20211422 Ver 1_Draft Prospectus_20210518

MITIGATION BANK PROSPECTUS
DUTCH FARMS
DM CAPE FEAR 02
UMBRELLA BANK
Guilford County, North Carolina
Mitigation Bank Sponsor:
Davey Mitigation, A Division of Davey Resource Group, Inc.
(attn. T.J. Mascia, Director)
Prepared by:
Davey Resource Group, Inc. dba Land Management Group
Raleigh, NC
May 12, 2021

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION 1
A. MITIGATION BANK TYPE AND PURPOSE 1
B. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 1
C. IDENTITY OF SPONSOR 3
II. ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION 3
A. UMBRELLA MITIGATION BANKING INSTRUMENT 3
B. DETERMINATION OF CREDITS 3
C. CREDIT RELEASE SCHEDULE 5
III. PROPOSED SERVICE AREA 5
IV. NEED AND FEASIBILITY 5
A. WATERSHED CONSIDERATIONS AND NEEDS 5
B. SITE SELECTION 6
V. OWNERSHIP AND LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT 6
A. SITE OWNERSHIP 6
B. LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT 7
VI. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES 7
VII. QUALIFICATIONS OF SPONSOR 7
VIII. ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS 8
A. SITE GEOLOGY AND LAND USE 8
B. WATER RESOURCES 8
C. SOILS 9
D. JURISDICTIONAL FEATURES 9
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES 9
F. THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 9
G. FLOODPLAIN COMPLIANCE 10
H. EXISTING STREAM CONDITIONS 10
I. EXISTING WETLAND CONDITIONS 20
J. EXISTING RIPARIAN BUFFER 21
K. FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENTS 21
L. SITE CONSTRAINTS 25
IX. MITGATION WORK PLAN 25
A. PROPOSED STREAM MITIGATION 25
B. PROPOSED WETLAND MITIGATION 26
C. RIPARIAN BUFFERS 27
D. ADDITIONAL WORK PLAN ELEMENTS 27
X. MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 28
XI. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN 30
XII. REFERENCES 31
i

FIGURES (APPENDIX A)
Figure 1. Vicinity and Planning Elements Map
Figure 2. Proposed Service Area Map
Figure 3. Watershed Planning Contextual Map
Figure 4. Land Use Map
Figure 5. Project Soils
Figure 6. Current Conditions Map
Figure 7A-7B. Channel Stability Mapping
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10A.
Figure 10B.
Figure 11A.
Figure 11B.
Figure 11C.
Figure 12.
Figure 13.
APPENDIX
Appendix A.
Appendix B.
Appendix C.
Appendix D.
Site Floodplain and Water Quality Stressors
Pre -Monitoring Features Map
USGS Drainage Area Map
DEM Drainage Area Map
Aerial Photography Map (2019)
Aerial Photography Map (2002)
Aerial Photography Map (1993)
Proposed Mitigation Features Map
Proposed Riparian Buffer Mitigation Map
Figures
Agent Authorization Forms
Soil Profile Logs
Stream Identification Forms
Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
ii

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Mitigation Bank Type and Purpose
The purpose of this Prospectus is to establish guidelines and responsibilities for the establishment,
use, operation, and maintenance of the DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank (Bank). The general use
Bank will provide compensatory mitigation for unavoidable adverse impacts to Waters of the
United States, that result from activities authorized under Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water
Act, and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act. The proposed umbrella structure of the Bank
is designed to initially permit the establishment of stream and/or wetland mitigation sites, while
enabling the establishment of future mitigation sites not yet identified. Most sites will also likely
include a nutrient offset and riparian buffer mitigation component, which will be coordinated with
the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (DWR).
Dutch Farms Mitigation Site ("Dutch Farms" or "Site") will serve as the first site proposed under
this Bank. Dutch Farms is located in Guilford County, approximately 2.0 miles northeast of
Climax, NC (Figure 1, Appendix A). Dutch Farms will also be submitted to DWR as a nutrient
offset and buffer mitigation bank.
B. Goals and Objectives
The following site -specific goals and objectives were developed for Dutch Farms to address
primary basin stressors identified within Section IV.A as well as site specific stressors. Nutrient
loading, sedimentation and fecal pathogens associated with agriculture production are
predominant stressors within the watershed and on -site. Primary goals of this mitigation project
focus on addressing those stressors. Goals include:
1. Reducing sediment, nutrient and pathogen sources that effect water quality.
2. Providing/enhancing flood attenuation.
3. Restoring and enhancing aquatic, semi -aquatic and riparian habitat.
These goals will be accomplished through the following objectives:
1. Reducing water quality stressors and providing/enhancing flood attenuation will be
directly tied to the following:
a) Restoring the existing degraded and incised tributaries on -site as primarily Priority
I restored streams so bankfull and larger flows can access the currently abandoned
(from bankfull flows) floodplain and associated riparian wetlands. The proposed
mitigation strategy will promote settling, uptake, and removal of pathogens,
nutrients, sedimentation, and debris from watershed runoff/floodwaters. Restoring
a stable dimension, pattern, and profile will ensure the channels will transport and
attenuate watershed flows and sediment loads without aggrading or degrading.
Priority I restoration should increase floodplain interaction and groundwater
storage within riparian wetlands, in -turn increasing the capacity of the Site to
uptake nutrients from upstream waters.
1

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
b) Stabilizing channel banks by removal of cattle impacts, restoring appropriate
channel alignment, incorporating woody structure, and planting native vegetative
species to provide soil stability, thus reducing stream bank stressors.
c) Reducing point source (i.e. cattle accessing the channel) and non -point source (i.e.
stormwater runoff through pastures) pollution associated with on -site agricultural
operations by exclusionary fencing from wetlands, streams, and riparian buffers.
d) Reducing point and non -point pollution associated with on -site agricultural
operations by restoring/enhancing riparian wetlands and vegetative buffers on
stream banks, adjacent floodplains and uplands. Establishing vegetative buffers
will increase the treatment of nutrient enriched surface runoff from adjacent
pastureland.
e) Relocating UT 6 to the natural low point of the valley will improve floodwater
interaction with adjacent riparian wetlands.
f) Restoring buffers adjacent to the streams and wetlands will assist in attenuating
floodwaters, in turn reducing stressors from upstream impacts.
g)
Raising adjacent stream bed elevations to restore/enhance wetland hydrology and
reconnect floodwaters, allowing treatment of nutrients from basin inputs during
bankfull and larger flows.
2. Restoring aquatic, semi -aquatic and terrestrial habitat will be directly tied to:
a) Restoration of a sinuous gravel bed channel that promotes bed form diversity and
accommodates benthic macroinvertebrate and fish propagation. Additionally,
woody materials such as log structures, overhanging planted vegetation and toe
wood in submerged water will provide a diversity of shading, bed form and
foraging opportunities for aquatic organisms.
b) Restoring native vegetation to the stream channel banks, wetlands, and the adjacent
riparian corridor that is currently dominated by herbaceous species will diversify
flora and create a protected habitat corridor that will provide an abundance of
available foraging and cover habitat for a multitude of amphibians, reptiles,
mammals and birds.
c) Restoration/enhancement of wetland hydrology and introducing floodwaters back
to the historic floodplain and associated riparian wetlands will provide a diversity
of habitats for semi -aquatic flora and fauna.
d) Protection (via the conservation easement deed) of the riparian areas provides a
connection between mature forests adjacent to the project.
2

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
C. Identity of Sponsor
Davey Mitigation (DM), a Division of Davey Resource Group, Inc. (DRG) will serve as the
Sponsor for the Bank. Davey Resource Group, Inc., dba/Land Management Group (LMG) is
responsible for technical aspects of the UMBI.
Davey Mitigation
T.J. Mascia
717 N. Courhouse Road, Suite 101
Richmond, VA 23236
[e-mail]
252.723.0815
Land Management Group
Ben Furr
3101 Poplarwood Court, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
[e-mail]
919.645.4350
II. ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION
A. Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument
The Sponsor is proposing to permit the Bank using an umbrella mitigation banking instrument
(UMBI). As proposed, the UMBI would allow for the establishment and operation of multiple sites
and multiple phases. Dutch Farms is the first site proposed under this UMBI and, if approved, will
serve as the Bank's initial source of mitigation credit. The Sponsor also proposes incorporating
additional sites not yet identified into the Bank, following Interagency Review Team (IRT) review
and approval.
B. Determination of Credits
Credit for Dutch Farms, and all additional sites, shall be based on the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) most current mitigation credit determination methodology. Presently, the
USACE is utilizing the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update (IRT 2016) to quantify mitigation project credit. If other methods are adopted by USACE,
future sites will use these methods as appropriate.
Dutch Farms will include the restoration, enhancement, and preservation of approximately 6,124
linear feet of stream. Anticipated stream credits produced from Dutch Farms are detailed in Table
1.
3

Dutch Farms Prospectus - May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Table 1. Proposed Stream Mitigation
Stream
Restoration - 1:1
Enhancement II - 3:1
Enhancement II -4:1
Preservation - 10:1
Proposed
Linear Footage
SMU
Proposed
Linear Footage
SMU
Proposed
Linear Footage
SMU
Proposed
Linear Footage
SMU
UT 1
2,006
2,006
63
21
UT 2
106
106
UT 3
112
112
UT 4
354
354
385
96
UT 5
296
296
69
7
UT 6
1,489
1,489
UT 7
250
250
209
70
UT 8
459
459
234
59
UT 9
92
23
Sub -Total
5,072
5,072
272
91
711
178
69
7
Total Proposed
Linear Footage
6,124
Total SMUs
5,348
Percent SMU's
Proposed for
Mitigation
94.8%
1.7%
3.3%
0.1%
Dutch Farms will include restoration and enhancement of approximately 2.25 acres of riparian
wetland. Anticipated wetland credits produced from Dutch Farms is detailed in Table 2. The
Sponsor may elect to forgo wetland credits in lieu of nutrient offset and buffer mitigation credits.
Table 2. Proposed Wetland Credits
Riparian
Wetlands
Reestablishment 1:1
Enhancement 2:1
Enhancement - 3:1
Proposed Acreage
(AC)
WMU
Proposed Acreage
(AC)
WMU
Proposed Acreage
(AC)
WMU
W1
0.04
0.02
W2
0.56
0.56
W3
0.01
0.01
W4
0.39
0.13
W5
0.27
0.27
W6
0.27
0.27
W7
0.15
0.07
W8
0.41
0.41
W9
0.15
0.05
Sub -Total
1.52
1.52
0.19
0.09
0.54
0.18
Percent
WMU's
Proposed for
Mitigation
84.7%
5.2%
10.0/° °
Total Acres Proposed for Mitigation
2.25
Total Proposed WMU's
1.79
Dutch Farms will also be submitted to DWR as a nutrient offset and buffer mitigation bank.
Nutrient offset and buffer mitigation credit shall be based on ratios and percentages provided in
15A NCAC 02B .0295 (m) and (n). Credits will be calculated using the DWR Project Credit Table
Template (updated October 2020). Anticipated nutrient offset and buffer mitigation credits
produced from Dutch Farms are detailed in Table 3.
4

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Table 3. Proposed Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Credits
TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION (TABM)
Mitigation Totals
Square Feet
Credits
Restoration:
620,445
620,445.000
Enhancement:
25,491
12,745.500
Preservation:
14,814
2,962.800
Total Riparian Buffer:
660,750
636,153.300
TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATION
Mitigation Totals
Square Feet
Credits
Nutrient
Offset:
Nitrogen
645 936
10,006.491
Phosphorous
298.551
C. Credit Release Schedule
Credits generated by actions described and approved in the final UMBI shall be released in
predetermined increments according to milestones agreed to by the Sponsor and the IRT in the
UMBI's credit release schedule. The Sponsor will use the credit release schedule detailed for
stream mitigation banks in the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Update (IRT 2016). Nutrient offset and buffer mitigation credits shall be released in predetermined
increments according to milestones agreed to by the Sponsor and DWR.
III. PROPOSED SERVICE AREA
The Bank is situated in the 03030002 (Cape Fear 02) hydrologic unit, which contains the Haw
River and its tributaries until reaching Jordan Lake. The Bank will provide mitigation credits to
offset unavoidable impacts to wetland and stream resources within the Cape Fear 02 River Basin
(Figure 2).
IV. NEED AND FEASIBILITY
A. Watershed Considerations and Needs
Dutch Farms is located within the Cape Fear River Basin, USGS 14-digit hydrologic unit
03030002040010. The Site is not within a Targeted Local Watershed; however, the Site is located
within a Targeted Resource Area (TRA) for Habitat (Figure 3).
Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities:
According to the 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP), the 03030002 HUC
comprises several large communities including Greensboro, Burlington, and Durham. Tributaries
at the Site drain to Big Alamance Creek, and ultimately to B. Everett Jordan Lake, a drinking water
supply that has been designated a Nutrient Sensitive Water. The North Carolina Division of Water
Quality (NCDWQ) developed the Jordan Lake Nutrient Management Strategy (Jordan Rules) in
5

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
2009 in an effort to reduce nutrient pollution to Jordan Lake and restore its designated uses. Major
components of the Jordan Rules include:
• Reducing nutrient inputs from wastewater facilities and agricultural operations;
• Promoting stormwater management; and
• Preserving existing riparian buffers and restoring degraded buffers throughout the
watershed.
Cape Fear River Basin Water Quality Plan:
The 2005 Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Management Plan (Water Quality Plan) was
reviewed to determine significant stressors in the Cape Fear River Basin. Habitat degradation,
algal blooms (chlorophyll a), turbidity, and fecal coliform bacteria are all noted as stressors within
the watershed. Common stressors associated with habitat degradation are sediment loading, lack
of organic material, and stream channelization. Algal blooms result from elevated water
temperature and nutrient concentrations often associated with agricultural practices. High levels
of turbidity and fecal coliform were mostly associated with stream reaches downstream of
urbanized and agricultural areas. The local watershed for the Site is dominated by agriculture. The
Water Quality Plan recommends continued funding and technical support for agricultural Best
Management Practices (BMPs) such as replanting riparian buffers and re-establishing permanent
wildlife habitat.
Historically, the Cape Fear 02 watershed has experienced relatively high stream mitigation
demand. Over the past 15 years the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, Division
of Mitigation Services (DMS) has issued requests for approximately 10,000 stream credits per year
on average. Since 2016, DMS has requested just over 40,000 stream credits in the Cape Fear 02
watershed.
B. Site Selection
The Sponsor conducted a site search in the Cape Fear 02 watershed to identify sites that would
provide opportunities to address stressors within the watershed as detailed in Section IV.A. Sites
were prioritized based on condition and land use and property owners were contacted to gauge
their interest in participating in a mitigation project. Dutch Farms was selected as the first
mitigation project to be developed under this UMBI based on opportunity for functional uplift,
land use, and landowner participation.
V. OWNERSHIP AND LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT
A. Site Ownership
Dutch Farms is comprised of three separate parcels (Figure 6), each owned by members of the
Fields family; Beverly Fields (PIN#: 7799349572), The Hauserfields Living Trust (c/o Larry Dean
Fields, PIN#: 7799543254), and Randy Steve Fields (PIN#: 7799452144). Owners will hereafter
be referred to as Landowners.
6

