20021345 Ver 1_Monitoring Report Year 7_20130212

T, - I
f
�Pwa cd(y
SANDY CREEK
Durham County, North Carolina
EEP Project No. 322
Contract No. D08039S
2012 Annual Monitoring Re
(Measurement Year -7 — MY7 (2012) — 3` year post- repair)
Site Constructed 2003 /Repaired 2008- 2009/Replanted 2011
6z- I345
Fig 1 2 2013
NR . WaM aunuTY
January 2013
Prepared for:
c�
1;11
stem
ll ellf
PROGR/1M
NCDENR -EEP
1619 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1619
RECEIVED
JAN 2, 9 2013
NC ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

T
Prepared by
&%%:Group roup he
otena
The Catena Group
410B Millstone Drive
Hillsborough, NC 27278
919 - 732 -1300

T I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY --------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -1
1 1 Goals and Objectives -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -1
1.2 Vegetative Assessment------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -1
13 Stream Assessment ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -2
14 Wetland Assessment -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -2
15 Annual Monitoring Summary---------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -2
2 0 METHODOLOGY ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -3
3.0 REFERENCES------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -3
AppendixA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - - - - -4
AppendixB --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 10
AppendixC --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 19
AppendixD --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 23
AppendixE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- 26
Sandy Creek Year 7 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 7 of 9
The Catena Group i January 2013

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sandy Creek is a wetland restoration and stream enhancement mitigation site located in
Durham County, North Carolina The project consists of 3 13 acres of wetland restoration
and 2,461 linear feet of Level II stream enhancement The conservation easement
encompasses 22 6 acres and includes an additional 7 1 acres of preserved existing wetlands.
Wetland and stream construction originally took place in 2003 Wetlands restoration
consisted of grading activities and planting wetland vegetation. Stream enhancement
consisted of the installation of log vanes to create pool features to enhance habitat and water
quality along 2,461 linear feet of stream. The wetland restoration area was again re- graded
between December 2009 and February 2010 to correct final grade elevations to establish
proper wetland hydrology Topsoil was added to improve soil fertility for plant growth and
the graded areas were replanted with native plant species This monitoring report represents
the 3`d year of wetland monitoring after site maintenance and re- grading Stream monitoring
has been conducted annually since original restoration activities completed in 2003
1.1 Goals and Objectives
Project Goals-
* Improve water quality by incorporating log vanes within the stream channel and planting
the stream buffer
• Improve wetland hydrology with the removal of fill material and the sludge drying beds
• Improve in- stream habitat with the installation of log vanes to enhance pool depths
• Restore wetland function with the incorporation of woody and herbaceous wetland plant
species
Project Objectives:
• The Level II stream enhancement of 2,461 linear feet of Sandy Creek
• Restoration of 3 13 acres of wetlands through the removal of fill material and the sludge
drying beds to improve wetland hydrology
• Establishment of a 22.6 acres conservation easement
1.2 Vegetative Assessment
Currently the vegetation is meeting the success criterion with 759 total woody stems /acre. The
success criterion for vegetation is 260 total woody stems /acre at the end of the monitoring
period. Based on the CVS vegetation data there are 313 planted woody stems /acre and 759 total
woody stems /acre. As a result of the wetland re- grading in December 2009, the vegetation in
monitoring plots 2, 3, and 4 was removed, leaving only vegetation monitoring plot 1 intact. The
site was replanted and plots 2, 3, and 4, were re- established in February 2010. Warranty planting
was conducted in February 2011 to replace trees that did not survive initial replanting after the
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Year 7 Momtormg Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

