20190681 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_2021_20211215

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20190681 Version* 1
.........................................................................................................................................................................
Select Reviewer:*
Katie Merritt
Initial Review Completed Date 12/16/2021
Mitigation Project Submittal - 12/15/2021
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* 0 Yes ® No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Jeremiah Dow [e-mail]
Project Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20190681 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
County: Randolph
Document Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Longhorn_100114_MY2_2021.pdf 6.51MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Print Name:* Jeremiah Dow
Signature:*

MY02 Monitoring Report
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
DMS Project No. 100114
DMS Contract Number: 7866
DWR Project Number: 2019-0681
Randleman Lake Watershed
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030003
RFP #16-007703
f , e� 3 7
x `r1 t �A ! ,1 , —.1 r1X
,--- , -„ 1-., , jjc,;\._ \I-4o -\''''',,, ,,„_P,44,e,,,,c.--1.4 yk,z,,,.;', ,- -, ,,.v,,,,:,#.6,-..01,_ - 4
,, - ;r-- .-'''.%% tV A A-1 ,,Ak, V-4 .,f.,1141',..A.,>., ,, ,....,' - -, r,.,,,,,. .... g
"4'.. Nd. T'Ar;. e ,04-,A. ..pe,..: :71-,,-„x -- .,.. ' ; . . .*AttA
0 +,,-... ,,A i . t4140
.1 - yr .wio2,li. ri
Tr; AA 0', ' o. 'd 4 $ `1"'. r 4,-,,..1''4;:.1<,-,',--''.'--,-''_,-if-‘"-4-0-.
ft _ san 0 y:
Prepared For:
r!IM
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652

le\
CLEARWATER MITIGATION
SOLUTIONS
December 13,2021
Mr. Jeremiah Dow
NCDEQ Division of Mitigation Services
217 W.Jones Street, Suite 3000
Raleigh,NC 27603
Re: Longhorn—Task 6 MY 2 (DMS Project No. 100114)
Response to Comments
Dear Mr. Dow,
Please find below the response to comments on the Longhorn Buffer Mitigation Site MY 2
Monitoring Report provided by DMS,November 22,2021:
1. Need to include the visual assessment table.
Re: Included within Appendix B.
2. Provide invasives treatment shapefile.
Re: Provided.
3. Also provide jpg of photos submitted in report.
Re: Included as a digital file.
4. Section 3.2 -second paragraph says planting consisted of planting approximately 538
stems/acre,but 1st paragraph of section 4.3 states 673 stems/acre.Need to clarify.
Re: Section 3.2 second paragraph has been corrected to "673 stems/acre". Annual
monitoring (MY02) was conducted on September 23, 2021 by LMG staff. An average
stem density of 435 planted stems per acre was tallied across the monitoring
plots(approximately 65% of the recorded baseline (MYO)plot density (673 stems per
acre)).
5. Figure 8 -has dam area to be added to CE at later date.
Re: "Area Added to Conservation Easement(11/03/2021)"as noted in legend on Figure
8.
Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions at 919-624-6901.
Sincerely,
-L';%-Pth•
Kevin Yates
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, NC 27609
919-624-6901
clearwatermitigation©gmail.com

MY02 Monitoring Report
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
Randolph County, NC
DMS Project No. 100114
DMS Contract Number: 7866
DWR Project Number: 2019-0681
Randleman Lake Watershed
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030003
PREPARED FOR:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
PREPARED BY:
Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
CLEAR W 4 TER lifTIGATiON
SOLUTIONS
S 4
604 Macon Place
Raleigh, North Carolina
Authorized Representative: Mr. Kevin Yates
Phone: [phone]
Contributing Staff:
Kevin Yates, Clearwater Mitigation Solutions
Christian Preziosi, Land Management Group
Wes Fryar, Land Management Group
Kim Williams, Land Management Group

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Mitigation Project Summary 1
1.1 Project Goals 1
1.2 Pre-Construction Site Conditions 2
2.0. Determination of Credits 2
3.0. Baseline Summary 3
3.1 Planting Preparation 3
3.2 Riparian Area Restoration and Enhancement Activities 4
4.0 Annual Monitoring 5
4.1 Methods 5
4.2 Tables 5
4.3 Results and Discussion 5
4.4 Maintenance and Management 7
5.0 References 7
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPENDICES
Figure 1 Vicinity Map
Figure 2 Watershed Map
Figure 3 USGS Glenola 7.5 Minute Topographic Map
Figure 4 NC DOT QL2 LiDAR Map
Figure 5 Randolph County NRCS Soil Survey
Figure 6 1998 NAPP Aerial Photography
Figure 7 2016 Aerial with Conservation Easement
Figure 8 Mitigation Plan Overview
Figure 9 Current Condition Plan View
Table 1 Buffer Project Attributes
Table 2 Buffer Project Areas and Assets
Table 3 Planting Plan
Table 4 Planted and Total Stem Counts
Appendix A. Figures/Tables
Appendix B Veg Data/Veg Visual Assessment Table/Veg Plot Photos/Photo Stations
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report i I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100114
November 1st, 2021

1.0 Mitigation Project Summary
The Longhorn Riparian Buffer Restoration Project ("the Site") is a buffer restoration project located in
Randolph County, approximately 1.5 miles northwest of the Town of Sophia, North Carolina and
approximately 9 miles south of High Point(NC). The property is situated just east of NC Highway 311 and
is bounded to the south by Marlboro Church Road (refer to Figure 1). The Longhorn Buffer Mitigation Site
is located within the Muddy Creek 12-digit HUC(030300030106)of the Randleman Lake watershed(Figure
2). The buffer restoration and enhancement areas are located along an unnamed tributary (UT) of Bob
Branch and drainages that flow directly into Randleman Lake Reservoir approximately 2 river miles
downstream (refer to Figure 3 and Figure 4). Prior to project completion,the Site was surrounded by areas
managed for cattle production and lacked existing forested buffer along a majority of the streams and
pond dissecting the site. The Site is expected to generate 376,644.994 riparian buffer credits (BMU).
The Site is located within Hydologic Unit Code(HUC) 03030003010060 and North Carolina Department of
Water Resources (NC DWR) Sub-Basin 03-04-07. The buffer mitigation site consists of one stream reach
(A1) and an in-line pond (P1) as illustrated in Figure 8. Reach Al is a perennial stream that flows from the
in-line pond (P1)to the north and into Bob Branch approximately 1,300 If downstream. Bob Branch has a
NC DEQ surface water classification as a WS-IV* waterbody.
1.1 Project Goals
The main goals of the project are to provide high quality compensatory mitigation for authorized riparian
buffer impacts credited through the NC DMS in-lieu-fee program and occurring within the Randleman
Lake Watershed by creating a riparian corridor and restoring the historic riparian buffer. The project
addresses the watershed goals identified in the Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Plan (RBRP) (NC EEP,
2010).These goals include:
• Removal of non-point source pollution (including nitrogen, phosphorous, and fecal bacteria)
resulting from current land-use practices (principally cattle pasture);
• Reduction of sediment run-off/sediment loading to creek waters resulting from cattle hoof
shear, bank instability, and lack of riparian buffer woody vegetation;
• Increased floodwater attenuation;
• Enhancement and protection of stream ecology and aquatic/semi-aquatic habitats; and
• Enhancement and protection of terrestrial habitats along stream terraces and hillside slopes.
These goals will be achieved via the restoration and protection of riparian buffers and adjacent riparian
areas along an unnamed tributary of Bob Branch (which flows east into Randleman Lake Reservoir).
Specific objectives of the proposed project to achieve the desired goals include:
• Conversion of existing cattle pasture into wooded riparian buffer and wooded riparian areas
along the existing stream channel and pond via planting of characteristic hardwood species and
installation of cattle-exclusion fencing;
• Reduction of stream bank instability via woody stem plantings (i.e. increased woody root
material) and cattle exclusion fencing;
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report 1 I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100078
November 1, 2021

