20130865 Ver 1_Year 7 Monitoring Report_2021_20220124

ID#* 20130865 Version* 1
Select Reviewer:
Erin Davis
Initial Review Completed Date 01/24/2022
Mitigation Project Submittal - 1/24/2022
Is this a Prospectus, Technical Proposal or a New Site?* O Yes O No
Type of Mitigation Project:*
Stream Wetlands Buffer Nutrient Offset
(Select all that apply)
Project Contact Information
Contact Name:* Email Address:*
Jeremiah Dow [e-mail]
Project Information
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
ID#:* 20130865 Version:* 1
Existing ID# Existing Version
Project Type: DMS Mitigation Bank
Project Name: Best Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site
County: Duplin
Document Information
Mitigation Document Type:*
Mitigation Monitoring Report
File Upload: Best_95353_MY7_2021.pdf 28.47MB
Please upload only one PDF of the complete file that needs to be submitted...
Signature
Print Name: * Jeremiah Dow
Signature:

BEST STREAM AND WETLAND RESTORATION PROJECT
MONITORING REPORT
MONITORING YEAR 7
FINAL
DUPLIN COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
CONTRACT No. 004631 - PROJECT No. 953 53
USACE Action ID No. 2012-01384 -NCDWR Project No. 13-0865
Prepared for:
Division of Mitigation Services
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1652 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1652
January 2022

fires
January 20, 2022
Jeremiah Dow
NC DEQ Division of Mitigation Services
217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite ioo
Raleigh, NC 27610
Corporate Headquarters
6575 West Loop South, Suite 300
Bellaire, TX 77401
Main: 713•520•5400
RE: Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Project: MY7 Monitoring Report (NCDMS ID
95353)
Listed below are comments provided by DMS on January 11, 2022 regarding the Best Stream and
Wetland Restoration Project: Year 7 Monitoring Report and RES' responses.
Please submit polygons representing the low stem density area and invasive treatment
areas and ensure both are displayed in the CCPV and correctly represented in Table 6.
A polygon for MY7 invasive treatment was added to the CCPV. The areas were not added
to Table 6 because they are no longer a problem area. Additionally, the area in and
around VP18 is not considered a low stem density area because of the survival of the
existing trees (RVP1) so was not added to the CCPV.
2. Please submit a feature characterizing the random veg plot.
Done.
3. Please update the groundwater gauge figures to delineate the growing season more
clearly. The MY6 figures serve as an example.

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
Best
Duplin County, North Carolina
DMS Project ID 95353
Cape Fear River Basin
HUC 03030007060010
Prepared by:
pre
s
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
3600 Glenwood Ave, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-209-1061
Resource EnOromnental Solutions, LLC

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND AND ATTRIBUTES........................................................ 3
1.1 Location and Setting...............................................................................................................
3
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives..................................................................................................
3
1.3 Project Structure.....................................................................................................................
5
1.3.1 Restoration Type and Approach.....................................................................................
5
1.4 Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data.......................................................................10
1.4.1 Project History..............................................................................................................10
1.4.2 Project Watersheds.......................................................................................................11
2 Success Criteria............................................................................................................................
11
2.1 Stream Restoration...............................................................................................................11
2.1.1 Bankfull Events............................................................................................................11
2.1.2 Cross Sections..............................................................................................................11
2.1.3 Bank Pin Arrays...........................................................................................................12
2.1.4 Digital Image Stations..................................................................................................12
2.2 Wetland Restoration.............................................................................................................12
2.3 Vegetation Success Criteria..................................................................................................12
2.4 Scheduling/Reporting...........................................................................................................13
3 MONITORING PLAN.................................................................................................................
13
3.1 Stream Restoration...............................................................................................................13
3.1.1 As -Built Survey............................................................................................................13
3.1.2 Bankfull Events............................................................................................................13
3.1.3 Cross Sections..............................................................................................................13
3.1.4 Digital Image Stations..................................................................................................14
3.1.5 Bank Pin Arrays...........................................................................................................14
3.1.6 Visual Assessment Monitoring.....................................................................................14
3.1.7 Surface Flow.................................................................................................................14
3.2 Wetland Hydrology..............................................................................................................14
3.3 Vegetation............................................................................................................................15
4 Maintenance and Contingency plan .............................................................................................
15
4.1 Stream...................................................................................................................................15
4.2 Wetlands...............................................................................................................................
15
4.3 Vegetation............................................................................................................................15
5 Year 7 Monitoring Conditions (MY7).........................................................................................
16
5.1 Year 7 Monitoring Data Collection......................................................................................16
5.1.1 Morphological State of the Channel(MY 7) .................................................................16
5.1.2 Vegetation.....................................................................................................................16
5.1.3 Photo Documentation...................................................................................................17
5.1.4 Stream Hydrology........................................................................................................17
5.1.5 Wetland Hydrology......................................................................................................17
6 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................18
Resource Envirolunental Solutions, LLC ii

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
Appendices
Appendix A. General Tables and Figures
Table 1. Project Components and Mitigation Credits
Table 2. Project Activity and Reporting History
Table 3. Project Contacts
Table 4. Project Information Summary
Figure 1. Project Vicinity Map
Figure 2. Project USGS Map
Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 3a,3b,3c. Current Conditions Plan View Map (CCPV)
Table 5. Visual Stream Morphology Stability Assessment
Table 6. Vegetation Condition Assessment
Table 7. Stream Problem Areas
Table 8. Vegetation Problem Areas
Figure 4. Vegetation Plot Photos
Figure 5. Stream Problem Photos
Figure 6. Vegetation Problem Photos
Appendix C. Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9a. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment Summary
Table 9b. Planted and Total Stem Counts (Species by Plot)
Appendix D. Stream Geomorphology Data (MY7 2021)
Table 10. Morphological Parameters Summary Data
Table 11. Dimensional Morphology Summary — Cross Sections Data
Table 12. Bank Pin Array Summary Data
Figure 7. Cross Section Plots
Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 13. Documentation of Geomorphologically Significant Flow Events
Table 14. Rainfall Summary
Table 15a. Wetland Hydrology Criteria Attainment
Table 15b. Wetland Hydrology Summary
2020 Groundwater Monitoring Gauge Hydrographs
Figure 8. Crest Gauge Verification Photos
Figure 9. Headwater Valley Restoration Flow Chart
Resource EnOromnental Solutions, LLC iii

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
1 PROJECT GOALS, BACKGROUND AND ATTRIBUTES
1.1 Location and Setting
The Best Stream and Wetland Site is located in Duplin County approximately two miles east of
Beulaville, NC (Figure 1). To access the downstream end of the site from the town of Beulaville, travel
0.6 miles east on NC HWY 24, take a right onto Lyman Road (SR 1801), and continue 1.6 miles
southeast to the crossing with Muddy Creek. Reaches UT7, UT8, UT9, UT10 and the lower end of
Muddy Creek may all be accessed from Lyman Road. Reaches UT5 and UT6 are located just south of
NC HWY 24, approximately 1.9 miles east of Beulaville. The upstream portion of the site may be
accessed from two locations. Reaches UT1, UT2 and Muddy Creek are located to the south of NC
HWY 24, opposite of the intersection of NC HWY 24 and Penny Road (SR 1720), approximately 2.8
miles east of Beulaville. To access reaches UT3, UT4 and Muddy Creek, travel 3.2 miles east on NC
HWY 24 from Beulaville to Edwards Road (SR 1835), continue south for approximately 1.0 mile, turn
right onto Put Lane, and follow the road down to Reaches UT3 and UT4.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The Best stream and wetland mitigation project will provide numerous ecological and water quality
benefits within the Cape Fear River Basin. While many of these benefits are limited to the project area,
others, such as pollutant removal and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have more far-reaching
effects. Expected improvements to water quality, hydrology, and habitat are outlined below.
Design Goals and Objectives
Benefits Related to Water Quality
Benefit will be achieved through filtering of runoff from adjacent CAFOs through buffer areas, the
Nutrient removal
conversion of active farm fields to forested buffers, improved denitrification and nutrient uptake
through buffer zones, and installation of BMPs at the headwaters of selected reaches and ditch outlets.
Benefit will be achieved through the stabilization of eroding stream banks and reduction of sediment
Sediment removal
loss from field areas due to lack of vegetative cover. Channel velocities will also be decreased through
a reduction in slope, therefore decreasing erosive forces.
Increase dissolved oxygen
Benefit will be achieved through the construction of instream structures to increase turbulence and
concentration
dissolved oxygen concentrations and lower water temperature to increase dissolved oxygen capacity.
Runoff filtration
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of buffer areas that will receive and filter runoff,
thereby reducing nutrients and sediment concentrations reaching water bodies downstream.
Benefits to Flood Attenuation
Water storage
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of buffer areas which will infiltrate more water during
precipitation events than under current site conditions.
Improved groundwater
Benefit will be achieved through the increased storage of precipitation in buffer areas, ephemeral
recharge
depressions, and reconnection of existing floodplain. Greater storage of water will lead to improved
infiltration and groundwater recharge.
Improved/restored
Benefit will be achieved by restoring the stream to a natural meandering pattern with an appropriately
hydrologic connections
sized channel, such that the channel's floodplain will be flooded more frequently at flows greater than
the bankfull stage.
Benefits Related to Ecological Processes
Restoration of habitats
Benefit will be achieved by restoring riparian buffer habitat to appropriate bottomland hardwood
ecosystem.
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
Improved substrate and
Benefit will be achieved through the construction of instream structures designed to improve bedform
instream cover
diversity and to trap detritus. Substrate will become coarser as a result of the stabilization of stream
banks and an overall decrease in the amount of fine materials deposited in the stream.
Addition of large woody
Benefit will be achieved through the addition of wood structures as part of the restoration design.
debris
Such structures may include log vanes, root wads, and log weirs.
Reduced temperature of
water due to shading
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of canopy tree species to the stream buffer areas.
Restoration of terrestrial
habitat
Benefit will be achieved through the restoration of riparian buffer bottomland hardwood habitats.
The North Carolina Division of Mitigation Services (NCDMS) develops River Basin Restoration
Priorities (RBRP) to guide its restoration activities within each of the state's 54 cataloging units. RBRPs
delineate specific watersheds that exhibit both the need and opportunity for wetland, stream and riparian
buffer restoration. These TLWs receive priority for DMS planning and restoration project funds.
Currently, no Local Watershed Plan (LWP) is available for the project area.
The 2009 Cape Fear River Basin River Basin Restoration Priorities (RPRP) identified HUC
03030007060010 as a Targeted Local Watershed (TLW). The watershed is characterized by 52 percent
agricultural land use area with Muddy Creek identified as Impaired for aquatic life because of a Fair
benthic community rating. The Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Project was identified as a stream
and wetland opportunity to improve water quality, habitat, and hydrology within the TLW.
The project goals address stressors identified in the TLW and include the following:
• Nutrient removal,
• Sediment removal,
• Reducing runoff from animal operations,
• Filtration of runoff, and
• Improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat.
The project goals will be addressed through the following project objectives:
• Establishing riparian buffer areas adjacent to CAFOs,
• Converting active farm field to forested buffers,
• Stabilization of eroding stream banks,
• Improving and protecting portions of headwater systems that discharge to a 303d listed stream,
• Reduction in stream bank slope,
• Restoration of riparian buffer bottomland hardwood habitats, and
• Construction of in -stream structures designed to improve bedform diversity and trap detritus.
The Best stream and wetland mitigation project is located within the northern (upstream) portion of the
TLW and includes sections of Muddy Creek (303d listed) and headwater streams that discharge into
Muddy Creek. Due to its location and improvements, the project provides numerous ecological and
water quality benefits within the Cape Fear River Basin. While many of these benefits are limited to
the project area, others, such as pollutant removal and improved aquatic and terrestrial habitat, have
more far-reaching effects. Many of the project design goals and objectives, including restoration of
riparian buffers to filter runoff from agricultural operations and improve terrestrial habitat, and
construction of in -stream structures to improve habitat diversity, addresses the degraded water quality
and nutrient input from farming that were identified as major watershed stressors in the 2009 Cape Fear
RBRP.
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 4

