20160225 Ver 2_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20211001

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#*
20160225
Select Reviewer:*
Version* 2
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 10/04/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 10/1/2021
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
r Stream r Wetlands rJ Buffer rJ Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Jason Lorch
Project Information
ID#:*
20160225
Existing ID##
Project Type: r DMS C•' Mitigation Bank
Email Address:*
jlorch©wildlandseng.com
Version:
*2
Project Name: South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer
Mitigation Bank Parcel
County:
Chatham
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload:
Signature
Print Name:*
Signature:*
Existing Version
South Fork Buffer and Nutrient Offset MY3
8.79MB
Report.pdf
Rease upload only one RIF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Jason Lorch
[).done J tc9d

South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
DWR ID# 2016-0225v2
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC's Cane Creek Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank
MONITORING YEAR 3 REPORT
October 2021
WI LDLAND S
ENGINEERING
PREPARED BY:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: [phone]

MONITORING YEAR 3 REPORT
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC's Cane Creek Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction 2
2.0 Parcel Location & Background 2
2.1 Project history 2
2.2 Location and Setting 3
2. 3 Parcel Background 3
2. 4 Project Objectives 3
2. 5 Mitigation Activities 4
3.0 Monitoring 5
3.1 Monitoring Process and Protocol 5
3.2 Results of Vegetation and Visual Assessment Monitoring 5
4.0 Long -Term Management 6
4.1 Parcel Maintenance 6
5.0 Conclusions 6
6.0 References 7
1ST OF TABLES
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Project Reporting History
Character/ Existing Tree and Shrub Species
Tree Species Selected for Buffer Restoration
Monitoring Plot Summary —As -Built (MYO)
Monitoring Plot Summary— MY3
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Figures
Figure 1 Parcel Location Map
Figure 2 Service Area Map
Figure 3 Credit Generation Map
Figure 4 Monitoring Components Map
Appendix B: Bank Credit Ledger
Appendix C: Vegetation Assessment Data
Table 6 Vegetation Plot Success Summary
Table 7 Planted and Total Stem Counts
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results
Appendix E: Overview Photographs
W South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 1
Monitoring Year 3 Report

MONITORING YEAR 3 REPORT
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC's Cane Creek Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank
The South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel ("Parcel") is a part of the Wildlands
Holdings IV, LLC (Sponsor) Cane Creek Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank (Bank). The Parcel
surrounds tributaries to South Fork Cane Creek in Chatham County, NC (Figure 1). The purpose of the
Parcel is to provide riparian buffer and nutrient offset mitigation credits to compensate for unavoidable
buffer impacts in the 03030002 Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) of the Cape Fear River Basin, within the Haw
River Sub -watershed of the Jordan Lake Watershed. The Parcel was planned and designed according to
the Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (effective November 1, 2015) and 15A
NCAC 02B .0703. The service area is depicted in Figure 2.
1.0 Introduction
This Parcel was developed to provide stream mitigation through the creation of a Stream Mitigation
Bank as well as nutrient offset and buffer mitigation through the creation of a Nutrient Offset & Buffer
Mitigation Bank. Riparian restoration activities deemed suitable for nutrient offset on this Parcel will
generate 2,249.36 lbs. -Nitrogen per acre and 143.81 lbs. -Phosphorus per acre (with a delivery factor of
71% and 67% respectively).
The Parcel involved restoring riparian buffers adjacent to mitigated streams onsite to help reduce non -
point source contaminant discharges to downstream waters in the Jordan Lake Watershed within the
Cape Fear River Basin. Approximately 18.13 acres are protected with a permanent conservation
easement. Of the 18.13 acres, 14.83 acres have been restored for either Jordan Lake riparian buffer
credit or nutrient offset credit. In general, riparian buffer restoration area widths on streams range from
50 feet to 100 feet from the top of bank.
2.0 Parcel Location & Background
2.1 Project history
Project history can be found below in Table 1.
Table 1. Project Reporting History
Activity
Completion Date
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC Cane Creek UMBI
March 2018
Bank Parcel Development Package Approved
July 2018
Conservation Easement
July 2018
Bare Root Planting
December 2018
As -Built & Baseline Monitoring Document
March 2019
Year 1 Monitoring Completed
September 2019
Year 2 Monitoring Completed
September 2020
Year 3 Monitoring Completed
September 2021
W South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Monitoring Year 3 Report
Page 2