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
The Sponsor and Landowners have executed separate Mitigation Acquisition and Development
Agreements. Following USACE approval of the UMBI and Bank Site Mitigation Plan, the Sponsor
will exercise its rights provided under the above -referenced agreements to protect the property.
Landowners have also signed Agent Authorization Forms allowing LMG to act on their behalf for
purposes of obtaining necessary approvals for this project (Appendix B).
B. Long -Term Management
Long term protection of the property is proposed through a conservation easement approved by
the USACE. Conservation easements will be held in perpetuity by a non-profit land trust that will
be identified in the UMBI. During the operational period of the Bank, the Sponsor will be
responsible for management actions. A long-term management plan will be developed for each
Bank Site and incorporated into their respective mitigation plans. In general, long-term
management activities will include protecting the sites from encroachment, trespass, clearing, and
other violations that interfere with conservation purposes. Other activities may be incorporated
based on site -specific considerations.
VI. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES
Prior to any debiting, the Sponsor shall provide financial assurances, as acceptable by the USACE,
in consultation with the IRT, to ensure a high level of confidence that the Bank will be successfully
completed and maintained in perpetuity. Financial assurances may be in the form of casualty
insurance, performance and monitoring bonds, or letters of credit. These assurances will only be
invoked in the event the Sponsor is unable to meet the terms of the UMBI (i.e. abandonment of
project, etc.). Following successful completion of construction and monitoring events these
financial instruments may also be reduced to reflect the decrease in financial liability to the
Sponsor. Additional details of these financial assurances will be provided in the UMBI.
VII. QUALIFICATIONS OF SPONSOR
DRG is an environmental consulting firm within the Davey Tree Expert Company (founded in
1880). DRG acquired LMG in 2018. LMG is a full -service environmental consulting firm that has
provided professional services in the Carolinas and Virginia for over 25 years. DM was formed by
DRG in 2020 to integrate DRG's companywide mitigation expertise and provide an avenue to
more efficiently pursue and complete a variety of mitigation project types. DM will serve as the
Sponsor and LMG will be responsible for completing technical aspects of the UMBI. DM staffs'
combined experience includes successful management and oversight of numerous mitigation and
restoration projects in North Carolina and across the southeast and mid -Atlantic.
LMG is composed of scientists and engineers with extensive experience in mitigation. Primary
individuals that will be responsible for completing this project (Kevin Williams, Christian Preziosi,
Ryan Smith, Ben Furr and Chris Smith) have combined to successfully complete over 60
mitigation sites throughout North Carolina and the continental United States. Between them they
have over 100 years of experience restoring streams, wetlands, buffers, and natural landscapes.
7

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
LMG's experience identifying, designing, and implementing mitigation projects provide the
background necessary to ensure quality work that is environmentally beneficial and successful
over the long-term.
LMG's project team is comprised of hydraulic and environmental engineers, licensed soil
scientists, professional geologists, and wetland and wildlife biologists which allows for an
interdisciplinary approach toward mitigation site evaluations and design strategies that promote
increased likelihood for project success. LMG specializes in ecological restoration and natural
resources inventories (including USACE jurisdictional determinations, stream identification, and
threatened and endangered species assessments) that provide the baseline data for the development
of natural design restoration projects. LMG has extensive experience in characterizing watershed
conditions and functional needs. Through the use of remotely sensed data and field
reconnaissance, LMG can effectively and accurately catalogue stressors contributing to wetland
and/or stream degradation. From these evaluations, appropriate management strategies can be
identified to effectively achieve watershed management goals. LMG routinely submits and obtains
regulatory concurrence on wetland and stream determinations. LMG has demonstrated experience
working with regulatory and resource agencies for mitigation design, implementation, monitoring,
and closeout.
LMG applies the most current agency guidelines and rules governing mitigation design,
implementation, and monitoring. LMG is well -versed in the 2008 Federal Rule for Compensatory
Mitigation for Losses of Aquatic Resources and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Wilmington District Stream Mitigation Guidelines. LMG interfaces regularly with federal and
state agency representatives regarding current permitting and mitigation requirements, including
numerous mitigation plans and monitoring reports.
VIII. ECOLOGICAL SUITABILITY AND EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Site Geology and Land Use
Dutch Farms is located in the Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont (NCGS, 1985). The Carolina
Slate Belt consists mostly of rocks originally deposited by volcanic eruption and sedimentation.
The name Carolina Slate is derived from the low-grade metamorphism that gives the rocks their
slaty cleavage (Rogers, 2010). Land use within the project's watershed is dominated by forest (32
percent) and agricultural (pasture- 48 percent), with the remainder of land in residential (19
percent) and open water (1 percent) (Figure 4).
B. Water Resources
Figure 3 depicts watershed planning elements and watershed contextual elements that are
discussed below. Dutch Farms is located within the 03030002040010 14-digit Hydrologic Unit
of Cataloging Unit 03030002 of the Cape Fear River Basin. Site tributaries are not 303d listed
streams but they do flow directly into Big Alamance Creek, which is classified as a water supply
watershed, nutrient sensitive water (per NCDENR Surface Water Classifications online map, 4-
21-2021). Dutch Farms is located in a Targeted Resource Area for Habitat (Habitat TRA).
8

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
C. Soils
Soil series depicted in the Guilford County Soil Survey are shown on Figure 5. The majority of
lands within floodplains on -site and associated riparian wetlands are mapped as Congaree soils.
Congaree soils are well drained but are known to contain minor components of Chewacla and
Wehadkee soils. Soil profiles were collected in representative wetland/relic wetland areas and
sealed by Nicholas Howell (NC License #1294), a licensed soil scientist with LMG. Mr. Howell
confirmed that the soil profiles he collected were consistent with the Wehadkee soil series. Soil
profile logs are provided in Appendix C.
Wehadkee soils are poorly drained with moderate permeability and moderate water capacity.
Wehadkee soils are often found in association with Chewacla soils. Chewacla soil is formed on
slightly higher ridges on floodplains while Wehadkee is formed in the lower swales of floodplains.
D. Jurisdictional Features
Nine unnamed tributaries to Big Alamance Creek (UT 1 — UT 9) are located within Dutch Farm's
proposed conservation easement. All tributaries on -site exhibit a continuous Ordinary High -Water
Mark (OHWM) throughout the property. A NCDWQ Stream Identification Form (NCDENR,
2010a) was completed for each unnamed tributary (Table 4 and Appendix D). All streams on -site
are perennial, with the exception of UT 4 — Reach 1 and UT 7, which are intermittent streams. A
jurisdictional determination has not been completed for Dutch Farms however, soil, hydrology and
vegetation conditions on -site have been assessed to determine the extent of potential wetlands. As
discussed in previous sections, anthropogenic disturbances associated with agricultural practices
have resulted in a severely altered vegetative community, interception of surface water, lateral
drawdown of groundwater, and the reduction/removal of overbank flooding in relic and existing
wetland areas. Despite these disturbances, W 1, W4, W7, and W9 still exhibit indicators for hydric
soils, hydrophytic vegetation, and wetland hydrology. W2, W3, W5, W6, and W8 are located
immediately adjacent to incised tributaries, lack primary indicators of wetland hydrology, and are
considered drained (i.e. relic) wetlands (Figure 6). A jurisdictional determination will be
completed as part of the UMBI.
E. Cultural Resources
There are no properties listed on the National Register within a one -mile radius of Dutch Farms
(NCSHPO, 2021). The Lilian Coble House is located approximately 0.9 mile northwest of Dutch
Farms and has been surveyed only (Site ID GF1944). Survey of the home was likely done to
identify and gather data on the community's historic resources. A survey does not guarantee that
the site is eligible for listing on the National Register and State law does not provide protection for
properties that are determined eligible but not listed in the National Register.
F. Threatened and Endangered Species
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists five species as threatened, endangered,
or at risk in Guilford County: Cape Fear Shiner (Notropis mekistocholas), Roanoke logperch
(Percina rex), Atlantic pigtoe (Fusconaia masoni), Schweinitz's sunflower (Helianthus
9

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
schweinitzii), and small whorled pogonia (Isotria medeoloides). Records at the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program (NHP) do not indicate an occurrence of a federally threatened or
endangered species at the Site. Based on preliminary site assessments, habitat for Schweinitz's
sunflower is provided in maintained areas throughout the Site; however, occurrence of this species
on -site is unlikely given the historical agricultural landuse. Records at the NHP do not indicate
that any federally protected species elemental occurrences are located within one mile of Dutch
Farms. The Sponsor will coordinate with the USFWS regarding threatened and endangered
species prior to UMBI development.
G. Floodplain Compliance
Review of the Floodplain Mapping Program website and the effective Flood Insurance Rate Map
(FIRM) Map Number 3710779900J Effective Date June 18, 2007 indicates streams on -site are not
part of FEMA study.
H. Existing Stream Conditions
Channel Stability Mapping is provided on Figures 7A-7B.
Field visits were conducted in June and September 2020. LMG walked the entire site making
visual assessments, taking notes on existing conditions of streams, wetlands, habitat, riparian
buffers and determining the potential for mitigation. Morphological data was collected on all
tributaries proposed for restoration (UT's 1-8).
Site floodplain alteration and water quality stressors are shown on Figure 8. Pre -monitoring feature
locations are shown on Figure 9. Discharges displayed in the following cross sections for each
channel were determined utilizing the NC Piedmont Regional Curve. While some cross sections
displayed potential bankfull indicators, most of the reaches have so significantly
incised/channelized and/or been impacted by cattle that reliable bankfull indicators are either not
present or unreliable.
Significant fecal and nutrient loads are entering Site tributaries as a result of direct cattle access to
streams and overland sheetflow from adjacent pastures. Evidence of this includes visual
observation of cattle in the stream channel during site visits and fecal matter along stream banks
and within the stream channel. LMG used equations and guidance developed by DMS in the
document titled "Quantifying Benefits to Water Quality from Livestock Exclusion and Riparian
Buffer Establishment for Stream Restoration" (June 15, 2016) to estimate potential fecal load
reductions that may result from proposed restoration activities at the Site. It is estimated that cattle
exclusion and establishment of a riparian buffer would decrease the fecal load of the Site by
approximately 2.88E+14 col/year. LMG also used equations set forth in the North Carolina
Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) memorandum titled "Approval of Cattle Exclusion
Nutrient Reduction Practices" (April 5, 2017) as well as the document titled "NC Division of Water
Quality — Methodology and Calculations for determining Nutrient Reductions associated with
Riparian Buffer Establishment" to determine potential nitrogen and phosphorous reduction loads
for the Site. Cattle exclusion and establishment of a riparian buffer is estimated to reduce the
10

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
nitrogen load to the Site by approximately 1,169 lb/yr and reduce phosphorous load to the Site by
approximately 120 lb/yr.
Tributaries on -site are primarily gravel bed streams with significant inputs of fine sediments due
to actively eroding banks, hoof shear and sheet flow from unstabilized soils in adjacent cattle
pastures. Eroding banks are primarily a result of 1) a lack of deeply -rooted stream bank and
riparian vegetation and 2) cattle accessing the stream as a watering source. Hoof shear is evident
from the upstream beginning of the Site to the downstream extent of the Site, throughout the
majority of length of tributaries. Substantial loads of fine sediments derived from bank scour and
sheet flow through adjacent pastures has deposited in many of the channel's riffles and pools.
Figures 7A through 7B depict a channel stability analysis for the Site. The analysis focuses on
determining portions of the channel that display active erosion due to moderate to high bank stress.
UT 1
UT 1 is the Site's dominant hydrologic feature. UT 1 flows through a well-defined floodplain.
Elevations range between approximately 722 ft MSL at the point at which UT 1 originates on -site
and approximately 690 ft MSL at the downstream end of the Site. UT 1 begins on -site as a first
order, perennial stream, flowing from west to east approximately 1,921 feet prior to exiting the
Site. Although the stream is depicted as intermittent on the USGS quadrangle, field indicators
and NCDWQ scoring (see Table 4) reveal that UT 1 is a spring fed, perennial stream within the
Site. The digital elevation model (DEM) and USGS quadrangle clearly depict a natural valley in
the landscape where UT 1 flows (Figures 10A and 10B). UT 1's drainage area is approximately
167 acres (0.26 square miles) at the downstream extent of the Site (Figure 10A).
For purposes of describing existing conditions, UT 1 has been divided into two reaches. UT 1 is
stable as it flows through W 1, however the riparian buffer is substantially altered and cattle have
unrestricted access to the channel. This section of UT 1 is referred to as Reach 1. Reach 2 begins
just downstream of W 1, where a headcut forms and UT 1 becomes incised with eroding banks
throughout the remainder of the Site.
Two ford crossings are located on UT 1 approximately 472 feet and 1,162 feet downstream of UT
1's origin. Ford crossings have been built using rock and fill material, which is creating a
backwater effect for approximately 100' upstream of each crossing. It should be noted that the
large majority of UT 1 contains channel banks experiencing active erosion. UT 1 has been
manipulated through channelization and straightening throughout the Site. Anthropogenic
manipulations result in a system that lacks natural channel geometry (i.e. little to no meandering),
is easily accessible for cattle and void of a natural buffer.
Data was collected from three separate locations on UT 1 in an effort to depict typical geomorphic
conditions of the stream system. This data is used to display overarching morphological
characteristics of UT 1 throughout the Site. All cross sections classified as E type channels which
is a typically a stable channel type. However, the bank height ratios ranged from 1.51 to 2 which
indicates the channel is incised in the landscape. Cross sections 2 and 3 depict slumped banks
found throughout many portions of UT 1 due to cattle impacts.
11