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
1.3 Project Structure
Following 2016 monitoring the NCIRT requested a review of the differential between the Approved
Mitigation Plan and Baseline Monitoring Report. RES does not plan on submitting an asset revision
and will revert to the Approved Mitigation Plan assets. The assets under the "Proposed SMUs" and
"Proposed WMUs" are the Approved Mitigation Plan assets.
Proposed Length
Mitigation
Reach
Mitigation Type
ProposedSMUs
Baseline SMUs
(U)
Ratio
UTl
P1 Restoration
1,723
1:1
1,723
1,757
UTl
SP & BE
303
1:5
61
56
UT2
P1 Restoration
2,770
1:1
2,770
2,772
UT2
SP & BE
309
1:5
62
66
UT3
Enhancement II
812
1:2.5
325
325
UT3
SP & BE
64
1:5
13
13
UT4
HVRestoration
510
1:1
510
494
UT4
SP & BE
655
1:5
131
129
UT5
SP & BE
4,043
1:5
809
809
UT6
Enhancement I
538
1:1.5
359
359
UT7
SP & BE
3,183
1:5
637
637
UT8
Enhancement I
825
1:1.5
550
510
UT8
SP & BE
313
1:5
63
63
UT9
SP & BE
1,171
1:5
234
221
UT10
SP & BE
768
1:5
154
154
Muddy Creek
SP & BE
9,073
1:5
1,815
1,815
Total 27,060 10,213 10,178
*P 1=Priority 1, SP & BE— Steram Preservation and Buffer Enhancement, HV= Headwater Valley
**The contracted amount of credits for this Site is 10,133 SMUs
Mitigation Area
Mitigation
Wetland
Mitigation Type
Proposed WMUs Baseline WMUs
(ac)
Ratio
W1
Restoration
3.66
1:1
3.66 3.77
W2
Restoration
0.29
1:1
0.29 0.31
W3A
Restoration
0.58
1:1
0.58 0.58
W3B
Restoration
0.59
1:1
0.59 0.59
Total 5.12 5.12 5.25
*The contracted amount of credits for this Site is 4.40 WMUs
1.3.1 Restoration Type and Approach
UTl
Priority Level 1 restoration was completed for UT1 to address all existing impairments, particularly the
greatly oversized channel and lack of bedform diversity. The design approach included meandering the
channel within the natural valley and backfilling the existing stream. A minimum 50-foot buffer was
established and planted with native riparian vegetation. Because the pre-existing buffer was devoid of
significant woody vegetation, woody debris was installed along the bed to improve in -stream habitat.
Livestock was excluded with fencing installed along the easement boundary. An existing CMP culvert
located along the middle of the reach was removed and replaced downstream at station 13+75 to allow
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 5

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
the landowner access to both sides of the property. Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was
completed for the downstream section of the channel where it flows through a forested buffer down to
the confluence with Muddy Creek. Buffer enhancement activities included the treatment of invasive
exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical control as well as planting bare root
seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct invasive species treatments on an
as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on monitoring results and regulatory agency
guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with specific invasive exotic plant phenology
for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the influence of established invasive exotics
on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete eradication of the targeted invasive species.
However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction of targeted invasive exotic species through
this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is control of invasive exotic species such that the
target natural communities are present and on a positive trajectory at project closeout.
UT2
Similar to UT1, Priority 1 restoration was completed for UT2 to address historic straightening and
channel enlargement. The existing channel was backfilled, and the restored channel was relocated such
that it meanders within the existing valley. A diffuse flow structure was installed at the ditch adjacent
to the proposed crossing. The structure was placed such that flows from the existing ditch will be
attenuated to establish sheet flow as the water enters the restored channel. All areas within the minimum
50-foot buffer were planted with native riparian vegetation. An existing 60" CMP culvert located at
station 20+25 of the reach was removed and replaced with a 48" HDPE culvert to allow the landowner
access to the entire property. Additionally, the existing culvert at the upstream end of UT2 was
upgraded to a 48" HDPE culvert and reset to more effectively transition the existing channel upstream
into the project stream. Priority Level I restoration was appropriate for this channel because it was the
only mitigation approach that would address bed and bank instability, establish a forested riparian
buffer, and significantly enhance aquatic habitat. Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was
completed for the most downstream section, where the channel enters the existing forested buffer, down
to its confluence with Muddy Creek. Buffer enhancement activities included the treatment of invasive
exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical control as well as planting bare root
seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct invasive species treatments on an
as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on monitoring results and regulatory agency
guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with specific invasive exotic plant phenology
for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the influence of established invasive exotics
on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete eradication of the targeted invasive species.
However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction of targeted invasive exotic species through
this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is control of invasive exotic species such that the
target natural communities are present and on a positive trajectory at project closeout.
UT3
Enhancement Level II was completed on Reach UT3 due to the channel's stability and appropriate size.
The design approach on this reach focused on improving the riparian buffer. The existing hog lagoon
located within buffer on the west side of the reach has remained in place, preventing the generation of
stream credits for approximately 600 linear feet. Through this section, the left buffer was extended out
to a minimum of 75 feet along the left bank, and the right buffer was extended just past top of bank.
The existing crossing located at station 8+50 was replaced and upgraded with a 30" HDPE pipe,
allowing the landowner continued access across his property. Additional bank grading and stabilization
was included in the culvert replacement. The grading of pools and the installation of woody debris
structures was performed along the reach to improve aquatic habitat. Upstream of the crossing, a 75-
foot buffer was restored along the east bank where the channel currently flowed through an active
pasture. A 100-foot buffer was implemented for the headwater origin point to further protect water
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
quality from cattle access. Cattle have been excluded with fencing. All areas within the buffer were
planted with native riparian vegetation. Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was implemented
along the downstream end where the channel enters the Muddy Creek floodplain. Buffer enhancement
activities included the treatment of invasive exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical
control as well as planting bare root seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct
invasive species treatments on an as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on
monitoring results and regulatory agency guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with
specific invasive exotic plant phenology for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the
influence of established invasive exotics on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete
eradication of the targeted invasive species. However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction
of targeted invasive exotic species through this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is
control of invasive exotic species such that the target natural communities are present and on a positive
trajectory at project closeout.
UT4
Headwater valley restoration was completed for the upper section of UT4. The existing channel was
backfilled, and flow was directed from its current position east back to the historic valley location. A
minor amount of earthwork was completed in the headwater valley restoration apart from ditch
plugging to tie the existing ditch back to the natural valley. Areas within the 100-foot buffer that were
disturbed or lacked riparian vegetation were planted. Cattle were excluded from the buffer through the
installation of fencing. An existing 15" CPP culvert crossing located at station 8+50 of the reach was
removed and replaced with triple 18" HDPE culverts. This crossing was relocated to the low spot in
the valley to allow the landowner continued access to an agricultural field west of the channel.
Downstream of the crossing, a smaller low flow channel was constructed within the natural valley. This
segment now connects the upstream headwater valley section to the existing channel approximately
230 feet below the crossing. Due to the stable nature of the buffer along the downstream reach of UT4,
Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was implemented from just downstream of the crossing
to the confluence with Muddy Creek. Buffer enhancement activities included the treatment of invasive
exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical control as well as planting bare root
seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct invasive species treatments on an
as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on monitoring results and regulatory agency
guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with specific invasive exotic plant phenology
for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the influence of established invasive exotics
on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete eradication of the targeted invasive species.
However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction of targeted invasive exotic species through
this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is control of invasive exotic species such that the
target natural communities are present and on a positive trajectory at project closeout.
UT5
Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was completed on UT5. The channel is stable throughout
the easement and provides a variety of aquatic habitats. The easement boundary extends a minimum of
50 feet outward from the stream channel, or the limit of adjacent riparian wetlands, whichever is wider.
The riparian buffer is an intact hardwood forest with localized areas of privet. Buffer enhancement
activities included the treatment of invasive exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical
control as well as planting bare root seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct
invasive species treatments on an as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on
monitoring results and regulatory agency guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with
specific invasive exotic plant phenology for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the
influence of established invasive exotics on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete
eradication of the targeted invasive species. However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction
of targeted invasive exotic species through this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
control of invasive exotic species such that the target natural communities are present and on a positive
trajectory at project closeout.
UT6
Enhancement Level I was completed on UT6. The mitigation approach on this reach focused on bank
stabilization, bedform diversity, and improving the riparian buffer. The existing channel was impaired
by channelization, vertical un-vegetated banks, and a dense privet understory within the buffer. The
grading of pools, grade control structures, and the installation of woody debris structures were
implemented along the reach to improve aquatic habitat. All disturbed areas within the riparian buffer
were planted with native riparian vegetation.
UT7
Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was completed on UT7. The channel is stable throughout
the easement and provides a variety of aquatic habitats. The easement boundary extends a minimum of
50 feet outward from the stream channel, or the limit of adjacent riparian wetlands, whichever is wider.
The riparian buffer is an intact hardwood forest with localized areas of privet. Buffer enhancement
activities included the treatment of invasive exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical
control as well as planting bare root seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct
invasive species treatments on an as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on
monitoring results and regulatory agency guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with
specific invasive exotic plant phenology for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the
influence of established invasive exotics on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete
eradication of the targeted invasive species. However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction
of targeted invasive exotic species through this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is
control of invasive exotic species such that the target natural communities are present and on a positive
trajectory at project closeout.
UT8
Enhancement Level I was completed on UT8. The mitigation approach on this reach focused on bank
stabilization, bedform diversity, and riparian buffer restoration. The existing channel was impaired by
channelization, localized bank instability, and cleared agricultural land in the buffer. Stabilization
activities included grading a floodplain bench, installing grade control structures, and installing woody
debris structures to improve hydraulic efficiency and aquatic habitat. All disturbed areas within the
riparian buffer were planted with native riparian vegetation. Stream Preservation and Buffer
Enhancement was completed on 313 linear feet where the channel enters the existing forested buffer,
down to its confluence with Muddy Creek. Buffer enhancement activities included the treatment of
invasive exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical control as well as planting bare
root seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct invasive species treatments on
an as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on monitoring results and regulatory
agency guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with specific invasive exotic plant
phenology for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the influence of established
invasive exotics on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete eradication of the targeted
invasive species. However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction of targeted invasive exotic
species through this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is control of invasive exotic species
such that the target natural communities are present and on a positive trajectory at project closeout.
UT9
Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was completed on UT9. The stream is channelized, but
stable throughout the easement. The active channel is meandering within the larger excavated channel
bottom. The riparian buffer is intact hardwood forest with localized areas of privet. The easement
boundary extends a minimum of 50 feet outward from the stream channel, or to the limit of adjacent
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
riparian wetlands, whichever is wider. Buffer enhancement activities included the treatment of invasive
exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical control as well as planting bare root
seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct invasive species treatments on an
as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on monitoring results and regulatory agency
guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with specific invasive exotic plant phenology
for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the influence of established invasive exotics
on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete eradication of the targeted invasive species.
However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction of targeted invasive exotic species through
this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is control of invasive exotic species such that the
target natural communities are present and on a positive trajectory at project closeout.
UT10
Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was completed on UT10. The channel is stable
throughout the easement and provides a variety of aquatic habitats. The easement boundary extends a
minimum of 50 feet outward from the stream channel, or the limit of adjacent riparian wetlands,
whichever is wider. The riparian buffer is an intact hardwood forest with localized areas of privet.
Buffer enhancement activities included the treatment of invasive exotic species by herbicide
applications and/or mechanical control as well as planting bare root seedlings in sparsely vegetated
areas. RES will continue to conduct invasive species treatments on an as needed basis. Additional
treatments will be dependent on monitoring results and regulatory agency guidance. These treatments
will be timed in accordance with specific invasive exotic plant phenology for the most effective control.
Considering such factors as the influence of established invasive exotics on adjacent land, it is not
feasible to expect complete eradication of the targeted invasive species. However, RES does expect to
achieve significant reduction of targeted invasive exotic species through this control plan. The goal of
the treatment program is control of invasive exotic species such that the target natural communities are
present and on a positive trajectory at project closeout.
Muddy Creek
Stream Preservation and Buffer Enhancement was completed for the majority of Muddy Creek. The
buffer was restored and increased to a width of 75 feet along the south side. Buffer enhancement
activities included the treatment of invasive exotic species by herbicide applications and/or mechanical
control as well as planting bare root seedlings in sparsely vegetated areas. RES will continue to conduct
invasive species treatments on an as needed basis. Additional treatments will be dependent on
monitoring results and regulatory agency guidance. These treatments will be timed in accordance with
specific invasive exotic plant phenology for the most effective control. Considering such factors as the
influence of established invasive exotics on adjacent land, it is not feasible to expect complete
eradication of the targeted invasive species. However, RES does expect to achieve significant reduction
of targeted invasive exotic species through this control plan. The goal of the treatment program is
control of invasive exotic species such that the target natural communities are present and on a positive
trajectory at project closeout.
Wetland WI
Wetland WI is located at the headwater of UT1 and has a natural constriction at the outlet. The soil is
a sandy loam/loamy sandy underlain by clayey textured subsoil that forms an effective restrictive layer
to groundwater loss. This area receives runoff from NC HWY 24. Based upon soil and landscape
position, it is likely this area has a seasonal seepage along the upper boundary.
Site modifications included removal of dredged and excavated materials, plugging the ditch, and raising
the streambed elevation to bring the water table closer to the ground surface. Additional temporal
habitat was constructed to eliminate surface leveling and smoothing for agricultural use. The temporal
habitat is variable to mimic sloughs, oxbows, root -tips and other shallow natural features. During
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
monitoring, beaver activity will be controlled to allow the site to stabilize and vegetative community to
establish. After the monitoring period, the site is designed to promote and tolerate beaver activity. No
hydrologic trespass is anticipated due to beaver activity in this wetland. These modifications will
increase storage and eliminate the rapid loss of surface water. This area may receive limited overbank
flows due to location in the headwater of UT1. Subsoil ripping and roughing of the soil surface were
performed to ameliorate soil compaction and create an uneven surface more conducive for surface water
retention, infiltration, and increase storage that would be present in natural wetland systems.
Wetland W2
Wetland W2 is located at the toe slope along Muddy Creek and UT2. The soil is a sandy loam/loamy
sandy underlain by sandy clay loam and sandy clay. This site is at a low elevation and is influenced by
the water table on the floodplain of Muddy Creek. It is unlikely that groundwater loss is significant
during most of the year. This area has a small watershed, but flooding from UT2 and Muddy Creek will
increase hydrologic storage.
Hydrology was restored by removing dredge material along the channel and raising the streambed
elevation, bringing the water table closer to the ground surface. Site modifications included subsoil
ripping, crown removal, and surface roughing of the area. Additional temporal habitat was constructed
to eliminate the surface leveling and smoothing for agricultural use. The temporal habitat is variable to
mimic sloughs, root -tips and other shallow natural features. This ameliorates past soil leveling and
compaction and creates an uneven surface more conducive of infiltration and storage that would be
present in natural wetland systems.
11i11K =1 111i11W
Wetland W3 is composed of two similar area (W3a and W3b) located at the toe slope along Muddy
Creek. A low finger of soil separates them. The soil in these areas is a loamy sand/sandy loam. The
surrounding upland is underlain by clayey subsoil that forms an effective restrictive layer that lateral
flow rides provide additional hydrological input. A ditch is located upslope of these areas and alongside
W3a that drains to Muddy Creek.
The soil is a sandy loam/loamy sand. The surrounding upland has a sandy clay loam and sandy clay
that form an effective restrictive layer that lateral flow rides provide additional hydrological input. Both
areas have small watersheds, but W3b receives groundwater seepage along the toe of slope diverted by
the upslope ditch.
Hydrology was restored by filling ditches and enhancing the concave topography by removing soil
material where cultivation had filled low features and leveled the surface to facilitate cultivation.
Additional groundwater seepage diverted by the ditch was restored to these wetlands. Temporal habitat
was constructed to eliminate the surface leveling and smoothing for agricultural use. Subsoil ripping
and surface roughing of the area was performed to ameliorate soil compaction and create an uneven
surface more conducive of infiltration and storage that would be present in natural wetland systems.
1.4 Project History, Contacts and Attribute Data
1.4.1 Project History
The Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Site was restored by Resource Environmental Solutions,
LLC (RES) through a full -delivery contract awarded by NCDMS in 2012. Tables 2, 3, and 4 in
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 10