2.2 Location and Setting
The Parcel is located in Chatham County near the Town of Snow Camp, NC (35° 49' 21.28" N and 79° 22'
54.62" W). From Raleigh, take US-64 West to the exit for NC-87 North. Continue north on NC-87 for 1.8
miles and turn left onto Silk Hope Gum Spring Road. Continue on Silk Hope Gum Spring Road for 8.1
miles. Turn right onto Silk Hope -Lindley Mill Road and continue for 2.9 miles. Turn left onto Moon
Lindley Road and continue for 1.3 miles. Turn left onto Johnny Lindley Road and continue for 0.7 miles
to 1727 Johnny Lindley Road, Snow Camp, NC (Figure 1).
2.3 Parcel Background
Prior to construction, the Parcel consisted primarily of livestock pasture except for a few areas that were
already forested. The cattle pastures on the Parcel were dominated by fescue grasses (Festuca spp.) and
broomsedge (Andropogon virginicus). Much of the riparian areas on the Parcel were wooded; however,
cattle had access to the streams. Vegetation in the wooded areas is primarily hardwood species
including white oak (Quercus alba), red oak (Quercus rubra), willow oak (Quercus phellos), tulip poplar
(Liriodendron tulipifera), sweetgum (Liquidambarstyraciflua), red maple (Acer rubrum), southern red
oak (Quercus falcata), and American elm (Ulmus americana) (Table 2).
Table 2. Character/ Existing Tree and Shrub Species
Scientific Name
Common Name
Quercus alba
White Oak
Quercus rubra
Red Oak
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip -Poplar
Liquidambar styraciflua
Sweetgum
Acer rubrum
Red Maple
Quercus falcata
Southern Red Oak
Ulmus americana
American Elm
2. 4 Project Objectives
The main objective of the Parcel is to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus loading to the Cape Fear
tributaries by establishing a forested riparian buffer of selected species on land previously used for
agricultural purposes (Table 3). The riparian buffer will immobilize nutrients, reducing quantities
available to downstream aquatic ecosystems in the Cape Fear River Basin.
W South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 3
Monitoring Year 3 Report

Table 3. Tree Species Selected for Buffer Restoration
Scientific Name
Common Name
Planted Number
% of Total
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
950
25%
Celtis occidentalis
Hackberry
100
3%
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
400
11%
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark Oak
200
5%
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
350
9%
Betula nigra
River Birch
850
23%
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
450
12%
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip -Poplar
300
8%
Ulmus americana
American Elm
150
4%
Total
3,750
100%
2. 5 Mitigation Activities
The revegetation plan for the entire buffer restoration area included permanent seeding, planting bare
root trees, live stakes, and controlling invasive species growth. The specific species composition that was
planted was selected based on the community type, observation of occurrence of species in riparian
buffers adjacent to the site, and best professional judgement on species establishment and anticipated
site conditions in the early years following project implementation (Table 3). Trees were planted at a
density sufficient to meet the performance standards outlined in the Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 of 260
trees per acre at the end of five years. An appropriate seed mix was also applied to provide ground
cover for soil stabilization and reduction of sediment loss, as necessary.
While planting was not anticipated to be needed in the cattle exclusion areas, except where required in
the stream mitigation plan, a seed mix was applied where cattle had removed all vegetation and caused
bare soils. The cattle exclusion areas within the easement were fenced to prevent further cattle
encroachment by using Three -Strand High Tensile Wire Fence. No planting was performed in the buffer
preservation areas except in areas affected during construction.
Table 4. Monitoring Plot Summary —As-Built (MYO)
Scientific Name
Total Stems Flagged
(MYO)
Calculated Planted
Stem Density
(Stems/Acre)
Live Stem
Composition
Platanus occidentalis
19
152
25%
Celtis occidentalis
2
18
3%
Quercus michauxii
8
67
11%
Quercus pagoda
4
30
5%
Quercus phellos
7
54
9%
Betula nigra
17
140
23%
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
9
73
12%
Liriodendron tulipifera
6
49
8%
Ulmus americana
3
24
4%
Total
75
607
100%
W South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Monitoring Year 3 Report
Page 4

