HomeMy WebLinkAbout20070491 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20130212FINAL
V� ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 1 (2012)
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
STREAM/WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
ASHE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(EEP Project No. 372, Contract No. 004802)
Construction Completed December 2011
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
LNR 2 0 �3 - WATER (SUAI QTY L
r~
EC )system
January 2013
6� -0qT1
FINAL
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
YEAR 1(2012)
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
STREAM/WETLAND RESTORATION SITE
ASHE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
(EEP Project No. 372, Contract No. 004802)
Construction Completed December 2011
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Ecosystem Enhancement Program
Raleigh, North Carolina
Prepared by:
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
r~
14,Cosysteni
Axiom Environmental, Inc.
January 2013
Table of Contents
10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2 0 METHODOLOGY ..... . .
2 1 Vegetation Assessment
2 2 Stream Assessment
3 0 REFERENCES . ........ . .......
Appendices
APPENDIX A PROJECT VICINITY MAP AND BACKGROUND TABLES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Table 4 Project Baseline Information and Attributes
APPENDIX B VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA
Figures 2 and 2A -2B Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A -513 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Stream Fixed - Station Photographs
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
APPENDIX C VEGETATION PLOT DATA
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 8 CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 9. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
APPENDIX D STREAM SURVEY DATA
Cross - section Plots
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Substrate Plots
Table 10a -10d Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 1 l a -11 d Monitoring Data
APPENDIX E HYDROLOGY DATA
Table 12 Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 13 Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Summary
1
3
3
3
5
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Table of Contents
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (hereafter referred to as
the Site) is situated within US Geological Survey (USGS) hydrologic unit 05050001 of the
Upper New River Basin and is in a portion of NC Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Priority
Sub -basin 05 -07 -02 The project is located in the northwest corner of Ashe County, about 1 mile
south of the Virginia state line and 3 miles east of the Tennessee state line (Figure 1, Appendix
A) The Site is encompassed within a 61.92 -acre easement located in a tract owned by Michael
and Virginia Tate The Site includes an unnamed tributary to Ripshin Branch (UT), Ripshin
Branch proper, and associated floodplain wetlands (Figure 2, Appendix A) This report
(compiled based on EEP's Procedural Guidance and Content Requirements for EEP Monitoring
Reports, Version 14, dated 11/7/11) summarizes data for Year 1 (2012) monitoring
The project goals are as follows
• Improve stream water quality and ecological function by excluding livestock, restoring pool and
riffle sequences, and restoring tree canopy and instream large woody debris
• Enhance aquatic and terrestrial habitat in the stream corridor and adjacent wetlands
• Enhance and/or restore the ecological function of riparian wetlands
• Restore the riparian corridor (forested buffer) for watershed and wildlife benefits
• Enhance habitat for native brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and improve fishery potential
• Increase biodiversity of the stream ecology, riparian buffers, and wetlands
These goals will be accomplished through the implementation of the following objectives
• Improve channel geomorphology toward reference conditions by providing watershed scaled and
Rosgen -typed channel dimension, adding floodplain benches where floodplain access is not
feasible, restoring sinuous pattern to straightened reaches where possible, and adjusting profile as
needed to restore or maintain sediment transport equilibrium
• Restore streamside floodprone area where appropriate (increase floodwater access to the
floodplain)
• Reduce sediment and nutrient loading by reshaping and stabilizing banks, reducing bank scour,
excluding livestock, and restoring riparian buffers
• Enhance or restore wetland hydrology and vegetation in former pastures and filled wetlands
During Year 1 (2012) monitoring, five vegetation plots were established and sampled
Vegetation Success Criteria (from approved Ripshin Branch Stream & Wetland Restoration Plan
[NCEEP 2007]) includes the following
• Survival of planted vegetation should exceed 80 percent after 5 years following planting
(minimum 260 stems /acre)
• Planted vegetation stabilizing at 20 years with distinct canopy, subcanopy, and shrub layers
• Establishment of herbaceous cover over 75 percent of the soil surface in restored wetlands and
riparian areas
• Plant biodiversity dominated by native species, with minimal ecological impact from invasive
species
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina page l
Overall, vegetation exceeded success criteria with an average of 332 stems - per -acre across the
Site In addition, three of the five vegetation monitoring plots met, or exceeded success criteria
of 320 stems - per -acre (minimum stem count after 1 year) Vegetation plots 2 and 4 were below
success criteria with 283 and 121 stems - per -acre, respectively Potential causes of the low stem
counts at these plots could be excessive hydrology associated with wetland restoration and over
competition by sedges and soft rush (Carex spp and Juncus effuses, respectively).
A visual assessment and geomorphic survey were completed for the Site The visual assessment
indicated that project reaches were performing within established success criteria ranges as
shown below The only stream problem area includes a reach of moderate erosion located in the
upper 150 to 200 linear feet of the UT Erosion in this reach occurred during heavy rains
immediately upon the completion of construction. Geomorphic measurements in this area
indicate channel widening with subsequent sediment aggradation This area will continue to be
monitored for future channel erosion
Stream Success Criteria (from approved Ripshin Branch Stream & Wetland Restoration Plan
[NCEEP 2007]) is as follows
• Channel morphology retains the design stream type over the majority of the reach
• Coarsening of riffle bed material in newly constructed reaches.
• Pool /riffle spacing should remain fairly constant
• Maintenance of bankfull width at riffles within 10 percent of the design
• Maintenance of bank height ratios at 1 1.1.
