20140129 Ver 1_ AMP Results Summary Memo_Oct 2021_20211008

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#*
20140129
Select Reviewer:*
Version* 1
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 10/08/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 10/8/2021
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* r Yes r No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
rJ Stream r Wetlands r Buffer r Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Paul Wiesner
Project Information
ID#:*
20140129
Existing ID##
Project Type: C' DMS r Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Little Buffalo Creek Mit. Site
County: Cabarrus
Document Information
...................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Information
File Upload:
Signature
.............................................
Print Name:*
Signature:*
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:
*1
Existing Version
Little Buffalo Cr 941471_ AMP Results Summary
11.65MB
Memo_Oct. 2021. pdf
Rease upload only one R]Fof the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Paul Wiesner

October 6th, 2021
Paul Wiesner
NCDEQ — DMS
5 Ravenscroft Drive
Asheville, NC 28801
RE: Little Buffalo Creek Stream Restoration Project Adaptive Management Results and Project Summary
NCDEQ —Division of Mitigation Services Contract #002029
DMS Project #94147
Cabarrus County, NC
Yadkin River Basin — 03040105
Dear Paul,
Below please find a summary of our results from the additional monitoring and site work described in the adaptive
management plan (AMP) (November 2020) and the repair complete memo (RCM) (May 2021) for the Little Buffalo
Creek Stream Restoration Project. The issues and subsequent repair work addressed in this memo include stream
channel improvements, additional plantings, cattle encroachment, and invasive plant removal. The previously submitted
repair complete memo provided additional detail regarding the work completed and permit approvals received. This
summary report also highlights the additional monitoring that has been performed, resolution of landowner concerns, and
the current status of the site prior to anticipated project closeout.
UT-2:
Issue: An approximately 75-foot segment of the UT-2 channel had an undefined bed and bank as a result of past
sediment accumulation.
Current Status: As noted in the RCM, a 75-foot single thread channel was excavated on February 25th, 2021 using the
originally designed channel dimensions as a guide for the appropriate width and depth. The repaired section begins at
Station 16+25 and extends downstream to Station 17+00. The location of the channel construction is shown in Appendix
A, Plan Sheet 15. All excavation was completed using hand tools to minimize potential damage to trees and shrubs along
the banks, and the excavated material was cast upslope into non -wetland riparian areas. On March 14th, 2021 the channel
edges were planted with a 1-2 rows of live stakes, approximately 3 feet apart, within the construction limits
(approximately 125 stakes in total). The pond outfall upstream of UT-2 has remained stable since the removal of beavers
and is no longer a major source of sediment. Herbacous vegetation has returned and the improved section has
maintained well-defined bed and banks. Photos of the repaired channel section are included in Appendix A. Photos are
provided which display the conditions immediately after repair, and months later after seasonal herbacous cover had
returned.
UT-3:
Issue: An approximately 400-foot section of the UT-3 channel was poorly defined and damaged by previous cattle
encroachment and sediment accumulation from the erosion of an off -site, unused cattle crossing.
Current Status:
Channel: To remediate the issue described above, a 400-foot single thread channel was excavated on February 18th and
25th, 2021. The repaired section begins at the upstream end of the conservation easement at Station 10+00 and extends
downstream to Station 14+00. The location of the channel construction is shown in Appendix B, Plan Sheet 17. All
excavation was performed using hand tools to limit impacts to the adjacent riparian areas. On March 13th, the
reconstructed channel edges were planted with a double row of live stakes at approximately 3-foot spacing.
Approximately 800 live stakes were planted along UT-3 in total. The area of prior bank erosion at the culvert has since
1

