20080358 Ver 1_Year 4 Monitoring Report_20130212

�S -C35
Cane Creek Tributary Stream Restoration Site
Monitoring Report MY04
Basin 03010104
EEP Project ID # 92325
Contract # D06002
K C I
TECHNOLOGIES
KCI Technologies, Inc.
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
lstlards 3 &orn»aaW &anCh
February 2013
r4d;J
Ecosystem
PROGRAM
NCDENR -EEP
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1652

K C I
TECHNOLOGIES
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Road
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Project Manager: Gary Mryncza, P.E.
Email: gary.mryncza @kci.com
KCI Project No: 1205472501

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
PROJECT BACKGROUND ............................................................................... ..............................1
1 1
Location and Setting.
.. .. 1
12
Project Goals and Objectives
1
13
Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach
1
14
Project History, Background, and Contact Information ..
.5
2.0
PROJECT CONDITIONS AND MONITORING RESULTS
......................... .............................11
2 1
Vegetation Assessment
11
22
Stream Assessment
11
2 2 1 Bankfull Events
. . . 12
222 Quantitative Measures Summary Tables
13
FIGURES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 As -Built Site Map
4"WW Did 11[a]V
Appendix A Vegetation Data and Photos
Appendix B Geomorphologic Data
Appendix C Stream Photos
Appendix D Current Conditions Plan View
.2
8
5
9
9
10
12
13 -22
.23-29
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 i 2012 — MY04
TABLES
Table 1
Project Restoration Components
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contact Table
Table 4
Project Background Table
Table 5
Verification of Bankfull Events
Table 6.
Baseline Stream Summary . .
Table 7
Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary . .
4"WW Did 11[a]V
Appendix A Vegetation Data and Photos
Appendix B Geomorphologic Data
Appendix C Stream Photos
Appendix D Current Conditions Plan View
.2
8
5
9
9
10
12
13 -22
.23-29
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 i 2012 — MY04

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Cane Creek Tributary Site (CCTS) is located in the Piedmont physiographic province in
northwestern Person County, North Carolina The project will provide mitigation for stream impacts
within the 8 -digit hydrologic cataloging unit 03010104 in the Roanoke River Basin by restoring,
enhancing, and preserving 19,059 linear feet on the CCTS, generating 14,621 stream mitigation units
(SMU's ) The goals of the project include restoring the stream's riparian buffer and creating a stable `
stream system In order to reach these goals, the project objectives included planting a functional - }
Piedmont Alluvial Forest floodplain community along with Mesic Mixed Hardwood Forest to create an
effective riparian buffer, removing cattle from the riparian areas with fencing, removing relic spoil piles
that disrupt overland flowpaths, stopping bank erosion by developing the appropriate channel dimension,
arresting bed elevation lowering, and stabilizing seep outlets }
The western portion of the project drains to the southeast and has a contributing drainage area of
approximately 0 70 square mile The eastern portion of the project also drains towards the southeast with
a contributing drainage area of approximately 0 62 square mile Each half of the project is made up of a
series of headwater and first -order streams Both sides of the project drain to Cane Creek downstream of
the site The project watershed is rural and faces low development pressure from the surrounding area
The stream design and the restoration plan were completed in December 2007, construction began in May
2008, and the site was planted in December 2008
The site was planted with bare root trees, shrubs, and live stakes A total of 17 different species were
planted at the site Twenty vegetation monitoring plots were established during the as -built survey
Riparian vegetation must meet a minimum survival success rate of 260 stems /acre after five years The
plots were monitored following the CVS -EEP monitoring Level 2 protocol and the fourth -year
monitoring counted an average of 378 planted stems /acre and 5,198 total stems /acre, including volunteers
There are some plots with low planted stem densities, including five plots with planted stem densities
below 260 stems /acre plots 5, 8, 13, 17, and 18 When including volunteers in these four plots, all plots
are above the 260 total stems /acre density Supplemental planting was conducted at the site during the
2010/2011 dormant season Additional supplemental planting may be conducted in the future if it is
deemed necessary Considering the plentiful volunteers and overall vegetative condition of the site, the
fourth -year monitoring found the vegetation component of the project to be on track to meeting the
success criterion
The stream restoration included thirty-four separate reaches, which have been enhanced and restored
based on a combination of Priority 2 and 3 approaches Rock cross vanes, step pools, and riffle grade
controls were used to control grade throughout the profile The streams were restored to B4, 134 /1, 134c,
B4 /lc, Bc /C4, C/134, and C /E4 stream types In addition to the restored and enhanced reaches, there are
nine preservation reaches These reaches are intermittent headwater streams that were identified as project
assets during the as -built stage The fourth year of monitoring found the majority of the project to be
functioning as designed Isolated areas of bank erosion and streambed degradation have been noted at the
site, but there are no systematic problems that indicate that the protect streams are unstable or becoming
so In 2012, there were two bankfull events at the site The project is on track to meeting the success
criterion of at least two bankfull events in five years with each occurring in different years
The site will continue to be monitored through 2013 or until the success criteria are achieved Reports will
be submitted to the EEP each year The planted riparian buffer must meet the success criteria of 260
planted stems /acre at the end of the monitoring period Stream success will be assessed utilizing
measurements of stream dimension, pattern, and profile as well as through site photographs
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KC1 Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 a 2012 — MY04

l�l IIIIIJIMiIXI' llIKK
1.1 Location and Setting
The Cane Creek Tributary Site (CCTS) is spread over two separate drainage areas on two parcels
under the same ownership The site is located off of Cunningham Road in northwestern Person
County, North Carolina. Specifically, the site is approximately 0 85 mile east of the intersection
of Cunningham Road and NC 119 (Figure 1) The project is centered at approximately 36 5038
degrees north and 79 1310 degrees west (WGS84) To reach the site from Raleigh, proceed west
on US -70 until it merges with I- 85/US -15 south Continue on I -85 for approximately 1 5 miles
and then take exit 176B for Duke St/US -501 Bypass Take a right off of the exit and travel on
US -501 for 27 5 miles Within the town of Roxboro, turn left onto Court St/US -158 west Follow
- US -158 west 0 4 mile and turn right onto NC -57, continuing northwest for another 12 3 miles
Once within the small community of Semora, turn right onto NC -119 and drive north 0 5 mile
Turn right onto Cunningham Road and continue east for 0 85 mile The CCTS is accessible
through a metal gate on the right
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The goals and objectives of the project are as follows
Project Goals
■ Restore the stream's riparian buffer
■ Create a stable network of headwater streams
Project Objectives
■ Plant a functional Piedmont Alluvial Forest floodplam community along with a Mesic Mixed
Hardwood Forest to create an effective riparian buffer
■ Arrest bed elevation lowering and stabilize seep outlets
■ Stop bank erosion by developing the appropriate channel dimension and stabilizing with
vegetation
■ Remove relic spoil piles that disrupt overland flowpaths
■ Exclude livestock from the riparian areas with fencing.
1.3 Project Structure, Restoration Type and Approach
The project streams had become degraded primarily through poor grazing management and
vegetation removal Historically, the two parcels were cleared and converted into pasture except
for narrow strips of riparian vegetation along the streams and intact forest in the southern portion
of the western parcel Prior to restoration, many of the project streams were experiencing severe
bank erosion Severe bed degradation was also evident throughout the different project reaches
All of the reaches exhibited areas of vertical instability Restoration, enhancement, and
preservation of 19,059 linear feet of channel were accomplished utilizing a combination of
Priority 2 and 3 approaches (Table 1) Reaches TI-T6 are on the western side of the project and
reaches T7 -T10 are on the eastern side
All of T1 was built as a B4c channel with small sections of C channel in those areas without
constrictive valley walls T1 has been divided into five different reaches to reflect changes in
drainage area and the type of mitigation. T1 -1 runs from Station 10 +00 to 17 +64 and stops at the
confluence with T3 A second reach, T1 -2, goes from this confluence with T3 at Station 17 +64
until Station 21 +50 Both T1 -1 and T1 -2 were enhanced by grading back the existing eroding
banks, building a bankfull bench, and developing distinct riffles and pools (Enhancement I)
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract 9 D06002 1 2012 — MY04

CASWELL
COUNTY
Semora
Or a Creek
r i
VIRGINIA
CASWELL PERSON
VIRGINIA
Y
Ci
L
U
O
a
e
m
21
1
Parcnn remintu Newth rnrnlin2
PERSON
COUNTY
Am
:1 �1
ALAMANCE
ORANGE DURHAM
GRANVILLE
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
KCI
Project Site Location
Major Roads N
ASSOCIATES OF NC
KC I
Other Roads ° e
�i Major Streams and Rivers s
L-63,360
- Major Lakes and Reservoirs I inch equals I miles
TECHNOLOGIES
= County Boundaries t O.s o I,�,
Miles

T1 was restored from Station 21 +50 until it ends at the property boundary There are three
separate reaches in this section of T1 T1 -3 from Station 21 +50 to 24 +76 where T4 enters, T1 -4
from Station 24 +76 to 34 +85 where T6 flows into T1, and T1 -5 from Station 34 +85 to 37 +67
These three lower reaches of TI were restored using a Priority 3 approach Along this section of
T1, the restoration established riffle and pool features and a new stable planform, while also
utilizing existing bedrock as grade control
T2, a B4 stream, was divided into four separate reaches T2 -1 begins at Station 50 +00 and ends at
Station 53 +05 This reach was improved by fencing out the livestock, removing adjacent relic
spoil piles to restore natural drainage to the stream, and planting the riparian buffer with native
vegetation (Enhancement H) Beginning at Station 53 +05 and ending at Station 55 +00, T2 -2 was
restored using a Priority 3 approach This reach was relocated away from a severely eroding
valley wall and reconnected to the existing stream at Station 55 +00 The next reach, T2 -3, was
enhanced by sloping back the existing eroding banks, building a bankfull bench, removing the
adjacent relic spoil piles, and developing distinct riffles and pools (Enhancement I) T2 -4 begins
at Station 56 +50, and was restored using a Pnonty 3 approach This bottom section of T2
connects to T1 at Station 58 +50 with a new stable pattern, dimension, and profile
T3 is the next tributary to loin TI, and is divided into two different reaches T3 -1 is a short
headwater reach that runs from Stations 60 +00 to 60 +85 and was enhanced by shaping the
existing eroding banks and defining distinct riffles and pools (Enhancement I) T3 -2 was restored
with dimension, profile, and pattern adjustments using a Priority 3 approach, and runs from
Station 60 +85 to its confluence with T1 at Station 76 +97
Similar to T3, T4 also flows into T1 and has been separated into two reaches The entire length of
T4 was restored as a B4 channel T4 -1 and T4 -2 run from Station 80 +00 to Station 82 +53 and
- . Station 82 +53 to Station 102 +81, respectively These two reaches, which are distinguished by
differences in slope, were restored with dimension, profile, and pattern adjustments using a
Priority 3 approach
T5 has two reaches and both are B4 channels. T5 -1 runs from Stations 110 +00 to 112 +64 and
was enhanced by fencing out the livestock and planting the riparian buffer with native vegetation
(Enhancement II) T5 -2, which goes from Station 112 +64 to Station 113 +95 at its confluence
with T1, was restored with dimension, profile, and pattern adjustments using a Priority 3
approach
T6 and its headwater tributanes consist of B4 channels At the top of this headwater system, there
are four intermittent headwater reaches These reaches, T6B -1 (Stations 248 +38 to 250 +00),
T6C -1 (Stations 117 +02 to 120 +00), T6C -2 (Stations 300 +00 to 300 +80), and T6C -3 (Stations
310 +00 to 310 +82) are stable streams surrounded by an established vegetated buffer and were
therefore preserved Two perennial headwater reaches, T6A (Stations 240 +00 to 240 +90) and
T613 (Stations 250 +00 to 251 +04), were improved with bank and seep stabilization (Enhancement
II) These two reaches come together to form T6AB from Station 240 +90 to 241 +21 T6C, from
Station 120 +00 to 121 +75 at its confluence with T6AB, is another headwater tributary T6 begins
at Station 121 +75, the confluence of T6AB and T6C, and ends at Station 134 +25, where it meets
T1 T6AB, T6C, and T6 were all restored using a Priority 3 approach with dimension, profile, and
pattern adjustments
On the eastern side of the property, T7 was divided into ten different design reaches The
headwaters of T7 include two preservation reaches These two reaches, T7A -1 (Stations 259 +38
to 260 +00) and T7B (Stations 320 +00 to 321 +25), are both stable channels bordered by a riparian
buffer. T7 -1 begins at Station 140 +00 and continues until Station 145 +25 It is a B4 /C4 stream
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KC1 Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 3 2012 — MY04

type that was improved with isolated bank stabilization, seep stabilization at the beginning of the
reach, fencing out the livestock, and planting the riparian buffer with native vegetation
(Enhancement II) T7A (Stations 260 +00 to 261 +36) and T7C (Stations 330 +00 to 330 +42) are
similar to T74 and were also improved as a B4 /C4 channel with the same Enhancement II
methods T7 -2 (Stations 145 +25 to 148 +57) was improved to a B4 stream type by sloping back
the existing eroding banks and enhancing the existing riffle and pool features (Enhancement 1)
T7 -3 begins at Station 148 +57 where T7 -2 and T8 loin together T7 -3 was restored as a B4c
channel using Priority 2 and 3 approaches with dimension, profile, and pattern adjustments T74
begins at Station 169 +86 where the stream enters a more confined valley with numerous bedrock
features The 134 /1 channel was improved by building an appropriate stream dimension and
enhancing distinct riffle and pool features that had been degraded by cattle and excess sediment
inputs (Enhancement I)
T7 -5 is a short B4 reach that was restored with dimension, profile, and pattern adjustments from
Station 182 +28 to 183 +75 using a Priority 3 approach From Station 183 +75 to Station 191 +59,
T7 -6 has frequent bedrock in the streambed and was improved by building an appropriate stream
dimension and developing distinct riffle and pool features (Enhancement I), creating a 134 /1
stream type T7 -7 begins at the confluence with T10 and continues until the stream enters Cane
Creek at Station 198 +13 This final reach along T7 was also modified as Enhancement I by
building an appropriate stream dimension and creating distinct riffle and pool features
There are three intermittent preservation reaches on the headwater system of T8 These include
T8 -1 (Stations 199 +06 to 200 +00), T813 (Stations 340 +00 to 340 +59), and T8A -1 (Stations
269 +75 to 270 +00), which are all stable streams with established riparian buffers The remaining
headwater reaches of T8 (Stations 200 +00 to 204 +38) and T8A (Stations 270 +00 to 271 +23)
were improved using Enhancement I (building an appropriate stream dimension and creating
distinct riffle and pool features) and Enhancement II (isolated bank stabilization, seep
stabilization at the beginning of the reach, fencing out the livestock, and planting the riparian
buffer with native vegetation), respectively Both reaches are B4 stream types T9 (Stations
210 +00 to 213 +68) is a similar headwater reach to T8 and received the same Enhancement I
improvements as T8
T10 runs along the eastern edge of the site and has been divided into two separate reaches T10 -1
is the longer reach and goes from Stations 220 +00 to 233 +00 T10 -1 is a 134 /1 channel and was
improved with isolated bank stabilization, livestock exclusion, and riparian buffer plantings
(Enhancement II) T10 -2 begins at 233 +00 and continues a short distance until the confluence
with T7 at Station 235 +94 This reach was improved using Enhancement I (building an
appropriate stream dimension and creating distinct riffle and pool features) of the 134 /1 channel
Table 1 below provides the linear footage for existing and as -built stream length as well as the
total stream mitigation units by reach For this table, the existing linear footage was calculated
from the existing stream centerline In some instances, the linear footage is less for the as -built
conditions than for the existing conditions This situation can arise when the design changes the
exact location of tributary confluences In other locations, the pattern of the existing stream had
an unstable meandering centerline that may have been influenced by debris blockages and cattle
damage to the stream In the as -built stream, the pattern is stable and more clearly defined, but the
actual length may be shorter than the pre - restoration conditions Some of these lengths are also
slightly different than the designed lengths On the restored reaches, this is due to occasional field
changes to the pattern during construction For the enhancement reaches, this is generally a result
of the as -built survey being more detailed, and picking up a more accurate depiction of the pattern
than was recorded in the existing conditions topographic survey
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 4 2012 — MY04

i 5 )
1.4 Proiect Historv. Background. and Contact Information
Table 1. Project Restoration Components
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Project
Pre-
Stream
Segment /
Project
Mitigation Type
Approach
As -Built
As -Built
Mitigation
Comment
Footage
Stationing
Reach ID
Footage
Units
T1 -1 and
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built,
1,087
Enhancement I
-
1,150
10 +00 -21 +50
725 SMU*
distinct riffles and pools were created around the existing bedrock, the buffer
T 1 -2
was planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
T1 -3, T14
1,688
Restoration
P3
1,617
21 +50 -37 +67
1,617 SMU
Stable riffles and pools were established along a realigned stream planform, the
and TI-5
buffer was planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Isolated eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, relic spoil piles adjacent to
T2 -1
305
Enhancement lI
-
305
50 +00 -53 +05
122 SMU
the stream were removed, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
The stream was realigned away from an unstable valley wall, relic spoil piles
T2 -2
227
Restoration
P2
195
53 +05 -55 +00
195 SMU
adjacent to the stream were removed, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were
planted and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built,
T2 -3
160
Enhancement 1
-
150
55 +00 -56 +50
100 SMU
distinct riffles and pools were created, relic spoil piles adjacent to the stream
were removed, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted, and cattle
exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
New riffles and pools were established along a new stream planform, the
T24
151
Restoration
P3
200
56 +50 -58 +50
180 SMU*
unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was
erected along the easement
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built,
T3 -1
107
Enhancement I
-
85
60 +00 -60 +85
57 SMU
distinct riffles and pools were created, the unvegetated portions of the buffer
were planted, cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement, and
entering seeps were stabilized
Stable riffles and pools were established along a realigned stream planform, relic
T3 -2
1,457
Restoration
P3
1,612
60 +85 -76 +97
1,592 SMU*
spoil piles adjacent to the stream were removed, the buffer was planted, and
cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
T4 -1 and
Stable riffles and pools were established along a realigned stream planform, relic
T4 -2
1,979
Restoration
P3
2,281
80 +00- 102 +81
2,261 SMU*
spoil piles adjacent to the stream were removed, the buffer was planted, and
cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
TS -1
244
Enhancement 11
-
264
110 +00 - 112 +64
97 SMU*
The unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted and cattle exclusion fencing
was erected along the easement
Stable riffles and pools were established along a realigned stream planform
T5 -2
118
Restoration
P3
132
112 +64 - 113 +95
132 SMU
creating a stable confluence with TI, the buffer was planted, and cattle exclusion
fencing was erected along the easement
Totall
7,991
1,
1 7,078 SMU*
rz = rriority z rs = rrionty s * I hese JMUs have been calculated by excluding the easement exceptions, which include ford crossings Tor the landowner
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 5 2012— MY04

Table 1. Project Restoration Components, continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Protect
Pre-
Stream
Segment /
Protect
Mitigation Type
Approach
Mitigation
Comment
Footage
Footage
tatBuilt
Stationing
Reach ID
Footage
Units
Isolated eroding banks were graded to a stable slope the seep where the stream
T6A
89
Enhancement II
-
90
240 +00 - 240 +90
36 SMU
originates was stabilized, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
T613-1
162
Preservation
-
162
248 +38 - 250 +00
32 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
Isolated eroding banks were graded to a stable slope the seep where the stream
T613
103
Enhancement II
-
104
250 +00 - 251 +04
42 SMU
originates was stabilized, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Grade control structures were used to stabilize the bed and maintain pools, the
T6AB
30
Restoration
P3
31
240 +90 - 241 +21
31 SMU
buffer was planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the
easement
T6C -1
297
Preservation
-
297
117 +02 - 120 +00
59 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
T6C -2
80
Preservation
-
80
300 +00 - 300 +80
16 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
T6C -3
82
Preservation
-
82
310 +00 - 310 +82
16 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
New riffles and pools were established along a new stream planform, the
T6C and T6
1,455
Restoration
P3
1,425
120 +00 - 134 +25
1,405 SMU*
headcut at the top of T6C was stabilized, the unvegetated portions of the buffer
were planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
T7A -1
62
Preservation
-
62
259 +38 - 260 +00
12 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
Isolated eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, a seep at the beginning of
T7A
136
Enhancement II
-
136
260 +00 - 261 +36
54 SMU
the reach was stabilized, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
T713
125
Preservation
-
125
320 +00 - 321 +25
25 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
Removed a well house at the head of the reach, stabilized the seep graded the
T7C
42
Enhancement II
-
42
330 +00 - 330 +42
17 SMU
banks to a stable slope, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Isolated eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, the seep where the stream
T7 -1
469
Enhancement II
-
525
140 +00 - 145 +25
210 SMU
originates was stabilized, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, banktull benches were built,
T7 -2
331
Enhancement I
-
332
145 +25 - 148 +57
221 SMU
distinct riffles and pools were created around the existing bedrock, the buffer
was planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
New riffle and pool sequences were established along a realigned stream
T7 -3
2,023
Restoration
P2/3
2,129
148 +57 - 169 +86
2,109 SMU*
planform, the buffer was planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected
along the easement
Totall
5,622
' ., a - - ` J
4,285 SMU*
P3 = Priority 3 P2 /P3 = Combination of Priorities 2 and 3
* These SMUs have been calculated by excluding the easement exceptions, which include ford crossings for the landowner
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc
6 2012 — MY04
ti,