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
Appendix A provide a time sequence and information pertaining to the project activities, history,
contacts, and baseline information.
1.4.2 Project Watersheds
The easement totals 142.7 acres and the project streams include ten unnamed tributaries to Muddy
Creek and a portion of Muddy Creek extending from approximately 0.3 miles west of Edwards Road
to 0.4 miles past Lyman Road. The total drainage area at the downstream limits of the project is 2,928
acres (4.58 mi2). The land use in the project watershed is approximately 47 percent cultivated cropland,
21 percent evergreen and deciduous forest, 13 percent shrub/scrub, ten percent bottomland
forest/hardwood swamp, three percent developed, and six percent managed herbaceous cover and
pasture.
UT1 has a drainage area of 0.06 square miles (41 acres) and flows in a southerly direction to the
confluence with Muddy Creek. UT2 flows south to its confluence with Muddy Creek and has a drainage
area of 0.23 square miles (146 acres). UT3 is located to the south of Muddy Creek, opposite of UT2,
and flows to the north and into Muddy Creek. This reach has a drainage area of 0.09 square miles (56
acres). UT4 is located to the west of UT3 and discharges to Muddy Creek. This reach has a drainage
area of 0.13 square miles (82 acres). UT5 flows in a southerly direction from NC HWY 24 to Muddy
Creek and has a drainage area of 0.59 square miles (380 acres). UT6 flows southeast to its confluence
with UT5 and has a drainage area of 0.12 square miles (79 acres). UT7 flows in a southerly direction
east of Lyman Road down to its confluence with UT5 before discharging to Muddy Creek. UT7 has a
drainage area of 0.60 square miles (387 acres). UT8 has a drainage area of 0.09 square miles (56 acres)
and flows in an easterly direction through a cultivated field east of Lyman Road down to the confluence
with UT7. UT9 flows southeast to its confluence with Muddy Creek and has a drainage area of 0.06
square miles (36 acres). UT10 is the downstream -most tributary within the Best Site and flows in a
westerly direction from a farm crossing west of Lyman Road down to Muddy Creek. UT10 has a
drainage area of 0.48 square miles (306 acres). Muddy Creek is a stable swamp stream system with
intact hardwood forest floodplain, extending from approximately 0.3 miles west of Edwards Road to
0.5 miles south of Lyman Road. Muddy Creek has a drainage area of 4.6 square miles (2,930 acres) at
the downstream limits and has an existing length of 9,214 linear feet.
2 Success Criteria
The success criteria for the Best Site will follow accepted and approved success criteria presented in
the USACE Stream Mitigation Guidelines and subsequent NCDMS and agency guidance. Specific
success criteria components are presented below.
2.1 Stream Restoration
2.1.1 Bankfull Events
Two bankfull flow events must be documented within the seven-year monitoring period. The two
bankfull events must occur in separate years. Otherwise, the stream monitoring will continue until two
bankfull events have been documented in separate years. Bankfull events will be documented using
crest gauges, auto -logging crest gauges, photographs, and visual assessments for evidence of debris
rack lines.
2.1.2 Cross Sections
There should be little change in as -built cross -sections. If changes do take place, they should be
evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example down -
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 11

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
cutting or erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example settling,
vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Starting in MY3,
BHR was calculated on riffles using the baseline bankfull elevation. This method was used because the
dimension of the channels has not changed enough to alter the bankfull elevation. Starting in MY5,
BHR was calculated according to the Industry Technical Workgroup memorandum. None of the
restoration riffle cross sections exceeded a 1.2 BHR. Two cross sections on Enhancement I reaches did
exceed 1.2 but both have baseline bankfull elevations below top of bank. Cross -sections are classified
using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross -sections should fall within the
quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
2.1.3 Bank Pin Arrays
Bank pin arrays will be used as a supplemental method to monitor erosion on selected meander bends
where there is not a cross section. Bank pin arrays will be installed along the outer bend of the meander.
Bank pins will be installed just above the water surface and every two feet above the lowest pin. Bank
pin exposure will be recorded at each monitoring event, and the exposed pin will be driven flush with
the bank, there should be little change in as -built cross -sections. If changes do take place, they should
be evaluated to determine if they represent a movement toward a less stable condition (for example
down -cutting or erosion), or are minor changes that represent an increase in stability (for example
settling, vegetative changes, deposition along the banks, or decrease in width/depth ratio). Cross -
sections shall be classified using the Rosgen stream classification method, and all monitored cross -
sections should fall within the quantitative parameters defined for channels of the design stream type.
2.1.4 Digital Image Stations
Digital images are used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion,
success of riparian vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal images
should not indicate the absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in
channel depth. Lateral images should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the
banks over time. A series of images over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian
vegetation.
2.2 Wetland Restoration
Success criteria and monitoring for wetland hydrology within the wetland restoration areas on the site
follows NCDMS Guidance dated 7 November 2011. The target minimum wetland hydroperiod is 9
percent of the growing season. Stream hydrology and water balance calculations indicate the wetland
area will meet jurisdictional criteria (5 percent hydroperiod). However, due to immature vegetation and
reduced PET, a longer success criterion is appropriate. Auto recording gauges are used to measure daily
groundwater elevations throughout the Sampson County growing season in all 7 years of monitoring.
If a hydrology gauge location fails to meet these success criteria in the seven-year monitoring period
then monitoring may be extended, remedial actions may be undertaken, or groundwater modeling may
be used to demonstrate the limits of wetland restoration.
2.3 Vegetation Success Criteria
Specific and measurable success criteria for plant density within the wetland restoration and riparian
buffers on the site will follow NCDMS Guidance dated 7 November 2011. Vegetation monitoring plots
are a minimum of 0.02 acres in size and cover a minimum of two percent of the planted area. The
following data is recorded for all trees in the plots: species, height, planting date (or volunteer), and
grid location. Monitoring occurs in the fall of Years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. The interim measures of vegetative
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 12

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
success for the site is the survival of at least 320 three-year old planted trees per acre at the end of Year
3, and 260 planted trees per acre at the end of Year 5. The final vegetative success criteria is the survival
of 210 planted trees per acre at the end of Year 7 of the monitoring period.
Invasive and noxious species will be monitored and controlled so that none become dominant or alter
the desired community structure of the site. If necessary, RES will develop a species -specific control
plan.
2.4 Scheduling/Reporting
The monitoring program will be implemented to document system development and progress toward
achieving the success criteria. The restored stream morphology is assessed to determine the success of
the mitigation. The monitoring program will be undertaken for seven years or until the final success
criteria are achieved, whichever is longer.
Monitoring reports will be prepared in the fall of each year of monitoring and submitted to NCDMS.
The monitoring reports will include all information and be in the format required by NCDMS in Version
2.0 of the NCDMS Monitoring Report Template (Oct. 2010).
3 MONITORING PLAN
Annual monitoring data will be reported using the DMS monitoring template. Annual monitoring shall
be conducted for stream, wetland, and vegetation monitoring parameters as noted below.
3.1 Stream Restoration
3.1.1 As -Built Survey
An as -built survey was conducted following construction to document channel size, condition, and
location. The survey includes a complete profile of thalweg, water surface, bankfull, and top of bank to
compare with future geomorphic data. Longitudinal profiles will not be required in annual monitoring
reports unless requested by NCDMS or USACE.
3.1.2 Bankfull Events
Six sets of manual and auto -logging crest gauges were installed on the site, one along UT1, UT2, UT3,
UT4, UT6, and one along UT8. The auto logging crest gauges were installed within the channel and
will continuously record flow conditions at an hourly interval. Manual crest gauges were installed on
the bank at bankfull elevation. Crest gauges will be checked during each site visit to determine if a
bankfull event has occurred since the last site visit. Crest gauge readings and debris rack lines will be
photographed to document evidence of bankfull events. Flow days will be reported on headwater valley
restoration reaches.
3.1.3 Cross Sections
A total of 31 permanent cross sections were installed to monitor channel dimensions and stability.
Twelve cross sections were installed along UT1 where Priority 1 restoration was performed. Twelve
cross sections (six pools and six shallows) were installed along UT2 also. UT4 has a total of two cross
sections installed throughout its length. Stream segment UT6 has two cross sections installed along its
length where enhancement activities were performed. On the UT8 side of the project, a total of three
cross sections were installed. Cross sections were typically located at representative riffle and pool
sections along each stream reach. Each cross section was permanently marked with 3/8 rebar pin to
establish a monument location at each end. A marker pole was also installed at both ends of each cross
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 13