• Bank stability over 90 percent of altered channel reaches
• Dimension and profile stability over 90 percent of altered channel reaches
• No significant channel aggradation or degradation
• Minimal development of instream bars
• Biological populations (invertebrate and fish) remain constant or increase and species
composition indicates a positive trend
Success criteria for stream restoration will be based on stream stability assessed using
measurements of stream dimension, pattern, and profile, Site photographs, visual assessments;
and vegetation sampling It is too early in the 5 -year annual monitoring period for Site
measurements to determine if stream success criteria, in relation to restoration objectives, are
being achieved However, the stream appears to be functioning properly and emulates design
conditions
During Year 1 (2012) monitoring, six groundwater gauges were installed at the Site Wetland
hydrology success criteria (from approved Ripshin Branch Stream & Wetland Restoration Plan
[NCEEP 2007]) is as follows
• Hydrologic monitoring indicates groundwater within 12 inches of the ground surface for
10 percent of the growing season
• Increasing wetland vegetation
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina page 2
• Development of hydric soils
• Fulfill US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) criteria for jurisdictional wetlands
Groundwater gauges were installed in mid October 2012, therefore, no groundwater gauge
reporting is available for Year 1 (2012) monitoring Groundwater gauge monitoring will be
initiated during Year 2 (2013) monitoring
Summary information/data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver or encroachment
and statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in
tables and figures within this report's appendices Narrative background and supporting
information formerly found in these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report
(formerly Mitigation Plan) and in the Mitigation Plan (formerly the Restoration Plan) documents
available on the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program ( NCEEP) website. All raw data
supporting the tables and figures in the appendices are available from NCEEP upon request
2.0 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Vegetation Assessment
Five vegetation plots were established and marked during the Year 1 (2012) monitoring period
Plots were established by installing 4 -foot, metal U -bar post at the corners and a 10 -foot, 0.75
inch PVC at the origin The plots are 10 meters square and are located randomly within the Site
These plots were surveyed in October for the Year 1 (2012) monitoring season CVS -EEP
Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Levels 1 -2 Plot Sampling Only Version 4 2 (Lee et al 2008)
(http //cvs bio unc edu/methods htm), results are included in Appendix C. The taxonomic
standard for vegetation used for this document was Flora of the Southern and Mid - Atlantic
States (Weakley 2012)
2.2 Stream Assessment
Annual stream monitoring was conducted in October of 2012 Measurements were taken using a
Topcon GTS 303 total station and Recon data collector The raw total station file was processed
using Carlson Survey Software into a Computer Aided Design (CAD) file. Coordinates were
exported as a text/ASCII file to Microsoft Excel for processing and presentation of data Pebble
counts were completed using the modified Wolman method (Rosgen 1993)
Eight permanent cross - sections, six riffle and two pool, were established and will be used to
evaluate stream dimension, locations are depicted on Figures 2, 2A, and 2B (Appendix B)
Cross - sections are permanently monumented with 4 -foot metal U -bar posts at each end point
Cross - sections will be surveyed to provide a detailed measurement of the stream and banks,
including points on the adjacent floodplam, top of bank, bankfull, breaks in slope, edge of water,
and thalweg. Data will be used to calculate width -depth ratios, entrenchment ratios, and bank
height ratios for each cross - section In addition, pebble counts were completed at cross - sections
4 and 8, and photographs will be taken at each permanent cross - section annually
Two monitoring reaches were established (Unnamed Tributary and Ripshm Branch) and will be
used to evaluate stream pattern and longitudinal profile, locations are depicted on Figures 2, 2A,
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina page 3
and 213 (Appendix B) Longitudinal profile measurements include average water surface slopes,
facet slopes, and pool -to -pool spacing Seventeen permanent photo points were established
throughout the restoration reach, locations are depicted on Figures 2, 2A, and 213 (Appendix B)
In addition, visual stream morphology and stability assessments were completed in each of the
two monitoring reaches to assess the channel bed, banks, and in- stream structures
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc Monitoring Year I of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina page 4
3.0 REFERENCES
Ecosystem Enhancement Program (EEP). Unpublished. Procedural Guidance and Content
Requirements for EEP Monitoring Projects, Version 1.4, dated 11/07/11. NC
Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Available online at
http: / /portal.ncdenr.org/c /document library/get file ?p 1 id= 1169848 &folderld = 2288101
&name = DLFE- 39268.pdf.
Lee, M.T., R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS -EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Levels 1 -2 Plot Sampling Only, Version 4.2. Available online at
http : / /cvs.bio.unc.edu /methods.htm.
N.C. Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2007. Ripshin Branch Stream & Wetland Restoration
Plan - Ashe County, NC.
Rosgen. 1993. Applied Fluvial Geomorphology, Training Manual. River Short Course,
Wildland Hydrology, Pagosa Springs, CO.
Weakley, Alan S. 2012. Flora of the Southern and Mid - Atlantic States. Available online at:
http : / /www.herbarium.unc.edu/Weakle, sFy Iora.pdf [September 28, 2012]. University of
North Carolina Herbarium, North Carolina Botanical Garden, University of North
Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina page 5
APPENDIX A
PROJECT VICINITY MAP AND BACKGROUND TABLES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contacts Table
Table 4 Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
W `
I ,
r.
d {
h _
Vt
Project Site I ��--�
S
x �F � - - -- °� CAI } �_ ✓ J ..
a J
T"N'° -`�..r
rik-
Directions from Raleigh:
Take 1 -40 West approx. 100 miles to US -421 North.
Travel approx. 71 miles, then take a right on US -221 North. = -
�� After approx. 12 miles, turn left on NC- 194N /US -221 Bus. North.
Travel approx. 5 miles, then turn left on NC- 194N/NC -88W.
After 2 miles, turn right on NC -194N. _
' Continue on S. Big Horse Creek Road._
Turn Left on Big Windfall Road.
f After approx. 5 miles, turn left onto Rip Shin Road. Site is about 2.5 miles on the right.
lid O w j� @
-
0 0.25 0.5 1 1.5 2
Miles =
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
(919) 215 -1693
Axiom Environmental. Inc.