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
91 0
k70
UT1-Reach2: XS1
+-Ground tf.RIklue T1MOO tele
00 5.0 m0 15.0
DOME• (R)
100
Wulnutlan- ES
NBAAOY0. m 0a0e:0.97
bR1anEMwm Rate- 3.94
OHM 151
91.0
900
L 890
A. 88.0
870
800
0.0
5.0
UT1-Reach2:X52
--- Gtound -e- Banllull —r ikeodprtne
2DO 1511
Distance (1t)
GafrukatIon: ES
Width.to-Depth Ratko:5.45
Entrenchment Rate: 232
BUR: 2.02
100 150
920
91.0
t 900 r
1 89.0
880
820
UT 1- Reach 2: XS 3
+-Ground t&mettl1 Tikwdpnmc
5lu0lped Bank
0.0 5.0 100
15.0
DWano9(R)
70.0
G1ata10tation 1:
Wldthto.0epth Rate 5 l5
Entrenchment Ratio !
75,0 50.0
UT 2
UT 2 is a short reach of approximately 106 feet within the Site that flows through a well-defined
floodplain. UT 2 enters the Site as a first order, perennial stream (USGS Climax Quadrangle),
flowing from south to north. Although the stream is depicted as intermittent on the USGS
quadrangle, field indicators and NCDWQ scoring reveal that UT 2 is a perennial stream within the
Site. The DEM and USGS clearly depict a natural valley in the landscape where UT 2 flows
(Figures 10A and 10B). UT 2's drainage area is approximately 50 acres (0.08 square miles) at it's
convergence with UT 1 (Figure 10A).
12

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
UT 2 is primarily a gravel bed stream that has unrestricted cattle access within the Site. A headcut
occurs on UT 2 just after entering the Site. UT 2 is incised downstream of the headcut. Like UT
1, UT 2 classifies as an E type channel but is incised in the landscape as indicated by a bank height
ratio of 2.02. The majority of UT 2 contains channel banks that depict moderate to substantial bank
erosion due to lack of deeply rooted vegetation and cattle access.
95D
94 0
= 930
1
s920
910
900
UT2: XS4
--GIWnd-/-B1nkfoll —e—Ebodgone
Mlfotlon: ES
W18814.0epth Ratio. 6.86
Entrenchment Ratio 3 1S
BMR / 02
0.0 SD 100 1S0 200 250 300 35.0
Miami (R(
UT 3
UT 3 is a short reach of approximately 112 feet within the Site that flows through a well-defined
floodplain. UT 3 enters the Site as a first order, perennial stream, flowing from south to north.
Although the stream is not depicted as a blue line on the USGS quadrangle, field indicators and
NCDWQ scoring reveal that UT 3 is a perennial stream within the Site. The DEM and USGS
quadrangle clearly depicts a natural valley in the landscape where UT 3 flows (Figures 10A and
10B). UT 3's drainage area is approximately 22 acres (0.035 square miles) at it's convergence with
UT 1 (Figure 10A).
UT 3 is primarily a gravel bed stream that has unrestricted cattle access within the Site. UT 3
classifies as a G type channel and is incised in the landscape as indicated by a bank height ratio of
2.0. The majority of UT 3 contains channel banks that depict moderate to substantial bank erosion
due to lack of deeply rooted vegetation and cattle access.
930
97.0
810
900
89.0
0.0 5.0
UT 3: XS 5
—o - I - • ooe
1011
15.0
DMt na (It(
200
Classification: G5
Widta.to.Dopt6 Ratio' 1.63
Entrenchment Ratio 143
BUR 100
250 3110
UT 4
UT 4 flows through a well-defined floodplain. Elevations range between approximately 730 ft
MSL at the point at which UT 4 originates and approximately 704 ft MSL at the convergence with
UT 1. UT 4 originates on -site as a first order, intermittent stream, flowing from southeast to
northwest. Although the stream is not depicted as a blue line on the USGS quadrangle, field
13

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
indicators and NCDWQ scoring reveal that UT 4 begins as an intermittent stream on -site (Reach
1) and transitions to a perennial stream downstream of a large headcut (Reach 2). The DEM and
USGS quadrangle clearly depict a natural valley in the landscape where UT 4 flows (Figures 10A
and 10B). UT 4's drainage area is approximately 20 acres (0.03 square miles) at it's convergence
with UT 1 (Figure 10A).
UT 4 — Reach 1 is stable but lacks a natural, wooded buffer. Cattle do not currently access Reach
1; however, the area adjacent to UT 4 and W4 is maintained as pasture (i.e. regular mowing). UT
4 — Reach 2 is primarily a gravel bed stream that has unrestricted cattle access within the Site. UT4
— Reach 2 classifies as an E type channel but is incised in the landscape as indicated by a bank
height ratio of 2.17. XS 6 below depicts the severity of cattle impact on the left bank (note what
appears to be a bench near bankfull, that is actually evidence of erosion due to hoof shear). The
cross-section classifies as an E-type channel in XS 6, however this is an unstable channel section
with confined flows. The majority of UT 4's channel banks through this reach exhibit moderate to
substantial bank erosion due to lack of deeply rooted vegetation and cattle access.
91.
ROO
R70
00 S0
UT 4 - Reach 2: XS 6
— t;routd -6- Ranklull-r110.dV/01te•
10.0 1S.0 200 ?S0
Mauna )R)
Classification: ES
Which -to -Depth Ratio: 482
Entranthment Ratio 342
BUR: 2.17
UT 5
UT 5 flows through a well-defined floodplain. Elevations range between approximately 730 ft
MSL at the point at which UT 5 enters the Site and approximately 710 ft MSL at the convergence
with UT 6. UT 5 originates on -site as a first order, perennial stream, flowing from north to south.
Although the stream is not depicted as a blue line on the USGS quadrangle, field indicators and
NCDWQ scoring reveal that UT 5 is a spring fed, perennial stream within the Site. The DEM and
USGS quadrangle clearly depict a natural valley in the landscape where UT 5 flows (Figures 10A
and 10B). UT 5 is a spring -fed system with a drainage area of approximately 5 acres (0.001 square
miles) at it's convergence with UT 6 (Figure 10A).
UT 5 was divided into two reaches based on stream condition (Figure 6). Reach 1 consists of the
upstream most portion of UT 5 as it flows through a wooded area. Reach 1 is a stable, gravel bed
stream with a mature, wooded buffer. The property owner currently grazes a horse in the area
adjacent to Reach 1 but there is no evidence of livestock access in the channel. Reach 2 consists
of the portion of UT 5 that flows through active cattle pasture prior to converging with UT 6.
Reach 2 is primarily a gravel bed stream that has unrestricted cattle access and severely eroding
banks. Reach 2 classifies as a B type channel and is incised in the landscape as indicated by a
bank height ratio of 3.05. A B type channel can be a stable channel type but it is anticipated that
UT 5 would naturally be an E or C type channel. Cross-section 7 is over -widened due to hoof
14

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
shear from cattle congregating within the channel This impact is typical throughout Reach 2 of
UT 5.
97.0
96.0
950
0
.. 940
1
93.0
92.0
91.0
900
0.0
50
100
UT 5 - Reach 2: XS 7
-• t,n,und • 0anktull —ra—I loodprone
150
20.0 25.0
Obhnc• (R)
30.0
350
400
: BS
WIdth 9D.p10 RROR: 25.73
BetrMnMwt1 Rider 1.81
Mt 3.05
490
UT 6
UT 6 flows through a well-defined floodplain. Elevations range between approximately 730 ft
MSL at the point at which UT 6 enters the Site and approximately 692 ft MSL at the convergence
with UT 1. UT 6 is contained entirely on Site as a first order, perennial stream, flowing from west
to east. Although the stream is not depicted as a blue line on the USGS quadrangle, field indicators
and NCDWQ scoring reveal that UT 6 is a perennial stream within the Site. The DEM and USGS
quadrangle clearly depicts a natural valley in the landscape where UT 6 flows (Figures 10A and
10B). UT 6 is a spring -fed system with a drainage area of approximately 21 acres (0.033 square
miles) at it's convergence with UT 7 (Figure 10A).
UT 6 is primarily a gravel bed stream that has unrestricted cattle access within the Site. UT 6
displays two separate stream types depending upon which landscape position the stream is
assessed. Therefore, geomorphic data was collected in both landscapes and separated into reaches
(Figure 6). The upstream reach (Reach 1) has a one tree buffer and is significantly incised through
a steeper valley. Vertical stream banks are actively eroding through most of this reach. Reach 1
classifies as a G type channel with a bank height ratio of 5.07.
960
950
940
0
93.0
910
910
90.0
R90
UT 6 - Reach 1: XS 8
Cl.fflika0n. 05
W dth.to-Depth Ratio'. 3 B/
Entrenchment Ratio' 1.11
BRR507
00 70 40 60 80 100 12.0 140 160 18.0 10.0
Mum. (R)
15

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Reach 2 appears to have been straightened and channelized within the downstream portions of the
valley (i.e. the lower slope portion of the valley). The straightened section of UT 6 now converges
with UT 7, outside of its natural flow path. UT 6 classifies as an E type channel in Reach 2 with
a bank height ratio of 1.7. While this section classifies as a typically stable stream type, the channel
has been straightened, lacks a wooded riparian buffer, and is impacted by unrestricted cattle access.
Streambanks are covered with herbaceous vegetation through Reach 2 but are undercutting below
the root line. In addition, rock and fill material used to stabilize a ford crossing at the beginning of
Reach 2 is creating a backwater effect for approximately 50' upstream.
970
930
UT 6 - Reach 2: XS 9
-0-WowW--BankluR
ClaffI k31on IS
WkIth-to-0•0h Ratio 10.
lniron(hmant Ratio I, �.
BMR 1/
00 5 0 100 ISO 20O 25.0
CIORMIC•IM
UT 7
UT 7 originates on -site as a first order, intermittent stream and flows through W7 prior to
converging with UT 6. Elevations range between approximately 710 ft MSL at the point at which
UT 7 originates and approximately 694 ft MSL at the convergence with UT 6. Although the stream
is not depicted as a blue line on the USGS quadrangle, field indicators and NCDWQ scoring reveal
that UT 7 is an intermittent stream within the Site. The DEM and USGS quadrangle clearly depict
a natural valley in the landscape where UT 7 flows (Figures 10A and 10B). UT 7 has a drainage
area of approximately 8 acres (0.005 square miles) at it's convergence with UT 6 (Figure 10A).
UT 7 was divided into two reaches based on stream condition (Figure 6). Reach 1 consists of the
upstream most portion of UT 7 as it flows through W8. UT 7 has been straightened through Reach
1 but maintains stable bed and banks until immediately upstream of its confluence with UT 6. UT
7 — Reach 2 begins at a headcut immediately upstream of the confluence with UT 6. UT 7 becomes
incised and exhibits eroding banks from the headcut to its confluence with UT 6. An at -grade
equipment crossing has impacted the bed and banks of UT 7 for approximately 50 feet just
upstream of the headcut.
UT 8
UT 8 flows through a well-defined floodplain. Elevations range between approximately 732 ft
MSL at the point at which UT 8 enters the Site and approximately 694 ft MSL at the convergence
with UT 1. UT 8 enters the Site as a first order, perennial stream, flowing from southeast to
northwest through wetland W9. Although the stream is not depicted as a blue line on the USGS
quadrangle, field indicators and NCDWQ scoring reveal that UT 8 is a perennial stream within the
Site. The DEM and USGS quadrangle clearly depict a natural valley in the landscape where UT
8 flows (Figures 10A and 10B). UT 8's drainage area is approximately 18 acres (0.03 square miles)
at it's convergence with UT 1 (Figure 10A).
16

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
950
92.0 •
0.0
S.0
UT 8 - Reach 2: XS 10
—•--Ground —a—Bank hU — 1bo/prone
10.0
150
DbtmcM (1t)
20.0
ctutinration
Width.to.Depth Ratio
Entrenchment Ratio
BHR ;
250 30.0
UT 8 has been divided into two reaches based upon stream conditions (Figure 6). Reach 1 is the
upstream portion of UT 8 as it flows through W9. Reach 1 is stable and cattle only have access to
the downstream most portion of this reach. However, Reach 1 lacks a wooded riparian buffer as
land adjacent to UT 8 is maintained as pasture. Reach 2 includes the downstream portion of UT 8
as it flows through active cattle pasture prior to converging with UT 1. Reach 2 is primarily a
gravel bed stream that has unrestricted cattle access. UT 8 classifies as an E type channel within
Reach 2 but is incised in the landscape as indicated by a bank height ratio of 1.86. Additionally,
UT 8 has abandoned typical stream form in multiple areas throughout Reach 2 due to cattle impacts
that have created variable bank configurations. Two ford crossings on UT 8 — Reach 2 are creating
backwater effects for approximately 40' upstream of each.
UT 9
UT 9 originates within the Site as a first order, perennial stream flowing out of a hillside near the
headwaters of UT 6. UT 9 is spring fed and has consistent bed and banks. Although the stream is
not depicted as a blue line on the USGS quadrangle, field indicators and NCDWQ scoring reveal
that UT 9 is a perennial stream within the Site. The DEM and USGS quadrangle depict a subtle
valley in the landscape where UT 9 flows (Figures 10A and 10B). UT 8's drainage area is
approximately 3 acres at it's convergence with UT 6 (Figure 10A). UT 9 is stable and has a mature,
narrow wooded buffer on both sides, but cattle have unrestricted access to the stream.
Biological Impairment
As noted above, the majority of streams on the Site have various physical impairments that include:
• Manipulation of natural channel planform, bedform and cross -sectional area,
• Continued maintenance of the manipulated channel,
• Fine sediment loads from degraded banks of most tributaries on -site,
• Continual maintenance of riparian buffers and denudation of deep-rooted vegetation from
those buffers,
• Fecal and nutrient loading into the channels from unabated access of cattle and sheet flow
through pasture lands adjacent to streams on -site, and
• Hoof shear of channel banks and bed form from cattle access and wading.
17