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
section to allow ease locating during monitoring activities. Cross section surveys will be performed
once a year during annual monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7 and will include all breaks in slope including
top of bank, bottom of bank, streambed, edge of water, and thalweg.
3.1.4 Digital Image Stations
Digital photographs will be taken at least once a year to visually document stream and vegetation
conditions. This monitoring practice will continue for seven years following construction and planting.
Permanent photo point locations at cross sections and vegetation plots have been established so that the
same directional view and location may be repeated each monitoring year. Monitoring photographs will
also be used to document any stream and vegetation problematic areas such as erosion, stream and bank
instability, easement encroachment and vegetation damage.
3.1.5 Bank Pin Arrays
Eight bank pin array sets have been installed at pool cross sections located along UT1 and UT2. These
bank pin arrays were installed along the upstream and downstream third of the meander. Bank pins are
a minimum of three feet long and have been installed just above the water surface and every two feet
above the lowest pin. Bank pin exposure will be recorded at each monitoring event, and the exposed
pin will be driven flush with the bank.
3.1.6 Visual Assessment Monitoring
Visual monitoring of all mitigation areas is conducted a minimum of twice per monitoring year by
qualified individuals. The visual assessments include vegetation density, vigor, invasive species, and
easement encroachments. Visual assessments of stream stability include a complete stream walk and
structure inspection. Digital images are taken at fixed representative locations to record each monitoring
event as well as any noted problem areas or areas of concern. Results of visual monitoring are presented
in a plan view exhibit with a brief description of problem areas and digital images. Photographs will be
used to subjectively evaluate channel aggradation or degradation, bank erosion, success of riparian
vegetation, and effectiveness of erosion control measures. Longitudinal photos should indicate the
absence of developing bars within the channel or an excessive increase in channel depth. Lateral photos
should not indicate excessive erosion or continuing degradation of the banks over time. A series of
photos over time should indicate successional maturation of riparian vegetation.
3.1.7 Surface Flow
The headwater valley restoration area on UT4 will be monitored to document intermittent or seasonal
surface flow. This will be accomplished through direct observation, photo documentation of dye tests,
and continuous flow monitoring devices (pressure transducers). An auto logging crest gauge has been
installed within the headwater valley channel and will continuously record flow conditions at an hourly
interval. This gauge will be downloaded during each site visit to determine if intermittent or seasonal
flows conditions are present.
3.2 Wetland Hydrology
Wetland hydrology will be monitored to document hydric conditions in the wetland restoration areas.
This will be accomplished with automatic recording pressure transducer gauges installed in
representative locations across the restoration areas and reference wetland areas. A total of twelve
automatic recording pressure transducers (Auto -Wells) have been installed on the site. Nine auto -wells
have been installed within the wetland restoration area and three within reference areas. The gauges
will be downloaded quarterly and wetland hydroperiods will be calculated during the growing season.
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 14

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
Gauge installation followed current regulatory and DMS guidance. Visual observations of primary and
secondary wetland hydrology indicators will also be recorded during quarterly site visits.
3.3 Vegetation
A total of 23 vegetation plots were randomly established within the planted stream riparian buffer
easement. Vegetation plots measure 10 meters by 10 meters or 5 meters by 20 meters (0.02 acres) and
have all four corners marked with metal posts. Planted woody vegetation was assessed within each
plot to establish a baseline dataset. Within each vegetation plot, each planted stem was identified for
species, "X" and "Y" origin located, and measured for height. Reference digital photographs were also
captured to document baseline conditions. Species composition, density, growth patterns, damaged
stems, and survival ratios will be measured and reported on an annual basis. Vegetation plot data will
be reported for each plot as well as an overall site average.
4 MAINTENANCE AND CONTINGENCY PLAN
All identified problematic areas or areas of concern such as stream bank erosion/instability,
aggradation/degradation, lack of targeted vegetation, and invasive/exotic species which prevent the site
from meeting performance success criteria will be evaluated on a case by case basis. These areas will
be documented, and remedial actions will be discussed amongst NCDMS staff to determine a plan of
action. If it is determined remedial action is required, a plan will be provided.
4.1 Stream
No stream problem areas were noted in Year 7. Cross Section 26 showed a shift in the depth and bank
distance from the previous years. RES believes this is not a systematic issue and the rooted banks and
rock bed will prevent any further degradation. Additionally, the cross section is contained between two
intact log sills that are holding grade.
4.2 Wetlands
The one wetland problem area that was noted in previous years is no longer a problem area in MY7.
AW7 did not meet success in four of the past six years, however this year it met success. RES inspected
the "at -risk" area around this well in February 2021 and the area displayed similar soil and vegetation
to the other areas in Wetland 313. A photo of AW7 is included in Appendix B which shows standing
water and algal mats in this area.
4.3 Vegetation
No vegetation problem areas were identified during the Year 7 monitoring period. Previously in MY6,
there was a vegetation problem area in and around Vegetation Plot 18 which was documented and
mapped on the CCPV as part of the annual monitoring report. This area consisted of a low stem density
area (0.28 acres) in and around Vegetation Plot 18. The area in and around VP18 was planted after
construction because it was anticipated that the existing forest would die due to the raising and
relocation of the stream channel. However, as seen in RVP1 (Table 9), the existing forest area meets
the vegetation success criteria. RES performed a comprehension invasive species delineation in
October 2021 and treated a number of the invasive species areas in November 2021. The main areas
were along tributaries to Muddy Creek outside of wetland areas. Treatments were also performed in
December 2021 and January 2022 and totaled approximately 24 acres of basal bark and cut stump
treatment (Figure 3).
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 15

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
5 YEAR 7 MONITORING CONDITIONS (MY7)
The Best Site Year 7 Monitoring activities were completed in May and October 2021. All Year 7
monitoring data is present below and in the appendices. The Site has met all stream, vegetation, and
wetland success criteria and is recommended for closeout.
5.1 Year 7 Monitoring Data Collection
5.1.1 Morphological State of the Channel (MY7)
Per the Approved Mitigation Plan, cross section data was collected in MY7. Data from MY7 is
discussed below and included in the appendices for reference. All morphological stream data for the
MY7 dimensions were collected during the annual monitoring survey performed during May 2021.
Appendix D includes summary data tables, morphological parameters, and stream photographs.
Profile
The baseline (MY-0) profiles closely matched the proposed design profiles. The plotted longitudinal
profiles can be found on the As -Built Drawings. Longitudinal profiles will not be performed in annual
monitoring reports unless requested by NCDMS or USACE. Morphological summary data tables can
be found in Table 10.
Dimension
The Year 7 (MY7) cross sectional dimensions generally match the baseline and MY5 cross section
parameters. Minimal changes were noted during Year 7 cross section surveys resulting from stable bed
and bank conditions. Cross Section 26 shows a shift in the depth and bank distance from the previous
years which was most likely caused by a middle channel bar that formed on the flow gauge directly
downstream of this cross section (discussed in Section 4.1). All cross-section plots and data tables can
be found in Table 11 and Figure 7.
Sediment Transport
The Year 7 conditions show that shear stress and velocities have been reduced for all six restoration
reaches. Pre -construction conditions documented all six reaches as sand bed channels and remain
classified as sand bed channels post -construction. Visual assessments (Table 5) show the channels are
transporting sediment as designed and will continue to be monitored for aggradation and degradation.
Bank Pin Arrays
Eight pool cross section locations with bank pin arrays were observed and measured for bank erosion
located on the outside meander bends. If bank pin exposure was noticeable, it was measured, recorded,
photographed, and then driven flush with the bank at each monitoring location. No bank pin array
readings were recorded during the Year 7 monitoring season. Bank pin array data tables can be found
in Table 12.
5.1.2 Vegetation
The Year 7 monitoring (MY7) vegetation survey was completed in October 2021 and resulted in an
average of 713 planted stems per acre, well above the interim survival density of 210 stems per acre at
the end of Year 7 monitoring. The average stems per vegetation plot was 18 planted stems. The
minimum planted stem per acre was 40 and the maximum was 1,255. Vegetation Plot 18 fell below the
final success criteria. Vegetation Plot 18 showed signs of heavy browsing and is located in a forested
area. RES conducted a random vegetation plot adjacent to Plot 18 that met success criteria (discussed
in Section 4.3). Volunteers were noted in several vegetation plots on the site and were recorded within
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 16

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
the CVS-EEP Data entry tool. The average planted stem height was 17.1 feet. Vegetation summary
data tables can be found in Table 9 and vegetation plot photos in Figure 4.
5.1.3 Photo Documentation
Permanent photo point locations have been established at cross sections, vegetation plots, stream
crossings, and stream structures by RES staff. Any additional problem areas or areas of concern will
also be documented with a digital photograph during monitoring activities. Stream digital photographs
can be found in Figure 5 and 7 and Figures 4 and 6 for vegetation photos.
5.1.4 Stream Hydrology
Six sets of manual and auto -logging crest gauges were installed on the site, one along UT1, UT2, UT3,
UT4, UT6, and one along UT8. The auto logging crest gauges were installed within the channel and
continuously record flow conditions at an hourly interval. Three of five crest gauges recorded bankfull
events during the Year 7 monitoring period (Table 13; Figure 8). The HOBOS in Crest Gauge 3 and 6
failed in MY7 and therefore recorded no data. All crest gauges with a bankfull standard have met the
success criteria. Crest Gauge 4 is located on a headwater valley restoration reach and the success criteria
is to document 30 days of continuous flow. In Year 7, this reach recorded 117 consecutive days of flow.
5.1.5 Wetland Hydrology
A total of 12 wetland hydrology gauges are installed at the Best Site, nine in areas of wetland restoration
and three as reference gauges in existing on -site wetland. All of the functioning wetland restoration
gauges achieved the success criteria by remaining continuously within the 12 inches of the soil surface
for at least nine percent of the growing season. Groundwater gauge data indicate the hydroperiods being
responsive to rainfall events. AW7, which has had some issues meeting success in previous years, met
with a nine percent hydroperiod in MY7 (discussed in Section 4.2). Rainfall data reported by CRONOS
station Williamsdale Field Lab indicated rainfall was below average during the months of January,
April, May, September, October and November. One out of three reference gauges met the nine percent
success criteria. The HOBO in AW5, RAW1, and RAW3 failed in MY7 and therefore recorded no data.
Wetland gauge and rainfall data is presented in Appendix E.
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 17

Best Stream and Wetland Restoration • USGS HUC 03030007
Year 7 Monitoring Report • Duplin County, North Carolina • January 2022
6 REFERENCES
Chow, Ven Te. 1959.Open-Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and
DDMSwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biological
Services, FWS/OB S-79/3 1. U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC.
Environmental Banc & Exchange (2013). The Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Project Final
Mitigation Plan. North Carolina Ecosystems Enhancement Program, Raleigh, NC.
Horton, J. Wright Jr. and Victor A. Zullo. 1991. The Geology of the Carolinas, Carolina Geological
Society Fiftieth Anniversary Volume. The University of Tennessee Press. Knoxville, TN.
Johnson PA. 2006. Assessing stream channel stability at bridges in physiographic regions. U.S.
Department of Transportation. Federal Highway Administration. Report Number FHWA-HRT-05-
072.
Lee, Michael T., R.K. Peet, S.S. Roberts, and T.R. Wentworth. 2008. CVS-EEP Protocol for
Recording Vegetation, Version 4.2(http://cvs.blo.unc.edu/methods.htm)
Natural Resources Conservation Service (MRCS). 2007. Stream Restoration Design Handbook (NEH
654), USDA
NCDENR. "Water Quality Stream Classifications for Streams in North Carolina." Water Quality
Section. http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/wqhome/html (June 2005).
Radford, A.E., H.E. Ahles and F.R. Bell. 1968. Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. The
University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Schafale, M.P. and A.S. Weakley. 1990. Classification of the Natural Communities of North
Carolina, Third Approximation. North Carolina Natural Heritage Program, Division of Parks and
Recreation, NCDENR, Raleigh, NC.
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC 18

