percent slopes
59.6
22.7%
RoB
Ronda loamy sand, 0 to 5
percent slopes, occasionally
flooded
32.0
12.2%
W
Water
7.9
3.0%
Totals for Area of Interest
262.9
100.0%
Map Unit Descriptions (Bishop Stream
Stabilization )
The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the
soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along
with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit.
A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more
major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named
according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic
class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the
11

Custom Soil Resource Report
landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the
characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some
observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class.
Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without
including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made
up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor
components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils.
Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the
map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called
noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a
particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties
and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different
management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They
generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the
scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas
are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a
given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit
descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor
components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not
mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it
was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and
miscellaneous areas on the landscape.
The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the
usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate
pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or
landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The
delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the
development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however,
onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous
areas.
An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions.
Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil
properties and qualities.
Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for
differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major
horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement.
Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness,
salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the
basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas
shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase
commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha
silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series.
Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas.
These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups.
A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate
pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps.
The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar
in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example.
An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or
miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present
12

Custom Soil Resource Report
or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered
practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The
pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat
similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas
that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar
interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion
of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can
be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made
up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example.
Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil
material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example.
13

Custom Soil Resource Report
Caldwell County, North Carolina
AcF—Ashe-Chestnut complex, escarpment, 50 to 95 percent slopes,
very rocky
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2vx2k
Elevation: 1,110 to 3,830 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 44 to 83 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 100 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Ashe, escarpment, very rocky, and similar soils: 55 percent
Chestnut, escarpment, very rocky, and similar soils: 30 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Ashe, Escarpment, Very Rocky
Setting
Landform: Ridges, mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, upper third of mountainflank,
crest, side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear, convex
Across -slope shape: Convex, linear
Parent material: Coarse lamy residuum weathered from granite and gneiss that is
affected by soil creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A - 0 to 7 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
Bw - 7 to 21 inches: gravelly fine sandy loam
C - 21 to 29 inches: gravelly loamy fine sand
R - 29 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 50 to 95 percent
Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 1.6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to lithic bedrock
Drainage class: Somewhat excessively drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Very low (about 2.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
14

Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Chestnut, Escarpment, Very Rocky
Setting
Landform: Ridges, mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, upper third of mountainflank,
crest, side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear, convex
Across -slope shape: Convex, linear
Parent material: Coarse lamy residuum weathered from granite and gneiss that is
affected by soil creep in the upper solum
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: fine sandy loam
Bw - 5 to 29 inches: fine sandy loam
Cr - 29 to 80 inches: bedrock
Properties and qualities
Slope: 50 to 95 percent
Surface area covered with cobbles, stones or boulders: 1.6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: 20 to 40 inches to paralithic bedrock
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Very low to high (0.00
to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Low (about 3.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 7e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Rock outcrop
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Upper third of mountainflank, mountaintop,
free face, crest
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex, linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Greenlee, extremely stony
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Drainageways, rockfalls
Landform position (two-dimensional): Footslope, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
15

Custom Soil Resource Report
Tate, extremely stony
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Coves, drainageways
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, footslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear, concave
Across -slope shape: Concave
Hydric soil rating: No
Cleveland, very stony
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Ridges, mountain slopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, upper third of mountainflank,
crest, side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear, convex
Across -slope shape: Convex, linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Buladean, stony
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Mountain slopes, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountainflank, mountaintop, side slope,
crest
Down -slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
BcB—Banister fine sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, rarely flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2 r91q
Elevation: 200 to 1,560 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 160 to 200 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Banister, rarely flooded, and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Banister, Rarely Flooded
Setting
Landform: Flats on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
16

Custom Soil Resource Report
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Old clayey alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 2 inches: fine sandy loam
E - 2 to 8 inches: fine sandy loam
Bt1 - 8 to 22 inches: clay loam
Bt2 - 22 to 37 inches: clay
Btg - 37 to 45 inches: clay
BCg - 45 to 52 inches: clay loam
C - 52 to 80 inches: sandy clay loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Moderately well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20
to 0.57 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 18 to 36 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Kinkora, undrained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions on stream terraces, backswamps on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread, flat
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Danripple
Percent of map unit: 3 percent
Landform: Hillslopes on stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Codorus
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
17

Custom Soil Resource Report
CnA—Codorus loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, frequently flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2r925
Elevation: 200 to 1,560 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 160 to 200 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if drained and either protected from flooding
or not frequently flooded during the growing season
Map Unit Composition
Codorus and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Codorus
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
A - 0 to 8 inches: loam
Bw1 - 8 to 18 inches: silty clay loam
Bw2 - 18 to 30 inches: loam
Bw3 - 30 to 38 inches: silt loam
BCg - 38 to 50 inches: silt loam
Cg - 50 to 80 inches: silt loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 2 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 6 to 24 inches
Frequency of flooding: FrequentNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 10.7 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D
Hydric soil rating: No
18