wetland was re- graded. Level II of the CVS -EEP protocol was administered for plots 1, 2, 3, and
4, which accounts for natural and planted woody stems Some planted stems are still exhibiting
evidence of being smothered by the herbaceous vegetation (i.e Juncus effusus) Vegetation
problem areas are sections with low stem densities and invasive exotic species Low stem
densities occurred within the immediate vicinity of plot 1 Chinese lespedeza (Lespedeza
cuneata), continues to thrive in patches along the adjacent forest margin and throughout the
wetland in the vicinity of plots 3 and 4 These areas along the woodland margin have remained
undisturbed throughout the monitoring period.
1.3 Stream Assessment
In general the stream banks are well vegetated and stable The log vanes are stable and
functioning as intended. The log vanes are providing adequate bank protection and generating
scour pools, creating habitat The cross section shows little change in stream dimension as
compared to previous monitoring data The erosion previously reported around the anchor
boulder at the top of log vane 12 has stabilized and has not further degraded. Local debris
buildup at log vane 6, station 13 +83, is creating bank degradation issues. There is local erosion
that may lead to the loss of a large tree on the bank Woody debris has built up and is causing
blockage to the two of the three existing box culverts under US 15 -501 at the bottom of the
project. The debris blockage can lead to backwater conditions that may degrade the habitat and
stability functions of the structures directly upstream of the box culverts Notification to NCDOT
regarding the current blockage is recommended so maintenance can be performed.
1.4 Wetland Assessment
The site was re- graded between December 2009 and February 2010. New groundwater gauges
were installed in the spring of 2010 at three locations — the reference wetland gauge, gauge A,
and gauge C. Gauge B remained undisturbed in its original location. Only gauges A and B
exhibited saturation within 12 inches of the ground surface for more than 12.5% of the growing
season (Table 13). The average annual growing season for Durham County is 222 days (March
24 to November 1).
1.5 Annual Monitoring Summary
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment,
and statistics related to performance of various projects and monitoring elements, can be found
in the tables and figures in the report appendices. Narrative background and supporting
information formerly found in these reports can be found in the mitigation and restoration plan
documents available on EEP's websrte. All raw data supporting the tables and figures in the
appendices are available from EEP upon request.
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
2
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

2.0 METHODOLOGY
All monitoring methodologies are a combination of current NCEEP templates and guidelines and
previous monitoring reports (EEP template version 1.4 11/07/2011) Level II of the CVS —EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation (Lee et al. 2008) was used for vegetation data collection.
Photos were taken with a digital camera. A Trimble Geo XT handheld unit with sub -meter
accuracy was used to collect monitoring feature locations and vegetation problem areas. Stream
assessments followed methodologies outlined in Applied River Morphology (Rosgen 1996).
Precipitation data were obtained from the State Climate Office of North Carolina
(http-Hwww.nc- climate.ncsu.edu /services /request php) (State Office of North Carolina 2012).
Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding Areas was the taxonomic standard
used throughout vegetation data collection ( Weakley 2011) Vegetation monitoring data was
collected on August 15, 2012 Stream monitoring was conducted on March 23 and July 28,
2012.
3.0 REFERENCES
Lee, Michael T., R. K. Peet, S. D. Roberts, and T. R. Wentworth. 2008 CVS -EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2 ( http : / /cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm)
Rosgen, D 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO
State Climate Office of North Carolina. 2012. North Durham Water Reclamation Facility
Precipitation Data (Jan 1, 2010 — Oct 31, 2012, Daily Totals) http / /www nc-
climate.ncsu.edu/services /request php.
Weakley, A.S 2011. Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, and Surrounding Areas
Working draft of May 2011. University of North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina
Botanical Garden, University of North Carolina 1015pp.
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Appendix A
Project Vicinity Map and Background Tables
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Year 7 Momtormg Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

i
4r
fZ
N
LZ rX
AL
L
if
14,
3J4
N, A
mil) a IS
3 —
S�;7 1
W-------
0- W.
T-
....... ..... ....
Conservation Easement ' " `- f f r�r ���
ewa
PO Dis j
f n1
—�7
AA.- lilt'!
LO
Site Directions: Head west on 1-40 to Highway 15-501. Take
15-501 north approximately 2 miles. Pass under 15-501 Bypass
and turn left onto Tower Boulevard. Go approximately 1/4mile and
take a left onto Pickett Road. Take a left onto Sandy Creek Road
I directly after crossing over 15-501 Bypass. Go to the end of Sandy
Creek Road until it ends at the entrance to Sandy Creek Park.
A1111 I
saimn
E
C)
• 1,00• 2,000
eet
Sandy Creek Figure
The Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site
Cateno Site Location Map
Group Durham County, North Carolina Osalull
Date 1 1a —111clit 1
USGS 7.5- Minute Topographic Quadrangle Map
EEP Project No. 322 January 2013 L
_--j ----------------

