20150416 Ver 1_Year 2 Monitoring Report_2021_20220119

ID#* 20150416
Select Reviewer:
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 01/19/2022
Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/19/2022
Version* 1
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?*
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:*
Matthew Reid
Project Information
ID#:* 20150416
Existing ID#
Project Type: DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Russell Gap
County: Alexander
Document Information
O Yes O No
Email Address:*
[e-mail]
Version:* 1
Existing Version
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Russell_Gap_100003_MY2_2021.pdf 15.97MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name:* Matthew Reid
Signature: *

Russell Gap Stream Mitigation Project
Year 2 (2021) Monitoring Report FINAL
DMS Project ID No. 100003, DEQ Contract No. 6980
USACE Action ID No. SAW-2017-00826, DWR# 20150416
Alexander County, North Carolina, Catawba River Basin: 03050101-120010
MY2 Data. Collection Period: January — October 2021
Submitted to/Prepared for:
NC Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Mitigation Services (DMS)
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1652
INTERNATIONAL
Submission Date: December 2021
0 This document was printed using 30% recycled paper.

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
797 Haywood Rd. Suite 2011 Asheville, North Carolina 28806
INTERNATIONAL
January 7, 2022
Matthew Reid, Project Manager
NCDEQ, Division of Mitigation Services
5 Ravenscroft Dr., Suite 102
Asheville, NC 28801
Subject: Response to DMS Comments for DRAFT MY2 Report
Russell Gap Mitigation Project, Alexander County
DMS Project # 100003, DEQ Contract #6980, Catawba River Basin
Mr. Reid:
Office: 828.412.6101
Please find enclosed our responses to the NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS) review comments dated
December 17, 2021 in reference to the Russell Gap Mitigation Project - DRAFT MY2 Report. We have revised
the draft document in response to the review comments as outlined below.
Report Comments/Questions:
• Please include IRT meeting minutes from the June 23, 2021 site visit in the appendix.
Response: IRT meeting minutes have been included in Appendix F.
• Please include encroachment discussed in section 1.4 Monitoring Results on CCPV.
Response: The encroachment area has been added to the CCPV as a shapefile.
• Section 1.4 states 64.4 inches of rainfall was observed for the project and the annual historic
average is 56.1 inches. Figure 7 note states historic average annual rainfall is 52.51 inches while the
observed project rainfall was 55.76 inches. Please review and revise as necessary.
Response: These data have been reviewed and corrections made to Figure 7.
• There is a discrepancy between growing season days listed in Section 1.4 and the note onTable
11 (227 vs 226). Please review and revise.
Response: This discrepancy has been corrected on Table 11.
• Table 2: Add the following to the table:
o "Maintenance— repairs, live staking, bridge replacement— Nov 2020"
o "Invasive Treatment — Jun/Oct 2021"
Response: These items have been added to Table 2.
• Table 2: Please add two lines directly under the Year 2 Monitoring line. The listed activity for
one line should be Vegetation Monitoring, and the second line should be Stream Survey.Under
the data collection column please include the date that each of these activities was completed.
Please include this information in future monitoring reports.
Response: Lines have been added as requested.

I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
797 Haywood Rd. Suite 201 1 Asheville, North Carolina 28806
Office: 828.412.6101
• CCPV: Include all areas that were repaired and replanted on CCPV.
Response: Repair areas have been added to the CCPV.
• Table 5 and 6: Please add dates to the tables to indicate when the field assessment was
completed for the Stream Stability Assessment and Vegetation Assessment. The IRT has
requested this information be included on these tables.
Response: Dates have been added to Tables 5 and 6 as requested.
• Table 5: R10b section is missing the assessed LF length amount.
Response: The assessed LF length amount has been added for R10b to Table 5.
• Table 6: Please include easement encroachment discussed on R26. Once this
encroachment has been rectified for a monitoring year, it can be removed.
Response: This easement encroachment is discussed in Section 1.4 Monitoring Results and Project
Performance and is included on the CCPV.
• Table 10: Table currently shows the MY2 data under MY1 2020. Please update table to
separate MY1 and MY2 data.
Response: The table has been updated as requested.
• Please ensure the Monitoring Phase Performance Bond has been updated and approved by Kristie
Corson before invoicing for Task 8.
Response: The monitoring Phase Performance Bond has been updated and approved.
IRT Meeting Minute Action Items:
• The IRT recommended relocating the flow gauge on R11 to the upper 1/3 of the reach.
According to the CCPV, this does not appear to have occurred. Does Baker intend to move
the flow gauge?
Response: The flow gauge on R11 was installed in its location due to steep topography at
the top of the reach. The stream bed has a lesser grade where it is currently installed
which was thought to be more effective in capturing flow. In addition to the flow gauge, a
programmed camera was installed at the bottom of R11 at the end of MY2 to capture
photographic evidence of flow in the channel during MY3.
• The outer bend upstream of the R11 and R1 confluence had erosion and there were
concerns of future alignment problems. Baker indicated that live staking and manual
repairs would occur and be discussed in the MY2 report. Please update report with
discussion on this issue. If erosion is still present, please update CCPV and Table 5.
Response: Live stakes were installed on the right bank of R1 at SPA-1 (shown on CCPV) at
the end of the 2021 growing season. Matting that had been displaced during flooding
was repaired and re -staked. Live vegetation that had fallen into R11 was cut back to
allow for flow in the design channel as to not undermine the right bank of R1 at SPA-1.

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc
■UAJLIMA r_l-dtWr•_iiM 797 Haywood Rd. Suite 201 1 Asheville, North Carolina 28806
INTERNAT10NAL Office:828.412.6101
Table 5 shows SPA-1 on R1 as requested and the report has been updated.
• IRT expressed concern with potential livestock access to the tops of R17 and R18. Baker was going
to discuss options with the landowner. Please provide an update to these two areas.
Response: The landowner is not interested in pursuing any further action beyond the original
scope of the project. The area in question is outside of the existing and agreed upon project
Conservation Easement. All fencing surrounding the original CE line on R17 and R18 is fully
intact and functioning as intended.
• Areas of bank erosion were noticed at the bottom of R4a. Manual repairs and live staking were to
occur and updates included in MY2 report. Please update report with discussion on this section. If
erosion is still present, please update CCPV and Table 5.
Response: This area, SPA-2, was monitored for continuing erosion during MY2. Monitoring will
continue during MY3. Maintenance and live staking will be implemented as needed. Table 5
shows SPA-2 on R4a as requested and the area is included on the CCPV and discussed in Section
1.4 Monitoring Results and Project Performance.
Electronic Deliverables:
• Please submit the features representing random veg plots as polygons rather than points.
Response: Random veg plots for MY2 have been changed to polygons on the CCPV and shapefiles
have been included with the electronic deliverables.
• Please include features representing the scoured eroding area along R1 and R4a and displaythese
segments in the CCPV.
Response: These areas are shown as "Stream Problem Areas" on the CCPV and the shapefile has
been included with the electronic deliverables.
The reported cross section data cannot consistently be used to replicate BHR calculations. For
example, cross section 17 has a reported LTOB elevation that exceeds the maximum elevation for
that plot. As another example, cross section 23 reports a bankfull elevation that achieves the as -
built bankfull area (BKF-ab) and a LTOB elevation that would produce aBHR other than what is
reported. Also, the BKF-ab for cross section 23 may have been calculated before excluding points
outside of the main channel but below the Low Bank Height elevation. Failing to exclude those
points would include those regions in the cross sectional area and influence BKF-ab. Please
ensure that the cross section data are reported such that these calculations can be replicated and
resubmit the excel workbook.
Response: Data has been reviewed and corrected as necessary to ensure that BHR calculations can
be consistently replicated and the excel workbook has be re -submitted as requested.
Please include the data used to create the flow gauge and monitoring well figures. The raw data
folder was empty.
Response: The raw data has been included in the folder as requested.

Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
797 Haywood Rd. Suite 2011 Asheville, North Carolina 28806
INTERNATI0NAL
Office: 828.412.6101
As requested, Michael Baker has provided a written response letter addressing the DMS comments and two
(2) hardcopies of the FINAL report, and the updated e-submission digital files will be sent via secure ftp link.
A full final electronic copy with electronic support files have been included on a USB drive. Please do not
hesitate to contact me ([e-mail] 828-412-6101) should you have any questions regarding
our response submittal.
Sincerely,
Jason York
Environmental Scientist
/-- �Z�
Enclosure: Final MY2 Report Russell Gap Mitigation Project

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY.......................................................................................3
1.1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION...............................................................................................................................3
1.2
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.............................................................................................................................3
13
PROJECT SUCCESS CRITERIA.....................................................................................................................4
1.4
MONITORING RESULTS AND PROJECT PERFORMANCE.............................................................................4
1.5
TECHNICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL DESCRIPTIONS...............................................................................5
1.6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................................6
APPENDICES
Appendix A Background Tables and Figures
Figure
1
Vicinity Map
Figure
2
Project Asset Map
Table
1
Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table
2
Project Activity and Reporting History
Table
3
Project Contacts
Table
4
Project Attributes
Appendix B Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3 Current Condition Plan View (CCPV)
Table 5 Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6 Vegetation Condition Assessment
Stream Station Photo -Points
Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Monitoring Gauges and Overbank Photographs
Appendix C Vegetation Plot Data
Table 7 Planted Stem Counts by Plot and Species
Appendix D Stream Geomorphology Data
Figure 4 Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Table 8 Baseline Stream Data Summary
Table 9 Cross -Section Morphology Data Summary
Appendix E Hydrologic Data
Table
10
Verification of Bankfull Events
Figure
5
Wetland Monitoring Well Graphs
Table
11
Wetland Hydrology Summary Data
Figure
6
Flow Gauge Graphs
Table
12
All Years Flow Gauge Success
Figure
7
Observed Rainfall Versus Historic Averages
Appendix F IRT Meeting Minutes
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 2
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT, DMS NO. 100003
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

1.0 PROJECT SUMMARY
1.1 Project Description
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc. (Michael Baker) restored approximately 4,209 linear feet of existing
stream, enhanced 8,857 linear feet of stream along Unnamed Tributaries (UTs) to Davis Creek, the East
Prong Lower Little River, and UTs to the East Prong Lower Little River. Michael Baker also restored
and/or enhance approximately 7.3 acres of riparian wetland in the Catawba River Watershed. The project
is located in the Catawba River Basin, within the Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 03050101-120010, which
is identified as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW) in the NC Division of Mitigation Services'(DMS) 2009
Upper Catawba River Basin Restoration Priorities (RBRP) report.
The Russell Gap Stream Mitigation project is located on an active cattle farm in Alexander County, North
Carolina, 10 miles northwest of the Town of Taylorsville as shown on the Project Vicinity Map (Figure 1).
Historic agriculture uses on the project site include cattle production, row crops, and apple orchards. These
activities had negatively impacted both water quality and streambank stability along the project streams
and their tributaries (Table 4). The project is being conducted as part of the NCDMS Full Delivery In -Lieu
Fee Program and is anticipated to generate at close-out a total of 9,166.949 stream mitigation credits
(contracted for 9,400) and up to 7.053 riparian wetland mitigation units (contracted for 4.0) (Table 1) and
is protected by a 35.97-acre permanent conservation easement.
1.2 Goals and Objectives
The goals of this project are identified below:
• Establishment of geomorphically stable conditions along all project reaches,
• Improvement of water quality by reducing nutrient and sediment inputs,
• Restoration of natural stream and floodplain interactions,
• Restoration and enhancement of riparian wetland functions,
• Restoration and protection of riparian buffer functions and corridor habitat,
• Improvement of in -stream aquatic habitat, and
• Establishment of a permanent conservation easement on the entire project.
To accomplish these goals, the following objectives were identified:
• To restore appropriate bankfull dimensions, remove spoil berms, and/or raise channel beds, by
utilizing either a Priority I Restoration approach or an Enhancement Level I approach.
• To construct streams of appropriate dimensions, pattern, and profile in restored reaches, slope
stream banks and provide bankfull benches on enhanced streams and utilize bioengineering to
provide long-term stability.
• Construct a correct channel morphology to all streams increasing the number and depths of pools,
with structures including geo-lifts with brush toe, log vanes/weirs, root wads, and/or J-hooks.
• Raise ground water levels in delineated hydric soils areas through the implementation of Priority I
restoration and the filling of ditches. Wetland vegetation will also be planted.
• Establish riparian buffers at a 50-foot minimum width along all stream reaches, planted with native
tree and shrub species.
• Establish a permanent conservation easement restricting land use in perpetuity. This will prevent
site disturbance and allow the project to mature and stabilize.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 3
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT, DMS NO. 100003
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

1.3 Project Success Criteria
The success criteria and performance standards for the project will follow the North Carolina Interagency
Review Team (NCIRT) guidance document Wilmington District Stream and Wetland Compensatory
Mitigation Update dated October 24, 2016 and as described in Section 7 of the approved Mitigation Plan.
All specific monitoring activities will follow those outlined in detail in Section 8 of the approved Mitigation
Plan and will be conducted for a period of seven years unless otherwise noted. Annual monitoring reports
will follow the DMS document Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data Requirements, and Content
Guidance from April 2015. The performance standards for the riparian buffer assets will be held in
accordance with 15A NCAC 0213.0295(n)(2)(13) and 15A NCAC 0213.0295(n)(4), and annual monitoring
reports will be submitted at the end of each of the seven monitoring years.
1.4 Monitoring Results and Project Performance
The Year 2 monitoring survey data of the twenty-six permanent cross -sections indicates that these stream
sections are geomorphically stable and are within the lateral/vertical stability and in -stream structure
performance categories. Stream Problem Area 1 (SPA1) was identified on RI from approximately station
22+50 to 23+00 on the outer bend of the right bank where scour and erosion occurred in November 2020.
This SPA makes up 1% of RI and was planted with live stakes to stabilize the bank during MY2. SPA2 is
located on the left bank at the bottom of R4a and is approximately 30 feet of scoured bank making up 5%
of R4a. All other reaches were stable and performing as designed and are rated at 100 percent for all the
parameters evaluated (Table 5 in Appendix B).
During Year 2 monitoring, the planted acreage performance categories were functioning well overall. The
average density of total planted stems based on data collected from the 20 permanent and 9 random
monitoring plots for the Year 2 monitoring conducted in October 2021 was 614 stems per acre (Table 7 in
Appendix Q. Thus, the Year 2 vegetation data demonstrate that the Site is on track to meet the minimum
success interim criteria of 320 trees per acre by the end of Year 3. No vegetation problem areas (VPAs)
were identified as exceeding the reportable mapping threshold of 0.1 acres. Scattered stems of privet
(Ligustrum spp.) and multiflora rose (Rosa mult flora) located throughout the site were treated with
herbicide in June and October 2021 and follow up treatment is anticipated to occur in future monitoring
years.
A culverted crossing on Reach 1 was damaged during a high flow event in November 2020 following the
completion of monitoring during MY 1. The culvert was replaced with a railcar bridge in May 2021. During
MY2 the bridge is stable. IRT and DMS staff agreed that the bridge repair was functioning as intended
during the June 2021 site visit. Storms during November 2020 also caused boulders in a structure at the
confluence of Reach 15 and Reach 4 to become dislodged which created a small area of bank erosion
immediately downstream on the left bank. The structure and bank were repaired during MY2 and is stable
and functioning. A sink hole that formed on the right floodplain of Reach 11 was also filled during MY2.
A Stream Problem Area (SPA1) was identified on the right bank of RI, upstream of the confluence with
RI 1. Approximately 50ft of the bank were scoured and eroding. Repairs to matting and live stake planting
was completed in October 2021. Approximately 100ft of RI I upstream from the confluence of RI was
cleared of hanging bank vegetation to expose the intact stream bed to allow flow to follow the design
channel. Vegetation on the right bank of RI was then pinned back with landscape fabric to expose the
streambed. An automated camera was installed near the confluence of RI I and RI to capture photos of
flow on the lower portion of RI 1. SPA2 on the left bank of R4a was identified as an area of bank scour and
was monitored during MY2. Monitoring will continue during MY3 and maintenance and live staking will
be implemented as necessary. During installation of easement boundary posts and signs an encroachment
of approximately 577 square feet of mowing was noted on the right floodplam at the bottom of R26. This
area is shown on CCPV Figure 313. The boundary is now clearly marked and will be monitored for future
encroachments. This area will be re -planted during MY3.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 4
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT, DMS NO. 100003
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

During Year 2 monitoring three separate post -construction bankfull events were observed (see Table 10 in
Appendix E and the Overbank Photographs in Appendix B). They were documented using manual cork
crest gauge readings and post -flood event site inspection photographs. Rain data and groundwater well
inundation is also considered to determine the approximate date of bankfull events. Crest gauges located
on R6 and R9 did not record an overbank event during MY2.
Figure 6 in Appendix E demonstrates that rainfall in the past 12 months has decreased since its peak in
November 2020. Rainfall since April 2021 has been lower than the historic averages five of seven months
during the growing season. A total of 64.4 inches of rainfall was observed for the project which is greater
than the annual historic average of 56.1 inches; however, 19.9 inches of rainfall were recorded in October
and November 2020. All observed project rainfall was collected from the North Carolina Climate Office
Weather Climate Database CRONOS station TAYL, located in Taylorsville, NC.
During Year 2 monitoring, eleven of twelve automated groundwater monitoring wells met or exceeded the
minimum hydroperiod performance criteria approved in the Mitigation Plan of 12% of the 227-day growing
season (27 or more consecutive days). Four of five automated flow gauges met or exceeded the minimum
30-day performance criteria during MY2 (See Appendix E, Table 12). Flow gauge 2 on R14 was perched
above the streambed during part of monitoring year due to minor localized scour. The gauge was adjusted
to sit on the streambed in October 2021 and will be monitored for future scour in MY3.
Summary information/data related to the Site and statistics related to 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
and in the Mitigation Plan available on the DMS website. Any raw data supporting the tables and figures
in the Appendices is available from DMS upon request.
This report documents the successful completion of the Year 2 monitoring activities for the post -
construction monitoring period.
1.5 Technical and Methodological Descriptions
Stream survey data was collected to a minimum of Class C Vertical and Class A Horizontal Accuracy using
a Leica TS06 Total Station and was georeferenced to the NAD83 State Plane Coordinate System, FIPS3200
in US Survey Feet, which was derived from the MY-1 Survey. The survey data from the permanent project
cross -sections were collected and classified using the Rosgen Stream Classification System to confirm
design stream type (Rosgen 1994 and 1996).
The twenty permanent and nine annual random vegetation -monitoring quadrants (plots) were installed
across the site in accordance with the CVS-DMS Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version 4.1 (Lee
2007) and the data collected from each was input into the CVS-DMS Data Entry Tool v. 2.3.1 (CVS 2012).
Nine automated groundwater monitoring wells were installed in the floodplain along Reach RI following
USACE protocols (USACE 2005).Three additional groundwater monitoring wells were installed in the
floodplain along R9. Flow gauges were installed on RI 1, R13, R14, R19 and R20 and an additional camera
was installed on RI I to capture pictures of flow. Collective data will document that these intermittent
streams continue to exhibit base flow for at least thirty consecutive day throughout each monitoring year.
The gauges themselves are all Van Essen DI800 BARO Diver data loggers. Four manual cork crest gauges
were installed on R1, R4, R6, and R9.
All observed project rainfall was collected from the North Carolina Climate Office Weather Climate
Database CRONOS station TAYL, located in Taylorsville, NC approximately nine miles south of the
project at 35.9139,-81.19087.
The specific locations of monitoring features, such as vegetation plots, permanent cross -sections, reference
photograph stations, and crest gauges, are shown on the CCPV map found in Appendix B.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 5
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT, DMS NO. 100003
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

1.6 References
Carolina Vegetation Survey (CVS) and NC Division of Mitigation Services (DMS). CVS-DMS Data Entry
Tool v. 2.3.1. University of North Carolina, Raleigh, NC. 2012.
Lee, M., Peet R., Roberts, S., Wentworth, T. 2007. CVS-DMS Protocol for Recording Vegetation, Version
4.1.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. 2010. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities.
NC Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. 2016. Neuse River Basin Restoration Priorities: Neuse-
01 Catalog Unit Update. NC Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh, NC.
North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services. 2017. Annual Monitoring Report Format, Data
Requirements, and Content Guidance June 2017. NC Department of Environmental Quality. Raleigh,
NC.
North Carolina Interagency Review Team (NCIRT). 2016. Guidance document "Wilmington
District Stream and Wetland Compensatory Mitigation Update ". October 24, 2016
Rosgen, D.L. 1994. A Classification of Natural Rivers. Catena 22:169-199.
Rosgen, D.L. 1996. Applied River Morphology. Wildlands Hydrology. Pagosa Springs, CO.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2005. "Technical Standard for Water -Table
Monitoring of Potential Wetland Sites," WRAP Technical Notes Collection (ERDC TN-
WRAP-05-2), U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, MS.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC. PAGE 6
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT, DMS NO. 100003
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

APPENDIX A
Background Tables and Figures

401010101
Wilkes County
Alexander County
Site Location
50101120010
030501\01120020
dw
Alexander County
Gr
e
03040101
Site
I nnntinn
1
Legend
CConservation Easement
Counties
14 Digit HUC
Note: Site is located within targeted local
watershed 03050101120010.
Figure 1
Project Vicinity Map
Russell Gap Project
INTERNATIONAL
0 0.5 1 2
Miles

Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Russell Gat) Stream Mitigation Proiect - NCDMS Proiect No. 100003
pl-
�tttt
�
t�tt�
tt
tttt
tttt
®a®
tt
t tt :
1 All stream stationing and restored footage numbers reported here, discussed in the report text, and shown in the as -built plan sheets use survey values.
2 The stream footage reported here uses the as -built streamcenterifne survey values and have all easement breaks removed from their totals. Buffer group values
reported here are the creditable areas as allowed for each group as described in detail in the mitigation plan.
3 Credits reported here are taken directly from the approved mitigation plan Table 11.1
Table 1.1 Table 1.2
As -Built Centerline Length and Area Summations by Mitigation Category Overall Assets Summary
Res aokion Level
Stream
(linear fie()
lbpadan Wetland
We")
Wetland
(acres)
Credited Buffer
(square fet)
Riverine
Non-l2iverine
Reetorafiun
4,063
6.773
Enlanrement
0.559
Enhance—t l
5.760
Enhancement It
"A6dl
Creation
preservation
High Quality Prey
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT
Asset Category
Overall
Credits
Stream
9,166.949
RP Wetland
7.053
NR Wetland
Buffer

Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Russell Gap Stream Mitigation Project - NCDMS Project No. 100003
Elapsed Time Since grading complete: 22 months
Elapsed Time Since planting complete: 21 months
Number of Reporting Years': 2
Activity or Deliverable
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
404 permit date
N/A
Dec-18
Mitigation Plan
N/A
Sep-18
Final Design - Construction Plans
N/A
Sep-18
Construction Grading Completed
N/A
Feb-20
As -Built Survey
May-20
May-20
Livestake and Bareroot Planting Completed
N/A
Mar-20
As -Built Baseline Monitoring Report (MYO)
Mar-20
Sep-20
Year 1 Monitoring
Nov-20
Dec-20
Year 2 Monitoring
Oct-21
Dec-21
Vegetation Monitoring
Oct-21
Dec-21
Stream Survey
Oct-21
Dec-21
Maintenance, Repairs, Live Staking
May and Oct-21
Dec-21
Invasive Treatment
June and Oct-21
Dec-21
Year 3 Monitoring
Year 4 Monitoring
Year 5 Monitoring
Year 6 Monitoring
Year 7 Monitoring
' = The number of monitoring reports excluding the as-built/baseline report
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

Table 3. Project Contacts
Russell Gap Stream Mitigation Project - NCDMS Project No.100003
Designer
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Cary, NC 27518
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
Contact:
Katie McKeithan, Tel. [phone]
Construction Contractor
5616 Coble Church Rd
Julian, NC 27283
KBS Earthworks, Inc.
Contact:
Kory Strader, Tel. [phone]
Survey Contractor
P.O. Box 148
Swannanoa, NC 28778
Turner Land Surveying
Contact:
(As -Built Only)
David Turner, Tel. [phone]
88 Central Avenue
Kee Mapping and Surveying
Asheville, NC 28801
(Existing Conditions and Monitoring
Contact:
Survey)
Brad Kee, Tel. [phone]
Planting Contractor
5616 Coble Church Rd
Julian, NC 27283
KBS Earthworks, Inc.
Contact:
Kory Strader, Tel. [phone]
Seeding Contractor
5616 Coble Church Rd
Julian, NC 27283
KBS Earthworks, Inc.
Contact:
Kory Strader, Tel. [phone]
Seed Mix Sources
Telephone:
Green Resources
336-855-6363
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Telephone: [phone]
Mellow Marsh Farm
ArborGen
Telephone: [phone]
Monitoring Performers
8000 Regency Parkway, Suite 600
Michael Baker Engineering, Inc.
Cary, NC 27518
Stream Monitoring POC
Katie McKeithan, Tel. [phone]
Vegetation Monitoring POC
Katie McKeithan, Tel. [phone]
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DIMS #100003)
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

Table 4. Project Attributes
Russell Gao Stream Mitieation Proiect - NCDMS Proiect No. 100003
Project Name
Russell Gap Stream Mitigation Project
County
Alexander County
Project Area (acres)
35.97
Project Coordinates (latitude and longitude)
36.0091 N,-81.2139 W
Planted Acreage (Acres of Woody Stems Planted)
29.67
Project Watershed Summary Information
Physiographic Province
Peidmont
River Basin
Catawba
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8-digit
3050101
USGS Hydrologic Unit 14-digit
03050101-120010
DWR Sub -basin
03-08-32
Project Drainage Area (Acres and Square Miles)
2,227 acres / 3.48 square miles (at downstream end of R3)
Project Drainage Area Percentage of Impervious Area
0.13% impervious area
CGIA Land Use Classification
82.6% forested, 14.5% agriculture, 1.5% rural residential, 1.4% roadway
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach RI
Reach R2
Reach R3
Reach R4
Length of reach (linear feet)
2,142
288
388
2,245
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Drainage area (Acres)
960
1,056
2227
806
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
Stream Classification (existing)
E4 (incised)
E4 (incised)
E4
E4
Stream Classification (proposed)
C4
C4
C4
B4c
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
IV - Degradation
and WideningIII
-Degradation
III -Degradation
IV - Degradation
and Widening
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach R4a
Reach R5
Reach R6
Reach R7a
Length of reach (linear feet)
299
256
631
155
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Drainage area (Acres)
716
150
154
210
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
Stream Classification (existing)
E4
C4b
G4
E4b
Stream Classification (proposed)
B4c
C4b
B4
E4b
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
I -Stable System
I -Stable System
Degradation
IV - Deg
and Widening
I -Stable System
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach R7b
Reach R8
Reach R9
Reach R10(AB)
Length of reach (linear feet)
1,170
463
439
371
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Drainage area (Acres)
288
333
358
17
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
Stream Classification (existing)
E4b
C4
E4b
E4b
Stream Classification (proposed)
E4b
C4
B4
E4b-C4
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
III - Degradation
I - Stable System
IV - Degradation
and Widening
II - Disturbance
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach RI
Reach R12
Reach R13
Reach R14
Length of reach (linear feet)
481
86
124
528
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately Confined, unconfined)
Confined
Unconfined
Moderately
Confined
Confined (Upper)
Unconfined
Lower
Drainage area (Acres)
17
115
21
22
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Intermittent
Perennial
Intermittent
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
Stream Classification (existing)
134a
Eb
C4
A4
Stream Classification (proposed)
134a
C4b
C4
E4
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
III - Degradation
IV - Degradation
and Widenm'
II - Disurbance
IV - Degradation
and Widenin
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach R15
Reach R17
Reach R18
Reach R19
Length of reach (linear feet)
226
130
185
481
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Unconfined
Unconfined
Unconfined
Moderately
Confined
Drainage area (Acres)
19
26
24
22
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Intermittent
Intermittent
Intermittent
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
Stream Classification (existing)
E4b
E4b
E4b
134a
Stream Classification (proposed)
E4b
E4b
E4b
134a
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
I - Stable System
I - Stable System
I - Stable System
IV - Degradation
and Widening
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach R20
Reach R21
Reach R22
Reach R22a
Length of reach (linear feet)
206
67
161
68
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Confined
Unconfined
Moderately
Confined
Moderately
Confined
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)
9
33
3
3
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
C
Stream Classification (existing)
A4a+
B4
B4
B4
Stream Classification (proposed)
A4a+
B4
B4
B4
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
III - Degrading
I - Stable System
II - Channelized
II - Channelized
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Existing Reach Summary Information
Parameters
Reach R25
Reach R26
Reach R27
Length of reach (linear feet)
422
548
165
Valley confinement (Confined, moderately confined, unconfined)
Moderately
Confined
Unconfined
Moderately
Confined
Drainage area (Acres and Square Miles)
33
32
19
Perennial, Intermittent, Ephemeral
Perennial
Perennial
Perennial
NCDWR Water Quality Classification
C
C
C
Stream Classification (existing)
134a
E4b
E4b
Stream Classification (proposed)
134a
E4b
E4b
Evolutionary trend (Simon)
III - Degrading
I - Stable System
I - Stable System
FEMA classification
Zone X
Zone X
Zone X
Regulatory Considerations
Parameters
Applicable?
Resolved?
Supporting Does?
Water of the United States - Section 404
Yes
Yes
PCN
Water of the United States - Section 401
Yes
Yes
PCN
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yes
Categorical
Exclusion
Historic Preservation Act
Yes
Yes
Categorical
Exclusion
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA or CAMA)
No
N/A
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
No
N/A
N/A
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
N/A
N/A
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT

APPENDIX B
Visual Assessment Data

10
•� \� r
t w �24
27
28 �•
VP 16 _ _ • ,
� 526 stems/ac VP 1 �.i �,, ,' •
�8 526stems/acIlk
t
NVO
? yS
w a, r. '�� MY2 RVP 9 /•t9 x Mis:L '�
92
y 607stems/ac •` v
FPS '! _ M11W34y
xS
"y x
stems/ac _10
ws R1
,. I a w6 Bank Scour r' F '
- e.�� �.. �, ., -y,._, /:; Live Staking and Repairs
MY2 RVP 8
687 stems/ac
A"fR11
-23
'(22
21 /'
V P 17
890 stems/ac
Monitoring Wells
Monitoring Flow Gauges
♦ Monitoring Crest Gauges
A Photo Points
Stream Problem Areas
MY2 Random Veg Poly
- Vegetation Plots
— Cross Sections
QConservation Easement
Approach
— Restoration
— Enhancement I
— Enhancement 11
— No Credit
Wetland Type
® Restoration
® Enhancement
I N T E R N AT 1 0 N A L
R13
1112
n13
'A14 VP3
• 768 stems/ac
1.6'
s
PG1 'S
24..-- . CG 1./3
�-'c.. XS ST
4 • 4
MY2 RVP 7 /
566 stems/ac h1W8 '
m18-' R12
M11W9
xS
VPVP
ems /ac 661 stems/ac 19
607 s L
,1 20
xs
a' 20'
FG2 L0 FG3'
l9 4
t R14 �£ .fir
0 150 300 Figure 3A
Feet Current Conditions Plan View
Russell Gap Project

.y
y N'
t
I"
av
a .
...-� d*
u
607 stems/ac +.
MY2 RVP5 V71
566 stems/ac
-1v
72
xs a
+ss x-S a
y a
�t
� is al
+�
Vk
>4v
�• r. VP6 4 at.
. 445 stems/ac a�t•`
,S -�65 SPA2
Bank Scour y
MY2 RVP 6
323 stems/ac
Monitoring Wells
Monitoring Flow Gauges
\ ♦ Monitoring Crest Gauges
A Photo Points
Stream Problem Areas
_ MY2 CE Encroachment
MY2 Random Veg Poly
- Vegetation Plots
— Cross Sections
Conservation Easement
Approach
— Restoration
— Enhancement I
— Enhancement 11
— No Credit
Wetland Type
® Restoration
® Enhancement
Michael Bakel mmmmE=� 0 150 300 Figure 3B
Feet Current Conditions Plan View
I N T E R N A T 1 0 N A L Russell Gap Project

E9
o ae
ae ae
ae
Ss
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
E 9
o ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
....
....
.
acd.
cci
G
J
cv:
C
J
7
Z y
—
z
is
F
F
�a
�a
za^
za^
r
�
r
ni
ni
L
9
c
2tR
9
El
-
3 t
3
o
U
�
U
U
U

dI
Eae
ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
� E �
S ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
�
� ae
ae ae
ae ae
a
a
S S
G ii
G ii
s
—s
c A
—
z°�N
z°�N
_
F
�a
�a
v •Ee
m .E9
E
�
�
a
C
C
ni
ni
Al
O
°G°
c
o
as
r.5
c
a
c
o,Ea
r
v
o
'�
- a
o
v
3
o
x
o
,•,
E
,•,
�Z.
m
.5mo
uu
_N
59=
6ba
Z �tSGn
_
_
c fig
6bg
tSn
_
�
$5 E
Q.5 O
1O..1
a
a
U
p
G U
G
U
c
G U
G
d
A'
iz
a
;a
A
dA"tee
T
U
a
U

E9
�° ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
0
� 5
S
a �
o 4 S
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
F
a�
�a
� G d
za�
za^
E
5
E
5
H
�
H
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
m
m
o
o
A
_
o
o a
22
IE
E
ob
oSo
c
u
o A
E
v
.n�_
d
o
y.E
c
v
o ,Eo
v
v'�'
v
c
y
tl
-Mg
o
svIz
E
aP
mZrtSn
33
—9—oS
c
9�9Zr
33
v
Q
FF
m
Q.SOFO.��FF
m
mm
m
n
C7 v�ma
mm
m
U
c
U
o
U
U
m
m
w

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
s 5
0
� 5
S
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
a�
�a
G
G 9a+
zw5
za
s
5
ME
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
WE
Ix
m
o
o
A
_
o
ob76.
.E o
v
v
Q .SOFO.��FF
m
Q.SOFO.��FF
m
o
mmm
�n
C7 �,
ma
mmm
v:
C)v�ma
���
o5am
x
; a
o
x
U
RP
U
m
m
m
w

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
s 5
0
� 5
S
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
IT
11
F
a�
�a
� G v
zap
za^
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
C
Fi
o
C
b
o
r
Ix
r
—
=
w
o —
..
'�
o —
.. m
O.
M
c
A
�. =
v
o
o
M
E�
c
t
sys
a�P
mZrtSn
33
—9—
�o��S
�_
9��9Zr�
33
s��S
�_
v
Q .SOFO.��FF
m
Q.SOFO.��FF
m
mm
m
n
C7 v�ma
mmm
v:
C)v�ma
G
eq
-
O
o�am
v.
U
ip
U

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
E 5
S
� 5
S
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
F
a�
�a
G
G 9a+
zw5
za
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
Ix
m
_.g
go o
aP
mZrtSn
339�9Zr
v
rl
lo lo
1
m
mm
m
�C7�m
a
mm
m
� �
C,
x
; a
�
C,RP
x
U
U

E 5
S
�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
� S 5
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
F
a�
�a
G
G 9a+
zw5
za
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
Ix
m
m
o
0
A
_
o
o a
76.
tog
fi
ME
a
u
o A
i d
o
c
v �
�
o ,so
v v
c
v
o
g
-
v
2 E
v
3
Ei
a�P
mZrtSn
33 —9—
�o��S
�_
v
Q .SOFO.��FF
m
Q.SOFO.��FF
m
mm
m
�C7�m
a
mm
m
ma
.31
���
o5am
x
; a
c",
x
U
ip
m
m
m
w

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
s 5
0
� 5
S
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
___
z7a
z7a
F
a�
�a
G
G 9a+
T�l
za5
za
5
5
�
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
C
Fi
o
C
b
o
r
Ix
r
—
=
w
—
o
.. m
_
=
w
—
o
.. m
m
o�
�
�
A
_
o�
a
1
�
go
.19
sm
OR
C,RP
x
U
U

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
E 5
S
� 5
S
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
F
a�
�a
G
G 9a+
zw5
za
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
m
m
o
b
Gov
"c
go
c S
v-M
o
m
Lv S
c
.s .s
>
E m
�', 'o
o
Lv L
° °�j}
m
=
`°
t
svS
°o�S
aP
mZrtSn
33 —9—oS
�_
9�9Zr
33
�_
v
Q.SOF
O.� �F
F
lo lo
l
m
mm
m
n
5 �,
ma
mmm
v:
C)�nm
a
U
U
m
L!-.
m
w

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
E 5
0
� 5
S
S
a
o S
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
a�
�a
G
G 9a+
za5
za�
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
m
o a
"c
91
2.
Gov
c22
Gov
21
ig
v
v
=
c o
v S
o o°
o3
a A
'.5 c
_
v
S .5
S
aP
mZrtSn
3 3 —9—
o
�_
9�
9 Zr
3 3
6,2ts
�
� �
�
C',
11611
x
; a
�
C',
x
U
RP
U
Lu$
St
U
m
m
m
w

E 5
S
�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
� S 5
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
F
a�
�a
c
G 9a+
za5
za
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
Ix
m
m
o
o
A
_
o
b a
"c
�9
Gov
c22
�o
%
Gov
22
�'
a
c c
t
svE
aP
mZrtSn
33 —9—oS
c
9�9Zr
33
s�S
c
o�Gm
x
U
RP
U

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
s 5
0
� 5
S
S
a
o S
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
F
a�
�a
G
G 9a+
za5
za
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
m
m
o
o
A
_
o
o a
Gov
"c c�
�1
�o
%
Gov
�9
22
�'
a
v
v
c o
=
ob
o S
Es
aP
m -A
v
Q .SOFO.��FF
m
Q.SOFO.��FF
m
o5amo�Gm
x
U
�
U
_
C
°,

�° ae
ae ae
ae ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae ae
ae a°
S
ae ae
ae ae
ae
ae ae
ae ae
E 5
S
5
S
s s
s s
s s
a
a
ffi
o ci
a �
� ci
a
7
7
___
z7a
z7a
F
a�
�a
c
G 9a+
zw5
za
s
5
s
5
�
„
a
3
a
3
ni
ni
m
o
A
E
o o
_
v
=
E
IE
c o
c S
E
a
o
x
_.g
m
Lv S
c
.s .s
>
E m
�', 'o
m
Lv s
° °�j}
m
=
`°
u�'
t
3 o
a�P
mZrtSn
9��9Zr�
svE
33 -9-
�o��S
c
33
v
Q.SOF
O.� �F
F
lo lo
1
m
oil
mm
m
�C7�m
a
mm
m
v:
C
U
_
�
U
�'
-'
e3
=9
o
�
�
a
P
�,��
9 a
d
sa
A'
a
�
H
o�am
x
mRp
U
U
m
m
m
w

\�
}�!
\
\
}
-
�
\\
k
_

k
J
\
%
/
\\\
\/\\
\
\
/`
/`
k°
°
:
�
°
-
}
2
=
�
}
»
}
/
)
)
;
)
�
)
(
}
)
)
)
)
}
)
/
�
6
°
3
\ �
\
\
\
\
\
\
ƒ
ƒ
(
\
ƒ
}
))
�
ƒƒ
\
\
\
\
\
!
)
\
{
(
)
\
�
\
\
_
\
�
\
\
�)
®
)j
\\}
\§
s[«
®
\
-
\
-
}
%)
)f
;
;
%I/
§`
&�«
i\
\
\
/
[
:
[
=
f
�
)
}
»
�
\
)
f
/
/
}
}
\
\
}
\
\
\
i
/
\
�
\
�
§
;

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
PP-1: Reach 13, view upstream Station 10+20.
(Anril 1 q 9091)
(April 15, 2021)
k4l_
4�. �•
z
b
tooi ,
PP-5: Reach 14, view upstream Station 15+00.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-2: Reach 14, view upstream toward Reach 13 at Station
ll�dq, (Anril I 9091)
(April 15, 2021)
11 v.1`�uy111(April 15, 2021) �u�1V111V I vv�

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
YY-"/: Reach 1, view upstream, at Station lU+LU.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-9: Keach 1, view upstream at Mation 15+UU.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-11: xeacn 1, view upstream at Jtatlon ZU+uu.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-8: Reach 1, view upstream Reach 1 at Station 13+00.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-lU: Reach 1, view upstream at Station 11+G5.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-1Z: xeacn 1, view downstream at Jtatlon ZU+uu.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
YY-13: Reach 1, view upstream at Station zU+'/5.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-15: Reach 1, view upstream at Mation ZI+5U.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-17: Reach 1, view upstream at Station 24+20.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-14: Reach 1, view downstream at Mation LU+'/5.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-16: Reach 1, contluence of Reach 1 and Reach 11 at
Station 22+75. (April 15, 2021)
YY-16: xeacn 1, view of upstream at Jtatlon Zi+uu.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
YY-19: Reach 1, view upstream Reach 12 at Mation 29+1U.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-Z1: Reach 11, view upstream at Station lU+ZU.
(April 15, 2021)
ee-z3: xeacn 11, view upstream at �!,tauon i z+ t D.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-ZU: Reach 1, view upstream at Mation 29+ZU.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-ZZ: Reach 11, view upstream at Mation 11+5U.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-Z4: xeacn 11, view upstream at Jtanon 14+5U.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
PP-25: Reach 10A, view upstream at Station 10+50
(April 15, 2021)
YY-2l: Reach lUA, view upstream at Station 1J+15.
(April 15, 2021)
ee-zy: xeacn 5, view upstream at station i i+uu.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-Z6: Reach WA, view upstream at Station 12+5U.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-M: Reach Iw, view upstream at Station 14+5U.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-3U: xeacn b, view upstream at Jtatlon 14+5U.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
rr-3i: xeacn it, view upstream at station ii+uu.
(April 15, 2021)
rr-33: xeacn n, view upstream at -3tation iy+5u.
(April 15, 2021)
rr-3a: iwacii io, view upstream at 3tauou iu+l7u.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-32: Reach 6, view upstream at Station 17+50.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-34: Reach 18, view upstream at Station 12+00.
(April 15, 2021)
rr-317: iwacii I A, view upsu'eaIu at 3tatiuu Gu+uu.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
rr-JI: 1[edcll ID, view Upsueaul aL 3miuI1 G1+IJ.
(April 15, 2021)
rr-Jy: nedcll ID, View UPNLIed111 dL JLdUUII GG+GJ.
(April 15, 2021)
rr -`i 1. 1\CdUll GU, VIUW UPMIUdul dL 3LClUUII -LUtOU.
(April 15, 2021)
rr-Ja: I-eacI1I13, view UUVVIISLI-ealll dL JLdUUII GG+UU.
(April 15, 2021)
rr-4U. nedcll ID, View UPNLIed111 dL JLdUUII GJ+JU.
(April 15, 2021)
rr-'3G. IXUdl.11 GU, VIUW UPAUedul dL JLd LlUll 11tJU.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
1 r -Yj. 1"ca"11 10, VIVVV UNaLlcalll aL OLauVll
(April 15, 2021)
PP-45: Reach 19, view upstream at Station 12+80.
(April 15, 2021)
11 -,I . 1\ aUl 10, VIGVV UFaUGUlll UL JML1V11VIOTUV.
(April 15, 2021)
r r -YY. 1Vcacu 10, V1cvV UNaucalll aL .3LauV11 1lto�.
(April 15, 2021)
11 -YV. Iwau11 10, Vlc VV Ufj3L1Ga111 aL OwUVll 10TLV.
11 -,U. 1\GUl.11 I—, VIUVV UFaUUU111 UL JLUUVll —XV.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
r r -Yu. lmcauu 111, V1cVV uumnucalll aL nauuli c,Ytuu.
(April 15, 2021)
l l -Jl. l�cacll c.c.r-1, vlcvv uNaucaul al .�I.auull luTuu.
(April 15, 2021)
11 -JJ. 1\I.— I—, VIUVV UtJaUGUlll UL JLUUVll O—VV.
(April 15, 2021)
I I -JV. 1\cal.11 111, ulc VV Up3 caul aL JLQLlull GJtf-J.
(April 15, 2021)
11 -JL. 1\cal.11 LLC'1, Vlc Vv ul Upaucalll al JLQLlull 11t1J.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-54: Reach 25, view upstream at Station 10+10.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)
PP-57: Reach 713, view downstream at Station 33+00. PP-58: Reach 7B, view upstream at Station 33+20.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)
PP-59: Reach 8, view downstream at Station 34+00. PP-60: Reach 8, view upstream at Station 37+00.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
PP-61: Reach 8, view upstream at Station 38+00. PP-62: Reach 9, view upstream at Station 39+20.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)
PP-63: Reach 9, view upstream at Station 41+00. PP-64: Reach 9, view upstream at Station 42+00.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)
PP-65: Reach 4A, view upstream at Station 13+00. PP-66: Reach 26, view upstream at Station 11+00.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
PP-67: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 11+10. PP-68: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 12+00.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)
PP-69: Reach 27, view upstream at Station 11+60. PP-70: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 15+00.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)
PP-71: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 16+10. PP-72: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 19+00.
(April 15, 2021) (April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
YY-YJ: Reach 15, view upstream at Station 11+UU.
YY-75: Reach 4, view upstream at Mation 23+LU.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-YY: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 28+3U.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-'14: Reach 15, view upstream at Station 1:3+UU.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-76: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 25+00.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-M: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 28+UU.
(April 15, 2021)

Russell Gap: MY2 Stream Station Photo -Points
YY-'19: Reach 4, view upstream at Station 3Z+UU.
(April 15, 2021)
PP-81: Reach 3, view upstream at Station 36+40.
(April 15, 2021)
YY-8U: Reach 3, view upstream at Station 33+00.
(April 15, 2021)

MY2 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Russell Gap - DMS Project #100003
Photo 1. Vegetation Plot 1 - (October 26, 2021)
Photo 3. Vegetation Plot 3 - (October 26, 2021)
Photo 2. Vegetation Plot 2 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 4. Vegetation Plot 4 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 5. Vegetation Plot 5- (October 26, 2021). Photo 6. Vegetation Plot 6- (October 26, 2021).

MY2 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Russell Gap - DMS Project #100003
Photo 7. Vegetation Plot 7 - (October 26, 2021)
Photo 9. Vegetation Plot 9 - (October 26, 2021)
Photo 8. Vegetation Plot 8 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 10. Vegetation Plot 10 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 11. Vegetation Plot 11 - (October 26, 2021). Photo 12. Vegetation Plot 12 - (October 26, 2021).

MY2 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Russell Gap - DMS Project #100003
Photo 13. Vegetation Plot 13 - (October 26, 2021)
Photo 15. Vegetation Plot 15 - (October 26, 2021)
Photo 14. Vegetation Plot 14 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 16. Vegetation Plot 16 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 17. Vegetation Plot 17 - (October 19, 2021). Photo 18. Vegetation Plot 18 - (October 19, 2021).

MY2 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Russell Gap - DMS Project #100003
Photo 19. Vegetation Plot 19 - (October 19, 2021)
Photo 21. Random Vegetation Plot 1- (July 30, 2021)
Photo 20. Vegetation Plot 20 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 22. Random Vegetation Plot 2 - (July 30, 2021).
Photo 23. Random Vegetation Plot 3 - (July 30, 2021) Photo 24. Random Vegetation Plot 4 - (October 26, 2021).

MY2 Vegetation Monitoring Plot Photos
Russell Gap - DMS Project #100003
i� •� a .. .'.�:.i - �� �ti: -
Photo 25. Random Vegetation Plot 5 - (October 26, 2021).
Photo 27. Random Vegetation Plot 7 - (October 19, 2021)
Photo 26. Random Vegetation Plot 6 (Transect) - (October
26, 2021).
Photo 28. Random Vegetation Plot 8 - (October 19, 2021).
Photo 29. Random Vegetation Plot 9 - (October 26, 2021).

Russell Gap MY2 Monitoring Gauges and Overbank Photographs
Monitoring Well 1. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 3. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 5. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 2. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 4. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 6. (October 19, 2021)

Russell Gap MY2 Monitoring Gauges and Overbank Photographs
Monitoring Well 7. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 9. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 11. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 8. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 10. (October 19, 2021)
Monitoring Well 12. (October 19, 2021)

Russell Gap MY2Monitoring Gauges and Ovra\Photographs
.
m«
°�-
/^�
-
.A (
\-
%1� .
»J
Flow Gag t Reach 11. (March 18,2021) Flow Gag 3 Reach 14.(MJc 1$2021)
Flow Gag & Reach 13. (Marc !% 2021)
Flom Gag % Reach 20. (Marc !$ 2021)
Flow Gag % Reach 19. (March 18, 2 2/
Crest Gauge IReach t(October !%2021)

Russell Gap MY2 Monitoring Gauges and Overbank Photographs
Crest Gauge 1 R1.
Crest Gauge 3 R4. BKF reading at 7.5 inches and 20.5
inches (June 14, 2021)
Crest Gauge 4 R6. (October 19, 2021)
Crest Gauge 2 R9. (October 19, 2021)
Crest Gauge 3 R4. (October 19, 2021)

APPENDIX C
Vegetation Plot Data

�o
7779
E
a
E E
y E E
c E E-
I
I
II
IIIII
...... ....

APPENDIX D
Stream Geomorphology Data

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 1
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB
Elev
Riffle
I C
1 17.6
1 14.5
1.2
1.96
12.0
1.1
5.2
1282.60
1282.95
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 1, Cross -Section 1
1285
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1284
F
283
...,----------------------- As -built
w 282 MY1
MY2
o- BKF
1281 DMS BKF=1282.68' ---o-- MY2 BKF
TWG=1280.72'
---o--- Floodprone
1280
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1282.68 as determined
from the as -built bankfull area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DIMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 2
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Stream BKF BKF Max BKF LTOB
Feature T e BKF Area Width Depth De th W/D BH Ratio ER BKF Elev Elev
Pool 22.6 16.1 1 1.4 2.0 1 11.5 1282.20 1 1282.40
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 1, Cross -Section 2
1285
1284
w 1283
r_
0
M 1282
m
w
1281 As -built MY1
o MY2 ---&-- BKF
1280
MY2 BKF ---&-- Floodprone
1279 '
0 10 20
30 40 50
Station (ft)
60 70
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 3
Year Survey Collected: September 2021
PON03031411-09,,
V.;
Looking at the ;Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Stream BKF BKF Max BKF I LTOB
Feature Type BKF Area Width Depth Depth W/D BH Ratio ER BKF Elev Elev
Riffle C 22.2 17.4 1.3 2.4 1 13.7 1.0 4.7 1274.60 1 1274.60
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 1, Cross -Section 3
1278
1277-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------o
1276
0 1275
y As -built
w 1274 MY1
1273 +MY2
o- BKF DIMS BKF= 1274.51'
1272 MY2 BKF TWG = 1280.72'
1271
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Station (ft)
Note: ver UMJAK I request, DanK nelgnt ratio Tor myz nas peen caicuiateo using Tne DanKTWI elevation oT -I Z /4.b-I as oetermineo Trom Tne as -Duet
bankfull area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 4
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elevliid
Pool
34.1
14.1
2.4
3.9
5.8
---
1274.00
1277
--------------------
1276
1275
1274
c
0
w 1273
m
w 1272
1271
1270
1269
0.00 10.00
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 1, Cross -Section 4
20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00
Station (ft)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 5
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
f y
boo
0o ing a he Lett an c
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
C
38.1
19.6
1.9
2.7
1 10.1
1.1
3
1223.70
1224.18
1229
1228
1227
E 1226
c
.21225
76
1224
w
1223
1222
1221
1220
0
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 3, Cross -Section 5
10 20 30 40 50
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
60
1223.82 as
70 80
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 6
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Stream BKF BKF Max BKF LTOB
Feature T e BKF Area Width Depth Depth W/D BH Ratio ER BKF Elev Elev
Riffle B 25.3 13.7 1.8 3.0 1 7.4 0.90 1.6 1248.70 1248.40
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 4, Cross -Section 6
1256
1255
1254
1253
1252
c
.2 1251
1250
w
1249
1248
1247
1246
1245
DIMS BKF = 1248.45'
TWG = 1245.72'
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1248.45 as determined from the as -built
bankfull area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 7
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
1
Riffle
I B
1 25.4
1 14.9
1.7
2.6
1 8.8
0.90
2
1242.75
1242.50
1249
1248—�-
1247
1246
1245
0
is 1244
m
w 1243
1242
1241 1 DIMS BI<F = 1242.57'
1240 TWG = 1240.16'
1239
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 4, Cross -Section 7
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1242.57 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 8
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
I B
1 20.5
1 13.8
1.5
2.8
1 9.4
0.90
2.3
1238.50
1238.50
1245
1244
1243
1242
w
r 1241
0
is 1240
m
w 1239
1238
1237
1236
1235
0
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 4, Cross -Section 8
IV LU SU 4U 5U bU /U
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1238.62 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 9
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
B
17.9
13.8
1.3
1.9
10.7
0.9
2.8
1236.40
1 1236.67
1243
1242
1241
1240
w
r 1239
0
w 1238
m
w 1237
1236
1235 DIMS BKF = 1237'
TWG = 1234.46'
1234
1233
0 10
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 4, Cross -Section 9
As -built
MY1
MY2
o- BKF
o- MY2 BKF
o--- Floodprone
20 30 40 50 60 70
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1237 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 10
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
a Tab
WIAwy1_- - Y,V-• -
at
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
I B
1 20.2
1 12.2
1.7
2.5
7.3
1.0
2.6
1231.65
1231.70
1237
1236
1235
y 1234
01233
1232
w
1231
1230 DIMS BKF = 1231.6'
1229 TWG = 1229.12'
1228
0 10
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 4, Cross -Section 10
20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1231.6 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 11
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
I B
1 12.9
1 9.9
1.3
2.0
7.6
1.1
2.4
1229.43
1229.80
1234
1233 _
1232
1231
0
1230
m
w
1229
1228
1227
1226
0
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 4, Cross -Section 11
DIMS BI<F = 1229.7'
TWG = 1227.42'
10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1229.7 as determined from the as -built bankfull area.
All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 12
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Pool
11.0
13.1
0.8
2.0
1 15.6
1300.30
1300.20
1304
1303
w 1302
r_
0
w 1301
m
w
1300
1299
1298
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 6, Cross -Section 12
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 13
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
I B
1 8.8
1 7.5
1.2
1.7
1 6.4
1.1
6
1292.40
1292.40
1296
1295
y 1294
c
0
is 1293
m
w
1292
1291
1290
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 6, Cross -Section 13
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1292.19 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 14
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
B
16.4
11.5
1.4
2.4
1 8.0
1.1
4
1259.00
1259.00
1264
1263
1262
1261
c
0
1260
m
LL' 1259
1258
1257
1256
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 7b, Cross -Section 14
As -built
MY1
MY2
o-- BKF
o-- MY2 BKF
o-- Floodprone
DIMS BKF = 1258.82'
TWG = 1290.68'
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1258.82 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 15
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Pool
13.4
14.6
0.9
2.0
15.8
1252.08
1251.80
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Looking at the Left Bank
Permanent Cross -Section 16
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Xs1 b rfb �' `-
ML
�TWW u [
Looking at the Right Bank
Stream
BKF
BKF
Max BKF
Feature
Type
BKF Area
Width
Depth
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Pool
--
1 11.5
11.4
1.0
1.8
1 11.2
1231.10
1231.30
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 17
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
C
14.3
12.9
1.1
2.1
11.7
1.1
6
1230.87
1231.05
1234
1233
i 1232
c
0
is 1231
m
w
1230
1229
1228
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 9, Cross -Section 17
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1230.87 as determined from the as -built bankfull area.
All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 18
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
:Q%''
IL
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
I E
1 4.5
1 6.8
0.7
1.1
10.2
1.0
2.2
1301.10
1301.30
1308
1307
1306
i 1305
0 1304
1303
w
1302
1301 DIMS BKF=1301.31'
1300 TWG=1300.04'
1299
0.00 10.00
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 11, Cross -Section 18
20.00 30.00 40.00
Station (ft)
As -built
MY1
MY2
o--- BKF
o--- MY2 BKF
o--- Floodprone
50.00 60.00
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1301.31 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 19
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
JBKFArea
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
B
1 1.8
4.4
0.4
0.6
1 10.9
1.0
2.5
1309.18
1309.30
1315
1314
^ 1313
0 1312
m w 1311
1310
1309
1308
0
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 13, Cross -Section 19
10 20 30
Station (ft)
40
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1309.26 as determined from the as -built bankfull area.
All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DIMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 20
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Nat'M
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
B
0.6
3.1
0.2
0.3
1 16.3
1.0
10.3
1272.03
1272.34
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1272.34 as determined from the as -built bankfull area.
All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 21
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Feature
Stream
I Type
1BKFArea
BKF
Width
I BKF
Depth
I Max BKF
Depth
W/D
I BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
I LTOB Elev
Riffle
I E
6.5
8.6
0.8
1.6
11.4
1.0
3
1281.40
1281.50
1286
1285
1284
-------------------------------
0 1283
M
w 1282
1281
DIMS BKF = 1281.52'
1280 TWG = 1279.76'
1279 -k--
0.00
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 19, Cross -Section 21
10.00
Station (ft)
20.00
As -built
MY1
MY2
o- BKF
o-- MY2 BKF
o-- Floodprone
30.00
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1281.52 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 22
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
I E
1 1.7
1 4.7
0.4
0.7
1 12.8
0.9
2.6
1298.30
1298.30
1304
1303
1302
0 1301
1300
w
1299
1298 � DIMS BKF = 1298.35'
TWG = 1297.62'
1297
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 20, Cross -Section 22
0 10 20 30
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation 1298.35 as determined from the as -built bankfull area. All
other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 23
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
I
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
B
2.0
4.2
0.5
0.7
1 8.9
0.8
1.9
1260.44
1260.44
1267
1266
1265
1264
0
1263
m
w 1262
1261
1260
1259
0
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 25, Cross -Section 23
10 20 30 40 50
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1260.68 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 24
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Feature
Stream
Type
BKF Area
BKF
Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
C
3.2
5.7
0.6
1 1.1
10.0
1.0
8
1287.10
1287.10
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 10b, Cross -Section 24
1289
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1288
c
2--------------
1287
As -built
a)
w MY1
t MY2
1286 --- BKF
DMS BKF = 1287.14'
TWG = 1285.98' --- MY2 BKF
o Floodprone
1285
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1287.14 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DIMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Permanent Cross -Section 25
Year 2 Survey Collected: September 2021
Looking at the Left Bank
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
I Type
BKF Area
BKF
I Width
BKF
Depth
Max BKF
Depth
W/D
BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
I C
1 4.1
1 6.7
0.6
1.2
11.0
1.1
5.7
1272.40
1272.64
1275
1274
1
�
O
J
1273
F::::)
w
I
1272
1271 +
0
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 12, Cross -Section 25
10 20
Station (ft)
DIMS BKF = 1272.54'
TWG = 1271.18'
30 40 50
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1272.54 as determined from the as -built bankfull area.
All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

Figure 4. Cross -Sections with Annual Overlay
Looking at the Left Bank
Permanent Cross -Section 26
Year 2 Survey Collected: October 2021
Xs?G rtb­�'.,;.. � r
Looking at the Right Bank
Feature
Stream
I Type
1BKFArea
BKF
I Width
I BKF
Depth
I Max BKF
Depth
W/D
I BH Ratio
ER
BKF Elev
LTOB Elev
Riffle
1
19.6
14.3
1.4
2.4
10.4
1.0
2.7
1225.39
1225.50
1231
1230
1229
i 1228
0 1227
1226
w
1225
1224
1223
1222
Russell Gap Mitigation Site
Reach 2, Cross -Section 26
—As-built
MY1
MY2
a• BKF
MY2 BKF
a--- Floodprone
0 10 20 30 40 50
Station (ft)
Note: Per DMS/IRT request, bank height ratio for MY2 has been calculated using the bankfull elevation of 1225.59 as determined from the as -built bankfull
area. All other values were calculated using the as -built bankfull elevation.
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
RUSSEL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT (DMS #100003)
MY2 MONITORING REPORT

cq
'
o
0
0
0
0
c
Op
-n
0
0�
0
l�
c9
M
0
O
0
0
o
o
C
6j
A
d
a
i.
c
�
❑
o
o
0
0
0
ri
00
0
ri
0
c
cj
0
o
c
0
b
�
U
en
r�
i.
U
Pr
�
�
o
0
0
0
0
-�
�
o°
❑
-�
-�
�
A
n.
�
�
r
A
�
a
c
0
A
o
1
7.
A
Po.
Pam.
ri
Q
0
0
ti
M
0
U
O

�o
b
��N
0
Now
�o
o
0
b
0
0
A
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
O
o
o
c
A
b
a
i.
°
�
❑
�
o0
O
0
o
0
0
0
ri
0
ri
0
o
o
O
O
o
o
O
o
O
G
b
O
U
en
M
O
`
Pr
0
F
O
O
O
O
r!
w
c
�
L1
�
'x
�
�
'�
�
If
m
❑
o
o
A
c
o
❑
`
�
A a
A
F4
F a
c4
A
at0.
a`.
ri
0
0
M
r
O

�o
0
oC�
ll�
_
0
N
0
o
0
b
�
c
0
o
0
A
O
O
o
0
o
0
0
0
o
0
c
A
-n
A
o
�
a
i.
❑
�
o0
O
0
o
0
0
0
ri
0
ri
0
°
�
O
o
o
�
c
O
G
b
O
U
en
W
ci
c+i
of
u
o
o
M
O
�
Pr
0
c
W
M
Q
r!
w
c
m
❑
O�=u�
it
•^�
w
o
U
ro
C
ro�
p
`�' id
7
CG
A
o
a
A
c
E
A
c
o
❑
`
�
W A
M
c
A
c
E
o
-J
fl
F- a
c4
A
a°
a`
0
0
M
0
r
O

o
0
0
0
0
I
0
O
coo
N
N
°?
o
�
o
�
co
of
o
ri
o�
o
0
c
O
0
o
c
c
o
0
o
�
0
o
o
0
-n
c
Op
O
O
0
�
0
0
o
A
O
O
o
0
o
A
-n
A
o
�
a
i.
0
o
c
o
❑
0
0
o
0
0
c
�
�
o
0
0
0
c
o
0
�
o
c
b
�
0
U
en
M
O
W
�
P.
O
�
W
�
O
O
O
A
w
Ll
'x
�
'�
"
'�
r!
c
m
�
❑
�
�
o
�
o
ti
v7
0
�
a
A
A
A
❑
A
v
A a
W
A
c
a
W A
C9
c
c
A
�
9
E
o
�
c
fl
Um
c4
A
91..
a`.
Jl
0
0
a
0
r
O

O
c+�
o
o
o
o
0
c
o
o
°�
O
O
co
co
co
�;
o
c
�.,�
of o�
o
Q
ro
c
c
o
co
°�
co
co
o
'"
`
�
c+�
c
o
0
o
o
co
O0
o
ri
-.
°'
o
o
0
o
°'
I
I
IN
o
W
�
°'
0
O
�
o
o
0
0
0
-n
c
Op
G
o
�
O
O
0
O
O
R
O
O
O
O
O
O
A
d
a
i.
0
°
�
❑
o0
0
o
0
0
c
0
o
0
co
0
0
0
co
c
o
0
�
o
c
b
�
0
U
en
M
O
`
0.,
0
O
O
�
�
�
L
O
Sil.'
I
4'�-.
�
Sil.'
ISyy
Cz
�
�
•�
N
'-,
arJ
'd
.tJ'
'd
.rJ'
O.
.rJ
O.
L'
�,
t
O
'd
�
L'
b0
L'
b0
N
b0
...
O.
�
�
O
id
tom,
Lam'
pp
�l
�
.:.
c
w
o
U
ro
ro
o
ro
'°
7
cG
o
A
o
-n
A
�
�
r
A
as A
C9
c
°
A
cc
9
c
F a
c4
A
a°
c`
i
0
0
0
r
O

�
ri
o
o
of
of
�
0
0
�
�
o
o
o
o
cO
O
Op
0
C
O
O
N
0
O
O
R
O
O
O
O
O
O
A
0
i.
❑
0
0
o
0
0
c
0
�
�
�
o
o
�
o
cO
G
O
U
en
M
O
`
Pr
0
O
C
O
M
w
Ll
�
'x
�
'�
"
'�
r!
c
m
�
❑
�
o
�
o
ti
ro
v7
0
c A
,61c,
o
F
m
�
A a
a
A
o
A
o
E
o
�
'fl
0
0
a
M
0
O

I
O
C
b
co
o
c
0
0
o
c
c+�
of
-n
O
Op
G
O
o
C
R
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
A
d
a
i.
❑
�
o0
o
0
o
0
0
0
ri
0
ri
0
�
�
O
O
G
b
O
U
c
M
O
W
`
Pr
C
O
A
y
L
t
7d
�
t
'd
�
t
O.
t
O.
�
�
-E
'�
�, t
O
'O
i
t
Lb�D
t
Lb�D
Lb�D
O.
W
N
O
Gti
�'
b0
�l
LbOD
r!
w
c
�
Ll
� 'x
�
�
'�
�
"
'�
m
❑
o
o
ti
'ro`
o
on
W
w
W
t
U
•^�
w
o
U
ro�
m�
o
�
ro
b
O
7
o
CG
v7
0
o
b
n.
A
�
r
A
0.
c
Acc
—
r
MEOIt
..
:r
ELMa

O
o
o
o
o
�
-n
c
Op
G
O
o
�
O
o
O
O
O
�
R
O
O
O
O
O
A
d
aa
E
❑
o
,,;
i.
�
�
❑
0
0
o
0
ri
o
c
0
o
0
�
o
c
b
�
0
U
c
M
O
`
Pr
0
O
M
O
O
C
W
A
'
G'
n.
ern
'
'�
❑
o
co.
r
A
cc —
c
�
�
:7o
F a
c4
A
at0.
a`.
ri
0
0
ti
a
M
0
U
O

o
o�
cli
5
ri
co
ri
ri
o
c
o�
o
0
0
0
O
o
o
O
a
0
0
A
q
o
o�
0
0
o
A
o
O
0
0
o
0
A
-n
�
A
o
a
i.
o
c
❑
0
0
o
0
0
c
0
�
�
o
0
0
0
c
�
0
O
o
o
c
b
�
0
U
en
M
O
`
Pr
0
O
O
O
p
A
L
O
❑
�
O.
�
W
�
ro
u
m
W
td
o
o
n
'�
❑
o
co.
r
A
F a
c4
A
at0.
a`.
ri
0
0
ti
a
0
U
O

o�
�o
o
o
�?
c+�
No
0
c+�
1
c
o
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
o
0
0
o
N
b
�
c
0
0
0
c
q
'�
r
�
o
`"�o
1111
'Z
'Z
0
c
0
O
0
o
O
O
o
o
0
A
b
a
i.
0
�
ao
❑
0
0
0
0
c
0
O
o
o
O
c
0
o
c
b
�
0
U
en
M
O
`
Pr
0
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
A
L
O
❑
]S
�
O.
�
W
�
w
U
ro�
m
�
o
�
v7
-d
o
CG
•^�
o
A is
c
•o
as A
c
c
F a
c4
A
a°
91"
i
0
0
M
0
U
O

�o
o
�
o
O
o
0
O
0
o
0
0
o
N
b
�
c
0
0
0
o
A
O
O
O
o
O
0
o
0
0
A
b
a
7�.
E
❑
o
,,;
O
i.
61
0
0
0
0
0
c
0
O
o
o
O
c
0
o
c
b
�
0
U
en
M
O
`
Pr
0
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
A
w
U
ro
�
m
�
o
�
v7
-d
o
CG
•^�
o
_n
c
•o
as A
C9
�
c
0
61
c
ri
0
0
0
r
O

immn■
mmmm
mmmm
immn■
mmmm
mmmm
immn■
mmmm
mmmm
immn■
mmmm
mmmm
no0oo�0�■
i�o0ommn0n
i0ms000mnoi
noi�nie■
nonm�o0�n
nonomo0on
n0mnan■
noao0�na0i
i�00ennaoi
innnn■
nnnnnn
nnnnnn
innnn■
nnnnnn
nnnnnn
io0o�is0e■
n0oa0nnoi
noomnin0i
im0�nni■
i0onno0ovi
i000�n00m0i
111119911■
191919119111
119199909lII
111111111■
IIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIII
111111111■
IIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIII
111111111■
IIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIII
111111111■
IIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIII
191lIIIII■
1919911911i1
I@i9911099i1
�e'e�vAao�
�oe�eeeeeoe�
�eaeeBeeean
191lIIl91■
IIII!lllllil
IBllil1019i1

III@■1911
II
I
I■91119911
IIII■6911
II
I
I■66911111
199@■IIII
II
I
I■11011111
I■IIIIIII
IIII■IIII
III
@IIIII��III
IIII■IIII
III
I■IIIIIII
911111��III
I■Ilillll
II01■fill
II
I
111019lllIII
IIIIlill
II
I
IIIIIIli,III
I■Ilillli
1919■9i91
II
I
I■19i1111
911911��991
IIII■IIII
III
I■IIIIIII
lIIIII��III
IIII■IIII
III
I■IIIIIII
I■IIIIIII
IIIIII��III
IIII■IIII
III
lIIIII��III
IIII■IIII
III
I■IIIIIII
lIIIII��III
I■IIIIIII
1119■1911
II
I
9111@I�,lII
i■o'm000�
iaoo�oaoi
��
i
��0o�0■■aoi
I!I!■IIII
II
I
119111lllIII
I■IIlIIII

APPENDIX E
Hydrologic Data

Table 10. Verification of Bankfull Events
Russell Gap Stream Mitigation Project - NCDMS Project No. 100003
Date of Data
Collection
RI Manual Cork Crest
Gauge #1
R9 Manual Cork Crest
Gauge #2
R4 Manual Cork Crest
Gauge #3
R6 Manual Cork Crest
Gauge #4
Date of Bankfull
Event Occurrence
Method of Data
Collection
Year 1 Monitoring (2020)
6/1/2020
NA
NA
1.25 ft.
NA
5/28/2020
Manual cork measurement
11/5/2020
1.5 ft.
NA
2.5 ft
NA
10/30/2020
Manual cork measurement
Year 2 Monitoring (2021)
6/14/2021
7.5 inches and 20.5 inches
3/25/2021 and 5/3/2021
Manual cork measurement
10/19/2021
1.1 ft.
10/7/2021
Manual cork measurement
Now Manual cork crest gauge readings were corroborated with associated spikes in the automated Continuous Stage Recorder (see graph in Appendix E) and/or with photographs (Appendix B).
MICHAEL BAKER ENGINEERING, INC.
YEAR 2 MONITORING REPORT
RUSSELL GAP STREAM MITIGATION PROJECT QMS PROJECT NO. 100003)

m
o
K
I I
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
N
O
N
I
I
N
N
�
N
N
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
�
N
N
O
N
W
N
N
C)
CD
N
co
N
Cn
N v
o
0
N
fa
O
�
m
0
0
0
0

m
o
Q
O
K
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
N
0
I I
N
n
N
CV
N
O
�
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
\
O
N
�
N
N
O
N
co
N
_
N
p
N
N
co
a,
O
cq
cq
O
N
O
m
(�
4-0C
CO
y
N
_
N
OC)
o
N
�
N
N p
�,�^^
p
M
co
V
=
N
O
L L
O
75
^m
W
�
V
m
N
N
N
tV
V
V
N
CV
N
N
LO
N
o0
0
m
0
0
0
0

m
o
Q
O
d
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
N
n
N
N
N
�
O
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N_
\
�
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
co
N
m
N
O
N
M
co
rn
O
m
cq
77
O
'L
Co
Co
0
ry
y0
O
ui o
Q
N
O
O
O
m
0
0
0
0

m
o
N
4J 4J
� 4J
K
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
I
I
N
n
N
�
O
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N_
\
N
O
�
N
N
N
O
N
co
N
N
O
O
N
r
N
co
O
N
O
N
I. fi
N
co
=
O>
CO
,m
N
O ?�
o
0
CC
ui M
N
N�
Q0
^M
O

m
o
a
O
d
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
N
n
N
N
�
N
O
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N_
\
�
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
co
N
N
�
O
N
LO`V
co
O
cq
N
O
_ N
_
m
N
�.�/
O
�L
m
W
(�
0 �1A�
y
Y /
�O
O
N
O
N
O
I. fi
M
M
CO
W
O
N
CV
O
Zn
�n
_
N
N
_
O
N
O
N
I
s
a
m
C7
GJ
N
O
N
O
bD
C
N
LO
L
0
N
N
O
C7
m
0
0
0
0

m
o
K
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
I
I
N
n
N
�
CV
O
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N
�
O
N
�
N
N
O
N
W
N
N
O
co
0
�
�
N
O
—
0
m
0
0
0
0

m
o
K
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
N
n
N
N
�
N
O
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N_
\
�
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
co
N
N
�
O
N
co
6,
O
cq
O
N
.(a
_
�
N
N
�L
co
(�
0
o >
m
0
0
0
0

m
o
00
a
d
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
I
I
N
n
N
CV
N
p
�
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N�
�
O
N
�
N
N
O
N
W
N
N
p
r
cq
co
CO
0
rn
N
io
�co
_
m
0
CO
(�
��
y
N
0
ON O
m
0
0
0
0

m
o
a
d
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
I
I
N
n
N
N
CV
p
�
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N
\
O
N
�
N
N
O
N
co
N
N
O
r
cq
CO
0
rn
N
_
�
= o
N
W
O
N
L
co
(�
0
ry ci IQ
m
0
0
0
0

m
O
O
K
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
I
I
N
n
N
N
O
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N
\
�
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
W
N
N
O
m
N
O
co
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
•CC
_
N
co
L
O �\
r ^m
V
4 O
a) O
o
ui N
OM
N
(n
ID
O
M
W
W
O
^
O
m
O
N
N
_
O
N
LL/
N
O
N
s
a
m
C7
N
N
pp
C
NO
LO
O
N
L
0
N
LO
r
N
C0
G
C
f6
y
O
N
O
N
O O O O
CDLO O
LO
O
LO
O
�n
O
N
O N M
N
N
N
bD
W
(ui) lie;uieb
(ui)
jolempunoig
of
yidoo
0
m
1D ti >
O N IQ
O �
_
O � N
O \
QO
O ti
� O N
O
pp
N N o
Up
O �
O
Q
C7
Z
O
w \
C7
Z o0
N
of
C7
m
0
0
0
0

m
K
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
I
I
N
n
N
N
CV
p
�
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N
�
N
O
N
N
O
N
co
N
N
p
N
O
a,
cq
O
, N
00
N
W
v>�
L
m
0
0
0
0

m
N
Q
O
N
4J 4J
� 4J
K
m UJ
I
W UJ
I
O
I I
I
I
N
n
N
N
O
N
n
N
N
N
O
N
N
\
O
N
�
N
N
O
N
W
N
N
O
N
co
N
O
cq
O
, N
N
W
O
m
0
0
0
0

�000
i
■III
0
■III

N
O
N
0
N
I�
N
N
p
�v7
N
N
O
N
N
�
N
W
N
O
N
p
N
co
N
O
67
�
N
O
�
r
N
zt
a+ rL
w
N J
C L-
O 0
O
Ln
m
Cj
+o
Q

C
O
Z4
N
r
" N
N J
C LL
O
0
V
CL
� 0
C7 LL
J
~ N V)
Ci
� C
W
O
O
� J
LL
�
C Ur
I
V)
0 cI
W N
O
U w O
w 2 00
Z Q �
uU NO
N
V) U
N
N
O
N
r
w
it
V
N
O
N
(•ij) yjdaa aaleM aaejanS
cn
O
O
O
O
O
Z
H
U
w_
O
a
V)
0
U U
Z U
— w
w a Z
w w O
C7 (D Q
Z Z C7
w H
W 0 c
a
m cO <
J C J
W J
Q N W
= oc v)
U_ Q V)
Lu a

N
O
N
0
N
I�
N
N
p
�v7
N
N
O
LL LL
N
0
N
N
W
N
O
N
p
co
N
N
6LU
Q
N
N
O
N
r
a+
n
w
N
m
O
O
O
O
O
Z
H
U
w_
O
a
0
U H
Z U
W
z � �
w a Z
w w O
C7 C7 Q
Z Z (7
w � H
W � c
a
m cQ �
J C J
W J
Q N W
U Q V)

N
O
N
0
N
I�
N
N
p
�v7
N
N
O
N
N
O
O
UU��cSypd`w + 0iT \vNNONONONN_NONON'7
�LCLI
LLJUr
\�n
On
oO O0
co
rtw N J
O
W NON
O M
O N U w N
N ^ c � O
O
Q
MCL O wN0
UOO�
Urn
N
N
O O
NLO Z-a
a)0v
.5i N
o O
a) 't
O O
C
LO U 0�NpN�N�rNMNNNON0
UN N
Eom
NON O O O
N N M O O
O O O O
NO Ilejuieb (,Ij) yjdaa aa;eM aaejanS
cp
m
O
O
O
O
O
Z
H
U
w_
O
o_
0
U U
Z w
z � �
w a Z
w w O
Z_ oC �
C7 C7 Q
Z Z (7
w E p
w � �
O_
m cQ �
J C J
W J
Q N W
U Q V)
m
O
O
O
O
O
Z
H
U
w_
O
o_
0
U U
Z w
z � �
w a Z
w w O
Z_ oC �
C7 C7 Q
Z Z (7
w E p
w � �
O_
m cQ �
J C J
W J
Q N W
U Q V)

N
O
N
O
I�
N
O
M
N
N
N
O
N
O
N
N
N
L2
N
O
N
O
N
N
co
N
O
�
(V
ON
N
N
O
•
•
•
f�
t
v
m
O
O
O
O
O
Z
U
W_
O
O_
cLn
G
0
U H
Z U
w
w a Z
w w O
Z_ oC
C7 C7 Q
Z Z C7
w E cp
W

ti
;.cz
� N
67 O
CO
� N
67 O
sir
�
� M
N
A
i
i
�
M
� N
7
y O
U
O
O
�--i
N
C\j
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
cz N
a, O
N
O
N
N
N
M
N
M
N
M
N
N
N
N
U
S
w
cz
4, O
G,
O
N
y
w
N
O
y
ro
ro
"'
rA
o
N
67 N
O.q
ucc
O
d
O
C
ro
~y
O
cc
ro
Co
CU
a'
U
N
3
°
3
I
a
C
�y N
Q
w
ro
ro
03
M
v
`n
�
3
•�
ro
�
a
oz
�
N
M
ro
❑
o
U
u O
N
•�'
V3
N
U •O
C
�
�
u
cnLr
a
I,
M
O
O
O
O
3
c
O
Oli O
c p
w
N
O�
M
N
d"
CA
ti
00
M
ro
ro
w
p
N
` 3
^' O
O
O
O
O
O
❑
O
W
O
O
M
co
co
o
7
a
ro
L"
N
N
N
N
N
w
w
j"TfCi
a
0
N
v
N
6, icy
N
m
Q
a'
N
M
d"
in
c
c
ro
�
10
11)
�I
W
I-4
W
I-4
Uj
(d
id
vim]
IU
U
h
y
U
ci
Z CL
a
wLU Z
Z O
� a
z �
W
L
W
Y �
a a
m �
J J
W J
a W
2 of
ULn
_

Note: Historic average annual rainfall for Alexander County, NC is 56.11 inches, while the observed project rainfall recorded a total of
64.44 inches over the previous 12 months (Oct. 2020 - Oct. 2021). Project rainfall data was collected from the NC-CRONOS station TAYL.

APPENDIX F
IRT Meeting Minutes

INTERNATIONAL
Meeting Minutes
Russell Gap Stream Mitigation Project
DMS Project ID. 100003
DWR #20150416
INC DEQ Contract# 6980
USACE Action ID: SAW-2017-00826
Catawba River Basin: 03050101-120010
Date Prepared:
July 1, 2021
Meeting Date, Time,
June 23, 2021, 12:30 PM
Location:
On -site (Alexander County, NC)
USACE —Todd Tugwel1, Kim Browning, Casey Haywood
DEQ - Erin Davis
Attendees:
DMS — Matthew Reid, Melonie Allen, Paul Wiesner
NCWRC —Olivia Munzer
Michael Baker International (MBI) — Scott King, Katie McKeithan, Jason York
Subject:
IRT Credit Release Site Visit
Recorded By:
Jason York
An on -site meeting was held on June 23rd, 2021 at 12:30 PM to review the as -built conditions for the
Russell Gap stream mitigation project (Full Delivery) in Alexander County, NC. The purpose of the
meeting was to inspect the as -built and MY1 (2020) conditions on the site as part of the IRT credit
release process. Participants met at the railcar bridge crossing on Reach 1 and then inspected tributaries
R11, R13, and R14 (see attached Project Asset Map for reference and reach labels). The channel and
wetlands were then inspected on the lower half of R1. The group continued to the southern portion of
the project and walked south along the farm road to R17 and walked back downstream in the easement
along R6 and R7a. Participants then inspected the culvert at the head of R9 and the lower third of R4
paralleling Mt. Olive Church Rd and observed a structural repair at the confluence of R15 and R4. Next,
the group drove up Mt. Olive Church road northeast to R4a and R26 where the lack of a marked
easement boundary was discussed. Lastly, participants reviewed the concerns of the IRT and possible
strategies to correct for existing and potential issues. Generally, the site is looking good for MY2 and
much will be determined in future monitoring years depending on the success of vegetation and proper
maintenance. Below is a list of notes and comments that were discussed at the walk-through:
Summary Notes and Comments:
• A culverted crossing on R1 was replaced with a railcar bridge after sustaining damage during
heavy rains from tropical storms in late November 2020 (after MY1 reporting). This
repair/installation was inspected and approved by all present.

• Low flow was noted in the lower half of R11. Flow was visible at the location of mid -reach flow
gauge and at the top of the reach. USACE staff suggested re -locating the flow gauge to the
upper third of the reach. A sink hole in the right floodplain was filled during maintenance and
the repair looks good. Additionally, the outer bend upstream of the confluence of R11 and R1
has some bank erosion that threatens to impact the alignment and hydrology of R11. Strategies
to prevent this from happening were discussed. This problem area was damaged when the
culvert on R1 failed during flooding in November 2020. We do not anticipate future erosion on
R1 that will impact or change the alignment of R11 following the installation of the railcar bridge
where the failed culvert was previously located. Live staking and manual repairs will be done to
stabilize the outer bend of R1 upstream of the R11 confluence. This area will be discussed in the
MY2 monitoring report.
• Erin Davis from NCDWR observed a steep slope with little vegetation on the left bank of R14.
This area will need to be re -seeded and stabilized.
Kim Browning from the USACE and Erin Davis from NCDWR expressed concern about the impact
dense populations of Juncus spp. may have on the density, diversity, and vigor of planted
vegetation. These rushes are widespread in the R1 floodplain. MBI staff noted that the presence
of Juncus likely minimized damage to the banks and floodplain and agreed to monitor the
success of other vegetation in these locations. All wetlands on the R1 floodplain are functional.
One auger test in a small area of low -growing vegetation revealed a small pocket of non-hydric
soil near wetland well #7; however, it was determined in the field to be a minor spot of ditch
filling (as clearly observable on old aerials) and additional pulls were hydric. All of the site's
groundwater wells met the established hydrology success criteria in MY1 (2020).
• R17 should be monitored to make sure it does not become more like a wetland area. The head
of the culvert should be protected to ensure the stream continues to flow through the pipe.
Erin Davis suggested that the tops of R17 and R18 culverts be inspected and fenced out to
eliminate livestock access and potential sediment and nutrient inputs into the project. It should
be noted that this area is outside of the conservation easement; however, MBI will discuss with
the landowner.
• CE signs were not hung on fence posts on site. This is a requirement and must be completed
before credit will be released. MBI staff agreed that this was an oversight and plan to install all
necessary signage as soon as possible. Photos of the installed conservation easement signage
will be forwarded to DMS for review and approval. Upon receipt, DMS will request release of
the MY1 (2020) project credits as proposed.
• The culvert between the bottom of R8 and the head of R9 should be monitored for piping.
• The structural repair at the confluence of R15 and R4 looked good.
• R26 was missing CE signs and posts along the right bank. This area is not active pasture
therefore fencing is not required; however, the easement boundary must still be clearly marked.
No encroachments on the easement were noted despite the lack of signage.

• The R26 portion of the easement should contain a "random" vegetation plot or transect during
MY2. The invasive Princess tree, Pawlonia tomentosa, was observed along with other scattered
invasive plants. This area should be treated in MY2.
• Areas of bank erosion were noticed at the bottom of R4a which is an Enhancement I reach.
Manual repairs and live staking will be completed to stabilize the banks and this location will be
monitored for further damage during MY2 and included in the monitoring report.
• Scattered populations of invasive vegetation were noted around the site. Multiflora rose, Privet,
Honeysuckle, and Princess Tree were all observed and will be treated with herbicide in MY2.
• DIMS staff requested that some survey pins be uncovered and photographed to confirm their
installation in required locations. These photos will be sent to DIMS along with photo
documentation of the installation of easement markers and posts where needed.
Jason York, Environmental Scientist
/-- �Z�
[e-mail]
828-380-0118