3.0 Monitoring
3.1 Monitoring Process and Protocol
Five 10-meter by 10-meter vegetation monitoring plots (plots numbered 3-7) were installed within the
buffer restoration area to measure the survival of the planted trees (Figure 4). The number of plots
required was determined in accordance with the Carolina Vegetative Sampling Protocol (CVS) Levels 1 &
2. Vegetation assessment was conducted in January 2019 following the CVS Levels 1 & 2 Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Version 4.0 (Lee et al. 2006). Performance Standards for the Parcel are based on
the health and survival of a minimum density of 260 trees per acre after five years of monitoring, and no
one species comprises more than 50 percent of stems. Height, visual assessment of damage, and vigor
are used as indicators of overall health. Desirable volunteer species may be included to meet the success
criteria upon NCDWR approval. A reference photo was taken from the southwestern corner of each
vegetation plot and included in the appendix. All planted stems in the vegetation plots were marked
with flagging tape and recorded. The total number of each tree species planted within the monitoring
plots, as well as planting density, and composition at as -built are included in Table 4 for comparison
purposes.
Annual monitoring activities began in the fall of 2019 and will continue each year for the remainder of
the monitoring period. Species composition, density, and survival rates will be evaluated on an annual
basis by plot for the entire site. An annual monitoring report will be submitted to NCDWR no later than
December 31' of each year for five consecutive years.
3.2 Results of Vegetation and Visual Assessment Monitoring
The 5 vegetation plots (Plots 3-7) were sampled in September 2021 at the end of the third growing
season. A reference photo was taken from the southwest corner of each plot, which can be found in
Appendix D along with the stem count raw data. Total numbers of planted tree species identified within
the monitoring plots as well as density and composition are summarized in Table 5. Vegetation result
tables with planted stem density, and stem count by plot and species are summarized in Appendix C.
The 2021 vegetation monitoring resulted in an average planted stem density of 461 planted stems per
acre with individual plot densities ranging from 364 to 526 stems per acre. When including volunteer
species, the average stem density is 1,279 stems per acre with individual plot densities ranging from 647
to 3,237 stems per acre. Both planted and total average stem densities well exceed the final
requirement of 260 stems per acre. Volunteer species will be monitored to make sure they do not out -
compete planted species. If volunteer species hinder the growth of planted trees remedial actions will
be taken.
Visual assessments of the cattle exclusion and preservation areas within the conservation easement
concluded:
• Fencing is in good condition throughout the site;
• No cattle access within the conservation easement area;
• No encroachment has occurred;
• Diffuse flow is being maintained in the conservation easement area; and
• There has not been any cutting, clearing, filling, grading, or similar activities that would
negatively affect the functioning of the buffer.
The Site is on track to meet its final success criteria.
W South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 5
Monitoring Year 3 Report