-
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Project
Pre-
Stream
As -Built
As -Built
Segment /
Project
Mitigation Type
Approach
Mitigation
Comment
Footage
Stationing
Reach ID
Foota a
Umts
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built,
T74
1,246
Enhancement I
-
1,242
169 +86 - 182 +28
828 SMU
overwidened portions of stream were built to the appropriate cross - sectional area,
distinct riffles and pools were created around the existing bedrock, the buffer was
planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
T7 -5
185
Restoration
P3
147
182 +28 - 183 +75
147 SMU
The stream was realigned away from an unstable valley wall, the buffer was planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built,
T7 -6 and
1,365
Enhancement I
-
1,438
183 +75 - 198 +13
945 SMU*
overwidened portions of stream were built to the appropriate cross - sectional area,
T7 -7
distinct riffles and pools were created around the existing bedrock, the buffer was
planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
T8A -1
25
Preservation
-
25
269 +75 - 300 +00
5 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
Isolated eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, a seep at the beginning of the
T8A
110
Enhancement II
-
123
270 +00 - 271 +23
49 SMU
reach was stabilized, a log structure was added for grade control, the unvegetated
portions of the buffer were planted, and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along
the easement
T813
59
Preservation
-
59
340 +00 - 340 +59
12 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
T8 -1
94
Preservation
-
94
199 +06 - 200 +00
19 SMU
Installed cattle exclusion fencing along the easement
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built, distinct
T8
449
Enhancement I
-
438
200 +00 - 204 +38
292 SMU
riffles and pools were created with mstream structures, the buffer was planted, and
cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built, distinct
T9
369
Enhancement I
-
368
210 +00 - 213 +68
245 SMU
riffles and pools were created with mstream log structures, the buffer was planted,
and cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Isolated eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, an eroding drainage swale was
T10 -1
1,300
Enhancement II
-
1,300
220 +00 - 233 +00
520 SMU
stabilized, the unvegetated portions of the buffer were planted, and cattle exclusion
fencing was erected along the easement
Eroding banks were graded to a stable slope, bankfull benches were built, distinct
T10-2
282
Enhancement I
-
294
233 +00 - 235 +94
196 SMU
riffles and pools were created with mstream structures, the buffer was planted, and
cattle exclusion fencing was erected along the easement
Total
5,528
- : *�'°= Yaz'��'sr`- . "_�r,
3,258 SMU*
Preservation Total
986
',xe }s ;; "
196 SMU*
Enhancement II Total
2,889
1,147 SMU*
Enhancement I Total
5,497
�` ; >a >���:�R� „��r,
3,609 SMU*
Restoration Total
9,769
9,669 SMU*
Total of All Reachesl
19,141
14,621 SMU*
P3 = Pnoritv 3 * These SMUs have been calculated
by excludme the easement exceptions. which include
ford crossmes for the landowner
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract 4 D06002 7 2012 — MY04

.19
towavo x
lop
n-s
tic
� Y
. '� ne GreeK
Figure 2. As -Built Site Plan
00"'� Preservation Reach Other Streams
Enhancement I Reach Project Parcel Boundaries w�E KCI
0—\_o Enhancement If Reach S ASSOCATES OF vc
1:9,600
KC I 10%/ Restoration Reach I inch = 800 feet
Project Easement 800 400 0 800 borAd
Feet
TECHNOLOGIES ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES
AND CONSTRUCTION. INC.
11mageSource: NC Slalewide Orthoima erv. 2010.
w
-
T7 -1
T88
R
-
T7A
F G
T8A-1
TB-1
I
T41
, , �d
_
n-s
.19
towavo x
lop
n-s
tic
� Y
. '� ne GreeK
Figure 2. As -Built Site Plan
00"'� Preservation Reach Other Streams
Enhancement I Reach Project Parcel Boundaries w�E KCI
0—\_o Enhancement If Reach S ASSOCATES OF vc
1:9,600
KC I 10%/ Restoration Reach I inch = 800 feet
Project Easement 800 400 0 800 borAd
Feet
TECHNOLOGIES ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES
AND CONSTRUCTION. INC.
11mageSource: NC Slalewide Orthoima erv. 2010.

Table 2. Protect Activity and Reporting History
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Restoration Plan
2007
Dec 07
Final Design
2007
Dec 07
Construction
N/A
Dec 08
Planting - Stream
N/A
Dec 08
Mitigation Plan / As -Built Year 0 Monitoring - Baseline
Jan 09
May 09
Monitoring Year 01
Dec 09
Dec 09
Monitoring Year 02
Jan 11
Jan 1 l
Monitoring Year 03
Nov 11
Jan 12
Monitoring Year 04
Jul 12
Dec 12
Table 3. Project Contact Table
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Design Firm
KCI Technologies, Inc
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact Mr Gary Mryncza
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Construction Contractors
Environmental Technologies and Construction
Landmark Center II, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact Mr Ryan McDavitt
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Quartermaster Environmental
P O Drawer 400
Shelby, NC 28150
Contact Mr Brooks Cole
Phone [phone]
Planting Contractor
Bruton Nurseries & Landscapes
150 Black Creek Rd
Fremont, NC 27830
Contact Charles Bruton
Phone [phone]
Monitoring Performers
MY -00 - MY -05
KCI Technologies, Inc
Landmark Center lI, Suite 220
4601 Six Forks Rd
Raleigh, NC 27609
Contact Mr Adam Spiller
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KC/ Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 9 2012 — A4Y04

Table 4. Project Background Table
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Project County
Person County
Physiographic Region
Piedmont
Ecore ion
Northern Inner Piedmont
Project River Basin
Roanoke
USGS HUC for Project and Reference
03010104061040 T to Cane Creek
03040101090010 UT Fisher River - reference
NCDWQ Sub -basin for Project and Reference
03 -02 -05 UT to Cane Creek)
03 -07 -02 UT Fisher River - reference
Drainage Area
132 sq mi
Stream Order
First, Second, and Third Order
Watershed Type Rural, Urban, Developing, etc)
Rural
Watershed LULC Distribution Urban
Ag -Row Crop
Ag- Livestock
Forested
Water /Wetlands
<1%
49%
12%
35%
1%
Watershed impervious cover %
<1%
Rosgen Classification of As -built (Stream)
134 (T2 -3, T24, T3 -2, T4 -1, T4 -2, T5 -2, T6, T6c,
T7 -2, T8, T9)
B4/1 T7 -4, T7 -6, T10-2)
B4c T7 -3)
134c /1 T7 -7
134c /C4 (T7 -5)
CB4 T1
C/E4 (T3 -1
C/E4 T2 -2
NCDWQ Classification for Project
Class C (Cane Creek
Within EEP Watershed Plans
No
Any portion of the project segment upstream of a 303d
listed segment?
No
Reasons for 303d Listing or Stressor
N/A
Total project acreage of easement
52 1 Acres
Total planted acreage
32 4 Acres
WRC Class Warm, Cool, Cold
Warm
Species of concern, endangered etc
None
Pre- construction Beaver activity9
No
Dominant Soil Types
Chewacla, Wehadkee Wilkes, and Wedowee
% of Project Easement Fenced
100%
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract 9 D06002
10
KCI Technologies, Inc
2012 — MY04

2.0 PROJECT CONDITIONS AND MONITORING RESULTS
2.1 Vegetation Assessment
The planted vegetation on the site is growing well Due to the baseline vegetation monitoring
occurring while the plants had not yet leafed out, some of the plants could not be identified
initially and they were recorded as unknown Since the baseline monitoring most of these plants
were identified Some of the previously unknown plants were dead, damaged, or missing and
could still not be identified These plants were again recorded as unknown
The bankfull bench, stream banks, and riparian buffer have isolated areas with sparse vegetation,
but overall they are well vegetated Additional permanent seed was applied to areas of bare soil in
2011 Some scattered populations of invasive species have been identified at the site These
include Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora), tree -of- heaven
(Ailanthus altissima), and princess tree (Paulownia tomentosa) Most of the invasive species are
in areas where the existing vegetation was left intact These populations will continue to be
monitored
KCI used the Level 2 CVS -EEP vegetation monitoring protocol to quantify the number of planted
stems and volunteer woody stems during Monitoring Year 4. The monitored vegetation plots
revealed an average density of 378 planted stems /acre and 5,198 total stems /acre when including
volunteers There are five monitoring plots (Plots 5, 8, 13, 17, and 18) that had calculated planted
stem densities less than 260 stems /acre This is not seen as problematic given the high potential -
for desirable volunteers to become established in the plots and across the site Like natural
vegetative communities, some areas will have slightly higher densities than others, but the data
from the vegetation monitoring plots reveal that the site has an adequate average stem density In
the fifth year of monitoring KCI will continue to use the Level 2 CVS -EEP vegetation monitoring
protocol to quantify the number of volunteer woody stems Supplemental planting was conducted
at the site during the 2010/2011 dormant season Additional supplemental planting may be
conducted in the future if it is deemed necessary Considering the plentiful volunteers and overall
vegetative condition of the site, the fourth -year monitoring found the vegetation component of the
project to be on track to meeting the success criterion The vegetative monitoring results are
displayed in Appendix A
2.2 Stream Assessment
During the 2012 growing season, the project streams have been functioning as designed There
are isolated areas of erosion on the streambanks and the side slopes, which have been noted on
the CCPV In 2012, maintenance was conducted to stabilize most of the areas of slope erosion
The on -site stream gauge recorded two bankfull events in 2012
The stream assessment found the stream to be stable overall There are some cross - sections that -
show stream degradation since the previous monitoring year, but the profiles do not show
systematic degradation so these areas are isolated and not indicative of instability across the
reaches It is also important to note that all of the streams across the site have grade control from -
in- stream structures, and in some instances significant bedrock Additional visual monitoring and
future surveying will determine if corrective actions are needed in these isolated erosion areas
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 11 2012 — MYO4

2.2.1 Bankfull Events
Table 5. Verification ofBankfull Events
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Date of Data
Collection
Date of Occurrences
Method
Photo
Number
8/4/2009
5/28/2009
Stream Gauge
N/A
8/4/2009
6/5/2009
Stream Gauge
N/A
10/13/2009
9/21/2009
Stream Gauge
N/A
10/13/2009
9/28/2009
Stream Gauge
N/A
10/13/2009
10/9/2009
Stream Gauge
N/A
7/22/2010
3/22/2010
Stream Gauge
N/A
7/22/2010
5/28/2010
Stream Gauge
N/A
5/27/2011
4/16/2011
Stream Gauge
N/A
7/25/2012
7/14/2012
Stream Gauge
N/A
7/25/2012
7/22/2012
Stream Gauge
N/A
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 12 2012 — MY04

2.2.2 Quantitative Measures Summary Tables
Table 6a T1 -3 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
arameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As- built*
^n
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
MedT
Max
n
Min
Max9
Min
Maxi
Bankfull Width (ft)'
102
` ,Ili`, y�
1
90
95
100
2
136
Flood prone Width (ft)
n �
� ¢
25 4
M,
1
13
17
20
2
30
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1 3a
i
t
1 1
1 2
1 2
2
1 2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
19
1
1 3
14
1 5
2
1 9
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ftZ
12 9
' "t "^
1
104
106
�!
107
2
164
Width/Depth Ratio
8 1
1
80
90
100
2
110
Entrenchment Ratio
AI'
,
2 5
1
1 3
1 8�I
23
2
22
Bank Height Ratio
�'�''
fit"
1 8
���
I
�a�tai- ,r+s'ti
1 0�z�
2
1 0
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
" &'
21
s a.'ti -; i
45
`,
40
70
40
54
70
3
Radius of Curvature (ft)
7
X`O,,,
19
13
a;> W.
, ' 4
42
ODI
30
1 40
30
35
40
4
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
07
7,r,9,
i,`le
19
1 3
44
22
30
MWM
ON=
Meander Wavelength (ft)
90
117
93
136
160
170
160
170
2
Meander Width Ratio
^ rl,
30-DW
2 0
Oe4I
awl'
45
50
111
30
50
NOM
FAWM
lomm
FA
Profile
Riffle Length (ft):'„
8
49
86
7
Riffle Slope ft/ft)
0 0138`
�°' ~""
;,flu:,
0013
V;'Z
0028
0010
0014
0006
0012
0030
7
Pool Length (ft)
13',,'`
E49
{
3'P_;
25
10
20
16
19
26
6
Pool Spacing ft
21
� F°
�1''�F
�'
30
= ou�'
la T
59
75
100
56
94
152
5
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
0%/13%/ 87%/ 0%/ 0%/0%
0% / 15% / 78% / 7% / 0% / 0%
0% / 34% / 66% / 0% / 0% / 0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
60/90/11/ 21/30
20/42/69/30/70
06/21/45/15/28
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
313
297
324
326
Drainage Area (SM)
060
038
060
060
Ros en Classification
E4
134c
CB4
C /134
Sinuosity
1 10
1 20
1 10
1 10
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00070
00130
1 00089
1 00089
' I his is a short restoration reach, similar to 1 1 -4 and I 1 -5, and does not have any monitored cross - sections I heretore there is no as -built dimension data
Cane Creek Strewn Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc
13 2012— A9Y04

Table 6b T14/T1 -5 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
^Min
Dimension -Riffle
Mm
Mean
Med
Max
n
Mean
Med
n
Mm
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
105
141
145
170
4
90
95
:� "a
2
150
T �A
153
164
174
2
Flood prone Width (ft)
19
24
20
35
4
13
17
2
1
33
39
41
42
2
Bankfull Mean De th (ft)
1 0
1 3
1 3
1 5
4
1 1
1 2F
r20
2
1 3
s;�r
1 1
1 3
1 5
2
Bankfull Max De th (ft)
1 2
1 8
1 8
2 3
4
1 3
1 4
1 ` c
2
2 0
$ f a~
1 9
2 0
2 1
2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft''
15 3
17 3
16 8
20 1
4
10 4
10 6
;„ ',2
200
189
206
222
2
Width/Depth Ratio
72
118
114
172
4
80
90
100
2
12 0's"��
105
13 3
160
2
Entrenchment Ratio
1 2
18
1 4
3 3
4
13
18
4,A14
23
1
2 2
�: a
22
2 5
27
2
Bank Height Ratio
14
20
2 1
23
4
y
1 0
"
2
1 0
K'
10
1 0
10
2
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
25
51
45;
,';
25
60
25
WWI&
60"�
Radius of Curvature (ft)
12
64
13
° > ;� "
av,,� A-
42
30
50
30
36
50
14
Rc Bankfull width (f /ft)
07
g
5 1
1 3
� �'
VtV
44
RZ
20
3 3
1 8
22
3 0
Meander Wavelength (ft)
106
�""
~t;'"
230
93
136
115
240
115
240
f,57 I
Meander Width Ratio
1 5
e° T
F tea"
47
F_
45
r Md.Fkr�"
'�"
50
1 7
40
1 5
wy� {�,
3 7
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
_ . 5
4'
8
49
86
7
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
00115
''
5,
00407
= "
0 013
0 028
0 005
0 013
0 006
0 012
0 030
7
Pool Length (ft)
11
-
30
3
25
10
30
16
19
26
6
Pool Spacing ft
29
y ,,,;_
, ; ;r
88
30
59
50
150
56
94
152
5
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
0 %/17 %/63 %/19 % /0 % /0%
0 %/15 %/78 %/7 % /0 % /0%
0 %/7 %/86 %/4 %/0 %/3%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
16/13/22/73/130
20/42/69/30/70Wf
r ` wl
1 69/14/19/41/62
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
1 290
297
1,290
1,291
Drainage Area (SM)
080
038
080
080
Ros en Classification
B /G/F
134c
C /134
CB4
Sinuosity
1 07- 133
120
1 10
1 10
Water Surface Sloe ft/ft
0 0072 - 0 0090
00130
00080
1 00071
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 14 2012— MY04

Table 6c T2 -2 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As- built*
_
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
z!
1
44
P „,;”
1
90
95
100
2
74
77
948=
1
Flood prone Width (ft)
a s>
>40
r .�,,W,
1
13
17
�
20
2
19
21
211M
1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
08
1
1 1
1 2
kXj,&'1
1 2
2
08
07
IIEM
1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)-~
09
1
1 3
1 4
1 5
2
1 3
1 2
ZBON
1
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ftZ
=art
33
1
104
106
1 'fir
107
121
57
_
54
200=1
1
Width/Depth Ratiof11sIR
5 9
+
1
1 80
100
2
93
Mw
110
AMWM
1
Entrenchment Ratio
`F %'17516
wx
23
2
25
PAMMINEM
27
&ISM
1
Bank Height Ratio
2
1 0
1 0
NIM,
I
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
11
Fqk ;
°n,
19
,;
4 r ,
;?t
45
w;"
14
23
14
.,
23
Radius of Curvature (ft)
5
, ' "
"',"
18
�°
13
;h, ;`
�`4 + ui,
42
7
10
7
10
10
6
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
1 1
,t 'g'�
�: „
41
1 3
�;,
a�:
44
1 0
14
1 0;
",
13
Meander Wavelength (ft)
39
61
,
93
',
f
136
40
53
40
acorn
53
Meander Width Ratio
25
;ice
33
y_
45
50
19
3 1
1 8
MRAM
30
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
0 %/33 %/66 %/ 1 % /0 % /0%
0%/15%/78%/7%/0%/0%
IW-
0%/23%/76%/1%/0%/0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
05/25/50/31/48
20/42/69/30/70
„, <��a'i�-
13/45/10/30/44
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
227
297
186
195
Drainage Area (SM)
0 11
038
0 11
0 11
Ros en Classification
E4
134c
C /E4
C /E4
Sinuosity
1 70
1 20
1 40
1 50
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
0 0179
0 0130
00231
i nis is a snort reacn ana noes not nave a monnorea iongauamai prone
Cane Creek Streani Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc
15 2012— MY04

Table 6d. T3 -2 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
34
58
52
109
6
90
95
100
2
fAf4-M $
78
81
83
2
Flood rone Width (ft)
6
27
8
78
6
13
17
20
2
M78
21
23
24
2
Bankfull Mean De th (ft)
0 5
0 7
0 8
0 9
6
1 1
1 2
-
1 2
2
v'
0 5
0 5
0 5
2
Bankfull Max De th (ft)
1 0
1 2
1 1
1 3
6
1 3
1 4
'° `*
1 5
2
bi
09
09
09
2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
25
3 9
41
5 1
6
104
106
107
2
56
.,
39
41
42
2
Width/Depth Ratio
43
92
70
233
6
80
90
! °r
100
2
109
156
160
164
2
Entrenchment Ratio
1 1
65
16
163
6
1 3
18
_'' _
23
2
2 1
27
28
29
2
Bank Height Ratio
10
19
20
32
6
10
; -± " „"
2
10
1 0
10
10
2
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
20
*x�� `�
25
45
;' ` W
40
45
25
per,
45
Radius of Curvature (ft)
8
+”
"w+*t
30
13
�,y;�
,;,
42
10
30
10
*MOM,
30
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
1 4
7 1
5!U
1 3
44
"
1 3
3 8
12
37
Meander Wavelength (ft)
80
9,77'-i
420
; r,
93
136
48
130
45
130
Meander Width Ratio
1 34
,; r
is "°
60
45
50
5 1
5 8
3 1
56
Riffle Length (ft)
:�
fi
- r s
",sr'
-..,
04,E �5 ? ".:
�,vi, °
7
23
56
11
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
00102
00640
0 013
0 028
0 014
0 045
0 005
0 022
0 036
11
Pool Length (ft)
6
"
, :AS
23
e°
3
'X5"
25
4
6
20
4
9
23
13
Pool Spacing ft
11
oX ,
i `4�
68
;,M
30
R=49
59
�';4
25
90
14
37
55
12
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C% 13 % /Be%
0 %/72 %/27 % /I % /0 % /0%
0 %/15 %/78 %/7 %/0 %/07/ -.
12 %/25 %/61 %/3 % /0 % /0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
028/047/07/9/27
20/42/69/30/70
JU� -IO _
011/15/11/35/54
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
1,457
297
1,554
1,592
Drainage Area (SM)
008
038
008
008
Ros en Classification
G4
134c
134
134
Sinuosity
1 10
1 20
120
120
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00202
00130
00215
00174
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract 9 D06002 16 2012— MY04

Table 6e. T44 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built*
m
-
_
r
Y
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med~
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
45
54
51
67
3
90
95
Fdg
100
2
62
=EM
FA=X
85
=IWO
1
Flood prone Width (ft)
6
8
8
10
3
13
17
&'W
20
2
12
24
1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1 1
1 2
1 1
14
3
1 1
1 2
Af4A
1 2
2
05
05
NMMM
1
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
14
1 5
15
1 7
3
13
14
JPAV
15
2
08
4ROM.NJIM,
10
GUM.
1
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ftZ
54
62
6 1
72
3
104
1 106
3ff
1 107
21
30
FI
41
XNFAMI
1
Width/Depth Ratio
3 3
48
48
6 2
3
80
go
'71, y
loo
2
12 4
4NAM
NOW
176
1
Entrenchment Ratio
15
1 5
1
1 5
1 6
3
1 3
1 8
4 A,
23
2
2 0
=N1
MM
28
=NO
1
Bank Height Ratio
3 1
38
41
4 2
3._
_-
-,;' r
10
1 0
IONO
1
Pattern
Channel Beltwldth (ft)
15
58
45
39
50
40
-
60
Radius of Curvature (ft)
7
i� f
26
a
13
" prat
%> yn`
42
A
15
20
15
16
20
5
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
10
5 8°
13
44
24
32
1 8
19
24
Meander Wavelength (ft)
35
x; °r
=4 : wN
290
93
fiw
�;; 2�
136
; 4,
77
95
70
90
Meander Width Ratio
22
„� "' `
aj
129
s=
45
°_ rt'
'
50
y
63
8 1
47
7 1,x
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
0 %/19 %/73 %/7 % /0 % /1%
0 %/15 %/78 % /7 % /0 % /0 %"rn
73 %/5 %/22 % /1 % /0 % /0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
15/Il/17/45/78
20/42/69/30/70
0 1/0 1/0 1/13/32
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
190
297
266
253
Drainage Area (SM)
006
038
006
006
Ros en Classification
G4
134c
134
134
Sinuosity
1 70
120
140
1 40
Water Surface Slo a ft/ft
00179
00130
0 0231
77O5 �i= s *` ae't -'I P L'Z' TZ
1 ne monitorea longituamal profile for 14 is on 14 -2
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc
17 2012— MY04