• Ensuring diffuse flow and increased surface roughness throughout the buffer mitigation area;
• Establishment of a conservation easement to protect the riparian buffer restoration site in
perpetuity; and
• Invasive species management(as needed) during monitoring period.
Ancillary benefits of the proposed riparian buffer and adjacent riparian area restoration effort include:
• Increase of organic material as food for invertebrate,fish and wildlife;
• Supply of woody debris that provides increased niche habitat for fish, invertebrates and
amphibians;
• Reduction of sunlight reaching the stream and modulation of surface water temperatures; and
• Floodwater attenuation via temporary storage, interception and slow releases from heavy rains.
1.2 Pre-construction Site Conditions
The project includes 20.81 acres of mostly open cattle pasture with one stream reach (A1) and an in-line
pond (P1) which drains to Bob Branch. An additional 0.89-acres was added to the project area to include
the pond dam within the conservation easement and will be reflected in an amendment to the
Conservation Easement Plat.The Site has historically been managed for agricultural and cattle production.
Site drainage and hydrology have been historically altered via the impoundment of waters. Based upon
a review of available aerial photography, the tributary was impounded in the early 1970s (between 1970
and 1973). A portion of the site was in cropland as early as 1948. The remaining land was cleared and
converted to agricultural production in the 1950s.
The buffer mitigation site consists of one stream reach(A1)and an in-line pond(P1) as illustrated in Figure
8. Reach Al is a perennial stream that flows from the in-line pond (P1)to the north and into Bob Branch.
There is approximately 625 If of stream associated with Reach Al within the proposed buffer easement
area. Pond (P1) is an in-line pond that is approximately 5.3-acres and lies entirely within the proposed
conservation easement area.
The stream reach (A1) and an in-line pond (P1) have been restored as a forested riparian buffer to 200-ft
(approximately 12.73 acres) while approximately 0.40 acres of partially forested areas are considered
suitable for buffer enhancement. An additional 0.21 acres of existing, wooded riparian area will be
enhanced as cattle exclusion fencing will be installed around the conservation easement boundary. As
indicated above, an amendment to the Conservation Easement Plat to include the pond dam will be
provided to NCDMS and NCDWR following recordation.The project attributes are listed in Table 1, located
in Appendix A.
2.0 Determination of Credits
On June 19th, 2019, Ms. Katie Merritt of the Division of Water Resources (DWR) performed an evaluation
of surface water features and adjacent riparian areas within the proposed mitigation site for the
determination of riparian buffer mitigation pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0295 (effective November 1,
2015). Based upon this evaluation, DWR determined that areas within 200 ft of Reach A-1 and Pond P-1
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report 2 I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100078
November 1, 2021

are eligible for buffer credit. Inclusive of this area are approximately 12.73 acres of non-forested
restoration site per 15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (n). In addition, 0.40 acres of partially forested areas are
considered suitable for buffer enhancement per 15A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (n) (i.e. areas classified such that
the establishment of woody stems (i.e., tree or shrub species) will maximize nutrient removal and other
buffer functions).
In addition to buffer restoration and enhancement on subject streams, per the Consolidated Buffer
Mitigation Rules (15 A NCAC 02B 0.0295 (o)), alternative mitigation is proposed on the site in the form of:
1) enhancement of grazing areas adjacent to streams. The project is in compliance with these rules as it
meets the following criteria:
Enhancement of Grazing Areas Adjacent to Streams(15A NCAC 02B 0.0295(o)(6)):
Buffer credit at a 2:1 ratio shall be available for an applicant or mitigation provider who proposes
permanent exclusion of grazing livestock that otherwise degrade the stream and riparian zone through
trampling, grazing, or waste deposition by fencing the livestock out of the stream and its adjacent buffer.
An additional 0.21 acres of existing,wooded riparian area will be enhanced as cattle exclusion fencing will
be installed around the conservation easement boundary.
There are no known site constraints that would impede or adversely affect the restoration,enhancement,
and preservation of riparian buffer within the recorded easement area. Diffuse flow of runoff will be
maintained in the riparian buffer.
Mitigation credits are presented in Table 2 and Figure 8 in Appendix A and are based upon the
conservation easement survey.
3.0 Baseline Summary
The project team restored high quality riparian buffers along all unnamed tributaries and an in-line pond
within the Site.The project design ensured that no adverse impacts to wetlands of existing riparian buffers
occurred during implementation. Refer to Figure 8 for the conceptual design of the project. Details of the
restoration activity that occurred follows in the sections below.
3.1 Planting Preparation
Based upon pre-project assessment of compaction within the proposed planting areas, all areas targeted
for vegetative plantings within the buffer restoration project were ripped to reduce compaction and to
enhance microtopography. Spot spraying of herbicide was initiated for control of invasive species within
the restoration, enhancement and preservation areas (i.e. Chinese privet (Ligustrum sinense), Multiflora
rose (Rosa multiflora, Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica), and Chinese tree-of-heaven (Ailanthus
altissima)). Treatment areas are depicted on Figure 9.The existing 84-ft pond spillway was stabilized prior
to planting. The spillway was widened to approximately 10-feet and tapered down to 6-feet. The side
slopes were lined with coir fiber matting, and the bottom of the spillway lined with rip-rap. Appropriate
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report 3 I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100078
November 1, 2021

