20091169 Ver 1_Year 1 Monitoring Report_20130212

I
6q-110
LITTLE TROUBLESOME CREEK MITIGATION SITE
Rockingham County, NC
NCDENR Contract 003267
NCEEP Project Number 94640
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Report
FINAL
Data Collection Period: September- November 2012
Submission Date: January 11, 2013
Prepared for:
NCDENR, NCEEP
1652 Mail Service Center
I' oo y, teal Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652
A i ?013
ENHANC EGOS STEJV;
ROGRAM

Prepared by:
kt�
WILDLANDS
i - itl I .,
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
1430 S. Mint Street, # 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
P - 704 - 332 -7754
F - 704 - 332 -3306

Y
LITTLE TROUBLESOME CREEK MITIGATION SITE
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Report
1 0 Executive Summary ................................ ............................... . ... 1
11 Project Goals and Objectives ... ..... ............................. 1
1 z Monitoring Year 1 Data Assessment 3
1 z 1 Vegetative Assessment 4
1 z z Stream Assessment ................................. ............................... 5
1 z 3 Wetland Assessment . ................................. ............................... 6
1.3 Monitoring Year 1 Summary .................................. ............................... 6
2 0 Methodology ....... ............................... .......................... ............ 6
30 References .............. ........................... ...... ............................... 7
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Figures 2a -2b Project Component /Asset Map
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3 Project Contact Table
Table 4 Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3 0 -3 5 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Table 5a -c Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Stream Photographs
Vegetation Photographs
Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7
Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 8a -b
CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 9a -c
Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Appendix 4
Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 10a -b
Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 11
Monitoring Data - Dimensional Morphology Summary (Dimensional
Parameters - Cross - Section)
Table 12a -d
Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Figure 4a -d
Longitudinal Profile Plots
Figure 5a -m
Cross - Section Plots
Figure 6a -k
Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Appendix 5 Hydrology Summary Data and Plots
Table 13 Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 14 Wetland Gage Attainment Summary
Figure 7a -d Groundwater Gage Plots
Figure 8 30 -70 Percentile Monthly Rainfall

T y
1.0 Executive Summary
The Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site is a full - delivery stream and wetland restoration
project for the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program (NCEEP) in Rockingham
County, NC The stream area, hereafter referred to as the Stream Site, is located on the
southeastern side of Reidsville along Irvin and Little Troublesome Creeks The wetland area,
hereafter referred to as the Wetland Site, is located approximately four miles southeast of the
Stream Site and is also adjacent to Little Troublesome Creek The Stream Site is located south
of Turner Road, east of the intersection of Turner Road and Way Street in the City of Reidsville,
North Carolina The Wetland Site is located approximately 3,000 feet southwest of the
intersection of NC Highway 3.5o and Mizpah Church Road, south of the City of Reidsville Little
Troublesome Creek is located within the Haw River watershed (North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (NCDWQ) Subbasin 03 -06 -o3.) of the Cape Fear River Basin (Hydrologic Unit
030300020 10030)
The Stream Site is located in a mature bottomland hardwood forest within a 34 5-acre tract
owned by Wildlands Little Troublesome Creek Holdings, LLC A conservation easement has
been recorded on 33 acres of the tract (Deed Book 3.4-13., Page Number 2458) The wetland
portion of the Little Troublesome Creek project is located within a tract of land owned by Jerry
Apple A conservation easement has been recorded on the 3.g -acre project area within the
Apple tract (Deed Book 3.43.2, Page Number 1685)
Little Troublesome Creek (NCDWQ Index No 3.6 -7), which is the main creek on the project site,
has been classified as Class C, NSW waters Class C waters are protected for secondary
recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic life propagation and survival, agriculture, and
other uses The Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW) classification is a supplemental classification
for waters that are subject to excessive growth of microscopic or macroscopic vegetation and
therefore need nutrient management Directions and a map of the Site are provided in Figure
-1
1 1 Project Goals and Objectives
Prior to construction activities, the most significant watershed stressors identified during the
technical assessment were stream bank erosion and instability Other stressors included
declining aquatic habitat, loss of forest, degraded riparian buffers, loss of wetlands, lack of
urban stormwater detention, and water quality problems related to increased sediment and
nutrient loadings As a result of the aforementioned stressors, the Stream Site and Wetland
Site had poor water quality due to sediment pollution and poor habitat due to lack of riparian
and wetland vegetation In particular, the Stream Site lacked stable streambank vegetation
despite being surrounded by mature vegetation The Stream Site also lacked in- stream bed
diversity and exhibited unstable geomorphic conditions Tables -1 -4 in Appendix 1 present the
pre - restoration conditions in detail forthe Stream and Wetland Sites
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site Page i
Monitoring Year i Annual Report—FINAL

I
The primary objectives of the project were to stabilize highly eroding stream banks, reconnect
streams to their historic floodplain, improve wetland hydrology and function, reduce nutrient
levels, sediment input, and water temperature, Increase dissolved oxygen concentrations,
create appropriate in- stream and terrestrial habitat, and decrease channel velocities These
objectives were achieved by restoring 4,988 linear feet (LF) of perennial stream channel, and
restoring, enhancing, and creating 18 o acres of riparian wetland The Stream Site and
Wetland Site riparian areas were also planted to stabilize streambanks, improve habitat, and
protect water quality
The following primary project goals (measured) were established in the project Mitigation Plan
(2011) to address the effects from watershed and project site stressors
• Stabilize stream dimensions,
• Stabilize stream pattern and profile,
• Establish proper substrate distribution throughout stream,
• Establish wetland hydrology for restored wetlands, and
• Restore native vegetation throughout wetlands and buffer zones
The following secondary project goals (unmeasured) were established in the project Mitigation
Plan (2011) to address the effects from watershed and project site stressors
• Decrease nutrient and urban runoff pollutant levels,
• Decrease sediment input,
• Decrease water temperature and increase dissolved oxygen levels,
• Create appropriate in- stream habitat,
• Create appropriate terrestrial habitat, and
• Decrease channel velocities
The following project objectives were established to meet these primary and secondary goals
• Riffle cross - sections of the restoration and enhancement reaches were constructed
to remain stable and will show little change in bankfull area, maximum depth ratio,
and width -to -depth ratio overtime
• The project was constructed so that the bedform features of the restoration reaches
will remain stable overtime This includes riffles that will remain steeper and
shallower than the pools and pools that are deep with flat water surface slopes The
relative percentage of riffles and pools will not change significantly over time
Banks will be constructed so that bank height ratios will remain very near to 1 o for
nearly all of the restoration reaches
• Stream substrate will remain coarse in the riffles and finer in the pools
• A free groundwater surface will be present within 12 inches of the ground surface In
the restored wetland areas for 7 percent of the growing season measured on
consecutive days under typical precipitation conditions
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site Page z
Monitoring Year i Annual Report —FINAL

T N
• Native vegetation appropriate for the wetland and riparian buffer zones were
planted throughout both the Wetland and Stream Sites The planted trees will
become well established and survival criteria will be met
• Off -site nutrient input will be absorbed on -site by filtering flood flows through
restored floodplain areas and wetlands, where flood flows can disperse through
native vegetation and be captured in vernal pools Increased surface water
residency time will provide contact treatment time and groundwater recharge
potential
• Sediment input from eroding stream banks was reduced by installing
bioengineering and in- stream structures while creating a stable channel form using
geomorphic design principles Sediment from off -site sources will be captured by
deposition on restored floodplain areas where native vegetation will slow overland
flow velocities
• Restored riffle /step -pool sequences where distinct points of re- aeration can occur
will allow for oxygen levels to be maintained in the perennial reaches Creation of
deep pool zones will lower temperature, helping to maintain dissolved oxygen
concentrations Establishment and maintenance of riparian buffers will create long-
term shading of the channel flow to minimize thermal heating
• A channel form that includes riffle /pool sequences and gravel and cobble zones of
macroinvertebrate habitat for fish was created Large woody debris, rock
structures, root wads, and native stream bank vegetation were introduced to
substantially increase habitat value
• Adjacent buffer areas were restored by removing invasive vegetation and planting
native vegetation These areas will be allowed to receive more regular and
inundating flows Riparian wetland areas were restored and enhanced to provide
wetland habitat
• By allowing for more overbank flooding and by increasing channel roughness, local
channel velocities can be reduced This will allow for less bank shear stress,
formation of refuge zones during large storm events and zonal sorting of
depositional material
12 Monitoring Year 1 Data Assessment
The final restoration plan was submitted and accepted by NCEEP in June 2011 Construction
activities were completed by Fluvial Solutions in May 2012 The baseline monitoring and as-
built survey were completed between April and May 2012 The first annual monitoring
assessment (Year 1) was completed in October 2012
The Stream Site will be monitored for a total of five years, with the final monitoring activities
conducted in 2016 The Wetland Site will be monitored for a total of seven years, with the final
monitoring activities conducted in 2018 The close -out for both the Stream Site and Wetland
Site will be conducted in 2019 Monitoring consists of collecting morphological, vegetative,
and hydrological data on an annual basis to assess the project success based on the restoration
goals and objectives The success of the Stream Site will be assessed using measurements of
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site Page 3
Monitoring Year i Annual Report —FINAL

k
the stream channel's dimension, pattern, profile, substrate composition, permanent
photographs, vegetation, and surface water hydrology The success of the Wetland Site will be
assessed using measurements of groundwater hydrology and vegetation Any areas with
identified high priority problems, such as streambank instability, aggradation /degradation,
insufficient groundwater hydroperiod, or lack of vegetation establishment will be evaluated on
a case -by -case basis The problem areas will be visually noted and remedial actions will be
discussed with NCEEP staff to determine a plan of action A proposal of work will be submitted
if remediation of an area is required
1 z 1 Vegetative Assessment
A total of 35 vegetation plots were established within the project easement areas (22 at the
Wetland Site, 13 at the Stream Site) using standard 10 meter by 10 meter vegetation
monitoring plots The number of monitoring quadrants required is based on the NCEEP
monitoring guidance documents (version 2 0, 10/12/10) Vegetation assessments were
conducted following the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) Level 2 Protocol for Recording
Vegetation (Lee et al, 2oo8)
The Stream Site included three plots along Little Troublesome Creek, five plots along Irvin
Creek Reach 1, and five plots along Irvin Creek Reach 2 Due to the narrow planted corridor
along UT1, vegetation plots were not established Instead, a visual assessment of the
planted corridor is used to evaluate vegetation growth success Vegetation plots were
randomly established within the planted corridor of the stream and wetland restoration
areas to capture the heterogeneity of the designed vegetative communities The
vegetation plot corners have been marked and are recoverable either through field
identification or with the use of a GPS unit Reference photographs at the origin looking
diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner were taken with the as -built The final
vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 26o planted stems per acre in the riparian
corridor of the Stream Site at the end of year five monitoring, and zoo planted stems per
acre within the Wetland Site at the end of year seven monitoring The interim measure of
vegetative success for the entire site will be the survival of at least 320 planted stems per
acre at the end of the third monitoring year The extent of invasive species coverage will
also be monitored and controlled as necessary throughout the five -year monitoring period
for streams and seven -year monitoring period for wetlands
The monitoring year one (MY -1) vegetative survey was completed in September 2012 The
203.2 annual vegetation monitoring on the Wetland Site resulted in an average survivability
of 639 stems per acre, which is greater than the interim requirement of 320 stems /acre and
approximately 9% less than the baseline density recorded (701 stems /acre) in April 2012
There was an average of 16 stems per plot compared to 17 stems per plot during the
baseline monitoring (MY -o) for the Wetland Site The average survivability on the Stream
Site was 807 stems /acre, which is approximately 15% less than the baseline density
recorded (953 stems /acre) There were an average of 20 stems per plot compared to 24
stems per plot in MY -o for the Stream Site
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 1 Annual Report —FINAL
Page 4

I ?
All 35 plots are on track to meet the success criteria required for monitoring year three
(MY -3) Please refer to Appendix 3 for vegetation summary tables and raw data tables and
Appendix 2 for vegetation plot photographs and the vegetation condition assessment
table
Maintenance Plan
Overall, both the Wetland Site and the Stream Site are on track to meet the required
vegetation success criteria for MY -3 No maintenance is proposed at this time
12 2 Stream Assessment
Morphological surveys for the MY -i were conducted in October 2012 All streams within
the Site met the success criteria for MY -1 Please refer to Appendix 2 for the visual
assessment table, current condition plan view (CCPV), and photographs and Appendix 4 for
morphological data and plots
Riffle cross - sections surveyed along the restoration reaches have met success criteria for
MY -1 The cross - sections appear stable and show little to no change in the bankfull area,
maximum depth ratio, or width -to -depth ratio All surveyed riffle cross - sections fell within
the parameters defined for channels of the appropriate Rosgen stream type The surveyed
longitudinal profile data for the stream restoration reaches illustrates that the bedform
features are maintaining lateral and vertical stability The riffles are remaining steeper and
shallower than the pools, while the pools are remaining deeper than riffles and maintaining
flat water surface slopes The longitudinal profiles show that the bank height ratios remain
very near to 1 o for all of the restoration reaches Deposition within pools was documented
in the longitudinal profile along UT-1 The deposition is not affecting channel stability but
will be monitored In- stream structures, such as root wads used to enhance channel
habitat and stability on the outside bank of meander bends are providing stability and
habitat as designed Pattern data will only be completed in monitoring year five (MY -5) if
there are indicators from the profile or cross - sections that significant geomorphic
adjustments have occurred No changes were observed that indicated a change in the
radius of curvature or channel belt width, therefore, pattern data is not included in the MY-
1 report
Substrate materials in the restoration reaches indicate a progression toward and the
maintenance of coarser materials in the riffle features and smaller particles in the pool
features
At the end of the five year monitoring period, two or more bankfull events must occur in
separate years within the restoration reach Bankfull events were recorded on Irvin Creek,
Little Troublesome Creek, and UT-1 by crest gage or onsite observations (wrack lines)
during the MY -1 data collection Please refer to Appendix 5 to review the hydrologic data
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site Page 5
Monitoring Year i Annual Report—FINAL

a i
1 2 3 Wetland Assessment
Groundwater monitoring gages were established throughout the wetland restoration,
enhancement, and creation areas on the Wetland Site The gages were installed at
appropriate locations so that the data collected will provide an indication of groundwater
levels throughout the wetland project area A total of eight groundwater gages were
installed According to local WETS station in Eden, NC, the growing season in Rockingham
County runs from March 25th to November 6th (226 days) Wildlands installed two soil
temperature loggers, one within each wetland, to collect additional growing season data
These probes can be used to better define the growing season using the threshold soil
temperature of 41 degrees or higher measured at a depth of 12 inches (USACE, 2010) The
probes indicate a longer growing season than that defined for Rockingham County by the
WETS station data A barotroll logger and a rain gage were also installed onsite All
monitoring gages were downloaded on a quarterly basis and will be maintained on an as
needed basis Monitoring gage locations are depicted on the CCPV maps in Appendix 2
The success criteria for wetland hydrology is to have a free groundwater surface within 12
inches of the ground surface for 7 percent of the growing season, which is measured on
consecutive days under typical precipitation conditions Since Installation in late March
2012, an onslte rainfall gage has recorded 20 95 Inches of precipitation through mid -
November This is lower than the historic precipitation average between April and
November of 3165 inches collected by nearby weather station Reidsville 2 NW, NC7202
(USDA, 2002) Five of eight gages met the annual wetland hydrology success criteria The
inconsistent range of wetland hydrology success across the site is likely due to drier than
normal weather Please refer to Appendix 5 for wetland hydrology data and plots
13 Monitoring Year 1 Summary
Overall, all streams within the Site are stable and functioning as designed All vegetation plots
met the success criteria required for MY -1 as seen in the CCPV There has been at least one (1)
bankfull event recorded along each restored project reach since construction commenced,
therefore, the MY -5 hydrology attainment requirement has been partially met for the Site at
this time Currently five of eight groundwater gages are meeting success criteria for wetland
hydrology This is likely due to below normal precipitation It is anticipated that success
criteria will be met during years of typical rainfall
Summary information /data related to the performance of various project and monitoring
elements can be found in the tables and figures in the report appendices Narrative
background and supporting Information formerly found In these reports can be found in the
Mitigation Plan documents available on NCEEP's website All raw data supporting the tables
and figures in the appendices is available from NCEEP upon request
2.0 Methodology
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site Page 6
Monitoring Year i Annual Report —FINAL

