20170887 Ver 2_Year 3 Monitoring Report_20211018

ID#* 20170887 Version* 2
Select Reviewer:
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 10/19/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 10/18/2021
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* Yes • No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address-*
Tasha King [e-mail]
Project Information
ID#:* 20170887 Version:* 2
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
County: Chatham
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank - Monitoring
9.86MB
Year 3 Annual Report.pdf
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name: * Tasha King
Signature:

Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
D W R I D# 2017-0887v2
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC's Cane Creek Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank
Monitoring Year 3 Report
October 2021
kt�
WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
PREPARED BY:
Wildlands Engineering, Inc.
312 West Millbrook Road, Suite 225
Raleigh, NC 27609
Phone: [phone]

MONITORING YEAR 3 REPORT
Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC's Cane Creek Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................2
1.1 Project Description................................................................................................................. 2
1.2 Bank Sponsor.......................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Project History........................................................................................................................ 2
1.4 Project Location...................................................................................................................... 3
1.5 Project Design......................................................................................................................... 3
2 VEGETATION MONITORING....................................................................................................4
2.1 Success Criteria....................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Description of Species and Monitoring Protocol................................................................... 5
2.3 Results of Vegetation Monitoring.......................................................................................... 5
2.4 Parcel Adaptive Management................................................................................................ 6
2.5 Conclusions.............................................................................................................................7
3 REFERENCES..........................................................................................................................7
LIST OF TABLE''
Table 1
Project Reporting History
Table 2
Tree Species Selected for Buffer Restoration
Table 3
Character/Existing Tree Species
Table 4
Monitoring Plot Summary — Planting (As -Built)
Table 5
Monitoring Plot Summary — Year 3
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 Stem Count Total and Planted Species by Vegetation Plot
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results
Appendix E: Overview Photographs
W Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 1
Monitoring Year 3 Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Description
The Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel (Parcel) is part of the Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC
(Sponsor) Cane Creek Nutrient Offset and Buffer Mitigation Bank (Bank). The Parcel was designed in
concurrence with the Cane Creek Umbrella Mitigation Bank: Bethel Branch Stream and Wetland
Mitigation Bank (SAW# 2016-02365). The Chatham County project surrounds three unnamed tributaries
which drain to South Fork Cane Creek, Cane Creek, and eventually to the Haw River. The Parcel location
is depicted in Figure 1. The purpose of the Parcel is to provide riparian buffer 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 (Figure 2).
Prior to construction, the Parcel had been mostly used for livestock grazing with small portions
maintained as managed herbaceous cover since before 1993. The livestock pastures were dominated by
fescue grasses (Festuca spp.) and although much of the riparian area on UT2 was wooded, livestock had
access to the streams throughout.
Riparian buffers and other riparian areas adjacent to mitigated streams onsite were restored and
livestock was fenced out in order to help reduce non -point source contaminant discharges to
downstream waters in the Jordan Lake Watershed within the Cape Fear River Basin. Approximately
16.30 acres are now protected with a permanent conservation easement. Of the 16.30 acres, 10.86
acres were mitigated to generate Jordan Lake riparian buffer credit. Of those 10.86 acres, 3.44 acres
qualify for buffer restoration, 4.87 acres for enhancement (via livestock exclusion), and 2.55 acres for
buffer preservation (Figure 3). Riparian area widths are a minimum of 30 feet from the top of stream
banks out to a maximum of 60 feet. Together these activities have generated 266,899.400 ft' of riparian
buffer mitigation credits after applying the appropriate credit reductions and ratios.
1.2 Bank Sponsor
The Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel is a part of the Bank. The Umbrella Mitigation Banking
Instrument (UMBI) for the Bank was signed in March 2018.
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC
1430 South Mint Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28203
Phone: [phone]
Attn: Shawn Wilkerson
Email: [e-mail]
1.3 Project History
The construction of the Stream and Wetland Mitigation Bank was completed in April 2019. No major
adjustments were made during construction that would drastically affect the Buffer Mitigation Bank
Parcel. Due to a survey error some adjustments were made to the conservation easement boundaries,
but the total acreage remains the same. The Umbrella Mitigation Banking Instrument (UMBI) for the
Bank and the Bank Parcel Development Plan (BPDP) were approved in March and November of 2018.
Project reporting history dates can be found in Table 1 below.
W Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 2
Monitoring Year 3 Report