erosion control measures were implemented before, during, and after the spillway maintenance to
prevent sediment loss into downstream waters. No other site preparation occurred. No observed drain
tiles were observed prior to, or during, construction and planting and no other land disturbance was
needed to maintain diffuse flow as required.
3.2 Riparian Area Restoration and Enhancement Activities
The conservation easement boundary was marked using 6-inch diameter treated post buried 2 feet,
standing 5 feet above the ground surface, within the pasture. Woven wire fencing with a top strand of
barbed wire was installed along the entire easement boundary. One pedestrian access gate was installed
for future monitoring and access. Three 12-ft wide gates were installed in appropriate locations to allow
cattle to exit in case they were to breach the fence and enter the conservation easement.The easement
boundary was marked with standard yellow Conservation Area signs, per the 01/23/14 NCDMS Boundary
Marking Standards.
The planting plan consisted of the planting at least four hardwood species on a density of approximately
673 stems per acre. Species selection and distribution were matched closely to micro-site hydrologic and
edaphic conditions and include species characteristic of riparian assemblages in the watershed. In other
words, species more tolerant of poorly drained soils (i.e. river birch, green ash, and willow oak) were
planted within lower landscape positions generally consisting of the Chewacla and Wedhakee soil series
while species characteristically occurring in better drained soils (Wynott-Enon complex)will be planted in
higher landscape positions(i.e. hillside slopes).The selected native trees are well-suited to the site-specific
conditions of the property to promote high survivorship rates. No one tree species planted was greater
than 50%of the established stems. Site planting was conducted on April 1st, 2020 by Carolina Silvics, Inc.
and supervised by project managers from both Clearwater Mitigation Solutions and Land Management
Group.
Table 3 summarizes the planting plan for the Longhorn mitigation site.
Table 3. Planting Plan'
Common Name Scientific Name %Composition Acreage Quantity
American Sycamore Plantanus occidentalis 30 3.94 2,119
Yellow Poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 25 3.28 1,766
River Birch Betula nigra 25 3.28 1,766
Willow Oak Quercus phellos 15 1.97 1,060
Green Ash Fraxinus pennsylvanica 5 0.66 353
Total N/A 100 13.13 7,064
'Note the planted area includes approximate 0.74 acres of conservation area. While no credit is proposed for this area, it was
planted per the same specifications(species density and composition)as those contained within final,approved mitigation plan.
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report 4 I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100078
November 1, 2021

4.0 Annual Monitoring
Annual Monitoring will be conducted during the growing season for a period of five years. The report will
include all information required by DMS monitoring guidelines including photographs, plot locations, and
documentation of existing species density and composition. Monitoring will be performed in accordance
with the Consolidated Mitigation Buffer Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295) and current DMS standards. The
performance criteria for the Site follows approved performance criteria presented in the guidance
documents outlined in the Consolidated Buffer Rule (15A NCAC 02B .0295). Performance criteria will be
evaluated throughout the five-year post-construction monitoring.
4.1 Methods
The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 260 planted stems per acre in the riparian buffer
at the end of the required monitoring period(MY05). Native hardwood and native shrub volunteer species
may be included to meet the final performance standard of 260 stems per acre. In addition,the Site must
contain at least four native hardwood species. Vegetative monitoring included the establishment of
eleven (11) permanent plots consistent with the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) protocol Level 2
(version 4.2) (refer to Figure 9 for plot locations). Reference photos of the vegetation plots and Site were
taken at each predetermined photo point location. Any vegetative problem areas in the site will be noted
and reported in each monitoring report. Vegetative problem areas may include areas that either lack
vegetation or include populations of exotic vegetation. Monitoring reports will identify any contingency
measures that may need to be employed to remedy site deficiencies.
Permanent photo stations were established across the project area in order to document site stability for
five years post construction. Markers were established and located with GPS equipment so that the same
locations and view directions on the Site are photographed each year. Photo reference stations are shown
on Figure 9 and photos are included in Appendix B.
Visual assessments will be performed annually during the five-year monitoring period. Problem areas of
vegetative health will be noted and areas of concern will be mapped, photographed, and documented in
the subsequent annual monitoring report. Problem areas that are found will be re-evaluated in each
subsequent monitoring event.
4.2 Tables
(MY2) vegetation plot photographs and the planted and total stem counts (Table 4) are included in
Appendix B.
4.3 Results and Discussion
Annual monitoring (MY02) was conducted on September 23, 2021 by LMG staff.An average stem density
of 435 planted stems per acre was tallied across the monitoring plots (approximately 65% of the
recorded baseline (MYO) plot density (673 stems per acre)). Stem densities within individual monitoring
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report 5 I r- d g e
DMS Project No. 100078
November 1, 2021

plots range from 121 to 688 planted stems per acre. Stem counts within individual plots range from 3 to
16 stems with an average of 10 planted stems per plot. Six different hardwood species were observed
across the site, exceeding the minimum diversity criteria. All but two vegetation plots (Plots 2 and 5) are
on track to meet the final stem density success criterion of 260 stems/acre for MY05. Plots 2 and 5
experienced high seedling mortality during MY01. Plot 2 seedling mortality was likely caused by
inundation and flooding of the plot. Based upon review of the area, it appears that an increase in
surface water has filled the western and side channel following construction of the new pond outlet
due to a shift and rehabilitation of the dam outlet structure. Many dead trees were observed buried
in alluvial deposits during MY01. During MY02, additional seedling mortality was observed due to
inundation in the same location. A supplemental plot was established just to the south of Plot 2 (Plot
2A). Plot 2A exhibited 10 planted stems with excellent vigor. In addition, the remainder of the
enhancement area was walked, and numerous planted stems were observed. Based on the enumerated
stems in Plot 2A and observed stems within the remainder of the enhancement zone, it is anticipated
that Plot 2 is the only area within the enhancement zone experiencing high mortality due to inundation.
Plot 5 mortality was likely caused by dry conditions post-planting and the subsequent overtopping by
dense grasses.The area around Plot 5 appears to have been affected by dry conditions and exhibits higher
mortality. Supplemental planting will occur in this area in the Winter of 2022 (January— February). The
proposed supplemental planting area equates to approximately 0.75-acres. Supplemental planting
densities and species will be coordinated with NC DMS prior to execution. The vegetation visual
assessment table is included in Appendix B.
In addition, it should be noted that Plots 7, 9, and 10 all exhibited relatively higher stem mortality and
lower vigor during MY01. It is believed that these areas experienced mortality due to dry
conditions following site planting and competition from fescue grass. Although these three plots were
exceeding the final stem success criteria during MY01, supplemental planting was proposed to occur in
these areas in the Winter of 2021 (January — February). However, a selective, broad spectrum,
postemergence herbicide (Poast) was used for control of fescue grass and mortality has ceased in
these areas. Most of the stem mortality occurred between MVO and MY01. During MY02 these areas are
on track to meet the final stem density success criteria. Refer to Figure 9 (Current Condition Plan
View) and Table 4 in Appendix B for additional information and proposed supplemental planting areas.
Small areas of invasive species were treated on the Site in MY02 (approximately 1.6-acres). Chinese
privet (Ligustrum sinense) and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora) have been observed within the proposed
buffer enhancement and preservation areas and along the eastern bank of Stream Al. A small cluster of
tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) and Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera japonica) were also observed
within the easement. These areas were treated prior to site planting and again concurrently during
MY01 & MY02. Treatment appears to be working and invasive densities are steadily declining across
the Site. Though some invasive species are present throughout the Site, none are currently affecting
the survival of the planted stems or the success of the project. Invasive species populations will
continue to be monitored and spot herbicide treatments will be conducted as needed during the
appropriate time of year. Please refer to Appendix B for visual assessment data and for
vegetation plot data and vegetation plot photographs.
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report Wage
DMS Project No. 100078
November 1, 2021