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site/ EEP Project No 322
c
Linear
Project
a,
Footage
Segment or
H
OW
or
Reach ID
Acreage
Stationing
Comments
2,461
00 +00 to
Primarily achieved with placement
Reach I
EII
BFI
linear feet
27 +00
of log vanes
Wetland
Wetland site re- graded and
Restoration
R
—
3 13 acres
N/A
replanted in Dec 2009
7 1 acres of preserved wetlands are
Wetland
P
—
7 1 acres
N/A
within the 22.63 acre conservation
Preservation
easement
* EII = Enhancement II, R = Restoration ** BFI = Bed form Improvement, P--Preservation
* ** Stationing begins at downstream end of project and increases upstream
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
6
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Protect No 322
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete 3 years
Elapsed Time Since Planting 19 Months
Number of Reporting Years' 7
Activity Report
Scheduled
Completion
Data
Collection
Complete
Actual
Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
N /A*
N /A*
Aug 2002
Final Design (90 %)
N /A*
N /A*
Dec 2002
Construction
N /A*
N /A*
Jun 2003
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area
N /A*
N /A*
Jun 2003
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments
N /A*
N /A*
Jun 2003
Bare root seedling installation
N /A*
N /A*
Jun 2003
Mitigation Plan/As- builts (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline )
N /A*
Jun 2003
Oct 2003
Year 1 Monitoring
N /A*
May 2004
Dec 2004
Site Replanting (portions of Zone 3
—
Mid 2004
Year 1 Monitoring re-sampling
N /A*
Sep 2004
Dec 2004
Year 2 Monitoring (Vegetation)
Dec 2005
Oct 2005
Dec 2005
Year 2 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges)
Dec 2005
Oct 2005
Dec 2005
Year 3 Monitoring (Vegetation)
Dec 2006
Oct 2006
Dec 2006
Year 3 Monitoring Groundwater Gauges)
Dec 2006
Oct 2006
Dec 2006
Year 4 Monitoring (Vegetation)
Dec 2007
Oct 2007
Dec 2007
Year 4 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges)
Dec 2007
Oct 2007
Dec 2007
Site Repair Period (Re- grading)
—
—
Nov 2009
Site Replanting
Dec 2009
—
Dec 2009
Year 5 Monitoring (Vegetation)
Nov 2010
Oct 2010
Nov 2010
Year 5 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges)
Nov 2010
Oct 2010
Nov 2010
Warranty Planting
Feb 2011
—
Feb 2011
Year 6 Monitoring (Vegetation)
Aug 2011
Aug 2011
Dec 2011
Year 6 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges)
Nov 2011
Nov 2011
Dec 2011
Year 7 Monitoring (Vegetation)
Aug 2012
Aug 2012
Aug 2012
Year 7 Monitoring (Groundwater Gauges)
Nov 2012
Nov 2012
Nov 2012
Bold items represent those events of deliverables that are variable Plain -font items represent events that are standard over the
course of a typical project
*N /A —Data not available
1- Equals the number of reports or data points produced excluding the baseline
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
8368 Six Forks Road, Suite 104
Designer
Raleigh, NC 27615 -5083
Ward Consulting Engineers, P.C.
Ph- 919 - 870 -0526
email. bward @wce -core com
Mr Greg Kiser
Construction Contractor:
6106 Corporate Park Drive
Shamrock Environmental, Inc.
Browns Summit, NC 27214
(336) 375 -1989
Mr Greg Kiser
Planting Contractor:
6106 Corporate Park Drive
Shamrock Environmental, Inc
Browns Summit, NC 27214
(336) 375 -1989
Mr Greg Kiser
Seeding Contactor:
6106 Corporate Park Drive
Shamrock Environmental, Inc.
Browns Summit, NC 27214
(336) 375 -1989
Seed Mix Sources
N /A*
Nursery Stock Suppliers
N /A*
1101 Haynes Street, Ste. 101
Monitoring Performers (MY- 01 -04):
Raleigh, NC 27604
EcoScience Corporation
(919) 828 -3433
8368 Six Forks Road, Suite 104
Re- Designer:
Raleigh, NC 27615 -5083
Ward Consulting Engineers, P.0
Ph- 919 - 870 -0526
email: bward @wce - corp.com
Re-Construction:
1405 Benson Court, Suite C
Environmental Quality Resources, LLC
Arbutus, MD 21227
Tel: [phone]
Re- Planting:
P O. Box 1197
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc.
Freemont, NC 27830
919 242 -6555
Re- Seeding
P O Box 91208
Erosion Supply Company
Raleigh, NC 27675
(919) 787 -0334
410B Millstone Drive
Monitoring Performers (MY -05 +):
Hillsborough, NC 27278
The Catena Group
(919)732 -1300
Sandy Creek Year 7 Momtormg Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year? of 9
The Catena Group 8 January 2013

Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP Project No. 322
Project County
Durham
Drainage Area
7.3 square miles to culvert at Bypass 15 -501
Impervious cover estimate ( %)
10 percent
Stream Order
3` order
Physiogra hic Region
Piedmont
Ecoregion (Griffith and Omermk)
Triassic Basin
Rosgen Classification of As -built
NA (Enhancement only)
Cowardm Classification
Stream (R3UB2)
Wetlands (PFO1
Dominant soil types
Stream - Chewacla and Wehadkee soils (Ch)
Wetlands - Urban Land (Ur)
SCO #ID 0
10542301
USGS HUC for Project and Reference
03030002060110/ N/A
NCDWQ Sub -basin for Project and Reference
03 -06 -05 / N/A
NCDWQ classification for Project and
Reference
C, NSW / N/A
Any portion of any project segment 303d
listed?
No
Any portion of any project segment upstream
of a 303d listed segment?
No
Reasons for 303d listing or stressor
N/A
Percent of project easement fenced
None
Sandy Creek Year 7 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year? of 9
The Catena Group 9 January 2013

Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data
10
Year 7 Momtormg Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

The
Catena
Group
Sandy Creek: Wetland Restoration
and Stream Enhancement Site
MY -07 CCPV Sheet Index
EEP Project No. 322
2010 Aerial Photography
Durham County, North Carolina
Date:
January 2013
Scale:
0 50 100 200 Feet
I i I i I
Job No:
4134
Figure
2

The
�e +2s
Catena
IL
- Group
Date:
January 2013
s
Scale:
0 50 100 Feet
I I
Job No.
4143
VP1
a
Title:
Gauge B 1s +ss
Sandy Creek
Wetland
Restoration
and Stream
VP4
Enhancement
Gauge A 13 +es
Site
� Gauge C �
MY -07 CC PV
EEP Project No. 322
2010 Aerial
_
Orthophotography
(NC OneMaps)
Durham County,
Conservation Easement (22.62 acres)
North Carolina
VP2 Sandy Creek Thalweg
Client.
Reference Gauge Groundwater Gauges
� Wetland Hydrology Met
10 +g9
Wetland Hydrology Not Met
O Stream Stations
'`rT
- Cross Section 1
t ®Log vanes
�
SySt�Ill
(111 1a1>�C'lllt'1�
Vegetation Plots
�R °6""""
x' -Criteria Met
� Vegetation Plot Origin
8 +88 %j;i Vegetation Problem Areas 2012
Figure
Wetlands
Wetland Restoration (3.1 acres)
Wetland Preservation (7.1 acres)

Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Not provided as project contains only stream enhancement via log vanes.
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Table 6
Planted Acreage'
Vmetatlon Condition Assessment
10.9
Easement Acreage'
14
%of
Mapping
CCPV
Number of
Combined
Planted
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Threshold
Degiction
s
ea=
cre
1. Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material.
0.1 acres
pattern Color
7
_Affev
0.30
2 8"/
2. Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria.
0.1 acres
Patten and
Color
4
0.10
0.9%
TOW
11
0.40 11411
3.7%
. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year.
0.25 acres
Patten and
Color
3
0.40
3.7 °0
C®ulaflve Total
14
0.80
73%
Easement Acreage'
14
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
13
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013
%of
Mapping
CCPV
Number of
Combined
Easement
Vegetation Cateeory
Definitions
_ZULho.Ig
ctlon
Po ons
ea=
Acre e
4. Invasive Areas of Concern'
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
1000 SF
Pattern and
Color
7
0.70
5.0%
S. Easement Encroachment Areas`
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale).
none
on and
PattColor
2
0.10
0.9%
1 = Enter the planted acreage within the easement. This number is calculated as the easement acreage minus any existing mature tree stands that were not subject to supplemental planting of the understory, the channel acreage,
crossings or any other elements not directly planted as pan ofthe project effort.
2 = The acreage within the easement boundaries.
3 = Encroachment may occur within or outside of planted areas and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. In the event a polygon is cataloged into items 1, 2 or 3 in the table and is the result at
encroachment, the associated acreage should be tallied in the relevant item (i.e., item 1,2 or 3) as well as a parallel tally in item 5.
4 = Invasives may occur in or out of planted areas, but still within the easement and will therefore be calculated against the overall easement acreage. Invasives of concemfiinterest are listed below. The list of high concern spcies are
those with the potential to directly outcompete native, young, woody stems in the short-term (e.g. monitoring period or shortly thereafter) or affect the community structure for existing, more established tree/shrub stands over timeframes
that are slightly longer (e.g. 1 -2 decades). The lonhraderate concern gmup are those species that generally do not have this capacity over the timeframes discussed and therefore are not expected to be mapped with regularity, but can
be mapped, if in the judgement of the observer their coverage, density or distribution is suppressing the viability, density, or growth of planted woody stems. Decisions as to whether remediation will be needed are based on the
integration of risk factors by EEP such as species present, their coverage, distribution relative to native biomass, and the practicality of treatment. For example, even modest amounts of Kudzu or Japanese Knotweed early in the
projects history will warrant control, but potentially large coverages of Microstegium in the herb layer will not lildey trigger wntrol because of the limed capacities to impact treMhrub layers within the Umehnmes discussed and the
potential impacts of treating extensive amounts of ground cover. Those species with the 'watch list' designator in gray shade are of interest as well, but have yet to be observed across the state with any frequency. Those in red italics
are of particular interest given their extreme rtsk/threat level for mapping as ponds where jsoated specimens are found, particularly eaky in a projects monitoring history. However, areas of discreet, dense patches will of course be
mapped as polygons. The symbology scheme below was one that was found to be helpful for symbolzing invasives polygons, particulalry for situations where the condnon for an area is somewhere between isolated specimens and
dense, discreet patches. In any case, the point or polygon /area feature can be symbolized to describe things like high or low concern and species can be fisted as a map inset, in legend items if the number of species are limited or in
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
13
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement Photo Stations
Photo Station 1: Log Vane #I (Station 2 + 04)
Photo Station 3: Log Vane #3 (Station 6 + 55)
Photo Station 5: Log Vane #5 (Station 10 + 99)
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
14
Photo Station 2: Log Vane #2 (Station 4 + 12)
Photo Station 4: Log Vane #4 (Station 8 + 88)
Photo Station 6: Log Vane #6 (Station 13 + 83)
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Photo Station 7: Log Vane #7 (Station 15 + 39)
Photo Station 9: Log Vane #9 (Station 19 + 72)
Photo Station 11: Log Vane #11 (Station 22 + 66)
Photo Station 8: Log Vane #8 (Station 17 + 45)
Photo Station 10: Log Vane # 10 (Station 20 + 9 1 )
Photo Station 12: Log Vane # 12 (Station 24 + 20)
Note exposed boulder, no change from previous year
Sandy Creek Year 7 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year? of 9
The Catena Group 15 January 2013