Table 6E T4 -2 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
45
54
5 1
67
3
90
95
100
2
92
"-'3V ',0
86
89
9 1
2
Flood prone Width (ft)
6
8
8
10
3
13
17
Y.
20
2
18
"' ';= ; ;6
24
25
26
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
1 1
1 2
1 1
14
3
1 1
1 2
1 2
2
08
;+ TTd`
06
08
09
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
14
1 5
1 5
1 7
3
1 3
14
--
15
2
12
7,' " 1_ �,
12
1 5
17
2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft ' -
54
62
61
72
3
104
1 10 6-
`` „' ";
107
21
7 1
!-f
59
69
79
2
Width /Depth Ratio
3 3
48
48
62
3
80
90
T
100
2
11 5
94
11 7
140
2
Entrenchment Ratio
1 5
1 5
1 5
16
3
13
18
li ^`';,',
23
2
20
,?
26
28
3 0
2
Bank Height Ratio
3 1
3 8
41
42
3
-'
�` .
1 0
, ,:` °'
2
10
111,t„i�',
1 0
10
10
2
Pattern
Channel Beltw►dth (ft)
15
`"" 71rr,
7
58
'x;'f
, "," �r
” ",=
45
_ ' �";
;
25
60
20
,
65
ig,
Radius of Curvature (ft)
7
1 ,!r5
26
"
13
"'"s,
;M,M�
42
10
30
10
30
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
10
I�OT
5 8
771
13
44
1 1
3 3
1 1
3 4
Meander Wavelength (ft)
35
777
290
'$
93
s 3,7
l s kY:
136
50
130
50
130
Meander Width Ratio
22
: _,y' '
129
�' `
45
�":�? �i
,,-
50
7�
27
65
22
73
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
r ' nr
; �„
r'
1;
.' =�
5�=
�-
4 r
����^
; r ,_,.5,„
� ,
5
23
56
15
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
00134
F -x
.. ,'
00381
` ` r
0 013
';' ,
i ,. ; ?
0 028
M`,
0 009
0 030
0 005
0 025
0 063
15
Pool Length (ft)
10
;;
35
3
:4 P..;
25
„.
5
40
1
11
28
19
Pool Spacing ft
20
x
sue;
80
,`;
30
" "PAS'
59
rR
30
85
7
46
94
18
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
00/o/19%/73%/7%/O%/]%
0%/15%/78%/7%/0%/0%
1%/47%/51%/1%/0%/0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
15/11/17/45/78
20/42/69/30/70
04/11/24/30/52
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
1,789
297
1,967
2,008
Drainage Area (SM)
0 10
038
0 10
0 10
Ros en Classification
G4
134c
134
134
Sinuosity
1 10
1 20
1 20
120
Water Surface Slo a ft/ft
00224
00130
00181
00141
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract 9 D06002 18 2012 — MY04

Table 6g. T5 -2 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As- built*
-Med
rt
A
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Max
n
Mtn
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
"rs,
JT�"'3
3 3"
1
90
95
100
2
50
YWUN
WMA
59
942R=
1
Flood prone Width (ft)
4
1
13
17
20
2
10
TMMN
110M
21
NO=
1
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)'
v
07
5rp:v
1
1 1
1 2
i,
1 2
2
05
YFAYMM
NOW
04
MEN=
I
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
t' u
09
�
1
1 3
14
1 5
2
08
AWAIM
PLOTAW
08
1
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
f
2 3�
?did^
1
] 0 4
10 6``
-,fs
10 7
2
2 5
2 4
1
Width/Depth Ratio
4, ,t
4 7
r, ,,
1
8 0
9 0
+ "'
10 0
2
10 0
14 5
now
I
Entrenchment Ratio
4VM
MW
1 3
1
1 3
1 8
) ,< }
23
2
20
SIR=
FOOMI
36
lgk=
1
Bank Height Ratio
27
1
1 0t°
2
10
MOMMIGNIMI
1 0
Mr=
1
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
`� i
; ' �
^�"
-� ''"
�'
45
�•'�`7777,*
15
30
15
, i
30
IN
Radius of Curvature (ft)
;Q; ,`�
`a5
),sy�
y.
13
A;t'
"ji
42
15
ter,
15
Re Bankfull width (ft/ft)
`h
; '-
��
1 3
,;G "
,r�
4 4
` = °y
30
?w�
25
Meander Wavelength (ft)
~ GrG
?, �„
x;�
93
%;' °
136
45
63
50
��ef
60
Meander Width Ratio
t
3
1
T ` p�
b �'x:�
'`� ,
;i
45
yns
x
50
W
30
60
25
��
5 1
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC% / Sa% / G% / C% / B% / Be%
file ,� "- 1 G ,, rtarytS�n�i
0%115%178%/ 7%/ 0%/ 0%
��w
40% / 41% / 20% / 0% / 0% / 0%
dl6 /d35 /d50 /d84/d95 mm
kL'`zps'u`'' �'"«
20/42/69/30/70
0 1/0 1/02/42/98
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
118
297
121
132
Drainage Area (SM)
002
038
002
002
Ros en Classification
G4
134c
134
134
Sinuosity
1 10
1 20
1 20
1 20
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00590
00130
00550
, i nis is a snort reacn ana Goes not nave a momtorea iongituainai prone
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
W
lob, Aft Am Alk dm ift
KCI Technologies, Inc
2012 — MY04

Table 6f T6 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre- Existm Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
34
44
_;" ^,
5 3
2
90
95
- '"
100
2
80
r "4
63
67
7 1
2
Flood prone Width (ft)
4
6
,' =
8
2
13
17
_
20
2
16"
'y' r`;'
167
172
186
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
04
06
08
2
11
12
12
2
07
_."� i
05
06
06
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
05
08
1 0
2
13
14
-
1 5
2
1 1
F, ti
08
09
09
2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
1 3
27
40
2
104
106
``' r
107
2
5 7
34
3 5
36
2
Width/Depth Ratio
70
79
87
2
80
9 0
v 's:
10 0
2
114
11 0
129
148
2
Entrenchment Ratio
1 1
1 3
-+ ='
1 5
2
1 3
18
1`
2 3
2
2 0
r3°'
26
2 7
27
2
Bank Height Ratio
30
49
68
2
' tz
�,��e
l 0
2
1 0�
1 0
1 0
] 0
2
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
16
M-'44-
7 =tA,)�
36
z?
,u; h,
s r
45
_�
f
36
40
30
6JIffiffft
40
Radius of Curvature (ft)
3-
";k
_ -,1
16
13
42
10
35
10
90@M
35
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
0 6
;�r'�
F; , "rl
47
1 3
r°'
44
13
44
1 5
_
52
Meander Wavelength (ft)
14
°_�" 4 "
`" ;
116
93
:'X.�. �-s
407,ft,
136
"�'!'
72
120
50
120
Meander Width Ratio
2 6
`'
34 1
45
pu,�
Fi,: "`
50
45
50
45
't er
60
C40
rofile
Riffle Length (ft)
`;ter
�� ;
7 -
_�`
s - .
v
11
25
49
12
Riffle Slope (ft/ft)
0 009
_
0 030
0013
y
0 028
0 013
0 025
0 010
0 024
0 040
12
Pool Length (ft)
9
13
3
25
6
15
2
6
14
14
Pool Spacing ft
26
48
30
$A9 %?
�i
59
25
70
5
36
68
13
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
0 %/52 %/45 % /1 % /1 % /1%
0 %/15 %/78 %/7 % /0 % /0% `4,A
1 %/14 %/81 %/3 % /0 % /0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
05/09/17/11/20
20/42/69/30/70 *may
56/34/40/56/63
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
1,275
297
1,230
1,230
Drainage Area (SM)
007
038
007
007
Ros en Classification
G
B4c
134
134
Sinuosity
120
1 20
1 20
120
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00245
00130
00240
00301
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 20 2012- MY04

Table 6g T7 -3 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
Design
As -built
^
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)
50
61
65
69
3
90
95
y'
100
2
82
3902=3
90
91
91
2
Flood prone Width (ft)
8
9
9
9
3
13
17
20
2
16
154
169
184
2
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
09
09
09
1 0
3
1 1
1 2
1 2
2
07
07
08
08
2
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
11
1 2
13—
1 3
3
1 3
1 4
1 5
2
1 1
09
1 1
1 3
2
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft)
50
56
59
60
3
104
106
y »fi'
107
2
60
64
77
90
2
Width/Depth Ratio
60
70
72
79
3
80
90
100
2
112
y
116
123
129
2
Entrenchment Ratio
1 2
1 3
1 3
14
3
1 3
1 8
23
2
20
amts
1 7
19
20
2
Bank Height Ratio
28
3 3
32
38
3"'
= v f
1 0
k `;„ r'
2
1 0
1 0
10
1 0
2
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
24
42
45
29
47
30
60
Radius of Curvature (ft)
22
`-
58
'"
13
``"
42
15
35
15
k
35Y
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
32
�j wr9
«, r' �,
9 7
�7
1 3
44
1 8
43
1 6
3 8
Meander Wavelength (ft)
52F=
115
93
136
55
106
50��
110
�!
Meander Width Ratio
3 5
'.,'
`�uiy��,
7
45
50
3 5
57
3 3
9)MMM
66
Profile
Riffle Length (ft)
;wl �^
»�f
27RO'WstiW
ip °'NOM
-t,i�
ft
t �ti 7j
"
15
26
40
15
Riffle Slope ( ft/ft)
0007
'r
0 012
0013
,_ ,
0 028
0 020
0 030
0 002
0 018
0 035
15
Pool Length (ft)
6
12
3
WWA
25
V
7
30
6
16
54
15
Pool Spacing ft
17
=
42
30
59
tip"
32
86
38
55
101
14
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
0 %/37 %/62 % /1 % /0 % /0%
0 %/15 %/78 %/7 % /0 % /0%
ssx"{z�%1
6 %/33 %/54 %/6 % /0 % /0%
d16/d35/d5O/d84/d95 mm
03/14/54/15/25
20/42/69/30/70
03/14/66/45/95
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
2,023
297
2,088
2,109
Drainage Area (SM)
0 18
038
0 18
0 18
Ros en Classification
G4c
134c
134c
134c
Sinuosity
1 10
120
1 10
1 15
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00132
00130
00128
00211
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 21 2012— MY04

Table 6h. T7 -5 Baseline Stream Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Pre-Existing Condition
Reference Reach(es) Data
—r--Design
As- built*
Dimension - Riffle
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Mean
Med
Max
n
Min
Max
Min
Mean
Max
n
Bankfull Width (ft)�
�t
'.
,t
90
95
- 411
100
2
104
�Y" �p
f '�y, d:34�J-0
�� �' it �'
11 5�"
,
1
Flood prone Width (ft)
' �:'
'
a
13
17
y
20
2
21
+
k M a,�
�`" t� �'
21
,<,0,e`
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
'`
1 1
1 2
1 2
2
0 9
4� "„ ;
t
09
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
1 f
_° }
♦
ref
:''?" `
K.,
'� ,
1 3
14
-i"
„� t �i
1 5
2
1 2
�' ' ' a.i% N''^l,''_
1 3
�
1
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ftz
104
106
107
2
90
107
1
Width/Depth Ratio
";n' "'
'^ >
; ;
80
90
; ,
100
2
120
124
s
1
Entrenchment Ratio
";'
};
,,;,E 4"
;;
1 3
Bank Height Ratio,.
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth (ft)
28
vI&P-4
h
25
20
25
Radius of Curvature (ft)
12
13
42
20
25
20
25
Rc Bankfull width (ft/ft)
`77-7
. '
„
`
1 3
TAW
mow'
44
1 9
24
1 7
22
s"
Meander Wavelength (ft)
62
93
136
s
64
68
60
70
r
Meander Width Ratio
r`
4 5
50
20
25
1 7
22
Substrate and Transport Parameters
SC % /Sa % /G % /C % /B % /Be%
�,` t
-.x
0 %/15 %/78 % /7 % /0 % /0 %'
-z''y"
0 %/23 %/63 %/2 %/0 %/12%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95 mm
20/42/69/30/70
09/44/11/34/55
Additional Reach Parameters
Channel length (ft)
185
297
154
147
Drainage Area (SM)
024
038
024
024
Ros en Classification
E4
134c
134c /C4
134c /C4
Sinuosity
1 20
120
1 08
105
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00145
00130
00193
i nis is a snort reacn and does not nave a monitored longitudinal protile
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 22 2012 — MY04

Table 7a. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Cross - Section 1
Cross - Section 2
Cross - Section 3
Pool
Riffle
Pool
Reach
T Is
4
' =3
�T1`'�4�W,x
;;.yr'�
girt.
� ' i " ' TAE_" ,..- y_
�'a,7'1
-4 r
Dimension
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY41
MY5
Bankfull Width ft
126
122
134
149
140
y�Zs'wf, 4
1 174
178
188
180
182
123
142
143
144
132
140
Floodprone Width (ft)
Flood rove Width ft
-
-
-
-
-
21
39
42
42
41
40
1W
-
-
-
-
-
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
16
1 7
24
24
25
07
1 1
1 1
1 2
1 0
09
,jW
1 5
16
14
16
1 4
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
Bankfull Max Depth ft
28
29
35
36
37
tl
19
23
29
22
20
OM
25
29
30
1 34
32
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft'
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
202
209
32 2
35 5
35 2
;;;7i
189
199
1 23 3
187
170
'
219
23 5
197
205
196
Width/Depth Ratio
Width/Depth Ratio
-
-
-
-
-
1 l 0
16 0
159
15 2
173
195
`
-
-
-
-
-
NMI
Entrenchment Ratio
-
2 1
2 9
2 5
FM"
27
28
24
22
23
26
-
-
-
-
-
-
Bank Height Ratio
Bank Height Ratio
-
-
-
-
-
" <°
1 0
1 0
10
1 0
10
-
-
-
-
-
Substrate
Substrate
d50 mm
5
1
1 2
1 2
1 12
1®
1 15
1 8
1 8
1 23
1 10
1 10
2
1 9
1 9
1 3
1 22
d84 mm
d84 mm
15
1
1 15
1 34
1 54
30
40
1 43
1 43
1 38
1 21
10 00
12
1 30
1 30
1 35
1 64
Table 7b. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Cross - Section 4
Cross - Section 5
Cross - Section 6
Riffle
Riffle
Pool
Reach
,.,tx°
- — -
•- -.., .. >+.v 4'is� -' ��J'r�'
� ' i " ' TAE_" ,..- y_
a � r•,�
w
Dimension
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
Bankfull Width (ft)
153
150
175
156
171
° ",,;;
77
75
67
65
78
,
123
126
135
123
144
Floodprone Width (ft)
42
37
37
45
42
21
21
21
21
23
9=1
-
-
-
-
-
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
15
15
12
12
1 1
07
06
06
06
07
1=1
1 1
09
1 1
1 1
10
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
2 1
24
23
23
22
1 2
1 2
1 1
1 0
1 3
J=1
22
2 1
23
23
23
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft'
222
22 1
212
188
19 3��
54
47
42
42
5 1
13 3
110
13 3
129
150
Width/Depth Ratio
105
102
144
129
152
4 R �
1 l 0
120
107
101
11 9
-
-
-
-
-
Entrenchment Ratio
27
25
2 1
2 9
2 5
FM"
27
28
3 1
32
29
-
-
-
-
-
Bank Height Ratio
10
10
1 0
10
1 0
11,00
1 0
1 0
] 0
1 0
1 0
-
-
-
-
-
Substrate
d50 (mm)
24
27
17
27
26
10
14
14
l
11
1 10
0 62
0 06
0 08
d84 mm
44
Bdrk
Bdrk
59
76
30
31
41
12
32
10 00
0 62
120
0 76
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
23
KC! Technologies, Inc
2012— MY04

Table 7c. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Cross - Section 7
Cross - Section 8
Cross - Section 9
Riffle
Riffle
Riffle
Reach
_' T3
-2` _
y'? ,T3
-2z
F
k .,fiT,4
-l_,
Dimension
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY]
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
Bankf ill Width ft
O
7 8
8 8
9 4
7 9
8 9
<' ;,,
83
103
93
82
78
`'
�_��:�,
85
83
104
101
97
101
Floodprone Width (ft)
21
22
22
22
24
. ;. w.
24
26
26
23
24
r
24
25
25
26
29
WAMA
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
05
05
05
06
05
05
05
06
05
04
04
1 0K
OS
06
OS
OS
OS
1 3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
09
09
1 09
09
09
y': `;
09
1 1 0
1 0
09
08
z
10
1 1
1 3
12
1 2
28
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ftZ)
39
44
43
45
45
'.,'
42
5 8
47
36
3 5
"3;�;
41
46
53
49
49
IBM
Width/Depth Ratio
156
176
d23
139
177
", =,�
164
183
184
187
174
69
176
150
204
208
192
AW
Entrenchment Ratio
27
25
22
27
27
�a
29
25
28
28
30
t'
28
30
24
26
30
W,j,
Bank Hey ht Ratio
1 0
1 0
1 0
10
1 0
1 0
%W ,
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Mi
-
-
-
-
-
Substrate
d50 (mm)
030
130
1 130
033
041
®
26
1 18
18
16
6
1 3
0
2
7
19
7
1 29
d84 mm
690
14100141
00
1 33001
18 00
1 26
42
1 50
1 50
1 58
1 41
1®
1 13
1 35
1 17
1 45
1 22
a
Table 7d. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Cross - Section 10
Cross - Section 11
Cross - Section 12
Riffle
Riffle
Pool
Reach
' .
„., s
„
,.. �;.,. , S .T„2�a�.'��
Dimension
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
Bankfull Width (ft)
91
95
83
93
80
''x,
86
67
68
61
66
R��`
107
103
105
99
101
Floodprone Width (ft)
24
21
21
22
22
'• " ""
26
22
22
21
21
SAY
-
-
-
-
-
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
06
05
05
04
05
'-
09
1 0
09
09
1 0K
1 1
1 1
1 3
1 4
1 3
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
12
08
08
08
09
` " ='`'
1 7
14
16
1 2
14
25
25
28
2 8
28
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area ft2
59
43
41
39
42
-�;, ;
79
64
64
5 7
63
123
112
136
13 4
12 9
Width/Depth Ratio
140
210
168
222
152
„y,�
94
70
72
65
69
a' t
-
-
-
-
-
Entrenchment Ratio
26
22
26
23
28
' -�
30
33
32
3 5
32
-
Bank Height Ratio
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
%W ,
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
Mi
-
-
-
-
-
d50 (mm)
8
1 20
1 35
1 17
1 12
1
1 35
1 10
1 1
1 3
0
1 5
1 25
1 10
1 29
low
d84 mm
39
1 43
1 59
1 39
1 26
16
1 Bdrk
1 25
1 19
1 10
1®
1 l
1 22
1 43
1 41
1 84
ISM
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract 4 D06002 24 2012 — MY04

Table 7e. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Cross - Section 13
Cross - Section 14
Cross - Section 15
Riffle
Riffle
Pool
Reach
, t �„ .TS: 2 • < � ; -�=
�, ..:�; � ' ,��b� ��'�. �T6�.� -� "u,� �'� �,z
�'����4� ; ��T6�`��
a� -�, >r; VT
"""��
MYO
Dimension
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
Bankfull Width (ft)
59
60
69
59
56
88
71
74
77
69
70
a=
41
60
50
51
52
17
Floodprone Width (ft)
21
23
23
27
24
v
19
26
26
38
35
VO
-
-
-
-
-
06
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
04
04
04
03
0 3
x,� "'�`,
s��
OS
06
08
08
09
08
08
07
07
07
07
09
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
08
07
09
09
08
20
08
14
1 8
18
1 7
14
12
14
14
14
13
3 6
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft z)
24
24
26
1 8
14
A;t
34
47
59
58
66
3 1
39
36
3 7
36
110
Width/Depth Ratio
145
15 0
183
19 3
224
v ;? �'
14 8
11 7
10 0
82
74
116
-
-
-
-
-
27
Entrenchment Ratio
3 6
3 8
3 3
4 6
43
-
26
3 5
3 4
5 5
50
20
-
-
-
-
-
10
Bank Height Ratio
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
;'
1 0
10
10
10
10
1 0
-
-
-
-
-
.
Substrate
d50 (mm)l
020
068
1 280
1 130
1 062
1
1 44
1 7
1 10
1 2
1 4
' . � � ,j
4
1 10
1 23
1 25
1 30
MOW
d84 mm
420
1 200
128 00
142 00
1 062
1
1 57
1 30
1 26
1 17
1 13
"?
20
1 35
1 44
1 54
1 59
1 A
Table 7f. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Cross - Section 16
Cross - Section 17
Cross - Section 18
Riffle
Pool
Riffle
Reach
;.T6;r L' -{ F, �����,
,' .,r - , T`/,i3',�n -' ;L����t, >����
�,,,�K,���.- ���, "�������� T�733,��`:
a� -�, >r; VT
Dimension
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MY
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MYI
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
Bank-full Width (ft)
63
60
74
69
75
`
73
88
98
101
94
VW
90
92
82
81
84
Floodprone Width (ft)
17
18
18
19
19
-
-
-
-
-
18
19
19
19
21
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
06
07
07
06
06
"'
1 1
12
14
17
18
08
08
09
09
08
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
09
12
12
12
12
20
20
23
26
24
13
14
1 5
17
15
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft2)
3 6
41
5 2
44
46
7 7
10 8
13 3
17 3
17 3
72
73
72
74
68
Width/Depth Ratio
110
8 8
105
108
122
-
-
-
-
-
116
116
93
89
104
Entrenchment Ratio
27
30
24
27
25
�4-
-
-
-
-
-
20
20
23
23
25
Bank Height Ratio
10
10
10
10
10
10
1 0
10
1 10
10
d50 (mm)j
35
1 45
1 22
1 19
1 10
1 i.
1 0 30
1 0 39
1 0 57
1 0 12
1 0 46
JOW1
2100
1 3200
1 730
1 056
1 082
IM
d84 mm
56
1 Bdrl.
1 45
1 52
1 34
y'k Sg
0 50
1 7 00
1 3 50
1 13 00
1 23 00
1 M11
5800
1 10000
1 6300
1 2000
1 2000
IMI
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc
25 2012— MY04