VICINITY MAP
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
EEP PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
Date:
October 2012
Project:
12- 004.13
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
I ate karm (Riashin Branch) stream and Wetland Restoration Site
Mitt at
Stream
Type Restoration Restoration Equivalent
Totals 2106 518
Project Component/
Station
Existing Linear
Footage/
Reach 1D
Range
Acreage
Reach I (Ripshin Br)
00 +00—
800
08 +00
Reach 1 B (Ripshm Br)
08 +00-
350
12 +00
Reach 1 C (Ripshm Br)
12 +00-
285
14 +85
Reach 2A (Ripshm Br)
14 +85-
785
23 +00
Ri shm Branch
--
518
Reach 3A (UT)
00 +00-
132
01 +24
Reach 3B (UT)
01 +24-
688
09 +12
Wetland UT
0
Wetland UT
1 24
Wetland Ri shm Branch
0
Wetland Ripshm Branch
274
Restoration Level
Restoration
Enhancement (Level I)
Enhancement (Level II;
Preservation
Wetland Enhancement
Creation
Totals
Mitigation Units
Prtortt
Approa
Enhance
Priority
Enhance
Priority
Preservat
Enhance
Priority
EY Yroiect Number 372
Credits
Riparian Wetland
Restoration Restoration E
3.8 1.99
Restoration Mitigation
near Footage/ Ratio
Acreage
800 1 2 5
400 1 1
285 1 2 5
815 11
518 15
124 1 15
788 1 1
15 11
124 12
230 1 1
274 12
Pro ects Components
Restoration/
y Restoration L
ch Equivalent
ment E II
II R
ment E II
II R
ion P
ment E I
I R
R
E
R
E
Component Summation
Stream (linear footage)
2003
124
1085
518
3730
2624 SN
Riparian Wetland (acres)
38
3 98
778
5 78 WMUs
Buffer
Comment
Buffer (square footage)
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year I of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (EEP Project Number 372)
Elapsed Time Since Grading Complete: 1 year 3 months
Elapsed Time Since Planting Complete: 0 year 11 months
Number of Reportine Years:
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion
or Delivery
Restoration Plan
March 2007
Final Design — Construction Plans
Land Mechanics Designs, Inc
September 2009
Construction
Aug ust 2011
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area
Habitat Assessment Restoration Program
Aug ust 2011
Permanent seed mix applied to entire project area
Surveyor
Aug ust 2011
Containerized and B &B plantings for entire reach
Raleigh, NC 27603
December 2011
As -built Construction Plans
Seed Mix Source
December 2011
Year 1 Monitoring 2012
October 2012
December 2012
Year 2 Monitoring 2013
Years 1 -5 Monitoring Performers
Axiom Environmental, Inc
Year 3 Monitoring 2014
218 Snow Avenue
Year 4 Monitoring 2015
Grant Lewis 919- 215 -1693
Year 5 Monitoring 2016
Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Tate Farm i shin Branch Stream and Wetland Restoration Site EP Project Number 372
Designer
Ecologic Associates, P C
Greensboro, NC 27404
Mark Taylor 336 - 382 -9362
Construction Contractor
Land Mechanics Designs, Inc
Willow Spring, NC 27529
Lloyd Glover 919 - 422 -3392
Planting and Seeding Contractor
Habitat Assessment Restoration Program
Charlotte, NC 28262
Surveyor
Stewart Proctor
Raleigh, NC 27603
Herb Proctor 919 - 779 -1855
Seed Mix Source
Green Resource
Colfax, NC 27235
336 - 855 -6363
Years 1 -5 Monitoring Performers
Axiom Environmental, Inc
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Grant Lewis 919- 215 -1693
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Table 4. Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Tate Farm i shin Branch Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (EEP Project Number 372)
Project Information
Project Name
Tate Farm Ri shin Branch
Project County
Ashe
Project Area (Acres)
6192
Project Coordinates (NAD83 2007)
1,037,279 65, 1,234,847,66
Project Watershed Summary Information
Ph sio ra hic Region
Blue Ridge
Ecore ion
Southern Crystalline Ridges and Mountains
Project River Basin
Upper New
USGS 8-digit HUC
05050001
USGS 14-digit RUC
05050001010050
NCDWQ Subbasm
05 -07 -02
Project Drainage Area (Sq Mi
2 0
Project Drainage Area Impervious Surface
<5%
Watershed Type
Rural
Reach Summary
Information
Parameters
Reach 1 T
Reach 2 shin Br.
Restored/Enhanced Length Linear Feet
2300
912
Drainage Area (Square Miles )
2 0
056
NCDWQ Index Number
05 -07
NCDWQ Classification
C, NSW, Tr
Valle Type/Morphological Descri tion
II/BC4
Dominant Soil Series
Colvard and Toxawa
Drainage Class
Well and Poorly Drained
Soil H dric Status
Nonh dric and H dric
Sloe
002
002
FEMA Classification
NA
Native Vegetation Community
Montane Alluvial Forest and Swamp Forest-
Bog Complex
Percent Composition of Exotic Invasives
<5%
<5%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable
Waters of the U S — Sections 404 and 401
Yes - Received Appropriate Permits
Endangered Species Act
No Effect
Historic Preservation Act
No
CZMA/CAMA
NA
FEMA Flood lam Compliance
NA
Essential Fisheries Habitat
Trout
"DN1_r._
VISUAL ASSESSMENT DATA
Figures 2 and 2A -213 Current Conditions Plan View
Tables 5A -513 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Stream Fixed - Station Photographs
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Axiom Environmental. I -ic.
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
(919) 215 -1693
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW
TATE FARM (UT to RIPSHIN BRANCH)
EEP PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by. KRJ
Date:
Sept. 2012
Project:
12- 004.13
FIGURE
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
f� Raleigh, NC 27603
(919) 215 -1693
4xiom Ervrcnmertal, lac.
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW
TATE FARM (UT)
EEP PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by. KRJ FIGURE
Date: 2 A
Project: Sept. 2012
12- 004.13
Axiom Environmental
218 Snow Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
(919) 215 -1693
Ax om Environmereal. Inc.
CURRENT CONDITIONS PLAN VIEW
TATE FARM (RIPSHIN BRANCH)
EEP PROJECT NUMBER 372
Ashe County, North Carolina
Dwn. by.
KRJ
FIGURE
•G)
Date:
Sept. 2012
Project:
12- 004.13
Table SA Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Unnamed Tributary
Assessed Length 800
Channel
1 Bed
1 Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1 Aegradation -Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
2 Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
2 Riffle Condition
1 Texture /Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
3 Meander Pool
Condition
1 Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth Mean Bankfull Depth > 1 6)
2 Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
4 Thalweg Position
1 Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
2 Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
1 Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
scour and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2 Bank 2 Undercut likely Does NOT include undercuts that are modest appear sustainable
and are providing habitat
3 Mass Wasting Bank slumping calving or collapse
8
1 Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs
2 Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
3 Engineered
w'l
III
Structures
2a Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
3 Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
4
4
15% (See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
4 Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining - Max Pool Depth Mean Bankfull
Depth ratio > 1 6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow
8
8
100%
4
4
w'l
III
100%
4
4
100%
4
4
100%
Table 5B Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Reach ID Ripshin Branch
Assessed Length 1444
Channel
1 Bed
1 Vertical Stability
(Riffle and Run units)
1 Aggradation - Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
flow laterally (not to include point bars)
2 Degradation - Evidence of downcutting
2 Riffle Condition
1 Texture /Substrate - Riffle maintains coarser substrate
3 Meander Pool
Condition
1 Depth Sufficient (Max Pool Depth Mean Bankfull Depth > 1 6)
-
2 Length appropriate (>30% of centerline distance between tail of
upstream riffle and head of downstrem riffle)
4 Thalweg Position
1 Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
2 Thalweg centering at downstream of meander (Glide)
1 Scoured/Eroding Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and /or
scour and erosion
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2 Bank 2 Undercut likely Does NOT include undercuts that are modest appear sustainable
and are providing habitat
3 Mass Wasting Bank slumping calving or collapse
1 Overall Integrity
2 Grade Control
3 Engineered
Structures 2a Piping
3 Bank Protection
4 Habitat
lures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs
e control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
lures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed
(See guidance for this table in EEP monitoring guidance document)
forming structures maintaining - Max Pool Depth Mean Bankfull
h ratio > 1 6 Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base -flow
0
0
#DIV /01
8
8
100%
8
8
100%
8
8
r,00%
Table 6
rianlea
I
Vecietatlon Condition Assessment
tt 9S
Mapping I CCPV I Number of I Combined I % of Planted
I1 Bare Areas IVery limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material I 0 1 acres I Brown Line I 0 I 000 I 00% I
12 Low Stem Density Areas (Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria 1 0 1 acres Brown Line 0 000 00%
13 Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor (Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year 1 0 25 acres I Brown Line 1 0 1 000 1 00% 1
Easement Acreage' 61 9
Mapping
CCPV
Number of
Combined
% of Easement
Vecietation Cateaory
Definitions
Threshold
Depiction
Polygons
Acreage
Acrea e
Light green,
4 Invasive Areas of Concern `
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
100 SF
yellow, and dark
0
000
00%
pink
5 Easement Encroachment Areas'
Areas or points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
none
Brown Line
0
000
00%
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 part of the project effort
2 = The acreage vnthin 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 of encroachment, the
assoaated acreage should be tallied in the relevant item (i a 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 conceMinterest 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 low /moderate concern group are those speaes 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 unit be needed are base the integration of risk factors by EEC such as species present
their coverage, distribution relative to native biomass and the practica ty of treatment For example even modest amounts of Kudzu or Japanese Knotweed early in the pro ects history will warrant control, but potentially large coverages of
Microstegwm in the herb layer will not likley tngger control because of the limited capacities to impact tree /shrub layers within the timeframes discussed and the potential impacts of creating extensive amounts of ground cover Those species vn h the
"watch list" designator in gray shade are of intterest 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 nsk/threat level for mapping as points where isolated
specimens are found particularly ealry in a projects monitoring history However areas of discreet, dense patches well 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 conditon 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 descnbe things like high or low concern
and species can be listed as a map inset in legend items if the number of species are limited or in the narrative section of the executive summary
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Stream Fixed - Station Photographs
Taken October 2012
y.