Table 5. Monitoring Plot Summary — MY3
Scientific Name
Total Stems Flagged
(MY3)
Calculated Live Stem
Density (Stems/Acre)
Live Stem
Composition
Platanus occidentalis
19
154
33%
Celtis occidentalis
2
16
4%
Quercus michauxii
6
48
10%
Quercus pagoda
2
16
4%
Quercus phellos
7
57
12%
Betula nigra
9
73
16%
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
8
65
14%
Liriodendron tulipifera
1
8
2%
Ulmus americana
3
24
5%
Total
57
461
100%
Long -Term Management
4.1 Parcel Maintenance
The parcel has been properly and accurately marked by adding witness posts with easement placards
every 100 ft and at every corner of the easement. Fencing locations were agreed upon with the
landowner and are displayed accurately in Figures 3 and 4. Issues with the initially installed tinsel fencing
maintaining a continuous stream of electricity were noted during Monitoring Year 2. The tinsel fencing
was therefore replaced with woven barbed wire during January 2021. The fencing has remained in good
condition since this event.
Throughout the remainder of the Parcel, adaptive measures will be developed, or appropriate remedial
actions will be implemented in the event the Parcel, or a specific component of the Parcel fails to
achieve the success criteria. Site maintenance will be performed to correct any identified problems that
have a high likelihood of affecting project success. Such items include but are not limited to excess tree
mortality caused by fire, flooding, drought, or insects. Any actions implemented will be designed to
achieve the success criteria and will include a work schedule and updated monitoring criteria.
5.0 Conclusions
Overall, vegetation is doing well across the Parcel. The Parcel has an average planted stem density of
461 stems per acre with individual plot densities ranging from 364 to 526 stems per acre. Each of the 5
vegetation plots exceed the final vegetative success criteria of 260 stems per acre. Herbaceous cover
has become well established across the Parcel. The tinsel fencing installed around the Parcel was
replaced with woven barbed wire in January of 2021 and has maintained a good condition. No problems
were identified, such as invasive species or excessive tree mortality, during Monitoring Year Three.
Therefore, no corrective actions are required at this time.
W South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 6
Monitoring Year 3 Report

6.0 References
Guidelines for Riparian Buffer Restoration. NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources,
Ecosystem Enhancement Program. October 2004.
Lee, Michael T., Peet, Robert K., Steven D., Wentworth, Thomas R. 2006. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4.0. Retrieved from
http://www.nceep.net/business/monitoring/veg/datasheets.htm.
Peet, R.K., T.R. Wentworth and P.S. White. 1998. A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure. Castanea 63:262-274. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC (2017). Cane Creek Mitigation Banking Instrument. NCDWR, Raleigh NC.
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/wq/nutrientbufferbanks
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 7
Monitoring Year 3 Report

Appendix A: Figures

00
Q.
M!°r kin Rd
Quakenbush Rd
c°h
a
v
762R.2re
Clark Rd
L
0
O
co
South Fork Bank Parcel Location
05
S� G��aeuWe�Opa Rd a
�yO ��
oP r
!, U
a _,\
Q�r
Rufus Brewer Rd
�� Rd
500` .4 d
Jo hnni
_4
d
a
8
0
ALAMANCE
CHATHAM
Otis jc
CdstA
Cate
0
`Church
I
u
�r■nch
�nso•�J
v
•
•
■ • '• •
■ ■
■ • ■
.. •..�
• .p
.•••«� ..
rt
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Figure 1. Parcel Location Map
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
0 0.5 1 Miles
I I I I I
Chatham County, NC

HUC 03030002
County Boundaries
Jordan Lake Sub -Watersheds
Service Area - Riparian Buffer Credits
South Fork Mitigation Bank Parcel Location
I.Lnir ,ii
Summ erliel J
Oak Ridge L
TOV.
Danville
I Ity
e,�
/V 2
rr-4
Yanceyville
1
VIRGINIA
r_,:boro
��.
Raven
Rock
State Park
•
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
Figure 2. Service Area Map
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
0 5 10 Miles
I I I
Chatham County, NC

2017 Aerial Photography
- I
Conservation Easement (18.13 ac)
Internal Crossing
Streams & Vernal Pools (2.42 ac)
South Fork Credit Zones
Restoration 0-100' (4.92 ac)
Restoration 0<50' (0.48 ac)
Enhancement 0-100' (0.47 ac)
Cattle Exclusion 0-100' (8.52 ac)
Preservation 0-100' (0.44 ac )
No Credit (0.88 ac)
,}{ =n Project Fencing
‘VidOWILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
0 210 420 Feet
I I I I I
Figure 3. Credit Generation Map
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
Chatham County, NC