4.4 Maintenance and Management
Overall, the Site appears to be progressing well towards the target success criteria. However, based upon
the documentation of reduced survivorship around Plot 5, supplemental planting will be performed in the
Winter of 2022. The specific planting plan and species mix will be coordinated with NC DMS prior to
execution.The site will continue to be monitored for problem areas. In addition, invasive treatment areas
will continue to be monitored, and invasive vegetation management will continue to be implemented if
additional exotic species volunteer into the site. If it is determined that the Site's ability to achieve the
performance standards are jeopardized, staff members of NCDMS/NCDWR will be notified, and an
adaptive management plan will be developed to address these issues.
5.0 References
Lee, Michael T. Peet, Robert K., Steven D. Wentworth, Thomas R. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation Version 4.2. http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/protocol/cvs-eep-protocol-v4.2-lev1-2.pdf
Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Web Soil Survey of Randolph County.
http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/HomePage.htm
North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program. 2009. Cape Fear River Basin Restoration Priorities
2009. http://www.nceep.net/services/Iwps/cape fear/RBRP%20Cape%20Fear%202008.pdf
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). 2017. Riparian Buffer and Nutrient Offset Buffer
Baseline &Annual monitoring Report Template (Version 2.0, 05-2017). Raleigh, North Carolina.
https://ncdenr.s3.a mazonaws.com/s3fspubl is/Mitigation%20Services/Document%20Management%20Li
brary/Guidance%20and%20Templa te%20Documents/RB_NO_Base_Mon_Template_2.0_2017_5.pdf
North Carolina Division of Water Quality(NCDWQ), 2011. Surface Water Classifications.
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-resources/planning/classification-standards/classifications
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Year 02 Monitoring Report 7 I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100078
November 1, 2021

APPENDIX A:
Figures/Tables

4 4 4,
� � �r � A\
ir• I 'zit r
a �l"
___..... + ', cc' r g► .fa �i •• ' Ea "'.'\- -\'.3 E: -gi -- ikiL---.-7- (/' , A
g -z-.--z)1/4:____:1 ._ ( 1,,
, 'fOc '`- +LAAe + Lit i i''';- r;c' i
r �ZHE:..
'-4, v./ ELF. " r .1 SpEIVi_ • c i<ii c--.7- ii fi 3
itt - i� C.
4: Links
>f `'tip--i. •a 1\ B
•
___ -_Ar 7 ;� , lam !:I rai - �' D fir.z
� � f lk
'0Y FA ooRD /�) .- .o v,09 SITE W-::
l � u
Mrs ., nson� . . EARL
,l ----RD--- f' y Field -.-gnf1D-~ '"u" 94D ��. g frale--- _ '
-1r791,-- ) a----
1\I.:, .. Ir •
• -15.--1,r-Air.nc -.1 1,.-..„. .2e_. rca i -• ' :"'‘ . \Al:77 0
I.EARLIAI� , . ,
z.:i / kr \NA r : o4.. , !: -;--- r)
NELSON \
___.,_,94, ..„., ((c, I ____.,-.) 0
Sgp - lilt., .-„:- i .P ., 44'r1.4..1‘1 ys\ ii `t
L --.- ,..
� p[�',
� Es
i1i8
•
,,,, .... i
EC=3 - - et ' ' •1 > )) .,1 ( " - 4e ! A .. 6 Ve-!-.
`f ��``� ' a�r_.• M j 6G
t- t
�w � $ � 'L C s'� Frt fr �y5 �� N/1444..'
1 L,,..----. --,,,,,=_, .0 ...st) 1 p,... : .. _., ___
0 111 $11:51.tf 4*i . '' 'II, 14
r--tik- '4' • 1 li-eil9 . "-e.. -.- 1-_,-,r.. , e
,..„ 1 0-7. .D, .
---\•,_ 4' ) .• ../ 0,1\ / ._:..-- , ,
tt\L:fiftroiripson:, \—\-A j,----1[ . . , :
'*..,- We.- • II N-,.. i . If.,,, pillar '
k• 73 t./ ' p ; 1 Q;NI. { \V" y Nor
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. N
Map Source: DeLorme 2012 Atlas & Gazeteer A 0 0.5 1 2
L:\WETLANDS\2018 WETLANDS FILES\LMG18.457___Randleman DMS Buffer Site,Kevin Yates\Proposal\Figures Miles
Longhorn Riparian GLE .RW4TER MITIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUTIONS 1
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 1
Randolph County, NC �T �� Vicinity Map
L Map Date: 01-07-19
LM G # 40-18-457 LAND MANAGEMENT GRQUF
a merit',a,mnanv

. --Ay ...,-'
. jti o •
•
-,� •
Guilford y �;
u.,..z ---- ,
N, ;- -- ., Orange .
_- - II Alamance Durham
•---. ' U 2 . ,
_ .
... 140,.• . ; 1.
oell.. . . .1.--, i .....'"'
1avidsa 1
_ vtt .oro.."�-".
11 Longhorn Randolph , 512,
II Site Chath.
ik
Wake
-121 . .
Aiiiii
Rowan -
I _i
04•
♦ ♦♦ Pl " - Broad ';
4. Anihurrre 1
•
National.. _ - .
' 9 rn ,. Forest -
• �,, 1♦ ♦•
' /
t .)
St> nly Montgomery ,00 Harnett
' Yooze a - .
...:,j. .
) ___•-•„. \,,.._,,
Union r- �2 . - ursr-� 4/
Legend ',: --Ne• R..,. rJandh1U ,rd.M. ,.-• r
Longhorn Project Boundary
Muddy Creek Watershed (030300030106) N
Randleman Lake Watershed
A
8-Digit Hydrologic Unit (03030003)
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. 0 2.5 5 10 15 20
Map Source:ArcGIS Open Street Map Miles
L:\WETLANDS\2019 WETLANDS FILES\LMG19.249---Longhorn Buffer Project,Kevin Yates\Mitigation Plan\Draft Mit Plan\Figures
Longhorn Riparian CLEARWATER MITIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUTIONS 4
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 2
Randolph County, NC 11.‘MG
Watershed Map
Map Date: 02-24-20
LM G # 19.249 LANDMANAU..MSENT GROUP
a pr1r4.Mm�ny `