Appendix A
Project Background History and Maps

�3
o
a
o s
z
z
z
� a
v
�
b
w
s
�
z a
a
�
M
�
� �
a w
w
a w
a
W a
ffi
a a
W
a W
a a
a a
••
•• ••
••
-,
° .�
G
a
w
a
3
0
CZ
3
'a
o+++
-
o
N+
N
o -
+
+2 +
+o
+ v
+
± +
+
+ +
+ +
+ +
w o
G
D
D
D
a
x
w

Project Activity and Reporting History
Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Project / DMS Project #95353
Activity or Report
Data Collection
Complete
Completion or
Delivery
Mitigation Plan
NA
Oct-13
Final Design — Construction Plans
NA
Nov-14
Construction Completed
Sep-13
May-15
Site Planting Completed
May-15
May-15
Baseline Monitoring Document (Year 0 Monitoring — baseline)
Jul-15
Oct-15
Year 1 Monitoring
Dec-15
Mar-16
Year 2 Supplemental Replant/Repair Work
---
Apr-16
Year 2 Monitoring
Nov-16
Jan-17
Year 3 Monitoring
Nov-17
Feb-18
Year 4 Supplemental Planting
---
Jan-18
Year 4 Monitoring
Oct-18
Jan-19
Year 4 Supplemental Planting and Repair Work
---
Dec-18
Year 5 Monitoring
Stream: July-19
Vegetation: Oct-19
Feb-20
Year 4 Invasive Species Treatment (UT1)
---
Sep-20
Year 4 Invasive Species Treatment (UT6)
---
Sep-20
Year 4 Log Sill Repair Work
---
Oct-20
Year 6 Monitoring
Vegetation: Oct-20
Nov-20
Year 6 Invasive Species Treatment (UT6)
---
Nov-20
Year 7 Invasive Species Treatment (Entire Site)
---
Nov-21
Year 7 Monitoring
Oct-21
Nov-21

Table 3. Project Contacts Table
Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Project /DMS Project # 95353
WK Dickson and Co., Inc.
720 Corporate Center Drive
Designer
Raleigh, NC 27607
[phone]
Frasier Mullen, PE
Wright Contracting
PO Box 545
Construction Contractor
Siler City, NC 27344
[phone]
Joseph Wright
0+47 to 18+00
18+00 to 21+03
2+30 to 30+30
Planting Contractor
30+30 to 33+39
David Godley
5+63 to 11+03
11+03 to 17+58
Seeding Contractor
Siler City, NC 27344
[phone]
Joseph Wright
Seed Mix Sources
Green Resource
Nursery Stock Suppliers
Arbogen, NC Forestry Services Nursery
Full Delivery Provider
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
302 Jefferson Street, Suite 110
Raleigh, NC 27605
Project Manager:
Brad Breslow
Monitoring Performers
Resource Environmental Solutions, LLC
3600 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 100
Raleigh, NC 27612
Project Manager:
lRyan Medric

Project Infomnatlon
Project Name But Sd,,,d end Wetland Resttdtdd Pr jed
Cwnt Doplin
P ject—,(acres) 1427
Project Coordinates (1—de end longihtde) 34° 54' 44 011" N "Tl ° 44' 57 344" W
Project Watershed Summary Inf.—Ai.
Physiog,aphic Province
5003
Rives Basin
Cape Fee,
USGS Hydrologic Unit 8digit
3030007
USGSHoelsoin 14
Ut
.0300E12
Q
DW
3/6/2022
Project Drainage Area (eau)
2,128 ac
Project Drainage Ar—cmtageof
Im ere us Area
6"i
CGIA Lend Use ClessiEcetion
Woody wetlands, emergmtherbecewwetlands, coltivefed aop s,
evugreen fora[
2+30 to
30+30
Reach Summary -.—Ai. (A—k C®ditlons) 30+30 to
33+39
--_-_
Wetland Summary Informatimr
Parmae[ers Wetlandl Waland2 Wetland 3A Wetland 3H
Sizeof—d(aaes) 11 031 05S 051
Wetland Type (von- p p nvenve P Riparian Rip— Riparian Riparian
Noboco, Marvyn, Marvyq
Mapped Soil Series Raivs, Aaryville Grimey, Grimey,
Gol dstov Marvya, —k— Mnlalee
Grime — loam
Drayage loss Poorly Mod Well, Poorly, Well Poody, Well
Poorl
Hydicv Hydri — i Hydricvath
Soil Hy- SI-s Yes Hy— Hy- Hy-
Inlasiovs Inlasiovs Inlasiws
Roaotf/Goo Roaoff/Goo RoaotF, RwotF,
Sowce ofHydrology vdwater vdwater Floodng Floodng,
Discharge Discharge GD—h-tu GD—h-tu
Discharge Discharge
Gaz
Hydrologic lmpairmwt Cable and Inosed Ditched Ditched
Inosed Chawl
Chanel
Nanvevegemtiw commwity Forested .1tvated CWtivated Qilnvated
Percwt mmpositiov of exoncivvasive vegaatiov 0 0 0 0
Regulatory C®sitluatl®s
Regulatl®
App.t..
Resobed
9upportlng
Documeutatl®
Watusofthe United States-S,ctdn404
Yes
Yu
SAW-201201384
Watusofthe United States-Sectdn401
Yes
Yu
DWR#13-0865
Endangered Species Act
Yes
Yu
USFWS(C— Letter)
Historic Preservation Ad
Yes
Yu
SHPO(—. Letter)
c,,d,l Eon, Managernmt Act(CZMA)/Coartal
Area Manag—Ad (LAMA)
No
NA
N/A
FEMA Floodplain Compliance
Yes
Yu
EEP Floodplein
Regoirernm6 Checklist
Essential Fisheries Habitat
No
NA
IN/A

s
3
FYI W O
�
iv
� Y
a
em Kir -o
Bt Ch rch pen
`Say
A
m fake ° otters
cid
U
N�
oa-
1
o
h g/%2
3
in ra
Best Stream and
A e
Wetland Mitigation Site
�a ttis iiie
me
�s
o
o Main m` C/cy °I
` 1
m
a
at i
\\s \\e \ � 4r wa 2
Ho W d3 F
w Keryne �—
a
r
�� O
Cole
op
o
c n ae
�
✓ o aS'
Son Ce m
< vj
io � m
uinn St e �� Ed c
o
°'
=
Fa �
�a6 Qo
% G C FoCK Oe\\��o
o�
we
e
Ge
oa Jo p Williams
T
a�
��
O
t
�
Q
Y Williams
athe,in
`
m
= uincy it ake
o Q
' gay en d
4
Legend
F Fie <o r
CS Airports
� \em
NC Highway
9 y
m The Best Stream and Wetland Site is located in Duplin County approximately two miles east of
= w Beulaville, NC (Figure 1). To access the downstream end of the Site from the town of Beulaville, travel
State Roads
0.6 miles east on NC HWY 24, take a right onto Lyman Road (SR 1801), and continue 1.6 miles
Streams
Q e southeast to the crossing with Muddy Creek. Reaches UT7, UT8, UT9, UT10 and the lower end of
O Muddy Creek may all be accessed from Lyman Road. Reaches UT5 and UT6 are located just south of
Waterbody
NC HWY 24, approximately 1.9 miles east of Beulaville. The upstream portion of the site may be
CBest Site Easement
accessed from two locations. Reaches UT1, UT2 and Muddy Creek are located to the south of NC
24, opposite of the intersection of NC HWY 24 and Penny Road (SR 1720), approximately 2.8
CHWY
5-Mile Aviation Zone
° miles east of Beulaville. To access reaches UT3, UT4 and Muddy Creek, travel 3.2 miles east on NC
HUC 03030007060010
m HWY 24 from Beulaville to Edwards Road (SR 1835), continue south for approximately 1.0 mile, turn
right onto Put Lane, and follow the road down to Reaches UT3 and UT4.
wE
Figure 1 Date: 9/15/2015
Project Vicinity Map Drawn by: BSH
re%s
Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Site
0 0.75 1.5
Duplin County, North Carolina
Miles

f J v � ` � � 1yt � •. �..
r.e
f
09
sqi,-_, �,4� T Muddy Creek Drainage Area f-'
4.58 square miles
77
In i 13i. (_
\ , •' y6 • YEj� y�6
0.0
48sq, Ti.
f
Legend
Muddy Creek Drainage Areaf /
Q Drainage Areas
Q Proposed Easement
Proposed Streams Beulaill'e,and Patters`Hill .USGS`Topographic Quadrangles
,i " /
Figure 2.
USGS Map
Best Stream and Wetland Mitigation Site r s
0 1.500 3.000 &000
Feet
1 inch = 3,000 feet

Appendix B
Visual Assessment Data

a
;M
hit,,.

§k
{]f>
■
§«k
0
{
=
_
}/ƒk
=
_ __
E
�kk
e
°
0
���
!)/
_
_ __
Ea0
LL
EWCD
z§a
2E
z
\/k
2
2
2 %
2
Et-
Z£
\\
\
\\
\�
\\
0
)
()
§
\§
{!
)\%/{
\
\\
\
\
\ \�
}0
\
\
\
\}\
\\
�!:2
::
§~/
o\
E
!/
2/
-
-'
§�
:
-
k;
2
2 !
!
!
.00
wn

§§
{]f>
■
§«k
0
{
=
_
}/ƒk
=
_ __
E
�kk
e
°
0
���
!)/
_
_ __
Ea0
LL
EWCD
z§a
2E
e
e
z
G
R
Et-
Z£
\\
\
\\
\�
\\
0
)
()
§
\§
{!
)\%E
\
\\
\
\
\ \�
}0
\
\
\ }\
\\
�.
Sm
o
::
§~/
o\
E
!/
2/
-
-'
§�
:
-
k;
!
!
!
2
2

EE
{]f>
■
§ «k
fw
=
_
{
}/ƒk
=
_ __
E
!)/
_
_ __
Ea0
LL
E01
ID 0
ol
z§a
2m
z
2
`
.0
Et-
Z£
{
\\
\
\
\ \R
\\
)
()
\§
§
{!
)\%E
\
\\
\
\
\ \�
\
2
\\
\
\ }\
\\
�!\
2
::/fr
-
/:
§~/
_
T\
E
J
!]!{;!
2/
-
-'
§�
:
-
k;
2
2 !
!
!
w/
\k\

E}
{]f>
■
§«k
0
{
=
_
}/ƒk
=
_ __
E
!)/
_
_ __
Ea0
LL
E01
ID 0
ol
z§a
2E
co=
z
\/k
=
_
= e
=
Et-
Z£
{
\\
\
\\
\�
\\
)
()
§
\§
o
{!
)\%E
\
\\
\
\
\ \�
}\
\
\\
\
\
\ }\
�!\
..06
::/fr
-
/:
§~/
_
T\
E
J
!]!{;!
2/
-
-'
§�
:
-
k;
2
2 !
!
!
w/
\k\

E]
{]f>
■
§«k
0
{
=
_
}/ƒk
=
_ __
E
!)/
_
_ __
Ea0
LL
E01
ID 0
ol
z§a
2E
Cl)
r
z
\/k
r
r
r m
r
Et-
Z£
{
\\
\
\
\ \R
\\
)
()
\§
§
{!
)\%E
\
\\
\
\
\ \�
\
2
\\
\
\ }\
\\
�!\
2
::/fr
-
/:
§~/
_
T\
E
J
!]!{;!
2/
-
-'
§�
:
-
k;
2
2 !
!
!
w/
\k\