2017 Aerial Photography
Conservation Easement (18.13 ac)
Internal Crossing
Streams & Vernal Pools (2.42 ac)
South Fork Credit Zones
Restoration 0-100' (4.92 ac)
Restoration 0<50' (0.48 ac)
Enhancement 0-100' (0.47 ac)
Cattle Exclusion 0-100' (8.52 ac)
Preservation 0-100' (0.44 ac )
No Credit (0.88 ac)
=n Project Fencing
❑ Buffer Vegetation Monitoring Plots
kowille WILDLAN DS
ENGINEERING
0 200 400 Feet
I I I I I
Figure 4. Monitoring Components Map
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
Chatham County, NC

Appendix B: Bank Credit Ledger

Cane Creek Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI)
South Fork Nutrient Offset & Buffer Mitigation Bank
Cape Fear (HUC 03030002) Haw River Subwatershed
Nitrogen Credit Ledger
Date Last Updated: 09-30-2021
DWR Bank Parcel Project #: 2016-0225v2
As -Built Credit Total: N/A
Delivery Factor: 71% N
HOLDINGS0
W I L D LA N D S
Sale/Release
Date
Purchaser Name or % of Credit Release
Project Name
14-digit HUC of Project
Credits Released/Available to
Bank
Credits Debited/Sold From Bank
Nutrient Credit Balance
Local Gov't
Requiring
Generated
Nitrogen (Ibs)
Delivered
Nitrogen (Ibs)
Generated
Nitrogen (Ibs)
Delivered
Nitrogen (Ibs)
Generated
Nitrogen (Ibs)
Delivered Nitrogen
(Ibs)
8/27/2018
Tasks 1&7 Release (25%)
03030002050050
2,929.79
2,080.15
2,929.79
2,080.15
NCDWR
12/17/2018
DWR Approved Transfer to South Fork Buffer Restoration Ledger
2,929.79
2,080.15
-
-
NCDWR
5/1/2019
Task 2 Release (20%)
03030002050050
2,343.83
1,664.12
2,343.83
1,664.12
NCDWR
5/30/2019
Task 3 Release (10%)
03030002050050
813.15
577.34
3,156.98
2,241.46
NCDWR
1/9/2020
Task 4 Release (10%)
03030002050050
1,106.69
785.75
4,263.67
3,027.21
NCDWR
2/23/2021
Task 5 Release (10%)
03030002050050
1,106.69
785.75
5,370.36
3,812.96
NCDWR
Total Balances
8,300.15
5,893.11
2,929.79
2,080.15
5,370.36
3,812.96

Cane Creek Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI)
South Fork Nutrient Offset & Buffer Mitigation Bank
Cape Fear (HUC 03030002) Haw River Subwatershed
Phosphorus Credit Ledger
Date Last Updated: 09-30-2021
DWR Bank Parcel Project #: 2016-0225v2
As -Built Credit Total: N/A
Delivery Factor: 67% N
W I L D LAN
D S
'
HOLDINGS
Sale/Release
Date
Purchaser Name or % of Credit Release
Project Name
14-digit HUC of
Project
Credits Released/Available to Bank
Credits Debited/Sold From Bank
Nutrient Credit Balance
Local Gov't
Requiring
Generated
Phosphorus (Ibs)
Delivered
Phosphorus (Ibs)
Generated
Phosphorus (Ibs)
Delivered
Phosphorus (Ibs)
Generated
Phosphorus (Ibs)
Delivered Phosphorus
(Ibs)
8/27/2018
Tasks 1&7 Release (25%)
03030002050050
187.31
125.50
187.31
125.50
NCDWR
12/17/2018
DWR Approved Transfer to South Fork Buffer Restoration Ledger
187.31
125.5
-
-
NCDWR
5/1/2019
Task 2 Release (20%)
03030002050050
149.85
100.4
149.85
100.40
NCDWR
5/30/2019
Task 3 Release (10%)
03030002050050
52
34.84
201.85
135.24
NCDWR
1/9/2020
Task 4 Release (10%)
03030002050050
70.76
47.41
272.61
182.65
NCDWR
2/23/2021
Task 5 Release (10%)
03030002050050
70.76
47.41
343.37
230.06
NCDWR
Total Balances
530.68
355.56
187.31
125.50
343.37
230.06