Table 7g. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Parameter
Cross - Section 19
Cross - Section 20
MY-02(2 10)
Riffle
Riffle
Reach
' .` T7 -3
T7 -5'
Dimension
MYO
MY1
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
MYO
MYl
MY2
MY3
MY4
MY5
Bankf ill Width (ft)
9 1
87
87
99
96
30
115
119
11 8
120
131
35
Floodprone Width (ft)
15
15
15
18
18
=
21
21
21
21
23
rda
Bankfull Mean Depth (ft)
07
06
06
06
06
a mil,
09
08
08
07
07
12
Bankfull Max Depth (ft)
09
08
09
14
1 .3
36
13
1 3
1 5
1 5
1 5
qe
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area (ft')
64
48
52
64
6 1
; "`$r
107
96
89
83
89
Width/Depth Ratio
129
15 8
146
153
15 1
n t
124
148
156
173
193
C4 /1
Entrenchment Ratio
1 7
1 7
1 7
1 8
1 9
1 9
17
1 7
1 7
1 8�
Bank Height Ratio
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
10
10
10
1 0
1 0
1 0
Substrate
d50 (mm)
2
25
33
2
9
��,
11
41
33
38
34
d84 mm
19
42
1 74
51
59
34
Bdrk
75
160
150
,
Table 7h. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Reach T1 -1
Parameter
MY - O1 (2009)
MY-02(2 10)
MY - 03 (2011)
MY - 04 (2012)
MY - 05 (2013)
Profile
Min
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Min
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Riffle Length ft
16
30
55
10
30
76
6
24
58
7
35
81
" �'
,r
a�
Riffle Slope (ft/ft )
0 0076
0 0160
0 0229
0 0017
0 0131
0 0395
00050
001133
00569
00058
00099
00760
s�
Pool Lengthiftj
5
10
18
4
12
19
5
18
44
1 11
19
36
'
Pool Spacing ft
15
66
134
27
82
222
10
64
149
28
1 72
1 192
Additional Reach Parameters
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft )
0 Ol 14
00111
00109
00094
Ros en Classification
C4 /1
C4 /1
C4/1
C4 /1
vattem measurements will only be taken atter M Y -uu it it is visually apparent that the pattern has changed
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 26 2012— AIY04

Table 71. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Reach T1-2,3
Parameter
MY - 01 (2009)
MY-02(2 10)
MY - 03 (2011)
MY - 04 (2012 )
MY - 05 (2 13)
Profile
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Riffle Length Lft j
7
14
36
7
30
49
17
19
22
22
26
31
M
a=
W&W
Riffle Slope ft/ft
00082
00244
00421
00016
00113
00223
00089
00185
00301
00233
00332
00490
Pool Length ft
16
23
27
9
18
25
16
28
63
5
20
33
Pool Spacing (ft)
57
1 117
169
1 22
1 60
1 107
1 37
1 77
1 104
53
1 77
1 100
_, y
Additional Reach Parameters
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft)
00068
0006.3
00068
00079
Ros en Classification
C4
C4
C4
C4
* Pattern measurements will only be taken after MY -00 if it is visually apparent that the pattern has changed
Table 7,1. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Reach T3 -2
Parameter
MY - 01 (2009)
MY - 02 (2010)
MY - 03 (2011)
MY - 04 (2012 )
MY - 05 (2 13)
Profile
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Riffle Length ft
2
12
43
1
13
30
5
16
27
9
16
27
TAN
a=
W&W
Riffle Slope ft/ft
00128
003342
00614
00148
00652
01841
000431
00275
00524
00044
00177
00351
Pool Length ft
2
12
23
3
9
28
2
9
16
1 3
10
21
Pool Spacing (ft)
14
1 46
1 72
15
1 57
1 115
14
1 57
1 117
15
1 63
1 117
`
Additional Reach Parameters
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft )
00180
00175
00176
Ros en Classification
B4
B4
B4
.00180
B4
* Pattern measurements will only be taken after MY -00 if it is visually apparent that the pattern has changed
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
27
KC! Technologies, Inc
20/2 — MY04

Table 7k. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Reach T6
Parameter
MY - 01 (2009)
MY - 02 (2010)
MY - 03 (2 11)
MY - 04 (2 12)
MY - 05 (201
-3)
Profile
Reach T4 -2
Avg
Max
Min
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Parameter
MY - 01 (2009)
MY - 02 (2010)
MY - 03 (2011)
MY - 04 (2012)
MY - 05 (2013)
Profile
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Riffle Length (ft)
4
19
36
7
20
52
21
26
32
17
17
17
0 0378
Riffle Slope ft/ft
0 0006
0 0221
0 0519
0 0004
0 0185
0 0496
0 0102
0 0153
0 0224
15
5
8
12'
Pool Length ft
2
10
30
4
14
35
4
12
32
4
14
26
I 7�
;
Pool Spacing ft
7
55
99
9
55
1 110
14
1 55
1 88
1 26
117
281
Kai °'I
P PMT
*w y�
Additional Reach Parameters
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00151
00140
00152
**
a `wrti,Ftrt
Ros en Classification
B4
B4
B4
B4Y
%Iy4:` °,�
Pattern measurements will only be taken after MY -UU it it is visually apparent that the pattern has changed
'* Water not present in channel at time of survey
Table 71. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Reach T6
Parameter
MY - 01 (2009)
MY - 02 (2010)
MY - 03 (2 11)
MY - 04 (2 12)
MY - 05 (201
-3)
Profile
Mtn
Avg
Max
Min
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Min
Avg
Max
Min
I Avg
Max
Riffle Length ft
6
13
26
2
12
19
8
8
8
19
25
32
Riffle Slope ft/ft
0 0051
0 0229
0 0472
0 0096
0 0261
0 0334
0 0609
0 0556
0 0784
0 0125
0 0250
0 0378
Pool Length ft
3
7
12
2
8
16
6
9
15
5
8
12'
Pool Spacing ft
5
1 38
106
7
48
115
22
60
129
22
61
140
,
Additional Reach Parameters
Water Surface Slope (ft/ft )
00254
0 027' )
00272
00259
Ros en Classificationj
B4
B4
B4
B4
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 28 2012— MY04

Table 7m. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Reach T7 -3
Parameter
MY - 01 (2 09)
MY - 02 2010
MY - 03 (20 1)
MY - 04 2012
MY - 05 (2013
MY - 05 (2 13)
Profile
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Riffle Length ft
4
15
37
5
20
39
7
17
33
10
23
39
;
;r',' '-'-7to
r
Riffle Slope ft/ft
0 0045
0 0266
0 0446
0 0025
0 0181
0 0422
0 0005
0 0227
0 0569
0 0053
0 0274
0 0760
Pool Length ft
5
17
41
6
16
44
6
14
47
7
16
38
Pool Spacing ft
27
1 55
1 101
1 27
58
1 100
10
1 59
1 146
19
1 54
95
Additional Reach Parameters
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
0 0103
00105
0 0204
00105
00109
Ros en Classification
B4c
B4c
B4c /C4 /1
B4c
B4c�`�;
- Pattern measurements will only be taken after M Y -UU it it is visually apparent that the pattern has changed
Table 7n. Morphology and Hydraulic Monitoring Summary continued
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Reach T7 -5
Parameter
MY - 01 2009
MY-02(2 10)
MY - 03 (2011)
MY - 04 (2012 )
MY - 05 (2 13)
Profile
Mtn
Avg
Max
Min
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Mtn
Avg
Max
Riffle Length ft
7
22
44
9
23
40
10
22
48
5
22
91
= a'`
;r',' '-'-7to
r
Riffle Slope ft/ft
0 0081
0 0349
0 0872
0 0074
0 0293
0 0494
0 0050
0 0289
0 0569
0 0192
0 0409
0 0760
Pool Length ft
2
8
17
4
9
17
2
9
17
1 3
13
44
PoolSpacing ft
42
1 74
1 116
28
54
119
24
49
1 131
23
47
116
Additional Reach Parameters
Water Surface Slope ft/ft
00212
0 0204
00198
00196
Ros en Classification
B4c /C4 /1
B4c /C4 /1
B4c /C4 /1
B4c /C4 /1_
• Pattern measurements will only be taken atter MY-00 it it is visually apparent that the pattern has changed
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
29
KCI Technologies, Inc
2012 — MY04

Appendix A
Vegetation Data and Photos
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

Table Al. Vegetation History: Stems /Acre Planted and Total with Volunteers
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Plot Number
MV -00
MY -01
MY -02
MY -03
MY -04
MY -05
Planted
Planted
Planted
Planted
Total
Planted
Total
Planted
Total
1
1,133
840
526
526
2,630
445
2,064
2
526
440
364
364
4,452
364
7 001
3
647
520
526
526
3,440
526
10,927
4
850
680
607
647
8,013
647
14,973
5
607
440
243
243
1,295
202
1,295
6
931
680
486
486
769
324
728
7
809
720
647
647
3,925
486
4,128
8
445
320
202
162
526
162
688
9
809
640
486
486
2,509
445
1,942
10
567
440
405
364
890
364
1,052
11
850
720
526
526
1,255
486
1,295
12
607
560
526
526
3,116
486
2,792
13
445
240
202
202
1,052
202
931
14
971
800
688
647
7,891
647
14,326
15
486
400
364
324
7,365
324
11,695
16
931
760
769
486
1,659
486
1,295
17
486
320
243
202
1,052
121
971
18
567
320
324
283
8,701
243
18,454
19
647
600
324
364
4,168
324
5,949
20
486
480
324
283
931
283
1,457
Site Average
690
546
439
1 415
3,282
378
5,198
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KC1 Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 2011- MY04

i
i
i
Table A2. Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Current Plot Data (MY04 2012)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
ECCTS -A -0001
ECCTS -A -0002
ECCTS -A -0003
ECCTS -A -0004
ECCTS
-A -0005
ECCTS -A -0006
ECCTS
-A -0007
ECCTS
-A -0008
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer floridanum
Southern Sugar Maple Florida
Tree
Accr negundo
boxelder
Tree
1
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
Acer saccharum
sugar maple
Tree
Ailanthus altissima
tree of heaven
Exotic
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
2
Asimma triloba
pawpaw
Tree
1
1
1
Baccharis
baccharis
Shrub
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern bacchans
Shrub
1
I
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
1
1
3
Callicarpa americana
American beauty berry
Shrub
Carya
hickory
Tree
Carya ovata
shagbark hickory
Tree
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
1
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
1
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
5
5
1
2
4
4
6
6
6
I
Dios yros virginiana
common persimmon
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
2
2
3
Fraxmus americana
white ash
Tree
Fraxmus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
3
3
36
1
1
1
1
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
2
2
3
1
1
1
4
4
4
Juniperus virgimana
eastern redcedar
Tree
1
2
5
Ligustrum sinense
Chinese privet
Exotic
Liquidambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
25
66
185
200
12
18
3
Linodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
1
1
1
Pinus echinata
shortleaf pine
Tree
1
2
1
Pmus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
Pmus virgimana
Virginia pine
Tree
1
1
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
1
8
1
1
56
3
3
68
143
6
1
1
69
3
Quercus
oak
Tree
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
Quercus falcata
southern red oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
Quercus michauxu
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
2
2
2
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
Rhus
sumac
shrub
3
Rhus copallmum
flameleaf sumac
shrub
11
Robinia
locust
Salix
willow
Shrub or Tree
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
1
3
1
1
1
1
Salix sericea
silk), willow
Shrub
2
3
5
5
3
3
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
Ulmus
elm
Tree
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
1
7
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
Ulmus rubra
slippery elm
Tree
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Stem count
size (ares)
_ size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
8
11
51
9
9
173
13
13
270
8
16
370
5
5
32
3
8
18
12
12
102
4
4
17
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
8
14
6
6
12
6
6
12
4
6
3
3
7
2
3
8
4
4
7
2
2
6
324
445
2,064
364
364
7,001
526
526
10,927
324
647
ERR
02
202
1,295
121
324
728
486
486
4,128
162
162
688

i
l
r
t
Table A2 Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Current Plot Data (MY04 2012)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
ECCTS -A -0009
ECCTS -A -0010
ECCTS -A -0011
ECCTS -A -0012
ECCTS
-A -0013
ECCTS -A -0014
ECCTS -A -0015
ECCTS
-A -0016
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T I
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer floridanum
Southern Sugar Maple Florida
Tree
7
Acer negundo
boxelder
Tree
1
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
Acer saccharum
sugar maple
Tree
Ailanthus altissima
tree of heaven
Exotic
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
Asimma triloba
pawpaw
Tree
1
I
1
3
3
3
Baccharis
baccharis
Shrub
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
Betula nigra
river birch
Tree
1
1
5
5
6
Callicarpa americana
American beautyberry
Shrub
1
I
Carya
hickory
Tree
Carya ovata
shagbark hickory
Tree
23
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
2
1
1
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
6
7
8
4
4
4
1
1
8
14
14
2
3
5
Diospyros virgmiana
common persimmon
Tree
4
4
5
3
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
22
1
1
2
Fraxmus amencana
white ash
Tree
Fraxmus pennsylvanica
green ash
Tree
5
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
1
1
1
3
3
3
2
Jumperus virgmiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
1
1
Ligustrum smense
Chinese privet
Exotic
Li uidambar stvraciflua
swcetgum
Tree
1
4
6
42
3
178
139
13
Liriodendron tulipifera
tuliptree
Tree
2
2
3
1
1
1
2
Pinus echmata
shortleaf pine
Tree
I
1
Pinus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
Pinus virgmmana
Virginia pine
Tree
7
72
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
29
10
3
3
7
42
131
3
Quercus
oak
Tree
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
Quercus falcata
southern red oak
Tree
6
6
7
4
4
5
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
Quercus michauxu
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
7
7
7
1
1
1
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
Quercus palustris
pin oak
Tree
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
Rhus
sumac
shrub
Rhus copallmum
flameleaf sumac
shrub
1
2
Robinia
locust
Sahx
willow
Shrub or Tree
Sahx nigra
black willow
Tree
5
1
2
2
Salix sericea
silky willow
Shrub
1
1
7
8
1
1
1
1
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
Ulmus
elm
Tree
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
1
2
Ulmus amencana
American elm
Tree
Ulmus rubra
slippery elm
Tree
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
9
11
48
9
9
26
4
12
32
12
12
69
5
5
23
9
16
354
8
8
289
8
12
32
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
4
7
4
4
9
1
3
9
3
3
9
2
2
9
2
3
8
2
2
8
3
5
8
364
445
1,942
364
364
1,052
162
486
1,295
486
486
2,792
202
202
931
364
647
14,326
324
324
11,695
324
486
1,295

Table A2 Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Current Plot
Data (MY04 2012)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
ECCTS -A -0017
ECCTS -A -0018
ECCTS -A -0019
ECCTS -A -0020
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all I
T
PnoLS
P -ail
T
Acer floridanum
Southern Sugar Maple, Florida IV
Tree
Acer negundo
boxelder
Tree
1
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
Acer saccharum
sugar maple
Tree
Ailanthus altiss►ma
tree of heaven
Exotic
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
Asimma triloba
pawpaw
Tree
Baccharis
bacchar►s
Shrub
Baccharis hal►mifolia
eastern baccharms
Shrub
Bettila nigra
river birch
Tree
4
1
10
Callicarpa americana
American beautyberry
Shrub
Cary a
hickory
Tree
Carya ovata
shagbark hickory
Tree
2
2
3
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
1
1
Cerc►s canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
2
Corpus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
2
2
2
1
1
5
5
5
Diospyros vmrginiana
common persimmon
Tree
Fraxmus americana
white ash
Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanmca
green ash
Tree
154
10
Juglans nigra
black walnut
Tree
1
3
1
1
1
Juniperns virgimana
eastern redcedar
Tree
4
Lmgustrum smense
Chinese privet
Exotic
Liquidambar st) raciflua
sweetgum
Tree
6
130
10
13
Liriodendron tulmpifera
tuliptree
Tree
2
3
Pmus echmata
shortleaf pine
Tree
Pmus taeda
loblolh pine
Tree
P►nus virgimana
Virginia pine
Tree
1
Platanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
1
2
2
2
163
99
8
Quercus
oak
Tree
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
1
Quercus falcata
southern red oak
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
1
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus m►chauxu
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
Quercus pagoda
cherry bark oak
Tree
Quercus palustrms
pin oak
Tree
3
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
4
4
4
Rhus
sumac
shrub
Rhus copallinum
flameleaf sumac
shrub
4
Robmma
locust
Salmx
willow
Shrub or Tree
Salix nigra
black willow
Tree
1
Sahx sericea
silky willow
Shrub
1
1
Sambucus canadensms
Common Elderberry
Shrub
Ulmus
elm
Tree
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
3
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
Ulmus rubra
Islippery elm
Tree
Unknown
I
Shrub or Tree
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE[
3
3
24
6
6
456
6
8
147
7
7
36
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
9
2
2
8
3
5
13
3
3
8
121
121
L 971
243
243
18,454
243
324
5,949
283
283
1,457

r,
t
Table A2 Stem Count Total and Planted by Plot and Species
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
MY4
(2012)
MY3 (2011)
NIY2 (2010)
MYI
(2009)
MYO (2008)
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all I
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Acer floridanum
Southern Sugar Maple, Florida V
Tree
7
Acernegundo
boxelder
Tree
3
Acer rubrum
red maple
Tree
3
31
5
Acer saccharum
sugar maple
Tree
5
Ailanthus altissima
tree of heaven
Exotic
3
Alnus serrulata
hazel alder
Shrub
2
3
1
Asimma tnloba
pawpaw
Tree
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
8
8
8
Baccharis
baccharis
Shrub
2
1
Baccharis halimifolia
eastern baccharis
Shrub
2
Betula mgra
river birch
Tree
6
6
28
6
6
31
8
8
8
10
10
10
10
10
10
Calhcarpa americana
American beautyberry
Shrub
3
1
1
l
2
2
2
4
4
4
Carya
hickory
Tree
2
2
2
Carya ovata
shagbark hickory
Tree
6
6
31
5
5
15
3
3
3
5
5
10
Celtis laevigata
sugarberry
Tree
3
2
1
1
1
Cercis canadensis
eastern redbud
Tree
6
6
Cornus amomum
silky dogwood
Shrub
42
57
63
45
60
62
47
70
70
48
81
81
53
98
98
Dios yros virgimana
common persimmon
Tree
21
21
48
23
23
43
23
23
28
34
34
41
3
3
3
Fraxmus americana
white ash
Tree
1
Fraxmus pennsylvamca
green ash
Tree
4
4
207
4
4
121
4
4
5
4
4
33
13
13
13
Juglans mgra
black walnut
Tree
12
12
19
18
18
25
14
14
14
17
17
20
Jumperus virgmiana
eastern redcedar
Tree
14
17
4
4
Ligustrum smense
Chinese privet
Exotic
3
Li mdambar styraciflua
sweetgum
Tree
1054
677
171
221
Linodendron tulipitera
tuliptree
Tree
4
4
12
6
6
14
5
5
8
15
15
39
5
5
5
Pmus echmata
shortleaf pine
Tree
6
Pmus taeda
loblolly pine
Tree
5
Pmus virgmiana
Virginia pine
Tree
83
14
Platanus occidentahs
American sycamore
Tree
9
9
853
8
8
450
8
8
130
10
10
181
12
12
12
Quercus
oak
Tree
4
4
4
5
5
5
46
46
46
Quercus alba
white oak
Tree
1
Quercus falcata
southern red oak
Tree
19
19
21
22
22
24
22
22
22
25
25
25
3
3
3
Quercus lyrata
overcup oak
Tree
1
1
1
Quercus michauxu
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
13
13
13
Quercus pagoda
cherrybark oak
Tree
1
1
1
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus palustns
pin oak
Tree
3
Quercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
8
8
8
9
9
10
6
6
9
6
6
6
3
3
3
Rhus
sumac
shrub
3
3
1
1
Rhus copallmum
flameleaf sumac
shrub
18
8
Robmia
locust
2
Salix
willow
Shrub or Tree
1
1
1
5
1
1
21
21
Salix mgra
black willow
Tree
3
16
2
18
2
2
3
4
2
2
Salix sericea
silky willow
Shrub
21
23
24
31
22
22
23
23
4
4
Sambucus canadensis
Common Elderberry
Shrub
1
1
1
1
3
3
Ulmus
elm
Tree
1
Ulmus alata
winged elm
Tree
15
5
1
1
Ulmus americana
American elm
Tree
5
Ulmus rubra
slippery elm
Tree
4
Unknown
Shrub or Tree
6
6
6
7
7
7
103
103
103
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
148
187
2,569
163
205
H3,282
168
217
565
212
273
758
266
341
341
20
20
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
0
14
16
32
14
17
16
20
27
17
21
30
12
16
16
299
378
5,198
330
415
340
439
1 143
1 429
552
1,534
1 538
690
1 690