remained stable and is no longer a significant source of sediment Similar to UT-2, herbacous cover has returned
throughout the summer and covered the stream; however, the defined channel section has remained stable. Photos of the
relevant section are included in Appendix B.
Riparian Vegetation: As noted in the RCM, WSP conducted two herbicide treatments for fescue and planted
approximately 300 additional container -grown trees within the riparian buffer of UT-3. Certain planted species were
more successful during the hot/dry summer months than others. Vegetation plot information provided in Appendix D
illustrates the success of these planting efforts.
Cattle Encroachment:
Issue: Cattle encroachment during the spring and summer months of 2020 had impacted the condition of the stream
channel and riparian zone in UT-3 and to a lesser degree along portions of UT-4 and the mainstem of Little Buffalo
Creek below (downstream) of Old Mine Road.
Current Status: Exclusion of cattle from the easement has been achieved over the past 12 months and has significantly
improved the condition of the site. The last instance of cattle encroachment was limited to a single calf in June of 2021.
Signs of the calf were observed at the very upstream end of the easement. It is unclear where the calf entered the
easement. That calf was promptly removed and any damage within the easement was negligible. Evidence of prior
cattle encroachments (spring/summer 2020), such as cattle trails, damage to the stream channel, and browsing of
vegetation has recovered, and is no longer noticeable in the easement.
Frequent communication has continued with the landowners/cattle owners. A brief list of the contacts is provided below:
• Mr. Marcus Harward — cattle -owner and lessee of pasture, owner of northeast pasture
• Mr. Will Edwards — Marcus's son-in-law, manager of cattle
• Mr. Phillip Cline — pasture -owner along east and west side of the easement
• Mr. Allen Hammill - primary landowner of the western crop and hay fields
Mr. Harward and Mr. Edwards have continued to be responsive and proactive in managing the cattle. They have added
additional panels and reinforcement to the cattle crossing. In addition to the fence reinforcement, the pasture on either
side of the crossing has been closed to cattle for the past five months, and was still closed as of September 28th. As such,
there has been no potential for encroachment or congregation at the crossing.
WSP has communicated that a watering source should be evaluated prior to re -opening those pastures to cattle and Mr.
Cline and Mr. Harwood supported the benefit of having an independent water source. Additionally, Mr. Phil Cline has
expressed that he is pursuing the sale of his lower pasture. If the sale is finalized, the cattle crossing will no longer be
used. As such, discussion of a watering source is unlikely to continue until the results of the potential sale are finalized
WSP is coordinating with staff at NCDEQ to handle questions and concerns pertaining to the sale, and implications of
the recorded conservation easement. In the meantime, Mr. Cline has been reminded on multiple occasions that as the
landowner he will be responsible for any cattle incursions within the easement. To date, limiting cattle access to the
crossing and regular fence inspection and maintenance has alleviated the risk that cattle may attempt to enter the
easement. The joint effort between WSP, Mr. Harward, and Mr. Cline to prevent cattle encroachment has proven
successful thus far and will continue through November 17, 2021 to satisfy the request of the IRT.
WSP has continued to work collaboratively with Mr. Harward and Mr. Edwards to repair damaged sections of fence.
Sections of repair work have been completed by either WSP or Mr. Harward depending on the location of the damage.
WSP has been conducting monthly inspections of the conservation easement, checking fence condition, and looking for
signs of cattle encroachment. WSP will continue the monthly inspections through the fall up until the proposed closeout
date. WSP has coordinated the site visits with DMS, who has also been inspecting the site monthly to provide regular
biweekly coverage since last year.
2