Table 1. Project Reporting History
Activity
Completion Date
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC Cane Creek UMBI
March 2018
Bank Parcel Development Package Approved
November 2018
Conservation Easement
September 2019
Bare Root Planting
April 2019
As -Built & Baseline Monitoring Document
September 2019
Year 1 Monitoring Completed
November 2019
Year 2 Monitoring Completed
September 2020
Year 3 Monitoring Completed
October 2021
1.4 Project Location
The Parcel is located in Chatham County near the town of Snow Camp, NC (35° 49' 45.56" N and 79° 22'
11.37" W) in the Cape Fear River Basin (03030002) and the North Carolina Division of Water Resources
(NCDWR) Subbasin 03-06-04 (Figure 2). From Raleigh, take US-64 West to the exit for NC-87 N. 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 0.6 miles. Turn right onto R E Wright Road and the project
area is accessible through the gate 0.1 miles on the left.
1.5 Project Design
Approximately 16.30 acres are now protected with a permanent conservation easement. Of the 16.30
acres, a total of 10.86 acres of riparian areas have been mitigated to generate Jordan Lake riparian
buffer credit. Credit generation is shown in Figure 3 and the current credit ledger is in Appendix B. All
areas of the conservation easement were fenced using woven wire fencing and barbed wire to prevent
encroachment by livestock. The pond and earthen dam at the upstream end of UT3 was removed and
the stream channel was fully restored as a part of the Bethel Branch stream and wetland mitigation
bank. The buffer restoration areas were replanted with appropriate native tree species within the
project corridors. The revegetation plan included permanent seeding, planting of bare root trees, live
stakes, herbaceous plugs, and controlling invasive species growth. Bare root trees selected for planting
were native bottomland hardwood species typical for Piedmont Bottomland Forest communities as
defined by Schafale (2012). Tree species selected, as well as size specifications, planting density, and
plant composition are detailed in Table 2.
W Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 3
Monitoring Year 3 Report

Table 2. Tree Species Selected for Buffer Restoration
Scientific Name
Common Name
Size
(feet)
Planting Density
(Stems/Acre)
Planting Composition
N
Betula nigra
River Birch
2-3
129
20
Celtis occidentalis
Northern Hackberry
2-3
20
3
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
Green Ash
2-3
109
17
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
2-3
39
6
Platanus occidentalis
Sycamore
2-3
129
20
Quercus lyrata
Overcup Oak
2-3
64
10
Quercus pagoda
Cherrybark Oak
2-3
44
7
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
2-3
64
10
Ulmus americans
American Elm
2-3
44
7
Totals
642
100
Natural recruitment of desirable Character Tree species shall be counted towards the survival and
success rate of the restored site. "Character Trees" are defined as planted or volunteer species
identified from a survey of local vegetation on less degraded sections of the specified stream and from
reference literature that details native species. A partial list of Character Tree species is included in Table
3 below.
Table 3. Character/Existing Tree Species
Scientific Name
Common Name
Acer rubrum
Red Maple
Liriodendron tulipifera
Tulip Poplar
Liquidambar styraciflua
Sweetgum
Quercus alba
White Oak
Quercus nigra
Water Oak
Quercus phellos
Willow Oak
Ulmus americans
American Elm
Source: Schafale (2012)
VEGETATION MONITORING
2.1 Success Criteria
Buffer vegetative success criteria are based upon the density and growth of Character Tree species, as
defined in Tables 2 & 3. Vegetative success criteria are based upon guidelines set forth in the
Consolidated Buffer Mitigation Rule 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (effective November 1, 2015). Success is
defined as a minimum of 260 live stems per acre at the end of the 5-year monitoring period with a
minimum of four native hardwood species, where no one species comprises more than 50 percent of
stems. Height, DBH, and visual assessment of damage and vigor will be used as indicators of overall
health. Desirable volunteer species may be included to meet the success criteria upon DWR approval.
If vegetative success criteria are not achieved based on acreage density calculations from combined
monitoring plots over the entire restoration area, or if an inspection of a buffer restoration site indicates
that portions of the Parcel do not have sufficient stem densities or are otherwise deficient,
supplemental planting shall be performed with tree species approved by NCDWR. Supplemental
W Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 4
Monitoring Year 3 Report