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
These physical impairments will have a significant effect on water quality and biological integrity
of the Site. Effects of physical impairment include:
• Loss and degradation of natural and essential plan and bed form features,
• Increased loading of nutrients and pathogens to on -site and off -site streams due to
maintenance of fields within riparian areas and access of cattle to riparian areas and stream
channels,
• Abandonment of floodplain interaction (i.e. flows are entrenched in the existing channel)
reduces the ability of the Site to uptake and store nutrients and other pollutant inputs,
• Denudation of riparian vegetation substantially reduces potential woody debris inputs to
the channel that are vital for aquatic propagation and cover habitat, and
• Denudation of riparian vegetation reduces semi -aquatic and terrestrial habitat corridors
through the Site.
Historical Presence of Streams
Table 4 provides justification for jurisdictional status of each stream reach on -site and summarizes
impairments.
Table 4. Existing Stream Conditions
Reach
Historical Presence
DA
(Acres)
*
DWQ
Score
Impairment
UT 1
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley
(Figure 10B); blue line on
USGS quadrangle (Figure
10A)
167
31.5
Incised/entrenched through
anthropogenic manipulation; cattle
and equipment access; little to no
mature vegetation along stream or
adjacent buffer, eroding stream
banks.
UT 2
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley
(Figure 10B); blue line on
USGS quadrangle (Figure
10A)
50
33.5
UT 3
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley
(Figure 10B); Stream
signature on historic
aerial photographs
(Figures 11A — 11C)
22
30.25
UT 4
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley
(Figure 10B); stream
signature on historic
aerial photographs
(Figures 11A — 11C)
19
22 75
(Reach 1)
31.5
(Reach 2)
Reach 1 — no mature vegetation
along stream or adjacent buffer.
Reach 2 — Incised/entrenched
through anthropogenic
manipulation; cattle and equipment
access; little to no mature
vegetation along stream or adjacent
buffer, eroding stream banks.
18

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Reach
Historical Presence
DA
(Acres)
DWQ
Score
Impairment
UT 5
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley30.5
(Figure 10B); spring box
at head of tributary
5
(Reach 1
and 2)
Reach 1 — No Impairments
Reach 2 — Incised/entrenched
through anthropogenic
manipulation; cattle and equipment
access; little to no mature
vegetation along stream or adjacent
buffer, eroding stream banks.
UT 6
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley
(Figure 10B); stream
signature on historic
aerial photographs
(Figures 11A — 11C)
21
32
Reach 1 & 2 — Incised/entrenched
through anthropogenic
manipulation; cattle and equipment
access; little to no mature
vegetation along stream or adjacent
buffer, eroding stream banks.
UT 7
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley
(Figure lOB); stream
signature on historic
aerial photographs
(Figures 11A — 11C)
8
19.25
Little to no mature vegetation
along stream or adjacent buffer;
channel straightened and impacted
by cattle and equipment access;
eroding stream banks.
UT 8
Definitive LiDAR
evidence of natural valley
(Figure 10B); stream
signature on historic
aerial photographs
(Figures 11A — 11C)
18
23.75
(Reach 1)
30 (Reach
2)
Reach 1 — No mature vegetation
along stream or adjacent buffer.
Reach 2 — Incised/entrenched
through anthropogenic
manipulation; cattle and equipment
access; little to no mature
vegetation along stream or adjacent
buffer, eroding stream banks.
UT 9
LiDAR evidence of
natural valley (Figure
10B);
3
27
Cattle have access to the stream
*See Figures 10A-10B for Drainage Area Maps
UT 5, UT 7, and UT 9 have drainage areas of less than 10 acres but UT 5 and UT 9 are spring fed
and UT 7 originates at a headwater wetland. All tributaries are perennial with the exception of
UT 4 - Reach 1 and UT 7, which are intermittent.
19

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
I. Existing Wetland Conditions
All wetlands on -site (relic and existing) are classified as Headwater Forest, as described in the
North Carolina Wetland Assessment
Method (NC WAM) user manual,
and are located adjacent to first order
tributaries.
Existing Jurisdictional Wetlands
W1, W4, W7, and W9 are existing
wetlands dominated by herbaceous
vegetation such as common rush
(Juncus effusus), various sedges
(Carex spp.), knotweed (Polygonum
spp.), tearthumb (Persicaria
sagittata), fescue (Festuca sp.), and
Japanese stiltgrass (Microstegium
W 1 also supports scattered, young woody vegetation such as red maple (Acer rubrum), tag alder
(Alnus serrulata), and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua). Soils within existing wetlands on -site
exhibit the F3 hydric indicator (depleted matrix) and several primary hydrology indicators such as
standing water, saturated soils, water within 12 inches of the soil surface, and water -stained leaves.
Cattle have unrestricted access to W 1 and W7, which has served to significantly alter the ground
surface condition and vegetative communities within each wetland. Cattle do not currently have
access to W4 and W9; however, these areas are maintained as pasture and were recently mowed.
Existing Headwater Forest wetlands are targeted for enhancement as described in Section IX.B.
Relic Wetlands
vimineum).
W2, W3, W5, W6, and W8 are drained wetlands located adjacent to incised tributaries that have
lowered groundwater levels in the floodplain to the point that wetland hydrology indicators are
absent. In addition, the incised
tributaries have severed close to
bankfull flows from accessing the
adjacent floodplain and associated
wetlands. Reduction of flood flows
from accessing these wetlands
reduces hydrologic inputs to the
wetlands when compared with
natural conditions. The Skaggs
Method of determining lateral
drainage effects was used to model
the potential drainage effect of the
incised tributaries (Skaggs 2005).
The table below lists the results from
W8 — relic wetland adjacent to UT 1 and UT 8
the model.
20

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Table 5. Skagg's Lateral Drainage Effects
Stream ID
UT 1
UT 4
UT 5
UT 6
UT 8
Existing Depth (ft)
3
2.5
5
5
2
Adjacent Drained Wetlands
W2, W8
W3
W5
W5, W6
W8
Average Potential Drainage
Effect* (ft)
127
114
155
155
97
*Based on default T25 values and Wehadkee soil series hydraulic conductivity
Cattle have unrestricted access to these relic wetlands. Soil compaction from cattle and the adjacent
incised tributaries have impacted surface and subsurface water storage and infiltration. Vegetation
is also significantly altered due to agricultural practices and consists primarily of herbaceous
species such as common rush, various sedges, fescue, broomsedge (Andropogon sp.), and other
pasture grasses. Woody vegetation is sparsely scattered throughout W5 along the edges of the
wetland and consists of red maple, sweetgum, American elm (Ulmus americana), and green ash
(Fraxinus pennsylvanica).
Soils underlying relic and existing wetlands at the Site are mapped as moderately well drained to
well -drained soil types on the Guilford County Soil Survey (Figure 5, NRCS 1977); however, soil
profiles taken at each relic and existing wetland were classified as Wehadkee loam by Nicholas
Howell (NC License #1294), a licensed soil scientist with Land Management Group. Wehadkee
loam is a poorly drained floodplain soil found throughout the Piedmont region. Soil profile logs
(sealed by Nicholas Howell) are presented in Appendix C. Relic Headwater Forest wetlands are
targeted for re-establishment as described in Section IX.B.
J. Existing Riparian Buffer
The majority of buffers along Site streams and wetlands are currently utilized as active cattle
pasture or hay production. Woody vegetation is limited to scattered trees located along the stream
banks. Vegetation along streams consists of species such as red maple, sweetgum, tag alder,
American elm, green ash, and privet (Ligustrum sinense). Herbaceous vegetation is dominated by
common rush, sedges and fescue.
Site wetlands are located within the floodplain/riparian areas of all tributaries on -site except UT 2
and UT 3. Site wetlands are generally devoid of canopy and sub -canopy species. Herbaceous
vegetation consists of common rush, fescue and sedges. W 1 contains scattered shrubs including
tag alder, red maple, and sweetgum. W5 contains scattered canopy trees including red maple, green
ash, sweetgum, and American elm.
K. Functional Assessments
NC WAM and the North Carolina Stream Assessment Method (NC SAM) were used to assess the
functions and values of a representative sampling of wetlands and streams throughout the project
area (Table 6 and Table 7). Headwater Forest is the only NC WAM wetland type at the Site. NC
WAM and NC SAM recognize three major functions (Hydrology, Water Quality, and Habitat) that
21

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
are rated based on several sub -functions. Cattle have direct access to existing and drained wetlands
on -site (except for W4 and W9), and to the majority of stream footage on -site (except for UT 4 —
Reach 1 and UT 8 — Reach 1).
NC SAM
Cattle access, stream channelization, and degraded riparian buffers resulted in low functional
ratings in all three major categories for most tributaries on -site. A low functional rating indicates
that streams fail to provide the benefits of a reference system in all major functional categories.
Eliminating cattle access, restoring appropriate channel dimensions, pattern and profile, and
restoring riparian buffers would raise the overall score for on -site tributaries substantially.
Table 6. SAM Assessment Scores
Mitigation Type
Enhancement
Restoration
Preservation
NC SAM Function Class Rating Summary
UT 1-
Reach 1
UT4- Reach 1,
UT8-Reach 1
UT 7 -
Reach 1
UT9
UT1-Reach
2
UT 2, UT 3, UT
4- Reach 2, UT
5 - Reach 2
UT6
UT 7 - Reach 2,
UT8-Reach 2
UT 5- Reach 1
(1) HYDROLOGY
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Flood Flow
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(3)StreamsideAreaAttenuation
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(4) Floodplain Access
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(4) Wooded Riparian Buffer
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(4) Microtopography
NA
NA
NA
NA
LOW
NA
NA
NA
NA
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(4) Channel Stability
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(4) Sediment Transport
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(4)StreamGeomorphology
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
HIGH
(1) WATER QUALITY
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
(2) Stream -side Area Vegetation
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(3) Upland Pollutant Filtration
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) Indicators of Stressors
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
(2) Aquatic Life Tolerance
HIGH
NA
NA
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
NA
HIGH
(1) HABITAT
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(2) In -stream Habitat
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
(3) Baseflow
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
HIGH
(3)Substrate
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
(3) Stream Stability
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(3) In -Stream Habitat
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
(2) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(3) Stream -side Habitat
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
(3) Thermoregulation
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
OVERALL
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
HIGH
NC WAM
NC WAM ratings were calculated for each existing and drained wetland within the Site. Most
wetlands on -site exhibited a low overall functional rating. The low rating is primarily due to cattle
disturbance, altered surface and subsurface water storage, disturbed vegetative communities, and
22

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
alteration of overland and overbank flow caused by the channelization of adjacent tributaries. W1
and W7 had overall scores of medium, with low Habitat condition metrics due to significantly
altered vegetative communities.
Table 7. WAM Assessment Scores
NC WAM Function Class Rating Summary
W1-
Headwater
Forest
W2, W3,
W6, W8-
Headwater
Forest
W4, W9-
Headwater
Forest
WS-
Headwater
Forest
W7-
Headwater
Forest
FUNCTION
SUB -FUNCTION
METRICS
RATING
RATING
RATING
RATING
HYDROLOGY
Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
Sub -Surface Storage and Retention
Condition
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
WATER QUALITY
Pathogen Change
Condition
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
Particulate Change
Condition
HIGH
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
Condition/Opportunity
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Soluble Change
Condition
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
Physical Change
Condition
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
MEDIUM
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
Pollution Change
Condition
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Condition/Opportunity
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
HABITAT
Physical Structure
Condition
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
Landscape Path Structure
Condition
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
Vegetation Composition
Condition
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
LOW
FUNCTION RATING SUMMARY
FUNCTION
METRICS/NOTES
RATING
RATING
RATING
RATING
HYDROLOGY
Condition
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MEDIUM
WATER QUALITY
Condition
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
LOW
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
Condition/Opportunity
HIGH
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
MEDIUM
HIGH
Opportunity Presence? (Y/N)
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
HABITAT
Condition
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
Overall Wetland Rating
MEDIUM
LOW
LOW
LOW
MEDIUM
Table 8 summarizes the uplift potential for each functional stressor identified on -site. The Site
provides High or Very High uplift potential for seven out of ten on -site functional stressors. It is
of note that the Site is located within a Habitat TRA.
23

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Table 8. Functional Uplift Justification
Functional
Category
Functional
Stressor
Functional Uplift Potential
Water
Quality
Non-functioning
riparian
buffer/wetland
vegetation
High — Most of the buffer (including all wetland acreage) is in active cattle
pasture or is being managed for hay production and lacks woody vegetation.
Restored buffer will range from 50' to 100' on both sides of all tributaries
on -site.
Sediment
High — Majority of stream banks on -site are actively eroding and sloughing
from cattle access and channel incision. Restoration of degraded tributaries
and riparian buffer should successfully treat sediment stressors on -site.
Nutrients
High — Cattle have direct access to streams and wetlands on -site. Excluding
cattle and restoring riparian buffers should reduce Nitrogen loads by
approximately 1,169 lb-N/yr. Phosphorous loads should be reduced by
approximately 120 lb-P/yr.
Fecal Coliform
High — Cattle have direct access to streams and wetlands on -site. Excluding
cattle and restoring riparian buffers should reduce fecal loads by
approximately 2.88E+14 col/yr.
Hydrology
Peak Flows
High — Bankfull flows are currently contained within the existing channels.
Adjacent wetlands and riparian buffers are degraded. Priority I restoration
of degraded tributaries, restoration of wetlands, and replanting riparian
buffers should attenuate peak flows.
Artificial Barriers
Moderate — Ford crossings on UT 1, UT 6, UT 7, and UT 8 are creating a
backwater effect on each tributary. Removing the ford crossings, restoring
tributaries, and installing appropriately sized culvert crossings should restore
natural flow through the channels.
Ditching/Draining
High — Multiple tributaries are channelized with entrenched flows
throughout the Site, exhibiting BHR ranging from 1.7 to 5.0. UT 1, UT 5,
and UT 6 are currently draining adjacent wetlands. Priority 1 restoration of
UT 1, UT 5, and UT 6 should restore interactions of surface water,
groundwater, and throughflow.
Habitat
Habitat
Fragmentation
Moderate — Multiple tributaries on -site are incised and largely disconnected
from adjacent relic wetland areas. In addition, large headcuts on several
tributaries prevent aquatic life movement upstream. Restoration of these
tributaries will restore and reconnect the stream to adjacent Headwater Forest
wetlands, promoting aquatic life movement and propagation within the
system.
Limited Bedform
Diversity
High — Anthropogenic disturbances and cattle access have resulted in
inconsistent and poorly formed bedform diversity. Restoration of on -site
tributaries should restore natural bedform diversity and improve habitat for
all aquatic life stages.
Absence of Large
Woody Debris
(LWD)
Very High — LWD is absent and providing no function. Restoration of on -
site tributaries would include placement of LWD within channels for grade
control, stream bank protection, and aquatic habitat. LWD may also be
placed within wetland areas to provide cover and foraging habitat.
24