Photo Station 13 Log Vane #13 (Station 26 + 12)
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
16
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

MY05 Aug 16, 2010
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Vegetation Plot Photos
W06 Aug 24, 2011
Plot 1
Plot 2
MY07 Aug 15, 2012
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
17 January 2013
Plot 3

W05 Aug 16, 2010
MY06 Aug 24, 2011
MY07 Aug 15, 2012
Plot 4 Plot 4 Plot 4
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
18
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data
19
Year 7 Monitoring Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Table 7. Vegetation Plot Success Summary Table
Sandy Creek Stream Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Site / EEP
Project No. 322
Vegetation Survival
Planted Stem Density
Total Stem Density
Threshold Met?
stems /acre
stems /acre
Plot
(260 total woody
ID
stems /acre
P1
Yes
161
485
P2
Yes
323
849
P3
Yes
364
1214
P4
Yes
404
485
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
20
Year 7 Momtormg Report
Year? of 9
January 2013

Table 8. Vegetation Metadata Table
Report Prepared By
The Catena Group
Date Prepared
10/31/2012 11 27
database name
database location
TheCatenaGroup- 2012- K- SandyCreek_MY7 mdb
computer name
P Uobs\2008 \4130 -34 (EEP Monitoring) \4134 (Sandy Crk)\2012 — MY -07
file size
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT -- --------
Metadata
Prol, planted
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data
Prol, total stems
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year This excludes live stakes
Plots
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year This includes live stakes, all planted stems,
and all natural /volunteer stems
Vigor
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc )
Vigor by Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots
Damage
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage by Slip
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each species
Planted Stems by
Plot and Slip
Damage values tallied by type for each plot
ALL Stems by Plot
and spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot, dead and missing stems are
excluded
PROJECT SUMMARY-----------------------------------
Project Code
322
project Name
Sandy Creek
Description
Sandy Creek Wetland Restoration and Stream Enhancement Project MY -06 (2010) EEP project # 322, 1st CVS
ear for VP 1, VP 2,3, &4 reset in February 2010,
River Basin
Cape Fear
length(R)
stream -to -edge width
ft
area (sq m
Required Plots
calculated
Sampled Plots
4
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
21
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013