Geomorphic data was collected followed the standards outlined in The Stream Channel
Reference Site An Illustrated Guide to Field Techniques (Harrelson et al , 1994) and in the
Stream Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook (Doll et al , 2003) Longitudinal and
cross - sectional data were collected using a total station and were georeferenced Reach wide
pebble counts were conducted along each restored reach for channel classification Cross -
section substrate analyses conducted in each surveyed riffle followed the loo count wetted
perimeter methodology Subpavement samples were collected at each surveyed riffle cross -
section and processed in an outsourced lab All CCPV mapping was recorded using a Trimble
handheld GPS with sub -meter accuracy and processed using was Pathfinder and ArcView
Crest gages were installed in surveyed riffle cross - sections and monitored quarterly
Hydrology attainment installation and monitoring methods are in accordance with the United
States Army Corps of Engineers guidelines (2003) Vegetation monitoring protocols followed
the Carolina Vegetation Survey -NCEEP Level 2 Protocol (Lee et al , 2008)
3.0 References
Doll, B A, Grabow, G L, Hall, K A, Halley, J, Harman, W A, Jennings, G D, and Wise, D E,
2003 Stream Restoration A Natural Channel Design Handbook
Harrelson, Cheryl C, Rawlins, C L , Potyondy, John P 1.994 Stream Channel Reference Sites
An Illustrated Guide to Field Technique Gen Tech Rep RM -245 Fort Collins, CO U S
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment
Station 61 p
Lee, Michael T, Peet, Robert K , Steven D , Wentworth, Thomas R (2008) CVS -EEP Protocol
for Recording Vegetation Version 4 o Retrieved from http / /www nceep net /business/
monitoring /veg /datasheets htm
Rosgen, D L 1994 A classification of natural rivers Catena 22 169 -199
Rosgen, D L 1996 Applied River Morphology Pagosa Springs, CO Wildland Hydrology Books
Rosgen, D L 3.997 A Geomorphological Approach to Restoration of Incised Rivers
Proceedings of the Conference on Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel
Incision Center For Computational Hydroscience and Bioengineering, Oxford Campus,
University of Mississippi, Pages 12 -22
Schafale, M P and A S Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, 3rd approx North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 2003 Stream Mitigation Guidelines USACE,
NCDENR -DWQ, USEPA, NCWRC
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site Page 7
Monitoring Year i Annual Report—FINAL

United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 2o10 Interim Regional Supplement to the
Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual Eastern Mountains and Piedmont Region
(ERDC /EL TR -10 -9) U S Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2002 Natural Resources Conservation
Service, Climate Information for Catawba County, NC 0.971 -2000)
WETS Station Reidsville NW, NC7202
http / /www wcc nres usda gov /ftpref/ support/climate /wetlands /nc/37157 txt
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1998 North Carolina Geology http
http / /www geology enr state nc us /usgs /carolina htm
Wildlands Engineering, Inc (2011) Little Troublesome Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan NCEEP,
Raleigh, NC
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site Page 8
Monitoring Year i Annual Report —FINAL

APPENDIX 1. General Tables and Figures

t t
10322006:%
44
16 .!.,
Hydrologic Unit Code (14)
todA EEP Targeted Local Watershed
ujuiuluj
RP Id. ' �J
,r s
e JAY, -
R•f!r„1!:• PY.ttl
Y.r rt
' ✓ter! `+
L! �
- n3o�oary�df�bdfl
Fr •,r 8N�8N�
Ca '!u
MC !3
r,
A
e: r
LOW eta
' •, *rlfl�tHJr ,�_ I
03030002
r
03CS00'J201ha�20 � � �
The subject project site is an environmental restoration site of the
NCDENR Ecoysystem Enhancement Program (EEP) and is
encompassed by a recorded conservation easement, but is
bordered by land under private ownership. Accessing the site may
require traversing areas near or along the easement boundary and
therefore access by the general public is not permitted. Access by
authorized personnel of state and federal agencies or their
designees /contractors involved in the development, oversight,
and stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within the terms �l
and timeframes of their defined roles. Any intended site visitation or
activity by any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles
and activites requires prior coordination with EEP.
03010104
I t
t •w .myfrvH,
let.'
Ott, �y
_r
r� 0 0.75 1.5 Miles
I
Figure i Project Vicinity Map
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project Number 94640
Monitoring Year i
Rockingham County, NC
(' :;.3 ?C2 %- %n •? %!
Directions:
F
The proposed stream
mitigation project area
is located south of Turner
Road, east of the
intersection of Turner
Road and Way Street in
the City of Reidsville,
North Carolina. The
proposed wetland
mitigation project area
'r►:`'
is located approximately
ar
3,000 feet southwest of
the intersection of NC
`
Highway 150 and Mizpah
G- QQ0304I OzC
�.;, .,
Church Road, south of
the City of Reidsville.
r� 0 0.75 1.5 Miles
I
Figure i Project Vicinity Map
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project Number 94640
Monitoring Year i
Rockingham County, NC

Figure za Project Component /Asset Map
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
r� Stream Site
0 250 500 Feet NCEEP Project Number 94640
I` ,((I \}'1tOI l I i I Monitoring Year i
Rockingham County, NC

Figure zb Project Component /Asset Map
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Wetland Site
l cc�sysrct» 0 125 250 Feet NCEEP Project Number 94640
W 1 1, D 1, A N 17 C I I Monitoring Year i
t N I; i 1 V t t R I N G
Rockingham County, NC

Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Monitoring Year 1
- Mitigation Credits
Stream
Riparian Wetland
Non-Ri anan Wetland
Buffer
Nitrogen
Nutrient Offet
Phosphorous
Nutrient Offset
Type
R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
Totals
5,052
N/A
103
28
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
Reach ID -
=As- Built,`
Stahonrng %'
! Location
Existing
Ho -'
`�(LF�i T
^ s
A' roach'
_
Resto�aUonTo� Restoration
' _ E u alert F_
- 'Restoration Foot ge`;
LF /Acreage A {
-
Min`'a n Ratio
Irvin Creek - Reach 1
102 +10 to
123 +05
1,640
Priority 1
Restoration
1,793
1 1
Irvin Creek - Reach 2
123 +05 to
142 +37
11505
Priority I
Restoration
1,882
1 1
Little Troublesome Creek
200 +00 to 211 +71
11080
Priority 1
Restoration
1,080
1 1
UT1
400 +00 to
402 +33
184
Priority 1/2
Restoration
233
1 1
RW I
N/A
N/A
Restoration
Restoration
8 7
1 1
RW I
N/A
N/A
Creation
Restoration Equivalent
49
3 1
RW 1
N/A
3 7
1 Enhancement
1 Restoration Equivalent
37
1 3 1"
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream linear feet
Riparian Wetland
acres
Non - Riparian Wetland
acres
Buffer
(square feet )
Upland
((acres)
Rivenne
Non- Riverme
Restoration
4,988
87
Enhancement
2 8
Enhancement I
-
Enhancement II
Creation
1 9
Preservation
High Quality Preservation
BMP Elements
Elements
Location
Purpose /Function
Notes
BR = Bioretention Cell, S F= Sand Filter, SW = Stormwater Wetland, WDP = Wet Detention Pond, DDP = Dry Detention Pond, FS = Filter
Strip, S = Grassed Swale, LS = Level Spreader, NI = Natural Infiltration Area, FB = Forested Buffer
' Note that lengths do not match stationing because channel sections that do not generate credit have been removed from length calculations
"The higher enhancement ratio was agreed to with Todd Tugwell, with the USACE, during a March 9, 2011 meeting for the several reasons The higher
ratio is warranted because of the low quality of the existing wetland enhancement zone Currently the enhancement zone like the restoration and creation
zones, is being used for farming The hydrology of the site has been altered by a drainage ditch and a berm along Little Troublesome Creek There is no
vegetation on the site except for some areas of grasses and cultivated crops Enhancement activities performed on the site will include improving the
hydrology of the enhancement zone (as well as the creation and restoration zones) and restoring the native vegetation Therefore the functional uplift of the
enhancement portion of the project will be nearly the same as that of the restoration zone and, thus, a high ratio for enhancement is appropriate

Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Monitoring Year 1
Activity orReport
Date Collection
Complete
Completion or
Scheduled Delivery,
Mitigation Plan
June 2011
June 2011
Final Design - Construction Plans
August 2011
August 2011
Construction
Aril 2012
May 2012
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area'
Aril 2012
May 2012
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments
Aril 2012
May 2012
Bare root plantings for reach /segments
Aril 2012
May 2012
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0 Monitoring - baseline )
April/May 2012
June 2012
Year 1 Monitoring
September / October 2012
December 2012
Year 2 Monitoring
2013
December 2013
Year 3 Monitoring
2014
December 2014
Year 4 Monitoring
2015
December 2015
Year 5 Monitoring
2016
December 2016
Year 6 Monitorin z
2017
December 2017
Year 7 Monitoring
2018
December 2018
'Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed

Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Table 3 Project Contact Table
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Monitoring Year 1
D_ e_signer
Wddlands Engineering, Inc._ _ _
5605 Chapel Hill Road, Suite 122
Raleigh, NC 27604
Jeff Keaton, PE
919 851 9986
Construction Contractor
Fluvial Solutions
PO Box 28749
Peter Jelenevsky
Raleigh, NC 28749
Planting Contractor - Stream Site
Fluvial Solutions
PO Box 28749
Peter Jelenevsky
Raleigh, NC 28749
Planting Contractor - Wetland Site
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
PO Box 1197
Freemont, NC 27830
Charlie Bruton
919 242 6555
Seeding Contractor - Stream and Wetland Site
Fluvial Solutions
PO Box 28749
Peter Jelenevsky
Raleigh, NC 28749
Seed Mix Sources
Mellow Marsh Farm
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arborgen
Dykes and Son Nursery
NC Forestry Service, Claridge Nurser
Monitoring Performers
Wddlands Engineering, Inc
Stream, Vegetation, and Wetland Monitoring, POC
Kirsten Y Gimbert
704 332 7754, ext 110

Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Table 4 Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Monitoring Year 1
Project Information
Project Name
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
County
Rockingham
Project Area acres
Stream Site 33 acres Wetland Site 19 acres
Project Coordinates latitude and longitude)
36° 20' 96 "N 79° 39 31 "W
Project Watershed Summary Information
Ph seo ra hic Province
Inner Piedmont Belt of the Piedmont
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
03030002
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
03030002010030
DWQ Sub -basin
03 -06 -01
Project Drainiage Area acres
3 254
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
17%
CGIA Land Use Classification
1 55% Forest Land 17% Cultivated Land, 28% Developed
Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Irvin Creek
Reach)
Irvin Creek
Reach
Little Troublesome
Creek
UTI
RWl
Length of reach linear feet - Post - Restoration
2095
1 932
1 171
233
N/A
Drainage area acres
525
584
3 245
62
N/A
NCDWQ stream identification score
45
45
455
265
N/A
NCDWQ Water Quality Classification
C
C
C NSW
C
C NSW
Morphological Desn tion stream a
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Intermittent
N/A
Evolutions trend (Simon's Model ) - Pre- Restoration
Stage IV
Stage IV
Stage IV
I Stage IV
N/A
Underlying mapped sods
CsA
CsA
CsA
CsA
CsA / HcA
Drainage class
Somewhat Poorh
Drained
Somewhat Pond%
Drained
Somewhat Poorh
Drained
Somewhat Poodt
Drained
Somewhat Poorh
Drained /Poodr
Drained
Soil H dnc status
No
No
No
No
No / Yes
Sloe
02%
02%
0-2%
0 -2%
0 -2%
FEMA classification
Zone AE
Native vegetation community
Bottom -land forest
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation - Post - Restoration
0%
Regulatory Considerations
Regulation
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Documentation
Waters of the United Stales - Section 404
X
X
Li0le Troublesome Creek Mitigation Plan USACE Nationwide Permit
No 27 and DWQ 401 Water Qualm Certification No 3689
Waters of the United States - Section 401
X
X
Division of Land Quality Dam Safety)
N/A
N/A
N/A
Endangered Species Act
X
X
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Plan studies found no effect (letter
from USFWS)
Historic Preservation Act
X
X
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Plan No historic resources were
found to be impacted (letter from SHPO)
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) /Coastal Area Management Act
CAMA
N/A
N/A
N/A
FEMA Flood lain Compliance
x
X
Approved CLOMR
Essential Fisheries Habitat
I N/A
N/A
N/A
•LF provided included portions of the stream that will be monitoring and have been reconstructed but for which mitigation credit will not be claimed Please refer to Table I for the
credit summary lengths

APPENDIX 2. Visual Assessment Data

Figure 3.0 Integrated Current Condition
r-�J Plan View (Key)
kt� Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
11I)S St011 0 250 500 Feet Stream Site
W - A N I NCEEP Project Number 94.640
"" Monitoring Year i
Rockingham County, NC

Sewer Line Easement
Gas Line
1
Railroad
Stream Restoration
Designed Bankfull
i
Irvin Creek
i
Cross-Section
Structures
r
Photo Points ..
Vegetation Plot • • •
..y.
Criteria Met
UL
i
f
01

ppil
Uri
cap
PPC
Irvin Creek
•
it
•
•
2M 2 OZA J'A,—',YM so 0 kM

I t4
4A
•
■
•
•
■
■
■
♦
♦
ZWe_ A40V
•
♦
•
♦
•
biryg--j4,
Conservation Easement
Duke Power R/W
Sewer Line Easement
Gas Line
t
Railroad
Stream Restoration
is Op.
Designed Bankfull
pp
Cross-Section (XS)
Structures
Photo Points (PP)
Vegetation Plot Condition
1.
Criteria Met
AA
A
5
PP18 ■
Wt mmm_- a Am

1fi's .
pp EM
r, { a
j 1 {
{
i � l
iLittle Troublesome
iCreek \ r
{ y
t { -
i
{ r_
+� a= \UT1 i
r
{
r �
{
r Y';
{t
�`r J
{
{
r Y';
{t
�`r J

Figure 3.5 Integrated Current Condition
Plan View
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
0 )�' �(('lll 0 125 250 Feet Wetland Site
Y I i I NCEEP Project Number 94640
Monitoring Year i
Rockingham County, NC

Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Table 5a Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1 (1,793 LF)
Monitoring Year 1
Adjust %
Number
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Category
Metric
as Intended
As -Built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation_
Vegetation
I Bed
1 Vertical Stability
A radation
gg
0
0
100%
Degredanon
0
0
100%
(Riffle and Run units)
2 Riffle Condition
Texture /Substrate
16
16
100%
3 Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient
16
16
100%
Condition
Lenth Appropriate
16
16
100%
Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
16
16
100%
4 Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide)
16
16
100%
2 Bank
1 Scoured /Eroded
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour
and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely
2 Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
providing habitat
3 Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3 Engineered
Structures
1 Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no ddodged boulders or logs
36
36
100%
2 Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
24
24
100%
2a Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
24
24
- -
100%
`
3 Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%
31
31
100%
=r
4 Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining -Max Pool Depth Bankfull Depth ? 1 6
Rootwads/lo s providing some cover at baseflow
12
12
l00%

Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Table 5b Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2 (1,882 LF)
Monitoring Year 1
Adjust %
Number
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Category
Metric
as Intended
As -Built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation_
Vegetation
I Bed
1 Vertical Stability
Aggradanon
0
0
100%
Degredation
0
0
100%
(Riffle and Run units)
2 Riffle Condition
Texture /Substrate
16
16
100%
3 Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient
15
15
1
100%
Lenth Appropriate
15
15
100%
Condition
Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
15
15
100%
4 Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide)
15
15
100%
2 Bank
1 Scoured/Eroded
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour
and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely
2 Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
providing habitat
= '
p a ��^,
3 Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
' Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3 Engineered
Structures
1 Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no ddodged boulders or logs
35
35
_ a
100%
-'
2 Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
19
19
100%
u
2a Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
9
9
100%
3 Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%
19
19
'
„ * _
100%
, o a-
- -
Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining -Max Pool Depth Bankfull Depth? 1 6
Roorwads4o s providing some cover at baseflow
19
19
1004

Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Table 5c Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
UT1 (233 LF)
Monitoring Year 1
Adjust %
Number
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Category
Metric
as Intended
As -Built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1 Bed
1 Vertical Stability
A dation
g�
0
0
100%
Degredation
0
0
100%
(Riffle and Run units)
2 Riffle Condition
Texture /Substrate
6
6
100%
3 Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient
4
4
u
100%
'
Condition
Lenth Appropriate
4
4
100%
Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
4
4
100%
4 Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide)
4
4
F 1000/.
2 Bank
1 Scoured/Eroded
Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour
and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercutloverhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely
2 Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
provichng habitat
e
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3 Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3 Engineered
Structures
I Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no dtlodged boulders or logs
6
6
_�
100%
2 Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
6
6
100%
:t
3
y a
2a Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
0
0
100%
3 Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%
0
0
100%
-
_
4 Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining -Max Pool Depth Bankfull Depth? 1 6
Rootwads/lo s providing some cover at baseflow
0
0
100%

Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Table 5d Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment Table
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek (1,080 LF)
Monitoring Year 1
Adjust %
Number
Number with
Footage with
for
Major
Stable,
Total
Number of
Amount of
% Stable,
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Stabilizing
Channel
Channel
Performing
Number in
Unstable
Unstable
Performing
Woody
Woody
Woody
Category
Sub-Category
Metric
as Intended
As -Built
Segments
Footage
as Intended
Vegetation
Vegetation
Vegetation
1 Bed
1 Vertical Stability
Aggradation
0
0
100%
Degredanon
0
0
100%
(Riffle and Run units)
2 Riffle Condition
Texture/Substrate
5
5
100%
3 Meander Pool
Depth Sufficient
4
4
100%
Lenth Appropriate
4
4
100%
Condition
Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend (Run)
4
4
100%
4 Thalweg Position
Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend (Glide)
4
4
100%
2 Bank
1 Scoured/Eroded
Batik lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or scour
and erosion
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears likely
2 Undercut
Does NOT include undercuts that are modest, appear sustainable and are
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
providing habitat
3 Mass Wasting
Bank slumping, calving, or collapse
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
Totals
0
0
100%
0
0
100%
3 Engineered
Structures
I Overall Integrity
Structures physically intact with no ddodged boulders or logs
9
9
100%
2 Grade Control
Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill
6
6
100%
2a Piping
Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms
1
1
100%
3 Bank Protection
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence does not exceed 15%
4
4
100%
4 Habitat
Pool forming structures maintaining —Max Pool Depth Bankfull Depth? 1 6
Rootwads /lo s providing some cover at baseflow
4
4
0
100 /o

Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (EEP Project No 94640)
Monitoring Year 1
Planted Acreage 337
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
(acres)
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acrea a
% of
Planted
Acreage*
Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material
0 1
0
0
000%
Low Stem Density Areas^
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria
0 1
0
0 0
0%
Total
0
0 0
0%
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
0
0
0%
Cumulative Total
0
0 0
0%
Easement Acreage 52
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
(SF)
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
1000
0
0
0%
Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
none
0
0
0%

Stream Photographs

.. .: "i
'i•
1, •' 1 •' - i L} .,
. .C` ,((
y��,..
SS1 ``
,{µrd
Memo
;i 1 -
a
•,���' •, � ; ��
! ,i !i� it .. ' n - t " ,�
It
r Tr
;L E
'Y
Photo Point 3
-looking upstream (10/26/2012)
Photo Point 3 - looking downstream (110/26/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs
,
�`
� f
• • ••
•• • • -• 1 YR-1 pill 1.4
• • •• •• • •• -•
'
ti •.i
`
rj 't M
P 1
J
t
Photo Point 5
- looking downstream (10/26/2012)
y t
1
Photo Point 6 -
looking upstream (10/26/2012)
MUITOW619011171
0 '141ABOMMOMMA
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

K Old,
qq i
�
r' / Ike } - ;,• , `
F k
_.
w
je
it l
R
• • • • i • • • 16, 1 • •
• • • • i • • • • • •
a�•. ,. , :.
-,"IT
of
•
,� ? t•
AI
.
OFA
'
�' ..�' ";S ^x.14, ;� `• .
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • Point • looking • • • 1
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs
Photo Point 10 - looking upstream (10/26/2012)
Photo Point 10 - looking -downstream (10/26/2012)
a'
y
r
-
'r
- _46,
.. � ��',.�.ii Sri; -` ` -
� *� t � `� - '.` -IZ'• '•_
Photo • • looking • • (10/26/2012)
• • • Point looking • • • (10/26/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

Photo Point 13 - looking upstream (10/26/2012) 1 Photo Point 13 - looking downstream (10/26/2012)
Photo Point 14 -looking upstream (10/26/2012) 1 Photo Point 14 -looking downstream (10/26/2012)
Photo Point 15 - looking upstream (10/26/2012) I Photo Point 15- looking downstream (10/26/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs
III lJJ ill III !1I III I 111 11111111111111 Jill
Oil • W, 111M 11!1,iiill
ill III JIJ JJJJJ��J J
•• • •• -• 1 1
'�^ . � _ � V •� rte!
„ .y1. { Y � t „ F�c t
K
1
• • '• int 17 - looking upstream (10/26/2012)
• • '• int 17 -looking downstream 1 1
' ,
vim': •�' �_i
� fit- Lip ,�� :fl r 1 ��
=
1 �A
Photo Point 18 - looking upstream (10/26/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

V WV i, Jw
Sir-
Photo '• int 19 - looking upstream (10/26/2012) • • '• •• • • -• 1 1
c, h
�, •t .•lam iII( t ,.�[ ?.
1 'N
R _
• • '• 11 991.11 i n • •• • 1 I I, 1 1
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs
-.a��. di'�'� ^`� _ •fit' �.Y 1.��`v^^ � ±� � i
< 1R y'
.. .. , .`.
i
w f ' . �'• Yom:
- #� � � ! •' � my -
.. ,,
.` �� t,.
- :rte •
S
R..
� r
.Y •- •
v _ ''���. "''K:�'
-
_
� Jam. � �
• • • • • • • • ' • •
M22,no • • • ''I I I 111 • • • • MOT 21.11 C-140 1 at • •
rr !
4Y. tij y
=M• hk
_ .. � _ t
'� •'4 `��� ', ��"�y��',�� ;�+fiit
r �• x•t
1
iii.
- •i.+Y�. •
M `
,5�, ,.:
eH
J
J
Photo Point 23 -looking downstream (10/26/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs
•
f �.. •mil :. .ais'1.6 �'.it 9f.
''.'!p`
JI
h
4
� •fi A �
f� •��4l�� 4• .1,� � - .J1
• • •• int 25 - looking upstream (10/26/2012)
• • '• int 25- looking downstream 1 1
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Stream Photographs

Stream Site Vegetation Photographs*
*Numbers shown on posts in each vegetation plot photo do not correspond with vegetation plot
identification numbers Numbers listed under each photo is correct identification number

r_
i
�
- 2
Vegetation Plot 23 (09/19/2012)
Vegetation Plot 24 (09/19/2012)
4
L
`
e
1
f . L.'f f �• M+,l t. 4)1{t i. 'L`j� `3 P'•' �3...P S (t ;�
i r
Vegetation Plot 25 (09/19/2012)
Vegetation Plot 26 (09/19/2012)
wL
Vegetation Plot 27 (09/19/2012)
Vegetation Plot 28 (09/19/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data - Vegetation Photographs - Stream Site

Vegetation Plot 29 (09/19/2012) 1 Vegetation Plot 30 (09/19/2012)
MW WRINI
Vegetation Plot 31 (09/19/2012) Vegetation Plot 32 (09/19/2012)
I Vegetation Plot 33 (09/19/2012) I Vegetation Plot 34 (09/19/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Vegetation Photographs — Stream Site

Vegetation Plot 35 (09/19/2012) I
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Vegetation Photographs — Stream Site

Wetland Site Vegetation Photographs

Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Vegetation Photographs — Wetland Site
AC e�
>EJ
Vegetation Plot 1 (9/20/2012)
Vegetation Plot 2 (9/20/2012)
° � •}fix
AIF
Y { I
k�
Vegetation Plot 3 (9/20/2012)
Vegetation Plot 4 (9/20/2012)
��
t '•"^"� r•, m -tom �rV
� ,-
i
Vegetation Plot 5 (9/20/2012)
Vegetation Plot 6 (9/20/2012))t
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Vegetation Photographs — Wetland Site

Vegetation Plot 7 (9/20/2012) 1 Vegetation Plot 8 (9/20/2012)
Y f
sw
Vegetation Plot 9 (9/20/2012) Vegetation Plot 10 (9/20/2012)
Vegetation Plot 11 (9/20/2012) I Vegetation Plot 12 (9/20/2012) I
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix 2: Visual Assessment Data - Vegetation Photographs - Wetland Site

9i
aF��M•T.+4is r - Y
r �
a � .
e � x 'rte-
'�.
•�'�.l?ir;�
,,.o-e"` �._ _ _..,�
�
vegetation • • • 1 1
• • • • • in F, RVIAITYA11 vg��
`y�,�/ • J
-t . �
.. ,
11 {fin
_'�'��.^
rL �'"'�.
Vegetation Plot 16 (9/20/2012)
Vegetation Plot 17 (9/20/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data — Vegetation Photographs - Wetland Site

Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data - Vegetation Photographs - Wetland Site
���������� f�• F ?�•.�.'�yi fir.
Vegetation Plot 19 (9/20/2012)
Vegetation Plot 20 (9/20/2012)
�.40, ' Itt�•� '
.lia. �
,i
f
1
d \ 4
Vegetation Plot 21 (9/20/2012)
Vegetation Plot 22 (9/20/2012)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site
Appendix z: Visual Assessment Data - Vegetation Photographs - Wetland Site

APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7 Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94
Monitoring Year 1
Plot
MYl Success Criteria Met
(Y/N)
Tract Mean
1
Y
100%
2
Y
3
Y
4
Y
5
Y
6
Y
7
Y
8
Y
9
Y
10
Y
II
Y
12
Y
13
Y
14
Y
15
Y
16
Y
17
Y
18
Y
19
Y
20
Y
21
Y
22
Y
23
Y
24
Y
25
Y
26
Y
27
Y
28
Y
29
Y
30
Y
31
Y
32
Y
33
Y
34
Y
35
Y

Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8a CVS Vegetation Tables - Metadata
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Wetland Site
Monitoring Year 1
Report Prepared By
Alea Tuttle
Date Prepared
1011612012 0 00
database name
CVS Data Table Output- Wetland Site MY]
database location
II WILDNCSVRIPro ectsl4ctivePro ects1005 -02124 Little Troublesome Creek FDPWonaoringWonitoring Year 11 Vegetation Assessment
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN
THIS DOCUMENT ------------
Metadata
This worksheet, which is a summary of the project and the project data
Plots
List ofplots surveyed
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes
Vigor b Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage
List of most re uent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by e or each species
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by e or each plot
Stem Count by Plot and Spp
Unknown
PROJECT SUMMARY-------------------------------------
Project Code
94640
project Name
Little Troublesome Creek -Cotton Rd Site
Description
Wetland Mitigation Site
length ft
n/a
stream-to-edge width ft
n/a
m
72843 42
wired Plots calculated
Ps
16
led Plots
122

Appendix 3. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8b CVS Vegetation Tables - Metadata
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Stream Site
Monitoring Year 1
Report Prepared By
Alea Tuttle
Date Prepared
1011612012 0 00
database name
CVS Data Table Output- Stream Site MY]
database location
II WILDNCSVRIPro ectsl4ctivePro ects1005 -02124 Little Troublesome Creek FDPIAfonitoringWonitoring Year II Ve etation Assessment
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN
THIS DOCUMENT ------------
Metadata
This worksheet, which is a summary of the project and the project data
Plots
List ofplols surveyed
Vigor
Frequency distribution of vigor classes
Vigor b Spp
Frequency distribution of vigor classes listed by species
Damage
List of most re uent damage classes with number of occurrences and percent of total stems impacted by each
Damage by Spp
Damage values tallied by e or each species
Damage by Plot
Damage values tallied by e or each plot
Stem Count by Plot and Spp
Unknown
PROJECT SUMMARY-------------------------------------
Project Code
94640
project Name
Little Troublesome Mitigation Site
Description
Stream Mitigation Site
length ft
n/a
stream-to-edge width 11
n/a
areas m
50990 39
Re wired Plots calculated
13
Sam led Plots
13

Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9a Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 9464)
Wetland Site
Monitoring Year
Type =Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total
Current Data (MY 1-9/2012)
Annual Means
Species
Common Name
Tvpe
Plot 1
Plot 2
Plot 3
Plot 4
I Plot 5
Plot 6
Plot 7
Plot 8
Plot 9
Plot I
Plot I1
Current Mean
MY -4/212
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Tree /Shrub
2
2
l
1
2
2
4
4
1
1
2
2
1
1
4
4
2
2
2
2
3
3
Betula nr ra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
4
4
3
3
1
1
3
3
3
3
2
2
6
6
3
3
5
5
3
3
3
4
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
1
4
4
6
6
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
Fraxinus americana
white ash
Tree
I
1
1
0
0
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
3
3
6
6
2
2
11
11
2
2
8
8
2
2
5
5
4
4
4
4
N ssa s lvatica
black um
Tree
2
2
1 3
3
5
5
1
3
3
5
5
1
3
3
2
2
Platanus occidentals
americansycamore
Tree
7
7
2
2
5
5
3
3
1
1
3
3
5
5
4
4
6
6
4
4
4
4
Platycladus orrentalis
oriental arborvitae
Shrub
I
1
0
0
Ouercus mrchauxrr
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
4
4
3
3
I
1 I
1 1
1
5
5
2
2
2
2
Ouercus hellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
I
1
4
4
I
I
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
1
1
2
2
2
1 2
Unknown
I
0
0
2
2
Plot Area (acres)
Species Count
Stem Count
Stems per Acre
00247
5
5
6
6
6
6
1 7
1 7
1 7
7
6
6
5
1 5
5
5
4
4
6
6
4
4
10
10
6
6
15
15
11
11
20
20
1 21
1 21
1 23
23
15
15
16
1 16
16
16
17
17
17
17
18
18
16
16
17
1 17
6071
607
1445
1445
1 8101
810
1850
1850
19311
9311
607
607
1 6481
648
1648
1648
1 6881
6881
6881
688
729
729
1 639
1 639
701
1 701
Type =Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total

Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9b Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 9464)
Wetland Site
Monitoring Year
Type =Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total
Current Data MY1- 9/2012
Annual Means
Species
Common Name
Type
Plot 12
Plot 13
Plot 14
Plot 15
Plot 16
Plot 17
Plot 18
Plot 19
Plot 2
Plot 21
Plot 22
Current Mean
MY -4/212
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Tree /Shrub
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
4
4
3
3
2
2
3
3
Betula nt ra
river birch
Tree
4
4
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
3
3
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
3
1
1
2
2
3
3
Fraxtnus amertcona
white ash
Tree
1
1
1
1
0
0
Fraxtnus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
1
1
5
5
2
2
2
2
1
1
4
4
3
3
2
2
5
5
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
N ssa s lvattca
black um
Tree
I 1
1
2
1 2
1
I
1 1
1
1
3
3
1 2
2
3
1 3
2
1 2
Platanus occtdentalts
amencan sycamore
Tree
6
6
5
5
1
1
1
1
5
5
2
2
5
5
5
5
1 9
9
4
4
4
4
Platycladus ortentalts
oriental arborvitae
Shrub
1
1
1
1
0
0
Ouercus mtchauxtt
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
5
5
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
uercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
4
4
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
5
5
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Unknown
I
1
0
0
2
2
Plot Area (acres)
Species Count
Stem Count
Stems per Acre
00247
7
7
7
1 7
6
6
1 6
6
5
5
5
1 5
6
1 6
6
1 6
1 4
1 4
6
6
1 6
6
10
10
6
6
16
16
1 16
1 16
18
1 18
1 13
1 13
1 8
1 8
9
1 9
1 13
1 13
16
1 16
1 15
1 15
1 16
1 16
1 18
1 18
1 16
1 16
1 17
1 17
648
16481
6481
648
1729
1 729
1 526
1 526
1324
1 324
1364
1364
1 526
1 526
1 6481
648
1 607
1 607
1 648
16481729
1729
1 639
1 639
1 701
1 701
Type =Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total

Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9c Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot with Annual Means)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 9464)
Stream Site
Monitoring Year
Type =Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total
Current Data (MY] 9/2012)
Annual Means
Species
Common Name
Type
Plot 23
1 Plot 24
Plot 25
Plot 26
1 Plot 27
1 Plot 28
Plot 29
Plot 3
Plot 31
Plot 32
Plot 33
Plot 34
Plot 35
Current Mean
MY -4/212
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
I T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
P
T
Beiulant ra
nvei buck
Tree
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
9
9
7
7
7
7
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
Car inns carohniana
amencan hornbeam
Tree /Shrub
3
3
1
1
3
3
2
2
3
3
4
4
3
3
9
9
3
3
8
8
2
2
4
4
4
4
Cornus amonium
silk-y dogwood
Shrub
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
Froxinus pennsvIvanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
3
3
13
13
6
6
7
7
6
6
6
6
2
2
7
7
3
3
I
1
3
3
2
2
5
5
5
5
Ltrvodendron tulipifera
tult tree
Tree
8
8
2
2
1
1
2
2
6
6
5
5
l
1
1
1
5
5
3
3
3
3
Plaranus occtdentahs
amencan sycamore
I Tree
5
5
3
3
2
2
5
5
13
13
11
11
1
1
2
2
2
2
I
1
1
1
3
3
4
4
6
6
Ouercus phellos
willow oak
I Tree
4
4
4
4
7
7
5
5
5
5
6
6
Ouercur rubra
northern red oak
Tree
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
5
5
2
3
2
2
UnkWOU'll
I
0
0
I
1
Plot Area (acres)
Species Count
Stem Count
Stems er Acre
00247
5
5
8
8
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
6
6
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
7
7
5
5
6
6
22
22
19
19
20
20
15
15
24
24
23
23
ll
11
23
23
25
25
13
13
17
17
26
26
21
21
20
20
24
24
891
891
769
769
810
810
607
607
972
972
931
931
445
445
931
931
1012
1012
526
526
688
688
1053
1053
850
850
807
807
953
953
Type =Shrub or Tree
P = Planted
T = Total

APPENDIX 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 10a Baseline Stream Data Summary
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Irvin Creek Reaches 1 and 2
Monitoring Year 1
( ) Uata as 1101 Pro%loco
N/A Not Applicable
'Design parameters %%ere c%panded during the final design phase
•LF Pre%ided included portions of the stream that n 111 be monitored acid ha%e been reconstructed but for %%hich mtngation credit a ill not be claimed Please refer to Table 1 in Appendix I for the credit summan lengths
-Pool to pool spacing calculations %%ere measured using the most do%mstresm pool In the meander for the as built compared to die design pool to pool spacing %ihmh included pools and plunge pools in the mm and max %slues
Pre - Restoration Condition
Reference
Reach Data
Desi
n
As -BU11t Baseline
Parameter
Gage
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Collins Creek
;1 to ews
erced
Roc
Creek
S encer Creek
Irvin Creek
Irvin Creek
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Min
I Max
Min
Max
Mm I
Max,
Mm I Max
I Mm I Max
Mm I Max,
Mm I Max
Mm I Max
Mtn
Ma
Mm
Max
Dimension and
Substrate - Riffie
BanLlull Width (11)
177
112
172
201
144
122
87
190
190
186
197
181
209
Flood roe, Width 11)
210
180
210
0
2000
720
2290
80+
2001
200,
200+
200+
200,
Banldud Mean 0. ih
1
5
1 9
20
2 7
20
1 3
1 2
16
16
16
17
16
1 6
BonAtull Ma% 1h
rJn
18
24
26
42
27
I8
19
22
22
24
26
24
24
Barkitill Cross sccu.nd Area(111
271
306
328
1329
274
161
106
297
297
293
337
290
327
Wid ih Ratio
115
80
86
121
76
91
73
120
120
II>
118
113
133
Enuenchmrnt Ratio
1
2
1 2
1 2
10
34 7
6 0
26 i
'1
2 2+
'1
2 2+
%1
'1
Boni. Het 1 Ratio
1 9
3 1
2 1
2 5
1 1
10
10
10
0
10
0
10
0
0
d>0 (mini
328
242
226
186
Profile
Rulle Le Ih(I
I
I
I
I
I
IS
1 92
17
1 71
Rullc Sio (Will
0001
00250
00019
0017
00030 00080
00606 00892
00100 00670
00060 00080
00070 00147
00039
0021>
00021
00280
Pool Len Ih (111
Na
32
141
46
85
Pmt Max a, (11)
209
365
227
iii
24
46
22
25
28 40
29 40
i7
42
36
40
Pools c (fl)^
19
60
27
76
3'-
80
75
1 26 1 81
13 1 47
76 133
77 1 135
1 57
1 236
1 91
142
Pool Volumc (u)
Pattern
Channel Belnl3dth R)
w—I
81
1 46
1 94
1
1 31
1 32
1
24
1 52
1 57
1 152 1
58
1 154
1 52
1 151
1 49
1 86
Radms at Curl at —(ill
n/o
57
114
100
251
16
27
5
22
38
57
38
58
38
59
38
62
Re B.Atull Width (M)
i2
64
66
146
22
41
15
28
2
3
2
3
20
31
2
3
Meamter W.-Lm ih 11)
86
17>
17>
148
71
101
54
196
152
228
154
231
1>0
21,
166
229
Meander Width Ratio
46
i
55
215
1 222
1
28
6
3
8
3
8
27
79
1
>
SubstraM
Bed and
Transport Parameters
Ri %JR.VJP%/G%/S%
SC°/ ✓S.VdG%/C%/B %/Bc%
d 16/,115 /d>0 /d84 /0> /d 100
da
O IA 6114 8/56 1198 1h2078
01/0314 5/247/111 /450
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
<0062Jc006Z1226/48511
640 1128
0062/<0062/18»/4828178>i /1800
Reach Shwr Stress (Coin icnm)lbAT
088
042
Oi8
043
038
041
040
Mai Pa. —(nun) mobdaw7 in MMiull
S— P.—(Ca ream)Man
Additional Reach
Parameters
Dmtna eArea(SM)
067
1 082
082
1 091
168
340
11
05
082
091
082
091
Watershed lm 3 tu o Cm er Fatunuta %)
17
17
17
17
17
17
Ros rnClasstlicauon
(34c
G4c
E4
ES
E4b
E4 /C4
C4
C4
C
C
Banklull Veimm lips)
11
i W
3 i0
30
3 3
2 7
1 31
31
4
Wal.11 Dtscha a lew
90
100
IIS
150
125
85
N/A
90
100
90
100
NFF re —mi
110
126
-
Q- USGS coin Imwn
Na
Q-Matimmis
122
99
101
Valk, Lrn Ih(n)
14909
15050
Channel Thlit— Len ih(111
16400
15050
2057•
1919•
2092•
1932•
Smuosm Rl
1
I
10
12
I 1
105
13
12
13
12
Wster sildinc Shope (IV11)
0001
0007
00235
00132
NIA'
NIA'
Bon6tu0 Slo IUnI
00107
00043
1
0045
00049
00075
1 00047
( ) Uata as 1101 Pro%loco
N/A Not Applicable
'Design parameters %%ere c%panded during the final design phase
•LF Pre%ided included portions of the stream that n 111 be monitored acid ha%e been reconstructed but for %%hich mtngation credit a ill not be claimed Please refer to Table 1 in Appendix I for the credit summan lengths
-Pool to pool spacing calculations %%ere measured using the most do%mstresm pool In the meander for the as built compared to die design pool to pool spacing %ihmh included pools and plunge pools in the mm and max %slues

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 10b Baseline Stream Data Summary
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek and UT1
Monitoring Year 1
Parameter
Gage
Pre - Restoration Condition
Reference Reach Data
I Design'
As -Bull[
Baseline
UT1 Little Troublesome
UT1'
Little
UTS'
Little Troublesome Creek
Ivhn
Max
Mtn Max
Mho Ma<
Min Mal
Min
Maa
Mtn
Max
Dimension
and Substrate - Riffle
Bwddull Width (11)
N.
2
287
Hier to mbk 5.
78
323
109
326 1
488
FIDodpmne Width (11
80
930
100+
285+
367
200+
Banldull Mean0.lh
12
26
06
27
05
16
27
Bwd.lull Ms Dqlh
19
11
09
38
1
41
42
BaN1ull Cross- tional Art (I1)
64
736
50
866
51
796
871
WiddvD,Tth R.no
43
112
120
120
23
122
10
Entrtrchmou Ratio
1 5
32
2 2+
22+
2 2+
22+
B.M Ha M Rau.
12 2 5
16 2 8
10
10
10
10
d50 (mm)
08
97
r
04
207
Profile
Rnllc I —h(Il)
a,
_ _
_
_ _
rclerto tabu. 5o
II
1 26
79
142
Ri111, S10 (tUll)'
00185 00369
0(1066 00088
00211
00600
00063
00126
Pool Lai N (11)
is
48
88
159
Pool Mai dt(11)
12 16
48 67
12
59
Pool S cm (It'/'
2a 43
129 226
35 59
206
267
Pool v.1.,n� Ot )
Pattern
Chumnl Bclusldth(11 )
No
119
rcw to mbl, >.
27
62
111
258
27
62
113
258
R.diue.fC, -.—n1)
101
ti3
16
23
65
97
16
23
65
97
RcB -1,U1 Width (Nn)
16
109
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
.0
Meander W., LUI th (11)
179
31>
62
94
2>8
388
1 62
94
1 258
X88
Mwnda Width Rauo
41
35
1 80
1 35
80
1 3>
80
1 1>
80
Substrate
Bed and Transport Parameters
R,/.R- /P%GWS
Ja
rcler to mbl, 5.
d16/d35 /d>Nd84 /d95/d100
062/ -0062 /-(1062/355 /1331-21
02N 3/10/22 0/10 2A2048
<0062/< 0062 /04/ 442 / 640 /1280
<0062/<0062R0 73/61
79/110 071180 0
Reach Shear So —(Coin rn,1)lbh1
096
041
NIA'
NIA'
034
038
0>3
Mal pan s¢c fnun)m.bihw in b.1mull
Stre.nl P.—(C. an) W/m
Additional
Reach Parameters
Drab eAnn(SM)
Na
01
495 1
507
relam wble S.
01
507
01
507
Watasbd lm ' .s o Cot a Esrmj.Na)
17
17
17
17
17
17
R. at Classdic.uon
G5
CS
CS
C5
C5
C4
B.n6lull Wt— O )
44
50
27
43
27
42 1
46
B.iJtull D-lung, (cls )
14
370
14
370
14
170
pNFF n. ressioi
422
-
Q- USGS"tra I.umi
Q- M.nn.tas
217
v.ilm Length (101
1 184
1 982
Chu aid Thalv.. Lai ih(R)
184
11L
1080
240
1158•
233
11717
Sinuosm (R)
I I
1 3
13
12
13
Water Surf.ce Slo (Nil
N/A'
N /A'
Baaknill Stop, (IU11
00181
00013
00123
00044
00126
00038
f 1 Data —not —ided
N/A Not Apphcable
'Design pinmeters Here elpaMed during the final design phase
Restoration approach 1ws adjusted from a pnonn I to a pnonn 2 during the final design phase
The critical shear stress anahvs.7s not pedomed on the sand bed channels
+LF pro1 lied included poroons of the stream 0ianull be monitored and Ivne been reconstnicted but for Much mitigation emdn n dl not be claimed Please refer to Table 1 in Appendil 1 for the credo swmnan lengths
^Pool to pool spacing plculauons vein melsured using the most doer natreatn pool in the meander for the as buds compared to the design pool to pool spacing w loch included pools and plunge pools in du mm and ir1a,
lalucs
lalucs