planting shall be performed as needed until vegetative success criteria are met. No quantitative
measurements of herb assemblages will be required to meet the vegetative success criteria.
2.2 Description of Species and Monitoring Protocol
The quantity of monitoring plots was determined in accordance with the Carolina Vegetative Sampling
(CVS) Protocols (Levels I & 11) such that at least 2 percent of the restoration area is encompassed in
monitoring plots. Two 10-meter by 10-meter and one 5-meter by 20-meter vegetation monitoring plots
were installed within the buffer restoration area to measure the survival of the planted trees (Figure 4).
GPS points were taken, and PVC pipe was used to mark the four corners of each plot. Each year a
reference photo is taken from the southwest corner of each plot. All planted stems within the 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. No planting was required in livestock exclusion or preservation areas, however
visual assessments are conducted each year and any issues identified will be photographed, corrected,
and reported as part of the annual monitoring report.
Table 4. Monitoring Plot Summary — Planting (As -Built)
Scientific Name
Total Stems Flagged
(MYO)
Calculated Planting Density
(Stems/Acre)
Planting Composition
N
Betula nigra
9
121
20
Celtis occidentalis
1
14
2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
6
81
13
Liriodendron tulipifera
3
40
7
Platanus occidentalis
12
162
27
Quercus lyrata
3
40
7
Quercus pagoda
7
95
15
Quercus phellos
3
40
7
Ulmus americans
1
14
2
Totals
45
607
100
2.3 Results of Vegetation Monitoring
The three vegetation plots were sampled in September 2021 at the end of the third growing season.
Reference photos taken from the southwest corner of each plot can be found in Appendix D along with
the stem count raw data. The total number of each tree species planted within the monitoring plots, as
well as planting density and composition, for Monitoring Year 3 are detailed in Table 5 below.
Vegetation result tables with planted stem density, stem count by plot and species, as well as a
vegetation plot success summary are available in Appendix C.
Vegetation monitoring at Year 3 resulted in an average stem density of 364 planted stems per acre,
which exceeds the final requirement of 260 stems per acre. All plots have 5 planted species per plot, and
no one species comprises more than 50 percent of stems. Volunteer stems include desirable species,
such as American persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), and overcup
oak (Quercus lyrata).
W Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 5
Monitoring Year 3 Report

Table 5. Monitoring Plot Summary —Year 3
Scientific Name
Total Stems Flagged
(MY3)
Calculated Live Stem Density
(Stems/Acre)
Live Stem Composition
N
Betula nigra
2
27
7
Celtis occidentalis
1
13
4
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
5
67
19
Liriodendron tulipifera
1
14
4
Platanus occidentalis
11
148
41
Quercus lyrata
2
27
7
Quercus pagoda
1
14
4
Quercus phellos
2
27
7
Ulmus americana
2
27
7
Totals
27
364
100
Visual assessments of the livestock exclusion and preservation areas within the conservation easement
concluded:
• Fencing is in good condition throughout the site;
• no livestock access within the conservation easement;
• no encroachment has occurred;
• diffuse flow is being maintained in the easement area; and
• there has not been any cutting, clearing, filling, grading, or similar activities that would
negatively affect the function of the buffer.
Follow up treatments were done on the small populations of tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) along
UT2 in the buffer preservation area in Monitoring Year 3. Sporadic populations of Chinese privet
(Ligustrum sinense), Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and multiflora rose (Rosa multifora)
along UT1 and UT2 also received follow up treatments during the growing season using various methods
of herbicide application including foliar, cut stump, hack and squirt, and stem injection. Wildlands will
continue to treat invasive species as necessary in Monitoring Year 4.
Significant progress has been made in reducing the bare areas along UT3. Herbaceous vegetation is
present along UT3 downstream left and the hillslope is stabilized. These areas will be monitored in
subsequent monitoring years and addressed as necessary. The last overview photograph in Appendix E
shows the old pond area at the top of UT3 and the vegetation that is established.
Ring sprays were applied to thick herbaceous vegetation around planted stems to help them thrive on
the downstream end of UT1 and in areas of the old pond bed along UT3. Additionally, a mix of humic
plus, biochar, lime, and essential minerals were added to the base of the trees along sections of UT1,
UT2, and UT3 to help them outcompete the thick herbaceous vegetation. Wildlands will continue to
monitor the health of the planted stems throughout the project.
The survival rate of live stakes planted on the stream banks was low, so an additional one thousand live
stakes were planted along the stream banks of UT1, UT2, and UT3 in January 2021. These additional
trees will grow quickly, and will provide shade and wildlife habitat for the streams.
Specific actions being taken to address the issues mentioned above are included in section 2.4 below.
2.4 Parcel Adaptive Management
Adaptive measures will be developed, or appropriate remedial actions will be implemented in the event
that the Parcel or a specific component of the Parcel fails to achieve the success criteria outlined in the
W Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 6
Monitoring Year 3 Report