Custom Soil Resource Report
Minor Components
Hatboro, undrained
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Depressions on flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Comus
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Dan river
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Ronda
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Natural levees on flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Banister
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flats on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Pfafftown
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
DaB2—Danripple sandy clay loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, moderately
eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2r92f
Elevation: 200 to 1,500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 160 to 200 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Danripple, moderately eroded, and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Danripple, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform: Hillslopes on stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Old alluvium derived from granite and gneiss
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt - 8 to 45 inches: clay
BC - 45 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 8 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
Minor Components
Banister
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flats on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Pfafftown
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Yadkin, moderately eroded
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Hillslopes on stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
DaC2—Danripple sandy clay loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes, moderately
eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2r92g
Elevation: 200 to 1,620 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 160 to 200 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance
Map Unit Composition
Danripple, moderately eroded, and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Danripple, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform: Hillslopes on stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear
21

Custom Soil Resource Report
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Old alluvium derived from granite and gneiss
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt - 8 to 45 inches: clay
BC - 45 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 8 to 15 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Medium
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Banister
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flats on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Pfafftown
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Yadkin, moderately eroded
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Hillslopes on stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
DoA—Dan River and Comus soils, 0 to 4 percent slopes, occasionally
flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2spnc
Elevation: 600 to 1,400 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 43 to 51 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 54 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 190 to 220 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Dan river, occasionally flooded, and similar soils: 50 percent
Comus, occasionally flooded, and similar soils: 40 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Dan River, Occasionally Flooded
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam
Bw - 8 to 46 inches: loam
C - 46 to 80 inches: loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 30 to 60 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 10.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
Description of Comus, Occasionally Flooded
Setting
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Loamy and sandy alluvium derived from igneous and
metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: sandy loam
CI - 8 to 55 inches: sandy loam
C2 - 55 to 80 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 4 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High (1.98 to 5.95
in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 36 to 60 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 6.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Codorus
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Banister
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Flats on stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave, linear
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Pfafftown
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
24

Custom Soil Resource Report
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Ronda
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Natural levees on flood plains
Landform position (two-dimensional): Toeslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex, linear
Hydric soil rating: No
FaD2—Fairview sandy clay loam, 15 to 25 percent slopes, moderately
eroded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2tqd8
Elevation: 660 to 1,640 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 43 to 51 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 55 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 190 to 230 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Fairview, moderately eroded, and similar soils: 88 percent
Minor components: 12 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Fairview, Moderately Eroded
Setting
Landform: Ridges, interfluves
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Saprolite residuum weathered from granite and gneiss and/or
saprolite residuum weathered from schist
Typical profile
Apt - 0 to 4 inches: sandy clay loam
Ap2 - 4 to 9 inches: sandy clay loam
Bt - 9 to 24 inches: clay
BC - 24 to 29 inches: clay loam
C - 29 to 79 inches: loam
25

Custom Soil Resource Report
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 25 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 7.5 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Westfield, moderately eroded
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Interfluves, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Woolwine, moderately eroded
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Interfluves, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Poplar forest, moderately eroded
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Interfluves, ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
HeD—Hayesville loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2r937

Custom Soil Resource Report
Elevation: 1,060 to 1,950 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 48 to 60 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 46 to 57 degrees F
Frost -free period: 124 to 176 days
Farmland classification: Farmland of local importance
Map Unit Composition
Hayesville and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Hayesville
Setting
Landform: Ridges on hillslopes
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Interfluve
Down -slope shape: Convex, linear
Across -slope shape: Linear, convex
Parent material: Residuum weathered from amphibolite
Typical profile
A - 0 to 5 inches: loam
Bt - 5 to 38 inches: clay
BC - 38 to 48 inches: sandy clay loam
C - 48 to 80 inches: fine sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 15 to 30 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately low to
moderately high (0.06 to 0.20 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: High (about 9.9 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: C
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Evard, stony
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop, interfluve
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
Cowee, stony
Percent of map unit: 4 percent
Landform: Ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit, shoulder
Landform position (three-dimensional): Mountaintop
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
PaB—Pfafftown loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, rarely flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2r93d
Elevation: 200 to 1,500 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 160 to 200 days
Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Pfafftown and similar soils: 85 percent
Minor components: 15 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Pfafftown
Setting
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Parent material: Old loamy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loam
BA - 8 to 14 inches: loam
Bt - 14 to 36 inches: sandy clay loam
BC - 36 to 48 inches: fine sandy loam
C - 48 to 60 inches: loamy sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 2 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: Low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: About 48 to 72 inches
Frequency of flooding: Rare
Frequency of ponding: None
28