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 11 Morphology and Hydraulic Summary (Dimensional Parameters - Cross - Section)
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Irvin Creek Reaches 1 and 2, Little Troublesome Creek, UT1
Monitoring Year 1
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Cross - Section 1 Riffle
Cross - Section 2 Pool
Cross - Section 3 Pool
Cross - Section 4 Riffle
Dimension and Substrate
Base MYi MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MYi MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MYi MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MYi MY2 MY3 ML MYS
bawd on /bred bankhdl elawtron
Bankfull Width ft
18 6
177
199
180
31 l
31 1
19 7
202
Flood rove Width (ft)
200+
200+
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
200+
200+
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
16
1 5
_19
22
19
1 9
1 7
1 7
Bank-full Max Depth ft
24
25
3 7
40
42
42
26
27
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft')
293
272
368
386
576
576
33 7
344
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
118
116
107
84
168
168
115
119
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
L2+
2 2+
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2 2+
22+
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1 0
1 0
1 0
'0
'0
'0
10
10
Irvin Creek Reach
2
Cross - Section 5 Pool
Cross - Section 6 Riffle
Cross - Section 7 Riffle
Cross
- Section B Pool
bamd of? fuedbankR2neA9wtw
Base
MYl
I MY2
I MY3
MY4
MYS
Base
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MYS
Base
MY3
MY2
MY3
MY4
MYS
Base
MYi
MY2
MY3
MY4
MYS
Bankfull Width (ft)
353
356
181
186
209
209
292
320
Flood prone Width (ft)
N/A
N/A
200+
200+
200+
200+
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
14
1 3
1 6
1 5
16
1 4
1 7
1 6
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
40
4 1
24
25
24
24
3 6
36
Bankful I Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
479
460
290
278
327
28 7
V1
50 1
500
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
260
275
1 1 3
124
13 3
15 2
170
205
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
N/A
_22+
22+
22+
22+
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
10
1 10
1
1
1
1
1 10
1 0
10
1 1 0
1 10
10
UTl
Little Troublesome
Creek
Cross - Section 9 Riffle
Cross - Section 10 Pool
Cross on it Riffle
Cross - Section 12 Pool
Dimension and Substrate
Base MY3 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MYi MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5
Base MYi MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
Base MYl MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
bagec, on AkV bankfUl eA"tw
Bankfull Width ft
109
80
93
96
326
330
41 0
422
Flood rone Width ft
367
35 7
N/A
N/A
200+
200+
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
05
05
07
06
27
26
3 1
3 l
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
10
10
1 2
1 2
4 1
40
59
65
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
5 1
4 1
64
56
871
846
1253
1288
Sankfull Width/Depth Ratio
23 0
15 5
13 5
166
122
129
134
138
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
L2+
2 2+
N/A
N/A
22+
22+
N/A
N/A
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 10
1
1
1
1
1 1 0
1 1 0
1
1
1
1
1 0
1 10
Little Troublesome Creek
Cross - Section 13 Riffle
Dimension and Substrate
Base MY3 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS
based on FAW bank/L // ek-wbm
Bankfull Width (ft)
488
35 7
-Flood prone Width (ft)
200+
200+
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1 6
2 1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
42
39
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
796
748
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio
300
171
Bankfull Entrenchment Ratio
2_2+
2 2+
Bankfull Bank Height Ratio
10
1 10

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 12a Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Monitoring Year 1
Parameter
As -Built Baseline
MY -1
MY -2
MY -3
MY -4
MY -5
IvLn Max
Nhn Med Max
Nhn Med Max
Mn Med Max
Nbn Med Max
Mtn Med Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (R)
196
197
177
19 o
202
Flood rone Width (11)
200+
200+
200+
200+
20D+
Bankfull Mean Depth
16
1 7
15
16
1 7
Bankfull Mm, De th
24
26
20
26
27
Bankfull Cross sectional Area ft )
293
337
272
308
344
Width/Depth Ratio
110
118
116
117
119
Entrenchment Ratio
22+
22+
22+
22+
22+
Bank Height Ratio
10
10
10
1 0
10
DA (mm)
30 0
44 2
Profile
Rtfnc Lcn th (R)
18
92
11
41
79
Ri Mc Slo (11/11)
00039
00215
0 0008
, 0 0070
00174
Pool Lcn th(fQ
32
141
33
63
153
Pool Ma, De th (R)
37
42
3 1
42
63
Pool Spacing (11)
37
236
63
103
227
Pool Volume (R')
Pattern
Channel Bcite idth(ft)
52
UI
Radms of Cun amre (0)
38
39
Rc Bankfull Width(N11)
20
31
Meander Wate Length (R)
150
233
Meander Width Ratio
27
79
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
C
C
Channel Thal�eg Len ih (0)
2090
2095
Smuosm (R)
13
13
Water Surface Sio (NR)
N/A
00044
Bankfull Slope (fl/11)
00043
00048
Rt *It Ru %/P%JG %/S
SC% /Sa %JG %dC%B %JBe
d 16/05/do0/d84109 /d 100
<0 0621<0 062/22 6148 53/64 0/128
0 2/0 7/9 7/38 4/57 91362 0
%of Rcach"ah Erodm Banks
1
0%
( -) Data was not provided
N/A Not Applicable

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 12b Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Monitoring Year 1
Parameter
As- Built /Baseline
MY -1
MY -2
MY -3
MY -4
MY -5
Mn Max
Nfm Mad Max
Mtn Med Max
Min Med Max
Min Med Max
Mtn Med Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
181
209
18 6
198
209
Flood rone Width (ft)
200+
200+
200+
200+
200+
Bankfull Mean Depth
16
16
14
15
1 3
Bankfull Mai Depth
24
24
24
23
2 a
Bankfull Cross sectional Area (ft )
290
327
278
283
287
W idth/De th Ratio
113
13 3
124
138
1:,2
Entrenchment Rauo
22+
22+
22+
22+
22+
Bank Height Ratio
10
10
10
10
10
Do0 (mm)
IS G
398
Profile
Riffle Length (R)
17
73
21
59
72
Riffle Slope (11/11)
00021
00280
00026
00087
00149
Pool Len (R)
46
85
52
64
89
Pool Max Depth (ft)
36
40
3 1
38
60
Pool Spacing (ft)
91
142
89
123
139
Pool Volume (0 )
_
Pattern
Channel f3ch-ddt (f))
49
86
Radius of Cur, amre (f)
31
62
Re Bankfull Width (ft/ft)
2
3
-
-Meander Win e Length (R)
166
229
_
Meander Width Ratio
3
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
C
C
Channel Tbal,ca Len th (ft)
1932
1932
Smuosm (ft)
12
12
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
N/A
00045
Bankfull Slope (fl/ft)
00047
00049
Rl%dRu%dP %/G %/S%
_
SC % /Sa%dG%dC° /dB%dBe%
d 16 /d3:,/d50 /d84 /d90 /d100
<0 062/4062/1813/48 28/78 53/180 0
0 1/04h 6/66 2/103 6k,12 0
% of Reach%%ith Erodm Banks
0%
( -) uata was not provided
N/A Not Applicable

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 12c Monitoring Data - Stream Reach Data Summary
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
UT1
Monitoring Year 1
Parameter
As -Built Baseline
MY -1
MY -2
MY -3
MY -4
MY -5
Mn Max
Mtn Med Max
Mn Med Max
Mn Med Max
Mn Med Max
Mtn Med Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (R)
109
80
Flood prone Width (R)
T6-7
357
Bankfull Mean Depth
05
05
Bankfull Mai De dt
10
10
Bankfull Cross sectional Area (R )
) 1
41
Width/De di Ratio
230
153
Entrenchment Ratio
22+
22+
Bank. Height Ratio
10
10
D50 (mm)
133
Profile
Rin)c Length R)
11
26
14
20
31
Riflle Sloe (NR)
00231
0 0600
0 0089
0021 - 7
0 0448
Pool Length R
18
48
15
23
36
Pool Max Depth (R)
12
12
13
14
Pool S acm (ft)
33
59
43
52
62
Pool Volume (R')
Pattern
Channel BelMidih (R)
27
62
Radius of Cun aturc R)
16
23
Re Bankfull Wtdth(0/h)
20
30
-
MeanderWmeLength ft
62
94
Meander Width Ratio
3 5
80
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classification
C5
C5
Channel Thalseit Len R)
233
233
Smuosm (R)
12
12
Water Surface Slope It/R)
N/A
00120
Bankfull Slope (11/ft)
00126
00121
Ri %/Ru %/P %/G %/S%
SC% /Sa %IG %/C%B %/Be
d 16/03 /60 /d84 /03/d 100
<0 062/,0 062/0 4/44 2164 0/128 0
<0 062/0 1/0 3/30 6/90 01128 0
of Reach with Eroding Banks
00/.
( ) Data was not provided
N/A Not Applicable

Appendix 4 Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Table 12d Monitoring Data -Stream Reach Data Summary
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek
Monitoring Year 1
Parameter
As -Built Basehne
MY -1
MY -2
MY -3
MY-4
MY -5
Mtn Max
bin Med Max
Mtn Med Max
Min Med Max
Mtn Med Max
bin Med Max
Dimension and Substrate - Riffle
Bankfull Width (ft)
326 488
330
344
3� 7
Flood prone Width (ft)
200+
200+
200+
200+
Bankfull Mean Depth
16
27
2 1
24
26
Bankfull Max De dt
4 1
42
39
40
40
Bankfull Cross sectional Area (R -)
796
87 1
748
797
846
Width/Depth Ran o
122
30
129
150
171
Entrenchment Ratio
22+
00
22+
Bank Height Ratio
10
to
10
10
d50 mm)
327
397
Profile
Riffle Length (R)
79
L41
74
107
147
Riffle Sloe Will
00063
1 00126
0 0061
00071
00178
Pool Length (R)
88
139
88
121
168
Pool Ma, Depth (R)
9
60
63
77
Pool Spacing (f)
206
267
194
219
297
Pool Volume (fl')
Pattern
Channel Bcltnnidth (R)
113
238
Radius of Cun amre (11)
6,
97
Re Bankfull Width (NR)
20
30
Meander Wane Len (R)
b8
388
Meander Width Ratio
3
80
Additional Reach Parameters
Ros en Classificauon
C4
C4
Channel Thahneiz Len th (R)
1171
1171
Smuosm (ft)
13
1 3
Water Swface Slope (ft/ft)
N/A
00039
Bankfill Slope (ft/11)
00038
00039
Rt %/RU%JP % /G% /S%
SC % /Sa%dG%dC%B%JBe%
d 16/d35/d50/d84/d95/d 100
<0 0621<0 062120 73/61 79/110 07/180 0
<0 062/0 3/8 0/74 1/165 3/312 0
%of Reach a ith Eroding Banks
01A
( -) Data was not provided
N/A Not Applicable

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 4a. Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Monitoring Year 1
728 —
726 -
724
722
iv
2 720
C
0
> 718
W
716
714 -
712
710
10000
O
O -
O •
- 0 • A A
O
X X
Y
X
♦
10500 11000 11500 12000 12500
Station (feet)
e TW (MYO- 4/2012) TW (MY1- 10/2012) ♦ BKF/TOB (MY1- 10/2012) o STRUCTURES (MY1- 10/2012) - - - -- WS (MY1- 10/2012)

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 4b. Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Monitoring Year 1
718
716
-
714
s' 0 O
712
—
0
710
A
- -
>
W
708
co
X X
-
704
-
-
702
12000
12500
13000
13500 14000
14500
Station (feet)
TW (MYO- 4/2012) TW (MY1- 10/2012)
♦ BKF/TOB (MY1- 10/2012)
O STRUCTURES (MY1- 10/2012)
— WS (MY 1- 10/2012) J
_-
I

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 4c. Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
UT1
Monitoring Year 1
708.5
708.0
•
707.5 - -- - - - - -
707.0 -- - - - -
706.5 - - - -
w �
0 706.0 - — - — —
"
w 705.5
•
705.0
704.5
704.0
703.5
40000 40050 40100 40150 40200 40250
Station (feet)
TW (MYO- 4/2012) TW (MY1- 10/2012) — WS (MY1- 1012012) • BKUMB (MY1- 10/2012)

i
Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 4d. Longitudinal Profile Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek
Monitoring Year 1
712
710 - - - -
708 A
706 - - -
c °!
o ♦ ,
m
704 - -
d e
w _ �Q
702 - -- — — " -
N M
700
698
20000 20200 20400 20600 20800 21000 21200
Station (feet)
TW (MYO- 4/2012) TW (MY1- 10/2012) -WS (MYl- 10/2012) ♦ BKFrFOB (MY1- 10/2012) 0 STRUCTURES (MYO- 4/2012)

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5a. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Cross - Section 1 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
I
Drainage Area
0.8 sy.mi
Date
10/18/2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation ft
722.4
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
27.2
Bankfull Width ft
177
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
724 86
Flood Prone Width ft
200
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
25
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1 5
W/D Ratio
11,56
Entrenchment Ratio
2.2,
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
C
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.17
723.74
- 722
8.46
723.43
721
21.21
723.05
31 43
722.79
33.82
721.73
36.22
720.63
37.23
720.36
37.35
72025
38.40
720.09
3929
720.01
40.55
719.95
4120
719.94
42.1 1
720.09
43,26
720.24
43.84
720.32
44.83
720.59
46.19
721.02
48.06
721.78
50.31
722.48
56.26
722.68
70.37
722.65
89.05
722.60
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Cross - Section 1 (Riffle) Station 109 +87
726
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (feet)
- -- MY(W2012 MYI. 10/2012 - Floodpmne Area _-- BaAiull
90
-1
-
773
-- -- -- -_
- 722
721
720
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (feet)
- -- MY(W2012 MYI. 10/2012 - Floodpmne Area _-- BaAiull
90
-1

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5b. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Cross - Section 2 (Pool)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
2
Drainage Area
0.8 sq.mi
Date
10/ 18/2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
722.1
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
38 6
Bankfull Width ft
I7,99
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
N/A
Flood Prone Width ft
N/A
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
3.99
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
2.15
W/D Ratio
8.38
Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
Bank Height Ratio
LO
Stream Type
N/A
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.22
723.60
6.38
722.77
12.88
72176
18.36
72198
21.06
722.29
2251
721.85
23.47
720.86
25.38
718.60
26.68
718.26
27.94
718.11
29.43
718.32
30.61
718.65
3104
719.01
33 30
719.42
34.02
719.98
34.55
720.72
36.42
721.52
3833
722.01
41.76
72224
44.38
722.37
51.22
722.43
61.76
722.40
7631
72254
84.27
722.50
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Cross - Section 2 (Pool) Station 110 +24
724 1
V
723
722
721
0
720
i 719
718
717
0 10 20
�- MYO-4/2012
•
30 40 50
Station (feet)
MYI- 102012
60 70 80
- Bankfull I
w

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5c. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Cross - Section 3 (Pool)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
3
Drainage Area
0.8 sq.mi
Date
10/18/2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
718.7
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
576
Bankfull Width ft
31.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
N; 'A
Flood Prone Width (ft)
NA
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
4.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.9
W/D Ratio
16.8
Entrenchment Ratio
NiA
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
N A
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.38
719.26
7.03
71908
16.26
718.98
21.44
718.71
25.05
71751
26.96
715.16
28.42
714.96
29.90
714.51
33.07
714.64
34.89
715.53
37.68
716.83
41.90
717.40
48.23
718.33
55.54
718.98
73.12
718.78
88.97
718.74
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Cross - Section 3 (Pool) Station 120 +47
720
719 _
718
.z
.: -7 1,
I
715
,~ 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Station (feet)
- - - -MYO -412012 _ MY1.02012 Bankfull
19