NN'
Invasive Plants:
Issue: Some recurrence of treated invasive species including Chinese privet and tree -of -heaven has been observed within
the easement. Multiflora rose and Japanese honeysuckle have also been noted by WSP and DMS staff.
Current Status: The presence of invasive plants has been greatly reduced within the easement, as noted by the IRT
during the initial site review on July 2', 2020. Invasive plant removal has since been performed regularly throughout
the winter of 2020 and spring of 2021. The stream restoration and enhancements corridors are walked regularly and
invasive plants have been cut down or removed by hand -pulling as encountered. Additionally, patches of fescue along
UT-3 were sprayed with an herbicide treatment in October 2020 and again in April 2021.
A more comprehensive and aggressive herbicide application treatment and removal of invasive species was performed
on July 21 st, 2021. The treatment focused on the overbanks along reachs 3 and 4, and expanded to cover a portion of
UT-2 and UT-3 near the respective confluences with the main stem. There was an emphasis on treating and removing
remaining patches of Japanese honeysuckle, Chinese privet, and multiflora rose; shorter stems of tree -of -heaven were
also cut and sprayed when encountered. During follow up site visits, WSP and DMS staff noted that the invasive
treatment appeared to be effective. During a site visit on August 26th, 2021 patches of treated Japanese honeysuckle
were observed to be dead in UT-3. A figure depicting targeted areas from the July 21st treatment and photos of the
invasive species treatment are shown in Appendix C.
Monitoring:
Channel Stability (UT-2 and UT-3): Since the completion of the stream channel corrections and additional plantings on
March 14th, 2020 WSP has begun periodic visual monitoring of site conditions along the entire channel and riparian
zones of UT-2 and UT-3. Photographs of UT-2 and UT-3 from site visits post -construction are included at the end of
both Appendix A and B. No significant degradation, accumulation or bank erosion along the channel have been noticed
within the repair reaches or along the mainstem and other tributaries. Visual inspection and associated documentation
will continue through November 17, 2021.
Upstream Conditions (UT-2): The beaver dam at the pond outfall above UT-2 has been removed and according to Mr.
Hammill, the beavers have been removed as well. The pond outfall has been relatively stable since the removal of the
beaver dam and there have been no signs of excessive sediment loads from the pond outfall.
Vegetation Plots (UT-3): Five additional 10 meter by 10 meter plots have been assessed for tree and shrub density within
the UT-3 riparian zones following the supplemental planting. The location of the plots, data collected, and photos from
monitoring on April 5th and August 26th (2021) can be found in Appendix D. The plots evaluated in 2021 were set as
close as possible to the locations of the random vegetation plots previously conducted (April 2020). Additionally, the
original UT-3 vegetation montioring plot (vegetation monitoring plot 3) was evaluated in August 2021. All plots were
exceeding the stem count criterion (260 planted stems per acre) by at least 10 percent, with the stem densities in August
2021 ranging from 290 to 532 stems per acre.
Landowners:
As noted above, frequent communication has occurred with the landowners throughout the past year. The landowners
have been more responsive in assisting with monitoring, maintaining, and otherwise managing the site. All of the
concerns expressed by the landowners have been addressed. The concerns which were previously expressed by Mr.
Hammill included sections of damaged fence, drainage in his crop fields, and condition of the culvert along Old Mine
Road.
Damaged Fence: On September 28th, the final outstanding fence repairs on Mr. Hammill's property were completed by
Strader Fencing (a subconsultant to WSP). The repairs were coordinated with Mr. Hammill prior to installation and
installed according to his requests.
Crop Field Drainage: WSP visited the site with Mr. Hammill and used a site level to confirm that positive drainage
existed from his field toward the easement and that the plow lines through the field blocked surface drainage. The
stream restoration and enhancement activities did not raise the grades or create a berm in any location. While onsite with
3

Mr Hammill, options for drainage were discussed which could be conducted outside of the easement, primarily that
swales should be maintained in the fields and should not be tilled in a manner to impede flow.
Old Mine Road Culvert: WSP has been in communication with NCDOT who has confirmed that the widening project is
progressing. That project is expected to repair the culvert, which is outside of the conservation easement. The most
recent communication with NCDOT has been received from Jason Callicutt on 09/16/2021. Mr. Callicutt confirmed that
right-of-way has been purchased on all of the relevant parcels expect for the one owned by Mr. Harward. Project
construction is expected to commence shortly after right-of-way acquisition is complete.
Project Closeout:
A fmal site walk with WSP, DMS, and the IRT will take place on November 17th at 1:00 pm. Based on the completion
of the repair work and monitoring efforts described above, and continued exclusion of cattle from the easement, WSP
and DMS are requesting full project credit for UT-2 (343 SMUs) and UT-3 (916 SMUs) for a combined project total of
6,337.533 SMUs (warm). The project asset table and project components map are available in Appendix E.
Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this summary memo.
Sincerely,
WSP USA Solutions, Inc.
Edward Samanns
Senior Lead Consultant
Cc: J. Becker, WSP
A. Johnson, WSP
C. Baker, WSP
(See Appendices Below)
4