BPDP. Parcel maintenance will be performed to correct any identified problems on the Parcel 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, easement encroachment, or insects. Any actions
implemented will be designed to achieve the success criteria and will include a work schedule and
updated monitoring criteria.
Lingering sporadic invasive species will be treated using various methods of herbicide application
including foliar, cut stump, hack and squirt, and stem injection. Wildlands will continue to monitor
invasive species and treat them, as necessary.
Additional soil enhancer and native herbaceous seeds will be spread over the previously bare area along
UT3 to encourage organic matter and continued thickening of herbaceous vegetation. Ring sprays will
be applied around struggling tree stems as necessary to help them outcompete thick herbaceous
vegetation.
2.5 Conclusions
Vegetation across the Parcel is exceeding performance standards. Monitoring Year 3 data shows an
average density of 364 planted stems per acre across vegetation plots. The Parcel is on track to achieve
the final success criteria of 260 stems per acre at the end of Monitoring Year 5. In addition, desirable
volunteer species, such as American persimmon (Diospyros virginiana), green ash (Fraxinus
pennsylvanica), and overcup oak (Quercus lyrata) are establishing themselves. The previously bare areas
have been stabilized and Wildlands will continue to encourage vegetation growth. Wildlands will also
continue to monitor invasive species and treat them as necessary.
3.0 REFERENCES
Lee, M.T., Peet, R.K., Steven D., & Wentworth, T.R. (2008). CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording Vegetation
Version 4.2 [PDF file]. Retrieved from http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-
5.pdf
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Ecosystem Enhancement Program. (2004).
Guidelines for Riparian Buffer Restoration [PDF file]. Retrieved from
https://ie.unc.edu/files/2019/10/buffer-restoration.pdf
NC Department of Environmental Quality. (2015). 15A NCAC 02B .0259 Mitigation Program
Requirements for Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Buffers [PDF file]. Retrieved from
http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-
%20environmental%20quality/chapter%2002%20-
%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0295.pdf
Peet, R.K., Wentworth, T.R., & White, P.S. (1998). A flexible, multipurpose method for recording
vegetation composition and structure [PDF file]. Castanea, 63:262-274. Retrieved from
http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/pubs/castanea63;262.pdf
Schafale, M.P. (2012). Guide to the Natural Communities of North Carolina, Fourth Approximation [PDF
file]. Retrieved from https://files.nc.gov/dncr-nhp/documents/files/Natural-Community-
Classification-Fourth-Approximation-2012.pdf
Wildlands Holdings IV, LLC. (2018). Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Development Package.
NCDWR, Raleigh NC.
Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel Page 7
Monitoring Year 3 Report