Custom Soil Resource Report
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 8.4 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Danripple
Percent of map unit: 8 percent
Landform: Hillslopes on stream terraces
Landform position (two-dimensional): Summit
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Banister
Percent of map unit: 7 percent
Landform: Flats on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
RhE—Rhodhiss sandy loam, 25 to 45 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2r93j
Elevation: 200 to 2,000 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 160 to 200 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Rhodhiss and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Rhodhiss
Setting
Landform: Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Saprolite derived from granite and gneiss and/or schist
29

Custom Soil Resource Report
Typical profile
A - 0 to 3 inches: sandy loam
E - 3 to 8 inches: sandy loam
Bt - 8 to 25 inches: sandy clay loam
BC - 25 to 30 inches: sandy clay loam
C - 30 to 80 inches: sandy loam
Properties and qualities
Slope: 25 to 45 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Well drained
Runoff class: High
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high
(0.57 to 1.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: None
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Moderate (about 6.1 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6e
Hydrologic Soil Group: B
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Devotion
Percent of map unit: 6 percent
Landform: Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Bannertown
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No
Stott knob, stony
Percent of map unit: 2 percent
Landform: Hillslopes on ridges
Landform position (two-dimensional): Backslope
Landform position (three-dimensional): Side slope
Down -slope shape: Linear
Across -slope shape: Convex
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
RoB—Ronda loamy sand, 0 to 5 percent slopes, occasionally flooded
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 2r93k
Elevation: 200 to 1,560 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 40 to 48 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 50 to 59 degrees F
Frost -free period: 160 to 200 days
Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated
Map Unit Composition
Ronda, occasionally flooded, and similar soils: 90 percent
Minor components: 10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Ronda, Occasionally Flooded
Setting
Landform: Natural levees on flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Convex
Parent material: Sandy alluvium derived from igneous and metamorphic rock
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 8 inches: loamy sand
C1 - 8 to 18 inches: sand
C2 - 18 to 80 inches: sand
Properties and qualities
Slope: 0 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches
Drainage class: Excessively drained
Runoff class: Very low
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): High to very high (1.98
to 19.98 in/hr)
Depth to water table: More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding: OccasionalNone
Frequency of ponding: None
Available water capacity: Low (about 3.2 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
Minor Components
Codorus
Percent of map unit: 5 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Pfafftown
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Hatboro, undrained
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Depressions on flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: Yes
Dan river
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Comus
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Flood plains
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Convex
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No
Banister
Percent of map unit: 1 percent
Landform: Flats on stream terraces
Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread
Down -slope shape: Concave
Across -slope shape: Linear
Hydric soil rating: No

Custom Soil Resource Report
W—Water
Map Unit Composition
Water: 100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Water
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 8w
Hydric soil rating: No
33

References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling
and testing. 24th edition.
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of
soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service FWS/OBS-79/31.
Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States.
Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States.
Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric
soils in the United States.
National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries.
Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service.
U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
nres/detail/national/soils/?cid =nres 142 p2_0 54262
Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for
making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http://
www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577
Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http://
www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053580
Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands
Section.
United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of
Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical
Report Y-87-1.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/
home/?cid=nres142p2_053374
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/
detail/national/landuse/rangepastu re/?cid=stelprdb1043084
34

Custom Soil Resource Report
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/
n res/deta i l/so i is/scie ntists/?cid=nres 142 p2_054242
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service.
2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States,
the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook
296. http://www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?
cid=nres142p2_053624
United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land
capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http://
www. n res. usda.gov/I nternet/FSE_DOCU M ENTS/n res142p2_052290. pdf
35