APPENDIX A
UT-2

509LZ eugme0 43iON '461eIeb
anuand apeM 6001
'011I 'dflOUO U3OU33 SInOl 3111
�L'
91 133HS a3S0d02id 33S
SN01110N00 O3SOd0ad
IlV OOdd 1N31N30NVHN3 II31SAS003
A1Nn00 snaav9v3
103f Oad NOI1va0153a INV3a1S
)I33130 Olvddfl9 311111

UT-2 Pre -construction Channel (Looking U/S) 11.17.20
UT-2 Pre -construction Channel (Looking U/S) 11.17.20
Appendix A - Photo Page 1 of 5

UT-2 Post -construction and Planting (Looking U/S) 04.05.21
UT-2 Post -construction and Planting (Looking D/S) 04.05.21
Appendix A - Photo Page 2 of 5

UT-2: Post -Construction (Looking U/S) 05.20.21
UT-2: Post -Construction (Looking D/S) 05.20.21
Appendix A - Photo Page 3 of 5

UT-2: Post -Construction (Looking U/S) 06.02.21
Appendix A - Photo Page 4 of 5

UT-2: Post -Construction (Looking U/S) 09.28.21
Appendix A - Photo Page 5 of 5

APPENDIX B
UT-3

31VO
MHO
NdG
SNOISIA3d
'ON
509LZ eugme0 411ON '461eIeb
anuand apeM 6001
'01I 'dflOUO U3OU33 SInOl 3H1
SNOI110N00 0350d0ad
mL y
IlV OOdd 1N31N30NVHN3 II31SA5003
AlNn00 snaav9v3
103fOad NOI1va0153a IV3a1S
)I33130 OlvJdfl9 311111
4
FIGURE B1
9l 133HS a3S0dOad 33S 8l 133HS a3S0d02id 33S
fire/ 61 Al
`oam,

UT- 3 Pre -construction Channel (Looking U/S) 02.18.21
UT- 3 Post -construction Channel (Looking U/S) 04.05.21
Appendix B - Photo Page 1 of 3

UT- 3: Pre -construction Channel (Looking D/S) 03.16.20
UT- 3: Post -construction Channel and Live -stake Planting (Looking D/S) 04.05.21
Appendix B - Photo Page 2 of 3

UT-3: Post -Construction (Looking D/S) 05.20.21
UT-3: Post -Construction (Looking U/S) 08.26.21 (stream channel towards right side of photo, flowing
water observed in channel)
Appendix B - Photo Page 3 of 3

APPENDIX C
INVASIVE
SPECIES
TREATMENT

UJ Cd U ( 5
W W W W W
Q Q Q Q Q
_ _ _ _ _
woo 'dsM'MMM
9910-d 'oN asuao!1
109LZ ON `46!ale l
laaJlS all!nallaRed 4E4
3111 VSl dSM
z
w
u1
0 0 0 0
_ _
00i 0n 0V V A
a Li Li
U Um Um _20 _20
J J
0 o W� wF- LL L¢iI
Q
n Om Iw Iw Iw Iw
• W W W W
QJ JeE JeE JcE Jet
cE =00 00 0' 0 00 00
(n WW WW WW WW
0 >w >ILE >0 >0 >0
Z
O
0
0
J
0
0
_
0
—SAW— MJIA NVId SNOLLIONOO 1N3?J?JflO
S301O83S NO11V0111W 30 NOISIOI0
m_Nf100 Sf188V8V0
1O3f 021d N011VLIO1S3LI WH3211S
;i332f0 01H33118 3�111�
i
1
FIGURE Cl