r + ilt r
F ti,
ii_milyr.:147rm_rm__._.r.re:j7earei
* + -Th J 1
Bob Branch /al
:drejarjair
le/ i
ill
' 1 - '''. .--m-51- . . II .
' 1 1.--1\-._ —__ il e
1 - * II 1 -,
MEr
iiir � � � .6 -III 7.7 41/--.Ill
i %��� SITE
ill � ,
•
�r � . .�
I ��
. � II
D) \ %r4s
e ,.. 01 i - I" _ _
, I -.1\
, , ,,,/ ,, e t..... ,,,,
h'j .. ' O
:_ 'q/: "'' .
I '"Yl� . _...
. ...----
i.
lc.
i ..., • •
'I `� /////j/ rr ,.... cb il'
....
i\...1
P
�, / . IIP
; . . . .. )1i _-.•
11:11 a 4 -
1111
I I _illim-- - m' il . i 1 -
111.
I a
••
Legend
MParcel Boundary: —45.18 Acres
Longhorn Conservation Easement: —20.81 Acres
N L:\WETLANDS\2019 WETLANDS FILES\LMG19.249---Longhorn Buffer Project,Kevin Yates\Mitigation Plan\Draft Mit Plan\Figures A 0 200 400 800
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. Feet
Map Source: USGS Glenola Quadrangle 7.5 Minute
Longhorn Riparian CLEARWATER 24 ITIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUTIONS NS 6
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 3
Randolph County, NC LMG Topographic Map
Map Date: 02-24-20
LM G # 19.249 LAND MANA"EMENT GROUP
a CVYIHY mmuanv

. , ,_ - -,_„ ; LiDAR
1 ,
Bob Branch - . _:,r ,,. 3. : ,Elevation
"r�. 802.533 - 812.23
a
. ,
4,.„::,
792.837 - 802.533
'. ;r::' 783.14 - 792.837
y '' -% 773.443 - 783.14
s . *:y, I 763.747 - 773.443
VT MI 754.05 - 763.747
V 'r' 744.353 - 754.05
�" 734.657 - 744.353
/'"
IT724.96 - 734.657
i
(7., ..Z.II - —_ .
/ .
f _ all / - f,
Legend
Parcel Boundary: —45.18 Acres
/7� Longhorn Conservation Easement: —20.81 Acres
N /�
L"IWETLANDS12019 WETLANDS FILEStMG19.249--Longhorn Buffer Project,Kevin Yates\Mitigatton PIan\Draft Mit PIan1Figures 0 200 400 800
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. Feet
Map Source: NC Floodplain Mapping Program 2014 QL2 LiDAR Data
Longhorn Riparian CLEARWATER MITIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUT/ONS 1
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 4
Randolph County, NC T LiDAR Map
Map Date: 02-24-20 L
MG
LMG # 19.249 LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a O/NfEY�.mmpan, 1

y --6/4-"‘I.
WtB McC2
JvC2 C/N‘
CnB2 Bob
Bra
its
MaC
CON WtB
WtC
\ cmG SITE
`311(
i, ,---„--)7
, MaC (I— '
,0••/ w 1
I
McB2 'N414 ,41Impi, ,L:
tCratr (sj,f
i❑ DOrp a.nurcn rca
torlboro G
c"N".".1 New
Market HeB ,
Legend
CmA: Chewacla and Wehadkee soils, 0-2% slopes, frequently flooded
CnB2: Coronaca clay loam, 2-8% slopes, moderately eroded
CnC2: Coronaca clay loam, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded
HeB: Helena sandy loam, 2-6% slopes
HeC: Helena sandy loam, 6-10% slopes
MaC: Mecklenburg loam, 8-15% slopes
MeB2: Mecklenburg clay loam, 2-8% slopes, moderately eroded
MeC2: Mecklenburg clay loam, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded W Longhorn Conservation Easement
WtB: Wynott-Enon complex, 2-8% slopes
WtC: Wynott-Enon complex, 8-15% slopes
WvB2: Wynott-Enon complex, 2-8% slopes, moderately eroded
WvC2: Wynott-Enon complex, 8-15% slopes, moderately eroded
WzB: Wynott-Wilkes-Poindexter complex, 2-8% slopes
N
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. A
0 350 700 1,400
Map Source: NRCS Randolph County Soil Survey, 2006 Feet
Longhorn Riparian CLEARWATERMITIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUTIONS 6
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 5
Randolph County, NC Soils Map
Map Date: 02-24-20 =LMG
LMG # 19.249 LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVEY .cnmaanv

�/ , * 1 i;.
r - ` ., 4, • s Bob Branch `
r� �' 14 4•4i,.-� .• ~ �� AS. ' * •r it:toll*: , • .0" .
A.. . ...itfi- P.41 " 'l' ' ;t • 4
` 2 4�� •�"A '; ,, �,1 SITE ijk. 4.0
--.-tiff - / 11 ���,
li
a
.4� `/,isI -I. % s
/, *—
4 . , i Ifrily ..I ,
It ..•NI ,
d L"_"
41
01i Marlboro ( " -
. r
itpi "bILS ;, 41
Legend
Parcel Boundary: -45.18 Acres
��. Longhorn Conservation Easement: -20.81 Acres
N
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. 0 200 400 800
Map Source: 1998 NAPP Aerial Photography Feet
Longhorn Riparian CLEA.RWATERMITIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUTIONS 6
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 6
Randolph County, NC �LMG 1998 Aerial Photograph
Map Date: 02-24-20
L M G # 19.249 LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVEY*.company