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
December 18, 2019
Ms. Brandee Boggs
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch
151 Patton Avenue, Room 208
Asheville, North Carolina 28801-5006
SUBJECT: Bishop Streambank and Shoreline Protection
Yadkin River, Caldwell County
Dear Ms. Boggs:
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) reviewed an
application to stabilize 300 feet of the Yadkin River and temporarily impact 15 ft of an unnamed
tributary to the Yadkin River in Caldwell County. Our comments on this application are offered
for your consideration under provisions of the Clean Water Act of 1977 (33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq.)
and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d).
Project activities should not impact wild trout and do not need to be avoided during the trout
moratorium.
The application proposes to stabilize an eroding reach of bank by placing installing riprap toe,
sloping and matting the bank, and planting three rows of trees on the top of the bank. It is likely
that a key driver for streambank instability is the lack of a suitable forested buffer, and we
strongly recommend that a wider forested buffer be planted as part of this project.
We offer the following recommendations to minimize impacts to the aquatic community:
1. Work should be accomplished as quickly as possible and vigilance used in sediment and
erosion control during site preparation, construction, and clean up. Disturbed areas should be
seeded, mulched and/or matted as soon as possible, preferably at the end of each work day.
2. Any erosion control matting used should be free of nylon or plastic mesh, as this type of
mesh netting frequently entangles wildlife and is slow to degrade, resulting in a hazard that
may last for years.
3. We recommend that a woody buffer of native trees and shrubs of at least 30 feet be planted
on the stream banks as infrastructure allows in order to ensure project success. We
recommend that woody vegetation be planted further downslope on the stream bank, as well.
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

Bishop Streambank Protection Page 2 December 18, 2019
Yadkin River, Caldwell County
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this project. Please contact me at
[phone] if you have any questions about these comments.
Sincerely,
Andrea Leslie
Mountain Region Coordinator, Habitat Conservation Program
ec: Savannah Starnes, Caldwell County Soil and Water Conservation District
Amy Annino, NC Division of Water Resources

United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Asheville Field Office
160 Zillicoa Street
Asheville, North Carolina 28801
October 8, 2019
Savannah Starnes
Caldwell County SWCD
120 Hospital Avenue
Lenoir, North Carolina 28645
Dear Ms. Starnes:
Subject: Bishop Streambank Stabilization Project; Caldwell County, North Carolina
Log No. 4-2-20-002
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the information provided in your
correspondence dated October 2, 2019, and phone conversation on the same date, wherein you
solicit comments regarding potential impacts to federally protected species that may result from
the proposed project. We submit the following comments in accordance with the provisions of
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended (16 U.S.C. 661-667e); the National
Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.); and section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (Act).
Project Description
According to the information provided, the proposed project aims to address streambank
instability and property loss along approximately 315 linear feet of the Yadkin River near
Lenoir, North Carolina. Specifically, the Applicant is seeking a nationwide permit 13 to stabilize
an eroding streambank with rock toe structures, toe lifts, and planted native vegetation. The site
is located adjacent to an agricultural operation (row crops). Onsite riparian habitats are highly
disturbed, low quality and limited to shallow -rooting herbaceous species. Surrounding land use
is dominated by agricultural and forested lands.
Federally Listed Endangered and Threatened Species
Based on the information provided, the Service believes that suitable habitat is not present onsite
for any federally protected species, and we would not object to a "no effect" determination from
the appropriate action agency. Therefore, we consider consultation under the Act to be
complete, and we require no further action at this time. Please be aware that obligations under
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act must be reconsidered if: (1) new information reveals
impacts of this identified action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not
previously considered, (2) this action is subsequently modified in a manner that was not
considered in this review, or (3) a new species is listed or critical habitat is determined that may
be affected by the identified action.

Our habitat suitability models predict the presence of two mussels; brook floater (Alasmidonta
varicosa) and notched rainbow (Villosa constricta) in this reach of the Yadkin River. These are
species of concern and are not currently afforded legal protection under the Act. However,
incorporating proactive conservation measures on their behalf may preclude the need to list them
in the future. Like most aquatic benthic filter -feeders these animals are highly susceptible to
perturbations in instream physical habitats (sedimentation) and water quality (pollution).
We offer the following general recommendations in the interest of protecting these and other
natural resources:
Stream Channel and Bank Restoration
A natural, stable stream system is one that is able to transport a wide range of flows and
associated sediment bed load while maintaining channel features and neither degrading nor
aggrading. Alterations to the dimension, pattern, or profile of the stream channel as well as
changes to streambank vegetation, floodplains, hydrology, or sediment input can significantly
alter this equilibrium.
We understand that this stream reach is actively eroding and we support the intent of the project
to stabilize habitats and mitigate property loss. We also acknowledge that it is likely that the
conversion of riparian forest to row crops has exacerbated property loss from base- and flood -
flows and restoring the site to a natural state may not be feasible. Still we offer the following
recommendations for the Applicant's consideration:
1. Streambanks with deep-rooted woody vegetation are the most stable, and stream
restoration efforts should incorporate the use of native vegetation adapted to the site
conditions. Live dormant stakes may be used to reestablish root structure in riparian
areas. In areas where banks are severely undercut, high, and steep, whole -tree revetment
or rock may be used as a stabilization treatment (small rock, gravel, sand, and dirt are not
recommended due to their erosive nature), and it should not extend above the bank -full
elevation (the elevation of the channel where the natural floodplain begins).
Deep -rooting woody vegetation should be established along banks where any channel
work is accomplished. Tree and shrub plantings should be spaced at intervals no greater
than 10 feet along banks. Vegetated riparian zone widths should be as wide as practical
but should extend at least 30 feet from the stream channel.
2. Only the absolute minimum amount of work should be done within stream channels to
accomplish necessary reconstruction. The amount of disturbance to in -stream and
riparian areas should not exceed what will be stabilized by the end of the workday.
Restoration plans should account for the constraints of the site and the opportunities to
improve stream pattern, dimension, and profile with minimal disturbance.
3. Reconstruction work should follow natural channel design methodologies that are based
on the bank -full, or channel -forming, stage of the stream. Bank -full stage maintains the
natural channel dimensions and transports the bulk of sediment over time. Natural
channel conditions should be identified using a reference reach (nearby stream reaches
2