UT-3: Pre -Invasive Species Treatment, 07.21.21
UT-3: Post -Invasive Species Treatment, 08.26.21
Appendix C - Photo Page 1 of 3

UT-3: Pre -Invasive Species Treatment, 07.21.21
UT-3: Post -Invasive Species Treatment, 08.26.21
Appendix C - Photo Page 2 of 3

UT-3: Pre -Invasive Species Treatment, 07.21.21
UT-3: Post -Invasive Species Treatment, 08.26.21 (not the same view as the above picture, but taken in
the general vicinity)
Appendix C - Photo Page 3 of 3

APPENDIX D
MONITORING

Legend
Little Buffalo Creek Conservation Easement
0 UT-3 Vegetation Monitoring Plot
O Random Vegetation Plot
UT-3 Thalweg
Source: Esri Aerial Imagery dated 02/01/19
Figure D1. UT-3 Vegetation Monitoring
Little Buffalo Creek Stream Restoration Project
DMS Project #94147
Cabarrus County, NC
September 2021
A
0 50 100
i
Feet

0
c0
G
0
as
0
0)
\a)
M
1-
i
a
a)
0
as
UT 3
Veg Plot 3
MY5 I August 2021
N
.-I
. i
N
.-I
. i
8
0.83613
0.02
7
1
N
.-I
.i
N
.i
.i
8
0.83613
0.02
6
RVP 6
April 2021 1 August 2021
.-I
.-I .-I
-
a
8
0.83613
0.02
5
387
.-I
.-I .-I
-
Cr
8
0.83613
0.02
5
387
RVP 5
April 2021 1 August 2021
.-I N
.-I
N
6
0.83613
0.02
4
290
.-I N
N
N
7
0.83613
0.02
4
I 339
RVP 4
April 2021 I August 2021
N
. -I
m
6
0.83613
0.02
3
290
N
.-I
cl.
7
0.83613
0.02
3
T
M
M
RVP 2
April 2021 I August 2021
M N
VD
11
0.83613
0.02
3
c-I
. i
M N
I--
14
0.83613
0.02
5
RVP 1
April 2021 I August 2021
-
.
N
.-I
N
-
8
0.83613
0.02
6
387
N
.'-I
M
c-I
M
.'-I
11
0.83613
0.02
6
M
N
Species Type
W
W
H
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
Tree
W
U
Stem count
size (ares)
Size (ACRES)
Species count
Stems per ACRE(
Common Name
Iriver birch
American hornbeam
sugarberry
persimmon
green ash
tuliptree
blackgum
American sycamore
southern red oak
swamp chestnut oak
pin oak
willow oak
American elm
(southern arrowwood
Scientific Name*
Betula nigra
Carpinus caroliniana
Celtis laevigata
Diospyros virginiana
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Liriodendron tulipifera
Nyssa sylvatica
Platanus occidentalis
Quercus falcata
Quercus michauxii
Quercus palustris
Quercus phellos
Ulmus americana
Viburnum dentatum
G
O
O
V

RVP1—View north, 04.05.21
RVP1- View southwest, 08.26.21
Appendix D - Photo Page 1 of 6

RVP2 —View north, 04.05.21
RVP2 —View east, 08.26.21
Appendix D - Photo Page 2 of 6

RVP4 —View south, 04.05.21
RVP4 —View south, 08.26.21
Appendix Photo Page 3 of 6

RVP5 — View west, 04.05.21
RVP5 — View southwest, 08.26.21
Appendix D - Photo Page 4 of 6

RVP6 —View northeast, 04.05.21
RVP6 —View east, 08.26.21
Appendix D - Photo Page 5 of 6

Vegetation Monitoring Plot 3 —View north, 08.26.21
Appendix D - Photo Page 6 of 6