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5d. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Cross - Section 4 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
4
Drainage Area
0.8 sq.mi
Date
10/18/2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary-Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
718.1
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
34.4
Bankfull Width (ft)
202
Flood Prone Area Elevation (ft)
720.8
Flood Prone Width (ft)
2001
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
2.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.7
W/D Ratio
11 9
Entrenchment Ratio
2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
C
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.34
71839
6.92
717.99
14.28
718.03
16.46
717.36
18.39
716.49
20.02
1 715 69
20.90
715.45
22.33
715.47
23.69
715.36
25.02
715.38
26.42
715.60
27.19
715.62
28.53
715.88
31.16
717.07
33 36
71779
34.54
718.14
46.41
718.49
60.38
718.5>
68.31
718.58
Irvin Creek Reach 1
Cross - Section 4 (Riffle) Station 121 +14
722
721
720
719
718
717
716 - - -- -
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
+ MYO. 4/2012 MYI- 102012 -Flo dprone Area - Bankfull
i

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5e. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Cross - Section 5 (Pool)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
5
Drainage Area
0.9 sq.mi
Date
10/18/2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation ft
713.7
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
46.0
Bankfull Width ft
35.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
N/A
Flood Prone Width ft
NIA
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
4A
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.3
W/D Ratio
27.5
Entrenchment Ratio
N!A
Bank Height Ratio
1 0
Stream Type
N
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.03
716.46
s
9.83
715.01
711
15.78
714.28
710
20 45
71426
22.26
714.25
0
2104
710.97
24.20
710.14
26.40
709.64
27.92
709.88
28.93
710.17
30.29
710.92
32.04
711.20
32.86
711.79
33.33
711.93
3449
71238
35.99
712.69
38.57
713.03
4334
713.46
4626
71338
52.82
713.46
60.95
71187
Cross - Section 5: View Upstream 10/18/2012
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Cross - Section 5 (Pool) Station 130 +91
717
716 - -
715
714 <r
SO
0 713
1.
w
712
s
711
1 ,e
710
709
0
10
+ MYO- 4/2012
20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
MY 1- 10/2012 -Bankfull
Y
1.
s
1 ,e
20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
MY 1- 10/2012 -Bankfull
Y

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5f. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Cross - Section 6 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
6
Drainage Area
0.9 sy.n,i
Date
1718/2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summa Data'
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
713.9
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
27 8
Bankfull Width ft
18.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation (ft)
716.4
Flood Prone Width (ft)
2001
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
2.5
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.5
W/D Ratio
12.4
Entrenchment Ratio
2.2
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
C
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.06
71322
5.57
713.80
12.25
713.90
1643
712.82
18.22
711.74
19.57
711.73
20.79
711.56
2111
71156
23.49
711.34
24.38
711.60
25.75
711.61
26.22
711.77
26.79
71221
28.97
713.12
31.33
713.66
3674
713.68
42.47
713.65
50 92
713.69
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Cross - Section 6 (Riffle) Station 131 +48
717
716
715
714
713
712 -
711
0 10
- MY04/2012
20 30 40
Station (feet)
MYI- 1012012
- FloodpFone Area
- Bankfull
50
I

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5g. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Cross- Section 7 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
7
Drainage Area
0.9 sq.mi
Date
101/18;'2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
710.5
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
28.7
Bankfull Width (ft)
209
Flood Prone Area Elevation (ft)
712.9
Flood Prone Width (ft)
200
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
2.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.4
W/D Ratio
15.2
Entrenchment Ratio
2.2-
Bank Height Ratio
1'0
Stream Type
C
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.00
71070
8.40
711.00
18.95
711.02
27.96
710.85
37.31
710.44
41.23
709.22
43.51
708.32
44.17
708.44
44.89
708.44
45.69
708.45
46.37
708.14
47.83
708.03
50.59
708.77
54.62
709.32
56,57
71029
59.04
710.78
71.21
711.14
82.91
711.39
90.00
711.59
Cross - Section 7: View Upstream 10/18/2012
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Cross - Section 7 (Riffle) Station 138 +52
714
I
713
712
711 - - - -
710
709
708 -- -
707 -
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Station (feet)
-MYO. 4/2012 MYI- 10/2012 - Floodprone Area - Bankfull

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5h. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Cross - Section 8 (Pool)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
8
Drainage Area
0.9 sq.mi
Date
I0 %18 2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
710.2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
50.0
Bankfull Width ft
32.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
N/A
Flood Prone Width (ft)
N/A
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
3.6
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.6
W/D Ratio
20.5
Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
N %A
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.65
710.76
15.10
711.08
25 79
711,71
33.58
711.31
42.13
710.20
50.50
709.04
54.86
708.40
55.74
708.00
56.47
707.56
57.52
706.81
59.82
706.60
60.94
706.67
63.97
706.66
6529
706.79
65.60
708.02
6633
709.13
68.10
709.91
78.32
710.45
86.64
710.45
95 -04
710.89
Cross- Section 8: View Downstream 10/18/2012
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Cross - Section 8 (Pool) Station 139 +09
712
Ill -- - - - -- - - - - - -
710 - - - -- - - -- - -- - - --
d
709 - - -- - -- - - - -
i 708
i
707 - - - -- --
i
�a
706
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Station (feet)
-• - MY04/2012 MYI- 10/2012 - Bankfull

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5i. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
UT1, Cross - Section 9 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
9
Drainage Area
0.1 sq.mi
Date
10 18 %2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
7075
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
4.1
Bankfull Width ft
8.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation (ft)
708.4
Flood Prone Width ft
35.7
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
01
W/D Ratio
I5.5
Entrenchment Ratio
2,21
Bank Height Ratio
I 0
Stream Type
C
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.09
708.54
- -
7 15
708.57
Is 76
70775
20.74
707 72
706.5
22 85
707, 13
2432
1 706.66
24.33
706.54
24.69
706.48
24.98
706.46
25.62
706.50
26.03
706.61
26.35
706.67
2728
706.83
29.44
707.43
38.06
708.02
51.89
708.96
60.46
708.98
Cross - Section 9: View Upstream 10/18/2012
Cross - Section 9: View Downstream 10/18/2012
UT1
Cross - Section 9 (Riffle) Station 400 +68
709.5
709 - - - -- --
708.5 - --
- -
708 _
t 7075
c�
707
- -
-
-
706.5
i
� 1
VV 0 10 20 30 40
Station (feet)
- - MYO4/2012 MYI- 10/2012 - Floodprone Area
50 60
Bankfull

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5j. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
UT1, Cross - Section 10 (Pool)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
10
Drainage Area
0.1 sq.mi
Date
10: 18 %2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
707.2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
5.6
Bankfull Width (ft)
9.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation (ft)
N/A
Flood Prone Width (ft)
N/A
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
1.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
0.6
W/D Ratio
16.6
Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
N/A
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.47
708.49
8.22
708.39
14.00
707.49
16.98
707.61
19.00
706.88
19.71
706.21
20.41
705.95
20.78
705.97
21.30
706.07
21.71
706.24
22.66
706.29
26.06
707.03
27.38
707.16
37.81
707.68
49.04
708 -44
55.68
709.29
61.48
708.98
Cross - Section 10: View Upstream (10 18/2012
UT1
Cross- Section 10 (Pool) Station 400 +94
709.5
709
708.5 �- - - -
708
707.5 - - - - - -
W 707
706.5
706
705.5
0 IO
-� MYO -4/2012
20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
MY 1- 10/2012 - Bankfull
V

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5k. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek, Cross - Section 11 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
I I
Drainage Area
5.1 sq.mi
Date
10/ 18; 2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation ft
708.9
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (U)
84.6
Bankfull Width (ft)
33.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation (ft)
712.9
Flood Prone Width (ft)
200,
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
4.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
16
W/D Ratio
119
Entrenchment Ratio
2.21
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
C
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.19
708.61
9.38
708.24
21.42
708.84
26.82
70872
30.84
707.31
34.59
705.92
35.85
705.31
38.88
704.94
41.27
704.87
43.05
705.03
44.78
704.95
47,01
704.93
49.08
70534
50.36
705.89
54.37
707.27
58.86
708.80
66.94
70894
76 95
709.23
82 36
709.31
Cross - Section 11: View Upstream 10/18/2012
Cross - Section 11: View Downstream 10/1812012
Little Troublesome Creek
Cross - Section 11 (Riffle) Station 204 +53
714
713 _ - - -- -
712
711
710 - - - - - --
709 i - -
708 - - -- -
707 - - - - -�
706 - - -
705
I
704
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (feet)
• -MYO- 4/2012 MYI- 10/2012 - FloodproneArm - Bankfull

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 51. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek, Cross - Section 12 (Pool)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin
Cape Fear
Watershed HUC
3030002
XS ID
12
Drainage Area
5lsq.mi
Date
10 18. -2012
Field Crew
Wildlands Engineering
Summary Data
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
707.5
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
128.8
Bankfull Width ft
422
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
MA
Flood Prone Width (ft)
N/A
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
6.5
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
3.1
W/D Ratio
13.8
Entrenchment Ratio
N/A
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
NA
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.22
707,01
15.90
70277
23.57
707.86
28.33
706.49
30.34
70551
30.76
704.09
32.26
702.51
33.95
700.97
43.19
701.82
46.13
703.01
47.86
704.05
48.90
704.48
52.47
705.42
60.64
706.34
67.51
707.55
78.40
708.07
93 27
708.13
Cross - Section 12: View Downstream 10/18/2012
Little Troublesome Creek
Cross - Section 12 (Pool) Station 208 +22
709
708 - - -- - - -
707 -
706 - - -
705 - -
704 - - -
703 -
+ s
702
701
700
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Station (feet)
-+- MYO-4/2012 MY 1- 10/2012 -Bankfull
r

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 5m. Cross - Section Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek, Cross - Section 13 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
River Basin Cape Fear
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.77
707.15
I,
I
Watershed HUC 3030002
707.10
1935
707.08
I
I
XS ID 13
705.65
50
60 70
27.20
C
- Bankfull
Drainage Area 5.1 sy.mi
703.71
I
31.71
703.38
Date 10' 1 8/2012
703.40
35.79
703.54
Field Crew Wildlands Engineering
703.47
I'
39.39
703.73
42. I I
705.13
46.73
706.43
Summary Data
51.54
707.19
62.33
F
Bankfull Elevation (ft)
707.3
703.20
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
74.8
i
Bankfull Width (ft)
3 1.7
R
Flood Prone Area Elevation ft
711,2
Flood Prone Width ft
2(10
,�.
Max Depth at Bankfull (ft)
3.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull (ft)
21
W/D Ratio
17.1
y
Entrenchment Ratio
2. I
Cross - Section 13: View Upstream 10/18/2012
Cross - Section 13: View Downstream 10/18/2012
Bank Height Ratio
1.0
Stream Type
Little
Troublesome Creek
Cross - Section 13 (Riffle) Station 209 +26
712
711
710
709
708
0
707
706
705
704
i
703
702
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.77
707.15
I,
I
9.35
707.10
1935
707.08
I
I
23.49
705.65
50
60 70
27.20
C
Station
Elevation
Station
Elevation
0.77
707.15
I,
I
9.35
707.10
1935
707.08
I
I
23.49
705.65
50
60 70
27.20
704.26
- Floodprone Area
- Bankfull
2958
703.71
31.71
703.38
33.49
703.40
35.79
703.54
37.38
703.47
39.39
703.73
42. I I
705.13
46.73
706.43
51.54
707.19
62.33
707.50
74.56
703.20
1
-
I
I,
I
ate,
s
I
I
0 10 20 30
40
Station (fee[)
50
60 70
+- MYO -0/2012 MYI. 10/2012
- Floodprone Area
- Bankfull
a

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6a. Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 1
' _ Coarse
33.G
33
Irvin Creek Reach 1
0.7
G
G
Particle
Class
Diameter
(mm)
Particle
Count
13
13
mary
�'e Coarse
45
64
7
i
7
7
97
Class
Percent
min
max Rife
Pool
Total
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clay
0.000
I) -062
3
11
14
14
14
�
Very fine
06062
0.125
0 -lll 0.1 1 10 111.1
1111111 llutnl
Particle Class Size (mm)
14
+ MYI- 10/2012
9
Fuse
Medium
0.125
0.250
0.250
0.500
1
7
10
7
11
7
11
21
32
5�
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
6
7
7
39
' l
1 i
Very Coarse
Vcry Fine
1.0
2.(1
2.0
2.8
3
3
3
42
42
Very Fine
2.8
4.11
1
1
2
2
44
i
l'ine
4.0
5.7
44
}
Fine
5.7
8.0
1
2
3
.3
47
Medium
8.0
11.3
3
2
5
5
53
Medium
11.3
16.0
2
5
7
7
59
g
Coarse
16.0
22.6
10
2
12
12
71
Small
61
90
1
1
1
98
� •,
Small
vu
128
1
1
1
99
10 \� �
,
Lac
138
180
99
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Reachwide
—
Lai
180
256
99
Small
256
362
1
1
1
100
Individual Class Percent
small
362
512
100
100% - - -- -
Medium
512
1024
1(10
90%
large /Very Large
1024
2048
loll
80%
- -
70
BEDROCK
Bedrock
2048
>2048
100
Total
50
50
100
100
100
a`
60%
a
50
a
40%
309/
20%
10%
0%
di ; 5 05 ♦ l ti4 0 5b ♦♦ ♦b b 7l �� l? q0 4 �Sb ♦�
Otis �� ♦40
O O
�bL q
♦OLa LOp� �Oqb
Particle Class Size (mm)
2MYI- 10/2012
' _ Coarse
33.G
33
G
0.7
G
G
77
�'e •Coarse
32
45
12
1
13
13
90
�'e Coarse
45
64
7
i
7
7
97
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
0.2
D�; =
0.7
Dw =
9.7
Dsy =
38.4
ll�, =
57.9
Dena =
362.0
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
!1111 - � �..�i
+►, � i • • - 11�
e
d
911 illtSaay - Sand--- -._..- -
' III I Gravel -�
� � obbl
8il
7n I
III ,
oul r
I
>
a
G n
I
I
i I
IL
i
I
~L I
-
IIII
�
0 -lll 0.1 1 10 111.1
1111111 llutnl
Particle Class Size (mm)
+ MYI- 10/2012

