20120365 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_20140121

PIP"- DWR
LOFLIN DAIRY BUFFER MITIGATION SITE
Randolph County, NC
DENR Contract 003995
NCEEP Project Number 95008
Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report
FINAL
Data Collection Period: July 2013
Draft Submission Date: August 19, 2013
Final Submission Date: October 4, 2013
(
noi@ NN2 no
2014
R UALITY
Prepared for:
t b, .'-
]
"O)SYSM I I
NCDENR,EEP
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC
27699 -1652
RECEIVED
OCT 7 - 2013
NC ECOSYSTEM
ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

Prepared by
" • = WILDLANDS
ENGINEERING
r - I
4
Wildlands Engineering, Inc
1430 S. Mint Street, #104
Charlotte, NC 28203
P — 704 - 332 -7754
F — 704 - 332 -3306

I
LOFLIN DAIRY BUFFER MITIGATION SITE
Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report
1.0 Executive Summary .................................................. ............................... 1
11 Project Goals and Objectives ................................... ............................... 1
12 Monitoring Year 2 Data Assessment ......................... ............................... 2
13 Monitoring Year 2 Summary ................................... ............................... 3
20 Methodology .......................................................... ............................... 4
3.0 References ............................................................... ..............................4
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 General Tables and Figures
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2
Project Component /Asset Map
Table 1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3
Project Contacts Table
Table 4
Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Appendix 2 Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3 0 -3 3 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
Table 5 Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Vegetation Photographs
Appendix 3 Vegetation Plot Data
Table 6 Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Table 7 CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Table 8 Planted and Total Stem Counts

1.0 Executive Summary
The Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site, hereafter referred to as the Site, is located within the
Randleman Reservoir watershed (North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) Subbasin
03- 06 -08) of the Cape Fear River Basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit Code 03030003010060). On -site
stream channels are unnamed tributaries to Bob Branch (NCDWQ Index No 17- 9.6 -(1)) in the
Randleman Regional Reservoir The Site is located in the Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont
Physiographic Province (USGS, 1998) approximately six miles southeast of the intersection of
Interstate 85 and Highway 311 in Randolph County, NC. The Site has historically been used for
agricultural purposes
The Site is comprised of two areas (Area A and B) on one parcel of land along several unnamed
tributaries and ephemeral ditches to Bob Branch Bob Branch ultimately flows into the
Randleman Regional Reservoir The current property owner has confirmed that Area A has
been used as an active dairy farm since 1947 and Area B has been surrounded by agricultural
fields since the late 1920s The Site is surrounded by fields that are alternately used for cattle
and crop production At the downstream limits of the project, Area A has a drainage area of 18
acres and Area B has a drainage area of 59 acres.
The NCDWQ assigns best usage classifications to State Waters that reflect water quality
conditions and potential resource usage Bob Branch is classified as Class WS -IV waters Class
WS -IV waters are used as sources of water supply for drinking or food processing purposes
where a more restrictive WS -I, WS -II, or WS -III classification is not feasible. These waters are
also protected for Class C uses such as secondary recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish and aquatic
life propagation and survival, and agriculture WS -IV waters are generally in moderately to
highly - developed watersheds or Protected Areas
A conservation easement has been recorded to protect the 9.8 acres of riparian corridor
resources in perpetuity Directions and a map of the Site are provided in Figure 1
11 Project Goals and Objectives
Prior to construction activities, the primary watershed stressor was the lack of a vegetated
buffer and nutrient runoff from adjacent agricultural maintenance activities The riparian zones
within these areas were maintained in the past and mowed on an annual basis resulting in
varying buffer widths and densities The riparian zones were also actively sprayed due to their
locations in an active row crop field and cattle pasture A concentrated flow of cattle waste
drained directly to several of the tributaries located adjacent to the dairy farm Although there
is no immediate evidence of increased development within the project site's watersheds; the
new NC Highway 311 corridor is being constructed immediately downstream of the project
area This new highway corridor may increase development pressure on the project's
watersheds and this area of Randolph County in the future The restored riparian buffer areas
within the Site will aid in protecting water quality and endangered species habitat within the
Deep River watershed by filtering runoff from adjacent agricultural practices and restoring
terrestrial habitat The Deep River watershed is an important component of the Randleman
Regional Reservoir in this part of the state.
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site Page :L
Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report—FINAL

Tables 1 -4 in Appendix 1 presents detailed information for pre and post restoration conditions
The project was completed to provide buffer mitigation units (BMUs) in the Cape Fear River
Basin The project design caused no adverse impacts to streams or wetlands The goals of the
Site address water quality improvements identified in the Cape Fear River Basin Restoration
Priorities Report and include the following:
Remove harmful nutrients from creek flow,
Reduce pollution of creek by excess sediment,
Restore terrestrial habitat, and
Improve aesthetics
The following project objectives were established to meet these goals
• 9 1 acres of riparian area will be fenced off from adjacent agricultural activities and
runoff will be filtered through buffer zones Flood flows will be filtered through
restored riparian areas, where flood flow will spread through native vegetation
Vegetation will be planted to uptake excess nutrients
Stream bank erosion which contributes sediment load to the creek will be greatly
reduced, if not eliminated, in the project area Eroding streambanks will be stabilized by
increased woody root mass in banks and reducing channel incision Storm flow
containing grit and fine sediment will be filtered through restored riparian buffer areas,
where flow will spread through native vegetation
The establishment and maintenance of riparian buffers will create long -term shading of
the channel bed, reducing thermal heating and improving aquatic habitat
"
• Adjacent buffer and riparian habitats will be restore d
invasive species will be treated as part of the project
cover and food for terrestrial creatures
12 Monitoring Year 2 Data Assessment
with native vegetation and
Native vegetation will provide
The final mitigation plan was submitted and accepted by the North Carolina Ecosystem
Enhancement Program ( NCEEP) in February 2012 Grading activities were completed by the
landowner in March 2012 Planting activities were completed by Bruton Natural Systems, Inc
in March 2012 The baseline monitoring and as -built survey were completed in April 2012.
There were no significant deviations reported in the project elements in comparison to the
design plans Appendix 1 provides more detailed project activity, history, contact information,
and watershed /site background information for this project
The buffer restoration success criteria for the Site follows the approved success criteria
presented in the NCEEP Mitigation Plan Guidance (Version 2 0, 10/01/2010). Annual
monitoring and monthly site visits were conducted to assess the condition of the finished
project in July 2013
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site Page 2
Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report —FINAL

12 1 Vegetative Assessment
A total of 16 vegetation plots were established within the project easement area using standard
10 meter by 10 meter vegetation monitoring plots Plots were randomly established within
planted portions of the stream buffer areas to capture the heterogeneity of the designed
vegetative communities The plot corners have been marked and are recoverable either
through field identification or with the use of a GPS unit Reference photographs at the origin
looking diagonally across the plot to the opposite corner were taken with the as -built
Subsequent assessments following baseline survey will capture the same reference photograph
locations The final vegetative success criteria will be the survival of 320 planted stems per acre
in the buffer corridor at the end of year five (5) of the monitoring period The extent of invasive
species coverage will also be monitored and controlled as necessary
The monitoring year 2 (MY2) vegetative survey was completed in July 2013 The average stem
density for the Site is 437 stems /acre, which is greater than the interim requirement of 320
stems /acre, but approximately 43% less than the baseline (MYO) density recorded (763
stems /acre) in April 2012. There is an average of 11 stems /plot compared to 13 stems /plot in
MY1 and 19 stems /plot in MYO Of the 16 plots, 14 met the success criteria required for MY2
Vegetation plots 6 and 15 did not meet the MY2 success criteria; however, the poor survival
rate does not appear to correspond with areas of dense invasive herbaceous cover as described
in the following paragraph. These plots had a higher number of River birch (Betula n1gra) bare
roots planting, which have low vigor scores throughout the Site
Areas of Johnson grass (Sorghum halepense) were identified within the Site, covering
approximately 90% of the planted acreage Other invasive plants were observed on -site as well
covering approximately 30% of the planted acreage in small patches, such as porcelain berry
(Ampelopsis brevipedunculata), morning glories /bindweeds (Ipomea spp , Calystegia spp ) and
Chinese yam (Dioscorea polystachs) These areas will be selectively treated with herbicide-in
Fall 2013 and follow up treatments will be conducted annually as necessary to control their
spread and dominance Please refer to Appendix 2 for vegetation plot photographs and visual
assessment data and Appendix 3 for vegetation plot data
1.3 Monitoring Year 2 Summary
Overall, the Site has met the required buffer mitigation success criteria for MY2 Although two
plots did not meet the MY2 success criteria, the average stem density of the Site is greater than
the required MY2 success criteria The areas of Johnson grass (S halepense) and patches of
other invasive species observed in MY2 will be treated and maintained as needed throughout
the monitoring period to ensure minimal advancement occurs within the Site
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
Mitigation Plan documents available on NCEEP's webslte All raw data supporting the tables _
and figures In the appendices Is available from NCEEP upon request
Il
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site Page 3
Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report —FINAL

-' 2.0 Methodology
Vegetation monitoring protocols followed the Carolina Vegetation Survey -NCEEP Level 2
Protocol (Lee et al , 2006)
3.0 References
Lee, Michael T, Peet, Robert K, Steven D , Wentworth, Thomas R 2006 CVS -EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation Version 4 0 Retrieved from http //www nceep net /business/
I -' North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program 2009 Cape Fear River Basin Restoraion
Priorities 2009 http / /www.nceep net / services /lwps /cape_fear /RBRP %20Cape %20Fear%
202008 pdf
Schafale, M P and A S. Weakley 1990 Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, 3rd approx North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Raleigh, North Carolina
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2009 Natural Resources Conservation
Service, Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) database for Randolph County, North Carolina
http• / /SoilDataMart nres usda gov
United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1998 North Carolina Geology http //
http://www geology enr state nc us /usgs /carolma htm
Weakley, A S 2008 Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, Georgia, Northern Florida, and Surrounding
Areas (Draft April 2008) University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill- Chapel Hill, NC.
Wildlands Engineering, Inc 2012 Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site Mitigation Plan NCEEP,
Raleigh, NC
Wildlands Engineering, Inc 2012 Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site Baseline Monitoring
Document and As -Built Baseline Report. NCEEP, Raleigh, NC
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site Page 4
Monitoring Year 2 Annual Report—FINAL

APPENDIX 1. General Tables and Figures

N rit
.,.!Hydrologic Unit Code (14)
NCDWQ Subbasin 03 -06 -08
EEP Targeted Watersheds
- Project Location
f3,0 00301 10 •
1
03040103030010 1 Kh . 0303
i
I'nin 1�
1
I-
�1
Ullp `
} ' 030e?
.1=
0304010303AMO
ea FIiFI
• 1
1
7'tt.MigsvnN• i �
09; 1
Iake Miff,
1 httadr(1,p, (jakfn4.
03030002020010 �� � �
'Q1 ege *4 03030002020040
03030002020040
— 220
UJ iy -.;.t rlolih sNeflh Carof
C ar..lins,
03030002 ,i eensq ve,
e, r�
)0030 020 ► 030 2020050
t
!� i"
Greensboro
04002
00 0100
�RS Itr. •atia` n
- !�l1fiQ00,(�101
it
03 00030 0 '?
-r Ulu
The subject project site is an environmental restoration site of the
NCDENR Ecoysystem Enhancement Program (EEP) and is
encompassed by a recorded conservation easement, but is k.t "
bordered by land under private ownership. Accessing the site may t�
require traversing areas near or along the easement boundary and
therefore access by the general public is not permitted. Access by
authorized personnel of state and federal agencies or their 03040103050040
designees /contractors involved in the development, oversight, Directions:
and stewardship of the restoration site is permitted within the terms The Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Project
and timeframes of their defined roles. Any intended site visitation or is located approximately six miles southeast of the
activity by any person outside of these previously sanctioned roles intersection of Interstate 85 and Highway 311 in
and activites requires prior coordination with EEP. Radolph County, NC.
0 1.25 2.5 Miles
WIL[)LANDS I I
E N cv i r, e E i N c>
Figure 1 Project Vicinity Map
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project Number 95008
Monitoring Year 2
Randolph County, NC

Figure 2. Project Component /Asset Map
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site
0 175 350 700Feet NCEEP Project Number 95008
� ,WILD LANDS I ' i ' i
1'/<'1)s�'titCill _ \� F ti N F F R N c Monitoring Year 2
Randolph County, NC

i
�1
_1
Table 1 Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Loftin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 95008)
Monitoring Year 2
TZ
_
Mtdgation Credits
-
Ri anan Wetland Non -Ri anan Wetland
u
_
Nitrogen
Buffer INutnentOffetl
Phosphorous
Nutnent Offset
Stream
T R
RE
R
RE
R
RE
i'S0
Totals N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Project Components
�Re..hLocation
Stationing/
Eia °sdrig
Footage
(L F)
Q roach
Restoraton or Restoration
E wvalent
-s�vr�
PA,ra _ acres
17
Mdi anon Ratio
1 1
Reach A l
Area A
N/A
Restoration
Reach A2
Area A
N/A
Restoration
07
1 1
Reach BI
Area B
N/A
Restoration
3 6
1 1
Reach B2
Area B
N/A
Restoration
I I
1 1
Reach B3
Area B
N/A
Restoration
2 0
11
Component Summation
Restoration Level
Stream (linear
feet )
Ri anan Wetland acres
Non- Ripanan Wetland
acres
Buffer
(s uarefeet
Upland
acres
r �
Rrvenne
Non - Rrvenne
- �^ +emu
Restoration
396,396
Enhancement_
Enhancement I
zin
=`i �Wt"v
Enhancement II
Creation
Preservation
High Quality Preservation'
BMP Elements
Elements
Location
Purpose /Function
Notes
BR = Bioretention Cell, S F= Sand Filter, SW = Stormwater Wetland, WDP = Wet Detention Pond, DDP = Dry Detention Pond, FS = Filter
Strip S = Grassed Swale, LS = Level Spreader, NI = Natural Infiltration Area, FB = Forested Buffer

J
Table 2 Project Activity and Reporting History
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 95008)
Monitoring Year 2
x i or Re ort
Date Collection
Com lete
Com lotion or Dehve
Mitigation Plan
December 2011
February 2012
Final Design - Construction Plans
December 2011
February 2012
Construction
January 2012
January 2012
Temporary S &E mix applied to entire project area'
January 2012
January 2012
Permanent seed mix applied to reach/segments
January 2012
January 2012
Containerized and B &B plantings for reach/segments
March 2012
March 2012
Baseline Monitoring Document Year 0 Monitoring - baseline
April 2012
June 2012
Year 1 Monitoring
Sept 2012
December 2012
Year 2 Monitoring
July 2013
August 2013
Year 3 Monitoring
2014
December 2014
Year 4 Monitoring
2015
December 2015
Year 5 Monitonn
2016
December 2016
'Seed and mulch is added as each section of construction is completed
Table 3 Project Contact Table
Loftin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 95008)
Monitoring Year 2
Designer _ _�
� jt_T �
—11 nds En °gmeenn`g,, Inc
5605 Chapel Hill Road, Suite 122
Raleigh, NC 27604
Damel Taylor
919 851 9986
QOnsttoctioniContraiaor
2409 Loftin Davy Road
Clifford W Loflm
Sophia, NC 27350
Planf,ng�Contractor
Bruton NaturaQSystems, Inc
PO Box 1 197
Freemont NC 27830
Charlie Bruton
919 242 6555
Seedin
9T
Bruton Natural Systems, Inc "Q
PO Box 1197
Freemont NC 27830
Charlie Bruton
919 242 6555
Seed Mix Sources
Mellow Marsh Farm
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arborgen
Dykes and Son Nursery
NICIForestry Service, Claridge Nursery
MonRO °rin Performers _ �Sr7i °- `' =r ==
_ +;?�►ddlands Engmenng, inc_
Kirsten Y Gimbert
Vegetation Monitoring POC
704 332 7754, ext 110

r-
r —i
Table 4 Project Baseline Information and Attributes
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No 95008)
Monitoring Year 2
l� yr _
Project Name
MEN= Information
- ��Tt3�'NP' "�acl
LoFlin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site
County
Randolph
Project Area acres
98
Project Coordinates latitude and longitude)
35o 50' 44 082 "N 790 52'22 487 "W
Protect Watershed
Summary Information
-
Ph sto ra hic Provence
Carolina Slate Belt of the Piedmont
River Basin
Cape Fear
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-di it
03030003
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
03030003010060
DWQ Sub -basin
03 -06 -08
�iAreairA
�Aiea")B
Project Dratma a Area acres
18
59
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Im erveous Area
<1%
CGIA Land Use Classification
82% Cultivated Land and 18% Forested Land
1
45% Cultivated Land 40% Forested Land,
100/6 Residential and
5 % Commercial
Reach
Summary Information
v
Parameters
Area A
Area B
Length of reach linear feet - Post - Restoration
Reach AI 917
Reach A2 155
Reach A2(ephem) 180
Reach A3 120
Reach B1 1489
Reach B2 866
Reach B3 486
Valley classification
N/A
N/A
Drainage area acres
Reach AI 61
Reach A2 65
Reach A3 10
Reach B 230
Reach B2 26
Reach B3 22
NCDWQ stream identification score
Reach Al 24/3,45
Reach A2 23 25
Reach A3 N/A
Reach BI 27 25/ 35 5
Reach B2 20 75
Reach B3 22 75
NCDWQ Water Quality Classficabon
WS -IV C
Morphological Desn tion stream a
Reach A I —Per / Int
Reach A2 — Int / Ephemeral Ditch
Reach A3- Ephemeral Ditch
Reach B I — Per / Int
Reach B2 — Int
Reach 83 — Int
Evolution trend Simon's Model - Pre- Restoration
N/A
N/A
Underlying mapped soils
W nott -Enon complex
Mecklenburg loam 8-15% slopes
Mecklenburg clay loam 2 -8% slopes
Drainage Gass
well drained
well drained
Soil H dnc status
No
No
Sloe
8 -15%
2 -8%
FEMA classification
no
regulated fioodplam
Native vegetation commune
Bonom -land Forest
Percent composition of exotic invasive vegetation - Post - Restoration
o%
Regulation
Regulatory
Considerations
Applicable? Resolved?
Supp orting Documentation
Waters of the United States - Section 404
N/A
N/A
N/A
Waters of the United States - Section 401
N/A
N/A
N/A
Endangered Species Act
X
X
Loom Dairy Buffer Mitigation Plan studies found "no
effect" (letter from USFWS)
Historic Preservation Act
X
X
Lotlm Diary Buffer Mitigation Plan No historic resources
were found to be impacted letter from SHPO
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) /Coastal Area Management Act
CAMA
N/A
N/A
N/A
FEMA Flood lain Compliance
N/A
N/A
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
N/A
N/A
N/A
u= unKnown

APPENDIX 2. Visual Assessment Data

Figure 3.0 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
(Key)
0 200 400 800Feet Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site
W I L D L A N D S I i I NCEEP Project Number 95008
17 1, (, NI r K N" Monitoring Year 2
Randolph County, NC

r�
ii"WILDLANDS
•1 OSVS�C1 '• C NC- I N EE R I N G
>> YII CIIICIt
75 150 300Feet
Figure 3.1 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
(Sheet 1 of 3)
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project Number 95008
Monitoring Year 2
Randolph County, NC

WILDLANDS
� "CY wstoII ENGINEERING
Figure 3.2 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
(Sheet 2 of 3)
0 75 150 300Feet Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site
i I I NCEEP Project Number 95008
Monitoring Year 2
Randolph County, NC

r~
Lcowstem
1 �,u �a1 cnu�nt
WILDLANDS
E N G I N E E R I N G
75 150 300Feet
Figure 3.3 Integrated Current Condition Plan View
(Sheet 3 of 3)
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project Number 95008
Monitoring Year 2
Randolph County, NC

Table 5. Vegetation Condition Assessment Table
Loflin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95008)
Monitoring Year 2
Planted Acreage 91
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
acres
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage*
Bare Areas
Very limited cover of both woody and herbaceous material
0 I
0
0
000%
Low Stem Density Areas
Woody stem densities clearly below target levels based on MY3, 4, or 5 stem count criteria
0 l
2
0 5
5%
Total
2
0 5
5%
Areas of Poor Growth Rates or Vigor
Areas with woody stems of a size class that are obviously small given the monitoring year
0 25 acres
0
0
0%
Cumulative Total
2
05
5%
Easement Acreage 975
Vegetation Category
Definitions
Mapping
Threshold
SF
Number of
Polygons
Combined
Acreage
% of
Planted
Acreage
Invasive Areas of Concern'
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
1000
N/A
N/A
90%
Easement Encroachment Areas
Areas of points (if too small to render as polygons at map scale)
none
0
0
0%
Approximately 90% of the total planted acreage is covered with Sorghum halepense and approximately 30% of the planted acreage is covered with other invasive plants, dominantly Ipomea spp
and Calystegia spp growing in small patches less than the mapping threshold of 1000 ftZ See Section 1 2 for details

Vegetation Photographs

Vegetation Plot 1 (07/25/2013) 1 Vegetation Plot 2 (07/25/2013)
Vegetation Plot 3 (07/25/2013) 1 Vegetation Plot 4 (07/25/2013)
7 <r
�f r
Vegetation Plot 5 (07/25/2013) 1 Vegetation Plot 6 (07/25/2013)

• Al
�� _ •��
Via. �RG ..'•r _ � ..e -
Al
r
Vegetation- Plot 9 (07/25/2013)
ti
• � r
- • - • • • •
- • - • [em • • 1

or
_t 1 OAK,
-•- • • • 1 1
Vegetation Pl• t 14 (07/25/20
1
J y'
Vegetation P• t 15 (07/25/2013)
�•- • • • 1 1

APPENDIX 3. Vegetation Plot Data

Table 6. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Loflm Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95008)
Monitoring Year 2
Plot
MY2 Success Cntena Met
(Y/1)
Tract Mean
1
Y
88%
2
Y
3
Y
4
Y
5
Y
6
N
7
Y
8
Y
9
Y
10
Y
11
Y
12
Y
13
Y
14
Y
15
N
16
Y

Table 7. CVS Vegetation Plot Metadata
Loftin Dairy Buffer Mitigation Site (NCEEP Project No. 95008)
Monitoring Year 2
Report Prepared By
Alea Tuttle
Date Prepared
7/29/2013 12 50
database name
Burnetts Cho el MY2_cvs -ee -ent tool -v2 3 0 mdb
database location
IQ \ActevePro ects\005 -02130 Burnetts Chapel Buffer Mitigation SiteWonitonngWonitoring Year Me etateon Assessment
DESCRIPTION OF WORKSHEETS IN THIS DOCUMENT ------------
Metadata
Description of database le, the report worksheets, and a sumnwry o ro ect(s) and ro ect data
Plots
Each project is listed with its PLANTED stems per acre, for each year This excludes live stakes
Stem Count by Plot and Spp
A matrix of the count of total living stems of each species (planted and natural volunteers combined ) for each plot, dead and missing stems are excluded
PROJECT SUMMARY-------------------------------------
Project Code
95008
project Name
Loflm Dairy Mitigation Site
Descn lion
Buffer Mitigation
length (ft)
stream-to-edge width (ft)
area (s m)
,Required Plots calculated
16
Sampled Plots 116

Table B. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Loflin Dairy Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project No. 95008
Monitorino Year 2
MYO & fM data are updated from the preriousl7 published reports because it nmr contains automated C VS data
Color Coding for Table
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less thin 10a/e
Fails to meet requirements. by less than 10%
Fails to meat requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS. Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T Total Stems
Current Plot Data (MY2 2013)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95008 -WEI -0001
95008 -WEI -0002
95008 -WEI -0003
95008 -WEI -0004
95008 -WEI -0005
95008 -WEI -0006
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Berula nigra
river birch
Tree
_
2
2
2
2
2
Carpinus carohniana
American hornbeam
Tree
Ca»zi sp.
hickory
Tree
1
Fraxinus pennsvivanica
green ash
Tree
8
8
8
5
5
5
5
5
5
2
2
2
1
1
1
Liriodendron inlipijera
tuliptree
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
1
4
4
4
Matanus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
3
3
3
Ouer —s michauaii
swamp chestnut oak
I
I
1
I
Duercus phellos
willow oak
Tree
4
4
4
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
Ouercus ntbra
northern red oak
Tree
1
I
I
1
I
I
1
I
I
Stem count
10
10
11
13
13
13
10
10
10
8
8
8
10
10
10
7
7
7
size (ares)
1
1
I
1
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Species count
2
4
4
4
3
3
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
Stems per ACRE
405
405
1 445
526
526
1 526
405
405
405
324
324
324
405
405
405
283
283
283
MYO & fM data are updated from the preriousl7 published reports because it nmr contains automated C VS data
Color Coding for Table
Exceeds requirements by 10%
Exceeds requirements, but by less thin 10a/e
Fails to meet requirements. by less than 10%
Fails to meat requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS. Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T Total Stems