Appendix A: Figures

Bea
°
O
aN'LtO`O-
CIO
4�
762 ff
r�Y
uy
a
0
Russell Kd
a
Lick Cremvu
Clark Ra
_------------
- -
ALAMANCE
-
- - - - -
---- - - - --
- - ---
CHATHAM
------- - - - - --
orb Johnson
mow%itrlrflcl.�+'d peek _
C,
fhurcr
P-d
Cxc`
Bethel Branch Parcel
Location
r
��p�•�y
s
v��
�1
nsO�r3rrch
�
�t `
Ro k F
c
Ra
JohniT$__`'
arm
c
cIPP
C%
�g��elfs
�i
'nv°oa Rd
772 ft
�J
,r
7
W111 Ofown Rd
1 5�pta Rd
Epps ClaricKd
ran
r
ga03
:3
X
-4
Fa
�
Sspn Rd
a
4*
x
u
V4�f .
1
d\\
C
Ja(o
740 ff
Figure 1. Parcel Location Map
WILD LANDS 0 0.5 1 Miles Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
ENGINEERING I I I I I Monitoring Year Report
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
Chatham County, NC

�•—••_ County Boundaries
HUC 03030002
Jordan Lake Sub -Watersheds
Service Area - Riparian Buffer Credits
Bethel Branch Parcel Location
I- t - -- -- -• ---- .................
•I
SummeAiald I
Oak Ridge
I
C
I
I
I
01030002
iHigh Point
I
1
Lii.l
I r—•--
I I
' I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
i I
i
I
I
I
i I
.....................—.....—. ti_..—........—..—..—..—.....—,
y
Haw River '
l
i
1i r
Upper Nhw Hope
1
er t
Re
1
Haw i
�•.�.,� Rive
Rare n
Rock
Stabs Park
(1�
Figure 2. Service Area Map
W I L D L A N D S 0 5 10 Miles Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
kvvl E N G I N E E R I N G I i i i I Monitoring Year 3 Report
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
Chatham County, NC

Conservation Easement (16.30 Ac)
Wetlands (3.21 Ac)
- Project Stream (2.05 Ac)
Credit Zones
Buffer Restoration (2.04 Ac)
Buffer Restoration - Ephemeral (0.68 Ac)
Buffer Restoration - Pond Area (0.72 Ac)
Livestock Exclusion (4.87 Ac)
Buffer Preservation (2.55 Ac)
No Credit (0.18 Ac)
E3 — E3 Fencing
Non -Project Stream
!I %.77
1 WIN
Figure 3. Credit Generation Map
NWILD LANDS 0 175 350 Feet p Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
%z ENGINEERING I I I I I IJN Monitoring Year Report
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
Chatham County, NC

U_ _� Conservation Easement (16.30 Ac)
Wetlands (3.21 Ac)
- Project Streams (2.05 Ac)
Credit Zones
Buffer Restoration (2.04 Ac)
Buffer Restoration - Ephemeral (0.68 Ac)
Buffer Restoration - Pond Area (0.72 Ac)
Livestock Exclusion (4.87 Ac)
Buffer Preservation (2.55 Ac)
1
No Credit (0.18 Ac)
+ Vegetation Plots
E3 — U Fencing
Non Project Streams
f
k
r
Figure 4. Monitoring Components Map
WILD LANDS 0 175 350 Feet Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
ENGINEERING i i i i i Monitoring Year Report
Cape Fear River Basin 03030002
Chatham County, NC

Appendix B: Bank Credit Ledger

§§§((\
\
\)§§�
D�
-
-
\
Z
� �
,
\\/(\\(
n\}\\
\\/\\
\
)
\\\\\
\
\o
\
\
\\\\\
-
}
y
§� | /
-
G
�~
-/\)))(
{
)
%2)Q£(§
52E
-
)
\
2
!
f
«/
o§M5
\;
E� }�\\
�?o
�\
_
02::
\ \
u
to
( \
o
o
§
f{{
-
-o
u
)
:)K
m
{
)
_-o
w
diwm
}:t
*
w8
)j))){\
\/\(\