'Al:. i
Z AIfY�
t +wy
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Stream Fixed - Station Photographs
Taken October 2012
(continued)
�y'`I fa• F /M r
Photo
Point 9
Ph
Poin 117
Photo
!
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Stream Fixed - Station Photographs
Taken October 2012
(continued)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch)
Vegetation Monitoring Photographs
Taken October 2012
APPENDIX C
VEGETATION PLOT DATA
Table 7 Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 9. Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Tate Farm (Rinshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (EEP Protect Number 372)
Vegetation Plot ID
Vegetation Survival Threshold Met?
Tract Mean
1
No
60%
2
Yes
3
Yes
4
No
5
Yes
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Protect Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Tate Farm shin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (EEP Project Number 372
Report Prepared By
Corn Fa um
Date Prepared
10/19/2012 9 17
database name
Axiom -EEP- 2012 -A mdb
database location
S \CVS database\2012
computer name
KENAN
file size
57331712
DESCRH'TION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT ------------
Metadata
Description of database file, the report worksheets, and a summary of project(s) and project data
Pro j, planted
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year This excludes live stakes
Pro j, total stems
Each project is listed with its TOTAL stems per acre, for each year This includes live stakes, all planted stems, and all
natural /volunteer stems
Plots
List of plots surveyed with location and summary data (live stems, dead stems, missing, etc )
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots
Vigor b Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage
List of most frequent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by type for each species
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by type for each plot
Planted Stems by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for each plot, dead and missing stems are excluded
ALL Stems by Plot and spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined) for each plot, dead
and missing stems are excluded
PROJECT SUMMARY---------------------------------
Project Code
372
project Name
Tate Farm
Description
Stream and Wetland Restoration
River Basin
New
length(ft)
stream-to-edge width (ft)
area s m
Required Plots calculated
Sampled Plots
5
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Table 9: Total and Planted Stems by Plot and Species
Tate Farm - EEP Proiect Code 372
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Pnol-S = Planted stems excluding livestakes
P -all = Planted stems including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruit stems
Current Plot Data (MY3 2012)
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
Plot 5
MY1 (2012)
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS IP
-all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Pnol-S
P -all
T
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
5
51
5
5
5
5
Aronia arbutifolia
Red Chokeberry
Shrub
2
2
2
3
3
3
5
5
5
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
5
5
5
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
21
4
4
4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
2
21
21
3
31
3
3
3
3
8
8
8
Ilex opaca
American holly
Tree
11
2
2
2
21
21
2
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
5
5
5
1
1
1
21
2
2
8
81
8
Prunus serotina
black cherry
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
Rhus
Isumac
Ishrub
1 1
1
Viburnum dentatum
Isouthern arrowwood
IShrub
3
3
3
1
3
3
3
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
7
7
7
81
81
8
10
101
11
31
3
3
13
13
13
41
411
42
1
1
1
1
1
5
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.124
4
4
4
4
4
4
QO.O
5
2
2
2
4
4
4
9
9
10
283.3
283.3
283.3
323.7
323.7
3237
404.445.2
121.4
121.4
121.4
526.1
526.1
526.1
331.8
331.8
339.9
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Pnol-S = Planted stems excluding livestakes
P -all = Planted stems including livestakes
T = All planted and natural recruit stems
APPENDIX D
STREAM SURVEY DATA
Cross - section Plots
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Substrate Plots
Tables I Oa -d. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Tables 11 a -d. Monitoring Data
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 1, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi :
1.6
Date:
10/16/2012
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Jemi an
Station
Elevation
0.00
58.97
3.37
59.01
5.88
58.94
7.46
58.93
8.28
58.89
9.48
58.48
11.12
57.97
11.85
57.85
12.66
57.79
13.81
57.42
15.01
57.27
16.18
57.24
17.94
57.17
19.69
57.02
21.09
57.51
22.21
56.98
24.49
57.37
25.63
57.59
26.90
57.93
27.71
58.20
29.20
58.41
30.82
58.65
32.35
59.12
34.18
59.04
36.47
59.14
37.52
59.06
39.33
59.05
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
58.9
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
27.6
Bankfull Width:
23.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
60.8
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.2
W / D Ratio:
19.8
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.4
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Stream Type I B/C
Ripshin Branch, XS - 1, Riffle
61
--------- ------- -------------- - - - - -- - --- ---------------------------------
60
59
- - - -- - -- ------------------------------------- - - - - -- - ------- - - - - --
.o
58
w
- - - - Bankfull
57
- - - - Flood Prone Area
t MY -01 10/16/12
56
0 10 20 30 40
Station (feet)
River Basin:
Upper New
0.00 6
Watershed:
Tate Farm
64.37
xs In
xs - 2, Pool
i
Drainage Area (s mi):
1.6
Date:
10/16/2012
9.42 6
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Jernigan
61.27
12.18 6
61.54
13.44 6
61.86
14.84 6
61.87
15.75 6
62.23
H
Strea Type B/C
Ripshin Branch, XS - 2, Pool
67
66
65
°' --
----------- ----- ------- --- -- --- ----- - - - - -- - - - - - --
64
z
0
63
w
- - -- Bankfull
62
62
Flood Prone Area
61
---o- ---o- MY -01 !0/16/12
60
0
10 20 30 40
Station (feet)
Station E
Elevation
0.00 6
64.24
2.25 6
64.37
4.02 6
64.32
5.59 6
64.34
6.56 6
Station E
Elevation
0.00 6
64.24
2.25 6
64.37
4.02 6
64.32
5.59 6
64.34
6.56 6
63.99
8.04 6
64.29
9.42 6
60.94
10.87 6
61.27
12.18 6
61.54
13.44 6
61.86
14.84 6
61.87
15.75 6
62.23
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation: 64.3
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area: 36.1
Bankfull Width: 23.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation: -
Flood Prone Width: -
Max Depth at Bankfull: 3.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.6
W / D Ratio: -
Entrenchment Ratio: -
Bank Height Ratio: -
River Basin:
Bankfull Elevation:
Upper New
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
37.4
Watershed:
Area s mi :
Tate Farm
Date:
10/16/2012
XS ID
XS - 3, Riffle
t
w
Drainage
W / D Ratio:
21.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
;..
Bank Ratio:
1.0
Station
Elevation
0.00
66.18
3.72
66.09
5.36
65.77'
6.84
65.46
8.40
65.23
10.20
65.03
11.96
64.92
13.10
64.66
13.96
64.39
w■+
+J!^r
14.82
64.20
Height
16.29
63.91
17.79
63.91
B/C
19.60
64.10
21.52
63.89
22.7
63.96
Ripshin Branch, XS - 3, Riffle
24.0
63.91
25.6
64.27
70
26.6
64.57
27.5
64.66
29.0
64.99
68 -------------------------------------------
-------
-- ----- ------- -- ---- --
30.1
65.40
31.4
65.41
4,
32.4
66.13
34.3
66.27
0 66
36.0
66.26
37.3
66.22
L?
---- Benkfull
38.7
66.19
64
- - - - Flood Prone Area
--o-MY-01 10/16/12
62
0 10
20
30 40
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
66.0
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
37.4
Bankfull Width:
Area s mi :
1.6
Date:
10/16/2012
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Jemi pan
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
66.0
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
37.4
Bankfull Width:
28.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
68.1
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max Ma: Depth at Banld'ull:
2.1
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.3
W / D Ratio:
21.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.8
Bank Ratio:
1.0
River Basin:
Upper New
t
Watershed:
Tate Farm
JiS ID
XS - 4, Riffle
Ratio:
1.0
Drainage Area (s mi):
1.6
Date:
10/16/2012
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Jernigan
Station
Elevation
SUMMARY DATA
0.00
77.63
Bankfull Elevation:
77.7
j y
6.66
77.91
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
23.5
f ,
8.88
77.96
Bankfull Width:
21.4
10.34
77.90
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
79.7
11.96
77.66
Flood Prone Width:
>80
13.45
77.09
Max Depth at Bankfull:
2.0
_
15.37
76.63
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
3
16.80
76.40
W / D Ratio:
19.5
18.97
76.01
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.7
20.98
75.95
Bank Height
22.30
76.14'.
23.35
75.71
Stream Type B/C
24.51
75.83
25.21
76.33
26.9
76.23
Ripshin Branch, XS - 4, Riffle
27.9
76.62
29.0
77.04
80
30.7
77.31
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
32.4
77.40
33.9
77.83
36.6
77.74
39.8
77.79
78
-------- - - - - --
------- -------------------
- - - - --
- - - - --- - - -- --
43.1
77.76
m
n
Eu
W 76
-
- - - - Bankfull
- - - - Flood Prone Area
--�- MY -01 10/16/12
74
0 10
20 30
40
Station (feet)
Ratio:
1.0
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfnll Elevation:
Upper New
Tate Fami
XS - 5, Riffle
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
q.
.s; t
River Basin:
Watershed:
XS ID
Drainage
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Jernigan
1.9
Station
Elevation
W / D Ratio:
24.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.7
0.0
83.1
83.0
83.0
82.91
82.7
> c .a< t11
Y
rt
't r,
t'.`� ' fi
l• :'
a
s �„ ..,+. �r
Y
5.9
9.5
12.6
14.4
18.1
82.2
:
h� �
1
20.2
81.9x'3,
.j
22.0
81.6
81.5+.
! ..,
23.0
24.3
81.4
81.1
,S
25.7
26.7
81.0
81.3
81.64
Stream B/C
27.8
28.6
30.3
82.03
82.49
82.72
83.10
83.15
83.09
86
----------------------------------------
Ripshin
Branch, XS - 5, Riffle
-- -- ---------
--- - - - - --- - - - - -
32.3
33.4
35.9
39.7
45.3
47.4
83.45
84.11
� 84
49.2
50.9
85.01
51.9
85.23
e
0 - -_ --- -- - - -- --------------
---- - - - ---- - ------------
------- -- - ---
53.5
84.92
55.4
84.46
W 82
____�nkfull
- - - - Flood Prone Area
�- MY -01 10/16/12
80
0 10
20
30 40
50 60
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfnll Elevation:
82.9
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
19.2
Bankfull Width:
Area s m>t :
1.6
Date:
10/ 16/2012
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Jernigan
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfnll Elevation:
82.9
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
19.2
Bankfull Width:
21.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
84.8
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
24.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.7
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
River Basin:
Bankfull Elevation:
Upper New
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
17.4
Bankfull Width:
Watershed:
0.6
Tate Farm
10/16/2012
Field Crew:
Perkinson,Jerni�an
XS ID
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
XS - 6, Riffle
W / D Ratio:
M
t_
Drainage
Rank Height Ratio:
1.0
p _
_
It.
_ 4 ll _
Station
Elevation
t y
F 7
Zr
0.0
80.3
A
3.2
80.3
F
6.0
80.3
7.3
80.2"
9.2
80.0
9.7
79.8
Depth
10.4
79.5
t`
i
12.0
79.0
"
13.5
78.8
14.7
78.5`
15.6
78.5
16.2
78.3
T e BiC
17.5
78.4
18.3
78.28
19.1
78.55
Unnamed
Tributary, XS - 6, Riffle
19.8
78.72
20.9
78.81
82
21.8
79.15
23.0
79.29
23.7
79.58
25.0
79.81
26.9
80.09
�
t
29.6
80.16
32.9
80.66
80
Q
41
�
- - - - Bankfull
- - - - Flood Prone Area
-0 MY -01 10/16/12
78
0
10
20
30
Station (feet)
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
80.0
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
17.4
Bankfull Width:
Area s mi :
0.6
Date:
10/16/2012
Field Crew:
Perkinson,Jerni�an
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
80.0
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
17.4
Bankfull Width:
17.4
Flood Prune Area Elevation:
81.7
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max at Rankfull:
1.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
17.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.6
Rank Height Ratio:
1.0
River Basin:
Elevation
Upper New
87.8
Y
Watershed:
Tate Farm
X5 ID
XS - 7, Pool
Drainage Area s mi):
0.6
Date:
10/16/2012
Field Crew:
Perkinson, Jernigan
t
I
q
1
y
..s i
Stream a
B/C
Unnamed Tributary, XS - 7, Pool
88
-- -- ---------------
-- --- --- ----------------
- - - - -- - - -- - --
---- --- - -
v
5
0 86
v
Cc:
- - -- Bankfull
- - - - Flood Prone Area
�- MY-01 8/18/09
84
0
10
20
Station (feet)
Station E
Elevation
0.0 8
87.8
2.4 8
87.8
Station E
Elevation
0.0 8
87.8
2.4 8
87.8
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation: 87.3
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area: 14.5
Bankfull Width: 16.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation: -
Flood Prone Width: -
Max Depth at Bankfull: 2.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull: 0.9
W / D Ratio: -
Entrenchment Ratio: -
Bank Height Ratio: -
River Basin:
Upper New
Watershed:
Tate Farm
XS ID
XS - 8, Riffle
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.6
Date:
10/16/2012
Field Crew:
I Perkinson,Jernigan
Station Elevation
0.0 94.7
2.5 94.5
9.1
11.0
12.1
12.6
15.4
16.0
16.6
17.7
19.1
20.2
22.9
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
94.5
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
8.9
Bankfull Width:
17.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
95.7
Flood Prone Width:
>80
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
34.0
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.6
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
18001111110 Type I B/C
Unnamed Tributary, XS - 8, Riffle
96
lu
lu
- - - - -- -------------------- ----- -- ------------ ------ - - -- -- - - ---
94
c
.IU
— — — — Bankfull
W
— — — — Flood Prone Area
t MY -0 1 10/16/12
92
0 10 20
Station (feet)
uJci Laic r - uic
Reach Unnamed Tributary Station 00 +00 - 08 +00
Feature Profile
Date 10 /10 /12
2012
Year i Monitoring \Survey
Station
Bed Elevation
Water Elevation
0.0
77.7
78.3
9.1
78.2
78.5
13.5
78.0
78.5
17.5
77.9
78.5
22.1
78.4
78.6
46.8
78.7
79.0
53.7
77.9
79.0
59.5
78.1
79.0
68.7
78.9
79.3
73.4
78.7
79.3
75.9
79.6
79.8
89.0
80.1
80.1
95.2
80.0
80.2
101.7
79.2
80.3
106.9
78.8
80.3
110.6
79.1
80.3
118.9
79.4
80.3
123.5
80.2
80.5
134.6
80.8
81.0
145.9
80.9
81A
151.9
80.0
81.4
154.8
79.7
81.3
159.8
80.3
81.4
162.8
81.0
81.4
172.3
81.6
81.8
185.5
81.9
82.2
195.8
82.2
82.5
214.1
82.2
82.7
100
95
m 90
a
n
d
85
c
0
.Y
d
W
80
75
2013
Year 2 Monitoring \Survey
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
2014 I 2015 I 2016
Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Year 4 Monitoring \ Survev Year 5 Monitoring \Survey
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
Tate Farm Year 1 (2012) Profile - Unnamed Tributary 00 +00 to 08 +00
70
0 100 200 300
- +-Year 1 (2012) Bed
400
Distance (feet)
500
fYearl (2012) Water Surface
600
700
800
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Avg. Water Surface Slope
0.0201
Riffle Length
30
Avg. Riffle Slope
0.0235
Pool Length
21
Pool to Pool Spacing
44.0
600
700
800
Project Name Tate Farm - Profile
Reach Ripshin Branch Station 00 +00 - 10 +00
Feature Profile
Date 10/10/12
Crew Perkinson, Jernigan
2012
2013
2014
2015
Year 1 Monitoring \Survey
Year 2 Monitoring \Survey
Year 3 Monitoring \Survey
Year 4 Monitoring \Survey
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
0.0 56.0 56.9
2.7 56.5 57.2
Avg. Riffle Slope
0.0247
25.9 57.5 57.8
Pool Length
30.5 57.2 57.8
35.5 57.6 58.3
Pool to Pool Spacing
55.0
45.5 58.4 58.8
56.9 58.3 59.0
73.5 58.0 58.9
85.6 57.9 59.0
99.7 58.5 58.9
110.4 58.4 59.0
119.6 57.3 59.1
125.2 57.1 59.1
131.6 57.6 59.1
135.8 57.9 59.0
150.3 58.7 59.4
166.7 59.9 60.2
181.1 60.3 60.7
187.6 59.7 60.7
197.8 59.9 60.6
207.7 60.2 60.9
226.2 60.9 61.5
233.5 60.6 61.6
242.0 61.3 61.7
252.5 61.2 61.8
270.3 61.7 62.2
288.0 61.0 62.2
298.4 61.2 62.2
Tate Farm Year 1 (2012) Profile - Ripshin Branch 00 +00 to 10 +00
80
75
70
.0
m
a
65
C
0
A
d
W
60
55
50
0 100 200 300 400 500
Distance (feet)
-® --Year 1 (2012) Bed
2016
Year 5 Monitoring \Survey
Bed Elevation Water Elevation
600 700
ts- -Year 1 (2012) Water Surface
800
900
1000
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Avg. Water Surface Slope
0.0182
Riffle Length
35
Avg. Riffle Slope
0.0247
Pool Length
28
Pool to Pool Spacing
55.0
800
900
1000
I Name
Tatc Farm - Profile
2013
2014
Ripshin Branch Station 10 +00 - 15 +00
2016
e
Profile
10/10/12
Riffle Length
Perkinson, Jernigan
Avg. Riffle Slope
2012
2013
Year 1 Monitoring \Survey
Year 2 Monitoring \Survey
Station
Bed Elevation Water Elevation
Station Bed Elevation Wal
999.9
74.6 75.4
1006.2
74.7 75.4
1009.5
74.7 75.4
1012.2
75.2 75.5
1021.1
75.3 75.8
1031.3
75.4 76.0
1035.0
75.4 75.9
1046.3
75.2 76.0
1049.5
75.6 76.2
1065.4
76.5 76.8
1069.0
75.9 76.8
1079.6
75.8 76.9
1084.3
76.3 77.0
1093.0
76.3 77.1
1099.3
77.0 77.4
1119.9
77.4 78.1
1136.3
77.3 78.1
1149.4
76.9 78.1
1160.3
77.4 78.1
1167.0
77.1 78.1
1177.9
77.1 78.3
1185.0
78.3 78.8
1200.8
78.8 79.4
1215.9
79.5 79.8
1223.6
78.7 79.8
1231.2
78.8 79.8
1238.9
78.9 79.8
1246.5
79.6 80.1
86
84
82
80
`m
a
78
C
0
M
a
a 76
W
74
72
70
1000
1050 1100
2014 I 2015 I 2016
Year 3 Monitoring \Survey Year 4 Monitoring \Survey Year 5 Monitoring \ Survev
Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation Station Bed Elevation Water Elevation
1150
Tate Farm Year 1 (2012) Profile - Ripshin Branch 10+00 to 15 +00
+Year 1 (2012) Bed
1200 1250
Distance (feet)
1300 1350
Year 1 (2012) Water Surface
1400
1450
1500
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Avg. Water Surface Slope
0.0182
Riffle Length
35
Avg. Riffle Slope
0.0247
Pool Length
28
Pool to Pool Spacing
55.0
1400
1450
1500
■■mnq■■■nnq ■■■nugi■�uq■�: `ai�t�i��luq
.:
■■
mnq�■■
I�I�q
■■■q�llq■■n�III���Iq�lll�■■muq
,
,..
■■
mnq■■
Illnll
■
■1811q■
■I■nllllr./
■Illllq■
■1111111
, ..
■■mliq
■■muq■■mnq■■mugr�■muq■■m�
.
,..
■■n
lua
■■■glnq■■muq■■nln�■■■nnll
■■mnq
.,.,
■■
■nn
■
■Illllq�
■1111111
■
■��'�II
■
■Inllll�
■1■nq
.
■■mnq
■
■1llnll
■
■Illnq!!��nll■
■1111111
■
■mn
,
. , ..
■■
m81
■
■Inllq
■
■111��'i
■mnq�
■mnq
■
■mIl
.
■■n
lnq■■■
nnq
■
/�'���1q
■
■�nnq�!
■milq�
■Innq
,
..■ �q■■ u�u ■�i111C�1 ■�lllnln���u��■I�lnq
111 Fiql
Size percent
Percent .-
.. l
' ;
■■
Illnl■■
1■
n1
■■Ii1111ii11111,���n11��111111
■
■
■1■
111■■n
lnl
■
■mllll
■t
/�i�i1
■Illnll■
■moll
■■
1111111■
■11n11
■
■
■Il��illill■
■11111
■■mnl
,. ,
..
■
■■Ilnl
■
■1■nl
■■moll
�
■1
■1111■
■111111
■
■mtll
. ,
■■1111111■■■11naM-E,M111
I■
■111111
■
■■111111■■EIIII
■■■111III■■IGN
1111111■
■■111111
■
■■111111■■m1111
.
�■1111111■�%■nl■
■1111111
■1111111■
■111111
■
■mnl
,
.
■■111111��nIn1■
■1111111
■
■1
■1111
■
■mllil
■
■m11
,
.
■■ID���i!!
■Ii111■
■1111111!
■1111111
■
■mn1
■
■mnl
,
,., ■■ 111�m■■■ 11��n1oill� ■�M1�a��w� ■�una ■ ■�anl
of 1 111 1111
Size percent
,_
In
Table 10a. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Ripshin Branch)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - EEP Project Number 372
Parameter
Gauge
Regional Curve
Pre - Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle Onl
LL
UL
E .
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Max
Med
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
BF Width (ft)
SC % /SA % /G % /C %B %BE%
210
240
144
171
230
250
I
Flood prone Width ft
35
dl6/d35/d50/d84/d95
60
27
4 0 -12 0
95
25
80
05
3 0 -5 0
BF Mean Depth ft
12
1 3
12
13
13
14
BF Max Depth ft
19
17
19
27
29
Incision Class <1 2/12-149/1 5 -1 99/ >2 0
BF Cross Sectional Area (ft)
260
290
176
207
300
350
Width/Depth Ratio
185
210
118
132
170
180
Entrenchment Ratio
1 9
26
16
66
1 5
20
Bank Height Ratio
18
12
10
12
Profile
Riffle length ft
Riffle slope ft/ft
00040
00170
00420
00400
Pool length ft
90
430
110
187
200
700
Pool Max depth ft
36
09
26
3 5
3 6
Pool spacing (ft)
330
2530
257
693
800
1300
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth ft
7 80 20 417 29 150
Radius of Curvature ft
10 160 253 185 55 135
Rc Bankfull width ft/ft
04 1 18 59 3 42
Meander Wavelength ft
30 240 975 140 85 365
Meander Width ratio
08 21 68 8 44 66
Trans ort varameter,4
Reach Shear Stress coin a enc lbs/fl
Max art size (mm) mobilized at bankful
Stream
Stream Power (transport ca aci r12
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
B4/F4 /C4
B4 /C4
134 /C4
Bankfull Velocity (fps)
55
4 8- 5
Bankfull Discharge cfs
158
Valley Len ft
- - --
- - --
Channel Thalweg Length ft
- - --
- - --
2300
Sinuosity
12
1 1- 1 2
1 1- 1 3
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
0 018 -0 024
0012-0019
0 02
BF slope ft/ft
- - --
- - --
- - --
Bankfull Flood lam Area acres
- - --
- - --
- - --
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
- - --
Channel Stabilitv or Habitat Metric
- --
Biological or Other
Table 10b. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Substrate, Bed, Bank, and Hydrologic Containment Parameter Distributions)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - EEP Project Number 372 - Ripshin Branch
Parameter Pre-Existine Condition Reference Reach es Data Desien Monitorine Baseline
Ri % /RU %P %G % /S%
SC % /SA % /G % /C %B %BE%
dl6/d35/d50/d84/d95
0 2 -0 3
4 0 -12 0
05
3 0 -5 0
Entrainment Class <1 5/1 5-199/2 0 -4 9/5 0-
Incision Class <1 2/12-149/1 5 -1 99/ >2 0
Table 10c. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Unnamed Tributary)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - EEP Project Number 372
Parameter
Gauge
T Regional Curve
Pre- Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
Monitoring Baseline
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle OnI3
LL
UL
E .
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Mean
Med
Max
SD
Min
Max
Med
Mtn
Mean
Med
Max
SD
BF Width (ft)
SC % /SA % /G % /C %/B %BE%
180
144
160
Flood prone Width ft
28
02
48
128
442
95
16
80
50
730
1000
BF Mean Depth ft
09
12
Entrainment Class <1 5115-199/2 0 -4 9/5 0-
09
BF Max Depth Lft)
14
17
1 3
14
Incision Class <1 2/1 2 -1 49/1 5 -1 99/ >2 0
BF Cross Sectional Area (f?)