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6b. Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Cross - Section 1 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 1 Summary
min
max
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative-
SILT/CLAY
ISilt/Clav
120.7
Dla, =1
362.0
�----&a —�
0
Ev9
5
Ven• fine
0.062
0.125
711
0
Fine
0.125
0.250
2
2
2
Dledium
0.250
0.500
4
4
6
Coarse
0.5
1.0
2
2
8
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
8
d }
139(
Very Fine
Very Fine
2.0
2.8
lull
1),1
8
2.8
4.0
Particle Class Size (mm)
8
Fine
4.0
5.7
8
9 I
• is
Fine
5.7
8.0
6
6
14
g,
3 Medium
8.0
11.3
1
1
15
Medium
11.3
16.0
1
1
16
Coarse
16.0
33.6
2
2
18
Coarse
22.6
32
15
15
33
Ven• Coarse
32
45
18
18
51
Ven Coarse
45
64
29
29
80
Small
Small
Lar ge
1
1 \,. Large
64
90
10
10
90
90
128
180
128
180
256
6
2
6
2
96
98
98
Small
256
362
2
2
100
Small
362
512
100
Medium
1 512
1024
100
Larn /Ven Largc
1 1024
1 2048
100
BEDROCK Illedrock
1 2048
1 >2048
1
1
100
Totall
100
1 100
1 100
Cross - Section 1
Channel materials (mm)
D16 -
16.0
D15 =
33.2
D% =
44.2
Ds4 =
73.4
D95 =
120.7
Dla, =1
362.0
Cross - Section 1
Individual Class Percent
100%
90% — -
80%
70% — -
d _
a 60
a 50% -
I J
40%
>_ 300/
a 20%—
10%
0%
Obi `,yh o h 05 \ '1- ,tip ? �b 4 ti� �b ,y�yb "t�' Ao Ic$` ^4 ��O ,�qb ntb� c,1'L `O.ya ��4 "qb
O O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MY 1- 10/2012
Cross - Section 1
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
90
�----&a —�
80
Boulder 'e 1�' ^'r
_ .. _ . . Bedrock
711
i
611
III
w
E
511
I --
II'
U
411
i
I
211
lull
1),1
1 111 11 "
Particle Class Size (mm)
• -MY I- 10/2012 J
Cross - Section 1
Individual Class Percent
100%
90% — -
80%
70% — -
d _
a 60
a 50% -
I J
40%
>_ 300/
a 20%—
10%
0%
Obi `,yh o h 05 \ '1- ,tip ? �b 4 ti� �b ,y�yb "t�' Ao Ic$` ^4 ��O ,�qb ntb� c,1'L `O.ya ��4 "qb
O O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MY 1- 10/2012

r
Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6c. Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 1, Cross - Section 4 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
Cross - Section 4
Individual Class Percent
100% - - - - -
90 % —
80
�+ 70% -
iv
60% — --
w 50%
U
4()%
a
> 30% -
9
20%
0%
�'j ♦iy5 O^5 Off' ♦ ,ti4 A 5b 4 ♦♦ ♦b ^ b •j'L D`� li q0 ♦ ^4 ♦�O ^cb �b ^. ♦'1, ♦O,tiP ry�4 ��b
O• O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
)
• MY I - 10/2012
Diameter (mm) Particle Cross - Section 4
Particle Class Count Summary
Class Percent
min max
Total Percentage Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clay 0.1100 (1.062 U
Very fine 0.063 (1.135 U
Fine 0.125 (1.25(1 4 4 4
�9
Medium 0.250 0.50(1 4
5 Coarse 0.5 l.fl 2 2 G
Venn Coarse 1.0 2.(I G
1
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 6
4
Ver)• Fine 2.8 4.(1 1 1 7
Fine 4.0 5.7 1 l 8
Fine 5.7 8.0 4 4 12
` � I Medium 8.0 11.3 G G 18
Medium 11.3 16.0 lU 1(l 28
Coarse 16.0 22.6 5 5 33
Coarse 22.6 32 11 11 44
' 1 �
Very Coarse 32 45 23 23 67
i
Very Coarse 45 64 21 21 88
Small 64 90 10 10 98
♦ � Small 911 128 2 2 100
Large 128 180 100
Lac 18(1 256 100
Small 256 362 1(10
Shall 362 513 100
\Icdium 512 1024 100
Lar /Very Lar 11124 2048 100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
Cross - Section 4
Channel materials (mm)
Cross - Section 4
9.9
D ;5 =
24.1
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
35.0
DX, =
11X1
� I
IIMI
- - --
D I,o =
128.0
�I i
lave
I
� �obble
� � Boulder 8edrnck
8(1
--
w
I
�I
I I
�
E
90
I
_I
i I
c
d
u
0.
�I I
X11
i
� i i
I
-
fl
�-
I1.(11
ILI I 111 11111 11X111 1111X111
Particle Class Size (mm)
�� MYl- 10/2012
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 4
Individual Class Percent
100% - - - - -
90 % —
80
�+ 70% -
iv
60% — --
w 50%
U
4()%
a
> 30% -
9
20%
0%
�'j ♦iy5 O^5 Off' ♦ ,ti4 A 5b 4 ♦♦ ♦b ^ b •j'L D`� li q0 ♦ ^4 ♦�O ^cb �b ^. ♦'1, ♦O,tiP ry�4 ��b
O• O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
)
• MY I - 10/2012
Diameter (mm) Particle Cross - Section 4
Particle Class Count Summary
Class Percent
min max
Total Percentage Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clay 0.1100 (1.062 U
Very fine 0.063 (1.135 U
Fine 0.125 (1.25(1 4 4 4
�9
Medium 0.250 0.50(1 4
5 Coarse 0.5 l.fl 2 2 G
Venn Coarse 1.0 2.(I G
1
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 6
4
Ver)• Fine 2.8 4.(1 1 1 7
Fine 4.0 5.7 1 l 8
Fine 5.7 8.0 4 4 12
` � I Medium 8.0 11.3 G G 18
Medium 11.3 16.0 lU 1(l 28
Coarse 16.0 22.6 5 5 33
Coarse 22.6 32 11 11 44
' 1 �
Very Coarse 32 45 23 23 67
i
Very Coarse 45 64 21 21 88
Small 64 90 10 10 98
♦ � Small 911 128 2 2 100
Large 128 180 100
Lac 18(1 256 100
Small 256 362 1(10
Shall 362 513 100
\Icdium 512 1024 100
Lar /Very Lar 11124 2048 100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
Cross - Section 4
Channel materials (mm)
Cross - Section 4
9.9
D ;5 =
24.1
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
35.0
DX, =
11X1
� I
IIMI
- - --
D I,o =
128.0
�I i
lave
I
� �obble
� � Boulder 8edrnck
8(1
--
w
I
�I
I I
�
E
90
I
_I
i I
c
d
u
0.
�I I
X11
i
� i i
I
-
fl
�-
I1.(11
ILI I 111 11111 11X111 1111X111
Particle Class Size (mm)
�� MYl- 10/2012
Cross - Section 4
Individual Class Percent
100% - - - - -
90 % —
80
�+ 70% -
iv
60% — --
w 50%
U
4()%
a
> 30% -
9
20%
0%
�'j ♦iy5 O^5 Off' ♦ ,ti4 A 5b 4 ♦♦ ♦b ^ b •j'L D`� li q0 ♦ ^4 ♦�O ^cb �b ^. ♦'1, ♦O,tiP ry�4 ��b
O• O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
)
• MY I - 10/2012
Diameter (mm) Particle Cross - Section 4
Particle Class Count Summary
Class Percent
min max
Total Percentage Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clay 0.1100 (1.062 U
Very fine 0.063 (1.135 U
Fine 0.125 (1.25(1 4 4 4
�9
Medium 0.250 0.50(1 4
5 Coarse 0.5 l.fl 2 2 G
Venn Coarse 1.0 2.(I G
1
Very Fine 2.0 2.8 6
4
Ver)• Fine 2.8 4.(1 1 1 7
Fine 4.0 5.7 1 l 8
Fine 5.7 8.0 4 4 12
` � I Medium 8.0 11.3 G G 18
Medium 11.3 16.0 lU 1(l 28
Coarse 16.0 22.6 5 5 33
Coarse 22.6 32 11 11 44
' 1 �
Very Coarse 32 45 23 23 67
i
Very Coarse 45 64 21 21 88
Small 64 90 10 10 98
♦ � Small 911 128 2 2 100
Large 128 180 100
Lac 18(1 256 100
Small 256 362 1(10
Shall 362 513 100
\Icdium 512 1024 100
Lar /Very Lar 11124 2048 100
BEDROCK
Bedrock
Cross - Section 4
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
9.9
D ;5 =
24.1
D;1, =
35.0
DX, =
59.8
D,�s =
81.3
D I,o =
128.0

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6d. Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 1
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 -
Irvin Creek Reach 2
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Summa
Dsa =
66.2
D9s =
103.6
D100 =
Class
Percent
Cobhk, F3
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY
Silt/Clay
0.000
0.062
60
12
12
12
12
5„
Very Fme
0.(162
0.125
E
3
3
3
15
Fine
0.125
0.250
.:, -_...
11
11
11
26
9
Medium
0.250
0.500
1
10
11
11
37
Coarse
0.5
1.0
o
o.ol n.1
8
8
8
45
Particle Class Size (mm)
Very Coarse
LO
2.0
1
1
2
2
47
Very I•me
2.0
2.8
47
}? ¢ I Very Fine
2.8
4.0
1
1
1
48
Fine
4.0
5.7
1
1
2
?
50
5.7
8.0
1
1
1
51
} i ; Dine
Medium
8.0
11.3
4
l
5
5
56
II Medium
11.3
16.0
2
2
2
58
Coarse
16.0
22.6
3
3
3
61
I 1 I; ; 31 Coarse
22.6
32
3
3
3
64
VM Coarse
32
45
10
10
10
74
Very Coarse
45
64
9
9
'/
83
Small
64
91)
9
1
10
1 n
93
Small
90
128
5
5
5
98
128
180
1
1
1
99
` Lar
180
256
99
Small
256
362
99
Small
362
512
1
1
1
100
Medium
512
1024
100
1024
2048
Large /Very 1,1'ge
100
BEDROCK Bedrock
1 2048
1 >2048
100
Totall
50
1 50
1 100
1 100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D16 -
0.1
DJ5 =
0.4
Dy =
5.6
Dsa =
66.2
D9s =
103.6
D100 =
512.0
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
100%
90%
80%
i 70%
u
a` 60%
a 50%
U 40%
a
� 30%
20%
10%
0%
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
Ob'S -" Otis Z5 \ ti '%4 A b b 11 �b 4. 'y'1' a5 bb cp `� 1 014 150 ,Sb1' r.�`L`p'la,Lpa6 Apgb
O• O
Particle Class Size (mm)
- -- - - -I - •MYI.10 /2012 -- -- -- - -�-- - - _�
•
•
9i1
- _SUVCla .. � IL
. sand... _ . .: _- Giavef . -_ ._,_
�,
) ..
Cobhk, F3
e
70
._.._
..._. - - -. _.._ _-
.....__
>
w
60
2
5„
E
.�i
411
I .,_
.:, -_...
...... ....
31)
a`
i
—__'
o
o.ol n.1
1 to
1W 1fXRI PRUO
Particle Class Size (mm)
• MYI- 10/2012
100%
90%
80%
i 70%
u
a` 60%
a 50%
U 40%
a
� 30%
20%
10%
0%
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
Ob'S -" Otis Z5 \ ti '%4 A b b 11 �b 4. 'y'1' a5 bb cp `� 1 014 150 ,Sb1' r.�`L`p'la,Lpa6 Apgb
O• O
Particle Class Size (mm)
- -- - - -I - •MYI.10 /2012 -- -- -- - -�-- - - _�
•

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6e. Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Cross - Section 6 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 0
Cross - Section G
Channel materials (mm)
Diameter (mm) Particle Cross- Section 6 Summary
6.7
Des =
29.3
D;,, =
Particle Class
Count
Class
Percent
146.7
Dlou =
512.0
min max Total
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY tint /Clav
1).000 ILOG2
�obble Baul�ar
L
0
Very fine
0.063 0.125
0
Fine
0.125 0.250 2
2
2
�9 Medium
� Coarse
0.251) 0.500 1
0.5 1.11 1
1
I
3
4
�
Vert/ Coarse
1.0 2.0 G
G
10
2.0 2.8
10
I
a
"S
�U
2.8 4.0 4
4
14
FF
4.0 5.7 1
5.7 $.0 '_
I
2
15
17
E
8.0 11.3 5
5
22
Medium
11.3 1G.f1 4
4
26
o
i} ii is 1
Il i4 li � I' Coarse
16.0 32.6 6
G
32
22.6 32 4
4
36
Very Coarse
32 45 22
22
58
b' I
Ve Coarse
45 64 18
18
76
100
BEDROCK Bedrock
2048
� Small
64 90 9
9
RS
Total
L00
100
100
e Small
90 128 $
8
93
•�
Large
138 180 5
5
9$
I
a
U
'• Lar
180 256
98
Cross - Section 6
Small
256 362 1
1
99
Particle Class Size (mm)
Individual Class Percent
—� MYI- 10/2012
Smau
362 512 1
1
100
100%
Medium
512 1024
100
90%
— -
Lar /Ven� Large
e
80%
`+
d
70
a
G0%
v
50%
—— -- — - — —
m
40% --
-- - -
0
e
'a
30%
20%
10%
0%
p5
♦ ti ,y0 b Ib 0 ♦♦ ♦b ,b "1' a5 ba � n5b ,�b'L ♦ti
obl ♦ti5 ZIP
^ ♦ti0 ♦0P h oya ^OpO oqb
Particle Class Size (mm)
�. 2 /OIMY I 012
Cross - Section G
Channel materials (mm)
D1o=
6.7
Des =
29.3
D;,, =
39.8
D8i =
86.7
Dy; =
146.7
Dlou =
512.0
'
rave
�obble Baul�ar
L
aanrnck..
�
>
GU
+I
I
a
"S
�U
E
o
b' I
1024
2048
100
BEDROCK Bedrock
2048
>2045
— —
� I I
111(1
Total
L00
100
100
Cross - Section G
Channel materials (mm)
D1o=
6.7
Des =
29.3
D;,, =
39.8
D8i =
86.7
Dy; =
146.7
Dlou =
512.0
r
Cross - Section 6
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
I
8u
'
rave
�obble Baul�ar
L
aanrnck..
�
>
GU
+I
I
a
"S
�U
E
o
b' I
d
3
— —
� I I
I_
I
a
U
11.111 1.1.1 1 111 11)11 11X111 IIXNNI
Particle Class Size (mm)
—� MYI- 10/2012
r