Vegetation Plot 1: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/21/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 2: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/21/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

Vegetation Plot 3: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 4: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012— MY04
a

Vegetation Plot 5: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/21/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 6: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/21/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012— MY04

Vegetation Plot 7: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/21/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 8: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/21/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

Vegetation Plot 9: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 10: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

Vegetation Plot 11: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 12: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 - MY04

Vegetation Plot 13: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 14: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/15/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

Vegetation Plot 15: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/15/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 16: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/15/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

Vegetation Plot 17: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/15/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 18: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/15/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract 4 D06002 2012 — MY04

Vegetation Plot 19: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/15/12 — MY -04
Vegetation Plot 20: View looking toward plot center from origin corner. 6/19/12 — MY -04
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KC1 Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012— MY04

Appendix B
Geomorphologic Data
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KC/ Technologies, Inc
Contract 9 D06002 2012 - MY04

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -1, Pool, Tl -3
Drainage Area (sq mi ):
0.49
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
501.64
0.7
501.33
3.3
50 1. 15
5.5
500.96
8.8
500.43
12.2
499.98
15.2
499.65
18.8
499.57
20.5
499.38
21.0
499.17
21.3
498.35
22.1
497.69
22.8
497.08
23.5
496658
24.7
496.07
26.7
495.67
28.4
496.03
30.0
496.06
30.8
496632
31.4
496.93
31.7
497.64
32.9
497.96
34.1
498.54
34.5
499.41
35.5
499.58
38.3
499.67
41.9
500.24
45.5
500.99
49.4
501.28
54.1
501.66
57.7
501.67
6062
501.62
60.3
501.89
SUNINIARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
499.4
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
35.2
Bankfull Width:
14.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
-
Nlax Depth at Bankfull:
3.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
2.5
W / D Ratio:
-
Entrenchment Ratio:
-
Bank Hei ht Ratio:
503
502
501
500
v
499
0
498
497
496
495
0
- - - - Bankfull
Stream Type I C/134
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -1, Pool, T1 -3
10 20
As- Built, 1/22/09
30 40
Station (feet)
MY- 01,12/16/09 MY -02, 8/11/10
50 60
MY_03, 6/15/11 -MY-04,7/16/12

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -2, Riffle, T1 4
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.62
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
tation
Elevation
0.0
501.44
0.4
501.24
2.5
501.32
5.3
501.26
10.3
501.22
14.4
500.78
17.2
499.89
19.1
499.34
21.2
498.70
23.1
498.27
25.6
497.73
28.4
497.48
31.1
497.26
33.3
497.00
34.4
496.76
34.9
496.27
35.5
495.58
36.4
495.41
37.1
495.56
38.1
495.61
39.0
495.57
40.1
495.48
40.9
495.58
41.5
495.97
42.4
496.40
43.5
496.39
44.4
496.97
45.9
497.17
47.7
497.38
50.8
497.48
52.8
497.67
55.1
498.32
57.2
498.85
59.5
499.23
60.5
499.73
61.6
500.01
63.3
500.31
67.5
500.61
69.5
500.73
70.0
500.95
SUNIMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
497.4
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
17.0
Bankfull Width:
18.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
499.3
Flood Prone Width:
40.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
2.0
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
19.5
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.2
Bank Height Ratio:
LO
y
m
r
0
a
v
W
-5
Y s A•
e
Stream Type I C /Q4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -2, Riffle, TI-4
501
500 - - -- -
499 -- - - --- -- ----------------------------------- ------- - - - - --
498 - - - - -- - -
------------------ - - - --- -------- - - - - -- - ------- - - - --
497 - - - - - - - -- --
496 - - - - - - - -
495 - -
494 - - - - - -
5 15 25 35 45 55
Station (feet)
-- Bankfull Floodprone Area As- Built, 1/19/09 MY -01, 12/16,
MY -02, 8/11/10 MY -03, 6/15/11 MY-04,7/16/2012
65 75

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -3, Pool, TI -4
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.62
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. DaN is
Station
Elevation
0.0
499.31
1.4
499.05
5.0
498.73
6.6
498.43
8.8
497.70
11.6
496.49
14.0
496.02
17.2
495.66
19.8
495.25
21.8
494.89
23.2
494.52
25.1
494.27
25.6
494.01
25.9
493.58
26.5
492.93
27.2
492.60
28.0
492.49
29.1
492.05
29.8
491.98
30.5
492.66
31.4
493.58
31.8
494.07
33.1
494.75
33.7
494.91
34.5
495.59
36.5
495.93
39.4
495.93
41.7
496.24
43.4
496.72
45.7
497.48
48.0
498.09
50.7
498.32
53.4
498.38
55.1
498.38
55.6
498.56
SUIIIAIARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
495.2
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area:
19.6
Bankfull Width:
14.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
-
Max Depth at Bankfull:
3.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.4
W / D Ratio:
-
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank llei ht Ratio:
-
500
499
498
497
v 496
r 495
0
494
W 493
492
491
Stream Type I C/B4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MV -04, XS -3, Pool, TI -4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
----Bankfull As- Built, 1/19/09 - MY -01, 12/16/09 MY-02,8/11/10 - MY-03,6/15/11 d - MY-04,7/16/2012

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ED
XS4, Riffle, T1 -5
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.70
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
493.61
0.0
493.27
2.9
493.14
4.7
492.95
5.8
492.48
8.6
491.80
11.3
490.79
13.8
490.25
17.4
489.77
20.5
489.65
23.5
488.89
26.3
488.68
28.6
488.40
30.0
488.08
31.5
487.53
33.0
487.44
33.7
487.89
34.5
488.19
35.9
488.51
37.3
488.74
37.8
489.63
39.8
489.69
41.5
489.92
44.1
490.45
45.9
491.05
48.7
491.62
51.0
491.68
53.5
491.82
54.0
491.99
494
492
t 490
0
0
G�
488
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
489.6
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
19.3
Bankfull Width:
17.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
491.7
Flood Prone Width:
42.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
2.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.1
W / D Ratio:
15.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.5
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
Stream Type I C/B4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -4, Riffle, TI-5
486 +
0
10 20 30 40
Station (feet)
- - -- Bankfull - -- -Flood Prone Area As-Built, 1/16/09 MY- 01,12/16/09
MY -02, 8/11/10 MY -03, 6/15/11 M-04,7/16/2012
50

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -5, Riffle, T2 -2
Drainage Area (sq mi ):
0.11
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
IA. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
520.97
0.9
520.59
3.1
519.98
4.7
519.63
6.4
519.15
8.6
518.46
10.7
517.77
116
516.96
14.7
516.27
16.7
515.98
18.4
515.85
20.2
515.45
21.9
514.75
22.4
514.54
23.3
514.41
24.2
514.55
25.0
515.13
25.9
515.41
27.5
515.85
29.0
516.03
31.0
516.13
33.0
516.51
35.3
517610
37.6
517.67
39.7
518.31
41.7
518.76
42.0
518.85
45.1
519.45
46.9
519.94
4T 1
520.20
SUNINIARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
515.7
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
5.1
Bankfull Width:
7.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
517.0
Flood Prone Width:
23.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.3
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
11.9
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.9
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
522
520
a
518
0
v
W 516
514
Stream Type C /G4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -5, Riffle, T2 -2
------------------ ------------------------------- ------
--------------------------- -- -- -
- ------------------ - - - - --
0
10
-- Bankfull
MY-02,9/3/10
20 Station (feet) 30
-- -Flood Prone Area As-Built, 1/19/09
MY- 03,6/15/11 MY- 04,7/16/2012
40
MY -01, 12/16/09
I
50

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -6, Pool, T3 -2
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.08
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
539.68
0.5
539.45
3.2
539.10
5.8
538.43
8.9
537.89
11.7
537.15
15.9
535.69
18.6
534.83
20.8
534.47
23.8
533.95
26.5
533.78
27.8
533.40
28.9
532.31
30.0
531.81
32.2
531.46
33.3
531.91
34.6
532.41
35.9
533.21
37.6
533.29
38.9
533.56
40.5
533.69
42.2
534.04
44.1
533.74
46.4
533.79
48.9
534.10
50.0
534.34
52.7
534.78
54.9
535.18
56.6
535.56
58.9
535.89
61.4
536.45
63.6
537.10
66.0
537.47
66.6
537.64
66.6
537.74
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
533.8
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
15.0
BankfWl Width:
14.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
-
Mas Depth at Bankfull:
2.3
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
I 0
W / D Ratio:
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
541
539
537
5
e
0
tl 535
S33
Stream Type 1 11 I
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -6, Pool, T3 -2
531 L
U
10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
----Bankfull -As-Built, 1/26/09 -- MY- 01,12/16/09 MY- 02,8/31/10 MY- 03,6/15/11 -
70
MY-04,7/16/12

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -7, Riffle, T3 -2
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.08
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
1A. French, F. I)avis
Station
Elevation
0.0
534.36
0.4
534.08
2.5
533.54
4.6
533.26
7.1
532.81
10.0
532.29
12.6
531.73
15.4
531.45
17.6
531.03
19.6
530.72
22.1
530.56
24.8
530.43
26.5
529.99
27.6
529.57
28.9
529.65
29.8
529.63
30.7
530.04
33.6
530.48
36.1
530.85
38.7
531.51
40.6
531.99
42.5
532.36
45.7
532.98
49.3
533.62
52.8
534.15
56.2
534.59
59.0
535.03
61.2
535.56
SUNIAIARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
530.5
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
4.5
Bankfull Width:
8.9
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
531.4
Flood Prone Width:
24.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
17.6
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.7
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
536
534
532
0
530
Stream Type B4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -7, Riffle, T3 -2
-------------- - - - - --
528 L
0
10 20 30 40
Slation (feet)
- - -- Bankfull - -- -Flood Prone Area As- Built, 1/26/09
- - MY-02,8/31/10 MY -03, 6/15/11 MY -04, 7/16/12
50
MY -01, 12/16/09
60

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -8, Riffle, T3 -2
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.08
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
1A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
513.24
0.6
512.90
3.6
512.63
6.1
512.11
7.3
511.65
9.7
510.76
12.2
509.92
14.8
508.95
16.7
508.43
19.7
508.27
22.3
508.05
23.5
507.81
24.7
507.66
25.6
507.45
26.2
507.23
26.9
507.28
27.6
507.27
29.3
507.66
30.0
508.02
32.0
508.27
34.5
508.39
38.4
509.02
41.6
509.61
45.3
510.42
49.0
511.20
53.2
512.13
56.0
512.50
56.4
512.71
56.3
512.80
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
508.0
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
3.5
Bankfull Width:
7.8
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
508.8
Flood Prone Width:
23.5
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.4
W / D Ratio:
17.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.0
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
514
513
512
511
a
510
r
0
Q 509
a
508
507
506
Stream Type I [31
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -8, Riffle, T3 -2
0 10 20 30 40
Station (feet)
- - -- Bankfull - -- -Flood Prone Area As- Built, 1/23/09 -- MY -01, 12/16/09 -
50
MY- 02,8/31/10 MY- 04,6/15/11
60

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -9, Riffle, T4 -1
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.10
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
IA. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
539.73
0.4
539.56
3.3
539.21
6.3
539.16
8.9
538.78
10.4
538.38
12.5
537.79
14.8
537.35
17.4
536.69
20.3
536.39
22.4
536.23
23.5
535.82
24.7
53574
25.5
535.34
26.1
535.23
26.7
535.39
28.6
536.18
30.5
536.48
32.8
536.36
35.2
536.58
37.2
537.06
39.3
537.40
43.5
538.06
46.1
538.36
46.4
538.44
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
536.4
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
4.9
Bankfull Width:
9.7
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
537.6
Flood Prone Width:
29.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
19.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.0
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
542
540
538
0
w 536
534 1-
0
Stream Type I B4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -9, Riffle, T44
--------------- \- --------- -------------- - - - - -- - ----- - - - - --
------------------------------ - - - - -- ----------------------
�Q�11 -- --
10 20 30 40
Station (feet)
-- •Bankfull Flood Prone Area As- Built, 1/23/09 MY -01, 12/16/09
MY-02,8/13/10 -----MY-03,6/15/11 MY-04,7/16/12
50

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -10, Riffle, T4 -2
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.10
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
IA. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
OA
528.92
0.5
528.58
2.4
528.32
4.4
527.98
6.2
527.76
8.3
527.24
10.6
526.65
12.6
526.04
14.0
525.16
16.4
524.77
18.9
523.69
20.9
522.92
22.8
522.52
24.7
522.15
25.8
522.07
27.6
521.86
29.4
521.71
30.3
521.40
30.8
521.24
31.8
520.94
32.1
520.92
32.6
520.82
33.0
520.81
33.6
520.77
34.0
520.99
35.1
521.21
36.0
521.27
37.5
521.71
39.6
521.62
41.2
521.66
42.9
522.01
44.7
522.74
46.8
523.44
49.2
524.49
51.5
525.18
*Other shots not included due to
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
521.7
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
4.2
Bankfull Width:
8.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
522.6
Flood Prone Width:
22.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.5
W / D Ratio:
15.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
530
528
526
0 524
w
522
520
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -10, Riffle, T4 -2
------------------------------- '�� - - - - -- -- -------------- - - - - -- ---
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (feet)
-- Bankfull - - - - Flood Prone Area As- Built, 1/23/09 MY -01, 12/16/09
MY-02,8/30/10 - - - -- MY-03,6/15/11 MY -04, 7/16/12
60

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek. MY -04
XS ID
XS -11, Rifle, T4 -2
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.10
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
1A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
519.01
0.4
518.70
4.2
518.44
5.9
518.12
8.4
517.13
11.0
516.25
13.6
515.41
16.5
514.63
19.2
514.22
20.6
514.20
21.5
513.98
22.4
513.25
23.0
512.86
23.7
512.76
24.3
512.66
24.8
512.54
25.3
512.57
25.8
512.59
26.1
512.75
26.9
512.84
27.5
513.08
27.9
513.69
28.4
514.07
29.7
514.25
31.7
514.47
33.9
514.76
36.4
515.20
39.4
516.23
42.0
516.94
45.1
517.92
49.3
518.79
51.3
519.15
53.1
519.42
53.4
519.57
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
513.9
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area:
6.3
Bankfull Width:
6.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
515.3
Flood Prone Width:
21.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.0
W / D Ratio:
6.9
Entrenchment Ratio:
3.2
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
520
518
516
0
v
W 514
512 L
0
Stream Type 134
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -11, Riffle, T4 -2
-----------------\------------------------------------------- - - - - --
-------- -- - - -- -tt - - - - -- - - - - - - --
10 20 Station (fee[) 30
- - -- Bankfull - - -Flood Prone Area As- Built, 1/22/09
MY-02,8/30/10 -- MY-03,6/15/11 MY -04, 7/16/12
40
MY- 01,12/16/09
50

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -12, Pool, T4 -2
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.10
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
IA. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
508.08
0.2
507.80
2.2
507.52
5.2
507.16
7.5
506.76
10.4
506.30
13.5
505.53
16.6
504.56
19.7
504.17
23.1
503.72
25.7
503.24
28.8
503.19
31.5
503.01
32.4
5027
33.8
502.41
34.9
502.07
35.4
501.33
35.9
500.95
36.5
500.69
37.7
500.29
38.3
500.36
38.9
500.70
39.3
501.57
39.9
502.16
40.8
502.66
41.8
503.10
43.5
503.17
45.5
503.15
46.9
503.46
49.8
504.29
52.6
505.14
55.9
505.96
58.8
506.13
59.7
506.21
59.9
506.43
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
503.0
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area:
12.9
Bankfull Width:
10.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
-
Maz Depth at Bankfull:
2.8
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
1.3
W / D Ratio:
-
Entrenchment Ratio:
Bank Height Ratio:
-
510
508
506
d
fi
° 504
R
502
Stream T e I B4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -12, Pool, T4 -2
­--------- --------
500 -
0 10 20 30
Sta
---- Bankfull As- Built, 1/22/09 MY -01, 12/16/09 -
40 50 60
'eet)
MY-02,8/13/10 - -- -MY-03,6/15/11 -MY-04,7/16/12

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -13, Riffle, T5 -2
Draina a Area (sq mi):
0.02
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
502.81
5.4
502.46
8.1
502.36
10.7
502.13
13.9
501.77
17.6
501.43
20.8
501.02
22.9
500.85
24.5
500.86
25.5
500.59
25.7
500.32
26.2
500.06
26.7
500.24
27.1
500.47
28.1
500.72
29.0
500.90
29.8
501.06
31.3
501.04
33.4
500.98
36.2
501.27
38.2
501.56
42.4
501.76
46.8
501.74
49.0
501.73
49.3
501.93
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
500.9
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
1.4
Bankfull Width:
5.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
501.7
Flood Prone Width:
24.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
Nlean Depth atBankfull:
0.3
W / D Ratio:
22.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
4.3
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
506
504
502
r
0
500
498
Stream Type I B4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -13, Riffle, T5 -2
0 10 20 30 40
Station eet)
Bankfull - -- -Flood Prone Area As-Built, 1/ 19/09 MY- 01,12/16/09,
MY-02,8/11/10 -MY-03,6/15/11 -MY-04,7/16112
50

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -14, Riffle, T6
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.07
Date:
7/16/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
522.87
4.1
522.20
5.7
521.97
9.2
52158
12.8
521.12
16.2
520.58
19.0
520.07
21.8
519.45
24.5
518.75
27.8
51 8.27
29.3
518.00
30.7
517.68
31.0
517.41
31.3
516.37
31.8
516.37
32.6
516.26
33.6
516.33
34.1
516.58
35.1
517.51
36.5
518.06
38.3
518.22
39.4
518.27
42.1
518.74
45.1
519.12
48.4
519.33
51.8
519.31
56.7
519.74
60.2
520.09
64.0
520.63
67.0
520.97
67.2
521.20
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
518.0
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area:
6.6
Bankfull Width:
7.0
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
519.7
Flood Prone Width:
35.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.7
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.9
W / D Ratio:
7.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
5.0
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
524
522
v
520
s
0
a
m
Lv 518
516 L
0
t I XI
Stream Type I 134
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -14, Riffle, T6
-------------- - - - - -- --- - - - - --
-------------- - - - - --
10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
- - -- Bankfull Flood Prone Area As- Built, 1/16/09 MY -01, 12/16/09
MY-02,8/9/10 MY -03, 6/15/11 MY-04,7/5/12
70

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -15, Pool, T6
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.07
Date:
6/28/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
497.12
0.2
496.71
2.6
496.62
5.4
496.45
9.3
496.26
12.3
495.82
15.5
495.45
17.8
495.11
20.5
494.86
22.2
495.21
23.2
494.89
24.7
493.97
26.4
493.14
28.8
492.83
31.1
492.64
33.1
492.56
35.1
492.16
35.9
492.07
36.6
491.73
37.0
491.43
37.3
491.21
38.0
491.09
38.6
491.03
39.3
491.22
39.6
492.28
40.4
492.65
41.6
492.86
43.3
493.06
45.4
493.52
46.9
494.25
48.4
494.91
49.9
495.60
52.0
496.56
53.2
496.97
55.2
497.74
57.4
497.73
57.6
497.93
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
492.3
Bankfull Cross- Sectional Area:
3.6
Bankfull Width:
5.2
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
-
Flood Prone Width:
-
Ma: Depth at Bankfull:
1.3
Mean De th at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
-
.
Entrenchment Ratio•
Bank Height Ratio:
500
498
496
m
5
2 494
W
492
490
0
Stream Type I B4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY-04, XS -15, Pool, T6
10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (feet)
Bankfull -- As- Built, 1/19/09 MY-01,12/16/09 --MY-02,8/9/10 -MY-03,6/15/11 -MY-04,6/28/12

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -16, Riffle, T6
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.07
Date:
6/28/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
497.11
0.8
496.60
4.0
496.44
6.0
496.23
9.2
495.96
11.8
495.42
14.6
494.98
16.6
494.20
18.6
493.44
20.6
492.90
22.2
492.64
24.5
492.33
26.4
491.97
27.5
491.42
28.0
491.37
28.8
491.17
29.5
491.07
30.2
491.21
30.8
491.80
32.3
492.39
34.6
492.68
36.8
493.34
38.9
494.33
41.0
495.57
42.0
495.87
43.6
495.90
45.5
495.89
47.2
495.85
47.6
495.91
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
492.3
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
4.6
Bankfull Width:
7.5
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
493.5
Flood Prone Width:
19.0
Max Depth at Bankrull:
1.2
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
12.2
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.5
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
499
496
5
c 494
a
W 492
490 L
U
10
Stream T ype 1 134
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -16, Riffle, T6
- -- BankfulI
- -
MY-02,8/9/10
20 30
- - -- - .Stattnnlfee_tL -
---- FloodProneArea As-Built, 1/16/09
MY-03,6/15/11 - MY-04,6/28/12
40
MY -01, 12/16/09
50

River Basin:
Elevation
Roanoke
Watershed:
Area s mi :
Cane Creek, MY -04
+
> . w
XS ID
A. french, F. Davis
XS -17, Pool, T7 -3
Drainage
n..
.�
}:
.y
Stream Type B4c
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -17, Pool, T7 -3
524
522 - --
- - -- - - - - --
a
m
520 - --
- - -
o
------------------------
-- - - -- = ----------------------------------
'w 518.
516
0 10
20 30 40 50
60
Station (feet)
- - - - Bankfull As- Built, 1/12/09 - MY -02, 9/2/10 MY -01, 12/16/09 MY -03, 6/14/11
MY -04. 6/28/12
Station E
Elevation
Area s mi :
0.18
Date:
6/28/2012
Field Crew:
A. french, F. Davis
Station E
Elevation
SUMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation: 518.7
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area: 17.3
Bankfull Width: 9.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation: -
Flood Prone Width: -
Max Depth at Bankfull: 2.4
Mean Depth at Bankfull: 1.8
W / D Ratio: -
Entrenchment Ratio: -
Bank Height Ratio: -