Cane Creek Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI)
South Fork Nutrient Offset & Buffer Mitigation Bank
Cape Fear (HUC tion & 03030002) Haw River Subwatershed
Buffer Restoration & Enhancement Credit Ledger
Date Lastr el Project #: 3016-02 -2021
DWR Bank Parcel Project #: 2016-0225v2
Total Credits Released To Date: 79,844.05 sq. ft.
Delivery Factor: 71% N
W I L D LA N D S
0
HOLDINGS
Sale/
Release Date
Purchaser Name or % of Credit Release
Project Name
Project w/ 14 Digit
HUC
Credits
Released/Available to
Bank
Credits Debited/Sold
From Bank
Buffer Credit Balance
Local Gov't Requiring
Square Feet
Acres
Square Feet
Acres
Square Feet
Acres
8/27/2018
Tasks 1&7 Release (25%)
03030002050050
5,771.70
0.13
5,771.70
0.13
NCDWR
12/17/2018
DWR Approved Transfer from South Fork Buffer Nutrient Offset Ledgers
56,628.00
1.30
62,399.70
1.43
NCDWR
5/1/2019
Task 2 Release (20%)
03030002050050
4,617.36
0.11
67,017.06
1.54
NCDWR
5/30/2019
Task 3 Release (10%)
03030002050050
6,635.99
0.15
73,653.05
1.69
NCDWR
7/15/2019
Collin Clampett
Lochside Sanitary Sewer Relocation (Clampett Residence)
03030002050050
1,839.00
0.042
71,814.05
1.65
City of Greensboro
8/13/2019
Mann's Chapel Subdivision, LLC
Ryan's Crossing Subdivision (aka: Mann's Chapel Subdivision)
03030002050050
15,078.00
0.346
56,736.05
1.30
Chatham County
1/9/2020
Task 4 Release (10%)
03030002050050
3,095.50
0.07
59,831.55
1.37
NCDWR
3/30/2020
Piedmont Triad Airport Authority
Piedmont Triad International Airport Rental Car Facilities Relocation(DWR #20191081 V2)
03030002050050
58,193.04
1.336
1,638.51
0.04
NCDWR
2/23/2021
Task 5 Release (10%)
03030002050050
3,095.50
0.07
4,734.01
0.11
NCDWR
Total Balances
79,844.05
75,110.04
4,734.01
0.11

Cane Creek Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI)
South Fork Nutrient Offset & Buffer Mitigation Bank
Cape Fear (HUC 03030002) Haw River Subwatershed
Buffer Enhancement (Cattel Exclusion) & Preservation Credit Ledger
Date Last Updated: 09-30-2021
DWR Bank Parcel Project#: 2016-0225v2
Total Credits Released To Date: 140,670.75 sq. ft.
HOLDINGS
W I L D LA N D S
"N'{
Sale/
Release Date
Purchaser Name or % of Credit
Release
Project Name
Project w/ 14 Digit
HUC
Credits
Released/Available to
Bank
Credits Debited/Sold
From Bank
Buffer Credit Balance
Local Gov't Requiring
Square Feet
Acres
Square Feet
Acres
Square Feet
Acres
8/27/2018
Tasks 1&7 Release (25%)
03030002050050
48,678.30
1.12
48,678.30
1.12
NCDWR
5/1/2019
Task 2 Release (20%)
03030002050050
38,942.64
0.89
87,620.94
2.01
NCDWR
5/30/2019
Task 3 Release (10%)
03030002050050
15,537.61
0.36
103,158.55
2.37
NCDWR
10/21/2019
Publix
Publix
03030002050050
98,892.71
2.27
4,265.84
0.10
Guilford County/ EMC
1/9/2020
Task 4 Release (10%)
03030002050050
18,756.10
0.43
23,021.94
0.53
NCDWR
3/30/2020
Piedmont Triad Airport Authority
Piedmont Triad International Airport Rental Car Facilities Relocation(DWR #20191081 V2)
03030002050050
23,021.94
0.53
-
-
NCDWR
2/23/2021
Task 5 Release (10%)
03030002050050
18,756.10
0.43
18,756.10
0.43
NCDWR
Total Ba lances
140,670.75
121,914.65
18,756.10
0.43