that exemplify restoration goals). Restoration design should match the pattern,
dimension, and profile of the reference reach to ensure the project's success.
4. All work in or adjacent to stream waters should be conducted in a dry work area to the
extent possible. Sandbags, cofferdams, bladder dams, or other diversion structures
should be used to prevent excavation in flowing water. These diversion structures should
be removed as soon as the work area is stable.
5. Equipment should not be operated in the stream unless absolutely necessary. Machinery
should be operated from the banks in a fashion that minimizes disturbance to woody
vegetation. Equipment should be: (a) washed to remove any contaminant residue prior
to project construction, (b) in good working order, and (c) checked to ensure there are no
leaks of potential contaminants (such as oil or other lubricants) prior to and during
construction.
6. Adequate measures to control sediment and erosion must be implemented prior to any
ground -disturbing activities in order to minimize effects on downstream aquatic
resources. In North Carolina, non -cohesive and erosion -prone soils are most common in
the felsic-crystalline terrains of the mountain and upper piedmont regions. Therefore,
reconstruction work should be staged such that disturbed areas would be stabilized with
seeding, mulch, and/or biodegradable (coir) erosion -control matting prior to the end of
each workday. No erosion -control matting or blankets should contain synthetic
(netting) materials as they trap animals and can persist in the environment beyond
their intended purpose. Matting should be secured in place with staples; stakes; or,
wherever possible, live stakes of native trees. If rain is expected prior to temporary seed
establishment, additional measures should be implemented to protect water quality along
slopes and overburden stockpiles (for example, stockpiles may be covered with plastic or
other geotextile material and surrounded with silt fencing).
The Service appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments. Please contact Mr. Byron
Hamstead of our staff at 828/258-3939, Ext. 42225, if you have any questions. In any future
correspondence concerning this project, please reference our Log Number 4-2-20-002.
Sincerely,
- - original signed - -
Janet Mizzi
Field Supervisor
3

4NRCS
South Carolina
COOPERATOR/REFERENCE NAME:
FROM: Person (s) Providing Assistance:
County:
Caldwell
Trip Report
on technical guidance provided by
NRCS CR Specialists based in
SC/NC
Eliza Bishop (T-5546)
Print Form
Jim Errante, CR Specialist
Purpose of trip:
Date (s) of assistance: 11 /21 /19
Streambank and shoreline protection (Ag. Cost Share).
List of Findings:
A preliminary literature search revealed many archaeological sites recorded in the vicinity and
a good potential for CR's at planned APE.
A cultural resources survey of the planned APE included both visual and subsurface investigations of all areas expected to
be disturbed by the planned assistance. Visual reconnaissance revealed only three prehistoric artifacts in soil that appears
to have sloughed off of the river bank and deposited close to the water level of the river. These artifacts consisted of a large
fragment of soapstone bowl, one ridge and valley flake and a large reduction flake from a quartz cobble.
All subsurface investigations of the planned APE were negative for CR's but these shovel tests were not able to
reach the depth of the expected streambank work. There is potential for additional buried cultural resources to be
located inside this planned APE.
Recommendations:
Should any prehistoric or historic cultural resource(s) or human remains be uncovered during assisted activities,
all work must cease in the area of the discovery, steps should then be taken to secure and preserve the discovery,
and the Cultural Resources Specialist should be contacted ASAP.
It is recommended that CR Specialist (Jim Errante) be present to monitor the practice during
the installation for cultural resources.
Agreed -to -items:
Contact the CR Specialist ASAP when a practice installation date is determined.
Jim Errante
TYPED SIGNATURE
cc'd to:
type in names of persons who will receive a copy
11/25/19
DATE PREPARED
William Faulkner
Savannah Starnes
SC NRCS Trip Report
form revised 12/17