Table 9. CVS Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
EEP Prolect Cade 322. Protect Name: Sandv Creek
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
22
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013
Currant Plot Data (MY7 2012
Annual M Bans
SciemMc Name
common Name
Species Type
E322 -01 0001
E322- 01-0002
E322- 01-0003
E322 -01 -0004
MY7 (2012)
MY6 (201J'�7
MYS (2010)
noLS
P -aU
T
noLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
Pall
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
Pall
T
noLS
P -all
noLS
P -aU
T
Ace rnegundo
boxelder
Tree
Ace ne undo var. negund
box elder
Tree
cchar's halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
5
5
6
6
4
1
1
Carpinus caroliniana var. ca
Coastal American Hor
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
V22
2
2
2
2
Ce haianthusoccidentalis
common buttonbush
Shrub
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
5
5
5
": '
4
4
Gleddsia triacanthos
hone locust
Tree
Liriodendron tulipifera var.
Tulip -tree, Yellow Pop[
Tree
i
Nyssa sylvatica
blackgum
Tree
1
1
Platanus occidentalis var. o4
Sycamore, Plane -tree
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
2
Quercus
oak
Tree
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
1
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus michauxii
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
1
1
1 1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
6
6
61
6
6
7
7
3
3
3
Robinia pseudoacacia
black locust
Tree
Sala ni ra
blackwillow
Tree
4
''
1
1
.,
5
5,,
5
5
_''
7
Ulmus
elm
Tree
":
Ulmusrubra
slippery elm
Tree
»ci
Stem tou
size fares
size (ACRES
Species c
Stems per ACREI
10.02
4
12
8
2
9
3
10
30
12
31
3
7
30
30
6
24
2
33
i
1
1
1
4
4
4
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.10
0.10
0.10
1
4
4
4
6
6
9
1 i
li
1 1
SO 1 1
161.91161.91485.61323.71
323.71849.81364.21364.21
12141404.71404.71485
313.6
313.6 758AI
303.5
303.5 6881
242 242-81 333.
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
22
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013

Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Appendix D
Stream Survey Data
23
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013

Cross Sectional Profiles with Annual Overlays
Project:
Sandy Creek/Project No. 322
Summe
6
MYO
NM
MY3
MYS
M
Cross Section: Cross Section 1
Feature
We
A (8KF)
109.6
114.7
119.7
1105
105.9
107.9
station:
18+25
(OKFj
31.4
31.4
31.2
31.3
30.9
30.7
Date:
7128712
Max d
4.1
45
53
4.2
4.1
4.2
Craw..
ZP, SV
Mean it
3.5
3.7
3.8
3.5
3.4
3.5
A
9.0
816
8.1
8.9
9.0
8.7
My06 -2011
MY072012
mvOD 2003
MY022006
pY11132000
1111PY062010
Ration
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Staten
Elevation
Notes
Station
Elevation
Notes
Station
1.00
Elevation Notes
265.02 LPIN
Station
1.00
Elevatan
265.09
Notes
LPIN
1.00 264.33
100 264.50
1.00 264.55 LPIN
1.00 264.55 LEFT PIN
5.70
254.44
3D0
264.57
2.00
264.60
5.00
264.80
1.00
264.55
1.0D
264.50
8.00
254.20
5110
264.66
4.00
264.69
8.00
264.55
TOBL
4.00
264.66
6.00
264.87
950
263.64
3L8ankfull
7.00
254BO
TOOL
6.00
284.78
9.00
263.86
Bankfull Lai
6.50
264.79
8.00
264.69
TOBL
9.90
752.79
800
264.29
8.00
264.47
TOBL
1000
262.72
B.00
26485 3LBsrnkfull
9.00
263.83
10.30
282.40
9110
263.82
3ankfull Lel
8.70
264.24
11.50
261.58
11.00
261.90
10.70
262.21
11.20
281.72
10.00
262.78
9.50
283.84
3anldull Le
12.60
260.06
TOE L
12.50
260113 Toe L
12D0
280.95
12.00
251.12
11.00
261.96
10.00
263.11
17.60
259.84
14.00
260.19
1250
260.05
TOE L
12.20
280.07
Tae L
11.80
261 D4
11.30
262.01
19.00
259.71
18.00
259.87
14JW
259.80
13.00
259.97
12.00
259.54
Toe L
11.70
261.48
22.00
259.85
22.00
259.92
16D0
258.72
14.00
259.99
15.00
259.49
12.40
25(1.37
23.00
259.75
28.00
259.58 TW
19,00
259.86
15.00
259.87
17.00
259.79
14.00
260.32
26.60
259.64
(WS. 255
30.50
259.72 GS l WSEI
22.00
259.83
16.00
259.03
21.00
259.82
18.00
280.49
31110
259.93
34.00
258.85
28.00
259.43
TW
17.00
259.86
25.00
259.88
19.50
280.11
35D0
260.02
36.00
259.77
29.00
259.61
18.00
259.83
31.00
259.77
73.00
280.00
37.20
259.75
TOE R
38.00
259.50 TOE R
32.00
259.88
19.00
259.82
33.70
259.71
27,00
259.42
38 AO
262.10
38.50
282DO
35.00
259.65
22.00
259.60
35.00
259.51
32.00
258.52
TW
39.25
262.8.5
brildull d0
40.20
263.84
37.80
259.55
TOE R
23.00
259.72
35.70
25937
36.00
2.58.88
40.40
283.97
41.00
264.04
38.50
262.13
35.50
259.51
IYS elev
37.00
259.27
TW
3B.20
258.76
Toe R
4130
264.41
TOBR
43.00
264.50 R Bankfull
39.50
263.38
Photo of XS-1, looking in the dovmsbasm direction
36.40
259.70
37.90
259.70
Toe R
39.00
262.32
44.00
264.52
46.00
264.30
4100
264.47
T08R
37.40
299.81
Toe R
38.70
262D1
41.00
264.13
T013R
48.00
264.16
RIGHT PIN
48.00
264.10
43.00
264.53
38.40
250.96
39.60
283.09
43.00
254.47
48.00
264.50 RRN
45D0
264.44
39.10
262.08
40.00
263.66
46.00
26438
48.00
264.16
39.70
262.64
41.00
264.11
4800
264.19
RPIN
48.00
264.57
RPIN
41.80
254.18
TOBR
42.00
25435
TOBR
43.00
264.30
45.00
264.35
46.00
264.31
48.00
264.18
48.00
264.13
Cross Section 1
2e5.00
26a.0o
204.00
263.00
W.
262.00
W
261.00
260.00
25900
25900
0.00
10.00
2900
30.00
4900
5010 60.00
Station (Feet)
--o-As -Bulk
Year 1 +Year 3 tYear 5 Year !B
-46•Year 7 --V-BKF