Appendix C: Vegetation Assessment Data

Table 6. Vegetation Plot Success Summary
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Monitoring Year 3 - 2021
Plot
Year
Northing
Easting
Planted Living
Stems
Missing
Stems
Volunteer
Stems
Total Living
Stems
Planted Living Stems
per Acre
Total Living Stems
per Acre
Number of Total species
per Acre
Vegetation Threshold
Met?
3
3
754752
1886490
13
1
3
16
526
647
6
Yes
4
3
755142
1887010
9
3
15
24
364
971
6
Yes
5
3
754682
1886680
13
0
7
20
526
809
5
Yes
6
3
754695
1886250
11
3
7
18
445
728
8
Yes
7
3
755620
1887380
11
2
69
80
445
3,237
5
Yes
*Target density is a minimum of 260 planted trees per acre at the end of the five (5) year monitoring period.

Table 7. Planted and Total Stem Counts
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Monitoring Year 3 - 2021
Current Plot Data (MY3 2021)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
VP 3
VP 4
VP 5
VP 6
VP 7
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Betula nigra
River Birch
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
Celtis occidentalis
Northern Hackberry
Shrub Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
56
Gleditsia triacanthos
Honey Locust
Shrub Tree
3
1
1
Juniperus virginiana
Eastern Red Cedar
Tree
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
Sweet Gum
Tree
10
1
3
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip -poplar
Tree
1
1
1
1
Pinus taeda
Loblolly Pine
Tree
2
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree
7
7
7
2
2
2
6
6
8
2
2
2
2
2
2
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark Oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
Ulmus alata
Winged Elm
Tree
4
4
15
Ulmus americana
American Elm
Tree
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
13
13
16
9
9
24
13
13
20
11
11
18
11
11
80
1
1
1
1
1
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
6
6
7
6
6
9
5
5
7
8
8
12
5
5
7
526
526
647
364
364
971
526
526
809
445
445
728
445
445
3,237
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
Pnols - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes
P-all: Number of planted stems
T: Total Stems

Table 7. Planted and Total Stem Counts
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Monitoring Year 3 - 2021
Annual Means
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
MY3 (2021)
MY2 (2020)
MY1 (2019)
MYO (2019)
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
PnoLS
P-all
T
Betula nigra
River Birch
Tree
9
9
9
11
11
11
11
11
12
17
17
17
Celtis occidentalis
Northern Hackberry
Shrub Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
Tree
8
8
61
9
9
29
8
8
12
9
9
9
Gleditsia triacanthos
Honey Locust
Shrub Tree
5
2
1
Juniperus virginiana
Eastern Red Cedar
Tree
1
Liquidambar styraciflua
Sweet Gum
Tree
14
14
3
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip -poplar
Tree
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
6
6
6
Pinus taeda
Loblolly Pine
Tree
2
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
Tree
19
19
21
19
19
21
19
19
20
19
19
19
Quercus michauxii
Swamp Chestnut Oak
Tree
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark Oak
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
Tree
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
7
7
7
Ulmus alata
Winged Elm
Tree
23
Ulmus americana
American Elm
Tree
3
3
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
3
3
3
Stem count
size (ares)
size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE
57
57
158
63
63
102
62
62
72
75
75
75
5
5
5
5
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.12
9
9
14
9
9
11
9
9
11
9
9
9
461
461
1,279
510
510
826
502
502
583
607
607
607
Color for Density
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
Pnols - Planted Stems Excluding Live Stakes
P-all: Number of planted stems
T: Total Stems

Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Veg Plot 3 - Year 3
Tree ID
Species
X (m)
Y (m)
Height (cm)
1
Quercus michauxii
0.8
0.6
65
2
Platanus occidentalis
1.2
2.8
415
3
Celtis occidentalis
1.0
4.7
115
4
Platanus occidentalis
0.8
7.1
285
5
Platanus occidentalis
0.6
9.5
330
6
Quercus michauxii
4.8
9.0
80
7
Betula nigra
5.1
6.5
Missing
8
Platanus occidentalis
5.1
4.6
405
9
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
5.0
3.0
128
10
Quercus phellos
5.0
0.9
87
11
Platanus occidentalis
9.5
0.8
376
12
Platanus occidentalis
9.4
2.9
151
13
Quercus pagoda
9.2
4.4
58
14
Platanus occidentalis
9.2
7.1
420
15
Betula nigra
9.3
9.7
Dead
WSouth Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Parcel
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Veg Plot 4 - Year 3
Tree ID
Species
X (m)
Y (m)
Height (cm)
16
Betula nigra
0.6
0.6
73
17
Betula nigra
0.6
2.4
55
18
Platanus occidentalis
0.6
4.6
425
19
Quercus phellos
0.6
6.9
106
20
Betula nigra
0.6
9.5
79
21
Quercus pagoda
4.7
9.5
Missing
22
Liriodendron tulipifera
4.7
7.1
Dead
23
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
4.7
5.2
Missing
24
Quercus phellos
4.7
3.3
Missing
25
Liriodendron tulipifera
4.9
0.7
Dead
26
Ulmus americana
9.6
0.6
81
27
Platanus occidentalis
9.5
2.7
375
28
Quercus michauxii
9.6
5.1
94
29
Betula nigra
9.6
7.2
Dead
30
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
9.6
9.4
84
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Parcel
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Veg Plot 5 - Year 3
Tree ID
Species
X (m)
Y (m)
Height (cm)
31
Platanus occidentalis
0.4
0.5
540
32
Platanus occidentalis
0.5
2.7
225
33
Liriodendron tulipifera
0.5
4.3
Dead
34
Betula nigra
0.5
6.3
460
35
Platanus occidentalis
0.6
8.4
375
36
Betula nigra
5.0
8.2
57
37
Liriodendron tulipifera
5.1
6.3
Dead
38
Betula nigra
5.1
4.2
301
39
Betula nigra
5.1
1.9
265
40
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
5.1
0.6
159
41
Platanus occidentalis
9.6
0.6
410
42
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
9.6
2.1
250
43
Platanus occidentalis
9.5
4.3
485
44
Platanus occidentalis
9.4
6.3
285
45
Quercus phellos
9.5
8.1
25
WSouth Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Parcel
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Veg Plot 6 - Year 3
Tree ID
Species
X (m)
Y (m)
Height (cm)
49
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
0.6
0.5
138
50
Betula nigra
2.8
0.5
122
51
Betula nigra
4.6
0.5
Dead
52
Quercus michauxii
7.1
0.5
78
53
Quercus pagoda
9.6
0.5
53
54
Celtis occidentalis
9.3
4.5
61
55
Quercus pagoda
6.9
4.7
24
56
Platanus occidentalis
5.0
5.0
520
57
Quercus michauxii
3.1
5.0
145
58
Quercus michauxii
1.1
5.0
102
59
Platanus occidentalis
0.3
5.0
480
60
Quercus michauxii
2.9
9.3
Missing
61
Betula nigra
5.1
9.2
Missing
62
Liriodendron tulipifera
6.9
9.2
97
63
Liriodendron tulipifera
9.5
9.2
Missing
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Parcel
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Tree ID
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
Veg Plot 7 - Year 3
Species
Betula nigra
Quercus phellos
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Platanus occidentalis
Quercus phellos
Betula nigra
Quercus phellos
Ulmus americana
Betula nigra
Betula nigra
Platanus occidentalis
Betula nigra
Quercus michauxii
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
X(m)
0.7
2.7
5.1
7.3
9.8
9.3
7.2
4.9
2.5
0.7
0.2
3.3
5.4
8.3
8.8
Y (m)
0.4
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.3
4.9
4.9
5.0
4.9
4.9
9.4
9.3
9.3
9.3
9.4
Height (cm)
315
110
176
237
500
84
Missing
94
67
Dead
Dead
298
56
Missing
74
South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Parcel
‘46, Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Appendix E: Overview Photographs

South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Appendix E: Overview Photographs

South Fork Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Appendix E: Overview Photographs