E/
{]f>
■
§«k
0
{
=
_
}/ƒk
=
_ __
E
!)/
_
_ __
Ea0
LL
E01
ID 0
ol
z§a
2E
Cl)
r
z
\/k
r
r
r m
r
Et-
Z£
{
\\
\
\
\ \R
\\
)
()
\§
§
{!
)\%E
\
\\
\
\
\ \�
\
2
\\
\
\ }\
\\
�!\
2
::/fr
-
/:
§~/
_
T\
E
J
!]!{;!
2/
-
-'
§�
:
-
k;
2
2 !
!
!
w/
\k\

w
c
R R
0
0
0
0
0
a s
o
0
0
0
0
U
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
w w
O
O
O
O
O
y
o
O
O
O
O
E U
o
o
o
o
o
O Q
U
160
O
O
O
O
O
F
F
dO
C
J
J
J
N
U
O
N
O
O
U
C O
N
N
N
a
m
m
LID
R
N
F
O
O
0
N
m
C
O
E
E
L
N
m
E
N
�
p
O
E
>
0
O
0
CD
N
a)
>
m
m
-2
N
y
N
L
m
�
>0
(6
O
U
_0
N
O
m
0
6
L
N
O
p
U
N
E
O
�
N
0
O
U
O
C
O
N
y
.�
°O
0
>
Q
O
O
r
R
a
R
�
a
�
`o
a�
O
C9
w
w
p
O
U
y
E
a
w
O
Q
N
o
R
a
y
R
0
N
m
J
Q
fV
M
c w
N
p E R
o
0
a
o
o
o
0
0
v�i U
W Q
w w
c
o
0
y
E U
o
0
O Q
U
O
C
N O
�
7 O
O
O
Z a
�
C
U
�
U
J
m
U y
o
p
U
C O
t
L`
U
N
R �
0
0
N
Mo
a
(6
O
o
a
N
a
(6
O
o
a
N
N
O
E
O
O
O
N
N
O
E
O
O
O
N
0
O
o
Q
`o
o
Q
`o
�
0
m
Q
m
Q
A
a
a
c
c
O
w
U
o
0
R
U
N
a
W
O
R
N
w
>
c
y
N
R
W
N
w o m-o�n 24
'� m a�Yao: 030
o s m w E -m o E'E w E
m m.� o
o a m
w m m o
E m c E U `m m W
o' o X m
m 0 0 m. o� E o
3 my
boy m>. -com
O o O m N U 0
>_ma
U L L y6 mt L m m O
N O
NCO 0
>.-�'3-oom-Ea
O m N UI 'O �O/1 O_ aC UTI N
a�L'E m..
U m
m L w) ma E
.. c -
o�o.amiaoMmE
O M N .• W m I. O
M O Om 2�C d m •• Q N
Y N m U N W. 'O m 0 Uj 'Y
m 4�
m O a= 0 O U
m E amiEm�Y�a
m o S
E `6cu"i.SE��-
am. U1
moa�Emmmw 0
a m c O O M E 0-
N U
m0 0 0 N o o N~ o c
U U 0 -O E 0 0 >
w m c
O O
O
a -C�CCL
N E U 0o
L m U
m
L m
O E Y 0 =
E
w - W m.y >
N N m O N a N �m/1
N M N 0 w ._
U
o am m m� a
U >O E a, m N U
m m > N 0 X.E m m t o
E m msmmm�umim��
O U O U N o O C
N N mUI YL-
a _'�N
m N `O > E U N w
O >0 �O L N d a O m O
t5'O O .. '- > UI an d
E o p_ O T o.� m t
o a� mo O
C C U E' E'�L'N
o- �=p N
U m N Y N U N W O
o O N_ m O� E OU P
'. mm �Em�amwwmo
E
umi -a ..0m m_o--.0�a
m U m 3 E �n" m 2 �D E
M N O N c m 3
N m Q OL c
N O Zi '• p U1 m E m N- .0 'O
-o ow minma.06mmmm
w a�'c
Ul N Tw.D
m O N L O
O N
m N N O N
'O L E a'� O o L F U
m cma
0 0 �. N O a m
c
moc�mmmm
a 0 m m.c L- m o m
ma�ins inEac
m o o> 0
E r m o m> 0
umi m -m0 2
mo- c Ym m�3>m�sa -mo>B
mm o oc m2000'm= -c0
L � o._ am W oa- o2L m OIL
'N O E H t - O L. N -E
L N _
O_ y6 o O UI N L N �1d
W U N ` W O O
U'O 0-5 ` N-O 0
O U- N m a m m 0- N
O-w �
m E m 0 0 o m o
mY m mm m� mwog E �Lami
a E'.. .. o-m
mm a
m
E m-m0 >o o�aEi Im>ao-o
Y m m 0 0 O a O -O = OU E -O N
L m c o c L T m m 0 0 0
o H o _
LLl II L mL w o
m N M m V Zi UI .c W a m N O

Table 7. Stream Problem Areas
Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Project - Project # 95353
Feature Issue Station # / Range Suspected Cause; Repair I Photo Number
Table 8. Vegetation Problem Areas
Best Stream and Wetland Restoration Project - Project # 95353
IM
Feature Category Station Numbers Suspected Cause; Repair Photo Number

ru
s
0
,{� t 1• 1^ 1 / < fir- 2 � - fi �.? � -
4
1
1
xP '
40
ENRON III NIPPON 11 IFNI
IOU
'�L�' x i Y � �� '� '� � ��'► set- i �-' - ,Iy
7 -J,
j

4•'� 9'_.
y
r.
a
�Y MT•s lot
� � /i r • -�
¢ M
■s■ �
7: �• t �a` i e ,3� � ,7a�
Yi�� 1 is
it
dw
/ • A, sue, '\� � '^� �.
r
ITT
r r
$1S
S}
4.

k gg s 9
'f D
axe
� �
v
7� D
� z t
Y
F �
� i .� r� r.�✓�k � f _ � 1 s�7 � I
"
� r

P
� a S
�t • 3/ yy

Appendix B. Visual Assessment Data
Figure 5. MY7 Stream Problem Area Photos
N/A

Figure 6. Vegetation Problem Area Photos
N/A

Appendix C
Vegetation Plot Data

Appendix C — Vegetation Plot Data
Table 9a. Vegetation Plot Criteria Attainment
Wetland/Stream Vegetation Totals
(per acre)
Plot #
Planted
Stems/Acre
Volunteer
Stems/Acre
Total
Stems/Acre
Success
Criteria
Met?
Average
Planted
Stem
Height (ft)
1
445
526
971
Yes
20.3
2
607
324
931
Yes
15.7
3
364
40
405
Yes
14.7
4
1093
243
1335
Yes
20.9
5
567
162
728
Yes
12
6
1214
445
1659
Yes
16.4
7
607
445
1052
Yes
12.8
8
688
0
688
Yes
20.8
9
1174
40
1214
Yes
19.8
10
809
81
890
Yes
18
11
1255
243
1497
Yes
10.6
12
1093
486
1578
Yes
21.4
13
931
243
1174
Yes
10.2
14
971
0
971
Yes
18.9
15
688
283
971
Yes
14.6
16
647
4532
5180
Yes
15.5
17
364
0
364
Yes
11.9
18
40
202
243
No
1.3
19
283
162
445
Yes
10.7
20
769
0
769
Yes
26.4
21
931
0
931
Yes
21.4
22
688
324
1012
Yes
14.4
23
567
890
1457
Yes
8.7
R1
324
0
324
Yes
37.2
Project Avg
713
402
1116
Yes
17.1

io
■
�iii�iiii��i��iiiiii
�n�n�n.�r�n�'
�n�n�r��n�n�'
■
I�III�II�II�II�II�III�IA
�Il�ll�il�ll�ll�l���
I�Ill�ll�ll�li�ll�ill�ll
'
t
t
1
1
IIII
II
II
Il11
II!
IIII
IIIIIIIII

��:;:,,:;:,':":;:poi.
��:;:,':;:,':o':;:,ii:
��:;:,':;:,�:o':;:'ii:
����.n.���n.�.�01'
I�iiiiiiiiiiii�liilli
I�E;:��:;:,,:":;:oll�
I�E;:��:;:,,:":;E;II:
�������������,����,10�
I�E;E,,:;:,,E'oE;Eoll:
tti�n�i�nn
i
111111lI
III

Appendix D
Stream Geomorphology Data

o
a?o
o
m mug
NO
N
a
Am
vvm
m
u�
u�v
�
-
O
00
O
co
O
(V
O
N
m
N
m
U)
m
LL
r
A LL�
A
rm'�?c`!m
O �
N N
A
co
of O
Am0ro
�
m
m m
u i co
LL�
co
N i
vu�
p LL�
co m
o
m co
cmo
L
(O
A
O
O
m N
N N
N
N
r
m m
V
N of
N
�
vo
�
com
fn
-
o u�
O
O
N
O
C
C
L
V
O
O
A of
TiO
O N
O
O O
M
O I�
N
W V
� V
�
N
O i
r LL�
N
di
W
N
L
N
(O
A O
A M
(O O
O �M
O N
N
(O O
M
�
O
N
� m
V
m O
O
N
d
9
(n
O
J
c
voo
�o
�v
our
� r
o
m
corno�°�co
ITI
I I o U
O
L m
�
o N
(O
m
O
O
O W
O
N
O
F—
cp
O O
V
LL�
N O
LL� r
m
of LL�
V
O
0
�
O
1�
E
N
8„O
t
�
.
O
(p
—O
O
—
O
m —
O
, N
(O (V
O
O
NO
N
N N —
0 LL)
O U
O
.p)m
C�
3
oor
m
N rm
o
m
� I
�
�
A m
v
mN
O�(00
(O M NA
M
N
X
W
-
NrNNi�
o
l oU
U
p�N
A
o
0
m
0
� W
ri
W
LL�
r'A'
O N
M
W N
b-MNrod
m of
N m
yLro
7
�
O
O
JN�-j
�
iymj
Lm
W
W
V
O V
O
V V
of
iy�j O
0 LL�
7
�
O
3
m
M
O 0
�
0 0
N
N
N
r
N 0
O
O
H
3
o�
N r
rn I
mo
co
omornmr
I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
H-1
v
0' O (�
O
H
��
�
o m�
I
�o
N
cO��O�O�cO
I
I I
I I
I
I I
I I
Noo
I our
O
U
�
m
m m
o0
o
mmm�vr
��com
u��
commm
N
N
d
C
_
V
O m
N
W O
r m
m
N
r N
LL� W
O
oo
i�
p V
4�
O
� No
4� 4�
V N
m
O O
W O
4�
C
im27
m O
O
mm
N
mN
N
V r
d
O
a
r r
m
4�
O 4�
O
4�
4� 4
4� ._
o
z
a10i
Q
ai
`m
Q
p p
mo
f
10
2��
d
a
O
o o w
u
C 0
w
00
m
o o_
.-
N
LL.-
cLi
N
LL—
l0
m U
O
> m
U>'�O
30
o LL'
o o
a a
o—
E>
_
N
C
m
in inm
N N U
o
0o
Z
Zm
m
oU)mm�wm�
LL
Leo
m
`m�
m
in
bA
U
in
U
U o
o-
m
o
a
K
o_
o_
m
d
m
d
U
z
U0
z
N
c
d
o
m
N
N
=
-
ii
o
y
a
a
Q
l0
l0
o
o
co
N
m
o m
O
O
� N
N N
3 0 �
U o a
o
- m m
K o 3
U 0 U
z w w

®1111111111
®1111111111
®1111111111

Table 12. Bank Pin Array Summary Data
Cross Section
L Location
Position
Year 1
Reading
Year 2
Reading
Year 3
Reading
Year 5
Reading
Year 6
Reading
Year 7
Reading
XS 1 @ Sta. 1+00 -
UT1
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
XS 4 @ Sta. 4+25 -
UT1
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
XS 5 A Sta. 6+25 -
UT1
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
XS 8 @ Sta. 9+90 -
UT1
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
XS 11 A Sta. 15+90 -
UT1
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
6"
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
24"
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
XS 13 @ Sta. 5+75
- UT2
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
XS 22 A Sta. 23+55 -
UT2
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
XS 24 @ Sta. 28+45 -
UT2
US
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
DS
Top
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Bottom
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0