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -18, Riffle, T7 -3
Drainage Area (sq mi):
0.18
Date:
6/28/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
518.78
0.3
518.55
4.1
518.52
5.1
518.35
7.6
518.27
10.5
517.95
12.6
517.85
13.9
517.56
15.1
516.95
16.5
516.34
18.1
515.58
19.4
515.34
20.5
515.30
21.7
514.70
22.4
514.25
22.9
514.03
23.5
513.76
23.7
513.63
24.3
513.60
24.7
513.75
25.3
513.82
26.1
514.04
26.8
514.47
28.5
515.04
29.9
515.27
32.1
515.65
34.7
516.52
37.1
517.21
40.8
517.82
44.6
517.98
48.1
518.14
48.4
518.35
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
515.1
BankfWl Cross-Sectional Area:
6.8
Bankfull Width:
8.4
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
516.7
Flood Prone Width:
21.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.8
W / D Ratio:
10.4
Entrenchment Ratio:
2.5
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
520
518
516
fi
0
a
m
W 514
Stream Type 1 13 1c
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -18, Riffle, T7 -3
512 L
0
10 20 Station (feet) 30 40
- -- -Bank Full - -- -Flood Prone Area - As- Built, 1/12/09 MY -01, 12/16/09
- - MY -02, 9/2/10 MY-03,6/15/11 - MY-04,6/28/12
50

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -19, Riffle, T7 -3
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.18
Date:
6/28/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
5
5.8
1 511.98
7.8
512.21
11.7
511.89
15.1
511.87
17.5
511.68
19.0
511.23
24.1
508.32
25.9
507.91
28.2
507.50
29.6
507.24
30.5
506.96
30.9
506.82
31.2
506.69
32.0
506.51
33.1
506.63
33.9
506.84
34.6
507.27
40.8 509.25
42.3 509.78
43.6 510.68
45.0 511.62
46.0 512.18
47.2 512.35
49.3 512.38
51.7 512.42
54.4 512.52
56.5 512.45
58.8 512.33
59.9 512.25
60.5 512.60
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
507.8
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
6.1
BaukfuU Width:
9.6
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
509.1
Flood Prone Width:
18.0
Max De th at Bankfull:
1.3
Mean Depth at Ban kfuI1:
0.6
W / D Ratio:
15.1
Entrenchment Ratio:
1.9
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
514 T
512
510
e
0
w 508
Stream Type I E33c
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -19, Riffle, T7 -3
------------------------ -- ----- -----------------
-1 ------ -------- ------------------------------
------------------------ ----------
506 -�
0
10 20 30 40
Slation ffeetl _ _ _
-- Bankfull - -- -Flood Prone Area As-Built, 1/12/09
MY -02, 9/3/10 -MY-0,3,6/15/11 -MY-04,6/28/12
50 60
MY -01, 12/16/091

River Basin:
Roanoke
Watershed:
Cane Creek, MY -04
XS ID
XS -20, Riffle, T7 -5
Drainage Area (sq mi :
0.26
Date:
6/28/2012
Field Crew:
A. French, F. Davis
Station
Elevation
0.0
478.58
0.5
478.28
2.9
478.14
4.5
478.16
6.0
478.17
7.4
478.07
9.2
477.88
10.1
477.82
11.9
477.57
13.1
477.64
14.8
477.59
16.0
477.70
17.4
477.51
18.3
477.51
19.4
477.58
21.3
477.13
22.7
476.97
24.7
476.68
25.9
476.23
27.4
475.76
28.4
475.18
29.3
474.68
30.4
474.13
31.5
473.94
32.9
473.80
34.3
473.71
36.1
473.37
37.5
473.1
39.4
473.0
41.3
472.8
42.2
472.7
42.6
472.3
43.4
472.1
44.3
472.0
44.9
472.1
*Other shots not included due to
SUMMARY DATA
Bankfull Elevation:
473.5
Bankfull Cross - Sectional Area:
8.9
Bankfull Width:
13.1
Flood Prone Area Elevation:
475.0
Flood Prone Width:
23.0
Max Depth at Bankfull:
1.5
Mean Depth at Bankfull:
0.7
W / D Ratio:
19.3
Entrenchment Ratio:
1.8
Bank Height Ratio:
1.0
480
478
v
j 476
r
0
Li 474
472 L
0
Stream Type I B4c /C4
Roanoke River Basin, Cane Creek, MY -04, XS -20, Riffle, T7 -5
------------
10 20 30 40 50
Station (feet)
---- Bankfull - - - - Flood Prone Area As- Built, 1 /12/09 MY -01, 12/16/09
MY-02,9/3/10 MY-03,6/15/11 MY-04,6/28/12
60

512
511
510
509
508
507
C
O
w
C�
506
v
W
505
504
503
502
501
500
Cane Creek Tributary Site
Longitudinal Profile 1
Tributary 1, MY-04
Stations 11 +70 - 19 +10
■
■
■
- ------------------
- -' -- --
■
�I
1150 1200 1250 1300 1350 1400 1450 1500 1550 1600 1650
Station (ft)
Bankfull - - - - Water Surface MY -01 * - MY -02 MY -03 — MY -04
*Profile added during MY -01
1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950

501
500
499
498
497
C
0
W 496
495
494
493
492
Cane Creek Tributary Site
Longitudinal Profile 2
Tributary 1, MY-04
Stations 23 +18 - 28 +66
2300 2350 2400 2450 2500 2550
■ Bankfull - - - - Water Surface As -Built
2600 2650 2700 2750 2800
Station (ft)
— MY -01 MY -02 MY -03 • MY -04
2850 2900
■
---------------------------------------------- - - - --� ■
A
� A `
-
---------- - - -
- -- •
---- - - - - --
2300 2350 2400 2450 2500 2550
■ Bankfull - - - - Water Surface As -Built
2600 2650 2700 2750 2800
Station (ft)
— MY -01 MY -02 MY -03 • MY -04
2850 2900

517
516
515
514
513
512
0
511
W
510
509
508
507
506
505
Cane Creek Tributary Site
Longitudinal Profile
Tributary 3, MY-04
Stations 71 +15 - 76 +44
7100 7150 7200
7250 7300
7350
Bankfull - - - - Water Surface As -Built
7400
Station (ft)
MY -01
7450 7500 7550 7600 7650 7700
MY-02
MY-03 I MY -04
■
� -- - -
--
•
■
7100 7150 7200
7250 7300
7350
Bankfull - - - - Water Surface As -Built
7400
Station (ft)
MY -01
7450 7500 7550 7600 7650 7700
MY-02
MY-03 I MY -04

s12
511
510
509
508
507
506
505
a 504
0
w
a�
503
w 502
501
500
499
498
497
496
495
494
9350
Cane Creek Tributary Site
Longitudinal Profile
Tributary 4, MY-04
Stations 93 +75 - 102 +33
9450 9550 9650 9750 9850 9950
Station (ft)
■ Bankfull As -Built MY -01 - - -- MY -02 MY -03 MY -04
* No WS due to no flow in channel during survey
10050
10150
10250

513
512
511
510
509
508
507
506
c 505
e�
504
W
503
502
501
500
499
498
497
496
495
12550
Cane Creek Tributary Site
Longitudinal Profile
Tributary 6, MY-04
Stations 125 +75 - 131 +28
12650 12750 12850 12950 13050 13150
Station (ft)
■ Bankfull - - - - Water Surface As -Built MY -01 MY -02 MY -03 My -04

524
523
522
521
520
519
c
0
518
W
517
516
6111
514
513
512
15200
Cane Creek Tributary Site
Longitudinal Profile 1
Tributary 7, MY-04
Stations 152 +25 - 160 +25
■
■
- - - - -- -- ■
■
'` ■
-- -
-------------------
■
---------------------------
---------------- %%
1
-
15300
15400
■ Bankfull - - - - - -- Water Surface
15500 15600 15700 15800
Station (ft)
As -Built MY -01 MY -02 MY -03
-- MY -04
15900
16000

w
0
w
W
484
483
482
481
480
479
478
477
476
475
474
473
472
471
470
469
468
467
466
465
464
Cane Creek Tributary Site
Longitudinal Profile 2
Tributary 7, MY-04
Stations 180 +00 - 187 +37
■
■
■
18000
18100
18200
18300
18400
Station (ft)
• Bankfull - - - - Water Surface MY -01 * MY -02
*Profile added during MY -01
18500
MY -03
MY -04
18600
18700
18800

Pebble Count Plots
Cross - Section
1 Pool
- MY04, Trib
1
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 1 Pool
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125-.25
A
2
Medium
.25-.50
N
3
100%
80%
■
a
Coarse
.50- 1
D
8
Coarse
1 -2
S
5
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
13
E
U
60%
Fine
4-5.7
G
1
Fine
5.7-8
R
4
Medium
8- 11.3
A
11
�a
40%
'— "S -Built
. MY -01
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
10
Coarse
16-22.6
E
9
LL
■ MY -02
MY -03
MY
Coarse
22.6-32
L
5
Very Coarse
32-45
S
9
20%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000
Particle Size - Millimeters
10000
-04
Very Coarse
45-64
8
Small
64-90
C
Small
90- 128
O
5
Large
128- 180
B
3
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
1316
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
1.5
7.4
12
21
54
160
Size Distribution
mean 9.0
dispersion 6.3
skewness -0.10
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
18%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
70%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
4
cobble
8%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
4%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
a'a
■
a

Cross - Section
2 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
1
2 a
'
ci
100%
80%
60%
--
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 2 Riffle
- -
', ••'����
■
• ■ ■
—
•'
P
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
2
Veiy Fine
.062-.125
S
2
Fine
.125-.25
A
3
Medium
.25 - .50
N
8
Coarse
.50- 1
D
11
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
8
Vety Fine
2 - 4
3
Fine
4 - 5.7
G
1
Fine
5.7-8
R
2
Medium
8- 11.3
A
13
C
40%
■ ,"
.. '
t As -Built
♦ MY -01
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
18
Coarse
16-22.6
E
15
Z
�
20%
-
•
A
■ MY -02
♦ MY -03
t MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
Very Coarse
32-45
S
4
-
Very Coarse
45-64
1
Small
64-90
C
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
1
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.53
2.5
10
14
21
35
Size Distribution
mean 3.3
dispersion 10.5
skewness 1 -0.38
T
pe
Small
362- 512
L
silt/clay
2%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
32%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-1-048
R
gravel
65%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
1%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
3 Pool
- MY04, Trib
I
1
100%
80%
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 3 Pool
Ems ME M
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125-.25
A
Medium
.25 - .50
N
Coarse
.50- 1
D
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
3
Very Fine
2 - 4
13
E
v
60%
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
3
Medium
8- 11.3
A
13
.o
40%
As -Built
• MY -01
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
5
Coarse
16-22.6
E
12
LL
•
■ MY -02
. MY -03
-
Coarse
22.6-32
L
18
Very Coarse
32-45
S
8
20%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000
Particle Size - Millimeters
10000
MY-04
Very Coarse
45-64
9
Small
64-90
C
5
Small
90- 128
O
5
Large
128- 180
B
1
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
295
Size (mm)
6
14
22
31
64
180
Size Distribution
mean 19.6
dispersion 3.3
skewness -0.05
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
3%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
81%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
5
cobble
11%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
5%
hardpan
0%
wood /det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
4 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
1
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 4 Riffle
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125 - .25
A
Medium
.25-.50
N
Coarse
.50- 1
D
1
100%
r
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
2
Very Fine
2 - 4
5
Y
2
E
v
80%
�
Fine
4-5.7
G
1
Fine
5.7-8
R
5
;
60%
ao%
As-Built
A MY-01
Medium
Medium
8- 11.3
A
9
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
I 1
Coarse
16-22.6
E
9
c
0
°
. +
■ MY -oz
— MY -03
t MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
15
Very Coarse
32-45
S
9
20%
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Very Coarse
45-64
13
Small
64-90
C
8
Small
90- 128
O
4
Large
128- 180
B
5
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
1365
D84
D95
Size (mm)
8.6
17
26
42
76
160
Size Distribution
mean 25.6
dispersion 3.0
skewness -0.01
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt /cla
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
3%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
77%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
3
cobble
17%
Total
100
boulder.
0%
Note:
bedrock
3%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
5 Riffle
- MV04, Trib
2
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 5 Riffle
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125-.25
A
Medium
.25- .50
N
l
Coarse
.50- 1
D
7
m
'
100%
80%
'
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
12
Very Fine
2 - 4
7
E
v
60%
Fine
4-5.7
G
2
Fine
5.7-8
R
5
Medium
8- 11.3
A
16
;
40%
`
- As -Built
• MY -01
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
18
Coarse
16-22.6
E
9
a.
o
20%
'
, ' r
r
• MY -02
. MY -03
— MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
7
Very Coarse
32-45
S
10
•
0%
0.01 0.1
• • •
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Very Coarse
45-64
4
Small
64-90
C
1
Small
90- 128
O
1
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
I
216
235
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
1.6
8.2
1 1
15
32
49
Size Distribution
mean 7.2
dispersion 4.9
skewness 1 -0.16
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
20%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
78%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
2%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
6 Pool
- MY04, Trib
3
>
.
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 6 Pool
�A,
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
44
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
15
Fine
.125-.25
A
10
Medium
.25-.50
N
12
Coarse
.50 - 1
D
5
Very Coarse
1- 2
S
8
Very Fine
2 - 4
2
E
U
80%
-
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
U_
60%
40%
' r
= 'S -B"'it
. MY -01
■ MY -02
—. MY -03
t MY -04
Medium
8- 11.3
A
1
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
Coarse
16-22.6
E
1
Coarse
22.6-32
L
1
Very Coarse
32 - 45
S
20%
0%
i
.-
—
Very Coarse
45-64
Small
64-90
C
1
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.062
0.062
0.082
0.19
0.76
2.8
Size Distribution
mean 0.2
dispersion 5.3
skewness 0.41
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
44%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
50%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
5%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
1%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
7 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
3
.:
°
100 /°
80%
--
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 7 Riffle
■
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
38
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
1
Fine
.125 - .25
A
1
Medium
.25 -.50
N
15
Coarse
.50- 1
D
25
Coarse
1 -2
S
3
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
U
60%
♦ +v AAA•
a •
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
1
Medium
8- 11.3
A
M
4t)%
_ �,
As- Built
. MY -o,
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
Coarse
16-22.6
E
2
C
0
20%
0%
' '
•
• &A&
■ MY -02
MY -03
- MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
3
Coarse
32-45
S
10
- - --
_
—Very
Coarse
45-64
1
—Very
Small
64-90
C
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.062
0.062
0.41
0.67
18
41
Size Distribution
mean 1.1
dispersion 25.3
skewness 0.26
T
pe
Small
362- 512
L
silt/clay
38%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
45%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
17%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
0%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
8 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
3
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 8 Riffle
■
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
1
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
2
Fine
.125 - .25
A
10
Medium
.25-.50
N
13
Coarse
.50- 1
D
9
100%
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
6
Very Fine
2 - 4
7
w
E
v
80%
60%
Fine
4-5.7
G
1
Fine
5.7-8
R
4
0
40%
t As_Bui1t
. MY -01
w MY -02
Medium
8- 11.3
A
4
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
3
Coarse
16-22.6
E
11
o
. MY -03
t MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
7
Very Coarse
32-45
S
8
20%
0%
Very Coarse
45-64
1
Small
64-90
C
1
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
11
Large
128- 180
B
1
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.29
1
6.4
18
41
110
Size Distribution
mean 3.4
dispersion 14.2
skewness -0.18
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
1%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
40%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
46%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
13%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
■
i
a�

Cross - Section
9 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
4
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 9 Riffle
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125 - .25
A
Medium
.25-.50
N
Coarse
.50- 1
D
9
00%
80 °%
� rrt-t t-
Z
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
25
Very Fine
2 - 4
13
E
v
°
so%
—
Fine
4-5.7
G
1
Fine
5.7-8
R
5
Medium
8- 11.3
A
14
C
40%
AL
+ `s -Built
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
5
Coarse
16-22.6
E
12
LL
■ MV -02
♦ MY -03
MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
9
Coarse
32-45
S
5
20%
0%
—Very
Very Coarse
45-64
1
Small
64-90
C
1
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000
Particle Size - Millimeters
10000
Small
90- 128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
216
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
1.2
2.1
6.7
11
22
37
Size Distribution
mean 5.1
dispersion 4.4
skewness -0.10
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
34%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
65%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
1%
Total
100
boulder,
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
-t t
• � f

Cross - Section
10 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
4
E
ci
100%
80%
60%
-
- --
-
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 10 Riffle
- —
?�
-
'
1 °'
-
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125 - .25
A
Medium
.25 - .50
N
Coarse
.50- 1
D
7
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
10
Very Fine
2 - 4
16
Fine
4-5.7
G
2
Fine
5.7-8
R
7
Medium
8- 11.3
A
5
P
a0 °%
•
As -Built
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
14
Coarse
16-22.6
E
19
c
'�
°
-
•
■ MY -02
. MY -03
MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
9
Very Coarse
32-45
S
4
20%
'
Very Coarse
45-64
5
Small
64-90
C
2
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
1.9
6
12
17
26
T5
Size Distribution
mean 7.0
dispersion 4.2
skewness -0.22
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
17%
Lr - Very Lrg,
1024-2048
R
gravel
81%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
2%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section 11 Riffle - MY04, Trib 4
Particle
Millimeter
D35
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
2
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
12
Fine
.125 - .25
A
artificial
Medium
.25-.50
N
Coarse
.50- 1
D
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
37
Very Fine
2 - 4
18
Fine
4-5.7
G
7
Fine
5.7-8
R
9
Medium
8- 11.3
A
21
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
6
Coarse
16-22.6
E
Coarse
22.6-32
L
Coarse
32-45
S
—Very
Coarse
45-64
—Very
Small
64-90
C
Small
90- 128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
Small
362-512
L
Medium
512- 1024
D
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
100%
d
80%
E
U 60%
c
�a
L
~ 40%
c
LL
20%
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 11 Riffle
■
,rq AAA.....
•
�A
AN
■
■
i
0%
0.01
0.1
Size (mm)
D16
1.3
D35
1.9
D50
3.1
D65
6.2
D84
9.5
D95
12
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
Size Distribution
mean 3.5
dispersion 2.7
skewness 0.06
-� As -Built
s MY -01
■ MY -02
♦ MY -03
—�— MY -04
1000 10000
silt/clay
2%
sand
37%
ravel
61%
cobble
0%
boulder
0%
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
12 Pool
- MY04, Trib
4
>
100%
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 12 Pool
--_----__-_.—_-
A -
,
- -
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
25
Very Fine
.062 - .125
S
Fine
.125 - .25
A
Medium
.25 -.50
N
1
Coarse
.50- 1
D
2
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
Very Fine
2 - 4
1
.80%
60%
— —
-
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
Medium
8- 11.3
A
4
_
40%
. .-./ ;
— ; -'
---•-- As -Built
• MY -01
Medium
11.3 - 16
V
5
Coarse
16-22.6
E
5
LL
-__�
•
■ a ■ ■
■ MY -02
--♦ MY -03
--q— MY-04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
10
Very Coarse
32-45
S
26
20%
0%
•
, ■ ■
—
Very Coarse
45-64
16
Small
64-90
C
3
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
1
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.062
13
29
37
50
64
Size Distribution
mean 1.8
dis ersion 234.7
skewness -0.71
Type
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
25%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
3%
Lr - Very Lr
1024-2048
R
=ravel
67%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
1
cobble
4%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
l %
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
9

Cross - Section
13 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
5
2
100%
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 13 Riffle
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
100
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125 - .25
A
Medium
.25-.50
N
Coarse
.50- 1
D
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
Very Fine
2 - 4
.2
E
0
80%
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
r_
60%
ao%
t as -Built
♦ MY -01
Medium
8- 1 l .3
A
Medium
11.3- 16
V
Coarse
16-22.6
E
■ MY -oz
♦ MY -03
--+— MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
Very Coarse
32-45
S
20%
0%
Coarse
45-64
—Very
Small
64-90
C
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.062
0.062
0.062
0.062
0.062
0.062
Size Distribution
mean 0.1
dispersion 1.0
skewness - --
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
100%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
0%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
0%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
0%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
� -1t
■
e ■

Cross - Section
14 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
6
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 14 Riffle
P
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125 - .25
A
Medium
.25 -.50
N
18
Coarse
.50- 1
D
9
'
100%
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
17
Very Fine
2 - 4
7
0
v
80%
f
Fine
4-5.7
G
2
Fine
5.7-8
R
3
C
At
60%
40%
` •
+ As -Built
. MY-01
Medium
8- 11.3
A
22
Medium
11.3 - 16
V
1 I
Coarse
16-22.6
E
8
1
`_
A
•' •
;
■ MY -02
♦ MY -03
—� MY-04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
1
Very Coarse
32-45
S
2
20 % , ♦
0%
0.01 0.1
- —
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Very Coarse
45-64
Small
64-90
C
Small
90-128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
1316
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.46
1.4
3.6
9.1
13
20
Size Distribution
mean 2.4
dispersion 5.7
skewness -0.14
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt /cla
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
44%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
56%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
0%
Total
100
boulder,
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
15 Pool
- MY04, Trib
6
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 15 Pool
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
12
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
4
Fine
.125-.25
A
1
Medium
.25- .50
N
2
100%
80%
Coarse
.50- 1
D
IA
A-
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
1
Very Fine
2 - 4
�
5
M
E
0
60%
/A
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
Medium
8- 11.3
A
3
40 °%
t AS -Built
• MY -01
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
2
Coarse
16-22.6
E
7
c
LL
°
■ MY -02
• MY -03
l MY
Coarse
22.6-32
L
15
Very Coarse
32-45
S
21
20%
0%
0.01 0.1
Ab
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
-04
Very Coarse
45-64
14
Small
64-90
C
5
Small
90- 128
O
2
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.13
20
30
40
59
2300
Size Distribution
mean 2.8
dispersion 116.4
skewness -0.63
T
e
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
12%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
8%
Lr - Very Lr
1024-2048
R
ravel
67%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
6
cobble
7%
Total
100
boulder,
0%
Note:
bedrock
6%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
•
•
7
•
S '
�

Cross - Section
16 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
6
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 16 Riffle
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
Fine
.125 - .25
A
Medium
.25 -.50
N
Coarse
.50- 1
D
3
100%
h,+
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
13
Very Fine
2 - 4
17
2
E
U
80%
60%
Fine
4-5.7
G
5
Fine
5.7-8
R
5
Medium
8- 11.3
A
13
40%
—•— As-Built
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
5
Coarse
16-22.6
E
7
U_
°
■ MY 02
—. MY -03
t MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
14
Very Coarse
32-45
S
10
20%
0%
0.01 0.1
A
1 10 100 1000
Particle Size - Millimeters
10000
Very Coarse
45-64
4
Small
64-90
C
2
Small
90- 128
O
1
Large
128- 180
B
1
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
2
4.7
9.5
19
34
59
Size Distribution
mean 8.2
dispersion 4.2
skewness -0.06
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt /cla
0%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
16%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
80%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
4%
Total
100
boulder,
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
a
c

Cross - Section 17 Pool
- MY04, Trib 7
Particle
Millimeter
0.075
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
32
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
11
Fine
.125 - .25
A
wood/det
Medium
.25 -.50
N
8
Coarse
.50 - 1
D
1
Coarse
1 -2
S
7
—Very
Very Fine
2 - 4
10
Fine
4-5.7
G
Fine
5.7-8
R
Medium
8- 11.3
A
1
Medium
11.3 -16
V
1
Coarse
16-22.6
E
12
Coarse
22.6-32
L
8
Coarse
32-45
S
1
—Very
Coarse
45-64
4
—Very
Small
64-90
C
4
Small
90- 128
O
Large
128- 180
B
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
Small
362-512
L
Medium
512- 1024
D
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
Total
100
Note:
100%
80%
E
U 60%
c
~ 40%
c
LL
20%
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 17 Pool
A
I
0%
0.01
0.1
Size (mm)
D16
0.062
D35
0.075
D50
0.46
D65
3
D84
23
D95
59
1 10 100 1000 10000
Particle Size - Millimeters
- As -Built
• MY -01
■ MY -02
• MY -03
MY -04
Size Distribution
mean 1.2
dispersion 28.7
skewness 0.26
Type
silt/clay
32%
sand
27%
gravel
37%
cobble
4%
boulder
0%
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross- Section
18 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
7
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 18 Riffle
.._.... _.. _ .__...
Particle
P
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
11
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
12
Fine
.125 - .25
A
4
Medium
.25 -.50
N
13
Coarse
.50- 1
D
14
100%
X _
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
7
Very Fine
2 - 4
7
£
U
80%
60%
a
r
r •
Fine
4-5.7
G
2
Fine
5.7-8
R
6
t
40%
♦ ■ ■ t ■
�/A
—�- As-auin
• MY -01
Medium
8- 11.3
A
3
Medium
11.3 - 16
V
3
Coarse
16-22.6
E
3
■ ; . •
■ MY -02
MY -03
t MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
3
Very Coarse
32-45
S
20%
Very Coarse
45-64
5
Small
64-90
C
0%
0.01 0.1
1 10 100 1000
Particle Size - Millimeters
10000
Small
90- 128
O
3
Large
128- 180
B
4
Large
180-256
L
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (mm)
0.083
0.38
0.82
3
20
110
Size Distribution
mean 1.3
dispersion 17.1
skewness 0.13
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt /cla
11%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
50%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
32%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
7%
Total
100
boulder,
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%
fie It

Cross - Section
19 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
7
E
v
100%
80%
60%
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 19 Riffle
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
1
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
1
Fine
.125-.25
A
3
Medium
.25-.50
N
6
Coarse
.50- 1
D
2
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
11
Very Fine
2 - 4
14
Fine
4-5.7
G
1
Fine
5.7-8
R
7
Medium
8- 11.3
A
8
v
40 °%
■
,
+ "$ Bu'"
. MY -01
Medium
11.3- 16
V
6
Coarse
16 - 22.6
E
5
a
LL
°
■
`�
■ My -oz
• My -03
—` My -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
1
Very Coarse
32-45
S
9
20%
0%
f�
1
, • `
■
Coarse
45-64
12
—Very
Small
64-90
C
6
0.01 0.1
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Small
90- 128
O
4
Large
128- 180
B
2
Large
180-256
L
1
Small
256-362
B
216
235
D50
D65
284
D95
Size (mm)
1.2
3.4
9.4
22
59
110
Size Distribution
mean 8.4
dispersion 7.1
skewness 1 -0.04
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt/clay
1%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
23%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
63%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
cobble
13%
Total
100
boulder
0%
Note:
bedrock
0%
hardpan
0%
wood /det
0%
artificial
0%

Cross - Section
20 Riffle
- MY04, Trib
7
Particle Size Distribution
Cane Creek
XS 20 Riffle
Particle
Millimeter
Count
Silt/Clay
< 0.062
S/C
4
Very Fine
.062-.125
S
3
Fine
.125 - .25
A
I
Medium
.25 - .50
N
I
Coarse
.50- 1
D
3
100%
-
Very Coarse
1 -2
S
I
Very Fine
2 - 4
3
'
E
v
80%
60%
_
••• -A •
Fine
4 -5.7
G
2
Fine
5.7-8
R
1
Medium
8- 11.3
A
6
r
M
1.-
40%
As-Built
. MY -01
Medium
1 1.3 - 16
V
9
Coarse
16-22.6
E
7
0)
U.
■ MY -02
MY -03
— + —MY -04
Coarse
22.6-32
L
8
Very Coarse
32-45
S
5
20%
0%
0.01 0.1
. ._
■ ■ ■'
1 10 100
Particle Size - Millimeters
1000 10000
Very Coarse
45-64
7
Small
64-90
C
7
Small
90- 128
O
13
Large
128- 180
B
8
Very Large
180-256
L
1
Small
256-362
B
D16
D35
D50
D65
D84
D95
Size (min)
4
17
34
78
150
2900
Size Distribution
mean 24.5
dispersion 6.5
skewness -0.11
T
pe
Small
362-512
L
silt /cla
4%
Medium
512- 1024
D
sand
9%
Lr - Very Lrg
1024-2048
R
gravel
48%
Bedrock
>2048
BDRK
10
cobble
29%
Total
100
boulder,
0%
Note:
bedrock
10%
hardpan
0%
wood/det
0%
artificial
0%

Appendix C
Stream Photos
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCl Technologies, Inc
Contract 9 D06002 2012 - MY04

PP #1 U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #2U — MY04 — 12/13/12
PP #3U — MY04 — 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP# 1 D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #2D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP 43D - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

I
PP #4U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #5U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP#6U - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #4D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #5D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #6D - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

PP #7 - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP 48D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP 49D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #8U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP 49U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP# 1 OU - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

PP# I OD - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #12U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #13U - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP# I 1 - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP# 12D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP# 13D - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCl Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

PP# 14U - MY04 - 12/13/12 PP# 14D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #15U - MY04 - 12/13/12 PP# 15D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP 416U - MY04 - 12/13/12 PP #16D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

++t a
PP# 17U — MY04 —12/13/121
PP #18U — MY04 — 12/13/12
PP# 19U — MY04 — 12/13/12
PP #17D —MY04— 12/13/12
PP# 18D — MY04 — 12/13/12
PP# 19D — MY04 — 12/U/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

PP #20U - MY04 - 12/13/12 PP #20D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #21 U - MY04 - 12/13/12 PP #21 D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #22U - MY04 - 12/13/12 PP #22D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KC/ Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04
-

PP #23U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP#24U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #25 - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #23D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP#24D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #26U - MY04 - 12/13/12
KC/ Technologies, Inc.
2012 — AfY04

PP #26D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #27UR - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #28U - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #27UL - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #27D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP 428D - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

PP #29U - MY04- 12/13/12
PP #30UL - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #30D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #29D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #30UR - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #31 U - MY04 - 12/13/12
KC1 Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

PP #31 D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP#32D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #33D - MY04 - 12/13)/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #32U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #33U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #34U - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04
-

PP #34D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #35D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #36D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #35U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #36U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #37U - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

PP437D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #38D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP439D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #38U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #39U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP440U - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04
a

PP #40D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #41 D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #41 U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #42D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #42U- MY04 - 12/13/12 PP443U - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc.
Contract # D06002 2012 — MY04

PP #43D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #44D - MY04- 12/13/12
PP #45D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #44U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #45U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP 446 - MY04 - 12/13/12
KC/ Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04
-

PP 447 - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #48D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #49D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
PP #48U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #49U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #50U - MY04 - 12/13/12
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04

PP #50D - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #51 U - MY04 - 12/13/12
PP #51 D - MY04 - 12/13/12
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site
Contract # D06002
KCI Technologies, Inc.
2012 — MY04
•

I
I '
Appendix D
Current Condition Plan View
Cane Creek Stream Restoration Site KCI Technologies, Inc
Contract # D06002 2012- MY04

o m CANE CREEK
K C I
z Z jo o o STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT � TECHNOWGILS r -
2 m ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
^� 0 1 SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA 46olslx FORKS ROAD Ecosystem
Z o..F orEo
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609 Ei lay ement oESC�rq�
•"• ^" REVISIONS

F
i
1
-40 -20 0 40 80
GRAPHIC SCALE
SEE SHEETS 6-7 FOR TRIBUTARY 3 �JQ
END T3 PROFILE
-PP #1171
' �ti ` \
>t
+ }} 1 \ \
O
\ __- _�__ - - - -- - -- - - -- -- - ��� END TI PROFILE
VEG PLOT #1 FLOODPLAIN ` 00 \ \ \ BEAVER w 0 Z
EROSION o-u `\ \\ \ \\ DAM � a O
\
BEAVER \ \ ` \ \ \ \\ 1/ // e(_ O Q
- ' DAM \ PP\ #3\ \\\ \ \\ \\ \ o 9S = of
BEGIN T1 PROFILE ` + ` a ~ O
1111111 1 \
49 W O Z O
l \ \ 1 1 1 \\ \ / / i }
SEE SHEET 5 FOR TRIBUTARY 2 \ \ 1 _ - - _- - OC- W F }o
Q
Z
w =) Z
<W Z F
/ r x U W O
\ ` \ d' M
` \ W
Q d ~
BANK ' / /' \ 1 \\ \ \ W Q ci
EROSION ` 11 \
W f
C-
VEG PLOT #2
oa[ DEC 2012
CURRENT
CONDITION
PLAN VIEW

SNOISIn38 96 +£l l 0100 +06 L V1S (INV 9Z +K 01 LS +ZZ V1S Silr1i'£-U
ol.o ,,a �,s �IIJItII IU „[�tl� 60912 vN8 SN8 x(SI Hol3lva Z
LLI� avow sxao3 xls lo9b VNIIOiJVO HIHON 'J.MOO NMJ3d 'V'dOW3S z 2 w
G S1SIA310S • S83NNVld • S833NION3 W
_ 103roUd NOUVd ]O1S38 IMV32US °
salarrn��o�ir�at �^ w I
A331:10 3NVO ° a
N
O
W
J
°v V
E8 OtlN N
OItlO ]N
V
aQ
O 02
C7
p
N
I
p V 133HS 33S 314I11431VIN
I II IIf I /
O
a 1 a \1 \\ I
z
F
w
x
I I
J2 I „Ii`�I 11111 1 � 1
I I
006 / /l /1 I ii l i l w
0
z0
O
m / / z
w / w
m�< / / I /1
z
O I , I III I l
W
x
Okr //
a.
a
/
Z
z
m MCI
l /CN O
0 00 /' III 1 \ a w
c' — �� — i� _s�o =N — O
00 O
Z � 1 001- /
O /0
0' a
a W //
co m I / 1 / ' /
OqX / / z
F
W
x
r� /

C133HS 33S- 3NIlH01VW
I I l' 1 11111 \ I I
/111
llll \ \ I 1 1
1 I 1 1 1 1 \ I I \ l
2\ +100 11 II I1 11 11
D� I I I I II I I I I I 1 I 1 1
m
\ \ \ \ II 11 1 \ \ \ I I I 1 I
\ \ \ 1 11 1\ \ \ 1 \ I I I
I
\ \ \ \ 1 111 \ \ 1 \ 1 1 \ \ \
\ \ \ 1 I 1 11 \ \ \ I 1 \ 1 \ \
\ \\ I I 11 \\ I I I 1 1 1
1
\ \\ \ \\ \\ 111 \ \ I I 1 I \ 1
\\
\I \\
\311300 x
m
z
#
m \ \
n m
Z 1 i
34 +00
1 I I I —
// I I 1
\111
---
-'x
G
N6
0
�' O G)
/
0
N
O
O
x
NC GPID
VI NAD 83
c
D
r
m
0)
O
CANE CREEK
KC I
n
o
, m
��TFCH\OLOLIES
Z z w
mN
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
�M
0 ;u
q °
N
ENGINEERS PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
° mm p z
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
0�j{j/(teni
ocscmvrax
o.rc
ewaarlo
< z �
4601SIx FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
{
1{I cli 1l.cille,�li
• ^a• ^�
T1 -4, TI-5 STATION 31 +26 TO STATION 37 +67
REVISIONS

A
O
N
O
O °g
n
N
() A
D o
r Im
O
O
S0
x0O
m
;
CANE CREEK
KC I
.�
o
N z Z �
m
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
71CHNOLOCIES
r�
O X
={ z
°
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
° m
G
C Z
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
g601 SIX FORKS ROAD
S tE171
J�;(6 }
Lai
Si•
OES[ciPigN
ONiE
NPPROYEO
T2 -1, T2 -2, T2 -3, T2-4 STATION 50 +00 TO STATION 58 +50
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
•^ • -M
REVISIONS

I
N
IT!
v
D
m�
D
�0
G2
09
e�
I 1 I 111 \ \ 1
1 1
� 1
\ ^ \ \ \\ \6�+,601,
1111 /
r I I
i t I I I I
I l lli \IL1 1 1 I I I
00 1
11110/ 1 1 1 11 1 \IIII \�/ / X
// m
I
f /, I 1 1111 �/ 0
II I l l l l I I
I I I I l l l l l l l l l l i 0
I In 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1\ \\ l l l 1 1 I\ 1 Z
III
IAr1'1
1 111
r /11111 /
MI/�I \\Ii \ !,b \111 \\
Z� //
110111
// // A I I I i` \\ Till
\\
A
�!J I_IJI I I I I 11 \
s
1
DI
I
\ \ _ \ \
1 t', I 1 1 \ \ \ \.'hC J \
\ \
I II \
A
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 7
O
N
G1
D
O
n
c
m
wo
00
O
N
Z
p n
5 Z C
e
m o
n
CANE CREEK
= K I
m Z v�
II
m N
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
TFCHM1�C FS
=! m
° rt'
° N
SEMORA PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
{ y�
US tel7l
s.�
ocsu+m—
DATE
"ROVEu
Z
U)
4601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
�',ll ]�lI]t E'IIICIIt
T3 -1, T3 -2 STATION 60 +00 TO STATION 66 +13
REVISIONS

i 1
N p ORZO
B3
—40 —20 0 40 80
GRAPHIC SCALE
BEGIN T3 PROFILE
e.
0
z
0
N
Li
It
/
EROSION AROUND
DRAINAGE
STABILIZATION
/
op I ��
`
\`- - - - -- O -- szs - -- -- — — SLOPE
O �VEG PLOT 1�_ — EROSION
_ Two i�--- '-- _ \� " - --- — �1 - - - --�
—
-PPS_ - - -- — __ zz
—,qsw
EAf
CD
y,
r=i
cz
\END T3 PROFILE
\
i
m
z
a
\ \ \ \
X- SECTION
\ \I III \\
#8
/ ! 1
t
W
O
&
Q
� I
SEE SHEETS 2< FOR
I
U
=
z
O
TRIBUTARY 1
W O
Z
Q
�
U W
:3
cn
W O
O
+
U
m
U W
O
Z
F-
w
a
Q
N
W
N
O
F
�
W
U)
i,n +4
CURRENT
CONDITION
PLAN VIEW

C
AA
-v
/14. 00 1
m
Z
0m
Om
z
/ I
00 '
CID Z I
/11 /
/ /
11,,,,
I l ,
4P
' /Illlll \j��l W I I
l / i / Illllli 1 \l \l; /loll I II
6 133H 33S-3NI1H31VW
1 \ \
0
/ \
l O O
v
cry --
E t♦ \�\\ -i � I
N
O
2
n
N
D O
m
°
O
oe
m z z
o <_ 1 m
m O z
C -i
< Z
O
o o
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
KC I
�ETFCH\OLOGIFS
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
A601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
i
os } e t�
Ll [li unicht
n
♦_�
O
' , III
II 1j1 1 1
+40
a
11ii 1
'hl,
I I I I
Illfl
I m
I m
-' •' //'/
I
1 1 1 11 1 I
' z
/
/ 1 1 1 1 I
I -1
1111
CD
p
�vvvOVED
'/ /i/ 111111 I I
I \
mill
2
p
REVISIONS
it
\I
Ill/ 11 4A.
it
1111 IIIIIII( I
/ II
\111)1
r
N
O
2
n
N
D O
m
°
O
oe
m z z
o <_ 1 m
m O z
C -i
< Z
O
o o
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
KC I
�ETFCH\OLOGIFS
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
A601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
i
os } e t�
Ll [li unicht
DESCVO•,gM
DATE
�vvvOVED
T4 -1, T4 -2 STATION 80 +00 TO STATION 91 +49
REVISIONS

l i
I
1\ I
,
/
I
/
I ;
EA�tmc'� -
w �rrr SLOPE
- - - EROSION END T4 PROFILE BEAVER
oz LODGE - - - - - - - -- - - - \ LODGE
00 SLOPE
b
- ♦�'
O X -i=ce l x` 00
-0)v
x I w
m
X- SECTION #11 `
0 � 1 VEG PLOT,#10 J ` \ \ \ \_ _ �i . \\ i / ` %;_ _ 1 i / l l lr ll r c
\ \ \ \ \ \ -�� BANK
EROSION \1 ` \ ' l PP #23 ' / II r r l A
VEG PLOT #9 \ \ \\ s\ \
00 ,h
BEGIN T4 PROFILE \ /
X- SECTION #12
-\
J
SEE SHEETS 2-0 FOR TRIBUTARY 1
NC GRID
NAD B3
-40 -20 0 40 80
GRAPHIC SCALE
#1
0
Ln
.>
4 W
a
� o
z `r
j oz
�� o0
w F 'z ou
a s
W J
z G
o
W
H
U
W
O
Q.
WO
W h
It Q
U X
WO
Z H
U Nw
IcL
G
Q
W
LL
H
11,11 DEC 2012 I
uu1� p.RO'
CURRENT
CONDITION
PLAN VIEW

v 7I
,_ m
$ o
N
x00
O
ti
jry�Q�)Q t }
j� li i'li?Z,? 1 l�A
L �i.(, l,�
1 ^ -°
N
O
O
2
T6A, T66, T6B -1, T6C -1, T6C -2, T6C -3, T6AB, T6C, T6 STA 300 +00
TO 300 +80 STA 310 +00 TO 310 +82, STA 240 +00 TO 241 +21,
STA 248 +38 TO 251 +04, AND STA 117 +02 TO 127 +10
C1
H
ocscnie a
�n
wuorco
c9
D
O
�o
m
m
OD
O
'
Qr
\
/
l � / / / 4
I Io/ I I / -Vl
10/ ///
/ Z , / -4 / /
, /
/1
m
cn // . I / /II I I I I
' / ,' ! / / ICI I I I
I /t`�
z /
''lFloo II I I
Z
y
;u , /' / I �!
I I r /, 11,111 I I I I
I I II 1 (! /!
/ ! / // !111111, O
ILL
I 1 I I I I I I I I z
v
1 I I O
x
1
1 \
/ I If
\6+ap \
\,
MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 11
A
,_ m
$ o
N
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
O
ti
jry�Q�)Q t }
j� li i'li?Z,? 1 l�A
L �i.(, l,�
1 ^ -°
N
O
O
2
T6A, T66, T6B -1, T6C -1, T6C -2, T6C -3, T6AB, T6C, T6 STA 300 +00
TO 300 +80 STA 310 +00 TO 310 +82, STA 240 +00 TO 241 +21,
STA 248 +38 TO 251 +04, AND STA 117 +02 TO 127 +10
C1
H
ocscnie a
�n
wuorco
c9
D
O
�o
m
m
OD
O
0 0
° Z p w
° m E) z
Z
,_ m
$ o
N
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
—�
KC I G
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
4601 R FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
ti
jry�Q�)Q t }
j� li i'li?Z,? 1 l�A
L �i.(, l,�
1 ^ -°
T6A, T66, T6B -1, T6C -1, T6C -2, T6C -3, T6AB, T6C, T6 STA 300 +00
TO 300 +80 STA 310 +00 TO 310 +82, STA 240 +00 TO 241 +21,
STA 248 +38 TO 251 +04, AND STA 117 +02 TO 127 +10
ocscnie a
o.*e
wuorco
REVISIONS

MA ro
�1
�/
I
/11 /i /
/lI I II IV
II /l/ l / // it /l I 1 1
l! I I 11\ 1
I/
IIIIII 1 �! I fl1 1V A 1V 1 I� \ V A\ O 1\
\ vV
v �i vv
vv
1111111 / / 11111vA vvvA\ V1A'Lv vv v
m
I l l I l Cn
' `I II
1 r 1 11I4/ / 1'1 1'1 11 m
II
\' 1� II
1 1 1 1 1 IIII I`I1�11 II 1\ \\ I 1 1 1 1 Z
1
I I 1j 11111111}l i l t 4 I I \ISI I m
fII1111 \ \I \\ \ 111111 O p
11111111 \'\ \\
1 1 1 111111111 111 1g1 \ z m
11 uI�II 111 � o
11�D
\��o�opl ,1 ,
VIIIISS VIII 1\ \ , �I A
117
1 0
„ °�III11111111 1111
I II 1111
11111111111!/ III 1 1111 \ \11\
VIII I 1111
/ / /lI I \ ,I
II 1! 1 /1111111
/!11111\
m
/ X//
/ m , / I I I l I�I 1 1 1 1 I \
/n / / / I\ 1 1 V I I I 1 1 1 I I< I`
=p / ,
/ 1/ // 1111 I I I 1 ,m
/ z ' rlur -
#
\00 �-
1111' \ --w-
I- -11111 1 1 1 h � \ \_
xp
Z� 1
}
o
o
m
O
D Z
C
pp m
o #
0 0
~ S z m
, m
CANE CREEK
KC I
�-
' z
92
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
TECHMLOOIES
r�
O .:1
° p z
0 o
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
m
z
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
�o$y$tClll
Li111�111CCi11Cilt
” °
"` ° " „°”
•`�°° `�
T6 STATION 127 +10 TO STATION 134 +25
REVISIONS
. ••.