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
L. Site Constraints
The main constraint on -site is hydraulic trespass on upstream landowners. The two main channels
that are constrained by upstream landowners are UT's 2 and 3. The slope of UT 2 and UT 3 will
be evaluated during UMBI development to determine the potential backwater effects of Priority I
restoration. If channel slope prohibits Priority 1 restoration, then portions of UT 2 and UT 3 may
be designed as Priority II restoration in order to eliminate hydraulic trespass on upstream
landowners.
It should be noted that crossings within the conservation easement are currently planned to be
culvert crossings. Cattle will be fenced out of the easement and gates installed at each crossing,
therefore the potential for cattle encroachment to waters flowing through the Site has been
significantly reduced. In addition, no beaver activity has been observed on -site.
IX. MITGATION WORK PLAN
A. Proposed Stream Mitigation
Restoration, enhancement, and preservation of on -site streams are proposed for a total of
approximately 5,800 existing feet (6,124 proposed feet) of stream throughout the Site. Proposed
mitigation lengths for each tributary are presented in Table 1 in Section II.B and depicted on Figure
12 in Appendix A.
In their existing states, the channels proposed for restoration (UT 1— UT 8) have all been impacted
in similar ways, such as, channel straightening; channel incision to the point where bankfull flows
are contained within the banks; erosion due to cattle access within the channels and foraging
adjacent to the channels; and nutrient and fecal pathogen (from cattle) loading to on -site and
downstream receiving waters.
The restoration approach is similar for all tributaries on Site. Approximately 4,748 existing feet of
Site tributaries will be restored as single thread, Priority I restoration with bank height ratios of
1.0. Restored footage will total approximately 5,072 feet. The restored channel will establish a
more natural location and spacing of riffles and pools within the gravel bed system; introduce large
woody debris in the form of log structures and soil lifts for grade control and habitat improvement;
restore a vegetated riparian buffer (in association with restored riparian wetlands), and remove
cattle from the channel and riparian buffer (i.e. the easement area). The easement will ensure that
temporary crossings that have been used in the past will be permanently removed from use.
It is anticipated that restoration of a single thread channel with a stable dimension, pattern and
profile will provide uplift in physical, chemical and biological function to the Site and downstream
receiving waters by 1) reducing sediment loads from the channel bank; 2) creating stable and
productive in -stream habitat through planform geometry that promotes riffles and pools within a
gravel bed system; 3) introducing woody debris/materials into the channel such as vegetated soil
lifts/toe wood and log structures that will provide refuge habitat for fish and semiaquatic species,
foraging habit for macrobenthos, channel depth variability, stream shading and invert stabilization;
4) connecting bankfull flows of the single thread channel to its abandoned floodplain through
25

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Priority I restoration will promote attenuation of flood waters across the broad floodplain, drop
and store suspended solids on the floodplain, filter nutrients, pathogens, pesticides and other
pollutants, and connect above bank flows to adjacent wetlands and riparian buffers. The final
bankfull channel size will be determined during development of the Mitigation Plan; however
preliminary data suggests that channels will be designed as moderate width -to -depth ratio C type
channels.
Approximately 272 existing feet of Site tributaries (UT 1 and UT 7) will be enhanced by excluding
cattle and replanting native vegetation on the stream banks and adjacent riparian buffers.
Approximately 619 existing feet of Site tributaries (UT 4 and UT 8) will be enhanced by fencing
out equipment (and potential future cattle access) and replanting native vegetation along stream
banks and adjacent riparian buffers to ensure that these areas will no longer be managed for hay
production or pasture. Approximately 92 existing feet of UT 9 will be enhanced by excluding
cattle and protecting the adjacent mature, riparian buffer.
Restoration of a riparian buffer through the easement area will promote terrestrial, aquatic and
semiaquatic foraging, propagation, and cover habitat; and will enhance the floodplain's ability to
uptake nutrients and settle other pollutants from above bankfull events.
Approximately 69 existing feet of UT 5 will be preserved to protect the spring head on UT 5 and
adjacent mature, riparian buffer.
B. Proposed Wetland Mitigation
Prior site disturbances have resulted in the loss and/or degradation of characteristic function
throughout existing and relic wetlands on -site. W 1 is in active cattle pasture which has promoted
hydrologic alteration of the Site and resulted in diminished nutrient uptake/transformation and
sediment retention. The consequence of these impacts is the rapid delivery of pollutants to down -
gradient waters. In addition, flood attenuation and wildlife habitat has also been compromised.
The proposed project will seek to restore these functions through enhancement and re-
establishment of a Headwater Forest. Re-establishment of approximately 1.52 acres of Headwater
Forest (W2, W3, W5, W6, and W8) will be completed by raising the bed elevations of UT 1, UT
4, UT 5, UT 6 and UT 8 to historic elevations, which will restore wetland hydrology to the
floodplain and allow peak flows to access the floodplain. Enhancement of approximately 0.19
acres of Headwater Forest (W 1 and W7) will be completed by excluding cattle and replanting
native vegetation. Enhancement of approximately 0.54 acres of Headwater Forest (W4 and W9)
will be completed by fencing out equipment (and potential future cattle access) and replanting
native vegetation to ensure that existing wetlands will no longer be managed for hay production
or pasture. All Headwater Forests will be planted with native vegetation characteristic of a
Piedmont Alluvial Forest as described in the Guide to the Classification of the Natural
Communities of North Carolina (Schafale 2012). Proposed wetland mitigation is summarized in
Table 2 in Section II.B and depicted on Figure 12 in Appendix A.
Wetlands on -site (with the exception of W4 and W9) are also impacted by cattle. Cattle access
has resulted in altered vegetative structure and surface storage/retention within and immediately
adjacent to wetlands. As part of restoration activities, cattle exclusion fencing will be installed to
26

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
prevent access to site wetlands and buffers. Planting densities of bare root species nearing 680
trees per acre are anticipated for the restored wetland areas and upland buffers.
Habitat function within the restored wetlands may be enhanced by the placement of large woody
debris throughout the floodplain. Woody debris serves as a food source for a variety of insects,
which in turn creates a foraging opportunity for small mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians.
The woody debris also provides much needed cover habitat for reptiles and amphibians to protect
them from predation.
C. Riparian Buffers
A riparian buffer populated with native vegetative species will be provided on each side of
tributaries (and will include riparian wetlands) through the Site. The buffer width (including
wetlands) will average approximately 60-70 feet in width along both sides of each tributary on -
site, with buffer width on some reaches nearing 100 feet. Although extremely sparse, the Sponsor
will flag and survey trees 12 inches and greater within the restored streams buffers to ensure
protection of mature vegetation to the extent practical during design and subsequent construction.
The desired plant community and species types will be established by utilizing a reference forest
system but may include species found within the wooded forest both up and downstream of the
Site. Planting densities of bare root species at approximately 680 trees per acre are anticipated for
the restored vegetative buffer. Soil amendments may be added during and following construction
to promote grass and tree growth within the disturbed areas on -site. Signs will be posted along the
easement boundary to clearly demarcate the easement boundary for the landowners. Figure 13
depicts proposed riparian buffer mitigation that may be developed in lieu of wetland credits.
Proposed nutrient offset and riparian buffer mitigation is also summarized in Table 3 in Section
II.B.
D. Additional Work Plan Elements
Stream Crossings
Planned crossings within the conservation easement will be culvert crossings. All cattle will be
fenced out of the easement and gates installed at each crossing, therefore the potential for cattle
encroachment to waters flowing through the Site has been significantly reduced.
Cattle Management Plan
A Cattle Management Plan has been discussed with the landowner such that water will be provided
to cattle and pasture usage rotated without allowing cattle direct access to tributaries on -site. It is
anticipated that proposed fencing meets the Woven Wire Fence Specification developed by the US
Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA, 2012). Per
the specification, the woven wire fence proposed is 39 inches high with a barb wire strand 5 inches
above the woven wire. Fence posts are allowed at 12 foot spacing across panels and 8 foot spacing
at brace assemblies.
27

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Easement Boundary Protection
A fence will be placed on the landowner's side of the easement boundary. Marking will be
provided in the form of signage and fencing will demarcate the bounds of the conservation
easement.
Invasive Removal and Riparian Vegetation Planting
Invasive and nuisance species such as Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense) were observed during
field investigations and will be cleared, grubbed and treated if necessary, to ensure that re -
colonization is deterred. Although it was noted, privet was primarily seen scattered on the stream
banks. A planting plan will be completed that reintroduces native species to zones along the
channel, its associated floodplain and restored wetlands that currently have little to no woody
vegetation. The vegetated buffer will extend through the stream buffer and wetlands to the
proposed conservation easement boundary. Vegetation to be planted on the channel banks will be
species that root quickly to help add stability to the already disturbed soils in and adjacent to the
channel. Vegetation to be planted in the riparian wetlands will be characteristic of a Piedmont
Alluvial Forest (Schafale 2012). Plantings will focus on vegetation which will provide long-term
foraging and habitat for wildlife. Planting of a riparian buffer zone on -site will benefit both aquatic
and terrestrial flora and fauna as existing woody vegetation along the stream banks is sparse
throughout most of the Site. A mature, vegetated buffer zone will filter nutrients from sheet flow
and overbank flows, provide cover and foraging areas for terrestrial animals, provide new habitat
for a diversity of local vegetation that will voluntarily root inside of the undisturbed easement,
provide woody debris to the restored stream channels to promote aquatic life propagation and
cover, and provide a wildlife corridor for terrestrial animals, amphibians, and aquatic fauna.
X. MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Performance standards shall be consistent with the requirements described in Federal rule for
compensatory mitigation project sites as described in the Federal Register Title 33 Navigation and
Navigable Waters Volume 3 Chapter 2 Section § 332.5 paragraphs (a) and (b). Additionally, the
October 24th, 2016 "Notification of Issuance of Guidance for Compensatory Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Conducted for Wilmington District" will be used to not only to determine monitoring
requirements but also success criteria. Criteria below are preliminary conceptual success criteria
and may change upon approval of the UMBI.
Streams
Restored stream reaches are proposed to be monitored for geomorphic activity. Annual fall/winter
monitoring will include development of channel cross -sections on riffles and pools in addition to
visual observation of channel stability. A longitudinal profile of the thalweg, water surface,
bankfull, and top of bank, will be collected during the as -built survey of the constructed channels.
Enhancement reaches will be monitored to document continuous surface water flow for at least 30
consecutive days (during normal rainfall) every year during the monitoring period.
28

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Stream Dimension
General maintenance of a stable cross-section and hydrologic access to the floodplain features over
the course of the monitoring period will generally represent success in dimensional stability. Some
changes in dimension (such as lowering of bankfull width -to -depth ratio) should be expected.
Riffle sections should generally maintain a Bank Height ratio approaching 1.0 — 1.2, with some
variation in this ratio naturally occurring, and display an entrenchment ratio of no less than 2.2.
Both ratios should display no more than 10 percent change from year-to-year. Pool sections
naturally adjust based on recent flows and time between flows; therefore, more leeway on pool
section geometry is expected.
Bank pins may be installed and should display no more than 10 percent variation in width over as -
built conditions and year-to-year. No individual measurements should exceed 20 percent variance
over as -built conditions over the monitoring time frame.
Stream Pattern and Profile
Pattern features should show little adjustment over the standard 7-year monitoring period. The
profile should not demonstrate significant trends towards degradation or aggradation over a
significant portion of a reach.
Substrate and Sediment Transport
There should be an absence of any significant trend in the aggradational or depositional potential
of the channel.
Hydraulics
All stream channels will maintain an ordinary high water mark (OHWM) through monitoring. A
minimum of two bankfull events must be documented within the 7-year monitoring period. The
two bankfull events shall occur within separate years. Continuous surface water flows of at least
30 consecutive days will be required for intermittent streams.
Macroinvertebrate and Water Quality
The Sponsor will coordinate with resource agencies to determine if site specific monitoring
protocols and success criteria for the Site are required.
Wetland Hydrology
If the sponsor elects to pursue wetland credits; hydroperiods for re-established wetlands will be
established in the Mitigation Plan and will be consistent with the Wetland Threshold Saturation
ranges identified in the Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation
Guidance (October 2016). Groundwater and shallow surface water elevations will be collected
daily during the growing season via automated gauges and downloaded quarterly. The Sponsor
will prepare hydrographs depicting water levels throughout the growing season of each monitoring
29

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
year. Should wetland hydrology fail to meet success criteria as outlined in the Mitigation Plan for
the Site, potential causes of failure will be evaluated and corrective actions and/or maintenance
actions will occur, as necessary.
Vegetation
Vegetation plots will be monitored for 7 years, with monitoring events occurring on years 1, 2, 3,
5, and 7. A combination of permanent fixed plots and random plots will be employed to document
vegetation coverage. Vegetation requirements state that there must be a minimum of 320 planted
stems per acre surviving after year three, 260 stems per acre after year five, and 210 stems per acre
after year seven. Trees should average 7 feet in height at year five and 10 feet in height at year
seven. In addition, any single species can only account for up to 50 percent of the required number
of stems within any vegetation plot. Should the performance criteria outlined above not be met
during the monitoring period, the Sponsor will implement corrective actions and/or maintenance
actions, as necessary. Vegetative monitoring will be conducted between July 1st and leaf drop of
each monitoring year.
Invasive Species
Invasive species will be identified and controlled so that none become dominant or alter the desired
community structure of the proposed Site. If invasive plants are identified as a problem in the
proposed Site, the Sponsor will implement a species -specific control plan that may include
herbicide applications and mechanical and/or hand removal.
Reporting
Monitoring of the Site will be performed until success criteria are met as defined in the UMBI.
Results will be documented on an annual basis, with the associated reports submitted to USACE
as evidence that goals are being achieved. In general, monitoring will be implemented for 7 years,
with an opportunity for an early termination after 5 years if a site's performance standards, as set
forth in IRT 2016, are met. The year of construction may have two submittals, one being the
Baseline Monitoring Report and the second being the First Year Annual Monitoring Report.
XI. ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN
In the event monitoring results indicate deficiencies in achieving success criteria on schedule, an
adaptive management plan will be developed for each Bank Site based on the plan approved in the
UMBI. Remedial actions will be implemented following notification of the UMBI's USACE
project manager and after all necessary permits have been obtained. General conditions that may
result in the need for an adaptive management plan include but are not limited to the following:
• Stream stability problems,
• Vegetation mortality,
• Dominance of invasive species.
30