E
\
±
§
=
2
!
.
?co
.
a
a
�
\
\k06'22
g
|C,
1
C,as
\|
2
`
2
2
Cl)}
pt
co
|
\
p
\
! a
a
•
t
2
r061
= 2
2
)
.
CV)
2
'|
R
A
`
EE
|
0
2
§
5
3
�
.
/
(}
\\;
m
.
co
00
00\/2
•
�
—
r
33
~
)
&
\ \
)
{
\ {
!)
-
°
3
/
§
/ 2
j \
\ §
\
°
\
\)
k
\
\ \
;
)
®
§
\
))
)
k
k
yEA81 ,
_

E
\
±
§
2
:.
?
\
`
!
3
(|
)
%
#
!
.|
�
\ 0
/
p
\
J
2
.
« 0
§
2
r
2\
~
R
/
@
;
) `
;
|
u
2
r
\
-
t
)�
2 t
, )
�
k
�
2
§
�
g
m
=
N
:�
nj
11
�A
j
�
�00
)\LO
•
4
e
e
® /
/ \
/)
)
§
/ 2
\ \
\ \
44
)
\
'0
\
\ \
r
}|
°
)!
)§
\))_)
°
©
_
k
yEA81
,
_

E
\
±
§
2
l
?
]
�
g
)
:
§
}
,
2
�
]
l
§
(
r
{
°
J
2
T\
�
|
|
A
EE
}
,(
k
CN
\
o
/»}
�k(�
§
|)
CN
m
j
/\2
2
%
2
m
It
2\
1co
)
f
`
-
-
��
\\\
\\
4
CN
e
/
))
\
:
j
�
)
§
°
]))
)
�
Cl)
)!
/
\
l
o
]
)
¥EA81
,
)

E
\
±
§
=
2
«
.
?
.
f
f
�
\
\(
'22
g
|
�
�
�
/
/
a
a
•
}
2`06
6
e
°co
>
pt
|
-
cn
2
CV)
)
/
,
/Cl)/
y
|
u
2
r
\\
2
A
EE
.
6 62\2
§
|
�
k
°
m
f
2
)
)paz7\%3y2
f
r
~
©
°
\))
\
\ \
\
®
)
)
2
k
¥EA81
,
)

E
)
/
§
=
2
«
.
?
.
f
f
�
g
|
/
2
a
a
•
\
°
pt
|
�
<
CV)/
p
3
; a
a
�
\
\\/
�
�
A
2 E
.
o
.
/3
2r
§
|
C
k
0
°
m
�
)
�«x7\2
i
\f
.
»
\\
$
g
g!
§
5 t
2
G
§ §
)
co
)
°
0
) )
\
\ )
)
�°
)
k
yEA81 ,
_

E
)
k
D
§
2
,
00
g
,
r
�
�
i
)
n
<
.
,
0
2
�
)
�
|
A
K
£,(
�
k
5
�
o
§
CN
m
•
00
,
2
CD
2
?
f
Ta
>\\©\/2G33
(/)
)
\
ƒ
r§)\r())
°
\
]))
\
\)
)
-
|
n
k!
]
¥UOIJEA81
,
_

E
\
±
§
2
:.
?
00
!
g
(|
)
|
°o
®
}.
(|
m
0cn
2
•
)z
§2r
±\2
§
cn
|�
�
�
.
�
`
|
K E
\
�!
CN
} }
\
\
2
\
\ \
%
§
CN
m
|
2
\
;
)e
.
2
f
�
�
.
LO
§
[
CN
-
\)
\
\
\
�
0
) )
\
\ \
\
\
_
| |
°
§
¥EA81
,
)

R
L
3
0
0
R
y
N
a
D
�
I
0
�
m
LC,
C�
'c
'c
I
LO
a
z
z
V
Q
I
I
I
N
't
m
C)
�
o
Cl)
pt
I
r
�
I
M
r
O
v
Q
o
m
O d
d
�
�0
o
zz
o
a
Cl)
�
y�y
V]
I
O
N N
O
00
I
C)
CV)
y
U
O
I
0
O
W
I
N
I
y
I
a
h
�
O
N N
O
N
0
H
I
_
N
L
I
00
GJ
O
O
O
N
ayi
m
I
L
f
-o
-o
I
C
C
04
o
o
x
co
o
3
w
(4) uoiyen813

E
\
±
§
_
2
)
� .
00
co
•
p
;
a
a
.
\
g
|
�
}
a
a
1
k\
2
2
°pt
|
°
m
/
p
}
t
2
=
ra=-
_
: 2
2
�
\
Q
R
\
|
Cc)
`
`
A
|
K E
§
•
� §
\
/
}
m
=
.
�
23
k
2
°
)$%z\3�a}A
©
f
)
»
33
)
�
�
/)
!
)
2
�°
j
¥EA81 ,
)

E
)
/
?
�|
)
(.
g
.
!
%
J
(|
m
,
.:.
—
•
))
n
\
�
E^
)|
A
\
, )
k
5))]
§
�
]
2
$
2
)
w
f
`
ƒ
{
C
.
°
f w
n
)ƒ
o
||
¥EA81
,
§
2
\
/
\)
2
/ }
/
2
(((�('!\%\/2
\
m
=
§\\A
/
@
{
g
2
=
1c,
g \
-
(/§)2}'%
)00
az\}'%3y2
))
bf
;
2 2
= .;
§
44
/
\/
)
0
/
')
\)§)
!/
!
)
_
/
]
2
)

E
2
/
/
_
2
ƒ
00
�
a
a
g
)
|
!aa
°
pt
m
a
R
\
$
—
ƒ
\
|
E t
k
CN
.
�
®
|
`
g
m
.
2
\
2@
§2-
.
2
a
]
f
$\%/\©©2s
-
-
a
CN
_
�
_
�Q
°
\
\
0
e
]
/
\
\ \
\
n
]
¥UOIJEA81 ,

E
2
/
/
2
:.
00
:.
g
(.
G2
|
°
}.
2
m
\ 0
=
Q
\
\A
} |
!!
a2;
cn
I
�
%%\2
\g\_
(
A
E^
®®)
�•
§
�
®
ƒ)]
(\
\\N
§
�
)
)
)\
00
/ A
2
`
:|
2
f
=§
gƒƒ/\<;;-g
}\))
)
\
/
.0
( |
§
§
!)
])
!.
)!
n
o
:
2
2
¥UOIJEA81 ,

E
)
/
)
.
?
|
g
\
|
)
.
.
.
=
°
y
.
ƒ
|
m
]
.
a
n
n
\
.
c
•
»
R
|
.
|
\
EE
|
k
It
)
CN,
|D
&
w
co
�
}
w
�
LO
.
�
.
°
/
.
.
�
Im
fn
|
¥EA81 ,
/
2
a
a
pt
Q
gaa
2
/
>\\\\\2233
§==e/|\/))
c
\\
m§)2=])]
�
)
/
)
2
2

E
\
f
§
2
.:
00
\
\
,
.:
\
2
/
6
�
-
)
.|
\
|(
\
(
\
\
\
2
n
!
,
CV)?
/
~
:
}
%�;
ƒ)
|»`
Nhk
§
K E
® )•:
°
�
,
)
04
�
•}
LJO
C
CN
!
!
)
2
)
)}
2A
CD
®
\
®-
<
\
\
\
\
[
®
! t
-
�
\
0
)\
\ \
\
n
¥UOIJEA81 ,
)

E
)
/
/
2
00
.
\
2
r
\
{o6
{
;
g
�
2
|
k
)
\
\
{oo
{
%
J
B
<
CV)?
$
{
Q
%
m
-
ƒ0
\2°
—
�
ccn
n
|�
\
«
\
\ \
2
E ^
]\\
\
,
§
}\2
m
2
)\
�
)
w
f
`2
>\\/\/£233
>- <
CD
§
\)::2§.;)§j
!
]co
))
\\\_\
!
_
2
¥UOIJBAOJ ,

E
/
\
A
E
)
/
ƒ
?
g
\
)
|
n
ƒ
m
)
CV)
\
k
�
ƒ
cn
�
|
\
EE
k
,It
)
(14
®
|
D
&
k
2
2
ƒ
2
f
r
|
CN
CN
�
n
\
¥BAOI
,

E
\
±
§
2
.!
00
p
;
_
,
;
.}
3
2
/
6
�
-
)
;
:
00
.)
2
00
Z
2
°
•)
�
\
.:
Cl)
°
p
2
`
9
.:
)®_
ANcn
)
2
00
\
cn
f
•!,
t
•!
•!
\
K £
�
o,
)
\
(\2
§
CN
(
o
•(
.
E
I :
E
.:
!
�
|
\
;
©
9
f
2
«
2§
s2-
.
�
®
>\\/\_«.;-\
-
� >-
\
�CN•
§
�
|
_
,
(\
,
e t
2
•
|
�
)
)
®
2 ®
j 0
§
)
\
\
g
0
2
¥UOIJEA81 ,
)

E
)
/
/
_
2
)
.
00
•
[
;
;
=
a
a
.
�
`
�
#
|
•
G
;
=
a
a
.
.
g
:
2
;
g
{
2
2
°
pt
�
3
m
7
p;
9 a
a
.|
§
2
;
= 2
2
o
a
-
R
\
$
_
ƒ
\
/
)
�
|
\
(
\ \
2
\
|
E E
k
5 \
)
(
c
% \
2
§
�
�
k
2
r
%\2
.|
2
ƒ
w
�
)\\k�»»233
04
-
�Q
°
()
72
§
)
.
`
0
j)
\ un
co
�
§
®)2)0
/fn
�)§)
]
¥UOIJEA81
,

E
2
/
/
_
2
)
.
00
co
.
y
\
=
a
a
•
k
2
;
«
`
2
2
L
#
/
\
a
a
|
)
•
g
.
2/
3
y±
2
2
°
pt
.
ƒ
%
|
m
7
Q
\
0
® 2
2
IL
CV)
±
2
|
.�:
|
u
2
;
A
\
EE
|
k
)
00
\\2
5)
(\cri
o
.
2
§
�
|
�
m
.
2
)\
7A
.
)11
»
�
>/33
§
CN
e
!
]
§
) 2)
.0
(
j
§
])
°®))�')))
.
})
�)§)
•
n
-
2
2
¥UOIJEA81
,

\
±
(
b
?
.:
g
%
7
-
�
)!
)
§®°
R
=
A
K E
(
.!
,
\\2
•}
)
/�}
2=
.:
CN
!
k
.:
,
2
)
)\
^
f\2
2
)
f
)\))
°-
5
(
;
\
\
co
2\\j2;-e
\)
\)))
¥EA81
,
_

E
L)
to
a
D
I
00
I•
N
D
v
N
In
}
I:
N
N
O
oc
00
M
V
I•
N
I
I:
0)
M
Q
a
�
o
N
C
O
of
O
01
O
�
,-�
N
O
0 0
N
U
N
I
�
N w
coN
O
N71
O
I;
V '
N 30
N inf
v
O
O
O
N
I:
i.i
NI
I
7
N
L
U
0
01
N
O
CO
LO
0)
O
W
3
o
W
(4) UOi;enaJ3

E
E
�
\
(
!
_
.
�
2
|
.
g
\
.
,
\co
|
.
m
}
%
|
)
R
\
§
.
|
y
w
m
�
C'4/
/
.
o
|
\
(
\
°
2
|
�
|
»
\
�
e
\
e
|
|
n
-
co
_°
�
»
u

E
�
\
k
2
g
b
t
Z
§
!
\
}
:
\
¢
2
)
/
}
m
{
§
R
%
\
2
t9l±
°
R
!
)
u22=E°-'7b\2
�
af
^ �e(
§
3 a
/
f =
2
g
=
_
_
-
1/
/
2
®
| }
D
m
)
2}
2
j
7/
2
f
)/
`
f
(
k
L
�2
ƒ
G33
\
=
2
2
t
2
bc
§)
_
n
co>-
|
)
}
3
o
=
3
]
» u
=

E
�
\
k
_
2
.
_
co
|
b
t
t
§
®
K
\
�
|
.
=
°
y
\
r
r
\
\
\
\
.
R
§
j
.
a
/
Lo
2
.
3 {
2
/
\
)
\
/
/
2
|
�
^
.
f
®
�
|
�
|
•
\�ƒ�\_//G33
l
>
-
°
\
co
)
}
3
|
©
§
3
_°
]
» u
=