Table 8. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Loflin Dairy Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project No. 95008
Monitoring Year 2
nI r v n m 1 , 6am arc upumeu rrom me preslousq pun nsnw reports oecause it noo contains at m Yo H x1Y I data are updaIN Irom the prey must) published reports t cesuse it noe contains automa I ed CV S data
Color Coding for Table
Exceeds requirements by 10•/
Exceeds requirements, but by I= than 10%
Fails to meet requirements. by less than 100/6
Fails to meat requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems
Current Plot Data (MY2 2013)
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Type
95008 -WEI -0007
95008 -WEI -0008
95008 -WEI -0009
95008 -WEI -0010
95008 -WE1 -0011
95008 -WEI -0012
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
I T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
8etula ni gra
river birch
Tree
I
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
I
2
2
Corpina.Y caroliniana
Amencan hombeam
Tree
3
3
3
1
1
I
Cann .qt.
hickory
Tree
P rcixinu.r penns.vhanica
green ash
Tree
4
4
4
8
8
8
4
4
4
1
1
1
2
2
2
Lirioclendron tulip/era
tnliptree
Tree
2
2
2
1
1
I
1
1
1
Ploranus occ•identalic
.American sveamore
Tree
6
6
6
1
1
1
5
5
5
9
8
8
2
2
2
Ottercus michaurh
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
I
1
1
3
3
3
1
I
I
Ouercvts phellos
willow oak
Tree
1
1-F
I
2
2
2
1
I
I
4
4
4
5
5
5
2
2
_
Ouercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
I
I
I
I 1
1
Stem count
14
14
14
12
12
12
15
15
15
9
9
9
16
16
16
9
9
9
size (ares)
I
1
1
I
1
1
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
Speciescou nt
5
5
5
4
1 4
4
6
1 6
1 6
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
Stems per ACREI
567
1 567 1
567
486 1
486 1
486
607 1
607 1
607
364
364
364
647
647
647
364
364
1 364
nI r v n m 1 , 6am arc upumeu rrom me preslousq pun nsnw reports oecause it noo contains at m Yo H x1Y I data are updaIN Irom the prey must) published reports t cesuse it noe contains automa I ed CV S data
Color Coding for Table
Exceeds requirements by 10•/
Exceeds requirements, but by I= than 10%
Fails to meet requirements. by less than 100/6
Fails to meat requirements by more than 10%
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted stems excluding live stakes
P -all: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems

Table 8. Planted and Total Stem Counts
Loflin Dairy Mitigation Site
NCEEP Project No. 95008
Monitorinq Year 2
MYO & MY I data arc updated from the pm%ioush published reports because it now contains at MYO & MY I data are updated from the pre%ioush- published reports because it now contains automated CVS darn
Color Coding for Table
Current Plot Data Y2 2013)
Annual Summary
Scientific Name
Common Name
Species Tye
95008-WE I 0013
95008 WEI -0014
95008 -WEI -0015
95008 -WEI -0016
MY2 (2013 )
M (9/2012)
MYO (42012)
PnoLS
Pall
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -9111
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
PnoLS
P -all
T
Berula ni ra
river birch
Tree
2
2
2
5
5
5
16
16
16
27
27
27
95
95
95
Carpinter carolintana
American hombeam
Tree
4
4
4
2
2
2
12
12
12
23
23
23
18
18
18
Cara s .
hickory
Tree
I
Fmxinus nnsvlvanica
green ash
Tree
6
6
6
8
8
8
3
3
3
57
57
57
61
61
61
62
62
62
Liriodendron tuli ifera
tuli tree
Tree
1
1
1
12
12
12
17
17
17
30
30
30
Plaronus occidentalis
American sycamore
Tree
1
1
1
5
5
5
39
39
39
42
42
42
50
50
50
uercus michauxit
swamp chestnut oak
Tree
1
I
1
7
7
7
11
11
1 11
7
7
1 7
Querctrs hellos
willow oak
Tree
24
24
24
24
24
24
19
19
19
Quercus rubra
northern red oak
Tree
I
I
1
1
1
1
6
6
6
12
12
12
21
21
21
Stem count
10
10
10
15
15
15
7
7
7
8
8
8
173
173
174
217
217
217
302
302
302
size (ares)
1
1
1
1
16
16
16
size (ACRES)
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.40
0.40
0.40
Species count
4
4
4
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
2
8
8
9
8
8
8
8
8
8
Stems per ACRE
405
405
405
607
607
607
283
283
1 283
324 -
324
324
438
438
440
549
549
549,
764
704
MYO & MY I data arc updated from the pm%ioush published reports because it now contains at MYO & MY I data are updated from the pre%ioush- published reports because it now contains automated CVS darn
Color Coding for Table
Exceeds requirements by 105/6
Exceeds requirements, but by less than 110%
V_
Fails to meet requirements, by less than 10%
Fails to meet requirements by more than IW.
5=
Volunteer species included in total
PnoLS: Number of Planted sterns excluding live stakes
Pall: Number of planted stems including live stakes
T: Total Stems