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
The Sponsor will provide a Record Drawing of remedial actions to USACE upon completion of
corrective measures.
XII. REFERENCES
Interagency Review Team (IRT). 2016. Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory
Mitigation Update. North Carolina Interagency Review Team — October 24, 2016.
North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC). Title 15A — Environmental Quality. Chapter 02 —
Environmental Management. SubChapter B. 15A NCAC 02B .0295. Mitigation Program
Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers. Accessed on April
14, 2021.
http : //reports. oah. state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015 a%20-
%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/ 15 a%20ncac%2002b %20.0295.pdf
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NCDENR). Division of
Water Quality. 2010a. Methodology for Identification of Intermittent and Perennial
Streams and their Origins, Version 4.11. North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality. Raleigh, NC.
NCDENR. Division of Water Quality. 2005. Cape Fear River Basinwide Water Quality Plan.
Website accessed on April 14, 2021.
https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/basin-planning/water-
resource-plans/cape-fear-2005
NCDENR. Division of Water Quality. "NC Division of Water Quality - Methodology and
Calculations for Determining Nutrient Reductions Associated with Riparian Buffer
Establishment." Nutrient Practices and Crediting, North Carolina Department of
Environmental Quality. Accessed on April 14, 2021.
https://files.nc. gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/NPU/Nutrient%20Offset%20Rule/
Ag-Buffer-Credit.pdf
NCDENR. Division of Water Resources. NC Surface Water Classifications online map.
Accessed 04-21-2021.
https://ncdenr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6e 125ad7628f494694
e259c80dd64265
NCDENR. Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Cape Fear River Basin Restoration
Priorities 2009. Website accessed on April 14, 2021.
https://files.nc.gov/ncdeq/Mitigation%20S ervices/Watershed_Planning/Cape_Fear_River
B asin/RBRP%20CapeFear%202009 %20Revised%20032013 .pdf
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). 2017. "Design Specifications
and Nutrient Accounting for Cattle Exclusion." Nutrient Practices and Crediting,
31

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, 5 Apr. 2017. Access on
December 26, 2018.
https://files.nc. gov/ncdeq/Water%20Quality/Planning/NPU/Nutrient%20Offset%20Rule/
Cattle%20Exclusion%20Practice%20Signed%2004-05-2017.pdf
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS). 2016. Quantifying Benefits to Water
Quality from Livestock Exclusion and Riparian Buffer Establishment for Stream
Restoration. June 15, 2016.
North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources (NCDNCR). Natural Heritage
Program (NHP). North Carolina Natural Heritage Program Online Database. Accessed on
April 14, 2021. Last updated on February 1, 2021.
https://www.ncnhp.org/data/speciescommunity-search
NCDNCR. North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (NCSHPO). HPOWEB 2.0.
Website accessed on April 14, 2021. Last updated on March 15, 2021.
https://nc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=79ea671 ebdcc45639f0860
257d5f5ed7
North Carolina Geological Survey (NCGS), 1985. Geologic Map of North Carolina.
North Carolina Stream Functional Assessment Team (NC SFAT). 2014. N.C. Stream
Assessment Method (NC SAM) User Manual (Version 2). 178 pp.
Rogers, John J.W. 2010. The Carolina Slate Belt. Accessed on April 21, 2021.
https://r1a.unc.edu/Publications/pdf/ResRep25/Ch2.pdf
Schafale, Michael. 2012. Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth
Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Department of Environment
and Natural Resources. Raleigh, NC. Accessed on April 21, 2021.
https://www.ncnhp.org/media/2/open
US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil
Survey. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Environmental Conservation Online System. Listed
Species for Guilford County, North Carolina. Accessed on April 14, 2021.
https://ecos. fws.gov/ecp/report/species-listings-by-current-range-county?fips=3 7081
32

Appendix A
Figures
Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Appendix

Jamestown
Rf.ry;+o
Legend
Property Boundary
Lillian Coble House (SHPO)
Airports
NC Natural Heritage Program Natural Areas
State Managed Conservation Land
' �z+
C7$
.,.v..., 'tii
s
a+'4 HAGAN STONE PARK o,
Fbldriew Rn P -
2 A Li
TT::LBL7OUSE
)24
13r•ri''H[1
Providence CO
Pleasant
Garden
_ _ _ NC y4Mfay sClimax
z ' l C — — _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ � _ _ �P G'�rax Rd'
BenrY Lineberry k'+
Choir
Watc Rd
LTiberty
S HOe Lrb.rlr r;l
suer snrr•
ALAMANCE -
CHATHAM
bek"'n'Aiernar, .
a
Source Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase-JIGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI,
Esri Chinay(Hong Kong), (c) Openstree[Map contributors, and the GIS User Community
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DEAVEY!: company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
6,500
13,000
Feet
26,000
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-14-21
Figure: 1
Vicinity and Planning Elements Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

e
Ill II111•
2578 ft
Oan I�
fo.� a+r
G
takes Tu
Forsyth
R fral HaII
Winst'-,
Sales,
• r 1 1. 111
1
1008 ft
Mayodarf
11 11 •11
11.1f, I . 11ir
1154 ft
A --le
L1L.rty
1 11
a2h
1• • yvill-
Hyco Lake
a
4i1
ti
1 •••I• •ro
asb u,
I irllsborough
,f-•' n•.
•
Du sham
Butner
Creedm" ,I
Faits
Reservoir
r2
Duo; a.ry Rd
543 ft
-J i. o.E Y
• 4yo Fjr
Cary
Wake Fort
Raleigh
1r f
Legend
1 /
Primary Service Area - 03030002
Project Location
8-Digit HUC Boundaries
Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadast'er_ NL, Ordn"an e Survey, Esri Japan, METI,
•
Esri China (Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMaprco`tributors, and the GIS User Community. �i`
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVE14. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0 33,000
66,000
Feet
132,000
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: April 14, 2021
Figure: 2
Proposed Service Area Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

LMG
LAND 1TANAC;FMFNT GROUP
a DAVEY'. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
3,300
6,600
Feet
13,200
mui
0303000204001
DigitaIGiobe,
GeoEye,
Legend
Downstream Extent of Project
Property Boundary
_ ■■ '�, C 14 Digit HUCs
r
Streams and Creeks
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: April 14, 2021
Geographies,
CINEMEAR
o
Habitat TRA
Hydrology TRA
Water Quality TRA
AeroGRI
Do : noN16'oou siBig
Figure: 3
Watershed Planning Contextual Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

Legend
S
Downstream Extent of Project
UT1 - 166.96 Ac
Property Boundary
Residential (19%)
Open Water (1%)
Forested (32%)
Agricultural (48%)
•
`l-
.1 lap
L
co
•
LMG
?.;AND M.ANM3Fti6NT GROUP
„ DAVEY . company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
330
660
Feet
1,320
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: April 14, 2021
Figure: 4
Land Use Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

liteC l
•-•-•
MhB2
EnC
Legend
Downstream Extent of Project
MN
Soils
Property Boundary
Project Streams
ApB - Appling Sandy loam, 2-6%
ApC - Appling Sandy loam, 6-10%
CcC - Cecil sandy loam, 6-10%
CoA - Congaree loam
EnB - Enon fine sandy loam, 2-6%
EnC - Enon fine sandy loam, 6-10%
EnD - Enon fine sandy loam, 10-15%
HhB - Helena-Sedgefield sandy loam, 0-6%
MaD - Madison sandy loam, 10-15%
MaE - Madison sandy loam, 15-35%
MhB2 - Mecklenburg sandy clay loam, 2-6% eroded
VaB - Vance sandy loam, 2-6%
VaC - Vance sandy loam, 6-10%
I
l
EnD
VaB
EnC
ti
ApC
EnB
EnB
CoA
tLMG
LAND MANACFMF.NT GROUP
a DAVEY. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
205
410
Feet
820
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: April 14, 2021
Figure: 5
NRCS Soils Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

LMG
I.ANI7 MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVEY* company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
Randy Steve Fields
PIN: 7799452144
Agti
Beverly Fields
PIN: 7799349572
N
0
200
400
Feet
800
The Hauserfields Living Trust
(c/o Larry Fields)
PIN: 7799543254
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 5-12-2021
Legend
0 Existing Fords
Downstream Extent
Proposed Easement
Property Boundary
0 Bedrock
Streams
REACH 1 (Perennial)
REACH 1 (Intermittent)
REACH 2 (Perennial)
REACH 2 (Intermittent)
Wetlands
Drained Hydric Soils
Existing Wetlands
Figure: 6
Current Conditions Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

bedrock
Property Boundary
— Eroding Banks
Streams
• - - ■ Incised
Stable
Wetlands
Drained Hydric Soils
Existing Wetlands
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVE14. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
A
0
130
260
Feet
520
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 05-12-2021
Figure: 7A
Channel Stability Mapping
Guilford County, North Carolina

LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DEAVEY!: company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
130
260
Feet
520
DigitaIGiobe,
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-19-2021
Downstream Extent
Property Boundary
Streams
Incised
Stable
Eroding Banks
Wetlands
Drained Hydric Soils
Existing Wetlands
Geographies,
Figure: 7B
Channel Stability Mapping
Guilford County, North Carolina

Strea m
UT 1
UT 2
UT 3
UT 4
UT 5
UT 6
UT 7
UT 8
UT 9
Total
A
Cattle Access and Buffer Condition
Existing Length (LF)
1,921
106
112
707
365
1,536
333
651
92
5,823
LMG
LAND 1T,AN.AC;FMFNT GROUP
a DAVEY'. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
Approach
R/E2
R/E2
R
R/E2
R/P
R
R/E2
R/E2
E2
Cattle Access
100
100
100
27
76
100
100
70
100
86
Dominant Buffer
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Pasture
Buffer Condition Summary
Buffer Type
Pasture
Mature Forest
N
0
200
400
Feet
800
Existing Length
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 05-12-2021
Legend
O
Existing Fords
Proposed Easement
Property Boundary
Project Streams
Drained Hydric Soils
Existing Wetlands
Cattle Access
Pasture (No Cattle)
Board
Figure: 8
Site Floodplain and
Water Quality Stressors
Guilford County, North Carolina

Legend
* Downstream Extent of Project
Property Boundary
Soil Profile Locations
.1=•=0 Existing Cross Sections
— Existing Streams
Drained Hydric Soils
Existing Wetlands
LMG
LAND NIAN.ACTEMFNT GROUP
DAVEA. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
SB 11
N
0
165
330
Feet
660
9 SB51
• ,
Digital@lebe,
GeoEye,
Geographies,
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-19-2021
W-SG-S
Aere@RI
Figure: 9
Pre -Monitoring Features Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

•
s
•
•
r
Legend
Downstream_Extent
UT1 - 167 Ac
Property Boundary
Project Streams
UT2 - 50 Ac
UT3 - 22 Ac
UT4 - 20 Ac
UT5 - 5 Ac
UT6 - 22 Ac
UT7-8Ac
UT8 - 18 Ac
UT9-3Ac
ILMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVEV . company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
300
600
Feet
1,200
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-20-2021
Figure: 10A
USGS Drainage Area Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

tLMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVEY. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
300
600
Feet
1,200
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-20-2021
i
Legend
Downstream_Extent
UT1 - 167 Ac
Property Boundary
- - Project Streams
DEM
Value
- High : 783.415
Low : 680.924
Figure:10B
DEM Drainage Area Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

Legend
* Downstream Extent of Project
Property Boundary
ZLMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVEY. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
270
540
Feet
1,080
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-20-2021
Figure: 11A
Aerial Photography Map (2019)
Guilford County, North Carolina

Legend
Property Boundary
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
DAVEY4. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
A
Dutch Farms Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-20-2021
NOT TO SCALE
Figure: 11 B
Aerial Photography Map (2002)
Guilford County, North Carolina

ILMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
DAVEY4. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
NOT TO SCALE
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 04-20-2021
Figure: 11C
Aerial Photography Map (1993)
Guilford County, North Carolina

LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DEAVEY!: company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
200
400
Feet
800
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 05-11-2021
Figure: 12
Proposed Mitigation Features Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

LMG
LANE MANA(;F•.\iF.NT GROUP
a DAVEY+. company
3101 Poplarwood Ct, Suite 120
Raleigh, NC 27604
N
0
165
330
Feet
660
Riparian Buffer Restoration (620,445 sq.ft.)
Riparian Buffer Enhancement (25,491 sq.ft.)
Riparian Buffer Preservation (14,814 sq.ft.)
Dutch Farms
Mitigation Site
Map Date: 05-12-2021
Figure: 13
Proposed Riparian Buffer
Mitigation Map
Guilford County, North Carolina

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Appendix B
Agent Authorization Forms
Appendix

3/19/2021 Scan0022.jpg
Property Owner:
SAMPLE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
LOT NO. _ PLAN NO.
PARCEL ID: 7 7// J 'f3DN,Sq
STREET ADDRESS: v 5 .4% I fJ j1 n e-f - f o)
Cl i'n1 O)c i J c as a3.3
Please print: � e J � c, I i'/� " ,
PIeasepOwner: h QuS�'r- /eIJS L/ V /i'1 Tra,S- (4:9fifd ,-.)
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
&r)
T 3einty f 6rz.tr
5303 V� rr4c< ✓<3(_ Or., &I -eel' $ ro,1t/( a 740
Telephone:
Au Authorized Signature
Date: j /7
i
Date:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1 /?ogbl#inbox?projector=l &messagePartld=0.3 1/1