Appendix C: Vegetation Assessment Data

2
c
-0
+'
o
+�
aj
bD
4A
L
s
a
>
O
-0
4A
d
s
c
d
y
Ln
Ln
Ln
E
a
m
a
an
z
oa
c
ai
J
{A
d
L
u
Q
0000
�
00
N
aj
O
Q.
ba
c
{A
L
-O
E
y
u
Q
M
00
�
�
y
N
L
N
M
c
m
Q
a
c
E
O
a
aJ
aJ
4A
c
c
7
aJ
4�
Or -I
O
00
O
�
>
b
IA
af°i
a;1O
m
LA
p
+,
Ln
'O
45 a5
na
E
r-I
r
�
�
�
a
w
-1
Iq
m
c
00
r1
o
++
4A
O
I-
N
n
r-I
O
W
O
Q)
rI
Ql
N
Ql
00
00
00
r-I
r-I
r-I
oa
to
�D
r1
ui
u1
rn
c
1n
qzjl
�o
s
o
4
Ci
i
O
O
O
n
u1
00
I-
Z
Ln
Ln
Ln
n
n
n
L
d
aj
M
M
M
N
�
d
d
0
E
�
E
�
M
a
v
v
1-1
N

a
H
m
m
m
m
N
—1
N
r�
00
M
N
—
a
N
m
—1
—1
N
m
—A
O
Ln
to
>
a
O
m
H
J
O
N
m
c-I
c-I
N
m
Ln
N
d
}i
Ln
UJ
—1
—1
Ln
Ln
>
jLn
E—
d
—1OLn
Nm
N
c-I
l0
—A
—A
0
N
r-I
lD
c-I
c-I
Lfi
aj
a
U
N
c-I
c-I
c-I
lD
—1
N
—1
m
—1
0)
0
00
a
E
GJ
m
—1
N
—1
N
—1
I-
—1
N
O
Ln
m
oo
N
a
O
N
L
00
CN
c in c
u
CL
c3
u u ° a
aj
H
CL
H N
a,
aj
a E
CL
a,
w
w
a,
a,
a,
a,
w
w
a,
a,
a,
H d
v)
0)L
L
L
.
�
L
Gila)
L
L
�
L
�
L
�
L
�
L
C)
L
�
L
0)
L
0
L
«
H
Ln
Ln
aj
E
m
C:
O
z
E
pY
E
U
U
i
a..�
E
ca
2
ca
2
aJ
d
O
L
n3
Y
O
w
ut
i
i
i�
Ln
n3
CL
i
a3
cYa
O
Lu
m
a,
a,
u
a
o°
E
Q
u>
3
cOa
.0
>
o'Ln
o
o
E
G
ma
.Z3
a>—
E
E
<0m�Lnou
w
a
a)
E
a
U
a
z
j
a
U
a
a
;~
a
a
.�
c
ice+
Cu
�
O
a
01
C
O
z
U
U
H
Q
CL
CL
a
H
O
a
u
O
j
a
a
O
O
C
C
U
U
U
N
N
N
Cu
U
U
O
a
cm
a
LL
_,
C7
C7
C7
Z)
E
aj
Y
Ln
aJ
Y
(L
Q
m
CL
E
aj
N
T
0
O
O
i
I

�
/
a
e
m
e
z
m
g
m>
m
r§
m}
_
�
m
�
z
m
g
m>
m
§
m%
k%
m\
o
z
m
e
z
m
g
m>
m
\
m}
ƒ
e
z
e
\
r,4
g
m
m
m
r,%
m/
_
�
z
z
r,4
g
m
m
m
�$
m±
k\
m\
a
o
#
a
z
e
z
g
m
r14m
e/
}
ƒ
}_
e
z
In
e
e
g
m
e
m
\
m\
«
�
%rj
z
g
m
e
m
C4
m
e
m
m\
o
m
LM
0rj
z
e
g
m
e
m
r4
m
m/
e
z
e
e
e\
e
g#
A
m#
A
§
\}
_
Q
%
e
z
e
g
erlj
r,4%
m
3
erj
m\
e
m
a
1-1z
-Ag
-A%
e/
10
a a 2
k
§ u § k
e
u
e
E w Q aj
q
//
°' �- CL
A
CL°
V)§
f
f
c
c
u
c
u
c
c
c
u
c
u
®
e-=
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
V)
e
z
Iz
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
aj
E
±
»
_
°
z
E
§
E
E
u
u
°
\
E
E\
7
7
E
E
u
E
E_
_\\
=
e
C\\
5=
f\
J
E//
E
2�
a
2/
\
Z»
E/
m
CL
\
(/
=
E
E
»
7
z<
G
m
e
z
o
u
R
E$<
k
c
z
(
®
z
c
c
\
u
±
2
f
k®
2/
G
\
C
c
[
/
(
2
=
3\
c
\
\
-
2
\
ƒ
\
=
\
k
\
\
o
c
\CL
\
\
\
Cu(
(
\
\
\
Cu
5
5
5
q
u
u=%
2
i
0
0
0
\ \ \
\ / o /
2 3 \ \
» 2 § u §
[ [ om-
B \
\ \ 2 \ \ j \ \
2 ° - - _ . o
u w j 2 2\ J a
§
aj
CL
§
aj
\
�
�

Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Veg Plot 1 (Stream VP 2) - Year 3
Tree ID
Species
X (m)
Y (m)
Height (cm)
1
Platanus occidentalis
0.4
0.6
244
2
Liriodendron tulipifera
2.3
0.6
105
3
Betulo nigra
4.8
0.7
Missing
4
Liriodendron tulipifera
7.2
0.8
Missing
5
Quercus pagoda
9.7
0.5
Missing
6
Betula nigra
9.5
5.0
Missing
7
Liriodendron tulipifero
6.9
4.8
Missing
8
Quercus pagoda
4.8
4.9
102
9
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2.6
5.0
136
10
Quercus phellos
0.5
4.8
Missing
11
Betula nigra
0.5
9.1
Missing
12
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
2.7
9.1
88
13
Celtis occidentalis
5.2
9.0
38
14
Quercus pagoda
7.8
9.0
Missing
15
Platanus occidentalis
9.7
9.2
383
Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Veg Plot 2 (Stream VP 5) - Year 3
Tree ID
Species
X (m)
Y (m)
Height (cm)
16
Quercus pagoda
9.7
0.5
Missing
17
Betula nigra
9.7
4.2
186
18
Betula nigra
7.9
2.7
Missing
19
Betula nigra
6.4
1.4
131
20
Platanus occidentalis
4.2
3.4
381
21
Platanus occidentalis
4.7
4.7
401
22
Quercus lyrata
5.8
5.8
Missing
23
Platanus occidentalis
7.0
7.1
446
24
Platanus occidentalis
8.1
8.4
495
25
Quercus lyrata
8.9
9.8
94
26
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
4.5
9.8
Missing
27
Platanus occidentalis
2.7
9.9
241
28
Platanus occidentalis
2.5
8.2
405
29
Quercus phellos
1.2
5.9
129
30
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
0.2
10.0
109
t..
t .a
1 � �
a z
♦. 4p N�
gg �
;
- _
'J Ala v+
&AV %Z K,
WBethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

Veg Plot 3 - Year 3
Tree ID
Species
X (m)
Y (m)
Height (cm)
31
Platanus occidentalis
0.9
0.3
Missing
32
Quercus phellos
1.0
2.2
109
33
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
3.2
0.4
224
34
Quercus pagoda
5.2
1.2
Missing
35
Quercus pagoda
4.7
3.5
Missing
36
Platanus occidentalis
8.3
4.8
325
37
Platanus occidentalis
8.4
2.7
216
38
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
8.4
0.7
82
39
Betula nigra
11.6
3.2
Missing
40
Platanus occidentalis
11.5
0.4
218
41
Betula nigra
15.7
0.4
Missing
42
Quercus pagoda
15.8
3.4
Missing
43
Quercus lyrata
19.3
4.4
113
44
Ulmus americans
19.7
2.5
88
45
Ulmus americans
19.9
0.2
71
WBethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Appendix D: Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos and Data Results

APPENDIX E. Overview Photographs

Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Appendix E: Overview Photographs

Bethel Branch Buffer Mitigation Bank Parcel
Appendix E: Overview Photographs