N Nok0 O
m
� o
Z
N Z
m Z
Z
= °
, m
b� °
N
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
—�
� KC I
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
4601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
,-
r-d
j
j dS{jJ(te1T1
jJ�� �i�j j�'elli vl it
1\4 i +00
' - o
T7A T7A -1 T7B T7C T7 -1 T7 -2 T7 -3 T8 TEIA T8A -1 T8 -1 TBB T9
STA 260 +00 TO 261 +36 STA 140 +00 TO 151 +57 STA 270 +00 TO 271 +23
STA 200 +00 TO 204 +38 AND STA 210 +00 TO 213 +68
o
srx
ocscmriue
OAIE
—ROVED
REVISIONS
o /
/1142 � . /O) ♦�
-III
O / / 11 /� /,/ i -" O,
/X/�lI I
143 +0 \
I
\\
I I I Il
1�Dc \
� \
� --
I
/
'S
-6
11 +\
1' II 1 ' 11 Ill IIII
270+0 ll
,
�ii�I /
111 /l I y 1
V� 11 /l / 1 1
-I
0
0
IlN
IIIII
13
141k0
+0/
/
II' /'
I I 1
VA1A
1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 ^II I1-0 t- c�8 }Q� ���\ / ,0!
/
-
I i
NI
m I I I/ I I I 111 I
`m,�
I
O�I
j.
Z I I I Ill I I \ \\ X \ \\
I
I \ \ \\ \\ 90 \\ \
/ \ 1
/I III I
IIII I '\ \
IIII
I�-L� /I l% 1 11 AV
mcn
O-V
pm
t'), I /� 111 I I
I 1 11 \\ \
Z
/// /
A
Ate— -
-----
-_,\ - -,/ 151
+00
/x o;
IV,
o
am
ZO
!!� _\ — — — — — — \\
33S
61133HS
m
� o
Z
N Z
m Z
Z
= °
, m
b� °
N
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
—�
� KC I
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
4601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
,-
r-d
j
j dS{jJ(te1T1
jJ�� �i�j j�'elli vl it
T7A T7A -1 T7B T7C T7 -1 T7 -2 T7 -3 T8 TEIA T8A -1 T8 -1 TBB T9
STA 260 +00 TO 261 +36 STA 140 +00 TO 151 +57 STA 270 +00 TO 271 +23
STA 200 +00 TO 204 +38 AND STA 210 +00 TO 213 +68
srx
ocscmriue
OAIE
—ROVED
REVISIONS

MATGNI.INE SEES, 12
0 o CANE CREEK
z o m o STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
< i m
im z ? SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
T7 -3 STATION 151 +57 TO STATION 164 +50
KCI
�TFCF4\OLOCIFS
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
4601SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
E Os Will
L11 tat anent
OESCw,Pr,01 I . -P.-
REVISIONS
\\
\ \ ' �`3�
OOI
\ \ I
ao
Z
-u
0 I IIII II \ \ f/ \II V \1 4 +00
I
m
m
/\ f
0
\ 1/ll��� I
j11j1I
.\W l t
00
i II111\ \ \\
\
\\ \
It 5\6 00
\1 m In
w x
\ I
I \X0 I Z
1
\ x
m
if 158 +00 ` z
\-v
I i 11 II •_
I I O
/ \ Xa
A
I A V A I AV I
\I I \♦11
1 1 I / it �
I I Il Vii, I I \ QI" \
/
\ \ \ l \\ Ill I I \I II
\ \
m x to m
6�x I I
o m 00
� m m 0
OQ I
v p cn Z
;o Z DD
0 v_k w;o
O
m D
IIIII \\ \\
l\I \I 1
-i
1
0
62 +b
I
A
m
�
I I /
1 /I, \
o
mm,
Z
I
I P I Iljlll I1�1 � 00 ll
N
O
o
� i�\r
I I
w
C
Z1
1 I II, \ \ 1 I I \
D�
O
y
II I I �, \�♦ \� 1\ f
D
�i 0-
6
I \ `�'-
m
III l 111
10 I,1,i/ /' / „IIII
/IIII
W\
CJ� \\
<
m
r
I / l/lll llllll 76
41"'
I I \ \\ r
1
V1133HS 33S 9NIIHO1HW
0 o CANE CREEK
z o m o STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
< i m
im z ? SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
T7 -3 STATION 151 +57 TO STATION 164 +50
KCI
�TFCF4\OLOCIFS
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
4601SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
E Os Will
L11 tat anent
OESCw,Pr,01 I . -P.-
REVISIONS

0
N
O
X01
D O
S
n
Vf
PLOD O
m
O
O
f
yd N \
1 \\ III/
`\ \ \ \ \ 1 It 1 11
1
16600\
\
z \V A
V A\ \ \ \ \ °�V11t /ll \ \ \\ \V A 11111111
1
11 I1 �
m 1 1 1 1 1111/ // \ 1 1 t1111t\
7- 1 1 1 1 1 11111 / 1 \_0 1 I t l 1 1 \
m I I I I III /1 ,' \\ 11 1 1 t
1 1
1 1 1 1 1
W1 1 11 \
D' l / / /// i /1111 I \IAI \ \v1 \\�E016 11111111
i IIIIII I\ I 1 I 11111
I ' 1
mw i /ir ,j1 It I I
;Q r
! I/ I I\ I I 1 1 1 11 1
00 / / u \ 1169*oQI
Om 111111111
z c
IIt11 \ \ I I III 1\ \ 1 1 1 1 I I
111A 111 I � �� A l l 11j1 I
/I I!lvvv II $ v 1 v v� vv117f1 -{-+W/
I 1 1 \ \\ II/ i' ,li %J \1111111 /11
I t \ 11111 lam, ,J \1 111 II 1111
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 11 1111
1111111111111
1 I I III l I 1 1 111 III
111111111 I I! I I I I
1 1 1 � I I l/ l 1 1 I l �A 1 A 111j111�I11
'oil 11,1111
G)l I I I I l / 1 // I/ 1 11 �II�II IIIIII�IIIj111
1 ��, 111III111111j11111111111
/d / / / // / //, /''/ / //� /1u 1111111f�111111I I ;111111
/// // /, //_ I 1 / l/ / /� / „1/ IIIII 111111
aig1111tt /11 /1111j1�iiillllll
, / / //l / / // 1 /r /�Il /f 11111111 if IllIllllllll
/ / // / / /// // 1 1 - - 11 /I /If 111!!1!18 IIIIIIIIIIIII
1I / 111111111111111 III IIIIII
IIIIIIilj1111
/�II�III�liljl 1111
/ I III IIIIIII III I III11 jI II
1 1 1 1 l l l l Il / , It IIJJIII 11111 IIIr11111 I
L 1,7 // I 1111117�1f1 11 II/IIj1111111
1 /1III� lI lllllllll
II Ill/ fll� lllllllllllll
\ \ \1I 111j11I It /I 1/11111
1/1)11 I11� 1l
l/o l lllll111
Illy // I111o1 11 1,71
\ II 11 //� 1111"'1
/ � jl 1 I / / / % //I I I 1111llf l l l I l 1 1' 1 1
1 / �I1j11f1111111111I
it IIII i I I I f�
�11111111I��j11j111i
11I11�111 �1111
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I/ I// 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IIII1�II 1 1 1
/ r / // // IIIIIj 1111 I II I I It1'I 11111111111 111111
k I 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
P0111111f II 1111
1j1I1j111 III I
\ �1� 1 1 II I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
\\\
1 I J \ \\ 11111II� II IIIIII I I I
\1111(1111 I I I I I I
III1111111111j1 11
1!1111- �/' � / /// II11j1111111 I
11 I I /, III
II 1 1111 � �/,/1j1111111111i1111111'11111
IIII 1 � I 1 I it i 1 I ' 1/ It II 11 11 11 I II IIIII 11 1 I � II
I I I I1 1 11 I l l 1 1 11 1 1 I\ 111751!-10I I I I III Il
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ 11 Ir II\ \ 1 1 1 1 1 1\ 111 \ 1
1111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111 111 \ 1
I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ \\ \ \\ \ \
1 1 1 I I I I \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! \ \ \\ 1 \\\ 1
I I 1 I\ I\ \\ 1 p ! / /ui \ ' ° \\ \ \ \\ \O \11111 \1 I \I \ \I \ \ \\ t \\
�\\ \ , 'A\ I 1 111111 ICt 1111 It 11 It \t 1\ 1 \�\
\ \ \�\ IIIII II 111111 \Ilt 1 \ \\
0 AVA \1VlI I 11 t\ 11A 111VA�
\ \ 1 \ \ \
vvv��vvv�vv �vvvvvv vv
It\ \ \ \ \\ \ \\\
\\\ \ \\ \ \
��\ \ \ \ 1• \II \I I\ `\\
SL 133HS 39S- 3NIlHO1tlW
t
n
m m
CANE CREEK
KCGI
. o
a z z x
4.0
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
7
0 ;o
o °
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
° z
m
< O
--I C Z
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
A601 SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
j } os stem
Ldlll21
STY
RES[RiPigx
OYlE
♦PPRYYEO
T7 -3, T7-4 STATION 16 +50 TO STATION 177 +29
REVISIONS
j�,Cment
�• ...

i , ,
/B
O
N
O
T1. O
n
V/
C1 A
D O
r
m
OD
O
VON-
NC G
NAD 83 83
i I 1
, m
a; °
o N
_ / / / /
w
m
r�
{�tElll
jt, L
Lal l�1 E'1T1�11�
•^M
z
-- /
0
- - - -- ' /
"
- - - -10 /
m
_- --
- - - - - - -
m
ONCE
—OW
T7-4, T7 -5, T7-6 STATION 177 +29 TO STATION 190 +18
REVISIONS
/ ,CO -, ', -/ r - -_
o
O
I
to l l ' / xgvaNn091N3W3Stl3
l 1 I
11 y
Z I I m
x /
m / / 1 �1�
111;1111
/ 0
Z
\ \ \t 1 II
\ \\ II IIII I I
I
\ \
\ \ \
\ 11111 11 111 / I 1
/
1 I
l
l ri \
l 11
(IIII 1VAVA1
11111 \111111111 I�
l
Ills\\
I, � I
\
\`I
111111 III11�1 � / � \
_
IltlllI 1111 �1 rl/ L Ad -
I
1 \`\ \a\; \ X83
\`00 \
\ \ 1111 \\ \
\00
11
\111 \
\1\\\\9\* N M
\ \1 \ 1 -t \ \\ � \ \
\\ \` \\ \11111 mm \ \ \ \� \ 1g4 \ +\0
\
\\ \ \\\I 1 D \ 1 1 9 \
\ \�\ 0 \ \� \ \ \ \3s�\ C)//,1 \\
o
1
1 bl \\�\ 0
111 11A�01Vv A A VA \\ \
I1�(t'll 6
1111
I I I I \ 11\ \
IIII III -AO-\ ,III
I f', Il \,`111 \I�,,_ \I 111111
V I II \1 Il k,� iVA + -oOIIIUIIII
D\ \ \ \\ II I 111 1$ 1111111
0\
\
m
1 v .`VAAAVA A1Vv
o
o
/I Bil +
O
m
O
Ik r// / O '
mac', 1 1+00
/B
O
N
O
T1. O
n
V/
C1 A
D O
r
m
OD
O
VON-
NC G
NAD 83 83
o 0
N z Z z
m
O
Z ?
, m
a; °
o N
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
� KC I
��TE(,H%O�OG' �
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
460151X FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
r�
{�tElll
jt, L
Lal l�1 E'1T1�11�
•^M
sr.
OESCN N
ONCE
—OW
T7-4, T7 -5, T7-6 STATION 177 +29 TO STATION 190 +18
REVISIONS

MATCHLINE SEE SHEET 17
1111111 III I I I I I I /`\ `\
1 II 1111 tl 11111 I l l l i l 1 1 � � /// � \111 I �i
I I I IIIIIIII 1 1 1 1 1 / 1 \I 1
IIII�II \11 I I 1 1 1 � �\ III
(IIIIIIII I I I 1 1 / � IIII
II III I II I 1 / /I
I IIII I I IIII I I I I � � 1/ li
II IIII IIII I I I/ - /l
IIII 1111111 I I III I 1
I IIII II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i I IIII � 1111
111111III�III III I 1 � I't III
I I IIII (IIII I // /I II
I I 1 1j11 111j11 1 / / / //I 111
I I I IIII (IIII I I I I II II
II II I
I I I I (IIII I I j 111 111 1 1 1 1 i t
/ � I � I I I I II II I I 111 I I III 11 � II III
// I 111 III I I /lrl 1 1 I
/ / I I It1j 111 I� / /llrl l II
I Illr /'111\\11
/ // / / Illlll rl I IIII I
it
II
;P //// / /// II
; 'k \
� I 1 11 / II
I I
/ III
-
-mm
�
x
.Z
'as I IIIIIIIIIIIII
U1 IIIIIIIIIIIII
\ I01I IIIIIIIIIIIII
\ I OI I IIIIIIIII1111
\1 1\ I I IIIIIIIIII111
I 1 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
II
20t
1 I I Illlllllllll�lll
( I I I I Ifllllllllll�I���I
I I I I I I IIII1111 I I III
111 I1 1 1 111111 I�IIII I1j111 \j1
1 1 1 1 1 1 IIIIIIII "� \ \�\� `\\
1 1 I\ 1 A I It���ll \VAAA \ \ \ \VAA
1132ck;0o \\ \ \ \\ \\ \\\ \\ \ t 0
\ I I
\ \\o
It
II\ \� \ \\ \\\ �1II II all 11 11
II \ \ ' \ \ \ 1 11 1111j111111111
I V ` A ` V ° 1 V 11 j1 11 11j11 111111
t 1111111j111111JIM
it
\1253�b01'1j11111 1 1111
11
\ \ 1 t
tl
I I I I & \
II\
234 +00
1 I I
I I /
i I I
\ t I
m
m � ♦ � v I/ 1 Ir �� r/ � I
\
v w / r 1 I t q
aV AA \, �v v \A //< 11111 O \
k. 111119
I I
\ \I
\ \\ \\ 4n\ It` \y' \\ 192 +00
\\ I
v
m
m
0
Z
v
1
\\ \\ \` \\ \ \ P m
\ \ \ \\
\ o
\ \ \\ \\ \`
I Ml \t \
\I \ \ij \�� l
j i 1\1 193 +00
\11 I II II11 \I 1\ 1 �
I II II I II 111111 I 1 � i� \
Iltllfllll IIIIIIII I\\ \ \/' \ \
\
r \ x \ \ \
1'1 1111
1 1 1111 It 1111 t
\ \ I
\ \ \` \V \I
iiltl�
\11111 t \ \ \ 11 \\\ \`\ \\I 1 \ \ I\
\\\\ \ \ \\\\ 0
Ilk\
\\
\ \\\ \ \ \ 11\11 \\ \�
\ \1\,t \\` \\\\ \ \ \\ \\\
O�` `
\
D c�
m o
00
0
v o n o CANE CREEK
8 z z� if N STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
< i m ° SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
o z Z1 T7-6, T7 -7, AND T10 STA 190 +18 TO 198 +13
AND STA 230 +37 TO 235 +91
=5= I
TECHNOLOGIES
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
4601SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
r�
i tClll Ll IalKIemcnt
GESCNm Iqx I UrtE I
REVISIONS

lQ
;9
g 220x00 c
If O
1 II �o
I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r rr 1 1 11 O
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l / /I1
i/
D O mo
r-
1 i l I i l lli li 221 f 0 m
1 '
11 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ \��� \`\ OD
1 1 1 1 1 1 + j
1 1 1' 1 I ' 1111 t
III V
OD I
\II,
I f II I I I � `� v 111 I' 1111111 QQ
fill, d1111�3
1 1 1 1 1 1 r/ r I
'I'll 01111
1 /r IIII illl1111111114/
II IIII I(
II fill
R�,�A
If I I I I I 1 /I
�4 1 1 1 1
/7
ll/111j�'r10
1 1 r 11 l r l
I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1/ r l/
111 I 11 1 /
III 11 111 1 111 1 1 1 1
11
j
j 1 i 11 i i rr
(P/ I/ 111 1 1 i l ( 1j111111111 I I
I I
I I I I I I I111111 j 111
R i, .///////11i 111 I II I I 1i111III I1
1 111 11 11111
1 I I I I I 11,
II \111 \l \1I \I \IIIIIIiI�II
11111 I l I l r //� // III 1A \�I\ I I I I ICI' � Ig111 111 I
I I I I I
ilk' 1 l I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I / / / r / t Ih 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 if I I Il I l ll ll l
1 II 1111111 Il II II I II I I II / / , % ✓/1 11 1 1 / 1 � 1 1 111 I 1 1111 1 1 Il
,11111IIIIlt
111 11111\ 1 \11 IIIII IIIII \I I \ l l l I I � 1 4 �l 1!/l /l ll I / \I V AV I I I\ 11 I\ 1111 111 1
Iillll VIIII��V \VA \ \I \1� 111 /��1 1111 I�ZI�k-Q 0lllll ll 111111
s 111 11111111
Illllll\1\\ \\ \ \\ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \1 \1x111 11111 1 1 1 Il \1 y \111,111 \III II
11111\\\ \ \\ \j\ \ \ \ \ \)Illl�l ll ll jell ly 1 \I 1 I \ Il I \t 111111
\\ \` \ \\ y III IIIIII 1 III 11111 1\ I I 1 1 1l III III lI 1 I 1 1111111
Icy \I \I \1 \111 \1 II I \1 \I Q, II11111111III11111 III\ I III \I II l\ \I \1 \111 \111111IIII III
1 11'111 I kl1al 1111111111, 1111 III\ \ , \
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1111111111 VA �Il/ II III ` A X��
IIIII \ IIIIll11l \ \\ \111/1 ���00� \\\,111 II 11111\\ \\
I I I I III 11111 1 .11j1 I �\q \" \ \\ \III ,IlI1t , 11 l\ \ \ \\\ \\
ly \ \ \ \l \ \ \ \ \ \ \�/ .�� \ \ \ 1 1 \\ \
II II III II 1 11 i61 11 \I \1t \III \I \ \\\\1 \�� \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \111111111 \
1 \ 1 y 1
11 11 11 II II III 1 1 I I IIIIII I I I \ \�� \ \\ \�\ \ \ \\ \\11111
I I I I I II II I 111 I I I l I I\ \\ 1 \ \ \� \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \� \ \\ \\ \\\ \\ \
I I I I 11111 II IIII I l l l l l l j
\ \
IIII ''fill I I I
11111 I \ \
1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I IIII' '1 V l l I l I\
I I I I II 1'111111 I I I I I III III \VAAA
11 1111! �1jIII I IIIII I I I I I 111 \1V 1 II V v A, A� A.,w
1 111 ' IIII IIIII I I 1 1 1 \ \ \ \`�'b'��
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l k \ l, 1 l N
—
N11111111111\ \11111111 \'_ --
1111111111\\\\\ _—_ --
I
.\�_ - - --
11111 \\ \111 \11111\ --
I �I
111 "1111 I I II111 \ 1 \ \III \ �k��\� —� \� 111
1 1 1 1 1, 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 \ \\ 1 y\ I` t\ 1 \ I I
111111'111
91133HS 3M - 9NIIHOltlW \
Z Z �
Z Z :O
q
-I m
0 5
M z
��
m
-t N
O N
CANE CREEK
STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT
SEMORA, PERSON COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
KC I
�� TG(.FL \OLOGItS
ENGINEERS • PLANNERS • SCIENTISTS
4GO1SIX FORKS ROAD
RALEIGH NORTH CAROLINA 27609
�! Ecosystem
l/v laicement
zxu
ocscamnou
o.re
vvaovco
T10 STATION 220 +00 TO STATION 230 +37
REVISIONS