E
Q
k
�
E
�
\
§
2
g
p
«
g
r
-
g
_
)
|
m
&
*
?�
j
)
R
2
§
\/\��?#
§
0))2
R
!.
a
/
(
(.
e
!
�
&
)
2
)\/\#
2
`
\)
f
co
w
»
�2
§
°
_
\
)
{
\
)
r
)
co
\
]
»
u
=

1
0
N
N
a`.
o�
In
�
I
I
�
I
N
V
�
O)
Q
kC!
M
�
I
o
CA
N
M
0
0
(�+"�
h
Q�
h
.r
�n
N
O
ll'
M
I I
U
U1
I
N
O
I
0
u
Vi
I
N w
m
A
I
N OF
} 0
7
N
s
U
I
I
y
N
m
co°
o
0
= o
Irn
I
b
o
o
x
1
O
m >
b
x
(u) UOIJeAai3
a

E
�
\
§
2
.
_
.
g
:
°
n
�
§
R
//}
G
°
)
.
/
\/{/0\2'}&/2
w
.
a
�
�\af
/
•
.
3\f=
\
\{\7/2�
//2
.
r
|)D
(
&
)
/
2
co
a)|
%
\[
G53
e
)
)
§
\
/
_
.
r
)f
|
|
)
)
3
o
w
w
w
w
w==
2
)
»UOIJeAOJ
u

E
�
\
§
2
}
&
g
»
)
|
m
4
R
2/
7gmmm77,
\
TINI
/
k»,/
§
3\)\
(
m
}
j
2
\
2
\
\
\
%
\
\
2
co
%
\[
g/\\d333
co
§
_
�
)
v u
z

r
i
t
se
. ••��,1'���
ter.
r` 1
sd .
E
f6
L)
to
Q
D
�
m
00
N
0\
I
o
Q
z
z
LO
Q
I
I
N
I
I
o�y��
M
pt
I
>
fq
N
I
T
N
I
O
}
vOO
O
M
oo
m
0
0
N
m
I
U
U
I\
N
_
I
�
N
c+�
a
x
m
'"
a,
O
U
co
F
I
I
D
N
L
U
I
7
Q,
I
>
I
.0
F4
F4
0
6
IPa
P�
0
�
�
�
�
U
V1
N
C
C
0
w
�
S
0
m
R
O
I
y
p
�
(u) UOIJeAai3

E
�
\
§
2
.
_
.
\
/
.
.
°
\
q
//2
\}j/2/2
)
22,/
§
.
c.4
\\\/\2
//2
|
°
(
|
m
k
d
2}
f
)\
J
r
\
®
.
§
)
LO
\<
\ƒƒ
/)
)
000
\
\
t
2
\
e
S
]
//
2
§
o
\
(
)
|
§
)
)
j
°
\\
}}
|
\\
\
o
©
2
)
»UOIJeA@J
u

E
�
\
§
2
g
k«m/
\
f
:
k2G=zz
m
g
\
g2=r_66'}b/2
k
/ ,
§
D
|�D
:
&
)
!
/
)
%
\2
a
"
_°
_
^`Z;§;
f <
§
| }
7
a7
t
e
!
/
§
\/
20
)
}c
\)\)
r
e
)
\
�
G
e G
7 G
G°
$
)
»
u

Appendix E
Hydrology Data

Appendix E. Hydrology Data.
Table 13. Documentation of Geomorphologically Significant Flow Events
Crest Gauge
Flow Events
Maximum Consecutive
Flow Days
Cumulative Flow Days
Consecutive Flow Date
Range
Crest Gauge (HWV UT-4
MY4
1
282
282
NA
MY5
1
270
270
NA
MY6
7
135
228
NA
MY7
4
117
172
1/1/2021 - 4/27/2021
Crest Gauge
Number of Bankfull Events
Maximum Bankfull Height (ft.)
Crest Gauge 1 (UT-1)
MY1
2
0.3
MY2
2
0.5
MY3
6
0.25
MY4
7
0.95
MY5
1
0.14
MY6
11
0.8
MY7
2
0.65
Crest Gauge 2 (UT-2)
MY1
11
1.3
MY2
18
1.95
MY3
22
1.19
MY4
21
2.91
MY5
16
1.42
MY6
25
1.46
MY7
12
1.06
Crest Gauge 3 UT-3
MY1
2
0.8
MY2
4
0.6
MY3
9
0.55
MY4
12
3.03
MY5
2
0.83
MY6
NA
NA
MY7
NA
NA
Crest Gauge 5 (UT6)
MY1
3
1.1
MY2
4
1.1
MY3
7
1.2
MY4
1
1.25
MY5
1
0.5
MY6
NA
NA
MY7
3
0.92
Crest Gauge 6 UT8
MY1
8
1.9
MY2
7
2.2
MY3
13
2.15
MY4
16
3
MY5
18
1.8
MY6
12
1.03
MY7
NA
NA
NA= Not Available due to HOBO failure

Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 14. 2020 Rainfall Summary
Month
Average
Normal Limits
Duplin County
Station Precipitation
30 Percent
70 Percent
January
4.33
3.32
5.03
0.00
February
3.23
2.14
3.87
6.45
March
4.50
3.23
5.32
5.70
April
3.16
1.70
3.85
1.32
May
3.68
2.69
4.34
191
June
4.49
3.11
5.34
7.62
July
6.06
4.16
7.22
7.20
August
5.40
3.12
6.56
7.66
September
5.00
2.04
6.07
1.08
October
3.21
1.62
3.92
1.68
November
2.89
1.83
3.49
0.38
December
3.24
2.14
3.88
---
Total
49.19
31.10
58.89
41.00
Above Normal Limits
Below Normal Limits

Appendix E. Hydrology Data
Table 15a.
2021 Max Hydroperiod (Growing Season 17-Mar through 14-Nov, 242 days)
Success Criterion 9% = 22 Consecutive Days
Gau a
Consecutive
Cumulative
Occurrences
Days
Percent of
growing
Season
Days
Percent of
growing
Season
AW1 *
37
15
37
15
1
AW2 *
27
11
29
12
2
AW3
54
22
140
58
7
AW4
38
16
99
41
4
AW5
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
AW6
27
11
85
35
11
AW7
22
9
47
19
8
AW8
36
15
94
39
15
AW9
27
11
69
29
9
RAW1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
RAW2*
27
11
27
11
2
RAW3
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Data from March 17 to May 11(55 days)
NA = Data not available due to HOBO failure

cz
W
W
w
r
O bD =
O
�
� L
bD
b
Q
O � _
O
O
N 7
Pr
V
M
�M/l �N/l
Val VT
M
V M
V
QV
O bD =
= O
bD
N =
a
��y O
/• U
R
h�
p p
h
r.
��
h V
L.
o � _
= o
en
L.
o � _
o
L.
o � _
o
In
L L
N

(segmi) uol4e4ldl3oad
O O O O O O O O O'
00 I� M In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
N
N
N
N
00
N
c
y

(smpui) uol4e4ldl3OJd
O O O O O O O O d
00 I� O In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r O In V (M N O
N
N
N
N
co
N
N
N
CN
Q
c
Q�
N
N Q
L
CN
r.+ �
r_ m
N O af
� o N
O CN
CN
M co
W N
N
N
O N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O O O O O O O O
N N M V
(say3ui) u014en813 aa;empunoaE)
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c I
o I
c3 I
� I
a' I
N
N
'3 I
o I
� I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(segmi) uoi4e4idl3OJd
0 0 0 0 o O O O d
00 I� (O In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
ci O W r (O 0 f (M N O
A
N
al
C)
O
N
N
N
N
co
N
M
N
Q
N
V
N
L
N_
LO
cu
o af
N >.
V � m
0
� � a
L
/VV11
N
�
N
�
M
I
N
dCN
m
N
N
r
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
(N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
(say3ui)
uoi;enBIB
aa;empunoaE)
c
O
�
N
•3
o
�
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(segmi) uoi4e4idl3OJd
O O O O O O O O d
00 I� M In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
N � O
N
N
C)
O
N
N
N
N
co
N
N
Q
N
C
N
N
L
CD
N_
LO
cu
CN O Ir
0
� � a
L
N �
N
I� co
N
dCN
m
N
N
r
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
(N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
(say3ui)
uoi;enBIB
aa;empunoaE)
y
m
c
O
c�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(smpui) uoi4e4idl3OJd
O O O O O O o 0 0
00 I� M In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r M In V (M N O
N
N
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
Q�
N
V
L
N
}I
N_
m
Lcu
N cu
�1!
t
c� O m
.Q
i
o
N
'� N
N
M
/d
W
N
r
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
N
O
(h
O
V
O
(say3ui)
uoi;enBIB
aa;empunoaE)
c
0
cv
N
c
o
�
I
I
I
c
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(segmi) uoi4e4idl3OJd
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 I� (O In V M N O O O O O O O O O O 0
O W r M In V CO N O
N
N
O
N
N
N
N
co
N
N
Q�
d
N �
N Q
M
V
L
N
LO
V
=
N �
N O T
i
N 3
°
M '
/MW
W
N
r
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
O O
O
N
O
(h
O
V
O
(say3ui)
uoi;enBIB
aa;empunoaE)
C
O
N
N
C
.3
o
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(smpui) uoge4id!3OJd
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 I- (D In I- Cl) N O O O O O O O O O O O
O 00 I,� M In V M N O
N
N
O
N
N
N
co
Q�
N
d
N
M
V
N
}1
N_
L m
N
�1!
cu
c� O
0
i
0
Q
o
N
'}� N
ui
co
/yd
W
_
N
�
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
O O
O
N
O
(h
06
V
(say3ui)
uoi4ena13
aa;empunoaE)
C
�
N
C
�3
o
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(smpui) uoi4e4idl3OJd
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 I� (O In V M N O O O O O O O O O O 0
O W r M In V CO N O
N
N
O
N
N
N
N
co
N
N
�
Q
d
N
N �
M
V
L
N
}I
N_
L m
N �
�1!
t
c� O o
�
.Q
o
N
'� N
N
Cl)
/d
W
N
r
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
O O
O
N
O
(h
O
V
O
(say3ui)
uoi;enBIB
aa;empunoaE)
C
O
�
N
.3
o
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(smpui) uoge4id!3OJd
O O O O O O O O O
00 I� O lC) V (M N O O O O O O O O O O O
N
N
N
00
00
N
r
�
N
W
N
N
� Q
N
o

(smpui) uol4e4ldl3OJd
O O O O O O o 0 0
00 I� M In V M N O O O O O O O O O O O
O W r M In V M N O
N
N
N
N
00
N
N
N
�
Q
L
W
N
CN
04
04
N w
N
_
L
L
d
N
C t
N r.+
0
N
Ocu
N
�
0
a
co
'
N
N
N
N
r
�
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
M
O
V�
CDN
(say3ui)
u014en813
aa;empunoaE)
c
o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c3
I
�
I
c
I
I
o
I
c�
�
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(smpui) uoge4id!3OJd
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00 I- (D In I- Cl) N O O O O O O O O O O O
O 00 I,� M In V M N O
N
N
N
N
00
N
5
�
Q
LL
_
W
N
�
N
� Q
N w
L
L
N ram.+ -
� � m
N A
O fy
1
N �
�
0
a
co
'
N
N
N
N
r
�
N
N
O
N
N
0
N
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
N
O
M
06
V�
(say3ui)
uoi4ena13
aa;empunoaE)
o
y
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
N
I
�
I
c
I
'3
I
o
I
�
—
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

(seg3ui) uoi;e;idl38Jd
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
In V (M N O
� O 00 I- M 0 V M N 0
1
N
' O
N
�
I
- O
I
I
_
N
�
O
,
J N
I
I
�
I
- _
N
O
N
I
W
N
O
�
N
I
r
�
I
I
V
O cn
U
;
Q
I,
CD
m
�
N
o
O
m
'm
In
w
4a
m
N
�
L
N N
N
a
r
O
N
N
M
O
_
m
N
N
O
C
N
G
,
I
N
I
N
O
�
I
N
I
0
0
N
I
0
� N
O
N
I \
I
I
0
0
N
In V (M N O O
(zeal) y;dea .Ia;eM