PPENDIX E
PROJECT
COMPONENTS

Asset Table
Table E-1. Project asset table.
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Reach ID
Stationing
Existing
Feet (linear
feet)
Restoration Footage*
(Stationing)
Mitigation
Ratio
Stream Mitigation Units
Reach 1
10+00 to 33+05
2,305
1200 EII (10+00 - 22+00)
377 R (22+00 - 25+77)
728 EII (25+77 - 33+05)
R 1:1
EII 2.5:1
1148
Reach 2
33+66 to 46+10
1,244
1244 EII (33+66 - 46+10)
EII 2.5:1
498
Reach 3
46+10 to 56+93
1,083
202 EII (46+10 - 48+12)
244 R (48+12 - 50+06)
637 EII (50+06 - 56+93)
R 1:1
EII 2.5:1
580
Reach 4
56+93 to 66+62
969
677 EII (56+93 - 63+70)
151 EI (63+70 - 65+21)
141 EII (65+21 - 66+62)
E I 1.5:1
EII 2.5:1
428
Reach 5
66+62 to 74+88
826
826 EII (66+62 - 74+88)
E II 2.5:1
330
Reach 6
75+19 to 82+55;
91+89 to 104+96
2,043
736 P (75+19 - 82+55)
1307 P (91+89 to 104+96)
p 5:1
409
UT 1
10+00 to 11+11
111
111 EII (10+00-11+11)
EII 2.5:1
44
335 P (10+00 - 13+35)
R 1:1
UT 2
10+00 to 19+51
951
44 EII (13+35 - 13+79)
EII 2.5:1
343
49 R (13+79 - 14+28)
523 EII (14+28 - 19+51)
P 5:1
218 R (10+00 - 12+18)
249 EII (12+18 - 14+67)
194 EI (14+67 - 16+61)
24 R (16+61 - 16+85)
UT 3
10+00 to 24+75
1,475
342 EI (16+85 - 20+27)
109 EII (20+27 - 21+36)
R 1:1
E I 1.5:1
916
23 R (21+36 - 21+59)
EII 2.5:1
255 EII (21+59 - 24+14)
40 R (24+14 - 24+54)
21 EII (24+54-24+75)
UT 4
10+00 to 18+31
831
421 EII (10+00 - 14+21)
410 EI (14+21 - 18+31)
E I 1.5:1
EII 2.5:1
442
UT 5
10+00 to 11+84
N/A
N/A
N/A
0'
UT 6
10+00 to 11+51
151
151 EII (10+00 - 11+51)
EII 2.5:1
60
UT 7
10+00 to 21+27
1,127
147 EI (10+00 - 11+47)
980 R (11+47 - 21+27)
R 1:1
E I 1.5:1
1078
UT 8
10+19 to 10+81
62
62 R (10+19 - 10+81)
R 1:1
62
Potential Stream Mitigation Units
6,337.533
*R=Restoration; EII=Enhancement Level II; EI=Enhancement Level I; P=Preservation
' Due to the lack of continuous flow in UT 5 over multiple years of monitoring, no Steam Mitigation Units are being requested for
the length of UT 5.
Note: Due to rounding some of the values when added may appear to be 1' short of total, this is purely a product of values being
rounded to nearest linear foot.
Little Buffalo Creek Stream Mitigation Project — Project #94147 — WSP — October 2021

MMOMSEMIMMUMMEMMEMMEMENEMMEMMOO
••
MM
4111 7 - j
j•
•
/ / f
woo dSMMMM
991.0-d 'oN asueor
109LZ ON '46!eley
4oagS 011!n0140Aed bEb
Sul VSfl dSM
dVW S1N3NOdk00 103f'Od
S3OIO13S NOI1VOLLM 30 NOISING
m_Nf100 SflaV8H0
1S3f 0d NOLL IO_LS3a Wd3a1S
map OiH33f o 3�111�
1
O 1
z
i
Anp 0.101. 00110.say lnoaso10 •oyy gassy 10 00 .0 N0a16 0J1n8 <411 l0-809£6l 0 0,000