3/19/2021 Scan0020.jpg
Please print:
Property Owner:
Property Owner:
SAMPLE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
LOT NO. _ PLAN NO. PARCEL ID: 77 99L-isA /LH
STREETADDRESS: 711 rr't (CIS 10%.1(nit
C (1./Y10-Y\ /NLa7 a3 3
/Gir‘dy SA-e-ve ri-e,14S
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
of Eaij
•
/11001QLyfilit'Vf (l7rot,y)
•••(`• :.••• ; • ao:E:ptance
• 7 • ''' ' ' • .1rr. a-Lt Srerf - :
(,70.; F7t- (45 Farm tZol} C--/I7400(j AK a..-LY33
Telephone:
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
thti, ALitheir:Z•t:t;
Date:
https://mai Lgoogle.com/mail/u/1/?ogbl#in box?projector=1&messagePart Id=0.1 1/1

3/19/2021
Scan0021.jpg
SAMPLE AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOT NO. _.----- _ PLAN NO.
Please print:
Property Owner:
Property Owner;
PARCEL ID: 7 7 / 9 19 J 7 a
61 16 rt,_6101 ro.rm go'
C(1Th& f_IJL o.7a3.3
devtr(`/ rItict
l
The undersigned, registered property owners of the above noted property, do hereby authorize
�ei
of. L-_CJ,n4 Aanalu 1il 6r°L,t,o
7°DS Co trig_fly /Wit a7a33
Telephone:
Authorized Sign e
Date: 37./
Authorized Signature
Date:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1 /?ogbl#inbox?projector=1 &messagePartld=0.2
1/1

Appendix C
Soil Profile Logs
Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Appendix

LMG 41,MG
u Npu ANIAr.M.SONT GaparE
• coup.
Project Site:
County:
Fields Propety
Guilford
Date:
look:
Location:
Climax
State:
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
9/16/2020
LMGR.009
NC
5B-1
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT: ISHWT:
Elevation: '"727 MIL
<12"
Drainage:
Slope: 4%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Footslope to Floodplain
Moderate
Vegetation: Pasture Grasses, common noxious weeds
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles Texture
Structure
Consistence
A
0-4
10TR 4/2
10YR 3/6 SL
w, f,gr
vfr,ns, np
AB g
4-8
10YR 5/2
10YR 5/8 CoSL
w, m, sbk
vfr, ns, np
BC
8-24
10YR 6/2
10YR 6/3 COSL
w, m, sbk
vfr, ns, np
10YR 6/6
Cg
Crg
24-39
39-48+
2.5Y 6/1
2.5Y 6/2
10YR 6/4 COSL
10YR 5/6
2.5Y 6/4 LCOS
Ma
Ma
fr, ns, np
fi-fr, ns, np
2.5Y 7/1
Notes
15% iron concentrations
5% iron concentrations
33%iron concentrations
33%iron concentrations
34%iron concentrations
30%Iron concentrations
20%iron concentrations
20% lithochromic color
Comments: Described By:
Nick Howell - L55 #1294
upper extent f Floodplain
u r[nMALCALM.Seler GaoDF
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
Job.:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
5B-2
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
2" ISHWT:
"T24 MIL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 0-1%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain
Moderate
Vegetation:
FAC Neutral herbaceous, Sapling and Shrubs
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
Ag
0-8
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 5/6
SL
w, m,sbk
fr, ns, np
5% iron concentrations
Bg
8-17
2.5Y 6/1
10Yr 5/6
CoSL
w, m, sbk
vf r, ns, np
5% iron concentrations
Cg
17-33+
2.5Y 6/2
10YR 5/6
CoSL
Ma
fr, ns, np
10% iron concentrations
10YR 6/4
10%iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - L55 #1294
compaction a d impact from cattle, strong odor from
MariLire
LMG LMG
nn er tar GROVE
• CARA coup.
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lob*:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
5B-3
Soil Classificaton: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
20" ISHWT:
"T08 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 2%
Very Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain
Moderate
Vegetation:
OBL, and FACW Herbaious
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
AB g
0-4
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 3/6
w, m,sbk
fr, ns, np
15% iron concentrations
Bg
4-10
2.5Y 6/2
10YR 5/6
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
20%iron concentrations
2ABg
10-16
2.5Y 5/2
2.5Y 5/6
C+SL
o, sbk
fr, ns, np
15% iron concentrations
2Cg
16-30
2.51'4/2
Co5
ma
vfr, ns,np
2Cr/R
30+
Dense materterial auger re sal norecov ry
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - L55 #1294
compaction a d impact from cattle
u MCI el AltiAMMISFAM GaoDF
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lob.:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
5B-4
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
33" ISHWT:
'"T08 M5L
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 2%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture Grasses with few OBL, and FACW Herbaious
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
AB g
0-4
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 3/4
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
15% iron concentrations
Bg
4-18
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 3/6
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
25%iron concentrations
2ABg
18-32
2.5Y 2/2
10YR 5/6
SCL
w, co, sbk
fr, ns, np
10%iron concentrations
2Cg
32-37
2.5Y 4/2
COSL/ LCo5
ma
fr, ns, np
many gravels
2Cr/R
37+
Dense meter erial auger re sal norecov ry
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - L55 #1294
compaction a d impact from cattle

LMG 41,MG
u Npu ANIAC.MISFIaT GRDaTE
• NigN4 coon.
Project Site:
County:
Fields Propety
Guilford
Date:
lobk:
Location:
Climax
State:
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
9/16/2020
LMGR.009
NC
SB-5
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
12" ISHWT:
"701 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 1-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain, steam bank
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture Grasses with few OBL, and FACW Herbaceous
Hydric Soil Ind camr(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
A
0-3
10YR 3/2
10YR 5/6
SCL
• o, sbk
fr, ss, sp
Bg
3-17
10YR 5/2
10YR 5/6
SCL
w, m, sbk
fr, ss, sp
Notes
20%iron concentrations
20%iron concentrations
AB g
17-21
10YR 4/2
SCL
vco, sbk
fr, ss, sp
CoS grains and common fin gravels thro ghout
21
Dense materterial auger ref sal norecov ry
Comments: Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
compaction a d heavy impact from cattle
LMG
Limn er ANA, ALE AT GaOVF
• noff.41 coup.
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lobk:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
SB-7
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OW:
Elevation:
23" ISHWT:
"T35 MIL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 1-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Headslope of Drain
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture Grasses with few 0 L, and FACW Herbaceous, common Noxious Weeds
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
A
0-5
2.5Y 3/2
10YR 3/6
SL
• , sbk
fr, ss, np
25%iron concentrations
Bg
5-9
10YR 6/2
10YR 6/4
FSL
w,f, sbk
fr, ns,np
20%iron concentrations
10YR 5/8
10%iron concentrations
ABgb
9-21
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 5/6
SCL
w, vco, sbk
fr, ss, np
20% iron concentrations
Cg1
21-30
10YR 6/2
10YR 5/6
COLS
I, ns, np
30% iron concentrations
Cg2
30-42+
5Y 6/2
10YR 3/4
SL/CL
ma
fr, ss, np
15% Iron concentrations
10YR 4/6
thin Clay loam strata
15%iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
KL1 ANIALEKFITT GROVE
• coon.
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lobk:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
SB-6
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OW:
Elevation:
38" ISHWT:
"T19 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 1-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Drainageway Toe Slope
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture Grasses with few OBL, and FACW Herbaceous, common Noxious Weeds
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
AB g
0-5
10YR 3/2
10YR 3/4
SL
• , sbk
fr,n, np
10%iron concentrations
Bg1
5-18
10YR 6/2
10YR 5/6
SL
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
5% iron concentrations
Bg2
18-26
10YR 5/2
SL
w, m, sbk
fr,n, np
AB'gb
26-34
2.5Y 3/2
10YR 3/6
SCL
ma
fr, ss, np
5% iron concentrations
Cg
34-46+
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 5/6
COSL
Ma
vfr,n, np
10% iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
LMG
rcD •r AAIALERIFITT GROVF
• rairrli coffin.
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lobk:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
SB-8
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
>43" ISHWT:
"697 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 2-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Flood plain
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture Grasses with few OBL, and FACW Herbaceous, few Noxious Weeds
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
AB g
0-5
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 3/6
• , sbk
fr, ss, np
20%iron concentrations
Bg
5-15
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 5/6
w, m, sbk
fr, ss, np
15%iron concentrations
10YR 3/6
10%iron concentrations
AB'gb
15-25
10YR 4/2
10YR 5/6
5L
w, m, sbk
fr, ss, np
20% iron concentrations
egg
25-43a
10YR 6/1
10YR 6/4
5L
m, sbk
fr, ns, np
20%iron concentrations
10YR 5/6
20%iron concentrations
10YR4/4
20%Iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
cattle compac on

LMG
u r[nu GRDaaE
•coup..
Project Site:
County:
Fields Propety
Guilford
Date:
Jobe:
Location:
Climax
State:
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
9/16/2020
LMGR.009
NC
SB-9
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
>38" ISHWT:
"695 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 2-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Flood plain
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture Grasses with few OBL, and FACW Herbaceous, few Noxious Weeds
Hydric Soil Ind camr(s):
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles Texture
Structure
Consistence
AB g
0-11
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 3/4
w, m, sbk
fr, ss, np
Bg
11-20
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 3/6 LS
w, m, sbk
fr, ss, np
Notes
20%iron concentrations
15% iron concentrations
L Bodies
ABgb
20-30
10YR 4/2
10YR 3/6 SL
w, m, sbk
fr, ss, np
20% iron concentrations
Big
30-38+
2.5Y 5/2
10YR5/6 SL
m, sbk
fr, ns, np
20%iron concentrations
7.5YR 5/8
10%iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LS5 #1294
cattle compac on
LMG
nn AIANA, Air GaOVF
• CARA coup.
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
Jobe:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
5B-11
Soil Classifica on: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
43"
"T22 MSL
ISHWT:
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 2-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Drainageway
Moderate
Vegetation:
Mixed noxious weeds, FACW and OBL Herbaceous and 5 plings
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
AB g
0-6
10YR 4/2
10YR 3/4
SL
w, f,gr
fr, ns, np
35% iron concentrations
Bg
6-16
5Y 5/2
10YR 5/6
SL
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
25% iron concentrations
ABgb
16-24
10YR 4/2
10YR 3/2
SCL
w, vco, sbk
fr, ss, np
15% organic stains
BCg
24-34+
10YR 6/2
10YR 6/4
SCL
, sbk
fr, ss, np
20% iron concentrations
10YR 5/6
25%iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LS5 #1294
LMG
KL1 AAIALEASFITT GROVE
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
Jobe:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
5B-10
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
43" ISHWT:
"694 MSL
Drainage:
Slope: 2-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Flood plain
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture Grasses with common OBL, and FACW Herbaceous, few Noxious Weeds
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
AB g
0-8
10YR 5/2
10YR4/4
SL
w, f,gr
fr, ns, np
35% iron concentrations
Bg
8-23
5Y 5/2
10YR 4/6
SiCL
w, m, sbk
fr, ss, np
25% iron concentrations
ABgb
23-37
2.5Y 3/2
10YR 5/6
SCL
w, vco, sbk
fr, ss, np
15% iron concentrations
BCg
32-46+
2.51,4/2
2.5Y 6/2
COSL
o, sbk
vfr, ns, np
20% iron depleations
10YR 5/6
LCOS
Mixed strata
15 iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LS5 #1294
cattle compac on
LMG
u KO Al AAIALMISFArr GHODF
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
Jobe:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
5B-12
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th
rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
14" ISHWT:
"T22 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 2-3%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Drainageway
Moderate
Vegetation:
Mixed noxious weeds, FACW and OBL Her
baceous and 5 plings
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19, A7
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
A
0-3
10YR 3/1
MuLS
ma/gr
fr, ss,np
Bw
3-10
10YR 6/3
L5
w, m, sbk
vfr, ns, np
Oxy-aquic layer
10YR 6/2
25% depleations
10YR 5/6
35% concentrations
2Bg
10-29
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 5/6
SiCL
m, co, sbk
fr, ss, sp
20% iron concentrations
2BCg
29-40
10YR 5/6
10YR 5/6
SCL /LS
co, sbk
fr, ss, np
20% iron concentrations
LS strata
2ABg
40-44+
2.5Y 4/2
SCL/ LS
Ma
fr, ss, np
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LS5 #1294
colluvial field rosion in upp r part of profile higher
value subsoil meets F19 with combined low chrome
volume of 65%

LMG 41,MG
u F[pu APAAC.MAENT GCCAUF
• coup.
Project Site:
County:
Fields Propety
Guilford
Date:
lobb:
Location:
Climax
State:
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
9/16/2020
LMGR.009
NC
SB-13
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
6" ISHWT:
"708 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 1-2%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Headslope of drainageway
Moderate
Vegetation:
Mixed noxious weeds, FACW and OBL Herbaceous and S plings
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19, A7
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles Texture
Structure
Consistence
AB g
0-6
2.5Y 3/1
10YR 3/6 MuSCL
,sbk
fr, ss, sp
Bg1
6-15
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 5/8 SCL
w, vco, sbk
fr, ss, np
10YR 5/6
Bg2
15-31
51' 6/1
10YR 5/6 SCL
w, vco, sbk
fr, ss, np
Notes
20%iron concentrations
10%iron concentrations
25%iron concentrations
10% iron concentrations
Comments: Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
High cattle traffcecompacti n
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lobb:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
SB-14
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
40" ISHWT:
"705 MSL
<12"
Drainage:
Slope: 1-2%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain / Drainage Way
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture grasses, few OBL/FACW herbaceous
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
A
0-6
2.5Y 3/2
10YR 3/4
COSL
w, m, gr
fr, ns, np
5% iron concentrations
Cg
6-14
10YR 6/2
10YR 3/4
CoS
Ma
vfr, ns, np
10%iron concentrations
14-20
7.5YR 5/8
10YR 3/6
CoS
Ma
vfr, ns, np
33%iron concentrations
Oxyaquic layer
2AB gb
20-35
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 3/6
SiCL
w, vco, sbk
fr, ss, sp
20% iron concentrations
2Bg
35-48+
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 3/6
SCL/ COSL
w, co, sbk
fr, ss, np
15%iron concentrations
mixed strata
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
cattle traffic c mpaction
LMG LMG
unn xr ANA, FA. Airr AO,
• CARA coup.
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lob#:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
SB-15
Soil Classifica on: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
>39" ISHWT:
"T14 MSL
<12"
Drainage:
Slope: 2-4%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain / Drainage Way
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture grass s, few OBL/FACW herbaceous
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
AB g
0-6
2.5Y 4/2
10Y R3/4
w, f, gr
vfr,ns, np
15%iron concentrations
Bg
6-17
2.5Y 6/2
10Y R5/6
SiCL
m, m, sbk
fr, ss, sp
20%iron concentrations
AB gb
17-26
2.5Y 4/2
10Y R5/6
SCL
w, co, sbk
fr, ss, np
15%iron concentrations
B'g
26-39t
2.5Y 5/2
10YR 5/6
5L
m, sbk
fr, ns, np
10% iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
cattle traffic c mpaction
u KO •rALAALMAFAM GHOLIF
Project Site:
Fields Propety
Date:
9/16/2020
County:
Guilford
lobe:
LMGR.009
Location:
Climax
State:
NC
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
SB-16
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
>33" ISHWT:
"T19 M5L
<12"
Drainage:
Slope: 1-2%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain / Drainage Way
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture grasses, few OBL/FACW herbacious, FAC tree o erstory
Hydric Soil Ind cator(s(:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles
Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
A
0-4
10YR 3/2
SL
w, f,gr
fr, ns, np
Bg1
4-18
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 5/6
SL
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
25% iron concentrations
Bg2
18-33+
2.5Y 6/2
10YR 6/4
SL
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
25%iron concentrations
Comments:
Described By:
Nick Howell - LSS #1294
cattle traffic c mpaction