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6f. Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Irvin Creek Reach 2, Cross- Section 7 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
Cross - Section 7
Diameter (mm) Particle Cross - Section 7 Summary
D1,, =
6.1
Cross - Section 7
11.3
Particle Class
Count
Class
Percent
llns =
214.7
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
382.0
min max Total
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clay
u.uliu u.OG2
(1
LHI
��
•
Very fine
0.063 0.125
0
90
Fine
0.125 0.250 1
1
1
RU
Cobble
_.
Bedrock
O
Medium
0.25(1 0.500 1
1
2
0
70
I�
5 Coarse
0.5 1.0 2
2
4
Very Coarse
1.0 2.0 4
4
8
i
GU
t Very I`tnc
2.0 2.8
$
511 -.
_
Vcry Fine
3.8 4.11 3
3
1 I
U
111 .�
- --;-
Dine
4.0 5.7 3
3
11
3n --
� �r
Dine
5.7 8.0 8
$
22
a`
i
\(edium
$.[I 11.3 12
12
34
YI
t 1`ledium
11.3 IG.O 13
13
47
111 —
— — a . -
AIM
.-
Coarse
16.11 3 °_.G 7
7
54
n
1 I
>201$
Coarse
22.6 32 R
R
G2
100
U,OI
(I.1 1 (0
Ill(N'I IMnui
Very Coarse
32 45 14
14
7G
Particle Class Size (mm)
Ven• Coarse
45 G4 12
13
$8
-- MYI- 10/2012
��� �`i ;�`♦���,; Small
G4 90 3
3
91
Small
90 12R 1
1
92
;Large
��� ��.
128 180 1
1
93
Cross - Section 7
Z • Large
1811 256 4
4
97
Small
256 362 3
3
100
Individual Class Percent
Small
362 512
10(1
100% --
Medium
512 1024
1011
90%
Lar e /Ven Lark
1023 2u:a
1(lll
e
80%
BEDROCK Bedrock
d
60%
0
67
50%
40%
30%
-
20%
10%
—
0%
;5
05 ♦ ^v ,y4 ? 11b 4 ♦♦ ♦b ��b niL t." b�` cp ♦�,°' ♦g0
�yb ,yb% cy ♦'ti
O• O'
Otis
♦O�ya ,yOp� dOgb
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYI- 1012012
Cross - Section 7
Channel materials (mm)
D1,, =
6.1
Dy; =
11.3
Ds„ =
18.6
Ds, =
56.9
llns =
214.7
D lot, =
382.0
2(14R
>201$
1[1(1
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 7
Channel materials (mm)
D1,, =
6.1
Dy; =
11.3
Ds„ =
18.6
Ds, =
56.9
llns =
214.7
D lot, =
382.0
•

f
S
Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6g. Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
UT1, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 1
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D,° =
Silt/ Clay
D3;=
O.t
UTI, Reachwide
Particle Class
Diameter (mm) Particle
Count
D9; =
UTI Summa
D109 =
128.0
Class
Percent
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
min max Riffle
Pool
Total
Percentage
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clan
(1.11(10 0.(162 5
26
31
31
31
1011
_. __._. __ - - � a• P -, -• s--
Vcry fine
(1.062 0.125
4
4
4
35
S, V Ia - i i i
' Cobbl gaUlder
Fine
11.135 0?50
3
3
3
38
811
�
p� Medium
U.250 0.500 4
8
12
12
50
7(1
- -
'Y Coarse
11.5 1.0 S
9
14
14
G�1
_�
Ven• Coarse
1.0 2.0
5.7
8.0
11.3
1
1
G4
1
I
64
GS
66
n� :d Medium
Coarse
Coarse
Very Fine
2.0 2.R
l
1
7
1
1
G4
E
i
Very
G
i
6
81
U
411
�.• Ii
9
`l
90
� � L ,•� Small
`u
30
r
5
5
95
Small
90
a
5
5
5
100
Lar
128
180
180
25G
100
100
Small
25G
3G2
1U
-
100
Small
3G2
512
u
l0U
Medium
512
1024
(1.111
(L1 1 11) 100 11X11.1 111(X111
1024
2048
1110
BEDROCK Bedrock
Particle Class Size (mm)
>2048
1(10
Total
50
-� -MYI- 10/2012
100
100
100
UTI, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
100%
- -- - -
80%
a
60%
-
w
50%
v
w
40%
30%
20%
I
-
10%
-
0
Ob'S ♦ti5 05 ♦ 1. ,L6 P 5b ♦♦ ♦b ^.yb '7'L a5 ba q0 ♦ ^6 ♦000 ^?b n�b0' y ♦ti
O
Otis ♦p'La rypa� p0°Ib
O
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MY L 10/2012
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D,° =
Silt/ Clay
D3;=
O.t
Dy, =
0.5
Ds, =
50.6
D9; =
90.0
D109 =
128.0
Fine
2.8
4.0
G4
fine
Fine
Medium
4.0
5.7
8.0
5.7
8.0
11.3
1
1
I
1
I
64
GS
66
n� :d Medium
Coarse
Coarse
11.3
16.0
22.G
1G.(I
22.G
32
l
1
7
1
1
I
1
G7
G8
75
32
45
G
i
6
81
V "en (:parse
45
64
9
`l
90
� � L ,•� Small
64
90
5
5
5
95
Small
90
128
5
5
5
100
Lar
128
180
180
25G
100
100
Small
25G
3G2
100
Small
3G2
512
l0U
Medium
512
1024
1(10
Larrn: %Vcn� Large
1024
2048
1110
BEDROCK Bedrock
2048
>2048
1(10
Total
50
50
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D,° =
Silt/ Clay
D3;=
O.t
Dy, =
0.5
Ds, =
50.6
D9; =
90.0
D109 =
128.0

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6h. Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
UT1, Cross - Section 9 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
Cross - Section 9
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
11111 - __ _. .. _..._ i- Yi Yr N
90 SJt /Clav L... - -Z. no.. _ -
1.. rave Cobble _ ....
I _ Baultler gedrack. ..
80 1 . - - . _ . ---
70 .
60
a
E 5n -
' T
d �
-
u
u.01 o.1 1 hl hNl w
Particle Class Size (mm)
- MY1- 10/2012
Cross - Section 9
Individual Class Percent
100%
90% - - -
e
80%
d
70% -
a 60% - -
GJ
50%
40% - -
v_
> 30%
c 20%
0%
_lj"7 ♦,1°i O^? 05 ♦ 'L ,L4 P ,ob W ♦♦ ♦b ti b ^jL p5 bQ q0 ♦ ^� ♦�O ^cb �b ^. y ♦'L ♦01,b �Op6 �Oqb
Ol•1 O
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYI- 10/2012
Particle
Diameter (mm) Cross- Section 9 Summary
Particle Class Count
Class Percen[
min t»a>: Total Percentage Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silri(;lac U.OUn u.nri3 H 8 8
Very fine 0.063 11.135 8
Fine 0.125 0.2511 8
(\lalium II?50 11.5110 4 4 t2
� Coarse 0.5 1.11 19
Very Coarse 1.0 2.p I 1 20
Very fine 2.0 2.8 3U
Very Fine 2.8 4.11 7 7 27
Fine 4.11 5.7 5 5 32
Fine 5.7 8.0 1 °_ 13 44
�I�dium ?{.l1 11.3 4 4 14
Medium 11.3 16.0 4 4 52
e 16.0 32.6 9 9 GI
se 22.6 32 7 7 GR
Coarse 32 45 25 25 93
Coarse 45 G4 7 7 100
l G4 9(1 l00
90 128 100
Large
Cross- Section 9
Channel materials (mm)
D1� =
0.7
D;; =
s.l
Ili,, =
13.3
D,,, =
39.8
49.8
64.0
138
180
180
256
l Op
100
256
362
1110
363
512
100
um
/A "ecv Lar �c
512
1024
100
1023
2048
t 011
ock
2048
>2048
100
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 9
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
11111 - __ _. .. _..._ i- Yi Yr N
90 SJt /Clav L... - -Z. no.. _ -
1.. rave Cobble _ ....
I _ Baultler gedrack. ..
80 1 . - - . _ . ---
70 .
60
a
E 5n -
' T
d �
-
u
u.01 o.1 1 hl hNl w
Particle Class Size (mm)
- MY1- 10/2012
Cross - Section 9
Individual Class Percent
100%
90% - - -
e
80%
d
70% -
a 60% - -
GJ
50%
40% - -
v_
> 30%
c 20%
0%
_lj"7 ♦,1°i O^? 05 ♦ 'L ,L4 P ,ob W ♦♦ ♦b ti b ^jL p5 bQ q0 ♦ ^� ♦�O ^cb �b ^. y ♦'L ♦01,b �Op6 �Oqb
Ol•1 O
Particle Class Size (mm)
■MYI- 10/2012
Particle
Diameter (mm) Cross- Section 9 Summary
Particle Class Count
Class Percen[
min t»a>: Total Percentage Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silri(;lac U.OUn u.nri3 H 8 8
Very fine 0.063 11.135 8
Fine 0.125 0.2511 8
(\lalium II?50 11.5110 4 4 t2
� Coarse 0.5 1.11 19
Very Coarse 1.0 2.p I 1 20
Very fine 2.0 2.8 3U
Very Fine 2.8 4.11 7 7 27
Fine 4.11 5.7 5 5 32
Fine 5.7 8.0 1 °_ 13 44
�I�dium ?{.l1 11.3 4 4 14
Medium 11.3 16.0 4 4 52
e 16.0 32.6 9 9 GI
se 22.6 32 7 7 GR
Coarse 32 45 25 25 93
Coarse 45 G4 7 7 100
l G4 9(1 l00
90 128 100
Large
Cross- Section 9
Channel materials (mm)
D1� =
0.7
D;; =
s.l
Ili,, =
13.3
D,,, =
39.8
49.8
64.0
1

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6i. Reachwide and Cross - Section Pebble Count Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek, Reachwide
Monitoring Year 1
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle Count
Little Troublesome Creek
ary
min
max
Riffle
Pool
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clay
0.000
0.062
18
18
18
18
9
5
Very fine
0.062
0.125
8
8
8
26
Fine
0.125
0.250
9
9
9
35
Medium
0.250
0.500
5
5
5
40
Coarse
0.5
1.0
1
6
7
7
47
Very Coarse
1.0
2.0
3
3
3
50
1 ! Very Fine
200
2.8
50
Very Fine
Fine
Fine
Medium
Medium
} = Coarse
2.8
4.0
50
4.0
5.7
50
5.7
8.0
50
8.0
11.3
2
-'
2
52
11.3
16.0
16.0
22.6
2
3
1 1
?
3
3
55
58
Coarse
22.G
32
4
t
4
62
Ven• Coarse
32
45
8
8
70
Very Coarse
45
64
11
I
11
81
Small
Small
�� ♦�' ?• Lace
�;? • ••a•\�• • �,;• Large
64
90
128
180
90
128
780
256
7
4
4
2
4
4
2
7
4
a
2
88
92
96
98
Small
256
362
1
99
Small
362
512
1
100
Medium
Large /Vcry Large
512
1024
1024
100
2048
100
BEDROCK Bedrock
2048
12048
100
Totall
50
50
100
100
100
Reachwide
Channel materials (mm)
D 14 =
SW Clay
D55 =
0.3
D;1, =
8.0
Dsa =
74.1
Dos =
165.3
D100 =
512.0
Little Troublesome Creek, Reachwide
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
11X1
90 slit/ la 1 ' l _
.. 6,rav l
1-
7l1 1U 4,
d> 60
rz
50 —
1
U 41
a3U
d s�
211
I j III
10 - —
i 1 --
I1111 11,1 I 1111 11100 1111111 11111w
Particle Class Size (mm)
— MYI- 10/2012
100%
900/
_ 80%
` 70%
u
a` 60%
a 50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
o�k'SO ♦,y5 O�''7 05 ♦ 'y ti� b yb 4 \♦ ♦b rytib �'Y p5 ka cp <n 4 0 n?k �kti 5 ♦� ♦O�'anOa4 ���b
Particle Class Size (mm)
• MY I- 10/2012
Little Troublesome Creek, Reachwide
Individual Class Percent
r
l

Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6j. Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek , Cross - Section 11 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
Particle Class
Diameter (mm)
Particle
Count
Cross - Section 11
Summary
min
max
Total
Class
Percentage
Percent
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /Clay
U.II(1O
0.062
Dmn =
256.0
O
Very Fine
9 Fine
Medium
Coarse
Very Coarse
0.062
0.125
Cobble Boulder - 6edrack...
D
0.125
0.250
0
0.250
0.500
0
0.5
1.0
12
12
12
LO
2.0
I
12
Very Fine
Very Fine
2.0
3.8
12
2.8
4.0
12
t I ine
Fine
Medium
4.0
5.7
1111, 1100 11.IIM 111
12
5.7
8.0
8.0
11.3
5
5
17
17
Medium
I I Coarse
Coarse
11.3
16.0
16.0
22.6
5
9
5
9
22
31
22.6
32
17
17
48
4 d Very Coarse
32
45
32
32
80
Very Coarse
45
64
11)
10
90
Small
Small
64
90
9()
128
4
4
4
4
94
98
Large
128
180
1
1
99
180
256
1
1
100
Small
I
256
362
100
dl
362
512
100
dium
Lar /Ven• Lar
ROCK Bedrock
512
1024
]0
105
I024
2048
2048
>2048
100
Totall
100 1
100
100
Cross - Section 11
Channel materials (mm)
D16 =
7.4
Dys =
24.5
Dsl, =
32.7
Ds, =
51.8
_ -
�,u
Dmn =
256.0
Cross - Section 11
Individual Class Percent
100%
90% -
`e
80% -
d
d
60% - — - -
v
50%
40% -
e
9
20%
10% -I
0%
O• O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MY I -10iM2
1
Cross - Section 11
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
lull
_ -
�,u
9u
- SdLCiay .... - Sand...-
Grave l
,.
- ...... ..
Cobble Boulder - 6edrack...
m
i
711
6u
E
y
40
I
-
y
'll
__
I�
_ ., .-
I
0.111
0.1 1 111
1111, 1100 11.IIM 111
Particle Class Size (mm)
MYI- 10/2012
Cross - Section 11
Individual Class Percent
100%
90% -
`e
80% -
d
d
60% - — - -
v
50%
40% -
e
9
20%
10% -I
0%
O• O•
Particle Class Size (mm)
■ MY I -10iM2
1

0
Appendix 4. Morphological Summary Data and Plots
Figure 6k. Reachwide and Cross - Section Substrate Plots
Little Troublesome Creek Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 94640)
Little Troublesome Creek , Cross - Section 13 (Riffle)
Monitoring Year 1
Cross - Section 13
Diameter (mm) Panicle
Cross - Section 13
17.4
D}S =
33.5
Cross - Section 13
39.7
Particle Class
Count
Summary
214.7
DI °� =
512.0
Class
Percent
Pebble Count Particle Distribution
min max Total
Percen[ age
Cumulative
SILT /CLAY Silt /(aav
0.000 0.062
0
lull
- - - - -- - - -__
Ii I
Very fine
U.IIG2 0.125
0
90
�
_
-
Fine
(1.125 0.250
0
80 —
7Ve cobble
-- -- -
Boulder
�9 Medium
1125(1 0.5(10
0
e
71)
-
5 Coarse
0.5 1.0 4
4
4
Y'ery Coarsc
1.0 2.0
4
W
Gu
e
Ve Fine
2.0 2.8
4
E
5(1
Y'ery Fine
2.8 4.0
4
e
- - --
Fine
4.(1 5.7 4
4
8
e
311
5.7 8A I
1
9
Medium
8.0 113 G
G
15
-H �
Medium
Coarse
11.3 ]G.tl
1 G.I] 22.6 4
4
15
19
Coarse
22.6 32 12
12
3l
0.1
1 111 1(x1
llxul lluNln
Very Coarse
32 45 311
3(1
61
Particle Class Size (mm)
�'e Coarse
45 64 13
13
74
1024
3048
-w-MY]-] 0/2012
� �j:i Small
G4 90 ] 0
10
84
1(10
Total
100
Small
90 128 8
8
92
Lac
128 180 2
3
94
��� Large
180 256 2
2
9G
Cross - Section 13
Individual Class Percent
Small
256 362 2
2
98
Small
362 512 2
2
1(111
100°%
Medium
512 1024
10(1
90%
Lar • /Ven� Large
e
80%
'�'
as
70%
d
60%
- -
-- - - -- - --
°
V
50°%
40%
9
30%
=
20%
10%
0%
\ti5 0 5 �y ♦
^. ,ti4 b �b '� ♦♦ \b 'S'b >`t Ic,�' q�
�5b
0�'90
^�yb ♦�� \��
�b�' h\1' \�'La ry�6 b�qb
Particle Class Size (mm)
w MY 1- 10/2012
Cross - Section 13
Channel materials (mm)
D1� =
17.4
D}S =
33.5
Dsn =
39.7
Dsy =
90.0
Dq; =
214.7
DI °� =
512.0
1024
3048
100
BEDROCK Bedrock
2048
>21148
1(10
Total
100
100
100
Cross - Section 13
Channel materials (mm)
D1� =
17.4
D}S =
33.5
Dsn =
39.7
Dsy =
90.0
Dq; =
214.7
DI °� =
512.0