)": . (14.'
e,..14 ✓ M• • to: .4 Bob Branch
riipose.,,.-..
,,,,...,
WkAN A.
' ', •L ihilktt•-e . . : % :,',` - .
Pt- j.„7.0'
, Y t 31. .14 J' ,
4
t . , - ,Ipie.... • loflin Dairy
lir It
;a% 14( •, '''' . 1-4. .A. '.;,, Glrr ,. Ilt):- • fig..,
3 SITE
' 4010 ,‘" ' bk)
0014: . • 4 4 ' !''' .4 .-. ' -; '' • t ,• •4•1, 1 .,,
„::.4/"...p. ,..0::4 te
.antr •er-joir v/ -/d, . -- • a !
•
i, : •'64* ' 7, . ., iT
te :"b.'''. _ ,
,. V '* 111444%*.IF ("Rot .
"fir---1•11110 1 16___.....---
Rd,A.W. : - • i 1-::. .s. 41 r ' ,
• Marlboro Churchr - t ; ; t`;#
$01ii, - ' i .
_ ,
Legend
Parcel Boundary: -45.18 Acres
��. Longhorn Conservation Easement: -20.81 Acres
N
A 0 200 400 800
3oundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. Feet
Map Source: 2016 ESRI World Imagery
Longhorn Riparian CLEA.RWATERMJTIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUTIONS i
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 7
Randolph County, NC �LMG Aerial Photograph
Map Date: 02-24-20
L M G # 19.249 LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP
a DAVEY*.company `

;i7W11,d �4 ' .
. Parcel Boundary (-45.18 ac.) -- -- — _
Subject to h _ 4•'�•�::: rlill Conservation Easement Boundary (-20.81ac.)
B Uffe r Rules I•,'��•'� ��',', Top Of Bank(Stream) (-0.10 ac.)
r ! .�i�i•Oi�i /4••v
-- ' 44 •••4, �•:•.v..,. � Monitoring Plot ❑
i.... 1...... -�;•;� •;•.„. .1 Buffer Restoration-Stream Oft-100 ft (269,068.000 BMU /1
I ..iiiiii........,• 0.000
........♦ 000.•.. Buffer Restoration-Stream(101 ft-200 ft) (94,224 994 BMU)
Access ........ .....
�•••�•:•••�•�•••�•�*:* ••••••• ^-Creditable A r�� \ Buffer Enhancement(To Be Planted)
♦...........♦ {� �,�,�,Q • (8,716.500 BMU) � `
Easement 1 _ """"" " "
..........
........- /� o,,.,.
�....... . .... .128 s.f.)
,,,,,�.• � �``� p� ;�• -�-�-,� �•n ! Buffer Enhancement(Cattle Exclusion) (4,635.500 BMU ������
7 ���•�.�.� �.� ��� ��•:•OOi� - , . Conservation Area (No credits) ��N1
Stream Start -
'.aai -____
��ssa�om�wvwe�� Area Added to Conservation Easement(11/03/2021) (No credits) i��m��
35.842449° " • --
. 1 �4� :* '`7T ��� TOTAL CREDITS 376,644.994 BMU
79.883372 �-
...... .....
y.... ■ ... .
.,,,, �V,,,
' a
Non-Creditable Ar:s � = I °:::::.::
(2,046.150 7.t; ,, i . ' ;;:
:,❖••
......
Headwater /.jr71rzr ................1 .....• ii - -
Wetland Area ••••••••• •..._,
.0000•... 1
(Herbaceous) I .
Access f
Easement 2 .5 ` r4
..1 r i
- ; , a,- �-==""�-- — -- _-- ram._ —_— —y►-- -
1 ,Iiiiirms...._. ..._, _: ., IA imaiiiiiii_ - - II"! _ .,. .
1111 I-fr. .. , .._.
. •
. 4 •,,•:. _.
NOTES: Project: Date: Revision Date:
1. TAX PARCEL BOUNDARIES AND 2018 AERIAL FROM NCONEMAP. LM G Longhorn Riparian Buffer November 2019 2/26/2020
2. BOUNDARIES ARE APPROXIMATE AND NOT MEANT TO BE ABSOLUTE. Mitigation Site
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP Catalog Unit 03030003 Scale: Job Number:
1"=300' LMG 19.249
a D1gIEY company Title:
0 CLEARWATERMITIGATTON Mitigation Plan Drawn By: Figure:
SOLUTIONS I GSF 8
L:\WETLANDS\2019 WETLANDS FILES\LMG19.249---Longhorn Buffer Project,Kevin Yates\CAD\Longhorn.dwg

- F77, Longhorn Conservation Easement & Fence
•••• _ Access Gates
'♦•♦❖♦' \ ♦:♦:♦: r �, Buffer Restoration (0 ft- 100 ft)
• •♦♦♦E •%%. ►♦♦•♦♦•♦♦•♦♦
�; !•••� •••• ♦♦♦. Buffer Restoration (101 ft- 200ft)
.•.•.•. .s. ♦•♦•♦•♦•
;.. -i . ►•♦♦♦♦♦♦♦•, ...i.s ►♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ Buffer Enhancement
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦� a ♦♦♦♦.
,,•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦•♦ ,., :•♦•♦•♦. Buffer Enhancement Cattle Exclusion
•
•.......•- .... ►•...., Invasive Species Treatment Areas: -1.6-Acre
tiIV .p'• : ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦-• e •�,I ►♦♦♦♦♦♦♦• p
•'♦♦•'♦♦♦♦ *'"� ♦•♦♦ ♦� = Supplemental Planting Areas: -0.75-Acres
�, ♦♦♦♦+
#•- •♦♦ •
*��I.** •.♦♦♦♦♦♦*►i (Green-Meets Success/Red-Fails to ,
i.... •♦•♦•♦•♦•♦ Vegetation Plots
• ,ti '� i'' • -.s-s.si >♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦_•' Meet Success)
4':` ' .` *PS'�r/ „ // , * Photo Stations
�,, - * .�
`PS4.. - .' , ,
P S 5 t.
♦♦♦♦♦
P :;
. „ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
•
/ 7 ,•••••
♦♦♦♦.. * •s ♦♦♦♦
♦♦♦♦♦ g ►♦♦♦♦♦
♦♦♦♦♦+ ,•♦♦♦w•1
41.
•.. ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ . * • ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦`-o♦♦♦♦•;*PS 7
♦♦♦♦. •
. •
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
,• 6. ♦♦♦♦♦ ,
♦♦♦♦
.,...iii,
,..• •
*, i low-
4.. , .
t..
.. fr• ••_.
. - - , 10 ♦♦♦♦♦•♦♦♦•
^- s ♦ - ♦♦♦♦♦
••••••••.,
. . . ..,.
,..‘„ _
.•-•• •
•
•
•
•
♦♦"♦♦�.♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦ - ♦♦♦♦♦
•
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
A_
.' .ipAn:::., . ... ,41P .., . . ... _ ----i 11;
• .,
r- _ 46*. -
/tAr�.r.��A' Cho HE M 1u 6D OpenS,re-, 20 o o c o��r i_
ol
*Ps 8 .-WMo �uoo�M�R9, ago OM J®r© i U : ..ems a._.:
L:\WETLANDS\2019 WETLANDS FILES\LMG19.249--- Longhorn Buffer Project,
Kevin Yates\Annual Monitoring\Baseline Monitoring\Figures N
Boundaries are approximate and not meant to be absolute. A 0 100 200 400
Feet
Map Source: 2016 ESRI World Imagery
Longhorn Riparian CLE4RWATER MITIGATION
Buffer Mitigation Site SOLUTIONS 1
Cataloging Unit 03030003 Figure 9
Randolph County, NC �T Current Condition Plan View
L Map Date: 11-02-20 MY02
LM G #19.249 LAND MANAGF.MMENT GROUF
a merit rnmnanv

Table 1. Buffer Project Attributes
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
Monitoring Year 2- 2021
Project Name Longhorn Riparian Buffer Restoration Project
Hydrologic Unit Code 03030003010060(14 digit)
River Basin Cape Fear
Geographic Location (Lat, Long) 35.841600,-79.882810
Site Protection Instrument(DB,PG) DB 163 Page 99
Total Credits(BMU) 376,644.994
Types of Credits Riparian Buffer
Mitigation Plan Date February 2020
Initial Planting Date April 1st, 2020
Baseline Monitoring Date April 6th,2020
Baseline Report Date June,2020
MY1 Report Date December 1st, 2020
MY2 Report Date November 1st, 2021
MY3 Report Date
MY4 Report Date
MY5 Report Date

Table 2.Longhorn,100114,Project Mitigation Credits
Cape Fear-Randleman Service Area
N/A N Credit Ratio(sf/credit)
N/A P Credit Ratio(sf/credit)
Subject? Total
(enter NO if Min-Max Buffer Convertible Convertible Delivered Delivered
(Creditable) Initial Credit Final Credit Riparian Buffer
Credit Type Location Feature Type Mitigation Activity Feature Name Total Area(sf) %Full Credit to Riparian to Nutrient Nutrient Nutrient
ephemeral or Width(ft) Area of Buffer Ratio(x:1) Ratio(x:1) Credits
i Buffer? Offset? Offset:N(Ibs) Offset:P(Ibs)
ditch ) Mitigation(sf) I A.
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Restoration 0-100 Al 82,245 82,245 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 82,245.000 No — —
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Restoration 101-200 Al 96,615 96,615 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 31,882.982 No — —
Buffer Rural Yes I/P Enhancement 0-100 Al 17,433 17,433 2 100% 2.00000 Yes 8,716.500 No —Enhancement via
Buffer Rural Yes I/P 0-100 Al 9,271 9,271 2 100% 2.00000 Yes 4,635.500 I No — —
Cattle Exclusion
Buffer Rural Yes In-Line Pond Restoration 0-100 P1 186,823 186,823 1 100% 1.00000 Yes 186,823.000 No — —
Buffer Rural Yes In-Line Pond Restoration 101-200 P1 188,915 188,915 1 33% 3.03030 Yes 62,342.012 No — —
Totals: 581,302 581,302
I
Enter Preservation Credits Below Eligible for Preservation(sf): 193,767
Total
(Creditable)
Min-Max Buffer Initial Credit Final Credit Riparian
Credit Type Location Subject? Feature Type Mitigation Activity Width(ft) Feature Name Total Area(sf) Area for Ratio(x:l) %Full Credit Ratio(x:l) Buffer Credits
Buffer
Mitigation(sf)
Preservation Area Subtotal(sf): 0
Preservation as%Total Area of Buffer Mitigation: 0.0% TOTAL AREA OF BUFFER MITIGATION(TABM)
Ephemeral Reaches as%Total Area of Buffer Mitigation: 0.0% Mitigation Totals Square Feet Credits
Restoration: 554,598 363,292.994
Enhancement: 26,704 13,352.000
Preservation: 0 0.000
Total Riparian Buffer: 581,302 376,644.994
TOTAL NUTRIENT OFFSET MITIGATION
Mitigation Totals Square Feet Credits
Nutrient Nitrogen: 0 0.000
1.The Randleman Lake buffer rules allow some ditches to be classified as subject according to 15ANCAC 02B.0250(5)(a). Offset: 'hosphorus: 0.000

APPENDIX B:
Veg Data/Visual Assessment Table
Veg Plot Photos/Photo Stations

Table 4. Planted and Total Stems
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
DMS Project No. 100114
Monitoring Year 2-2021
CVS Project Code LRBMS.Project Name:Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
LYS Project Code LRBMS.ProjectName:Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site
Current Plot Data(MY22021) Annual Means
LRBMS-01-0001 LRBMS-01-0002A LRBMS-01-0002 LRBMS-01-0003 LRBMS-01-0004 LRBMS-01-0005 LRBMS-01-0006 LRBMS-01-0001 LRBMS-01-0003 LRBMS-01-0009 LRBMS-01-0010 LRBMS-01-0011 MY2(2021) MY1(2020) MY0(2020)
Scientific Name Common Name Species Type PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T PnoLS P-all T
Acer rubrum Tree 8 5 13 1
Baccharis halimifelia Silverling,High-tide Shrub Tree 1 1
Betula nigra River Birch,Red Birc:Tree 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 18 18 18 14 14 14 28 28 28
Carya glabra Pignut Hickory Tree 1 1
Fraxi n us pen nsylvan ice Green Ash,Red Ash Tree 7 7 7 6 6 6 3 3 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 21 21 21 17 1] 17 25 25 25
Liquidambar styraciflua Sweet Gum,Red Gur Tree 30 1 8 55 1 2 4 4 105
Hriodendrontulipifera Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 8 8 8 26 26 26 29 29 29 46 46 46
Platanusoccidentalis Sycamore,Plane-tre Tree 3 3 3 1 1 1 7 7 7 3 3 3 1 1 1 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3] 37 37 39 39 39 5] 57 57
Quercus pagoda Cherrybark Oak,Swa Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 5 5 5 2 2 2
Quercus phellos Willow Oak Tree 5 5 5 4 4 4 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 1 1 5 5 5 3 3 3 22 22 22 22 22 22 27 27 27
Stem count 16 16 54 10 10 10 3 3 4 13 13 22 1] 17 77 5 5 6 11 11 12 9 9 11 11 11 11 10 10 14 8 8 8 16 16 20 129 129 249 123 123 124 183 183 183
size Cares) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12 11 11
size(ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.30 0.27 0.27
Species count 4 4 6 4 4 41 1 2 4 4 6 5 5 7 2 2 3 5 5 5 3 3 4 2 2 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 10 6 6 7 5 5 5
Stems per ACRE 647.5 647.5 2185 404.7 404.7 404.7 121.4 151.9 525.1 525.1 890.3� 688 3116 202.3 202.3 242.8 445.2 445.2 485.E 364.2 364.2 445.2 445.2 445.2 445.2 404.7 404.7 555.6 323.7 323.7 547.5 647.5 809.4 435 435 839.7 452.5 452.5 455.2 673.2 673.2 673.2
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%
PnoLS:Number of planted stems excluding live stakes
P-All: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T:Total stems

Visual Vegetation Assessment
Planted acreage 13.13
Mapping Combined %of Planted
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Acreage Acreage
Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%
Low Stem Density Areas Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on current MY stem count criteria. 0.10acres 0.80 6.1%
Total 0.80 6.1%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates Planted areas where average height is not meeting current MY Performance Standard. 0.10 acres 0.00 0.0%
Cumulative Total 0.80 6.1%
Easement Acreage 20.81
Mapping Combined %of Easement
Vegetation Category Definitions Threshold Acreage Acreage
I nvasives may occur outside of planted areas and within the easement and will therefore be
calculated against the total easement acreage:Include species with the potential to directly
Invasive Areas of Concern 0.10 acres 1.60 7.7%
outcompete native,young,woody stems in the short-term or community structure for existing
communities. Species included in summation above should be identified in report summary.
Encroachment may be point, line, or polygon. Encroachment to be mapped consists of any
violation of restrictions specified in the conservation easement. Common encroachments are
Easement Encroachment Areas none #Encroachments noted
mowing,cattle access,vehicular access.Encroachment has no threshold value as will need to be
addressed regardless of impact area.

APPENDIX B.VEG PLOT PHOTOS
+'�. r ,•`fir
,;
(1) Plot 1 (2) Plot 2
:•
Ali ,.' g:..(- a 4;r
00
•
scr
(3) Plot 3 (4) Plot 4
. x_tI: ;' '. -ki•- _. _ 'I,�I :1r/'�;: _ { - - - -
..` ;� � ,gym,. "��,-
(5) Plot 5 (6) Plot 6
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site-Appendix B 1 P a g e
DMS Project No. 100114

APPENDIX B.VEG PLOT PHOTOS
f k` � , �
- 5tt-
•'rx �. • i ..w .?' Q,_ yr; - s:: ±.ti:
yrR `tii' i•
t 4 ..f t•- fir- _ _ilk:' .9,,,:'' •�:.'a 1.
Ii '
(7) Plot 7 (8) Plot 8
1
•
y , si r .x I10.,.-..:-., fa". ' .
'l:'
•t 5
7 I
: %. + A
/
(9) Plot 9 (10) Plot 10
� s ' t. .
SR , a
:::-_
,,F:.
/
1 A"
i \ . -. . ,.
4 tot1y� • man _ ..
- N. �ry � iLy.�•.. S .- �I
\'. _c •'-! ':�y Z i. -.\fir y .,5[[����..rr .
k:.'` •
is r d F4- •y, _ Ir ...,
, I hie 1
,,k.- ..41-• ,..vr•i'k,.,..,4:k,....t.f ''•':„4!--'1'Aff",:i-w..H'-°:11 - 1 ,, ,_ -
(11) Plot 11 (12) Plot 2A
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site-Appendix B 2 I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100114

APPENDIX B. PHOTO STATIONS
..,q..., 0.01- ..i?1, -..:.,40' 1 : allahr14.
' '-.` ' : ,,•"1"--•'''',"1.4
e.. "-. . '. -
,_ __________.,._. .„ ._,... k,, .,:,.....„... ..: .
,.. :-.-..„,.-1 ,.,,, ..p.,,..- „,f ,
. ,,, . .. _ . ,., .. __-, - 4 , - i - f
r.'
r _. . .
. .. r ....,
r ,:.,...
, . , . . ., , . . .._ ... ,_ ,,
L.t , , . , . . , ,. ...
_,_„ .,. . ,..., . . ..., „.., . . . . , .
..., a; .-4 o.:.1.,:t's.< . '1 : ,...:4',I; '°4 0,l'jr.•,-, ”,,' • 4'...„ 4.:`„14.1
.„ . ACC.444.1.-tat, .1`0.' i.Alittitflri ,INAV-eVlai.-ANNAV4Pri '
(1) PS1 (looking south) (2) PS2 (looking south towards Pond)
y pf.' i x.' ; 7L'" s• .. •0 . .. .;f•fir:' .- •
7
,. "4,ar
ri' -y' rF .i. ....-.4.. rF r'Si, -1;-4=g,V., 7,,,,5r 9
;; 4 - ''' .if_
w"
.di
V • .44 - .. ram ` LK �,y�
(3) PS2 (looking north towards restoration area) (4) PS2 (looking west)
' _ lk;<!
e a'h
, . ,_,, , 4,,,,,,,,, 4'' l'k ' • .
_ fit`.. [ , e. •
N..- - - - It�,.�.: ..1.,,W_�. { _ r
�.r• I •. ` ,V 9 ..iSuli
,r!.` i.If iM 37 • a - ^� -,- .. aiLfi: _'4 1
v y
tir`Aidg.iiSjr' . .''d.•,,4..1. ;�:.,&y l r £ 3" K .. ..m.'t--: L'r ''-'mtei Q: 1
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site-Appendix B 1
DMS Project No. 100114

APPENDIX B. PHOTO STATIONS
Mir
IIIIIIIMIIIIII
-
; ',d 7"p�.a e 1 .�V ,F tack T-•`,,, .' - •
(7) PS4(looking south into easement) (8) PS5 (looking west along conservation easement)
, MINJ1 •
4,._ . . 4., „ . t '
: :
Vt.,
:,.' • _
. ' 4‘?‘;?,1 '_„.. ',,•,•-:,:-: 4,'-'1:krelp&l:•'('74 , - .
2 -.• . 1..4-f . ,.-„,...r. ,•.:,„ ,,,.,, , , ,
„..,L...:.,-,,,,
•1--,:-..4"'4ti-,-,,-7.4.,,.t,-t-.-.:7:4,--',:,,,p,--_.,•;:?!;Aq4"iU,-,:-.:J_•,t.:.7',7----,,•-
fyty `+ y:
�L;'��, i '&. -j:!P1�':•.•33.A ,..d •o'y4 - _ _-. _ _- - •a',l.r .� may.
,k-'r,*:.,;.wx:•t 4
e.
;,*.,,,c-,r.;,"„,4.:.4.7",1 4.•,•-,I0,U1
-,,,,,,e,4,tf,,
Iy ... .
'rir�' ? -".,,xF
(9) PS6(looking north along pond edge) (10) PS7 (looking southwest into restoration area)
,i:ii. '•rah;. .»�_..-
"i'r -
tam:.zyyei•_ 'a
(11) PS8 (looking north into restoration area)
Longhorn Riparian Buffer Mitigation Site—Appendix B 2 I P a g e
DMS Project No. 100114