Longitudinal Profiles with Annual Overlays
Not provided as project contains only stream enhancement via log vanes
Pebble Count Plots with Annual Overlays
Not provided as project contains only stream enhancement via log vanes
Table 10a and b. Baseline — Stream Data Summary
Not provided as project contains only stream enhancement via log vanes
Table lla and b. Monitoring — Dimensional Morphology Summary
Not provided as project contains only stream enhancement via log vanes
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
25
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013

Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Appendix E
Hydrologic Data
26
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013

Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Not provided as project contains only stream enhancement via log vanes
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
27
Year 6 Momtormg Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013

Figure 4. Monthly Rainfall Data for Entire Year
Sandy Creek 30-70 percentile Graph for Rainfall 2012
9.00
8.00
7.00
6.00
s 5.00
x
r
d 4.00 —
i
`s
Q 3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00 ... ..... —� - -T
Q E $ E E
d p
LL 2 t]
Ln
Growing Season
Growing Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(h ttp: //www.wcc. nres.0 sda.go'/Rpref upport/di m ate&edan ds/ne/37063.b(t)
—30%
—70%
2012
Rain Data: Station DURH
(httpJAvww.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/ser,AcesA,equest.php)
Sandy Creek Year 6 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 6 of 9
The Catena Group 28 January 2013

Figure 5. Precipitation and Water Level Plots
Graving Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days) Rain Date: Station
DURH
(htlp: //www. wee. nres. usda. pwAtproVSUppart /Gimate/wetlandslnc/37083.bct) ( h1tp: Uwww. nc- Gimate ,ncsu.edu/seMees/roquest.php)
San
dy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
29 January
2013
Sandy Creek Gauge A
5
10
iiuiin
0
11/'
- 4
-10
IN
3
�
e
J
.20
^2
-30
�1
-40
M,�O
-50
Date
Graving Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days) Rain Date: Station
DURH
(htlp: //www. wee. nres. usda. pwAtproVSUppart /Gimate/wetlandslnc/37083.bct) ( h1tp: Uwww. nc- Gimate ,ncsu.edu/seMees/roquest.php)
San
dy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
29 January
2013
iiuiin
DURH
(htlp: //www. wee. nres. usda. pwAtproVSUppart /Gimate/wetlandslnc/37083.bct) ( h1tp: Uwww. nc- Gimate ,ncsu.edu/seMees/roquest.php)
San
dy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
29 January
2013

Graving Beeson: March 24 to November 1 (222 days) Rain Date: Station DURH
(http: /lwww.wcc.nres.usde . govAtproi/ support /dimate/wetlends/nc/37083.b(
t) (httpJ/www.ncclimate.ncsu.edu / services/roquest.php)
Sandy Creek Year 6 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 6 of 9
The Catena Group 30 January
2013
Sandy Creek Gauge B - Island
10
II
5
�I�Il�gp
0 Ell
11.11 loll
11/'
4
,o
3
�►
c
O
_20
-2�
-30
1
_40
11� mi,
50
- - - - -- -- - in,
-- -
�1' I
--- - - 0
Date
Graving Beeson: March 24 to November 1 (222 days) Rain Date: Station DURH
(http: /lwww.wcc.nres.usde . govAtproi/ support /dimate/wetlends/nc/37083.b(
t) (httpJ/www.ncclimate.ncsu.edu / services/roquest.php)
Sandy Creek Year 6 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 6 of 9
The Catena Group 30 January
2013
�I�Il�gp
t) (httpJ/www.ncclimate.ncsu.edu / services/roquest.php)
Sandy Creek Year 6 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 6 of 9
The Catena Group 30 January
2013