LMG
r[Du Gapxls
• me..
Project Site:
County:
Fields Propety
Guilford
Date:
lob#:
Location:
Climax
State:
Soil Series:
Wehadkee
Data Point:
9/16/2020
LMGR.009
NC
56-17
Soil Classification: fine -loamy, mixed, active, nonacid, th rmic Fluvaquentic Endoaquepts
OWT:
Elevation:
>33" ISHWT:
"T14 MSL
<6"
Drainage:
Slope: 1%
Poorly Drained
Landscape:
Permeability:
Floodplain / Drainage Way
Moderate
Vegetation:
Pasture grass s, few OBL/FACW herbaceous, FAC tree o erstory
Hydric Soil Ind cator9si:
F3, F19
Horizon
Depth (in)
Matrix
Mottles Texture
Structure
Consistence
Notes
A
0-7
10YR 3/2
SL
w, f,gr
fr,n, np
Bg1
7-22
2.5Y 4/2
10YR 5/6 51
w, m, sbk
fr, ns, np
25% iron concentrations
Bg2
22-33
2.5Y 6/2
10YR5/6 SL
w, m, sbk
fr,n, np
25%iron concentrations
7.5YR 5/8
Comments: Described By:
Nick Howell - LS5 #1294
cattle traffic c mpaction

Dutch Farms Prospectus — May 12, 2021
DM Cape Fear 02 Umbrella Bank
Guildford County, North Carolina
Appendix D
Stream Identification Forms
Appendix

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: _ (bJ �6
Evaluator: a h / r-
Project/Site:/ , ll �aff
County: 6641142
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if z 30*
3/.5
Latitude: 35.93 o a ` !
Longitude: -79, 616 03.7
Stream Determination (circle one
Ephemeral Intermittentrenniaj)
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
vl7
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = I-D )
Absent
0
Weak
1
Moderate
2
Strong
CO
1 a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
CD.2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
_ 5. Active/relict floodplain
0
12
T
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
CD
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1)
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0)
Yes = 3
s are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
)
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
CD
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
11111CP
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
(Yes = 3 )
. rsrologv (Juototal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
;)
T 2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
0.5
2
1
3
1.5
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
CE>0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
C 5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: _odor is 'ram P- DQs ; S1or',?3 .c-(rec,J1
v`
Sketch:

Date:
NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
‘L--l6- ao as
Evaluator:
�3N
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if a 30*
33S.
Project/Site: 4u4411 Fo rfS
County: 6 I t i,( 'T o c al
Stream Determination (cir Ieope
Ephemeral Intermittent Qerennial)
Latitude: 36 93 0 13 0
Longitude: 7i 45 / 7 7
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
Ltf a
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = l 7i 5 )
la Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
4. Particle size of stream substrate
5. Active/relict floodplain
Absent
0
0
Weak
1
Moderate
2
2
Strong
3
0
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
7. Recent alluvial deposits
8. Headcuts
9. Grade control
10. Natural valley
11. Second or greater order channel
a artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
14. Leaf litter
15. Sediment on plants or debris
16. Organic debris lines or piles
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
C. Biology (Subtotal = 7 )
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
21. Aquatic Mollusks
22. Fish
23. Crayfish
24. Amphibians
25. Algae
26. Wetland plants in streambed
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Cip
No
No = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: Caadod1'S `[y
Sketch:
1
1
0.5
0.5
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
CV
1
0.5
1
2
2
0.5
0.5
2
2
Q
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
Yes = 3
cy s
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
3
3
3
3
1.5
C71.-5)
3
0
1.5
1.5
0
0
3
3
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: g _ j� D_oa a
Evaluator: £ N
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if a 30*
30, as
Project/Site: ,0i,[4ek rams Latitude: 35. q30 r $s
County: 6 , r` T - W
Stream Determination (circ
Ephemeral Intermittent erennial
Longitude: 79. 6 Sys / 9
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
krr 3
A. Geomorgholoav (Subtotal = / 7 , S
Absent Weak
Moder
1a. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2J
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
CT)
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
33
6. Depositional bars or benches
+
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
Q
1
2
3
9. Grade control
0
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0 0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
Qlo = 0D
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see disc sions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = )
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
0
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
Q
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
49
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
4ICP
0.5
1 1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0�
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
..j..
Yes = 3
Blologv (Subtotal = 7=
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
tor°
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
CZCW = 0.75;]DBL = 1.5 Other = 0 Co-,,-e
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of
manual.
Notes: Gd,14jji^5
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
Evaluator: 6 AIaC
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if a 30*
aa.75
Project/Site:6 j24G1 rams
County: 664 11 c r. _ I
Stream Deter
Ephemeral
circle one)
Perennial
Latitude: 35.9a96 y
Longitude: _79 69a5aq
Other ti 1 ! _404, I
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =1 &1)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1 a' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
CD
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
CID
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
MP
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
��
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
L:
6. Depositional bars or benches
o
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
' 0
2
3
9. Grade control
Ck,
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
IMP
11. Second or greater order channel
No = " )
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = S ]
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
411IP
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
lie
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
[ 0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
CYes = 3
Biology (Subtotal = y,
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
0
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
_
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
_
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
ACUV = 0.7- OBL = 1.5 Other = 0 "(k
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 9_ l b
aO
•
Project/Site: Du-I-G� d pits
Latitude: 35.9 3 O L' C7 L
Evaluator: 6/v F
County: Ge4) _ro fa)
Longitude: -796935$4
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if a 30*
3 /
5
Stream Determination circ e o
Other lit _� G�
e.g. Quad Name:
Ephemeral Intermitten Perennial
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal =1 U ► ::-) )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
40
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
<3
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
CD
9. Grade control
Q
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
lelar
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes = 3
itches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrolovy (Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
0
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
Q
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
IIILIP
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
t)
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
C0.5]
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
..
No = 0
Yes = 3
. BIOIOQV (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
_
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
1 0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ► Stream Identification Form Version 4.1
Date: 7-, l ... a O a
Project/Site: Du-c.j 'gi,MS
Latitude: 35 93,13 c, 0
Evaluator: B/ v lr
County: Guy 14ortj
Longitude: 1949669a
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent 3 o r S
if a 19 or perennial if a 30*
Stream Determination (rant))
Ephemeral Intermittent Perennia
Other 14 7-- 5
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = 13 1-:-))
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
CO
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
a]
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
3
CO-
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
ilir2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
` 1
2
3
8. Headcuts
CO_}
1
2
3
9. Grade control
[T)
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0 0.5
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
(0 0-
Yes
= 3
itches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
CD
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
4110
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
41211P1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
4117
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
cirg-
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
. alology IsuDtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
d
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
CO
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
l 5'
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
J FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: S r-, `ij ..kci A' co_cl 4+"s F[�f
/
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date:
944-a.oao
Evaluator: is/vl=
, Project/Site:, - k k. rkais Latitude: 3c, 93 IS a a
County: G
Longitude: 77,C96 73 9
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if a 19 or perennial if a 30*
3a
Stream Determination (circle one
J Ephemeral Intermittent
Other
e.g. Quad Name:
1-Cr G
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = J t t D )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
la. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
CO
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
CJ
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
CV
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
CD
9. Grade control
CO
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
1.5�
11. Second or greater order channel
(No =0
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7, .S
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
C
3
_ 13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
CD
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1 1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
_
No = 0
CYes t3
. Biology (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
411,2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
MO
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: _ c _ 3.0 a�
Evaluator: s r
Project/Site:A(46k f trM3
County:6e ,'/-�O i )
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if z 19 or perennial if z 30*
g, as
Stream Deter
Ephemeral
circle one)
Perennial
Latitude: 3E, 93a6 05
Longitude: =79, 69390 o
Other
UT 7
e.g. Quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = IS ,_ )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
1' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
1
`',J
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
()
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
CO
2
3
9. Grade control
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
11110
= 3
11. Second or greater order channel
No = 0
Yes
artificial ditches are not rated; see disc
B. Hydrology (Subtotal =
sions in manual
12. Presence of Baseflow .
0
()
2
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
(c'es = 3-)
Biology (Subtotal =
,
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
C1 ]
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5 1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed•
FACW = 0.79OBL = 1.5 Other = 0 Cci.. f<_,K.
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:* G(T 7 (o-S bean oh,Serveot i1 -k ,rl o alero -f o S4Y o ►'t-5
pose-(0vi dal-...3 hr /_ l w,-FtM b
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: Ci- i6 - a C5 o.,0
Project/Site: at4.6k faint S
Latitude: 35, 9315 y S
Evaluator: .6 / v I-
County: Gu 1FI �o lf'of
Longitude:- 9. 0 f yg (
Total Points:
is at least intermittent a3 t -15
if z 19 or perennial if a 30*
Stream Determination (c' - . ie
Ephemeral Intermitten 411Z5=
Other L( ( SrStream
e.g. Quad Name: ieto.d,1
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = / V 1.)
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18. Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
Q
3
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
Ill&2
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
041111102
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
3
9. Grade control
0
.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
)
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrolovv {Subtotal =
12. Presence of Baseflow 4e
0
1
2
4'
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
@
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1.5
OD
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
c_SL]
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
t �i a)
1
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
_
No = 0
Yes = 3
. Biology (Subtotal = ,
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
3
2
[ 1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
1
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
t
1
2
3
22. Fish
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
`perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
, Notes: t L{T _
s' oksee Wi' Ao-Ste.#-'IdW in /Neer' ,//5j 6toSo✓ 3
64 re-.O.M o r .--3 r-iLD. F e.5 'or �J-�' he �piLn%O-+fi- k'Qt10./Ld
Sketch:

NC DWQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
Date: 9 _ , ( - �O c1,0
Evaluator: 6N ,
Total Points:
Stream is at least intermittent
if a 19 or perennial if z 30*
30
Project/Site:.6 t.c. f Fors
Latitude: 35 g3 � 3
County: c91,4 / 1/ co r el
Longitude: 79, 49a635
Stream Determination (circl Other
Ephemeral Intermittenterennial e.g. Quad Name:0.Lk
u-rg
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = I .,. )
Absent
Weak
Moderate
Strong
18' Continuity of channel bed and bank
0
1
2
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1
t: 2)
3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
, 1 j
`J
2
3
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
2
3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
C'J
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
1
2
9. Grade control
C UJ
0.5
1
L 3
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
0.5
1
t�.�
11. Second or greater order channel
No 7-0)
Yes = 3
artificial ditches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = 7, r7 ]
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
le
3
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
1
2
3
14. Leaf litter
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris fines or piles
0
0.5
CD
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Yes = 3
BI
.IO
oL]Y (Subtotal =
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
3
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
�
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
0
1
2
3
22. Fish
1 0
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0
0.5
1
1.5
24. Amphibians
0
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
*perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes:
Sketch:

NC ❑WQ Stream Identification Form Version 4.11
`
Date: ti _. a.
� r
Project/Site:A.-Takor/f'ts
Latitude:35, 13 (�, 77
Evaluator: Ai r
County: G: 1 .-'a co)
Longitude: - 79, 49 7a6 7
Total Points:
Stream is at feast intermittent
if a 19 or perennial if a 30"
Stream Determination (6e
Ephemeral Intermittent Perenma
Other UT 9
e.g. quad Name:
A. Geomorphology (Subtotal = / -5
Absent
0
Weak
1
Moderate
Q
Strong
3
X
1a' Continuity of channel bed and bank
2. Sinuosity of channel along thalweg
0
1ARP3
3. In -channel structure: ex. riffle -pool, step -pool,
ripple -pool sequence
0
p
2
4. Particle size of stream substrate
0
1
AIM3
5. Active/relict floodplain
0
1
2
3
6. Depositional bars or benches
0
1
2
3
7. Recent alluvial deposits
0
1
2
3
8. Headcuts
0
0)
2
3
9. Grade control
Q
0.5
1
1.5
10. Natural valley
0
�5)
1
1.5
11. Second or greater order channel
a
No = 9
Yes = 3
itches are not rated; see discussions in manual
B. Hydrology (Subtotal = !1,
12. Presence of Baseflow
0
1
2
13. Iron oxidizing bacteria
0
1
2
141110
14. Leaf litter
1.5
1
0.5
0
15. Sediment on plants or debris
0.5
1
1.5
16. Organic debris lines or piles
0
0.5
(
1)
1.5
17. Soil -based evidence of high water table?
No = 0
Y� es
=
. tilology (Subtotal = }
18. Fibrous roots in streambed
p
2
1
0
19. Rooted upland plants in streambed
Q
2
1
0
20. Macrobenthos (note diversity and abundance)
0
()
2
3
21. Aquatic Mollusks
1
2
3
22. Fish
C_(1]
0.5
1
1.5
23. Crayfish
0.5
1
1.5 _
24. Amphibians
0.5
1
1.5
25. Algae
_ Q
0.5
1
1.5
26. Wetland plants in streambed
FACW = 0.75; OBL = 1.5 Other = 0
-perennial streams may also be identified using other methods. See p. 35 of manual.
Notes: oavvoh,; c d s i 5f fezvv s-s spr- r' j --'e i
Sketch: