20140547 Ver 1_Year 7 Monitoring Report_2021_20220104

Mitigation Project Information Upload
ID#* 20140547 Version* 1
.........................................................................................................................................................................
Select Reviewer:*
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 01/04/2022
Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/4/2022
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Is this a Prospectus,Technical Proposal or a New Site?* 0 Yes O No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Paul Wiesner [e-mail]
Project Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20140547 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: • DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: 601 East Stream Restoration Project
County: Union
Document Information
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: 601 East_95756_MY7_2021.pdf 10.37MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Print Name:* Paul Wiesner
Signature:*
reds

Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7
FINAL
601 East Stream Restoration Project
NCDMS Contract No.: 004925
NCDMS Project No.: 95756
USACE Permit Action ID: 2013-00265
DWR Project No.: 14-0547
Union County, NC
Data Collected: June & October 2021
�wDya�"te Submitted:: December 2021 1 y,'
�'•I i 'd�; "Ye ,� s'9,4Fy,`1 •t hp,', r 'it , 4 .., IV ,'' �r �� 4-f
�l � yi3� � •'-: x 'l"Rl'A`. t4 T I � k �6 ��i ks .i�'qo!R
a . m ' 1 1
f
.= 'A' r Y,,,+o Y -� ..fr• M . .
��-e+4 s7� fl
:,,,,y,,,,,„,,,-s, ' ' lk .:11," -fr101.11,.;-"' •"' %.'-. .-.> '-_— ,, ,*-.,; r'.. kr—
i�� +
-- . - ‘,------,,:=, 4----7 .,,,...-,,,°,4.k. -- -vt,_ — .,., - , '
t
Submitted to:
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services
NCDEQ-DMS, 1652 Mail Service Center Raleigh NC 27699-1652

360o Glenwood Avenue,Suite too
res Raleigh,NC 276to
Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South,Suite 300
Bellaire,TX 7740t
Main:713.52o.5400
December 14, 2021
Paul Wiesner
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Drive, Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
RE: 601 East Stream Restoration Site: MY7 Monitoring Report (NCDMS ID 95756)
Listed below are comments provided by DMS on November 9, 2021 regarding the 601 East Stream
Restoration Site: Year 7 Monitoring Report and RES' responses.
On November 5, 2021, the NCDEQ — Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) received the Draft
Monitoring Year 7/ closeout report for the 601 East Stream Restoration project from Resource
Environmental Solutions (RES). The report establishes the year 7 monitoring and proposed
closeout conditions at the project site.Anticipated mitigation on the site includes 3,372 linear feet
of stream restoration; 400 linear feet of stream enhancement (Level I); 215 linear feet of buffer
establishment and BMP sediment import reduction (5:1)for a total of 3,638.667 Stream Mitigation
Units (SMUs) (R) and 43.000 SMUs (RE). Total project credits are 3,681.667 SMUs (warm). The
following are our comments on the draft report:
Section 1.3. Project Setting and Background: In this section, please also note that RES has
reverted back to the Mitigation Plan (Proposed) SMUs for the project. Total project assets are
3,681.667 SMUs (warm). The slight credit difference (1.667 SMUs) is due to minor rounding errors
in the approved mitigation plan.
Done.
Section 1.4.1 Vegetation: DMS recommends continued invasive species/ parrot feather
treatment and beaver/ beaver dam removal within the conservation easement through project
closeout in 2022.
Done.
Section 1.4.2. Stream Geomorphology: "None of the riffle cross sections exceeded a BHR." Please
review and correct.

Section 1.4.2. Stream Geomorphology: "The channel substrate will be monitored in future years
for shifts in particle size distributions." Please update as 2021 is the final year of project monitoring
and project closeout is proposed in 2022.
Done.
Table 1: In the table, please report Total Mitigation Credits as: 3,681.667 (R) &43.000 (RE) to be
consistent with the DMS credit ledger and final closeout request. Total project credits are
3,681.667 SMUs (warm).
The table was updated to display 3,638.667 (R) &43.000 (RE).
CCPV Maps: If possible, please update the aerial imagery to the most recent available. As noted
on the maps, current aerial imagery is from 2019.
The most recent NC OneMap aerial for this region is from 2019. Additionally, the most recent
Google Maps Satellite imagery is also from 2019.
Table 5 -Vegetation Condition Assessment: Please include the date that the project was visually
assessed at the top of the table. This was an IRT request at the 2021 credit release meeting. DMS
did not observe any current conservation easement encroachment during a 9/30/2021 site visit.
Please confirm that no invasive areas of concern were noted, or minor areas are beneath the
established mapping threshold. This has been a previous IRT question on projects reporting 0%
at MY7/ project closeout.
The assessment G a has been added to Table 5 and RES confirms 0%vegetation problem areas.
Table 6 - Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment: Please include the date that the
project was visually assessed at the top of the table. This was an IRT request at the 2021 credit
release meeting. The Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment reports that 100% of the
project is stable and performing as intended. Please review and confirm that this is correct or
minor areas are beneath the mapping threshold.This has been a previous IRT question on projects
reporting 100% at MY7/ project closeout.
The assessment date has been added to Table 6 and RES confirms 100% stream stability.
MY7 2021 Project Station Photos: Please provide dates for all project photos. If exact dates
cannot be provided, please include the month and year for each photo.
Done.
Appendix E — Flow Gauge Graph: DMS recommends showing the start and end points of the
146 days of consecutive flow reported.
Done.

Digital Support File Comments:
• Please review the cross-section calculations. The points above the specified low bank height
were not excluded using the Omit Bkf boxes, which causes the bankfull elevation that achieves
the MY0 bankfull area to be artificially low. The points above the current monitoring year's low
bank height should be omitted from both the BHR and LTOB spreadsheet because these points
affect multiple metrics (e.g. cross sectional area, BHR, etc.).
Done.
• Please consistently specify the calculated BHR value or use <1 in the cross-section figures and
Table 11a.
Done.

Prepared by:
) res
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh,North Carolina 27605

Contents
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY 5
1.1. Goals and Objectives 5
1.2. Success Criteria 5
1.3. Project Setting and Background 7
1.4. Project Performance 8
2.0 METHODS 9
3.0 REFERENCES 10
601 East Stream Restoration Project 3 RES
NCDMS Project No. 95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

Appendices
Appendix A. General Tables and Figures
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Information
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Current Conditions Plan View Map
Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Table 6. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Figure 3. 2021 Photo Station Photos
Figure 4. 2021 Problem Area Photos
Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7. Vegetation Plot Mitigation Success Summary
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Metadata
Table 9. Total Planted Stem Counts
601 East Closeout Vegetation Table
Figure 5. Vegetation Plot Photos
Appendix D. Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table l la. Dimensional Morphology Summary
Table 1 lb. Stream Reach Data Summary
Table 12. Pebble Count Data Summary
Charts 1-5. MY7 Stream Reach Substrate Composition Charts
Table 13. Bank Pin Summary
Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 14. Verification of Bankfull and Stream Flow Events
Table 15. 2021 Rainfall Summary
601 East Stream Restoration Project 4 RES
NCDMS Project No.95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
1.1. Goals and Objectives
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following:
• Reduce water quality stressors originating in and around the project area affecting the project
• reaches and downstream watercourses,which include population of the Savannah Lilliput
• (Toxolasma pullus)and the Carolina Creekshell(Vilosa vaughiana),both listed species of
concern. Specifically involving:
o Reducing turbidity and sediment loading
o Input reductions of nutrients and crop protection chemicals
o Improving thermoregulation
• Improving aquatic habitat quality and diversity within project reaches
• Improving recruitment of instream fine organic matter(FOM)in the near term and both FOM and
• large wood in the long term
• Improving terrestrial habitat diversity and quality in the vicinity of project reaches
• Establishing habitat continuity between the reach headwaters and Lanes Creek
• Improving flood flow attenuation and floodplain interaction
The project goals are addressed through the following project objectives:
• Restore or enhance reach pattern,dimension,and profile
• Stabilize eroding stream banks
• Install stream structures to maintain grade and improve bed form complexity
• Implement BMP detention devices on lateral agricultural drainages
• Install diverse native riparian buffer
• Removal of invasive exotic plant species
• Secure a protective conservation easement and establish fencing as needed
1.2. Success Criteria
The success criteria for the 601 East Stream Restoration Site follows accepted and approved success criteria
presented in the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent NCDMS and agency guidance.
Specific success criteria components are presented below.
1.2.1. Stream Restoration
Morphologic Parameters and Channel Stability — Restored and enhanced streams should
demonstrate morphologic stability to be considered successful.Stability does not equate to an absence
of change,but rather to sustainable rates of change or stable patterns of variation. Restored streams
often demonstrate some level of initial adjustment in the period that follows construction and some
subsequent change/variation is also to be expected. However, the observed change should not be
unidirectional such that it represents a robust trend. If some trend is evident, it should be modest or
indicate migration to another stable form.Annual variation is to be expected,but over time this should
demonstrate equilibrium on the reach scale with the maintenance of or even a reduction in the
amplitude of variation. Lastly, all of this must be evaluated in the context of hydrologic events to
which the system is exposed and the design type/intent (i.e. threshold versus free form alluvial
channels).
Dimension —General maintenance of a stable cross-section and hydrologic access to the floodplain
features over the course of the monitoring period will generally represent success in dimensional
stability. However, some change is natural and expected and can even indicate that the design was
601 East Stream Restoration Project 5 RES
NCDMS Project No.95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

successful and appropriate for the hydrologic and sediment regime. Examples include depositional
processes resulting in the development of constructive features on the banks and floodplain such as
an inner berm,a slightly narrower channel,modest natural levees,and general floodplain deposition.
For stream dimension,cross-sectional overlays and key parameters such as cross-sectional area, and
the channel's width to depth ratios should demonstrate modest overall change and patterns of
variation.
Significant widening of the channel cross-section or trends of increase in the cross-sectional area
generally represent concern, although some adjustment in this direction is acceptable if the process
is arrested after a period of modest adjustment. In the case of riffle cross sections, maintenance of
depths that represent small changes to target competence (e.g. consistently low BHRs <1.2) would
also reflect stability. Although a pool cross-section may experience periodic infilling due to
watershed activity and the timing of events relative to monitoring, the majority of pools within a
project stream reach/component should demonstrate maintenance of greater depths and low water
surface slopes over time. Rates of lateral migration need to be moderate.Bank pins will be installed
to monitor rates of erosion.
Pattern and Profile—Pool depths may vary from year to year,however the majority of pools should
maintain depths that are distinct in the profile and are readily observed.Pattern measurement will not
be collected unless observations indicate a detectable change based on observations and/or dimension
measurements.
Substrate—Generally it is anticipated that the bed materials will coarsen over time.The majority of
riffle pebble counts should indicate maintenance or coarsening of the substrate. The D50 and D84 of
the substrate should show a coarser distribution of bed materials in riffles and finer size class
distribution in pools.
Sediment Transport — Depositional features should be consistent with a stable stream that is
effectively managing its sediment load. Point Bar and inner berm features should develop without
excessive encroachment of the restored channel. Trends in the development of systemic robust mid-
channel or alternating bar features will be considered a destabilizing condition and may require
intervention.
The tributaries outside of the conservation easement will be observed yearly and the monitoring
report will document the function of the upstream basins in capturing excess sediment produced by
observed degradation in the narrative.A specific performance standard has not been added.
1.2.2. Surface Water Hydrology
Monitoring of stream water stages through a staff gauge should show recurrence of bankfull flow on average
every 1 to 2 years. Throughout the monitoring period, the surface water stage should achieve bankfull or
greater elevations at least twice. The bankfull events must occur during separate monitoring years.
601 East Stream Restoration Project 6 RES
NCDMS Project No.95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

1.2.3. Vegetation
The vegetation monitoring will be conducted according to the Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) —EEP
protocol Version 4.2 (Lee et al 2008). Vegetation monitoring plots will be 100 square meters in size and
will be conducted according to the Level I protocol which has a focus on planted stems only. The purpose
of this level of monitoring is to determine the pattern of installation of plant material with respect to species,
spacing,density,and to monitor the survival and growth of those installed species. The success criteria for
the preferred species in the restoration areas will be based on annual and cumulative survival and growth
over seven(7)years. Survival on preferred species must be at a minimum 320 stems/acre at the end of the
three years of monitoring and 260 stems/acre after five years. At year 7, density must be no less than 210
seven-year-old planted stems/acre. Level II of the CVS protocol,which includes natural stems and planted
stems,will be followed for the monitoring year 2 and subsequent years until the project close out year.
1.3. Project Setting and Background
The 601 East Stream Restoration Site is located in Union County,approximately 13 miles south of Monroe,
NC (Figure 1). The site encompasses 12.8 acres of formerly agricultural land and includes portions of
Tanyard Branch, a tributary of Lanes Creek. The Site is located within the Yadkin River Basin, United
States Geological Survey (USGS) 14-digit Hydrologic Unit 03040105081010 and the North Carolina
Division of Water Resources (NCDWR) sub-basin 03-04-14. The drainage area of Tanyard Branch at the
downstream end of the site is 0.56 square mile(354 acres).Land use within the watershed is predominately
agriculture with the remaining land use composed of low density residential and forested areas.
Following 2016 monitoring the NCIRT requested a review of the differential between the Approved
Mitigation Plan and Baseline Monitoring Report. The table below details the discrepancies by reach. The
primary cause of increased baseline SMUs is survey methodology(thalweg vs. centerline). The Mitigation
Plan lengths were based on centerline. Additionally, there were likely minor field adjustments during
construction. RES has reverted back to Mitigation Plan (Proposed) SMUs for this project. Total project
assets are 3,681.667 Warm SMUs. The slight credit difference (1.667 SMUs) is due to minor rounding
errors in the approved mitigation plan.
Proposed Length Mitigation
Reach Mitigation Type* (LF) Ratio Proposed SMUs Baseline SMUs
Reach A Buffer Establishment 215 5:1 43 43
Reach la P1 Restoration 350 1:1 350 350
Reach lb Enhancement I 85 1.5:1 56 57
Reach lc Enhancement I 155 1.5:1 103 103
Reach ld P1 Restoration 800 1:1 800 803
Reach 2a Enhancement I 40 1.5:1 26 30
Reach 2b Enhancement I 120 1.5:1 80 85
Reach 2c P1 Restoration 724 1:1 724 730
Reach 3a P1 Restoration 368 1:1 368 369
Reach 3b P1 Restoration 650 1:1 650 649
Reach 3c P3 Restoration 480 1:1 480 495
Total 3,987 3,680 3,714
*P1=Priority 1,P3=Priority 3
**The contracted amount of credits for this Site was 3,576 SMUs
601 East Stream Restoration Project 7 RES
NCDMS Project No.95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

1.4. Project Performance
Monitoring Year 7 (MY7) data was collected in June and October 2021. Year 7 monitoring activities
included cross sections, vegetation plots, hydrology data, visual assessment of all reaches and the
surrounding easement, and permanent photo stations. The Site has met all stream and vegetation success
criteria and is recommended for closeout.
Summary information and data related to the occurrence of items such as beaver activity or encroachment
and statistics related to performance of various project and monitoring elements can be found in the tables
and figures in the report appendices. A visual overview of the site can be seen in the Current Conditions
Plan View Maps (Figure 2). Photographs taken at permanent stations throughout the project site also
display general site conditions (Figure 3). Narrative background and supporting information formerly
found in these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report (formerly Mitigation Plan) and in
the Mitigation Plan(formerly Restoration Plan)documents available on the NCDMS website.All raw data
supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from DMS upon request.
1.4.1. Vegetation
Visual assessment of the easement(Table 5; Figure 2)indicates vegetation is well established throughout
the easement.One area of encroachment was observed and repaired in June 2020.The encroachment repair
included installing t-posts, horse tape, and easement signage along the easement boundary as well as
planting 60 three-gallon container trees. The planting was done in June 2020 and species included
sycamore,river birch,and willow oak. In January and September 2021,RES inspected the entire easement
boundary and replaced all missing easement signage. Invasive species including parrotfeather were treated
in September 2021. The kill on parrotfeather appeared very effective when observed in October 2021. The
areas of cattails are still present but only in localized wetland areas and are not considered problem areas.
RES will continue to treat invasive species,as needed,prior to closeout.
Monitoring of the 10 permanent vegetation plots was completed during October 2021. Summary tables and
photographs associated with MY7 monitoring are located in Appendix C. Stem densities for MY7 ranged
from 364 to 931 stems per acre with a mean of 587 stems per acre across all plots. When volunteer stems
are included, the annual mean increases to 1012 stems per acre. A total of 19 species were documented
within the monitoring plots. The average planted stem height observed in the plots was 15.7 feet.
1.4.2. Stream Geomorphology
Visual assessment of the stream was performed to document signs of instability, such as eroding banks,
structural instability, or excessive sedimentation(Table 6). The erosional feature noted in the right buffer
of Reach 1 was addressed by stabilizing the headcut with rock and adding coir logs along the feature. RES
also removed remnant beaver dam on Reach 2 in June 2020 and on Reach 3 and 4 in November 2020.
Between October and December 2021, four beaver dams were built on Reach 4. The dams were removed,
and beavers were trapped in December 2021. RES will continue to manage beavers, as needed, prior to
closeout.
Geomorphic data for MY7 was collected during June 2021. Summary tables and cross-section plots related
to stream morphology are located in Appendix D.Baseline stream summary data for reference can be found
in Table 10. Cross-sectional overlays showed minimal dimensional change between MY5 and MY7 data
collection efforts (Table h a; Figure 6), as well as minimal change in overall reach dimensions (Table
11b).None of the riffle cross sections exceeded a BHR of 1.2.
601 East Stream Restoration Project 8 RES
NCDMS Project No.95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

Substrate monitoring was performed during MY7. Pebble count D5o was fine gravel for Reach 1,medium
gravel for Reach 2,medium gravel for Reach 3,and medium gravel for Reach 4(Table 12; Charts 1-5).
The bank pin arrays indicate that no erosion is taking place in the pools at cross-sections(Table 13).
1.4.3. Stream Hydrology
In MY7,seven bankfull events were recorded on Reach 2 and 11 on Reach 3.Project site precipitation data
can be found in Table 15. A flow gauge was installed on April 30, 2020 and moved on June 3, 2020
upstream on Reach 1 per IRT request.The flow gauge recorded 146 days of consecutive flow and 219 total
days of flow in MY7. Photo documentation of the stream is in Appendix B.
Summary information/data related to the performance of various project and monitoring elements can be
found in the tables and figures in the report appendices.Narrative background and supporting information
formerly found in these reports can be found in the Baseline Monitoring Report(formerly Mitigation Plan)
and in the Mitigation Plan(formerly Restoration Plan)documents available on NCDMS' website.All raw
data supporting the tables and figures in the appendices is available from NCDMS upon request.
2.0 METHODS
Visual assessments of the project were performed at the beginning and end of the monitoring year.
Permanent photo station photos were collected during vegetation monitoring. Additional photos of
vegetation or stream problem areas were documented with photographs throughout the project area.
Geomorphic measurements(MYO,MY1,MY2,MY3,MY5,MY7)were taken during low flow conditions
using a Topcon GTS-312 Total Station. Three-dimensional coordinates associated with cross-section and
profile data were collected in the field and geo-referenced (NAD83 State Plane feet FIPS 3200).
Morphological data was limited to 18 cross-sections. Survey data was imported into CAD, ArcGIS, and
Excel for data processing and analysis.Channel substrate was characterized using a Wolman Pebble Count
as outlined in Harrelson et al. (1994)and processed using Microsoft Excel.
Vegetation success (MYO, MY1, MY2, MY3, MY5, MY7) is being monitored using 10 permanent
monitoring plots. Vegetation monitoring followed CVS-EEP Level 1 Protocol for MY1 and is following
Level 2 Protocol Version 4.2 for monitoring years 2-7(Lee et al.2008).Level 2 Protocol includes analysis
of species composition and density of planted species. Data is processed using the CVS data entry tool. In
the field,the four corners of each plot were permanently marked with rebar and photos of each plot taken
from the origin each monitoring year. The locations of the three temporary plots surveyed in Years 2 and 3
were randomly selected within the replant areas. The plots were surveyed by pulling tapes to form 10 x 10
meter plots then counting all woody stems within the plots.
Precipitation data was reported from the NCCRONOS station number 315771 in Monroe,NC. Two crest
gauges were installed on the mainstem channel, one upstream of Lansford Road in Reach 2 and another
downstream of Lansford Road in Reach 3.During quarterly visits to the site,the height of the cork-line was
recorded. In MY6,RES replaced the cork-line crest gauges with HOBO stage recorders.
601 East Stream Restoration Project 9 RES
NCDMS Project No.95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

3.0 REFERENCES
Resource Environmental Solutions,LLC. 2015. 601 East Stream Restoration,Baseline Monitoring
Document and As-Built Baseline Report Final,Union County,North Carolina.NCEEP Project
No. 95756
Harrelson,Cheryl,C. Rawlins and J. Potyondy. 1994. Stream Channel Reference Sites: An Illustrated
Guide to Field Technique. Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-245. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range
Experiment Station.USDA Forest Service.Fort Collins,Colorado
Lee,M.T.,R.K. Peet, S.D. Roberts,and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for Recording
Vegetation.Version 4.2.http://cvs.bio.unc.edu/methods.htm;accessed November 2008.
601 East Stream Restoration Project 10 RES
NCDMS Project No.95756 Annual Monitoring Report
Monitoring Year 7 of 7 December 2021

Appendix A
General Tables and Figures

Appendix A—General Tables and Figures
Table 1:Project Components and Mitigation Credits
601 East Stream Restoration Site
Mitigation Credits
Nitrogen Phosphorous
Stream Riparian Wetland Non-riparian Wetland Buffer
Nutrient Offset Nutrient Offset
Type R RE R RE R RE
Totals 3638.667 43.000
Project Components
Mitigation
Project Component- Restoration-or-Restoration
Stationing/Location Existing Footage/Acreage Approach(PI,PII etc.) Restoration Footage or Acreage
or-Reach ID Equivalent Ratio Credits
Reach A Ephemeral 5+45—7+60 215 Buffer establishment and BMP 215 1:5 43
sediment import reduction
Reach la 7+60—11+10 336 P 1 R 350 1:1 350
Intermittent
Reach lb 11+10—11+95 85 Enhancement El 85 1:1.5 56.7
Intermittent
Reach lc Perennial 11+95-13+50 136 Enhancement El 155 1:1.5 103.3
Reach l d Perennial 14+00-22+00 790 P 1 R 800 1:1 800
Reach 2a
22+00-22+40 40 Enhancement El 40 1:1.5 26.7
Perennial
Reach 2b
Perennial22+80-24+00 125 Enhancement El 120 1:1.5 80
Reach 2c Perennial 24+00-31+24 669 P 1 R 724 1:1 724
80'active channel
Reach 3a Perennial 43+06-46+60 PI R 368 1:1 368
112'relic channel
Reach 3b Perennial 47+20-53+70 502'relic charmel PI R 650 1:1 650
Reach 4 Perennial 53+70—58+50 470'relic charmel P3 R 480 1:1 480
Component Summation
Stream Non-riparian Wetland Buffer
Restoration Level Riparian Wetland(acres) Upland(acres) Mitigation Credits
(linear feet) (acres) (square feet)
Riverine Non-Riverine
Restoration 3372 3372
Enhancement
Enhancement I 400 266.6
Enhancement II
Creation
Preservation/Other 215 43
HQ Preservation
BMP Elements
Element Location Purpose/Function Notes
Ephemeral Channel
FB,LS,S,FS 5+45-7+60 Slowing the water down for settling and filtering excess sediment Sediment expected from future degradation upstream
BMP Elements
BR=Bioretention cell;SF=Sand Filter;SW=Stonnwater Wetland;WDP=Wet Detention Pond;DDP=Dry Detention Pond;FS=Filter Strip;S=Grassed Swale;LS=Level Spread;NI=Natural Infiltration Area;FB=Forested Buffer
Note:Stream credit calculations were originally calculated along the as-built thalweg Based on the April 3,2017 IRT Credit Release M eeting these stream credits have been reverted back to the amounts in the IRT approved mitigation plan.

Appendix A—General Tables and Figures
Table 2.Project Activity and Reporting History
601 East Stream Restoration Site
Activity or Deliverable Data Collection Completion or
Complete Delivery
Restoration Plan May 2013 Jan 2014
Final Design—Construction Plans Sept 2013 Jan 2014
Construction - Dec 2014
Containerized,bare root and B&B plantings - Jan 2015
Mitigation Plan/As-built(Year 0 Monitoring—baseline) Feb 2015 Feb 2015
Year 1 Monitoring Nov 2015 Nov 2015
Supplemental Planting(Entire Site) - Apr 2016
Year 2 Monitoring Sept 2016 Oct 2016
Year 3 Monitoring Stream-July 2017 Jan 2018
Vegetation-Oct 2017
Supplemental Planting,Encroachment Blocking,Beaver Removal,Invasive Mar 2018
Treatment
Invasive Treatment - Sept 2018
Year 4 Monitoring Nov 2018 Jan 2019
Year 5 Monitoring Stream-July 2019 Jan 2020
Vegetation-Oct 2019
Beaver Dam Removal,Encroachment Repair,Erosional Rill Repair - June 2020
Invasive Treatment and Beaver Dam Removal - Nov 2020
Year 6 Monitoring Nov 2020 Dec 2020
Easement Sign Repair and Invasive Treatment - Sept 2021
Year 7 Monitoring Stream-June 2021 Oct 2021
Vegetation-Oct 2021
Beaver Dam Removal(Reach 4) - Dec 2021

Appendix A—General Tables and Figures
Table 3. Project Contact Table
601 East Stream Restoration Site
Designer Ward Consulting Engineers,P.C. (WCE)
4805 Green Road,Suite 100,Raleigh,NC 27616
Primary project design POC Becky Ward(919)870-0526
Construction Contractor Wright Contracting
P.O.Box 545,Siler City,NC 27344
Construction contractor POC Joseph Wright(919)663-0810
Planting Contractor H&J Forest Services
1416 Ocean Boulevard,Holly Ridge,NC 28445
Planting contractor POC [phone]
Construction Survey Contractor Turner Land Survey,PLLC
3719 Benson Drive,Raleigh,NC 27629
Survey contractor POC Elizabeth Turner(919)827-0745
Seeding Contractor Wright Contracting
P.O.Box 545,Siler City,NC 27344
Construction contractor POC Andrew Dimmette(919)663-0810
Seed Mx Sources Green Resource-Raleigh,NC
As Purchased by EBX(919)829-9909 x213
Nursery Stock Suppliers Arbor Gen-Blenheim,SC
[phone]
NC Forest Service Nursery -Goldsboro,NC
[phone]
[Baseline]Monitoring Performers Ward Consulting Engineers,P.C.
4805 Green Road,Suite 100,Raleigh,NC 27616
Stream Monitoring POC Rachael Zigler-WCE-[phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC Chris Sheats -The Cantena Group -[phone]
Monitoring Performers (MY1-MY2) Equinox
2015-2016 37 Haywood Street,Suite 100
Asheville,NC 28801
Stream Monitoring POC Drew Alderman(828)253-6856
Vegetation Monitoring POC Drew Alderman(828)253-6856
Resource Environemntal Solutions (RES)
Monitoring Performers (MY3+) 3600 Glenwood Ave,Suite 100
Raleigh,NC 27610
Stream Monitoring POC Ryan Medric(919)741-6268
Vegetation Monitoring POC Ryan Medric(919)741-6268

Appendix A—General Tables and Figures
Table 4.Project Baseline Information and Attributes
601 Fast Stream Restoration Site
Project Information
Project Name 601 East Stream Restoration Site
County Union County
Project Area(acres) 12.78
Project Coordinates(latitude and longitude) 34°50'21.62"N,80°25'32.26"N
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province Piedmont
River Basin Yadkin River Bas in
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-Digit I USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit I 3040105081010
DWQ Sub-basin 3/4/2014
Project Drainage Area(acres) 361.33
Project drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area 2%
CGIA Land Use Classification 2.01.01.07 Annual Row Crop Rotation
Reach Summary Information
Parameters Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4
Length of reach(LF) 1,418;1,393 LF Restored 906;902 LF Restored 1,080;1,018 LF Restored Relic Channel,495 LF Restored
Valley Classification II II VIII VIII
Drainage area(acres) 109 135 333 359
NCDWQ stream Intermittent:19.5 33.5 33.5 33.5
identification s core Perennial:33.5
NCDWQ Water Quality 13-17-40-(1) 13-17-40-(1) 13-17-40-(1) 13-17-40-(1)
Classification
Morphological G4/B4/C4b C4/EA/DA C4/G4 G4
Description(stream type)
Evolutionary trend
(reference channel G C/DA G G
evolution model used)
Intermittent:Tatum gravelly silty
Cid channery silt loam,T atum
Underlying mapped soils Perrenial:Cid channery silt loam gravelly silt loam Chewacla silt loam Chewacla silt loam
Drainage class Well Drained Moderately Well Drained Somewhat Poorly Drained Somewhat Poorly Drained
Soil Hydric status Non Hy dric Non Hy dric Non Hy dric Non Hy dric
Slope 2% 0.84% 0.67% 1.25%
FEMA classification N/A N/A N/A N/A
Agriculture along upstream Canopy species include Willow
Red Maple,Sweetgum,Eastern
Canopy species include Red Canopy species include Red
The remaining stream buffer Maple,Hackberry,Willow Oak, Maple,Hackberry,Willow oak,
Native vegetation
within this reach is composed of Wetland A is composed of and Sweetgum. The presence of and Sweetgum. The presence of
community Willow Oak,Red Maple,River Cattails,spike rush arrow-arum, Chinese privet outcompete any Chinese privet outcompete any
Birch,Black Willow,Elderberry, and duckweed. shrub and herb layer. shrub and herb lay er.
and Blackberry.
Percent composition of 5%of Japanese stilt grass,80%
0% 50%of Parrot feather 80%Chinese privet
exotic invasive vegetation Chinese privet,and kudzu

Appendix A—General Tables and Figures
Table 4 con't.Project Baseline Information and Attributes
601 Fast Stream Restoration Site
Wetland Summary Information
Parameters Wetland 1
Size of Wetland(acres) 0.43 ac
Wetland Type(non-
Non-Tidal Freshwater Marsh
riparian,riparian riverine,
Mapped Soil Series Cid channery Silt Loam
Moderately Well Drained to Somewhat Poorly
Drainage class
Drained
Soil Hydric Status Non-Hydric
Tanyard Branch headwaters,groundwater,and
Source of Hydrology
adjacent runoff
Wetland A formed from accumulating sediments
Hydrologic Impairment filling the channel resulting in a braided channel
system through the wetland.
Herbaceous-Vegetation is domninated by
herbaceous vegetation such as Cattail(Typha
latifolia),Bulrush(Scirpus cyperinus),Common
Native vegetation Rush(Juncus effuses). Some tree species such as
community Black Willow(Salix nigra),and Red Maple
(Acer rubrum)are present in the wetland
margins.
95%-The invasive Parrot Feather
Percent composition of (Miriophyllum aquaticum)is dominant
exotic invasive vegetation throughout the wetland where there is standing
water.
Regulatory Cons ide rations
Regulation Applicable? Resolved? Supporting
Documentation
Waters of the United SAW 2013
States-Section 404 Yes 00265;EEP IMS
#95756
Waters of the United Yes DWR# 14-0547
States—Section 401
Endangered Species Act No Yes ERTR
Historic Preservation Act No Yes ERTR
Coastal Zone
Management Act
(CZMA)/Costal Area No N/A
Management Act
(CAMA)
FEMA Floodplain No N/A
Compliance
Essential Fisheries Habitat No N/A

' C ')%• C (%-------\(
_ i
Driving Directions: From Monroe drive south on Hwy. �-• • _ „F-
ir'. 601. Turn left on Landsford Road. Site is loacted on the r\;" ' �, \ ,;_- �)f ,i s
„i left and right .25 miles down and accessed from a , r''7.:-. ---:'. \ t '�'.. \ 4 (
parking area on the south side of Landsford Road. `•� :f s� . ;� _ '� ':._ �1 (
The subject project site is an environmental restoration site ' , • •" ' - _
of the NCDMS and encompassed by a recorded c---• - _ . : ; , ', _� • '. '
conservation easement, but is bordered by land with - ic, '` -- ��'
Pprivate. ownership. Accessing the site mayrequire li`, `� • ,'1� rY; /
P g q :; ,\�---ti_-.-.�; ,�' • ��.f �
3 traversmgareas near or alongthe easement and =. " i -- --_ .2•-_ --'- i f�"_r
bounday I .::. y1 is y v
therefore access to the general public is not permitted. '�-J,•' ) j {�� :-• '" )t - '
Access byauthorized personel of state and federal S, if f 'I ���--'f %' `! `}i '`f `=
i agencies or their designee/contractors involved in the the \\-M' 't 11 r !, 1 �,_,' K.-��:= �'f'� ir
ti 2 development, oversight, and stweardship of the restoration •- i.•-, �.`--� 5v� ; %� --. i' ? r
1
site is permitted within the terms and timeframes of their �.- _- ���f •;�) - -� ti_ y ��, ,
defined role.Any intended site visitation or activity by any sob -- '\ `I ..1.
�; Y 1}
-. person outside these previously sactioned roles and ! .�}} i j 3 r. �r .tip, ('
activities requires prior coordination with NCDMS. • -- - ._- (r i )�_�- I -- - , , •�
•
fr—\--,F (_\--,,-,— I ,---/-; r--x 5,0?../1„)
__/-) \ /- -'---%-. . . ./jj,--/ --``-'--- ) (7) i 1 r-- (I— /) I ' i' "1
...--------,, / i ,. . ( „..)) ., ..."-- ,----) \-,_,./ .-------\ C
, - , , , „._ „„
_-_-_-7 , I.,4 .
',�' ..- r r` i (r r� 601 East Mitigation Site - f���-
7 •1 `�. ( L�� - / . f r _ BP `i v .i
f ,I. --
•
, , ... .., ,
f ire - -, � fgpa �.i I{ ► i - r . i ''B M - ari ls ° ,, ; a �
.,.' -- ' .. n"..----. "-—/ .... ../;," i ` 'e '''1, ' .(11 - ' 1 '1 X\ \ t//,:lakj----., \1 L. •., \ ..
; ) _ ,7 i rj
"------ --. 1 .- ..))f \-, d='''- `,._,_=N---,.: / 1:----'----- :•)_,/ )).: , .--
j f'• '��� 5Q I �T _. ,1 t`� 1 , �� r o
h 5l.. `-`1. ���'''J� I ' '
r, •`J., i rl� .JJ c_._._.1 ,-- f ,.
J ` 1- :'� / l f
iii.
--N, f _, ;Via ` , v—`� ! ,' r.` - ) ] 4-- is
"--- __. Streams _ - `, ��
' N . Roads r' 7. i^ `'• \iI
-
se r ) r
4 Mitigation Sites a , . '� \� ��
Water Bodies `��""� 1 \
:1-
_ 1± — r
Figure 1
601 East Mitigation Site M„+w�;1.,...�-� -,
res
��` �{=h.; Project Site ;I"
Project Vicinity Map �_�♦���������,- ��`�
0 0.25 0.5 1 *'.�'
Miles

res_. - .', - ��'K,�' `^ •fir" r .....7...,
vim,• " "..� 16-4- •t __ - --_-- ,--_ - ' - -
441,
:.•ae- � w
•
'A -a' • ./t0 100 200
gFeet
' . F *T S; -4---
�:_:: 1 inch =200 feet
Reach A Figure 2a
Y-{ 601 East Stream
nr,
Restoration Project
,.i � fe MY7 2021
CurrentConditions
00216
9 ' � V,� Y Plan View
y „3?.� Date: 10/29/2021 Drawn by: RTP:1
"it� r�'
1 - ,fit S. '� `'t`� - - f• • < ,�.,. LEGEND
"` I=1 Conservation Easement
' 1 ^o� �j= ® Existing Wetland
�. �. 7 _ �'-�, $ n-. 4 a 1 1 Vegetation Plot
? i.ti- • +� 1 1 Structure
I Y ;,
t;, ;� . . , 6 Stream Treatment
--4. ••4,• :.: a . - BMP(Ephemeral)
•: - t iii - Restoration (Intermittent)
l i - - El (Intermittent)
— Restoration (Perennial)
. El (Perennial)
1 •
, _ - Cross Section
,, . '''' IlIlli' — Structure
, \ ,..... . _ . -•' Top of Bank
---� g Bankpin Array
[ - * Photo Station
= F ® Stage Recorder
• Flow Gauge
,3, • ,- iik-'(
- Vegetation Condition Assessment
n
_ y. _ L . w Target Community
- w Present Marginal Absent
■ : �. act
Absent
�+ i. _ 1No Fill
y .- ? a! �; -' N Present
,' .� � _4,' - - $ .; Source: OiJQGO OneMap Aerial Imagery

, ........,
. ..
Pres
i
.. .
.J
....
.„
. T100
Feet
'° w 1 inch = 100 feet
• 1
fl Figure 2b
601 East Stream
. :, Restoration Project
4110
"` Current Conditions
-• • Plan View
• - - Date: 12/14/2021 Drawn by: RTM
LEGEND
r O Conservation Easement
Vegetation Plot
—Beaver Dam(Removed 12/2021)
' '/ Stream Treatment
BMP(Ephemeral)
{ -. -• — Restoration(Intermittent)
• • — El(Intermittent)
`' . .Restoration(Perennial)
—El(Perennial)
Cross Section
Reach 4 _ —Structure
—Top of Bank
''`.' { ]t : Bankpin Array
15 * Photo Station
® Stage Recorder
_ . - Flow Gauge
l co1
r
A-° Vegetation Condition Assessment
\...._/ - ' *. ' .. —':.:1r' w Target Community
• - r. 2 Present Marginal Absent
' Q Absent No Fill
rn
.N Present
f6
Source:`L teGO OneMap Aerial Imagery

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment
601 East Stream Restoration Site
Planted Acreage 12.8
Easement Acreage 12.8 Date Assessed: 10/13/2021
of
Vegetation Category Definitions CCPV Depiction Number of Combined Planted
Polygons Acreage
Acreage
1. Bare Areas Very limited cover of both woody d herbaceous material. Red Simple Hatch 0 0.00 0%
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3,4,
2. Low Stem Density Areas Orange Simple Hatch 0 0.00 0%
or 5 stem count criteria.
Totals 0 0.00 0%
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small
3. Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor given the monitoring year. Orange Simple Hatch 0 0.00 0%
Cumulative Totals 0 0.00 0%
Number of Combined %of
Vegetation Category Definitions CCPV Depiction Easement
Polygons Acreage
Acreage
4. Invasive Areas of Concern Areas or points(if too small to render as polygons at map scale). Yellow Crosshatch 0 0.00 0%
5. Easement Encroachment Areas Areas or points(if too small to render as polygons at map scale). Red Simple Hatch 0 0.00 0%
N/A-Item does not apply.

Table 6. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 1
Assessed Length 1,393 feet I Date Assessed:10/13/2021
Number Number Footage Adjusted%
Major Channel Channel Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, with with for
Metric Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Category Sub-Category Performing
As-built Segments Footage as Intended Woody Woody Woody
as Intended
Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1
1.Bed 1.Aegradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
1.Vertical Stability flow laterally(not to include point bars). 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run Units) 2.Degradation-Evidence of downcutting. 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 32 32 100%
1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>_1.6). 33 33 100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition 2. Length appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 33 33 100%
upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run). 33 33 100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend(Glide). 33 33 100% MI
1
2.Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
1. Scoured/Eroding scour and erosion. 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse. 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
MI in 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
3.Engineered 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 45 45 100%
Structures
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 35 35 100%
2a.Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 35 35 100%
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence doesNOT exceed
3. Bank Protection 15 10 10 100%
Pool forming structures maintaining' Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull
4. Habitat 10 10 100%
Depth Ratio>1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.

Table 6 cont'd. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 2
Assessed Length 902 feet I Date Assessed:10/13/2021
Number Number Footage Adjusted%
Major Channel Channel Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, with with for
Metric Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Category Sub-Category Performing
As-built Segments Footage as Intended Woody Woody Woody
as Intended
Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1
1.Bed 1.Aegradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
1.Vertical Stability flow laterally(not to include point bars). 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run Units) 2.Degradation-Evidence of downcutting. 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 16 16 100%
1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>_1.6). 17 17 100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition 2. Length appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 17 17 100%
upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run). 17 17 100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend(Glide). 17 17 100% MI
1
2.Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
1. Scoured/Eroding scour and erosion. 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears MI
2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse. 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
MI in Totals 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
3.Engineered 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 12 12 100%
Structures
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 8 8 100%
2a.Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100%
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence doesNOT exceed
3. Bank Protection 15 4 4 100%
Pool forming structures maintaining' Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull
4. Habitat 4 4 100%
Depth Ratio>1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.

Table 6 cont'd. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 3
Assessed Length 1,018 feet I Date Assessed:10/13/2021
Number Number Footage Adjusted%
Major Channel Channel Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, with with for
Metric Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Category Sub-Category Performing
As-built Segments Footage as Intended Woody Woody Woody
as Intended
Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1
1.Bed 1.Aggradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
1.Vertical Stability flow laterally(not to include point bars). 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run Units) 2.Degradation-Evidence of downcutting. 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 18 18 100%
1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>_1.6). 18 18 100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition 2. Length appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 18 18 100%
upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run). 18 18 100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend(Glide). 18 18 100% MI
1
2.Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
1. Scoured/Eroding scour and erosion. 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse. 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
MI in Totals 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
3.Engineered 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 17 17 100%
Structures
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 12 12 100%
2a.Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 12 12 100%
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence doesNOT exceed
3. Bank Protection 15 5 5 100%
Pool forming structures maintaining' Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull
4. Habitat 5 5 100%
Depth Ratio>1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.

Table 6 cont'd. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 4
Assessed Length 495 feet I Date Assessed:10/13/2021
Number Number Footage Adjusted%
Major Channel Channel Stable, Total Number of Amount of %Stable, with with for
Metric Number in Unstable Unstable Performing Stabilizing Stabilizing Stabilizing
Category Sub-Category Performing
As-built Segments Footage as Intended Woody Woody Woody
as Intended
Vegetation Vegetation Vegetation
1
1.Bed 1.Aggradation-Bar formation/growth sufficient to significantly deflect
1.Vertical Stability flow laterally(not to include point bars). 0 0 100%
(Riffle and Run Units) 2.Degradation-Evidence of downcutting. 0 0 100%
2. Riffle Condition 1. Texture/Substrate-Riffle maintains coarser substrate. 9 9 100%
1. Depth Sufficient(Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull Depth>_1.6). 9 9 100%
3. Meander Pool
Condition 2. Length appropriate(>30%of centerline distance between tail of 9 9 100%
upstream riffle and head of downstream riffle).
1. Thalweg centering at upstream of meander bend(Run). 9 9 100%
4. Thalweg Position
2. Thalweg centering at downstream of meander bend(Glide). 9 9 100% MI
1
2.Bank Bank lacking vegetative cover resulting simply from poor growth and/or
1. Scoured/Eroding scour and erosion. 0 0 100% 0 0 100%
Banks undercut/overhanging to the extent that mass wasting appears
2. Undercut likely. Does NOT include undercuts that are modest,appear sustainable 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
and are providing habitat.
3. Mass Wasting Bank slumping,calving,or collapse. 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
MI in Totals 0 0 100% N/A N/A N/A
3.Engineered 1. Overall Integrity Structures physically intact with no dislodged boulders or logs. 14 14 100%
Structures
2. Grade Control Grade control structures exhibiting maintenance of grade across the sill. 8 8 100%
2a.Piping Structures lacking any substantial flow underneath sills or arms. 8 8 100%
Bank erosion within the structures extent of influence doesNOT exceed
3. Bank Protection 15 6 6 100%
Pool forming structures maintaining' Max Pool Depth:Mean Bankfull
4. Habitat 6 6 100%
Depth Ratio>1.6. Rootwads/logs providing some cover at base-flow.

Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3. 2021 Photo Station Photos (6/8/2021)
,
i
,' �. e
a
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 1
Top of Project—Looking Downstream
F •{ w . �' as .�,
p• 1
y{ r.. 1
�
' l'ilq • :: k r.i.:71#4 k 4't•Al, , _ , ,
11 i itio:ii, i#,4?"-,r,,411i1,,,ti,LN / i _,.
7,t,e„ 1....4,,ii, - AvAtii,j1,\,,,..,itv. ,
Q.ifieSik,, tit*
1 , -mob _ • o ' � � ,,1,°.' ' i .
r Tip `'14 4 P4', �, t� , �,.
it
't/aI u '
t-,
-,t-,''',L MLA, -ra .. 1 t- '"t1 .. tl % �w
1 £te'04a . "4 s A
ft_
•
tee°�� m y •; `yam ,4 1 /` 1—'
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 2
Cross Section 1 —Looking Upstream

Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
,�{,.-v--,,.,..—ct'... '';' 1',',',:4„.4...;._\;.-,-..,.L.-i.4-.,.-'.,,,.„..-.,-'. b ` ''..
b ; ,1 t tip7,_12.-
,,,,..
. i __ Al••- ----, ' '''
•
•_ - -
i0',-'
,S `t{ ` ray e _1,-, �0 _ . � ti` at iA - ` i \r -' r � a � ye�t - � � � , �.i� -y , a y. a
?C k, -. wr: r g. ‘ �fir °r„.0.•�; 0� . , t --z/�
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 3
Cross Section 2 —Looking Downstream
{ 7 yr maya:.5, ,,
•
b'. I A J �E
� --rr I r .;„"a- ,z
k �J ,,.. ,
A- yR \ , as.ryy F 1r '`` 5 b ]Fb bp, -
� i !{ .z C y � gip. Y
y� 1 .ry �.. iSb;� z -`a.�.f "' P,/ , 11 r� ^'a 1+a+r
_ i s r • If, r y° - � �
-'-'-j'f '`.-- tkitl'' ---- -- -- 4:' ,IL'il,-,y-41:„ ,._ :440'4
a \•,--,. -75- -1-4;,- --'':. '-'Ar..... ''''',` , -, - f ''', - NA'': �
' . ..4*.._
�`� , N t-.4 rya i �s ---/ \n' I`
041
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 4
Cross Section 3 —Looking Downstream

s V.
Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
, u l,f x 1 . I1i 3 M ,tip i,
It
-I. , �'.4 L •• 1
III
1 ✓ .e5f 1. ,. ,1,. 7 -$ kf,sl ° 1 r,14 4{•1+PS�.0` i�'S� • d t• . ..
�p r
/ if _ - '.--i. iN „Y'd"_. erg.i 11
✓
4 —r .ryrof
• -a 'lc'
a .fir . ,
f
•ai►r ,,,,..,,.':,4`
�
.1 : __ � 5 , ' a � �►
..' V'. . i I' ' 1 11rl z,L'c''i A _.
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 5
Cross Section 4—Looking Upstream
• J
4,..,„:vp. -•„! _•. . _ rr, •.,r,.... .i.:., _ . . I - fr.
M . -....77. ,
4 . ti
-- . is-
*_ •
V ,.sue - r``1W,v '
t ! mot, - fir,
.,,•.*._,T41..f'\-.:...4't".t\',.`,..r7"*..N:'..:'I.V1f7eq,1 N.
:,4'1:.4 4::i:S.•''r''''4'.'-..:..;:-!-,,,:'.,,-•..40,•.-1;.'4'-;....q.•
1..'.,,.F,:._'',",.•'._-:'e.,.'=,-:,-•.,,.-'\„1,:.,,,-_1.,.•:,';e,..--'..,-...._<.1 1o1.4l
1.
' , _ /' .
'� m
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 6
Cross Section 5 —Looking Downstream

Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
#el aF F „5'`rr+' •,fi.
•
•
i
._ r • Li m ` . . \ 1
✓-1{_Ste• // ,' � iY: y y ` ;{.I ..�
a / �. - ¢�M -( ter? Y Y. -
i
pli
�TJr i Fy. F l.yr' ,. *` - #ram. �+ `�^'a. .�
�,kTti eJt l
( ;... ,>f, '.• ?1 rr/B N o f '{_ -.-. � . .- 4 -_-*
,*'''' -l" '
',
/ r '! -> • r '.
Reach 1 -Permanent Photo Station 7
Cross Section 6 -Looking Downstream
' -. ,-''' '.1. . .41.i, t' ' .., .'''''''. • ' . -- ' -
a ppp a y . �� 4 i- a.
k ix iG i'044 7 fie? w i r x; •.L+� " \
•
ri
I p.
i•
44
h�l - r G. l J". 41' r
. , ,_...,- ..,,,.,,,-,,,,,„,... - ,..„,,,r,.. .„ ..,„„,„„,..,,,... ..,,..,,,,,,,„..„.‘, ....„..,..., .,... . ,,,_.. . _
• . „....,. . ...,,,,, ,...,.....).
,... ..„... :, ,„.. ...
.,, , ..,..ek..:, ',... .,:41e-:4%4'.1.,.; ,A,i,:....''• .„'„ . _.... .1.-, -........,-,:v.., ,. f'. ..,;.-t.
•rn
Aa . __±_-_,..w.„.‘„, .. ,,,{ � ,_er � ,p ,,
L
7 k GV ifi a ti'_' J `•isv �;Iy
r' 4-`�ff" p :.j^ i'4 :-
'_ . r ,. ' i = � a�=...._ , ,I�� ��_ - ,. ''
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 8
Cross Section 7 -Looking Downstream

Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
Y
-2t, -.- .
ill - _ '2 _ ;vim
•
i _
&_,
. ,'._, IN 1,4' : ft' • —.'•,-,,;t•-:44,,c'..,
`. 'ate< . 4111141t ,,
, .III. -
1 .;r
ift
Reach 1 —Permanent Photo Station 9
Cross Section 8 —Looking Downstream
C . ,M -} � N 7� k` ?�":-.,aF � r t j , am` Y ;
� 1 U .ma {, °�'r- S • rY�Y�F HP r"• fF.t•4 . ' t --$ u '-
4 i 1'!yis p ,1 ,y.� �� t f YF �
lirA
- Js'P r -.d' x 'SSA' r: f• -2 ',y e
gyp _ ;,' , � - w `�.,
•
Jr i
i ii- ram.+ d. . ;:#:;:, :' `jT
w."_,,,,-#1:.
3
• - d �r'� r ' 's- .
Reach 2 —Permanent Photo Station 10
Cross Section 9 —Looking Downstream

Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
R N• `J\ 7 7 ��g�, ,)� p . BEN .t'�R M� '$ tl:li ,8\4.‘44}
8 . i �Si S .Ms S - ' - d p� '' Y r f �„
y
T
c.
'i ,..
Reach 2 —Permanent Photo Station 11
Cross Section 10—Looking Downstream
.
` ._� it s' I
K n w' fy-
e %' ` 4i s fit.
7.-- ' ' - , .----4e• • „_______Ar
'fir. ♦ " '4i!,. � •� }(_.-. - 1 4
-..: . . _ „ ,..--.,....,,,.-14. „-..,.
N . •„. . ,„,.,.. -
.., , ..._ •., . : ,r._,.....
. . .,.. ,--.• ...,.;„,.„ .-„, ,...:-
.,.
•,,,,-, '11134hr 2 1. :''':‘.'
Reach 2 —Permanent Photo Station 12
Cross Section 11 —Looking Downstream

Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
• ci 1;14' '1,-;*4, 4' -' -', . ' . ..e ."4 r .' - Ai; .,--7 - .
-lit ,4 ,:tti,
," 1A in _ ,cam ; ` 1
i '..1 k§.,... 4�I: � ,tr.'
-`, _---- _No,,, 4"� -.fie: ..�r;i" -
,,, ,o PN '•'14'',' 44
4.1 t.
( 4 , / j _
mu
Reach 2 —Permanent Photo Station 13
Cross Section 12—Looking Downstreamt, -e- - N' ',Nt k,. ' \\,, .I 1 4 ' ' .'-
, - }
ii.
R I
poitobetak
d A
.14
.rr,�r\: ' Fly.
Alp- - -4, ,...- -. - - _,, 4, i . ,
Reach 3 —Permanent Photo Station 14
Cross Section 13 —Looking Downstream

r Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
'• eE r< 7� a c o d L 6 t f1 '. 'e A, i All-4' „,,11.‘tif.':' ...r/4 ' --fhtl'iiv,,
/
q , x =!
1 ' '
J •
$ ti �--r
/ _ �- _ t. 1.
y �, u
_ 4� '� ��cc , 3 `
Alb
Reach 3 —Permanent Photo Station 15
Cross Section 14—Looking Downstream
q+fit-} _ ! I- pi ' ii a 4 t ''. , S ..«.'', '
F •
.4‘
t Se: C .: ,.:„.„ , , ,.... : ;--N, '
' _ 4 yr e p - ',
! - r - :.,am•.-�- �Ya sue._
-! rs,♦ ,a• A .
- _ - sat ;': sr,`
y'tx1s. 1 .fR t a� ;'a�R
a.. s �J
sv)
Reach 3 —Permanent Photo Station 16
Cross Section 15 —Looking Downstream

A yy Ir j� jivrt Appendix B-V#isual Assessment Data
�'' 11 t,yq 77
'&4 'c,�
-, .. i-y. ' a
/ � - _ f -^^wit - {ryi
_ ti `'4`
• -4, +!�'
'_, =�..fi '-— :.vim �v - a
`{
f f Reach 3 -Permanent Photo Station 17
Cross Section 16-Looking Downstream
--.0-_'•-•Ver;-.._ _ ''.1 ' ' ',!,' 4.-II '';',1'1r4*'‘.6:774.4:"71 ' _ , . _ ,
__ �, kS 4 t r
s` � ?ii;-
R�*-•�� `><., .. ,.Fj 4 F ; may,,,-- -
W -tiff ,;:.---4-
, 4 A,_ `!�'y - - -
_„ -.-
�Y- - - _
f t-- -
Reach 4 -Permanent Photo Station 18
Cross Section 17-Looking Downstream

[� Appendix B—Visual Assessment Data
091,1i
$a 1
, '..,t,„,Hks.,,: _.-".:7'1„,',1,-0..-,, •Pr.,-..op.. -,:t.'i..,:-.T.-,,..,.c.„':'.. •-.2.-'0.f-,,-,,,t, -:4T-Oilis4. -.._•..,_
tV- j` t y9.1Xi ' r :° '0
t,
�'yC4 S 1s"mc`3p ,�r wP . _,..4 h. 4 't :t.
I >
�t -suers, Rs.=a 4. :, . ��' • q• �
w r �:
y`ili.t et 3 4. i .
a F 7 of 7.:— _ _ II
i , ,w' G, `` y rg ;- , r jai'
�-ri '4 , , x ' •mac •� , _
r >w, cam"•• �'
04u/ r �j � * .�._ i ='ham n
Reach 4 —Permanent Photo Station 19
Cross Section 18 —Looking Downstream
r �f r
•
SF 1. w -le - { :d fir+ r i f a
a
n'1
T .
•
'4. ��r 't�T s� �`� r +'
S,
yam.. . x ./� :;2. r !
/
r(^ p r
v. _,,,,, ... .. T.,..: _of", ,4_,,, , ,,N , . - _•_ • „.• - _,, ,,..,,,,,,,_ „40 ,..4 . 4 #ii?.•.,../.
elf}. SFr. 'P•. _ -. ,J S • rr_ r1 :i',• �, -.,
'f' ' .-.`_'. !!,-...40*.'r.t,.....--::
Reach 4 —Permanent Photo Station 20
Bottom of Project—Looking Upstream

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7.MY5 Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Wetland/Stream Vegetation Totals
(per acre)
Average
Planted Volunteer Total Success Planted
Plot# Criteria
Stems/Acre Stems/Acre Stems/Acre Stem Height
Met?
(ft)
1 567 2428 2995 Yes 26.3
2 931 121 1052 Yes 11.1
3 567 324 1174 Yes 17.9
4 486 40 526 Yes 12.4
5 526 567 1093 Yes 14.8
6 567 121 688 Yes 18
7 364 121 486 Yes 16.5
8 486 40 526 Yes 10.1
9 647 121 769 Yes 12.9
10 728 81 809 Yes 17.9
Project Avg 587 397 1012 Yes 15.7

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
Table 8. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table S:C:VS Vegetation Plot'\ta tad ma
601 East Stream and Wetland Re.toration Sue
Report Prepared B. _Ryan MIedric
Date Prepared 10/21/201915:14
�database mute RES-MYS_2O19-5O/Eastmdb
C:\users\rmedric\Dropbox(RES)\a2RES Projects\North
Carol l na\6D1 EastlMonitor!ng\ivionitonng
database location Data\MY5 2419\Vegetatlon Data
computer ua*ne D4VOKGHZ
61e size 4853350.2
DE SCRIPT TON OF WORI:ZSHEETSLti THIS DOCU1iE\T
Description of database file,the report worksheets, and a
Me tad at, summary of project(s)and protect Cats.
Each project is listed with Its PLANTED stems per acre.for each
Prod_ pinnteci year. This excludes Dye stakes.
Each project is-Hated with Its TOTAL stems per acre.for each year. '
This includes live stakes. all planted stems.and all
Proj. total.tent, natural/volunteer sterns.
Jstof pion surveyed with location and summary data(live stems. '
Plots dead stems. missing. etc.).
Vigor =requency distribution of vigor classes for stems for all plots.
Vigor by S)p Frequencydlstribution of vigor classes listed byspecies.
ustof most frequent damage classes with numberof occurrences
Damage and percent of total stems impacted by each.
Damage by Spp Damage values tallied by type for each species.
Damage by Plot Damage values tallied by type for each plot.
A matrix of the count of PLANTED living stems of each species for
Planted Stems by Plot And Spp each plot;deaf and missing stems are excluded.
A matrix of the count of total I Iving stems of each species(planted
and natural volunteers combined) for each plot; dead and missing
ALL Stems by Plot and spp stems are excluded.
PROJECT SUMMARY _
Project Code 95756
project Ntute c.:=East
Description
River Basin Yadkin-Pee Dee
length($)
stream-to-edge n Kith(ft)
areft(Se;m)
Required Plots (calculated)
Sampled Plots 10

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9. Total Planted Stem Counts
EEP Project Code 1. Project Name:601 East
Current Plot Data(MY5 2021)
001-01-0001 001-01-0002 001-01-0003 001-01-0004 001-01-0005 001-01-0006 001-01-0007 001-01-0008 001-01-0009 001-01-0010
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
Acer negundo boxelder Tree 50 1
Asimina triloba pawpaw Tree
Betula nigra river birch Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 4 4 4 1 1 1 5 5 5 1 1 1 2 2 2 6 6 6
Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree 2 1
Celtis occidentalis common hackberry Tree
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Cercis canadensis var.canadensis eastern redbud Tree
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 5 3 3 3 2 2 16 4 4 6 3 3 3 5 5 5 8 8 8 2 2 2
Gleditsia triacanthos honeylocust Tree 1
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Tree 5 1 3 2
Liriodendron tulipifera var.tulipifera Tulip-tree,Yellow Poplar,Whitewood Tree 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 4 4
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree 1 1 1
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree 2
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 1 1
Platanus occidentalis var.occidentalis Sycamore,Plane-tree Tree 8 8 8 14 14 14 10 10 10 4 4 4 5 5 5 2 2 2 3 3 3 1 1 1 8 8 8
Populus deltoides var.deltoides eastern cottonwood 1 1
Quercus oak Tree
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 4 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
Quercus nigra water oak Tree
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree
Quercus stellata post oak Tree
Quercus velutina black oak Tree
Rhus copallinum flameleaf sumac shrub 1
Rhus copallinum var.copallinum flameleaf sumac shrub
Salix nigra black willow Tree 6 6 1 1 3
Ulmus alata winged elm Tree
Ulmus americana American elm Tree 3
Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree
Stem count 14 14 74 23 23 26 14 21 29 12 12 13 13 13 27 14 14 17 9 9 12 12 12 13 16 16 19 18 18 20
size(ares) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
size(ACRES) 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
Species count 5 5 8 6 6 9 4 6 10 4 4 5 6 6 6 5 5 6 6 6 7 5 5 6 4 4 5 6 6 7
—
Stems per ACRE 567 567 2995 931 1052 567 850 1174 486 486 526 526 526 1093 567 567 688 364 364 486 486 486 526 647 647 769 728 728 809

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
Annual Means
MY7(2021) MY5(2019) MY3(2017) MY2(2016) MY1(2015) MVO(2015)
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
Acer negundo boxelder Tree 51 16 26 33
Asimina triloba pawpaw Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2
Betula nigra river birch Tree 22 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 26 33 33 33 14 14 14 24 24 24
Celtis laevigata sugarberry Tree 3 2
Celtis occidentalis common hackberry Tree 6
Cephalanthus occidentalis common buttonbush Shrub 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 4 6 6 6
Cercis canadensis var.canadensis eastern redbud Tree 2
Fraxinus pennsylvanica green ash Tree 27 27 48 28 28 39 29 29 29 27 27 29 3 3 3 3 3 3
Gleditsia triacanthos honeylocust Tree 1
Liquidambar styraciflua sweetgum Tree 11 15 20 19
Liriodendron tulipifera var.tulipifera Tulip-tree,Yellow Poplar,Whitewood Tree 8 8 8 8 8 8 12 12 14 20 20 22 16 16 16 30 30 30
Nyssa sylvatica blackgum Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 18 18 18
Pinus taeda loblolly pine Tree 2 4
Platanus occidentalis American sycamore Tree 2 2
Platanus occidentalis var.occidentalis Sycamore,Plane-tree Tree 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 55 59 59 59 59 47 47 47 58 58 58
Populus deltoides var.deltoides eastern cottonwood 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 3 3 1 8 8
Quercus oak Tree 9 9 9 12 12 12
Quercus lyrata overcup oak Tree 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Quercus michauxii swamp chestnut oak Tree 12 12 12 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 10 10 10 20 20 20
Quercus nigra water oak Tree 2 2 2 1 1 1
Quercus phellos willow oak Tree 12 12 13 13 13 13 10 10 10 8 8 8 5 5 5 26 26 26
Quercus rubra northern red oak Tree 1 1 1
Quercus stellata post oak Tree 1 1 1
Quercus velutina black oak Tree 1 1 1 2 2 2
Rhus copallinum flameleaf sumac shrub 1 7
Rhus copallinum var.copallinum flameleaf sumac shrub 12 11
Salix nigra black willow Tree 1 7 9 1 7 8 1 7 10 1 6 16 5 5
Ulmus alata winged elm Tree 1
Ulmus americana American elm Tree 3 2
Ulmus rubra slippery elm Tree 2
Stem count 145 152 250 150 157 216 157 164 243 178 184 263 116 123 123 200 207 207
size(ares) 10 10 10 10 10 10
size(ACRES) 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25
Species count 10 11 19 10 11 18 11 11 17 15 15 19 13 14 14 11 11 11
1 Stems per ACRE 587 615 1012 607 635 874 635 664 983 720 745 1064 469 498 498 800 828 828

Appendix C-Vegetation Plot Data
Figure 5. Vegetation Plot Photos MY7.
,yfiy44 - - ,..10, ur.--_,,,„ ,., -1, .,i,sff,-41'r'1157-17 "IX',3 14.•, i
—• •,-. -L-••- ,,,,ik •• . 4 ,.. 0 _ .t ',: -.let. :: . ,,,,,...-te t,„„:"..',.::-.:,:1,,..id,,,-.1 47:;4.,9.,....,:. ... ..,
..1 I_ iT y c
r:. „c t r f '4'
r'��
k
_.#•l mow{ �. ��.. -
aT .. .
Syr r1 a•'a� S. t,, ..4
'
/? .S.:. .1. _ y.
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 1 (10/14/2021)
s/Pr/ - ---4 . . • 't.L.ii* ,, ' d , 7. it 4. ., + G jo A.
�` I ,..„,.) .ems i �1 �, .
l k �,..4 Pk' ,:
4
... , 3 -
_ SST ! sAw i i _Y ps '-
ti
,elil--..,..i.,... _.
X� .7f f y� ,10 t x-.H:1: qx� is y 1Y r am -'fin
F•t., .-7-.'.r6.4.: ', ,-' ...x• -,444: . ...'-',44! '''''''-!.' , \\- tii.:--r-t-t/..":.' 1 ,....:,,, •:44411Pw,f4.-.1 W
tit
i,... .,.._ _ ,, ,
"� k U i HP 'k'� \a-,V.... trry 1 Tx
p yip.,. -
_� \ -ice. s-; r
....4,
�IS'y l
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 2 (10/14/2021)

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
{111*
t � � ,der 4 r
a` ` e ,.l ten '
{ -°'
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 3 (10/14/2021)
4
. .....,, ..-._
a i q�I, . 1 � :
., ,
1 i l• t'� ti +1 i p 1•
V { ` .,� yd5°L.y��y-�y�y• �%4. _ a' -yj� �'
E 4 + lY ,• .7 E c-r•0 -.3' Z .�� yes
Ilk
--,:..-0,,--7-4,=N ,...,:, i'vy.,4- .4,,s,_-.--z-,„ ,,...k.c...-41, .-6--,,al,-.3 _, -. -- , .4,- vx-rilig -ti-4,:....,,,,,,1
lig -----,tzetkik -.-mk.--:`'.z,...:;--4,-*4,4-1,-,, l'-','' '4,--77""-ici--- - i.--110-1—Q,a '1_.1 .-''''-._
17
R + f � r cx t 9
<j a a.U --f' }'emu . ,F ".Y\+kt. f_. , i �1 'rat ' "�I
4 4i�q �,-i - ;'"t .i 1 _ •_ ai rs` _
• S• p,
g � s 9� l a r"C�y � 5.r" a �
�L� _ � � '. 4 A �y eye
/ �'
l .,,,,<1/4
g r
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 4 (10/14/2021)

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
; �f , ..a 1'.' � „ a0 rt
•
6>�
.-
•
'`• c ' ,
t ,l .�•
Pam'' j� J° �.� .
•
iiikt-.*;:i.,%-r.. '4 ...-. ..., ;-‘. • '..---- ,;-:-....,,,- 0-440.J''-.1' ..A.I'f.;,-•-.•
s ° S
.
r d> q:
sr
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 5 (10/14/2021)
y
�y q, ` f r( A I Y 1, ~
ate' ` •IM1 }!! , �I. j ,-/./ k
•
D T � .- - ' .,p
aeN ee� Y *.R J l Z . 2 I '
,11
"^V ��,,,f.. Y-tf�% _ p
, � , �,�a '' 9 p t_ee � - z� .. ; �i , S y
.
r •
r' I s0. , • Tr 1
J
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 6 (10/14/2021)

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
VAI
Aw
lAkV
J.
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 7 (|0/|4/202|)
Per
Vegetation Monitoring Plot (10/14/2021)

Appendix C—Vegetation Plot Data
�„' 3ra,-
y I� r
Irl'IP
ice' t y ..ttte5 45-,,,"• - Y.. '/!. _ - !I� ,5-. :.
- (. y.F '�:�Y y}Fu 'i.,Yh,{ .. ~ tfi L. �M4 ,_ gra0.a
t,... .:,:,.„‘._.
- . "-,..-',7,!.4V- -"-4 •`5".rt.,..-Itie';:." .; e _
__.,_,__.,, ,,. . ...,....,,:„.„..„,,,.,.„.,,,,,.., ,„:„., ,.., . .,..., . .. , . ,
it ! -'*y! , , ' -.;itiP .,..
' ' i . ' . - ' ' '
4,. ... : ;,'',-,.'•!',. , it- -- %
•
!
Vegetation Monitoring Plot 9 (10/14/2021)
' . . is : ,, eI,
./ . T. �54 ^t 4--i 1 4.i
s� � 411
',<I7-,*•:Akt,;-;-- • '.• •'' 'AA,7.,,,..-- ," ,i,. , . i'' '',V" -,,:::-'".., `.-7::.,‘'':-1---'' "?.:',4 .4
ems _ :.-. r �Fn r,s. uyL a h ?-:t1i' T .7r - fi- .-„S„# -�, , f.- . '> ,"` 2'' Y- . �
..,..„.„..„,. ,.. . ,„_ __ --,v; ,:;-;:.*,*,- - .'".. 4 - '. l' '---'.,L'_ -.--,
� `,'�' y= i nn k 15 � 4 Y�
�^`R • M� `
;T r at a ! ' I ' h
,"4-:40.:''.,''_ -+5,0,,,Nk',1?1 , -i, -,,',:', , '. ' ' -,
,wa F .• !...a'�. 4n9:‘449,
� - ate—V'egetation
Monitoring Plot 10 (10/14/2021)

601 East(95756)
Stems Per Plot Across All Years
MY7-2021 MY5-2019 MY3-2017 MY2-2016 MY1-2015 MVO-2015
Plot Planted Total Stems Total Planted Total Stems Total Planted Total Stems Total Planted Total Stems Total Planted Total Stems Total Planted Total Stems Total
Stems Stems/Ac Stems Stems/Ac Stems Stems/Ac Stems Stems/Ac Stems Stems/Ac Stems Stems/Ac
1 14 74 2995 15 31 1255 15 50 2023 21 55 2226 12 12 486 20 20 809
2 23 26 1052 24 32 1295 25 32 1295 24 37 1497 21 21 850 22 22 890
3 14 29 1174 14 33 1335 13 31 1255 15 31 1255 14 21 850 19 26 1052
4 12 13 526 13 15 607 15 17 688 16 16 647 9 9 364 19 19 769
5 13 27 1093 13 19 769 14 14 567 19 19 769 9 9 364 19 19 769
6 14 17 688 14 19 769 14 14 567 13 18 728 7 7 283 21 21 850
7 9 12 486 9 12 486 10 10 405 7 8 324 11 11 445 23 23 931
8 12 13 526 13 14 567 13 14 567 18 18 728 S 8 324 18 18 728
9 16 19 769 17 21 850 17 21 850 20 21 850 9 9 364 16 16 648
10 18 20 809 18 20 809 21 24 971 25 27 1093 16 16 647 23 23 931

Appendix D
Stream Geomorphology Data

a.. I
"lot •IC-",/.'1‘; '41%
, dap ,,, x, i t` . _ • _
4.' 1 ma "`` [_1. : . a.. . '','" ir.• - ---
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 1 -Pool
546
545 ---- -- -
-- a
544 \ i
w
543
542
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 ---Approx.Bankfull ---LowTOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 13.6 15.1 15.1 14.7 - N/A - -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 - N/A - -
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.1 - 1.1 - 1.5
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 14.1 13.7 14.3 13.4 - 3.7 - 5.2
Width/Depth Ratio 13.2 16.6 15.9 16.2 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratio' 10.3 3.0 3.0 N/A - N/A - -
Bank Height Ratio' 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - -
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

likt
��5� r eif.. .;',',.;
i -{` •-4 �1'i'i [1C
a ,1 t Y 6; 6 S "0 4 6r "•
fr sr ,4 < + 's •'i--A l 4 ,1icis'
fyTr
4 1! _ C -7 r tom'It. •44. .
s s.tia +mow .3 Si. _ y - `"�-- ]• ,y ' " �? r � 0�."i
q f ,� 4. y i •
+ y_ e ' r . r ': � . tea:
';"_..e-,--. .,' ,c- -,.--- ,,,ietiei r,i,- -44.1,q. k,:s'll' ,141 46,7.-, . ' --_. --0,-•--•V->: - ..., - ,.,,T..r(,. • ...• :•-• -
.• „- ,..,,,,.., _ . . ., ...„.„ . „ .
fi
ir:- "'KL. ' :,f \ II ' .. Yf r i!f '71. 1 9 p. '.`I� , r - -Fi_f -.,--,\
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 2-Riffle
543
542
42
.° 541
%
w
540
539 , ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB ---Floodprone Area
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 15.1 14.7 15.2 15.2 - 5.6 - 4.9
Floodprone Width(ft)1 77.0 77.0 77.0 77.0 - >19.5 - >19.5
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.6 - --- - N/A
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 - 0.9 - 0.6
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.8 - 3.4 - 1.7
Width/Depth Ratio 25.3 27.0 28.9 26.2 - --- - N/A
Entrenchment Ratios 9.3 5.2 5.1 5.1 - >3.5 - >3.9
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

I - -1.,_ ,..pti, ,1,- ,„ .r,....40 1- i _
- j
S f' a ti `� :, T
el f'V' - g�1 .,_
41s''sr ,:* l _•; !0.t ` ! . -a^ --e .
_
+� .... d -. 1_
VY 4l i -I� /- !�~ � .!T �` -fib
f ,,'lf{l y.. _..fie'• fp, _ 1' +,_ --. _ ‹t _. w ' ^
,F •,('< ;y � •
,'� "`may ti r,
.y, AEI",' r,.. _l .
+..d[F% :: y'f: _--4. - ""finttz..- ' •:--
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 3-Pool
540
539
° 538 _ `� `� _
> - - - - -
w
\\
537
\\ i
536 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 -MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 9.4 9.5 9.3 9.2 - N/A - N/A
Floodprone Width(ft)1 154.0 154.0 154.0 154.0 - N/A - N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 - --- - N/A
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.8 - 1.1 - 1.5
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 8.7 8.5 8.8 8.5 - 3.3 - 7.1
Width/Depth Ratio 10.2 10.7 9.8 9.9 - --- - N/A
Entrenchment Ratios 14.9 14.6 16.6 N/A - N/A - N/A
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - N/A
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Jam:' - 4 - s , e ' -
.c •/7ram.2 '_' ?•. - '!,
,...0....(4.-_•.6,-.-1_'1 ,....,it.,-=:
t * - , - r 1. 7 . ' N. )W >, ! .
?,. a\ !!.' " 4 ; , 2 ram. ' : f . v .._-.1-J . 4
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 4-Riffle
536
535
i :::
532 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 -MY5
MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 8.8 9.1 9.4 9.2 - 12.9 - 6.5
Floodprone Width(ft)1 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 - >22.2 - >22.2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 - --- - N/A
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.0 - 0.7 - 0.9
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 4.5 4.8 5.8 5.1 - 2.6 - 2.8
Width/Depth Ratio 17.5 17.1 15.3 16.7 - --- - N/A
Entrenchment Ratios 15.9 8.3 8.0 8.2 - 1.7 - >3.4
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

'> ''1 f' - " f ' '� sus" �k • '_;
i F f -".-SIT �- ', ram, •x• 1
rf
, • t• 4/0--" -..;. ...T,A,---..--- -P.-, ''' - 'Ttlii.,...09.;a-
a
s yr
� w .~ i� , , ;•,- _, . • __
,.-.5 - - --- tr
_ ifi• All,
4
.d A, ' 1 P. i - -_
• ter . _.. _ a
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 5-Pool
532
531 _
° 530
75
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
w
529 ® /i/
V
528 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 12.9 12.1 12.0 13.2 - N/A - N/A
Floodprone Width(ft)1 61.0 61.0 61.0 61.0 - N/A - N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 - --- - N/A
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.9 - 1.1 - 1.1
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 12.8 11.0 11.2 12.8 - 4.2 - 4.4
Width/Depth Ratio 13.0 13.2 12.9 13.6 - --- - N/A
Entrenchment Ratios 17.4 5.1 5.1 N/A - N/A - N/A
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - N/A
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

V. arc_ .,;�)$"?-,,.Y - 4., ,:. ' s-. ' - .if,- "� , v
■dx - - + . v a
' ' ti • ■ 5.1 'i.. -'- l am.
iii:
Upstream Downstream
3X Vertical Exaggeration 601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 6-Riffle
530
529
w
527
526 , ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 -MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 11.3 11.3 11.3 11.1 - 10.5 - 10.0
Floodprone Width(ft)1 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 - >22.8 - >22.7
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 - --- - N/A
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 - 1.3 - 1.3
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 6.6 6.6 7.2 6.9 - 5.6 - 5.6
Width/Depth Ratio 19.3 19.5 17.9 17.9 - --- - N/A
Entrenchment Ratios 9.7 7.1 7.1 7.2 - >2.2 - >2.3
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

_ ,f
r
Y - 1 -7 •
•
%,.. __-)k i.,V,I.-:_ ..-4,-__- ,R.i;L.:r.-.".!' ".
t r _ ., ___ . .
i \ Sr•.'
.,.. -..".,,
'- _
fit• tit,
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 7-Pool
526.5
525.5 -401.1
-
If
° 524.5
w
523.5 /Ij
522.5 I ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 -MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 10.3 11.4 10.3 10.8 - N/A - -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 63.0 63.0 63.0 63.0 - N/A - -
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 2.0 2.0 2.1 1.9 - 1.3 - 1.3
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 12.3 11.2 10.4 9.9 - 4.7 - 4.7
Width/Depth Ratio 8.6 11.5 10.3 11.8 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 10.7 5.5 6.1 N/A - N/A - -
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - -
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

; a I '1,L .,d i. . •'Lt _ zr .12-.! - i'.'.:._:-14.,....ti,- ; 1 r,:..,;�1• .;.':. 10f ,q- 7
t.
ez i _ _ t may, .
u. y MIL..
,�C. 4: rrc r r
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 1 -Cross Section 8-Riffle
525
524
.t 523 =_
w - -oil
- - - - - - - - 4 •
522 /
521 , ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 -MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 10.1 8.8 9.2 9.0 - 9.5 - 9.1
Floodprone Width(ft)1 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 - >21.6 - >21.6
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 - --- - N/A
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - 0.8 - 0.8
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 6.2 5.6 5.8 5.9 - 4.6 - 4.2
Width/Depth Ratio 16.6 13.9 14.7 13.7 - --- - N/A
Entrenchment Ratios 10.9 4.5 4.3 4.5 - >2.3 - >2.4
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

1 '7r111/ '`_y. -
1 ` .. � •i`` ..r-a - C•
eti, - :..r;
.,` =�:�
,.. .,..1..::
441W
.11
t),,,,i. j,.
601 East-Reach 2-Cross Section 9-Riffle
519.5 ---
518.5
w
° 517.5 /
w
� �-
516.5 /�
515.5 , ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 4 .MY3 -MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 24.2 24.3 24.4 23.0 - 25.4 - 9.8
Floodprone Width(ft)1 62.0 62.0 62.0 62.0 - >29.5 - >29.6
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 - 0.8 - 1.0
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 17.7 16.5 17.5 15.2 - 3.8 - 5.1
Width/Depth Ratio 33.1 35.6 34.2 34.8 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 5.8 2.6 2.5 2.7 - >1.2 - >3.0
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

tirt►" -'� 1
ham:, .
illrrillillir,
'
F.}
+Y by
__ '. .Yo'S. i . .4-,:•' . .-f x - •••
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 2-Cross Section 10-Pool
517.5
516.5
_\ !a
1= \�° 515.5
Lu
m N,,11 1 IF.,‘ ,A 9
514.5
513.5 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 - MY5 -MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 19.2 19.7 19.7 20.8 - N/A - N/A
Floodprone Width(ft)1 132.0 132.0 132.0 132.0 - N/A - N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.0 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.0 - 1.9 - 2.3
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 25.3 24.4 23.1 20.1 - 12.1 - 20.7
Width/Depth Ratio 14.6 16.0 16.8 21.5 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 11.7 6.7 6.7 N/A - N/A - N/A
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - N/A
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

f
rat 4-:.e• val42..swag- tI:-t+,,f.::-.
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 2-Cross Section 11 -Riffle
517 ----
516 V11116...
w
`\ _.f/
.g 515 -
w \`
514 I/
_Or
513 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 -MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 15.5 15.8 14.1 17.3 - 16.3 - 9.0
Floodprone Width(ft)1 73.0 73.0 73.0 73.0 - >25.2 - >25.3
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 - - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.3 - 1.5 - 1.7
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 9.4 8.6 8.3 9.8 - 6.7 - 7.5
Width/Depth Ratio 25.5 28.9 23.8 30.5 - - -
Entrenchment Ratios 7.1 4.6 5.2 4.2 - >1.5 - >2.8
Bank Height Ratios 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

it y m''' -�:,5 F -,• .i i. ea „.ti: ;v?'•,. 5s ,-p-_ -!• .
_ �� �' i�r� i rr�fS. . ��- I s
'. f F - d0r ii a 7+� ` 4 7 ;, i;�e ..
•
.- - -..0: -a 2. ' � y-� - lam; `
y .3 S wf E. �. .''w T - Ir 7 - n _ Y-
die
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 2-Cross Section 12-Pool
514.5 -
��
513.5 -� __ _ ���
.° 512.5 -`
,
2
w
511.5 /
,4/q/
510.5 , ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5 -MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 20.0 20.6 20.6 20.7 - N/A - -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 168.0 168.0 168.0 168.0 - N/A - -
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.2 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 2.5 2.4 2.6 2.8 - 1.9 - 2.8
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 21.3 21.4 23.1 24.5 - 9.4 - 18.3
Width/Depth Ratio 18.8 19.9 18.4 17.4 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 7.0 8.1 8.2 N/A - N/A - -
Bank Height Ratios 0.9 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - -
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

15
r.
-. $�' ...
Upstream Downstream
601 East -Reach 3-Cross Section 13-Riffle
500
499
° 498 - - -
497
/
P..°'''' F. ''''',/.-
496 i ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 -MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 15.9 16.9 17.5 17.1 - 16.0 - 11.9
Floodprone Width(ft)1 75.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 - >23.3 - >23.3
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 - 1.2 - 1.6
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 12.8 13.6 12.2 12.6 - 5.6 - 8.8
Width/Depth Ratio 19.6 21.0 25.0 23.1 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 8.8 4.4 4.3 4.4 - >1.5 - >2.0
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Li'
..erQ, - r1 { jay ..1-,_ - r • +y. ntt r .. r•;ir, � '
-41 ec.. «` - r � f
. k*_:
-- F '-- - _ _' : mac `
.e
k .,.. . . . ,
. . : _
z .
. . ..„ ,. . ... . _ .
jr
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 3-Cross Section 14-Pool
496.5
495.5 = - - - - - - - 1111��
494.5
mi/j
2 493.5
w � i
492.5 k�,
491.5 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 4 .MY3 4 .MY5 4 .MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MYO MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 17.5 18.4 17.9 18.2 - N/A - -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 350.0 350.0 350.0 350.0 - N/A - -
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 3.4 3.1 3.4 3.5 - 2.1 - 3.4
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 28.2 28.0 28.7 29.7 - 11.5 - 25.8
Width/Depth Ratio 11.0 12.0 11.2 11.2 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 12.8 19.1 19.6 N/A - N/A - -
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - -
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

hh �[>S 1 S Ty` '.41;,4y
.1 , 4• .•f •pay,. .-•, ,y.r.a
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 3-Cross Section 15-Pool
495.5
494.5 - - _
r 493.5
"
2 N it
492.5
3
491.5 i
490.5 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 . - -MY3 MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)' 19.6 21.1 20.5 19.4 - N/A - -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 350.0 350.0 350.0 350.0 - N/A - -
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.7 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3 - 3.1 - 2.5
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 36.1 34.4 31.5 32.4 - 29.0 - 18.2
Width/Depth Ratio 10.6 13.0 13.3 11.6 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 5.6 16.6 17.1 N/A - N/A - -
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A - N/A - -
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

wi \ :. �y ! A---Ti ::.:
''.. ,t
A., , . •
■..+s: '' •,sue -:+- `
W.
t.•y'
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 3-Cross Section 16-Riffle
495.5
494.5
1493.5
75
Lu
492.5
491.5 ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 -MY5
MY7 - - •Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MYS MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 17.7 17.5 18.3 16.7 - 17.9 - 7.0
Floodprone Width(ft)1 150.0 150.0 150.0 150.0 - >20.4 - >20.4
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.6 - 0.9 - 0.8
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 14.1 12.9 14.8 14.0 - 3.7 - 3.8
Width/Depth Ratio 22.4 23.8 22.5 19.8 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 7.9 8.5 8.2 9.0 - >1.1 - >2.9
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 - <1 - <1
Note:Starting in MYS,the parameters denoted with'were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

'L-- %.,‘.ii,..-x;,, •-•, ' )151•• ,‘:.W.91't•.:,_ ,
--',-' '&.;-,..- ''-W,'--;''', , rt.„,,-,- ... .,..„-... .,--. -_ .,,- ..-„,,,J ,..t.i.....t. - -
- .. _ k_. _
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 4-Cross Section 17-Pool
493.5
492.5 . -
491.5 \
490.5 /
0
rr r a j •
489.5
w \
488.5 /
487.5
486.5 , ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 4 .MY3 4 .MY5 4 .MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull - - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 16.9 17.2 17.2 18.1 - N/A - -
Floodprone Width(ft)1 42.0 42.0 42.0 42.0 - N/A - -
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.7 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 2.7 2.9 2.9 2.9 - 2.3 - 2.9
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 29.8 29.1 28.7 31.3 - 22.8 - 31.1
Width/Depth Ratio 9.6 10.2 10.3 10.4 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 2.5 2.4 2.4 N/A - N/A - -
Bank Height Ratios 1.2 1.1 1.1 N/A - N/A - -
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Jam
. _
�L� •'J
,, ,W t. L ••S L"::•A f- ' S
/l. _ __ •y.•.4.- 'Si,' 7 -+r -_ ~ ' �! .S•r
- •i- - . .1-. "--'1.•,....--'r. ;*:._':..._ ...:_:::: -_;.,.. _:.... ::_,-44..__:t,'....,4,-7w.7.-.;
S4i�Y
Upstream Downstream
601 East-Reach 4-Cross Section 18-Riffle
494
493
��492
° 491
Aliggell
it
490
489
488 - ,
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45
Distance(ft) 3X Vertical Exaggeration
Baseline MY1 MY2 MY3 MY5
MY7 - - -Approx.Bankfull ---Floodprone Area - -Low TOB
DIMENSIONS SUMMARY MY0 MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankful Width(ft)1 14.9 14.6 14.1 14.6 - 14.3 - 14.6
Floodprone Width(ft)1 30.4 31.0 31.0 31.0 - >32.1 - >32.2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 - --- - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 - 1.7 - 1.9
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 14.7 14.5 14.0 15.0 - 13.7 - 17.8
Width/Depth Ratio 15.2 14.6 14.2 14.3 - --- - -
Entrenchment Ratios 2.1 2.1 2.2 2.1 - >2.2 - >2.2
Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 - 1.0 - 1.1
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with 1 were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull
elevation and the parameters denoted with 2 were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the
2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Appendix D- Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Sumary
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 1(1,393 feet)
Parameter Gauge Regional Curve Pre-Existing Conditions Reference Reach(es)Data Design As-built/Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft) 7 21 60 7.42 9.88 11.61 10 8.82 11.45 10.77 15.13 2.23 8
Floodprone Width(ft) 8 60 101 18.51 26.43 33.59 22 28 35 40.00 74.38 69.00 154.00 35.32 8
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.2 0.5 0.9 0.68 0.79 0.97 0.72 0.50 0.81 0.77 1.20 0.26 8
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.7 1 1.4 1.28 1.78 2.16 1.2 0.87 1.53 1.54 2.07 0.49 8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 8 1 1.4 0.97 1.39 1.82 7.2 4.45 9.27 8.85 14.07 3.48 8
Width/Depth Ratio 1.1 27 47 8.14 12.95 16.82 13.9 8.56 15.45 14.89 25.33 5.40 8
Entrenchment Ratio 0.4 2.4 9.5 2.02 2.4 3.24 2.2 2.8 3.5 3.30 6.90 5.62 16.40 4.19 8
Bank Height Ratio 0.34 2 0.97 1.39 1.82 1 0.93 0.98 1.00 1.00 0.03 8
d50(mm)
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 2.7 24.9 107.3 5.97 11.26 26.78 14 23 90 10.04 22.09 18.54 95.26 14.52 32
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0.0007 1.7 40 0.015 0.031 0.05 0.021 0.036 0.046 0.015 0.034 0.032 0.064 0.012 32
Pool Length(ft) 9.03 16.89 56.86 13.6 20.13 31.74 14 22 29 13.38 24.28 21.23 65.67 11.47 33
Pool Max depth(ft) 1 2.4 3.9 1.4 1.83 2.2 2.2 1.16 2.19 2.17 3.15 0.38 33
Pool Spacing(ft) 15.5 50 128 23.5 36.2 57.4 24 36.7 58 31.42 44.63 40.18 116.51 16.87 32
Pool Volume(ft3)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 10 19.6 25 13 17.33 20 13 18 21 13 18 21
Radius of Curvature(ft) 14.5 84 118 16 33 53 16 32.1 52 16 32.1 52
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 1.7 4.6 11.5 4.35 6.04 8.9 4.3 6.1 8.9 4.3 6.1 8.9
Meander Wavelength(ft) 36 96 240 43 59.67 88 43 61 89 43 61 89
Meander Width Ratio 0.5 0.94 1.7 1.32 1.76 2.03 1.3 1.8 2.1 1.3 1.8 2.1
Substrate,bed and tr
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 45.5% 53.6% 0.0% 26.8% 17.2% 47.9% 8.1% 0.0% 44.3%1 155.7%1 I 0.0%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% 4.1% 27.3% 67.6% 1.0% 0.0% 0.0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/diP/diP(mm) 2.71 6.72 10.56 24.89 38.23
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f
2
Max part size(mm)Mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power(transport capacity)W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area(SM) 0.166 0.144
Impervious cover estimate(%)
Rosgen Classification G4/B4/C4b B4/C4 B4/C4b B4/C4b
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 3.2 3.2
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 24
Valley length(ft) 1,425 378
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 1,479 440 1,438 1,438
Sinuosity(ft) 1.04 1.16 1.17 1.17
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0196 0.017 0.017
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.017 0.017
Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
Proportion over wide(%)
Entenchment Class(ER Range)
Incision Class(BHR Range)
BEHI VL%/L%/M%/H%/VH%/E%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other

Appendix D- Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 2(902 feet)
Parameter Gauge Regional Curve Pre-Existing Conditions Reference Reach(es)Data Design As-built/Baseline
I I I I
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft) 7 19 21 10 12.2 14.3 12 15.50 19.73 19.63 24.18 3.56 4
Floodprone Width(ft) 40 214 60 42 77 11 48 91.5 135 62.00 108.75 102.50 168.00 50.05 4
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.5 1.33 0.5 0.92 1.12 1.34 0.9 0.61 0.93 0.90 1.31 0.32 4
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 0.7 1.9 1 1.2 1.6 2.2 1.5 1.49 2.01 2.02 2.53 0.58 4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 6 21 1 12.2 13 13.4 10.7 9.43 18.42 19.49 25.26 6.75 4
Width/Depth Ratio 6.1 38 27 7.7 11.3 15.6 13.3 14.64 23.00 22.13 33.10 8.07 4
Entrenchment Ratio 2.2 10 2.4 2.9 6.5 8.6 3.6 7.6 10 2.56 5.63 5.79 8.39 2.54 4
Bank Height Ratio 0.9 1.7 0.34 1.1 1.5 1.7 1 0.90 0.96 0.96 1.00 0.05 4
d50(mm)
•
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 10.9 24.9 19.7 4.03 14.18 13.61 14 23 90 12.13 23.38 18.96 50.22 10.70 18
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0.00 1.7 0.04 0.006 0.02 0.05 0.021 0.036 0.046 0.004 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.01 17
Pool Length(ft) 11.1 16.89 525.4 18.51 32.11 58.03 14 22 29 15.06 32.87 29.14 74.26 14.68 17
Pool Max depth(ft) 1.9 2.4 4.2 1.7 2.47 3.1 2.5 1.91 2.87 2.67 4.03 0.59 17
Pool Spacing(ft) 20 50 512 29 48 84 38 57 85 32.94 55.57 47.60 110.28 20.48 17
Pool Volume(ft3)
Pattern _
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 12 32 42 25 40 65 25 40 65 25 40 65
Radius of Curvature(ft) 68 75 77 20 31 65 38 47 58 38 47 58
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 5.2 5.7 5.9 3.2 3.9 4.8 3.2 3.9 4.8 3.2 3.9 4.8
Meander Wavelength(ft) 46 70 97 61 84 97 61 84 97 61 84 97
Meander Width Ratio 0.9 2.4 3.2 2.1 3.3 5.4 2.1 3.3 5.4 2.1 3.3 5.4
Substrate,bed and tr paramete
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 12.6% 87.4% 0.0% 27.2% 3.7% 61.5% 7.6% 0% 39.5% 60.5% 0.0%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% 0.0% 33.7% 66.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/diP/disP(mm) 0.90 4.57 8.92 24.42 47.93
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2
Max part size(mm)Mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power(transport capacity)W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters
-
Drainage Area(SM) 0.212 0.5
Impervious cover estimate(%)
Rosgen Classification C4/E4/DA C4 C4/E4 C4/E4
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 2.1 2.6
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 27
Valley length(ft) 830 378
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 1,479 440 945 945
Sinuosity(ft) 1.01 1.1 1.34 1.34
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0069 0.0069
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0069 0.0069
Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
Proportion over wide(%)
Entenchment Class(ER Range)
Incision Class(BHR Range)
BEHI VL%/L%/M%/H%/VH%/E%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other

Appendix D- Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 10. Baseline Stream Data Summary
601 East Stream RestorationSite-Reach 3(1,018 feet)
Parameter Gauge Regional Curve Pre-Existing Conditions Reference Reach(es)Data Design As-built/Baseline
- ■ I
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft) 65 15.7 29 10 12.2 14.3 17 15.86 17.69 17.66 19.58 1.52 4
Floodprone Width(ft) 150 200 2601.26 42 77 11 150 200 300 75.00 231.25 250.00 350.00 140.50 4
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.5 0.9 2.1 0.92 1.12 1.34 1.18 0.79 1.26 1.21 1.84 0.54 4
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.28 1.7 19.4 1.2 1.6 2.2 2 1.58 2.51 2.52 3.44 1.06 4
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 10.5 14.5 31 12.2 13 13.4 21 12.85 22.79 21.12 36.08 11.26 4
Width/Depth Ratio 12.8 17.5 16.5 7.7 11.3 15.6 14.4 10.62 15.88 15.27 22.36 5.98 4
Entrenchment Ratio 9.6 12.7 4 2.9 6.5 8.6 8.8 11.8 17.6 4.73 12.74 13.17 19.90 7.31 4
Bank Height Ratio 1.3 2.2 1.7 1.1 1.5 1.7 1 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.01 4
d50(mm)
Profile Riffle Length(ft) 0.97 10.58 23.77 4.03 14.18 13.61 15 25 103 10.12 24.10 16.77 110.25 22.07 19
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0 0.2 0.6 0.006 0.02 0.05 0.008 0.018 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.01 17
Pool Length(ft) 7.83 20.87 64.91 18.51 32.11 58.03 25 35 50 27.38 35.18 35.18 49.71 6.68 18
Pool Max depth(ft) 1.8 2.7 3.4 1.7 2.47 3.1 3.4 1.93 2.91 2.98 3.50 0.36 18
Pool Spacing(ft) 8 48 125 29 48 84 39 66 117 41.11 58.55 54.44 137.89 20.86 18
Pool Volume(ft3)
Pattern I _ I I I
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 13 41 58 25 40 65 35 56 92 35 56 92
Radius of Curvature(ft) 22.5 49.7 78 20 31 65 27 43 63 27 43 63
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 1.4 3.2 4.9 3.2 3.9 4.8 1.6 2.5 3.7 1.6 2.5 3.7
Meander Wavelength(ft) 32 57 89 61 84 97 87 119 134 87 119 134
Meander Width Ratio 1.3 2.6 3.7 2.1 3.3 5.4 2.1 3.3 5.4 2.1 3.3 5.4
Substrate,bed and transport parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 38.0% 62.0% 0.0% 27.2% 3.7% 61.5% 7.6% 0.0% 43.0% 57.0% 0.0%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be% 4.0% 51.9% 44.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/diP/disP(mm) 0.8 3.5 5.4 12.8 19.6
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2
Max part size(mm)Mobilized at bankfull
Stream Power(transport capacity)W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters
Drainage Area(SM) 0.52 0.5
Impervious cover estimate(%)
Rosgen Classification C4-G4 E4/C4 C4 C4
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 3.2 3 3
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 55
Valley length(ft)
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 1,064 1,064
Sinuosity(ft) 1.05 1.2 1.2 1.2
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0056 0.0056
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0056 0.0056
Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
Proportion over wide(%)
Entenchment Class(ER Range)
Incision Class(BHR Range)
BEHI VL%/L%/M%/H%/VH%/E%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other

Appendix D- Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 10.Baseline Stream Data Summary
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 4(495 feet)
Parameter Gauge Regional Curve Pre-Existing Conditions Reference Reach(es)Data Design As-built/Baseline
Dimension and Substrate-Riffle LL UL Eq. Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Med Max Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft) 5.2 11.6 20 7.42 9.88 11.61 16 14.93 15.92 15.92 16.91 1.40 2
Floodprone Width(ft) 16 20 25 18.51 26.43 33.59 30 35 40 30.39 36.19 36.19 42.00 8.21 2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.76 0.9 1.1 0.68 0.79 0.97 0.98 0.98 1.37 1.37 1.76 0.55 2
Bankfull Max Depth(ft) 1.2 1.33 1.28 1.78 2.16 1.8 1.49 2.11 2.11 2.72 0.87 2
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2) 12.3 15 16 0.97 1.39 1.82 15.7 14.70 22.25 22.25 29.81 10.68 2
Width/Depth Ratio 7 12.9 18 8.14 12.95 16.82 16.3 9.60 12.38 12.38 15.16 3.93 2
Entrenchment Ratio 1.4 1.7 2.2 2.02 2.4 3.24 1.9 2.2 2.5 2.04 2.26 2.26 2.48 0.32 2
Bank Height Ratio 3.3 3.5 4.2 0.97 1.39 1.82 1 1.00 1.10 1.10 1.20 0.14 2
d50(mm) . i
P of rile � ` -I 1.1.•__M_
Riffle Length(ft) 0.79 10.58 23.7 5.97 11.26 26.78 15 23 103 15.84 20.829 18.18 28.96 4.77639 9
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0 0.02 0.06 0.015 0.031 0.05 0.021 0.036 0.03 0.018 0.0274 0.0298 0.0382 0.00676 9
Pool Length(ft) 7.83 20.7 64.91 13.6 20.13 31.74 14 22 42 30.82 35.01 35.78 38.85 3.12426 9
Pool Max depth(ft) 2 2.5 3.2 1.4 1.83 2.2 2.2 1.997 2.8154 2.753 3.392 0.39095 9
Pool Spacing(ft) 12 29 55 23.5 36.2 57.4 38 59 93 49.77 56.111 54.805 69.26 6.24406 8
3Pool Volume(ft3)
Pattern
Channel Beltwidth(ft) 12 32 82 13 17.33 20 21 28 32 21 28 32
Radius of Curvature(ft) 18 34.9 61 16 33 53 26 52 84 26 52 84
Rc:Bankfull width(ft/ft) 1.6 3 5.3 4.35 6.04 8.9 162 3.25 5.25 162 3.25 5.25
Meander Wavelength(ft) 30 56 113 43 59.67 88 69 97 142 69 97 142
Meander Width Ratio 1.1 2.8 7.2 1.32 1.76 2.03 1.32 1.76 2.03 1.32 1.76 2.03
Substrate,bed and transport parameters
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 19.9% 80.1% 0.0% 26.8% 17.2% 47.9% 8.1% 0.0% 39.1%I 165.6%I I 0.0%
SC%/Sa%/G%/C%/B%/Be%
d16/d35/d50/d84/d95/diP/di'(mm)
Reach Shear Stress(competency)lb/f2
Max part size(mm)Mobilized at bankfull 1111
Stream Power(transport capacity)W/m2
Additional Reach Parameters In = '
Drainage Area(SM) 0.56 0.144
Impervious cover estimate(%)
Rosgen Classification G4 B4/C4 B4 B4
Bankfull Velocity(fps) 4 3.27 3.27
Bankfull Discharge(cfs) 55
Valley length(ft) 378
Channel Thalweg length(ft) 440 465 465
Sinuosity(ft) 1.04 1.16 1.13 1.13
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0114 0.0114
BF slope(ft/ft) 0.0114 0.0114
Bankfull Floodplain Area(acres)
Proportion over wide(%)
Entenchment Class(ER Range)
Incision Class(BHR Range)
BEHI VL%/L%/M%/H%/VH%/E%
Channel Stability or Habitat Metric
Biological or Other

Table lla.Dimensional Morphology Summary
(Dimensional Parameters- Cross Sections)
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 1
Cross-Section 1 Cross-Section 2 Cross-Section 3 Cross-Section 4
Pool Riffle Pool Riffle
Dimension Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 544.82 544.82 544.82 544.82 N/A NEM N/A 540.40 540.40 540.40 540.40 541.09 IEM 541.3 537.87 537.87 537.87 537.87 N/A NEM N/A 533.69 533.69 533.69 533.69 533.58 NEM 533.8
Bankfull Width(ft)1 13.6 15.1 15.1 14.7 N/A N/A 15.1 14.7 15.2 15.2 5.6 4.9 9.4 9.5 9.3 9.2 N/A N/A 8.8 9.1 9.4 9.2 12.9 6.5
Flood.rone Width(ft)1 45.0 >45.0 >45.0 >45.0 N/A N/A 77.0 >77.0 >77.0 >77.0 >19.5 >19.5 154.0 >154.0 >154.0 >154.0 N/A N/A 75.0 >75.0 >75.0 >75.0 >22.2 >22.2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 --- --- 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.6 --- --- 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 --- --- 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 --- ---
Bankfull Max De.th(ft)2 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.1 1.1 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 0.9 0.6 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.1 1.5 0.9 0.9 1.1 1.0 J 0.7 0.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 14.1 13.7 14.3 13.4 3.7 5.2 9.0 8.0 8.0 8.8 3.4 1.7 8.7 8.5 8.8 8.5 3.3 7.1 4.5 4.8 5.8 5.1 I 2.6 2.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 13.2 16.6 15.9 16.2 --- --- 25.3 27.0 28.9 26.2 i --- --- 10.2 10.7 9.8 9.9 --- --- 17.5 17.1 15.3 16.7 ' --- ---
Bankfull EntrenchmentRatiot 10.3 >3.0 >3.0 N/A N/A N/A 9.3 >5.2 >5.1 >5.1 I >3.5 >3.9 14.9 >14.6 >16.6 N/A N/A N/A 15.9 >8.3 >8.0 >8.2 111. 1.7 >3.4
Bankfull Bank Hei!ht Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 I <1 <1 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 IM <1 <1
d50(mm) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A -M N/A N/A 8.3 0.062 0.062 I 0.062 0.062 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A -M N/A N/A 22.0 17.0 28.0 -I 22.0 11
Cross-Section 5 Cross-Section 6 Cross-Section 7 Cross-Section 8
Pool Riffle Pool Riffle
Dimension Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 530.49 530.49 530.49 530.49 N/A N/A 528.11 528.11 528.11 528.11 528.18 528.1 525.02 525.02 525.02 525.02 N/A N/A 522.48 522.48 522.48 522.48 522.33 522.5
Bankfull Width(ft)1 12.9 12.1 12.0 13.2 N/A N/A 11.3 11.3 11.3 11.1 10.5 10.0 10.3 11.4 10.3 10.8 N/A N/A 10.1 8.8 9.2 9.0 9.5 9.1
Flood.rone Width(ft)1 61.0 >61.0 >61.0 >61.0 N/A N/A 80.0 >80.0 >80.0 >80.0 >22.8 >22.7 63.0 >63.0 >63.0 >63.0 N/A N/A 40.0 >40.0 >40.0 >40.0 ii >21.6 >21.6
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 --- --- 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 --- --- 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 --- --- 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 ' --- ---
Bankfull Max De.th(ft)2 2.0 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.1 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 2.0 2.0 2.1 1.9 1.3 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 I 0.8 0.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 12.8 11.0 11.2 12.8 4.2 4.4 6.6 6.6 7.2 6.9 5.6 5.6 12.3 11.2 10.4 9.9 4.7 7.8 6.2 5.6 5.8 5.9 ' 4.6 4.2
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 13.0 13.2 12.9 13.6 --- --- 19.3 19.5 17.9 17.9 --- --- 8.6 11.5 10.3 11.8 --- --- 16.6 13.9 14.7 13.7 I --- ---
Bankfull EntrenchmentRatiot 17.4 >5.1 >5.1 N/A N/A N/A 9.7 >7.1 >7.1 >7.2 >2.2 >2.3 10.7 >5.5 >6.1 N/A N/A N/A 10.9 >4.5 >4.3 >4.5 I >2.3 >2.4
Bankfull Bank Hei.ht Ratios 0.9 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A 0.6 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 <1 <1 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 I <1 <1
d50(mm) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 26.0 2.6 4.0 I 4.300 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.062 0.062 70.0 I 26.0
calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for
adjusting the bankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with z

Table 1la cont'd.Dimensional Morphology Summary
riir (Dimensional Parameters- Cross Sections)
601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 2
Cross-Section 9 Cross-Section 10 Cross-Section 11 Cross-Section 12
Riffle Pool Riffle Pool
Dimension Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY! MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 517.50 517.50 517.50 517.50 MM 517.63 518.48 516.22 516.22 516.22 516.22 N/A N/A 515.16 515.16 515.16 515.16 514.92 MEI 515.24 513.68 513.68 513.68 513.68 N/A EM N/A
Bankfull Width(ft)1 24.2 24.3 24.4 23.0 25.4 9.8 19.2 19.7 19.7 20.8 N/A N/A 15.5 15.8 14.1 17.3 16.3 9 20.0 20.6 20.6 20.7 N/A N/A
Flood.rone Width(ft)1 62.0 >62.0 >62.0 >62.0 >29.5 >29.6 132.0 >132.0 >132.0 >132.0 N/A N/A 73.0 >73.0 >73.0 >73.0 >25.2 >25.3 168.0 >168.0 >168.0 >168.0 N/A N/A
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 --- --- 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.0 --- --- 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 --- --- 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.2 --- ---
Bankfull Max De.th(ft)2 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.8 1 2.5 2.6 2.6 2.0 1.9 2.3 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.7 2.5 2.4 2.6 2.8 1.9 2.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 17.7 16.5 17.5 15.2 3.8 5.1 25.3 24.4 23.1 20.1 12.1 20.7 9.4 8.6 8.3 9.8 6.7 7.5 21.3 21.4 23.1 24.5 • 9.4 18.3
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 33.1 35.6 34.2 34.8 --- --- 14.6 16.0 16.8 21.5 --- --- 25.5 28.9 23.8 30.5 --- --- 18.8 19.9 18.4 17.4 ---
Bankfull EntrenchmentRatiot 5.8 >2.6 >2.5 >2.7 >1.2 EV >3.0 11.7 >6.7 >6.7 N/A N/A N/A 7.1 >4.6 >5.2 >4.2 >1.5 >2.8 7.0 >8.1 >8.2 N/A I N/A - N/A
Bankfull Bank Hei!ht Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 <1 <1 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 <1 <1 0.9 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A N/A
d50(mm) N/A 0.062 5.8 2.3 N/A 12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.062 0.062 17 16.0 7.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A - N/A N/A
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with'were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with z were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

-.
Table h la cont'd.Dimensional Morphology Summary
(Dimensional Parameters- Cross Sections)
- 601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 3
A M__ _
Cross-Section 13 Cross-Section 14 Cross-Section 15 Cross-Section 16
Riffle Pool Pool Riffle
Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 497.88 497.88 497.88 497.88 - 497.88 498.07 495.50 495.50 495.50 495.50 - N/A N/A 494.42 494.42 494.42 494.42 - N/A N/A 493.73 493.73 493.73 493.73 - 493.73 1111111 494.38
Bankfull Width(ft)1 15.9 16.9 17.5 17.1 16 11.9 17.6 18.4 17.9 18.2 N/A N/A 19.6 21.1 20.5 19.4 N/A N/A 17.7 17.5 18.3 16.7 17.9 7
Floodprone Width(ft)1 75.0 >75.0 >75.0 >75.0 >23.3 >23.3 350.0 >350.0 >350.0 >350 N/A N/A 350.0 >350.0 >350.0 >350.0 N/A N/A 150.0 >150.0 150.0 >150.0 >20.4 >20.4
no
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 --- --- 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 --- --- 1.8 1.6 1.5 1.7 --- --- 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 --- ---
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.2 1.6 3.4 3.1 3.4 3.5 2.1 3.4 3.4 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.1 2.5 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.6 0.9 0.8
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 12.8 13.6 12.2 12.6 5.6 8.8 28.2 28.0 28.7 29.7 11.5 25.8 36.1 34.4 31.5 32.4 - 29 18.2 14.1 12.9 14.8 14.0 3.7 3.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 19.6 21.0 25.0 23.1 --- --- 11.0 12.0 11.2 11.2 --- --- 10.6 13.0 13.3 11.6 --- --- 22.4 23.8 22.5 19.8 --- ---
Bankfull EntrenchmentRatiot 8.8 >4.4 >4.3 >4.4 >1.5 >2.0 12.8 >19.1 >19.6 N/A N/A N/A 5.6 >16.6 >17.1 N/A N/A N/A 7.9 >8.5 >8.2 >9.0 >1.1 >2.9
Bankfull Bank Height Ratios 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 <1 <1 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A n/a 1.0 1.0 1.0 N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 <1 <1
d50(mm) N/A 20 9.1 85.0 10.0 5.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A . N/A li N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A IN N/A N/A 31.0 3.3 62.0 9.4 22
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with'were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with z were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Table lla cont'd. Dimensional Morphology Summary
(Dimensional Parameters- Cross Sections)
i 601 East Stream Restoration Site-Reach 4 IIIII
Cross-Section 17 Cross-Section 18
Pool Riffle
Dimension Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7 Base MY1 MY2 MY3 MY4 MY5 MY6 MY7
Bankfull Elevation(ft)-Based on AB-XSA1 489.11 489.11 489.11 489.11 • N/A Milli. N/A 490.01 490.01 490.01 490.01 489.99 490.04
Bankfull Width(ft)1 16.9 17.2 17.2 18.1 N/A N/A 14.9 14.6 14.1 14.6 14.3 14.6
Floodprone Width(ft)1 42.0 >42.0 >42.0 >42.0 N/A N/A 30.4 >31.0 >31.0 >31.0 >32.1 >32.2
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.7 --- --- 1.0 1.0 1.0 1 --- ---
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 2.7 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.3 2.9 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.9
Bankfull Cross Sectional Area(ft2)2 29.8 29.1 28.7 31.3 22.8 31.1 14.7 14.5 14.0 15 13.7 17.8
Bankfull Width/Depth Ratio 9.6 10.2 10.3 10.4 --- --- 15.2 14.6 14.2 14.3 --- ---
Bankfull EntrenchmentRatiot 2.5 >2.4 >2.4 N/A N/A N/A 2.0 >2.1 >2.2 >2.1 >2.2 >2.2
Bankfull Bank Height Ratios 1.2 1.1 1.1 N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.1
d50(mm) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 47 4.2 12.0 17.0 13
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with'were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the bankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with z were calculated using the current years low top of bank as the bankfull
elevation.These changes reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Table 11b. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
601 East-Reach 1(1393 feet)XS 2,4,6,8
Parameter Baseline MY-I MY-2 MY-3 MY-4 MY-5 MY-6 MY-7
Dimension&Substrate-Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft)' 8.8 11.4 10.8 15.1 2.2 8 9.1 11.3 10.8 14.7 2.4 4 9.2 11.3 10.4 15.2 2.8 4 9.0 11.1 10.2 15.2 2.9 4 5.6 9.6 10.0 12.9 3.0 4 10.00 12.95 12.40 17.00 3.09 4.00
Floodprone Width(ff)' 40.0 74.4 69.0 154.0 35.3 8 40.0 68.0 76.0 80.0 18.8 4 40.0 68.0 76.0 80.0 18.8 4 40.0 68.0 76.0 80.0 18.8 4 19.5 21.5 21.9 22.8 1.4 4 19.50 21.50 21.90 22.70 1.41 4.00
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.2 0.3 8 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.1 4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 4 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.1 4 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 0.9 1.5 1.5 2.1 0.5 8 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.3 0.2 4 1.0 1.2 1.1 1.4 0.1 4 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.3 0.1 4 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.3 0.3 4 0.60 0.90 0.85 1.30 0.29 4.00
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ftT 4.5 9.3 8.9 14.1 3.5 8 4.8 6.3 6.2 8.0 1.4 4 5.8 6.7 6.5 8.0 1.1 4 5.1 6.7 6.4 8.8 1.6 4 2.6 4.1 4.0 5.6 1.3 4 1.70 3.58 3.50 5.60 1.69 4.00
Width/Depth Ratio 8.6 15.4 14.9 25.3 5.4 8 17.1 20.5 18.9 27.0 4.5 4 14.7 19.2 16.6 28.9 6.6 4 9.9 18.6 17.3 26.2 5.4 4 - - - - - - - - - - -Entrenchment Ratio 3.3 6.9 5.6 16.4 4.2 8 3.9 6.1 6.2 8.3 2.0 4 4.3 6.1 6.1 8.0 1.7 4 4.5 6.3 6.2 8.2 1.7 4 1.7 2.4 2.3 3.5 0.8 4 1.20 1.75 1.75 2.30 0.47 4.00
Bank Hei•ht Ratio 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 4 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.1 4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 4 0.50 0.75 0.80 0.90 0.17 4.00
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 10.0 22.1 18.5 95.3 14.5 32
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0.015 0.034 0.032 0.064 0.0 32
Pool Length(ft) 13.4 24.3 21.2 65.7 11.5 33
Pool Max Depth(ft) 1.2 2.2 2.2 3.2 0.4 33
Pool Spacing(ft) 31.4 44.6 40.2 116.5 16.9 32
Pattern
Channel Belt Width(ft) 13.0 - 18.0 21.0 - -
Radius of Curvature(ft) 16.0 - 32.1 52.0 - -
Rc:Bankfull Width(ft/ft) 4.30 - 6.10 8.90 - -
Meander Wavelength(ft) 43.0 - 61.0 89.0 - -
Meander Width Ratio 1.3 - 1.8 2.1 - -
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification B4/C4b
Channel Thalweg Length(ft) 1,438
Sinuosity(ft) 1.17
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0170
Bankfull Slope(ft/ft) 0.0170
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 44.3%I - 155.7%I - 1 - I liaki 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I M. 1 1 1 I
N/A-Information does not apply.
Ri=Riffle/Ru=Run/P=Pool/G=Glide/S=Step
Baseline based on riffle and pool dimensions-MY1-7 based solely on riffle dimensions
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with`were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the b ankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with'was calculated using the curentyears low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Table llb cont'd. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
601 East-Reach 2(902 feet)XS 9,10
Parameter Baseline MY-1 MY-2 MY-3 MY-4 MY-5 MY-6 MY-7
Dimension&Substrate-Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft)' 15.5 19.7 19.6 24.2 3.6 4 15.8 20.1 20.1 24.3 6.0 2 14.1 19.2 19.2 24.4 7.3 2 17.3 20.2 20.2 23.0 4.0 2 16.3 20.9 20.9 25.4 6.4 2 21.00 23.20 23.20 25.40 3.11 2.00
Floodprone Width(1')' 62.0 108.8 102.5 168.0 50.0 4 62.0 67.5 67.5 73.0 7.8 2 62.0 67.5 67.5 73.0 7.8 2 62.0 67.5 67.5 73.0 7.8 2 25.2 27.4 27.4 29.5 3.0 2 29.50 29.50 29.50 29.50 - 1.00
Bankfiill Mean Depth(ft) 0.6 0.9 0.9 1.3 0.3 4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.1 2 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.1 2 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.1 2 - - - - - - - - - - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 0.6 4 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.1 2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.0 2 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.4 0.1 2 0.8 1.2 1.2 1.5 0.5 2 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 - 1.00
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ftT 9.4 18.4 19.5 25.3 6.7 4 8.6 12.6 12.6 16.5 5.6 2 8.3 12.9 12.9 17.5 6.5 2 9.8 12.5 12.5 15.2 3.8 2 3.8 5.3 5.3 6.7 2.1 2 3.80 7.95 7.95 12.10 5.87 2.00
Width/Depth Ratio 14.6 23.0 22.1 33.1 8.1 4 28.9 32.3 32.3 35.6 4.7 2 23.8 29.0 29.0 34.2 7.4 2 30.5 32.7 32.7 34.8 3.0 2 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Entrenchment Ratio 2.6 5.6 5.8 8.4 2.5 4 2.6 3.6 3.6 4.6 1.4 2 2.5 3.9 3.9 5.2 1.9 2 2.7 3.5 3.5 4.2 1.1 2 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.5 0.2 2 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 - 1.00
Bank Height Ratio 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.2 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 1.00
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 12.1 23.4 19.0 50.2 10.7 18
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0.004 0.019 0.015 0.036 0.010 17
Pool Length(ft) 15.1 32.9 29.1 74.3 14.7 17
Pool Max Depth(ft) 1.9 2.9 2.7 4.0 0.6 17
Pool Spacing(ft) 32.9 55.6 47.6 110.3 20.5 17
Pattern
Channel Belt Width(ft) 25.0 - 40.0 65.0 - -
Radius of Curvature(ft) 38.0 - 47.0 58.0 - -
Rc:Bankfull Width(ft/ft) 3.20 - 3.90 4.80 - -
Meander Wavelength(ft) 61.0 - 84.0 97.0 - -
Meander Width Ratio 2.1 - 3.3 5.4 - -
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification C4/E4
Channel Thalweg Length(ft) 945
Sinuosity(ft) 1.34
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0069
Bankfull Slope(ft/ft) 0.0069
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 39.5%I - 160.5%I - I - I I A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
N/A-Information does not apply.
Ri=Riffle/Ru=Run/P=Pool/G=Glide/S=Step
Baseline based on riffle and pool dimensions-MY1-7 based solely on riffle dimensions
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with I were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the b ankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with'was calculated using the curentyears low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Table llb cont'd. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
601 East-Reach 3(1018 feet)XS 13,16
Parameter Baseline MY-1 MY-2 MY-3 MY-4 MY-5 MY-6 MY-7
Dimension&Substrate-Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft)' 15.9 17.7 17.7 19.6 1.5 4 16.9 17.2 17.2 17.5 0.4 2 17.5 17.9 17.9 18.3 0.6 2 16.7 16.9 16.9 17.1 0.3 2 16.0 17.0 17.0 17.9 1.3 2 16.40 17.65 17.65 18.90 1.77 2.00
Floodprone Width(ft)' 75.0 231.3 250.0 350.0 140.5 4 75.0 112.5 112.5 150.0 53.0 2 75.0 112.5 112.5 150.0 53.0 2 75.0 112.5 112.5 150.0 53.0 2 20.4 21.9 21.9 23.3 2.1 2 20.40 126.35 126.35 232.30 149.84 2.00
Bankfiill Mean Depth(ft) 0.8 1.3 1.2 1.8 0.5 4 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 2 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 2 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 2 - - - - - - - - - - -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)2 1.6 2.5 2.5 3.4 1.1 4 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.1 2 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.8 0.0 2 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.1 2 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.2 2 0.80 1.20 1.20 1.60 0.57 2.00
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft2)2 12.8 22.8 21.1 36.1 11.3 4 12.9 13.3 13.3 13.6 0.5 2 12.2 13.5 13.5 14.8 1.8 2 12.6 13.3 13.3 14.0 1.0 2 3.7 4.7 4.7 5.6 1.3 2 3.90 6.35 6.35 8.80 3.46 2.00
Width/Depth Ratio 10.6 15.9 15.3 22.4 6.0 4 21.0 22.4 22.4 23.8 2.0 2 22.5 23.8 23.8 25.0 1.8 2 19.8 21.5 21.5 23.1 2.3 2 - - - - - - - - - - - -
Entrenchment Ratio 4.7 12.7 13.2 19.9 7.3 4 4.4 6.5 6.5 8.5 2.9 2 4.3 6.3 6.3 8.2 2.8 2 4.4 6.7 6.7 9.0 3.3 2 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.5 0.3 2 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 0.00 2.00
Bank Height Ratio 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.1 2 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 2 0.50 0.70 0.70 0.90 0.28 2.00
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 10.1 24.1 16.8 110.3 22.1 19
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0.00 0.018 0.015 0.041 0.011 17
Pool Length(ft) 27.4 35.2 35.2 49.7 6.7 18
Pool Max Depth(ft) 1.9 2.9 3.0 3.5 0.4 18
Pool Spacing(ft) 41.1 58.5 54.4 137.9 20.9 18
Pattern
Charnel Belt Width(ft) 35.0 - 56.0 92.0 - -
Radius of Curvature(ft) 27.0 - 43.0 63.0 - -
Rc:Bankfull Width(ft/ft) 1.6 - 2.5 3.7 - -
Meander Wavelength(ft) 87.0 - 119.0 134.0 - -
Meander Width Ratio 2.1 - 3.3 5.4 - -
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification C4
Channel Thalweg Length(ft) 1064
Sinuosity(ft) 1.2
Water Surface Slope(Charnel)(ft/ft) 0.0056
Bankfiill Slope(ft/ft) 0.0056
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 43.0%I - 157.0%I - I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
N/A-Information does not apply.
Ri=Riffle/Ru=Run/P=Pool/G=Glide/S=Step
Baseline based on riffle and pool dimensions-MY1-7 based solely on riffle dimensions
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with I were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the b ankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with'was calculated using the curentyears low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Table llb cont'd. Monitoring Data-Stream Reach Data Summary
601 East-Reach 4(495 feet)XS 18
Parameter Baseline MY-I MY-2 MY-3 MY-4 MY-5 MY-6 MY-7
Dimension&Substrate-Riffle Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n Min Mean Med Max SD n
Bankfull Width(ft)' 14.9 15.9 15.9 16.9 1.4 2 - 14.6 - - N/A 1 - 14.1 - - N/A 1 - 14.6 - - N/A 1 - 14.3 - - N/A 1.0 14.60 14.60 14.60 14.60 N/A 1.00
Floodprone Width(ft)' 30.4 36.2 36.2 42.0 8.2 2 - 31.0 - - N/A 1 - 31.0 - - N/A 1 - 31.0 - - N/A 1 - >32.1 - - N/A 1.0 32.20 32.20 32.20 32.20 N/A 1.00
Bankfull Mean Depth(ft) 1.0 1.4 1.4 1.8 0.5 2 - 1.0 - - N/A 1 - 1.0 - - N/A 1 - 1.0 - - N/A 1 - --- - - N/A 1.0 - - - - N/A -
Bankfull Max Depth(ft)' 1.5 2.1 2.1 2.7 0.9 2 - 1.6 - - N/A 1 - 1.7 - - N/A 1 - 1.8 - - N/A 1 - 1.70 - - N/A 1.0 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 N/A 1.00
Bankfull Cross-Sectional Area(ft')2 14.7 22.3 22.3 29.8 10.7 2 - 14.5 - - N/A 1 - 14.0 - - N/A 1 - 15.0 - - N/A 1 - 13.7 - - N/A 1.0 17.80 17.80 17.80 17.80 N/A 1.00
Width/Depth Ratio 9.6 12.4 12.4 15.2 3.9 2 - 15.6 - - N/A 1 - 14.2 - - N/A 1 - 14.3 - - N/A 1 - --- - - N/A 1.0 - - - - N/A -
Entrenchment Ratio' 2.0 2.3 2.3 2.5 0.3 2 - 2.1 - - N/A 1 - 2.2 - - N/A 1 - 2.1 - - N/A 1 - >2.2 - - N/A 1.0 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 N/A 1.00
Bank Height Ratio' 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.1 2 - 1.0 - - N/A 1 - 1.0 - - N/A 1 - 0.8 - - N/A 1 - 1.00 - - N/A 1.0 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 N/A 1.00
Profile
Riffle Length(ft) 15.8 20.8 18.2 29.0 4.8 9
Riffle Slope(ft/ft) 0.018 0.027 0.030 0.038 0.007 9
Pool Length(ft) 30.8 35.0 35.8 38.8 3.1 9
Pool Max Depth(ft) 2.0 2.8 2.8 3.4 0.4 9
Pool Spacing(ft) 49.8 56.1 54.8 69.3 6.2 8
Pattern
Channel Belt Width(ft) 21.0 - 28.0 32.0 - -
Radius of Curvature(ft) 26.0 - 52.0 84.0 - -
Rc:Bankfull Width(ft/ft) 162.0 - 3.3 5.3 - -
Meander Wavelength(ft) 69.0 - 97.0 142.0 - -
Meander Width Ratio 1.3 - 1.8 2.0 - -
Additional Reach Parameters
Rosgen Classification B4
Channel Thalweg Length(ft) 465
Sinuosity(ft) 1.13
Water Surface Slope(Channel)(ft/ft) 0.0114
Bankfull Slope(ft/ft) 0.0114
Ri%/Ru%/P%/G%/S% 39.1%l - I65.6%I - I - I LalMi I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
N/A-Information does not apply.
Ri=Riffle/Ru=Run/P=Pool/G=Glide/S=Step
Baseline based on riffle and pool dimensions-MY1-7 based solely on riffle dimensions
Note:Starting in MY5,the parameters denoted with I were calculated using the as-built cross sectional area as the basis for adjusting the b ankfull elevation and the parameters denoted with'was calculated using the cmrentyears low top of bank as the bankfull elevation.These changes reflect the 2018 guidance that arose from the mitigation technical workgroup consisting of DMS,the IRT,and industry mitigation providers.

Appendix D- Stream Geomorphology Data
Table 12. Pebble County Data Summary
Table 12.Pebble Count Data Summary
601 East
MY1-2015 MY2-2016 MY3-2017 MY4-2018 MY5-2019 MY6-2020 MY7-2021
Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count Pebble Count
Stream Reach D50 D84 D50 D84 D50 D84 D50 D84
D50(mm) D84(mm) D50(mm) D84(mm) D50(mm) D84(mm) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (mm)
mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
Reach 1 14.1 48.8 4.9 25.6 25.5 87.3 4.8 48.3 12.0 28.8 - - 5.44 40.01
Reach 2 0.062 61 2.9 34.1 9.7 20 5.5 30.9 16.0 58.0 - - 9.9 46.5
Reach 3 27 79.5 6.2 39.5 73.5 140 26.5 72.0 9.7 70.5 - - 13.7 51.5
Reach 4 47 110 4.2 66 12 95 12.0 95.0 17.0 63.0 - - 13 120
Charts 1-5.MY5 Stream Reach Substrate Composition Charts
Chart 1.
601 East MY7 Substrate Composition
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
2096
Li
10%
III 1111
096
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
■Reach 1 a Reach 2 ■Reach 3 ,;Reach 4

Appendix D— Stream Geomorphology Data
Chart 2.
601 East R-1 - Substrate Composition
60%
50%
40% II II
30%
20%
10% II1 II 111 Ii.I
0%
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
■MY1 ■MY2 MY3 ■MY4 i MTh i MY7
Chart 3.
601 East R-2 - Substrate Composition
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10% I
IL
. i liii
Silt/Clay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
■MY1 •MY2 MY3 •MY4 ■MY5 s MY7

Appendix D— Stream Geomorphology Data
Chart 4.
601 East R-3 - Substrate Composition
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
1095 ILi ■ 1_, III Liii
— —
0%
Silt/Clay Sand Grave' Cobble Boulder Bedrock
•MY1 •MY2 MY3 ■MY4 •MTh ■MY7
Chart 5.
601 East R-4 - Substrate Composition
8o% —
70%
60% --
50%
40%
30%
20%
1
0% 1 I _ ll ilii _ -
Silt fClay Sand Gravel Cobble Boulder Bedrock
■MY1 ■MY2 MY3 •MY4 ■MYS i MY7

3.
StreamBankPin MitigattionArray SiteSummary
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7
Bank Pin Location Position Reading(mm) Reading(mm) Reading(mm) Reading(mm) Reading(mm) Reading(mm) Reading(mm)
Upstream 0.0 35.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-1 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-3 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-5 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-7 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 12.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-10 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-12 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-14 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-15 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Upstream 0.0 0.0 50.8* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
XS-17 At Cross-Section 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Downstream 0.0 0.0 177.8* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
*A beaver dam directly downstream caused unusually high water and localized bank erosion.

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

Appendix E-Hydrology Data
Table 14.Verification of Bankfull and Stream Flow Events
Year I Number of Bankfull Events Maximum Bankfull Height(ft) I Date of Occurrence
SR Reach 2
MY1 2015 1 Unknown 9/30/2015
MY2 2016 1 1.40 2/16/2016
MY3 2017 3 2.50 4/24/2017
MY4 2018 1 0.66 9/16/2018
MY5 2019 NA NA NA
MY6 2020 5 1.82 5/27/2020
MY7 2021 7 1.89 6/6/2021
SR Reach 3
MY1 2015 0 --- ---
MY2 2016 1 0.20 Unkmwn
MY3 2017 3 1.40 6/20/2017
MY4 2018 1 0.79 9/16/2018
MY5 2019 NA NA NA
MY6 2020 8 0.95 5/27/2020
MY7 2021 11 1.17 8/18/2021
MY5 gauges failed due to ant infestations
MY6 HOBOs were installed and used in place of cork gauges
Year Consecutive Flow Days Total Flow Days Number of Flow Events Maximum Flow Day Date Range
FG Reach 1
MY6 2020 58 113 7 ---
MY7 2021 146 219 7 1/1/2021-5/26/2021
FG installed on 6/3/2020
Table 15. Rainfall Summary
Normal Limits
Month Average 30 70 Pageland Station
Precipitation
Percent Percent
January 4.07 2.74 4.87 3.87
February 3.49 2.39 4.17 4.59
March 4.45 3.10 5.29 2.23
April 3.07 1.82 3.72 0.62
May 3.47 2.22 4.18 1.77
June 4.57 2.91 5.50 4.84
July 4.50 2.90 5.42 2.33
August 4.71 2.78 5.18 3.39
September 4.24 2.02 5.18 2.09
October 3.81 2.00 4.57 0.41
November 3.33 1.90 4.05 ---
December 3.85 2.56 4.62 ---
Total 47.56 29.34 56.75 26.14
Above Normal Limits Below Normal Limits

MY7 2021 601 East Reach 1 Flow Gauge
4 —
-
_ 146 days 14
I � l
3 — 12
- 10
F 2 —
E
Q - 8
ii
c
L.,,,„,tict.,Arik6 r
1\km:ffiltd\
- 4•
\Iiii i I
- 2
_ .II I _. _I I I I_ .ill, it .._ _ III. I_ �i. _III_ II I I_F . ill _. II I I-10
11/11/2020 12/11/2020 1/10/2021 2/9/2021 3/11/2021 4/10/2021 5/10/2021 6/9/2021 7/9/2021 8/8/2021 9/7/2021 10/7/2021
Date
Rainfall — Reach 1 Bed ———DS Riffle Elevation