Crowing Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(http: //www.wec.nres.usdo.gmi tpreft uppod /dimatahetlandstnc/37063.bct)
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Rain Data: Station DURH
(http:/Mrww.nc- climate .ncsu.edu /services/request. php)
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
31 January
2013
Sandy Creek Gauge C
10
5
0-
11P
� 4
-10 -
3
c
al
J
-20
C
12 inches Below
a
Sail Surface
2
Season
-30
1
�
-40
Date
Crowing Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(http: //www.wec.nres.usdo.gmi tpreft uppod /dimatahetlandstnc/37063.bct)
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Rain Data: Station DURH
(http:/Mrww.nc- climate .ncsu.edu /services/request. php)
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
31 January
2013
IN�II�
Crowing Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(http: //www.wec.nres.usdo.gmi tpreft uppod /dimatahetlandstnc/37063.bct)
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
Rain Data: Station DURH
(http:/Mrww.nc- climate .ncsu.edu /services/request. php)
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
31 January
2013

Growing
Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(h dP: //www.wx. nres.0 sda .pov/RpreUsupporGdimetelwetlen ds/neld7l>63.brt)
Rein Date: Station DURH
(http:/AY,Nw.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/seNcestrequest.php)
2013
Sandy Creek Year 6 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 6 of 9
The Catena Group 32 January
Sandy Creek Wetland Reference Gauge
10
5
0-
11
4/29/12 6/28112 8/27/12 lOf26/12 4
,A
-10
3
c
d
_20
12 inches Below
Soil Surface
GrovAng
71,
2
Season
-30
_40
-50
- -
-- - -- - - -- - - - - - -- - - -
- 0
Date
Growing
Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(h dP: //www.wx. nres.0 sda .pov/RpreUsupporGdimetelwetlen ds/neld7l>63.brt)
Rein Date: Station DURH
(http:/AY,Nw.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/seNcestrequest.php)
2013
Sandy Creek Year 6 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 6 of 9
The Catena Group 32 January
Season: March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(h dP: //www.wx. nres.0 sda .pov/RpreUsupporGdimetelwetlen ds/neld7l>63.brt)
Rein Date: Station DURH
(http:/AY,Nw.nc-climate.ncsu.edu/seNcestrequest.php)
2013
Sandy Creek Year 6 Monitoring Report
NCEEP Project Number 322 Year 6 of 9
The Catena Group 32 January

Table 13. Wetland Criteria Attainment 2010 -2012
a — Gauge installed 6/15/2010 — groundwater level monitored for 139 days of the growing season
b - Gauge installed 6/25/2010 — groundwater level monitored for 129 days of the growing season
c — Gauge installed 6/14/2010 — groundwater level monitored for 140 days of the growing season
d - Gauge malfunction — groundwater level monitored for 203 days of the growing season
e - Gauge malfunction — groundwater level monitored for 167 days of the growing season
Growmg Season March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(http / /www wcc nres usda gov /ftpref /support/climate /wetlands /nc/37063 txt)
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
33
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013
I K
2010
-03
2011 MY -04
2012
-05
•�
O
•�
°q
y EO y
•�
y eC y
a
y CO y
C7
QUA
Zvi
ri U
QUA
o
riQ
QUA
ern
ri U�
Ref
65
3%
No
29
13%
Yes
16
7%
No
A
31
14%
Yes
62
28%
Yes
58
26%
Yes
B
21
9%
Yes
36
16%
Yes
33'
15%
Yes
C
7 °
3%
No
38
17%
Yes
20
9%
No
a — Gauge installed 6/15/2010 — groundwater level monitored for 139 days of the growing season
b - Gauge installed 6/25/2010 — groundwater level monitored for 129 days of the growing season
c — Gauge installed 6/14/2010 — groundwater level monitored for 140 days of the growing season
d - Gauge malfunction — groundwater level monitored for 203 days of the growing season
e - Gauge malfunction — groundwater level monitored for 167 days of the growing season
Growmg Season March 24 to November 1 (222 days)
(http / /www wcc nres usda gov /ftpref /support/climate /wetlands /nc/37063 txt)
Sandy Creek
NCEEP Project Number 322
The Catena Group
33
Year 6 Monitoring Report
Year 6 of 9
January 2013
I K