163
176
140
Width/Depth Ratio
218
118
180
Entrenchment Ratio
1 6
66
10
25
Bank Height Ratio
23
12
10
Profile
Riffle length ft
Riffle slope ft/ft
00400
00170
00400
Pool length (ft
3 6
199
187
250
Pool Max depth ft
14
26
1 9
Pool spacing (ft)
110
800
690
500
900
600
Pattern p
Channel Beltwidth ft 12 33
417 35 100
Radius of Curvature ft 25 25
253 40 200
Rc Bankfull width ft/ft 08
18 34 14
Meander Wavelength (ft 50 170
975 120 160
Meander Width ratio 49
29 8 3 88
Transport Varameter4
Reach Shear Stress com etenc lbs4
Max part size (mm) mobilized at bankful
Stream Power (transport ca aci W /m,
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
B4/F4
C4
B4 /C4
Bankf ill Velocity s
5 1
45
Bankfull Discharge cfs
83 07
Valley Length (ft
- - --
- - --
Channel Thalweg Length (ft
- - --
- - --
912
Sinuosity
1 2
12
1 0-12
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
002
0 012
002
BF slope ft/ft
- --
- - --
Bankfull Flood lain Area
(acres)-
--
- --
- --
% of Reach with Eroding Banks
-
-
I
!
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other
Table 10d. Baseline Stream Data Summary (Substrate, Bed, Bank, and Hydrologic Containment Parameter Distributions)
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - EEP Project Number 372 - Unnamed Tributary
Parameter Pre-Existing Condition Reference Reach es Data Desi n Monitorme Baseline
4
Rt %/RU %P %G % /S%
SC % /SA % /G % /C %/B %BE%
dl6/d35/d50/d84/d95
02
48
128
442
785
80
118
184
730
1000
Entrainment Class <1 5115-199/2 0 -4 9/5 0-
Incision Class <1 2/1 2 -1 49/1 5 -1 99/ >2 0
Table l is Monitoring Data -Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters -Cross Sections)
T.,ta Timm (Rmshm Branch) - EEP Protect Number 372 - Rinshin Branch
Table I1b Monitoring Data -Stream Reach Data Summary
Tate Farm (Ripshln Branch) - EEP Proiect Number 372 - Ripshin Branch
Cross Section 1
Cross Section 2
Cross Section 3
Cross Section 4
Crass Section 5
Parameter
Riffle
Pool
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
c
..�,4 '•lr- �h .€�. ➢
Mrs
^xJ
'�[�.�
'ik 3-0P.X'�5��
:. ots
r t e
i..` �#'i i -
,.
�: � 3. S.�
y
r
"i." �i'•
^E'r � d „I "� Sc"` k-�h:..A'x �
a :3'•"+ - � .� t 3...,.s_ is ,s;_ & a
?
3
�:,��' - acvWK' ;��+n
S=
Dimension
MYO
MYI
MY2
MY3
MY4
MYS
MYS+
MYO
MY
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY5+
MYO
MYI
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY5+
MYO
MYI
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY5+
MYO
MYI
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY5+
BF Width ft
234
23 2
281
214
21 7
Floodprone Width (ft) (approx)
800
NA
80 0
800
800
BF Mean De th ft
1 2
16
1 3
1 1
09
BF Max Depth ft
19
34
21
20
19
BF Cross Sectional Area (It')
276
36 1
---
__�mm
374
®m---------
23 5
---
192
--
--
Width/Depth Ratio
-
198
NA
211
195
245
Entrenchment Ratio
3 4
N
28
37
3 7
•�
-
-
-__
Bank Height Rana
iii
10
. i
i i••
i i i
--------------------
1!0
10
1 0
l 0
d50 mm`
79 2
Table I1b Monitoring Data -Stream Reach Data Summary
Tate Farm (Ripshln Branch) - EEP Proiect Number 372 - Ripshin Branch
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
r
Ratio me
Entrench ',
---
__�mm
®m---------
---
--
--
-
-
--
•�
-
-
-__
iii
i i
. i
i i••
i i i
--------------------
Radius
Additional Reach Parameters
water Surface Slope I is :
11
%of Reach with Erodg Bank,
i
Channel Stability or Habitat Metni,
Table l le Monitoring Data -Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional Parameters -Cross Sections)
Tate Farm (Rhishin Branch) - EEP Protect Number 372 - Unnamed Tributary
Parameter
Cross Section 6
Cross Section 7
Cross Section 8
Riffle
Pool
Riffle
_^a•�z ty
�-i+r Fr,, . t , ae'a. ;a.°S•
e!.
�'�
.� y.a x -� �zp
i_'��.�. __ �' }-
� u,;,,
'S-.KhF .�. -u�:
> ^,�d -.0 n '.;i'
.:fv .,t� �
-^ti rr4 =•._4 ,yam -;o...
- �- 'tr..�..= �,2',�`�ru�"C�:i�'�' -1 �
•a ___ R_ ,y; ,e ,�
rv" s _ _ _ c._�[. fie
^�--a +e•"' t `_ ,
n .���s �.. , ..2.1�, r�Gy_ x -+ �- l'r.�1�a'"; k�.�.•..`.,�: ��'4
Dimension
MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY5+
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY5+
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MY5+
BF Width (ft)
174
160
174
Floodprone Width (R) (approx
800
NA
800
BF Mean Depth (R
10
09
05
BF Max Depth (ft
17
24
12
BF Cross Sectional Area (fi)
174
145
89
Width/Depth Rati
174
NA
BF Cross Se.han"rea(d)
340
Entrenchment Ratic
46
NA
46
Bank Height Ratio
10
1 0
10
d50 (mm)
1 0
Table lld. Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) - EEP Project Number 372 - Unnamed Tributary
'Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Only'_
BF Cross Se.han"rea(d)
Profile - Upstream
Rad.m of Curvature (ft,
Additional Reach Parameters
1 1 1
Channel Stability or Habitat Metm
APPENDIX E
HYDROLOGY DATA
Table 12 Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 13 Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Summary
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Table 12. Verification of Bankfull Events
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Stream and Wetland Restoration Site (EEP Project Number 372)
Date of Data
Photo (if
Date of Occurrence
Method
Collection
available
No bankfull events were observed during the Year 1 (2012)
NA
NA
__
monitoring period
Tate Farm (Ripshin Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices
Table 13. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment Summary
* Groundwater Gauges were installed in October 2012, therefore, groundwater monitoring will be initiated during
the Year 2 (2013) monitoring year
Tate Farm (Ripshm Branch) Axiom Environmental, Inc. Monitoring Year 1 of 5 (2012)
EEP Project Number 372 January 2013
Ashe County, North Carolina Appendices